Sol

I
Worth
and

John
Adair

Through
Navajo Eves
with a new
introduction,
afterword,
and notes by

Richard
Chalfen
An

Exploration

in Film

C om m unication

an d Anthropology
T H R O U G H NAVAJO EYES
N e w prologu e, fo re w ord , afterword, and new p hoto gra p hs
1997 by Richa rd C h a l fe n . A ll rights reserved.
Through N a v a jo E yes wa s or ig in ally published in 1972 by the U n i v e r s it y o f I ndiana
Press, isbn 0- 25 3-36015 -3.
T h e U n iv e r s it y o f N e w M e x i c o Press revised edition published 1997 b y a r r a n g e
m en t w it h the U n i v e r s it y o f In d ia n a Press and the authors.

L i b r a r y o f C o n g re s s C a t a l o g i n g - i n - P u b li c a t i o n D at a

W o r t h , Sol.
T h r o u g h N a v a jo eyes : an ex ploration in fd m c om m u n ication and a n t h r o p o l o g y /
So l W o r t h and Jo h n A d a i r ; wi th a new fo re wor d, af terwor d, and illustrations by
Rich a rd C h a l fe n .

p. cm.

In cludes bibli ograp h ic a l references (p. ) and index.

isbn 0 - 8 2 6 3- 177 1- 5 (pa : alk. paper)

1. N a v a jo In d ia ns S o c ia l life and customs.

2. N a v a jo philo sophy.
3. M o t i o n pictures in e t h n o l o g y N e w M e x i c o .
4. Visu al an th r o p o lo gy N e w M e x i c o .
I. A d a i r , J o h n , 1913
II. T i tl e .

E9 9 - N3W77 ! 997
7 9 i.4 365203972 dc'20 96 -30195
C IP

- Ml !

h 2 ' b 4
9 \o r - - zZ
v / O i >* l w * ' I* 11 ( t
 Contents

Prologue to the R evised E dition v ii

Foreword to the R evised Edition ix
Acknowledgments to the Original Edition x x iii
Introduction 3
PART ONE
CHAPTER I H ow Do People Structure Reality
Through F ilm ? ii
CHAPTER 2 A Look at Film As I f It Were a Language 21
CHAPTER 3 The N avajo 3

PART TW O
CHAPTER 4 The M ethod o f Research 42
CHAPTER 5 The Lives op' Some o f the N avajo Students 63
CHAPTER 6 Teaching N avajos about Cameras and Film 74
CHAPTER 7 The Community Attends the World Premiere 128

PART T H R E E
CHAPTER 8 Analysis H2
CHAPTER 9 N arrative Style i 42
CHAPTERIO Sequencing Film Events 166
C H A P T E R II Who Can Be an Actor in a N avajo Film 181
C H A P T E R 12 They H andle the Equipm ent Like Pros I()0
vjj C on ten ts

ch apter 13 Motion or E ven tin g 199

ch apter 14 Intrepid Shadows and the Outsider 208
ch apter 15 H ow Groups in Our Society Act When Taught
to Use M ovie Cameras (with Richard Chalfen) 228
ch apter 16 Some Concluding Thoughts 272

appendix a A B r ie f Summary of the Films M ade by

the N avajo 263

Afterw ord to the R evised E dition 27$

appen dix b The Ten Most Frequently Asked Questions

about the N avajo Project 343

Bibliography 3S1
N ew References fo r the R evised Edition 337
Index 369
 Prologue to the
Revised Edition

During the summer o f 1966, I had the invaluable opportunity to

serve as research assistant to Prolessors Sol Worth and John
Adair while they undertook fieldwork on the Navajo Film
Themselves Project. I was very fortunate. A s a new graduate stu
dent at the Annenberg School of Communication, I was asked
i f I would be interested in combining my undergraduate and
graduate training in anthropology with a new research project in
visual communication. It was really a matter o f being in the right
place at the right time; the project was a turning point in my
early career. Later, in 1970, I was asked to contribute several
chapters to their book, Through N avajo Eyes. I worked on Navajo
audience reactions (Chapter 7) and a report that described com
parable filmmaking projects in Philadelphia (Chapter 15). As
some indication that projects are never actually completed, I now
have the chance to contribute additional reflections and com
ments on that same project thirty years later.
W hile reviewing materials for this new edition, I came across
many articles and notes that 1 had previously read, sometimes
quoted, and eventually put away. One, however, caught my at
tention in new way. W riting a review o f the Navajo-made films
in 1974, John Collier, Jr. describes the making o f the Tsosie sis
ters film, The Spirit o f the N avajo, labeling it the most undis
turbed record ever made of a Navajo sing. In this film, Sam
Yazzie enacts a curing ceremony including chants, hair and jew
elry washing, and purification. Collier mentions that having a
W hite man for a patient [Dick Chalfen, W orths and A d a irs re
search assistant] eliminated the stress of magic danger, tor the
filming could only hurt the patient. It has occurred to me that
roughly one month later, as I was watching and helping Alta
Kahn complete her weaving film, 1 developed an unbearable
headache and sufficient nausea to send me to bed tor two days.
Worth had already returned to Philadelphia and John Adair had
to take me to a small hospital facility in Gallup. I was kept there
for a week; after several spinal taps, and lots of I V fluids, I was
later released having recovered from an undiagnosed blood vi
rus. Western medicine had not a clue. But as Collier said, The
filming could only hurt the patient a white man. So, as it
turned out, the filming may have neither hurt nor helped the
sheep, but it had other effects. In short, it affected and maybe
infected one o f us. In this episode, perhaps we have an im
portant metaphor for future thought.
 Foreword to the
Revised Edition

Several factors have stimulated the publication o f this revised

edition ol Through N avajo Eyes. T h e book originally appeared in
1972, six years after a summer o f fieldwork in Pine Springs, A r i
zona. The field research and the original monograph attracted a
great deal o f attention and continues to be cited in recent work
in such fields as visual anthropology, visual sociology, cinema
studies, and popular culture as well as in more recent cultural
and critical studies. Since 1972, many theoretical issues central to
Worth and A d a irs work with the Navajo have been debated with
increasing interest and intensity. In other cases, the research and
results have been either misinterpreted, dismissed, ignored, or
simply mentioned in passing without critical assessment. In ad
dition, the original book went out of print in 1991 (but the origi
nal films are still available for rental from the Museum o f M o d
ern A rt in N ew York). The current climate o f new research on
indigenous media demands that the book be made available once
again.
A revision project becomes a challenging undertaking for sev
eral reasons. Clearly, new events occur new research projects,
new findings, speculations, arguments, and the like must be
mentioned and critically addressed. But this effort also lets one
see how thinking about specific topics can and in fact is highly
likely to change as time passes. Observers become aware o f new
and revised paradigms coming into favor, some even being rein
vented; we can see what happens as concepts become reconfig
ured and human relationships are understood and appreciated in
different ways. T h e new sections that I have added to the origi
nal 1972 version o f Through N avajo Eyes will explore some of
these changes.

S itu a tin g the N avajo P roject

To begin, some sense of historical context will be helpful for

situating the remarks that follow. It is instructive to locate the
Navajo Project in relation to the few well-recognized reference
points in visual anthropology (see also Ruby 1996). For readers
who are new to the field, the following may give some idea of
how much has happened in a relatively short period of time.1
In any schematic overview of what is currently classified as
visual anthropology, one would surely include the premiere
screening of Robert Flahertys Nanook o f the North (1922), the
publication o f Margaret M ea d s and G regory Batesons research
in Bali (see Balinese Character, 1942), the widespread distribution
o f Jean Rouches Les M aitres Fous (1953), John M arshalls The
Hunters (1956) and Robert G ardners D ead Birds (1963), and the
original publication of John Collier J r . s Visual Anthropology:
Photography as a Research M ethod (1967). T h e 1972 publication of
Through N avajo Eyes has found an enduring place in this pro
gression o f significant work.
T h e late 1960s and early 1970s were active times. For instance,
in 1966, at the time of A d a irs and W orths original fieldwork,
John Collier J r . s classic and widely read text had not yet been
published (1967), and it was a full decade before Karl Heider
wrote Ethnographic Film (1976). T im o thy Asch and Napoleon
Chagnon had not yet begun work on the now commonly used
series o f films on the Yanomamo ol Venezuela (1968). John
Marshall and Tim othy Asch had not yet established the Center
for Documentary Anthropology (1968, now Documentary E d u
cational Resources) in Massachusetts. During the mid-1960s we
saw the appearance ol Asen Balikcis first films in the Netsilik
Eskimo series, lor future use in the controversial M A C O S
(M an: A Course o f Study) Project. Fieldwork lor the Navajo Proj
ect was carried out one year betore the National Film Board
o f Canada began the Challenge for Change program (1967),
directed by George C . Stoney to promote citizen (especially
minority) participation in the solution ol social problems. It
was also one year before the Fogo Island Project directed in 1967
by researchers at the University ol N ew Foundland.
The study was also made before the first Conlerence on Visual
Anthropology, best known as C O V A , an annual event directed
by Jay Ruby and his colleagues at Temple University. A n d in
1966 programs in ethnographic film and visual anthropology
were yet to be established at Temple University in Philadelphia
(1974), the University ol Southern California (1982), N ew York
University (1986), the Grenada Center for Visual Anthropology
at the University ol Manchester (1986), and long before inter
national conlerences on ethnographic film and visual anthropol
ogy became popular. Each of these milestones gave people much
to consider in defining and reevaluating the relationship of cam
era technology to several sub-fields of anthropology.-
Over the past seventy years the field of visual anthropology
has developed and changed in rapid and dramatic ways, and the
pace appears to be accelerating. Interestingly enough, in recent
years each o f the landmark events has undergone or is currently
undergoing some form ot reinterpretation as historians of the
field seek to develop and refine a comprehensive overview o f the
emergence o f visual anthropology. Through N avajo Eyes is nec
essarily taking part in this process.
One significant change is that observers have become more
sensitive to the context in which the early contributions were
 produced as a means o f understanding why they were so highly
valued initially. T h e visual products, that is, have come to be
seen as part o f a process o f visual communication that, in itself,
demands critical attention. T h is has in turn stimulated the re
study and rvaluation o f previous image events and, in some
cases, the re-issue o f original texts. For instance, John Collier
J r . s 1967 monograph, Visual Anthropology, was revised with M a l
colm Collier and published by the University o f N ew Mexico
Press in 1986; in 1980 a rvaluation and extension o f Flahertys
w ork was edited by Larry Gross and Jay Ruby and published in
Studies in Visual Communication; even M ead and Batesons work
in the 1930s has been re-examined in The Balinese People: A
Reinvestigation o f Character by Gordon D. Jensen and luh Ketut
Suryani; and in 1989 the contributions o f Robert G ardners film-
making efforts have been critically reevaluated by several authors
in an issue o f the SVA N ew sletter3; and the w ork o f John M a r
shall is reviewed in a separate monograph, The Cinema o f John
Marshall, edited by Jay Ruby.4 T h e present republication o f
Through N avajo Eyes, finds its place in this context.
Some o f this drive toward a new contextualization conforms
to Sol W orths 1976 essay in honor o f M argaret M ead in which
he suggested a reformulation o f visual anthropology into an
anthropology o f visual communication. Here Worth proposed
an amended agenda for visual anthropology.5 I will continue to
explain below how the Navajo Project can be seen as a corner
stone of this reformulation. T h e study continues to have an im
pact on the field.
I also feel that the analysis o f conceptual and theoretical issues
has lagged behind the emergence o f new imagemaking tech
nology a situation that is hardly restricted to visual anthro-
pology. Clearly, scholars and practitioners from a variety o f dis
ciplines find common interests as reconfigurations o f knowledge
emerge. For instance, we see new patterns o f convergence as a
focus on representation takes center stage in semiotic studies,
in postmodernist debates, in revisionist historical research, in
the political economy o f communication, and in the anthropo
logical politics ot symbolic torms. Herein lies another reason
why the 1966 Navajo Project deserves a second look.

Contexts o f C ollaborative F ilm m ak ing

We gain another perspective when we examine where the Navajo

research fit into the approaches and competing paradigms that
were popular during the late 1960s. It was heretical then (and
may still be) to state that any film might be looked at ethno-
graphically that is, with ethnographic questions in mind and
with some access to knowledge o f social and cultural context.
Ethnographic cinematographv was still grappling with defini
tional issues and related arguments. Another complex of prob
lems centered on technology, mechanics, chemistrv and optics,
that is, problems ot determining the best equipment to use under
different field conditions. I mention these details to give some
idea of how different, even radical, the Navajo Project appeared
at that time. Ethnographic filmmaking practice was still verv
much in the hands o f one ot the following categories o f workers:
someone who knew cinematography and perhaps a little anthro
pology; an anthropologist who knew a little about basic film-
making; or perhaps two agents an anthropologist and a small
filmmaking crew people who had not yet figured out how to
agree, disagree, or agree to disagree. T h e central players had
little understanding of how each saw the same thing or how
to respect mutual differences in theoretical perspectives and/or
practical working styles. At this time paradigms o f collaborative
ethnographic film research were simply not well developed. In
this sense the communications scholar Worth and the cultural
anthropologist Adair were breaking new ground by suggesting
an action research collaboration along two dimensions first,
across disciplines, and second across the politically loaded divide
o f scholar/outsider and native/insider.
 But what kind ol collaboration was being suggested? Has the
meaning ol collaboration ever been carefully described? Has it
been oversimplified? Such questions demand clarification o f the
kinds o f activity and relationships involved. Today, we have to
be explicit about who is being expected to collaborate with
whom and under what conditions. For instance, is the focus on
collaboration by personnel behind the camera, that is, film
makers and anthropologists? Is the emphasis on a collaboration
among people who are positioned both behind and in front o f
the camera? Or is the locus on how research personnel can col
laborate with native community members who will take charge
o f making the films themselves?
Finally, readers should understand that in 1966 the idea o f so
cial scientists, filmmakers and/or photographers letting native
members ol a specific community use cameras to make films
about themselves was anything but a familiar practice. It is also
important to realize that since then the notion o f handing the
camera over to others to do certain Western-oriented things
was welcomed with excitement at first, and then later come
under philosophical and ethical fire. I will discuss this issue at
some length below.

N ative P articipation in Visual Studies

Yet another way to reintroduce the Navajo Project is to consider

how the W orth-A dair research compares with other models o f
past and on-going native participation in visual studies. Here
I will give primary attention to instances o f camera-generated
representation at the risk o f neglecting other media such as
drawing or painting. Even more specifically, I will attend to con
nections between anthropological filmmaking and what has vari
ously been called the production ol indigenous imagery, in
digenous media, and native- or subject-generated imagery. '
 Treating the term visual studies in a broad sense, we discover
considerable variability in the notion o f participation and, in
some cases, o f collaboration.7 In a sense, there is always some
form o f participation taking place, such as when members o f a
community have been asked to play different roles in a particular
film production or in the fdm communication process in general.
We know that natives have been asked to appear in films, as
subjects, with varying degrees o f rewarded or unrewarded co
ercion, either in contexts o f acting (usually reenactments) or
what we are asked to interpret as natural behavior. But six or
seven other categories ot participation deserve attention:
(1) In one rare and dated example, we know that Robert
Flaherty asked several Inuit to help process his footage tor what
eventually became Nanook o f the North (1922).
(2) In other cases, we know that native people have been
asked to help edit films made about them, as in David M ac-
D ougalls 1977 Good-bye Old M an.
(3a) In still other cases, anthropological filmmakers have asked
members o f communities to select the topics for a particular film
as in several examples produced in Canadas Challenge fo r Change
program, David and Judith M acD ougalls film with the Turkana,
A Wife Among Wives (1981), or Sarah E ld ers and Leonard Kamer-
lings 1974 film, People ofTununak.
(3b) Conversely, we have examples ot filmmakers being asked
by natives to follow their choices and decisions to produce films
on a specific topic, as occurs at the Australian Institute o f A b o ri
ginal Studies, and in Cavadini and Strachans Two Law s (1981),
made about Australian Aboriginal land rights (M acBean 1983).
(4) At the other end o f the communication process, anthropo
logical filmmakers such as Jean Rouch have insisted that members
o f native audiences see and discuss the films that have been made
about them and that these films become community property.
Examples include his M oi un N oir (1957) and Jaguar (1965).
(5) In an interesting variation, Tim othy Asch asked a Balinese
healer to be filmed during her viewing o f her own performance in
a film he had made o f her earlier; see Jero on Jero: A Balinese
Trance Sance" Observed made in 1985.
But none o f these examples has addressed the issue o f more
complete participation by local people in the film communication
process.s Thus we must also account for instances in which com
munity members have been asked to make their own films after
some basic technological instruction, either in experimental or
applied contexts. Here, several more subcategories are relevant.
(6a) Project directors or research personnel have asked local
people to make a movie on anything o f your own choosing.
T h is rather opened-ended approach includes w ork by Edmund
Carpenter (1972, 1975), my own studies o f teenage filmmakers in
Philadelphia (1972, 1974), and Bellman and Jules-Rossette (1977).
Worth and A d a ir s 1966 Navajo Project obviously falls into this
category. A modest videotape counterpart was also undertaken
by Ronald L igh t and Bradley Henio in Ramah, N ew Mexico
(1977). In another extension, Duncan Holaday organized a project
in Indonesia in which he instructed natives to instruct other
Indonesians to make their own films (1991).
(6b) The second subcategory is characterized by a more di
rected and applied approach, in which native people are asked to
make a film on a specific topic. Several projects with teenage
filmmakers belong in this category such as Evanss work (1979),
where the prescribed topic was alcoholism. Other projects have
focused on dance, drug use, race relations, water rights, and police
relationships.
In one Navajo example, Adair was approached in 1971 by
Dr. Robert Bergman, a psychiatrist, who was then head o f the
National Program on M ental Health for American Indians.
Bergman had been very impressed with Navajo use o f cameras,
and he urged Adair to develop a similar program to learn how
contemporary problems associated with Navajo alcoholism might
be described through Navajo eyes. John agreed, and they made
two Super-8 sound-over films in Gallup, N ew Mexico. One film,
called M y L ife at the Bottle, was made by Johnny Sakatero, a very
talented Navajo painter; a second film was made by a group o f
teenagers who lived in the dorms. But Sakateros film was never
shown, in part, because it was such a sensitive subject a film on
drinking by Navajo high school kids supported by government
funds. This film has since been lost, and, as Adair lamented, the
most important kind ol feedback [that is, to educators and ad
ministrators] never took place (personal communication).
(6c) There is also a subcategory in which a final film included
footage produced by the anthropologist (or filmmaker) and m em
bers o f a community. Victor Fucs describes a coauthoring ap
proach when he asked Waiapi Indians o f Am azonia to use both
cameras and microphones to produce the desired Waiapi bias
(1989).
(6d) Another variation was involved when local Siberian Inuit
were invited to make films in 1991 o f their own choosing but
within boundaries and conventions o f the ethnographic record
as suggested by outsiders an anthropologist, Asen Balikci and a
communication scholar, M ark Badger (1995). In the late 1980s
and early 1990s, another model of indigenous imagemaking has
appeared and is attracting scholarly attention. As described by
James Faris, this model features local people filming (or video
taping) themselves or others, sometimes editing such footage, or
variously projecting it themselves or watching it on a sponsored
television channel (1993).
(7) Th is category contains the increasing number o f situations
in which community members have initiated their own filmmak
ing or videomaking projects. In these cases anthropologists are
somehow involved, whether in finding equipment, organizing
technological instruction, or studying the films or tapes within
locally defined processes o f visual communication. Observation
and study focus on the results o f local energies and initiatives al
ready in place and operating with minimal help from outsiders.
Here I would include work by anthropologist Terence Turner has
noticed for the Kayapo Indians in the Am azon Basin (1990,1991),
Eric M ichaelss research with the Warlpiri (1985, 1991) in the C e n
tral Desert o f Australia, or what George Stoney has recorded in
his 1985 videotape, A Message from B ra zil, which includes video
tape letters made by Krao Indians in northern Brazil. Also in
cluded are H am m onds commentary on Tongan videographers
living in Utah (1988) and Indian videographers studied by Jhala
(1989).
Several points must be kept in mind. I present these categories
so as to bring some order to the proliferation o f work in this
area. Readers should realize that the categories outlined above
are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Overlaps of objectives,
approaches, and procedures can be found as project directors
work with alternative models o f intervention and collaboration.
It should also be noted that I have included just one or two ex
amples in each category, rather than attempting an exhaustive
listing. Several additional examples will be elaborated upon in
the Afterword.
Considerations of space make it impossible to acknowledge
and discuss the next logical set of topics, variouslv referred to as
community video or community television, alternative
video or alternative television, guerrilla television, deep
dish television, and the like. In this review I have not been able
to give adequate attention to activities such as narrowcasting,
public access cable (for example, Boston Neighborhood N e t
work), television cooperatives (for example, Kentuckys Appal-
shop), and recent related examples. These are important topics
for books that remain to be written.
In addition, projects that might be identified as pure re
search are far outnumbered by those that have applications,
either internal or external, to the local community o f origin. In
semiotic terms, interests have turned away from problems o f
syntactics or semantics to those o f a pragmatic orientation.
There is more interest in the politics o f symbolic forms than in
theoretical relationships o f cognition, cross-media expression
and visual communication. T h e newer emphases on the appli
cations o f media expressions are most likely overtly political in
nature, and seem to be restricted to a focus on scopic technolo
gies ol subalterns for their empowerment (Faris 1993). In the
Afterword I will return to several o f these projects and discuss in
additional detail how they are related to the original Navajo
materials. Here I have tried to develop a repositioning o f this
material in what is emerging as a viable and popular interest in
studies o f culture and communication and in the anthropology
o f visual communication.
In many o f the examples cited above, direct connections can
be traced to the original theoretical orientations and research
agenda suggested in the first edition o f Through N avajo Eyes.
The significance o f W orths and A d a irs approach to indigenous
media production has been neither adequately documented nor
publicly acknowledged. One objective ol this revised edition is
to contribute an added sense o f contextualization to the original
work, to enhance the significance ol their work and to avoid
needless reinventions ol the wheel. This new edition will have
succeeded i f a new generation o f visual anthropologists and
others interested in indigenous visualization realize that the
Navajo Project research represents a significant benchmark in
the development of visual anthropology.

A ck nowledgm ents

During the past few years, several colleagues have responded to

my request for suggestions as to how this revised edition might
become more useful in the classroom and to the field in gen
eral. For their replies and advice I thank Jonathan Benthal,
Peter Biella, Tom Blakely, M alcolm Collier, Peter Ian Crawford,
James Faris, Paul Henley, Karl Heider, Kathleen Kuenhast, Peter
Lozios, Paul Messaris, Lucien Taylor, Keyan Tomaselli, and
Terry Turner. I also extend thanks to Peter Biella and Muriel
Kirkpatrick, in the Department o f Anthropology at Temple, for
preparing the new photographs that appear in this edition.
I also acknowledge the Research and Study Leaves Committee
o f the College o f Arts and Sciences at Temple University for
granting me release time to complete an earlier draft of this
writing.
Sol Worth died in 1977 at age fifty-five, five years after the
original publication of Through N avajo Eyes. H is death prema
turely curtailed his ongoing research in the area of meaning as
derived from visual images, a pursuit stimulated by his ground
breaking work, in the late 1950s, at h a r y o u (Harlem Youth pro
jects), which resulted in the Navajo Project.
But especially my warm thanks go to John Adair, who offered
invaluable amounts o f insight and encouragement throughout
the original fieldwork and during this process o f republication.
As always, I am very grateful, and I accept responsibility for all
misinterpretations o f the good counsel I have been offered along
the way.

Notes

1. For a different and more extensive review of visual anthropology as a

subdiscipline o f anthropology, see Rub y (1996).
2. A n excellent review o f these integrations and changes in thin kin g can
be found in the 1986 publication o f M elissa Banta and Curtis M . I linsley,
From Site to Sight: Anthropology, Photography an d the Pow er oj Imagery
(C am b rid ge, Mass.: Peabodv M useum P r e ss /H arvard University Press).
3. T h e first part o f this issue, 5(1) : 1 13, is devoted to a controversy sur
rounding G a r d n e r s film Forest o f Bliss.
4. Classic studies using still photography are receiving similar attention
focused on the circumstances under w hich certain photographs were taken
and subsequently used in various contexts. For instance, the research on
human locomotion by M uyb ridge and M a re y has been restudied and the
original taking o f some Farm Security Adm inistratio n photographs under
the leadership o f R o y Strvker has been reviewed and criticized; see M a h a -
ridge and W illiam son (1989), A n d T heir Children A fter Them, and Ganzel
(1984), D ustbow l Descent.
5. See W o r th s paper M argaret M e a d and the Shift from Visual A n
thropology' to the A nth ro p o lo gy o f Visual C o m m u n ica tio n , Studies in
Visual Communication 6: 15 22.
6. Parts o f this section appeared in another version in my essay Native
Participation in Visual Studies: F rom Pine Springs to Phila delph ia
(Chalfen 1989).
7. Sarah E ld e r recognizes the variability in the notion o f collaboration
as follows: W it h regard for differin g levels o f control, the term collabo
ration has long served as a politically acceptable catch all description o f
most joint efforts. In docu mentary the term is tossed around to mean any
thing from the subject as informant to the sharing o f differing skills to the
subject introducing the crew into a co m m unity to the subject as co
pro ducer ( 1 9 9 5 : 94) .
8. For a valuable discussion o f other variables related to the question
how participatory is participation? in indigenous media, see Tomaselli
(1989), as related to com m unity m edia especially his valuable table o f
structural differences between com m unity video and p rofessional/ conven
tional video (1989 :13). See also Stuart (1989) for the relevance o f partici
pation in media development.
9. A far more comprehensive listing o f similar projects appears in G in s -
burgs Indigenous M e d ia: Faustian C ontract or G lo b a l V illag e? (1991 ). A
slightly more cynical but equally rich review appears in R u b y (1991b).
A l l o f the fo llo w in g photographs are
new to this revised edition o f
T h ro u g h Navajo Eyes. Unless oth
erwise noted, a ll these pictures were
taken by R ichard Chalfen during Ju ly
an d August 1966.

1. A erial view of the center o f Pine

Springs in A u gust 1966, as seen
from the water tower. T h e top
building is the school dormitory;
the left w in g was used for our
sleeping area and converted into
the editing rooms. T h e middle
building is the schoolhouse, which
we used for introductory teaching.
T h e lower building, w hic h is par
tially hidden by several trees, was
the Pine Springs T rad in g Post,
where we had our research office
and inte rv iew room; and the build
ing in the lower right was the
schools kitchen and our dining
area.
2. Sol W orth giving introductory
information in class, talking
about the basics o f technology, in
cluding frames of 16m m film, posi
tive and negative film, and the
chemicals and technology needed
to process and develop film. M ik e
A nd erson can be seen on the right
and M a r y Jane Tsosie on the left.
A n open three-lens turret Bell and
H ow ell F ilm o camera is shown in
the foreground.
3. In-class attention by (left to
right) M ik e And erson, M a r y Jane
Tsosie, and Susie Benally, during
the first w eek o f the project. S tu
dents almost always took notes dur
ing these sessions.
 4- Sol W orth in a teaching session
just outside the classrooms, with
M ik e And erson (left) and Jo h n n y
Nels on (center). Students were still
learning basic i6 m m technolo gy at
this point.
5. M ax in e Tsosie gets a private tu
torial from Sol W orth just outside
the editing rooms and the school
dormitories, during the first two
weeks ot the project.
4
6 and 7. John A d a ir in the procees
o f in terviewing A 1 C la h while he
planned a shot for his film, In trep id
Shadows, making sure he was clear
about A l s intentions and ideas. We
frequently asked A 1 to explain rela
tionships of objects, spinning, and
shadows as part o f his careful orga
nization o f each scene. Interviews
and observations took place at as
many times and places as possible
during each film production.
8. Sol W orth studies Jo h n n y N e l
sons (left) film in g schedule on the
basketball court just outside the
school building, while A 1 C la h
(middle) looks on. Jo h n n y was pre
paring his film The Shallow Well
Project. M ik e A nderson can be seen
on the far left.
9. Navajo film m aker Jo h n n y N e l
son using a Bell and H ow ell Film o,
three-lens turret camera while
shooting his second film, The Sh al
low Well Project.
10. Research assistant D ic k C h al-
ten helps Susie B en ally with the Se-
conic light meter during her p ro
duction o f A N avajo Weaver.
Students knew they could ask for
technical assistance and advice at
any time.
IO
 i i and 12 . M ik e A nderson and his
cousin preparing shots and shoot
ing his film O ld Antelope Lake. T h e
lake is seen in the background o f 12.
13. M ik e A nderson film in g his
younger brother taking some la un
dry and a pail aw ay from Ante lope
Lake. T h e editing of these shots is
described and analyzed on pp. 173
76 o f the original text and seen in
II frames 2 2 - 2 5 f the illustrations.
14. M a r y Jane Tsosie film in g her
grandfather and prominent m edi
cine man, Sam Yazzie, tor her film
The S p irit o f the N avajo. Sam was
returning home after a long w alk in
search o f the proper plants. See the
illustrations 3 5 - 4 0 in the original
text.
15. M a r y Jane Tsosie (center) and
her sister M axin e Tsosie (right) ac
com pany their grandfather Sam
Yazzie, who carries some plants
that would be used as medicine in
their film The S p irit o f the N avajo.
16. M a r y Jane Tsosie film in g her
grandfather Sam Yazzie, while
M a xin e Tsosie prepares lunch in
their summer hogan. T h is is the
scene for frame 21 as discussed on
p. 156 o f the original text.
1 7. A lta Kahn is seen film in g her
teacher and daughter Susie Benally
weaving a belt in the m aking o f her
untitled film. T h is film came to be
called N a va jo Weaver Two. Su sies
nephew observes the film ing. See
frames 4 4 - 4 7 in original text.
18. A section of the audience for
the premiere screening of the
Navajo student films in Pine
Springs, J u ly 25, 1966. In the back
row, we see (left to right) Jo h n n y
Nels on, A 1 C la h , and M ik e A n d e r
son. W e also see M a r y Jane Tsosie
pouring drinks tor refreshments
and Susie Benally (back to camera)
directly to the left of the projector.
See C h ap ter 7 of original text for a
discussion of this event. P h o t o
graph by Sol Worth.
19 and 20. D u rin g off-m om ents,
the two principal investigators
made sure they recorded each oth
ers presence in the Pine Springs v i
cinity, in a blend of evidence and
aesthetics (first, W orth with the
camera, then Adair).
 Acknowledgments to the
Original Edition

A lth o u gh it is usual to say in a section ack n o w led g in g the con tri

butions o f others that the w o rk reported could not have been
done w ith o u t the help o f m a n y people, in this case it is literally
and exactly so. What w e shall be w r itin g about in the fo llo w in g
pages is not o n ly ou r o w n w ork but also that o f a g ro u p o f N a va jo
w h o patiently consented to be our students. T h e y not only
w orked th roughout a su m m er m aking films, w h ich is a difficult
creative task, but they also allow ed us to observe, question, and
w rite about them w h ile they did it. Indeed, they encouraged us.
T h e y felt that prod u cin g k n ow led ge about com m unication, how
people in different cultures make films, was som ething they
wanted to participate in.
T his book, therefore, could not have come about without our
N a v a jo students, Mr. M ik e A n d erso n , Mrs. Susie B enally, Mr. A 1
Clah, Mrs. A lta Kahn , M r. J o h n n y N elson , Miss M a r y Ja n e Tso-
sie, and M iss M ax in e Tsosie.
T h e co m m u n ity o f Pin e S p rin g s agreed to allow us to live with
them w h ile w e w ere w orkin g . W e wish w e could thank each one
in d ividually, but since they acted as a co m m u n ity to w elcom e us,
w e must th ank them as a co m m u n ity for their help and frien d
ship.
M r. and M rs. C la re n ce B irc h w e re the schoolteachers in the
B ureau o f Indian A ffairs school at Pine Sp rin gs. N o t on ly did
they w elcom e us and help us in e v e ry possible w a y , but C larence
Birch offered us the schools dorm itories for ou r sleeping, teach
in g and w o rk quarters. We used his school as ou r o w n and we
w a n t to thank him for a llo w in g it.
M r. Russell G r is w o ld , the o w n e r o f the tradin g post at Pine
Sp rin gs, gave us an office behind the post w h ich w e used for
interview s and for ou r o w n personal notetaking and conferences.
H e w as one o f the most know ledgeable men in the area about the
co m m u n ity and its members, and he and his fam ily helped us in
w ays, both large and small, too m a n y to be enum erated here.
M a n y other people helped to smooth o u r w a y . T h e N a v a jo
tribal leaders at W in d o w Ro ck supported and often encouraged
us w h en it seemed as if b u rea u cra cy w o u ld o vercom e us. T o all
those, and in particular to M r. M au rice M cC a b e and M r. N e d
Hatathli, o u r thanks. M r. G r a h a m Holm es, N a v a jo area director,
M r. W alter Olsen, director o f the A lb u q u erq u e area office, Mr.
E rn est M agnu so n, and M r. B u ck B enham , all o f the B ureau of
Indian A ffairs, gave us invaluable help and support w h ile on the
N a v a jo reservation.
O u r colleagues in a n th rop olo gy and com m u nication with
w h o m w e discussed our plans w e re unu su ally patient and en
couraging. Some, h ow ever, gave their time and experien ce so
ge n erou sly that w e w a n t to take this o p p o rtu n ity to a ckn ow ledge
their help. W ard G o o d e n o u g h w as one of the first an thropolo
gists to recognize the possible contribution o f the bio-docum en
tary method to eth nograph ic research. H e encouraged ou r plans
and helped cla rify ou r ideas in discussing the project w ith us.
W hen w e cam e to analyze ou r experience, Dell H y m e s proved
one o f the intellectual rocks w e leaned on most heavily. H is
detailed criticism o f the first draft o f this m anu script enabled us
to correct m a n y unclear passages. M arga ret M ead stuck with us
all the w a y . S he helped us to w o rk out m any n ew ly-fo rm e d ideas
in hours o f conversation w ith her. T h e day w e spent w ith her
w h en w e returned from the field w ith the N a v a jo films, looking
at the films over and over again, w as prob ab ly the finest lesson
in visual eth no graph ic method w e ever had. G e n e Weltfish was
enorm ously helpful before w e w e n t into the field, re v ie w in g
problems o f field method with a camera.
O u r w o rk was supported by the N ation al Science Foundation
under grants n u m b er G S 1038 and G S 1759, and by the A n n e n b e rg
School o f C om m u nicatio ns, U n iv e rs ity o f Pen n sylvania. A llan
Smith and then R ic h a rd Lieban, w h o w e re successively head of
the an thropology section o f the Foun dation , not only helped us
to solve problem s o f budget and red tape, but became valued
friends w ith w h o m w e could discuss our findings, research prob
lems, and plans at any time. T h e i r help and en couragem en t made
the research much easier. E d w a r d Hall and Jo h n Collier, Jr.,
visited us in the field and gave us an o p p o rtu n ity to re view our
findings and methods w ith them. We found these occasions both
helpful and stim ulating.
Last but not least, w e w a n t to thank G e o r g e G e r b n e r , Dean o f
the A n n e n b e r g School, w h o allow ed one o f us, at least, to spend
almost four years talkin g about nothing but N a va jo m aking m ov
ies. H e found space w h e n space w as hard to find, he allowed us
to m onopolize secretaries w h en there w e re almost none to go
around. H e made the cameras, projectors, and ed iting equ ipm ent
available w h e n e v e r they w e re needed. H e criticized and ques
tioned, w ith great sensitivity, o u r papers and the colloquia at
which w e first began to form ulate our analyses. H e was in the
deepest sense a valued colleague. A n d so w as the late Dr. Adan
T re ga n zo , C h a irm a n o f the D epartm ent o f A n th ro p o lo g y , San
F rancisco State College, for the other o f us.
Miss I'e rry Z a r o ff not only was responsible for ty p in g this
manuscript, but she kept her cool d u rin g at least five successive
rewrites. S h e checked ev ery reference and helped to organize us
so that the w o rk could go on despite teaching, meetings, and
num erous other distractions. S he deeply deserves ou r thanks.
M u rdoch M atth ew o f the Indiana U n iv e rs ity Press was our
editor. H e cut, questioned, rew rote, and made contributions on
almost ev ery page. A s with a film, a book is made in the editing
room. M u rd och M atth ew is that kind o f editor. We thank him.
x x v i) Acknowledgments to the Origitial Edition

We w a n t to say som ething about Richard C h alfen in these

acknow led gm ents, but it is difficult to thank someone w h o m we
consider to be one o f us. H e started as our graduate assistant in
the field and has continued w o r k i n g in visual com m u nication and
the eth n o gra p h y o f co m m unication. A lth o u g h his name appears
on on ly one chapter, w e w ou ld like to say here that the w ork
reported in the fo llo w in g pages w as done by the three o f us.

S ol W orth

J o h n A dair

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Gallup, New Mexico
 Introduction

We wish to tell h ow w e went about a n sw e rin g the question,

What w o u ld happen if someone with a cu ltu re that makes and
uses motion pictures taught people w ho had n ever made or used
motion pictures to do so for the first time? Would they use the
cameras and editing equ ip m en t at all? I f they did, what w ou ld
they make movies about and h ow w ould they go about it? T h is
book reports the outcome o f such an end eavor am on g some
N a v a jo Indians living in the S o u th w e stern U nited States.
O ne of the places w e visited in a p re lim in a ry trip was Pine
S prings, A rizona, w here, twen ty-five years before, Joh n A d a ir
had done one o f his first studies on N a v a jo silversmiths.
When w e arrived in Pine S p rin g s, A d a ir sought out an old
friend, Sam Yazzie, w h o was one o f the leading m edicine men in
the area. We wanted to tell Sam about our plan to teach N avajos
to use motion picture cameras and to enlist his support for the
project. Sam was, at the time of ou r visit, about eighty years old
and had just returned from a g o vernm ent hospital after a severe
bout with ch ronic tuberculosis.
We w e re told that Sam was in his hogan, and after w a n d e rin g
through several m u dd y tracks that proved to be w r o n g turns, we
found his house. It w as an a p paren tly new square log cabin in a
clearing next to a m ore traditional hogan, w hich w e found out
later he used only for sings (the traditional N a v a jo cu rin g cere
monies). A s w e entered the dim in terior and waited a moment for
ou r eyes to adjust, w e saw H u s k y B urnsides, one o f Y a z z ie s
relatives by m arriage w h o had in terpreted for A d a ir years before
and who was ready to do so again.
I he cabin had a dirt floor, like the traditional hogans. It was
furnished with three cots, some old w ooden chairs, and several
stacks ol heavily used suitcases, w hich served as storage and
dresser facilities. Sam was ly in g on one o f the cots, his hair
braided in the old style, a colorful bandanna around his forehead.
As he got up to greet us, he glanced at Worth, but reserved his
greetings for Adair. H e said, G r a n d s o n (in Navajo), and A dair
replied, G r a n d f a t h e r " (in Navajo). We seated ourselves in a
circle around Yazzie, w e on the other cots and B urn sid es on a
wooden ch air next to Yazzie. A d a ir and Sam spent about tw e n ty
minutes catch in g up on the n ew s since their last visit, Sam being
particu larly graph ic about his hospital visit. H is black eyes
flashed as he described the h orrors o f being a w a y from home and
subject to alien authority.
A lth o u gh Sam was old, tired, and still co u gh in g a great deal,
there w as no m istaking the auth o rity in his manner. Finally
A d a ir felt that it was time to b rin g up the subject o f ou r visit.
A d a ir explained that w e w anted to teach some N a v a jo to make
movies and mentioned W o rth s part in the process several times.
B y the time A d a ir had finished, Y azzie was looking at Worth
frequ en tly, seem in g for the first time to a ck n o w led ge his pres
ence as legitimate. When A d a ir finished, Sam thought for a while,
and then turned to Worth and asked a lengthv question which
was interpreted as, Will m ak in g movies do the sheep anv
harm ?"
W orth w as h appy to explain that as far as he knew , there was
no chance that making movies w o u ld harm the sheep.
Sam thought this over and then asked, Will m akin g movies do
the sheep good? Worth w as forced to reply that as far as he knew
m aking movies w o u ld n t do the sheep any good.
Sam thought this over, then, looking around at us he said,
T h e n w h y make movies?
 Sam Y a z z ie s question keeps h au n tin g us. We did not a n sw er
it then and it is not directly a n sw ered in this book, but w e want
to place it squarely before our readers. Research is designed to
formulate and solve problems, to ask and to a n sw e r questions. All
o f us doing research, and our students w o r k in g with us and being
trained to becom e researchers on their ow n, are concerned about
the kinds o f questions and a n sw ers w e provide. We have co n
stantly before us the certainty that our colleagues w ill question
and criticize ou r theories, hypotheses, methods, and conclusions.
All too often w e forget about the questions that people like Sam
Yazzie ask. What will they think about what w e did? H o w will
they benefit from our research and findings?
T h e r e is an im plicit and perhaps justifiable assum ption behind
much w o rk o f the kind w e will be describing. It is that the proper
study of m ankind is m an that k n o w in g more about host w e live
in our rich diversity, h ow we interact and become social through
our manipulations o f a variety o f sym bols and sym bol forms,
enables us to co m m unicate more fullv and fru itfu lly with each
other and with ourselves.
We assume that better com m u n ica tio n has a positive value,
that the more channels o f com m u nicatio n available to a grou p the
better off they will be. We assum e that k n o w in g how people
im ply m eaning through sym b olic events will autom atically ben
efit all o f us. We assume that stu d y in g h ow people present them
selves through the images they make w ill be beneficial and ce r
tainly will harm no one.
Perhaps.
Perhaps w e ought to have the courage to say at the outset that
w e do not kno w the effect o f such a study as ours. We have
th erefore tried to describe in great detail not o n ly what the N a v a
jos did w h en they learned to use the camera, make movies, and
look at movies, but also what w e the researchers did and felt as
w e w ere teaching, observing, and analyzing.
T h e r e has recently been m uch discussion in anthropological
and sociological circles about the need for a reflexive attitude
(Scholte 1970) in eth n ograph ic th eory and description. W e are
a w a re that o u r o w n w a y s o f seeing are mediated through our
culture. W e have attempted, b y d escrib in g ourselves our pre
conceptions, attitudes and actions in the field to a llo w the
reader room for co m p arin g us w ith ou r N a v a jo students.
Perhaps w e ought also to have the courage to say at the outset
that w e do not k n o w w h eth er this w o rk w ill help S am Y a z z ie s
sheep, or help him to attain any o f the other things he holds dear.
W e can say that S am helped us. H e cooperated to the extent of
letting his gran dd aug hters make a film about him, called T h e
S p irit o f the N a v a jo . H e said he thought that w h a t w e w ere
doin g was good. H e said that he liked the films that w e re made
d u rin g the project.
Incidentally, as far as w e could learn, S am Y azzie and his
fam ily o w n e d no sheep at the time w e w e re in P in e Sp rin gs. T h e
sheep he asked about, w e suspect, w e re a sym b olic possession for
him, as th ey have become a s y m b olic problem for us. S a m s
concern w as h ow the n e w method o f com m u n ication that we
w e re to teach his people could help the N avajo . H o w w ou ld
m ak ing films su pport their values and their w a y o f life?
In sorpe w a y , then, S am Y a z z ie s sym b olic question leads us
into ou r stu dy o f h ow one small g ro u p o f N a v a jo learned to
m anipulate and to use a novel s y m b olic form. A s w ith m any
sym b o lic events, this one also y ields useful generalizations. In a
time in w h ic h much o f the w o rld is deeply concerned about how
people w ith v a r y in g cultures w ill learn to live w ith one another,
a method b y w h ich one g ro u p can s h o w another w h at it sees and
h o w it feels must assume proportions larger perhaps than the
specific research described here w as meant to do. We feel that this
study is relevant beyond the N a va jo , that some o f the methods
and findings reported here can be applied in other countries with
people o f other cultures and m ight perhaps prove h elpful in our
o w n co u n try at a time w h e n w e are p a rticu larly feeling the strain
o f d iffering grou ps stru g g lin g to k n o w and to live w ith one an
other.
 Since the work described here was started, scores of projects
of a similar nature have been undertaken. Thousands of high
school and even grade school students have been learning to use
motion picture cameras and to make movies about events and
subjects of their own choosing (Larson and Meade 1969, Lay-
bourne 1968). Canada has started a project designed to teach
Canadian Indians to use motion picture cameras (Challenge for
Change 1969). Boards o f Education in cities throughout this coun
try and in Europe (particularly in England) are preparing or
conducting experimental programs with this new mode of com
munication integrated within the standard curriculum.
Mt. S inai Hospital in N e w Y o r k C ity has th rough its D e p a rt
ment o f C o m m u n ity M ed icin e b egu n a p ro g ram o f teaching doc
tors, medical students, patients and ghetto high school students
in their area to make movies of events and prob lem s o f their o w n
choosing. The medical staff believes that o n ly by m ak ing n ew
form s of co m m u n ication available to all the participants in the
health care field can a true sense o f co m m u n ity develop.
C le arly , then, people o f various kinds, w ith major differences
in culture, technological training, and formal education, can use
motion picture cameras. What is not quite as clear is w h at w e are
to say or think or feel about the resultant movies. H o w do w e deal
w ith these movies? O f w h at value are they? T o whom ? H o w shall
w e use them? H o w shall w e allocate resources to produce them?
T here is little research in this area today and there was none
only five years ago. It is hoped that this study, by e x a m in in g and
a nalyzin g one such project in detail, can c la rify and lend impetus
to the entire area o f visual com m u n ication research.
In this sense this is not a study o f the N a v a jo Indian. It is a
studv o f h ow a g ro u p o f people stru ctu re their vie w o f the w orld
their reality through film. In that sense the results m ay be
generalized.
M a n y people today are seeking not only n ew w a y s in w hich
they can kn ow one another but n ew w a y s to present themselves
to one another. A n th ro p o lo g y has a lw ay s had as one o f its aims
the description o f man. It has sometimes been forgotten that a
coro llary to that is the presentation o f man. It is in that spirit, not
o n ly as a study o f a small g ro u p o f men, but as a study of h ow
man can present him self, that this w o rk is offered.
O ne other notion needs to be introduced. We are w r itin g a
book about motion pictures. W e are tr y in g in it to describe a
visual process o f com m u nication in a verbal code, an intrinsically
difficult task. J o h n n y N e lso n , one o f ou r N a v a jo students, said,
Y o u make a m ovie about it and then it s m o v in g around w h ere
you can actually see w h at is b eing done, h o w it moves. I f you
w rite a w h o le book about it, then it s still. Y o u give it to some
body and he reads it and he does not get the picture in his mind.
. . . What I w a n t to see is som eth in g that can move in front o f my
eyes. . . .
W e have not succeeded in p ro v id in g a book that enables one
to see som eth in g that can m ove in front o f (his) ey e s and
w h e re you can actually see w h a t is being done h o w it m oves.
W e have not succeeded in tran slatin g im ages into words. T h e
reader o f this book w ill not be able to k n o w com pletely w h at w e
are w r itin g about w ithou t seeing the films that the N a v a jo made
at least once.
We have explained in w o rd s w h at happened, h ow and w h y it
happened, what w e and the N a v a jo s said and thought about what
happened, and h o w w e analyzed w h at they did. We have not been
able to show w h at they did in words.
A lth o u gh in some sense w e are u n h a p p y about this, in another
sense w e w e lco m e ou r o w n failure. I f w e could have accom
plished the translation o f film into w ord s the en tire project w e
are re p o rtin g w ou ld have been redundant.
T h e films m entioned in this book are available from the C en te r
for M ass C o m m u n ica tio n , C o lu m b ia U n iv e rs ity Press. I'hey can
be rented for classroom v ie w in g at special prices, m aking it sim
ple for students and teachers to see w hat they w ill be reading
about and discussing. F o r those interested in a fuller exam ination
of the materials described in the book, copies o f all the film
materials made by the N a v a jo and all the notes and in te rview
transcriptions are on deposit at the L i b r a r y o f C on gress and can
be viewed there.
We have, h ow ever, included photographs in the book. Som e o f
the scenes analyzed in depth are represented by still photographs
made from one o f the fram es in the movie scene. T h i s is not a
substitute for seeing the scene on the screen in motion, but it mav
give you a feel for what is b eing written.
Scientific studies rarely concern themselves with such nonob
jective things as atmosphere, or the look o f th ings. W h erever
possible w e have tried to do so. We must explain that w e faced
some self-im posed restrictions. W e didn't w ant to use cameras
ourselves until such time as w e felt our students w o u ld be m in i
mally influenced by ou r w a y o f m aking pictures. We felt that
w a lk in g around co m p etin g w ith ou r students as filmmakers or
photographers w ould first im pose a b urden on us w e w ou ld
look for good shots rather than at what w a s h a p p e n in g and
second, w ou ld w ide a model o f how use o f the camera was
organized and, ost im portant, what was to be photographed.
Som e events that took place before the project started, such as the
co m m u n ity m eeting at w hich perm ission to w o rk in Pine
S p rin g s w as debated, w e re of such im portance that w e asked and
w ere given perm ission to record them. We em phasize that the
photographs in the book are not meant to be definitive about the
N a va jo or their cu ltu re or to take the place o f motion pictures.
We have also attempted in the A p p e n d ix to describe briefly all
the films. O b v io u s ly w e face a d an ger in that, because w e must
abstract from the film and describe those events that seem signifi
cant to us in a w a y that w e think w ill make the reader visualize
what we saw on the screen. But w e do it in ou r term s in themes
and stories, cuts, close-ups and so on. A s you will note in the body
of the book all those things have special and often different m ean
ings for the N avajo.
We have accepted the obvious: that preten d ing w e are not part
o f our culture, that we have no preconceived w a v s o f v ie w in g the
w orld or o f v ie w in g a film, is impossible. D ism issin g culture is
no a n sw e r to the problem o f cultu ral relativity. W hat w e have
tried to do is describe what w e saw as honestly as possible, put
ting as m u ch light upon ourselves as w e could and h op in g that
the reader can make judgm ents w ith in his fra m e w ork, sometimes
re co gnizing that w e organize the w o rld the w a y he does and
sometimes reco gnizing differences. We hope that w h a teve r issues
develop w ill aid rather than h inder clarity and understanding.
A lth o u gh w e have done ou r best to describe the films in the
A p p e n d ix , there is no particu lar point in tim e w h e n w e suggest
that you fam iliarize y o u r s e lf w ith them or their descriptions.
Som e people w ill feel more co m fo rtab le reading the synopses o f
the films and v ie w in g the films before they start the book. Others
w ill w ant to do it after finishing the book.
We k n o w o f no rules for learn ing to understand h ow a people
present themselves. We hope that this book w ill add to all our
abilities to do just that.
 PART ONE

Chapter

1
How Do People Structure
Reality Through Film ? Some
Problems in Communication,
Anthropology, and Film

O u r object in the su m m er o f 1966 was to determ ine w h eth er we

could teach people with a culture different from ours to make
motion pictures depictin g their cu ltu re and themselves as they
saw fit. We assumed that if such people w ou ld use motion pic
tures in their o w n w a y , they w ou ld use them in a patterned
rather than a random fashion, and that the particular patterns
they used w ou ld reflect their cu ltu re and their particular cogn i
tive style.
In this book, we report on three areas o f this research, f irst,
we describe some of the com m u n ication s and anthropological
problems u n d e rly in g our w ork; second, w e describe some o f the
methods w e used, both to teach the N a v a jo to make films and to
collect o u r data on the film m aking process; and third, w e describe
briefly some o f the films and relate some o f o u r observations and
analyses c o n c ern in g them.

M alin o w sk i (1922) w rote m a n y years ago that: T h e final goal,

o f w h ich an E th n o g r a p h e r should never lose sight . . . is, briefly,
to grasp the n atives point o f vie w , his relation to life, to realize
his vision o f his w o r ld . This cle arly fo rm ulated objective has
created a methodological problem that has been partially solved
by collecting life histories w ith n on directive techniques. T h e s e
materials not o n ly reveal things about the dy n a m ic s o f personal
ity but also help us to understand h ow the individual relates
h im self to the outer w orld through the terms provided by his
particular language. M y th s and linguistic texts have likewise
given us exten sive verbal records for analysis.
A n o th e r n o n v e r b a l1 approach that has helped to b rin g an
th ropolo g y part o f the w a y tow ard M a lin o w s k i s goal has been
the endeavor to understand the w a y people use visual modes of
expression and com m u nicatio n to orient themselves, and to e x
press their relationship w ith their environ m ent. We have some

1. The t e r m nonverbal is a m b i g u o u s . It has been used to r e fe r to alm ost a n y t h i n g

e x p r e s s i v e or c o m m u n i c a t i v e that falls o u t s id e the strict d e fin itio n s o f la n g u a g e
p r o p o se d b y p r o fe s s io n a l lingu ists. T h u s nonverbal has been used to d e s c ri b e such
d i v e r s e acts as h a n d w r i t i n g , p a in t in g , m o v ie s, and g r a p h i c s ; ge sture, fa cial e x p r e s
sion, and h a n d - b o d v m o v e m e n t ; m u s i c in its w r i t t e n fo rm ; as w e l l as such la n
g u a g e c o n n e c t e d acts as paus es, s h o u t i n g and w h i s p e r i n g , an d s peec h r h y t h m .
M a n y o f the a b o v e a c tiv itie s are d i r e c t l y c o n n e c t e d b y c o r r e l a t i o n o r t r a n s f o r m a
tion to sp e ec h and are m o r e p r o p e r l y r e fe r r e d to as m e t a v e r b a l. What w e shall
be d i s c u s s i n g are those acts that are not c o m m o n l y be li e v e d to be sp e ec h or
l a n g u a g e c o n n e c t e d , an d w h i c h m ig h t be m o r e a c c u r a t e ly d e s c r i b e d by such
w o r d s as picture, image, picto rial o r visual, as o p p o s ed to the a m b i g u o u s nonverbal.
W e w i ll use the t e r m nonverbal w h e n w e w i s h to m ak e a p oint o f s e p a r a t i n g w ha t
w e are t a l k i n g ab ou t f r o m speec h o r s p o k e n l a n g u a g e in g e n e r a l, but it is i m p o r
tant to u n d e r s t a n d that w e do not w a n t to i m p l y b y nonverbal that n o n v e r b a l
e v e n t s are not l a n g u a g e related. T h a t , in fact, is on e o f the im p o r t a n t q u e s t io n s
d isc usse d in this book. A t all oth er tim e s w e w i ll re fe r to the pictu re , image,
visual, m ov ie , o r film, w h i c h e v e r seem s to c o n n o t e the ev en t m os t a c c u r a t ely .
slight idea based on our ow n experiences within our o w n culture
o f the uses o f such pictorial modes, but information is sadlv
lacking in the area that might be called cross-cultural visual com
munication.
T h e r e has, to be sure, been some significant w o rk in recent
years. C o llier (1967) and Leigh ton and Leighton (1944) have photo
graphed the en viro nm en t o f their inform ants as a sensitive means
for eliciting data often missed by other methods o f investigation.
S pindler (1955), G o ld sch m id t and E dgerton (1961), Mills (1959) and
others (Boum an 1954) have used d raw in gs o f the en viro nm en t
made by native artists as a means o f stim ulating a verbal response
from the informant. B ut to our knowledge, no one has yet de
vised a method o f eliciting a visual response in any w ay com p ara
ble to statements obtained through the use o f verbal linguistic
techniques. O f course, pictures and pa rticularly motion pictures
have been used to co m m unicate anthropological data, mainly
when the anthropologist uses visual means to send messages con
cerning another society to his ow n colleagues. H ere visual
phenomena (images o f other people and their en viron m en t re
corded in movies, draw in gs, diagram s, photos, charts, etc.) are
used prim arily as a means o f keeping visual records to enable
other researchers and outsiders to see and learn som ething about
the society under the view o f the anthropolo gists or film m akers
camera. T h e s e records m ay be used to satisfy sim ple cu riosity or
for sophisticated analysis o f specific social, personal, and physio
logical behavior. Excellen t and inform ative film w o rk has been
done by such people as Paul Fejos, who, with a professional
background in cinema, filmed the Y agu a; M argaret M ead and
G r e g o r y Bateson, w h o have provided valuable research films
from Bali and N e w G u in ea ; and Robert G a rd n e r, Asen Balikci,
T im o th y Asch, and others, w h o have made beautiful films of
various aspects o f cultures and societies quite different from our
ow n. T h e s e films range from the poetic analogy o f G a rd n e r, who
related the mutual w a rfare o f the Dani in N e w G u in e a to his ow n
attitudes to w ard w ar, to the stra igh tfo rw ard w orks o f Balikci on
the Eskim o, w hich are single-concept teaching-films for use in
grade schools.
R esearch ers such as B ird w h iste ll (1952, 1970), O sgood (1966),
E k m an (1965), Sorenson and G a jd u sek (1966), H a rriso n (1964) and
others have also used film to study gesture, facial expression, and
the cod in g systems o f visual modes o f com m unication.
O f course, m aking such films required the closest cooperation
o f the subjects being photographed. But the n atives eye was not
at the eye piece nor did his hand direct the lens or edit the filmed
material, and seldom did he see the finished product. So m e eth-
nofilm makers have recently asked their native inform ants to
v ie w the finished films or selected sequences from them, to co m
ment upon the rightness o f the presentation, or to suggest
com m ents for the sound track. Several anthropologists in recent
years have proposed m aking movies o f particular events in an
alien culture and using these movies to elicit responses from
native inform ants, asking them w h a t certain events mean to
th em and h ow they are valued. A t this w r itin g w e have not seen
any o f the com pleted studies done in this w a y . In any case, we
kn o w o f no one before o u r ex perim en ts w h o taught the native
to use the camera and to do his o w n editing o f the material he
gathered.
Worth and his students had had consid erable success in teach
ing the use o f the motion picture camera to y o u n g adults in
Philadelphia and N e w Y o r k C ity. In the early sixties, wh en these
attempts am o n g black teenagers w e re still novel, he w as asked
h ow beginners, untrained technically and n ew to filmmaking,
w e re able to produce such revealing films. H e replied, A doles
cents and y o u n g adults w h o are unable to talk about themselves
or w rite about themselves are frequ en tly w illin g and even eager
to reveal themselves and their w orld on film.
We reasoned that if a m em b er o f the culture b eing studied
could be trained to use the m edium so that w ith his hand on the
camera and ed iting equ ipm ent he could choose what interested
him, w e w ou ld come closer to ca p tu rin g his vision o f his world.
 O u r cu rrent investigations derive largely from ou r an th ropo
logical-visual-aesthetic interests and from u n an sw ere d questions
about pictures and visual com m u nication in general that drove
Worth, a practicing painter, ph otographer, and filmmaker, into
the field of com m u nications research.
T h e questions are global ones, h o w eve r partially they are taken
up in the w o rk we are reporting. H o w do the pictures one makes
the paintings, the photographs, the films work? H o w does a
filmmaker k n o w how, for exam ple, to sequence a set o f visual
events recorded on strips o f film so that w h en the v ie w e r sees
them, he k n ow s what the film m aker meant? What processes in
human beings allow them to com m u nicate visually? What hap
pens w h en the film m aker and the vie w e r do not share the same
culture? A r e there things w e can understand in pictures or film
no matter h ow different our cultures happen to be? Can we
com pare the structure o f visual events such as paintings or photo
graphs to structures o f verbal events such as w o rd s and lan
guages? Can w e learn som eth ing about h ow w e kn ow our world
by s tu d y in g how w e kn ow things that others com m u nicate to us
visually?
Can a nyo ne make movies? C an anyone understand a movie?
H o w do you learn? What do you learn?
We w ill be discussing tw o things that are inseparable but n ev
ertheless sligh tly different. O n e is the study o f images themselves
in their cultural context, under the variety o f constraints that a
culture and its technology impose. T h e other is the study o f the
w av the hum an mind in general p a n cu ltu rally deals with im
ages. T h e first w ould ask w h y a particular person, in a particular
culture, in a particular situation, made a particular image or
interpreted it in a particular w ay. T h e second w ould seek to learn
how these particular w a v s are related to w a y s that all men use
wh en they try to make sense o f pictures.
Most o f us know, or confidently assume, that com m unication
through film takes place. That is, w e assume that film can
w o r k , although it doesn t a lw a y s w ork, or sometimes works
o n ly partially. G iv e n that deep u n d e rly in g assumption, how ever,
it seems all the more rem arkable that w e do not k n o w m ore about
the generalities o f film; w e do not k n o w much about the patterns
o f its use, the context both verbal and socio-cultural within
w hich it occurs, and w e have no idea o f the possible rules o f
inference and implication that govern that im probable moment
wh en someone sees a film and says, I kno w exactly what he
m eant.
When w e started thin kin g about tackling some o f these pro b
lems, w e w e re not so much concerned with e x p lo rin g the aes
thetic or norm ative questions like What makes a film good? but
rather the substantive questions in volved in h ow a person w h o
sees a film determ ines w h at it means, and h o w a person who
makes a film determ ines what to shoot, h ow to shoot it, and how
to put it together in a sequence so that a v ie w e r will get from the
film the m ean ing the film m aker w an ts him to.
It was clear to us that the norm ative question is not com pletely
separable from the substantive one. We felt rather a difference in
emphasis, w h ich w o u ld determ ine the direction o f questions we
wou ld ask in in terview s, observations w e w o u ld make of
filmmakers and view ers, and w a y s in w hich w e w ould analyze
ou r data. A great deal o f norm ative and evaluative information
turned up in o u r data and w h e r e v e r possible w e have included
it in our analyses.
In s tu d y in g the process o f film m akin g and try in g to determ ine
the patterns and perhaps even the rules by w h ich people co m
municate through film, W orth w on d ered if the study o f speech
offered an analogy. T h a t is, if he could observe the process o f
learning to use a film lan guage if he could observe someone
becoming a film speaker he might learn som ething about the
process o f being a speaker, a speaker o f film.
Such a thing is w o rth doing, because s u rp ris in g ly little is
known about language and language acquisition. What is certain
is that most hum an beings, w ithou t direct instruction, learn to
speak their native language d u rin g their first five years of life. It
is easy to take that fact for granted, or to gloss over it because of
preoccupation with co n fo rm ity to arbitrary rules o f g ra m m a r or
p revailing literary usage, but its im portance should not be ob
scured. H u m a n children learn to speak; and the u n iversality o f
the achievement suggests to m any that the ability to learn lan
guage is innate. Just what aspect is innate is a matter o f con tro
versy am ong linguistic scholars. C h o m sk y (1965) and others
hypothesize that w hat actually happens w h en one learns to speak
a particular language is that one learns the relations between the
innate deep structure o f language in general and the particular
surface structure or gra m m ar o f his language.
But, o f course, what we do with sound learn to perceive it,
to interpret it as evidence of a reality outside ourselves, and to
make sym bolic use o f it we also do with visual events. A baby
must analyze what he sees as clues to distance, texture, weight,
and motion. T hat virtu ally e v ery o n e with eyes learns to do so
successfully, even precisely, suggests the possibility that there is
an innate pattern for interpreting images. Perhaps what
filmmakers in various cultures do is to learn to make relations
between innate patterns for orga n iz in g kn ow led ge obtained visu
ally and the conventionalized set of regularities, or rules, preva
lent in their o w n language, tradition, and culture. Perhaps the
same structure underlies both the method o f o rga n iz in g sound
through language and the method o f orga n iz in g images through
film, and thus helps to create a com m u nicative deep structure
that can be transform ed to generate m any surface structures for
v a ry in g modes of com m unication.
While this study w ill not attempt to form ulate the rules of
innate universal film com m unication, w e have tried to search for
pattern in the use o f film by a specific gro u p in a specific culture
and context. B y ex a m in in g m any different groups, by finding
regularities and patterns com m on to each g ro u p or context, and
by cross com parison o f gro u ps and contexts, w e will suggest
possible universal patterns by w h ich film attains meaning. In the
con clu d in g chapter w e will mention several other studies done
with disparate groups and point out several areas o f difference
and sim ilarity.
Worth has suggested that it is im portant to study film as an
ongo ing com m unication process consisting o f at least three inter
related parts. First, there are one or more filmmakers. Second,
there is the piece o f celluloid called a film. A n d third, there are
one or more viewers. Each o f the three units, or param eters of
study, exists within a specific context. T h e three parameters of
the process o f film m aking can be called variou sly (depending on
the model and the discipline o f the analyst) sender, message, and
receiver; or speaker, utterance, and listener; or creator, w o rk of
art, and re-creator. It seems clear that research in this area must
be concerned with the total process and with the social, cultural,
and institutional contexts s u rro u n d in g it.
Som e aspects o f these relationships have, o f course, been con
sidered in the past. T h e r e is an extensive literature on film and
film analysis, and there has been a fairly large body o f research
on the effects o f specific films on audiences. Recen tly Worth,
Kessler (1970), and Z illm a n n have been stu d y in g changes in the
meaning inferred from a film w h en various aspects o f its stru c
ture, such as time and sequence, are changed. O thers have begun
to study the general psychological and physiological responses of
individuals in determ inin g m eanin g from a film sequence. But in
general little attention has been paid to the process of constru ct
ing (organizing, patterning, coding) visual com m unications. In
the main, studies on the visual arts have been philosophical (aes
thetic), historical (history o f art, painters, or movements), or in
trospective (reports about how one goes about w r itin g a poem or
painting a painting). W ork such as P a n o fs k y s (1939) or G o m -
b rich s (1961) has dealt with the sym bolic and psychological as
pects o f pain tin g and related them to the actual events and his
torical context o f composition. T h e process o f coding, how ever,
the process by w hich m eanings are put together from specific
parts o f a visual com m unication, has been neglected, even in the
older fine arts. In the study o f film, there has been almost no such
research at all.

