To create my series of short interviews-documentaries, I will be editing the footage on Adobe Photoshop. Each film will be around 45-60 seconds long, which will feature each person who I photographed, discussing what one of the three words displayed on the website (Butch, Queer, Effeminate) means to them and how they perceive it. The audio will be played over a compilation/montage of extreme close ups of of the subjects face and body.
Here is a screen shot of the start of my editing process, an example of the framing of my shots. Extreme close ups of the subjects features are used to disorientate the viewers of who is speaking, as if they need to put together parts of the face to realise who is actually speaking. As the intentions of my film is to reduce the social implications of being LBG in society and focus on the fact they are humans, just like the audience who will be viewing it, therefore aspiring to decontexualize the stereotypical representation of the LGB community, through these still shots.
Something that I have been contemplating throughout the editing process is how I could manipulate the sound and visuals to juxtapose each other. By this I mean by adding the audio of one of the interviewees and actually apply it over someone else close ups, as a way to confuse the viewers as to who’s opinions are actually being conveyed. What has inspired me to do this is Gillians Wearing’s video art piece ‘2 into 1’- two separate interviews of a mother and her sons, however swapping their audios and adding it to other interviewee who are miming the audio response.
This video reinforces the idea of decontextualisation, through the unconventional link between the visual and audio method. Through exposing the ‘truth’ behind the perception of families and the relationships within them, Wearings observational documentary challenges the notion of perfect families ‘By attempting to destabilize the relation between the observer and the observed, both during the production and consumption, she attempts to complicate any conclusion based on detached observation in the field’. (Wesley Aelbrecht, August 2011).
The description above of ‘destabilising’ the relationship between the viewer and the subject (on screen) is something I am interested in exploring as I think it would be beneficial to the narrative of my film. As I am already essentially doing this by making it harder for the audience to detect exactly who is talking through the extreme close ups, as in testing their memory to remember who it is in the photographs on the homepage. However by disconnecting the the correct sound to the visual footage further enhances the concept of decontextualisation of the subject as it distorts the ‘truth’ to the audience of who is actually talking.
I have to take into account of what I am intending to achieve by doing this as it may over-complicate the presentation of the results of my visual research project. Although I do believe it will tie in effectively as theoretically it does follow many of my objectives I had initially for the video.
‘In short, Wearing’s work radically changes documentary practices that long for objective truths and familiarity into its reverse, the unfamiliar.’ (Wesley Aelbrecht, August 2011).