(as one document, the page numbers are difficult to negotiate)

OPTION ONE INVESTIGATING GANG CULTURE: THE KEMP DOCUMENTARIES

DRA 710 SELOGADI MAMPANE 28430647 Faculty of Humanities Department of Drama MR. C. BROODRYK 25 JUNE 2011

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

TABLE OF CONTENTS PLAGIARISM FORM........................................................................... INTRODUCTION.................................................................................. THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL DOCUMENTARY...................................... LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION!: HOW WE SEE AND HEAR THE WORLD OF THE FILM............................................................... ACTORS AND THE OBJECTS THEY COME IN TO CONTACT WITH................................................................................................... THE SPOKEN WORD......................................................................... CONCLUSION.................................................................................... SOURCES CONSULTED....................................................................

Page 1 2 3 5 11 17 18 20

1. PLAGIARISM FORM

FORM A UNIVERSITY OF PRETORIA FACULTY _________________of Humanities___________________ DEPARTMENT _____________of Drama___________________ The Department ________________of Drama_________ places specific emphasis on integrity and ethical behaviour with regard to the preparation of all written work to be submitted for academic evaluation. Although academic personnel will provide you with information regarding reference techniques as well as ways to avoid plagiarism, you also have a responsibility to fulfil in this regard. Should you at any time feel unsure about the requirements, you must consult the lecturer concerned before you submit any written work. You are guilty of plagiarism when you extract information from a book, article or web page without acknowledging the source and pretend that it is your own work. In truth, you are stealing someone elses property. This doesnt only apply to cases where you quote verbatim, but also when you present someone elses work in a somewhat amended format (paraphrase), or even when you use someone elses deliberation without the necessary acknowledgement. You are not allowed to use another students previous work. You are furthermore not allowed to let anyone copy or use your work with the intention of presenting it as his/her own. Students who are guilty of plagiarism will forfeit all credit for the work concerned. In addition, the matter can also be referred to the Committee for Discipline (Students) for a ruling to be made. Plagiarism is considered a serious violation of the Universitys regulations and may lead to suspension from the University. For the period that you are a student at the Department of Drama___________________ , the under-mentioned declaration must accompany all written work to be submitted. No written work will be accepted unless the declaration has been completed and attached. I (full names) Selogadi Mampane Student number 28430647 Subject of the work DRA 710 Declaration 1. I understand what plagiarism entails and am aware of the Universitys policy in this regard. 2. I declare that this _assignment_____________________ (e.g. essay, report, project, assignment, dissertation, thesis etc) is my own, original work. Where someone elses work was used (whether from a printed source, the internet or any other source) due acknowledgement was given and reference was made according to departmental requirements. 3. I did not make use of another students previous work and submitted it as my own. 4. I did not allow and will not allow anyone to copy my work with the intention of presenting it as his or her own work. Signature _ _________________________________

2.INTRODUCTION

Theories resound on the authenticity of the documentary film, raising the question is what we see real or fake for verisimilitude constitutes documentarys very reason for being (Allen 1991:103). In this paper, I would like to explore how and why what we see in the world of the documentary film, appears to be authentic as well as what within the world of a given documentary betrays the idea of authenticity. It is vital here to consider theories of the real, turning to ideas on realism in order to confront the reality which the documentary presents us with. Barnard (2007:2) explains that Documentaries bring viewers into new worlds and experiences through the presentation of factual information about real places, and events, generally portrayed through the use of actual images and artifacts [sic] If documentaries present the viewer with images of a real world and actions that occur in actuality (however manipulated and impressed upon) and if realism as a film theory grapples with the authenticity of the film image in reference to the objects as they exist in the pro-filmic world, then the two must be considered in tandem so as to allow for a more colourful, acute observation and analysis of the documentary film. In the treatment of the film image, Kracauer asserts that the world photographed by the camera, the real world, for him being the raw material of film, should be represented as authentically as possible to as to preserve the iconography of the world displayed on the screen (Andrew 1976:141). This he sees as the task of films which are located within the realm of realism. He goes on to talk of the task of the documentary, according to him being the portrayal of actual reality (Kracauer 1961:99). How then does one begin to rerepresent, that is translate this actual reality, this real world outside the world of the film to the film screen. Kracauers observations are useful for he grapples with the film form, the manner in which the image is and for him should be constructed, his concerns being mostly the world of film realism. Bazin on the other hand is primarily concerned with what has been done in cinema, rather ascribing to analysis of the film apparatus ability, the nature and style of

