First-rate documentaries

Press, 25 May 1984, Page 11

First-rate documentaries

F

Ken Strongman

" During last week, there Eave been some genuinely first-rate documentaries. Documentaries that have i done exactly as they should, yhich is to inform the viewer about some aspect of the world but in such a way that it doesn’t hurt. And two of the three best were made by TVNZ. On Sunday, “Lookout,” which is consistently good, took us to Benares for a captivating and spell-bind-ing hour. So many aspects of this programme approached the superb that it is difficult to know what to praise. On reflection, it was colour which impressed more than anything. Was it all due to the amazing, strange light of India or to the subtlety of the filming? Probably a combination of the two. This was a very interesting visual essay, nicely punctuated with brief interviews with bright, committed, cultured Indians. It brought home the point, all too easily neglected, that Western civilisation does not have the monopoly on culture and ideology. Benares is the oldest city

in the world and provides a surfeit of complexity and richness, with a myriad of people appearing to be so exactly right within it. After an hour that passed with surprising speed, one felt that one had actually been to Benares, and looked up in mild bemusement at the drabness of the world outside the television. As all fine programmes should, this one left behind not only slight befuddlement but also a question. Was it all an exact portrayal of reality or was it a vision romanticised by clever cameras? Although such a question demands an answer intellectually, in the aftermath of the programme it was actually difficult to care what that answer might be. It was simply a celebration of the sumptuousness of life. From the optimism of the

Ganges, Tuesday’s “Pacemakers,” the first of the six, thrust one bodily into the vicious pessimism of local society. It was another compelling documentary which so wrapped one up in another viewpoint that the programme was forgotten in favour of its content. At the end, one felt that one knew Sue Lytollis and what she stands for reasonably well. In just 30 minutes there appeared a world of contrasts. The necessity for women to defend themselves against sexual abuse is obvious, now, but it has led to yet another form of institutionalised violence in society. A cult of self-de-fence could easily develop, it it has not already. Sue Lytollis herself is a person of contrasts, from fervent, genuine beliefs and a flair for teaching to an imprecision and an extremism in what she advocates and how she advocates it. The commentator described Sue Lytollis as believing that “Anything a man does to a woman that she doesn’t feel good about is rape.” Well, one can see

the point, but it is just too extreme. What about the converse? Is anything a woman does to a man that he is not comfortable with rape? Or harassment? No, this is too much, and a touch frightening. In fact, the whole business, although right in one way, is frightening, at least to a non-rapist. Will the martial art women be out in their legions ready to go for the eyes, or the earclamps, or even the knee in the critical reviews if they mistake a humble glance for an incipient sexual pounce? I anticipate some traumatic errors. Anyway, to move on to safer ground, this was another excellent documentary. Describing it has left no space to do other than mention “The Tuesday Documentary,” which followed it on the other channel. This was an informative analysis of spinal injury. Documentaries seem to become ever more watchable and it is particularly refreshing to see some which do not feature monkeys in South America or wetas in New Zealand.