In some earlier investigations o f what he had com e to call the

bio-docum entary film, Worth found not on ly the obvious that
different grou ps respond differently to the same films on both
emotional and cognitive levels but that films could be classified
in a crude w a y according to differences in the structure of the
response of different audiences to specific film structures. T h a t is,
aspects o f the structure or pattern in a film seemed relevant to the
cognitive processes em ployed in dealing not on ly w ith film, but
with other modes or media o f com m u n ication as well.
T h e w a y one organized his visual utterances as a sender as well
as a receiver seemed to be related to the w a y one organized his
verbal utterances. When data on the context o f the film e x p e ri
ence (who made the film, h ow and w h en was it show n, w ho
looked at it, with w h om , when) was collected along with the
inferences and interpretations o f the films, it became apparent
that a com plex relationship existed between the w a y in which the
subjects dealt with other com m unication form s (writing, speech,
dance, etc.) and the w a y in w h ich they made inferences from a
film.
W ithin the first few years o f teaching film in the northeastern
United States, w e decided that almost an y student could be
taught to use a movie camera and with it w ould make something
that could be called a movie. T h is mode of com m unication
seemed a m ore universal form o f co m m unication than d r a w in g
or painting, skills which, although taught and encouraged from
kindergarten on, seemed to present special difficulties for most
A m erica n s past the age o f tw elve. O u r culture seems to p resup
pose a special talent to be a painter or to paint pictures. M ak in g
movies, on the other hand, seemed to bypass pa in tin g s demand
for specialized h an d -ey e coordination, w h ich takes years to de
velop. A lth o u g h folklore had it that m aking movies is technically
difficult, the northeastern A m erica n s in our classes seemed not to
be discouraged by that. A n y o n e w h o could drive a car or w in d
a watch seemed to feel able to make a movie. W h y and h ow a
culture develops special and p referred methods o f co m m u n ica
tion for specific and d iffering purposes and h ow these pre fe r
ences change over tim e is a problem that has o n ly just been
recognized, and one that the methods and observations in this
study are m eant to illuminate.
 Chapter

2
A Look at Film As I f
It Were a Language

T h e next aspect in ou r research plan intruded itself almost insidi

ously. I f people can com m u n icate through film if people of
v aryin g cultures can use it w id e ly as both makers and vie w e rs
it becomes necessary, in order to understand this form o f human
interaction, to find or form ulate some o f the patterns, codes,
rules, conventions or even laws by w h ich such com m unication
takes place.
T h r o u g h most o f the literature on the visual arts, and particu
larly in film, aesthetics, psych ology and a nthropology, one no
tion kept c ro p p in g up. Film is a language, said Sergei
Eisenstein (1949). T h e literature echoed this m etaphor con
stantly, in statements asserting the syn tax o f film, the g ra m
mar o f film, the structure o f pictures, and the language of
art (G oo dm an 1968).
We became in trigued by the sheer multitude o f statements
linking film and language w ithou t any verification or reference
to notions or theories o f language. It seemed clear that the fre
quent use o f linguistic terms w as more poetic than scientific.
A lth ou gh pictures and film as language had not been studied
extensively or pro ductively, the study o f verbal language and o f
pictures as an aspect o f cu ltu re has been. T h e s e approaches as
developed in anthropology, co m m unication and linguistics,
seemed to offer a fruitful paradigm for the study o f culture
th rough films produced by m em bers o f a culture themselves.
O nce one begins to look at a film w ith in a linguistic fram ew ork
and here w e w ou ld like to em phasize that w e mean to look for
structures analogous to those o f language and not to claim that
film actually is a language in a linguistic sense m any questions
o f interest to anthropologists, com m unication researchers, and
film theorists arise. It becomes necessary to form ulate and con
sider questions such as: I f film is like language, are there different
languages o f film? A r e there native grou ps o f hearer-speakers o f
film could one c o m m u n ity o f persons produce and understand
a film utterance that w ou ld not be understandable or makeable
by persons o f other groups? I f such different languages o f film
exist, and if people acquire them natively, do the divisions follow
the normal linguistic divisions? 1 hat is, do F ren ch speakers make
films that o n ly French-speakin g people understand? C ould lin
guistic families be grouped, so that speakers o f Athabaskan-
related languages w ou ld make films that their fellow speakers
could all understand but that w ou ld not be understood b y speak
ers o f R om a n ce languages?1
O r are w e perhaps talking about such languages as surrealism
or abstractionism w hich cut across linguistic grou ps and refer to
deeper and more com plex w a y s o f conceptualizing? O r to pat
terns or conventions, w h ich have diffused only within limited
areas and act as a b arrier betw een those areas and others?

i. L o m a x (1968), in s t u d y i n g the m u s i c o f d iff eren t g r o u p s , rep or ts that diffe ren t

c od es and s tyles o f m u sic e x ist w i t h d i ff er en t c ultures. M e y e r (1956), also r e f e r r i n g
to m u sic, t h in k s that in f e r e n c e s f r o m m usi cal fo r m s are d i ffe r e n t fo r p eop le w it h
d iff eren t cultu res.
 We w o u ld then be p ropo sing that the language o f film is cor
related w ith cultural patterns values, m yths, rituals, and w orld
views. O ne m ight also ask w h eth er the native speaker concept
applies differentially to makers and v ie w e rs do people u n d e r
stand films o f different cultures or groups more or less easily than
they can produce them?
T h ese questions lead one to ask further w h eth er the very con
cept, gram m atical, so com m on to verbal language, has any co u n
terpart in film com m unication.
T h e concept o f gram m aticality is a difficult one. In general we
mean the notions im plied by a native speaker o f a language when
he says T h a t is (or is not) a correct sentence or T h a t s a
sentence that nobody w ould s ay . T h e first level o f correctness
might correspond to our more conventional forms o f gram m ar:
every native speaker o f E nglish kn ow s that T h e boy went into
the or H it the Jo h n ball w a s are not English. In the second
level, ev ery on e k n o w s that if a stranger w alks up to y ou on Fifth
A ven u e and says, E xc u se me, m y name is Jo h n Jones, could you
direct me to T im e s Squ a re ? he is not sayin g w h at is norm ally
said. It is correct in one sense, but it is a sentence that nobody
uses. G ra m m a tic a lity , then, as used here in relation to film, im
plies (1) correctness o f form; that is, all the right elements are
present in the right order, and (2) correctness o f use, or a p p ro p ri
ateness.
I f languages have lexicons (dictionaries) which list sy n on y m s
o f w ord s and paraphrases o f ideas, could w e find evidence o f such
units in film co m m u n icatio n filmic sy n on y m s or paraphrases
w ithin specific cultures or across cultures?
It became clear that m any o f these an sw ers w ould depend upon
research am on g n ative speakers o f different cultures. We
w ould first need to k n o w w h o spoke film, or w h o could speak
film, w h eth er in ou r culture or in others. It w ou ld be on ly after
w e learned w h o could produce film utterances and u n der what
conditions that w e could begin to com pare them. E v e n more
precisely, on ly after w e had (in a film can) a variety o f utterances
produced under known circumstances could we begin to test
some of these questions. T o look for rules or patterns in the use
of a mode of communication, one must know the rule input and
be able to subtract it from the patterned and analyz.ed output. In
a sense the resultant pattern would represent the pattern im
posed on this mode bv cognitive processes native to the culture
in question.
It was such questions that led us to specific research w e will
now discuss.
First, we proposed to determine the feasibility of teaching
people in another culture to use film. Worth had already done so
among eleven- to fourteen-year-old N egro dropouts in Philadel
phia and college students in a school of communication. Since
then many others have worked with a variety of subgroups such
as middle-class whites, unwed mothers, grade-school children
(some as young as eight years), Puerto Ricans, Mexicans, and
Negroes. T h e methods and aims of the film teaching projects
varied tremendously, but in all o f them it was found that almost
everyone could be taught to use motion picture cameras.
This method o f film m aking was designated as the bio-docu
mentary film as opposed to the standard docum entary. In 1964,
before w e had fully conceived the research method which is the
subject o f this book, Worth presented the first report o f the
bio-docum entary method at a m eeting of the Society for A pplied
A n th ro p o lo g y in Puerto Rico. H e had at that time w orked only
with college students and black teenagers in H arlem , but the
advantages o f the method seemed to call for further exploration.
T h e report stressed:

T h e motio n pic ture is no m ore than a recen tly in vented and m e

ch a n ically sophistic ated tool to aid men in th eir desire to make
pictures. Its d e ve lop m e n t p ro b a b ly stems from the same needs
that have m otivated men for th ousands o f ye ars to depic t th e m
selves, their fellow s, and the w o r ld around them.

D e s c r ib in g the cu ltura l fu nction o f a picture, o r its n ew est mani-

 festation the motio n p icture is an e x t re m e ly difficult task. It is
difficult, I think, because its use is so ve r y basic to man. O f all the
acts o f com m u n ic a tio n that m an has learned to p e rfo rm pic tures
seem to take a special place.

T h e pic ture made by the cave m an is still re cognizable as a picture.

We k n o w w h at it is, and feel quite close to it. T h e p icture as a basic
fo rm o f c o m m u n ic a tio n as a de vice for one man to shoii' another
has p ro b a b ly ch anged less in term s of o u r ability to recognize
the im ag e referent than alm ost a n y other c o m m u n ic a t iv e mode.

T h e a nthrop ologist and other researchers in the social sciences use

film as an aid to m e m o ry , a w a v to re m e m b e r the look o f a com plex
action or object, or as a w a y to describe it. . . . F o r w h a te ve r
purpose the anth rop ologist uses his h im as an aid to m e m o rv or
descriptio n, as a teachin g tool or as a t ra in in g de vice he is
p rim arily c o n ce rn e d w ith pre se n tin g, p re se rv in g, or d ocu m e n tin g
the facts about s om e thin g he has ob served. . . . T h e d ocu m e n ta ry
film m aker in this role is a re p o r t e r who, fu n c tio n in g at his best,
observes, c om m e n ts, and in terprets the object o f his observation
and study. Fhere is, h o w e ve r, an o th e r w a v the him can be used.
A n d it is this new w a y o f using film that I w o u ld like to describe.
. . . F or lack o f a m ore precise n am e 1 am c a llin g this kind o f him
B io - D o c u m e n t a r y as d istingu ishe d fr om the D o c u m e n t a r y .

A B io - D o c u m e n t a r y is a him m ade by a person to sh o w how he

feels about h im s e lf and his w o rld . It is a sub je ctive w a y o f s h o w in g
what the ob jective w o rld that a person sees is r e a ll v like. In part,
this kind ol him bears the same relation to d o c u m e n t a r y him that
a self-portrait has to a portrait or a [ b io g rap hy to an) a u to b io gra
phy. In addition, because ot the specih c w a y that this kind o f him
is made, it often cap tu res feelings and reveals values, attitudes, and
con cerns that lie b ey ond con scious co ntrol o f the maker.

In the ch apter a n aly zin g some o f the films made bv the Navajo,
we will describe how one o f the filmmakers explained the fu n c
tion of his film in almost the same w a v used above as a self-
portrait rather than an objective report, as a description o f how
it is in side rather than out th ere.
T h e 1964 report continued:
T h e B io - D o c u m e n ta r y is a film that can be m ade b y a person w h o
is not a professional film m a ke r or by som eone w h o has n e v er made
a film before. It is a film that can be m ade b y a n y o n e w ith enou gh
skill, lets say, to d r iv e a car, b y a person o f a d ifferent c u ltu r e or
o f a different age g r o u p , w h o has been taught in a specific w a y to
make a film that helps him to co m m u n ic a t e to us the w o rld as he
sees it and his c o n ce rn s as he sees them.

It is the d ifference o f intent b etw e e n D o c u m e n t a r y and B io -D ocu-

m e n ta r y that separates and defines them. O p e r a tio n a lly , a film is
a film. Both kinds o f film m a k in g requ ire cam eras, editing, sensi
tized e m uls io ns, and lenses. Both need the sam e e quipm en t. T h e
distinction b etw e e n the t w o fo rm s is not o n ly operational but
in tentional. T h e intent o f the B io - D o c u m e n ta r y film m aker is to
present the subjective, the phe nom e nolog ical, rather than the o b
jective. T h e intent o f the v i e w e r o f B io - D o c u m e n ta r y must also be
different.

W hen one looks at a d o cu m e n ta ry , one expects to see an im age o f

the w o r ld that can be accepted as real. In a d o c u m e n t a r y film
about the N a v a h o , for exam p le , y o u w o u ld look for an objective
presentation o f h o w they live. . . .

O f cou rse no v ie w o f one man b y another is e n tire ly objective. T h e

most ob jective d o c u m e n ta ry film o r report in clu des the v ie w and
values o f the maker. T h e standard d o c u m e n ta ry film tries, h o w
ever, to e xclu d e as much as possible o f this personal value system.
T h e B io - D o c u m e n ta r v method teaches the m aker o f the film to
search for the m e an in g he sees in his w o rld , and it e n cou rag es the
v i e w e r to con tin u e that search by c o m p a r in g his values w ith the
values exp re ssed b y the film m ake r in the film. T h e B io-D ocu m e n -
tary m ethod suggests that at tim es it is fru itfu l to get a w a y fr om
an e xam in atio n o f man as object and try to learn m ore about him
as subject. T h e B io - D o c u m e n t a r y , it seems to me, e xp resses the
cu ltu re o f the m aker w ith o u t m uch o f the se lf-consc iousness o f art,
w ith o u t the de m an d s o f great am oun ts o f p hysic al skill requir ed
in the othe r arts, and w ith o u t resort to the traditio nal w a y s of
seeing in herent in the othe r visual arts. A n d most im portant,
B io - D o c u m e n t a r y is, by de finition (because the film m a ke r must
see it to s h o w it), tied to the visib le w o r ld o f the moment.

T h i s a llo w s the anthropologist to c o m p are the v i e w o f the w o rld

that the film m ake r has s h o w n w ith the v ie w o f that sam e w o rld
 as seen bv himself and others. It allows not only the anthropologist
on the scene to make comparisons, but permits others who are not
there to make independent evaluation of the same observations.

Upon these early formulations, we based the research that we

are reporting now.
Besides determining if and how members of another culture
would use film, we proposed to find out if it was possible to
systematize the process of teaching, to observe it on the three
levels mentioned earlier (the maker, the film itself, and the
viewer) and to collect data about it in such a way as to assist other
on-going research exploring the structure and process of mean
ing inference from film language communication.
In recent years there has developed a small but significant body
of researchers exploring what has been called the semiotics of
film and what Worth has called vidistics, who are interested in
developing the rules, codes, patterns, and possibly language of
film communication.
We would like to emphasize, then, that the purpose of our
work was not only to find out about the Navajo. We chose the
Navajo precisely because much is known about them. Adair and
many others had been conducting research among the Navajo for
many years, and we could check our inferences from visual com
munication against other data. We were interested in studying
the general nature of the cognitive processes involved in film use
within specific cultural contexts. T h e Navajo were a people with
a contrasting language and culture to that of the investigators.
Before knowing that Navajos could make films and before
knowing what or how many rules we would have to teach, we
had no clear way to state many of these problems. Before know
ing the alternative ways in which Navajos could structure visual
events, we had no way of comparing our way with theirs.
A working hypothesis, then, for our study was that motion
picture film, conceived, photographed, and sequentially arranged
by a people such as the Navajo, would reveal aspects of coding,
cognition, and values that may be inhibited, not observable, or
not analyzable when the investigation is totally dependent on
verbal exchange especially when such research must be done in
the language of the investigator.
We were interested not only in studying the general nature of
the cognitive processes involved in this visual mode of communi
cation itself, but we were searching for specific pattern, code, and
rules for visual communication within a cultural context. It was
the interdependence between a mode of communication and its
context as expressed in patterned, interrelated behavior that was
sought.
Further, we felt that our research in the methods of photo
graphing filmed image events and then sequencing them through
the editing process might create new perspectives on the Whor-
fian hypothesis, work on which has for the most part been limited
to linguistic investigation o f cognitive phenomena. Through
cross-cultural comparative studies using film as a mode of visual
communication, relationships between linguistic, cognitive, cul
tural and visual phenomena might eventually be clarified. Pro
cesses involved in cognition might be better understood if the
way in which people produced a structure of visual sequences
were compared to the way the same people structured their ver
bal language; that is, we hoped to be able to compare two com
municative structures, one verbal and one visual. By making
comparisons across these two modes, we might be able to make
statements about language and culture similar to those made by
comparing two verbal linguistic structures in a Whorfian man
ner. 'The use of both modes visual and verbal compared across
cultures, could provide an analytic structure which would make
it possible to analyze these deeply interrelated verbal, visual,
cognitive, and cultural phenomena within one conceptual frame
work.
We also reasoned that the images, subjects and themes selected
and the organizing methods used by the Navajo filmmakers
would reveal much about their mythic and value systems. We felt
that a person s values and closely held beliefs about the nature of
the world would be reflected in the w a y he edited his previously
photographed materials. We w e re able to elicit data relevant to
these areas bv asking the students w h y certain portions o f film
were totally discarded, or w h y certain pieces w ere em phasized bv
position in the film or by control o f length and rh y th m ic relation
to other pieces c o m in g before and after it.
As mentioned earlier, an additional interest o f ours was in the
process o f innovation itself what happens w h en that process is
guided by the investigators. A process w h ich might be called
guided innovation, in contrast to the more conventional and oth
erwise unattainable retrospective and historical studies of inno
vation and diffusion that have taken place entirely independently
of the investigator. G u id e d innovation allow s the investigator to
study the introduction o f som ething new to a c o m m u n ity in the
very act o f in trod ucing it.
T h is process, in which the investigator is intim ately in
volved as the central agent in the diffusion and introduction
of a new technology, a new ideology, a n ew form o f social
structure, or, as in the present instance, a n ew mode of com
munication, is central to studies of participant intervention.
H o lm b erg (i960), for example, after a period o f participant ob
servation du rin g w hich he conducted basic studies o f the ex
isting econom y, technology, and social organization o f a ha
cienda at V icos, Peru, intervened in the political process and
altered his role to incorporate direct action. T h e anthropolo
gist in that case deliberately stimulated the co m m u n ity and
other levels in the national g o vernm ent to accept innovation.
A nother exam ple o f this approach was C orn ell U n iversity
Medical C o lle g e s w o rk in introd ucin g new medical practices
at M an v F arm s on the N a va jo reservation. Essential to this
method o f study is the com m unication to the c o m m u n ity o f
w h y the investigator is there, w h at his objective is, and an ex
planation o f his interest in them. Ju st as we, as m embers o f
another society, sought a context for u n derstanding the w ay
Navajos organized their world, they too needed a context for
understanding our behavior as researchers.
O ther anthropologists such as H o lm b e r g (i960), Barnett (1953),
S p ice r (1952, 1961), A d a ir (1944), A d a ir and V o g t (1949) and Goode-
nough (1965) had observed and analyzed the process o f technologi
cal innovation. It was som ew hat easier, h ow ever, to explain w h y
one was teaching and o b servin g a process o f a gricultu re or o f
politics. Little is kn ow n, h ow ever, about h ow a n ew mode o f
communication w ould be patterned by the culture to w h ich it is
introduced, and w e had no precedent for ex p la in in g what we
w e re goin g to do or w h y w e w e re going to do it.

One of the cardinal interests in this research was to see what

other peoples had to say about themselves through film, and how
one could teach them to say it. Many of our formal theoretical
notions may or may not be borne out. What emerges from the
film data we have collected, however, is a new form of expression
from a group of people in another culture who have never ex
pressed themselves in this way before. Their statements, and the
method by which they were made, are now available for study
and replication.
It is now time to deal with the specific methods by which we
were able to teach filmmaking to the Navajos and our methods
of collecting data about what they did and did not do. Before
discussing these methods, however, it is essential to understand
something of Navajo culture their history, the particular com
munity in which we worked, and something of the value system
common to them and contrasting with ours.
 The Navajo

T h e N a v a jo reservation is located across north w estern N e w

M exico and northeastern A rizona, w ith a small section extending
up into southern Utah. It is high co u n try part of what geogra
phers call the C o lorado Plateau. T h e altitude varies from 3,500
feet to mountain peaks over 11,000 feet. O n the higher ranges are
large stands o f pinon and ju n ip e r w h ich above 6,500 feet merge
into ponderosa pine.
T h e w h o le o f the terrain has v e ry little rainfall, ra n gin g from
twelve inches a year in the m ountains to as little as five inches
in the lo w er desert regions. D u r in g years o f drought there is even
less, w hich makes agricultu re and sheep raising v e ry precarious,
especially for those at the lo w er altitudes. M ost o f the precipita
tion comes in J u l y and A ugu st, w h en there are great cloudbursts
w hich wash the top soil d ow n the arroyos. W inter is marked by
some sn o w a good bit in the m ountains and severely cold
nights o f sub-zero temperature.
U n til recently the N a v a jo have lived in hemispherical earth
and log houses, called hogans, w h ere much o f the ph otography by
the N avajos in our study took place. 1'he hogan, a one-room,
windowless structure about eighteen feet in diameter with a
central fireplace (today occupied by a stove) and smoke hole in
the roof, provides adequate protection from the cold and the
severe dust storms. Its persistence is also due to religious sanc
tions, since curing ceremonies known as sings must be held in
such a dwelling. In the summer the people move into brush
structures which shade them from the sun and take advantage of
the breeze. T h e Navajo detest extreme hot weather an impor
tant factor in the periodic return to the reservation of those who
have gone to seek wage work in southern Arizona or California.
While it is a severe land, marked with recurrent droughts, dust
storms, and blizzards, it is a land of great beauty. Vast panoramas
of red rock and deep canyons with beautiful pine-studded park
land attract visitors from all over the United States. Tourists also
come to see the Navajo in their picturesque dress the women
in long full sweeping skirts of calico and blouses of velveteen,
useful garb for a people who make much of bodily modesty.
Many of the men, especially on the northwestern edge of the
reservation, still wear their hair long, put up in a double knot at
the nape of the neck.
Compared to tribal peoples living in the interior of N ew
Guinea, the upper Amazon River drainage, or the remote high
lands of Southeast Asia, the Navajo are in no sense a primitive
people. Most of them share, to some extent, twentieth-century
technology, live in part in our economy and speak some English.
T h e Navajo, however, do have some characteristics in common
with other tribally organized peoples. T h ey retain in good mea
sure their own traditional social organization and religion which
differ greatly from those of urban-living peoples with a Euro-
American orientation such as ourselves, and from subcultures in
our society such as Mexicans, Negroes, Puerto Ricans, and oth
ers, who share our religion, language, and variations of our social
organization. T h e y think of themselves as a coherent group. In
their own language, they call themselves Dine, which means the
People.
 The very facts that the N a v a jo do share much o f our tech
nology, are involved in our w age econom y, and speak our lan
guage as well as their o w n , make them representative o f a very
large segment of the developin g w o rld . Those developing soci
eties share with us features o f tw entieth-century life, but also
share with tribal peoples m any o f the ideological and social p rin
ciples o f hum an organization that give them a v e ry different
approach to living and a very different system o f understanding
their total environm ent.
It should be noted that although the N a va jo speak E nglish in
ever-increasing num b ers (most o f the population under thirtv is
bilingual), only a small percentage o f those over sixty are fluent
in spoken English and an even smaller n u m b er are literate.
N avajo remains the language o f the home and the com m u nity. It
is the language in which the child first learns to think, and it
remains the language that he reverts to w h en, as an adult, he
meets a crisis.
It is also well to appreciate that the N avajo living on the edge
o f the reservation have been in contact with the w hite man, his
values, his fam ily, and his c o m m u n ity organization for one h un
dred years.
In 1869 the N a v a jo w e re returned to their homeland from Fort
S u m n er in eastern N e w M exico, w h ere they had been interned
for the previous five years as part o f an all-out attempt on the part
of the W ar Departm ent to put an end to raids on Anglo- and
Span ish -A m erican settlements in the Southwest. L pon their re
turn the present reservation was established by treaty.
The next fifty years was a period of forced assimilation. The
white politicians, civil servants, and educators o f that era thought
that it the children o f the N avajo (and o f all other 1ndians) were
isolated from their ow n people, placed in boardin g schools dis
tant from the reservation, and kept out o f touch with their fam i
lies and com m unities, they would autom atically be educated,
assimilated into white culture, and thus become "c iv iliz e d .
It is now apparent that this program was a failure; it produced
misfits unable to function in either their o w n or the dominant
society. N o r did the attempts to C hristianize the N a va jo meet
with great success. E xcep t for a small n u m b er o f converts, the
N a v a jo have retained their o w n religion and its elaborate cere
monial life.
It was not until the reform administration o f Jo h n Collier,
C om m issio n er o f Indian A ffairs under the presiden cy o f F ra n k
lin D. Roosevelt, that go ve rn m e nt officials began to entertain a
more sym pathetic and understand in g v ie w o f Indian culture.
U n d e r C o llie r the trend in education was reversed, from distant
boardin g schools to high schools near the reservation and ele
m entary schools in the local com m unities. Indian arts, religion,
m yth ology, and tribal w a y s w e re officially sanctioned by the
gove rn m e nt officials in the Bureau of Indian A ffairs on both the
W ashington and district levels. But the less educated, run-of-the-
mill school teacher, doctor, or land managem ent officer, w h o was
w o rk in g on the local tribal and co m m u n ity level on the reserva
tion, did not necessarily go along with what they thought to be
the im practical idealism o f C o llie r and his staff.
A t this time there was another ve ry important developm ent on
the N a v a jo reservation the beginn ings o f tribal governm ent.
Before 1920 the N a v a jo had no political unity as a tribe. T h e
people had been organized into local bands, each with its ow n
leaders, but there was no overall tribal identity. In the 1920s a
tribal council was established and by the end o f the thirties it
began to have recognized authority, even though du rin g those
years m any o f the N a va jo thought o f the council as a rubber
stamp for W ashington. A fte r the Second World W ar the council
became an effective political and legislative body with a chairman
and vice-chairman and seventy-four councilm en elected by secret
ballot from as m any voting districts spread across the reserva
tion. W hile at first the tribal governm ent was under the tutelage
o f some able federal civil servants at W in d o w Rock, Arizona,
today it is com pletely in the hands o f N a v a jo leadership. A d d i
tionally the tribe has developed its o w n committee system re
sponsible to the tribal council, for example, a com mittee on ed u
cation, a committee on health and welfare, a committee on graz
ing. T h e N avajo have successfully assumed the responsibility for
governing their own affairs after a period of over a hundred years
o f dependence on the federal governm ent. T h at dependency had
crushed Indian groups elsew here, notably the Indians on the
plains whose econom y was drastically altered by the disappear
ance of the buffalo and the encroachm ent o f white settlers.
Political grow th has been matched by economic gro w th on the
Navajo reservation. U ran iu m , natural gas, oil and tim ber became
sources for the build ing o f capital funds under federal guidance.
T h e income from such wealth (held triballv, not individually) has
been used to develop a tribal tim ber industry, to further arts and
crafts production, to set up m erch an d isin g centers, to encourage
small businesses, to im prove roads, and to advance com m u nity
development. A dd ition ally, the tribe has a generous fund used
for supporting higher education. T o d a y the N avajo have their
own civil service, e m p lo y in g o ver a thousand men and wom en;
it conducts the administration o f their affairs (including their
own police force), all of w hich had been in the hands o f federal
administrators thirty years ago.
I he grow th of the N avajo du rin g this period, as a unified
people with a nationalized ideology o f their ow n (they have co n
stantly held out against pan-Indian political involvement), may
be compared with the grow th o f national pride in the developing
nation states of A frica and elsewhere.

T h e social organization of the Nava|o is based on about sixty

matrilineal clans and on an extended family system which traces
kin to collateral lines far beyond the nuclear family. The clans
principal function is to regulate m arriage; it is an exogamous unit
with m arriage rules which are still in effect tor example, to have
sexual relations with a clanmate is to commit incest. Ulan m em
bers also have economic obligations to one another members of
the same clan join in putting on the expensive nine-night cerem o
nies.
U p on m arriage, the husband joins the c a m p o f his wife,
w h ere the couple set up their o w n hogan (house) adjacent to those
o f her gran dm other, mother, and num erous sisters, all o f w h om
live w ith their husbands in separate d w ellin gs nearby. T h is is the
classic residence pattern, but it is breakin g d o w n today am ong
the m em bers o f the tribe w h o have been off to school; they tend
to set up their homes apart from the w i f e s female relatives.
A s mentioned, the econ om y o f the N a v a jo has changed rapidly
in the last thirty-five years. A s late as 1934 most o f the families and
com m u nities w e re largely self-sufficient, fo llo w in g a subsistence
econ om y based largely on h orticulture (corn, beans, squash,
potatoes, and other garden crops) and sheep herding. T h e large
herds o f sheep w e re used for food and the w oo l and lamb crop
w e re used for barter w ith the traders. T h e w oo l also was used for
ru g-w eavin g, in w h ich N a v a jo w o m en excel. W ith in a radius of
fifty miles o f G a llu p , N e w M exico, there g r e w up a con centra
tion o f silversm iths w h o made je w e lr y fro m silver and turquoise
obtained from the w h ite traders. In the late thirties and early
forties the sheep econ om y w as g reatly altered, w h en the large
flocks o f sheep and horses had to be greatly reduced. F o r cen tu
ries the arid region had been overgrazed and enforcem ent o f the
soil erosion regulations set back N a v a jo -F e d e r a l relations, creat
ing much m isunderstanding, bitterness and recrim ination. It was
not until w ell after the Second W orld W a r that the w ounds
healed, w h e n the N a v a jo undertook the en forcem en t o f their
o w n gra z in g regulations.
D u r in g the Second W orld W a r thousands o f N a v a jo w e n t to
w o rk in defense industries and on the tracks o f the western
railroads. W ithin ten years, the tribe became h igh ly dependent
on o u r cash econom y. In 1937 there w e re on ly a fe w automobiles
in and around P ine Sp rin gs. T o d a y almost ev ery fam ily has
either a passenger car or a pickup truck.
M a n y men and w o m en on the reservation are dependent on
 FLAGS 0 B'b!iote:3

federally or tribally sponsored program s. In the last few years the

various federal and state poverty program s have had a great effect
on com munities all o ver the reservation. It should be noted that
while the tribe jointly has considerable wealth, most families
which have five or m ore children fall under the federal law for
direct aid.
A lon g with this rapid economic change has come a breakdow n
in the extended fam ily, especially am ong those educated N avajo s
who live on the edge o f the reservation or in the borderin g small
towns and cities. In such families the rights and obligations o f the
mothers b rother w h o traditionally played an im portant role in
teaching the N a v a jo s moral code to his sisters ch ildren have all
but been forgotten bv the generation now g r o w in g up. T h e use
of alcohol also has greatly increased; today alcoholism is a major
mental health problem for the tribe. C oupled with auto acci
dents, it is a scourge for the N a v a jo just as for the rest of the
nation.

T h e religion of the N a va jo is still central to their identity

despite almost a hundred years o f mission activity. Its central
focus is cu ring, which in N a v a jo ideology is the means w h ereb y
the patient is restored to a pro p e r h arm on y with his total en v i
ronment his fellow man, his natural surroun dings, and the
gods. T h e s e cu rin g rites include short, one-night sings as well as
complex nine-day cerem onies in volvin g sand paintings and the
singing o f song cycles w ith sacred texts. T h e N ig h t Chant, or
Yeibechai as it is popu larly called, is one such rite. It is perform ed
only du rin g the w in ter season, after the first frost and before the
first th under o f the spring. H u n d red s o f people come from a
great distance to attend the final night, when teams of men from
various com m unities vie with each other in the perform ance o f
a masked dance. It is an abstracted cardboard mock up o f the
mask o f one o f the Y ei (gods), which appears in one of the films
to be described later. D u r in g the previous days the medicine man
has been s in gin g o ver the patient and directin g assistants in mak
ing the elaborate sand paintings w h ich depict the gods through
co m plex geom etric patterns created by sifting colored earth p ig
ments through the thum b and forefinger onto a base o f carefu lly
smoothed desert sand. A t the com pletion o f each sand painting,
the patient sits in the middle o f the pattern, and the medicine
man transfers its strength and beauty to various parts o f the
patients body.
T h e s e cerem onials, attended b y m a n y relatives and neighbors
all p ra y in g for the patients recovery, have considerable p sych o
therapeutic value. T h o u s a n d s o f N a v a jo retain faith in the cu ring
properties o f these religious observances. T h e y are an essential
com plem ent to the therapy given by medical doctors, w hich may
rid the body o f germ s but fail to b rin g about the h arm on y re
quired for health. Physicians from ou r culture w h o have worked
as doctors or researchers on the reservation have o n ly recently
been learn ing the effectiveness o f the cu rin g cerem onies in the
total health o f their patients.
With the passing o f each decade there are fe w e r medicine
men w ith control o f all the k n o w led ge essential to the enact
ment o f a nine-day chant, a kn ow led ge w h ich entails mem o
rizing the origin al m yth and the texts o f long chants and
songs, k n o w in g the form ulae for medicinal plant infusions,
and h avin g sure control o f the design o f the sand paintings.
Such skill takes m any years o f training, starting in adoles
cence, as it is believed that the slightest erro r in an y part o f
the ce rem on y m ay cause the death o f the patient. T h i s reli
gious system w as geared to a subsistence econom y, and now
that y o u n g apprentice m edicine men must w o rk off-reserva-
tion for wages, the essential time for learning, not o n ly these
most elaborate rites but the shorter ones too, has been sharply
curtailed. T h e resulting loss o f these and other aspects o f tra
ditional N a v a jo cu ltu re might provide some insight into the
motivations o f ou r N a v a jo students; almost all o f them quickly
chose subjects for their films depicting the old w a y s .
 But m any o f the shorter and less elaborate cerem onies, includ
ing the very sacred B lessing W ay, which is used as a proph ylaxis
against evil and disease, are still perform ed in great nu m b er in
every N avajo co m m u n ity. K lu ckhoh n and Leighton (1946) es
timated that the N a va jos spent a p p ro x im a tely a quarter of their
w akin g hours in religious participation. W hile participation is
probably much less than that today on the reservation as a whole,
traditional religious activity is still a dom inant theme in the lives
of most N a v a jo and a focus for c o m m u n ity participation.
In recent years, starting in the 1930s, use o f the hallucinogenic
drug peyote, a sacrament in the N a tive A m erica n Church,
diffused to the N a v a jo by w a y o f the Lite Indians of southern
Colorado. T h is religion, w hich is widespread am ong Indians all
over the w estern U nited States, has provided the N a v a jo with an
alternate religious system w hich is not so dependent on a long
period of train ing and one w hich is a fusion of C hristian and
pagan elements. T o d a y the peyote cult has m any thousands of
N avajo follow ers and continues to grow . F o r m any years this
religion and the use o f peyote was outlawed by the tribe, but
recently that law was revoked and the N a tiv e A m erica n C hu rch
now conducts its ritual openly.
T h e r e is some evidence o f a revival of N a v a jo custom, not only
o f traditional religious practice and m yth ology, but o f the older
code o f ethics, in cluding kinship behavior. T o d a y such a revival
is to be found at the Rough Rock Dem onstration School in the
very heart o f the reservation. T h e re , eighty miles north of Pine
Springs, this elem en tary school under the direction o f Navajo
educators has a level o f co m m u n ity interest and support no
longer enjoyed by the G o v e rn m e n t and mission schools. It in
cludes in its cu rricu lu m the teaching of the N a va jo language
(both spoken and written) as well as English. A dd ition ally,
N a v a jo history, m yth olo gy, and tradition k n ow n to the grand-
parental and earlier generations is being taught to y o u n g chil
dren. M a n y N a va jos w h o are now in their middle years, most of
wh om have lived off-reservation for a considerable period, have
faced w h at psychologists in ou r culture call an identity crisis.
In several o f the films (see A p p en d ix ) this search for identity
becomes a central theme. O ther films show a deep concern for the
general concept o f the search for origins, w h eth er o f self or of
their traditions. In the section on analysis o f the films this con
cern for origin s should p a rticu larly be noted.
In seeking an a n sw er to the question o f identity, the N avajo
educators at R ou gh Rock have turned to their o w n cultural
roots in the b elief that if the N a v a jo is more secure as an In
dian, he w ill be more secure livin g am on g w h ite men. T h is is
a far cr y from the educational policy of fifty years ago, but it
is one increasin gly respected am o n g those concerned w ith the
education o f N e gro e s, M exicans, and other m in ority popula
tions in the U n ited States.

Pine S p rin g s is about forty miles west of G a llu p , N e w M exico,

and ten miles north o f U .S . Interstate H i g h w a y 40, the main
route betw een C h ic ag o and L o s A n geles that follow s the Santa
Fe railroad tracks from A lb u q u e rq u e across n orthern A rizona to
California.
Pine S p rin g s is a small co m m u n ity o f a p p rox im a tely six h un
dred people, bounded on the north by the road from G a n a d o to
W in d o w Rock. Ponderosa pine shades into pinon and ju niper as
one goes south.
C o m m u n ity activity centers in the trading post and the board
ing school, w h ich is limited to first and second grades. Both are
located on a sort o f central square, as is a R om a n Catholic mis
sion, w h ich com pletes the roster o f three institutions o f the white
man usually found in N a v a jo com munities. Half-a-mile a w a y is
a large one-room chapter house built by the co m m u n ity for local
meetings. T h e r e w e met w ith the elders o f the co m m u n ity at the
outset o f the film teaching project.
Political developm ent o f Pin e S p rin g s has been held back by
 rL A C : J - C:blicte:3

its division into tw o constituencies. T h e part east o f the road

from the h ig h w a y is D istrict 18 which votes at Oak Springs;
residents on the west vote at K la g e to h .1
C o m m u n ity leadership is in the hands o f the local chapter, the
smallest unit of tribal governm ent. Such chapters w e re estab
lished in the early years o f the cen tu rv and w ere essentially based
on the old band organization. Ju a n I sosie was the chairman o f
the local chapter and J o h n n y N e lso n was vice-chairman when we
came to Pine Springs.
Pine S p rin g s differs from most N avajo com m u nities in only
one respect the high prepo nderance o f craftsm en, both s ilver
smiths and weavers, resident in the area. A s early as the m id
thirties Pine S p rin g s began to build a reputation for the quality
of its vegetable dye rugs and silver jew elry. T h e latter was espe
cially noted for its cast w ork w ith ou t turquoise. T o d a y many o f
these silversmiths w o rk in G a llu p but keep their homes at Pine
Springs. T h e weavers all still live in the com m u n ity , w h ere thev
work in their hogans, assisted in carding and s p in n in g bv their
daughters and by the older w om en with failing eyesight. T h e
finely w oven rugs b rin g prem iu m prices and are w id e ly sought
by collectors. W hile these crafts provide considerable income to
the co m m u n ity, the N a va jos here as elsew here are largely de
pendent on cash wages w hich they earn a w a y from home or on
governm ent aid.

i. T h e r e s e r v a t i o n is d iv id e d into n in ete en d ist ric ts set up o r i g i n a l l y as land

m an a g e m e n t a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d istricts, w h i c h have s in c e been adapt ed as the basis
for 106 v o t i n g p r ec in c t s fo r t ribal c o u n c i lm e n .
 PART TWO

Chapter

4
The Method o f Research

A s w e have said, in order for us to interpret ou r data it seemed

necessary to understand som ething o f N a va jo culture. It is quite
clear that the o n ly w a y w e could show that the movies the N avajo
made, and the w a y thev made or d id n t make them, w ere
related to other patterns o f their w a y o f life, was by co m p arin g
their films and film in g behavior to other behavior patterns already
kn ow n about the Navajo.
S im ila rly but less o b viously, w e feel that the reader must know
not only the methods w e used in gatherin g ou r inform ation about
the films and film ing but also some o f the larger concepts that lay
behind ou r choice o f particular methods, for it w ill be impossible
to determ ine what in the films came from us (in the sense o f being
consciously or u nconsciously transmitted) and what came from
N a v a jo w a y s o f th in kin g and orga n iz in g their w o rld without
k n o w in g what we, the investigators, instructed ou r students to
do and w h y w e decided upon certain instructions. O u r questions
and observations must also be understood in this light. What we
asked our students, as well as ou r behavior am on g them, w ere
certain ly influences even if not a lw ay s noted and understood
upon what they thought they should do, or thought w e wanted
them to do.
In many w a y s the reader o f this report faces m any of the same
problems that we faced. Just as we w e re attem pting to find a
structure in the N a v a jo w a y o f m aking a film, so the reader must
find a structure in ob servin g and analyzing w hat w e did. What
we told the N avajo, w h at w e asked them, and what w e observed
about their behavior and our reasons for doing so, are much like
the N avajo explanations about what they filmed or d id n t film,
what they chose to include or leave out in their final film, and
how they organized their view. T h e reader can analyze our re
port in much the w a y w e we attempted to analyze the N a v a jo s
reports and to discern their w a y o f stru ctu rin g reality.
T h e methodological and theoretical issues involved in the
study o f a body o f visual expression derived from actual users are
varied, com plex, and not easy to deal with. It is beyond the scope
of this report to deal even cu rso rily with all o f them, for they go
beyond visual expression, bevond verbal expression and lan
guage theory, and w ould demand explication o f the nature of
symbolic expression in general. We feel, h ow ever, that we must
touch on at least those that we actively considered in determ in ing
our method.
A major difficulty in s tu d y in g the w a y a gro u p develops the use
of a com m unication code is that o f d e rivin g a unique pattern of
use or perform an ce w h en that pattern might itself be derived by
imitation from someone else. T h e r e was alw ay s the possibility
that we might ascribe the possibly unique patterns of our stu
dents films to their culture in a situation in which what they did
could instead be ascribed to their imitation o f us, as teachers, or
of movies that they m ay have seen or heard about.
In many w a y s this problem is sim ilar to the one encountered
by some researchers w h o attempted to study h ow children learn to
speak their native language how children learned the unique pat
terns of particular languages to how children learned to verbal
ize or to think about such abstractions as causality, size, or time.
44 ) Through Navajo Eyes

It was argued by some (Skin ner 1957) that the w a y a child

learned to speak could be explained by means o f a functional
analysis o f verbal behavior, the controlling variables o f which
could be subsumed under such notions as stimulus, reinforce
ment, and so on, w hich are part o f a larger theory o f learning. T o
oversim p lify , this approach argued that a child learned his lan
guage by a co m plex process o f imitation and conditioning; that
his parents, schoolteachers, and the people around him rewarded
or punished his stu m b lin g attempts to imitate the language he
heard; and that after some time he learned to speak like other
adults in his culture. T o some extent o f course this is true. When
to say something, w h at not to say, what accent to use, and many
other aspects of speaking are learned the w a v all culture is
learned by living in a gro u p and co n fo rm in g to gro u p norms.
T o the extent, h ow ever, that such researchers felt that infant
speech patterns w e re mere mistakes to be corrected by proper
rew ards and punishm ents, they denied the possibility that chil
dren learned to speak by learnin g rules of their language and that
all languages had u n d e rlyin g patterns or rules.
Som e curren t researchers in language (Chom sky 1965, 1968;
M c N e ill 1966), for example, are re tu rn in g to a position first pro
posed bv V ic o and Descartes: that not o n ly are there rules that
can describe what happens wh en a native speaker learns and
speaks his language, but that there are innate, basic, universal
rules em bedded in the human brain w hich make it possible for
human beings to learn language and w h ich make certain
sim ilarities and patterns betw een all languages necessary. Since
the basic structure and pattern o f all languages stems from the
neurological structure o f m a n s brain, some com m on set o f basic
rules or gra m m ar must be the basis from w hich the differing
patterns and gram m ars of individual languages are derived.
A lth ou gh the parallel between film and language is not exact,
it may be that the m anipulation o f images events in film ing and
their stru ctu rin g in editing is not a random activity. We assumed
that anybody making a film w o u ld be influenced in m any ways,
and we assumed that wh en the N a v a jo were taught to use motion
picture cameras they w ould develop patterned w a vs o f filming
and filmmaking; that the language and culture already known by
the N avajo w ould influence not only their semantic and thematic
choices o f image, but also their syntactic choices, the very w ay
they put these images together in a sequence.
T h ere are several problems w hich can be extracted even from
this inexact parallel with language and language development.
We haven't provided data on all o f them, but all w ere to some
extent involved in our problem and it may be fruitful to list them
briefly.
(1) Is there a pattern or code in film at all, and is this code
similar or analogous to the g ra m m a r of a specified language?
(2) A re there cultu rally different codes in film just as there are
culturally different languages with different gramm ars? And,
relatedly, are there cultu rally different patterns o f filming which
might not reach the level o f gra m m ar but which might c o rr e
spond to different patterns and codes o f speaking?
(3) Is there a universalistic basis for a film code or gram m ar
that w ould encompass all w a vs o f filmmaking on some basic level,
just as the postulated deep structure o f language is basic to many
different languages?
(4) H o w does one learn these codes? H ere one w ould have to
look historically at film developm ent as well as at individual
instances o f how each film m aker learns to make a film.
I f one looks at film without try in g to make direct inferences
from studies o f languages, one finds sim ilar questions. Without
any concern for notions o f g ra m m ar w e find (1) that persons
understand film messages, therefore they must share a code with
the filmmakers; (2) not all persons understand all film messages,
therefore all codes are not identical or all persons do not share
them; and (3) yet there seems to be some u n iversality involved in
film since most people understand something from almost all
films.
 T h ese w ere some o f the questions behind our instructions to
our N a v a jo students con cern in g motion picture cameras, and
which w e re to a large extent responsible for our choices about
what w e observed and how w e analyzed the films made by the
Navajo, their filming and film m aking behavior.
In the chapters devoted to ou r analysis o f the results o f the
study w e w ill show that in certain cases specific patterns emerged
despite what w e said in our instructions to the Navajo. In some
cases, although ou r code o f film ing and filmmaking was so strong
that w e at first unconsciously urged it upon the Navajo, they
w ould not accept it and developed their o w n ways. In other cases
they developed w a y s of film ing and filmmaking that w e never
thought o f and co u ldn t possibly have taught.
We also participated in the process w e studied, which added to
the com plexities of sorting out influences upon the process o f
filmmaking. A lthough participant observation, or in our case,
participant intervention and observation is not a new technique
for anthropologists, it has rarely been used in com munications
research in general and it is even rarer in film research.
Most o f the research undertaken in the past several decades
into visual modes o f com m unication (in either still pictures or
films), w ith the exception o f a small body o f w ork bv Collier
(1967), G a r d n e r (1957), Rouch (1955) and others, has been e x p ri
m ental and has followed closely the research paradigm s o f soci
ology or psychology, that is, either testing responses to specific
films or other visual stimuli by psychological and experimental
procedures or by questionnaires and surveys designed to measure
the responses o f various groups to visual stimuli o f various kinds.
T h e purpose was to learn som ething about psychological or soci
ological process; about learning, coding and encoding behavior,
grou p preferences, persuasion, or social networks.
In recent years there has been some exciting w ork in content
or message analysis o f films in the aggregate. H ere attempts were
made to deal with the analysis o f the films o f several nations and
the researcher inferred national traits" (Mead and M etrau x 1953;
Wolfenstein & Leites 1957). Som e studies com pared such concepts
as heroes, teachers, and so on across cultures. R ecently
G e r b n e r (1970) has proposed a large scale content analysis which
w ill include visual material distributed through the so-called
mass media. Interestingly, he has proposed that this kind of study
be carried on con tin u ou sly as part of a process of assessing what
he has termed cultural in dicators. R ather than concentrating
on an analysis o f visual materials in the attempt to see h ow a
people present themselves, G e r b n e r , recognizing that the mass
media are produced bv a few for the m any under a variety o f
cultural, economic, and institutional constraints, assumes that
w h a t the public sees in large quantities plays a large part in
determ ining the values, mvths and attitudes o f a society. H e is
th e re fo re interested in an aly zin g the c u ltu re presented to what
has become a p u b lic by the v e ry act of seeing the same set of
films or T V program s. W here the anthropologist and ethnogra
pher have exam ined individual life histories and behavior and
asked people what thev believe, G e r b n e r is ex a m in in g what they
see around them, a n alyzing that, and p roposing that that kind of
input is indeed what people are being taught to believe.
But both the content analytic and experim ental w ork have
dealt prim arily, if not only, w ith the films or the visual presenta
tions after thev w ere made or with the responses o f audiences to
these films across psychological or sociological parameters.
O u r purpose was som ew hat different. We w ere starting at an
earlier stage in the genesis o f a com m unication. O u r study was
of both the process o f developm ent and of the structure by w hich
a beginner or learner goes about organizing a com munication.
So instead o f describing a process o f participant observation,
we shall be describ ing a process o f participant intervention.
In selecting a location for our field w ork, we looked for a
com m u n ity with a set o f boundaries in order to check our ex p e ri
ence against previous observations. We had found that black
youngsters in the slums didn't like m aking films on their own
block. T h e i r films, made in different cities under v a ry in g condi
tions, w e re about fam iliar activities rather than places and
showed the you ngsters doing those things they w ere most com
fortable doing in areas associated w ith the w hite film teacher. In
a film called N o t M uch T o D o a group o f eleven- to fourteen-
year-old black you ngsters in Philadelphia photographed them
selves, as they said, sneaking into a u niversity museum, steal
ing goldfish from a university pond, b reaking into an
abandoned firehouse, s w im m in g illega lly in the art museum
fountain, and so on. In all of these cases the presence o f the white
teacher made these activities legitimate for a film. T h e r e w e re no
scenes photographed in their o w n homes, their o w n churches, or
their ow n back yards. In other projects in N e w Y o r k and Phila
delphia sponsored by settlement houses of co m m u n ity groups,
the first things photographed w e re the sanctioned activities o f
the settlement house ping-pong in the recreation hall, basket
ball and football in the playgro und , etc.
Would the Navajo want to communicate about things in their
own community? Would they photograph their own families in
their own homes? Would they be concerned with activities rather
than places?
We wanted a c o m m u n ity that w ould have a clear-cut sense o f
tu rf so that w e could see w h eth er the N a va jo w ould follow us
outside it, w ou ld w an t to avoid it, or w ou ld be constrained and
in what w a y within it.

C h o o s in g th e C o m m u n it y a n d th e S tu d e n ts

We made a b rief su rvey of the reservation in M arch 1966, before

selecting the c o m m u n ity w h ere w e w ou ld work. We visited sev
eral h ighly acculturated areas (W in d ow Rock and Chinle, both
centers o f Federal and T r ib a l governm ent) and several more
traditional com m unities (M an y F arm s, Pinon, and P ine Springs).
We felt that w o rk in the form er w ould be difficult because they
were large and amorphous. A lth ou gh M a n y Farm s and Pinon
were much more traditional, tran sportin g film in and out o f the
com m unity w ould have been difficult. It was im portant to hold
the delay in feedback to a m inim um .
Pine Sp rin gs, A rizona, was chosen. It was much less accul-
turated than either W in d o w Rock or Chinle, was sufficiently
small (around 600) to give us a feel for com m u n ity structure and
organization, and had the added advantage o f being on ly an hour
by car from the G a ll u p airport.
Aside from these factors, the matter o f rapport had to be co n
sidered. We had only two months at our disposal. A d a ir had
worked in Pine S p rin g s tw enty-eight years before and had kept
in touch w ith his old friends. A d a ir had also made a film there
previously, and w e felt that it might be possible to com pare his
film to the films the N a va jo might make themselves.
Pine S p rin g s was also isolated enough that some people in the
com m u nity spoke no English, but the village was close enough
to G a llu p , an E n glish-speaking co m m u n ity , that there also were
many bilinguals. We d id n t kn ow if nonspeakers o f English
would deal with movie cameras differently than w ou ld English
speakers. It seemed possible that the language one spoke would
influence the w a y one made films. F o r the same reason we
wanted a co m m u n ity that w ould not have been much exposed to
television and wh ere people had seen no or very fe w films. Pine
Springs qualified. M a n y o f the older people spoke no E n glish and
there w ere m any people w h o had seen almost no films. In addi
tion Pine S p rin g s had only that y ear been invaded by television.
One set was available in the schoolhouse, and at the time we w ere
there no pattern o f w a tch in g had developed in the com m unity.
We wanted men and wom en, boys and girls, as students. We
wondered w h eth er there w ould be a cultural difference in who
could be allow ed to make films. F o r example, at H opi there are
specialized vocabularies for w o m en and for men. Would there be
a sim ilar difference am ong the N avajo not in verbal language
but in w h o could use the film language or in how they used it?
 We w e re also w o rried that, although Worth had been success
ful in teaching college students and others in ou r urban A m e r i
can society to make motion pictures, the N a va jo w ou ld prove to
be so different that the entire study w ould be impossible. Sam
Y a z z ie s question, W h y should the N a v a jo make movies? had
added a cautious overtone to much o f our planning. What if
e v ery on e felt that way? W e realized that despite our original
optimism , w e had no idea w h eth er the N a v a jo w o u ld w ant to,
and if he w an ted to, could make movies.
A s a safeguard against the possibility that the N a v a jo livin g in
Pine S p rin g s w o u ld not w a n t to make movies, and also to see if
there w ere any differences betw een a N a v a jo m akin g movies in
his o w n co m m u n ity and a N a v a jo w h o w as bro u ght in from the
outside, w e hit upon the idea o f finding a N a v a jo artist. T h is
choice proved effective, since as it happened both the dimension
o f artist and that o f ou tsider w e re particu larly im portant in
the w a y the N a v a jo made films.
We therefore chose a nineteen-year-old N a v a jo artist, A 1 Clah,
w h o was born in a co m m u n ity about fifty miles from Pine
Sp rin gs, and w h o had attended the Institute of A m erica n Indian
A r t at Santa Fe. T h is school for Indian students, set up by the
B ureau o f Indian Affairs, attempts to com bine W estern notions
o f art and artist w ith the traditional values and crafts that are part
o f the heritage o f almost e v e ry A m erica n Indian tribe.
We also felt that as a painter and sculptor, A 1 Clah w ou ld be
accustomed to m anipu lating visual form s and w ou ld be moti
vated to explore a n ew medium. We further anticipated close
rapport between such an artist and Worth, w h o had been trained
as a painter and sculptor, and w h o felt confident he could teach
the technology o f film to someone w ith an art background.
We w ill in the chapter on the analysis o f the film com pare
C la h s choice o f subject matter, style o f w orkin g , and film struc
ture w ith those o f the other N avajo.
O ther researchers using participant observation techniques
had found that one com plication in choosing participants and
 f l a c id - E:b::ct-3J3

com munities for research was the strong feelings in the village
or com m u n ity about w h o w ould be chosen (and often paid) to
participate. I f the c o m m u n ity w a s not involved in the choosing,
it often interfered w ith the people chosen or with the project in
subtle ways. We therefore felt that it w ould be best for the other
participants to be selected by the co m m u n ity itself, or by some
one w ith in the c o m m u n ity w h o w as well placed in the po w er
structure. We also hoped to observe the methods by w h ich people
w ere selected for a task such as filmmaking, and shall report on
some of these methods.
A d a ir therefore w en t to a y o u n g N a va jo friend, Jo h n n y N e l
son, w ho was the n u m b er tw o man on the local political ladder,
and asked him to help select others from w ith in the com m u n ity.
B y the end o f our ex plora tory field trip, w e had decided to seek
four different sorts o f students: (1) a girl; (2) a craftsman or wom an
w h o w ou ld be, as it w ere, a step d o w n in the artistic (in the
Western cultural sense) h ierarchy; (3) a person w ith political am
bitions, w h o might see this n ew w a y o f com m u n icatin g as a
means to enhance his p o w e r in the co m m u n ity ; and (4) a N avajo
w h o had no craft, artistic, political, or personal interest or apti
tude in filmmaking.
N o t only did w e w an t the kinds o f students w e have outlined,
but w e had planned to brin g on ly enough cameras, editing equ ip
ment, and film for four students. O n e reason for this limitation
w as that w e wanted to observe them w h ereve r they w en t w hile
film ing and so w ere constrained by the n u m b er o f observers
available. T h e r e w e re three o f us: A dair, Worth, and Dick
C halfen, a student o f W o rth s at the A n n e n b e rg School o f C o m
munications, w h o had also had extensive course w o rk in anthro
pology. H e w ould be part o f the team, h elping W orth in the
teaching and h elping us all with ou r many observations. We felt
that more observers could o n ly inhibit the learn ing process by
being constantly underfoot, and w o u ld have strained the facili
ties available to us for living and teaching.
A s w e have noted above, it has proved best, wh en w o rk in g in
a culture whose response to the intended innovation is un know n ,
to move slo w ly and to let the people w ithin the culture determ ine
as much as possible about the specific arrangements. In our case
w e also wanted to gather data about the values and attributes o f
those persons w h om the N a v a jo chose to learn filmmaking. Data
on how' filmmakers started and proceeded to become filmmakers
was v e ry rare.
When w e first met Jo h n n y N elson d u rin g our p re lim in a ry trip
in M arch, he w as w o rk in g as an assistant in the trading post.
J o h n n y ch ee rfu lly agreed to scout around, to see w h o was avail
able for the summer.
W hen w e arrived in Ju n e there seemed to have been little
result. O ne girl, a silversmith, w h o had tentatively agreed to be
a student in M arch, inform ed us that her husband had taken a
su m m e r job off the reservation and that he wanted her with him.
E v e ry o n e was extrem ely vague, and A 1 Clah was ou r only stu
dent.
On Ju n e 3, after we had been in the reservation area for tw o
days (staying in a motel in G a ll u p because w e still had not made
final arrangem en ts with the N a v a jo nor received final permission
from the Bureau o f Indian Affairs), J o h n n y told Worth that peo
ple in the c o m m u n ity w e re som ew hat confused. T h e y thought
our project was a Bureau o f Indian A ffairs project w hich would
give them jobs in the school for the summer. H e asked Worth to
explain again w h y w e w ere in Fine S p rin g s and what w e w ould
be doing. J o h n n y by this time had assumed the role o f public
relations man for the film project. H is m an n er o f talking and
acting implied that he understood, but that he just wanted to
check so that he could say the right things to his friends in the
com m unity.
Worth again made his standard explanation. A d a ir and I are
professors in large universities, Jo h n on the West Coast and I on
the East Coast. I am a professor o f com m unications; that is, I
study h ow people get their ideas across to each other. Jo h n is an
anthropologist; he studies h ow people different from ourselves
Indians, for exam ple live. I am a teacher o f movie co m m u n ica
tion. I teach people to get their ideas across to each other by
making movies. Dick C halfen is one o f my students; he studied
h ow to make movies w ith me and is helping Joh n and me while
we teach the N avajo. Y o u understand, Jo h n n y , that the reason
w e re here is not only to teach the N avajo out of the goodness
o f our hearts how to make movies but also because w e want to
learn h ow to teach better. We w a n t to learn how N a va jos learn,
and how they make movies. We feel we will learn m ore about
com m unication in general if w e learn how people different from
ourselves learn to com municate. R em em b e r I told you that our
students could make movies about an yth in g they want, in any
w a y they w a n t to all we want to do is learn w h at you do.
J o h n n y had listened intently to this retelling, and w h ile Worth
was talking, had led him a w a y from the front o f the trading post
until they w e re both leaning on a log fence at the side out o f sight
o f everyone. J o h n n y s face had becom e animated as W orth talked,
and he said with great enthusiasm, T h a t s a great idea, that idea
o f try in g to find out h ow people get ideas across to other people.
H o w do you do that exactly? W orth replied, T h e r e are all sorts
o f ways, but the w a y w e wanted to try was to see h o w N avajos
did it w h en they learned h ow to make films.
W o rth s field notes o f that conversation say at this point, 1
must have been a little dense because it n ow occurred to me that
Jo h n n y had som ething very im portant on his mind and was
actually just t ry in g to get up nerve enough to say it ou trigh t.
I'he y o u n g man said, Y o u know , I think 1 w ould like to be one
of yo u r students. (T his conversation is transcribed from
W orth s field notes made directly after this conversation.)
Worth replied, G ee, Jo h n n y , that w ould be great but you have
to w ork at the Trading Post, and wh en w e w e re here last time,
you know, tw o months ago, you told us you co u ld n t w o rk any
place else.
H o w much are you goin g to pay the students? J o h n n y asked.
I think about $1.25 an hour. T h a t s the gove rn m e n t rate.
 Y o u know , I think I could end up m aking as much w o rk in g
for you as I w o u ld w o rk in g for G r is w o ld (the trader). A n y w a y ,
it isn t the m on ey I got som ething in me to say, and I w a n t to
say it. T e ll me h ow it w o u ld w ork , w h a t w ou ld w e be doing?
Well, w e w o u ld start out, and I w ill probably ask you what
y ou w an t to make a film about, and then w e w o u ld talk about
that, and I w ill show you h o w to use the cameras and the expo
sure meters and film, and the things that you w o u ld need, and
then yo u w ou ld go ahead and make a film, and I w o u ld w a tch ,
W orth explained.
H o w m a n y hours a w eek w ou ld I be w o rk in g for you?
I d o n t know . It could be about fo rty hours, but its up to you
h o w long y o u ll w a n t to w ork. I f y ou w anted to w o rk a long time
on the film that w ou ld be okay, or a short time, that s up to you.
M a k in g a film is up to you. Y o u do it any w a y you think is rig h t.
J o h n n y declared, T h a t s ex actly w h at I want. T h a t sounds
like real w o rk, not this w o r k in g just in the store w r a p p in g pack
ages and bundles. I ll go talk to G r i s w o ld .
A t this point, w e agreed to meet again after lunch. A s soon as
Jo h n n y met W orth again, he continued as if the conversation had
not been broken off, I really w an t to get starting in this learning
h o w to make movies. I can learn a lot about it.
W h y is m akin g movies such a good idea, Jo h n n y ? Worth
asked.
I been th in k in g a lot since you and Jo h n came here, and now
w h en you tell me that you study the w a y people can get to tell
each other things about themselves, and that they can understand
one another, I really feel its time some N a v a jo became a profes
sor in that just like you. Y e p , I think its about time there was
a N a v a jo professor of this.
W orth looked at him and asked, Y o u mean you ?
N e lso n smiled and said, M a y b e .
D u r in g the lunch period, Jo h n n y had introduced C h alfen and
A d a ir to M ike A nderson . M ike w as about eighteen and had re
tu rned to the reservation for the sum m er. H e had no particular
interest in film m aking but had agreed to talk to us about becom
ing a student because J o h n n y told him it was a p a y in g job, and
Mike said he wanted som eth ing to do.
A t one point as W orth and N e ls o n talked, M ik e A n derso n and
Chalfen walked over to us, overh e arin g N e ls o n say, I ca n t wait
to get m y hands on that cam era. Later C h alfen reported that
A nderson also seemed ve ry interested in the idea o f learning to
w o rk a camera.
It has been ou r experience, and that o f others w o r k in g with
teenagers or m em bers of other cultures, that people w h o are
norm ally suspicious and hostile about b eing taught o f an yth in g
like school w ill readily accept b eing studied and questioned if,
as J o h n n y put it, they can get th eir hands on that cam e ra. T h is
unusual m otivating factor is w o rth noting in relation to other
possible educational or research attempts w ith people o f other
cultures. W hen W orth w orked w ith the H a rle m Y o u th O p p o r
tunities g ro u p ( h ary o u ) in N e w Y o r k C ity in 1963-64, he found
high school dropouts w illin g to attend classes in film m aking and
a n sw er questions about their attitudes and ideas in obvious con
trast to their normal school behavior. T h e same response was
show n by five different gro u ps in Philadelphia, w h o learned
film m aking in projects run by several o f W o rth s students.
E ven middle-class w h ite college students, both graduates and
u ndergraduates, seem to gravitate to film courses in universities
throughout the U nited States. T h e white students articulate it
clearly: F ilm is w h ere its at. Film is the thing to k n o w . T h e
attitude expressed by Jo h n n y , I got som ething in me to say, and
I w an t to say it, might easily have been said by an y middle-class
high school or college student today.
But J o h n n y was able to express other attitudes w h ich reflected
very basic N a va jo values. O v e r the next several days, he talked
more about w hat this project meant to him. H e said, C ould I go
on learning more about film, even after the su m m e r? Suppose
m y film was really good, suppose I was a v e ry good learner, could
I learn more, is it possible? I k n o w I ca n t learn all there is to
kn ow on ly this su m m e r, I k n o w this is a good chance for me
to get a lot o f knowledge, I w a n t to get as much know led ge as I
can.
In the next several days, J o h n n y introduced us to M a r y Jane
and M ax in e Tsosie, the daughters o f Ju a n Tsosie, the chapter
chairman. J o h n n y felt that they too should be students. H e told
us, M o n e y is not the only th in g they want. 'They w ant to learn.
I f you have no money to pay them, it ll be all right. 'They want
the k n o w led ge .
Later he said to us, I d o n t have enough knowledge, and I
want to do this thing to get more. I told the chapter [the co m m u
nity g o v e rn in g body] that I c a n t su pervise a job for them because
I need this su m m e r for knowledge. I w a n t to teach the tribe later
on . . . What I want kn ow led ge for is for m y s e lf to develop for
my fam ily ev ery th in g is for m y fa m ily for m y tribe to help
them .
It is o f course possible that J o h n n y w as telling us this because
thats what he thought professors w ou ld want to hear. But in the
translation o f his speech at the chapter m eeting later that week
w hich introduced us and ou r project to the entire com m u nity,
J o h n n y said much the same thing. We doubt that that speech was
aimed at us (in any event, w e d id n t speak enough N a v a jo to
understand it). It seemed rather to be a clear reflection not only
of N a va jo values as reflected in the literature, but o f the hierarchy
o f value. In a pinch, accordin g to the old N a va jo values, k n o w l
edge comes before money. In the chapter a n alyzing the responses
o f the co m m u n ity to the films, w e will show the same values
reasserted.
We now had agreed to take as students A 1 Clah, an artist and
an outsider; M ike A nderson , a m em b er o f J o h n n y s fathers clan,
w h o had w orked in a potato chip factory and w h o just wanted
to do som ething over the su m m e r ; and Jo h n n y N elson, a politi
cian. N elson then introduced us to his y o u n g neighbor, Susie
Benally, an expert w e av er w h ose husband was a w a y from the
reservation in m ilitary service.
 We had what we thought was an interesting sample in our four
students Clah, w h o was an artist and w h o w e thought w ould be
most likely to be motivated to learn and to use a new symbol
form; B enally, an expert craftsw o m an, skilled in hand m anipula
tion and in the use of sym bolic forms; N elso n, w h o seemed
highly motivated, even though he had no craft or art experience;
and A n derson , w ho seemed totally uninterested in the project
other than as a w a y to keep b usy and to earn some m oney until
his return to San Francisco to attend barber school in the fall.
A lthough w e thought that the selection was complete, so that
we could start teaching, another principle basic to the N avajo
value system first had to be satisfied. Just after w e had agreed that
M ike and Susie could join him as students, J o h n n y kept suggest
ing that what we needed w ere tw o men and tw o w om en, im p ly
ing that if w e allowed him to suggest another w om an , w e would
be finished. T h is seemed an obvious sligh ting of A 1 Clah, w h o
had been largely ignored by ev ery o n e in the com m u nity. Jo h n n y
was acting as if the outsider d id n t exist. Indeed, all the N avajo
were m aking it clear to us that the selection process was not
finished; or rather that they w e re not ready to start school. We
should have tw o girls to make it rig h t, was said by several o f the
students after J o h n n y broached the subject, and wh en asked w h y ,
he replied, Y o u ca n t have o n ly one w o m a n a single wom an
need a frien d it w ou ld be v e ry hard for a bashful girl to ask
questions in front of men. It w o u ld be possible that she never ask
any question about som ething that bother her because there was
no w om en to ask it of a w o m an w o n t ask a question because
there was no w om en by her side.
T h e s e objections also seemed consistent with N a v a jo values.
Balance or equ ilibrium is a deep N a v a jo value. T h e universe is
balanced thus healthy. If a N a v a jo enters an unbalanced situa
tion, he is bound to becom e sick to function poorly or not to
function at all. It is not so much that all things come in pairs, such
as a boy and a girl, or a night and a dav, or being good and being
bad, but rather that the universe in its balanced form contained
the u nity b o y - g irl, n ig h t-d a y , or good-bad. O ne d id n t exist
without the other. A sch ool or healthy learnin g situation
c o u ld n t exist without the right balance w h ich meant m e n -
wom en.
We rem inded J o h n n y that w e had chosen three men and one
w o m an but suggested that perhaps w e could include one more
w o m an if he could help us find her. It w as then that he brought
up h aving introduced us to M a r y Ja n e and M axin e, the daughters
o f the ch apter chairm an. We realized that J o h n n y had b rilliantly
fulfilled several obligations. A s w ell as m ain tainin g balance, he
had m anaged to include the political leader in the project by
finding a source o f k n ow led ge and income for his daughters.
Jo h n n y had also managed to cover h im self ritually, since Ju a n
T so s ie w as S a m Y a z z ie s son. S am w as a re n ow n ed m edicine man
and, should p h otog ra p h y be in conflict w ith ritual, J o h n n y k n ew
that having a m edicine man on his side could o n ly help. J o h n n y
realized that having the m edicine m a n s gran dd aug hters and the
political leaders daughters in volved w ou ld obviate an y possible
objections in tw o v e ry im portan t areas.
T h e sisters agreed to w o rk w ith us, em phasizing that they w e re
ve ry interested in goin g to school and su ggestin g that w e w rite
a letter to their high school teacher g iv in g them credit for s u m
m er school. W e asked them h ow they felt about h aving three
w o m en and three men, and they told us that it w ou ld be very
hard to learn if there w e r e n t an equal n u m b er o f men and
wom en . T h e y explain ed (i) that they w ou ld not be com fortable
listening to instruction unless the people w e re e v e n ; (2) that
they couldn't learn well unless th in g s w ere equal; and (3) that
neither men nor w o m en w ou ld ask questions unless things w ere
equal.