the film camera, most importantly that the filmmaker must recognise the realistic nature of this raw material (Andrew 1976:142). Bazin too proclaims that the material of cinema is reality. Andrew explains Bazins realism as the visual and spatial reality, the real world of the physicist (1976:137) concerned with the realism of space (Bazin 112). The documentary being concerned with portraying actuality is therefore concerned with this realism of space the treatment of an authentic pro-filmic world. This is true for the television documentary series which I will use as a point of discussion. Before diving into the crux of the matter, one must locate the documentary pieces under analysis, namely the Ross kemp on Gangs (Philipson 2006; 2007a; 2007b; 2007c; 2008a; 2008b) television and digital versatile disc series, within specific sub-genre's of the documentary film. Kracauer speaks of the factual films which concentrate on actual physical reality (1961:194), films which explore the natural world in-depth. These factual films have the environment of the natural world as their focus, unlike fictional films the focus is not so much on the individual but on the world in which they exist (Kracauer 1961:194). The environment and events which occur within actuality are central to these factual visual documents, Rotha (quoted in Kracauer 1961:194) expounds this If there are human beings, they are secondary to the main theme. In the Kemp series, gang culture and the effects that this culture has on its environment is the key focus, there are human beings but their main function is to shed light on this gang culture: they provide knowledge on this culture, the culture being the subject on which the series reports, the main subject at the centre of the investigations.
3.THE ANTHROPOLOGICAL DOCUMENTARY

Visual anthropology has the documentary technique at its centre (Grimshaw and Ravetz 2005:3) as a style which is able to translate to the screen explorations concerning human culture. In turn the documentary uses anthropological styles in order to capture individuals in their environments in order to shed light on the culture of their lives. MacDougall describes anthropological films as those which cover new ground through an integral exploration of the data (1997:76). In the Ross Kemp series, investigations reveal new insights and never before filmed environments are brought to a wider public eye.

The manner in which these investigations occur fall into the sub-genre of the anthropological documentary, as cited in Allen (1991). Allen describes the anthropological documentary as that which seeks to record evidence of a cultural life style gained from naturalistic or scientific observation (1991:104). His observations and contributions in this regard are valid and useful in my investigation as he locates a popular and specific mode of documentary film and television. Network television stations broadcast anthropological documentaries as ways of introducing their viewers to new worlds and the experiences of individuals in these worlds as Barnard states above. This is not to say that an anthropological film is the exact partner of anthropological documentary. Robertson (2005), an anthropologist having worked on television documentaries elucidates these differences. She prescribes the fundamental difference as The process through which the representation of peoples realities is arrived at pointing to the lengthy time taken by field anthropologists to grow in knowledge with groups under study. so that the truth is something attained together (2005:52). In film and television documentary, an anthropological style is used within the parameters of the film and television mediums so that the investigation and arrangement of the artefact is dictated by the demands of the specific medium. What dictates the explorations is the goals of the television documentaries, which are what Robertson (2005:52) calls predetermined. In the Kemp series the goal is to highlight the negative effects of gang culture, revolving mostly around the violence that terrorises individuals within and in contact with the specific cultures. The canvas is not blank, gradually coloured by the knowledge the crew gains from spending time in the various environments, at the start of each episode, the theme of violence is introduced as a predetermined conclusion- the investigations move towards gaining evidence on the type of violence used and the related effect it has on the surrounding community. Kracauer (1961) further explicates on these documentaries of investigation, calling them documentaries of reportage. His analysis covers several film pieces which, like the Kemp series, aim to confront spectators with real images of these impoverished slums (Kracauer 1961:202). Linking to the use of an anthropological technique within pictures

such as these, there is a a tendency towards a snapshot quality of the pictures which makes them appear as authentic documents (1961:202). This points to the naturalistic quality of the film images, which is necessary i order to convince the viewer that what they see is real. The crew of the Ross Kemp series delve into the world of various gangs through observing the life style of various gang members, through visual recordings and interviews that seek to gain factual information concerning the activities of these gangs. The images seen at times are simplistic and naturalistic, seeming to just capture real spaces as they exist, therefore adding authenticity to the images presented to the viewer. Monaco (2009), on Bazins thoughts concerning the function of the camera, calls to Bazins desire for Functionlism (as opposed to Kracauers desire for Formalism) for what the camera does- as it is the subject matter which influences the style of the filmmaking(2009:457). As a point of departure I will at first explore the construction of the images presented to the viewer through the Kemp documentaries- how their goals regarding the subject matter result in the specific style of representation.
4.LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION!: HOW WE SEE AND HEAR THE WORLD OF

THE FILM The above phrase points to the importance of the visual surroundings when constructing a filmic environment. The world seen is quintessential in the world of the documentary for it is this raw material of the natural world which grants the documentary its authenticity and plausibility- its visual record (Allen 1991:103). Considering the nature of the Ross Kemp collection, (being an anthropological, documentary of reportage), the style in which natural environment or pro-filmic world is captured, supports the function of the said genre and sub-genre's, which is to record information and evidence as authentically as possible (Millar and Reisz 1968: 125) and (Allen 1991:104). It is the environment seen which is of crucial importance for the very existence of the series. With kemp as a constant, he remains at the centre of the seen world, he is our guide. Being British, Kemp as forming part of dominant racial group, the world around him may be as foreign to us as it is to him.

