I plan to interview Ana Meyerson, the geology department secretary at Lafayette College, later this afternoon. I will film the interview in the style that has Ana addressing the audience, responding to questions I ask her. I will not have my voice or self in the shots. If necessary during the interview, I will ask questions in different ways so that she incorporates them into her answers. This will allow the audience to more fully understand the flow. I plan to interview her in her office in the department, as it shows how central she is to running the show. I want the interview to convey how important her work is to the department’s success. In addition, her office area is also always full of plants and photos and books and positivity, which shows a large part of her character.

In terms of B-roll, I plan to film a few things: the outside of Van Wickle by her office, possibly a few shots inside the building, and hopefully a few shots of Ana and students participating in an upcoming geology lunch event held for upper-class majors. I will run this by the department head before filming anything.

In terms of the actual interview, I have a few things I want to make sure we touch on. I first want to discuss how she became involved at Lafayette and in the geology department here, and what she does in the department. Ana goes absolutely above and beyond, so I want to bring to light how helpful and enthusiastic she is. I want to talk about how she takes classes here and overall how hard she works.

When thinking about documentary, I keep returning to the idea of truth. Documentary is seeking the truth to the best of ones ability. In this film, Errol Morris ultimately tells two truths: the truth of the case itself, and the truth of how these people found that truth. Morris tries to make his own opinions unknown and purely show the truth of the case; he does so through the story of people who lived these events. The story is told through a synthesis of material: music, radio recordings, images, interviews, acted scenes, and newspaper articles. Normally, I would think that it would be difficult to keep to the truth in such a dramatized film; however, Morris does a very good job of this.

From the beginning, the audience hears different tales of the encounter. Morris also keeps the audience hooked through repeating shots in different ways, going back and looking at different peoples’ scenes during the same time. This is illustrating if testimonies match or not. I found The Thin Blue Line thought provoking because both documentary and investigation try to find truth; documentary is investigation.

While Morris’ voice is never actively inserted into the film, he does add many elements of art: intense original music, photo shots dramatically framed in black tint, shots of the buildup of cigarettes, shifting hours of the clock, the chocolate drink spilling on gravel, scenes shown in the drive-in theater, feet slowly stomping and loudly clicking. Morris uses artistic techniques to show what occurred, since it cannot actually be seen.

Dams diminished populations such as the American shad, but allowed for the introduction of others; at this point in time, is dam removal worth the repercussions?

We will explore dam removal by documenting is controversy in local river and stream systems. Is dam removal necessary on the Delaware, Lehigh, and Bushkill? Would its effects positively revitalize the environment, or have dams been in existence in these areas too long, creating new ecosystems that would be damaged by removal? We will use resources readily available to us at our institutions, such as professors, as well as reach out to local interest groups. In terms of local ecosystems, our focus will be on mussels and shad. We will focus on the dams proposed for removal on the Bushkill, as well as some on the Lehigh and Delaware.

(Anna, Emily R., Devin D.)

I spent my fall break mapping a section of the Bighorn Basin in Wyoming. Large-scale deformation here shaped the landscape and allows geologists to ably observe and study exposed rock layers on ridges, plateaus, and in valleys. As I hiked the terrain with my field team, my mind often wandered to a comparison: geology as documentary. It’s what the science is, really; geologists attempt to tell the story of this planet, on a large scale or in smaller sections. We find some product in the field and we use all resources and knowledge we have in order to tell its story.

There are many ways in which it is unexpectedly similar as well. Bias and perspective are both very real in this type of fieldwork. I read once in a book by John McPhee that the place where a geologist learns the basics, influences what they initially think of any area for their entire career. My main exposure to geology has been around Pennsylvania and New Jersey, and so Appalachian-type geology will most likely warp my vision of outcrops. However, I have also been on interim courses in areas such as Iceland, so hopefully a wider geographic beginning will help diminish my bias.

I think that perspective is as different from bias in geology as in documentary. Perspective is formed by not only where you studied but also what exactly you learned there, perhaps who your professors were and what they taught. It is formed additionally by your individual character and mind forming judgments on what you are seeing, your own nature and nurture and personal experiences.

The tangible end result of this Wyoming mapping project is a paper on the history of the studied area: in what ancient environments the rocks were laid down, and during what subsequent events they were deformed. Both of these questions are those of documentation. The paper that will exist is documenting the area.

On the surface, these two remarkable women might not be considered similar, as they are in such different fields of work. If you look past their job descriptions, however, they deal with many of the same things.

I was riveted the entirety of Cameraperson, completely invested in the people and events; they were real, and I cared. Gladstone began her talk with Las Vegas, and included other recent incidents as well, and I was once again invested; they were real, and I cared.

Filmmakers document. I interpreted Johnson’s work to be largely based on perspective; she intentionally allows viewers to understand that she is behind the camera. The people and places she films affect her just as she does them. She attempts, to the best of her ability, to tell their story.

