Interesting aspects according to me

Interactive media as an alternative lifestyle

I think you understand 'Flow' perfectly. In fact, you're the first to pick it up, in relation to what I'm trying to do here, so quickly and with what seems to be a rich understanding of it. I like common ground :o)

It had not crossed my mind to draw parallels between interactive media and community/alternative living as you've done. Thanks for the insight. I get it, in order to live an alternative lifestyle as the UB were new rules had to be learnt, there were different challenges offered through UB living that weren't offered in the mainstream. The way I see it, the people that went off to join the UB had to be looking, searching for the joy of discovery. Mainstream culture wasn't giving them that so off they went to this new type of experience. They were referred to by the UB as 'seekers'. Perfect, as they were seekers of new life experiences. Perhaps in interactive doco we need to learn how to be seekers.

It is really interesting  to use this to understand more about interactive doco flow and to envisage a future for it.

I see that many of the aspects of UB life in 1978, things that were unique to these alternative lifestyles have now become an accepted part of mainstream living. Yoga, health & fitness in general, organic food, organic farming, meditation, eastern philosophy, ... the list could go on. I don't remember much about 1978 but I'm quite sure that none of these things were norms of mainstream living in Australia at that time. Fast forward 30 years, even 20 years, and look, all of these things are well accepted and even valued aspects of mainstream living in the 21st C. It is really interesting that you laughed (ok, we) - 'nazi youth camp' -  when we saw the vision of the UB people jogging around the property but when I drive to work each morning I see dozens of people jogging up and down the footpaths on Glynburn rd - why is this not so funny? Maybe it would be if we were part of a culture that didn't do that kind of thing.  Don't know. In terms of Flow, the UB culture had a 'rule' that health and fitness were good, our 21st C mainstream culture has the same 'rule' now.

Anyway this tells us that there's been a transferral from alternative to being mainstream over a period of time.  Although, not all aspects of UB life have become mainstream - I'm not sure anyone would be up for doing the Brotherhood Reel anytime soon :o/ ... even me.

If we return to the parallels you drew between interactive media and alternative living in your last posting then this tells us that while interactive media, documentary, at this point is alternative living. It offers different rules and challenges and requires different skills of both producers and audience (who must learn to become users or seekers). As you mentioned  - the UB & interactive media are disruptive systems to the norm. So we're sitting here in 'mainstream, traditional doco' land with all our rules and skills relevant to this and we look over there and wonder, how on earth can 'alternative/interactive doco' land ever Flow? What a funny place! Just like if you visited UB 1978 - you have different goals, skills, rules and are not into the challenges they were offering. Totally out of the flow.

Given this, will Interactive Doco Flow begin as we learn the new skills and rules required. Just like the UB seekers had to do? And what is it that would drive us to want to learn new skills and rules?

Csikszentmihalyi, in his book Creativity (1996) suggests that humans have two main tendencies - one toward entropy - the desire to rest, store energy - and another toward negentropy or creativity - the joy of discovery, growth, evolution. His study into creative people found that these people do what they do (paint, invent, research sell things, make things, whatever) for the joy of discovery. Not to finish it or for anything connected to the end result, but to engage in the process of discovery, learning, growing. He refers to this as an autotelic experience and identifies as key to Flow.

Contemporary society seems to have us geared toward entropy - can't wait for the weekend when i can rest, cant wait to finish this so I can rest, can't wait for my holidays etc. We're fast forwarding through life to get to the bits where we can rest. And of course, don't know about you but as soon as I do rest, I get bored and immediately want to get back into the creativity stream. It would also appear that the entire entertainment industry is all about feeding this desire to rest as well. Traditional media feeds our desire to rest doesn't it? Is this why Interactive media isn't flowing for us? If we could approach an interactive doco through our desire to be creative, learn, grow, evolve rather than our mindset of resting would the experience bring about Flow for us? Is this new skill required on the part of the audience? How can interactive doco get users into the state of the joy of discovery? Into that autotelic experience?

Documentary is particularly interesting. I've identified that, in terms of Flow, the goals of documentary are to learn or to know and to be entertained. Interesting. This genre appears to be attempting to feed both of our tendencies - sit back, rest and be entertained as well as pay attention and engage in the joy of discovering new things about this world. Interactive doco is perfect for allowing the creative aspect - to learn and know to be presented but doesn't follow the traditional rules of entertainment, especially suspension of disbelief. Doco commentator/author Bill Nichols disputes that suspension of disbelief happens in documentary, rather he calls it 'activation of belief' ... rubbish, it's the same thing as suspension of disbelief. And this is where Flow breaks down.