Therefore, at the start of each episode, no time is wasted in acquainting the viewer with the world of the documentary, immediately one receives information explaining why Kemp has traveled to meet these gangs in particular. Kracauer explains that it is the world of the documentary film that is of key focus rather than the personal passions and journeys of particular individuals (1961:194) and so it is necessary to orientate the viewer to the specific environment. Whilst individuals may be the key sources in detailing the events that occur in the profilmic world such as is in the Kemp series, it is their interest, description and understanding of the world around them that the documentary depends on (Kracauer 1961:194). Thus, at the onset of each episode, photographic images of the actions that occur within the gang spaces are thrown at us, multitudinously juxtaposed providing the viewer with mounds of information through these flashing images. At the same time, our introduction to the environment is often accompanied by an interview with an individual directly in contact with the environment. As is seen in the episode Ross Kemp on Gangs: Rio De Janeiro (Philipson 2006), upon entering the environment, after receiving information through a voice-over by Kemp, we witness an interview between Kemp and his taxi driver. Kemp first introduces the conversation coming conversation What I hadnt expected was to be told by my driver Ivan two minutes form the airport, that I was now in the middle of a war zone, where rival gangs fight it out for power. Kemps initial voice-over at the start of the episode informs us of the violence caused by the gangs of Rio De Janeiro, this is then confirmed by the taxi driver who drives him form the airport, he says two gangs shoot at each other across the road, depending on the time- usually at night- the road will be closed because of the gunfire (the drivers words are delivered to the viewer through a translated voice-over). On the documentary of reportage, Milar and Reisz further elaborate on the simplicity of the film image, adding that At its simplest it is concerned solely with the presentation of natural happenings (1968:125). The above mentioned seen is shot in the vehicle as they cross the road which the taxi driver says is plagued by violence. The scene is presented as simply as possible, as naturally as possible and therefore authenticity is rendered to the film image

Milar and Reisz suggest that the skill of the documentary filmmaker compounds into the skill of an editor (1968:125). They further explain that in order to execute a convincing impression of actuality... a most elaborate editing process may have to be brought into operation (Millar and Reisz 1968:126). Elaborate in being able to convey information and construct meaning through the arrangement of the photographic elements, of the evidence of the documentary in question. Therefore, each episode, whilst pictorially depicting the gangs world, the location, displays a series of images which immediately inform the viewer of the subject matter, juxtaposing images which together, quickly locates the viewer in the given environment. Pace, rhythm and tempo in editing and music here play a key role in constructing each locale at the start of each episode. An informative and descriptive voice-over as well as an interview or conversation with an occupant of the given world come together to orientate the viewer. For example in the episode Ross kemp on Gangs: Belize (Philipson 2008), Kemp opens with the lines Ive come to Belize in Central America.... its only a small country but it plays a significants part in the international, multibillion dollar business of cocaine smuggling. At first we come in to contact with Kemp but soon move to selected images of the location, his words carry on as a voice-over as we witness vast landscapes shots, images of police arrests, tons of cocaine and weapons being confiscated by police and military armed men patrolling the streets. Images of the natural world collide with related or unrelated images of drugs and guns. The erie music moves to a fast pace tempo as we enter the world of the documentary, the soundtrack of any documentary film, giving structure assisting in meaning making allowing arbitrary connections or association [to] appear natural (Allen 1991:108). What is most striking, is the excitement created through the use of music and the style of editing, gradually building up speed as we move from one shot to the next. Steadily, the director accelerates the tempo, keeping the length of shots not longer that seven seconds. Millar and Reisz, when speaking on pace and rhythm or the speed and pattern at which images and sound move explain that when images follow one another at an ever-increasing speed or accelerate, an effect of increased excitement is produced (1968:242).