T h e C o m m u n it y A g re e s
the meeting o f the local ch apter later that afternoon. Juan
would in troduce us and tell the entire co m m u n ity about our
project.
T h e Pine S p rin g s ch apter house had been com pleted shortly
before w e arrived and w as the only N a v a jo b uild in g there that
had electricity. In contrast to the hogans that most m em bers o f
the c o m m u n ity lived in, the log chapter house had a peaked
shingled ro of and a w oo d en floor.
When w e arrived, about seventy-five adults and tw enty-five
children had fairly filled the b uild ing (photo 1). Som e o f the
children w e re a few months old; some o f the adults w e re in their
eighties. M a n y o f the men still w o re their hair secured and
braided with double strands o f w ool in the back. M ost o f the
w om en w o re velveteen long-sleeved blouses and long calico
skirts. E v e r y o n e w o re je w e lr y rings, necklaces, and bracelets.
As people came in, each one took one of the n ew metal folding
chairs and sat in one o f the rows. Ju a n T s o s ie and a w o m an (the
chapter re co rd in g secretary) sat in front on a small raised plat
form.
A lth o u gh e v ery o n e k n ew they w ere at an im portant and fo r
mal meeting, there seemed no restriction on noise, movem ent, or
personal conversation w h ile speeches w ere b eing made. Adults
kept going in and out casually, passing in front of the speaker,
and children continued to plav w ith each other and their parents
in apparent total disregard for the form ality o f the occasion. We
found the same attitude later on w h en we show ed the films to the
com m u n ity. It was difficult at times to rem em ber that w e w ere
at an official p erm ission -grantin g council.
T h e meeting, w e learned, w as to be in the N a v a jo language,
but there w o u ld be interpreters for our benefit.
Ju a n opened the m eeting by an no u n c in g the agenda, which
included electing certain representatives to the council, ar
ran gin g for the construction o f several shallow wells in the
area, and introd ucting a new g ro u p of w hites w h o had come,
Ju a n said, to help us. In introd ucing A dair, Ju a n empha-
the u n ity b o y - g ir l, n ig h t-d a y , or good-bad. O n e d id n t exist
w ith ou t the other. A school o r healthy learning situation
c o u ld n t exist w ithou t the right balance w h ic h meant m e n -
wom en.
We rem inded J o h n n y that w e had chosen three men and one
w o m a n but suggested that perhaps w e could include one more
w o m a n if he could help us find her. It w as then that he brought
u p h avin g in troduced us to M a r y Ja n e and M ax in e , the daughters
o f the ch apter chairm an. We realized that J o h n n y had brillian tly
fulfilled several obligations. A s w ell as m aintain in g balance, he
had m anaged to include the political leader in the project by
finding a source o f k n ow led ge and incom e for his daughters.
J o h n n y had also m anaged to co ver h im self ritually, since Ju a n
T s o s ie w as S am Y a z z ie s son. S am w as a re n ow n ed m edicine man
and, should p h otog ra p h y be in conflict with ritual, J o h n n y kn ew
that h avin g a m edicine man on his side could o n ly help. J o h n n y
realized that h avin g the m edicine m a n s gran dd aughters and the
political leaders daughters in volved w o u ld obviate any possible
objections in tw o v e ry im portant areas.
T h e sisters agreed to w o rk w ith us, em phasizin g that they w e re
v e ry interested in goin g to school and su ggestin g that w e w rite
a letter to their high school teacher g iv in g them credit for s u m
mer school. W e asked them h ow they felt about h avin g three
w o m e n and three men, and th ey told us that it w o u ld be very
hard to learn if there w e r e n t an equal n u m b er o f men and
w om en . T h e y explained (i) that th ey w ou ld not be com fortable
listening to instruction unless the people w e re e v e n ; (2) that
they c o u ld n t learn well unless th in g s w e re equal; and (3) that
neither men nor w o m en w ou ld ask questions unless things w e re
equal.

T h e C o m m u n ity A g re e s
the meeting o f the local ch apter later that afternoon. Juan
w o u l d introduce us and tell the entire co m m u n ity about our
project.
T h e P ine S p r in g s ch apter house had been com pleted shortly
before w e arrived and w as the o n ly N a va jo b u ild in g there that
had electricity. In contrast to the hogans that most m em bers o f
the co m m u n ity lived in, the log chapter house had a peaked
shingled ro o f and a w ooden floor.
When w e arrived, about seventy-five adults and twenty-five
children had fairly filled the b u ild in g (photo i). Som e o f the
children w e re a fe w months old; some o f the adults w e re in their
eighties. M a n y o f the men still w o re their hair secured and
braided w ith double strands o f w o ol in the back. M ost o f the
wom en w o re velveteen long-sleeved blouses and long calico
skirts. E v e r y o n e w o re je w e lr y rings, necklaces, and bracelets.
A s people cam e in, each one took one o f the new metal folding
chairs and sat in one o f the rows. Ju a n T sosie and a w o m an (the
chapter re cord in g secretary) sat in front on a small raised plat
form.
A lth o u gh e v ery o n e k n e w they w e re at an im portant and fo r
mal meeting, there seemed no restriction on noise, m ovement, or
personal conversation w h ile speeches w ere b eing made. Adults
kept goin g in and out casually, passing in front of the speaker,
and children continued to play w ith each other and their parents
in apparent total disregard for the fo rm ality o f the occasion. We
found the same attitude later on w h en we show ed the films to the
com m u n ity. It was difficult at times to rem em ber that w e were
at an official p erm issio n-granting council.
T h e meeting, w e learned, was to be in the N a v a jo language,
but there w o u ld be interpreters for our benefit.
Ju a n opened the m eeting by an n o u n c in g the agenda, w hich
included electing certain representatives to the council, ar
ra n gin g for the construction o f several shallow wells in the
area, and i n t r o d u c i n g a n ew g ro u p o f whites w h o had come,
Ju a n said, to help us. In in trod ucin g A dair, Ju a n em p h a
sized, H e re is a man w h o is not a stranger to the N a va jo he
is a good m an a man w h o k n o w s N a v a jo religion and re
spects the N a v a jo . A d a ir then explained w h at w e w e re to do,
a dd in g that ev ery o n e k n e w that anthropologists came to the
N a v a jo and often took pictures, but that w e w e re goin g to
teach the N a v a jo to take m o v in g pictures, and that they could
make movies o f a n y th in g th ey wanted. Both W orth and
C h alfen made short speeches, and then A d a ir asked the co m
m u n ity if W orth could take still pictures o f the meeting. P e r
mission w as given w ith m uch b an te rin g back and forth, and
then Ju a n told us that w e w e re w e lco m e to the co m m u n ity.
H e said he appreciated that some w h ite men cam e to help the
N a v a jo and thanked us for resp ecting N a v a jo people and
w ays. H e repeated the statement that he w ish ed m ore wh ite
men w ou ld respect the N a va jo . W orth thanked Ju a n for in vit
ing us to w o r k there and told him h ow much he appreciated
J u a n s u n d e rstan d in g and respect for our w ork. T h e partici
pants in o u r project w e re also there, and A 1 C la h was in tro
duced to the co m m u n ity for the first time.
O n his w a y out from the meeting, A d a ir asked an elder, an old
friend o f his, if he thought the project was a good idea. W ould
the N a v a jo be able to learn to make film? T h e a n sw e r was: I
d o n t know. Its too ea rly to tell. A sk me later. In typical N a v a jo
fashion, the elder w o u ld accept, o bserve ca refu lly, then make a
statement based on the outcome.
W e then left the m eeting k n o w in g that w e could move our
equ ip m ent to P ine S p rin g s and start w o r k in g w ith o u r students
three men and three w o m e n the next day. A ll spoke both
N a v a jo and E n g lish w ith v a r y in g degrees o f fluency in both
languages. A ll had seen films before: A l, about a h und red (by his
estimate), some o f them d o cu m en taries, and S usie about ten (by
her estimate), none o f them do cu m entaries.
A l C la h s acquaintance w ith him w as the most exten sive o f our
group. F r o m discussions w ith A l and his teacher at the Santa Fe
school, w e learned that he had indeed seen about a hundred
docum entary films in the last several years. T h e y ranged from
Canadian F ilm B oard docum entaries to such art films as those
made by the San F ran cisco avant-garde film group. W hen w e
asked A 1 w h at films he rem em bered or w h at films he liked, h o w
ever, he had great difficulty re m em b e rin g the names o f the films
or their directors, w h ic h he had been told, or even their story
lines. He rem em bered a film about a Canadian Indian artist, a
film about nature, and a film about an im als. H e said he liked
films about rocks and trees and things like that. O f another film
he liked, he recalled, I t s about w a ter and trees and ripples in
the w a ter.
W hen w e asked C la h s art teacher in Santa F e what kind o f film
he thought A 1 w ou ld make, he replied, A 1 w ill make a film about
something obscure som eth ing h avin g to do w ith old m yths or
something h avin g to do with the m ythical and mystical concepts
of his childhood as a N a v a jo . (See A p p e n d ix and Part 3 for a
description o f C la h s film.) A c c o r d in g to the teacher, A 1 had seen
such films as Beauty and the Beast b y Cocteau, White Mane, and a
film called The Sorceress. H e also mentioned that in his years o f
sh o w in g film to Indians, he found that they seemed to like Ja p a
nese films best a p a rticu larly in teresting com m ent in the light
of the f o llo w in g anecdote.
W orth is a m em b er o f the B o a rd o f D irectors and a trustee o f
the F la h e rty Film S em inars, a g ro u p o f do c u m en ta ry filmmakers,
teachers, and students w h o meet once a yea r to v ie w and discuss
docu m en tary films produced around the w orld . In A u g u st 1966,
he showed A 1 C la h s film at the sem inar, ex p la in in g a little about
the project and about Clah. S u su m i Hani, a guest at the festival
and a leading Japanese feature and do c u m en ta ry filmmaker, said
to W orth after the screening, I just w ant to tell you that that
N a va jo film w a s the most beautiful film I ve ev er seen in A m e r
ica. It is too bad that you A m erica n s cannot understand it but
the N a v a jo must be like the Ja pan ese since I can understand it.
W orth w as astonished b y this, not h avin g rem em bered the co m
ment by A l s teacher w h ich he had recorded in his notes at the
time. H e asked H ani to tell him w hat the film w as about. H a n is
response rem ains the closest in agreem ent to A l s o w n w ord s of
a ny com m en t about the film. (See C h a p ter 14 for fuller descrip
tion.)
 The Li ves o f Some o f the
Navajo Students

Before w e continue our account o f the research activities, it

may be useful to re view the b ackgrounds o f some o f ou r students.

M a x in e a n d M a ry J a n e T s o s ie

L ike so m a n y N a v a jo girls o f their generation, seventeen-year-

old M ax in e I'sosie and her twenty-one-year-old sister, M a r y
Jane, daughters o f Ju a n T so sie, live in tw o con trastin g worlds.
When they are a w a y from home in b oarding school or w o rk in g
off the reservation, they live essentially in the w h ite m a n s world.
With that small percentage o f N a va jo girls w h o reach high
school, they live with their classmates in a kind o f adolescent
culture typical o f the A m erica n rural West, or more accurately,
the rural West o f A m erica some decades ago. T h e ir high school,
h ow ever, is less a place for college preparation than a place for
vocational training.
A school like the public high school at F o rt Defiance, run by
the state o f A rizona, superficially appears to a p p ly to its students
the same m o ld in g process as those elsew here in the cou n try. But
there is one im portant point o f contrast. T h e w h ite student in a
high school in A lb u q u e rq u e or P hoen ix has some sense of conti
n u ity betw een life at school and home. T h e language, the reli
gion, the beh avior o f their teachers, the goals and values taken for
granted are not unlike those o f their parents. F o r M ax in e and
M a r y Ja n e there is v e ry little shared by the tw o environm ents.
T h e life style o f their parents, and to a much greater degree their
gran dp arents, is in sharp contrast to what th ey are taught at
school. I'he use o f the N a v a jo language at school has been dis
couraged if not forbidden. T ra d itio n a l N a v a jo religion is prac
ticed at home; starting in ele m en ta ry school, time is set aside for
learnin g one o f the varieties o f the C hristian faith. T h e degree to
w h ich a N a v a jo o f the T so s ie sisters generation uses the native
language and takes part in N a v a jo religious practice and b elief is
largely dependent on the con tin u ity o f fam ily and co m m u n ity
life. F o r the T s o s ie sisters and m a n y others o f their generation,
this co n tin u ity has been badly fractured by long stretches o f time
spent a w a y from home.

M a x in e

M a x in e w as born at the g o ve rn m e nt hospital at F o rt Defiance,

a fe w h ou rs drive by auto fro m w h ere her fam ily was living.
W hen she w as o n ly tw o years o f age, her m other died and her
father moved to B arsto w , C aliforn ia. M ax in e attended school
there until she was about ten years old. H e r father then brought
her back to the reservation to live with her maternal g ra n d
mother, f o llo w in g the N a v a jo matrilineal custom. In the old days
upon the death o f a mother, it w as her sisters, her mother, or
another w o m a n o f her lineage w h o w o u ld assume the responsi
b ility for raising the child, w h o w o u ld not have been taken a w a y
b y the father as was M axine.
T h e gra n d m oth e r lived at Oak S p rin g s , a co m m u n ity about ten
miles to the n orthw est o f Fine Sp rin gs, w hich became M a x in e s
prim ary home. While there, she saw her father only when he
returned to the reservation from his job in California.
For three years M a x in e attended a g o vernm ent boarding
school at Fort Wingate, sixty-five miles to the east, then a public
school in G a ll u p for tw o years w h ile her father, back from C a li
fornia, worked as a silversmith for one o f the local craft m erch an
disers. She then entered public high school at Fort Defiance and
was to start her last y ear in the fall after w e met her during
summer vacation.
M ax in e did well in school, especially in English. She placed
first in a high school speech contest. She told us that since she was
a you ng girl, she had wanted to be an elem entary school teacher
and she planned to go to A rizona State U n iv e rs ity for teacher
training.
In talking with her du rin g the months o f the project and
w atch ing her make her film concerned with ritual, w e realized
that she kn ew very little o f the religious life o f her people and had
attended v e ry few o f the traditional cu rin g cerem onies; she said
she had never seen any o f the sand paintings. T h e squ aw dance
held at Fine S p rin g s that su m m e r was the first she had been to.
T h is is exceptional; most girls o f her age have been to m any such
dances. She had not k now n her grandfather, Sam Yazzie, the
father o f Ju a n Tsosie, a prom inent medicine man in the Fine
S p rin gs area, until five years before. A lthough her grandm other
at Oak S p rin g s speaks some E nglish and had been married to one
o f the most acculturated m em bers of the F in e S p rin g s co m m u
nity of that generation, it was she w ho encouraged M ax in e to
learn the w a y s o f her people and w h o scolded her father for not
taking her to N a va jo ceremonies.
M ax in e considers herself a Rom an Catholic. She was baptized
as a small child wh en she was livin g at Barstow. W hen she is in
high school she attends mass e v e ry week. T h a n k s to her g ra n d
mother she has learned to speak N avajo, although she w as ten
years o f age before she heard the language spoken by others in
the com m u n ity.

M a ry J a n e

M a r y Jan e is five years older than M ax in e and the second o f the

seven sisters (M axine is next to the youngest). U n lik e M axine,
her ea rly years w e re spent in g o ve rn m e n t schools and her first
tw o years o f high school w e re at a public school in C alifornia.
W hile there she did part-time dom estic work. S h e then returned
at her fath ers request to help out at home. U n fo rtu n a te ly a ppen
dicitis, fo llo w ed by a severe infection and in term ittent hospitali
zation, delayed her last tw o years in high school. Uike her sister,
her best subject in school w as English. She hopes to becom e a
laboratory technician after taking a tw o-year college course.
M a r y Ja n e also considers h erself a R om a n C ath olic and has
been to v e ry f e w N a v a jo cerem onies. H o w e v e r, w h e n she was
eighteen, she was sh o w n the Y eib e ch ai masks at a N ig h t C hant
she attended w ith another sister; this rite was traditionally part
o f e v e ry y o u n g N a v a jo s initiation into the cerem onial life o f the
people.
M a r y Jane, although shy and less ou tgoin g than her sister, is,
perhaps because she was older w h en she lived a w a y from the
reservation, m ore oriented to the n o n-N avajo w o rld than M a x
ine. M a r y Ja n e told us, I d id n t like it on the reservation after
livin g in C alifo rn ia ; people seemed different. T h e y w e re not
frien d ly and stared at m e. S h e had a more difficult time learning
the N a v a jo language. M y g ra n d m o th e r and uncle scold me be
cause I speak E n glish nearly all the tim e. M a r y Ja n e looks fo r
w a rd to re tu r n in g to C alifo rn ia for more schooling, and hopes to
live there.
O f the tw o sisters, M a x in e w as much the m ore self-confident
in her relations w ith us and w ith the m em bers o f the co m m u n ity.
M ax in e , m ore aggressive, is nevertheless much closer to tradi
tional N a v a jo w ays. I f M a x in e w e re to m a rry a N a v a jo and settle
d o w n as a teacher in an Indian school at O ak S p rin g s or Pine
S p r i n g s , it is quite possible that in ten years she w ou ld be well
in tegrated into N a v a jo fam ily and co m m u n ity life, f or M a r y
Ja n e , integration w ould be much more difficult; she is much more
d r a w n to the w o rld o f the wh ite man.

S u s ie B e n a lly

Susie Benallv was the most traditional o f any o f the filmmakers.

She spent the w hole o f her girlhood with her fam ily at Pine
S prin gs and was over fourteen w h en she first went to b o arding
school a w a y from home. She w as shy in the presence o f strangers
and soft-spoken. D u r in g the first week o f the class she hardly
spoke above a w hisper. H e r dem ean or contrasted sharply to the
almost bold behavior o f the T s o s ie sisters.
Susie w as born at P ine S p rin g s in 1940, the third of eight
children six boys and tw o girls. F or her first five grades, she
attended the local elem entary school w h ere our classes in
filmmaking w e re held. D u r in g those form ative years she was in
constant touch with her fam ily and was raised in the c o n ve n
tional N a v a jo manner. Alta, her mother, was a w ell-k now n
w eaver from a matrilineal line o f outstanding craftsmen. Mabel
Burnsides, her m oth ers sister, had taught w e a v in g for many
years at various gove rn m e n t b oarding schools, and other aunts
and uncles w e re well kn o w n w e av ers and silversmiths. S u s ie s
early memories are much like those o f other w om en o f her age
at Pine Sp rin gs. She recalls herd in g sheep with her m other and
gran dm o ther wh en she was about six. At eight she began to help
her mother with w eav in g, starting with the sim plest task o f ca rd
ing the wool; later she was taught to spin. She was able to help
her mother weave sashes w h en she was eleven, and by fifteen, she
was w e a v in g her o w n rugs. 1'here had been a close relationship
aetween the girl and her m other in the learning o f w eaving.
Susie, like most o f the girls o f her age at Pine S p rin g s, went
o the various sings w ith her m other and father, unlike the Tsosie
sisters. A t her first menses, Susie w ent through the traditional
gir ls p u b ertv ce rem on y and shared the large corn cake with
m an y clanmates and friends in the com m unity.
A t fourteen, after several years out o f school, Susie was sent to
the Bureau o f Indian A ffairs vocational school at Stew art,
Nevad a. T h e r e she remained for five years in a course for hospital
attendants. She did not like this type o f w ork, h ow ever; du rin g
the five su m m ers she used her earlier training as a craftsman by
w o rk in g in a curio store at B ry c e N ational Park, w h ere she
demonstrated w e a v in g and waited on trade.
In 1963 she married F lo y d B enally, a N a v a jo boy from Bluff,
Utah, w h o m she had k n ow n at school. A fte r they returned to the
reservation, Susie w orked briefly as a waitress at a cafe on the
h ig h w a y not far from Pine Sp rin gs. F lo y d entered m ilitary ser
vice and S usie continued living at her m o th ers home at Pine
Springs.
S u sies verbal tim idity w ith us did not seem to handicap her in
learning film technique. She w as an acute observer. L o n g train
ing as a craftsm an and thorough know led ge o f her subject gave
her confidence in filmmaking. H ands trained to spin and weave,
and eyes trained to distinguish subtle variations in tone and
texture and to com pose h arm onious patterns, w e re easily re
trained to see with critical discrim ination through the ca m eras
lens. F urth er, as a weaver, Susie was accustomed to think holisti-
cally about pattern; before she was far along in the w e a v in g of
a rug, she had the wh ole pattern in her m in d s eye. Such an
outlook is o f course a trem endous asset to the filmmaker.
But for the T s o sie sisters, on the other hand, the task o f
film m aking presented a v e ry different set o f problems. V erbal
discourse w as the easiest part o f the job. Both w e re able to joke
and banter w ith us from the v e ry first day. T h e y w ere sure o f
their ability as students in the classroom at W in d o w Rock, and
Worth and C h alfen w e re im m ediately accepted as new teachers.
T h e subject o f the practice footage shot by M a r y Ja n e and M a x
ine the school build in g and the children at play in the school
yard indicated their feeling o f ease in that environ m ent. T h e y
wrote careful notes and w ere m ore dependent on paper and
pencil than was Susie. But lack o f training as craftsm en made
them much less sure o f themselves in learning the technical pro
cesses. T h e y w ere also u n fam iliar with the subject N a v a jo reli
gion which thev chose for their film.
Susie was much closer to the traditional culture o f the co m m u
nity and she chose a subject w ith which she had been intimate
from childhood. L ik e w ise Susie, typically N a va jo , had a close
relationship w ith her m other w h o acted in her film; this intim acy
extended to a shared interest in a new technical task. Each
woman was able to anticipate the oth e rs demands; S u s ie s k n o w l
edge o f the sequences o f the process of w e av in g allowed her to
anticipate film sequences in a w a y that greatly facilitated the
shooting o f her first film.
In contrast, the T so sie sisters found it very difficult to handle
their actor, their grandfather, in any m eaningful w ay. N o t only
were they unable to anticipate w h at w ou ld come next in the sing
he conducts in the film; but the film ing presented them and Sam
Yazzie with a reversal o f roles. O rd in a rily he w ould tell them
what to do, and not they him. But in so far as they w e re the ones
who had the white m a n s technology to record his actions, he
looked to them for directions w hich they w ere hard put to give,
not k n o w in g what they should expect of him in his role as a
medicine man.

M ik e A n d e rs o n

M ike A n derso n was born at Pine S p rin g s in 1942 and was twenty-
four wh en w e w orked w ith him. H e is the third o f five siblings,
three girls and two boys. O ne o f his sisters and his brother are
older. Two sisters n ow live in G a ll u p and one in California. T h e
brother, I e r r y Lee, an ex-marine, is now on the N a v a jo police
force.
M ik e s first education was at a Catholic school in G a llu p ,
where he remained for five years. W h e n he was in fourth grade
Mike was bapti/.ed in the Roman Catholic Church as his mother
had been years before. Mike thinks of himself as a Catholic; as a
boy he was not taken to sings held at Pine Springs nor was he
shown the Yei masks at the initiation rite to Navajo ritual.
From Gallup Mike was sent to the Phoenix Indian School for
four years, and he then finished high school at the public school
at Fort Defiance.
After graduation Mike decided to go to a barbers school in San
Francisco, but upon arrival he found that the school was full. He
got a job as a machine bag operator at a potato chip factory in
Burlingame, California, and remained on that job for three years,
eventually earning the m a x i m u m union wage, $2.25 an hour.
W h e n the factory moved to Texas, Mike quit and got a job as a
painter and maintenance man at Dominican College in San
Rafael, a suburb of San Francisco. It was the job he held before
coming back to Pine Springs for the summer.
While in California Mike would have liked to live with a
brother, but since none were available, he lived alone to avoid
drunken Navajos, w h o were constantly asking him for money.
Even so they found him, and he changed his place of residence
numerous times to elude them. Mike attended Sunday mass regu
larly and sometimes visited an uncle and a cousin who lived
nearby, or another cousin wh o lived across the bay in Oakland.
O n other weekends, he would go to the Indian Center in the
mission district.
Mike says that he still plans to return to San Francisco and
enroll in the barbers school he tried to attend earlier. Questioned
about where he will set up as a barber after he has finished the
course, Mike spoke once of possibly opening a shop near W i n d o w
Rock and on another occasion of remaining in San Francisco.
Of the three men, Mike seemed to have the weakest ties to
traditional Navajo culture, although he did have an interest in
the religion of his people. Like Mary Jane Tsosie, he had spent
his childhood away from the reservation and his only close ties
were to his immediate family- T h e chances are that he will, as the
years go by, become increasingly involved in urban life aw ay
from the reservation.

J oh n n y N e ls o n

Jo h n n y N e lso n was born at Indian Wells, seventy miles west of

Pine Sprin gs, on J u l y 7, 1933. H is mother w as F lore n ce Yazzie, o f
T sina-jinnie clan, and his father was Joseph Nelson.
J o h n n y s m other died wh en he w as tw e lve years old and he was
adopted by his m oth ers sister D o ro th y Pavatea, the w ife o f a
Hopi, T o m Pavatea, Jr. H is foster father was the son o f the
w ell-know n storekeeper, l orn Pavatea, w h o had had a trading
post for m any years at Polacca, at the foot of First Mesa, Arizona;
T o m , Jr. helped his father w ait on trade.
From the age o f tw e lv e J o h n n y was part o f a tri-lingual family.
D orothy had taught her H opi husband a good bit o f N a va jo in
addition to what he already k n ew as a storekeeper with many
N avajo customers. Both parents spoke English. J o h n n y said his
mother made a regular practice o f speaking to him in N a va jo and
expected him to address her in the language of his people. Hopi
was the language o f his playm ates and he learned enough o f that
tongue to get along with them on the p lay g ro u n d and elsewhere.
J o h n n y s first formal education was at the Kearns C an y o n
Board in g School, only a few miles distant from Polacca, w h ere
he finished sixth grade. T h e re , Jo h n n y remem bered, the d o rm i
tory attendant punished the children wh en they spoke N a va jo
instead o f English. D u r in g sum m ers much o f his time was spent
herding sheep for his parents. H is next schooling w as far from
home, at C arson C ity , N evad a , w h ere the Bureau o f Indian
Affairs had a special p ro g ram essentially an accelerated course
in English. J o h n n y com pleted the course, designed for five years,
in tw o years. N e x t came one y ear in the B u r e a u s high school in
Phoenix, w h ere Jo h n n y was enrolled in the academic course
rather than in vocational training.
 In 1954 J o h n n y entered the M arin es and w e n t to boot cam p at
C a m p Pendleton, California. U n fo rtu n ate ly, a co n vo y truck in
w hich he w as rid in g turned over and he suffered in ju ry to his
shoulders and ribs. H e was given a medical discharge after only
seven months in the service. J o h n n y then got a job on the railroad
as a track worker. A fte r a short time w ith a c r e w laying and
m en ding track, he advanced to assistant forem an on a track-
layin g machine and later became its head operator.
Jo h n n y had met R u b y B urnsides, the dau gh ter o f M ark B u r n
sides (a fo rm e r chapter ch airm an o f the O ak S p r in g s - P in e
S p rin g s area), at school in C arson C ity . T h e y w e re later married
and first lived at her home at P ine S p rin g s; subsequently they set
up their o w n home next to R u b y s parents.
J o h n n y soon became in volved in co m m u n ity affairs. A b o u t ten
years before, A d a ir had interview ed him and he had then ex
pressed a desire to be an interpreter, to help his c o m m u n ity to
have a better understan d in g o f the w h ite m a n s w orld , and to
im p ro ve the local educational opportunities for the P ine S p rin gs
children. In fact, he had been ch apter ch airm an before 1957, but
the exigencies o f politics had replaced him w ith someone else.
Ju a n T so sie held the job wh en w e w e re there in 1966, and J o h n n y
was the n u m b er tw o politico in the com m u nity.
J o h n n y N e ls o n s life is typical o f m any N a v a jo men o f his and
the previous generation: assorted schooling, m ilitary service,
shifting residence, and a variety o f jobs. T h e one respect in which
J o h n n y s history is different from that of fellow s like M ike A n
derson was the exposure from an ea rly age to a fam ily with
obvious awareness o f the im p ortan ce o f multi-lingual u p b rin g
ing. N avajo, H opi, and A n g lo -A m e ric a n customs and culture all
im pinged on J o h n n y from early life, perhaps shapin g his knack
for ready com m u n ication w ith a va riety o f peoples in a variety
o f situations good train in g for an yone w ith political aspira
tions.
It is obvious from these short sketches that ou r students were
not what one could call professional N a v a jo . I f their films
sh ow e d a com m on pattern and if the pattern could be related to
N a v a jo language and culture, w e could feel certain that there was
n o deliberate attempt to obey N a v a jo rules; m any o f them sim ply
d id n t know them. W h atever was N a va jo about their film m aking
and filming behavior had to be a result of their internalizing their
cu ltu re and unconsciously acting in accordance with it when
th ey made their films.
 Chapter

6
Teaching Navajos about
Cameras and Film

E v e n though w e planned to pay them a modest wage, w e were

not certain in the b egin n in g that ou r subjects w ou ld have the
motivation essential to learn enough about the camera to produce
significant results.
T h e N avajo, h ow ever, are ou tstan d in g am ong A m erica n In di
ans in their w illin gn ess to accept innovations. E v o n V o g t (1961)
has characterized the style o f cu ltu re change illustrated by the
N a v a jo as incorporative: . . . the N a va jos have had over the
centuries to make selective adaptations to cultural elements that
w e re presented to them and w hich they successfully incorpo
rated into their g r o w in g and e x p a n d in g cu ltu re. T h u s the
N a va jo learned a set o f agricultural technologies from the Pueblo
Indians and adapted it to their o w n h un tin g and gathering
economy. A ls o from the Pueblos, w h o had settled in the S o u th
west hundreds o f years before the A thabascan Indians (of wh om
the N a v a jo are one group), they learned w e a v in g and pottery
making- M a n y o f the elements in N a v a jo religion in cluding
sandpainting, p ra y er sticks, and the dance step seen in the Night
Cbant have been taken over fro m other peoples and in corpo
rated into their cu rin g rites. In m ore recent years sheep and cattle
were b o rro w ed from P ueblo peoples and the S pan ish A m erican
settlers, resulting in a considerable econom ic gro w th . T h e au
tomobile, w a g e w ork , small in d ustry, the elective system for their
tribal council, and a civil service system are all exam ples o f latter-
day adaptations from the wh ite man in corporated into their cu l
tural whole.
T h e w illin gn e ss o f the N a v a jo to accept innovation comes,
however, o n ly after a careful consideration o f its probable value
to them. In the w o rd s o f Ethel A lb e rt (1956): T e c h n ic a l or ritual
innovations are acceptable but o n ly wh en accom panied by a full
set o f directions for use, their w o rth proved by experience, and
their contents modified to fit traditional pattern. T h e behavior
o f the N a v a jo in learn ing film m aking often illustrated A lb e r t s
three criteria; they w e re crucial in their day-to-day decisions.

T h e F ir s t D a y : G e ttin g R ea d y

We had made a rrang em en ts w ith the school teacher in the Pine

Sprin gs B o a rd in g School for o u r research team to use the b o y s
dorm itory w i n g as a classroom, ed iting room, and livin g space.
A 1 Clah, w h o was a stran ger in the c o m m u n ity , w ou ld live there
as well.
T h e P ine S p rin g s B oa rd in g School was typical o f the schools
the U .S . G o v e r n m e n t had built th roughout the reservation in the
last tw e n ty years to teach N a v a jo children the w h ite m a n s lan
guage and customs. W h ere the older schools had been repressive
and authoritarian, the n e w e r ones paid some attention to N a va jo
culture and religion and attempted to find som eth in g better for
the N a v a jo than D ick and Ja n e readers. T h e airy and com fortable
school was the most modern b uild ing in Pin e Sp rin gs. It was
built o f cin d er block and brick w ith modern plu m b in g, heating,
and school fixtures, to accom modate the first tw o grades. T h e
school shared with the T r a d i n g Post and the chapter house the
distinction o f h aving electricity. Its disadvantage for us was the
small-scale fu rn itu re and equ ipm ent designed for use by six- to
nine-year-olds. T h e r e w e re tw o large classrooms, tw o dorm ito
ries, tw o bathrooms, and a large, co m fortable lib rary and recrea
tion room. T h e kitchen and d in in g rooms w e re well equipped.
In general the school looked like an y reasonably good camp
facility in other parts o f the country.
T h e d o rm ito ry w in g w e had chosen was rou gh ly fifty feet long
and tw e n ty feet wide. A four-foot aisle d o w n the center separated
four eight- by ten-foot com partm ents on each side. T h e r e w ere
eight cubbies in all, each w ith tw o double bunk beds. We left the
beds in four co m partm ents for sleeping, and used tw o com part
ments for editing, one as a classroom, one for storing equipment,
and the aisle for projection.
We did most o f our teaching either in the d o rm ito ry or sitting
just outside it under the pin trees.
We brought with us all the equ ipm ent w e needed in four
portable cases, easily carried by tw o people. T h e r e w e re four Bell
& H o w ell 16 mm cameras, four film viewers, fo ur sets o f rew inds
and related equipm ent, and all the film w e needed. We also had
four exposure meters and tw o tripods.
O u r first day at Pine S p rin g s was spent m ovin g beds and
im p rovisin g editing tables. We all had a chance to get to know
one another, and the N a va jo had a chance to see and to touch
everyth in g. That was by plan the traditional method o f N a va jo
learning was by doing and touching, ex p lo rin g n ew materials
directly rather than by lecture or lengthy explanation. In that
first day Worth named every piece o f equ ipm ent and had the
students suggest places for storage. We consulted them about
placing equipm ent and a rra ng in g the teaching spaces. We
wanted to see h ow they w ould do it; w e also felt that they w ou ld
probably have some good suggestions that w e had n t considered.
We had ou r first inkling that the w hole thing w ou ld w ork
d u ring that first day. T h e students worked w e ll full o f energy,
full o f interest, imm ediately im m ersed in problem solving. H o w
can w e keep the re w in d boards from m oving? W orth asked. One
o f the N avajos imm ediately suggested attaching the 1 x 12 boards
w ith C clamps to the small tables which w ere all we had. When
we replied that w e had no C clamps, several o f the students
instantly suggested a trip to to w n for nails, clamps, extension
cords, and so on. T h e y w ould s h o w us the.best store and help us
carry things. T h a t was in sharp contrast to other groups o f begin
ners we had know n, even in the university. N e o p h y te s tend to
feel lost in n ew situations, especially w h ere technology is in
volved, and hesitate to offer any suggestions so early: they expect
the teacher to solve most problems.
We found at Pine S p rin g s that we w ere w o rk in g with people
so used to solving problems on their o w n that the normal co n fu
sion of setting up shop was minim ized. Worth had foreseen days
o f confusion but the N a va jo behavior reminded him at once o f
the w a y in w hich he himself, confident in his kn ow led ge o f the
process as a professional filmmaker, would go about setting up
his ow n w o rk spaces. T h e lack o f fear in relation to n ew things,
the immense drive to get on with the work, and the cheerful w ay
that everyone cooperated suggested a successful com pletion of
the filmmaking experience.

On the first day, before W orth said an yth in g about movies or

how to make them, he in terview ed each o f the six N avajo in a
small office set up in back o f the Trading Post. H e introduced
them to the tape recorder, exp la in in g that he w ould w ork it in
the beginning, but that later he w ould teach them to use it, and
they w ou ld w o rk it for our in terview s. We had feared that they
would object to talking into a tape recorder, and so introduced
it as a part o f the film m aking equ ipm ent they w ere to learn.
Perhaps that was w h y there was no objection; both the boys and
girls watched avidly as W orth loaded tape and tested the ma
chine.
T h e initial interview s w e re arranged so that the students
co u ld n t talk w ith the others before W orth spoke with them. He
emphasized w ith each person, Y o u can make anv kind o f movie
you want to; you can make it about an yth in g you want; I w o n t
tell you what to do. H e then asked w h at each expected to accom
plish d u rin g the summer.
T o our surprise, three o f the students im m ediately started
talking about w h at they wanted to make a film about. T h e others
seemed to have some ideas but for some reason uncertainty,
lack o f skill with words, shyn ess th ey seemed to have difficulty
ex pressin g them. We learned later that the N a v a jo had been
th in kin g about subjects for films from the m om ent they heard
about the project.
We o rig in ally w o ndered h ow the N a v a jo w o u ld define film.
We thought they might w an t to film isolated bits o f behavior and
show them as snapshots. We w ere surprised to find that so many
o f ou r students had a strong and clear desire to make films on
subjects, topics, or themes, and that they w ere able to articulate
them so well. In the first taped interview with J o h n n y Nelson
made on J tine 6, he gave the fo llo w in g response wh en Worth said,
What I w ou ld like is if you w ou ld sort o f tell me how you
understand what w e are go in g to d o :

I've been th in k in g a lot about the, w hat I w ou ld t ry to think of

m ostly to m ake a m ovie of. What the h ow the, o u r people have
been li vin g and how, w h a t like the landscape, and then h ow thev
make their hogans. Its just s om e thin g they do. I d like at the same
time to make a nother m ovie about som e o f about h o w the people
used to make their livin g . . . and then t h e re s an o th e r thin g that
I had in mind. It might be v e r y difficult to . . . like a lot o f people
they com e som e o f them com e to the T radin g Post, or just d riv e
around in q u i r i n g h ow th ey make those w o n d e r fu l necklaces and
concho belts and all those thin gs that the Indian people have as
 their traditio n . . . I thin k this w o u ld , you k n o w , this w o u ld be ve ry
in teresting to make the movies, 'cause h ow the w o m a n weaves,
and w ithou t h avin g to c o p y from a certain design. Just like uh, just
talking the, see there, its almost identical to, it's like t r y in g to
make up y o u r m in d w h a t m ovie y o u re g o in g to make, 1 believe
this is the sam e w a y that the Indian w o m e n have, they have to use
their kn ow le d g e, s om e thin g up here [poin ting to his forehead],
they d o n t fo llow any patte rn, y o u kn ow , all they do is set up their
looms, and they start w e a v i n g and just as they go alo ng they have
to use their heads to m ake the de sign s that th ey feel w o u ld be
in terestin g to people they sell their rugs to. . . . T h a t 's one o f the
things that 1 thought about sin ce w e m e t . . . about h ow to use y o u r
kn o w le d g e and that w o u ld be to m a kin g a movie.

A 1 Clah responded:

I could use a lot o f m y ideas, and I could go out and film some
o f those art film w h ich 1 could s h o w in San F ran cisco. . . . I might
sh ow some film there, you k n o w m ayb e a shadow . Ju s t a shadow
m o v in g a lon g see h o w it w o rk s, it moves, the colo rs and how
it moves. T h e r e are a lot o f rock fo rm ation s w ith the shadow . T h e
shadow is intrepid, and on the trees, you k n o w , h o w the w in d
b low s and un de r the bush, h ow it moves, and these c o m b in e to
geth er like that, you k n o w , dance a little bit. . . . S o m e t h i n g like
that w o u ld really w o r k . . . and at the sam e tim e from the ground,
up into the air, see the trees m o v i n g and look back d o w n again on
the g ro u n d and it m oves again. T h e r e s a relation to it. . . . T h e r e 's
some place 1 w ant to point, like rocks, I m ean in different areas
that I w ant to record on m y ca m e ra in w a t e r colors, and I w ould
run it o v e r again to look at it, y o u know. . . . I'll be d o in g that for
some time, and I get a little hom esic k m aybe, just let the proje ctor
run.

M ike A n derso n had little to say in that first interview :

Well, I don't thin k 1 have a n y idea right n o w and just wait

aro und and 1 can thin k about it. . . . Well, see I d o n t have a n y th in g
in m in d right now, and I thin k I ll thin k about som e thin g and you
k n o w , go out som e place and take pic tures and then I can put it
together.
8o ) Through N avajo Eyes

M a r y Ja n e T s o s ie replied to Worth:

O h thats a good question. O h, gee, I re a lly d o n t k n o w , but I

thin k this is w o n d e r fu l and w o u ld be som e good e x p e rie n c e for me
cause I n e v e r had it and I m p re tty s u re I m go in g to learn a lot.
. . . I h a v e n t really de cided [w h at to do] yet. S o m e t h i n g about
w e a v i n g and uh, m ayb e s q u a w dances i f they have one aro und
here, and som e o f the traditio nal w a y s , you know. . . . 1 really d o n t
k n o w m uch about the N a v a j o w a y s you k n o w , the traditio nal
w a y s like s in g in g and s q u a w dan c in g , and I m v e r y m uch in te r
ested to learn m y s e lf because m y father, one day he got after me
because I d i d n t k n o w a n y th i n g about s in g in g [ N a v a jo religious
ceremonies].

M a x in e also spoke about the traditional w ays, but m ore pu rpose

fully.

Well, so m e th in g like this [our project] has n e v er hap pened

here, and, w e ll, I'm v e r y in te rested in this, and, uh, d o in g it,
and w ell, w e [her sister and she] could do so m e t h in g thats tra
ditio nal to N a v ajo s. A n d o f course, m ayb e peop le out w h e r e
you com e fr o m d o n t k n o w any. M a y b e some o f them d o n t
k n o w h o w N a v a j o s live and h o w th e y do. [W orth asks fo r in
stance? ] O h boy, like ru g w e a v in g , m ayb e , w ell, w h e n a small
girl gets to be a w o m a n , you k n o w th ey have som e kind o f
p arty fo r her w h e r e they g r in d corn and all that . . . and th ey
make som e kind o f cake, they d ig d o w n in the g r o u n d and th ey
cook it o v e r n ig h t, and the n ext m o r n in g they h ave a c e le b ra
tion o f her t u r n i n g to a w o m a n you m ight say.

Susie was shy. She said she d id n t mind the recorder, but her
voice was so low it h ardly registered. In a n sw e r to W o rth s ques
tion she said, Well, I d o n t k n o w right n o w its hard to talk
I guess I m kind o f bashful I was th in k in g I w o u ld like to make
a film about som eth in g this sum m er. W e avin g
M ost o f the ideas m entioned in the first in te rview s w e re very
close to the final films that the students decided to make.
 T h e S econ d D a y : H o w th e C a m e ra W o rk s

We had planned for W orth, w h en he began actual instruction, to

stick as closely as possible to the technical and to avoid any
con ceptualizin g o f w hat a film is or h ow one edits. E v e n asking
the students w hat they w ere p la n n in g to do w ou ld place heavy
values on certain attitudes about film. It w ou ld im p ly first, that
a film had an idea or w as about something, and second, that one
could think about it or plan it. We tried to avoid im p artin g such
values by ca re fu lly w o rd in g the first question that W orth asked:
What I w o u ld like is if you w o u ld tell me h o w you understand
what w e are goin g to do. We did not w an t to ask, What is y o u r
idea for a film? or even What is y o u r film about? U p o n reflec
tion w e realize that even by accepting their free a n sw ers to the
o pen ing question and s h o w in g an interest in the plans and the
stories they started to tell us about, w e w e re en c o u rag in g them
to plan and to make films abou t. Still, hum an interaction al
w a y s results in some sharing o f attitudes. Research that requires
com m u nication w ith others cannot and perhaps should not be so
controlled and objective that one h u m a n s response to another
is com pletely vitiated.
O n the second day, after getting the w o rk in g spaces in order
and co n d u ctin g the in terview s, W orth started talking about pic
ture-m aking in general. H e m entioned that peoples across time
and across cultures all had made pictures. H e m entioned G reeks,
E g y p tia n s, E u ropeans, A m erica n s, Indians, and sand painting,
d raw in g , sculpture and w eav in g. H e tried to point out that the
motion picture camera w as just a n ew w a y o f m akin g pictures,
and that since people a lw ay s had special and different reasons for
m ak ing pictures, they could decide w h at they w an ted to show
and for what reason.
A fte r about an hour o f general introduction to picturem aking,
W orth asked for questions. M ost o f the students either said,
V e r y interestin g, or w e re quiet, except for M ike, w h o alone
w as w o rried about participating in such a novel situation and
throughout was more concerned with c o m m u n ity acceptance
than w e re the others. O n this occasion, M ike asked, W e ren t
there people w h o d id n t like to have their pictures taken?
W orth said he thought there w e re and asked M ike if he knew
o f any. M ik e said he did not, but asked if W orth did. M ike said
that he had been w o rried for some time that action might be taken
against him if he took pictures o f people w h o d id n t w an t you
to, or w h o might not like it a fte rw a rd s . H e did eventually
make a film, but he was the only one w h o questioned w h eth er we
should sho w the finished films to the com m unity.
W orth tried to relieve M ik e s apprehension b y sayin g that he
had been in a situation such as M ik e feared. H e once had made
a film w hich included a scene o f a Je w is h w e d d in g cerem ony.
W hen W orth appeared at the w e d d in g to film it, the rabbi told
him that his religion forbade the m aking of pictures in a holy
place. W orth im m ediately left and d id n t even try to make any
pictures, since doing so w ou ld be in conflict w ith religious ob
servance. H e told the students that on his earlier trip to Pine
S p rin g s he had been invited to a sing and had w alked into the
hogan w h ere the sing was taking place w e arin g a still camera
around his neck. Im m ediately he was told that pictures w e r e n t
allowed, and he removed his camera and d id n t take any pictures.
M ike seemed satisfied and there w e re no fu rth e r questions.
A bou t eleven o clock W orth took the camera out o f the case and
passed it from one student to the next, asking them to look it over
before he explained how it worked. A 1 took hold o f the camera
w ith confidence (and a bit o f bravado), J o h n n y w ith a firm grasp,
and Susie w ith a delicate touch; Mike, M a r y Jane, and M ax in e
w e re less sure o f h ow to handle it, but showed no fear in doing
so.
T h e n W orth started exp la in in g the w o rk ing s o f a movie cam
era in much the same w a y that he did w ith graduate students at
the U n iversity o f Pen nsylvania. H e briefly outlined the prin ci
ples and historical developm ent o f photography, touching upon
how lenses worked, h ow silver salts on film reacted to light just
as household silver (which the N a v a jo k n ew and w orked with)
tarnished w h en exposed to light, and h ow an image was fixed by
hypo salts so it w o u ld n t con tin ue reacting to light. He then
continued, using d raw in g s on an im provised blackboard, to show
how a movie camera functioned. H e described a movie as a series
o f still photographs made in rapid sequence and projected back
at the same rate o f speed, and discussed the mechanisms by which
the film w as transported from one spool to another, passing be
hind the lens, stoppin g for the correct exposure, and then m ovin g
on so that the next still picture could be made. H e pointed out
the camera gate, shutter, cla w for advancin g the film, and the film
loops necessary for smooth and even passage of film across the
lens. H e explained briefly about the w a y s to control exposure,
describing the shutter and the f stop m arkings on the lenses,
telling the students that the exp o su re meter w ou ld be described
the next day. H e continued by ex p la in in g the function and effects
o f different focal length lenses.
T h is p re lim in a ry in troduction took about an hour. We noticed
then that the students seemed relaxed, attentive, and to be ab
sorbing all that Worth was saying, although some o f the words
must have been quite strange to them. (On the other hand, Worth
was quite tense in this strange situation.) 1'he tapes o f this session
showed that a great m any technical w o rd s ( ga m m a , dia
p h rag m , variable, and so on) crept in, despite o u r intention
to avoid them at this stage. It became evident in later sessions that
learning to use and manipulate the materials was not dependent
on k n o w in g the names o f specific parts but rather on understand
ing their function. The diaphragm ring on a lens w hich set the
correct exposure, for example, was co m m o n ly called the thing
you turn for e x p o su re or the exposure tu rn e r , much as we
frequently refer to a thing as the gizmo that
T h is becomes clear wh en w e listen to Susie teaching her
mother, A lta K a h n , w h o was about 55. Sin ce A lta spoke no E n
glish, the fo llo w in g com m ents are translated (all translations are
by W illiam M organ) from tapes made in N avajo. H e re Susie asks
her mother w h at she rem em bers from a previous explanation.

S u s i e : I sh o w e d you som e thin gs on the camera. W h ich ones do

you rem em ber?

A l t a : I just r e m e m b e r the little knob w h ic h you turn back and

forth [the w i n d i n g handle on the Bell & H ow ell].

S u s i e : H o w about the little black knob? W hat is the little kn ob for?

A l t a : T h e y adjust the lightin gs and the shadow s [exposure].

S u s i e : H o w about the knobs that adjust the distances, like one for
close shots, not so far a w a y , and the fa r a w a y shots? [H e r e Susie
re fe rred to the turret w h ic h could be turne d to b r i n g a different
focal length lens into shootin g position, and also to the fo cusin g
rin g on each in dividu al lens.]

A t that point Susie and her m other w e re calling e v e ry th in g a

little knob that It was her m oth ers expression and Susie
adopted it. L a te r she taught her m other the correct words, which
w e re sometimes used by the older w o m an and sometimes not.
The N a va jo students show ed some desire to learn the names of
parts, but mostly they wanted to know , What does this thing
do? or What is this for? R a re ly did they ask, What do you call
it? W o rth s and others college students seem to feel much more
com fortable using a thing w h en they k n o w the proper name for
it, perhaps because our culture has em phasized the n am in g fu n c
tion so heavily in its instruction. O ne has o n ly to think o f the
anxious w h ite middle-class m other sayin g to her infant, T h is is
a book, dear, say hook, or U se y o u r spoon, dear, spoon.
We w ould u sually break for lunch at noon and eat together in
the schoolhouse d in in g room, a lw ay s joking about the child-sized
tables and chairs. T h e N avajo, exceptin g A l, tried to sit by them
selves, but a slight en couragem ent from us was enough to bring
a fe w over to fill our table. T h e ice had been broken s im p ly and
naturally, by mutual involvem en t in learning and eating.
A fte r lunch W orth continued his demonstration o f the w o r k
ings o f the 16mm Bell & H o w e ll triple lens turret camera, point
ing out the exposure and focus m arkings on the lens, how the
vie w in g system worked, and h o w the camera was loaded.
A s soon as W orth finished his first run through on loading, he
passed the camera around so that each o f the students could
examine it. H e thought they w ou ld require individual teaching
before they could load and be ready to use it. H is graduate stu
dents had required fo ur or five hours o f explanation and practice
before they w e re able to do so properly. T o his surprise, however,
Jo h n n y asked if he could load the camera, and, w h en W orth gave
him a scrap piece of film, he w as able to load the camera perfectly
after only tw o tries.
Within an hour all six students had show ed they could load the
camera, a job that requires a fair amount o f finger dexterity in
order to get into tiny spaces, an ability to m anipulate several
small parts in a definite sequence, and the ability to understand
the notions o f film loop size, cla w engagement, and accurate
w indup.
Despite the N a v a jo s reputation for being com fortable with
innovation, w e w ere still surprised at h ow rapidly and easily they
mastered this and most other mechanical and conceptual tasks of
filmmaking.
In a m eeting several weeks later with the fo rm er treasurer of
the N a v a jo T r ib e , M au rice M cC abe, w e described h ow quickly
the N a va jo learned filmmaking. The Treasurer remarked
proudly that N a va jos had also been trained very qu ickly to use
some I B M equ ipm ent just bought bv the tribe. H e remarked with
a smile, M a y b e you d id n t tell them it w as hard and that they
cou ldnt do it. M ay b e they d id n t k n o w m aking movies was sup
posed to be a tough job.
A fte r the students had practiced loading for about h alf an hour,
w e w en t outside w h ere W orth show ed them h ow to look through
the vie w finder and hold the camera. H e explained that he
wanted to shoot a hundred feet o f film so it could be sent to the
laboratory for developing that day. We had noticed the attraction
o f polaroid p h otog raphy for the N avajo, and thought that per
haps motivation w ou ld be strengthened by quick v ie w in g o f the
footage w h ich they w ou ld shoot. We therefore had arranged for
the film to be developed, printed, and returned w ith in tw o days
after it w as shot. B y d r iv in g to G a llu p (a one hundred mile round
trip), w e could put the film on a small freight plane traveling to
D en ve r and back daily. O u r film laboratory consented to pick up
and deliver rushes at the plane. T h e laboratory processed the
negative and prepared positive w o rk prints, keepin g the negative
for safe keeping and further cod in g for identification purposes.
O n ly the w o rk prints w e re returned. T h u s w e could view film
shot on M o n d a y afternoon by W ednesday, w h ile the negative
remained safely in the lab for fu rth e r work.

T h e F ir s t S h o ts a n d th e N o tio n o f E d itin g

Worth began by taking about ten shots o f the students just

standing around. H e said nothing to explain w hat he was doing.
T h e students m erely observed him taking an expo su re reading,
w in d in g the cam era spring, focusing, and c h a n gin g lenses.
H e then asked each student to take some pictures with the
cam era a n y th in g you w a n t. M ost spent some time exploring
the different images available through the various focal length
v iew fin ders and practiced h olding the camera to their eyes. T h e
subjects they chose to shoot w e re interesting, consid erin g the
b ackground o f each student. A 1 C lah shot the geom etric pattern
o f the m on key bars on the school play g rou n d and the shadows
they cast. M a r y Ja n e took shots o f the school building. M axine
directed the camera at children on the teeter-totter in the play
ground (photos 2-3). J o h n n y N e ls o n took shots o f a boy on a
bicycle, o f parched desert plants, and then o f a su m m er rain,
w h ich he im provised by having W orth hold a garden hose off
camera. Mike took pictures o f a pin seedling. Susie chose to
photograph parts o f the swing.
We finished shooting at about five o'clock, and C halfen drove
off to Gallup to put the film on the plane so that w e could get
rushes back by T h u rs d a y
A fter each student had made the first shots, W orth held a
private in terview in an im provised office in the back room o f the
T ra d in g Post. C halfen remained with A d a ir to observe how the
rem aining students w en t about using the camera but gave no
help o r instructions.
In the second day o f the project and the first day o f instruction,
then, we had been able to teach them enough to load a motion
picture camera and to actually shoot their first footage.
A s a guide to h ow and what w e w ould teach, w e had begun
amongst ourselves with a speculative analogy: Sup pose w e could
find a group of humans much like us but lacking a little machine
in their throats that enabled them to make that large nu m b er o f
sounds which would even tu ally be coded to become verbal com
m unication or language. Sup p ose w e gave them a b o x that
could make all the varieties o f sounds produced by the human
voice. Suppose that w e taught them only h ow the b o x worked
and then observed (1) w h eth er they used it at all, (2) whether, if
they used the box, they used all the sounds it could make or just
some particular set o f sounds, and (3) w h eth er they organized
these selected sounds as an observable pattern o f sound and a
pattern of relationships. What system, if any, w ould they impose
on the sounds? Would they use them to com m u n icate under
what conditions, and so on?
U sin g the box that made m ovin g pictures as a substitute for the
im aginary box that made sounds, w e tried as far as possible to
lim it our instruction to that analogous to teaching them what
buttons to push in ord er to make all the possible sounds. We tried
to teach our students only the mechanical rationale o f the camera
and the chemical rationale of film, and then observed h ow they
went about using the box, w hat images they wanted to produce
with it, what they produced, and what system or pattern they
imposed upon the images w h en and if they organized them.
F ro m that approach, ou r major problem w ou ld be the intro
duction o f view ers, rew in d s and splicers editing equipm ent in
general. Ideally, w e w ou ld have liked to b u ry a camera, film, and
editing equ ipm ent under a tree, and i f the N a v a jo discovered
them, observe h ow they used them. It might even have been ideal
to leave only a camera and film u nder a tree and see if they
discovered or invented projectors, view ers, splicers, and so on.
T im e , am ong other considerations, precluded this form o f re
search and so w e had som eh ow to introduce these materials. We
had to tell ou r students how a splicer w orked, and w e had to do
it in a w a y that w ou ld reflect as little as possible o f ou r system
o f co nstru cting film utterances, consistent w ith giv in g them
com petence in the technology and the use o f the materials.
We decided that w e w o u ld begin w ith s h o w in g h ow a simple
film splicer worked. We did it as if the splicer was part o f the
buttons o f the camera box. W orth described a splicer as, a little
machine for pasting pieces o f film together for an y reason you
want. Y o u can use it to fix film that tore or for pu ttin g lengths
of film together for any purpose like w h en it comes from the lab
in ioo-foot lengths and you w a n t to see it all on one reel for
projection. We hoped that they w o u ld discover or develop some
principles o f organization, some reasons for putting film together
any w a y you w a n t.
We w e re a w are that the ve ry notion o f pu ttin g units o f a n y
th ing in clu d in g film together w as a basic first step in the de
velopm ent o f a structure. We w e re w illin g to go that far in
introd ucing the splicer because w h at w as o f param ount interest
w as how they w ou ld put pieces o f film together, and h ow their
w a y w ould com pare w ith ou r w ay. We w ere also concerned to
study the developm ent o f their rules the succeeding steps o f
differentiation o f image units and the w a y they handled the more
com plex units o f w h ich a film could possibly be constructed.
D u r in g the first week w e therefore had them practice splicing
pieces o f torn a p art film together. T h e y learned the technique
o f the splicer in about tw o hours and seemed to accept it as just
another procedure to be learned, like loading the camera, thread
in g the projector, and so on.
D u r in g the first week w e also suggested that each student make
a movie using one roll (100 feet) o f film. We had explained that
a movie could be any length they wanted, o f any subject or object.
We said that they d id n t have to use all o f the roll, but they w e re
limited in this first try to only one. We d id n t w ant to permit
their early ex perien ce to becom e a constraint on the final film
organization that they had planned and discussed with us in the
taped interview s. We w anted first, to allow at least tw o weeks for
each o f them to form his ideas about the film he was to make, and
second, to provide a quick o p p o rtu n ity for e x p lo rin g the medium
and their o w n intuitive w a y s o f o rga n iz in g it.

T h e D e v e lo p m e n t a l S tru c tu re o f F ilm

Before describ ing the first one-m inute films made and edited
d u rin g the second week, w e should re view the developmental
structure o f film organization. We will then be able to clarify
how and how far each film m aker progressed in the process o f film
com m unication; and w e will be able more easily to analyze the
films that w e re made.
Let us first distinguish between the shot as it comes out o f the
camera, w h ich w e will call the cademe, and the shot as it is actually
used in the utterance the ed iting shot or the edeme. T h e cademe
is that unit obtained by p u shing the start button o f the camera
and then releasing it, pro d u cin g one continuous image event.
Lim ited only by the length o f the film in the camera, one cademe
can be a film, precisely as w e re the first movies made in 1895. A
film also can be composed o f thousands o f edemes taken from
cademes and sequenced in any o f an infinite nu m b er o f ways.
H istorically, the developm ent o f film might be described in the
fo llo w in g w a y : First, the film m aker has at his com m and one unit
o f film just as it comes out o f the camera. H e controls the subject by
p ointing the camera; he controls the length by his decision to
start or stop the camera. T h e result is his film.
A t a later stage he realizes that he can join cademes by pressing
the button and a llo w in g the camera to start again, putting his
next set o f images on the same strip o f film contiguously. H e may
do so until his film runs out. H e n ow show s this length (as
distinguished from true sequence) o f several cademes as it comes
out o f the camera, and that is his film. This stage w as achieved by
Porter in 1899, wh en he photographed three cademes con tig u
ously in ord er to show T h e F ife o f a F ire m a n . H e first made
a cademe s h o w in g a fire w agon, horses snorting, racing out the
door o f a firehouse, then photographed a second cademe o f the
fire w agon racing along a street, follow ed by a third cademe of
the fireman actually putting out a fire. A ll w ere shot on different
days, and at different fires, but on the same strip o f film. Porter
kept one film magazine for his fire film; wh en he had the o p p o r
tu nity to photograph a fire, he put the magazine contain ing his
previous cademes into the camera and continued shooting.
Porter him self described it (Porter 1914): [this film] continued to
run for a longer time than an y other film p reviou sly made. Fn-
couraged by the success o f this experim ent, w e devoted all our
resources to the production o f stories made this w a y , instead o f
disconnected and unrelated scenes.
1 he first stage might be com pared to the holophrastic utter
ances o f ch ildren the one-w ord sentences that children make
and could be called the stage o f the holophrastic cademe. T h e
second stage com bines one or more holophrastic cademes within
the camera in a sim ple linear com bination. The third stage occurs
wh en the film m aker realizes that all cademes he shoots need not
be show n. So m e shots may be th ro w n a w a y because they are not
good or not needed. T h e film m aker is still governed by his simple
linear succession o f holophrastic cademes, m erely exclu d ing
some com plete cademes from the length.
 T h e fourth stage occurs w h en the cademe itself is seen as
divisible. A t this point, the edeme idea is developed, and com plex
sequence becomes possible. T h e film m aker realizes that not only
is every cademe not necessary in his final film, but that all o f each
cademe may not be necessary. H e realizes that he has a larger unit
which can be cut apart part used and part not used. H e has still
not learned that the original order in w hich the cademes were
shot is not totally determ ining. T h e next stages in development
might be called the developm ent o f a syntactic sense o f film
sequence. 1'he historical evidence is not clear that the follow in g
steps develop in any particular order, but each must have oc
curred.
First it is seen that the cademes themselves can be arranged in
a sequence other than the one in w hich they w e re photographed
and other than the w a y the event actually took place. Secondly,
given the notion o f m aking an edem e from a cademe, the n u m ber
o f edemes made from a cademe can be expanded and used in a
variety o f sequences. F o r exam ple, in the Porter firehouse film we
could cut up the three original cademes (Ci) the w agon leaving
the firehouse, (C2) the w agon dashing d ow n the street, and (C3)
the wagon pu ttin g out the fire o f the b urn in g house and get the
fo llo w in g sequence: Ei, b u rn in g house (part o f C3); E2, wagon
leaving firehouse (part o f Ci); E3, b u rn in g house (part o f C3); E4,
wago n dashing d o w n street (part o f C2); E5, b u r n in g house (C3);
E6, w agon dashing dow n street (C2); E7, b u rn in g house and so on,
ach ieving the form o f the early Western with its alternating shots
o f the good gu ys and the bad gu ys or the cavalry ridin g to save
the besieged settlers.
We have been using the sy n ch ro n ic (historical) developm ent o f
film as it actually occurred as a con venient w a y o f describ in g our
stages o f development. The next stage that occurred was the
development o f an object modifier relationship between edemes
by the use o f v a ry in g spatial relationships o f the semantic units
in the photograph. T h e early films w ere photographed in what
is now called the long shot. C ad em e scenes show ed as much of
the action as w as possible. I'he object modifier relationship was
made possible wh en the close-up and m edium shot w e re in
vented. S uccessive edemes could n o w show a long shot of a man
(shown from head to toe w ith in a scene context) p u llin g a gun out
o f his holster, follow ed by a close-up o f only the gun, pointing
and shooting directly at the v ie w e rs rather than at another per
son show n on the screen.
T h e close-up o f the gun needed the context o f the long shot and
was perceived in relation to it, as m o d ify in g or cla rify in g the
im portant action o f the p recedin g edeme.
It is n ow possible to photograph the fo llo w in g tw o cademes:
C i, long shot (LS) o f a man w a lk in g d o w n the street; C2, close-up
(CU) o f feet w a lk in g on the street, and from them to produce the
fo llo w in g sim ple edeme sequence: (Ei) L S o f m an walkin g; (E2)
C U o f feet; (E3) L S o f man w a lkin g; (E4) C U o f feet and so on.
E2 and E 4 obviou sly tell us that som ething about the feet and
w a lk in g are modifiers o f the man. O ne can also see that with the
introduction o f a third cademe o f a girl w a lk in g d o w n the street,
or o f a car d r iv in g w ild ly along the h ig h w a y, w e can produce a
boy-meets-girl sequence, or an om inou s man-might-get-run-over-
and-killed sequence.
O nce the object modifier possibility is learned, a variety o f
other param eters o f syntactic m anipulation become possible. A n
obvious early device w ou ld be the length o f the edeme w h ich is
again illustrated by the alternating good gu ys and bad gu ys ru n
n ing across the mesa, w h ere each edeme becomes progressively
shorter and shorter until the posse catches up w ith the bad guys
in one long shot.
T h e next stages revolve around the specific dim ensions or
param eters along w h ich these cademes and edemes attain overall
m eaning: their length, their placem ent in the film, their spatial
dim ension (long shot, close-up, etc.), their semantic content, and
the relation o f one set o f cues and contexts to the others.
H ere, too, semantic usage m ight provid e an analogy with the
developm ental sequence in w h ic h one learns to join cademes into
sequences according to some rules o f occu rren ce casual or as-
sociational.
A n a ly z in g precisely what rules the N a va jos follow ed in this
scheme, and h ow far they progressed in the developmental p ro
cess, was the purpose for w hich much o f ou r data w as gathered.
We wished to see at w h at point they w ould learn to discard
cademes and w h y . A t w hat point w ould they break cademes into
edemes? What edemes served as modifiers for other edemes?
Which cademes w e re ex ten sively used and w h ich w e re dis
carded? H o w com plex a structure, and h o w predictable a struc
ture, w ou ld each N a v a jo develop individually, and w h at rules
would all o f them seem to follow? Did their rules correspond to
our rules, or w e re they different?

