Politics vs. Poetics

Can something be both political and poetic?

To put it simply yes, in fact I would argue that it is difficult to produce work that is one or the other.

Other artists, such as poets, painters and writers express their highly political works in some of the most creative ways. For example George Orwell’s book 1984 explores socialism through animals, Australian musician Paul Kelly’s song From Little Thing Big Things Grow advocates for Indigenous land rights through music and lyrics. Therefore why can’t documentary filmmakers use poetics in their art form to make a statement?

This plays into the bigger issue of documentaries and the argument that they must be truthful, objective representations. However the issue is in the very word ‘representation’. Film is a construct. Therefore regardless of genre or form, film has a perspective. Although I believe it is truth, it is one person’s version of the truth.

I think it’s also important to think about the question in reverse – can something be poetic and political? I flipped my thinking by looking at a documentary that I previously had not seen as political at all and assumed was simply poetic.

The the film ‘Better than Sinatra’  doesn’t outright make a political statement. It is a human study rather than a traditional “political documentary” however this film that is considered poetic could have political underpinnings. Although it isn’t centred around an issue it makes a comment not only on the protagonists life, but also on the elderly, poverty and many more societal issues.


Conversely, often the work that hits my hardest as “political” is often because of the creative treatment of the subject. The film, ‘The Falling Man’ deals with the atrocities of 9/11 through looking at photography of the event. One photograph in particular and the reactions to it are focused on.

I think the reason I like the film so much is because it deals with a political issue in such a humanised and really quite a beautiful way through the medium of photography.

In conclusion I think that yes a film can be both poetic and political. In fact, I think we could look at it as a given, films are inherently political and inherently poetic. It is simply a measure of how much.

What room is there for formal experimentation?

I’m going to use a terrible example here. It’s not a documentary at all (rather, a long running, underrated comedy show starring Zach Braff).

In one episode of Scrubs a woman see’s life as if she is in a musical due to a tumour.  The episode is her version of reality.

I see it once again as playing into the bigger question of what is true, what is objective, what is real?

Who is to say which, if a person see’s things as a musical then why can’t  documentary experiment with musical form to illustrate their representation of reality? It may not be my reality but it is for somebody else.

Experimentation allows for a really bold statement to be made therefore documentaries that play around formally can often make the greatest political statement.

Although this may step away from the traditional definition of documentary, it ultimately makes it a more inclusive art form allowing for all kinds of realities.

Comments are closed.