Representing Post-production notes

I thought the tough part was over, but I was wrong. It took me about two hours to figure out what to import and ended up with a bloated gallery of footage, something like 90 minutes on my increasingly tightening powerbook hard drive. I ended up working out of my borrowed Art+D external drive for good measure. That and I had about a gig of external media, like all the pictures I ended up from Danielle. I looked back at my treatment and started from there. I started with the first bit of footage I ever took dealing with this issue, the Chief rally held the first monday after the February 16 announcement. It ended up being a pastiche, a lot of related clips to just set the mood, a pastiche that would set the tone for the pastiche that became the rest of my piece.

I consciously went into this without wanting to do titles to avoid injecting any bit of my commentary, but titles don't necessarily imply any bit of bias. Mainly the titles were used to demarcate the chronological ordering of events and to introduce my two subjects. In this regard, they worked well because they avoided having to expose those facts through lenghty video explanations, which, given the time constraints would have bloated the piece even more than it ended up. I think I represented well how the event was attended, and the activity that went on. I took a lot of footage of how the media covered it, there were a lot of local network cameras and photographers, as well as the obligatory DI photographers I recognized. I included the short bit of Dan Maloney talking to the cameras for good measure, he doesn't say much to add to the piece however. I kind of mixed up the order of things for aesthetic effect, I don't think it changes the meaning too much, and it created a good transition to Paul's initial bit of his interview. Specifically, I made it seem that the chanting of "save the Chief" was spontaneous when it was really followed after a rousing rendition of the Alma Mater. I didn't include footage of the speeches which I suppose was the whole point of the rally. I didn't capture the sound too well. That or the hordes of students buying T-shirts from the Students for Chief Illiniwek representitives.

I started off with Paul talking about the uniting power of the Chief and followed it with Danielle reinforcing that idea but from the perspective of viewing the student body as diverse and needing a uniting symbol, rather than an appeal to tradition and a more longitudnal attitude towards the Chief's bonding power. As I would see in the footage, Danielle would end up being a more common voice than Paul Schmitt, who was incredibly well-spoken on the issue. I wanted to make it clear she was a sports fan in particular, so I mentioned that she was an Orange Krush member through text. After that I tried to steer the discussion towards one particular topic, and that at the time was the racial sensitivity issues surrounding the Chief, but it ended up being a slower process than just that. Paul said something quite post-modern about the issue, being that a symbol such as the Chief is whatever you make of it and reveals what you may think or feel. I wanted this to be a piece about semiotics or objectivity itself, I had Danielle talking about effective argumentation, that is, how she goes about trying to understand the other side of the issue in order to better understand her stances. In that regard, both my subjects were thankfully thoughtful and did recognize the merit of both sides of the issue.

I managed to include the footage of the Chief's last dance and surrounded it by my subject's responses to the question regarding how we are educated about Native history and culture, in what I hope should be the more thoughtful parts of the dialogue. They both recognized that we don't learn much about Native history and culture, and I even have Paul Schmitt admitting that the Chief is not meant to be accurate. I in turn recognized that Paul was genuine in his belief that Chief Illiniwek could have and should have served the interests in teaching the public and raising awareness about Native issues and saved that for a finale. It really is their saving grace in my mind, that they feel that the Chief is a misrepresentation.

I included a lot of my external media in the form of pictures into which we zoom in. Let's just say I went a little crazy with the Ken Burns effect. I think it works for the best, it not only accentuates the subject's speech but provides a visual break. I seriously don't want to look at a talking head for more than 30 seconds, and I made sure you and I don't have to. I also realized from the start that I would be framing the expository parts around the events of "Chief Week" and beyond and ended up including the February 26 candlelight vigil before Paul really addresses the racial issues. As for the rest, they're just nails in the coffin of the Chief. To add a topical element, I included the recent news surrounding the University's decision to retain rights of the Chief's image and logo and effectively end the manufacture of related merchandise in the coming months. Which is dandy in my mind, but I didn't add that feeling, merely presented the facts of the matter.

After 5 minutes of an actual piece, I was at a loss of how to continue without going over excessively, but the way the piece flows, it doesn't seem at all like 5 minutes. So I tacked on another minute and half and accentuated the point about how there was disrespect towards to the pro-chief movement in the final days of his existence. And after that, the topical elements and other historical framings of what went on.

I can honestly say that this may not be my strongest work. For one thing, I'm portraying neutrally or even somewhat positively a viewpoint I don't agree with. For another, it doesn't end with the grace that I had envisioned. It ends with what I thought would be a good thing, a final thought that would provoke the audience to think or at least challenge their beliefs. It may or may not do that, but the intention is there. Also, I could have ended on a light-hearted yet nostalgic note with a montage of every bit of the Alma mater being sung, at the first rally, at the basketball game, at the candlelight vigil, etc. But it would have ended up just as I described: light-hearted and nostalgic, or in other words, depressing and inappropriate. The inclusion of music in this piece would have disturbed the effect, I think the feelings and thoughts of the subjects and the other media speak enough for themselves without the need to be sung.

And that's that. I head off to critiques.... now.

Seeya soon!