And this brings us nicely back to your question from last posting - Did the UB require suspension of disbelief to perpetuate flow? Yes. Although suspension of disbelief is brought through immersion, so that is also required. Flow requires that the outside world be dimmed so that the experience can overtake all of the senses and a loss of self awareness arises - i believe certain philosophies refer to this as 'being in the now'. Immersion in the experience is required. In filmic terms, immersion allows for the suspension of disbelief  Dark room separate from the ordinary world, loud sound, big screen ... all about shutting out the outside world. The UB lived separately from mainstream society, had big ideals and they all worked hard and were kept busy to keep the people in the Flow. hmm ... that description also works for the mainstream cult we all live in too, though.

Apologies for the extra long posting, so much to say!! I wonder if you can submit a PhD thesis by Blog?... this of course has discussed two streams of flow that my doco is trying to deal with - UB Flow and Documentary Flow. There is a third which I'll post about some other time, my Flow and where the UB and doco fit into that.

Thanks for listening. Writing this posting has brought me to some new insights ... and as a seeker of the joy of discovery that is awesome :o)

Documentary Flow

In 1975 pscyhologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi theorised that an optimal experience of life is best described as Flow. His theory described 9 characteristics that can be found in any experience where Flow is achieved (1996, p.112) -

• There are clear goals
• immediate feedback to one's action
• a balance between challenges and skills
• action & awareness merge - at one with what is going on
• distractions are excluded from consciousness
• no worry of failure
• self-consciousness disappears (self growth after the experience)
• sense of time is distorted
• activity becomes autotelic

Csikszentmihalyi (1990) states that:

The combination of all these elements causes a sense of deep enjoyment that is so rewarding people feel that expending a great deal of energy is worthwhile simply to be able to feel it (Csikszentmihalyi 1990, p.49).

Over the years this theory has been applied to the design of a range of diverse activities, from designing playground equipment to computer games. The first part of my exegesis is dedicated to the discussion of Documentary Flow, I've not been able to find any previous literature where Flow has been applied to the design or discussion of traditional media. I'm looking to identify and discuss what it is in traditional documentary that gives us, the audience, an experience of Flow. Then I can then examine and compare the emerging form of digital, interactive documentary and identify how Flow might be achieved. From observations and experiences with interactive documentary I have noted that the original spirit or heart or essence, that has been documentary over the past 80 years, is missing or at very best faint. Documentary is more, or should be, than a space (website) that contains an archive of audiovisual material. I have watched many traditional format docos where I wasn't initially interested in the subject but through their magic (heart, spirit, essence) they reel you in a make the experience Flow. Interactive doco struggles to do this.

I'm likening this spirit or heart to Flow - the optimal experience of documentary. A first draft of what is described here is complete and my focus now is to build a cross-platform documentary (what that actually means is still loose) that exemplifies Documentary Flow in both traditional and interactive versions of the genre. Then, I'll go back to the exegesis and discuss my doco in detail in relation to Flow.

What's behind the gaze?

What do I see in this archive and where does it take me? In these questions Mike I guess you've summed up the focus for the documentary. Right up front in the film there needs to be the setting up of these questions that the audience wants answered - just like you've been hooked in/intrigued I guess this is the position i need to place the audience in as well. To answer these questions and actually get to the 'meta narrative' of the film a little further digging is required so I can't give it to you right off. Hand me a shovel, a pen and some A4 lined paper and we'll see where we go.

Thanks for your comments David (DM). I should introduce this 3rd voice commenting occasionally - David spent 4 or 5 years living in the UB, has become the most wonderful of friends and has had to trawl through his past life as a communard as I've been on this journey of discovery. He's a great collector of things and is a major contributor to the UB archive I've been using. Interestingly he was one of many interviewed for the ABC doco and was not included in the final production ... probably due to the fact that he didn't find his UB experience mentally disturbing and has no dusty old bones to pick with SC. His story was far too positive for the vision of the film. Contentment doesn't make for good story.

Anyway, back to me :o) ... and to the blog - Yes, DM, I consider this film as a kind of alchemy; the bringing together of elements that have been brewing.  It will bring my own personal response (although won't be outwardly stated) to the ABC film and serve to close my UB journey and allow me to move on to whatever comes next!!! Can't wait!

Stay tuned ... next posting I'll flesh out my theory and passion for the Flow of Documentary ...

Exaggerated mise en scene

Jabe Babe doco clip

The above link is to an Australian documentary by Janet Merewether about Jabe Babe and her life with Marfan (giant?) syndrome. I point it out because I love this relatively new(?), almost hybrid, kind of documentary where there is definitely a very real story being told by a woman about herself but there is an element of fiction/fantasy going on. This element doesn't take away at all from the realism of her story, in fact it accentuates her story with an aesthetic beauty. I love how this adds to her words, she is sitting amongst a model of a suburb to illustrate her personal feelings of being a giant. I guess a good description of it would be a exaggerated use of mise en scene which normally plays a huge role in fictional film but is not usually at the forefront of documentary. The mise en scene of documentary is usually subtle but here it is fantasised and fictionalised and totally in your face. Love it! 

