Download Anthropology and Film ANTH/CINE 327, Section 1 Room: BUS 122

Anthropology and Film
ANTH/CINE 327, Section 1
Room: BUS 122
Hours: Tuesday 3:35 to 6:20
Peter Biella
[email protected]
Office: SCI 381
Office Hours: Tuesdays 9 to 11
and by appointment
Course links at:
http:userwww.sfsu.edu/~biella/
3 units
Course Reader
ANTH/CINE 327 Course Reader: available from Photo Day, 3418 Geary (at Stanyon) 415-3874779
Course Description
Film and Anthropology introduces students to three approaches that anthropology has
taken to films – the analysis of narratives – the analysis of audiences – and strategies for
designing films that contribute to social change. Each week, films will be shown to enhance or
illustrate the reading. In the first section, the course introduces the problem of multiple readings
of narratives and then seeks to explain it through divergent theoretical approaches. An essay by
Bordwell introduces out the problem, emphasizing the layers of authorial messages in structuring
interpretation. The class then explores Freud’s free-associative method for explaining hidden,
idiosyncratic interpretations of dreams; Propp, Wollen and Field offer formalist approach to
fairy-tale / Hollywood fiction narratives which model the structure but not the reading of
narratives. Barthes’ post-structural, semiological approach brings back elements of Freud’s
technique blended with a class-analysis of implicit meanings, but is less concerned with order
and structure.
The second section of the course looks at audiences. A reading by Martinez presents a
study in which student responses to anthropological films ere quantitatively measured. Media
analysts Perse and Schrader provide an overview of media effects and audience research in the
US and European contexts. Hands-on looks at marketing from different sides of the isles are
provided by Hiam and Klein. The section concludes with the culture theorist Jhally whose classbased analysis places special emphasis on the negative effect of advertising on social well-being.
The last section of the course explores culture-specific HIV-AIDS educational media with
special focus on Southern Africa. Several media anthropologists worked on this project, and
three essays, including one by myself will be read. My essay looks at the importance of
fieldwork in media targeting and design; The essay by Levine explores the educational “afterlife
of a film,” whereas that by Engelhart studies changes in audience reception when a film
screening is introduced and followed-up by an expert facilitator.
The course then builds toward an understanding of how narratives engage viewers, how
viewers have themselves been understood, and how health messages can be designed to
successfully reach viewers.
Two essays are required in the class. The first, worth 50%, is due April 7th. Its
purpose is to explore how people with different socio-cultural backgrounds respond differently to
the same film. Your essay should be based largely on assigned readings by Freud, Martinez,
Bordwell and Barthes, and on the class discussions.
For the assignment, find someone whose cultural background is very different from your
own. No housemates – no girl/boyfriends - no relatives or person from this class. You must
select someone with significant differences from yourself in at least three of the following
categories: age, ethnicity, “race,” occupation, gender, health or education. This person has to be
willing to dedicate at least 10 hours to the project.
The first part of the assignment is to view a film/DVD of your choice together – it may be
a documentary, ethnographic film or fictional. For ethnographic films, the Library’s Media
collection is quite large (see links on my homepage). While watching, both of you should
monitor carefully your emotional and intellectual reactions to the film. Take careful notes on the
film, even stopping it in process if necessary. The most important part of this note-taking task is
to concentrate on particular images, sequences and ideas that strike you personally and
powerfully, either as appealing or repugnant, intelligent or puzzling, fascinating or boring. You
are, in effect, doing fieldwork on your own emotional reactions. Both viewers should then take
at least an hour after the film is over – without conversing – to clarify and write down their
reactions. Do not shorten or compromise this part of the assignment. If you do not work
carefully and alone at this point, you may later be unable to reconstruct your first reactions. If
you discuss the film, you may forget or change your personal reactions.
The next part of the assignment is to compare your reactions with those of your partnerinformant. This requires a lengthy discussion / interview. The goal is to identify the personal,
historical and cultural factors in your lives which you both help to explain the differences or
interesting similarities in your reactions to the film. Write up preliminary conclusions and give
the project a rest for a week.
Next look at the film a second time, alone. Pay special attention to those moments or
sections which brought about the most interesting differences (or unexpected similarities) in your
reactions. Again, take careful notes on your discoveries. You must then speak a second time
with your partner to clarify any ideas and questions that this new phase of your research raises.
The essay that you present will summarize your conclusions from this visual fieldwork. It
is very important to refer to works read and discussed in class: use them to guide your own
personal analysis. Use citations (Chicago Manual of Style format). I am easily distracted by
grammatical and silly errors, even to the point of losing the thread of the argument. Persistent
grammatical errors will be marked down. For this reason, I strongly urge you to ask a friend – or
someone in the Reading Center – to proof read a draft of your essay before you turn it in. This is
what professional academics do with their own papers before publication.
The paper’s content will be evaluated on the basis of the sensitivity and penetration of its
analysis. I will look, first, for thoughtful use of material read in class, and second, your selfsearching reactions to the film, your ability to understand those of your partner, and the cogency
of the argument you make to explain your different reactions in terms of the different life
experiences and cultures.
