That said, it is worthwhile remembering that this is a silent witness, not a mute one. The very nature of photography, moving or static, raises serious questions about authorship and, while 102 Minutes... may provide one of the least filtered accounts of 9/11, the filtration of images will always exist at some level.
Filtering the Images of 9/11: Citizen Journalists
Take the source material: simply via the act of picking up a video camera, each contributor has enacted an initial layer of filtration, by deciding which images they will record and when. Not only that, each contributor has differing equipment, and varying levels of skill with which to operate that equipment and, perhaps most importantly, has a different reason for picking up the camera in the first place, from the curious, terrified onlooker to the most hardened TV cameraman.
According to I-Witness to 9/11, a short companion documentary which provides interviews with 102 Minutes... contributors, the images and sounds that make up the main film were taken from a collection assembled by the US Government in the weeks and months that followed 9/11. Here, we are presented with a second layer of filtration, unable to know the Government's selection process, or the exact reasons for collecting such extensive amounts of eyewitness material.
Finally, the crucial third layer of filtration is that of the Producers and Editors who assembled the film from countless hours of material. Once again, it is impossible to know who was in control of this process, and to what extent certain images were omitted. One would assume that eyewitness videos would include footage much more harrowing than that which featured in the final documentary, although the reasons for not including such material is fairly self-explanatory.
9/11 and Documentary Ethics
In a documentary realm obsessed with ethics, this kind of 'citizen journalist' approach allows a fresh perspective, presenting the honest, terrified and terrifying reactions of the citizens of New York and New Jersey, as well as visitors caught up in the moment. It provides a representation of New York in an instant of chaotic turmoil.
What it doesn't do, however, is attempt to sway opinion, to suggest that the audience should feel a particular way about 9/11. While it does offer a couple of vox pop scenarios with people watching the events unfold on giant screens in Times Square, what these people offer is not so much a comment on the events but a reinforcement of the particular viewpoint of the audience. While some may totally agree with the more extreme sentiments on offer, others will read them as simply the outward fears of a shocked and devastated city.
For all of these reasons, 102 Minutes That Changed America is perhaps the most interesting, engaging and effective documentary dealing with 9/11, and while it is by no means unfiltered, it will surely provide the clearest possible eyewitness account for future generations.
Filtering the Images of 9/11: Citizen Journalists
Take the source material: simply via the act of picking up a video camera, each contributor has enacted an initial layer of filtration, by deciding which images they will record and when. Not only that, each contributor has differing equipment, and varying levels of skill with which to operate that equipment and, perhaps most importantly, has a different reason for picking up the camera in the first place, from the curious, terrified onlooker to the most hardened TV cameraman.
According to I-Witness to 9/11, a short companion documentary which provides interviews with 102 Minutes... contributors, the images and sounds that make up the main film were taken from a collection assembled by the US Government in the weeks and months that followed 9/11. Here, we are presented with a second layer of filtration, unable to know the Government's selection process, or the exact reasons for collecting such extensive amounts of eyewitness material.
Finally, the crucial third layer of filtration is that of the Producers and Editors who assembled the film from countless hours of material. Once again, it is impossible to know who was in control of this process, and to what extent certain images were omitted. One would assume that eyewitness videos would include footage much more harrowing than that which featured in the final documentary, although the reasons for not including such material is fairly self-explanatory.
9/11 and Documentary Ethics
In a documentary realm obsessed with ethics, this kind of 'citizen journalist' approach allows a fresh perspective, presenting the honest, terrified and terrifying reactions of the citizens of New York and New Jersey, as well as visitors caught up in the moment. It provides a representation of New York in an instant of chaotic turmoil.
What it doesn't do, however, is attempt to sway opinion, to suggest that the audience should feel a particular way about 9/11. While it does offer a couple of vox pop scenarios with people watching the events unfold on giant screens in Times Square, what these people offer is not so much a comment on the events but a reinforcement of the particular viewpoint of the audience. While some may totally agree with the more extreme sentiments on offer, others will read them as simply the outward fears of a shocked and devastated city.
For all of these reasons, 102 Minutes That Changed America is perhaps the most interesting, engaging and effective documentary dealing with 9/11, and while it is by no means unfiltered, it will surely provide the clearest possible eyewitness account for future generations.
- 102 Minutes That Changed America (2008)
- A History Channel Documentary
- Running time: 102 minutes
Comments