A contemporary example of visibility is the TV series ‘The Secret Millionaire’ (2006 – present) in which millionaires go under cover into impoverished communities and agree to give away their own money (Appendix 1,2). Members of the are told the cameras are present to film a documentary. The millionaire lives like the people in area and they must survive on a budget.
They dress differently so as not to reveal their wealth. They hide their true identities from the people they meet, but as viewers we know he or she is pretending, they change their appearance in order fit in and obtain access to the area they may want to help. The people the millionaire meets are unable to tell his status by his appearance, much like the citizens of seventeenth century France and England.
As the audience observing the millionaire we are fully aware he is pretending, we see what he really is and watch as he meets people who accept him as the person he is representing. They are sure they are addressing an equal not someone much higher up the social ranks. At the end of the episode the millionaire reveals his or her real identity to the community, they regain their real place in society as they give out their money.
Recently the lines between fact and fiction have become increasingly burred.
Today images can be created out of nothing on a computer “the most striking facility of new imaging technologies is their ability to […] simulate it from scratch using only numerical codes as the object or referent” (Kember 1996) Reality can be created and can look just as realistic as something that is real. It doesn’t need any real reference or basis in reality to be created.
With the invention of online virtual realties, people can create a new reality for themselves whist wearing a mask and hiding their real identity. However the person wearing the mask can feel safe in the knowledge it is not a real world, and so lose their inhibition and show their true self. “In the guise of fiction, the truth about himself is articulated” (Zizek 2004).
Simulation is another way of obfuscating our true selves. (Baudrillard, 1983) says that to simulate is present something to have what is there, however simulating is complicated because it is not just pretending. An example being someone who fakes being ill can make everyone believe that they are truly ill. If they are simulating illness they can produce symptoms. “Therefore pretending […] leaves the principle of reality intact: the difference is always clear, it is simply masked” (Baudrillard, 1983) the reality is still present and visible; you know it is a mask. Whereas “simulation threatens the difference between ‘true’ and ‘false’, between ‘real’ and imaginary’” (Baudrillard, 1983) The simulation becomes reality as they cannot be separated from each other, you cannot see where reality ends and the simulation begins.
“On today’s market we find a whole series of products deprived of their malignant property: coffee with out caffeine, cream without fat, beer with alcohol…” (Zizek 2004) The coffee without its caffeine is perceived as being coffee, but it is without what constitutes the raw coffee beans.
Like making coffee without caffeine, how about making reality without its substance? Recently television programmes such as ‘Made In Chelsea’ (2011 – present) and ‘The Only Way Is Essex’ (2010 – present) have evolved the documentary genre with a new type of reality TV – ‘structured reality’, where real people play themselves in supposedly real situations. These shows have grounding in reality but have become exaggerated and removed from their source so as to entertain. They been criticized by documentary makers, and have changed the way that documentary stories are captured and told.
The disclaimer at the beginning of ‘The Only Way Is Essex’ stating that ‘the people are all real although some of what they do has been set up purely for your entertainment." was added after the first series. This new type of reality questions the authenticity of the participant’s contribution. The producers of a programme can have power over how people are seen.
The participants in these constructed reality programmes are playing a simulated version of themselves. They are shown as being real people but are being placed in scripted situation by the programmes producers. Are they be reacting to the situation as themselves or how the producers want them to react? They could be simulating a reaction that could be in reality their own actions, or what they want to be shown as their genuine feelings. They are perceived, as being themselves but what is chosen to be made visible to the viewers could not be reality, but the two cannot be distinguished from each other.
They may be themselves in front of the camera, being filmed in their own environments as opposed to a set, but as they are being partially scripted and in a sense are acting, they may well be considered actors, and should be paid as such.
Having actors in a reality show or documentary undermines the truth and information in what is being made visible to you. However if the real people being shown are simulating their realness and you cant tell the difference between the simulated and the real, you could not call them actors.
An example of both visibility and reality in contemporary work is the reality TV show ‘Big Brother’ (2000 – present) “where everything is given to be seen” and “there is nothing left to be seen” (Baudrillard, 1983). The participants or ‘housemates’ could be seen as people who are being themselves, you think you are seeing the real person, but they could be posing.
