THE CAPITOL

Recall back to the first assignment. I felt many people would be focusing on The Capitol in regards to its legacy of glamour and success, of a bygone time where the theatre was an event and not so homogenised, uninfluenced by event blockbusters.

Instead, I felt the most interesting part of The Capitol theatre was the parts of its history where its status diminished in the eyes of the public. This could’ve included the early 1960s when Hoyts had let its lease expire, and thus an exploration into the efforts to save The Capitol theatre, but instead the period that interested me was from 1992 to 1997, when a Chinese theatre company began operating The Capitol theatre. This was interesting to me as it lent itself to investigation – there was no available information from anywhere in regards to the identity of the theatre owners, which group was operating the theatre, or even to whom the lease had belonged.

As such, to approach this topic, I decided to create an oral history by framing a series of interviews against contrasting images of The Capitol, Chinese items of cultural significance, and an example of the types of films that may have been shown at The Capitol during this period of time.

To begin with, I sought to get interviews from the theatre group, but as stated previously, I could not find any record of the group aside from brief asides in written history records.

Following a conversation with Mark Poole (oh, hi Mark!), I sought to interview Phillip Le Liu, who had been in contact with a Chinese theatre group to lease The Capitol theatre. However, although he initially had responded to my emails with enthusiasm, he stop answering my emails and so could not interview him.

I also sought to interview someone from the Arts Centre in Melbourne, as well as to film stock footage. However, the earliest possible date they are available is June 3rd. And so, I could not interview them either.

The Museum of Chinese Australian History did let me film in the museum after paying an entry fee, but even after continuous emails and personal correspondence at the museum, was declined an interview with any curator.

I was able to contact and interview a local Chinese Theatre group affiliated with the University of Melbourne, which was formed in 1993 – just a year after the lease at The Capitol. I thought their perspective would be useful and give insight to the role The Capitol had played.

I decided to try and use split-screen for this assignment; it was essential to have visual appeal as it may be played without sounds. The interview was conducted in Chinese, which requires subtitles regardless and so met the requirements as well. The use of split screen allowed me to show multiple images on screen:

1. Footage of The Capitol arcade
2. Footage from the Chinese Museum
3. Footage from a Chinese film Spring in a Small Town (1948) (Public Domain)
4. Interview footage

The interview begins without showing them on-screen, before coming in later. The façade was used at the beginning of the video to allude to the lobby of the past, as well as to serve as a background for the context provided at the beginning. The music fades in shortly after – it is also public domain music. The contrast of The Capitol and the Chinese museum serve to emphasise the connection between them, as well as how culture is both different and shared between the two. The use of Spring in a Small Town (1948) is to serve as an example of the films the Chinese theatre would’ve shown (it is regarded as one of China’s greatest films), an allusion to the past to compliment the idea of tradition in the interview footage, and to allude to Chinese culture and film together. This is so when the interview footage comes in at the end, it serves to tie everything together in relation to The Capitol. The interview was 10 minutes long, but I took a short snippet of it. This ended with a light-hearted joke to fade out the history.

This works as oral history as the interview recounts a personal experience. Although it wasn’t directly related to The Capitol, the use of complementary footage sought to create a connection as some people didn’t respond to my requests for an interview. All together, the clips create a story and context into why the Chinese theatre would have shown Chinese films without actually finding them, or really anyone with first-hand experience with The Capitol.

Again, as stated in Assignment 1, oral histories have evolved to be more self-driven and visually appealing. I sought to emulate that in my assignment, especially considering the parameters in which it would’ve been shot. Furthermore, I felt that the interview I was able to get served to underline the connection Chinese students such as myself feel to our culture even as we’re living in another country, which again with the use of complementary clips serve to link this to the Chinese Theatre group at The Capitol.

PART ONE:

 

Linda Shopes begins her article ‘Making Sense of Oral History’ as such: ““Oral History” is a maddeningly imprecise term” (Shopes, 2002, p.1). In essence, the definition of an oral history is the retelling of memory, a recorded recounting of history where subjects either recount or remember specific events that occurred to them, or their experiences in regards to an universal event. As we know it and its application to our field, oral histories must be recorded.

 

Personally, I think oral history is precise in its definition. It requires discipline in its style, but can be permuted upon. This is especially prevalent when assessing modern oral histories. Although Shopes describes the oral history as “at its heart, a dialogue” (Shopes, 2002, p.3) between the interviewer and the interviewee, I think oral history as a medium has expanded to include self-guided oral histories.

 

Certainly, given our capacity and the tasks set ahead for us as media practitioners in ‘The Capitol’, it is expected that we follow Shopes’ guideline. However, this does not account for the role of the audience in consuming media in the sense that they have independent reactions to the history.

 

For example, Joanna Bornat states “it’s about their experience, and so their past” (Bornat, 2015), but only in the format of the interview. Although I am no expert and boast no PhDs, this is a limited framework. Certainly as directors we will guide the conversation, but as much as this is true of us to guide the narrative, there is the element of the narrative finding itself through the subject’s own exploration.

