Of all the sites we explored this week, I think I was most struck by Mapping Memories–not because their projects were more powerful or better produced, but because the organization has such an aggressive mission, and seems very savvy in how they employ different media to pull it off. Whatever it takes to give a voice to refugee youth, Mapping Memories seems willing to try it out. That is: when they can, they will bring storytellers straight to classrooms, with the understanding that first-person experience is always more powerful even than video. One project emphasizes writing and photography because “the technology is quick to grasp and permits a group to emphasize message over technological know-how.” But with a little more time to teach skills, as in “Entry Point: Queer Refugees in Montreal,” Mapping Memories is excited to employ film because it “allow[s] people to tell their stories on their own terms.” Thinking about why we as participatory media facilitators might hand someone a pen vs. a camera, I think the two examples above illustrate a great point about the strengths and weaknesses of both. Writing for digital media takes less technical know-how and can be very powerful in the hands of an effective writer; however, video opens up opportunities for oral storytelling! Particularly for ESL students who may feel more comfortable speaking vs. writing in English, I think this is an important distinction to make–video allows oral storytellers to speak “on their own terms.”
Continuing on this subject, I noticed a comment below that one of us was frustrated by how some of the CDS videos seemed more like slideshows with audio than traditional video. For whatever reason, this didn’t bother me. I watched one video where a son speaks about the body issues his grandmother had instilled in his mother, and I found it to be incredibly powerful. Even though there was no “video” to speak of, there are some beautiful choices in how to present the photographs: disembodied arms appear, or the video zooms in on his mother’s feet when he recounts her own mother’s insults towards them. The CDS website describes a short workshop that “challenges you to create a digital story based on a single photo, using the hardware platform and software of your choice.,” and I wonder if this story might have sprung from something similar. There’s no fancy production, but I felt like the filmmaker used the tools at his disposal to tell a very affective story. I wonder if this should perhaps be an overall goal for participatory media: to embrace the tools you have, and use storytelling skills to put them to good use.
I actually found the low-tech approach of CDS to be more powerful and interesting than some of the other video projects we’ve watched. Panning and zooming into photos can be just as effective as full-motion video. The choice of music, the vocal variety of the narrator and the skill of the writing all combine to create a seemingly simple, but complex, whole. I agree with you that participatory media should mean embracing the tools available and putting them to good use in telling stories. Not having much experience in producing video, I felt empowered by the CDS pieces because I could see how I could create similar stories.
Obviously this approach to storytelling isn’t appropriate in all circumstances. Your point about video opening opportunities for oral storytelling is important. In my mind, the CDS stories are the result of careful writing and narration. Video on the other hand can document oral storytelling, which may be a more comfortable approach for certain subjects. I would agree that video allows oral storytellers to “speak on their own terms.”
I also liked how Mapping Memories incorporated a variety of approaches to fulfill its mission; however, I’m not sure I agree that bringing storytellers straight into the classroom as a form of first-person experience is “always more powerful even than video.” I think it all depends.
I agree with you about the photographic slideshows presented in some of the CDS projects. I watched the video about the man’s defense of his mothers beauty, and the slides of their arms slowly moving into the frame also worked for me too. I think that the storytellers use of this body part was very intentional and even symbolic. In certain cases, I think that photographs can be more powerful than video because it requires undivided attention from the audience member. The filmmaker is shaking them into focusing on exactly what they wanted them to focus on; not necessarily what is the most interesting aspect in the frame at that moment.
I also agree about the photographic slideshows in some of the CDS projects. They didn’t bother me, and in fact in many cases I just closed my eyes and listened to the story rather than watching the video. I found the narrator’s voice to be the most compelling descriptive feature of any of the videos. I loved that in this project is was the subjects of the video themselves who seemed to have complete ownership over how their story was told from the script they wrote to the photographs they shared. This approach made for particularly poignant portraits.
The CDS videos were the most memorable videos this week for me because of the “normal everyday people” feel they had. I thought that the videos were produced in a user friendly way. I often times think that less is more, so the low-tech nature of CDS videos did not distract me from the stories. The audio and first person narrative engaged me. Their videos also included subject matter that I could relate to. Having videos searchable by category on YouTube helps you find a video that’s relevant and interesting to you too.