The second essay, also worth 50%, is due in class, May 12th. In this project, you will
design an HIV/AIDS educational video. The “message” portion of your work must be based on
all of the essays assigned between April 7 and May 5th, with special emphasis on the Biella,
Hennessy and Orth essay of April 28. and on class discussions for those days. The narrative
portion should be based on theories of narrative, particularly Propp (Feb. 17) and Field (Feb. 24).
Select an audience in a community to which you have comfortable access. Conduct some basic
health-related ethnographic fieldwork. Based on your understanding of what needs to be
communicated in HIV/AIDS education, establish what factors would be most helpful, for that
community, in an educational video. Consider what people need to hear, what they have
difficulty hearing, and how you might overcome the difficulty with a film script. The script may
be of any genre, from animation or fiction to ethnographic. In the first four pages of your essay,
present the results of your ethnographic research about the needs of the community, and justify
the strategy you have picked based on the needs and the readings (you may also use any other
materials). Then present a four-page description of your film. Use a narrative (film treatment)
style in writing the description, not the two-column film script style.
Jan 27
Course introduction: multiple perspectives on viewing
Handout: Transcript, Copacabana scene, Goodfellas
Viewing: National Film Board of Canada, Four Families (1959, 10
min., AV82201);
Martin Scorsese, Goodfellas (1990, 4 min., AV65284)
February 3
Course reader: Sigmund Freud, “Irma’s Injection” from The
Interpretation of Dreams (1900)
Viewing: Advertising and “news” from the professor’s collection
February 10
February 17
Course reader: Roland Barthes, Selections from Mythologies (1954)
Viewing: Sut Jhally, Race: The Floating Signifier (1996, 63 min.
AV86463)
Marlon T. Riggs, Color Adjustment (1991, 88 min, AV84139)
Course reader: Vladimir Propp, “Functions of the Dramatis Personae,”
“A Specimen Fairytale” and “List of Abbreviations” (1966 [1922])
Peter Wollen, “North By Northwest: A Morphological Analysis”
(1982)
Peter Biella, “A Proppian Analysis of North by Northwest” (1996)
Viewing: Alfred Hitchcock, North by Northwest (1959, 136 min,
AV65290)
Feb 24
Course Reader: Syd Field, Selections, The Screenwriter’s Workbook
(1988)
Viewing: Sydney Pollack, Tootsie (1982, 116 min., AV60500)
March 3
Course Reader: David Bordwell, Selections from Making Films Mean
(1989)
Transcript: The Jungle (1995)
Viewing: The Head: Episode 7, The Jungle (1995, 20 min.)
March 10
Course reader: Wilton Martinez, “Critical Studies and Visual
Anthropology” (1990)
Viewing: Selections from ethnographic films in the SFSU AV Catalogue
March 17
March 24
March 31
April 7
Course reader: Robert Hariman and John Lucaites, Chapters 1 and 2, No
Caption Needed (2007)
Viewing: Amanda Rudman, India Inhales (2000, 25 min., AV10162)
Jean Kilbourne, Pack of Lies: The Advertising of Tobacco (1991,
38 min., AV86291)
No class – Spring Break
No class – Cesar Chavez Day
MIDTERM PAPER DUE
Course reader: Robert Hariman and John Lucaites, Chapter 3, No
Caption Needed (2007)Viewing: Berak Goodman, Merchants of
Cool (2001, 56 min., AV66689)
Inside Business Today, Marketing to Minorities (1983, 28 min.,
AV84833))
April 14
Course reader: Sut Jhally, “Image-Based Culture” (1990)
Tim Pilgrim, “Summary of Advertising and the End of the World
(2008)
Viewing: Sut Jhally, Advertising and the End of the World (1997, 47 min.
AV67603)
April 21
Course reader: India’s National AIDS Control Organization, FACs
(2005)
Viewing: Peter Biella, AIDS in the Barrio (1989, 35 min.), Maasai Speak
Out (2008, 14 min.)
April 28
Course reader: Peter Biella, Kate Hennessy and Peter Orth, “Essential
Messages” (2003; for over 50 video clips from AIDS films see the
same essay online: http://bss.sfsu.edu/biella/varcd/fsetp.html)
Viewing: Orlando Mequita, The Ball (2001, 5 min., AV11164)
Siyabonga Makhatini, The Moment (2001, 8 min., AV11158)
Bert Sonnenschein, True Friends (2001, 7 min., AV11165)
Brian Tilley, It’s My Life (2001, 70 min.)
May 5
Course reader: Lucinda Englehart, “Media Activism in the Screening
Room” (2003; for linked video clips see:
http://bss.sfsu.edu/biella/varcd/englehart.html for video clips)
Viewing: Portia Rankoane, Red Ribbon Around My House (2001, 26
min., AV11153)
Peter Biella, Maasai Migrants (2008, 22 min.)
May 12
Final Papers Due
Viewing: Mike Nichols, Angels in America (2003, 168 min., AV66831)