{"word_count": 664, "character_count": 4236}
Our paper focuses on the process behind the making of the movie “Very very different”. It has been realized in the city of Bari (IT) by 5 people without abode who joined the documentary and storytelling workshops organized by Associazione INUIT. These workshops aimed to let the participants bear their own stories to tell gradually, fostering familiarity with audiovisual languages in order to merge their attitude in the production of the participatory movie.Each session was built up to be a moment of mutual learning. From the writing of the screenplay to the shooting and editing of the video itself, participation was the conditio sine qua non for the reciprocal exchange of knowledge: the technical one of field experts and the local knowledge (Geertz, 1983) brought by the homeless group.The five authors have chosen a common subject starting the discussion from a news story and inflecting it according to the priorities of their personal narrations. Each video shows the city from the street’s point of view carrying values, imaginaries and spatial boundaries' significance. The movie in its entirety, put several aspects on the line trying to negotiate them: the use of visual means and the concept of authorial commitment, the ethnographic encounter and the weight of relations between researchers and informants, the sense of spaces and the constructions of personal “visualscapes”.Skilled vision. The horizontal author and the zero degree gaze.If we can state the predominance of the ethnographer eye in the production of a documentary, considering the specific differences, we are dealing with an assumption about the role of the researcher, who selects the information among different sources leading to the production of a visual speech. In our case the researcher gives way to the informant’s subjectivity as a function of his speech.The whole project calls the authority of the researcher in question, the same authority that is assumed in front of the informants’ lives, supposing a cultural background higher than the one of people telling him their own stories. We deal with a skilled vision (Grasseni, 2004) more than a zero degree gaze (Bourdieu, 1993), where participants exchange their knowledge through the camera, a tool that can tip perspective and authority over. Generally, the main character of his own tale doesn’t speak. This field offers different issues to analyze: do informants’ gazes reset the authority of researchers? Can informants’ primacy on the experiential field erase the prismatic filter of the anthropological interpretation?Visualscapes. The Homeless City.Allowing the direction to who is generally directed does not mean however that what is told is more “authentic”, even in this case, with the five authors who built up their gaze choosing a way to represent themselves. Following the sessions of the workshop as researchers, allowed us to collect step by step the passages that led to the construction of a personal visualscape, a visual horizon, a posture of the gaze, loaded of aesthetics and biographical sediments of self awareness and its projection through images, that is unavoidably interpreted and judged. In this way we mean visualscape as a moment of crystallization -even temporary- of a particular cultural present (Scarpelli, 2007), in which place is the result of a fixing relationship between space and time, considered at that moment as take for granted and unchangeable. For example, the image of street dinners summarizes the idea of Trastevere, the narrow streets with laundry spread on balconies becomes the imagine of Naples, the courtyards of Sassi tell stories about Matera. These clear images are the product of a subjective point of view. In the case of Bari, how did the five authors decide to represent the homeless city? Which new geographies do they draw?References: Bourdieu, P., La Misère du Monde, edition du Seuil, 1993. Geertz C., Local Knowledge. Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology, Basic Books, New York, 1983. Grasseni, C., ‘Skilled Vision. An apprenticeship in breeding aesthetics’, Social Anthropology, 12, 1, 2004, pp. 41 – 55. Scarpelli, F., La memoria del territorio. Patrimonio culturale e nostalgia a Pienza, Pacini, Pisa, 2007.