T h e P r a c tic e F ilm s

Let us n o w exam ine the actual first one-m inute films made after
the students had seen the rushes o f the shots W orth had made and
those they themselves had photographed on the second day. T h e y
had now learned h ow to splice and had discussed their first prac
tice photographs as a gro u p before starting to photograph and
splice these practice films.
T e a c h in g the use o f a splicer was easier than w e expected.
Worth explained h ow to scrape the em ulsion from one side o f the
film to be joined, how to cut the film accurately in the splicer, and
h ow to ap p ly solvent to the join. T h e r e w e re no questions about
w h y one joined film. A fte r each student had practiced making
about twenty-five splices, e v ery o n e declared h im self satisfied that
he had learned splicing.
T h e N a v a jo students seemed pleased wh en they saw the results
o f their first shots on the same roll o f film that W orth had used
wh en he made some shots to demonstrate the camera. When
W orth asked them w hich shots they liked particularly, M ax in e
mentioned the shot o f the snake or som ething in the grass.
Sin ce neither C halfen, W orth nor A d a ir had seen an yth in g like
that in the screened footage, w e asked the students to describe the
shot M ax in e was talking about. A 1 and J o h n n y seemed instantly
to know which shot M ax in e referred to; J o h n n y remem bered
that it was the first shot in the second 100 feet o f film and said,
I m not sure if its a snake, but its som ething m ovin g in the
grass.
When w e looked at the footage again (photo 5), it became clear
that they had assigned m eaning to an image that the three o f us
k n e w was meaningless.
T h e usual practice in cin em ato graph y is to waste the first and
last five feet on a roll o f film by m erely ru n n in g the required
n u m b er o f feet through the camera. 'This allow s the laboratory
some leew ay in processing since they must attach one roll o f film
to the next in their processing m achinery. When a cin em atogra
pher runs off his film, therefore, he pays no attention to what the
camera is doing. In this case, W orth had asked C halfen to load the
camera. S tan d in g outdoors, he inserted the film, closed the cam
era, and pressed the start button to run off his five feet. A s he did,
he continued talking and m ovin g his hands in a normal talking
movement, even though the camera was being held in one of
them. T h i s resulted, inadvertently, in a m ovin g shot o f parts of
the low grass on w hich Chalfen was standing. B y accident, the
lens in the taking position w as focused properly. T h e camera
movem ents were, to our minds, random, meaningless, and
chaotic. N o t h in g was level and parts o f the m ovem ent w e re so
fast that w e c o u ld n t make an yth in g out. When w e (the investiga
tors) looked at it several times, w e could see that it was earth and
grass that w e w ere looking at. But whereas w e k n e w that we
w e re not supposed to see a n y th in g that the footage w as only
leader the N a v a jo saw it as the most interesting shot in the roll.
I hey told us that they kn ew there w as som ething there because
o f the w a y it moved. It was either the grass or the camera
both m ovements seemed to count, not only individu ally but in
relation to one another. T h e y laughed at our puzzled looks, and
when we explained that we had n t meant to make an yth in g like
that, that it was an accident, they still insisted that they could
use the shot to show a thing m o vin g in the grass.
A lthough w e knew that theirs w as a motion-oriented language,
and w e had hoped that w h en they made movies they w ould use
motion in com plex w ays, we w e re hardly prepared for this dra
matic example. We w e re prepared for differences in perception,
but we found throughout the project and the subsequent analysis
that the specific w a y s in which perception differed w ere difficult
to predict beforehand. T h e literature on perception, u n fortu
nately, has not yet accumulated much evidence b earing on the
kinds o f problem s we w e re to encounter.
When M ike started to make his practice film, he said that he
wanted to make a movie o f a pin tree. H e w anted to show h ow
it g r o w . .. . H e then set about finding a pin seedling and made
a shot of it. H is next cademe w as o f a little taller tree, and then
one still taller, and so on, until he had photographed a series of
seven cademes end ing with a full-grow n tree. W orth then
thought he was finished, but he continued with a cademe o f a
dead pin tree that still had some grow th on it, follow ed by one
o f a tree that had fallen to the ground, follow ed by some dead
branches, then a cademe o f a single pin nut, en d in g w ith a shot
o f the same pin seedling he started with.
When the film was returned from the laboratory and was
show n to the gro u p w e detected some puzzled looks. T h e film
consisted o f tw elve cademes as described above.
A lth ou gh M ike and the others c o u ld n t, at that moment, make
clear the reasons for their surprise at the result o f M ik e s first
shooting experience, M ike later w as able to articulate his diffi
culty. H e had photographed a sequence o f trees in a particular
order, a cademe sequence. Its sequence and semantic content, he
felt, should im p ly the meaning, H o w a pin tree g r o w s . In
stead, because all the photographed images had the same spatial
relation to the size o f the screen all the trees both small and
large w ere shot as close-ups filling the full fram e he failed to
com m unicate the process o f gro w th w h ich can be show n when
som ething small becomes big. Because all the big things and
small things w e re made to appear the same size in relation to the
size o f the screen, they lost their representative or iconic qualities
o f bigness and littleness, w hich w e re the relevant semantic di
mensions o f the cademes. A s M ike continued his filming, he was
able to master the semantic elements o f space to achieve a rather
sim ple syntactic arrangem ent.
In J o h n n y s case, w e have evidence o f the independent discov
ery o f what w e have called the modifier-object relationship.
J o h n n y said that for his first practice film he wanted to make
a m ovie about a horse. H e was the o n ly one o f the students w ho
used the practice shooting o p p o rtu n ity to make more than a set
o f shots o f an object. W hile the others made four or five shots of
things they saw around them, J o h n n y had constructed a little
story about the d ry earth to be found on the reservation. H e made
a shot o f cracked earth, a shot o f a m a n s feet w a lk in g over it and
ra ising dust, a shot of a hand c r u m b lin g the earth and letting it
sift through its fingers, a shot o f rain clouds, and finally two
staged shots: one o f water fallin g on the earth w h ich he achieved
by having W orth hold a hose out o f camera range w h ile he photo
graphed the w ater falling on the ground, and a shot o f a tiny
desert flow er bloom ing out o f the n ow dam p ground. H e had
picked the flo w er from another spot and had transplanted it to
the area he had wet.
F o r his next effort, the horse movie, he explained that w e (the
investigators) as well as m any other people k n ew v e ry little about
horses, and that since they w e re so im portant to man, it was
important to s h o w as much as one could about them. H is com
ments to W orth w h ile shooting made it quite clear that he was
shooting his film to explain the im portance of the horse person
ally to Worth. H e kept asking, D o you kno w about this
pointing to various parts o f the horses anatom y or gear. T h e
com m on attitude for all the N avajo, except Clah, w as to use the
shot to con vey in form atio n to co m m unicate subject matter
rather than a personal em otion about it. In general, the difference
between C lah and the others might be said to be one o f the
personal film o f self-expression as opposed to didactic c o m m u n i
cation as expressed in a teaching film.
A fte r getting permission from its o w n e r to use a horse tethered
near the Tradin g Post, J o h n n y started shooting. First, he e x a m
ined the horse through the various focal length view finders on
the camera. H e remained at the same distance from the horse, but
tried to see it from the different distances that various focal
lengths allow. H e finally told W orth that he was goin g to make
pictures o f pieces o f the horse so you [Worth] will get to know
a N a va jo horse w h en you see m y film (photos 611).
H e shot about ten close-ups o f the head, the eyes, the tail, the
legs, and so on. Each shot took him perhaps tw o minutes of
thought to determ ine. A t one point, the horse began to urinate.
J o h n n y tried to make exposure readings and distance settings to
be able to photograph it, but he co u ld n t do it fast enough. He
said to Worth, 1 wanted to get that shot. It is im portant to show
a horse does all sorts o f things like people.
H e worked quietly, asking fe w questions, setting exposu re and
distance with care. A fte r about tw e n ty minutes, he started look
ing at W orth frequ ently, not by tu rn in g his head all the w ay, but
by that quick sidew ays m ovem en t o f the eye characteristic o f the
Navajo. Then he said, I got it n o w w h ile shooting the picture
of the horse I thought o f it. O n S u n d a y there will be lots o f horses
at the S q u a w Dance. T h e y com e riding up with lots o f dust. Im
going to shoot that and use the pictures in the splicin g so that
ev ery on e w ill kn ow about the horses. That horses run and also
how they look.
Worth said that he d id n t quite understand what Jo h n n y
meant, and Jo h n n y explained, M r. Worth, if I show pieces of
this horse, and then t o m o rro w take a picture o f a com plete horse
at the S q u a w D an ce or lots o f horses can I paste them together
and will people think that I m s h o w in g pieces o f all the horses?
W orth managed to restrain h im self and said m erely, "W h a t do
you think? J o h n n y thought a bit and said, I d have to think
about it more, but I think this is so w ith movies. W orth asked,
What is so? and J o h n n y replied, 1'hat when you paste pieces
o f a horse in betw een pictures o f a w h ole horse, people w ill think
its part o f the same horse.
We mention these incidents for several reasons. First, it is
difficult to k n o w h ow J o h n n y learned this rule. Second, no mat
ter how he learned it, J o h n n y after tw o days k n ew that people
infer that a close-up (pieces o f horse) is a modifier o f a long shot
(pictures o f a w h o le horse) in certain circumstances. M ike also,
as w e have seen, in tuitively k n e w that the w a y his cademes o f the
pinon tree w e re sequenced d id n t com m unicate the concept of
grow th.
In the first taped in te rview with J o h n n y before film in stru c
tion began, he expressed a notion that seems quite consistent
with his later intuitive u n d erstan d in g o f film editing. Jo h n n y had
been sayin g that he thought in a m ovie one d id n t have a design
ahead o f time, that the design developed in the head as one
w orked, but that after a short time, the com plete design is in
y o u r head. W orth asked him to explain, and J o h n n y replied:

Designs [for jewelry and other things the Indians made] is just
like making a movie. It's the same thing to use your head. T h e y
d ont just come by, you know like a certain designs that a silvers
miths would sit down and concentrate and make a few designs. He
would say, make oh, about half a dozen designs. And then when
he's through making about half a dozen designs, he would put
them all together and think about each one, and then he would
pick out maybe one or two o f these half dozen and make that.

W hat J o h n n y was exp la in in g was precisely the process he h im

self used later on. First he w ou ld make a n u m b er o f shots, then
look at them and think about them, and choose one or tw o that
he w ou ld a rrange in the right w a y .
M ax in e did som ething very different in her first attempt at
m aking a practice movie. She had made six shots o f little boys on
a seesaw (photos 2-3). W h e n the film returned from the lab, some
of the other students said they wanted to practice splicing and
wondered if they might practice on their own film. W e agreed to
give them several hours at their editing tables, telling them that
thev could work alone, and that if they had questions, we would
be around to answer them. About two hours later, Maxine said
she was finished and wanted to see the film on the projector. W e
quote from Worths field notes made at the time:

M ax in e had just shown six cuts on action that are phenomenal.

Y o u can barely see where she is cutting in this footage o f hers o f
kids on a seesaw. She did it for practice, but said she didn't want
to spoil the film. When 1 asked her what she meant, she said, You
told us we could make splices, so 1 decided to make the splices in
such a w a y that it w o u ld n t spoil what was already there so you
wouldn't see my splices. I asked her, Did you have to put these
splices in special places or did it w ork out right w herever you put
therm" She said, Oh no, it had to go in special places. At this
point, she started making nervous, contorted motions with her
hands around her body, which reminded me o f Debby (Worths
12-year-old daughter). 1 cant explain it, Maxine said.

W h a t M a x i n e had d o n e w a s to s e p a ra te the s e v e ra l up and

d o w n m o tio n s o f the s e e s a w as t h e y a p p e a r e d in a s in g l e c a d e m e
as w e ll as in all the c a d e m e s she shot. Then she c h a n g e d fro m one-
part o f a c a d e m e to a n o t h e r and f r o m on e c a d e m e to a n o t h e r until
she had a s tr ip o f film r e p r o d u c i n g the o r ig in a l u p an d d o w n
se q u e n c e o f the se e sa w f ro m fo o ta g e not in the o r i g i n a l l y shot
ord er. S h e m a n a g e d it so s k il lf u ll y that at a q u ic k v ie w in g , an
e x p e r ie n c e d f ilm m a k e r w o u ld not k n o w that a n y t h i n g had been
ch an ged . E a c h cut o c c u r r e d at just the right place in the m otion
to en a b le h er to pick the m o tio n u p again in the next piece o f film
so that the m otion a p p e a re d real and c o n tin u o u s. F o r the most
part, she ch ose m in u te m o m e n ts o f pause in m otio n , such as those
m o m e n ts at the b e g i n n in g or end o f a s w in g in w h ic h th ere w e r e
three or f o u r fram es o f film in w h ic h no m otion w a s o c c u rrin g .
Since at least one fram e is lost at e v e ry cut, finding those places
w h ere the loss o f several fram es w o u ld n t be noticed and
w o u ld n t disturb the rh ythm o f motion was quite an exercise of
skill in both conceptualization as well as view ing.
W hen M a x in e was asked what she did she said:

M a x in e : Well [laughs] I just made only one shot.

W o rth: Uh-huh.
M a x i n e : And I sort of put them together and I cut six parts of

that one shot, and 1 switched them around and it came out all
right, too.
w o rth : Can you say why you switched it around?
: Well, it's real easy. See this boy was sitting in the same
m a x in e

position and I looked at other parts and I saw another one it's
sitting in the same position so I cut both one out and 1 first
switched it like that. Actually 1 cut three parts. I cut right here and
here and here . and I cut this whole part out and I put it in
between that one and thats the one I just switched these two
together.
w o rth : And w hat did th a t do?
m a x i n e : It did come out about its just the same, riding the see

saw, remember its just the same, vou know, going up and down
. . . it didn't change it. It did nt change anything. 1 switched it but
it still had the same thing, you know, going up and down like that
that movement the same.

When in the chapters a nalyzin g their films w e refer to the

N a v a jo use o f motion, w e will refer to this exa m p le again. It is
also im portant to keep this exercise in mind because w e later
report that in certain portions o f her final film, M ax in e edited in
com plete disregard o f these rules. As in this case, she had a very
good reason for it.
At this point in their work, a week after instruction started, all
the students k n ew very clearly what they wanted to do, in con
trast with W o rth s graduate students w h o frequ en tly are not
certain o f their subject matter for several (often up to six) months
and also in contrast to o u r w ork with black vo ungsters w h o take
a long time to decide what their films are about." I'he black
youngsters often just shoot, sayin g that their film is about what
they are doing. F o r example, in the case o f the film N o t Much
T o D o , the n- to 14-year-old filmmakers shot the things they
were doing e v e ry day and put the scenes together k n o w in g only
at the end that it was about what they did in the film clu b .
Susie had decided that she w ould make a film about her mother
w eavin g a rug. She wanted to sho w how hard it is, h ow good
my mother is, and w h y N a v a jo rugs must be so ex pen sive.
Jo h n n y was go in g to make a film about a silversmith. It also
should show h ow good N avajo s are with silver, and how hard
it is to make good je w e lr y . M ike wanted to make a film about
a lake. Ju s t to show all the things there are there. A 1 kept
talking about a film that w ou ld have lots o f sy m b o ls, that
would be about the w o rld , and that w e w ould understand
later. D u r in g one o f the class discussions on the fourth day of
classes, A 1 mentioned that his film w ou ld be called Intrepid
S h a d o w s. H e explained the title o f the film to the students as
meaning that shadow s are fearless, and then he produced a poem
which he said he had w ritten and w ould like to read. T h e poem
as he w rote it is reproduced below.

Wheels,
wheeling,
wheeling around, and round, and round
Rusty shadows pushing outward and bursting into spin
leaving nothing but motion and time.
T h e wheel belt traveling into circle
letting its shadows marking it
black highway between its wheels.
Around, and around the wheel and the belt spins,
the intrepid shadows spinning.
T h e winds, nursing the treetops
with little break-up puzzles of black shadows
dancing underneath its root
Dance, and dance of little pebbles
 Bath, and not bath
as the black shadows dance.

I see big rocks

partially black
partially white
making my eyes recall
the countless painted of grays and ochre whites
the archaic dance on the surface.

Dancing,
And drumming,
And singing of the ancient lore
Are heard in the distant forest.

On the ground I hear the intrepid shadows,

Dancing.

A 1 later decided to record the poem on tape, th inking that he

w ould then compose and play music on his flute, and use the
poem and the music as the sound track for his film.
A 1 seemed extre m ely proud o f his poem and the other m em
bers o f the class seemed quite impressed. Jo h n n y im m ediately
started talking about shadow s and exp la in in g to us (the investiga
tors, since the N a va jos seemed clearly to understand all about the
m eaning o f shadows) w h y shadow s w e re fearless. H e said, S h a d
ow s involves the sun up there, and explained that shadows at
different times o f day have different lengths, and the fact that
shadows could change so qu ick ly was very im portant in u n der
standing w h y shadow s w e re fearless. H e also pointed out that the
light o f the shadow o f a person is lighter on the part around the
head than in any other place, and that if one looks at his own
shadow on a mesa, he w ill see that the shadow is a lw a y s lighter
around o n es head. Worth com m ented in his notes at this point,
N a tu ra lly this is so because the light is more diffused as it gets
further a w a y from the object casting the shadow, but w h y is this
im portant enough to make a film about?
J o h n n y continued what was now becom ing a g ro u p explan a
tion for shadow s being fearless, sayin g D arkness alw ay s ap
proaches from the E ast. A 1 interrupted to say, O f course, thats
w h y I m go in g to make a film about this. J o h n n y then added that
one cannot destroy light, and therefore one cannot destroy shad
ows. A s long as the sun exists, he explained, there w ill alw ay s be
a shadow. H e felt that it was so im portant for us to understand
that he turned to W orth and told him about a movie he had seen
about a w a r in A ra b ia in w h ich people tried to camouflage
some tents, cars, and m ilitary equipm ent, but that no matter how
hard they tried to camouflage them from aerial view , people
could a lw a y s tell that there was som ething there because other
people could a lw ay s see the shadow s cast by the camouflaged
equipm ent on the ground. A 1 concluded, T h e shadow alw ays
reveals the im age.
N o t only did shadow s o f objects (rocks, grass, and trees), and
the movem ents o f shadows, play a major sym bolic role in A l s
film, but most of the im portant action was show n as the m ove
ment o f an objects shadow rather than o f the object itself. O ne
long and beautiful section in the film show s the shadow o f A 1 as
filmmaker with his camera held up to his eye search in g over the
landscape to find a place in the w o rld w h ere his shadow could be
as long and as big as possible (photos 53-54). H is film will be
discussed more fully in C hapters 13 and 14.
M a r y Ja n e and M ax in e inform ed us that they had decided to
w ork together, and that they wan ted to make a film about the old
ways. It w ou ld be about ou r grandfather, w h o is a v e ry im p or
tant medicine m an. A lth o u gh the girls chose it, it seemed to us
that they w e re uneasy about the subject. Because o f their con
stant, uneasy behavior w h ile m aking their film, w e w e re alw ays
reminded o f the remark M a r y Ja n e made in her first interview ,
M y father, one day he got after me because I d id n t know a n y
thing about s in g in g .
O nce they told us o f their decision to make a film about their
grandfather and his religious activities, they seemed at a stand
still. T h e y d id n t kn ow h ow to make arrangem en ts for photo
g ra p h in g him, nor did they kno w how to approach him, to ask
him for his schedule o f activities.
F o rtunately at the time, the third w eek of the project, that they
w e re w o n d e rin g h ow to find the subject matter for their film on
the old w a y s , they found out that the co m m u n ity w as plann in g
a S q u a w D ance (part o f the E n e m y W ay Cerem on y). T h e cere
m o n y would involve several days o f preparation and several days
o f intense religious as well as social activity. It was the same
activity at w h ich J o h n n y planned to photograph his footage of
horses. T h e T s o s ie sisters decided to photograph their g ran dfa
ther and their o w n fam ily m akin g preparations for the S q u a w
D ance and to build their film around that activity.
T h e y made some sporadic shots o f Y azzie gatherin g w ood and
herbs (photos 35-36), but really d id n t k n o w w h a t he w as doing
it for. They follow ed him around w h is p e r in g to each other and
telling Worth, w h o was near them, T h is is v e ry h ard. A t one
point, Sam walked into one o f the shaded outdoor kitchens and
took a cup o f coffee. A s W orth w alked over to look at the cooking
preparations, the girls decided th ey w ou ld photograph Sam
d r in k in g his coffee (photo 21). T h e y gathered up courage to ask
him to look up and smile. It was the first time they had ever told
their g ran dfath er to do something. H e com plied readily and hap
pily. T his cheered the girls, and they tried directin g him for the
first time, telling him, M ove this w a y . H e did, but q u ick ly left
and went into Ju a n T s o s ie s house. T h e girls d id n t k no w if they
had offended Sam and seemed undecided about w h at to do next.
F in a lly W orth asked them w h y they d id n t go into the house, and
M ax in e replied, Its because there are a lot o f people there. H e
asked, Did y o u r gran dfather say that you sh ou ldn t photograph
in the house? and M ax in e a n sw ered w ith a shake o f her head,
Oh no, it s just that it makes me uncom fortable to photograph
there du rin g a c e re m o n y .
T h is sense o f discom fort about a film con c ern in g a religious
topic seemed general. A s soon as they announced their subject,
the class, both boys and girls, burst into a series o f giggles and
laughs. M ike was the biggest g ig g le r in the group. W orth re
corded in his notes, I suspect w atch to see if he says an yth in g
that the idea o f a film about a medicine man absolutely terrifies
him [M ike].
T h e fo llo w in g day, W orth d rove M ike to the lake w h ere M ike
said he w an ted to make some shots about the w a te r . In the
fifteen minute car ride, M ik e brou ght up the conversation of the
p receding day. What do you think about the film that M axine
and M a r y Ja n e make the film about a medicine man? he asked,
sm iling broadly. W orth said he d id n t k no w , and M ik e con
tinued, M a y b e he [Sam Yazzie] w ill change his mind w h en they
start taking his pictu re. W orth asked if he w ould like to make
a film about a medicine man. M ik e replied v e ry firmly, Oh no.
W h y not? M ike thought for a m om ent and replied as if he w ere
finishing a sentence, and besides I d o n t k n o w any medicine
m en d on t have any in m y fam ily since m y m oth ers father died
d o n t k n o w an y m edicine m e n . M ike not o n ly expressed fear
o f ph otog ra p h in g m edicine men but clearly said that he was more
com fortable not h avin g to photograph people. He hinted
through several conversations that no m edicine man w ou ld ever
allow h im self to be photographed. When it w as seen that the girls
w ere ph otog ra p h in g Y azzie and that, further, Y azzie w as a llo w
ing Worth, A dair, and C halfen to make stills o f him doin g a sand
painting, M ike seemed v e ry much relieved and considered add
ing some shots o f people to his film. T h a t week M ike even al
lowed A 1 to take some shots o f his feet, w h ich A 1 said he needed
for his film.
Several other interesting beh avior patterns regardin g visual
im agery became apparent in ou r observations d u rin g these first
days o f shooting. T h e students all show ed great confidence in
m anipu lating w h at might be called nature or the natural e n v iro n
ment, in contrast to their hesitation or reluctance to manipulate
people or the film images themselves.
F o r exam ple, M ik e kept t r y in g to plant grass in bare spots, to
make it look better w h en I shoot. H e preferred planting grass
to search ing for a camera angle that w o u ld n t s h o w the bare spot
or w ou ld make the existing grass look good. T h e first time M ike
had a camera in his hands to make his h ow a pin tree g r o w s
film, he first arranged the gro u nd by pulling at stumps and pieces
o f grass to make the tree look better, w h ere by m ovin g to another
angle, he w ou ld have been able to keep the stumps out o f view.
A t the lake, he moved rocks, smoothed the earth, changed the
contour o f the lake edge slightly, and changed the position o f
several small clum ps o f grass.
A 1 started his p h otog raphy in yet another w av. H is first several
days o f w h at he called w o r k in g on m y film consisted o f search
ing and finding various rocks, branches and bleached bones upon
w h ich he painted such w ord s as m o v in g , flo w in g , and spin
n in g (photo 4). H e seemed to need to orient him self first by
using his fam iliar paint and brushes, creating with w ord s and
paint the things he hoped to accom plish with the movie camera.
H is first shots w ere o f the rocks w ith m o v in g and f lo w in g
painted on them. H e never used these cademes in his film, but at
the time they w e re im portant to him, as if he w e re m aking sure
that if the movie camera c o u ld n t do it, he w ou ld be able to get
the idea across a n y w a y . A s he progressed he seemed to find that
he d id n t need the painted motion words.
T h e most rem arkable m anipulation o f the en viron m en t, h o w
ever, occurred d u rin g A l s first week o f shooting. C en tral to his
film was an o p en in g scene in w hich a man w ould poke a stick into
a spider web, w hich is taboo behavior for a N avajo. A 1 found
several spider webs under some old trees in h alf a d a y s search
and study, but he inform ed us that they w ere no good and that
he'd have to make a spider web. W hether that w as because the
thought of d e stro y in g a real spider w e b was too much for him (he
planned to photograph his o w n hand because he said he knew he
c o u ld n t ask a nyo ne else) or because the real spider webs w e re in
fact not right, w e d o n t know. In any event, he bought a spool
o f v e ry thin strin g and a package o f pins at the Trading Post,
found a piece o f wood about a yard square, and proceeded to spin
a web by placing the pins in the w ood to form the outside edges
of the w e b (photo 50). We w ere so taken aback by his unexpected
skill that w e never did check w h eth er he did it the w a y a spider
would, but A l s w e b held together and looked exactly like a
genuine spider web. H e took the finished w e b outside, placed
other pins on the underside o f a fallen tree and on the ground
below it, and transferred the w e b from the board to the tree. He
made sure that the pins s u p p o rtin g the w eb w ould be outside the
cam eras range bv constantly ch eckin g through the viewfinder.
When the w e b was photographed in the finished film, we, the
investigators and other whites w h o saw the film, w e re unable at
our first v ie w in g to tell that it was not real.
Al, w h o w as a lw ay s quite proud o f his achievements, seemed
not to make too much o f this and neither did the other students.
T h e y seemed to think it a reasonable thing to do and to be able
to do.
We mentioned earlier J o h n n y N e ls o n s film in w hich he made
rain, and w e will discuss later his manipulation of the e n v iro n
ment to create a silver mine.
T h is general ability and easiness at creatively m anipulating a
natural en viron m en t contrasts sharply with ou r attitudes or
w ork habits. O n ly the experienced and very professional
filmmaker goes about creating nature. A s a matter o f fact, this
aspect o f professional film m aking is a lw a y s accompanied in
professional cin em atography journals and fan magazines by de
scriptions o f the high cost and the experience and ingenuity
required. It is also often denigrated as the mark of a H o lly w o o d
or com m ercial film. O n the other hand, wh en a filmmaker like
A nton ion i spray paints a landscape to change its color (or to
make it look goo d ) w e recognize the innovation, since an ama
teur never m onkeys around w ith the en viron m en t, only with
people.
D u r in g the second week o f the project, Worth com m ents in his
notes for Ju n e 15,
 All this ease at manipulating the environment is in such contrast
to my ow n feelings I have to manipulate the world by rearrang
ing images because it seems easier, or I am not confident enough
about my ability to manipulate the real natural world . . . if Mike
could take a bunch of cademes directly out of the ground, I bet
hed feel much more comfortable and confident about editing
them. . . . If the Navajo think o f images as natural events, they will
feel easy about manipulating them in editing. If images are people,
they w o n t be so happy editing them.

A s it turned out, the N a va jo show ed a remarkable skill and ease

in learning, or inventing, the ed iting process.

Th ey S ta rt F ilm in g

B y the second week wh en the students started to w ork on the

real film, w e stopped any formal instruction. We w ou ld an
sw e r questions w h en asked; w e drove them w h ereve r they
wanted to go, w h ich gave us a natural excuse to hang around as
observers; and w e got the film developed.
F o r the first fe w days, there w e re m an y questions: C an I do
this? or Is this all right to do? M ostly, w e a nsw ered that they
could do w h atever they wanted to do. Som etim es w e explained
that som ething w o u ld n t work, as, for example, if they loaded the
camera incorrectly.
D u r in g the first days, the N a v a jo often asked us if they had to
use the tripod. W orth had explained on the first day that a tripod
w as to rest the camera o n and that an exposure meter was to
tell you how much light there is.
We an sw ered most questions about w h eth er M u st w e use
som ething in the same w a y : Y o u can if you w ant to you can
use w h atever you w a n t." A ll the N a v a jo students chose to use the
exposure meter and used it all the time. T h e tripod, h ow ever, was
used in freq u e n tly on ly w h en they needed to rest the camera in
some position in which they couldn't hold it. F o r example, Susie
used it for her titles, w hich w e re the last things she shot (photo
26). She had decided to pin pieces o f loosely spun yarn to a
blanket into the shape o f letters, w h ich required her to walk back
and forth from the blanket stretched on the ground to the camera
fixed on a tripod. She wanted to see h ow it will look as 1 make
it. A 1 used the tripod to hold the camera so he could photograph
his ow n feet w a lk in g along a field. 1 le w ould rather have used an
actor but co u ld n t find one at the time.
T h e students remarked at various times that they enjoyed
holding the camera in m y o w n hands, that a tripod is not
necessary.
O u r observations d u rin g this film ing period ranged from notes
as to whether, how, and w h y they did or didn't use particular
pieces of equipm ent such as tripods, lenses, exposu re meters, and
measuring tapes, to formal life histories o f the students, their
position in the co m m u n ity , and their relations w ith various as
pects o f N a v a jo political, social and economic life. We were able
to observe each other in our roles as teacher, in te rview er and
observer, and how these roles w e re accepted or rejected in spe
cific contexts by the N avajo. W e kept a ru n n in g record o f the
c o m m u n ity s reactions to the film m aking project h o w much the
various teaching and filming activities attracted interest or co m
plaints. We remained, h ow ever, most concerned with h ow our
students conceived, photographed, and edited their films.
Som e of the students decided that they wanted to w rite out
some o f the things they w ere go in g to shoot. M ax in e said, I hats
how it should be in school w e keep a notebook and w rite in it.
S om e wanted to show us their notebooks and some used them as
notes d u rin g discussions in class. N o one, h ow ever, took his
notebook w ith him wh en he used the camera. Susie never used
a notebook. Worth casually asked her w hy, and she replied that
she kn ew ev ery th in g in her head about her film.
T h e notebooks seemed very much like grade school assign
ments and v e ry unlike w hat the actual films w e re about. In
J o h n n y N e ls o n s notebook w as the fo llo w in g page:
 (SIL V E R SM IT H
"Bang! Bang! came the sounds from a hogan where a Navajo
silversmith was busy smelting a government minted coin. The
sound was very familiar in the twenties and thirties. As there
wasnt any silver to work with. . . .

This is particu larly interesting since J o h n n y s film had the

silversmith mine his o w n silver. In a later chapter w e report on
this aspect o f his film and his insistence that he made the film the
w a y he did not because it was true, but because thats h ow you
tell the story in a film.
O n another page headed B ir d s J o h n n y w ro te tw o sentences:
Birds fly on wings. But they must have air and open space to fly-
in. I l e never talked about a film about birds and w e d id n t know
he even had contemplated one.
W hen the film came back from the laboratory in D enver, we
viewed all the rushes with ou r students and asked them h ow they
liked what they had done. Was it what vou thought you were
doin g? Is it right? and so on. A s the editing progressed, we
asked, W h y does this shot go with that one? W h y did you
leave that out? W h ats the purpose of that? W h y did you
splice here instead of here? When the films w ere finished, we
asked each student in an extended interview w h y he chose each
shot and what it meant in the film. M u ch o f the material in the
chapters an aly zin g the films is taken from these interviews.
A n oth er level o f observation was ou r o w n notes about how the
N a va jo w e re pho tographin g and editing. O u r daily field notes
and those o f D ick C halfen are full o f remarks like T h e y are
doing it all w r o n g , T h e y d o n t start at the b eg in n in g , T h e y
have no idea o f how an event is stru ctu red, T h e y d o n t know
how to spot the important th in gs.
It was E d w a r d Hall, on a weekend visit to Pine S p rin g s to talk
with us and to observe our w ork, w h o first said to us, F o r G o d s
sake, if it is so clear to you that they are doing it all w ron g , it must
be because they are breaking a set o f rules w hich you have and
which they don't. Y o u r job w ill be to make explicit the different
rules you and they are operatin g u n der. We w ill return to that
in the chapters a nalyzin g their films.

S u s ie a n d H e r F a m ily G et In v o lv e d in F ilm in g

D u r in g the period that A d a ir w as ob servin g Susie at w ork on her

film he noted h ow sm oothly and easily the filming w as integrated
into the daily life o f Susie and her mother and father. N avajo
w a n d e rin g by w ould stop and ask Susie if they could look
through the viewfinder. She was a lw ay s calm and a lw a y s allowed
them. S u sies m other w as quietly curious and asked several times
if she could look through the camera. Susie a lw ay s let her mother
exam ine the camera. A t one point, du rin g the first d a y s shooting
at S u sies m oth ers hogan, w h ile Worth was sitting on the cot
ob serving Susie p h otog raphing her mother at the loom, S u s ie s
father, w ho had been in and out apparently not payin g much
attention, asked if he could look through the camera. She showed
him how to look through it and how to switch lenses so that he
could see through the various focal length viewfinders. H e looked
for about tw o minutes, t u rn in g the turret m any times, and then
returned the camera to Susie and sat d ow n to watch. A fte r about
five minutes, he got up and began o pen ing one o f several storage
suitcases in the corn e r of the hogan. F inally, he pulled out a pair
o f old field glasses and looked through them at Susie and her
mother about six feet aw av, e v id e n tly with some difficulty but
w ithout try in g to adjust the focus. A fte r about five minutes, he
smiled b ro ad lv not saving an yth in g because he knew Worth
spoke no N a va jo and handed W orth the field glasses, signalling
him to look through them. W orth d id n t kno w w h eth er he was
being asked to focus the glasses or to share kn ow led ge about
things that help one to see better. Worth looked, focused, and,
smiling, handed them back say in g N ij u n e h " (nice). H e r father
shook his head as if to sav, N o , that w a s n t what I meant," and
walked over to S usie poin ting to the camera and then to the
field glasses. H e then said som eth in g to Susie, w h o told Worth,
H e says that the field glasses and the camera w o rk the same
w a y .

T h e evident satisfaction and ease sh ow n by S usie and her

parents in relation to m a kin g a m ovie provided us w ith the
o p p o rtu n ity to attempt to pass on to a n on -E n glish speaker
the same techn ology w e had taught the bilingual, and so
gather com parative data. It had been A d a ir s ex perien ce in ob
serv in g the transfer o f medical techn ology that it had been
greatly facilitated by a several-step operation o f first teaching
an E n glish -sp e akin g N a v a jo and then having him teach the
m onolingual N avajo. In effect it w as a stru ctu rin g o f roles in
accordance w ith theories o f diffusion o f a n e w technology
from one society to another. T h e m ore acculturated in d ivid u
als served as in term ediaries b etw een the outsiders and the
more co nservative m em bers o f their o w n social group. T h u s
A d a ir reasoned that Susie m ight be m ore successful in teach
ing her m other than w ou ld Sol Worth.
We asked S usie if she w o u ld teach her m other to make movies.
A lth o u gh S usie w as e x tre m ely shy, she responded to this in a
m ore o vertly positive m an n er than to almost a n y th in g else w e
asked her to do. In agreeing, h ow eve r, Susie laid d o w n the rules
o f the game. S h e must be alone w ith her mother at first, and only
after that m ight W orth observe her and record on tape w h at w as
said. (Worth w a s not allowed to com e betw een m other and
daughter.) A d d itio n ally , she said her m other must be able to see
the rushes in p riv a c y and no other N a v a jo w as to be around
d u rin g the editing.
Th in kin g to record the first teaching o f film in the N a v a jo
language, w e asked Susie first to tell us in E n g lis h w h at she
planned to teach her mother. W e then asked her, T e l l me w hat
y o u in N a v a jo w ill say to y o u r m other w h e n y ou explain to
her about m aking a movie tell me tell the tape recorder in
N a v a jo .
Susie had no difficulty in r e p ly in g to these questions in either
N a v a jo or E n glish. She seemed so confident that w e asked her if
w e could go ahead and tape her first teaching session with her
mother. She asked her mother, w h o agreed, and so w e w e re able
to tape the first tw o hours o f instruction in w h ich she taught her
mother to load the camera, to take exposure readings, and to start
photographing.
A tape o f Susie and her m other talking w as made w h ile Worth,
Susie, and A lta w e re sitting outdoors in the shade o f a pinon tree
near A lt a s house. It was the place and the arra ng em e n t Susie
made for her teaching. W orth w as allowed to hold the m icro
phone o f his U h e r recorder six inches from the lips o f the speak
ers a closeness necessary because Susie and her m other spoke to
each other in the almost w h is p e r in g conversational style typical
o f N a v a jo w om en. It w as u nusual at least to an o b se rve r within
our cu ltu re for adults other than trained actors to be able to
converse naturally and w ith ou t an noyan ce in the presence o f a
m icroph on e placed so close to their lips. M ost adults w ill bend
their heads sh a rp ly backw ard or step back w h en con fron ted with
a m icroph on e at six inches, but neither A lta nor Susie seemed to
mind the m icrophone, nor did they seem to change their behav
ior or voice level in any w ay. T h e y w ent sin gle-m indedly about
their tasks o f learning and teaching.
A lth o u gh it was the first time that the N a v a jo language had
been used for the purpose of teaching someone to use a camera
and to make a film, there seemed no problem in adapting the
language to such a seem ingly foreign use.
W hat follow s are selected portions o f the teaching dialogue.
We have shortened the time involved in each step and present
these selections as an indication o f h ow the teaching was done,
rather than as a com plete report o f the process. It is apparent that
although S usie said w e could tape her first teaching session w ith
her mother, she had already spoken to her about cameras. H o w
much conversation she had w ith her mother about cameras w e
do not know.

: One time [yesterday] I showed you how to use a camera, the

s u s ie

thing that you take pictures with. H o w much do you remember?

Would you tell me?
a lt a: I remember some, but not too much. . . . I just remember the

little knob which you turn back and forth. I also remember the
thing you push to get the pictures. But as I said, I am not sure.
s u s ie : What is the little knob [f stop ring on lens] for?
a lt a : It adjusts the lightings and the shadows.
: H o w about the knobs that adjust the distances, like one for
s u s ie

close shots, not so far away, and the far away shots? Do you
remember how to do those?
a l t a : Yes, there were three adjustments but I dont remember how

to work them. You showed me how to work those things only

once. Remember? If we went over it again two or three times, I
might be able to do it.
: Th at is w h y we are here again. We want to know what you
s u s ie

dont remember so we can show it to you again. T h is way you can

learn more about it. N o t only that, but we would like to see you
take some pictures this afternoon. T h a t is w h y we came over. He
[Worth] wants to stay around until noon to watch how things go.
He will be back later this afternoon to watch you take some pic
tures. T h e pictures you take will be sent off. So be thinking about
what y o u re going to take pictures of.

N o tic e that S usie instantly tells her m other to be th ink ing

about w h at y o u re going to take pictures o f before her mother
has learned to use the camera. T h i s is consistent w ith the w a y
S u s ie s m other w e n t about the process o f w eaving. A s Susie de
scribed it, W hen a w e a v e r gathers roots and berries for the dyes
she is already th ink ing o f the design. S he is th in k in g o f the design
in her head w h e n she is p re p a rin g the w o ol and for ev ery th in g
she does because the colors and the fineness o f the wool are all
part o f the design h ow y ou make a ru g . T h e r e w e re m any
instances in both the w e a v in g and silversm ith film in w h ich the
filmmakers indicated that their actors w e re th ink ing o f the de
sign w h ile p re p arin g to work. See the discussion o f face close-ups
in C h a p ter 9u

: What do you think about that? We will show you some of

s u s ie

the things about the camera that you dont remember so you will
learn how to use it. . . . You hold it [camera] here and hold it up
like this. T h is long thing here takes pictures at close range. Th e
next one takes pictures not so far away, just a short distance.
a lt a : T h is one?

T h e description long, short, or m e d iu m refers not to the

actual length o f the lens but is A m e ric a n cin em a to g ra p h e rs argot
for telephoto, w ide angle, and norm al lenses.

: T h e ones on this side. This is the long one [a 75mm lens], this
s u s ie

is the medium size and this is the short one. I'he medium size one
[a 25mm lens] takes pictures about half the distances. T h is shorter
one, the 10 [a 10mm lens], takes pictures which seem to be far away
and yet they may be close by. Whatever range you wish to take
pictures you can always set it by turning these things. T h e y have
numbers on them. T h e y are called long-shot lens, medium and
close-up lens. But you can also adjust it to what this other little
thing I had while ago. T h e y called it exposure meter. It records
the amount of light or picks up the amount of light. T h e y have
numbers on them so you adjust your camera accordingly. N o w I
want you to thread this thing. I will show you how to do it as you
go along. But first, hold it up and look into it. No, hold it like this.
You notice how Im holding it? N o w look into and look off into
the distance. . . . T h e other way, to the left N o w turn it. Hold
it like this. N o w turn this one here. Here, get your hand out of
the way, from this side. N ot these, just this one. You see these red
marks? T h is one says run. T h is side says lock. When this red mark
is over here and you pull this other one down it w o n t run. T h e y
are not at the right place, thats w h y. If you put it here where it
says run in red, it will run and you can take pictures. . . . [Run and
Lock were said in English and in a louder voice.] N o w lets try
loading the camera. T h e film goes here. . . . N o w watch carefully
how I do it. You push it together and lift it. D o nt touch this
[turret], it will get out of place. T h e n you take this out. T h is is
made so you can open it like this. When you put the thing [the film]
you run the end into here. Let me get one, Ill show you how to
do it. . . . T h is is how you put it in. You stick this in here. You
tear this open first. As soon as you open it, take this end and run
it into here. . . . You run this one in here. These have little metal
points to catch these right here along the edge. T h e y turn and pull
the strip along. Sprockets is what they called them. T h is round
thing has sprockets.
a lt a : Uh-huh.
s u s i e : Here is another one [the camera claw], I showed it to you

at one time, remember? Th at also catches the strip down there.

Look at it, its w ay inside.
a lt a : Yes.
: T h e y go through these little holes. It turns inside and
s u s ie

when it turns one little point of metal comes through one at a

time and pulls the strip to here and through here. When you
press this to take pictures you hear the sprockets working.
Th e n the film goes around this one. Then you turn here and
make a loop. Like this, and be sure the loops are same sizes.
T h e y say it does not work right if they are not the same. T h e
loops should be about this size.

a lt a : Both should be the same sizes?

Yes, make them both the same on either side You see how
s u s ie :

these sprockets come through and hold the film. G e t them all like
that and close this one here.
a lt a : I see.
T h e n you put this [the camera body cover] on. N o w you do
s u s ie :

it. Do it just like I showed you T h is is the top and this is the
bottom. T h e white [emulsion] is on the outside and the green side
[film back] is on the inner side. N o w try it. T u r n it over.
a lt a : Like this?
s u s ieYes, the film goes in coiled up like this, dont you see? Run
:

it up through here. N ot that side. Put it over the round thing like
1 showed you. It catches right here. Be sure they are in place. T r y
pulling the strip and see if they are secure. Are they in place?
. . . H ow about the other one that I showed you? You made it too
tight here. Do it like this, you see? N o w its looser and has a little
play in it. Look at it from here. When they are fastened and secure,
they look like that. N o w you push this back on it. Take this out
from under it. . . . When you push this over it it closes better.
a i .t a : Now!
s u s ie : Push this down and lets see if itll run.
w o rth : [English) V e ry good! Its perfect!
s u s i f .: Press the button again.
w o rth: [English] Its a perfect load, the first time! T h a t s abso

lutely correct!
a lt a : T h is is how it goes, does it?
Yes, be sure you put it on correctly. N o w , let it run and let
s u s ie :

it go through all the way. All of it. N o w , suppose you do it all by

yourself. [In English): I'll let her do it by herself, without helping
her. . . . Exposure meter, the thing that picks up the light.
a lt a : Yes, I see.
T h e re are numbers all over inside of it. I showed you how
s u s i f .:

to use this gadget some time ago. Perhaps you remember some of
the things I told you about it. When you take it out into a very
bright light this needle moves w a y over here. You see the numbers
on here?
a lt a : Yes.
Yes. When the light is very bright the indicator goes all the
s u s ie :

w ay to 16. When the light is not as strong it will not go very far
up. When the light is very, very dim it will barely go up, around
figure 2 or even less. N o w this thing registers around 16. It shows
the light is brighter. T h is thing [the mask that is inserted between
the photosphere and the photoelectric cell to cut down the amount
of light entering cell] goes in here like this. Y ou see the indicator
went all the way back down. This thing that I am talking about
goes behind this white round thing which picks up the light. You
use it when the light is very bright so the indicator will not go too
far up. The indicator now falls between 2 and 8. We are in the
shade under a tree. N o plate behind it the indicator will go up,
perhaps up to 11 or over.
a lt a : I see.

When the light is bright you put this thing between here.
s u s ie :

When you are using the exposure meter when its dark, when its
cloudy or indoors you remove this little black thing. T h is will give
you correct readings. We are now working outdoors and the lights
are brighter so that is why we have it in there. It says in right here
and it says out over here. When the thing is placed behind the
white round thing you read the indicator on the in side. When you
leave the thing out you work with the out indicator. Turn the
things accordingly until you get a correct reading. We are now
working with the in indicator. [Out and In were said in English
and in a louder voice.] Now I have it set and the indicator points
to 16. You set this one over here [the f stop on the camera lens] with
what you can get from figure 16. Now look into it [the camera] and
see which lens you want to take pictures with. Pick it up and look
through it. You have a choice of either long shot, medium shot, or
the close-up. Now pick out the lens you wish to use and adjust it.
a lt a : I want the close-up lens.
: Its already in place. How far away is your subject? By that
s u s ie

tree over there?

a lt a : Yes, by the tree.
: Now back to this thing here. The indicator on figure 16 has
s u s ie

changed somewhat. The numbers are all on here. Move it up to

this mark, slightly past 16.
a lt a : Figure 16 is right here, right?
How far do you think, or how many feet do you think it is
s u s ie :

to that tree?
a lt a : About 18 feet.

s u s ie : I believe its more than that.

a lt a : Perhaps its 20 feet.
: No. Twenty feet is about up to here. I think its about 45 feet
s u s ie

to that tree. How many feet do you think over to that tree? [Ad
dressed to Sol Worth]
w o rth : Which tre e? The big one?

s u s ie : The little one.

w o rth : I would say its about 40 feet. What do you think?
s u s ie : I said 4 j.

w o rth : Ill tell you what, Susie. Hold these, Ill measure it. I bet
its close to 50 now.
s u s ie : [Talking to her mother] H es zig-zagging!
w o rth : Its 47, youre better than I am. What did your mother say?
She says its about 20 feet. [Susie and Alta laugh] Its 47 feet
s u s ie :

to that tree. Now set the reading on 47. You wont find 47.
a lt a : T h ey re not there? What do you do then?
s u s i e : Just set it between, and do the best you can where you think

47 should be. It should be right here. Now go over yonder, take

a reading of something else. . . . Look through it and bring your
subject in to where you want it. Pick the sagebrush for your
subject. How far away is it? If you want it to be closer bring it in
in your lens. . . . Look through it and keep turning it until you
bring it in to where you want it.
a lt a : T here!
s u s ie : N ow ? You have the subject close by?
a lta : Its not far away.
: Now, turn that one. You passed it. Turn it back. You have
s u s ie

to look through it while youre turning it.

a lta : N o w I got it one medium shot.
s u s ie : Yes. Now the distance. How many feet to that sagebrush?
: I dont know, maybe its about 20 feet. No, its that far. I
a lt a

think its about 16 feet.

s u s ie : [To Worth] She says about 16 feet.
w o rth : Thats about right. What do you think?
: I think its about right too. . . . [to Alta] You should practice
s u s ie

a lot like that. You can set it at another place and go through the
same procedures again. Now you got the camera all set to shoot.
a lt a : Yes.
: Lets try another setting. Turn it to another lens.Remember,
s u s ie

theyre not all the same. Look through the lens.

a lt a : Its getting heavy.
It is kind of heavy, especially if youre not used to handling
s u s ie :
it. Hold it up close to your eyes. When these things are open, try
to keep your fingers away. If you do, it leaves some marks and they
will show on the film. T r y working it from the side.
 a lt a : Its getting awfully heavy, Ill tell you.
s u s i e :T ry
the other lens you havent practice on. This, the close-
up lens you got here. This is the medium shot. Which one did you
use just now?
a lt a : This one?

s u s i e : Yes. Look right through here until you see something. The

other way, turn it the other way. Turn it sun-wise [clock-wise].

[The students were never instructed that they should turn lenses
sun-wise. Obviously the turret can turn in either direction.] Here,
take another reading. Hold it farther away from you, kind of side
ways. Now set it accordingly.
a lt a : Its the same.
s u s i e : Read the numbers closely. Its not set right. You have it set

on eight instead of twelve.

a lt a : Then its right here in the middle, right?
s u s ie : Yes.
[Worth checks the reading and finds an error.]
s u s ie : There was a mistake in the setting at another place. T ry
again.

Afternoon

: [To Alta] Explain into that thing [the tape recorder] what
s u s ie

you are going to take pictures of. How are you going to make it?
a l t a : Somebody will be walking this way from over there. Come

out from over there, walk along the road and enter the hogan over
there.
s u s ie : Then what? Thats too short. What else would you like to
take?

T his is one o f the few indications w e have o f S u s ie s notion o f

the appropriate length o f a shot. In questioning her about w h y
she said, T h a t s too short, she replied, Som e things take more
film to make them the right length. I d o n t k n o w w h y . O b v i
ously, h ow ever, there w as some notion o f right length for
certain events in certain contexts. O th e r students often remarked
th a t sh ots th e y o r o th e rs took loo ked too lo n g , n o t lo n g
e n o u g h , o r too s h o r t .

a l t a : Perhaps wood chopping. Yes, I'll take a shot of someone

chopping wood.
: Which kind are you going to use [meaning which lens]?
s u s ie

What would be the distance?

a i .t a : The same one which is on here, the medium shot.
s u s ie : Well, turn it and set it.
a lta : No, its already set.
s u s ie : N o , t h a t is n o t t h e r i g h t s e t t in g .

a lt a : Right here, right?

s u s ie : You passed it.

a lt a : Can I turn it back? [counter sun-wise]

s u s ie : Turn it like this, [sun-wise]
a lta : Wait, just a moment!
Look into that other thing [exposure meter] again. I think
s u s ie :

the light changed.

a lt a : The sun came out again. What shall I do now?
s u s ie : What are you going to try now?
: Nothing, its set at the same place. [Taking picture of sash
a lt a

weaving] Lets try it from this other side again. 1 havent take
picture of it yet I took it only when the weaving just started.
s u s ie : Let me check it again for you.
a i .t a : Just right in the area where you are working.
: Are you going to take some more or are you finished? Maybe
s u s ie

you want to take it in another way.

a lt a : Is this all right again? N o w it is in the shadow.
: Eight and one-half. Eight and eleven, or some place between
s u s ie

the two. Its better in the middle.

a lta : Its getting a little bit dark in here.
s u s ie : Look through it and keep turning it. Bring it real close.
2 2) Through Navajo Eyes
a lt a : This thing wouldnt go up.
s u s ie : I think you have to push it down a little.
a lt a : I want it to be straight, [or, level]
s u s iePush it down first. Loosen this one. Screw this down. Hold
:

it tight, its liable to come down. Turn it backward to take it off.

Now take it off by turning it. . . . This is only about five feet of
it left. You are about to run out [of film]. If its not right you can
move it back so you see the whole thing. Put it over there.
a i .t a : Its the long shot.
s u s ie : Bring it in closer so you can see it all. Now this is too close.
a lt a : Is this eight right here?
: You finished it [or, you got to the end]. Now just turn it
s u s ie

down over here and let it run out completely. There is a bit left
in it. Wind some more. Press the button again.
a i .t a : I guess that finishes it.
I didn't hear anything. Now here take it out. I urn this thing
s u s ie :

right here. Take it out and put it away in that thing over there [the
camera case].

Several im portant things become clear from this section o f

actual teaching. First, is the ability o f a m onolingual N a v a jo to
learn to use a com plex mechanical tool so readily, but more
im p ortan tly it corroborates the method o f letting the partici
pants in the tran sfer o f techn ology structure situations that are
com patible w ith traditional role enactment. T h e teacher-student
relationship structured by the m o th er-d au g h te r role relation was
a fam iliar one to each o f them. W hile the m other was the custom
ary teacher o f the daughter in passing on traditional technology
she taught her to w eave in the first place the dau gh ter had
m an y times taught the m other m an y o f the wh ite m a n s w a y s she
had learned in school and in her visits to to w n s and cities off the
reservation.
S econ dly, w e have here a rather unusual illustration o f the
creative aspects o f language use. Susie and her m other w ere able
to adapt the N a v a jo language to an en tirely n ew purpose, finding
w ays to describe objects and processes that w e re en tirely new to
the language. S u sies m other seemed able to understand the con
cepts in volved in telephoto lenses, w id e angle lenses and the like
from the use o f traditional N a v a jo words. It may therefore be
assumed that at least for N a va jos classroom instruction in Navajo
about w hite m a n s c u ltu re is a reasonable method. Educators
and gove rn m e n t officials have often feared that concepts and
technologies foreign to the N a v a jo w ould not be explainable in
the N a v a jo language. H e re w e have one instance in w h ich N avajo
seemed to facilitate transfer in a clear and rapid way.

A V is u a l R eco rd

In addition to the usual methods o f recording in the form o f field

notes, tape recordings, and still ph otography, w e took some film
footage ourselves. A s w e mentioned in the introduction, w e felt
from the b egin n in g that w e could not, to ou r o w n satisfaction,
describe ve rb a lly a process o f com m u n ication that w a s so largely
dependent on visual signs and sym bols. N o t on ly w e re our basic
data a corp us o f im age events produced and organized by the
N avajo , and therefore essentially not translatable into verbal
signs, but they w e re produced by m em bers of another culture
w h ose sem antic interpretation o f these signs, and w h ose particu
lar mode o f organization, was the v e ry point o f the study. T h a t
is, w e w e re attem ptin g to learn h ow the visual signs they chose
to use achieved m e an in g for them, and h ow their interpretations
m ight or m ight not differ from ours. In order to do this, w e knew
w e w ou ld have to talk about w h at we saw w h en w e analyzed the
films, and that it w ou ld have to be possible for those interested
in ou r analysis to look at the same materials. We have therefore
made the films and film footage available for study. But w e real
ized that w e w e re also facing a problem com m on to all ethno
graphic description w e w e re reportin g on behavior w h ich was
not verbal. F o r exam ple, w e say that the N a v a jo looked very
com fortable w h e n using the com p le x technology, or w e describe
the co m m u n ity o f Pine S p rin g s in w ord s largely inadequate to
give a feel o f the environ m en t. T h e use o f films made by the
anthropologist to describe these things is a co m m on place today,
and w e had to decide w h eth er w e w ou ld, in addition to present
ing their v ie w o f their w orld , present ours.
A p a r t from the fact that A d a ir h im self had made or w as in
volved in the m aking o f several o f the m any films about the
N avajo, w e had another consideration. We felt that if w e were,
in a sense, to compete w ith the N a v a jo students in m ak ing a film,
w e w o u ld u n d e rm in e much o f w h a t w e w e re tr y in g to do. I f w e
w e re seen p h o tog ra p h in g in the co m m u n ity w e w o u ld be dem o n
strating w h a t w e thought appropriate to photograph, what we
thought in teresting or im portant. Students might at the very
least tend to photograph the kinds o f things w e photographed,
th in k in g that the teacher k n ow s w h at is right. T h e students
w e re sure to w a n t to see ou r rushes along with theirs w h e n film
w as returned from the lab. We considered not s h o w in g ou r foot
age, say in g in effect that it w as not for them to see, that it was
secret. We rejected this plan for several reasons. First, w e just felt
u n com fortable asking them to open themselves to us w h ile w e
remained closed. Second, w e felt that refu sin g to show w h at w e
had shot w o u ld give the im pression to the students as well as the
co m m u n ity that w e w e re shooting unpleasant or bad things
about them things so bad that w e w o u ld n t show them to Nava-
jos. O bv iously, the choice w as not w h eth er w e should shoot and
not show the footage, but rather w h eth er w e should shoot at all.
I f w e made a film, w e could h ard ly not sho w the ra w footage, and
w e w ou ld thus im pose not o n ly ou r choice o f subject matter, but
also ou r method o f organization o f the material. E v e n our u ned
ited footage w ou ld teach them a great deal about ou r rules.
T o test ou r notion that the N a va jo s saw events som ew hat
differently fro m us, w e decided to observe Susie photographing
a sequence o f her w e a v in g film. W o rth s wife, w h o is neither a
film m aker nor ph otographer but w h o had studied w e a v in g both
in Finland and the U nited States, was asked to be another ob
server. She w as instructed to sit quietly near the site o f the
w e av in g and to w rite dow n things S u sies mother was doing
that w ould explain h ow a N a v a jo w e av er w en t about it, as
W o rth s notes put it, avoiding at that stage w ord s like structure
and organize.
T h e particular activity that day was the m oth ers preparation
(even this is ou r w a y o f stating it) o f the loom and the wool before
actually s trin gin g the w a r p on the loom. S h e had to rem ove the
loom from the hogan, c a rry it outdoors w h e re the s trin ging o f the
w a rp w ou ld be done, arrange all the materials o f loom and wool
in their proper order, position and then put on the w arp, tying
all the pro per knots, and so on.
R e m o v in g the loom from the hogan seemed an important task
to Mrs. Worth. She noted h ow the various parts o f the loom w ere
taken apart, marked so they could be put back together again and
placed on the ground outside. She pa rticularly recorded certain
distances which, she felt, S u s ie s mother c a re fu lly measured
between various parts o f the loom placed loosely on the ground.
T h e w ork took about tw o hours to com plete and w as reflected in
Mrs. W o rth s notes by over seven ty separate acts w hich had
seemed im p ortan t in the process.
A lta s activity also seemed important to Worth, w h o k n ew v ery
little about w eaving. T h e expression on S u s ie s m oth ers face, her
intently deliberate actions, the effort o f c a rry in g ten-foot-high
wooden supports out o f the hogan, the care in placing everyth in g
just right, all conveyed to him that something important in the
w e av in g process w as going on. A lth o u gh Worth co u ld n t have
named the steps involved he felt that most o f what Mrs. Worth
recorded should be included in a film about weaving.
Susie photographed none o f these preparations. She had the
camera in her hand all the time but evidently felt that nothing
im portant for her film was go in g on. She started ph otographin g
after the loom was arranged outdoors, after all the measurements
had been taken and only wh en the actual strin g in g o f the w a rp
began.
T h e w a r p is stru n g by passing the wool over the top and
bottom supports o f the loom, ty in g a knot at the top for each pass.
Sin ce the w a r p is composed o f several hundred threads, it is a
h igh ly repetitive job. Mrs. W orth noted the type o f knot used and
then s im p ly waited for the next step. Susie, h ow ever, made
thirty-seven cademes o f this process, p a y in g particular attention
to the motions o f her m oth ers hands as she passed the ball of
w ool over the wooden supports in a sort of flippin g hand-over-
hand motion w ith the ball o f wool passing from one hand to the
other. T h e r e w e re m any close-ups o f the n u m b er o f knots tied
and the exact w a y they w e re done. T h e sequence in the final film
show ed the entire w a r p b eing put on with all the knots show n
clearly and often.
H ad w e been photographing this scene for ou r records, we
w o u ld have started at the point w h ere the loom was being dis
mantled in the hogan. Susie w ou ld have noted that w e thought
certain scenes w e re im portant, and further w ou ld have noted
that certain acts w ere shot in close-up or long shot. She would
have heard the length o f time that the camera ran and such an
authoritative exam ple m ight well have altered her o w n design
for what to shoot, how long to shoot, and w h ere to shoot it from.
It is, h ow ever, not certain that w e could in fact have influenced
her or that e v e ry th in g w e did w o u ld have become a model for
her. In a later chapter w e w ill describe an attempt to instruct
some o f the students to take the kind o f footage that w e thought
w as right. A t the time, h ow ever, w e decided that w e ourselves
w ould not try to docum ent exten sively the N a v a jo filmmaking
w ith ou r o w n motion pictures. Instead, w e used still cameras
s om ew hat m ore freely, particu larly in the beginning. Because
some o f the objections w e mentioned about film ing held true for
stills also, w e used stills on ly in such places as w e re o bviously not
goin g to be filmed by N avajo , such as the early ch apter meeting
before the project began. In the later weeks o f the project, wh en
our students had begun to develop their o w n style and w ere
pretty clear about what they w anted to do, w e took footage o f
their interaction with us, at w o rk in the ed iting rooms, du rin g
some o f the in te rview sessions, and du rin g the last weeks o f their
ow n shooting. We felt it im portan t to s h o w h ow the editing
rooms looked, and h ow they w e re set up, as well as how the
students looked w o rk in g with the equipment. A fte r their films
w e re finished and the project w as over, Chalfen took some foot
age o f the c o m m u n ity itself.
'I'he teaching process continued for tw o months w ith the last
several weeks devoted m ain ly to in te rv ie w in g the students about
their almost completed and com pleted w ork. D u r in g these tw o
months the N a v a jo students made seven tw en ty-m in u te black
and wh ite films and five small one- and two-m inute films. T h e y
w e re all silent. M ost o f the students felt that sound w as not
needed, that the films explained everyth in g. A 1 talked about us
ing his poem as a sound track, but d id n t get to ex pressin g any
specific desire about it.
These films then can be considered the first filmic utterances
or expressions prepared by another culture, in w hich the teach
ing input, the method o f adapting to a n e w com m unication
mode, and the resultant film structure, w e re observed and
analyzed systematically.
 Chapter

7
The Community Attends
the World Premiere

B y J u l y 24 all the films, except the one being made by S u sies

mother, w e re finished. Several days before, the T so s ie sisters had
approached C h alfen and asked him if it w ou ld be possible to
show the films to the entire co m m u n ity. It w o u ld be a great
idea, w e said, if y o u think it is a good th in g. T h e students,
except for M ik e A n derson , w e re unanim ous. M ike had reserva
tions but was persuaded by the group. T h e students made a
poster an no u n c in g World Premiere N avajo Films. It gave the time
and place and concluded, all invited. T h e notice w as posted on
the T r a d i n g Post door and the students proceeded to prepare the
school d in in g room for the show ing.
A p p ro x im a t e ly sixty N a v a jo show ed up on J u l y 25, in cluding
some children. T h e r e was the same info rm ality as at other
N a v a jo gatherings such as sings or chapter meetings: people

Much of the research on the response of the community to the films was by
Richard Chalfen. This material is more fully developed in his masters thesis.
came and went, mothers nursed their infants, and the older ch il
dren played in the aisles. S m a ll children ran in fron t o f the
projector, putting their faces, tongues or hands in front o f the
lens. Som e children tried to grab the ray o f light c o m in g from the
projector and show ed frustration when they co u ld n t quite hold
onto it. All o f this casual behavior surprised W orth, w ho was
accustomed to silent movie and theater audiences. But the ac
tivity and conversation did not distract the N a va jo s from paying
close attention to w hat was h appe n in g on the screen. T h e adults
accepted the ch ild re n s behavior and seemed to take the occa
sional d im m in g or disappearance o f the screen image as part o f
the perform ance. T h e r e w as laughter d u rin g the scene in Antelope
Lake w h en the boy washed his clothes (the actor con tinu ally had
to hike up his beltless pants), m ore laughter w h en the w e a v e r s
and silversm ith s faces w e re sh o w n at close range (probably out
o f shock), and loud laughter w h e n Sam Y azzie faced the camera.
But on the whole, the audience w as quiet and attentive. A fte r the
show ing, A d a ir (through an interpreter) in te rview ed nine of the
adults w h o attended, five w om en and four men. We w ere espe
cially interested in what the films said to the in terview ees, and
h ow they evaluated them.
T h e films w e re generally liked because they conveyed info rm a
tion. Som e typical responses w ere: Yes, that certainly teaches a
lot o f good things about w e a v in g , I think they all b rin g out
good points as far as learning is co ncerned, and . . . there is a
lot o f teaching behind this w o r k . T h e films concerned with
crafts w e re h igh ly valued because they w e re related to the eco
nomic w e lfa re o f the com m u n ity . O n e o f the respondents said she
like the films because they taught

how to do these things. I think that is what the film is intended

for. T h e same is true o f silversmithing. T h is should also be taught
to the children.
O thers responded:

1 his is the type of work that some of the people are supporting
their families . . . so it is good and a good thing to know.

Perhaps the Navajo rugs would bring a little more money from
now on . . White people never give much money for anything.
M aybe this is w h y they want to show them and how the rugs are
made.

It was showin g how to make silver crafts which will bring more
money and will be on demand.

J o h n n y s film s h o w in g h ow a shallow well is made was liked

because it teaches h ow to fix w a ter so you can alw ay s have clean
w a ter to use, and the T s o sie sisters The Spirit o f the N avajo was
liked because H e [the m edicine man] did not make any mistake.
H e perform ed the ce rem on y like he should.
In the nine interview s there w e re tw o instances in w hich the
N a va jos made interesting rem arks about their reasons for not
understand ing certain films (Intrepid Shadows and Shallow Well).
Both films w e re som ew hat outside the fra m e w o rk o f N a va jo
cognition: Intrepid Shadows because o f its co m plex form, and Shal
low Well because o f its nontraditional subject matter.
When asked, Does that film tell you a n yth in g? one respond
ent, a 44-year-old w o m an with one yea r o f schooling, w h o said
in the same in terview I never been to a movie b efore, replied:

I cannot understand English. It was telling all about it in English

which I couldnt understand.