On the control exercised by film makers through the editing process, Millar and Reisz speak of how the director needs to distort and control the factor of time in order to make a natural event arresting and life-like (1968:126). An interpretation of the images may be achieved because of the way the director, has allowed the audience to participate in the experience through the representation of the images. According to Monaco (2009:461) Bazins mis-en-scne theory, which refers to deep focus photography and the sequence-shot brings the viewer in to closer contact with the film images allowing them to experience them more fully. Drawing from Bazin, Monaco (2009:461) explains that He [Bazin] outlines why this is so: depth of focus brings the spectator in closer relation with the image than he is with reality. This implies consequently both a more active mental attitude on the part of the observer and a more positive contribution on his part to the action in progress.... From the attention and the will of the spectator, the meaning of the image derives. The construction of the reality of the world seen is action-packed, events in the film world, in the world of the gangs, occur sporadically. Individuals, cities, guns and drugs are inextricably linked making up the violent, volatile and turbulent world the film presents to us. The above analysis is an interpretation of the images portrayed, the meaning arising from this interpretation is informed by the juxtaposition of the images in the film supported by the ominous and rhythmic soundtrack. Each Kemp documentary, with its successful use of montage at its start informs the spectator of the nature of the coming experience; Therefore, expectation is immediately fulfilled. The spectator, who is at first greeted with what seems to be compelling evidence of what the team has garnered through their travels, already receives a conclusion of the evidence the team has gathered, what fuels further engagement of the material is witnessing just what type of evidence has resulted in Kemp concluding that violence rocks the environment under exploration. When speaking on editing in documentary films, Millar and Reisz propose that editing is the film [emphasis in original] (1968:123) and that theme (1968:124) replaces plot in documentary film then through the editing techniques used, through the images selected, Philipson conveys the overall theme of each episode through his treatment of the filmic

images at the start of each episode. The sequence and resulting theme which opens each Kemp documentary, is in fact a montage. Millar and Reisz (1968:112) describe a montage as the quick impressionistic sequence of disconnected images, usually linked by dissolves, superimpositions, or wipes, and used to convey passages of time, changes of place, or any other sense of transition. According to Bazin, the use of montage prohibits any ambiguity (Monaco 2009:461), from the montage that opens each Kemp film, the theme is easily identifiable- the violent nature of the gang world and the degradative effects this culture has on the given environment. Eisenstein suggests that it is through montage that new ideas and therefore new realities are created (Monaco 2009:452) and it is through the meaning that each image imparts to the next that meaning making occurs in the Kemp documentaries. Together the images and music support the function of documentary films, which Allen explains is to to supply evidence or proof in an argument (1991:103). Through the selected images and treatment of the locations under investigation, the Kemp series succeeds in authenticity or verisimilitude. The world created is convincing in the selection of the seen images and the manner in which the said images support and give meaning to one another; the music moving to bind the images seen creating what appears to be a natural whole. Kracauer links newsreels with documentaries in that they both reflect the real world, reporting on actual events but in different ways, the former investigates in a brief and neutral manner of supposedly general interest to the public and the latter further elaborates on natural material for various reasons (1961:194). The Kemp series being a piece of investigative journalism, incorporates a newsreel style in the construction of each episode. In these investigation, Kemp asks the question why?, his aim is to discover what fuels and perpetuates the gang cultures. In order to answer this question, Kemp conducts several interviews with various parties for it is these people that form part of each world under investigation that would be able to provide real answers, as documentaries mostly feature the individual... and the world he lives in (Kracauer 1961:194). In his interviews Kemp keeps a distance of emotion, not to say that he does not draw favour but that his reporting style at most times is unemotional.

When analysing films of fact and reportage, Kracauer speaks of the distance the investigator maintains when exploring the given environment. His analysis, as previously mentioned, is of documentary material that investigates socially de-gradated environments and from his analysis he deduces that Human suffering, it appears, is conducive to detached reporting (Kracauer 1961:202). Kemp further incorporates news pieces concerning gang activities in the areas investigated, which further move to strengthen the authenticity of the material, such as is seen in Ross kemp on Gangs: Belize (Philipson 2008). However, in the series, never is a caption seen which identifies which has been filmed by the crew of the series and which has been garnered from existing material. Therefore, the constructed nature of the film, the operation of manipulative processes or the subjective treatment of the filmic material is concealed (Allen 1991:104). Although this technique adds an undeniable flow to the film, it also draws attention to the highly constructed nature of what is seen. An expository technique is used by Philipson where an explanatory conceptual framework, and images and sounds are used to illustrate or provide (loose) evidence for what is stated by the voice-over narrator (Platinga 2005:109). Platinga goes on to describe how such narration's make make an overt argument which is true of the Kemp series. As seen through the introduction of each episode, Kemp overtly describes the violence that occurs due to gang culture. He provides evidence for his claims yet at times Kemps investigations are led by the teams own ideological and social views, the evidence included in the product is guided by the ideological standpoint and aims of the director. On the subjective nature of selection and editing in film, Allen (1991:104) states that the anthropological filmmaker tends to find counterproductive any relativization of his/her perspective and to resist the notion that film incorporates a spectrum of decisions informed by the filmmakers cultural values. Like the other documentarists the anthropological filmmaker uses film to state a truth, this time scientific, i.e. assumed to be outside the boundaries of ideology or cultural conditioning. Using an anthropological style gives the impression that a more objective and unbiased investigation is underway which aims to uncover all aspects of a given topic. However, the knowledge garnered by Kemp and his investigative crew is constructed by the choice of which individuals are sought out to give their side of the

