Historically Speaking: Hottentot Venus

I found the bit shown in class on the “Hottentot Venus” really disturbing and outrageous, but I guess it was the way exotic cultures were interpreted back then, which of course does not make it right.

I think that if Ethnology was born out of these “Ethnological Zoos” where public exhibits of human beings was in their “natural” or “primitive” state were common it’s a sad reflection on the anthropological field of study. These human exhibits were a form of visual documentary and they were common until the 20th century. In the article The Other History of Intercultural Performance, Coco Fusco writes that though human zoos as they were back then no longer exist “the desire to look upon unpredictable forms of Otherness from a safe distance persists” (154).

The short clips of the history of Saartjie Baartman, who was a member of the Namagua tribe, better known as the “Hottentot Venus” were just so sad and vile it’s hard to imagine what her life must have been. She was on display in London until her death in 1815. The people that were exhibiting her allowed spectators to touch her especially touch her buttocks in exchange for payment.

Coco Fusco performed inside a cage with a friend of hers and she says that “after the ritual surprise of encountering caged beings, audiences invariably revealed their familiarity with the scenario to which we alluded” (154) which is a very sad statement because I would want to think that we have come a long way since the times of the human zoos, but for people to see familiarity in such a vile spectacle is not encouraging.

Couple in the Cage

I didn’t really enjoy watching “Couple in the Cage” with Coco Fusco and Guillermo Gomez-Peña who were posing as undiscovered “Amerindians” - even though they did have a purpose in mind before doing what they did. I think that putting themselves in a cage and playing with orientalism and all the prejudices and stereotypes, and notions that go with it, and exposing people is quite brilliant, but doesn’t necessarily make it a good read or something fun to watch.

The portion in the article that Fusco wrote on “Intercultural Performance” is something that I really found disturbing:

“Those people from other parts of the world were forced first to take the place that Europeans had already created for the savages of their own Medieval mythology; later with the mergence of scientific rationalism, the ‘aborigines’ on display served as proof of the natural superiority of European civilization, of its ability to exert control and extract knowledge from the ‘primitive’ world, and ultimately of the genetic inferiority of non-European races” (146).

I liked how their performance forced people to come into contact with the unexpected, and in Fusco’s words “people’s defense mechanisms are less likely to operate with their normal efficiency, caught off guard, their beliefs are more likely to rise to the surface” (148). This whole idea of catching someone off guard, in order to bring out their inner prejudices and fears, especially when they encounter something unfamiliar, an exotic “other” - is really interesting BUT it’s also a bit unfair isn’t it? Everyone has their own prejudices and being tricked into exposing them in a very public manner, is questionable at the very least.

Regardless, I think some of the aspects of Coco Fusco and Guillermo Gomez-Peña’s performance were hilarious like them lifting weights, watching television, Fusco’s wild unabashed dancing. These activities seemed so far from what the stereotypical “native” activities, I loved how the audience was just taken aback by watching them engage in “normal” Western culture.

Another good point that Fusco makes is about the feeling of objectification from being in the cage and being watched by strangers. She said that in Spain many men made highly charged sexual comments about her body, and some even went as far as “coaxing others to add more money to the donation box to se my breasts move as I danced” (162). Furthermore, I didn’t find it too surprising when she said that Guillermo Gomez-Peña “found the experience of being objectified continuously more difficult to tolerate” (162) I guess because he was now the subject of that voyeuristic “gaze.”

Overall though, I think that this film could have been a lot shorter, it felt a bit like it dragged on. I feel like it could be condensed into much shorter footage.

Cannibal Tours

Watching Cannibal Tours created a sense of discomfort in me that I definitely did not expect to feel when I watched the film. The tourists seemed typical and ignorant of the tribal culture in Papua New Guinea. What struck me the most was the part with the native man saying he wants the tourists to stop asking him for a second price because he can’t do that when he goes to a market in town, or a mall. He is absolutely right!.