I came across this clip as I was beginning to contemplate how I will represent myself in the film. I have no simple answer yet.  My comfortable place (in life and in filmmaking) is to sit behind the camera and observe the world ... not in front of it, ... speaking. The entertainer/performer archetype (if she exists) is well asleep! Deep and meaningful verbal conversations are reserved for the few that I feel comfortable with ... not a piece of electronic plastic sitting on a tripod staring at me, flashing a little red light!! Jeez ... now there's a conversation killer! Now, the written word ... blogs for example ... i seem to be able to share my voice clearly and accurately in this format. Not all that engaging for the audience though .. :o/ ... I'll keep working on this one - i want aesthetic engagement through mise en scene and clear, engaging communication in the representation of myself.

one year to go and it's just begun

Two years ago someone said to me, 'you need a filmmaker on board with this PhD thing' ... yer right, I responded, where am I going to find one of them!

Now, with exactly one year left on this journey and at exactly the perfect moment, the filmmaker materialises (hello and thanks MC!) and the team is complete! Two supervisors to guide the academic thought/writing processes and one filmmaker (and, as it happens, ex-communard) to extract the story/film/artefact from me. I am very happy :o)

So, let's start this conversation.

Mike, first up, you're spot on with your initial observations and seem completely in tune with what is going on here. I get a sense that this dialogue has great potential and I am incredibly appreciative of your willingness to be involved. I know that it can be hard work getting interested and involved in someone else's creative pursuits. I hope it will prove to be rewarding for you.

I understand and agree with your take on Naturalistic Inquiry, your thoughts are somewhat deeper than what I've presented in the blog thus far. I understand that this is the process and exploration of the intertwining of elements and perspectives. In my methodology chapter I've tried to explain this using the metaphor of fractals - an infinite structure that repeats itself over and over, that will completely alter given the slightest disturbance. I, as the filmmaker/researcher am at the centre of this little universe and I can be found at all levels. The fact that you are now an element in this research project/film will have changed the process and results. I look back upon the previous two years on this journey and see all of the barriers and false starts and I could say, if only I could have been where I'm at now, two years ago ... but as you say, things that are obvious in hindsight are never obvious in foresight. Each one of those barriers and false starts were key to where I am now.

As I mentioned to you today, I've found it challenging to identify why I care about this thing called the Universal Brotherhood. My initial hook (six years ago) was the spiritual leader Fred Robinson. His apparent calling in life was as a prophet more than a leader. He believed passionately that the world was in trouble, on the wrong path with regard to education, economics, lifestyle and he spent the last 40 years of his life dedicated to 'doing God's will'. His spiritual sources were obscure - channelled information from the 'elder brothers from outer space', a 19th Century book called the Oasphe and another called the Urantia.

You asked, why is that interesting to me? Fred 'spoke' to me because he was talking about concepts that had long been part of my life. I grew up in a house where it was quite normal (and as a child, exciting) to be discussing ETs, ghosts, channelling and other astral phenomena. I grew up with a knowing that there is an unseen, intangible element to this world that it is far more expansive than we could ever fathom so to discover, as an adult, this 80 year old man who had been touring around the country in the 1960s and 70s trying to convince the world of his message for the 'new age' was exciting and I was keen to know what he had been saying.

From that initial interest I began meeting and interviewing some of the ex-communards who live in Adelaide. From this I made a 20 min film called 'The Calling' that was about Fred. Through these people I began to learn more about life in the community and it became like a living world for me. This sounds ridiculous but a part of me felt a shock when I went over to Balingup in WA, to the community and saw that it wasn't there like it was in the 70s, that the characters I had heard about were all 30 years older and could barely remember their time in the UB!! I would speak to them as if a day hadn't passed by. it wasn't these 50 year olds that i knew, I felt as if I knew them as 20 year olds and a part of me was disappointed to not be able to speak with them. This prompted me to begin thinking about time and space and how the archives were kind of like little portholes in time, allowing me to peak into the past, allowing me to converse with the people of the past.

The expansive archive has been a hook for me as well and the search for the long lost 16mm film became somewhat of a holy grail scenario, check out the keyword 'Deacon Chapin' for the blog postings about this journey. This passion for history is something that I have reflected on over time. I have an absolute passion for personal histories. I love to see old photos, home movies, letters, anything that tells me about who people are and where they've been. This is key to my love for documentary. Through processes of self reflection I have come to the conclusion that my deep interest in other people's history is because I don't have one of my own. I was adopted and as an adopted child my lineage begins and ends with me. So, if this is an accurate reflection then it's not lost on me that my entire interest in the UB could stem from the need for a history of my own. These people that lived in the community are of the same generation that my parents would be. Have I immersed myself in the world of the UB community because that is where I would like my own history to be?

Hmm, Mike, did you ever think of becoming a psychotherapist? You asked two simple questions and have opened a door to a new dimension! If this is where I'm at and where I'm coming from then this is no longer a film about the UB but about myself ... :o/ ... do i even want to go there?? Filmmaking as therapy?

Over and out ...