story and which peaces of this information have been selected for representation in the filmic document. Therefore the construction of a reportage film is not free from the influence of the ideologies of the crew constructing the said documentary. How many other perspectives and voices have been left out of the Kemp discussions and given the strong presence of the expository technique, which is heavily scripted (Platinga 2005:109)- consider that many of the Kemp episodes follow the same narrative structure- there is most definitely a particular perspective which informs the route of investigation. On dramatic structure, Boggs and Petrie, make clear that whether the dramatic structure is linear or non-linear, both contain and depend on these dramatic elements: exposition, complication, climax and dnouement (2008:54). The Kemp documentaries often follow the same dramatic structure for each episode: the situation is introduced, next we become aware of the complications that arise from gang activities searching for the reasons why the culture is so prevalent, Kemp attempts to make contact with a powerful gang leader as a climatic point of the adventure and it all comes to an end- observing the knowledge gained in retrospect whilst Kemp makes his conclusions. Each time the team makes to investigate a particular situation, they have a specific structure in mind but what if adhering to this specific structure could also mean that their investigative techniques and approach remain constant. If each situation is unique, using the same approach to every story could result in loosing out on garnering information specific to each situation.
5.ACTORS AND THE OBJECTS THEY COME IN TO CONTACT WITH

When critiquing the episode Ross kemp on Gangs: Kenya Special (Philipson 2008), Simuyi (2009) makes light of this tendency to approach a situation with an already set perspective and goals to be achieved which that results in what she terms a skewed investigation (2009:[sp]). Unsatisfied with the Kemp teams approach to investigating the matter and being a native of kenya herself, in her article Ross Kemp on a Kenyan Gang: Mungiki (2009:[sp]) she begins to unravel the teams failed and

biased investigative techniques, stating that his know it all attitude of interrupting everything his subjects are saying to give his thoughts on what they are trying to say makes him lose information. In the documentaries, Philipson at times chooses not to dwell on the political situations of each county to the extent that they expose institutional influence of the gang culture- this he may do, only when it suits him. Simuyi further goes on to identify how his selection of interviewees and his approach to certain authorities such as policing institutions is negatively influenced by what seems to be his already biased attitude to the Kenyan investigation. The Kemp documentaries which lean towards sensationalism and action-packed footage, such as is seen in Ross Kemp on Gangs: East Timor (Philipson), he chooses to move to another area of the city as the policing and military authorities have subdues any violence that might occur, stating Trouble seems to melt away when the GNR arrives so we moved on to another part. By comparing Kemps his investigative technique in the particular episode with his methods of investigation in others, Simuyi contrasts how the teams ideological stance results in certain parties being denied fair exposure. Simuyi (2009:[sp]) finally concludes In a 90 minutes documentary, the police have only been given less than a minute... No victims of the gang are interviewed... It is a documentary groping in the dark, trying to tie in un-related sensational elements, lacks objectivity, gives misleading information as facts, and ends up painting a gang as more sinned against that sinning, simply because Kemp cavorted with them exclusively. It ranks as one of those documentaries... in the "how not to make a factual documentary" class. By diving in to the situation expecting to follow the same procedures and receive the same support from institutional authorities resulted in the investigative team experiencing what they felt was a brick wall. Attempting to interview policing authorities when they are attempting to subdue a violent situation resulted in their questions being rejected. Therefore, the team spent more time garnering information from parties who were more easily available, thus the conclusions made on the situation in Kenya were informed from a group of select people, the outcome being an exclusive investigation and a subjective viewpoint.

Here, we have an individual, Simuyi, highly involved and informed in the reality of the situation of the pro-filmic world, who gains a platform on which to restructure the film reality, this type of restructuring is usually only kept specially for the filmmaker (Allen 1991:105). Considering the fact that a large amount of the information the Kemp team obtains come from interviews with individuals involved in the reality in a specific manner, the information and evidence obtained is of a biased nature. The interviews Kemp undertakes are with what Kracauer calls non-actors pointing to the unstaged nature and his function as raw material (1961:98). Here, the idea of naturalism is suitable to describe the conditions by which individuals are constructed in the Kemp series. Kracauer describes how film audiences have become acquainted with and expect to relate to the camera portraying nature in the raw (1961:94). Given that the individuals Kemp interviews are not trained for or accustomed to camera presentation, their manner on the film screen may be said to fall in with a style of naturalism. Therefore, the gestures and manner of these individuals when faced with a camera results in spontaneous action (Kracauer 1961:98). This adds to the authentic goals of the series, showing real people in real places- the question is simply which particular people in which particular places. The spontaneity derived from filming individuals in non-scripted situations adds to the verisimilitude of each Kemp episode, therefore aiding in convincing the viewer that what they are witnessing is real. If every social actor plays their role in the documentaries when juxtaposed with Kemps eloquent and precise speaking style, the viewer begins to believe that each individual is real and not simply a payed actor. For Bazin, the cinema of the real automatically registers the real world, recording what is really there, therefore reinforcing the spectators belief in the authenticity of the film image (Andrew 1976:138). By interviewing individuals within their natural environments, within an authentic reality, the real nature of these individuals, that is the conformation of their actual involvement in such activity is all the more convincing. Andrew expresses that cinema registers the spatiality of the objects and the space they inhabit (1976:138), if the film representation occurs within a natural setting, spontaneously and with real people, then little may be said to question the authenticity of what is seen.