Reporters also (should) pursue truthfulness. Gladstone discussed those who do not do as Johnson did in Cameraperson: those who skew the truth, skew the news beyond what is real. She instructed us to be wary. Gladstone, too, attempts to tell the stories of others.

The juxtaposition of Johnson and Gladstone’s talks may have been intentional or a matter of circumstance, but definitely was a productive lesson in proper documentation.

This film elicits emotion immediately. From the perspective of the people, you see the white balloon. What is it doing? Why is it not moving? Why is it unmarked? Is it watching us? Humans fear what they do not understand, and we do not know what the balloon is doing. I was apprehensive. Johnson then tells us that it is classified information. We will not learn the answers through the course of the film.

Action shots of the town below, cars and people moving around, contrast with the stationary unmarked white balloon. Through the shifting of shots from action in the town to the balloon, Johnson seems to be telling us that the balloon sees all. If you are in town, you always see the balloon above. The sound intensifies, adding to this contrast. Here, I recognized a shot included in Cameraperson.

Different shots all include one thing that is the same: the balloon. It was always present, always knowing everything. It seemed like some kind of divine power. This analogy was confirmed when Johnson included the quote from the man in town, about how God is all powerful; “God sees everything. Be aware that He will find out everything.” It was striking when the man said that God created the man who created the balloon. The boy’s bright balloons added another dimension to the film as well. These were colorful, fun, and moving, unlike the blimp.

The shift to Maryland shocked me. The man said there were no cameras on board in the United States; this did not happen in Kabul. Maryland and the shot of the American flag made me angry; why did the blimp seem to imply safety more in Maryland than in Kabul? The shot of the blimp above the church implied it was higher than God.

Then, Johnson allowed the viewer to know that even when cameras are not on the blimp in Kabul, they fly it in order to control the behavior of the people.

The title ‘The Above’ perfectly suits this film. It is vaguely encompassing of some presence perpetually hovering.

When I read books multiple times, I get something new out of them each time. This especially happens as I age; for instance, I have read The Great Gatsby many times and continue to pause in thought or surprise every so often.

I watched Chasing Coral for a third time tonight at a screening hosted by the Geology club, LEAP, and PAW. I watched it twice this summer, but I found myself just as, if not more, mesmerized watching it tonight than either time before.

There were many aspects of documentary filmmaking that I newly appreciated. Mainly, these were struggles, challenges to be overcome. During the first few rounds of attempts, divers and filmmakers experienced countless frustrations. These brilliant people were attempting to film a documentary and affect change in an environment for which no equipment is truly built. It was hard and painstaking, but people were driven. Parts were custom made for the project. Mass amounts of time were spent brainstorming and creating parts that would allow for these underwater timelapses to be perfect. Data came back, and was blurry. Troubleshooting began.

The team had to adapt to their environment not just underwater but in quickly changing water, with unpredictable storms and harsh currents. When an opportunity arose to shoot somewhere else, they had to make moves to do so; they handled these times with intense motivation and grace. I found that while watching, I thought that I could only hope to learn to handle unexpected situations in that manner.

The second we heard a sneeze that shook a camera shooting lightning, I was engaged.

I was not sure what to expect when I sat down to watch Cameraperson. I appreciated and respected Kirsten Johnson’s director’s statement, and was excited to meet the writer. I was not quite sure how a biographical-type documentary worked. The filmmaker is separate from the film; the point of documentary is to facilitate this separation in order to find and illustrate truth. Right?

Wrong. The point of documentary is to bring truth to light, yes, but there are many ways in which to do this. Cameraperson taught me that truth can be found by exploring the world through the eyes of the filmmaker. From their vision, you learn not only their personal truth but also that of others with whom they interact.

This film was quite honestly an intense emotional rollercoaster. The snapshots of a documentarian’s lifestyle are absolutely riveting; Cameraperson did an excellent job of showing how invested the filmmaker becomes in their stories, and the fast transitions illustrated how difficult it is to be torn away. I became absolutely and wholly invested in the lives of the people in the films, as I could tell KJ did as well.

I found myself moved almost to tears when she returned to the family that she had earlier filmed. Documentary takes wild and unexpected turns; that had not been her original intention. The happiness of those children and their family watching the old video was contagious.

Reading through the list of potential films, I genuinely wish we had time to document all of them. As an avid environmentalist eager to enter the active world of documentary in my field, I am inclined to prefer the options of “What the Frack is Going On?” and “Saving the Shad?”

These are extensive topics of contention in the Lehigh Valley of which, as far as I know, a complete up to date documentation has not been attempted. Only recently have environmental documentaries been made and become relatively popular; I can list off the top of my head the accurate, entertaining, and groundbreaking ones that I have seen. This is one of the most pressing issues of our time, and much of the public is astonishingly in disbelief.

Our environmental film options are not huge globally-based climate change documentaries such as An Inconvenient Truth or Chasing Ice. Instead, they are focused, hugely important to the local community; this is so much better for our project, as we will have both access and resources to document for the rest of the semester. And they do have far-reaching implications as well.