Attending, listening, taking time: the quietly radical ethical practice of the filmmaker Jenny Gilbertson
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jenny Gilbertson, an independent self-funded filmmaker, lived and filmed Shetland communities in the 1930s, then, after a teaching career, Inuit communities in Arctic Canada from 1970–1978. Keen to develop a practice that resists the extractive nature of documentary production and a determination to foreground Gilbertson as an ethical filmmaker, in this thesis, I ask what can contemporary filmmakers learn from her way of living with and filming an Indigenous community? \nEthical debate in documentary filmmaking is largely dominated by the protection of the filmmaker’s property (the film) through copyright, consent and freedom of expression. Yet this strengthening of ownership cannot deny the very nature of documentary, which is extractive and assimilatory. Gilbertson’s approach was quietly different: shaped by the valuing of friendship, community and reciprocity, it resulted in a portrayal of Inuit by a qallunaaq (white person) that was unlike any other at that time. \nUsing the three experiential events of archival research (including close readings of Gilbertson’s diaries, her last film, Jenny’s Arctic diary (1978) filmed in Grise Fiord and her newly digitised Arctic Sound Recordings from 1970–1978); fieldwork (filming and interviews carried out in Grise Fiord in 2018); and the editing process, I used my buddhist practice and theory as liberatory practice to deepen and develop the ethics – thinking and caring – in my filmmaking practice. \nRecognising the 40 years of political and cultural change between Gilbertson and myself, I consider the daily business of documenting people and place and how in thinking and caring about those you film, you confront and negotiate desire, responsibility and possibility, all within the context of a relationship, a project, an industry, a technology, a budget, and, significantly, the history of the other. My written thesis draws on these confrontations and negotiations to examine Iris Murdoch and Simone Weil’s theories of attention and Pauline Oliveros, Dylan Robinson and Salomé Voegelin’s approaches to listening and sounding, I consider both Gilbertson’s and my own attempts to resist ‘taking’ from and ‘using’ the people we filmed and recorded and where this sits alongside our shared overriding desire to make community and kin. \nThe outcome of this liberatory theory on my practice research is a 75-minute film in which I go ‘with’ Gilbertson to Grise Fiord. In this I learn about her time there, the people and things she looked at, listened to and spent time with. Using this time between Gilbertson and myself, I present a visual and sonic reflection of Gilbertson’s practice through my own and reveal the ways in which attending, listening and putting the filmed before the film can generate ethical possibilities that interrupt the norms of documentary filmmaking.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".