On the non-actor, Kracauer identifies the documentary films essential link and what he calls preference to real people on the film screen as they are closely interrelated (1961:99). Through Philipsons use of varying individuals who together describe a synonymous environment of gang activities, the viewer is moved to accept the information imparted through natural representation, repetition and reinforcement. To describe the use of real people Kracauer refers to typage which he describes as the resource to people who are part and parcel of that reality and can be considered typical of of it (1961:99). The typage of the individuals mostly interviewed in the series are gang members, family members of the gang members, members of policing and military institutions and individuals who perform social work in the volatile communities. The descriptions made by the news footage seen, policing and militant groups who aim to alleviate the violence in the given areas and individuals who are personally involved in one way or another with the gang members and activities all relate to one another. Consequently, it is not only Kemps words that we are expected to believe to be true but the words of the real social agents interviewed. By reinforcing each others statements, the evidence supplied by the documentary then seems to be true and factual. The gestures of the interviewees in front of the camera further points to a naturalness or what Kracauer terms casualness, referring to the portrayal of an unstaged reality(1961:95). The style in which interviews are conducted- in moving vehicles, in open streets- and the manner in which these type social actors are filmed- wearing balaclavas, within their personalised environment, in dark alleys- adds to the naturalness and the realness of what is seen. Although some of the gang members presented in the film appear to violent to be true, the images and evidence of violent weapons and reinforcement of their statements by authoritative figures, solidifies their statements. For example, in the episode Ross kemp on Gangs: Belize (Philipson 2008), Corporal Lonsworth of the Anti-Gang Unit describes how gangs in Belize City operate with heavy machinery such as explosives, AK47s and AR15s. This is then followed by a clip of a television news report, of the same news anchor the viewer has become accustomed to seeing in the episode, reporting on the explosion of a hand grenade in Belize City.

Later on in the episode, Kemp is on his way to an unknown location, having made contact with a local gang who have promised to show them the kind of weapons used in the gang wars. Unexpectedly Kemp appears before the camera holding a Nato Hand-Grenade. Bazin, understanding that the object which the camera portrays is simply an impression or fingerprint of the real object, points to the authentic re-representation of said object (Andrew 1976:140). The image of the grenade in Kemps hands has a definite existence in the real world, it exists complete outside the world of the film much like the gangsters and other individuals interviewed. In this way, the information the viewer receives is constantly reinforced by individuals who form part of the reality of Belize City. In the shot of Kemp holding the grenade, we see him in a straight record, this simplicity, the plain way in which he is filmed further moves to create an authentic image, taking on the form of a matter-of-fact account (Kracauer (1961:203). However, Kracauer explains that this simplistic shooting style is not the only manner in which documentary realities may be conveyed, more personal portrayals of the pro-filmic world are also of use to the documentary director(1961:203). In the series simplistic record is combined with artistic representation, this creates a work of film which holds authority in its professional execution. At one time the automative quality of the camera is reinforced in that it simply records what it sees whilst the desire for a perfect representation of reality that Bazin claims is the aim of developments in film technology is reached (Andrew 1976:139). The use of non-actors, real people in the film who constantly come in to contact with Kemp, our constant, once more add verisimilitude to the world portrayed in the film. However, Andrew (1976:139) explicates that For Bazin every photograph begins to affect us with a primitive psychological impetus derived from the fact that is is linked to the image it represents by means of a photo-chemical transference of visual properties. If we notice that the photo has been touched up after the fact or that the objects represented were tampered with before the fact, some of the psychological impetus will be lost. Many of the interviews Kemp conducts in the series are with individuals who do not speak English. In the episode Ross Kemp on Gangs: El Salvador, MS 13 (Philipson 2007) he uses an interpreter to speak to the interviewees but in Ross Kemp on Gangs: Columbia (Philipson 2007) there is no interpreter. In the latter, Kemp interviews a gang member