The black and white photography that pops up periodically throughout the film shows the natives (back then) looking extremely miserable as if they were specimens, next to the caucasian explorers. The documentary photography in the film is similar to the photography in the National Geographic, because it is exhibiting an exotic culture. The readings from the book Reading National Geographic, by Catherine Lutz and Jane L. Collins paint a different picture of the National Geographic than what is traditionally thought. The natives are a an exotic “other” and according to Lutz and Collins the magazine “is continually drawn to people in brightly colored, ‘different’ dress, engaged in initially strange-seeming rituals or inexplicable behavior” (89). The magazine definitely focusses on exotic aspects like what the natives wear partly perhaps because “exotic dress can stand for a pre-modern attitude, Western dress for a forward-looking Western orientation” which is essentially what is conveyed in many of these images.


The scenes in the film, with the tourists going around with their cameras photographic everything, asking the natives to “smile” for them and pose, made them (the tourists) appear almost cannibalistic. It’s the tourists who are insatiable, completely consuming any exoticness that they perceive. But I think that what made the scenes even more disturbing for me was that I remember my mom doing the same thing when I went to Panama last summer - asking a tribe of native girls to smile while I went and posed with them. I just felt really guilty after watching those scenes. But I think that the absolutely most vile aspect of the film was that it seemed the natives were selling their culture, or at least the Western world’s consumerism was essentially consuming their culture. The act of paying for a photograph of their most sacred building, and then paying them to pose was uncomfortable watch.

Professional Viewing

The Rodney King video that we screened was footage that would’ve outraged just about anyone that watched it. The court footage from the trial showed the defense and the prosecution each making their case to the jury. While watching the footage, I didn’t feel prosecutor Terry White did such a bad job at drawing attention to the officers at fault. However after sitting through the testimony and the cross-examining of each of the 3 officers (Koon, Powell, Briseno) at the trial (Wind did not get cross examined) I had to almost laugh at how it was possible that the jury bought into what the officers said.

In the article “Professional Vision” by Charles Goodwin he shows how the defense was able to use its own “coding scheme” when examining a piece of evidence as incriminating as the infamous video tape of the Rodney King beating. It is absolutely fascinating how the defense for the 4 Los Angeles Police Department officers was able to breakdown the tape in such a way that the jury viewed it according to their “coding scheme,” and to the point where they no longer saw events in the tape the way an average person did. Goodwin defines coding schemes as “one systematic practice used to transform the world into the categories and events that are relevant to the work of the profession” (608). Therefore what in reality was a massive beating by the officers, was now transformed into ten separate events each with its own sequence of stages, and the aggression displayed by the officers was “coded” as professional practice.

The defense also made use of “expert testimony” which according to Goodwin “had the effect of filtering the events visible on the tape through a police coding scheme, as articulated by an expert who instructed the jury how to see the body movements of the victim in terms of that system” (616).

By way the defense broke down the events in the tape, the expert called incidents of police brutality - periods of “escalating and de-escalating” force used to apprehend a suspect, the batons that the officers were beating King with were now referred to as “tools” used by the officers, and minor movements in King’s body were interpreted as aggression on his part. A part of me considers this brilliant use of rhetoric but I can’t help wonder that behind all this coding, behind all the “professional police talk” how could the jury just not look at everything like an average citizen would putting aside all the police babble.? Even the fact that one of the officers accused, Briseno, defended himself by actually admitting that the other officers were going too far. There was even a break in the defense! Not all 4 officers could agree on a single defense, and how could the jury NOT pick up on this?

Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story

The documentary film “Superstar: The Karen Carpenter Story” by Todd Haynes is quite a dark depiction of the rise and fall of this singing sensation.

The documentary was done entirely without live actors instead Haynes uses modified Barbie dolls to portray the various members of the Carpenter family and other close associates.