A n oth er response was:

Th at picture was also being explained in English. T h e reason I

didnt get the meaning is because I can t understand English.
 N o n e o f the films, o f course, had an y sound at all. S in ce these
in terview s w e re conducted in N a va jo , w e d id n t see the trans
lated tapes until w e left the reservation, and have not been able
to question ou r inform ants fu rth e r along these lines. W e can on ly
speculate that in a situation such as w e are describing, wh en
someone sees a film he doesn t understand, it seems reasonable
(not on ly to the subject in this case but also to the N a v a jo inter
preter) to assume it is in a language different from his. In this
case, since w e spoke E n glish and o u r respondent d id n t, she may
have assumed that w h e n she d id n t understand the film that it in
effect spoke in E n glish even th ough it w as a silent film.
W hile the in te rview s w e re all too b rief and sampled too small
a g ro u p from the co m m u n ity , th ey did tend to indicate that the
camera in the hands o f the N a v a jo w ou ld indeed serve to reveal
their value system, since the values o f the individu al filmmakers
w ere, w ith the exceptions noted, com m u nicated to the nine v ie w
ers. Ethel A lb e r t s statement (1956) about the N a v a jo value system
[it is] em p iric ally based, pra gm a tically phrased, and geared to
consequences. . . . characterizes the films as well as the values
o f the v ie w e rs w h o judged them.
 PART THREE

Chapter

8
Analysis

U p to this point w e have been concerned with describ ing specific

procedures and events in the field. We presented an outline of
w ork already done, and a description o f a set o f interrelated
problems in com m unications and anthropology w h ich led us to
the w ork described. N o w our task is to analyze the data and relate
them to the problem s under study. T h e procedure and events in
the field are critically important, in ou r opinion. It is not on ly the
films that will be analyzed, but the films in relation to the filming
behavior w e observed: patterns o f N a va jo social and cognitive
activities as ou r students related them to their process o f making
films. We w ill consider the films conceived, photographed, and
edited by N avajo s in the light o f ou r field notes w hich recorded
h ow we, ou r students, and the co m m u n ity behaved d u rin g the
project. We will also refer to transcribed in terview s cove rin g the
N a v a jo students conceptions, difficulties, and achievements d u r
ing the filmmaking, as well as their explanations o f the w a y they
edited and completed their films.
O u r analysis draw s upon several disciplines: com m unication,
anthropology, linguistics, and cogn itive psychology. H y m es
(1967, 1970) has recently dw elt on the theoretical problems of
interdisciplinary research, using linguistics as a conceptual para
digm. H e co rrectly points out that the problem is not one o f
com bining a body o f th eory in an thropology with a body o f
theory in another discipline and thus b eing in te rd isc ip lin ary .
Rather it is a question o f certain problem s dem an din g new theo
ries, w h ich (in ou r case) are not anthropological alone or com-
m unicational alone. What is needed in ou r case is what Worth
has called a theory o f Codes in C o n te x t, or w h at H y m e s (1964)
has called the E th n o g r a p h y o f C o m m u n ica tio n .
While ou r analysis is not presented as part o f a formal theory
o f codes in context, w e did have such a theory in mind as an
organizing principle for our analysis.
O u r analysis will be concerned with the fo llo w in g kinds of
questions: (1) Who, in what culture, with what technology, with
what instruction, and in what conditions or context, can com
municate by means o f motion pictures? (2) A m o n g those w h o can
com m unicate by means of movies, how do m em bers o f some
specific cu ltu re organize their com m unication? Is there a discern
ible pattern or code in the structure o f their movies? I f so, (3) is
it present in such a w a y that others in their o w n or other cultures
can understand or infer m eaning from their patterned film pro
ductions? (4) I f persons in d iffering cultures can produce film
productions that are patterned and allow com m u nication to take
place between filmers and film view ers, what is the relation be
tween the code and the culture in w h ich films are produced and
understood?
T h e s e are the sort o f questions that a theory o f codes in context
w ould have to elucidate, and w e will deal with them in our
analysis. We have obviou sly not been able to find definitive an
swers, but ou r analysis should provide several valuable tools to
w a rd such answers. First, there is a need to stimulate m ore w ork
in this area and this report presents the first exposition o f a
methodology designed to assist the developm ent o f a theory o f
codes in context. Second, this report docum ents a large range of
findings w hich make it possible to begin com parative w o rk across
cultures using a com parable methodology. D espite the difficulty
o f gen eralizing beyond our N a v a jo experience, enough w o rk has
been done by us and by ou r students to make possible some
com parisons between N avajos, black teenagers, w h ite teenagers
and other groups. In a co n clu d in g chapter w e w ill present data
from other com parable research that makes it clear that certain
aspects o f film ing and film m aking differ from g ro u p to group. We
can see that persons in different cultures approach the filming
situation differently and make films that differ on several im p or
tant parameters.
It is therefore im portant to recognize that ou r analysis is not
meant to describe only N a v a jo films and filming, although we
stick ve ry closely in this study to observations o f the N avajo. O u r
w ork is intended as a paradigm in both a theoretical and a metho
dological sense o f h ow to o bserve and com pare the w a y groups
go about co m m u n ica tin g in the film mode.
It is also im portant to realize that once a method o f teaching
people in other cultures to make films is articulated and people
o f a different cu ltu re prove able to make films amenable to a n aly
sis, a great variety o f com plex and controllable possibilities be
come available for research.
A th eory o f codes in context such as that u n d e rly in g what we
are doing w o u ld suggest testing along hom ogeneous or hetero
geneous linguistic grou ps or s im ila rly divided cultural gro u ps to
see if the co d in g and pattern in g o f films follo w broad cultural,
perform an ce or linguistic patterns, and w h at their relationship
is to each other and to film.
A n o th er broad area o f research suggested b y o u r findings is
that o f universals in film co m m unication. T h a t is, do the
N a v a jo films as a g ro u p s h o w sim ilar patterns and do they show
patterns sim ilar to films made in other cultures? C on versely ,
w h ere do the N a v a jo films differ from one other, and w h ere do
they differ as a g ro u p fro m films made in other cultures?
T h e N a v a jo learned to put discrete records o f image events
into a sequence w h ich they assumed w ou ld be m ean in gfu l to
someone w h o saw their film. It is as if they had an innate sense
that visual events in sequence have meaning, and more, that other
people ce rta in ly people like themselves w o u ld understand the
meaning they im plied w h en th ey chose the events they photo
graphed in the w a y th ey photographed them and in the w a y they
organized them into a film. T h e fact that th ey stru ng these image
events together in a specific w a y different from the w a y w e
photograph and sequence events seems to us much less im portant
than the fact that they did in fact string them together and as
sumed that someone else w o u ld understand. T h e im portant u n i
versal o f film may be that w e k n o w that images in sequence
have meaning.
Let us state it another w a y . I f w e w e re to start w r itin g in
Finnish, most readers o f this m an u script w o u ld not understand.
T h e y w ou ld , h ow eve r, assume w e w e re w r it in g in another lan
guage. F o r ou r part, w e too w o u ld assume that m an y w ould not
understand us. A n unspoken agreem ent in ou r concept o f verbal
language is that a variety o f languages exist and that ou r ability
to speak and to understand all o f them is limited.
O n the other hand, if w e make a film or a N a v a jo makes a film,
w e assume that w e all can m ore or less understand it. W hether
or not it is true, w e so m eh o w do assume that e v ery o n e can u n der
stand a movie. A movie is a m o vie, w e seem to im p ly, and the
babble o f tongues do e sn t ch ange ou r intuition. T h a t notion is
now open to testing, u sin g the materials w e have gathered. O ne
can find out, given the statements by the N a v a jo about what they
meant to con vey, w h e th e r in fact others can in fer the same m ean
ing from the film. O n e can find out h ow much was conveyed and
more im p ortan tly w h o, and fro m w h a t cultures, w ith w h at train
ing, can make inferences fro m a film sim ilar to those im plied by
the filmmaker.
A n o th e r strikin g aspect o f ou r research w as that, although w e
found it c o m p ara tive ly easy to teach people o f another culture to
make a movie, they did not necessarily use it in the same w a y that
w e did, s h o w the same sort o f interest in it, or seem likely to
continue to use it and find a place in their culture for it. T h e most
difficult th in g to accept about ou r P ine S p rin g s experience was
ou r feeling that w h en w e left P ine Sp rin gs, so w ou ld all ideas
about the use o f movies by the Navajos. It w as not, after all, as
if w e w e re teaching graduate students, w h o w e re seeking k n o w l
edge and techniques to fit into their plans for a career.
W e felt that w h en w e pulled out of Pine S p rin g s after tw o
months the innovation w o u ld stop. T h e r e is good evidence that
w e w e re right. T h e social and econom ic structure o f the Pine
S p rin g s co m m u n ity was not geared to support this innovation.
E ach o f the filmmakers was at a dead end, w ith no o pportu n ity
to do an yth in g more w ith what he had learned. So, w h ile the
motivation and ability w e re there, w e too w e re there as a stim u
lant to the innovation process and as an econom ic resource. In
1970 A d a ir in terview ed J o h n n y N e ls o n to learn what had hap
pened in the co m m u n ity after each student had received the print
o f his film. T o the best o f his k n o w led ge he is the o n ly one w ho
has sho w n his films publicly.
Stated in another w a y , if J o h n n y N elson , as a local political
leader, w an ted to make fu rth e r use o f film for the developm ent
o f his com m u n ity , he w o u ld have to seek financial as well as
psychological support from some outside source. C apital for the
use o f film at P in e S p rin g s w o u ld not be available in that c o m m u
nity. I f film is to become a functional part o f the life o f the N a va jo
themselves, it w ill have to be funded, at least initially, from some
outside source.
L ik e w ise we, as outsiders, w o u ld have to gain econom ic and
political support if w e w e re to attempt to test the feasibility and
functional use o f this innovation to the tribe as a whole. I f such
an attempt could be made, it is predicted that this mode o f com
munication w o u ld be taken up in m an y parts o f the reservation.
T h is estimate is based on (1) the feasibility o f teaching N avajos
the technology o f film m aking in a co m m u n ity such as Pine
S p rin gs; (2) the on go in g interest o f the N a va jo leadership in m od
ern modes o f com m unication; and (3) the desire of the tribe to
com m unicate to the remote areas on the reservation those meth
ods o f developm ent that have proved practical at W in d o w Rock.
We can report that teaching film m aking to the N a v a jo and to
members o f other cu ltu re gro u ps in ou r society w as easy. T h e
N a va jo seemed to k n o w what films w e re even those w ho said
they n ever saw one and they learned to make them qu ickly and
easily. T h e y learned to make films much m ore easily, for e x a m
ple, than w e learned to speak N a va jo . It is clear, after this e x p e ri
ence, that the N a v a jo learned to express themselves m ore fluently
through film after one month o f instruction than m em bers o f one
linguistic co m m u n ity learn to express themselves in the verbal
language o f another.
It is this that strikes us as m ore rem arkable than all the differ
ences that w e shall report betw een the w a y w e make films and
the w a y the N a v a jo make films. N o t on ly the N a v a jo but all the
people black, N a va jo , you ng, old with w h o m w e have w orked
seem able to learn this method o f co m m unication readily. W h y
should people o f a cu ltu re so different from ours or w ith such
different tra in in g learn a n ew and com plex mode o f co m m u n ica
tion so quickly? C ould it be that a concept sim ilar to the Chom-
skian v ie w o f an innate deep structure o f language operates for
the visual mode o f com m u n ication also? C h o m s k y s v ie w seeks to
explain the almost m iraculous ability o f children to have mas
tered at tw o years o f age the com plex g ra m m a r o f speech by
su ggesting that the hum an brain has so evolved over the millenia
that it is neurolo gically functional to learn a com plex system of
rules relating verbal signs to each other and to the outside w orld
to w hich they refer. 1'he theory suggests that this structure is the
same for all verbal language, and that specific languages are varia
tions or transform ations from a more basic deep structure. It
seems to us not at all unreasonable to assume that just as children
have internalized a com plete and com plex system of rules which
can generate origin al verbal utterances w h ose m ean ing is shared
within a culture, so have the N a va jo or others w h o have never
made films and w h o m w e can m etaph orically consider as film
children internalized some set o f rules w h ich m ay also be in
nate, w h ich may be based on rules o f perception and cognition
that are neurolo gically functional, and w hich make learn ing to
construct film utterances possible, easy and natural.
It should be noted here that ou r use o f the w o rd lan g uage
reflects not o n ly an academic difficulty w e have hedged and put
quotation marks around it th rou g h o u t but reflects a bias in our
ve ry use o f sym b olic form s in com m u n ication o f all kinds. We
sim ply do not have a good w o rd for the stru ctu re inherent in
messages in different modes. W e do not have the right w ord s to
talk about film, dance, facial expression, body positions, and com
m u nicative patterns or structures that are not verbal or that
accom pany verbal co m m unication. L a n g u a g e is the w o rd we
use w h en w e w ant to say that com m u n ication has occu rred in
any mode. T h u s w e find that w e talk o f the language o f dance,
the language o f gesture, the language o f art, the language o f film,
and even the language o f poetry. We are o n ly n o w b egin n in g to
separate speaking from lan g uage and to make the kinds of
distinctions w h ich in m any w a y s the ubiquity o f the w o rd lan
gu a ge has prevented ou r recognizing. It is o n ly recently that a
phrase like the language o f spea k in g, re fe rrin g to the pattern,
code, or even g ra m m a r o f speaking, has becom e m eaningful.
We will con tin ue to use the w o rd lan g uage because e u p h em
isms for it are not really clear enough, but w e w ou ld like our
readers to k n o w that w e are concerned with m ore than the com
m o n ly accepted ideas o f verbal gram m ar. We are interested in
more than the rules o f gram m atical utterances or in so-called
correctness. In fact, at this point in the developm ent o f ou r un
derstand in g o f film or in the developm ent o f film as a mode of
com m u n ication, the notion o f gram m aticality doesn t make
m uch sense. We are concerned w ith patterns o f usage in ou r film
language, with w h y a person makes one film cademe rather
than another or w h y he makes one particular cademe at one time
and not at another time or in another situation. We are concerned
with what things he chooses to say film ically and w ith how he
says it, so that w e m ay discover the rules he is unconsciously
following.

T h e W a y W e In te n d to A n a ly z e O u r D a ta

In order to delineate some o f the differences w e noted, w e will

need to describe certain elements o f the context (the filming
behavior) as well as o f the code (the film). It is useful, therefore,
to think o f ou r w o rk as the report o f observations in these tw o
areas, code and context, and to consider (1) the differences w e
noted as reflecting the different contexts in w h ich w e and the
N a v a jo make films and (2) the consequences o f those differences
on the resultant pattern o f film.
T h e context might be defined as those dim ensions w h ich ex
plain some im portant aspect o f the specific situation within
w hich the films w e re produced. A m o n g them are the following.
(1) The learn in g situation com posed o f the students previous
level o f learning as w ell as w h at w e taught them, and including
the specific arrangem ents and methods under w h ich they
learned. T h i s w o u ld have to include the w a y the N a v a jo co n
ceived o f learning, its place in their value system in general, how
they placed learn ing film w ith in their general notion o f learning,
and how th ey structured their o w n learn ing situation in relation
to our teaching methods. (2) T h e choice o f students the w a y s
and reasons that w e had for choosing certain students, and the
w a y s they devised for co n tro llin g ou r choices. (3) T h e students
choice o f actors for their films the kinds o f activities and talents
they felt actors in their films should have, as well as the social
relations they felt it necessary for them to have w ith their actors.
(4) T h e choice o f film subjects or themes the kind o f subject
matter they thought appropriate to make a film about, and the
kind o f event they felt appropriate to photograph to express an
idea or theme. U n d e r this aspect o f context w e w ou ld include
their awareness o f the c o m m u n ity s feelings about a p pro priate
ness o f certain themes or events b eing described or show n in a
film. (5) T h e i r method o f w orkin g , both technical and perceptual
h ow they handled equipm ent, what kind they preferred,
w h eth er they literally saw c o m fo rta b ly or in the same w a y w e did
w h en looking through view finders or vie w e rs or at projected
images. (6) T h e interrelation o f the film m aking and the co m m u
nity. H e re w e w ou ld be con cerned w ith an aly zin g the social
controls and freedoms su rro u n d in g filming, filmmaking, and
learning film w ith in this particular culture.
T h e second area o f analysis includes those elements w hich
relate to the code the film itself, its description, and the rules
or patterns that m ight be applied to gen eratin g or prod ucing
w h at w e or they w ou ld call a N a v a jo film. T h e areas considered
at this stage o f code analysis are: (1) T h e narrative sty le o f the
films, related to the m yth ic and sym b o lic form s o f the culture.
H e re w e w ou ld be concerned w ith h ow a N a v a jo feels it neces
sary to tell a film story, and w h at specific structures he alw ays,
or in certain situations, em ploys. (2) T h e syntactic organization
and sequencing o f events and units o f e v en tin g. H e re w e
w o u ld be concerned with h ow an event, an act, or a part o f a story
or theme is divided into units o f cademes and edemes. We w ould
be concerned with the rules o f sequ encing they w a y edemes are
joined w h ich edemes or cademes need som ething in b etw een ,
or can go together. We w ou ld w a n t to know if certain edemes
cannot go with others, are optional, or must be preceded or fol
lowed by some other event. (3) T h e cultural, perceptual, and
cognitive restriction influencing either semantic or syntactic o r
ganization and structure. H e re w e w an t to s h o w not h ow they
see, in a biological sense, but w h at they feel they ought to see in
a cultural sense. C an certain cademes be taken but not used as
edemes? A r e there cultural restrictions about taking or using
close-ups, long shots, or m edium shots o f specific events, in spe
cific situations? (4) T h e relation between the structure o f their
verbal language and the structure o f their films. H e re w e want
to relate specific properties o f the N a v a jo language its concern
with motion, for ex am ple to specific w a y s in w hich N avajo
speakers structure their films.

We have decided to build our analysis around a presentation

of the differences betw een ou r films and the N a v a jo films on the
level o f code. M a n y o f the areas delineated above in the first area
of analysis have been discussed in previous chapters and can best
be further discussed in connection with the specific films or parts
of films w e w ill be d escrib in g on a coding level. T h e areas o f
context (1 to 6) and code (1 to 4) are in truth necessary intellectual
distinctions w h ich w e hope can be kept in mind. T h e process of
making a film, h ow ever, is an on goin g one. A specific person
living in a specific w a y makes a specific film. H e doesnt decide
that certain problem s are code problem s or context problem s any
more than a child speaking makes conscious decisions about s y n
tax or semantics wh en he w an ts to tell daddy about seeing a red
fire engine. T h e process o f d escrib in g how people make films
seems in some w a y similar. T h in g s get mixed up in the describ
ing; more than one level o f analysis is necessary to describe what
on another level looks like one event.
We w ill therefore talk about specific films and specific edemes
and cademes, h ow specific students photographed and edited
them. In the process, w e will b rin g to bear ou r observations on
the context w hich influenced them. We will not talk about the
sim ilarities betw een the w a y the N a v a jo make films and the w a y
people in other cultures make them. We have already mentioned
that the w a y so m any different grou ps make films understood by
so m any others is one o f the most significant findings in our
research in this area.
We are concerned in this book p rim a rily w ith tw o things: to
present a method o f teaching people to make films s h o w in g us
h ow they see their w orld , and to present a w a y o f a nalyzin g these
films in their cultural context as a com m u nicative code.
 Chapter

9
Narrative Style

First, let us consider that dim ension o f the code w h ich w e are
calling narrative style. O n e element o f it might be thought o f as
those events in daily life w h ich are im portant enough to show in
a film about any subject. O r co nversely, those events, irrespective
of subject, that are a lw a y s part o f a film discourse for the Navajo.
F o r exam ple, wh en w e tell a story in film it is usually about a
single person or a pair o f people a hero and heroine w h o try
to accom plish som ething against some adversity or odds. We
almost a lw a y s include some aspect o f love, o f a girl, a man, a
wife, a husband, a mother or father, and often o f flag or apple pie.
We must s h o w h ow it comes out at the end, w h o w in s and w ho
loses. We even have institutions in H o lly w o o d supported by
national sanctions that act as arbiters so that a bad man doesn t
w in in the end. O u r cu ltu re k no w s what m ay and m ay not be
show n and what must be sho w n if the audience is not to be
shocked or confused. We k n o w h ow films begin and end, and how
to tell w h at a film is about fro m the w a y the film is made.
H o w do N a va jo s construct a film? What elements must it have?
What elements doesnt it have? H o w does it begin? What are the
im portant things to include, no matter w h at the story is about?
In some w a y s this kind o f analysis calls to mind the analysis of
myth and folktales w h ich has long been a part o f anthropological
and hum anistic research. O ne searches for com m on themes and
com mon relations or structures between thematic events. In
stead, h ow ever, o f using verbal utterances as ou r sole datum, w e
are using w h at might be called visual utterances.
A lth o u gh w e do not intend at this point to present a complete
structural analysis o f the films, o u r aim at this level is to begin

with a [film] which has not been chosen arbitrarily; rather it has
been selected because of an intuitive feeling that it is promising
and productive . . . and establish for each sequence the group of
its transformations either as they are manifested within the [film]
itself or as they are elucidated in isomorphic elements of sequences
taken from a number of [films] belonging to the same population.
(Lvi-Strauss 1964, with the word film in brackets substituted for
the word myth that appeared in the original.)

A n a ly z in g the films o f a cu ltu re different from ours on the level

o f narrative, m yth, or tale is a task for w hich f e w precedents exist,
and o u r attem pt is m e rely a starting point. A g a in Lvi-Strauss
expresses m a n y o f o u r hopes and fears w h e n he says:

Mythical analysis is very much like Penelopes task. Each step

forward offers a new hope which hangs on the solution of a new
difficulty . . . [myth (and also film)] is no more than an imaginary
phenomenon implicit in the effort of interpretation. It will be
quite enough if we can have the more modest assurance of having
left difficult problems in a less bad state than they inhabited when
we began working with them. . . . Even a partial grammar or a
sketch of a grammar represents a valuable acquisition where an
unfamiliar language is concerned. We do not have to wait for a
tally of a theoretically limitless series of events in order to see
syntactical processes at work, especially since syntax consists of
the body of rules which governs the engendering of these events.
(Lvi-Strauss 1964)
 I f w e con sid er the ev en ts that L vi-S tra u ss mentions as the
im age events w e w ill be discussing, his w ord s reflect ou r attitude
to w ard the f o llo w in g analysis.

W a lk in g

A lm o st all the films made by the N a va jo s p o rtra y w h a t to

m em bers o f ou r cu ltu re seems to be an in ordinate am ount o f
walking. A s w e observed the films b eing made, excessive cademes
o f w a lk in g seemed to us clear exam ples o f w r o n g filmmaking.
In J o h n n y N e ls o n s film on silversm ithin g, for exam ple, most
o f the footage he used is com posed o f edemes o f the silversmith
w a lk in g to get his materials. In his fifteen-minute film almost ten
minutes are spent s h o w in g the silversm ith as he w alks to the old
m in e , w alk s to find his silver nuggets, w alks back to the hogan,
w alks again to find sandstone for the mold, w alk s to his hogan
again, and so on (photo 32).
In Susie B e n a l l y s film about a N a v a jo w eaver, the same p ro
portion o f tim e is spent in w alk in g. In a tw e n ty -m in u te film,
S u s ie s m o th er spends fifteen m inutes w a lk in g to gather vegeta
bles for dye, w a lk in g to collect roots for soap, w a lk in g to shear
the wool, and w a lk in g to and fro m the hogan betw een all activi
ties (photo 28-29). H e r son w alks w ith the sheep and in one spot
rides his horse a w a y from and to the hogan to indicate the passage
o f time.
In A 1 C la h s film, the mask o f the Yeib ech ai w alks and w alks
search ing for the tu rn in g wheel. T h e in tru d er is sh ow n w alking.
T h e r e are a n u m b er o f long sequences o f peop les feet just w a lk
ing across the landscape. T h e r e is the long shot o f A l s shadow
w a lk in g across the field. A g a in , in a ten-m inute film, close to
three-quarters o f the footage is co ncerned w ith w a lk in g (photos
4 8 - 55 )-
T h e T s o s ie sisters also show ed their gra n d fa th e r w a lk in g for
the ga th e rin g o f roots, herbs, sandstone, chalk, and other materi
als he would use for the ceremony they were planning (photos
37-38). Although most of the action in the film occurs indoors and
sitting in one place, they also managed to use a great deal of
walking footage.
In the interviews, when we asked them what they were going
to shoot the next day, or what they had shot that morning or
just before, they described the shots in great detail. For exam
ple:

So I decided I take a picture o f it approaching the cornfield the

old road that used to go to the cornfield. 1 take a picture o f that and
just as I approaching the cornfield, and then when 1 came to the
fence, 1 took the fence, and then to show this was a field, this was
a cornfield, and then after we got into the field then I went out
there . . . I had my little helper [a young boy Joh n n y hired to act
for him] walking here, looking over this field, then he stood there
a minute and looked down, picked up some dirt like that [crum
bling motion with his hands] to see how dry it was. Kick up the
dirt [motion of scuffing with foot] like that. Then I cut that out
right there and then I turn my lens on to three [3 inch] which was
the closest, the close-up picture. Him kicking up the dirt. I took
a picture of that. Then I turn in back to the wider lens.

It w a s difficu lt fo r us to u n d e rs ta n d that this scene w a s a scene

full o f w a l k in g . N o t e the w o r d s w e h ave italicized approaching,
came, w alking. A s w e listened to J o h n n y ta lk in g , these seem ed to
be m e r e ly c o n n e c tiv e s o f little co n se q u e n ce , jo in in g the actions
o r im a ge s he w a s t a lk in g about. B u t w h e n J o h n n y says, I take
a p ic tu re o f it a p p r o a c h in g the c o rn fie ld , the it re fers to the
a p p ro ac h , and the footage J o h n n y took w a s o f the b o y w a lk in g
to w a rd a field a lo n g the road. W h e n he says, I ca m e to the
fe n ce , he d o e s n t m ean that w h e n he reached the fence, he
p h o tog ra p h e d it, but rather that he took a n o th er shot o f the boy
w a l k in g to w a r d the fence and then had the b o y w a lk alon gsid e
it, m o v in g the ca m e ra a lo n g the fence.
A s the N a v a jo w e r e w o r k i n g and te llin g us about th eir films,
w e failed to h ear or to u n d e rstan d fu lly the im p o rtan c e o f the
word s re fe rrin g to w alking. It w as on ly after seeing the footage
that w e realized h ow much w a lk in g there was. A s w e first saw
it, in the screenin g o f the film as it came back from the lab, we
w e re upset. W orth put in his notes, W hen they d o n t k now what
to do they s h o w som ebody taking a w a lk . A lth o u gh one o f our
purposes in do in g the research was to discover an y differences in
the han d ling o f images and sym b o ls between us and th em ,
it took us some time to see h o w d eeply the concept of w a lkin g
w as em bedded in their w a y o f seeing and o f s h o w in g the world,
and h ow deliberately they planned and used images o f w alking.
It w as o n ly after stu d y in g ou r in te rview tapes and field notes
that w e noticed the frequen t repetitions o f phrases like mother
goes looking fo r, then he goes looking fo r, then she goes,
m y b rother goes, he approaches, he comes to.
We realized afte rw a rd s that in listening to their descrip tions
o f w h at they w e re goin g to do, w e had screened out w h at to our
thought system w e re mere connectives. We paid attention to
what was im portant to us. We w e re looking for m y th s and
n arratives havin g to do w ith old legends, silver mines, etc. N o t
until w e saw the films, analyzed ou r in te rview materials, and
w e n t back to the literature on the N a v a jo did w e understand the
m yth ic qu ality o f w a lk in g as an act. F o r the N avajo , w a lk in g was
an im portant event in and o f itself and not just a w a y o f getting
som ew here. We expected the film m akers to cut out most o f the
w a lk in g footage but they d id n t. It was the least discarded foot
age. In qu estion ing them, it became clear that although they
d id n t verbalize it, w a lk in g w as a necessary elem ent to a N a va jo
telling a story about Navajos.
J o h n n y N e ls o n said to us on the thirteenth o f Ju n e, T h e n the
w a y the film is going to open its goin g to be Jo h n Baloo, hes
going to be w a lk in g and w a n d e rin g around those holes in the
grou n d w e re goin g to have the feelin g that hes alone, and its
v e ry hard to find what hes g o in g to find. F u r th e r in the same
interview , he tells us that w e d o n t see the face w e ll see the
silversm ith w a lk in g .
 In r e a d i n g th e N a v a j o m y t h s a n d s to rie s la te r w e w e r e s t r u c k
b y h o w , in m o s t N a v a j o m y t h s , th e n a r r a t o r s p e n d s m u c h o f h is
t im e d e s c r i b i n g th e w a l k i n g , th e l a n d s c a p e , a n d th e p la c e s h e
passes, t e l l i n g o n l y b r i e f l y w h a t to u s a r e p lo t lin e s.

D eer w e n t over there. T h e n , It is indeed true! he said wh en

he came ru n n in g back. A n d then Jack Rabbit also started ru n ning
off to that Coyote. T h e n , It is true indeed! he said as he also came
ru n n in g back and the D e e r again started over there. H e looked at
C oyote again. It is indeed true! he said as he too came ru n n in g
back.

T h e n , H o w about you? Y o u ru n over too! w as said to Prairie -

dog. A n d so he also ran over there. It is indeed true! he also said.
A n d then to C h ip m u n k , W hat about you? Y o u ru n o v e r there too.
It is quite true. H e has d ied , w a s said to him. A n d so he ran over
there too. ( S a p ir 1942)

O r, in th e N i g h t C h a n t :

. . . H a p p i l y I go forth
M y in t e rio r fe e lin g cold, m a y I w a lk .
N o lo n g e r sore, m a y I walk.
I m p e r v io u s to pain, m a y I w a lk .
W ith liv e ly fe e lin g s m a y I w a lk .
A s it used to be lo n g ago, m a y 1 w a lk .
H a p p i l y m a y I w a lk.
H a p p ily w ith abundant dark clouds, m ay I walk.
H a p p ily w ith abundant show ers, may I walk.
H a p p ily w ith abundant plants, m ay I walk.
H a p p ily on a trail o f pollen, m ay I walk.
H a p p ily m ay 1 walk.
B ein g as it used to be long ago, m ay I walk.
M a y it be beau tifu l before me.
M a y it be b eautiful beh in d me.
M a y it be b eau tifu l b elo w me.
M a y it be b eau tifu l above me.
M a y it be b ea u tifu l all aro u n d me.
In b eau ty it is finished.
( M a t t h e w s ipto)
Or again, from The Killing of Tracking Bear:

And then he started to go back [home]. He started to go back to

the summit o f Black Rock. He went back up to the summit of
Black Rock Encircled with Black. T h en he went back up to the
summit o f the Mountain Th at Lies on Another. He just took a look
at the place where he had done so. At noon today something took
place here, he thought.
And then, yonder across from there, on the summit o f Beautiful
Mountain, the Crystal fool lived. T h ere he was fed. He ate. When
he had eaten, he went back to his home on the summit o f Huerfane
Mountain w a y off yonder.
T hen he again started off to the east. He went there and back
in vain. T h ere were no monsters. He also went to the south and
back. T h ere were again no monsters. He also went to the west and
back. T h ere were no monsters. He also went to the north and
back. There were no monsters. He again went back to his home.
T ru ly there were no more monsters.
N o w here the story stops. N o w 1 have nothing more to tell.
(Matthews 1910)

A ll the film s but one ( w h ic h w e shall note later) d is p la y this

u n u su a l c o n c e n tr a t io n on im a g e s o f w a lk in g , not o n l y as an in
trin s ic part o f the N a v a j o n otion o f e v e n t in g , as can be seen in
the q u o tes above, but as a kin d o f p u n c tu a tio n to s eparate a c tiv i
ties. T h e m o th e r an d the s ilv e rs m ith , fo r e x a m p le , are a lw a y s
s h o w n w a l k i n g t o w a r d o r a w a y fro m the hogan to ind icate a
stru ctu ra l b rea k s o m e w h a t akin to phrase, p a ra g ra p h , o r ch a p ter
s tru ctu re . C o m p a r e T ra c k in g B e a r w ith A lta and Jo h n B aloo
(in the w e a v in g and silv e rs m ith films) w h o go to get roots and
back again, go to get s ilv e r and back again, go to light the fire and
back again. T h ro u g h o u t the films the actor goes and com es back,
and as in 'T ra c k in g B e a r , w h e n the g o in g stops, N o w the story
stop s. In S u s i e s film o f her m oth er, the film ends a b r u p tly (for
us) w h e n her m o th er holds up the finished rug. W e h a v e n t been
sh o w n m uch o f her m oth er w e a v in g the rug. That portion o f the
film s h o w ed o n ly the v e r y b e g in n in g o f w e a v in g and took o n ly
four or five minutes out o f tw en ty. S u sies film is rather a film o f
com ing and going. T h e actual w e a v in g is on ly barely started. But
the w a lkin g parts, of mother and fam ily, are finished. O ne can
almost hear Susie saying, N o w that y o u ve seen h ow 1 go and
come back in m aking m y rug, I have nothing more to tell. A fte r
the going and com ing, you see the ru g . A n d in the film in what
to us appears an abrupt cut w e see S u sies m other holding up
the finished rug. (In the co n clu d in g w ord s o f the Night Chant, In
beauty it is finished. ) T h e camera pans s lo w ly across it ( before
me . . . behind m e ) in a long shot and then in a close-up, and then
repeats the image with a shot o f another ru g held vertically on
which the camera pans up and d o w n (below me . . . above m e )
also in close-up and long shot.
Several people w h o have seen these films have com m ented that
it doesn t seem su rp risin g to have first films com posed chiefly of
walking. A ft e r all, they say, what do other b eginners do?
T h e y a lw a y s show people w a lk in g . T h e y also argue that w a lk
ing is used in avant-garde films like those b y A n ton ion i to show
upset, lassitude, or general qualities such as the passage o f time.
Several facts, h ow ever, tend to strengthen our conviction that
w alkin g in N a v a jo films is used uniquely. First, w h en w a lk in g is
used in o u r films, it is h ard ly i f ever seen as an event in and
o f itself. It is used in most cases as a bridge betw een activities, a
structural device to get people from one place to another, sim ilar
to the fam iliar shots o f a railroad train speeding along the tracks,
or o f an airplane taking off, follow ed by a shot o f the main
character re la x in g in his seat, followed by a shot o f the airplane
landing. W hen used as an event, as in an A n ton ion i film, it is seen
as a som ew hat unusual event. It is h ard ly the kind o f thing w e
see in all movies, and certain ly w e cannot rem em ber films in
which the major action is com posed o f the main character
m e rely walking.
It has been suggested that the reason for so much w a lk in g is
not that the N a v a jo w e re f o llo w in g a particular context derived
from the structure o f their narrative, but rather that they w ere
im itating life. T h a t is, that the N a va jo , being p rim itiv e people,
walk a great deal and therefore sho w w a lk in g in their films in
imitation o f their actual daily activity. T h e strikin g th ing in this
regard is that the N a v a jo seem to dislike w a lk in g and avoid it
w h ereve r possible. T h e y w ill go to great lengths to ride and will
at e v e ry o p p o rtu n ity use some means other than w a lk in g to get
someplace. H a r d ly ever did w e observe our filmmakers w a lk in g
to w h ere they w e re photographing. T h e y a lw a y s insisted on
drivin g, and almost all the m em bers o f the Pin e S p rin g s co m m u
nity o w n ed pickup trucks and used them for jou rneys as short as
a hundred yards. We observed scores o f instances w h ere N a va jos
waited patiently for hours at the side o f a road for a ride to
another part o f the co m m u n ity or to the T r a d i n g Post. It m ay be
true that in the old d a y s the N a v a jo walked a great deal; if so
they are goin g back to a traditional form o f b ehavior in order to
show h ow th ey see the world. R a th e r than s h o w in g behavior as
it is, in this instance w a lk in g they are s h o w in g it in a w a y that
they have heard about and that is ritually and cu ltu ra lly right.
A n o th e r strikin g exam ple to support ou r claim for difference
in the use o f w a lk in g as event is ou r analysis o f tw o films on
N a v a jo life made almost tw enty-five years ago by A d a ir on his
first visit to Pin e Sp rin gs. W e have com pared his films w ith those
made by the N a v a jo in ou r research. O ne o f A d a ir s films is a
finished film, photographed b y A d a ir but edited by M itchell
Wilder, then D irec tor o f the T a y l o r M u seu m in C olorado
Sp rin gs, and the other is a film that is unedited and contains all
the footage shot by A d a ir in ord er to make a record o f the daily
activities su rro u n d in g w e a v in g and silverm aking. It w as A d a ir s
first attempt at film m aking and, although made by a y o u n g an
thropologist, the film can still be said to reflect the y o u n g an
thropologists w a y o f stru ctu rin g events in contrast to the w ays
o f ou r N a v a jo students.
W hat is notable is that A d a ir does tw o things different fro m the
N a v a jo and quite consistent w ith w h at w e do in film m aking
today. Both his films (the cademe version and the edeme version)
show almost no w alking. People just are in the places they are
supposed to be. N o b o d y searches for silver that is hard to find
or walks to get roots and plants for dye. Second, his footage is full
o f face close-ups sh o w in g the expressions o f the N a v a jo as they
go about their activities.

We mentioned earlier that one film d id n t show an inordinate

amount o f w alking. It is an interesting deviation in support o f our
original observation.
Jo h n n y N e ls o n made tw o films. T h e first was about a silver
smith in w h ic h w a lk in g occu rred a great deal. T h e second was
about the b uild in g o f a shallo w well. In that film no w a lk in g
occurs at all. In style it is sim ilar to A d a ir s ea rly films o f N a va jo
activity.
O u r explanation for this dram atic shift in style is that in the
silversmith film, J o h n n y was telling a traditional story and there
fore he n a tu ra lly told it in the traditional N a v a jo w ay. In the
shallow well film, on the other hand, he w as telling about non-
Navajo w a y s and so told it in E n g lis h . T h i s recalls the remark
by the N a v a jo mentioned earlier, that the v ie w e r d id n t u n der
stand the film because it was in English.
It might be thought that a better explanation for the change in
style is the fact that no w a lk in g occurred in the actual m aking o f
a shallow well, w h ile w a lk in g naturally occurs in m aking silver
jewelry. T h e reverse is actually true. A d a ir was stunned w h en he
noted that J o h n n y w as asking his actor to go to the m in e to
look for silver. T h e fact of the matter is that silver w as never
mined by the N avajo. This event in the film was derived from
necessities im posed on the n arrative style by other factors in the
context. R e m e m b e r that in J o h n n y s notebook he writes about the
N avajo silversm ith, and refers to the fact that the silversm ith was
using g o ve rn m e n t minted silver coins because there w as no silver
on the reservation.
On the other hand, in the b u ild in g o f the well, much w a lkin g
actually occurred in order to get the materials, and much com ing
and go in g o f the trucks c a r r y in g the materials w as observed by
us. N o n e o f this motion and activity is in either the finished film
or the cadem e footage.
W hat w e are su ggesting here is that people w ith in the context
o f their cu ltu re have different codes for s a y in g different things,
that on es cogn itive system m ight well em p loy a meta code or
program that w ou ld relate the rules for one mode o f com m u n ica
tion to rules for the other. I f someone has one set o f rules for
talking and subsets o f rules for talking about certain things or
telling certain stories, he m ight reasonably be expected to apply
those rules to stru ctu rin g a m ovie about these subjects. In the
above observations, w e seem to have some evidence that the rules
o f N avajo myth and storytelling are more relevant to s h o w in g
events like w e a v in g a rug, m a kin g silver je w e lry , or b uild ing a
shallow well, than are the real events that occu r w h en these
activities are actually perform ed. W hen A d a ir questioned J o h n n y
after the films w e re made about the fact that N a va jo s never
mined silver on the reservation, J o h n n y a lw ay s a n sw ered (with
out definitely d e n y in g A d a ir s statement), T h a t s the w a y you
make a film about it.

F a ce C lo s e -u p s

T h is leads us to another cod in g difference, that mentioned in

cod in g (3): the cultural, perceptual, and cognitive taboos influenc
ing semantic or syntactic organization and structure o f an utter
ance. T h e N a v a jo do not use face close-ups, except in v e ry limited
circumstances. M ost shots are either cut off at the head or show
the head tu rned a w a y from the camera. In all the films there are
no m ore than three face close-ups, and those, as far as w e can
determ ine, are in tw o specific situations.
T h e first is most com m on, s h o w in g a full front v ie w o f the face
w ith the eyes looking sligh tly u p w a r d sort o f staring inw ard ly.
When questioned about w h at these shots mean, w e w e re told by
several o f the students, T h is sh ow s my m other [or, m y cousin]
thinking about the design . T h e y occu r in those places in the film
in w hich the N a v a jo is about to em bark on the actual w o rk o f
w e av in g or m ak ing a piece o f je w e lr y (photos 16-20).
T h e difficulty that the N a v a jo had in shooting or v ie w in g face
close-ups was one o f the earliest to reveal itself and one of the
most consistent features o f their w o rk with the camera. T h e Pine
S p rin gs b oard ing school had recently installed a television set,
and some o f the youngsters, ages six to nine, w ou ld on occasion
come in the e v en in g w h e n w e w e re using the lib rary and ask to
watch T V . W e noted frequ ent g ig g lin g at w h a t seemed strange
points in the dramas th ey w e re w atch ing. A t points o f extrem ely
tense action, fo r exam ple, w h e n the m other in a story had to leave
her sick baby in the m iddle o f the night to find a doctor, the
children w e re giggling, sm iling, and sometimes looking aw ay. A s
we watched this stran ge behavior, it seemed as if the giggles
and looking a w a y w e re correlated w ith the appearance o f a large
face close-up on the tube. In the pre vio u sly described story, when
the big face o f the m other appeared, looking frigh ten ed and, to
us, soap opera co n c ern e d , the ch ildren w atch in g either looked
a w a y or smiled.
A fte r the students had looked for the first time at the film shot
by Worth on that first day o f instruction, w e asked them to
describe w hat they saw in the footage. We have already m en
tioned the snake in the grass sequence, w h ere they saw some
thing in w h a t to us w as clearly waste film.
Part o f the footage w as a series o f close-ups and m edium shots
o f the boys and the girls sitting around on rocks near the school.
Worth had shot close-ups o f heads, feet, and hands, not w ith any
particular plan but as part o f his w a y o f s h o w in g any scene. It
seemed perfectly natural even though w e w e re deeply aw are
that what w e shot could influence h ow they shot to photograph
ourselves in a sim ple w a y . W hat could be more obvious than to
show several long shots o f the g ro u p and then to make some
close-ups o f the faces, the hands, and the feet as w e sat and stood
around. It s im p ly was not possible for us to even im agin e at the
start o f o u r field w o rk that such things as w a lk in g or ph otog raph
ing faces could be relevant areas o f difference.
It is im p ortan t to em phasize this point. W h en dealing w ith a
c o m m u n ica tive mode, o n es o w n w a y o f do in g things can be seen
at all o n ly in contrast to an oth er w a y . E v e r y t h in g is possibly
significant and nothing can be taken for granted as the w a y its
don e.
Later, w h ile v ie w in g these first films, W orth asked, A n y b o d y
rem em ber a n y th in g else th ey s a w a n y other kind o f shot? T h e
f o llo w in g exchan ge took place:

n elso n : Besides the hands and the snake.

w o r th : Yeah.
: Well, there was that one about the face, the girls sitting
n elso n

up and looking around and about the face there. I think that there
was some action there that makes the people feel they do have
some attention, have to pay attention, you know to tryin g to
avoid the camera, all the time.
w o r th : What in the shot made you say that?
n elso n: Well, that shot there, I noticed about two, three o f the

students there they gave me the impression that they were tr y

ing to, uh, force something to look aw ay from a certain object that
was taking their picture.

In e x p a n d in g his explanation, the other students w e r e n t much

clearer, but th ey all seemed to understand that som eth in g w as
w r o n g about s h o w in g the faces. A t the time, w e d id n t note this
concern for faces at all. It w as o n ly after stu d y in g ou r tape tran
scriptions that w e w e re made a w a re that this con cern had s u r
faced so early in the field w ork. In e x a m in in g the photographs
b eing discussed, w e discovered that all the eyes w e re shut or
invisible to the camera.
A day or tw o later, A 1 w as telling us about his film, Intrepid
Shadows. H e w as d e scrib in g h o w he w ou ld s h o w the intruder,
who at that point was to be acted by J o h n n y N elson. H e said,
T h is person is very, hes ve ry u n kn ow n . H e s the in tru d er but
I w o n t sho w his face.
It w as on the basis o f that prom ise that his face w o u ld n t be
sho w n that J o h n n y agreed to act in the film. When the footage
was show n to the class after processing, w e saw several shots o f
Jo h n n y in clu d in g a clear close-up o f his face (photo 15). Several
hours after that screening, A 1 told us that his film w o u ld have to
be changed because J o h n n y refused to be an actor. N e ith e r A 1
nor J o h n n y w ou ld tell us directly that it w a s because o f the face
close-up, but about ten days later, w e overheard A 1 asking M ike
to act in his film. M ik e asked A l, Will m y face be a part o f the
picture? A l answ ered, Oh no, I am on ly goin g to use y o u r feet,
you know, there are no more faces in m y film .
W hile J o h n n y was telling us about his silversm ith film, he
explained the perm issible face close-up this w ay:

H e ll [the silversmith] be making some sort o f design there on the

ground and then looks around a little bit here, there, maybe up
in there [looking upward] . . . then I will make him sit there and
think, oh maybe hell be looking around up there, at the clouds like
that . . . thats the way most people think . . . while hes doing that,
1 will take a picture of the pins that he made, the finished product
. . . and insert it right between where hes thinking and then back
to where hes drawing. . . .

T h is is a perfect description, made tw o weeks before Jo h n n y

shot this portion o f the film, o f the w a y the sequence looks in the
finished film. T h e silversmith su dd en ly appears in close-up, his
eyes roll sligh tly u p w a rd (in w h at to us appears almost the b egin
ning o f a faint or a trance) and the shot is held for only about half
a second. N o t on ly does this shot appear in J o h n n y s film, but
Susie also has a sim ilar scene w h e re her mother is th in k in g o f the
design. She used the same kind o f close-up w ith the same slow
rolling o f the eyes u p w a rd , w h ich she said w as put there to show
her mother th ink ing o f the design .
T h e second perm issible close-up is in the form o f an in joke.
T h e N a v a jo stares at the cam era and makes a f u n n y face. T h is
ty p e o f shot is used b y the T s o s ie sisters w h en ph o tog ra p h in g
S am Yazzie. A t one point, they catch him almost looking straight
at the cam era (photo 21). A t first he glares in a rather te r rify in g
w a y but soon smiles and sticks out his tongue. T h e girls stopped
shooting at first and almost left the area, but as soon as he m ugged
th ey resumed.
We can speculate that one o f the reasons for this stra n ge
behavior re ga rd in g face close-ups is the fact that N a v a jo s g e n er
a lly avoid eye-to-eye contact. S ta rin g at someone or looking him
straight in the e y e is a fo rm o f invasion o f p riv a c y and a trans
gression o f N a v a jo in terpersonal beh avior rules, unless it is done
for clearly h um orous purposes. A major form o f insult is to look
someone in the eye w ith ou t blinking. A t one point A 1 taught
C h alfen and W orth to do it and laughed because w e c o u ld n t keep
looking w ith ou t blinking. A 1 said, I guess y o u g u y s c a n t really
insult a N a v a jo but w e can insult y ou and y o u d n ever k n o w it.
A t the time w e thought this w as a rather subtle w a y for A 1 to be
able to act out some o f his hostility to w a rd his teachers w ithou t
getting into trouble.
T h e avoidance o f looking at the eyes relates to values o f priv ac y
in N a v a jo culture, w h ere close livin g and m odesty taboos must
be reconciled by some form o f perceptual avoidance behavior. It
seems possible to conclude that this aspect has been carried over
into film discourse. E d w a r d H a ll has pointed out that p ro x im ity
in interpersonal co m m u n icatio n assumes the level o f rule-gov
erned b eh avior d iffering m a rk ed ly across cultures. It m ight be
fru itfu l to con sid er research w ith the above reported method to
test w h e th e r cu ltures seeking eye-to-eye contact w o u ld th erefore
use a large proportion o f face close-ups.
A fte r about a month o f observations, w e noted that although
close-ups w e re plentiful, face close-ups w e re h ard ly ev er taken or
used. T h e fo llo w in g incident, told in some detail, w ill serve to
illustrate the ex trem e difficulty that ou r students had w ith the
face close-up. A lth o u g h the m ajor point in this incident is an
attempt to influence a deeply held attitude, it also illustrates some
o f the difficulties inherent in an y kind o f participant intervention
and observation.
D u r in g the shooting o f a sequence for the T s o sie sisters
film about a medicine man, A l, M a r y Jane, and W orth w ere
alone with Sam Y azzie in his cerem onial hogan. W orth was
there to observe, M a r y Jane w as doing the shooting that day,
and A l was goin g to act as the medicine m a n s assistant. T h e
sequence had taken the tw o girls over a week to arrange, and
not only they, but all the people involved in the project w ere
anxiously a w aitin g the results o f the first N a v a jo attempt to
film a religious cerem ony. T h e y had already shot several h un
dred feet o f film depictin g their gran dfather p re p arin g for this
sing and had planned to have the making o f the sand painting
one of the major sequences in the film. A s far as they w ere
concerned, they w e re on trial. They w ould be con trolling (i)
their grandfather could they do it? (2) a new mode o f co m
munication could they do that? and (3) a N a v a jo religious
cerem ony w h ich they really k n ew very little about.
W orth also was tense in this situation. A lth ou gh he was an
observer, it was difficult for him to divorce him self from the fears
and anxieties o f his students, and o f other m em bers o f the com
munity.
Sam had come into the hogan holding tw o three-foot sticks,
whittled and smoothed. H e had previou sly prepared several
buckets o f sifted and cleaned desert sand. H e n o w sat dow n
crosslegged on the dirt floor, poured the sand into a heap at his
feet, and began sm oothing the sand first with his hands and then
with the sm oothing sticks until he had a layer o f sand about a
half-inch high and about forty inches in diameter.
U p to this point, M a r y Jan e had done no shooting. S he watched
avidly, holding the camera at her side. W orth w as becom ing
increasingly upset. In his notes he writes, I suddenly became
aw are that it was possible that if left to her o w n devices nothing
w ould come out of to d a y s shooting. M y instinctive desire was to
tell her what to shoot.
 W hen W orth noted that the actual sand painting was about to
begin and that M a r y Ja n e had done no shooting, he said to M a r y
Jane, D o n t you think you should have gotten a shot o f y ou r
grandfather as he walked in and got started? Oh y e s , she
qu ickly said, and instructed Sam to w alk into the hogan and
begin sm oothing the already smoothed sand. S am seemed w illin g
to do as M a r y Ja n e told him. S he made a quick shot o f Sam as he
entered the door and im m ediately dropped the camera to her side
and stood w a tc h in g as before. W orth waited a fe w minutes, feel
ing that M a r y Ja n e was go in g to miss the b eginning. Sam sat
d ow n again, w ent through all the sm oothing motions and began
the sand painting. W orth rationalized that he c o u ld n t allow the
girls to fail in their depiction o f this scene. It might make Sam
and m any others in the co m m u n ity angry. T h e re fo re , as Sam
started painting, W orth asked M a r y Ja n e if she d id n t think she
should have a close-up o f S a m s hand. She said yes, and took such
a cademe.
We spent about an hour in this w a y Sam w o r k in g quietly on
his sand painting, M a r y Ja n e w atch in g and occasionally shooting
w h en W orth reminded her that this was som ething you should
shoot. D u r in g this hour and a half, it became clear that M a r y
Ja n e co u ld n t quite get h erself to do any uninstructed shooting.
E ith e r she w as so unfam iliar w ith the activity that she was unable
to divide it into image events and so was com pletely blocked from
shooting or the very notion o f stru ctu rin g and reco rd in g a reli
gious event was too much for her.
A fte r the first hour A l Clah, w h o was avidly w atch in g Sam and
m aking d r a w in g s o f the sand painting, looked up at W orth and
nodded tow ard M a r y Ja n e as if to s h o w sy m p a th y with a frustra
tion that he shared with Worth. W orth gave M a r y Ja n e an in
struction at that point and A l smiled at him, nodding. A fte r
several minutes, A l turned to W orth and in a low voice said, I
wish I had a grandfather w h o did sand painting I w ou ld like to
make a film about thatV' N o t only does his rem ark reveal A l s
awareness and essential agreem ent w ith W orth about all that
M a r y Ja n e was m issing by not ph otographing, but it is another
indication o f the N a v a jo s extrem e reluctance to photograph a n y
thing w hich doesn t b elon g to them. We w ill return to this
point later.
A fte r tw o hours, S am began to tire and asked A 1 to help him
finish. A 1 agreed w ith much alacrity and seated him self next to
Sam ready to receive instruction. H e kn ew h ow to d rip the sand
through his thum b and first finger but w o u ld n t take the respon
sibility for the placem ent o f so much as a line, w a itin g for S a m s
instructions.
A t this point W orth realized that as far as M a r y J a n e s shooting
was concerned, the day w as a fiasco. H e determ ined, not k n o w in g
if there w ou ld be another op p ortu n ity , to get as good a record as
possible by both instructing her and taking stills himself. F ee lin g
the need for some close-ups o f the faces o f both painters, W orth
got d ow n on the floor, belly d o w n in rifle-shooting position and
positioned his Leica so as to get face close-ups.
W orth stayed that w a y for about five minutes, m aking about
five exposures, and then as he dusted h im self off, he looked right
at M a r y Ja n e, w h o was w a tc h in g carefully. H e hoped that he
could get her to make a sim ilar shot w ithou t b eing forced to tell
her to do so directly. Sam and A 1 said things in N a v a jo and both
laughed. W orth asked w h at w as fu n n y , and A 1 replied, H e said
you looked pretty f u n n y d o w n there. W orth waited a fe w m in
utes, and w h en M a r y Ja n e made no effort to move her camera
from her side, he asked if she d id n t think she should get a
close-up o f S a m s face? M a r y Ja n e nodded and standing upright
walked over and pointed the cam era straight d o w n on S a m s
head. H e was sitting crosslegged w ith his head and body bent
over the painting so that his face w as about a foot and a h alf from
the sand (photo 39 ).
W orth asked, M a r y Jane, can you see his face from the w a y
you have the camera pointed? S h e said, N o . W orth asked, Is
there a n y th in g you can do to get the camera so it w ill see his
face? She thought for a m om ent and replied, I can ask him to
look up at me.

w o r th : Will you see his face as it looks when hes working?

m a r y j a n e : Well no, he cant w o r k i f he looks at me.

w orth : I s t h e r e a n y t h i n g else y o u c a n do?

m a r y ja n e : I su p p o se I can kneel d o w n .

She thought about that for a m om ent and tried to lo w er herself

to the ground, but seemed unable to make herself. T h e n :

m a r y j a n e : Would you do itl y in g on your belly the w ay you did

before I would be ascared to do that.

w o r th : What do you mean, ascared ?
m a r y ja n e : I would be afraid to get down on my belly like that.

W orth wan ted those face close-ups so badly that he took her
camera, lay d o w n on the floor and shot about fifteen feet o f
close-ups o f S a m s face. A fte r that he proceeded to instruct her
constantly, telling her to get cu t-aw ay shots and ex p la in in g
that these w e re close-ups o f things like the cans o f sand, hands,
and parts o f the sand pain tin g that could be used in the editing
process later on to make transitions.
It was the first time that W orth had ever mentioned any con
ceptual system for either p h otog raphing or editing. H e w as so
surprised at his o w n loss o f o bjectivity that he felt com pelled to
create som ething useful for the research out o f the experience.
W hile instructin g M a r y Jane, he realized that it w as extre m ely
hard to get her to do it his w a y even when he told her to. H e
realized that he had failed to get her to take a face close-up, even
by direct exam ple, and that it was not a matter o f her u n a w a re
ness o f h o w to lie d o w n so that the camera could see the face.
It then occu rred to us that if w e could manage in some w a y to
repeat the sand pain tin g and get the tw o girls to try to photo
graph it over again w ith another ob server (Adair), w e could have
a w a y o f testing w h eth er M a r y J a n e s inability w as due to the
strangeness of the situation or to the stronger prohibitions o f her
w a y o f life.
A d a ir w as at first upset at this break in research discipline. H e
em phasized to W orth that his behavior reflected a com m on atti
tude in m any representatives o f one culture teaching another. H e
felt that in this case, W orth w as fulfilling a pre ac h e rs and also
a teachers role, and that although acting as researcher, he was
unable to com pletely divorce h im self from his o w n culture.
Worth felt h im self as film m aker to be a representative o f the
rig h t w a y o f doing things, teaching those w h o w e re doing it
w r o n g .
We felt that if w e managed to repeat the sand pain tin g se
quence in such a w a y that the girls and Sam w anted to do it over
again w e w o u ld be able to test h ow far o u r influence as to what
was the rig h t w a y w ould be accepted b y them. I f they made
face close-ups, or fo llo w ed any o f the instructions W orth had
given about w h at events to shoot and how to shoot them, it w ould
indicate that those w e re possible choices for them to make. We
w ould learn that they could understand o u r w a y o f stru ctu ring
and that they could execute it.
F o rtunately, the rules o f N a v a jo religious observance w ere
com patible w ith our research needs. Sam had erased the first sand
painting at su n d o w n as no sand painting could be allowed to
stand after the sun set it a lw ay s had to be destroyed either by
a patients use o f it or by the m edicine man. Several days later the
girls learned that a major part o f the ce rem o n y w as to have the
patient sit on the sand painting. T h e y w e re so ignorant o f ritual
that they d id n t k n o w this basic fact. T h e y then decided that Sam
w ould have to be asked to make another painting, and since they
c ou ldnt or w o u ld n t use a N a v a jo for the patient, that they
w ould photograph the ce rem o n y w ith D ick C h alfen in that role.
T h e girls left at nine o clock in the m o rn in g w ith Jo h n A d a ir
to pick up S am and start shooting the duplicate sand painting.
W orth drove Susie to her m oth ers and observed Susie w h ile she
w as w o r k in g on her film.
T h e r e was no u n certainty there. Susie and her m other worked
a w a y, Susie at the camera, her m other at the loom. Susie knew
exactly what w as to happen next, k n ew ev ery m ove in advance
and h ardly had to say a w o rd to her mother. O ccasionally she
w o u ld turn to W orth, telling him w h at w ou ld happen next and
describ ing w h at lens she w ou ld use and what angle. She seemed
to think that he was o b se rvin g the process o f w e a v in g it hardly
occu rred to her that what she was doing was v e ry difficult or
important.
A t about 10:30, W orth drove to S a m s hogan to see what was
h appe n in g w ith the T so sie sisters film both M a r y Ja n e and
M a x in e w e re to be shooting this time. W hen W orth arrived he
discovered that the camera had jam m ed and that no shooting at
all was taking place. T h e girls had ruined their first roll o f film
and the back o f the camera was open, expo sin g the film to the
light. It w as unusable an yh ow .
T h i s accident w as ve ry unusual. N o one had misloaded a cam
era up to that point, w h ich w as J u l y 7, th irty days after in stru c
tion started. T h e girls had loaded the camera co rrec tly for the
tw e lve rolls o f film used before then, doin g it perfectly each time.
N o w W orth found that th ey had fo rgotten to make a loop o f
film before inserting the film onto the w in d in g reel. In his in
struction, W orth had ca re fu lly explained that this w as the most
im portant part o f loading no loops, no usable pictures.
W hen the girls had to ph otograph the scene for the second time
with no chance o f help they k n ew that A d a ir w o u ld not help
them (we had been v e ry careful to avoid m en tion in g that A d a ir
was a skilled cameram an) th ey solved their problem by m islead
ing so that they d id n t have to shoot the scene at all. T h e y seemed
re ady to forget about the w h ole thing, im p ly in g that as long as
part o f the ce re m o n y w as ruined in the camera, they m ight as
well stop. A d a ir asked M a x in e to reload and she did. Worth
 P h o t o g r a p h i c S e c t io n
fr om the o r i g i n a l edit io n

i. Some Navajo o f Pine Springs

meet in the chapter house to hear
the authors ask permission to carry
out their project.
2 - 3 . Two frames o f the seesaw se
quence filmed by Maxine Tsosie.
She cut the sequence apart and re
ordered it so that the motion o f the
two boys remained the same as in
the unedited film.

2
 4- O n the first day o f film in g, A 1
C lah painted w ords on the ground
and other objects and ph oto
graphed them . H e said that they
represented ideas for his film and
he was just tryin g them o u t.
5. O ne o f the tram es casually ex
posed in running up the first five
feet o f film in the cam era during
the first instruction. W hen the first
rushes were screened, all the stu
dents w ere struck by this footage,
saying that they clearly saw a snake
in the grass. W orth, A d air, and
C h alfen had d ifficu lty un derstand
in g the students com m ents because
they had disregarded the footage as
m eaningless.

6
 - x x . Fram es from Jo h n N elso n s
short film , N avajo Horse. Jo h n n y
asked, W h at happens w hen I take
bits o f a horse and cut them apart
and put them in betw een shots o f a
whole horse? 7 and 9 w ere made
on the first day o f film in g; 6, 8, and
10 were made at the squaw dance
the next day and intercut in editing
w ith the pieces ot the h o rse . 11 is
the shot taken at the end when
horses and riders dashed across the
field. A t this poin t the drum stick
held by the lead horsem an broke. B e
cause o f this shot, Jo h n n y was asked
to pay a fine or return the footage to
the fam ily.
 12 -14 . C lo se-u p s o f some o f the
students taken by W orth on the
first day before he realized that face
close-ups w ere not som ething the
N avajo did. 12 is M a ry Jan e T sosie,
13 is M axin e T sosie, and 14 is M ik e
H A n d erson .
15. T h e face close-up o f Jo h n N e l
son m ade by A 1 C lah as he began
his film In trep id Shadows. It follow s
the action o f poking a stick at the
spider w eb. Seein g this shot in the
rushes, Jo h n n y refused to act fu r
ther in any film by A 1 C lah .

!5
i 6 - 2 i . T h e only face close-ups
made by the N avajo. 1 6 - 2 0 are
from I am th in kin g about the d e
sign sequences used in two o f the
film s. 1 6 - 1 7 w ere made by Susie
B en ally and w ere on the screen
for about two seconds. 1 8 - 2 0 w ere
made by Jo h n N elson : there was
about one second o f 18, fo llow ed by
a h alf-secon d o f 19 before the head
turned dow n in 20. 21 w as made o f
Sam Yazzie by M axin e T sosie for
her film S p irit o f the N avajo. M o st
o f the audience at the w orld p re
m ier giggled or w hispered at seeing
it. In the film , the gran d fath ers eyes
sweep back and forth to avoid lo o k
in g d irecting into the cam era.
2 2 - 2 5 . Fram es from three d iffe r
ent shots edited into one w alking
sequence by M ik e A n d erson fo r his
film O ld Antelope Lake. (T h e y fo l
low the scenes shown in 5 6 - 6 0 .)
2 2 - 2 3 are from one long pan fo l
low in g the boy as he m oved behind
the tree and em erged on the other
side. In editing, M ik e ju m p -cu t
from 22 to 23 so that the boy van
ished on the left side o f the tree and
appears on the right. See the full
discussion of this cut in C h ap ter 10.
In the film , shot 23 continues until
the boy reaches the end o f the
fram e, then 24 continues the b o ys
w alk to the end o f the fram e, then
25 continues until the boy is about
three-quarters across the fram e.
T h ere the w alkin g sequence ends.
26
27
26 -30 - Fram es from the film by
Susie Ben ally, A N a va jo Weaver,
about her m other, A lta K ahn. T h e
title (26) was w ritten w ith yarn on a
factory-m ad e (not a hand-w oven)
blanket. T h e film opens, as do the
others on crafts, w ith the artists at
w ork (27); then preparations for the
project are show n. 2 8 - 2 9 represent
the m any com ings and goings
gathering yucca roots used to make
soap to wash the w ool, d iggin g
28
roots and gath erin g berries lo r dye.
28 is typical o f the do7.ens of w alk
in g shots discussed in the text; 29 is
a recurrent shot used b y Susie to
separate sequences, show ing her
m other always return ing to the ho-
gan. 30 shows the warp being put
on the loom to begin the actual
w eaving.

29
32
3i

3 1 3 4 - Fram es from the film by

Jo h n N elson , A N a va jo Silversm ith.
31 is from the title shot. 32 is sim ilar
to the w alkin g sequences in A
N a va jo Weaver (28); here the silver
sm ith looks for sandstone to make
his m old. N o te that in m ost o f the
33 w alk in g shots, the actor faces away
from the cam era and w alks toward
the horizon, usually tow ard the trees
or w oods. A fte r th in kin g o f his de
sign (see 1 8 - 2 0 ) , the silversm ith
carves it out o f the sandstone block
w ith his knife (33). T h e figures are
cast in the sandstone m old and
cooled in a ja r o f w ater (34).
35 ~ 38 - Fram es from The S p irit o f
the N a va jo by M axin e and M a ry
Jan e T sosie. 35 - 37, made by M a x
ine T sosie, represent the jum p-cut
sequence discussed in C h ap ter 10 o f
w hich she said, B ut everyone will
know that i f hes sittin g and then
w alkin g, he got up in betw een .
T h e film cuts from 35, Sam Yazzie
gath erin g herbs, to 36, kneeling
to gather herbs, to 37, w alk in g w ith
M a ry Jan e , to 38, Sam w alking
alone. 35

36
 1
.

3 9 is one o f the shots m ade by M a ry

Jan e w hen W orth asked her to take
close-ups o f Sam s face as he
w orked on his pain ting. Seem ing
to com ply, she photographed her
grandfather from above, not show
ing his face at all.
40 is one of the close-ups the girls
felt perm issible, o f Sam s hand ap
plying color to the sand painting.
(See 21 for the facial close-up the
girls did take and use.)
4 1-4 3 . Fram es from Shallow Well
Project by Jo h n N elson. 41 is the
opening shot, show ing the kind o f
w ell used by the N avajo before they
learned the new tech n o lo gy dirty,
fly-in fe ste d , and unhealthy, accord
in g to Johnny, con trastin g w ith 43,
the com pleted new w ell. 42 is one
o f the close-ups o f construction
m eant to show N avajo skill w ith
technological objects. Jo h n n y asked
W orth to pose for 43, saying, You
havent been in any pictures so fa r.
W orth thought Jo h n n y realized he
needed a w ork in g shot o f the w ell
but felt he could not ask any o f the
w orkm en, w ho were not relatives,
to come back to pose for it.
 45

44 " 47 - Fram es from the untitled

film by A lta K ahn o f her daughter,
Susie Benally, w eaving a belt. In 44,
Susie is spinning; a basin for dyeing
yarn is in front o f her. In 45, Susie
w eaves on the loom in her m others
house, the same loom and location
show n w ith her m other in A N avajo
Weaver. B o th w om en presented the
process in the same way, but Susie
did not thin k it necessary to sit or
dress like her m other: she sat on a
m etal chair in w estern -style clothes.
46 is a close-up o f Susie w eaving. In
47 the finished belt is show n, much
as finished blankets w ere shown in
Su sies film . In the background D ick
C h alfen m akes his own record.
49

48-55- Fram es from the film by

A 1 C la h , In trep id Shadows. In 48,
the in tru d er (Jo h n n y N elson)
w alks through the field tow ard the
spider web (50, made by A 1 from
cotton thread.) In 4 g, he pokes at it
w ith a stick. 15 follow ed in the film
ing, the face close-up that offended
5 Jo h n n y N elson and led to A 1 C lah
devising ways for h im se lf to appear
in his film as the in tru der.
51 shows the w heel ro llin g through
the landscape: in early sequences
the shadow is short, and longer and
longer shadow s w ere used in later
scenes. In 52, the Yeibechai is w alk
ing and searching across the lan d
scape. A 1 made the mask so that the
eyes could m ove back and forth, al
m ost im itatin g the N avajo way o f
glan cin g back and forth to avoid d i
5i rect eye contact. N o te the m ovie-
film -lik e stripe in the center ol the
m ask, a design unknow n in trad i
tional decorations.
53 _ 54 are from the sequence in
w hich A 1 shows the search for and
the fin din g o f his own shadow. T h e
shadow is first short, and at the end
it is long and strong. 55 is from the
last shot o f the film , o f the shadow
o f the w heel spinning, spinn in g, un
til it is met by the actual w heel itself,
seen entering the fram e in the upper
left corner. T h e shot is m eant to
represent everythin g com ing out all
right, being peaceful, the shadow
and its object reunited.
5 6 - 6 0 . Fram es from the film bv
M ik e A n d erson , O ld Antelope Lake.
56 is the title card. 57 is the first
shot m ade o f the lake, show ing the
source. M ik e then film ed sun-w ise
(clockw ise) around the lake. 5 8 - 5 9
represent the sequence discussed in
C h ap ter 10 , in w hich the shot o f
the footprin ts o f a horse goin g into
the lake (58) must be follow ed by a
horse in the water (59), and fo o t
prints o f sheep leaving the lake (not
show n, but sim ilar to 58) m ust be
follow ed by shots o f sheep in the
distance (60 one o f Susie B en al-
ly s m any shots o f sheep, borrow ed
by the other film m akers). W orth did
not notice the footprints during the
film in g but thought M ik e was p h o
tograph in g mud and trash at the w a
ters edge. F or another sequence
from this film , see 22 - 25.
checked it before she closed the camera, and pointed out to M a x
ine that again one o f the loops was too small. She corrected it
instantly and surely. With the camera loaded both girls stood
around w atch in g until M ax in e started directing her sister, telling
her to take certain shots. T h e r e w ere long periods (about fifteen
minutes) w h en no one said or did anything. In the course of
three-quarters o f an hour, the girls shot about seventy-five feet of
film in three or four bursts o f activity. F in a lly M a r y Ja n e walked
over to W orth and said:

m a ry ja n e : Would you do that shot of S am s face like you did last

time?
w o r th : What shot?

m a r y j a n e : You know the one where you lay down on your belly

on the floor and shoot his face.

w o r th : Oh no, not this time. Y ou have to do everything yourself
today.
m a r y ja n e : Oh, I couldnt do that one, Id be too frightened.

