the first documentary? (Robert J. Flaherty)

In watching Nanook of the North, I not only learned about “the way of the Eskimo”, but found myself constantly comparing my own sense of survival to theirs. This is a depiction of a much simpler form of life, not generally, but psychologically. They are not weighted by the problems of today, such as self-depression, or ethics of right and wrong. These people “do as they do” for self-preservation’s sake. Their tough, without a flinch before killing. The film brought up many points of view on natural order, vegetarianism, and how different one reacts when viewing a Hollywood fictional movie to a documentary like Nanook. Specifically, the scene where they capture the walrus; it was thrilling, yet disturbing for me. There’s no way to not-justify the animal sacrifice, seeing how the Eskimo lives in their natural surrounding. Flaherty leaves out the unnecessary, like days spent without food, how the family gets by or what they do. Do these people have any sort of timeline to live by? They travel night to day, is all we get. I would’ve liked to have learned more about that. The gramophone scene acts as an in-between, but we don’t get much more. Being a silent film from 1922, I imagine there were limits to what Flaherty could present and keep entertaining. As I watched, I repeatedly forget this is a filmmaker’s vision, and not random shots accidentally taped together without care of what the audience would think. I haven’t researched Flaherty’s intentions beyond what’s written in the film, but I assume he was for the most part, concerned with making a true portrayal of their culture, and at the same time, wanting to make a good movie! Even though it’s 1922, and considered the first documentary film with no guidelines to work off of, once you put a camera before an image for the sake of cinema, it becomes entertainment. In comparing this documentary to modern documentaries, Nanook felt very natural/lifelike. The film does gain a momentum, but it’s not forced. When I think of the last bunch of documentary films I’ve seen, the modern filmmaker tends to have more pull, and for lack of a better word- tricks, to assist his/her cinematic vision. Obviously, the difference is that Nanook was the first of its kind, inventive filmmaking, and shot in the 1920’s. All the events and characters depicted in Nanook, add to the general point of view of Nature’s law. Whether it’s the Eskimos, or Cherokee Indians, or any survivalist culture etc. - on a larger scale, it’s a vehicle to present Mother Nature’s way of life; take care of your own, self-preservation above all, and most profoundly, the film stands the test of time, by way of today’s audience reflecting our own self being, to theirs. Nanook is a perfect example of the- less-is-more theory. I usually have a hard time appreciating vintage films of any kind, but surprisingly felt quite attached to the characters, and the innocence to their motives. It really puts modern, superficial human dilemmas in perspective. At the films commencing, I found myself judging my diet, personal intentions, and simple goals to get through the day. We live in a very acute, neurotic society here in America, or rather NYC, filled with subliminal advertising campaigns and outrageously lazy products such as the drinkable Krispy Kream donut! Every act in Nanook is undisputedly necessary. It makes you wonder, has the American culture gone far past the point of no return, unable to recognize the advantages of a simpler way of life presented in this film.