without a translator (the same language is spoken in both countries), this is not the only time this happens in the series. At times, interviews are edited in such a way that shows a lapse of time between the question asked and the answer, this gives the interviews the appearance of being staged, taking away from the authenticity of the interviews. What is most striking is the that Kemp and his crew are able to gain the trust of gangsters who tell their stories on camera for the world to see, this also draws to question the authenticity of the interviews. Allen, when speaking on the anthropological documentary talks of the selecting process of the film images, stating that what the viewer is witnessing and experiencing is not so much a visual truth (the filmic document) as a verbal and conceptual one (1991:104). As most of kemps interviewees are conducted with gang members who carry with them heavy weapons such as guns and rifles and are riddled with tattoos proclaiming the names of the gangs mentioned in the episode, the construction of the gang member is accurate. There is violence committed by gang members in various countries but given Kemps repeated easy access to these gang members, one has to question the authenticity of these alleged gang members. Some interviewees appear out of nowhere, confess to murder and then disappear once again in to the world under investigation. This seems to good to be true. When observing Deborah Patta in her investigations on Third Degree, she informs the viewer of the path taken and the manner in which she gains access to her subjects, perhaps explaining that after many attempts individuals finally agree to an interview. Kemp does at times state that interviews lined up for him have been cancelled due to fear of being exposed or at times individuals cut interviews short due to fear of exposure but most of the time is successful. However, when observing the Kemp series, the viewer is completely unaware of how these gangs are contacted, and how they are convinced to spill the beans to Mr. Kemp.

6.THE SPOKEN WORD

One of the functions of an interview is to draw information out of the interviewees as concisely and descriptively as possible. Yet, with no visible interpreter, and such a willingness to expose the operations of their gangs one wonders as to the authenticity of the supposed gang members in the Kemp series. On language in the documentary film, Ohlin (1998:128) believes that every human has a story to tell, drawing from Perrault he states that And all people have something to say: It is totally inconceivable that a human being would not have anything to say, It doesnt happen. It all just depends on the questions that you ask him, on the space that you make available to him... And if you find a favourable space, you will get, in reply, his words his spoken language. Thus the camera not only produces a documentary record of an event but establishes a kind of liberated territory within which the individual is free to express and develop himself. Now we stand at the question, if news media exists in these countries, and the media means opening gangs and gang members up to exposure, then why would these individuals have such trust in opening up themselves to Kemp and his crew. Perhaps it can be said that a platform is provided for these gang members to tell their stories, not for news reporters or police officers or other institutional figures to tell their stories for them. If death is the ultimate and inevitable end for a gangsters life, then perhaps it would suit such an individual to leave a world mark of their existence: of their hardships, struggles, power and ability to kill with little thought. However, many of the interviewees are young, either forced to join a gang or feeling that it is necessary for survival, such as in the episode Ross Kemp on Gangs: Columbia (Philipson 2007). Some seem brainwashed by ideologies they themselves are unable to explicate fully such as is seen by the Polish, racially motivated gangs in Ross Kemp on Gangs: Poland (Philipson 2007). Many of the subjects are not what appears to be high-ranking members of the gangs, who strictly adhere to a code of sworn silence. Although, in the Belize episode, Kemp says to have made contact with a leading figure of George Street, the most feared gang in Belize, on the interview, Kemp himself comments Im surprised by Jasons honesty. It is this kind of self-reflexivity that knowingly or unknowingly calls to question the legitimacy of the film world.

Allen speaks of self-reflexivity in documentary films, describing it as any aspect of a film which points to toward its own procedures of production... By presenting them selfreflexively, a documentary film can make an audience aware of the processes of production as a limitation on the films neutral stance (1991:103). The commentary which Kemp provides on the interviews, as is seen in other episodes, also points to the constructed nature of what is seen. By constructing interviews as a fluid conversation and responding to what the subjects say through gestures which signify Kemps understanding of what is being said, Kemp undermines and subverts his own work. It seems, unknowingly, for Allen unpacks selfreflexivity as a conscious effort, for one would not expect to see documentary selfreflexivity in areas which audiences accept professional authority and expertise in the absence of their own (1991:104).
7.CONCLUSION

The Ross kemp on Gangs (Philipson 2006; 2007a; 2007b; 2007c; 2008a; 2008b) series whilst recording new environments in new light, bringing an unseen actuality to the the television screen does so in a manner that is superficial. On the study of human subjects within the realm of television, recognising the constructed nature of the programmes she has studied Robertson (2005:52) identifies that What was significant and had meaning was chosen according to a set of criteria that exist outside of what was being filmed. Whilst the Kemp documentaries reveal truths, the truths revealed are selected according to the criteria and desired structure of the show. In this regard, Millar and Reisz speak of the selective filming process of the documentary film, in which the footage filmed must lend itself to the ultimate desires of the director, stating that the editing process must begin long before the film reaches the cutting rooms (1968:125). The focus being the violent effects of gang culture and the reasons why the culture is so prevalent, the material selected and presented on the screen is aimed at fulfilling only these aims in a sensational manner. Although the team do have the right to select material so as to advance their purposes, it must be noted that it is only for the above mentioned purposes that the investigations ensue.

