search the archive
search the archive
UPDATE: The Documentary Tradition (8/15/06; Film & History, 11/8/06-11/12/06)
full name / name of organization:
Call for Papers
AREA: Art of the Real
Because the documentary lies somewhere between "art" and "record," its success or failure indicates the aesthetic and topical choices a culture values. When and why do we say that one documentary--a war film, a reality TV program, a cinematic exposé on drug dealers in City Hall--is aesthetically superior to another documentary? Ever since Aristotle, literary critics have done more than determine a text's scandal quotient or political orientation. What formal, rhetorical, cinematic, or thematic choices make a documentary artful, not just true or false? On the other hand, how much "reality"--and what kinds--must a documentary program contain to resist classification as a "fiction"? If the documentary is a unique art form, like the lyric poem or the tragic drama, then its generic parameters can be defined--and violated. How can a documentary film succeed or fail as "documentary"? And have the generic standards changed over time, requiring different aesthetic criteria?
Formal analyses of fictional documentaries or historical fictions
Send your proposal (200-400 words) to Dr. Loren PQ Baybrook, Area Chair, Department of English, University of Wisconsin Oshkosh, Oshkosh, WI 54901. Phone: 920-424-2253. E-mail: baybrook_at_uwosh.edu. Panel proposals, for up to four presenters, are also welcome, but each presenter must submit his or her own paper proposal. Deadline: August 15, 2006
This Area, comprising multiple panels, is a part of the Film and History League’s “The Documentary Tradition” conference for 2006. See the Film & History web site (www.filmandhistory.org) for details about the upcoming meetings and about other areas of scholarship.
Loren PQ Baybrook, Ph.D.