The House, in which the housemates are confined, (Appendix 3) is built to look like a real house interior. It has the image of a real house, it is dressed to give the impression of a real house, but behind the walls are cameras and crew. We the viewer and the housemates see a house, however we know it is only pretending to be a house to create a real environment where it “… is the place of a fake sociality, a virtual sociality” (Baudrillard, 1983).
As the housemates are fully aware that they are being constantly watched they could be simulating a real person to the audience. They are not really themselves, but a representation of what they want the audience, and the other housemates to see as real. The show is a game and the housemates are contestants hoping to win. They could be constructing an image or simulation of themselves in order to gain the viewers approval and win the game.
In ‘Big Brother’ the viewers have the power to evict people they watch continuously and to decide who wins. The viewers move from spectator to judge and become their own real big brother. “The power of control is internalized, and people are no more victims of the image: they transform themselves into images – they only exist as screens” (Baudrillard, 1983)
The themes that have been discussed can be related to my work. I am going to relate some of these ideas to a documentary I made recently in December 2011, ‘Life With Sailor’. The documentary is about the canine assistance charity, Canine Partners, a charity that trains and places dogs to assist disabled people in the UK.
I choose to make this film to make people more aware of how dogs can help people and the positive effect it can have on their lives. I focused my film on a woman, Eileen and her assistance dog Sailor, and told her personal story.
When filming the documentary I did not just sit back and merely observe through a camera lens, I did in a way construct the reality. I needed to show what Eileen had talked about – all the jobs Sailor helps her with. However she did not need all the jobs doing in the short amount of time that I spent with her, so we set up scenarios to be filmed where the dog assisted her even though she didn’t really need assistance at that moment.
One of these constructed shots is when the dog takes the washing out of the machine, there was no washing being done at the time, so we placed some items in the machine and asked the dog to unload it, to him it was reality and the items had really been washed (Appendix 4). Another is a shot of Sailor opening the bathroom door, even though nobody at the time needed to get into the bathroom.
Even though I constructed these shots, the actions were representations of what is reality. In reality the dog does take the washing out of the machine when there is washed clothes in there. The dog does open the bathroom door when Eileen needs him to; he has been trained to do that for her, not only for the camera.
This is different to the example of the TV show ‘The Only Way Is Essex’, where the participants are told what to do or scripted into a situation. The scene they are filming may have no connection to a real situation or event, and is created solely for entertainment. I created my scenes to show and inform people about the work of the charity and how the individual dog helps this person.
When doing my interview with Eileen, I did not just talk to her as if I might if I just met her unplanned, I prepared in advance what I wanted to ask her, and I hoped by doing this I could control her answers. Eileen was also prepared and was aware that a lens was observing her; she dressed slightly differently as to what she would have worn on a normal day. Eileen decided what she didn’t want to be shown or said on film and controlled how she was represented in the film. She tried to control how the audience interpreted her dress and her identity.
As producers of film we have a responsibility to the subjects portrayed, to show them as true to reality as we can, to not interfere or dictate how they should portray their reality for the purposes of film making, but sometimes in order to portray reality on film its needs some external influence, while the reality seen on camera may not be a true reality being observed it should portray reality.
Subjects and producers have control over how they are seen. People can simulate how they are seen and in what way they are visible to others. Subjects can construct and choose their own reality, which could be seen as being more real as the truth itself. If they hide behind masks they can show their true selves more than if they were being seen as their real self.
Both of my chosen themes are apparent in other contemporary practitioners work and my own. In reality TV and structured reality programmes, reality is not always the truth or what is shown to be real. In my work I have set up reality to be filmed in order to portray what is real. However I will need to be careful that I do not influence what is being shown as reality.
In conclusion visibility and visuality and reality have many similarities but they show their subjects in different ways. You can pretend to be something but whilst pretending you are, you are still keeping the reality of the real you in place. If you simulate yourself with attributes you do not have you will obfuscate the true reality and it will be difficult for others to know the reality.