What must then be understood is that the truth seen is a selective truth and that the subjects who enlighten the viewer are selected for the impact their words will have on the viewing public, again taking from Robertson (2005:52), film material such as this is packaged in terms of televisions own frame work of understanding. Packaged to shock, to attract viewers episode after episode. Kracauer furthers the notion of the documentary director who may yield to an urge to picture reality in the light of his views and visions. His formative impulses will then prompt him to select the natural material according to his inner images, to shape it with the aid of the techniques available to him (1961:203). Therefore, it would be necessary for the Kemp team to ensure that the material photographed from each environment would fulfil the expectations of the viewing audience time after time. The team then approaches each environment with an already set idea of what is to be filmed- of what type of knowledge is to be gathered and which authoritative figures are needed in order to authenticate the images the film presents to the viewer. The use of montage is of special use in the Kemp documentaries, on the meaning making of montage, Bazin says the creation of a sense or meaning not proper to the images themselves but derived exclusively from their juxtaposition (1967::127) is what is seen, a reality selectively constructed for the viewer. Although success is garnered in creating an authentic environment, the evidence supplied comes in to question. Yes these communities are plagued by violence and yes a gang culture exists and the prevalence of these cultures is authentically portrayed on the screen, revealing a particular reality to the viewer. Yet, in spite of that, Bazin explains of language of cinema that Through the contents of the image and the resources of montage, the cinema has at its disposal a whole arsenal of means whereby to impose its interpretation of an event on the spectator (1967:127)

8.SOURCES CONSULTED

Allen, J. 1991. Self-reflexivity in documentary, in Exploration in film theory. Selected essays from cin-tracts, edited by R Burnett. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press: 103110. Andrew, JD. 1976. The major film theories. London: Oxford University Press. Bazin, A. 1967. What is cinema. Translated by Gray H. Berkeley: University of California Press. Bernard, SC.2007. documentary storytelling: Making stronger and more dramatic nonfiction films. Oxford: Focal Press. Boggs, D & Petrie, W. 2008. The art of watching films. New York: McGraw-Hill. Burnett, R (ed). 1991. Exploration in film theory. Selected essays from cine-tracts. Indianapolis: Indiana University Press. Grimshaw, A & Ravetz, A (eds). 2005. Visualizing Anthropology. United Kingdom: Intellect. Kracauer, S. 1961. Nature of film. London: Dennis Dobson. Macdonald K, & Mark C. 1998. Imagining reality: The faber book of documentary. London: Faber and Faber. Millar, G & Reisz, K (eds). 1968. The technique of film editing. Second edition. Cornwall: Hartnolls. Monaco, J. 2009. How to read a film. Fourth edition. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Ohlin, P. 1998. Film as word: Question of language and documentary realism, in Imagining reality: The faber book of documentary, edited by K Macdonald & C Mark. London: Faber and Faber. Philipson, A. 2006. Ross Kemp on Gangs: Rio De Janeiro. [Video Recording]. United Kingdom: Sky One. Philipson, A. 2007a. Ross Kemp on Gangs: Columbia. [Video Recording]. United Kingdom: Sky One. Philipson, A. 2007b. Ross Kemp on Gangs: El Salvador. [Video Recording]. United Kingdom: Sky One. Philipson, A. 2007c. Ross Kemp on Gangs: Poland. [Video Recording]. United Kingdom: Sky One. Philipson, A. 2008a. Ross Kemp on Gangs: Belize. [Video Recording]. United Kingdom: Sky One. Philipson, A. 2008b. Ross Kemp on Gangs: Kenya Special. [Video Recording]. United Kingdom: Sky One.

Platinga, C. 2005. What a documentary is after all. The Journal of Aesthetics and Art and Criticism. 62(3), Spring106-117. Robertson, R. 2005. Seeing is believing: An ethnographers encounter with television documentary, in Visualizing Anthropology, edited by A Grimshaw & A Ravetz. United Kingdom: Intellect: 42-54. Simiyu B. 2009. Ross Kemp on a Kenyan Gang: Mungiki. [O]. Available http://www.kenyaimagine.com/index.php? option=com_content&view=article&id=2977&catid=268:society&Itemid=226 Accessed 21 July 2011.