Friends,
Thanks for your patience during our list migrations and wanderings.
The cyberjournal.org lists are now dismantled, and I hope we haven't
left anyone behind. If you have any problems or questions re/your
subscription(s), just let me know.
Since these postings are being mirrored on google, I will no longer
include your email addresses with your messages. But if you want to
talk to the author of some message, I can arrange it.
The migration has taken a lot of my time. Also my daughter is
visiting from California, so I'm way behind in my correspondence. I'm
in the middle of conversations with several of you about the
documentary, and I promise I'll get back to you all soon.
As a result of these conversations, all of which are appreciated, the
documentary has evolved considerably. The basic theme remains the
same: using food production and hunger as a lens through which to
understand the sustainability crisis generally. Here's a latest
version of the synopsis...
The first half of the documentary will delve into the depths of the
problem. We'll begin by "showing the abyss", as regards the depletion
and misuse of our global food-production resources, the scope of
famine today, and the even-larger scope of the emerging "peak food"
crisis. Then we'll look at "why it's that way". This will lead us
into the IMF, privatization, neoliberalism, global finance, NGO & aid
efforts, etc. The "big point" that I want to get across here -- by
showing it not by saying it -- is that the sustainability crisis is
both systemic & urgent: it cannot be fixed without making fundamental
shifts in how our societies operate; and it must be fixed.
The second half of the documentary will be about climbing back up
from the depths of the abyss, as we look for solutions. In our search
for solutions we won't be looking at theories, ideologies, or policy
proposals. Rather, we'll be looking at real-world examples of
sustainable food practices. We'll start by looking at examples in the
North, such as commercial organic producers, eco-villages, and the
like. We'll examine the economic viability of such operations, and
the systemic forces that prevent such models from achieving 'critical
scale'.
We'll then turn our attention to the South, and look at places like
Cuba, Venezuela, Bolivia, and Brazil (MZLN, participatory budgets).
We'll find here examples of systemic shifts toward sustainability,
and we'll see that these shifts involve synergy and cooperation
between national priorities on the one hand, and local initiatives on
the other. We'll see that they involve non-neoliberal economic
models, a production-oriented perspective regarding land use and land
ownership, and a strong role for grassroots participation in decision
making. In this process, we'll spend considerable time listening to
people at the grassroots, sharing their own experiences.
This kind of material will present difficulties for some audiences,
particularly in the USA. As much as possible, I'm trying to minimize
those difficulties by framing the investigation in scientific terms.
We're objectively investigating the following question...
"As we examine examples of 'best practice re/ food
sustainability', what societal and economic organizing principles
seem to be most supportive / enabling ?"
It is the dialog group, however, that will play the most important
role in helping audiences deal with the challenges of these Southern
perspectives. We'll be seeking to include sufficient diversity in the
group so that most people in the audience will be able to identify
with the dialog process, to feel their concerns are being
more-or-less expressed.
Admittedly, there is a great deal of 'design' going on here. But in a
very real sense, the whole thing (except for the narration, which is
added later) is entirely unscripted. It could almost be billed as
'reality video'. There are places I want to see, people I want to
interview, and questions I want to ask, but I don't know what they're
going to say, or where that might lead. The filming could take
unscheduled turns. I think certain facts and themes will emerge, but
I could be surprised. The filming & interviewing are a voyage of
discovery, and the audience and the dialog group are passengers.
Even more unscripted, and more 'reality-like', is the dialog group.
There is no predicting what might develop there. We're mixing a lot
of very powerful ingredients together, in a process that is able to
release latent energy and creative synergy. We're giving the process
every chance to develop to its full potential, by allocating plenty
of time, and by providing conditions as close to ideal as we can. The
process is known for enabling groups to come up with 'breakthrough
solutions' to 'impossible problems', so who knows? The dramatic
conclusion of the combined film is likely to catch us all by surprise.
At one level, the viewer is having an experience 'about
sustainability', and what is learned and internalized at that level
will presumably be enhanced and enriched by the participation of the
dialog group.
At another level, the viewer is having an experience of dialog, to
the extent he or she identifies with what happens in the group. Rosa
and I both are hoping that we'll be able to present this material in
such a way that people are able to 'feel' what it is like for a group
to enter a space of open collaboration, and for conflicts to
transform into synergies...to see that this is about ordinary people
'just like us', and that it is about empowerment, about We the
People. (Rosa would of course use different words here, but our
sentiments seem to be in general harmony.)
