Ehrlich, N. (2019). Conflicting realism: animated documentaries in the post-truth era. Studies in Documentary Film, pp.1–21. doi:10.1080/17503280.2019.1663718.
For the critical analysis, I have chosen this article as it is more in line with my professional practice. I can agree with the author that documentary animation is being used as a self-reflection. In this day and age, we are surrounded by media which exposes people to fake news rather easily and hence, blurs out the line between fact and fiction. I will be writing the critical analysis of pages 13 and 14 which raises the question: Do documentaries depict the truth or truth with a capital “T”?
Animation is more like a virtual tool which is explicit of any meaning and can easily indicate more than one perception or context. Animated documentaries are bolstered by a conceptual tool known as Gilles Deleuze’s crystal image which helps in understanding the line between an actual and virtual image (which is subjective, a recollection and a representation). The virtual is external to the actual image, but it is what indicates meaning since meaning is always outside of the film or cultural creation.
According to the article, It is never absolutely clear what viewers actually see in animated documentaries. The relation between the actual image perceived and its virtual ‘flip-side’ of interpretation constantly changes, returning us to Deleuze’s crystal image. What the author is implying is that animation can take on various styles and depict reality in its own way. But the authenticity of it comes into question and will always linger on. What the author suggests and I do agree here is that since we are much more easily exposed to misinformation or click-baits, one must always question the information presented is, in itself, an important political position. The complexity of animated documentaries underscores their role as representations that emphasize heterogeneity, complexity, uncertainty and multiple narratives.
There is no refuting with the author on this that the tension between fact and fiction, truth from Truth is timelier than ever in today’s post-truth. This ongoing uncertainty and confusion about believability raise further questions about what has become the barely-discernible line between transparency and deception. The question arises as to what exactly is the role of documentaries.
‘Parafiction’ is a term coined by artist Carrie Lambert-Beatty to address the advantageous effects that ambiguous documentary works may have. She explains parafiction as part of a deception, a ‘gotcha’ moment of being fooled in which these fictions are experienced as fact. Combining fact with fiction so the two become indistinguishable creates more critical consumers of information.
Ehrlich argues that sometimes people go through surrealistic events and hence often there are no written or documented records of the event. Hence, Animation comes into play, where word of mouth helps dictate the event. I do agree with the notion that animation is better suited for such documentaries but disagree to the extent that such records are very subjective. That being, they are half-truths and these spoken accounts are one’s own reality of the event. Then again, it’s my own point of view that the history we read today is very subjective and distorted.
Deleuze’s crystal image, which denies a single, clear vantage point from which to view and interpret the constantly-shifting meanings of the image, positions animation in documentaries as part of a wider field of disorienting aesthetics. What is presented as factual and straightforward information rather than as argument, is in fact covert, not overt, because viewers are encouraged to take what is presented as truth.
The relationship between animation and realism is in constant flux and this continuous shifting is primarily based on its changing status and myriad uses in contemporary visual culture. Realism itself can be considered both as an easily-legible and transparent form of representation, as well as a new form that challenges existing assumptions and generates new ways of seeing. The topic of animation in non-fiction, which in various ways depicts both, centres on these contrasting ideas of the familiar and easily understood against the new and unfamiliar.
I believe that animation is just a medium to portray the set events but my question here is if the foundation (that being reality) is constantly shifting then how can the medium do justice to the content? I disagree with the author as I often question the relationship between reality and realism. They are always in constant flux with one another. An example of this is the partition of India and Pakistan and despite being based on official documentation and facts, the history itself is subjective as the narratives of the British, Indians and Pakistanis all vary. Although the events are the same, they are perceived and depicted in completely different ways despite sharing the same outcome.
Recognizing whether and how animation in non-fiction captures and portrays the current and convincingly conveys it is necessary for exploring whether or not animated documentaries are realistic and the article is sucessful in explaining this to some exten
Although it is impossible to define “the modern” precisely, a consideration of the many types of realism in animation must take into account the growing disbelief in the media in a time of post-truth and fake news.
What the article makes you realise is that you should be aware of real-world narratives so that you can avoid being trapped in ideological fantasies. Hence, the animated documentary can teach the viewer to perceive reality in their own way.
Arsalan Awais 