Karen’s doll was modified to reflect the effects of anorexia nervosa on the body. As Karen’s anorexia progressed, the doll’s face became slimmer along with her arms. The use of the Barbie dolls was a bit distracting because even though it made a point about society, body image and anorexia, it was still a bunch of dolls bouncing around the screen. I personally found it harder to take seriously than if it had been done with live actors.

The documentary paints the Carpenter family in a negative light. It appears to be sympathetic to Karen’s struggle and everything she went through on her path to recovery from anorexia nervosa. Karen’s mother, Agnes is portrayed as a very controlling woman, not wanting Karen to move out of the house and making career decisions for Karen. Agnes also appears to be in denial of Karen’s issues with her weight until it gets to a point where it actually starts seriously affecting Karen.

Karen’s brother Richard looked scary in the film. The Ken doll used for him was almost “evil looking” and the very portrayal of him as a perfectionist with a temper, was not the most flattering.

Overall I found the documentary sad but I don’t think it really did the memory of Karen Carpenter any justice.

Nobody's Business

Watching the documentary Nobody’s Business was incredibly entertaining. A part of this film reminded me of my own family because our family tree is quite large back in Panama. I think it is important to try and find out about ancestors and great grandparents because it gives a sense of history. I found it rather sad that Oscar, (Alan’s father) did not care nor cared to find out more about his own grandfather in Eastern Europe.

The scenes where Oscar gets defensive which were cut interjected with a black and white boxing match made me wonder if the comments were real or not, especially since Oscar’s comments were just hilarious.

I think this film really explores the relationship between father and son overall. Alan compares his father’s upbringing with his own. He explores his father’s life with all of its ups and downs. Alan’s quest to get his father to confront his memory, and talk about his past is admirable because his father often refuses to cooperate. The film really hit a point by going and exploring different generations of the Berliner family going from the ancestors in Eastern Europe all the way to his sister’s daughter Jade.

One of the elements that stuck out to me the most was the sound used throughout the film. The bells, the ringing, the clock ticking, the fight scenes, were like another character in the documentary.

I liked how the film showed that even strangers can have a connection yet at the same time there are people living in this world who are completely lonely, and he used Oscar as an example.

Tarnation

It’s not often that I sit through a film and it has actually evoked some manner of emotion from my gut. I usually don’t feel anything after watching a film, besides a lingering giggle if I have watched a comedy or a slight shudder if it’s a thriller. But the film, Tarnation by Jonathan Caouette left me feeling like crap to be honest. I felt terrible after that movie, and I’m not saying the film was terrible by any means, it’s just that the absolute tragic portrayal of his mother - it’s just really unfair. I think the film in many ways made me think about my own mother and all her eccentric-like behaviors in the past. It made me miss her at times too.

Caouette’s style of editing, and what he chose to include made some scenes difficult to watch. I felt like I shouldn’t be watching some of the more private moments, and I think that was exactly his goal. In an interview with the BBC, he tells them “I love the idea of making a narrative where it feels like the audience member is peeping in on something that they don’t necessarily know if they should be peeping in on.” There were definite scenes where as the viewer I felt very intrusive, and I was tempted to almost look away. For me the scene where we see the degree of Renee’s mental degeneration towards the end of the film made me think that it was almost cruel to have her exposed like that at the same time it evoked so many feelings of sympathy from me that I couldn’t feel more sorry for her and all the crap she’s endured.

The entire film is like one long video confessional for Caouette. In the article “Video Confessions” Renov (the author) states that in one video “the subjects seek not forgiveness but expressive release in the form of dialogues” which I think has some baring on Tarnation. I think that the people in it, when in front of the camera feel some form of release by expressing themselves or else they would not say anything. I also think Caouette is using this film to as an apology for not being there for his mother. The scene where she tells him she’s all he’s got and that he never appreciated her was revelatory because even though Renee is highly delusional at times, I realized that more than anything she’s a very lonely person.