Being new to documentary, my original impressions were simple. It’s non-fiction, relatable, and doesn’t include “actors” just “real” people. This chapter expanded up my understanding. It also gave my disparate impressions some structure: “the form of documentary is mainly determined by subject, purpose and approach.” It also became clear that this structure is not a firm one. Documentary allows for interpretation in all areas, with experimental documentary as the most avant-guard. One such experimentation is the use of imagery and “beauty”. McLane writes that “beauty is functional”. From what I can interpret, she is implying that in documentary, scenery and beauty are used to communicate feeling or enhance information, rather than to create beauty for the sake of beauty. I find this a very fine line that I would like to explore. This connects to her comment that “documentary is purposive”, with the intention of achieving something. All this has expanded my understanding of documentary as an art-form.