 

This can be seen in modern interpretations of oral history online. YouTube is one of the predominant modes of media consumption among millennials and Generation Z. The vlog is often self-guided and many times takes on the format of a guided oral history. This is especially prominent in the era of the personality, where oftentimes people have their experiences recounted with the addition of visual aids.

 

Furthermore, this broad term of oral history can be applied to the medium of podcasts, wherein oftentimes interviews take on the mode of an oral history of recounting. This isn’t even to mention the written oral histories that have existed in books and now take the form of articles online, or even self-guided histories where people use their own experience to create. Nowadays, media creation isn’t as limited by resources, and many ametuer creations rival or even surpass professional creations.

 

In another Shopes paper discusses the oral history as a text, and how there must be equal consideration to both the role of the experience and the role as a researcher to accurately record history. In particular, she refers to a quote by Alessando Portelli describing the reliability of his oral sources: “errors, inventions, and myths lead us through and beyond facts and to their meaning” (Portelli, 2010). Shopes states this approach tends to ignore the responsibility as creators to find the truth in oral history. Instead, she advocates for a balance – “both the ‘facts’ of experience and the subjective rendering of experience are types of evidence” (Shopes, 2014, p. 267).

 

This, again, I disagree with. The simple act of recording alters and affects the reliability and portrayal of history. Although there is a duty to truth in the role of the interviewer – if that exists, given discussion above – I believe that narrative is the most important part to storytelling, and so to oral history. Memories are often imperfect and beautiful, and Portelli uses this understanding of oral histories reliance on the personal experience to create a personal story. When looking at events of historical significance grandiose and personal, it is the intimate details which paint the richest picture.

 

From this, my personal interpretation, of oral history is our dedication to retelling the memories of our subjects. Traditional conventions of oral history that treat it as a historical document or record are flawed, and other modes of understanding should account for the democratization of content creation. Ultimately, oral histories will continue to be a dominant mode of expression of our personal experiences, but it up to practitioners to adapt to modern tastes (as they already have begun to) for both creative and commercial success.

 

Bibliography:

 

Portelli, A. (2010) Death of Luigi Trastulli and Other Stories, The: Form and Meaning in Oral History. New York. Suny Press.

 

Shopes, L. (2015) Insights and Oversights: Reflections on the Documentary Tradition and the Theoretical Turn in Oral History, The Oral History Review, 41(2), p. 267. doi:10.1093/ohr/ohu035

 

Shopes, L. (2002) What is Oral History? History Matters: The U.S. Survey on the Web.

3. 1-3. Retrieved from http://historymatters.gmu.edu/mse/oral/

 

PART TWO:

 

Source: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rqa8p1xbjds

 

This video, titled “The Time Kanye and Ninja of Die Antwoord Played Basketball at Drake’s”, or alternately “Ninja in Banana Pudding” is an example of an oral history that uses the character of Ninja and his voice to inform the visual aesthetic of the completed piece.

 

Ninja’s story is engaging because he uses a lot of visual imagery in his storytelling, which Muizon not only remains faithful to in his animations, but uses them as jumping off points. Sometimes, while Ninja doesn’t specifically speak of any type of visual (e.g. describing himself listening to “Started From The Bottom for the first time), Muizon still adds animated scenes (for instance, Drake shown firing handguns whilst shown doing his dance from his ‘Hotline Bling’ video, a reference to the 2014 meme).

 

The shots intercut between Ninja narrating the story and animated illustrations to accompany Ninja’s story.  The animations that accompany the video underline the lurid and surreal reality of the celebrity, and is used to portray contrasting perspectives, context, or to add beats to the story – frequently, the animations create new images that go unspoken.

 

To preface, I don’t know anything about Ninja, but I am familiar with Drake and Kanye West. However, this oral history succeeds because of Ninja’s bemused delivery, the juxtaposition between Ninja’s appearance against his role as the ‘straight man’ in the story, and the animations by Julien Jourdain de Muizon supplementing Ninja’s storytelling. The role of oral history here is admittedly lighthearted, and certainly a lighthearted and modern approach.

 

I selected this example as I felt it best represented the direction I believe modern oral histories have become and will continue to develop from. Oral histories are often shown online through the medium of the online video or podcast, and are optimally designed to be able to be consumed in as little sittings as possible. They also must be able to be compressed – in a sense, memeable, as the more easily you can show a short GIF of it online, the higher its exposure, and thus the more likely it will succeed commercially. This short video’s use of animation is easily memeable; the use of celebrity in the animations make it recognizable and understandable.

 

This oral history inspires me because I think this is where oral histories are headed; an interview by itself is simply not engaging enough when presented on screen by itself for most subjects, as most interviewees lack stage experience to be wholly engaging. Although in this example Ninja is shown to be very dynamic (frequently jumping up, moving around, acting as the other characters in the story), the animations intercut are yet another avenue to supplement Ninja’s oration.

 

PART THREE:

 

Summarily, considering both previous posts, my work in this studio will seek to incorporate a personal story or recollection whilst emphasising visuals. Nowadays, the oral history must compete with more types of content, and so I’ll be striving to create something with visuals that supplement the interview and can be compressed easily / have the potential to go viral.