She turned to M ax in e and said, A ll you have to do is lay dow n

on the floor and shoot S a m s face. M ax in e took the camera and
lay d o w n on a sheepskin with her feet up against the hogan wall
and put the camera to her eye. A s soon as she looked through the
viewfinder, she turned the camera a w a v and started giggling.
When Worth asked her what was the matter, she said, Its
fun ny, m y eyelashes keep getting in the w a y o f the view fin der so
its hard to see. It was the on ly time anyone had com plained that
they co u ld n t see through the view finder, and M ax in e certainly
had no previous difficulty. W orth replied that she could so see
and to go ahead. She then looked up at him and said that her arm
was ve ry tired, that it w as shak in g, and that it was very
hard to photograph like this. A s she received no sy m p a th y from
anyone, she started pushing the button without focusing and
w ithout setting exposure. She made about a five-second shot that
w a y and imm ediately arose, took the camera into her left hand
and, looking at us, said, M y G o d , look at the w a y m y hand is
shaking, and held her hand out stiffly in front o f her. It was as
steady as could be.
O ver the course o f the afternoon, M ax in e repeated at least ten
times that her hand was trem bling, shaking, or unsteady and said
that it was very hard to shoot under these conditions. Worth
asked, What conditions? and she pointed around the hogan in
reply.
W hen M a r y Ja n e held the camera, she did no shooting. She
circled around, looking at things, at people, but shot practically
nothing. She did none o f the things that W orth had ta u g h t" her
the previous time. W o rth s notes o f that day sum up his im pres
sions as follows:

She shot very little while I was there she didnt do any cover
shots any face shots or any of the things 1 showed her. She
didnt seem to do any close-ups of anything at all. N ot sand paint
ing not cans o f sand not hands nothing. She certainly wasnt
photographing the sand painting itself so as to show it either take
shape or to show it clearly at any point. It is a question of deciding
whether she is just an inferior photographer or just terrified to
shoot in this situation or whether the entire event is seen by her
in a system so different from mine that I cant understand what
shes doing.

A lth o u gh w e cannot d ra w definitive conclusions because o f the

nature o f this e x p e rim e n t, it seems clear that (1) ph otographin g
a religious ce rem o n y was an e x tre m ely difficult thing for people
like the T so sie sisters, w h o had no experience with the cerem ony,
even if the main character w as close kin; (2) face close-ups were
a form o f syntactic arrangem ent o f an image event that was to be
avoided, even though a respected authority requested it. It was
not so bad to have the shot (Worth was asked to take it, and in
the finished film they used tw o seconds o f it); what was to be
avoided was the situation o f looking at the face in the camera and
taking it; (3) although certain things m ainly technical could be
taught easily, certain w a y s o f con ceptu alizin g w e re so foreign to
these girls and to the other students (although w e n ever tested it
in quite this w a y again) that even direct explanation and direc
tions did not teach it to them.
We had a chance to observe the girls shoot a sand painting for
the third time several days later. Sam inform ed them at the end
o f the day o f the second painting that he w o u ld n t allow anyone
to sit on this painting it w as not correct. (It is possible that
Sam was influenced not only by rules of ritual observance but by
economic necessity. We w ere p a y in g him five dollars a day to
make the sand painting, and that was S a m s only income at the
time other than his g overnm ent pension.)
O n the third try, the girls loaded the camera correctly but
photographed the scene in much the same w a y they had done
p reviously (photos 39- 4 0 ).
 Sequencing Film Events

In recent years it has become increasingly apparent to people

in volved in education and in the study o f how people take on the
customs o f a group that is, learn their cu ltu re that u n d e r
standing h ow people m anipulate things is not enough to explain
h o w people do what they do and become what they become.
Increasingly, it has become clear that people m anipulate objects
that stand for, or refer to, things in a variety o f w ays: that people
m anipulate symbols, and furth e rm o re that they m anipulate s y m
bols speech and pictures, for exam ple in different ways, for
different purposes, at different times. T h e r e seems sufficient evi
dence that such m anipulations and uses o f sym bols and sym bolic
form s or modes are patterned, have regu larity and structures,
and in some cases have rules o f use w h ich are understood or used
w id e ly enough w ith in a culture to assume the theoretical level of
a th eory or a gram m ar.
We shall n o w turn to an exam ination o f the N a v a jo films on
the level o f sym b olic structure; specifically to the w a y in which
the N a va jo s in ou r study organized the sym bolic events into
sequences o f sym b ols meant to co m m unicate some m eaning to
those v ie w in g the film.
 In previous chapters w e discussed the w a y s in w hich they
organized themselves to learn about film, the kinds o f things they
photographed or did not photograph, and the kinds o f actions
they thought it im portant to show. We talked about actions,
things (such as faces), events and w hat th ey did about them. In
this chapter w e will discuss h ow they organized and put together
the sym bolic representation o f these things; h ow pieces o f film
representing or sy m b o liz in g certain events, ideas, and meanings
w ere organized into a com plex sym bolic form.
A ga in w e must rely on an inadequate lexicon. We will use
words like semantic and syntax, rather than attempt to find new
words w hich w ou ld o n ly add to an already confused jargon. We
w ill be using such w ord s in the sense o f syntactic and semantic
reasons behind the organization o f sequences o f cademes and
edemes. But w e shall try to use syntax and semantics in the
semiotic or the ethnosem antic sense rather than in a strictly
linguistic sense. S y n ta x refers to the relations betw een one sign
and another (in o u r case betw een one piece o f film and another)
w hile semantics refers to the relations between a sign and its
referent between a piece o f film and what it is a picture of. In
the ethnosemantic sense we are concerned with the w a y our
students divided up their w orld into little pieces o f film and then
restructured it by putting the film together.
T h e distinctions here are subtle and by no means dichotomous.
U s in g such notions is on ly a convenience. It is almost impossible
to talk about putting pieces o f unexposed film in sequence, al
though one can im agine certain art films consisting o f a sequence
of blank film and black (exposed) film in w h ich neither was an
image of an yth in g except possibly blackness and whiteness. O ne
might argue that in such a case the film w as about light and no
light. A s a matter o f fact, certain avant-garde filmmakers in the
U nited States are ex p e rim e n tin g w ith just such ideas. O rd in a rily ,
h ow ever, one on ly sequences pieces o f film that are about some
thing, and the w a y one puts these pieces together usually has
some relation to what the pieces are about.
We will describe some rules that seem to govern the w a y the
N a v a jo filmmakers structured their films, and the w a y these rules
differed from ours. We have already touched upon some o f these
things in d escrib in g ou r film m akers response to the snake in the
grass sequence, the h ow a pinon tree g r o w s sequence, and the
w a y in w h ich Susie photographed her mother pu ttin g the w a rp
on the loom. C erta in classes o f objects sym bolized on film that
is, certain sem antic referents seemed to call for specific syntac
tical organization. It is these kinds o f rules w e w ill be describing.
H o w , and at w h a t point in a cademe, is a piece o f film cut apart
to make an edeme? What is allow ed to follow what? W here does
the film m aker cut tw o cademes apart because he feels he needs
som ething to go in between?
W e found, fo r example, that the N a v a jo w e re joinin g edemes
together in a w a y quite different from the w a y w e do. It be
came clear to us that ou r rules w e re being broken. In fact it
w a s n t until w e noted that the N a v a jo w e re doing it w r o n g that
w e realized the prescriptive strength o f some o f ou r rules o f
syntactic organization.
T h e f o llo w in g are tw o (out o f many) basic connected rules
g o v e rn in g the w a y w e put film together. A ll A m erica n and most
W estern film m akers kno w these rules im plicitly; and most ex
plicitly. In later chapters w e w ill offer some evidence that y ou n g
people exposed to movies and television have learned these rules
m erely by w atch in g movies.

R ule i: T h e major purpose of editing and sequencing units is

to make it appear that no join exists, so that the viewer
sees one continuous piece o f action.
When a filmmaker has two cademes a long shot of a man walk
ing, for example, and a close-up of a mans feet walking he will
usually try to match action. Th at is, he will cut the long shot at
a point in the walking that can be placed immediately next to a
point in the close-up that follows naturally. If one cuts at the
point where the left heel is just about hitting the sidewalk, the next
shot will begin with the left heel having hit the sidewalk. T h e walk
will continue through the two shots without a break in continuity.
 R u l e iA : T h in g s that arent joined on action are a form of
magic, or are funny, and are not the way things hap
pen.

When something seems to appear on the screen suddenly and

without explanation such as a glass appearing in a persons hand
before his hand reaches the glass standing on the table, we know
we have seen something wrong. For example, imagine two
cademes. O ne is a continuous long shot o f a man sitting in a chair
near a coffee table. H e reaches for a glass standing on the table,
picks it up, and takes it to his mouth. Another cademe in close-up
shows a hand reaching for a glass, picking it up, and taking the
glass back toward a mouth. N o w imagine that we cut the first
cademe at the point where the hand is some distance from the glass
and insert the second close-up cademe at the point where the hand
holding the glass is returning to the mouth. On the screen we
would have a man reaching out in a long shot and suddenly the
glass would jum p into his hand as if by magic and would be taken
to his mouth. The technical name for this kind of editing error
is the jum p cut.

It is in te r e s tin g to n ote that th e F r e n c h and oth e r a van t-g ard e

f ilm m a k e rs d e lib e r a t e ly b rea k this rule o c c asio n a lly . T h e y use
the so-called ju m p cu t fo r so m e o f the sam e reasons that pain ters
began u s in g p r i m i t i v e art fo rm s ; o r w h a i is m o re to the point,
fo r the sam e re aso n s that poets w i ll say the ach ieve o f the th in g ,
k n o w in g that the w r o n g g r a m m a r w ill add p o w e r to the
phrase, and f u r t h e r k n o w i n g that we k n o w the rule and k n o w that
the poet is b r e a k in g it d e lib e ra tely .
O n the o th e r hand, som e o f the black teen ag ers w ith w h o m w e
w o rk e d f o llo w e d the H o l l y w o o d - T V rule, R u le i. In a film made
b y a g r o u p o f eleven- to fo u rteen -year-old teenagers w o r k i n g in
a c h u rch -re la ted film c lu b set u p b y one o f W o r t h s students, the
teen agers ch ose to m ake a film about th eir d a ily activities. T h e
cadem es w e r e p h o tog ra p h e d in m u ch the sam e w a y as the N a v a
jos w o rk e d . They seem ed to k n o w w h at to do, did it w ell, and
w o rk e d q u ick ly . W hen it cam e to o rg a n iz in g the cademe
m aterial, h o w e v e r, th ey seemed in n a te ly to use a different sys-
tern than that used by our N a v a jo students. T h e y organized their
film accordin g to the standard W estern notion o f plot, b uilding
to a clim ax to w a rd the end, e m p lo y in g suspense, and using se
quences w h ich in effect provided com ic relief. T h e film ended in
tragedy with one of the boys getting hit by a car and killed on
the street.
S yn ta c tica lly the film was im p ressively sim ilar to a standard
television or H o lly w o o d dram atic film. In all cases w h ere one
cademe had to be cut to join another, the cut fro m cademe to
edeme w as made at that point w h e re the action could be made to
flow smoothly. F o r exam ple, in a fight scene w h en a long shot o f
one boy s w in g in g his fist at an oth er had to be joined to a close-up
(because the cadem e was not com plete as far as the action was
concerned), the long shot cadem e w as cut wh en the fist was in the
center o f the screen m o vin g from left to right. T h e close-up
cademe w as cut w h en the fist w a s in the same place on the creen.
W hen the tw o edemes w e re sh o w n together, the fist traveled
across the screen smoothly, and the editing join w as barely no
ticeable. T h e black teenagers seemed to have so m eh o w in ternal
ized ou r system o f joining events (although they never verbalized
it). We can think o f no other place than w a tc h in g films and
television w h e re they could have learned our rules for sequ enc
ing or sp e a k in g film.
O n the other hand, the N a v a jo d id n t follow the rule o f editing
on motion or action at all. T h e notion o f smoothness o f action or
m aking a conn ective unnoticeable d id n t seem to occu r to them,
or w a s n t im p ortant enough to do a n y th in g about, except in
specific cases. T h e r e are nu m erou s exam ples o f people suddenly
ap p ea rin g on the screen, ju m p in g from one place to another,
m a g ic ally g o in g from a kneelin g to a w a lk in g or stan d ing posi
tion.
It m ight be thought that these rule b reak ings are evidence
o f lack o f skill on the part o f the N avajo , or lack o f a conceptual
a bility at that stage in their filmmaking. T h a t is, that wh en they
got b etter they w ould n a tu ra lly follow the rule. But rem em
ber the description o f M a x in e s first editing effort with the see
saw described in C h a p ter 6. She deliberately and with great skill
chose to connect her pieces o f film so that the motion o f the seesaw
was uninterrupted. A g a in , our black teenagers in the T a b ern a cle
Film C lu b w e re as much b eginners as the N a v a jo and also w ere
able tech n ica lly to make w h at professional filmmakers in our
culture call smooth transitions. It will become clear that wh en
the N a v a jo d id n t make smooth transitions, or used ju m p cuts,
they w e r e n t b reaking ou r rules at all. T h e y just d id n t accept the
rule that a ju m p cut was strange or unnatural. T h e fact that a
sym bolic event (walking, or p ic k in g up a glass o f water) d id n t
have to match the actual event seemed much more reasonable to
them than it does to us.

We spent a great deal o f time o b servin g the N a v a h o at their

editing tables, trying, at times w ith o u t question ing at all, to de
termine their methods o f o rga n iz in g the material. O ne day to
ward the end of Ju ne, W orth w a s o b servin g M ike, w h o was
ed iting his film, Antelope Lake. H e watched the cademes as M ike
ran them through the v ie w e r and watched as M ike cut and joined
them. D u r in g one period, M ik e w as w o r k in g on a sequence in
w hich a boy, w h o is w a sh in g clothes at the lake, walks dow n the
road. T h is comes at a point betw een the b o y s ligh ting a fire to
w a rm w ater and the actual w a s h in g sequence. M ike had about
fo ur shots o f the boy w a lk in g (photos 22-25). Each shot was about
eight seconds long. H e cut pieces from e v e ry shot and joined
them, but instead o f joining them accordin g to the cut on mo
tion rule so that the action is continuous, he made each cut a
ju m p cut. T h a t is, the boy w alks d ow n the road, then seems to
ju m p m agically about tw e n ty feet and continues w alkin g, then
jum ps again and w alks and so on. Worth walked over to the
v ie w e r and asked to see w h at M ik e was w o rk in g on. M ik e happily
turned the film back, and W orth w ou nd the film through using
the rew in d s himself. H e stopped at the jum p cuts, ru n n in g them
back and forth so that the ju m p was v e ry obvious and asked, Do
these cuts seem okay to yo u ? M ike looked at them again, k n o w
ing that the teach er w as p ro b ab ly pointing out a mistake. H e
took the re w in d s into his hands and looked twice. F in ally , very
puzzled, he said, Yes, they are okay w h a ts w r o n g with them?
Worth asked, D o esn t it seem f u n n y to you that the boy is over
here and then in the next fram e hes o ver there? M ike looked up
at W orth and said, N o .
W orth left M ik e and walked o ver to the T s o s ie sisters and
asked to see w h at they w e re doing. T h e y w e re w o rk in g on a
section in w h ic h Sam w as gatherin g yucca roots for his sing. O ne
shot show ed Sam on his knees cu tting roots. T h e next shot,
w hich they had already put in place, show ed Sam w a lk in g dow n
the road holding the roots. N o t on ly w as he w a lk in g but M ax in e
had su dd en ly appeared at his side (photos 35-38). W orth had tried
being subtle about his questions previou sly, but w e had realized
that w e w o u ld have to ask v e ry direct questions in order to get
an sw ers at all. (A dair had found a similar situation with the
N a va jos in a previous research project in medical care. H e had
found that doctors could not get a n sw ers to general questions,
like What color is y o u r spit? in an attempt to diagnose tu b er
culosis. T h e N a v a jo not only had no w ord s for the generic ques
tion but had difficulty h andling the generality even w h en bilin
gual.)
Worth asked the T so sie girls, D o esn t it seem fu n n y to you
that at this place Sam is kneeling, and at this place right after
w a rd hes w a lk in g ? Both said that it did not seem funn y. It
seemed perfectly all right. W orth said, Well, it certainly seems
fu n n y to me to have him sitting one moment and w a lk in g the
next. D o n t you think an audience will be confused? M ax in e
seemed pleased that she had finally understood the point o f
W o rth s questions and replied eagerly, But e v e ry b o d y will
kn ow that if he s w a lk in g in this shot that comes last, he must
have gotten up between time he was sitting and the time hes
w a lk in g .
 C halfen later arranged w ith M ike to go o ver M ik e s finished
film, shot by shot. In it there occurred an edited sequence in
w hich the boy in the film w alks to w a rd the lake to get his washed
clothes (photos 23-25). In the cademe footage, as it came out of the
camera, there is one long shot, about ten seconds long, in which
the boy w alks from the left tow ard a small clu m p of trees, passes
behind the trees, and just reappears on the right. T h e next
cademe, as it came out o f the camera, starts w ith the boy appear
ing from behind the trees and w a lk in g right, tow ard the lake.
T h is is follow ed by a cademe o f a still longer (wide angle) view
o f the boy w a lk in g d o w n the road and by another one from
another direction. In the first tw o cademes described, not on ly is
the boy w a lk in g tow ard the tree and passing behind it, but M ike
also is pan n in g in the direction o f the walk, so that, at the point
w h ere the boy is behind the tree, the tree fills most of the frame.
A s the boy appears on the left side o f the screen the tree is on the
right in the first cademe. In the second, as the boy appears on the
right side o f the screen the tree is on the left. In ou r w a y of
editing, the natural place to cut w ou ld be w h ile the boy was
behind the tree. A n editor w o u ld cut the first cademe just after
the boy moved behind the tree, then cut the next cademe just
before he em erged, splicing the tw o pieces together so the boy
walks behind the tree and then em erges again and continues his
walk. T h u s the boy and the pan w ou ld match in action.
M ik e edited these cademes as follows. T h e boy w alks toward
the tree, but w h en he is about a second aw ay from the tree, Mike
cuts the film. T h e second shot is cut about a second after the boy
em erges from behind the tree. T h e tw o edemes are then joined
with the resultant jump. T h e boy appears, as if by magic to jump
across the space occupied by the tree. H e n ever goes behind it.
C h alfen follow ed the same proced ure that W orth used, asking
D id n t it look fu n n y ? M ike again said N o in that same puz
zled w ay. Chalfen persisted po intin g out the ju m p cut tw ice
and M ik e finally seemed to understand what was w r o n g , say
ing, Well, if I splice the other w a y , you co u ld n t see the boy
because he was behind the tree. T h i s shot is about the boy goes
d o w n to the lake.
S in ce the tw o cademes o verlap in action, M ik e had a great
choice o f points at w hich he could cut both pieces o f film and join
them to get the actor d o w n to the lake.
In a small study done b y W orth he asked twenty-five students
and faculty at Pen n sy lvan ia to indicate on the diagram re p ro
duced b elo w at w h a t point th ey w o u ld cut the film to achieve the
effect o f h avin g the actor get fro m the left side o f the screen to
the right side.

1 i
1 i

\
"t

, _ _
t
1

1 i
1 l

if Q j- > >
1 i
i i

T h e subjects chosen w e re faculty m em bers in com m unication,

students at the A n n e n b e rg School, and m em bers o f the anthro
pology and psy ch olo g y departm ents, random ly chosen, with
v a ry in g degrees o f k n ow led ge about editing. E igh teen o f the
tw e n ty indicated that they w o u ld com bine the film in parallel
fashion; that is, no matter w h ere th ey w ou ld cut the first cademe,
they w o u ld m atch that point on the second cademe. T h e dotted
lines on the d r a w in g represent some o f the places w h ere they
indicated they w ou ld cut. T h e subjects m ore sophisticated in film
marked the cut as o cc u rrin g w h e n the actor w as behind the tree.
T h is w o u ld make the cut the least noticeable.
T w o o f W o rth s film students, h ow ever, marked the diagram
for a ju m p cut, that is, so as not to achieve continuous action. B ut
w h at is most striking is that both (they did this at different times
and had not spoken to each other) im m ediately looked at W orth
after m a rk in g the diagram w ith smiles on their faces. O ne said,
Fooled you, d id n t I? and the other observed, T h a t screw s up
y o u r experim ent, doesn t it?
Both students kn ew o f our w o r k w ith the N a v a jo and w e re
clever enough to see the point o f the study w ithou t being told.
T h e y deduced w h at it was that W orth was attem pting to dem on
strate. A p p a r e n t ly th ey k n e w the rule o f continuous action so
well that they deliberately broke it-but co u ld n t resist telling
Worth about it. W hen he pointed out that they w e re confirm ing
the hypothesis that con tin u ity o f action was a rule for us, they
sheepishly agreed.
M ike, on the other hand, cut the sequence as sh o w n by the
heavy line in the diagram.
In m a n y w a y s this result is sim ilar to that o f the B ro w n -
L e n n e b e rg study conducted w ith N a v a jo and H a rv a rd students,
in w hich the subjects w e re given color names for color swatches,
consisting o f the same syllables, mo, mo; tna, ma, but spoken with
the vow els v a ry in g betw een long and short o and a. When the
subjects w e re asked to name the colors w ith the new names, the
N avajo s co rrectly repeated the lo ng and short vow el names for
the colors w h ile the H a rv a rd students named tw o different colors
w ith the same syllable, disrega rd in g their vow el length. When
B r o w n subsequently asked the H a rv a rd students, D id n t you
hear the difference? they replied, Sure, but w e k n ew it d id n t
m atter. T h e ir rules for language told them that vow el length
was not a significant difference, just as M ik e k n e w that con tin u
ity o f action was not a significant difference.

T h e H ors e H a s to C om e

A fte r th e F o o tp r in ts o f th e H o rs e

A n oth er o f the things w e tried to learn in in te rv ie w in g the stu

dents at an editing table in ou r office at the T r a d i n g Post was
their reasoning in choosing one shot over several others w hich
seemed to us v e ry similar, or w h y certain shots w en t together
at all when w e could see no apparent reason for it. In m any cases,
w e w e re told m erely, T h o s e tw o shots (cademes out o f the cam
era) are all right together, but these tw o need som ething in be
tw e e n . T h is phrase it needs som ething in b etw een was a
frequent explanation. It indicated an acute sensitivity about what
could go together and what could not, but the students w ere
never able fu lly to articulate the rules for this. In o u r analysis of
the com plete corpus o f film shot, w e found large sections o f film
used as it came out o f the camera, and then eviden tly something
was shot w h ich demanded separation. T h e sections o f cademe
w h ich they used just as it came out of the camera w e re sections
contain ing inn u m erable jum ps in action. T h e s e w e re the sections
w h ere we w ou ld need som eth ing in between. Western
film m aking finds it intolerable in general to continue actions
w hich are discontinuous. We have a special term for the edeme
w e insert at that point, a cutaway.
It was just this point that W orth had tried to explain to M ary
Ja n e wh en he told her to shoot close-ups o f S a m s hands, face, and
cans o f sand. So it is not that w e do not have the in b etw een
constraint, but rather that o u r rules o f what specific events need
som ething in between are different from theirs.
O ne reason, h ow ever, for their choice o f shots and sequence
that seem unreasonable to us might s im p ly be that their k n o w l
edge o f the w o r ld o f nature is so very different from ours on
a sim ple experiential level. It m ight have been as difficult for
M ike to understand how W orth could edit a s u b w a y sequence as
it was for W orth and C halfen to understand h ow M ike edited the
fo llo w in g sequence.
W hile M ike w as ph otographing his film about a lake, he e x
plained that he planned to w alk around the lake, starting at the
source and con tin u in g clockw ise or sunwise, s h o w in g all the
things that h ap p e n at the lake. It was o u r impression that M ike
had made, o ver the course o f several days, a series o f cademes o f
horses, sheep, and what to us looked like several cademe close-ups
o f mud on the bank o f the lake (photo 58). W orth saw the m u d
shot as an in teresting one s h o w in g some old beer cans ly in g near
the shore spoiling the natural beauty o f the landscape. M ike took
several m u d shots du rin g the day, in different places, and wh en
he was editing his film, W orth noticed that he seemed to be
looking for som eth in g to put in b etw een them.
A t the time o f this in te rview , M ike had edited these shots
into a sequence, and C h alfen w as try in g to find the logic o f
his selection o f edemes and their organization. The first
edeme w as a shot o f the m u d follow ed b y a shot o f a man
on horseback in the water. C h a lfe n asked w h y the man on
horseback followed. M ik e d id n t seem to understand the ques
tion, and C h alfen then asked about the first shot, What is
that about? M ik e explained, T h a t shot is a shot o f hoof-
prints o f a horse. We realized then that w h at had been our
semantic interpretation of an edeme as mud w as just
wrong. N o w C h alfen asked, O kay, w h y was this shot of
hoofprints follow ed by this particu lar man on horseback? Y o u
had lots o f other shots o f men on horseback, and o f horses.
M ike replied, Y o u see these h oofprints are leading tow ard
the w a ter and so the horse w h ich these are hoofprints o f must
be in the water. Its the one g o in g into the w a ter I need to
use.
Several edem es later, M ike had placed another close-up o f the
hoofprints follow ed by an edeme o f a long shot o f sheep grazin g
in the distance. C h alfen asked, W h y isnt there a shot o f another
horse in the w a ter or o f sheep in the w ater? M ik e looked up v e ry
surprised and said, B ut these sheep hoofprints are goin g aw ay
from the w a ter so the next shot the sheep have to be far a w a y .
T h is detailed ex am ple is one o f m an y instances revealin g a
sim ilar logic o f organization w h ic h depends upon the N a va jo
method o f v ie w in g and o rga n iz in g the world. E a rlie r in this book
w e mentioned the W h orf-Sa p ir hypothesis w h ic h in general ad
vances the notion that no in dividual is free to describe nature
with absolute im partiality, but is
 co n strain ed to certain m odes o f in te rp retatio n even w h ile he
th in ks h im s e lf m ost free. . . . W e are thus in tro d u ced to a new
p rin cip le o f re la tiv ity w h ich holds that all o b se rve rs are not led b y
the sam e p h ysical e vid en ce to the sam e p ictu re o f the u n iverse.
. . . W e cu t up and o rg an ize the spread and flow o f e ven ts as w e
do la rg e ly because, th ro u gh o u r m oth er tongue, w e are p arties to
an agreem en t to do so, not because n atu re itse lf is segm en ted in
e x a ctly that w a y fo r all to see. (W h o rf 1952)

M a n y o f the things w e have been discussing bear direct rela

tion to the above point o f view . It is almost as if W h o rf w ere
th in k in g o f film m aking w h en he talked about cutting up and
o rganizing the spread and flow o f events. It is clear that w h en w e
talk about the w a y Susie shot and organized the sequence in
w h ic h her m other stru ng the w a rp on the loom or the w a y the
T so s ie sisters shot and organized the sand pain tin g or A 1 C lah his
entire film, w e are su ggesting that through (their) mother
tongue (the N a v a jo students) w e re parties to an agreem en t to
segment nature in a particular w ay.
H a r r y H oijer, a N a v a jo linguist, m ight have been explaining
in the fo llo w in g analysis o f one aspect o f the N a v a jo language
w h y M ike felt it correct or even m an datory to pay attention to
the link betw een a set o f hoofprints and their consequent, and not
to pay attention to the relationship between one shot o f a boy
w a lk in g and the next.

W e are n o w re ad y to isolate . . . a p ossib le fash ion o f sp eak in g

p e cu liar to the N av ajo . T h e N a v a jo speaks o f acto rs and g o als
(the term s are in a p p ro p ria te to N av ajo ), not as p e rfo rm e rs o f ac
tions o r as ones upon w h om actions are p e rfo rm e d , as in E n g lish ,
but as en titie s linked to action s alrea d y defined in p art as p e rta in
in g e sp e c ia lly to classes o f bein gs. . . . (H o ije r 1954)

A c c o r d in g to H o ije r there seem to be in this case tw o types o f

w h at w e call action, one seen as entities linked to action al
ready defined and one seen as w e do as mere action perform ed.
T h e boy in M ik e s film w a lk in g behind the tree, or Sam Yazzie
sitting and then suddenly w alkin g, represent perform ers o f an
action for us. T h e y are walking, or kneeling actions, and for us
the logic or linkage between edemes must continue the action.
F o r M ike the boy w a lk in g was already linked to an action already
defined. In M ik e s w ords, T h is shot is about the bov goes dow n
to the lake. F o r w a lk in g in and o f itself there seem to be no
m andatory connections wh en sym bolized in film structure. T h e
shot o f hoofprints, h ow ever, and the horses or sheep w hich must
follow them are m andatory connections because they are con
nected as entities linked to actions already defined in part by
the precedin g shot. T h e horse and the sheep w hich follow ed the
hoofprints w e re m andatory because the h oofprints defined, as
M ike might have said, that this shot is about a horse goes in the
lake, or a sheep goes a w a y from the lake.
H o ijer further writes, T h i s division o f nature into classes o f
entity in action or m ovem ent is the universe that is given; the
behavior o f hum an beings or o f an y being individuated from the
mass is cu stom arily reported by assignment. . . . (H oijer 1954)
T h e hoofprints represent a class o f entity in action or m ove
m ent, and the horses or sheep are a b eing individuated from
the mass .. . [and] reported by assign m en t. T h e horses and sheep
are assigned a syntactic position after the edeme represen tin g a
class o f entity in action.
In S u s ie s film about w e a v in g w e also find instances o f m anda
tory connection of an entity in action or m o ve m en t being
reason for the choice o f place to start or stop an edeme or an
edeme sequence.
In the sequence in w hich her mother is rolling the spun wool
into balls w e seem to have too m an y shots o f a seem ingly trivial
nature. It takes too much screen time to watch her m other rolling
y arn into a ball, just as in the w a r p sequence w e spend too much
time w atch in g the knots b eing tied. In both cases w e have to
continue seeing this action until the end o f the wool is in sight
literally. We have to watch until the v e ry end o f the hank o f
wool is on the ball, or has been knotted. T h e class o f entity in
action is rollin g all the wool into a ball, or knotting all the knots.
T h e wool end individuates the action from the mass o f wool
rolled up or the nu m b er o f knots.
E xa m p le s like these, w hich can be carried out in m any other
segments o f these films, also point out the value o f the Whorf-
S ap ir hypothesis as one possible method o f un derstanding the
w a y the N a v a jo present themselves to us in their films. A lthough
much o f our analysis stems from a research point o f view moti
vated by what S ap ir form ulated by w r itin g L a n g u a g e is a guide
to social reality, w e do not wish to overstate the point nor to
enter the con tro ve rsy s u rro u n d in g the W h o rf-Sapir hypothesis.
F o r us it is an extre m ely im portant heuristic, lending insight to
our o w n developm ent of a m ethodology by w h ich w e can e x a m
ine the w a y a people see their world.
 Who Can Be an Actor
in a Navajo Film

T h e N a v a jo choice o f actors for their films and the restrictions

of locale w e re also different from those o f people living in our
culture. W hile graduate students at the U n iv e rs ity o f P e n n s y l
vania and at high schools and colleges throughout the co u ntry
can and most often do make films about a n yb o dy, living a n y
w h ere even o f N a va jo s the N a v a jo w e re limited by restricting
themselves in their choice of actors and locales.
In fact it seems to us that people in our culture limit themselves
in opposite ways. We can make movies o f people living som e
w h ere else or being som ew hat different much more easily than
w e can make movies o f ourselves. In looking at all the fifty or so
docu m entary films made at the A n n e n b e rg School o f C o m m u n i
cations at the U n iv e rs ity o f P en n sy lvan ia over the last seven
years, on ly one is about the film m akers o w n environm ent. One
is about the school the easiest subject technically that a beginner
can make a film about. H e doesn t have to travel, he has permis-
sion, he kn ow s the people, etc. Rather, they make films about
T ib e tan s livin g in N e w Je rsey , tugboat captains, autistic ch il
dren, prizefighters, and so on.
O ne has o n ly to look at the field o f anthropology in general to
notice the ease with w h ich observation o f far-aw ay people is
carried out in com parison with observations o f people or cultures
close to us. A lth o u gh this could seem a value criticism o f anthro
pology, it is pointed out here in o rd er to clarify more sharply the
differences betw een those w h o m w e can make films about and
those w h o m the N a va jo chose as their actors and subjects.
T h e N a v a jo w ere extrem ely loath to photograph those distant
from themselves, and con versely a lw a y s sought the closest kin as
their subjects and showed the greatest ease and ability w ith the
cameras in those situations. T his restriction o f closeness did not
on ly manifest itself in people. T h e y also felt e x tre m ely u ncom
fortable p h otog raphing an yb o d y elses land, sheep, hogans, or
horses. I f the situation w as such that they had no alternative that
fit their plan for their film, they a lw ay s asked elaborate perm is
sion or tried to b o r r o w the needed person or object from some
one related to them. A p p a r e n tly the use of a sym bolic representa
tion o f a person or an object was closely tied to their feelings
about the use o f the actual person or thing the im age referred to.
T h e ir attitude tow ard ph o tog ra p h in g an anim al or a house was
sim ilar to the attitude w e w ould have o f b o r r o w in g it. We
w ould feel most com fortable in b o rro w in g houses (for use du ring
a vacation, for example) from ou r nearest relatives or perhaps
from our dearest friends.
T h e filmmakers, as m em bers o f N a v a jo society, w e re subject to
certain broad u n d e rlyin g moral strictures w hich tend to regulate
their interpersonal behavior. O n e such stricture concerns p ro p
erty rights. P ro p erty for the N a v a jo is not just the o w n e rs h ip o f
real estate, silver je w elry , sheep, and other wealth, but extends
even to the rights o f a medicine man to conduct a cu rin g rite; he
may not do so until he has paid his medicine man teacher from
w h om he learned the ce rem o n y for that knowledge. H u m an
transactions are validated, made legal and binding, by economic
exchange in all phases o f life.
F o r this as well as other reasons all o f the filmmakers w ere
extre m ely careful about their choice o f people and objects to be
photographed in their films. W ithin the fam ily, and to a degree
within the clan, paym ents may be required or ignored depending
on the situation and the relationship between the tw o kinsmen;
but such pa y m en t is a lw a y s demanded betw een nonkinsmen.
T h e T s o s ie sisters felt that it w as appro priate for them to pay
their paternal gran dfather for ap p ea rin g in the film and did so
out of m on e y they earned w h ile m akin g the film. Sam Y azzie also
asked that we, the teachers, pay him for a ppearin g in his gra n d
d au gh ters film. Fie explained that his perform ance w as part o f
our project part o f ou r teaching and that since w e w ou ld be
w a tch in g him and learning from him, w e too should pay. Susie
Benally, on the other hand, seemed to feel that it was not a p p ro
priate for her to pay her mother. H e r relationship to her mother
and to w e a v in g w ere so close that legitim acy w as assured without
payment.
In the same vein, A 1 Clah felt that he c o u ld n t make a film
about a m edicine man or about a cu rin g ce rem on y because, I
had no father or g ran dfath er w h o did that. We mentioned ear
lier that before J o h n n y felt that he could photograph a horse for
his practice film, he had to get the o w n e r s permission.
It was a violation o f this code that got J o h n n y N elso n into
trouble wh en he tried to photograph additional sequences for his
horse m ovie (photos 6-11). We mentioned earlier the moment
w h en he asked w h eth er w e thought that inserting pictures o f a
wh ole horse between pictures o f pieces o f a horse w ou ld make
people think that the pieces w e re parts of the w h o le horse.
J o h n n y had said, I w ill think about it.
H e finally decided to get his photographs o f wh ole horses at a
ce rem o n y that was to occur tw o days afterw ard. H e decided that
he w ould photograph certain parts sacred parts o f the S q u a w
Dance. T h e particular scene that caused difficulty was one when
 the virg in em erged fro m the hogan c a r r y in g the scalp pole. A t
this point in the ce re m o n y about t w e n ty to tw en ty-five horses,
g a ily decorated w ith balls o f colored wool, race across the mesa
ch a sin g the virg in . J o h n n y felt that this was the best m om ent to
get shots o f w h o le horses to use in his film.
T h e f o llo w in g day, w e learned fro m several o f o u r students
and from m a n y m em b ers o f the c o m m u n ity that the en tire
c e r e m o n y had been a failure. W e learned that the scalp pole
had broken d u r i n g the ch a rg e o f the horses, and that n o w the
c o m m u n it y faced an u n u su a lly h ea vy e c on o m ic and ritualistic
burden. T h e y w o u ld have to repeat the c e r e m o n y at great
cost in o rd e r to in su re the health o f the patient, w h o w a s not
a kin sm an o f J o h n n y s. W e h eard ru m o rs the fo ll o w in g day
that the c e r e m o n y w a s a fa ilu re because the w h ite m an tried
to p h o to g ra p h it. S in c e all th ree o f us w e r e e x t r e m e ly ca re fu l
to make no p ic tu res d u r i n g the c e re m o n y , w e w e r e n a tu ra lly
c u rio u s a bo u t the co m p la in t. W e had w o n d e re d , at the tim e
th at J o h n n y m e n tio n ed p h o t o g r a p h in g the c e r e m o n y , w h e th e r
it w o u ld be pe rm issib le . W e had discu ssed the p h o to g r a p h y
d u r i n g the c e r e m o n y w ith him , and he had a ssu red us that it
w a s all right. In an i n t e r v ie w w i t h N e ls o n b e fo re the c e r e
m o n y , W o rth asked if p e op le m ig h t o b ject if he ( Jo h n n y ) took
p ic tu re s o f the S q u a w D an c e. J o h n n y replied:

I just dont know. I guess some of these older people, so much

rooted in their old way of belief that when you take a picture of
some ceremonial that they think is sacred . . . just with a still
camera, or maybe with a movie projector . . . they feel that they
wouldnt be cured of some evil thoughts that theyve had in their
that they wanted to cure. T h e reason why they have the Squaw
Dance 'This is something that Ive talked to some people and this
is what theyve said. If you capture any of the secret ceremonies
that the Indians do, that they would not be cured because its been
captured by some camera or movie camera. And then when its
being shown somewhere, it ll remain right where he the same
place as where he w ouldnt be cured . . .
 So m e o f the o ld e r people, like M r. Sam Y a z z ie I talked to him
about it, and he said it w as a v e r y good idea bout m ak in g a m ovie
o f the S q u a w D an ce. L ik e uh these kids that go to sch ool, th ey
d o n t k n o w a n y th in g about a S q u a w D an ce . . . qu ite a fe w old er
people, th ey are the ones that k n o w h o w to do it are g e ttin g
p re tty old and the y o u n g e r p eo p le a re n t le a rn in g a n y th in g about
a S q u a w D an ce. T h e n he [Y azzie] says that if he can ca p tu re it [the
S q u a w D ance] in a m ovie, he w o u ld , that th is w o u ld be taught
back to the y o u n g and m ake them realize h o w the S q u a w D ance
w as done and w h at it m eant, w h at kind o f a h ealin g c e rem o n y it
w as fo r. So this is w h a t he said to me.

W hen the scalp pole broke, h ow ever, the co m m u n ity finally

settled their blame on Jo h n n y . We (the investigators) made it
v e ry clear that w e had taken no pictures. Jo h n n y , as it turned out,
had not arranged perm ission or paym en t to any o f the sponsors
o f the cerem ony. H ad he done so, the sacredness o f the subject
matter m ight have been overlooked. F ro m their point o f view,
Jo h n n y had stolen the ce rem o n y from them, and that, they w ere
certain, w as a major cause o f the cerem onial failure.
J o h n n y reported that a delegation of the sponsors o f the cere
m ony visited him o b jecting to his p h otog raphin g it and asking to
see what he had done. A ft e r w a r d s they (as J o h n n y reported it)

w an ted to take th is ou t and that out, so I had to take them all out,
all them shots out and then . . . th e re s an o th er p oin t in this th in g
that uh, w h ich kind o f m akes m e c u rio u s . . . then he says if you
w an t to m ake a film about a S q u a w D an ce, w e w o u ld need about
fo u r o r six head o f sheep, plu s $20 and oh ab out six o r seven days
o f g ro ce rie s fo r the S q u a w D an ce. A n d th in k in g about th is there,
he w o u ld ru n it up to a h u n d red dollars.

J o h n n y then told us that he refused to pay that am ount of

money, and the delegation dem anded the film. J o h n n y gave it to
them and he now consid ered the incident solved. Before he
finished, h ow ever, he added,
 W hat m y c u rio sity bothered me w as if he felt that w as real sacred
that that sh o u ld n t be taken w ith a cam era . . . w h y did th ey w an t
p aym en t fo r it? T h is is on e o f m y cu rio u s b oth ers so m e th in g like
that.

The moral code defining p ro p e rty rights and econom ic obliga

tions o b viou sly had a restraining effect upon the filmmakers. On
the other hand, the c o m m u n ity gave the individuals w o rk in g
w ith us a good deal o f freedom as long as these obligations w ere
not violated. O n ce w e had explained to the co m m u n ity w h at the
purpose o f ou r being there was, and w h y N a v a jo people in their
co m m u n ity w e re m aking film, there w as no attempt on the part
o f the co m m u n ity to discourage any of the participants from
w o rk in g w ith us.
D u r in g an in te rview that w e reported previously, at w hich
M ik e had explained the mud shots, w e also asked him w h y this
particular horse had been chosen w h en w e had seen shots o f
several horses in the lake. M ik e explained that this particular
horse was his brothers and that the other shots w e re o f horses
that he d id n t know , and therefore had better not use because
the people w h o o w n ed it [the horse] might not like it.
A s you w ill rem em ber, that film sequence included an edeme
o f horse footprints followed by a horse in the water, then an
edeme o f sheep footprints follow ed by an edeme long shot o f
sheep in the distance. We assumed that the sheep in the film
belonged either to M ike or to m em bers o f his fam ily. A fte r all,
he had just told us that he chose the horse edeme by those criteria.
We therefore n ever asked him direc tly about the o w n e rs h ip o f
the sheep.
It was not until some months later, d u rin g the early stages o f
ou r analysis, that w e got to that stage o f our w o rk w h e re w e were
checking all the footage in the films against the actual negative.
We wanted to put together an accurate ch ro n olog y o f wh en each
cademe w as taken, and to record the context o f each cademe in
relation to the other ones on that same roll o f film. T o our su r
prise w e found the cademe from w h ich M ik e s sheep edeme w as
taken came from a roll o f film photographed in its entirety by
Susie.
In reconstructing this shooting day from ou r three individual
sets of field notes o f that day, w e found that Susie had taken that
cademe one m o rn in g at the start o f her w o rk on her film on
weaving. O n that roll she had photographed several long shots,
show in g a flock o f sheep grazing. Susie w as asked, What are
those pictures you are taking about? She replied, T hese go in
the film before my mother shears the wool. . . . T h e s e are my
m others sheep . . . these are the sheep the w ool for the w e av in g
comes fro m .
F ro m other sections o f our notes w e discovered that several o f
the students had asked Susie if th ey could b o rro w some film from
her. We h ad n t k n ow n what it w as for at the time and sim ply had
overlooked the significance o f the interchange. Susie had agreed
and had been seen han din g over pieces o f film to several students.
In th in kin g about this incident, as w e tried to reconstruct it,
it became clear that the m eanin g o f b o rro w some film was
understood by us in a totally different w a y from the w a y in
which they used it. We ignored it w h en w e heard it because
b o r r o w in g a piece o f film to a film m aker in our culture
means to b o rro w the celluloid, not the image on it. We ask some
one if w e can b o rro w some leader or a hunk of film wh en w e are
busy w o rk in g and need a piece o f leader, filler, or som ething for
some trivial or technical purpose not connected with the fact that
it is an image, a cademe, or edem e o f anything.
It seems clear that as M ik e w o rked on his film, and started
putting his edemes together, he found that the sequence o f hoof-
prints needed the proper edemes to go with them. H e found a
cademe that he could use o f a horse that belonged to his fam ily
but c o u ld n t find one o f sheep. S in ce neither M ik e nor his fam ily
o w ned sheep, M ike w ou ld have had to photograph someone elses
sheep without permission, or find someone w h o had sheep, get
permission to photograph them and perhaps pay them for it
and then spend all that time and effort going out and ph o tograph
ing, all for just one little edeme. M ik e was not the kind of person
w h o w ou ld consider p h otog ra p h in g w ithou t perm ission and so
he developed a much better solution. H e b o rro w e d a piece of
cademe from Susie w h o had, as w e saw on her original roll o f
film, plenty o f sheep. H e got it quickly, for nothing, had to do no
ph o tog ra p h in g o f his o w n , and had his permission to use it all in
tw o or three minutes.
T h e s e same sheep appeared in S u s ie s film, o f course, and w e
discovered pieces o f this roll o f film in J o h n n y N e ls o n s s ilver
smith film also. H is actor and silversm ith in the film was Joh n
Baloo, a classificatory brother o f J o h n n y s, w h o had no sheep (or
the sheep w e re elsew here at the time o f the shooting). So Jo h n n y ,
w ith Susie B e n a lly s permission, used some o f the shots she had
taken of her fa m ily s sheep and spliced them into his film. N o
self-respecting N a v a jo w ou ld w a n t his home en viro n m en t show n
w ithou t sheep, and no apprentice N a v a jo film m aker w ou ld want
to deprive a relative o f such respect.
It must also be pointed out that there w e re in nu m erab le o p p o r
tunities for M ike and J o h n n y to take shots o f sheep if they wanted
to do so w ith ou t permission, if they had felt it w as legitimate.
Sheep w e re e v e ry w h e re , gra z in g free ly all over the landscape.
T here w e re so m any sheep around the schoolhouse that we, half
jo kingly and half seriously, put a sign on the d o rm ito ry door,
N o sheep allow ed in ed iting roo m . D espite that, w e w ould
often come in and find the students w o rk in g at their tables w hile
one or tw o sheep from a flock outside w ere stand in g near them
w atching. N everth eless, M ike and J o h n n y chose to b o rro w from
Susie rather than photograph some sheep themselves. T h ese
sheep shots w e re the o n ly cademes b o rrow e d by the students.
A p a r t from those, they used their o w n footage.
A lo n g these lines it should also be noted that w h ile w e
photograph almost a n y w h e r e geographically, these N a v a jo re
stricted themselves to the bounds o f Pine Sp rin gs. In fact, on ly
one o f the N a v a jo students, M ike A n derson , even suggested mak
ing his film a w a y from Pine Sp rin gs. H e at first thought he w ould
make a film at Jeddito (about a h undred miles to the northeast)
w h ere his brother was living, but soon decided that he w ould be
more com fortable closer to his o w n com m u nity. H e did make one
trip to Jeddito, but w h e n he returned he said it had not gone well.
N o b o d y there kn ew about film. T h e y d o n t k n o w what I m
doing here.
In contrast the N e g r o teenagers w ith w h o m W orth worked in
a sim ilar m an n er in Philadelphia show ed an opposite tendency.
T h e y refused to photograph their ow n block their tu rf and
made their film on other blocks, on university grounds, or on
public spaces like museums. C h alfen , on the other hand, w ho has
since the N a v a jo project w ork ed w ith five or six other black
teenage grou ps in the Philadelphia area, reports that they tend
to feel v e ry com fortable on the t u r f established by the project
sponsor. F o r exam ple, if w o r k in g w ith a settlement group, the
you ngsters w ill first photograph the settlement house and its
activities. I f in a neighborhood club, they will gravitate toward
the p lay g ro u n d or the em p ty lot in w hich they u sually play ball.
 Chapter

12

They Handle the

y y
Equipment Like Pros

N o t only w e re there differences betw een our w a y and the N a v a

jos in the act o f film ing and o f learning, and the choice o f subjects
and actors in the films, but there w e re also differences in their
h andling o f the physical equipm ent, materials, and processes
involved in filmmaking. We found w h at seemed to be a rem arka
ble difference in the w a y they actually w orked w ith machines
such as splicers, re w in d s and view ers. T h e y w o rk ed so much
faster than w e did and with such certain ty about w h at they w ere
d oing that w e often thought that th ey w ere cutting film apart and
joinin g pieces at random. F o r those w h o have n ever w orked with
film, a short description o f a film m akers ed iting routine might
help to make clear the distinctions w e are discussing.
W hen the rushes (the film as it comes from the processing
laboratory) arrive, the film m aker n o rm a lly view s them in projec
tion on a large screen at the pro p e r speed at least three or four
times. H e tries to note w h ich cademes he likes, w h ich cademes
are unusable (out o f focus, overexposed, or spoiled in some way),
and w hich cademes might have some special quality.
H e then looks at the film on a table v ie w e r w h ere he can slow
or speed the film through easily. H e may make notes of what
cademes are on each roll or about how he intends to use each
cademe. H e m ay cut out the bad shots that he noted du ring
projection.
A fte r all his cademe footage is assembled after the entire film
is shot he cuts up the film cademe by cademe and puts together
a rough cu t, a strin g o f cademes in rough sequential order. H e
doesn t w o r r y about exact length o f edeme, or about the exact
place he w ill cut. H e w ill often have tw o or three edemes o f the
same thing, because he isnt sure w hich one to use, or w hich one
will go best w ith other edem es in a final sequence. L ik e the
painter w h o tries to cover his canvas so as to get a feel for the
whole th in g at the start, the film m aker makes his rough cut to see
how the film might look if it w e re all on one reel. H e kn ow s that
he will make m an y changes later. H e deliberately does not try to
decide the exact point o f a cut, but leaves extra film on each
edeme so it can be cut off later.
When his entire film is assembled in rough cut at this point
it is often tw ice as long as it w ill be in a finished version he
begins p ru n in g the almost final edemes. C adem es or pieces of
cademe are discarded, and he begins w o rk in g to find the exact
points at w h ich to join tw o pieces o f film. W h eth er w o rk in g on
a M oviola or a sim ple view er, he goes through a long process o f
ru nn ing the film back and forth, back and forth, deciding on the
exact fram e in each cademe that w ill join with the next to form
his final edeme.
A n editing room presents a scene o f intent decision making as
the editor w in d s the film back and forth, o ver and over, deciding
the precise fram e o f the cademe to cut on. A class o f beginners
w o rk in g on their vie w e rs and re w in d s looks almost like a ballet,
with arms tu rn in g one w a y and then the other in rh ythm ic
movements. When the splice for the fine c u t is finally made, the
editor u sually w ill run it th rough several times to check it and
often redo it because he is dissatisfied w ith the result. F o r e x a m
ple, in a sequence sh o w in g a man w a lkin g, the cut betw een a long
shot and a close-up o f the feet m ay not look smooth enou gh the
m ovem ent o f the leg m ay ju m p or hesitate if the foot in the long
shot is not ex actly in the same place as on the close-up.
W hen the N a v a jo began editing, their pattern o f activity was
quite different. T h e y seemed to spend no time at all looking at
their rushes. O n e v ie w in g on the projector seemed enough.
W hile o b se rvin g Susie at the vie w e r, w e felt as if she w a s n t
looking at the image at all. She w o u ld w in d the film through the
v ie w e r and casually take her hands off the re w in d s to take hold
o f the film. W h en one lets go o f the re w in d s w h ile it is turning,
it continues to turn, m o vin g the film through the view er. We
c arefu lly stop the re w in d and the film in the v ie w e r at the
correct fram e and mark the film w ith a grease pencil so that we
can cut at the right place. Susie w o u ld allow the film to continue
ru n n in g s lo w ly and w ou ld take hold o f the strip as it came
through the v ie w e r, lift it up, take her scissors, and cut the film
at some point a p paren tly w ith ou t looking all in one smooth,
continuous, and u n in terrup ted motion.
We (the investigators) w e re certain that her behavior meant
that cu ttin g on approximately the right fram e was all that Susie
w as interested in. We could think o f no w a y to ask questions
about it and, at one point, W orth w alked over as Susie used the
scissors, grabbed the ends o f the film, and asked Susie to describe
the point at w h ich she had cut. Susie calm ly described the exact
frame. We did this several times, and each time Susie described
the fram e finally sm ilin g as she did so, k n o w in g that w e w ere
p la y in g a gam e at w h ic h she o b vio u sly excelled. A t this point in
the project, W orth recorded in his notes that Chalfen seemed
anxious and c o m petitive w ith the N avajo. H e asked Chalfen what
w as go in g on, and C halfen replied, H o w do y ou expect me to
feel? T h e s e g u y s seem to be ed iting better than I do.
I f the students w e re not cu tting at random, w h ic h at that point
seemed doubtful, they had w h at seemed to us a v e ry remarkable
ability to perceive and rem em ber individual shots and single
frames o f im age events.
Jo h n n y also show ed similar behavior. A t one point he asked
Mike, w h o had the ed iting table on the other side o f his cubby,
if he could b o rro w it for an afternoon w h ile M ike w as a w a y
shooting. Jo h n n y then set up dual editing tables for w o rk in g on
one film. H e w o u ld take one reel o f film on one table and another
on the opposite table, ju m p in g fro m one side o f the small space
to the other, cutting film, taking pieces from one reel to the other
at a speed w h ich again made it seem almost random. W orth tried
the same gam e w ith Jo h n n y . H e grabbed a piece o f cut film from
one table and then another, asking J o h n n y to describe the exact
frame he had cut. J o h h n y could do it but seemed annoyed at
h aving to stop his w ork. O u r im pression was that he w as annoyed
because w e w e re s lo w in g dow n his thin kin g process.
It is not, in ou r opinion, that their perception o f individual
frames w as better, but rather that their ability to perceive a single
fram e in a motion sequence and to remember it for both short
and long periods was better than ours. A lth o u gh w e w ere not
prepared at the time to do more extended research in this area,
it is in teresting to speculate on w h at was happening. Was their
ability due to a specialized co d in g procedure for dealing with
events in motion, or w as it due to a highly developed memory?
Asked about it, J o h n n y N e lso n explained, Its because w e al
w ays have to have the design in ou r heads. Both Susie and
Jo h n n y , early in our interview s, expressed several times the no
tion that m aking a film was like w e a v in g , or like the w a y the
N a va jo do th in gs.
T h is concept, w e have the design in our head, w as expressed
in m any w a y s at various stages o f the project. 1'here seemed both
a need to conceptualize film m aking in some w a y w hich legiti
mized such thinking, and an ability to think about, to plan, the
sequencing o f specific images. We felt that for Jo h n n y at least the
need to understand h ow images w e re manipulated in the head
had to come before he could be en tirely com fortable about doin g
it w ith his hands on pieces o f film. In the second in te rview w ith
Jo h n n y , w h ich took place on the day after instruction started,
W orth asked him, W hich [part o f the previous d a y s instruction]
is the most fu n so far?

j o h n n y :T h e
m ost fu n I h ave, le ts see, w e re h a n d lin g the cam era
and h a v in g in stru c tio n on p ic tu re takin g like m ak in g film s
w h e re yo u have to use y o u r head to m ake a p ic tu re the w a y you
w an t it to, o r m ake it the w a y yo u feel it should be.

L a te r in that in te rview J o h n n y seemed to be s tru gglin g to ask

about something.

A b o u t that p ic tu re th ere [a p ossib le m ovie that Jo h n n y w as talk in g

about] w h e re . . . you cu t ou t that little pieces fro m an o th er film
and p u ttin g it to geth er and m ak in g it m ore o f a so m e th in g th ats
real. Y o u kn o w , so m eth in g that is real and its v e r y h ard fo r m e
to e xp lain .

w o r th :Ju s t e x a c tly w h at do yo u w a n t to kn ow ? I m not su re

I u n d erstan d it. W hat is y o u r question ? W hat do yo u w a n t to
know ?

j o h n n y : W ell, the qu estion is, if y o u p u t like a p ic tu re , if I w an ted

to like take a p ic tu re o f a b ird fly in g and it ll be fla p p in g its w in g s
back and fo rth like that, then I take an o th er p ic tu re o f som e m ore
b irds fly in g and I take a p ic tu re o f a c ro w and put it in the m idst
o f a b unch o f b ird s fly in g , w ill that m ake it in the w ro n g place
th ere th ats w h at I m tr y in g to get in.

W orth kept t r y in g to avoid say in g an yth in g about any specific

editing rules and tried to elicit m ore reasons from Jo h n n y . N o te
h ow specific all the exam ples were. A s w e m entioned earlier,
N a va jos find generic questions on an abstract level almost im pos
sible to use.

w o r t h :I f
yo u k n o w in y o u r head w h y y o u re p h o to g ra p h in g these
b irds, uh, le ts say you give m e a reason. W hat w o u ld be a reason
 for photographing those birds and putting them together the w ay
you said?
: I think he [the bird] would be expressing the uh nature,
jo h n n y

of how the birds migrate from one country to another in a flight,

or something like that and w h y the birds have to fly, what makes
the birds fly.
w orth : Would it matter if you put a picture o f a crow in a movie
like that?
: Well, the crow s can fly, yes, but I think that a crow is
jo h n n y

it makes them some sort of a well, I ll say that if I was just to take
a picture of the small birds flying, like how they fly and all of a
sudden, I jump into a crow, they would now be out of its not
actually out of a picture the wrong picture its just that the
birds all of a sudden then there ll be this great big crow. People
will watch the birds, how they fly and how they sit down on a
branch or something, and all o f a sudden, here comes a crow.

w orth: Can you think of a place where it will be good to have birds
and a crow together?
: Well, I think theres only the only good place to have
jo h n n y

crows and birds is in a corn patch, and lets see, maybe some
melon patches. These two places where crows and birds go to
gether.

In this i n t e r v ie w w e see h o w q u ic k ly J o h n n y feels the need to

u n d e rstan d , in his h ead c o g n it iv e l y h o w d iffe re n t im ages on
film can be o rga n iz ed . H e w a n ts to k n o w and is able to do it in
his head ev en b efo re he starts p h o t o g r a p h in g or e d itin g film. T h e
e d itin g fo llo w s a n a t u r a l p rocess w h ic h is w o r k e d out b efore
he uses the m aterials. F o r m a n y o f o u r u n iv e r s ity students the
ab ility to ju g g le c o n c rete im ages in the head is difficult to learn.
T h e a b ility to v isu alize specific im ages in a sequ ence u s u a lly takes
m a n y y e a rs o f film m a k in g e x p e rie n c e and m a n y peop le o f ou r
cu ltu re find it alm ost im p ossib le to do on the o rd e r o f c o m p le x ity
Jo h n n y d e m on strates in the abo ve quotes.
A s w ith m a n y o f o u r data, aspects o f this portion o f the in ter
v ie w illu m in ate sections o f an aly sis discussed in o th e r chapters.
Jo h n n y is not o n ly s h o w in g an unusual grasp o f the syntactic as
well as the semantic possibilities o f film, but he is already s h o w
ing the same sort o f category form ation for cademes and edemes
that exist in his language. We referred earlier to M ik e s reasons
for placing the sheep after the hoofprints. H e re J o h n n y is divid
in g his shots as entities linked to actions and is already expressin g
a set o f rules for d eterm in in g w h at images go together. Jo h n n y
puts images o f c row s and im ages o f birds into separate categories
o f entities. L in k in g them by action, he finds that the o n ly good
place to have c r o w s and birds is in a corn patch.
S o that early in the process after o n ly tw o days of instruction
J o h n n y (w ho was ex ceed in gly skilled in verbalizing) was able
not on ly to conceive and express the notion o f orga n iz in g sepa
rate images and image events into a specific sequence, but also to
begin articulating what must have been existing rules for such
organization. H e w en t on to develop his ideas in his film about
horses.

T h e N a v a jo show ed an imm ediate need and ability to organize

sym bolic events in the head. T h e y thought about concrete
images, and w e re able to manipulate these sym bols cognitively.
T h e y not o n ly needed and w e re able to do it m entally they did
it p h ysically as well. T h e y handled the physical materials o f film
in the same organized, systematic and patterned w ay. W e have
already m entioned J o h n n y s ability to use tw o ed iting tables at
once on the same film, pu ttin g together sequences from different
parts o f the film at the same time, using film units com in g from
w id e ly spaced rolls o f film. Susie demonstrated the same kind of
physical organization w h ile w o r k in g on her film. A lth o u g h she
could never verbalize h ow she thought about visual sym bolic
events, the fo llo w in g observations w ill make clear the same need
for pattern and a sim ilar ability to ju gg le com plex sym b ols in her
head.
W hile o b se rvin g Susie d u rin g the early weeks o f Ju ly , w e noted
the developm ent o f a quite systematic w a y o f working. First, she
would cut up tiny strips o f quarter-inch m asking tape (which we
had provided) into one by one-eighth inch strips, w h ich she put
on the edge o f her ed iting board so that most o f the tin y strip was
han ging free. T hen as she vie w e d the film and cut it with a
scissors in the m ann er w e have previou sly described, she would
attach some pieces w ith the bits o f tape to a reel o f film lying
beside her and hang other pieces on paper clips, w hich were
attached to a string han ging over her table. (Worth had shown
this method of h anging film from p a p e r clips as he had show n his
o w n students at the A n n e n b e rg School. F e w college students
used the clips, but Susie found good use for them.) A s Worth
watched, try in g to see some pattern in which pieces o f film went
on the reel and which pieces w e n t on the rack holding paper
clips, he finally asked Susie, C o u ld you tell me y o u r system o f
editing? N o r m a lly he w o u ld n t have phrased a question in this
w ay, using a w o rd such as system, but at that m om ent he felt as
if he w ere addressing a peer, w h o clearly w as w o rk in g in a sys
tematic w ay. Susie explained to W orth that she was at that point
in her w o rk just before doing the actual splicin g on the splicer.
First, she organizes the shots she has taken in the fo llo w in g way.
T he shots that she is going to use go on the paper clips in the
order in w hich they will appear in the film. W orth noticed at that
point that the strips o f film w ere h an ging in bunches spaced an
inch or m ore from other bunches. Each bunch w as part o f a
separate sequence in the order in w hich the shots w ou ld appear.
T h e film on the reel was film that she had decided not to use.
When all the shots on a bunch w ere assembled that is, wh en all
the shots that she had to have for a sequence w e re on the clips
in o rd er she w ould splice them.
It seemed to us consistently rem arkable for an yone to be able
to be so certain about w h ich shots w e re in and w hich out with
so little examination. H e r lack o f need for reassurance that she
had chosen correctly and her lack o f need for v ie w in g more than
once w ere certainly different from our experience w ith other
filmmakers. Peraps w h en she said, Its like m aking a design its
all in the head before you start, she w as talking about a percep
tual and cognitive process very different from our ow n , which
aided m em o ry and recall and w h ich allowed for the com plex
arrangem ents she had to make in her head. Perhaps as with
musicians and mathematicians, there is an image or design sense
w hich is h igh ly developed in the N a v a jo and w hich allows them
to handle the vast quantities o f in form ation in volved in m em oriz
ing cademes shot and ed iting them in the head. It m ay also be the
case that in the very act o f shooting, the cademes are so organized
that they fall into place as it were.
In w r itin g this book and in doing the analysis o f the filmed
materials, w e have often thought w ith en vy about S u s ie s and
J o h n n y s ability to m anipulate masses o f data, o rd erin g it, and
putting each piece into its correct place.
 Chapter

13
Motion or Eventing

In a p p ly in g the Whorfian concept to ou r research, w e thought

that the catego ry o f motion, w h ic h w as so im portant to the
N a va jo language, w o u ld also be a good concept for us to use in
analyzin g the w a y the N a v a jo handled motion pictures. It seemed
reasonable to assume that the N a v a jo w ou ld express an interest
in film because o f its v e ry ability to depict motion.
T h e N a v a jo w e re indeed from the v e ry first interested in the
motion aspects o f film and learned to m anipulate it almost im
mediately and in a controlled fashion. R e m e m b e r M ax in e and
her seesaw film, w h ere the possibilities o f re arran ging the motion
w ithout d e stro y in g its flow occu rred to her as the first thing she
could do w ith film.
T h e N a v a jo also use m ovem ents w h ich are quite rare in o u r
kind o f film m akin g and use motion in what seems to be a m ean
ingful as opposed to a stylistic fashion.
M argo t A str o v pointed out in 1950 that:

T h e concept of motion in all its possible variations is the perennial

current on which Navajo culture is carried along and from which
 it receives its unfailing stimulus . . . the very language o f the
Navajo is one of actions, the idea of motion gives it its distinctive
character.

T h e Navajo will always minutely differentiate whether the person

in question was walking, speeding, slowing down. . . . T h e very
structure of the language does not permit the Navajo to be sloppy
in presenting some type of motion.

. . . the Navajo should consider gait as tangible a part of a man

as his nose. . . .

. . . creation with the Navajo is motion . . . in many curing ceremo

nies the idea of sanctification and restoration through ritually
directed movement is paramount.

On motion life depends . . . in a psychologically significant rite of

the Enem y Way, the ability to move is taken from the enem y
by the patient who holds up against the imaginary foe a bundle
consisting o f back tendons and leg sinews cut from a previously
slain enemy.

M ost observers o f the N a v a jo agree that motion pervades the

N a v a jo universe; it permeates his m yth ology, his habit system,
and his language. H a r r y H o ije r (1951) has written:

It would appear that Navajo verb categories center very largely

about the reporting of events or better, eventings. These event-
ings are divided into neuters, eventings solidified, as it were, in the
states of being by virtue of the withdrawal of motion; and actives,
eventings in motion. Th e latter are further subdivided into imper-
fectives, eventings in process of completion; perfectives, eventings
completed; progressives, eventings moving along; and iteratives,
eventings repeated over and over again. Th e customary reports
eventings repeated by force of habit or custom; the optative, a
desire that an eventing take place; and the future, the expectation
that eventing will occur.
But this is not all. A careful analysis o f the meanings of Navajo
verb basis, neuter and active, reveals that eventings themselves are
conceived, not abstractly for the most part, but concretely in terms
of the movements of corporeal bodies. Movement itself is reported
in painstaking detail, even to the extent of classifying as semanti
 cally different the movements of one, two, or several bodies, and
sometimes distinguishing as well between movements of bodies
differentiated by their shape and distribution in space.
But this high degree o f specificity in reporting o f movements is
not confined in Navajo to verbs having particular reference to
motion o f one sort or another. On the contrary, it permeates the
Navajo lexicon in the sense that many verbs, not at first sight
expressive o f movement, proved to be so on more detailed analysis.
For example, the theme ha h one animate object moves (in an
unspecified fashion) is easily recognized in a large number of
words, the meanings of which appear to be far distant from any
concept of motion. T h e following examples are typical: oa. -na-
. . . -ha. be busy, preoccupied, literally one moves continu
ously about with reference to it; ?e.h - . . . -ha. one dresses,
literally one moves into clothing; hO- . . . ha h the ceremony
begins, literally a happening moves; na- . . . ha one lives,
literally one moves about here and there;" ?ani.-na- . . . ha one
is young, literally one moves about new ly; yisda- . . . ha.H
one is rescued, saved, literally one moves to safety.
T o summarize: in three broad speech patterns, illustrated by the
conjugation of active verbs the reporting of actions and of events
and the framing o f substance o f concepts, Navajo emphasizes
movements and specifies the nature, direction, and status of such
movement in considerable detail. Even the neuter category is r e n
table to the common conception o f a universe in motion. For just
as someone is reported to have described architecture as frozen
music so the Navajo defined position as a resultant of the w ith
drawal of motion.