There is an unfortunate and large discrepancy between the
transformative potential of dialog, on the one hand, and society's
general appreciation of that potential on the other. Most of the
'dialog people' I know seem to agree that an appreciation of dialog
generally requires experiencing it directly, in favorable
circumstances. The result is a propagation bottleneck
re/appreciation. The film can be seen as an attempt to project to a
mass audience a vicarious experience of dialog, one that is
sufficiently engaging so that it might be able to awaken an
'appreciation of the potential of dialog' in a reasonable percentage
of the audience. And when I say 'appreciation', I mean at a visceral
level, at a feeling level.
I'm tempted to say that the 'dialog experience' is the more
important aspect of the film. No amount of 'problem & solution
understanding' ever changes anything on its own, as knowledge. The
'dialog experience' is about how We ordinary people may able to play
a role in changing things. How many films have much really useful to
say about that?
At the same time, the 'sustainability level' of the film is strong in
its own right, as documentary, and that strength provides important
fuel to the dialog process, by highlighting problems that are,
objectively speaking, of utmost urgency and concern to all of the
dialog participants, and to the audience.
So I suppose the two levels of the film are like yin and yang, each
contributing a necessary form of energy, as they interact.
---
I've come to the conclusion that I need to direct the film, if it's
going to become what I envision. That's a bigger challenge than the
book was, at many levels, but the book-writing experience taught some
useful lessons, and also provided the basic research for the film.
What I seem to have a skill for, when I'm in good form, is making
things very clear, even complex things. I may not always succeed, but
I do get lots of positive feedback in that regard. The question is
whether I can transfer that skill into the film domain. Does the
synopsis support optimism in that regard?
Without making a program of it, and almost by serendipity, I've been
doing a lot of research into filmmaking and film generally over the
past several years. I know a lot of local filmmakers, and some
serious film buffs, and have learned a lot about what can be done
with the medium and the available technology. From a production point
of view, the documentary will be very routine. It's basically filming
informal conversations, in camera-friendly venues, and getting field
footage of tractors or fisheries or whatever. One can assemble a film
crew that can be relied upon to do a very good job on this kind of
production.
What I know, as director, is what quest I want to pursue, and what
kind of places and people are likely to provide clues and answers for
that quest. What I don't know in terms of people and places, I need
to research, because no one else has quite the same research
criteria. So I'll come up with a list, and some initial contact work,
and I think I can do a good job of that...the same kind of research
tasks as with writing the book. Then there needs to be a production /
logistics manager, to setup the filming itinerary and make the
necessary arrangements.
What I also know, as director, is what questions I want to explore
with the people we interview, and I'll only know at the time how I
want to follow up on things as the conversation develops. This kind
of exploratory conversation is very similar to my writing process, as
you may have figured out.
There is one tiny problem with this scenario...the fact that I have
no filmmaking or directing experience. That is particularly
embarrassing given the ambitious nature of the proposed project. Any
funding proposal that combines an ambitious film with a novice
director would seem to be destined quite promptly for the dust bin,
no matter how appealing the concept might be.
There seems to be only one remedy, one way forward to the dragon's
lair. I need to direct a pilot sequence, one that is good enough to
serve both as an effective 'director's portfolio', and as a
'convincing pilot' for the documentary concept. If I can do that, the
project may have a chance. If I can't do that, then I probably
couldn't handle the bigger project anyway.
I don't see any reason why I couldn't focus a pilot locally, here in
Ireland, and more specifically in Wexford County. We've got debt
bubbles, over-dependence on the construction and housing sectors,
alarming failures in social services, farmers going out of business,
cartel food processing, fishing fleets suffering, invasions of
foreign chains, etc. I can do some preliminary research and some
preliminary (non filmed) interviews and identify a focus for a pilot,
one that doesn't involve too much travel. All the problems seem to
manifest here in the local Wexford area, even in just the town and
its outskirts.
Fortunately, I have some friends here who could do a very good job
with the filming and the editing / mixing, who have access to the
necessary equipment -- and they've expressed interest in undertaking
the project on a volunteer basis. The ingredients seem to be on hand
to move forward.
that's the picture as of now,
rkm
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Posting archives: http://cyberjournal.org/show_archives/?lists=cj
Escaping the Matrix website: http://escapingthematrix.org/
cyberjournal website: http://cyberjournal.org
Community Democracy Framework:
http://cyberjournal.org/DemocracyFramework.html
To subscribe to the cyberjournal list:
Send message to: •••@••.•••
with Subject: subscribe cyberjournal
To subscribe to the Google mirror of cyberjournal, send a message to:
•••@••.•••
Moderator: •••@••.••• (comments welcome)
Share: