Documenting Social Justice

I’m a documentary junkie. All those boring history vignettes you were made to suffer through in school? I loved them without shame. Give me an expose on where my food comes from, on a political revolution, on the inner dysfunctions of a band, and I’ll watch it.

But, what makes a documentary? Is it an adherence to the truth, a presentation of events without the creative direction of a screenwriter ? Is the raw material of a documentary a better interpreter of the realities of life than a cinema of actors and actresses?

Documentaries have a long place in history – as methods of scientific record in the 19th century, as staged (and sometimes grossly incorrect) historical recreations during the 1920′s, and as government-sponsored propaganda during times of war. During the 1950′s, documentaries began to shift towards a more cinéma vérité approach to filming, utilizing editing and the advancement in portable movie technology to shoot on-location. This method tended to directly involve director and camera in the action unfolding before the lens – sometimes to the point of provocation. In North America, the movement (coined ‘direct cinema’) was more rooted in the idea of non-involvement.

By virtue of their definition, documentaries are meant to provide an honest and impartial eye to history. But, I think the most interesting aspect of this turn in documentary filmmaking was the emergence of a defined perspective in regards to the material. While maintaining an intimate relationship between subject and viewer – often sans sit-down interviews or voice-over narration – directors were able to provide commentary without the obligation of balanced coverage. This spurred a number of films that not only shed light on societal issues, but ultimately impacted the people and environments that were featured.

Basil Collins aims his weapon at Kopple and crew

Barbara Kopple’s 1976 documentary Harlan County, USA falls neatly into this category of film as a means of social justice. Kopple initially intended to document the drama that unfolded between Tony Boyle, then-president of the United Mine Workers Association, and the Miners for Democracy organization. But, when 180 miners and their families organized a strike against the Duke Power Company-owned Eastover Mining in Harlan, KY for the right to join the United Mine Workers, Kopple shifted her focus to the miner’s plight. She and her crew spent a couple of years off-and-on living among the miners, chronicling their efforts to bring about safer working conditions and better pay through unionization.

Kopple’s film obviously sympathizes with the striking miners. While viewers who adhere to the idea that documentaries should be free of judgment might take issue with her biased documenting, I think her intention to create a film about the universal struggle of the working man and woman is free of any expectation to present both sides of an issue. Harlan County, USA represents the already underrepresented. If anything, the film – and others like it that challenge the status quo – are a necessity to balanced coverage.

But, what impact did the camera have on the miner’s strike? It becomes clear that as the film progresses, and the strike becomes further heated, both sides are more willing to openly brandish firearms in front of the camera. In one terrifying scene, Eastover employee Basil Collins blatantly aims a pistol from the cab of his truck at our filmmakers as he drives through the picket line. Essentially, Kopple and her crew have managed to access a very real and emotionally-charged environment by playing wallflower to the people of Harlan County. I think that ability to integrate without provoking is what makes this film that more intimate, that more honest – and ultimately, that more beneficial to the cause.

In an interview for The Making of Harlan County, USA, miner Jerry Johnson believes that despite Kopple’s insistence on non-involvement, the mere presence of her and her crew was to their advantage. “The cameras probably saved a bunch of shooting. I don’t think we’d have won it without the film crew. If the film crew hadn’t been sympathetic to our cause, we would’ve lost.”