 

Considering the parameters of the task, where we have to create something that could be presented at The Capitol where we may not be able to hear the video in a busy lobby, a oral history with strong visuals is vital for conveying the message of the interviewee without losing any of its core identity.

 

However, I do think there will be an emphasis on The Capitol as a structure, which would then forego the intimacy that I believe in integral to all stories. There’s a reason why Titanic is about Jack and Rose, but also so much more, all contributing to the sweeping epic that captures the feeling of the catastrophe instead of a dogged historical retelling.

 

As of writing, I want to explore the period where a Chinese Theatre group operated out of it during the 1990s. This is certainly a low point in regards to The Capitol and its prestige. However, I think exploring this early instance of multicultural theatre would be interesting and relevant to today, and finding these actors and directors to ask them about The Capitol at this point in time would be enlightening especially as it gears up to be reopened.

 

This interview style of their personal recollections can be intercut with footage of Chinese Theatre, which would enhance the visual aspect. Hopefully there are Chinese Theatre companies which would permit us to film part of their performance or backstage, which would complement their experiences of the past. We could also advertise this to people who can only speak Chinese and English as well.

The object of the studio is to explore the history of The Capitol Theatre (to my understanding, at least) through the use of these techniques. With consideration to the legacy and influence The Capitol theatre has, it is important for us as creators to communicate its grandeur both past, present, and future.

 

My personal goal is to explore non-fiction filmmaking. I think it takes an immense amount of skill to take the real stories in our world, and using film form and storytelling techniques to create an engaging narrative. It’s also something I don’t have experience with, and seek to explore during this semester.

 

This course, in conjunction with my contextual studies subject True Lies: Documentary Filmmaking helps me explore the ways in which narrative and film form are manipulated to create engaging stories about real-life events. The act of documentary is, in effect, a “true lie” in that we use film form and narrative technique to create a lasting impression.

 

That’s the key, really. It is necessary for us as creatives to promote and present The Capitol with respect to what makes me tick. Honestly, most available material in regards to The Capitol – the story of the architects, the gender divide, architecture – while interesting, I feel will be overexplored. Instead, what interests me is what went wrong with The Capitol. The idea that the theatre was downsized and turned into a shopping mall, as well as falling into general irrelevance over multiple periods even as it remained an architectural landmark in Melbourne. The idea this theatre is just hiding along Swanston Street is genuinely surreal. There’s that parallel, that this theatre is hidden away is part of the appeal, as is the years lost to time which I hope to rediscover. 

 

That is what I hope to invoke in my oral history. This sense of mystery and resurrection in the face of disrepair. As interesting as the history of The Capitol is, I think it is more interesting to see how that history can explore the worst of The Capitol, and what lessons could be carried from that period.

To paraphrase Paul:

If you’re going into this course looking to make a short film, you’ve come to the wrong place… we’re going to learn the basics for filmmaking; I’d rather see one short great shot than some shitty short film of yours.

I want to create scripted shows for television. I know what’s ‘supposed’ to go into a great piece of media – specifically, I’ve seen a ton of online video essays – but I don’t know all of the boring set-up.

It’s like I wanna learn how to make a timballo, but I don’t know how to turn on a stove.

As such, when I was told that the course would be “boring”, it meant I chose right: I need to know ALL of the boring set-up. I need to know about exposure, white balance, audio, camera movement. I need to know about eyelines, rule of thirds, framing. I have no real aesthetic: I’ve been passing off my poor filmmaking (in the realest sense: using the camera) stylistically by not making it the focus, but I really want to make one small thing that looks great.

I have to make something that looks great. My future career depends on it.

So, what is Small Things?

Small Things is designed for someone like me who has all of these big picture ideas, but hasn’t the slightest clue how to actually use a camera. I’m technically incompetent – get it? – but I want to learn how to make things by myself. I want to give myself as many skills as possible in order to stand out. I don’t want to be limited to only one aspect of television production: I want to do it all. I firmly believe a complete understanding of all aspects of film production would make me a stronger content creator overall: the perfect shot requires consummate control, and I can barely keep the camera level.

Don’t shoot the shit out of it.

I’ve been enrolled for two weeks, and I’ve yet to have that perfect shot where everything lines up, where I know I’ve done it as well as possible. To reiterate: I really want to make one small thing that looks great.

Throughout this studio we will continue to make small things, and I fully expect most of mine to be shit. But this studio is for someone like me, who needs to learn film production in all its components, and is going to make mistakes.

The advice we’ve been given is to not shoot the shit out of it. And I won’t. But what I will do is shoot the shit out of it: I’ve got to make every shot as strong as possible to the best of my limited ability, and if everytime I do so I get a little bit better…

I’ll have made one great small thing.

Welcome to your brand new blog at Media Factory .

To get started, simply log in, edit or delete this post and check out all the other options available to you.

For assistance, visit the edublogs User Guide. (Or come to class.)