In the N a v a jo films themselves and in the w a y they talked

about w hat they w e re go in g to do in their films, w e can see many
exam ples o f this inordinate need both to p ortray motion pre
cisely and to use it as a recurrent theme. O n the second day o f
instruction J o h n n y was asked, What did you shoot today? H e
replied:

T h e other day [yesterday] 1 shot one shot only that you let us take.
. . . I have the whole people [the group of students] standing there
. . . and they were talking, they were laughing, so I just stood there
 and I took a straight picture . . . today I had to I thought I might
take something moving. T h e first one I took was with them stand
ing still, so I w o n t be but today, I just kind of figured if I move
the camera a little bit and see how it will come out.

N o te h ow at this early date, J o h n n y blurts out today 1 had to

and then changes it to, I thought I might take som ething m ov
ing. H e continues:

So I had my little boy, he was riding a bicycle right there I got

him, 1 had him on the bike right there [pointing out the win dow
behind the T ra d in g Post] then he ride right around that little field
right there got my camera and went all the way round like that
[holding a camera up to his eye and swiveling completely around
in his chair].
w o rth : Whered you learn how to do that?
Well, I just wanted, 1 wanted to take some pictures of
jo h n n y :

something moving, but you know I just wanted to get the feel of
moving the camera with something moving at the same time.

It is not on ly that at this stage o f learning J o h n n y expressed

interest in the co m plex relationship o f m o vin g the camera w hile
an object is moving, but also that he w as able to execute these
m ovements so clearly and smoothly. T h is first shot show ed none
o f the shakin g or unevenness o f m ovem ent w hich is so difficult
to avoid in a hand-held camera. N o t only did Jo h n n y , Susie, and
A 1 Clah sho w the same ability; all o f them com bined in very
intricate patterns the various form s o f motion. T h e y played con
stantly w ith the speed o f the object m ovin g and the speed o f the
camera m ovement, sometimes goin g in the same direction and
often goin g in opposite directions.
T h e ju m p cut for us is an in terru ption o f m ovement, o f the
causal consequences of an action; but motion for them was in
some w a y differentiated from action in a causal or semantic sense.
T h a t is, a man sitting and a man w a lk in g w e re not parts o f the
same motion, w hereas a seesaw or camera m ovem ent were.
 It is a v e ry difficult thing for us to rem em ber the kind and
speed o f cam era m ovem ent from one shot to another. O n e o f the
most difficult editing tasks is to cut on camera movement. O ne
o f the prescriptions for standard H o lly w o o d editing is never to
cut two pans together. Let us imagine a sequence in w hich w e
were to juxtapose tw o movem ents of the cam era let us say a pan
across a wall in w hich the camera moves from left to right across
one wall and then a shot m o vin g fro m left to right across another
wall. Further, the shot o f wall A w ould be made several hours or
even days later, all to be done w ith a hand-held camera. Worth
reports, N o film m aker I k n o w w ou ld be able to handle that
sequence easily. G e ttin g the same flow in each shot the same
kind o f m otion so it could match is almost im possible to keep
in my head. I suppose I d make fifteen or tw e n ty shots o f each,
v a ry in g the motion o f the camera, and hope I d be able to pick
out the best match o f motion in editing. But even in editing it
would be v e ry difficult for me to see or feel the same motion.
T h e films made by the N a v a jo are full o f sequences cut on this
type o f motion, with the students often co m m en tin g on h ow nice
[nijuneh] it looked.
In A 1 C la h s film, the m ovem ents o f the camera are so com plex
that W orth com m ents in his notes, I wish that gu y w ou ld stop
w a v in g the camera around so much. I get dizzy w a tch in g . Y et
in the finished film, the motion o f the images (one doesn t see it
as the camera) have an almost inexorable quality.
When A 1 was talking about his film with W orth d u rin g one of
the in terview s, he attempted to explain his intense dissatisfaction
with his state o f progress. H e was concerned that he w as sh o w in g
only pieces of image and that an audience w o u ld n t understand
his film. In particular he was concerned about how he could
explain or make c o n vinc in g the motivation for the entire film if
he c o u ld n t use J o h n n y as his actor in the sequence in which
Jo h n n y disturbs the spid er web. (We mentioned earlier that
when J o h n n y saw the cademe close-up o f his face, he refused to
continue as actor.)
 a l : Well the fact how these things happen [without showing Joh n

nys face] the film is dead, it just dont make sense. If I see him in
there, then I know what the film is about. If he's doing all these
things you know, walking through these trees, making motion
. . . I was looking all through these, you know, little pieces [of film]
trying to put something in there. I got to have an intruder that
pokes in these things, that points out to the audience This, this
is the real motion. . . . [emphasis in speaking]

In looking at the films and at the students raw footage, w e can

better understand the use o f w a lk in g in the context o f their
extrem e aw areness o f motion. A n image o f a person or a camera
or a shadow in motion provides a means o f depictin g a certain
form o f e v e n tin g (H o ije rs term). T h e search ing and finding of
the mine, the silver, the herbs for cu rin g , the plants for d y in g the
wool, the rock for casting are all exam ples o f ev en tin g that must
be accom panied by motion to give them their pro p e r place in the
scheme o f things.
We have com pared the footage as o rig in ally shot w ith the films
as com pleted by the N a v a jo students. F o r exam ple, in the films
Navajo Silversmith and Navajo Weaver analyzed so far, w e find that
their makers have included almost all the scenes depicting their
subjects w a lk in g and have used less than half o f the many
cademes that they had depictin g the actual fabrication o f the
je w e lry and rug.
D u r in g the second week o f Ju ly , A d a ir in terview ed Jo h n n y
about his life history. D u r in g the course o f the conversation,
J o h n n y started talking about w h y films are so interesting to
Navajos. H e said,

You make a movie about it and then its moving around where you
can actually see what is being done how it moves [our italics]. See,
in a letter you can read it over and over, but you cant express
exactly what, how the shallow well was, unless you want to write
a whole book about it. But . . . if you write a whole book about it,
then its still. You try to give it to somebody, and he reads it
through, and he does not really get the picture in his mind. You
cannot express just exactly how a shallow well was erected.
 At another point J o h n n y said, What I really w a n t to see is
so m e th in g that can move in fron t o f m y eyes, that I took m yself.

T h e L o n g J o u rn e y a n d th e O rig in M y th

In previous sections o f this book w e have noted h ow im portant

a place sequences o f w a lk in g have in the films made by the
Navajo. In this connection it is important also to note that in
N avajo myths, tales, and in the narrative style itself, the long
jo u rn ey is often the central them e for the origin myths.
It has frequ en tly been noted that N a v a jo myths tell o f the
culture hero w h o travels freely am ong the gods collecting ritual
information as he goes. F ro m this series o f su pernatural con
tacts the h ero s o w n fund o f p o w e r is collected and increased.
T h e structure and narrative style o f the films, Navajo Silversmith,
Antelope Lake, Intrepid Shadows, and Navajo Weaver resemble one
of the ch a n tw a y myths. Jo h n n y N elso n, for example, show s the
craftsman at w o rk but has his craftsm an set out on a jou rney for
an ancient silver mine. T h e fact that silver w as never mined on
the reservation is inconsequential; the o rigin o f silver and the
travel to the origin, like the o rig in o f the horse (depicted in the
origin myth as e m erg in g with man), must be accounted for in the
N a va jo universe and is depicted in his film.
It is also w orth noting that in the sequence o f the grow th o f
the pin tree, show n in stages from seedling to the m ature and
then dead tree and then tu rn in g back to the pine cone, w e find
the same basic structure as in several o f the other films. Each
comes back to the images from w h ich it started, but not exactly
to the same scene. T h is goin g back to the b eginning, to w h ere the
action started, is basic to N a v a jo cognition and is manifested in
their m y th o logy and their ritual and visual arts.
T h e r e is almost a com pulsion in the N a v a jo to get back to the
start, to s w in g full circle to the beginning. T h e r e is need for
closure, but closure must not be complete. T h u s w e find many of
the sand paintings enclosed on three sides by ra in b o w but open
on the east, just as the hogan has its door alw ay s to the east (the
direction from w hich good and beauty come), and the zig-zag
c ircu lar pattern on the w e d d in g basket is broken through to
prevent com plete closure. W hen a w om an comes into the hogan
du rin g a cerem on y, she must w alk clear around the fireplace,
s u n w ise, as the N a v a jo say, before she sits on the north side of
the enclosure. A n oth er ex am ple o f the films adh ering to this
basic form occurs w h en M ik e A n derso n started shooting his
Antelope Lake.
A s they approached the lake, W orth asked w h ere to park the
car. M ike chose a place on the shore in the center o f the lake, but
then proceeded to w alk s low ly tow ard one end. T h e y finally
came to a v e ry un pretty part o f the landscape, m u dd y and over
gro w n w ith weeds and trees. M ik e started p h otog ra p h in g there
and moved around the shore line from east to west. Sin ce he
made m an y trips to the lake, W orth began to notice that he
a lw ay s started shooting at that point o f the lake wh ere he had
finished the day before. When he had com pletely circled the lake
su nw ise and returned to the m u d d y spot he had started with, he
announced that he was finished photographing. W orth asked him
w h at this spot is here (the point wh ere film ing started and
stopped), and M ike replied, T h i s is the part w h e re the lake
begins, w h ere the w a ter starts it is the head. W orth then asked
him, W h y did you walk all around the lake ph o tog ra p h in g in
stead o f shooting the interesting places first? M ike replied,
[That] is h ow to show so m eth ing the best, by goin g around it
you show an yth in g by goin g around it.
H is a n sw er is v e ry sim ilar to J o h n n y s response to A d a ir when
asked, W h y did you have a silver mine w h en the N a v a jo never
mined silver? J o h n n y replied, T h a t s the w a y to tell the s to ry .
A s in the myths, p o w e r a ccru in g from motion and especially
from travel is not only a feature that may be depicted in a film,
but may also explain the b ehavior o f the filmmaker. Perhaps
fo llo w in g his actor in his search for the mine or for herbs, for
roots, for stone or for the source o f the wheel that turned gave
him a sense o f assurance in an u nfam iliar situation certainly
this is characteristic o f N a va jo psychology: if you are uncertain
of you rself in a particular situation, d on t remain still travel.
Most o f the films and the students discussions o f the films
reflect what might be called a N a v a jo w o r ld v ie w in W h o r f s
words, a distinctive w a y not o n ly o f looking and o rgan izin g the
world but a distinctive w a y o f not orga n iz in g the world. T h a t is
to say, not on ly does the W h o r f - S a p ir hypothesis suggest that a
particular culture w ill find it easy to use a particular form o f
categorizing and organization, but it suggests also that certain
other w a y s o f stru ctu rin g reality are more difficult and that cer
tain languages and cultures make certain styles of s a y in g less
likely to occur.
For example, all but one o f the films are w ithou t what we
would call n arrative suspense. T h e purpose o f the film is not to
show a suspenseful story leading to an en d ing w hich w ill present
a solution or satisfy in some w a y , but rather to show a journey,
a motion describ in g an event.
In the film on w e a v in g w e are im m ediately sh ow n the w eaver
making her rug. We then go on to the long jou rn ey o f gathering
roots for dye, carin g for the sheep, cutting, carding, spinning,
boiling, and so on w h ich is the event o f w eaving. We then come
back at the end to the finished ru g not the same edeme, h o w
ever, but a sim ilar one. T h e circle is almost closed.
T h e silversm ith film has an identical structure. T h e v e ry title
shows us the silversmith at w o rk on the finished piece o f silver.
T h e first shots show the com pleted end. T h e n w e go on to the
same long journ ey. F in d in g the mine, m in in g the silver, w a lkin g
endlessly to gather materials. A t the end w e see a sim ilar shot o f
the silversmith and the finished jewelry.
T h e r e is v e ry little feeling o f h ow it will turn out. We are
told that im m ediately. Suspen se o f en d in g is not the point. T h e
process o f becom ing, o f eventing, o f m ovin g tow ard completion,
is what w e are made to feel is im portant; not what w ill happen,
but how it happens.
 Chapter

H
Intrepid Shadows
and the Outsider

T h e films made by the N a v a jo are sim ilar except for one. A ll the
others are direct depictions o f eventings. T h e y are specific and
som ew hat didactic in tone. T h e r e is little direct generalization or
deliberate sy m b o lis m as in ou r u n iversity student films. A ll the
other films sho w the w a y it looks ; they are about outer rather
than inn er processes and things. T h e y are objective rather than
personal; w e w ou ld classify them as docum entary. T h e films
obvio u sly objectify the N a v a jo w orld according to the N avajo
w a y o f stru ctu rin g things, but they are stru ctu rin g outer rather
than inn er or personal events. T h a t is in line w ith the N a va jo
language and customs, w h ic h do not even have w o rd s for generic
subjects such as color. O ne must ask in N a va jo, Is it blue? not
What color is it? T h e r e is no w a y o f saying, w h at generaliza
tion is som eth in g?
T h e exception is A 1 C la h s film, Intrepid Shadows. T h e r e w as a
marked difference on almost all levels o f observation between A 1
and the other Navajos. H is w a y o f w ork ing, his notion o f what
he wanted to make a film about, and his behavior w h ile w o rk in g
seemed much more com parable to the students at the A n n e n b e rg
School than to the N avajo. A 1 w as extrem ely introspective, hos
tile, and com petitive; he could easily, sim plistically, and quite
uselessly be characterized as n eurotic, a middle-class art
school type o f kid. N o n e o f these qualities show ed up in the
other Navajo.
Y et A l s film is also intensely N a v a jo in content and manner,
particularly his use o f motion as a form to con vey meaning, his
intense in volvem ent and ability to portray a feeling o f anim ism,
and his identification w ith his natural en viron m ent rather than
his personal one.
A description o f A l s film as he finally photographed and edited
it appears in the appen d ix to this book. It m ight be fru itfu l to
follow its developm ent as A 1 described it in his interviews. We
will insert ou r com m ents relating his ideas to the relevant aspects
of N a va jo culture.
First it should be rem em bered that A 1 Clah was a stranger to
the com m u n ity. We chose him and brought him to P ine Springs.
He lived with us in the dorm itory. H e had no kinsman there and
was n ever invited b y a n y person in Pine S p r in g s to a n y o f the
hogans. H e stuck close to us and the other students du rin g the
whole tw o months. W hen w e left for a w eekend, A 1 usually left
Pine Sp rin gs, too. Indeed he was not on ly lonely but said so, and
was rejected and resented by the com m unity.
A t one point, in what seemed to us an effort to make friends
with M ike and Jo h n n y , he participated in a hostile incident at the
T r a d in g Post. In discussing the incident w ith the trader and his
w ife as well as with other N a va jo s in the com m u n ity , the blame
was in variably focused on A l, although M ike and J o h n n y w ere
as deeply involved. A s the trader described it,

Al is the instigator of the whole thing I feel sure. I looked out

and saw Clah and Mike outside. I asked Al to come in and as soon
 as I had him in the office, I grabbed his shirt. I didnt hit him
I wanted to hit him so bad but I didnt. E ve r since he opened his
mouth around here that first day I wanted to hit him. . . . I know
he is a trouble maker.

A s A 1 tells the story, he treated the trader as a friend but

realized that like the others, he doesn t w a n t me around .
A l s v e ry title and the discussion- o f the intrepid or fearless
shadow reflects one o f A l s earliest needs to express his lack of
fear in his n e w situation. H e then developed the theme o f the
intruder, w h ic h at first was a v a gu ely fo rm ulated sym b o lic event
in no w a y connected with him self, but rather w ith the shadows
and the rollin g wh eel w h ich w e re the first things he shot.

c la h :T h e most important thing is the wheel I have over there.

. . . I let it go, it spins like that [circular motions of his hand],
. . . See the pictures triangle and a third of that piece, that metal
things here [top third]. . . and the rest of this be a shadow
spinning it was going that fast you know it was a very, very,
very great trans-transform-transformation. Th at was the first shot
I make.
w o rth : A nd you shot all of the hundred feet on that?
c la h : Yeah.

W orth then asked w h at else w as in the film, and A 1 mentioned

those rocks, and a spider w e b , and som ebody got to see that
wheel m o vin g all the time like that. W orth asked h ow long it
w o u ld take to shoot.

c la h :It all depends, how I find it cause I need certain days the
shadows have to be and it depends on how bright it gets, and
how long the shadows. T h a t s important how long the shadows
get. . . . Im going to try to find me a nice area where theres rocks
. . . what I ve seen I like is about a shadow. I need a bright sun like
a shadow can go through it a silhouette. Person going to be like
that.
 This was the first mention o f a person in the film and Worth
encouraged A 1 to go on.

I m going to think about the film because what I seen

c la h :
through the lens or reviewer [viewer] has sort of come out the way
I want it. Not just everything move, just some things moving.
Maybe the person the part o f the person in the way [our italics]
that is abstract way o f moving but you can see the person, but
I dont want to see the. . . . [At this point, A 1 gestures vaguely
toward the upper part o f his body.]

On the twentieth o f Ju n e, W orth asked A l, I d like y ou to tell

me about the shadows called intrepid shadows that I heard in the
poem. W hats the film goin g to be, w h a ts the b egin n in g?

c la h :Its going to open with J o h n n y s walking and all that carries

down to where we see the tree with the web . . . and, uh, J o h n n y s
still investigating [in the film] the whole ideas round this shadows
which comes first. T h is will be a very solemn first. T h e n he
hears a snap, he stops then he starts walking. . . . Remember he
heard something he heard something. He plays with the spider
web pokes a stick in it then bang we sees the wheel coming
in he looks up.
Did you deliberately shoot that shot with the head in it
w o rth :

looking up like that?

c la h : Yeah.
w o rth : Y o u d id ?

c la h :I told him. . . . We stop there and we had a little discussion

and I taught him how . . . then hes going to be standing there and
uh really surprised faces, then he goes like that [Al snaps his head
from side to side with quick jerky movements] . . . after he play
with that web that's when he starts running. T r y to see what it
is. H e s going to come right through the trees as he runs. He runs
behind the tree afterwards from another shot, Im going to find
a tree which is very close together and all of a sudden theres a tree
like that hes going to come like that and Im going to take some
of his shadow, his foot walking . . . then I take the wheel again and
the shadow . . .
 H e continued to describe m otions and specific arrangements
until W orth said, I m b e g in n in g to understand it now. T h is is
a man or a boy, a man out in the w orld , and there are things that
catch his eye after he plays w ith a spider w eb and then he
investigates?

Uh-huh H e s a, hes a intruder see, thats w h y I call them

c la h :

intrepid shadows.
w o rth : Tell me more a b o u t th at.

c la h : T h e intruder is like Johnny.

w o rth : What does an intruder mean What does it mean in the
film?
c i.a h :See hes out there in the world right there observing things.
T h e r e s nobody been there.
w o rth : N obody been in the world?
c la h :Right there in the film nobody been there. T h is other
person is very the person that push the wheel hes unknown
. . . because I w o n t show his face and more mysterious things
happen and Jo h n n y s going to investigate I show his face then
the rain comes in. He finds everythin g happen. T h e wheel is
mysterious to him . . . his face there's going to be rain on his face
getting wet the wheel gets wet too. . . . Then he sort of wonders.
Then he hears something else, a lot of things. Its sort of com
plicated, but I thats the w ay m y mind I cant, I cant push it
push it out. [A 1 motions toward his mouth ]
I m interested in this intruder. What is he intruding into.
w o rth :

Is he intruding
c i .a h : Into
these mysterious mysterious things happen . . . he uh,
he intrudes the spider web. T h e n something happen because he
was there.
w o rth : I s that the shot where he poked the stick?
c la h : Yeah into the spider web, he was intruding the spider.
w o rth : A nd then something happens?
c i.a h : Yeah.
w o rth : In the film the next shot is the spinning wheel?
 CLAH : Uh-huh.
w o rth : A n d w hat does that mean?
W ell, I, sort of, put it one w ay. See I need the spider first,
c la h :

in there som etim e because its sort o f the spider bewitch him.

In N a v a jo m y t h o lo g y , the S p i d e r L a d y is one o f the creators

o f the w o rld , w e a v i n g an d h o ld in g it together. It is v e ry dangrous
to in te rfe re w i t h h e r fu n c tio n as it m ig h t d estroy the delicate
balances h o l d in g th e w o r l d together. A s described by W a sh in g
ton M a tth e w s, F a t h e r H a il e and others, the N a v a jo conceive o f
th em selves as in a p a r tic u la r re la tio n s h ip w ith their e n v iro n
m ent. N a v a jo m a n lives in a u n iv e r s e o f eternal and u n ch an g in g
forces w h i c h he a tte m p ts to m a in ta in in e q u ilib riu m (even to the
exten t o f n e e d in g th re e g ir ls as film students if there are already
th ree boys). T h e r e is a co n sta n t b a la n c in g o f po w ers. T h e mere
fact o f liv in g is, h o w e v e r , lik e ly to distu rb this balance (which A 1
w ill m e n tio n later) and t h r o w the w o r ld out o f gear. T h e shadow
m en tio n ed in th e title is also s y m b o lic of the N a v a jo concepts of
soul, that w h i c h is l y i n g in , as th ey say. T h e soul can be killed
o n ly b y th e su n , and so w e find in this film a play betw een man
and n a tu re and a b a la n c e b e tw e e n the two. A t the begin nin g, the
sun is s t r o n g an d the s h a d o w s sh ort and w eak , and man too is
fa llib le w h e n he in te rfe re s w ith nature.
A n i n t r u d e r , J o h n n y N e ls o n in the film, h appens on a spider
w eb , a n d w h i l e p l a y i n g w i t h it d e s tro y s it. P o k in g the w e b again
sets the s ta g e fo r th e i n t r u d e r s lon g jo u r n e y .
I m m e d ia t e l y a fte r J o h n n y po kes a stick into the spider web, a
r o llin g h o o p (an old tire rim ) is seen m o v in g m y sterio u sly across
the lan d s ca p e . I he in t r u d e r looks aro u n d but finds no explan a
tion. T h e h o o p seen in te r m itte n tly ro llin g th rough the landscape
m ay be b est in te r p r e te d in the light o f the f o llo w in g quotation:

C losed c ircles made o f meal or pollen or perhaps merely described

on the gro u n d , hoops and rings are frequently encountered in
ritual. I'h ey represent a space so narrowed down that it is under
 control, an area from which evil has been driven and within which
power has been concentrated. (Reichard 1950)

It is the m ysterious p o w e r w h ich so frightens the intruder. He

must find it and become united with it so that balance in the
universe m ay be restored.

w o rth : T h e spider bewitched him?

Almost, yeah, something like that. Th en hes out of his mind
c i.a h :

for a while. . . . All of a sudden theres these mysterious rims

metal setting out o f nowhere. . . . I like some kind of motion some
kind of mysterious thing happen.
w o rth : T h e mysterious thing is like being bewitched?
c la h : Uh-huh.
w o rth : A nd the intruder ?
c i .a h : Shouldnot have touched the spider web. At the end where
the rain is on his face after I want the rain there then he thinks
about it and I shoot this other part where he was touching the
web. I can take it [the shot] back to where the rain is [the end of
the film]. Then that will tell that he is thinking about that [touch
ing the web]. T h a t s the reason w h v it [the rest of the film] happen.
. . . Its sort of dark, and water running in his face, and he think
back What did I done. Oh yes, spider in the spider web, that
probably what happen. I going to make a shot of him touching
it, touching it, you know, just touching it then a shot of his face
looking at it and touching it again. . . . Slowly going into the spider
web. M aybe you know, see a spider web and all of sudden his mind
fill with those wheels spinning, just those wheels spinning. . . .
Then he; still faced with that he's still faced with it.
w o rth : What made you want to make a film about an intruder?
c i .a h : .
. . T h e film [without an intruder] is dead just doesnt make
sense. If I see him in there then I know what the film is about.
I like somebody that pokes in these things [our italics]. T h e y point out
to the audiences . . . I got somebody on there to tell me, thats it.

Worth c o u ld n t understand w h at there referred to, but Al

soon cleared it up.
c la h : In other words, the little people on there says, you know, to
do it.
w o r t h : T h e little people, you re making a motion as if there are
little people on your shoulder, is that it?
Yeah; What are you doing? one o f them asked me. Said Im
c la h :

trying to make them intrepid. . . . Th e n one o f them said I should

have somebody in there to point. So you have to choose one of your
own men one your ow n peoplel So I chose Johnny.
w o rth : T h e little men on your shoulder told you
Yeah, yeah. Th en he said, go head. N o w I'm telling you,
c la h :

he says. T h a ts telling you, yo ur ow n people, telling you to point

out these things . . . cause I cant get in the film when Im taking
the pictures. . . . This I fe lt was me on the inside and I have to choose
somebody to be me in the film [our italics]. T h a ts w h y I tell them to
act like I did.
w o rth : In other words, hes going to be you.
c la h : Yeah!
w o rth : T h e intruder is you?
I s me! T h a ts me thats trying to put it up. T h is little man
c la h :

[on his shoulder] he says its personal you have to show the
other people to make them understand.
w o rth : When did you get the idea for the intruder?
I had it in mind all the time people ask me w h y you make
c la h :

this shots and you have to explain it. . . . I tried to make you
understand it or John [Adair], but you really got confused. Then
I have to do it in a way so you can understand.
w o r t h : Y o u h a d t o d o it [ t h e f i l m ] t h i s w a y t o m a k e u s u n d e r s t a n d ?

Yeah, ves. But the whole thing was in here, in my head.

c la h :
Then I have to put it in another element Joh nny Nelson. . . . It
was so personal at first . . . then I lay down during the night to
think about it. . . Then I found the solution in Jo h n n y said,
yeah, this is what Im going to do. I m going to do it my action.
w o r t h : You felt we w ouldnt understand just from seeing the

shots you made that it was really you and you were making a film
about how' it feels to be an intruder.
c la h : Yeah. I was going to make you an intruder.
 w o rth : Y ou were going to make me an intruder?
c la h : The audience, and you, to feel this and you but I thought
it was too complicated so I just have to get Johnny. . . . I was going
to do it this way; therell be no actor except you will be the actor
yourself. T h e audience can feel, see if they can feel it this didnt
happen. T h e y going to get the w ro ng idea. But now with the actor,
they can get, they can make themself Johnny. N o w they can do
it. . . . I have to make people feel Joh nny in the film cause I seen
with my painting they really understand sometime. Sometime
they dont. . . . I want people to understand. I like people to
understand. . . . I only got, how can I put it, the center of the film,
its not there yet. I got to get it. T h e center . . . that the guy really
intrudes and he gets that reaction from nature because he was
there to intrude.

Later A 1 inform ed us that one time he w as goin g to be an

engineer, that in an aptitude test at school he was told he could
be an engineer, and so he thought that was the th ing to do. But
as he started d raw in g , he decided he was meant to be an artist.

w o r t h : Who do you think, Al, is more o f an intruder, an engineer

or an artist?
clah: An artist.
w o rth : Why?
Well, engineer he just repeat things over and over, buildings
c la h :

and mechanics. But artist his minds working. He wants to see

things, he doesnt have to touch it, he have to do it with spirit,
recapture the image on his pad. Th e re he touch the world, like I
touch, like I make a portrait o f you there touched a mans face,
I can t say it, I cant describe it, I cant touch it. This is the face
(pointing to a pad]. If I want to make a drawing of this [pointing
to Worths face] sure I touch it.
w o rth : . . . thats what Joh nny does with the spider web.
c la h : Yeah!
w o rth : He touches it.

c la h : Examines it closely. . . . T h is [his film] is a self-portrait, yeah.

 w iu - Bib!iote_3

There you can begin to understand the self-portrait of the artist.

He portrays h i m s e l f w i t h a n e w , w i t h a n e w t h e m e h e s l e a r n i n g
like Im learning this film. . . . Its going to be just one motion
my portrait, my life, my feeling. T h is is my feeling.

T h is is perhaps the sharpest and clearest expression o f the

notion o f motion in N a v a jo thinking. A self-portrait is just one
m otion in w h ich to p ortray a n ew theme a man is learning. N o t
only is the value o f learning and education tied to motion, it is
an integral part o f it. T h e film depicts the motion o f learning m y
portrait, my life, m y feelin g. F o r Al and perhaps for the others
their films are not so much explanations o f events as depictions
o f a process o f learn ing these events.
When M ike tells us that he has to photograph the lake by
walking around it sunwise, he too is sharing the idea that the
process of film ing is part o f the film. H e doesn t divorce his o w n
actions from the events on the film just as A l doesn t separate the
motion of movie im ages from the motion o f his life.

w o rth : Y ou m e a n in t h e film , y o u c a n m a k e a p o r t r a i t o f y o u r
fe elin gs.

c la h :Uh-huh. Th in g s happen. T h is is the artists mind sometime.

. . . But if I want to try to self-portrait m yself all the w ay through,
deep, it would take another thousand, thousand, thousand feet of
film. T h is is one way I feel sometime. Being an intruder.
w o rth : Even in a rt.

c la h : Everywhere. . . .

A t this point A l begins to talk about the newest element in his

film after J o h n n y had refused to continue acting in the film and
a substitute had to be found. A l refused to remove the shots o f
Jo h nn y , but now he c o u ld n t have an actor portray himself. As
he developed within him self his kn ow led ge o f w h o the intruder
really was, he decided to substitute a hand-painted mask o f a
Yeibechai god, w hich he cur out o f corrugated cardboard. It was
a free version o f the standard ritual Y eibechai mask, w ith an
im portant variation the eyes w e re made in three dimensions,
controlled by strings and pieces o f w ood from the back so that
they could be m anipulated to s w in g to and fro in the m an ner he
had o rig in ally described as J o h n n y looking for the w h ee l. A s
soon as J o h n n y looks up, the wh eel appears; w e see it rollin g and
then a Yeib ech ai mask appears looking in all directions for the
cause o f the disturbance. J o h n n y has been replaced by the Y e ib e
chai.
D u r in g the course o f the film, the intru d er gains p o w e r by
contact w ith the Y eibechai in his w an derings. A t the end o f the
film A 1 h im self is intrepid to match his shadow (which has also
joined the search), and the sun is weak.
A 1 continues talking about the place o f the Yeib ech ai mask.

I m not supposed to paint Yeibechai faces. Sometimes I make the

mask, people feel very strong about it. M y teacher he says, its very
strong, just a little bit thats all. T h ere I intrude the mask. T h e
sacred mask. People cant understand this mask is sacred, very
ritual. T h e y ask me, H ow come you do this? Y ou shouldnt do
this you shouldnt even touch these things. So there I thought
about why did I do it. I am an intruder. I find m yself the intruder
everywhere well, I want to intrude in myself too. I want to find
out more about myself, see what happen see what happen to me.

In A l s cardboard Yeib ech ai mask, it is in teresting to note the

tw o lines r u n n in g from the nose u p w a rd (photo 52). Such lines
n ever appear in cerem onial Y eib ech ai masks and these look so
m uch like a d r a w in g o f a piece o f m ovie film that one is forced
to speculate that A 1 unconsciously m erged the m agic o f the movie
w ith the m agic o f the N a v a jo god represented in the mask, the
god w h o replaced A 1 himself, and w h o searches the w orld to see
w h at happens w h en the intruder pokes a stick into the web. H ere
again A 1 expressed his feeling that the film is one motion o f his
life.
A 1 recognized that his film was different from those o f the
other students. In many ways he was making the film for fellow
artists, for those who could understand, but he wanted to achieve
communication. It was important that he be understood. At one
point he said,

1 still believe in my Indian w a y s . . . the other students they making

films of the daily lives o f the people, but I w ent beyond, a little
beyond that . . . they making films about things out there, the
T ra d in g Post, things you can see, I m making films about inside.
I like to see scenes that people n ever expected, the legends, the
gods. I definitely believe in ancient lore, those things which never
exists before. Sooner or later you get out o f it. I was a Catholic
faith and all of a sudden, never w ent to church no more. I found
out the gods never existed, that the church, that the church are just
church. . . . T h e gods aren t really exist because if you, if really
exist he could have really w ent and found that wheel. I mean the
wheel was there.

H e c o n tin u e d to e x p l a i n , w i t h m u c h g o i n g b a c k o v e r th in g s ,
that the mask w a s th e N a v a j o s g o d s b u t it w a s a ls o the i n t r u d e r
and also re p re s e n te d th e C h r i s t i a n g o d s. W h e n th e i n t r u d e r u n
b ala n ced the w o r l d a n d th e w h e e l s ta r te d s p i n n i n g , e v e r y o n e
tried to find out w h a t h a p p e n e d . I f th e g o d s r e a l l y w e r e g o d s
if the movies w e r e r e a lly m o t io n t h e y c o u ld h a v e f o u n d the
w h e e l and stop p ed its s p i n n i n g , a n d all w o u l d h ave been w e ll.
Instead it w as A l h im s e lf, w i t h a c a m e r a at his e y e o r r a th e r his
shadow gro w in g longer and longer w h o s e a rc h e d and
searched for k n o w l e d g e an d fin a lly m e r g e d w i t h the s h a d o w o f
the w h eel. N o n e o f the gods, w h it e o r N a v a jo , co u ld b ec om e
in trepid shadow s, o n l y A l co u ld , b ecau se he w a s on a lo n g jo u r
ney for k n o w le d g e a bo u t h im s e l f an d b ecau se he co u ld m a k e the
w h ee l stop. H e says the film is a f e e lin g se lf-p o rtra it o f an artist
based on a little bit, part o f the legends, the a n c ie n t god s and o f
n ature.

1 found out that 1 have on ly one w a y I can express m y self-

portrait is through nature and the ancient gods. Because I feel that
 way thats w h y I say that I dont believe in gods. I believe in gods
to express by self-por to self whats another word? Maybe I
can put it this way. That's [a film] the only w ay that the gods can get
me out in the open and they imitate me instead [our italics], . . . That
was me, thats where my mind was, my body and soul. Also I wore,
I wear the white shirt and pants in the film, thats my spirit.
w o rth : The film is y o u r s p i r i t ?

c l a h : Uh-huh.
T h a t s why I hate to show this to my parents the
ancient gods is taboo to use gods to take the place o f yourself.

In a still later in terview , w h en the film was almost completed,

Worth asked Al, What do you w ant people to feel after th ey ve
seen Intrepid Shadows? "

In the beginning everythin g is black, black . . . you know,

c la h :
very good contrast.
w o rth : What kind o f emotion is that?
I want them to feel their muscles tense. T h a ts the word
c la h :
tense, I guess.
w o rth : Can you think of more words you want them to feel?
c la h : I want them to feel their emotion . . . very grotick and tense.
w o rth : Growtick?
c la h : Grotesque?
w o rth : Grotesque?
c l a h : Yes, grotesque, tense undecided they feel alone a this

and a that . . . and at the end o f the film relaxed. . . . T h e wheel

supposed to be sort of in between grotesque and tense and at the
end calm. . I'm not sure that would express it cause the language
. . . the Navajo language is very hard.
w o rth : Could you say it in Navajo?
N o. In grotesque everything is sort of twisted. And tense is
c la h :
just you get sort of free for a while and see w hats happened and
the wheel is running and I want to feel the calm again between.
I he eyes moving and calmness, flowing, walking, just walk, and
the mask comes in, goes down that w a y nice flowing. And all of
a sudden, he stops and just something happens. . . .
 w o rth : I s the film still about an intruder and fearless shadows?
c la h :I was stuck on that yesterday. I was looking at it the in
truder, shadows, w h ats a shadow whats that an intruder? Who s
an intruder? Its a different story now Id like to change the title
but dont know how. . . . I was going to make it into a dream.
. . . Th e dream, my true image . . . still, just a mask don't portray
my image. . . . M y the way I experience things.
w o rth : T h e mask is you, too.
Is me, yes . . . the gods have mingled with people, which is
c la h :

a very paranoid expression, but thats the way the story goes.
w o rth : Its a what kind of expression?
c l a h : Paranoid, its the gods they never, there s no gods that ever

existed.
w o rth : D o you mean paranoid or paradoxical?
c la h : Paranoid.
w o rth : Paranoid means ?
c la h :Is when I would say Im Michelangelo. T h a ts paranoid.
. . . I would sleep, and I would dream I went to sleep, and the
gods came looking for something because I didnt believe. Then
the god told me if you dont believe go out and look. See if you can
find these things. Although I dont believe these gods come at
night . . . try to catch me.
w o rth : Y ou sound as if you are talking about yourself.
c la h : Yes.
w o rth : A re you really?
Yes, as I said but I always say that when Im the mask no.
c la h :

Its this little, little two scales Im standing on trying to balance

M y real feeling for the right thing that the legend says and on
myself I dont believe these legends. Its those little two scales Im
trying to balance.

H ere A 1 finally manages to explain the film in almost perfect

accord with one o f the deepest N a v a jo values recorded in the
literature. H e explains his o w n need for m aintaining equilib
rium, a balancing o f pow ers betw een him self and M ichelangelo;
between N a va jo god and C hristian god, between him self and the
old god, between him self and nature, between h im self and film
itself. I le know s that the mere fact o f living th row s things out of
balance, and he justifies his b eing an artist as a w a y o f com pro m is
ing or balancing the gods w h o tell him to undertake the long
jo u rn ey w h e re he w ill see w h at happen.
T h e tense" section o f his film occurred at the point that the
in truder poked a stick into the spid er w e b and the hoop started
rolling. T h e grotesque section occurs d u rin g the constant
m ovem ent o f the camera as the Y eibechai is looking for the cause
o f the disturbance set up by the rolling hoop that w as loosed by
the in tru d ers poking into the spider web, and the ca lm comes
wh en w e see the hoop and its shadow m ergin g into one entity.
T h e last shot of the film is unaccustom edly long and well
planned. It is the longest shot in the film, and as A 1 explained
before he shot it, T h is part w ill be hard because the shadow
must com bin e w ith the wheel and this might take a long time to
happen. T h e shot opens w ith only the s p in n in g shadow shown
on the screen, s low ly, almost lazily making its effortless (and for
most audiences, calm) circles across the earth. T h e n almost im
perceptibly the actual wheel hub comes into the frame, never
in te rfe rin g with the shadow but gra d u a lly becom in g part o f the
same universe. A t almost the m om ent that an audience is able to
perceive this the film ends (photo 55).
T h e question m ay be asked: Was A 1 Clah consciously using
traditional N a v a jo sym bols or w as the sym bolism and narrative
style in w h ich it was expressed unconscious? O r is the resem
blance between the abstract form s and N a va jo ritual stylization
pu rely fortuitous?
It must be rem em bered that A 1 Clah had spent seven years
a w a y attending the Indian A r t School at Sante Fe and, although
his home was nearby, he w as a stranger to the Pine S prin gs
com m u n ity. T h e intruder is o f course A 1 Clah. ( I ca n t be be
hind the camera and act in the film at the same time . . . so Jo h n n y
w ill be m e. ) A s soon as Jo h n n y , h ow ever, saw the rushes o f the
footage Al had shot, in which J o h n n y not only was made to poke
a stick into a spid er w e b but had his face show n in close-up, as
well, a tension developed betw een them; J o h n n y refused to act
in the film and became less frien d ly to Al.
At this point Al started m aking the Y eibechai mask out o f
cardboard and it became the sym bol o f the long searches. A l had
originally intended to have the in truder (Johnny) search for the
thing (the rolling hoop) that started wh en he poked into the
spider w e b .
N o t on ly did the mask act out the long search, but A l finally
created a method by w hich he h im self could become strong and
fearless, id entify with the ancient gods, and be h im self in the
film. H e learned first to use the camera in such a w a y that he
could press the start button w ith the camera on a tripod, and then
appear in front of it. H e arranged the camera to photograph his
white shirt and pants to show his soul, as he put it. Later he
created a long sequence in w hich he held the camera up to his eye
in such a w a y that he could see through the v ie w in g lens and that
the camera could be seen in the shadow he cast before him. He
then photographed his search for that portion o f his w orld in
which the shadow he cast was sharpest, longest, and clearest. It
is a beautiful section in the film in which A l clearly achieved that
flowing motion first flow o f m otion that he talked about in
his early interviews.

B y the middle o f Ju n e, A d a ir noted that a relationship had

developed betw een Sol W orth and A l Clah that w as quite differ
ent from what w e had orig in a lly anticipated. Al as an e x
perienced artist was not acting as an interm ed iary between
Worth and the students. O rig in a lly w e had chosen A l because we
felt that he w ou ld be most likely able to learn filmmaking. We
were still uncertain at the tim e that A l w as included in the
project that any o f the other N a v a jo w ould be w illin g and able
to make a film depictin g their w o rld as they saw it. N o t o n ly did
we feel that A ! w ould be easier to teach, but w e thought from
previous research that a two-step flow from w hite innovator to
more acculturated N a v a jo and then to less acculturated w ou ld be
necessary. T h a t method was used effectively with Susie and her
mother, but the facility o f the five students from Pine S p rin g s in
learning the technology o f film m aking made A l s anticipated role
superfluous. A 1 was forced to take his place in the classroom
alongside the others as an equal and was taught as if his needs
w ere the same as the other m em bers o f the class. B ut A l s needs
w e re different on m an y levels. First, he lived with us, and not
with the N a v a jo in a hogan of his ow n , with his o w n kin. Second,
he was used to learn ing new media in a place w h ere ev ery effort
was made to explain rules and develop abstract ideas. Worth
refused to say w h at was good and h ardly mentioned the w o rd art
to the N avajo. A 1 kn ew that film was an art form and was very
frustrated because he c o u ld n t talk about art in class no one
really understood it and W orth w o u ld n t discuss it. Y et A 1
kn ew that W orth had been an artist, had spent m any years as a
painter and sculptor and had made films that had w on prizes and
w ere in museum collections.
A 1 began to rebel, s h o w in g off, b ecom in g aggressive, acting
superior, and in general b eh aving in w a y s that accentuated his
alienation from the N a v a jo and began to affect the research as
well.
A d a ir called this situation to W o rth s attention, su ggesting that
som ething be done. Worth realized that A l s talents and back
ground demanded special teaching. The other students allowed
Worth to maintain his pro fesso r-stu dent role with them, A 1 in
sisted that they w e re equals both fellow artists. Sin ce this was
a difficult role for W orth to maintain w hile attem ptin g to be a
neutral teacher as w ell as a researcher, he orig in ally responded
to A 1 w ith some hostility.
When W orth realized that his behavior w as su p p o rtin g A l s
alienation from the co m m u n ity bv keeping him frustrated, he
decided to spend extra private time w ith him. It w orked out well.
Worth w ould sit d o w n or go fo r a walk w ith Al, allo w in g and
even encouraging him to talk about art, his film, and any subject
Al wanted to talk about.
It was clear after o nly a few days that Al was a foreigner to this
com munity; that his tra in in g as an artist in a school distant from
the reservation even though run for and by A m erican Indians
had divorced him from N a v a jo c o m m u n ity life and had given
him an image o f h im self very different from that o f the other
Navajo in the class. T h e som ew hat special treatment that Al
received w as not enough to preven t his feelings o f alienation,
although it may have som ew hat softened his frustration.
When A l said in his interview s, T h e other students are m ak
ing films o f the daily lives o f the people, but I went beyond, a
little bit beyond that, I like to see in my film scenes that people
never expected. In my painting nobody expects me to paint fact.
I can alw ay s change it, he w as leading up to his explanation o f
his role in the N a v a jo as well as the w hite world. When A l later
said, A n artist has a w orld o f his o w n , he w as not m erely
mouthing a cliche com m on to all art students in the West, he was
holding on to the only explan ation he could find that w o u ld allow
him to exist in the essentially paranoid schizophrenic situation
he really w as in.
F o r all his sim ilarity to a Western neurotic personality type,
A l was a N avajo, and his film in o u r opinion could o n ly have been
made by a N avajo. T h r o u g h it A l m anaged to express his at
tempted reconciliation with both o f the w orld s he lived in the
Navajo w orld he was born into and the Western w h ite w orld he
was thrust into. H e succeeded in recording the first N a v a jo bio
docum entary film. A l could express h im self and explain him self
only through his culture, which, by the time o f our intervention,
was an apparent jumble o f w h ite art school abstraction and an
cient N a v a jo lore.
In all the films made, w e find repeated reference to standard
themes in N a v a jo m y th olo gy w h ic h show the strong ties (deliber
ate or not, conscious or unconscious) that exist betw een the real
problems o f the filmmaker, the problems o f film technology, and
the themes and problems as expressed in the film m akers m y th
ology.
K a therine Spencer, in an analysis o f the plot construction of
N a va jo m yth, has said, Rejection bv his fam ily or ridicule and
scorn on the part o f associates m ay set the stage for the heros
reckless b eh avior (Spencer 1957). N o t only was the hero o f A l s
film reckless in the m an ner w e have described, but so w as Al
himself.
Before m eeting his sister for a reunion and just after finishing
the calm sequence o f the film, A l w en t to a S q u a w D ance in a
n eigh b o rin g co m m u n ity. T h e re , by getting d run k and acting the
role o f the provocative stranger, he got into a fight, was stabbed
several times, and ended up in the hospital unable to com plete the
reunion with his fam ily and return to the ca lm he said he
wanted.
Ju st as motion and travel give pow er, and the m anipulation of
the en viro n m en t to put people and things in motion give power,
so does the m anipulation o f the en viron m en t in other w a y s
through film give p o w e r and positive satisfaction to the Navajo.
Jo h n n y and M ike w e re able to give their relatives sheep by
b o rro w in g film o f sheep from Susie and inserting them in a
sequence depicting their ow n relatives. Susie, on the other hand,
could be generous by giv in g a w a y film sheep and still retain
her real sheep. O n e w h o has so much that part can be given
to friends is indeed pow erful.
A ll the filmmakers enjoyed m anipu lating the environ m en t,
from the sim ple ability to rearrange the m ovements in the seesaw
sequence w hich M ax in e discovered in her first film, to A l s mas
sive m anipulation by m aking the entire w o rld join him in his
o w n personal search.
Susie was able to show that her m other was a superior weaver,
and her m other could in return show that Susie w as a superior
weaver. T h e films gave the fam ily added prestige and thus power.
M ike w as able to make a hau n ted hogan beautiful by
m anipulating the en viro n m en t through ed iting to make it look
as if the haunted hogan was indeed still inhabited. H e showed
first the outside of the hogan w h ich ev ery on e k n e w could not
be lived in, and then cut to a shot o f someone elses hogan which
was clearly lived in.
Jo h n n y was able to control the making of the shallow well
through film w h ile not actually taking the job o f construction
foreman. T h r o u g h film he acquired the p o w e r to have his cake
and eat it. Perhaps J o h n n y expressed it best w h en he said, What
I really w ant to see is som ething that I can move in front of my
own eyes, that 1 took m yself that I made.
T h e question o f the consciousness or deliberateness with
which traditional narrative form s are transferred to n ew modes
o f expression is one that aestheticians, anthropologists and art
historians am on g others have asked m any times. T h e im portant
thing to note is that the N a va jo s on first using film, in an en
deavor to co m m unicate their v ie w o f their world, chose to create
forms w h ich w e re fulfilling and possibly even therapeutic to
them in traditional N a va jo style.
 How Groups in Our Society
Act When Taught
to Use Movie Cameras

S o far in this book w e have been describing the films and filming
behavior o f a single grou p o f people the N a va jo w o rk in g as
individuals w h o made films under ou r instruction within the
context o f a small c o m m u n ity on the N a va jo reservation.
S h o rtly after w e returned from the reservation, C h a lfe n who
had w orked as ou r assistant w ith the N a v a jo and shared the
teaching w ith W orth began to explore the possibilities o f using
this bio-docum entary technique to study the film m aking behav
ior o f several inn ercity groups o f teenagers living in Philadel
phia. A s w e have said, one o f the aims o f ou r research was to
develop a method for collecting, analyzing, and co m p arin g how
various gro u ps and cultures structured their w orld w h en making
a film about it.
A his chapter will report on several projects undertaken in the

T h i s c h a p t e r is w r i t t e n w i t h R i c h a r d C h a l fe n .
last few years in w hich sim ilar methods have been used to study
groups differing socio-culturally from the Navajo.

Since 1964 there has been a trem endous gro w th in the num ber
o f teenage and adolescent film m aking groups in the U nited States
and G re at Britain. In 1968 the C o m m u n it y F ilm W orkshop C o u n
cil (established by the A m erica n F ilm Institute) identified sev
enty film w orksh ops in thirty-five cities w h ic h have produced
about tw o hundred films. M ost o f these w orksh ops are in urban,
black ghetto neighborhoods. Since then m any other groups have
been established in sim ilar situations (A chtenberg 1967, A m e r i
can Film Institute 1969, British F ilm Institute 1966, C u lk in 1966,
Department o f H E W 1968, G il b e r 1967, L a y b o u rn e 1968, Lidstone
and M cIntosh 1970, P eavy 1969, Rob b in 1966, S te w a rt 1965, Stod
dard 1967). O n e should not assume, h ow ever, that all o f these
projects are designed to serve sim ilar research purposes or that
the films made are analyzed in sim ilar w ays, if they are analyzed
at all. T h e r e is little in com m on between the teaching methods
we have reported in ou r w ork and those o f most other groups
learning to make films in the C o m m u n ity F ilm Workshop. Most
o f these groups are co ncerned and rightly, w e feel with co m
munity service and action. T h e y have, h ow ever, spent very little
o f their energies a nalyzin g the results o f their activities in w a y s
comparable to ours. In m any instances, the film m aking projects
are not reported in the literature. H o w e v e r, the w r itin g s o f A c h
tenberg (1967), Larson and M eade (1966, 1969), F erguson (1969),
Robbin (1966), W orth (1963, 1965, 1969, 1970), Chalfen (1969), and
Chalfen and H aley (in Press) give some indication o f the variety
o f approaches and functions in the production o f teenage movies.
In general, apart from the extent o f the analysis made o f the films,
the projects differ w ith respect to the interests and motivations
o f the sponsors, the functions o f the film m aking activity, and the
settings and personnel involved.
In one instance, R o d ger Larson, w h o has done extensive w ork
at the U n iv e rs ity Settlem ent Film C lu b on N e w Y o r k s L o w er
East Side, reported that low er socio-economic blacks and Puerto
Ricans turned off to films made by middle-class w hite kids. T h is
prompted him to seek funds to provide poor adolescents with
their o w n film m aking opportunities. H o w e v e r, Larson never re
turned to the puzzling implications o f his observation that not all
groups o f teenagers liked the same types o f films. I f adolescents
o f different backgrounds are m aking different kinds of film that
provoke positive and negative reactions, can any generalizations
be made to account for the likes and dislikes, the sim ilarities and
dissimilarities? A re different patterns o f film com m unication in
volved? What are the different grou ps relating to, and reacting to,
wh en asked to see and evaluate a film? A re no n overla p p in g social
contexts, involving class, race, and sex, stru ctu rin g the produc
tion and interpretation o f the film com munication?
T h e s e problems are seldom discussed in the literature on films
made by adolescents. Such questions can be explored only when
a systematic means o f observation and analysis is applied to diff
erent gro u ps as they both produce and evaluate films under simi
lar conditions.
A ss u m in g that there are subcultures living and functioning
w ithin any urban setting, and that these subcultures perceive and
structure their im mediate en viron m en t in different w ays, w e can
imm ediately try to ap p ly to them theoretical questions w e have
discussed earlier in this book and applied to the Navajo.
U s in g such a fram ew ork, Chalfen attempted to develop further
methods that could describe and help clarify various aspects of
context as they relate to the analysis o f films made by groups with
different backgrounds and cultures.
A d o p tin g a socio-linguistic fram ew o rk ( H y m e s 1964) which
stressed the analysis o f speech activity as differentiated from the
analysis o f speech itself (if speech can indeed be said to exist by
itself) Chalfen attempted to develop further w a y s of describing
and a nalyzin g film m aking activity as opposed to a n alyzing films.
A s can be seen from the previous chapters, w e have been con
cerned w ith the socio-cultural context in w h ich films w e re made
but had not fully articulated the distinction between filmmaking
and filmmaking activity. T h is shift in emphasis, from the study
o f film m aking as a w a y o f stru ctu rin g reality to the study o f
filmmaking activity as the study o f h ow social context interacts
and determ ines the use of sym b olic form s in com m unication,
seems like a m inor change in em phasis but has led to the clarifica
tion and understan d in g of aspects of film m aking that w ere
heretofore rarely discussed or seen as related to the v e ry forms
of the films made by all m em bers o f a society.
T h is approach to the study o f visual com m unication, the eth
nography o f film com m unication, suggests that genres o f film
productions may be distinguished along tw o dimensions: (1) the
type and am ount of em phasis placed on different form s o f ac
tivity within the total film production (such as the actual shoot
ing, or the acting, the editing, etc.), and (2) the com parative use
o f contextual items such as topics in the film, the settings, the
participants, the themes, etc. It is hypothesized that nonoverlap
ping or dissim ilar patterns o f elements o f these tw o dimensions
will be responsible for a mutual lack o f appreciation b y the va ri
ous groups m aking and seeing the films.
A t this point it might be w o rth w h ile to explain another shift
in term inology and emphasis. Chalfen has used the term socio
docum entary rather than bio-docum entary because he felt it was
important to contrast his method w ith that o f Worth. Worth,
both in his w ork at the A n n e n b e rg School and on the N a va jo
reservation, has consistently dealt with individuals m aking films.
T h e results o f such individual efforts has been generalized to the
subculture (as wh ite middle-class graduate students) or the cu l
ture (the Navajos) at large. O n the other hand, all o f C h a lfe n s
work has been done w ith subjects w o r k in g in groups, and the
films have been products o f g ro u p decisions. C halfen feels that
the term bio-documentary may be misleading in that the individual
filmmaker is never w o rk in g in the isolation o f the bio-self. It
is often the case that what the individual does is largely particu
larly in film m aking a product of a socio-self, that is, the
film m akers social context. T h e question at the m om ent remains
unclear, how ever. Does a film made b y an individual socio-self
allow the researcher to make accurate or different judgments
about film m aking activity, com pared to the judgm ents made
from a film made by a g ro u p o f people? We will attempt in this
chapter to point out the differences in methodology, but will
treat the films made by both socio- and bio-docum entary methods
as comparable.
Both these approaches can also be criticized on the grounds
that the sample chosen for stu dy is inadequate for the level of
generalization attempted. We are a lw a y s faced w ith the chance
that the behavior o f a small sam ple will not be characteristic of
the gro u ps w e are talking about. T o this extent w e must assume
that certain aspects o f cu ltu re and co m m unication are revealed
by all m em bers o f the culture. O u r method has been to search for
the com m on items that either the individuals or the g ro u p sug
gest or produce; that is, to look for the com m on pattern o f things.
In the case of the N a v a jo films, it was v e ry obvious that five of
the students w e re w o rk in g in sim ilar manners, and one, the art
student, w as beh aving in quite a different manner. T h u s the
deviant w as clearly illum inated and identified by seeing the pat
tern of items (behaviors) com m on to the other m em bers o f the
group. In the case o f having a grou p make a film together, the
deviant nature o f one or tw o subjects appears to be cancelled out
n aturally by the com parative norm alness o f the other group
m embers w h en they realize that all the ideas for the film must be
discussed and agreed upon before the film is actually shot.
T h e r e are several other differences in the approach taken by
Chalfen to that o f W orth and A dair. W orth is p rim a rily con
cerned with developing an an alytic fra m e w ork for the study of
com m unication based on the semiotic characteristics o f the film
code. W hile he is concerned w ith the context o f the filmic utter
ance, his p rim a ry objective is to understand better how film is
encoded and decoded, and the relationships between the
film m akers im plications and the audience m e m b ers inferences.
flow Groups in Our Society Act ( 2JJ

Explication of the film code is the focal point o f W o rth s research.

Chalfens p rim a ry interest, on the other hand, is in the context
of the film m akin g activity; that is, what social conditions allow
0r disallow the film m aking activity itself; what is the relationship
of the people in the film to the people w h o are m aking the film;
is there more o f a desire to be in the film than to do the actual
shooting and editing o f the film; are there a com m on set o f topics
and settings that the film m aking g ro u p judges as most a p p ro p ri
ate to be filmed; and, in fact, is film m aking activity b eing treated
as co m m u n ica tion b y the movie filmmakers? T h e context o f
the codes use then becomes central to C h a lfe n s approach.
A com bination o f the tw o approaches yields a more complete
study o f w h at W orth has called codes in context. W hen a person
of one cu ltu re wants to study a co m m u nicative code w hich is
utilized b y a m em b er o f another culture, an analysis o f the social,
cultural and behavioral context s u rro u n d in g both codes must be
developed. It should be realized that elements o f a code are relative
to the context w ith in w h ich that code functions. Interpretation
(again cu ltu ra lly relative) o f the message form can be seen as
relative to the social activity that produced the message.
B riefly then, w h ile W orth p rim a rily investigates the film code,
Chalfen is m ore concerned w ith the film mode. H e assumes that
by separating and differentiating the pattern o f events and activi
ties that com bine to produce a finished film product, different
genres o f film com m u n ication can clearly be distinguished. F or
Chalfen it is not the code that categorizes the film genre but
rather the pattern o f contextual elements. E xa m p le s o f con tex
tual likenesses and differences w ill make this clearer.

P re v io u s a n d C o n tin u in g S o c io -D o c u m e n ta ry R esearch

Let us n ow briefly describe the projects that w e w ill be co m p ar

ing. B etw e en S ep te m b er 1967 and Ja n u a r y 1968, C h alfen worked
at the H ouston C o m m u n ity C en ter, a settlement house in a low
socio-economic neighborhood in South Philadelphia. D u r in g the
fall and w in te r o f 1967, he organized a film club o f eight black
teenage boys betw een the ages o f tw e lve and fifteen. M eeting as
a grou p for tw e n ty sessions, learn ing to use the camera in the
w a y s described in earlier chapters, they conceived, filmed, edited
and recorded the sound for a fourteen-m inute black and white
film titled, What We Do on Saturdays on Our Spare Time. T h is film
records w h at they considered typical activities in the settlement
house and at a nearb y park ing lot, inclu d ing scenes o f ping-pong,
dancing, an in te rview session, a lot o f football, and a mass fight
sequence. T h e same gro u p o f boys made a three-minute film
titled The Robbery. T h is silent production, totally made in two
hours, depicts three boys b reakin g into the locked filmmaking
room and stealing equipment. O n e o f the boys is caught by the
film teacher (Chalfen) to end the film.
A t the Philadelphia C hild G u id a n c e C linic, C h alfen and Jay
H aley, D irecto r o f F a m ily Research, organized a film m aking pro
ject w ith eight poor black girls between the ages o f tw elve and
sixteen, m em bers o f the Dedicated Soul Sisters, an adolescent
grou p m eeting re gu la rly at the clinic under the professional
guidance o f a social w o rk e r and a psychologist. (Chalfen and
H aley, 1971.) B etw een the b eg in n in g o f Ju n e 1968 and mid-March
1969, the girls met tw en ty-three times and produced a scripted
nine-minute sound film titled, Don't Make a Good G irl Go Bad.
Briefly, the film involves the plight o f an u n w ed teenage mother
w h o is evicted from her home by her mother. T h e y o u n g mother
takes her baby to live with a g ro u p o f girlfriends w h o share an
apartment. T h e y are seen e n jo y in g a party, dancing, drinking,
taking drugs, and fighting w ith one another. T h e cops raid the
party, h avin g learned about the use o f drugs. F in ally , the unwed
g ir l s m other enters the apartm ent and takes the illegitimate
child from the daughter, w h o lies drun k on the couch.
In Ju n e and J u l y 1969, C h a lfe n and H aley attempted to in
troduce a grou p o f black teenage boys to the socio-documentary
procedures. T h e N o b le T e en s, a brother grou p to the Dedicated
Soul Sisters, also w e re m eeting regu larly at the clinic with a
social w o r k e r . D u r i n g and after the in tro d u c to ry sessions, pieces
o f film m a k in g e q u ip m e n t w e r e re p orted m issing. The project
w as ca n ce lle d a nd that g r o u p n e v e r w e n t b ey o n d their four h un
dred feet o f p ra c tic e footage. B e f o r e the project ended, they had
decided to m a k e a film abou t th e ir activities in the com m u n ity ,
p lay in g b all, r id in g bikes, and g e n e ra lly m e ssin a ro u n d .
In M a r c h 1970, C h a l f e n b ega n w o r k w ith w h ite middle-class
adolescents l iv in g in W e st Phila d e lp h ia . T h e first g ro u p con
sisted o f f o u r fifteen- an d sixteen-year-o ld boys. T h e y produced
a p re tty p o l lu t io n film in the cou rse o f forty-five meetings
b etw een A p r i l and O cto b er.
E ig h t g r o u p s w ill be d e s crib e d and co m pared. T h e m ajority of
the o b se rv a tio n s and fin d in g s co m e f ro m the projects that
C h a lfe n p e r s o n a lly d irected . H o w e v e r , field notes and interview s
given b y the f ilm m a k in g teach ers in volved in the T a b e rn a c le
F ilm P ro je c t (see A c h t e n b e r g 1967, S to d d a rd 1967), the S h ip le y
Sch o ol P r o je c t (p erso n a l c o m m u n ic a tio n ) and the 12th and O x
ford F i l m m a k i n g C o o p e r a t iv e h ave prod uced in teresting and
valu ab le c o m p a r a t iv e e v id e n c e on several co m p ara tive subjects.
F iv e o f the e ig h t to be c o n s id e re d here w e r e taught by C halfen,
and t w o o th e rs also w ere taug h t by researcher-film m akers
trained b y W o rth . W e h ave a ttem pted to contro l the contextual
variab les a cro ss the five in n e r c ity groups. T h e g ro u p s may be
com pared as fo llo w s :
(1) S e v e n o f the e ig h t p a r tic ip a tin g g ro u p s m ay be defined as
n atu ral g r o u p s that is, all m e m b e rs o f the g ro u p w e re close
frien d s l iv in g in the sam e n eigh b orh ood . T h e y did not neces
sarily go to the sam e school b ut g e n e ra lly shared social activities,
such as athletics, b ic y c le trips, g o in g d o w n to w n , parties, etc.
(2) S ix o f the eight film m a k in g efforts investigated took place
w ith in S o u th and W est P h ila d e lp h ia . O f the other projects, one
w as in N o r t h P h ila d e lp h ia (n th and O xfo rd ) and another in
C h e stn u t H i ll , in a school s lig h tly north o f P h ila d e lp h ia s city
lim its.
(3) S e v e n o f the e igh t film m a k in g projects took place in or
p ro x im a te to th e g r o u p s n eigh b o rh o od . In all o f C h a lfe n s pro
jects, the subjects understood that they could re gu la rly meet and
make the film in or out o f their neighborhoods as th ey wished.
T r a v e lin g to shooting sites w as ge n era lly restricted by time in
volved and budget limitations. A major exception to this oc
curred w h en one middle-class g ro u p insisted on film ing a sunrise
over w ater and a clear horizon. T h is required an hour and a half
d rive to the N e w Je rs e y coast line.
(4) In all cases, the participants w ere volunteers from larger
groups; they all chose themselves in different w a y s after an initial
contact w as made w ith a representative(s) o f the group. A self
selection process was involved in d eterm in in g the g ro u p s final
composition.
(5) Each film m aking grou p consisted o f either all boys or all
girls, all blacks or all whites. N o grou ps integrated by sex or race
have been investigated so far.
(6) A s one might expect w h en w o rk in g w ith natural groups, all
participants w e re ro u gh ly the sam e ages, ra n g in g betw een twelve
and sixteen. A lso som ew hat expected, brothers and sisters were
included in several o f the groups.
(7) In each o f C halferis projects, there w as an attempt to limit
the size o f the film m aking g ro u p to five members. I f the group
consists o f m any m ore than five, decision m aking and activity in
general becom e ve ry difficult to observe; m any less than five loses
the statement o f the g ro u p criterion o f the research. Interest
ingly, after initially requesting five participants, the black groups
tended to become enlarged, w h ile the w hite grou ps contracted
usually to four members. Both the T a b e rn a c le and Shipley
grou ps consisted o f between five and seven members.
(8) In seven o f the eight productions under consideration, each
grou p w as gen erally subjected to procedures suggested by the
bio-docum entary film m akin g approach. T h e basic technological
in form ation was given to the g ro u p m em bers w h ile the su pervi
sors maintained a determ ined neu trality in matters o f aesthetic
preference and choice o f film content. In six o f the eight projects
the su pervisor was an admitted investigator, and in these cases
the project was called research. A u d io tape record ings w e re regu
larly made at meetings, w ritten and photographic journals w ere
kept, and a careful film log recorded each piece of film that was
shot.
(9) Each participating grou p had access to ge n era lly the same
pieces o f film m aking equipm ent. Th ree-lens 16mm B olex and
Bell and H o w e ll cameras w e re used w ith Sekon ic light meters
(only the S h ip le y g ro u p had a zoom lens); tripods w e re available;
and quarter-inch tape and taper recorders w e re used for nonsyn-
chronous sound tracks (only the 12th and O x fo rd g ro u p had sy n
chronous sound equipment). Ze iss m oviscop view ers, M oviola
rew inds and G r is w o ld splicers w e re used for editing generally
the same eq u ip m en t available fo r the N a v a jo film m aking stu
dents.

A lte rn a tiv e E x p e cta tio n s

Working from these baseline com parison s in the contexts o f

filmmaking activity in the groups, three basic assumptions may
be put forth as possible hypotheses.
(1) Since all gro u ps consist o f novice filmmakers learning and
working under a relatively sim ilar set o f contextual circ u m
stances with basically the same film m aking equipm ent, all films
made by different gro u ps will be alike. In this case, universal
forms o f b ehavior associated w ith m aking a movie or learning to
communicate through a visual code for the first time are likely
to emerge.
(2) Since there are an infinite nu m b er o f possibilities in what
a group may w ant to film or actually put on film, and since this
mode of com m u n ication can be so intensely personal and ind ivid
ual, every g ro u p using film for the first time under sim ilar cir
cumstances w ill make an en tirely different type o f film.
Idiosyncratic differences will rule out the possibility o f patterned
behavior.
(3) T h e results o f such film m aking research w ill fall in between
alternatives one and two. T h i s w ou ld lead investigators to
hypothesize that patterns o f film m aking behavior do exist and
deserve systematic investigation.
Worth and C h a lfe n s w o rk h ighly favors the third possibility
T h e assumptions are that film m akin g is a cu ltu rally structured
activity, and that the fra m e w ork o f this structure w ill emerge
after consideration o f likenesses and differences in both the films
produced and the behavior s u rro u n d in g the production o f the
films. It may be true that a person with a camera can take a
picture o f an yon e or anyth in g, at any time in any place but it
is clear that he doesn't.

C ross G ro u p C o m p a ris o n s

O ne o f the first contextual variables w e have found is that of

geographical location and setting. T h eo re tica lly a film can be
photographed a n yw h e re, limited only by the time and money
available. We do not instruct o u r students in any w a y regarding
the geographical location and setting o f their film. T h e y can go
a n y w h e re they w ant to. W h ere they do go and w h at they do
shoot, h ow ever, is e x tre m ely significant. A ft e r re v ie w in g film
productions made b y different groups, a pattern o f preferred and
proscribed settings emerges.
We have observed that all the N a v a jo filmmakers selected
film ing locations in P ine S p rin g s, in most cases near their homes
or actually in houses o f closely related kin. M ike A nderson , for
example, thought that he w o u ld like to make a film using his
brother as subject. H is brother was a N a v a jo policeman working
in a co m m u n ity about tw e n ty miles from Pine S p rin g s and Mike
went there one day to start p h otog raphin g for a film on my
b rother. When he returned he told us that he did not do any
shooting that day, that he thought he w ou ld make another film,
that he felt it w as too far a w a y that film. H e decided then to
make a film about the lake. H e frequently referred in the first
weeks to w a n tin g to make a film about his brother, but that it was
 too hard to make a film so far a w a y . N o n e o f the others ven
tured very far a w a y from their homes.
White middle-class graduate students at the A n n e n b e rg School
regularly select locations a w a y from the School or the university
setting. In their case, the place com m on and most fam iliar to
students enrolled in the D o cu m e n ta ry F ilm L a b o rato ry is av
oided. F o r this group, film activity is an excuse for going to far
places to photograph the exotic, the unusual, the seldom seen.
M any students re gu larly travel fro m Philadelphia to N e w Y o rk
or to outlying areas several hours a w a y from Philadelphia. T h e y
find Tibetan villages in N e w Je rs e y , tugboat captains, ru n aw a ys
in G re en w ich V illage, cou ntry folk singers, and so on. T h e cam
era is a socially accepted device to make them explorers, to get
them aw ay from home and fam iliar surroundings. N o t on ly do
they seldom photograph or make films about the school, the
university, or the im mediate area, but wh en they have an o p p o r
tunity to make a film about or in their homes they almost never
do so.
T h e black lower-class teenagers re gu la rly choose shooting lo
cations near their homes for the practice shooting. E xam ples
include the outside basketball court w hich was theirs (having
been labeled m any times with their names w ritten with spray
paint and indelible markers), or a vacant local park in g lot (used
as a football field), or the playstreet w h ere several m embers o f the
filmmaking g ro u p lived. H o w e v e r, wh en it came tim e to produce
the final film, they preferred to travel to sites around the city,
generally outside of their imm ediate neighborhoods, or to use
fictive settings such as a room in the C hild G u id a n c e C lin ic made
to look like one o f their living rooms.
While the black teenagers chose subjects w hich w e re theirs
for practice films, the N a va jo s reversed the procedure. T h e prac
tice films w e re made in o u r geographic territo ry the s w in g in
our playground, the teeter-totter in our p layg roun d , and the
parched earth behind the tradin g post. T h e y considered the
school to be a governm ent, w h ite area. N o n e o f the N a v a jo prac
tice films w ere on their o w n land or about their o w n families
W hile the N a v a jo turned to their families, their homes, and
their o w n possessions as subjects for the final projects, the black
teenagers traveled a w a y from such things. T h e geographical loca
tion o f Not Much to Do was o u r turf; the u n iversity, the Phila
delphia M u seu m o f A rt, the W istar Institute, an old firehouse
and so on. When the Dedicated Soul Sisters needed a living room
for their film they made one up at the C linic, rather than use one
o f their o w n homes. A t the H ouston C enter they filmed them
selves p la y in g p in g p o n g in the center recreation room.
M ax in e T so s ie made a practice film about A d a ir han ging out
the lau n d ry at the schoolhouse, but she and her sister made their
real film about their g ran dfath er at his hogan.
T h e w h ite middle-class teenagers, on the hand, seemed to avoid
their neighborhoods entirely, w h eth er practice shooting or mak
ing their final film. T h e y consistently chose far a w a y nature
settings trees, heavy foliage, rivers, streams, parks, etc. T h ey
insisted on film ing a sunrise near the ocean (several h ours drive
away) rather than film it in the city. T h e y traveled quite a dis
tance to find their nature shots, ign o rin g a perfectly good park
tw o blocks from w h ere they lived. T h e wh ite middle-class teen
agers seemed to behave tow ard the film m aking setting exactly as
do their older counterparts in graduate school.
It seems clear at this point that there are g ro u p feelings about
w h ere film m aking activity is appropriate. T h e feeling o f the right
or a ppropriate setting seems consistent w ithin the groups and
different across groups. V a ria b le relations exist between
film m aking settings and the g ro u p pro d ucin g the film.
It seems that w h ite teenagers or graduate students find the
film m aking activity an appro priate means o f con trollin g images
o f distant and unusual places and events. T h e y feel free to cap
ture distant space and event on film.
Both the N a v a jo and the black teenagers, on the other hand,
consider film m aking activity an appropriate means o f dealing
sy m b olic ally with places and events closer to home. In some cases
 their home, and in other cases o u r home, but rarely with the
far away, the strange, or the exotic.
It hardly seems unreasonable to speculate that in a w hite so
ciety, w hite middle-class teenagers and graduate students feel
freer to ventu re forth w ith a camera, to control s y m b o lic ally
as they do in other w a y s those places and events far a w a y from
them. F o r the w h ite groups w e have studied, film m akin g activity
is not inconsistent w ith the conquest o f n ew territory, new peo
ple, and new ideas. F o r the N a v a jo in contrast to both other
American grou ps (black and white), the fam ily, its home, land,
possessions, culture and ideas are the appropriate setting for
filmmaking activity. T h e y are not m aking films about whites as
we are about them. T h e y are m ak in g films about themselves. T h e
black groups w e have studied also deal w ith themselves, not in
their o w n homes, perhaps, but th ey do not ventu re v e ry far aw ay.
T h ey too are not ca p tu rin g on film places and things far a w a y
from them.

T o p ic s a n d A c tiv itie s

I f one looks at the topics or themes about w h ich the filmmakers

build their films, and at activities w hich the filmmakers choose
to have their actors portray, one also finds a pattern o f relation
ships between groups.
In all the black teenagers films, some form o f fighting or horse
play appears. It m ay be in the form o f pushing, sh o vin g and
pulling, or o f w restling, fist fighting, or kidding around pummel-
ing, in groups or betw een individuals. T h e fighting varies from
a reenactment o f a street gan g fight or rumble, to actual fighting
during sport or horseplay.
T h e rough house is almost a lw a y s accom panied by some form
of drin kin g or dan cing and related activities. Som etim es such
behavior is part o f the story, as w h en a major scene occurs at a
dance, or w h e re the theme o f the film is drin kin g, getting drunk,
or acting badly d u rin g drinking. A t other times the drinking an(j
dancing, and often the fighting, just happen to be there, or ar
seen in the b ackground w h ile some other activity goes on. It s
almost as if these persistent themes form a com m on appropriat
basis and background for social and individual behavior in their
films.
E q u a lly com m on but not a ppearin g in all the films made by
black teenagers is the theme o f com petition and athletics, varying
from organized sports football, baseball, p in g p o n g to spon
taneous and com petitive acts o f physical skill sh ow n in a competi
tive w ay.
In Not Much to Do, for exam ple, the boys break into an aban
doned firehouse and each one g leefully takes a turn ch in n in g and
s w in g in g on an old w a ter pipe. T h e filmmaker actors comment
on the strength, grace, and skill o f each as he does his act. Later
they decide to s w im (illegally) in the Philadelphia M u seu m of Art
fountain, and the film allow s each one to show h ow he dives,
swim s, and does tricks. In the soundtrack they again com ment on
h ow each com pares with the others in physical prowess.
Such topics are seldom if ever treated by the w h ite middle-class
filmmakers. T h e y tend to shoot things rather than activities. The
most com m on set o f things these teenagers filmed involved ele
ments o f nature clouds, trees, leaves, streams, birds, flowers
or architectural elements lines and edges o f buildings, cement
and brick patterns. T h e activities they do show are relatively
inactive, such as a person w a lk in g s low ly or sitting thinking
about something, looking lost. It is interesting to note that the
graduate students also rarely show fighting, drink ing, or athletic
competition. In over forty films o n ly one has a fight in it, and that
is in a film about a black prizefighter. It is the on ly film in which
physical prow ess is the theme or is show n in any significant way.
O ne film on the other hand satirizes exercise and the use o f the
gy m , and several films attack or are quite critical o f fighting, as
represented by war. O n ly one o f the w h ite graduate student films
show s d rin k in g and dancing: a film about a fratern ity party,
meant to show in an extrem ely critical w a y the behavior o f the
fraternity party type. There is, h ow ever, no fighting in the film.
The N avajo films have no scenes o f fighting in them. T h e y
show no competitive activities and no drinking. The last is im
portant, for it could be said that o f course the N a v a jo do not show
such activities since they do not perform them in their culture.
But drinking is a com m on, and c o m m o n ly understood, problem
for the N avajo. O u r male students w e re no more averse to alcohol
than other N avajo, and for some it was a real life problem. They
fought bitterly and violently w h en drunk, and accepted such
behavior as part o f their lives and as part o f the social life o f the
community. Y et their films never showed it. For the black teen
agers fighting and d rin k in g w e re part o f their lives and appropri
ate activities to be show n in their films. F o r the N a v a jo fighting
and drinking w ere also part o f their lives, but inappropriate activi
ties to be show n in their films.
Further differences betw een grou ps are revealed w h en we look
at the amount o f footage devoted to s h o w in g human beings, and
when we examine h ow the filmmakers choose to show human
beings.
Alm ost w ithout exception e v e ry cademe made by the black
filmmakers showed people, either posing, standing still, or m ov
ing in some favorite activity. In direct contrast, the w h ite middle-
class male teenage filmmakers deliberately avoided ph o tog raph
ing people. In only tw o ten-foot sections o f four hundred feet of
their first footage did they show anv people at all. In these two
sections they asked each other to pose in front o f the camera.
In the black films made by groups w e have w orked with, and
in some th irty or forty other films made by sim ilar black groups
that we have seen, the tendency was to film other m embers o f the
filmmaking group exclu sively. T h e actors w e re almost a lw ay s the
members of the film club, film group, or film workshop.
In the white groups the opposite tendency was equally strong.
Th e filmmakers w ere h ardly ever the actors, and the films were
never about them directly. The white middle-class girls did ap
pear in about 40 per cent o f the early practice shooting, but th
girls did it relu ctantly, as a favor to each other, and clearly fe|t
that it w as unsophisticated actually to be in their o w n movies

S tru c tu rin g th e Im a g e a n d S tru c tu rin g T h e m s e lv e s

T h e most striking difference that seems consistently to appear in

an exam ination o f the patterns o f black and wh ite filmmaking
activity is w h eth er the im portance o f the film m aking activity lies
in b eing the actor in front o f the camera or b eing the image
m an ipulator behind the camera.
In the gro u ps w e have studied, w e have found clearly and
consistently that blacks pre fe r to be the im age in fron t and that
whites perfer to m anipulate the im age from the back.
Black grou p s tended to organize themselves around the ac
tivity in front o f the camera. T h e y talked most about w h o would
be in the film. I'hey usually decided that it w ou ld be themselves.
T h e y planned to ex clude others from that preferred position and
com peted for the best roles.
O n the other hand, w h ite grou ps tended to organize them
selves around the behind the camera activities. T h e y competed
for the best jobs as image m an ipu lator cam eram an, editor, di
rector, and so forth. T h e y n ever competed to appear in the film,
and n ever competed for acting honors.
T h e wh ite teenager and graduate student saw preference,
pow er, appropriateness, and status in b eing an im age m anipula
tor. I he black teenagers in all cases saw preference, pow er, ap
propriateness, and status in m a n ip u latin g themselves as images.
Related to the clear pattern o f preference for b eing in front or
in back o f the camera is an equ ally clear preference for participat
ing in or a voidin g the technical, mechanical aspects o f filmmak
ing activity. T h e w h ite teenagers competed for the use o f the
camera and ed iting apparatus, w h ile the black teenagers had to
be rem inded frequ en tly that since they w e re m akin g a film, some-
How Groups in Our Society Act (24j

one had to stay out o f each scene to run the camera. T h e y fre
quently wanted the teacher to run the camera for them so they
could all be actors. W hite graduate students, o f course, followed
their teenage predecessors. N o t o n ly had they come to school to
study com munication, but they kn ew before they came that
status was achieved by b eing an editor, director, cam eram an, etc.
Th e greater the amount o f control they could acquire over the
image m aking and image m anipu lating technology and social
interaction, the greater was their inner feeling of status. T h e
director controlled the actors, the writers, the editors; therefore
the director had social status. In contrast to the black teenagers,
control over their fellow s as actors or images was rarely sought.
It is clear that making a film means different things to different
groups in our society. O u r findings on this point w e re beautifully
expressed in the H o lly w o o d film Medium Cool made in 1969. In
one scene, tw o television new s cam eram en attempt to get an
interview with some black activists, one o f w h om comments,
Man, when w e appear on the tube, in front o f all those people,
thats when w e live. T h a t s life, m an .
In relation to an adolescents or y o u n g adults strategic quest
for recognition, the black preferen ce for presenting self on cam
era and the w hite preference for asserting self behind it as an
image manipulator, as the good filmmaker, illustrate two quite
different behaviors.
T h e w a y a grou p or an individual perform s an activity can be
seen as a fundam ental act o f social com m u nication the co m
munication o f self, particu larly if that m ann er of perform ance is
patterned w ith in the g ro u p and distinctive across groups. In the
case o f movie m aking activity, the individuals and gro u ps engage
in it not only to make movies, but also to make som ething o f
themselves, to show themselves as a certain kind o f person, par
ticularly as a person with a higher status than those others who
cannot make movies, w h o do not have access to such an im p or
tant technology.
In this sense, then, w h at is the status of film m aking activity for
the gro u ps w e have been discussing? F o r the wh ite middle-clasj
teenager and y o u n g adult the status is in captu rin g the symbolic
form o f the far a w ay, the exotic, the novel, and in m a n ip u l a ^ ^
the sym bols to produce messages, art forms, or entertainments
A wh ite achieves status through film m aking activity in direct
proportion to his control over the images he manipulates.
F o r the black teenager the status in film m aking activity is in
presenting h im self as image, as actor, entertainer, social activist
or man o f physical prowess. H e does not see ca p tu rin g symbols
o f others as a w a y to social status and social power. T h e more he
h im self is seen, the better.
F o r the N a v a jo the status in film m aking activity seems to be
in presenting m o vin g images o f his gro u p in h arm on y with his
environ m en t. W hile the wh ite film m aker presents others and the
black presents himself, the N a v a jo presents his context and his
culture. T h e N a v a jo frequ ently says, I w a n t to sho w h ow we do
things, how we live, h ow we look.
A t present, it is difficult not to overem phasize black teenagers
enthusiasm for those parts o f the film m aking activity which
promise the o p p o rtu n ity to act out a story and their disinterest
in the technical-m anipulative aspects o f the craft.
Vlessaris, a w h ite college student, reported a revealing incident
as part o f course w ork in the A n n e n b e rg School o f Com m unica
tions at the end o f 1970. W hile doing c o m m u n ity w ork in Prince
ton in 1969, he mentioned to tw o of his black roommates that he
had access to a 16mm camera, and asked if they wan ted to make
a film. T h e y w e re v e ry enthusiastic, he wrote. T h e y wanted
to make a film called The Black Invader starrin g themselves as
black alien's w h o w ou ld land in Princeton in a flyin g saucer and
take over the w o rld . H e reports that they spent several weeks
talking with each other about the story.

T h e y w e r e g o i n g to s t a r in th e film . . . . T h e y w a n t e d all t h e ir
f r i e n d s to b e in t h e fi lm w i t h t h e m , a n d in th e n e x t f e w w e e k s m o r e
t h a n 10 b la c k y o u t h s , s o m e o f w h o m I had n e v e r m et, c a m e u p to
m e, s aid th at t h e y h e a r d [w e ] w e r e m a k i n g a film , a n d a s k e d i f th ey
 could act in it. . . . T h e y never asked my advice about anything.
At no point did anyone ask to use the camera, learn how to use it,
work on any sound or editing, or in any way involve himself with
the technical aspects o f the film. With these things they were all
completely unconcerned. T h e y were interested in having a good
part, in playing members of the conquering army, and all ques
tions were related to what the action was going to be like. . . . 1
often heard [them] discussing the story: they would always discuss
action, conflict, the young blacks overcoming the local police and
killing the mayor.

U n fo r tu n a te ly , the film w a s n e v e r m ade. It s e e m s d ifficu lt to

know h o w it c o u ld h a v e been m a d e u n le ss M e s s a r is h im s e l f
would h ave b ee n c a m e r a m a n and ed ito r.
T h e r e is a f u r t h e r d is t in c t io n to be m ade a bou t h o w p e op le
have been s h o w n in film s m a d e b v d i f f e r i n g g r o u p s . G r o u p m e m
bers seem to h a v e a f e e lin g fo r h o w t h e y w a n t to be seen in film
or h o w th e y w a n t to s h o w p e o p le in th e ir footage. In the black
projects the a ctors and actre sse s h a m m e d a n d s h o w e d o ff p l a y
fully fo r the ca m e ra . T h e r e w a s a s t r o n g d i s p la y o f the s e l f as a
strong, to u gh , an d cool (hip) in d iv id u a l. T h e c a m e r a w o u l d start
and the h a m m i n g w o u l d b egin . T h e re w a s c o m p le t e a c ce p ta n ce
of their s tr o n g d r iv e to s h o w and see th em selves.
T h e w h ite film m a k e rs b eh ave d d iffe re n tly . A p e rso n w o u ld
not present h im s e lf fo r the ca m e ra; the ca m e ra w o u ld catch a
person d o in g s o m e th in g as if he did not k n o w the ca m e ra w a s
being used, or, the c a m e r a m a n w o u ld c a r e fu lly d ire c t p eop le h o w
to behave in the shot. A s m e n tio n e d before, such d irec tio n o c
curred m u ch m o re fr e q u e n tly w ith the w h ite g ir ls than boys.
T h e re is a n o th e r stra n g e q u a lity c o n c e r n in g h o w the w h ite
filmmakers s a w and filmed h um ans. In most cases, a person is
used in a shot as an in a n im a te object, his status equal to that o f
a tree or rock. There is an in te nse ly im p erso n al q u a lity about the
infrequent a p p ea ra n ce o f people p ictu red in the w hite male foot
age and an in te nse ly personal q u a lity about the h u m an images in
the black project.
One can think o f ob viou s parallels in the n ew cinem a fo rm s o f
the 1960s. C in m a vrit, direct cinema, and the F ren ch nouvelle
vague concentrated on the developm ent and justification of an
aesthetic based precisely on the notion o f ca p tu rin g real behavior
on the screen o f develo ping acting and editing styles that give
the im pression o f behavior caught rather than reenacted. The
notion o f the s to ry is giv in g w a y to the notion o f fragments of
real life caught b y the filmmaker.
T h e po pu larity o f the eth nograph ic film the film that objec
tively records the life o f others has also increased enorm ously
in recent years and is n o w b eing included in the aesthetic of
avant-garde w h ite filmmakers. In all these movements, the over
w h e lm in g direction seems to be the en hancem ent o f attitudes
deeply rooted in w hite consciousness regardin g appropriate
film m aking behavior along the lines w e have described.

T o p ic s a n d Them es

We can also com pare film themes across different groups on

several levels. First, sim ilarities m ay be seen in the themes o f the
films made by several o f the groups. F ive out o f the six Navajo
films w e re about crafts and the N a v a jo s daily work. T h e films
explain ed facets o f N a v a jo life and w o rk w hich revolved around
the idea o f productivity. We noted previou sly that one o f the
most com m on responses o f N a va jo s to N a v a jo films w as that such
and such a film, actor, action, or sequence, show s how well we
do it [w eaving, silversm ithing, etc.], h ow well so and so does it,
or that a film show s how co rrectly a character perform s his ritual
a ctivity that is, h ow a ch a racters perfo rm ance fits the ritual
dem ands o f the culture.
T h e themes ru n n in g through the black teenage films also have
the quality o f life-style explanation or exposition. H o w e v e r, the
activities in the film all involve w hat w e w ou ld consider play or
play in g around, fantasy, or wish fulfillm ent. T h e y are rarely
about p rod u ctive as opposed to leisure activity.
How Groups in Our Society Act ( 24Q

Another thematic dim ension separated w hite middle-class and

black lower-class produced films. T h e black males and females
wanted to film subject matter that w as very fam iliar to them and
to show it as it appeared in e v e ry d a y reality. T h e y seldom
throught o f distortin g the image, either in the social circ u m
stances (exchange one setting for another in editing), or by
manipulating the film m aking technology (slow motion, single
framing, etc.) T h e wh ite groups likew ise w anted to film co m
monplace material, but they w an ted to do som ething to it so that
viewers w ou ld see it all in a n ew , fresh, and revealing way.
Manipulations o f ca m e raw o rk and editing w e re often considered
of prim ary importance, w h ereas the black filmmakers sim ply
wanted to shoot and maintain on film the reality before them.
The films made by black youth resemble the N a v a jo productions
in that they both use film to co n ve y in form ation about how
something looks. T h e films made by wh ite teenagers, on the
other hand, through various form s o f manipulation, seek to co n
vey a feeling for the novelty or o rig in ality w ith w h ich the subject
matter was shown.
T h e appearance and nature o f a story line is another element
of the film products that may be com pared and contrasted. A
story line is one technique a film m aker m ay use to tie his film
together, to give it a feeling o f co n tin u ity and progression. H o w
ever, it is not safe to assume that all filmmakers or film m aking
groups will value this method o f ach ieving cohesion. T h e y may
develop an alternative strategy to determ ine what happens as the
film passes through a projector from a b egin n in g to an end. T h u s
the fram ew ork o f story line, or lack thereof, is a variable which
may be investigated for potential patterns.
H andling o f this variable in each o f the several Philadelphia
groups under investigation is ve ry similar. T h e m ajority o f the
films made by low socio-economic groups place im portance on
story line fram ew ork. B eyo nd the groups w e have investigated,
Achtenberg, Larson, and R o b b in substantiate this observation.
The films produced by grou ps taught by W o rth s students w ere
organized around the theme, What w e do . T h e films concen
trated on the story possibilities o f the b o vs or g ir ls everyday
lives. T h e H ouston C en ter film, What We Do in Our Spare Time on
Saturday, the D S S film, Don't Make a Good G irl Go Bad, as well as
T a b e r n a c le s Not Much to Do and O x f o r d s The Ju ngle illustrate
this point.
A s W orth and A d a ir observe, the orga n iz in g principle or
strategy used by the N a va jo s was also consistent. T h e ir story line
(if one em phasizes the s to ry aspect o f the variable) is largely
neglected. T h e N a v a jo films produced are held together by the
process line rather than the story line. The w a y to tell a story
o f events necessary to the process, or the activity o f making
something, provided the u n ify in g function. T h is is clearly seen
in both w e a v in g films (Susie B en ally and Alta Kahn) and the
s ilverm akin g film (Johnn y Nelson). N e ls o n s Shallow Well and the
T so sie sisters medicine man film also use the natural ordered
events o f the process to ord er the events in the film, but they
occasionally rearrange the ord er inside the natural beginning
and end of the central process or activity.
In the exam ples provided so far by the wh ite middle-class
film m aking groups, the rearrangem ent aspect and neglect of
story line or natural progression o f events is maximized. For
instance, the male group, b egin n in g their film with a sunrise, felt
no need to end the film with a sunset. T h e films made by these
teenagers tend to be collections o f neat shots, segmented activi
ties, and diverse subject matter. A v ie w e r must w ork hard to put
the pieces together. White graduate students show much the
same tendencies. A lthough the course is called D ocu m en tary
Film Lab o rato ry , and the em phasis is on presenting a vie w of
process, persons, or events, students rarely concentrate on the
pure story line or on clear exposition o f activity, process, or
event. Rather, events are seen as p ro vid in g the film m aker with
images w h ich can be manipulated, rearranged, and controlled for
political, social or artistic purposes. T h e s e students tend also to
be concerned w ith effects, clever editing, and unusual juxtaposi
tions, often p re fe rrin g shocking cuts to m erely unusual ones.
How Groups in Our Society Act

Even th is b rie f review o f the c o n te xtu a l b ack grou n d of

film m a k in g a m o n g s e v e r a l d iffe re n t g ro u p s c le a rly indicates that
different f o r m s o f f i l m m a k in g a c tiv it y exist for different groups.
A n a ly s is o f s im il a r it ie s a n d d iffe re n c e s b e tw e e n different groups
seems to g iv e i n s ig h t in to the b r e a k d o w n o f c o m m u n ica tio n be
tw e e n g r o u p s o f film v ie w e r s .
I f f i l m m a k i n g a c t iv it y stand s fo r d ifferen t things for different
g ro u p s , if s ta tu s is a c h ie v e d b y b e in g in front or in back of the
ca m e ra, if it is a p p r o p r i a t e fo r o ne g r o u p to s h o w things far aw ay
and fo r a n o t h e r to s h o w th in g s n e a r b y , there is a great likelihood
that the film c o m m u n i c a t i o n s o f one g ro u p w ill neither be u n
d e r s t o o d o r a p p r e c ia t e d b y the others.
E v e n if o n e w a s not c o n c e r n e d w ith this so-called co m m u n ica
tion b r e a k d o w n o r gap, a n o th e r p ro b le m seem s im plicit in the
data w e a r e r e p o r t in g . O u r c u ltu r e , pre fe ren c es, and statuses are
the v a lu e s t a u g h t b y sch o o ls, mass media, and life in a white-
d o m in a te d s o c ie ty . M a k i n g it in o u r society means developin g
o u r n o tio n s o f the a p p r o p r ia t e n e s s o f film m a k in g and other
c o m m u n i c a t i o n a c t i v i t y in c lu d in g speech activity. We tend to
u n d e r v a l u e th e a p p r o p r ia t e n e s s o f o th e r m otives for co m m u n ica
tion a c t i v i t y a n d h e n c e to insist that m e m b e rs o f other cultures
see t h in g s (lite ra lly ) o u r w a y .
P e r h a p s b y s e e in g a n d u n d e r s t a n d in g the fact that co m m u n ica
tion s a c t i v i t y ca n h a v e m a n y and va ried social purposes, w e can
r e c o g n iz e th e v a lu e o f e n c o u r a g i n g o thers to d e velo p their ow n
f o rm o f c o m m u n i c a t i o n and learn to u n d e rstan d and value them
fo r w h a t t h e y are.
 Some Concluding Thoughts

T h e last ch apter of a book re p o rtin g research in a n ew area is

a lw ay s a difficult one to write. M u ch o f what w e w ant to say in
conclusion can be sum m ed up in the typical sch olars phrase,
M o re research is needed. In all honesty much o f this chapter
is our attempt to make that cliche som ew hat more specific. We
shall refrain from say in g it too often, but hope that some o f our
conclusions will be considered as possible areas for further study
to clarify some o f the issues w e have raised, and to confirm or
disconfirm ou r findings by testing them with other groups.
M ost im portant am on g the m an y aspects o f this report is that,
for the first time, m em bers o f another culture radically different
from ours in language, technological developm ent, and use o f
images, have been taught to use the film mediu m and have pro
duced expressions o f themselves and their w orld as they see it.
T h e films they made, the w a y they made them, and what they
said about them are here reported so that all these activities can
be com pared w ith sim ilar activities o f different gro u ps within
ou r o w n society and elsewhere.
In this book w e have sh ow n some o f the sim ilarities and differ
ences in films, filming, and film m aking activity o f different
groups o f people livin g in different ways. We have sh ow n their
attitudes to w ard film m aking and their w a y s o f o rga n iz in g and
patterning their vie w o f their world. We have show n some o f the
things involved wh en different grou ps w ith different cultures
reveal their o w n structure o f reality through films they make.
We feel that this method may offer the fields o f anthropology,
com m unication, cognitive psych ology, and the hum anities a new
research technique another method for getting at the w a y peo
ple structure their o w n hum anness. O u r investigations seem to
confirm that this method does help to reveal culture as deter
mined and organized by the people within that culture. T h e
others vie w o f his w orld is different from ours but not so differ
ent that w e cannot understand it, and by it to see just h o w we
pattern our o w n w o rld through o u r ow n culture.
In m an y w a y s k n o w in g h ow others structure reality is our
only w a y to k n o w about ou r o w n hidden stru ctu rin g o f the w a y
w e k no w o u r o w n reality. C u ltu re is, after all, largely that part
of ou r stru ctu rin g process that w e take so for granted that w e can
hardly conceive o f it as b eing done any differently; w e can hardly
conceive that w e are d o in g a n y th in g at all. M ovies, w e think,
o n ly reflect w h at is out there.
In a period wh en both social science and the mass media are
increasingly s h o w in g us the w o rld out there through film, it
becomes ex tre m ely im portant for us to realize that w e do struc
ture reality through film, and that the stru ctu rin g process em bo
dies our notions o f appropriateness, ou r notions o f what is im p or
tant, right, and good. C u ltu res are d y in g or being killed all
around us. A n th ropolo gists are orga n iz in g in tern ationally in an
effort to collect records o f fast van ishing civilizations. Increas
ingly as technologies o f film ing and television develop, the record
of man is being made on film. But w h o makes these films? W e
do. We do because that is the w a y w e have done it since the
motion picture camera w as invented. We do because that is the
w a y to be objective, scientific, and accurate. We do because we
are anthropologists, scholars, researchers, or whatnot. We do
because it never occurred to us that th e y ought to be doing it,
that th ey can do it, and most im p ortan tly that w h en w e do
it w e are s h o w in g a picture o f ou r w o rld and salvagin g a culture
not o f others but o f ourselves. O u r record o f them m ight very
w ell be a record o f us. (Worth 1972)
We are not advocating that anthropologists cease describing
and a n alyzing other cultures. We are advocating that those w ho
study others become aw a re that a major part o f that study of
others lies in stu d y in g precisely h ow they structure their reality
com pared to us and other th eys.
M uch, of course, still has to be done to make a com plex meth
odology a com pletely scientific tool for the study o f man. T h e use
o f film in this w a y , h ow ever, offers a method w h e r e b y a few
native people in a relatively short time can produce a visual
statement o f their o w n v ie w o f their culture w h ich can be viewed
and interpreted by m any investigators in addition to those di
rectly in volved in the research.
T h e notion o f teaching m em bers o f another culture to use the
com m unication modes and technologies o f our culture is a n ew
one. We kn ow little about the cultural effects o f ou r method of
teaching film, nor do w e k n o w if it is the best method for all
cultures. There has been almost no research attem pting to deline
ate different w a y s o f teaching people to com m unicate, and none
at all in different w a y s o f teaching people to com m unicate
through film. W e hope that our method w ill provide a s p rin g
board from w h ich other methods, such as C h a lfe n s socio-docu-
m en tary approach, will be developed.
In this research we obvio u sly had the advantage o f w o rk in g
w ith a culture and w ith grou ps fully described in the ethno
graphic literature. T h e existin g w o rk afforded us a model o f how
the culture w as perceived by the outsider, w h ich w e w ere able
to use in gu id in g ou r research, and as a basis o f com parison with
the film model made by the m em bers o f the society themselves.
'I'he question remains, can this method be used in ethnographic
exploration o f little-known cultures, inclu d ing those n ow rapidly
disappearing?
O ther cultures w ill have to be investigated b y the same method
to determ ine if cross-cultural com parisons can be made.
T he success o f this introd ucto ry study was enhanced by factors
which may not exist in other cultures, and it w o u ld be necessary
now to learn h ow m an y o f the factors available to us by w o rk in g
with the N a v a jo are necessary for all cultures in order to produce
films and other data sim ilar in usefulness to that w e have gath
ered. It must be rem em bered that (i) the N a v a jo are k now n as a
people w h o value innovation and knowledge, and (2) the N a va jo
are a people for w h om motion is central to language and to major
areas o f their cultural life. A m edium w hich gives a person so
attuned to motion such free access to manipulation o f motion
might be a stimulus that w o u ld not be present in a culture w h ere
motion plays a sm aller or negative part in their lives. (3) T h e long
association o f A d a ir with the people in Pine S p rin g s m ay have
provided a b ackground o f trust and w illin gn ess w hich could not
be replicated w h ere such a long-standing relationship did not
exist. (4) T h e role of the teacher in a new society may depend
more on his personal characteristics than on his technical and
scientific know led ge as an investigator.
It is ou r opinion that these fo ur special attributes o f both the
investigators and the people b eing investigated w e re im portant
interactions, the effect o f w h ich cannot be determ ined by this
study alone. A ll field research depends on the ability o f the inves
tigators to do their job to gain trust, to be able to teach their
informants, and to learn fro m them. It will be necessary to dis
cover w h eth er this method is as re w a rd in g u n der less favorable
circumstances.
Since it is n ow established that films can made by people with
other cultures, it might be w o rth w h ile to explore the possibility
that such films could be made for a variety o f purposes differing
from those in our project. Chalfen has shifted em phasis from
filming and coding to film m aking activity and social o rganiza
tion. E m ph asis could shift from h ow the images w e re put to
gether to content, w h at was sh ow n b y whom.
A n oth er shift in emphasis m ight be to restrict the range of
possible subject matter. Instead o f asking people to make a film
about a n y th in g they want, w e m ight ask them to make a film
about specific techniques, subjects, or concepts o f interest to the
investigator. What films w o u ld result from instructions like,
S h o w me h ow you build a house, or S h o w me the important
things in y o u r village ? 1'he instructions could be more specific
Make a film about all the kinds o f y a m s or less specific
Make a film about health. A s more groups are taught to use
film, and as more films of other cultures are made and analyzed,
w e could begin to build up ou r m eager store o f k n ow led ge about
h o w people structure, not on ly a general v ie w o f their w orld , but
a specific v ie w o f specific aspects o f life such as health, housing,
cooking, hunting, and so on. T h e s e aspects o f life are shared by
m any grou ps and cultures but have different structures, patterns
o f use, and place in a society. C o m p a riso n s am on g such specific,
requested vie w s w ou ld help us to understand and to present a
more com plete picture o f man.

We have sh o w n that s tu d y in g a culture such as the N a va jo

a culture with a v e ry different language and w a y o f life has
helped us to study and w ork w ith segments o f ou r o w n popula
tion w h ere other modes o f com m u n ication are severely restricted
or have broken dow n. We have discussed some o f the recent w ork
done with black and wh ite teenagers by methods com parable to
those w e used with the Navajo.
O ther w o rk o f com parable nature is already being planned or
unde rw a y . C h ild ren in various types o f schools are b eing taught
to make films in ord er to reveal cogn itive data difficult to get at
by other means. A d a ir is p la n n in g to w ork w ith alcoholics under
the sponsorship o f the N atio n al Institute o f M ental H ealth to see
if the bio-docum entary technique can be useful in u nderstanding
the values and attitudes u n d e rly in g a major health problem. T h e
w o rk o f C h alfen at the Philadelphia Child G u id a n c e C lin ic and
that o f H a m p e (a student o f Worth) in the M arria g e C o u n se llin g
S ervice are further exam ples o f the continued attempts to get
people w ith special problem s or w o r ld v ie w s to present them
selves on film.
Worth is presently w o r k in g w ith the D epartm ent o f C o m m u
nity M ed icine at Mt. S inai M edical School in N e w Y o rk to de
velop a bio-docum entary teaching unit w hich w ill teach doctors,
medical students, patients, and m em bers o f the geographical
c o m m u n ity s u rro u n d in g the medical school to present them
selves and their w o rld on film. T h e i r films w ill be used to facili
tate com m unication betw een the grou ps through cable netw orks
in the c o m m u n ity w h ere films m ay be show n to provide data for
research in the attitudes and values o f the participants, and to
provide teaching materials on specific health subjects made in the
bio- and socio-docum entary manner.
It has been our experience that w h ile the N a v a jo w e re an ideal
people to w o rk w ith in this study, they are not necessarily unique
in their w illin gness and ability to use film m akin g technology. We
believe that film m aking is a form o f social activity and a mode of
com m unication that w ill have an active and creative appeal for
peoples in m any areas o f the non-Western as well as the Western
w o rld for m any o f the same or sim ilar reasons that the viewing
of film and television has had so great an appeal to almost all
people. T o the best o f o u r kn ow ledge, w h ereve r these media have
been introduced people have been fascinated by them. T h e un
d e rly in g reasons for m o vin g p ictu res universal appeal are little
understood at the present time. W e might guess, in the absence
o f evidence, that peoples less open to innovation (and contrasting
to the N a v a jo in other respects) w ou ld also be w illin g to cooper
ate with investigators using this method for reasons going
beyond cultural differences and into basic psychology. It may
well be that film and television have their com p ellin g quality
because they most closely sim ulate dream ing. E v e ry o n e in every
cu ltu re has had dream s and assum es that this flow o f im ages in
m otion and sequence has m eaning. We believe that people o f
v a ry in g cu ltu res w ill be fascinated in actively p a rticip atin g in the
film mode o f com m u n ication because it can thus n ever be com
p letely u n fa m ilia r to them.
W hy is this so? O ne m ay speculate that in the process o f choos
in g im ages and im age events and again in the process o f ed itin g
them , the N a v a jo m ay have been p ro jectin g un con sciou s or in
nate system s o f organ ization and o f catego rizin g his w o rld in
w a y s that are little understood at present. W hile the W horfian
h yp oth esis deals on ly w ith verbal language and suggests a com
parison b etw een cu ltu res w h ose languages are differen t, it m ight
also be applied in a sim ilar situation in w h ich w e could com pare,
not tw o d ifferen t verbal languages and the w a y they act as con
strain ts in d e scrib in g a w orld , but tw o d ifferin g modes o f com
m u nication , verb al lan guage and visu al lan g u age and the w ay
the differen t m odes act as con strain ts in d e scrib in g the w o rld that
d ifferent people live in.
S in ce verbal language is a rb itra ry , the signs in use by d ifferen t
lin gu istic gro u p s w ill d iffer g re a tly , m aking it obvious that
grou ps com m u n icate in differen t w ays. V isu al fo rm s are much
m ore d eep ly connected b io lo g ica lly (perceptu ally) w ith the out
side stim u lu s they represent. T h e rules o f social p erception are
learned e a rly and contain sim ilarities across the en tire hum an
species (although they are not identical). A n d yet, although the
events w e p o rtra y in film are b asically recogn izable to all a
picture o f a man is after all an im age com m on to m an w e use
them in differen t w ays. A lth o u gh th ere are such ob viou s percep
tual u n iversals in volved in film com m u n ication , differen ces are
real and have received ve ry little attention.
W hile the system s o f in terp retation o f dream s m ay d iffer across
tim e and cu ltu re, the notion o f tak in g m ean in g or sense from a
flow o f im ages m ight be d eep ly in grain ed in hum an conscious
ness and m ight m ake film m ak in g a u n iq u ely easy and responsive
m ethod ology to learn. A lth o u gh m ethods o f dream in terp reta
 tion have varied across cu ltu res and o ver tim e, m en alw ay s
seem ed to assum e that th eir in n er im ages and im age even ts, o rg a
nized u n co n scio u sly and rem em bered o n ly in fleetin g bursts,
w e re w o rth re p o rtin g and u n d erstan d in g. M en from the earliest
m om ents o f record ed h isto ry h ave assum ed that d ream s have
m ean in g, that the im ages selected fo r his dream w e re im p ortan t
and that the sequ ence in w h ich th ey o cc u rred played a part in
th eir in te rp reta tio n . S in c e the re p o rtin g o f d ream s w a s a lw a y s
verb al, it is im p o ssib le to say that the notion o f the im p o rtan ce
o f seq u ence in the in te rp reta tio n o f im age even ts o cc u rred befo re
lan guage. It has c e rta in ly existed as fa r back as lan g u a g e and m ay
indeed b elo n g to that sam e in n ate a b ility w h ic h is m an s lan gu age
and s y m b o liz in g ca p a city .
A t the m o m en t w e do not k n o w if e v e ry o n e can be tau g h t to
m ake a m o vie as e v e ry o n e lea rn s to use lan g u age. It m ig h t be
w o rth w h ile to see if m a n s s y m b o liz in g fa c ility ex te n d s to m ak
in g film s, and i f so h o w he goes ab o u t c re a tin g his sy ste m s and
la n g u a g e o f film sy m b o ls.
A lth o u g h the re la tio n sh ip b etw een d ream s, lan g u a g e , cu ltu re ,
and c o m m u n ica tio n is o n e w e h a rd ly d are do m o re th an touch
upon at th is p o in t, it m ig h t be u se fu l h ere to q u o te S u sa n n e
L a n g e r:

Cinema is like dream in the mode of its presentation: it creates a

virtual present, an order o f direct apparition. That is the mode of
dream. . . . The most notew orthy formal characteristic o f dream
is that the dream er is alw ays at the center o f it. Places shift,
persons act and speak, or change or fade facts em erge, situations
grow , objects come into view with strange importance. . . . But the
dreamer is alw ays there, his relation is, so to speak, equidistant
from all events. T h in gs may occur around him or unroll before his
eyes; he may act or want to act, or suffer or contemplate; but the
immediacy o f everyth ing in a dream is the same for him. . . . T h e
percipient o f a m oving picture sees with the cam era; his stand
point moves with it, his mind is pervasively present. T h e camera
is his eye. . . . H e takes the place o f the dream er. The work is the
appearance o f a dream, a unified, continuously passing, significant appari
 tion o f culture. . . . M otion pictures, are our thoughts made visible
and audible. T h e y flow in a sw ift succession o f images, precisely
as our thoughts do, and their speed, w ith their flashbacks like
sudden uprushes o f m em ory and their abrupt transition from
one subject to another, approxim ates very closely the speed o f our
thinking. T h e y have the rhythm o f the thought-stream and the
same uncanny ability to move forw ard or backward in space or
time. . . . T h e y project pure thought, pure dream, pure inner life.
T h e w ork is the appearance of a dream . . . a significant apparition
of culture . . . our thought made visible. (Langer 1953)

O th e r o b se rv a tio n s m u st a lso be m ade. W h ile h a v in g v ie w e d

film s b e fo re a tte m p tin g th e ir o w n p o s s ib ly a ffec ted th e n a tu re o f
th e film s m ad e b y th e N a v a jo film m a k e rs, it is o u r d e e p c o n v ic
tio n th at d e sp ite su ch c o n ta m in a tio n th e p a tte rn s in b oth the
film s and in the b e h a v io r o f th e film m a k e rs re v e a l d e e p -ly in g
c u ltu ra l an d p s y c h o lo g ic a l p h e n o m e n a . S u s ie B e n a lly , w h o had
seen tr a in in g film s at sch o o l an d so m e H o lly w o o d film s in m o vie
th ea ters, m ad e a film th at is m u ch th e sam e in sty le , co n te n t, and
s y n ta x as th e on e m ade b y h er m o th er, A lta K a h n , w h o had been
m in im a lly ex p o sed to film s. It m a y be su g g e ste d th at the
s im ila rity m a y be a cco u n te d fo r b y th e d a u g h te r s in flu e n ce on
the m o th er, ju st as a n y tea ch er in flu e n ce s a p u p il. N o n e th e le ss,
the film m ade b y the m ore a c c u ltu ra te d d a u g h te r, d e sp ite co n
ta m in a tio n b y see in g o u r film s, is sig n ific a n tly d iffe re n t fro m
film m ade in the u sual W e stern tra d itio n .
Id e a lly it w o u ld be w e ll to h ave a c le a n e r test situ atio n , not
o n ly to ru le ou t the effect o f E u r o -A m e ric a n in flu e n ce on the film
sty le o f n on -W estern p rim itiv e p eop les, but also to see i f a people
w h o had n e v e r seen the resu lts o f film m a k in g (or even a n y still
p h o to g rap h s) w o u ld b ecom e m o tivated to use film as a m ethod o f
e x p re ssio n and co m m u n ica tio n . O r, in o th er w o rd s, co u ld a peo
ple w h o did not k n o w that th ere is such a th in g as m otion p ic
tu res be m o tivated to m ake su ch p ic tu res th em selves w ith o u t the
stim u lu s o f seein g the finished p ro d u c t m ade b y som eon e else? Is
it essen tial to see film o f oth ers o r m ade by o th ers in o rd er to
m ake the film at all?
 T h e re have been perio d ic reports in the an th rop ological litera
ture o ver the last ten years su ggestin g that p rim itiv e people
learn to read ph otographs v e ry qu ickly. We know nothing,
how ever, about th eir notion s o f m akin g im ages that move. G iv e n
a still cam era m an y people w h o have n ever m ade a photo w ill
point it and accept the resu ltin g p ictu re w ith glee. W ill these
same people, u nexposed (literally and figu ratively) to m otion pic
tures, organ ize and o rd er th eir cadem es to make w h at w e call
movies?
O ne p ractical fact should be noted. Peoples isolated from W est
ern influence, such as those in in te rio r N e w G u in ea , are so far
from urban cen ters and film processin g laboratories that it w ould
be difficult, if not im possible, to replicate o u r exp erim en t w ith
the N avajo . A n y g reatly delayed feedback m ight prove crucial.
(The need fo r quick feedback m ust also, o f course, be tested.)
T h ere fo re , if this film m ethod w as developed fo r use w ith such
isolated people, pro cessin g equ ip m en t m ight have to be brought
to the field. T h is is by no m eans an u n usual o r novel idea. R ob ert
F lah erty in 1920 brou gh t p ro cessin g and p rojection equ ipm en t
w ith him w h en he m ade Nanook o f the North. H e used projectors
and pro cessin g m achines in areas w h ere e le ctricity w as alm ost
unknow n. W ith the developm en t o f portable batteries, and the
m iniaturized equ ip m en t available today, the student o f cu ltu re
w ill find it in fin itely easier to tran sp o rt and to use in the field
cam eras, processors, and projectors.

Q uite aside from its scientific valu e and on som e levels tra n
scending those values, film m ak in g in the hands o f native peoples
o f d iverse cu ltu ral tradition s m ight also be considered as a co n tri
bution to the arts and h um anities. Intrepid Shadows, fo r exam ple,
dem onstrates w h at a train ed artist w ith cu ltu ral roots differen t
from ou r o w n can do w ith film reduced to its essential and basic
com ponents. T h e w h ite m iddle-class W estern eye, conditioned
by its cu ltu re and the in tricate tech n ology and tradition o f H o lly
wood and the television screen, is in d an ger o f lo sin g sight o f the
beauty and vita lity o f the film produced sim p ly and u n der the
control o f the film m aker for personal expression . In com m ercial
en tertainm ent, ends becom e con fused w ith m eans; sheer techni
cal accom plish m ents in optical effects and sound reco rd in g aided
by elaborate ligh tin g and d o lly shots ca re fu lly scripted and
scheduled to meet the dem ands o f a budget o r a spon sor have
diverted film m akers from the force and beauty o f sim ple human
com m unication. T h is m edium , taught b y the bio-docum entary
m ethod and used b y an artist o f an oth er society, d ra w in g on very
different m yth and m usical styles, d ram atic stru ctu res, and diff
erent concepts o f event, tim e, and space, m ight w ell serve not
on ly to present one cu ltu re to another but also to en rich that
store o f k n ow led ge about man w h ich our cu ltu re tradition ally
calls art, and w h ich cle arly is part o f the scien tific stu dy o f the
cu ltu re o f man.

It seem s fitting to end this book in N a v a jo m yth style by re

tu rn in g to the b egin n in g before w e com e to the v e ry end. In the
b egin n in g o f the book w e m entioned M alin o w sk is stricture,
T h e final goal o f w h ich an E th n o g rap h er should n ever lose sight
. . . is to grasp the n atives point o f vie w . . . to realize his vision
o f his w o rld .
We th erefore m ust not a llo w ou rselves or our readers to forget
how o u r N a va jo frien d s m ight vie w the w o rk w e are doing.
Jo h n n y N elso n , in talkin g about his film , said:

What I really w ant to see is som ething that can move in front
o f my eyes, that I took m yself. . . . Y ou make a movie about it, and
then its m oving around where you can actually see what is being
done how it moves. . . . If you w rite a whole book about it then
its still. . Yo u try to give it to som ebody, and he reads it through,
and he does not really get the picture in his mind.
 Appendix A

A B rief Summary o j the

Films Made by the Navajo

P r a c tic e F ilm s

T h e first film s m ade b y the N a v a jo s w e re m ade after tw o days o f

instruction in the techn ical use o f the cam era, ex p o su re m eter,
and splicer. T h e N a v a jo s w ere told: H e re is a h un d red feet o f
film. Shoot a n y th in g you w an t w ith it. T h e y w e re then asked
what they w e re go in g to do, or su b seq u en tly w h at th ey had done.
A ll the students decided to m ake little m ovies out o f w h at w as to
us a practice assign m en t in the use o f tech n ology. T h e concept
o f m ere practice seem ed alien to the N a v a jo (either because o f
inherent d islike o f w aste, o r because o f in a b ility to im agin e use
less practicing). A t this point, it m ust be rem em bered th ere had
been no in stru ction in ed itin g o r con cepts o f film m akin g.
 264)

M ik e A n d erso n : The Pin Tree. 2 m i n u t e s .

T h is w as the first subject that M ik e th ou gh t of. H e said, I

m ake a m ovie o f a pin tree. It g ro w s fro m sm all to b ig . T h e
film is a series o f tw e lv e edem es (shots) in w h ich M ik e started
w ith a sm all bush (but sh o w n fu ll in the fram e), go in g to b igger
and b ig g er bushes, and fin ally trees. A fte r th is series o f edem es
(w h ich M ik e ph otographed in such a w a y that all the trees w ere
the a p p ro x im a tely sam e size in the fram e) he co n tin u ed w ith a
d y in g pin tree, then a fallen and dead pin tree, then some
old ro ttin g b ran ches o f a tree, and fin ally a sin gle p i n acorn.
M ik e s o n ly sequ en cin g d u rin g ed itin g w as to tra n sfe r part o f
the acorn shot to the b eg in n in g o f the film , k eep in g the o th er part
fo r the en d in g.

J ohnny N elso n : The Summer Shower. 2 m inutes.

Jo h n n y had to tell a sto ry. It w as h ow the earth is d ry and the

N a v a jo w aits fo r rain. T h e n com es the rain and ev ery o n e feels
good . T h is w as also Jo h n n y s first idea fo r a film . H e executed
it w ith the confid ence o f a H o lly w o o d directo r. H e too shot it in
the o rd er in w h ich the shots w e re to appear on the screen. H e
started w ith som e m ovin g shots o f d ry earth, cracked earth, d ry
grass, and clou dless skies. T h e n a N a v a jo boy w alk s in the du sty
field and stoops d ow n to cru m b le the d ry earth in his hand.
S u d d e n ly the rain com es, a p u dd le form s, a sm all flo w er gro w s,
the rain clouds are show n.
H e re Jo h n n y directed W orth to hold a w a ter hose in such a
w a y as to m ake rain (as it looked to him th rough the cam era). H e
planted a flo w er and arranged the w a ter so it puddled and flow ed
in the d irectio n he w anted.

J ohnny N elso n : The Navajo Horse. 3 V2 m inutes. (Photos 6 11.)

T h is w as Jo h n n y s second film . H e re he w an ted to m ake a

m ovie about h ow im p ortan t a horse is to the N a v a jo and how
he know s all about h im . T h e film started w ith ten o r fifteen
extrem e close-ups o f hoofs, nostrils, eyes, saddle, b rid le, etc.
Som e o f the shots w e re m o vin g and som e w e re still. A t one point
Jo h n n y asked W orth, I f I take lots o f shots o f parts o f a horse,
and then take shots o f m an y horses, and put the shots o f parts o f
one horse in betw een all the horses, w ill people think the parts
o f one are parts o f all? H e then tried to p h otograph another
hundred feet o f film sh o w in g m an y horses at the S q u a w D an ce
(a cerem on y held the n ext day). T h is w as su ccessfu l, and he m ade
a film w h ich started w ith several shots o f com plete and differen t
horses, then cut back and forth fro m extrem e close-ups o f the one
horse to shots o f the horses as a gro u p g e ttin g read y fo r a dash
across the fields (part o f the cerem ony). In ed itin g the film , he
arranged his shots in an o rd er d ifferen t from that in w h ich he
took them in the cam era, and cu t shots into sh o rter pieces, u sin g
them in several d ifferen t places in the film. T h e end o f the film
show s the dash o f the horses across the field m ark in g the start o f
the cerem on y.

T s o s ie s i s t e r s : John A d a ir Hangs Out the Laundry. 2 m i n u t e s .

A t this poin t the tw o sisters first decided to w o rk as a team.

T h e y said th ey w o u ld m ake a film o f Jo h n A d a ir and D ick
C halfen (our assistant) h an g in g out the lau n d ry. T h is film fo l
lowed a co n ven tion al plot stru ctu re , and m e rely had A d a ir hang
out som e lau n d ry, aided by an assistant. It w as shot in sequence
and had the g irls g ig g lin g fo r h ours. It w as edited alm ost the w a y
it w as shot.

M a x in e T s o s ie : The Boys on the Seesaw. i /2 m inutes. (Photos 2-3).

H ere M ax in e ph otograph ed tw o boys on a seesaw . She took a

series o f shots from the sam e cadem e sh o w in g the boys and the
seesaw g o in g up and d o w n . W hen the film cam e back fro m the
lab she decided to cu t it up and splice it fo r fu n . S h e achieved
the rem arkab le feat o f cu ttin g the action o f a seesaw into parts,
re -arran g in g them in a d ifferen t o rd er w ith o u t c h a n g in g the flow
o f action.

A l C la h : The Monkey Bars. 2V2 minutes.

C la h felt that he w an ted to ex p e rim e n t w ith the m o tio n . H e

chose fo r his su bject a set o f clim b in g bars (m onkey bars) w hich
w e re in the school p lay g ro u n d . H e took a series o f ten o r tw elve
pans m o vin g up, across, and d o w n the vario u s m etal parts o f the
p lay g ro u n d toy. C o n tra ry to the others, he did not exp ect to
p h otograp h his little ex e rcise in the sequ ence in w h ich he w ould
fin ally pu t it together. H e said he m erely w an ted to try out how
it looks w h en the cam era m o ves. It w as in this first film that C lah
began to sh o w his extrem e co n tro l o ver a v a rie ty o f cam era m ove
m ents, and it w as here that he first sh o w ed that he m oved the
cam era in a c irc u la r rath er than a lin ear fashion. W hen the film
w as retu rn ed he w as pleased w ith the resu lts and spent about
fo u r h ou rs on the ed itin g b ench p u ttin g the sequence together.
W hen asked w h at he w as d o in g he said, I w a n t to see h ow the
m otion goes to geth er.

S u s ie B en ally: The Swing. 2 m i n u t e s .

S u sie ph otograph ed the fram e o f the sw in g s in the p lay g ro u n d

from vario u s angles. T h e n she had several shots o f the em p ty
sw in g s. T h e last shot show ed a little N a v a jo g irl s w in g in g on a
sw in g . It also w as ph otograph ed in sequence, but S u sie cut out
parts o f shots w h ic h she felt w e re w r o n g .

M ik e A n d erso n : The Ants. 2/2 m i n u t e s .

M ike w an ted to ph otograph red ants in an ant hole. H e

crou ched o v er the tin y hole and heap o f sand and w aited fo r ants
to em erge. S in ce he shot w ith a w id e an gle lens, the ants w ere
alm ost in visib le and M ike did n o th in g fu rth e r w ith th is footage.
 T h ere w e re several o th er film s m ade d u rin g the first practice
day. A ll the stu dents show ed m ore or less the sam e sk ill in the
use o f the cam era. A ll o f them exposed th eir film accu rately,
loaded the cam eras accu rately, and w e re in gen eral able to
achieve just w h at th ey said th ey w an ted to achieve.

F u ll L e n g th F ilm s

At the end o f the first w eek the N a va jo s began w o rk in g on

their full len gth film s w h ich are describ ed below .

S u s ie B en ally : A N avajo Weaver. 20 m inutes. (Photos 26-30).

Susie chose to d ep ict h er m oth er as she w o v e a ru g. T h e film

starts w ith a series o f sh ort shots sh o w in g a N a v a jo w o m an w e a v
ing at her loom . It then tu rn s to the job o f ra isin g the sheep,
shearing the w ool, d ig g in g y u cca roots fo r soap w ith w h ich to
wash the w o o l, ca rd in g and sp in n in g , w a lk in g , d ig g in g and
searching fo r roots w ith w h ich to m ake d ye, d y in g the w ool, and
putting the w a rp on the loom. In tersp ersed w ith these activities
are large sections sh o w in g the m oth er w a lk in g and search in g for
the various m aterials n ecessary to m ake and to com plete all these
stages in the process o f w e av in g . W hen to w ard s the end o f the
film, after 15 minutes have gone by, the m other actu ally b egin s to
w eave the ru g, w e see in tersp ersed shots o f S u s ie s little bro th er
m ounting his horse and tak in g care o f the sheep, the sheep gra z
ing, and vario u s other a ctivities aro u n d the hogan. T h e film o n ly
show s about th ree inches o f a six-foo t ru g b ein g actu ally w o ven ,
and o n ly about 4V2 m inu tes o f actu al w eavin g. It ju m p s fro m the
last shot w h ich sh ow s the m oth er h an d lin g the w ool on the loom
to the final shots w h ich have the m oth er stan d in g inside the
hogan h old in g up a series o f finished rugs. T h e se are alw ay s
show n in close-ups and lon g shots w ith the ru gs held both h o ri
zontally and v e rtica lly . T h e sam e sequence is repeated w ith a
d ifferen t set o f ru gs w ith the m oth er stan d in g outside the hogan.
O f p a rticu la r note in this film is the fact that th ere is o n ly one
close-up o f a face the I am th in k in g about the d e sig n shot
w h ich w e m ention in o u r an alysis.

J ohnny N elso n : The N avajo Silversmith. 20 m inutes. (Photos 31-34.)

T h is film is stru ctu red in alm ost the sam e fash ion as the w eav
in g film. T h e film starts w ith a series o f shots sh o w in g the N avajo
silversm ith co m p le tin g the filin g on som e little Y eib e ch ai figures
w h ich have alread y been cast and are on his w o rk bench. W e then
cut a w a y from this (as in A N avajo Weaver) to w h at is ap p aren tly
the b e g in n in g o f the story. W e see the silversm ith w a lk in g and
w a n d e rin g across the N a v a jo landscape and fin ally a rriv in g at
w h at appears to be a silv e r m ine. T h e silversm ith spen ds a great
deal o f tim e fin d in g nuggets o f silv e r em bedded in the rock. H e
then spends an oth er period o f w a lk in g and w a n d e rin g to look for
the p a rticu la r kind o f sandstone fro m w h ich he w ill m ake his
m old. W e see him w o rk in g at sa w in g and g rin d in g his mold,
fin ally d ra w in g his design in the sand, and then tra n sfe rrin g it
to the m old. A t this point w e have again the o n ly face close-up
(th in kin g o f the design) in the film.
A fte r the m old is m ade w e see him m eltin g the n u ggets o f
silv e r and p o u rin g the silv e r into the m old. H e goes th ro ugh the
process o f filin g and p o lish in g and the last shot in the film is the
shot w ith w h ich w e began. A t one point in the film , d u rin g the
silv e rsm ith s w a n d e rin g s to find silver, the film is in terru p ted to
show us w h at appears to be an abandoned log cab in . In this
sequence, the c irc u la r cam era m ovem ents, m o v in g clo c k w ise like
the sun, are m ost cle a rly apparen t. T h is sequence w as inserted
to sh ow that the m ine w as in deed v e ry old, because the d w e llin g
places aroun d it are also old. O f note in this film , and m entioned
in ou r an alysis, is the fact that the N a v a jo have never m ined silver
on the reservation . Jo h n n y w as a w a re o f that, but seem ed unable
to tell his sto ry w ith o u t startin g at the b eg in n in g , and d id n t
w o rr y about the real tru th .
M a x in e and M ary J ane T s o s ie : The Spirit o f the Navajo. 20 m in
utes. (Photos 35-40.)

H ere the d au gh ters o f the ch ap ter ch airm an o f the co m m u n ity

decided to m ake a film sh o w in g the old w a y s . T h e y chose th eir
gran dfather as subject. H e w as one o f the best kn ow n sin g e rs
(medicine men) in the area. T h e film opens w ith the old m edicine
man w a lk in g and w a n d e rin g across the N a v a jo landscape, again
diggin g and search in g fo r roots and h erbs w h ic h he is to use as
part o f a cerem o n y. W e see him at one o f the ca m p s before a
cerem ony, eatin g and d rin k in g . T h e sequence o f the g ran d fath er
eating is the o n ly one in w h ich a face close-up is show n . It is
apparent, h o w ever, that the shot w a s con sid ered a h um oro us one,
almost like a hom e m ovie in w h ic h one o f the ch ild re n sticks his
tongue out at the cam era. B u t even here the g ra n d fa th e r can n ot
have his eyes looking righ t at the cam era, and w e see an alm ost
terrified sw e e p in g back and forth o f his black p u p ils as he tries
to avoid lo o k in g straigh t at us.
We then see the m akin g o f a sand p a in tin g from b eg in n in g to
end. W e see the g ra n d fa th e r p re p a rin g the sand in his hogan,
search in g fo r the rocks w ith w h ich to m ake the dried p o w d er
w hich is then d rip p ed on the sand as pain t, and w e see part o f
the c u rin g ce rem o n y in w h ich a p atien t appears. It w as im pos
sible fo r the N a v a jo to co n sid er u sin g a N a v a jo as a patient, so
they chose o u r assistant, C h a lfe n , w h o agreed to reenact the part
of a patient. T h e film ends w ith the g ra n d fa th e r w a lk in g from the
hogan after his cerem o n y to his o w n cam p.

J ohnny N elso n : The Shallow Well. 20 m inutes. (Photos 41-43.)

T h is is a film that Jo h n n y u ndertook to m ake after he w as

reprim an ded b y the co m m u n ity fo r m akin g the ph o tograph s o f
horses w h ich are describ ed in the text. It w as at that tim e that he
w as asked to su p ervise the co n stru ctio n o f a sh a llo w w ell.
Jo h n n y p re v io u sly had ex p e rien ce as a forem an h elp in g to
co n stru ct these w e lls in the co m m u n ity . H e told the relative w ho
su ggested that he u n dertake the su p ervisio n o f th is con stru ction
that he co u ld n t do it because he w as learn in g to m ake m ovies.
B u t then he realized that p erh ap s he could m ake a film about it
and thus regain som e o f his status.
T h is film is in m any w a y s d ifferen t fro m a n y o f the other
film s m ade b y the N a v a jo and is discussed in the a n alysis sec
tion. It opens, h ow ever, in m uch the sam e w a y , sh o w in g the
old first a series o f shots o f the old open ponds fro m w hich
the N a v a jo used to d raw w ater. W e then see a series o f close-
ups o f flies and insects on the w ater. A fte r m o vin g w ith the
cam era aroun d the stagnant pool w e cut q u ick ly to a series o f
N a v a jo w o rk m en b eg in n in g to b uild th eir sh a llo w w ell. We
fo llo w , in alm ost ed u cational film style, all the processes, in
close-up, b y w h ich the vario u s po rtio n s o f the w e ll are built.
In tercu t at m om ents are shots o f the N a v a jo re ad in g blu e
p rin ts, m e asu rin g w ith y ard stick s, and re ce iv in g in stru ctio n s
from the forem an w h o a ctu ally w as in ch arge o f th is project.
Jo h n n y again sh ow s the ty p ic a l N a v a jo use o f the c irc u la r pan
in m an y o f the shots o f the cem en t w o rk as the cam era ex
plores the variou s parts o f the installatio n , a lw a y s m o vin g in a
su n w ise d irection . W hen the job is finished w e see a N a va jo
(Jo h n n y used W orth to p lay the part o f a N avajo ) w a lk in g up
to the w e ll and d ra w in g w a te r and w e see w a ter co m in g from
the vario u s parts o f the sh allo w w ell. T h e film ends not w ith
shots o f a n yb o d y w a lk in g , but w ith a series o f shots o f trucks
d riv in g a w a y from the w ell.
O f in terest here is that alth ou gh th ere are no face close-ups,
there are also no shots o f N a v a jo s w a lk in g to get an yth in g. A ll
the tools and all the eq u ip m en t th ey need are rig h t there. Instead
o f w a lk in g a w a y from the job th ey ride aw ay. T h is is the o n ly
tim e in an y o f the film s in w h ich N a va jo s are sh o w n u sin g th eir
p ickup trucks.
M ike A n d erso n : Old Antelope Lake. 15 m inutes. (Photos 56-60,
22-25)

In this film M ike decided to m ake a m ovie about a lake. F irst

he show s w h at tu rn s out to be the source o f the lake, or the m outh
by w hich it is fed. H e then proceeds to m ove su n w ise (again)
around the lake sh o w in g a v a rie ty o f details o f both anim al and
plant life. H e also has a sequ ence o f his y o u n g e r b ro th er w ash in g
clothes at the lake. T h e seq u en cin g o f shots in the film fo llo w s
an alm ost ex a ct n atu ral order. T h a t is, not o n ly m ust the se
quence be in a su n w ise d irectio n around the lake, but also certain
shots m ust be fo llo w e d by the ap p ro p ria te an im al and d irection
o f action. T h e tim e elem en t is n t v e ry im p ortan t in this film.
Scenes that w e re shot in the m o rn in g appear later in the film than
scenes that w e re shot in the aftern oo n . W hat w as im p ortan t to
M ike w as that w e first saw the so u rce and then m oved all around
the lake sh o w in g the u n ity b etw een the n atural th in gs and the
hum an b ein gs in the en viro n m en t.

A l C lah : Intrepid Shadows. 15 m inutes. (Photos 48-55.)

T h is is one o f the m ost co m p lex film s m ade by the N avajo . It

is the one least u nderstood b y the N a v a jo and m ost appreciated
by a van t-gard e film m akers in ou r society. T h e film opens w ith
a long series o f shots sh o w in g the va rieties o f landscape around
our schoolhouse. W e see rocks, earth, trees, sky, in a v a riety o f
shapes but m ostly in still or static shots. T h e sh adow s are v e ry
sm all o r short. W hen w e have fam iliarized ou rselves w ith the
th in gs that co m p rise the w o rld w e see a y o u n g N a v a jo com e
w alk in g into the landscape. H e picks up a stick, kneels do w n , and
begins to poke at a h uge sp id er w eb. A t this point the tone o f the
film changes. S u d d e n ly a hand appears ro llin g an old m etal hoop.
T h e hoop is cu t in in te rm itte n tly th ro u g h o u t the rest o f the film ,
ro llin g as if p rop elled by unseen hands th rough the variatio n s in
the landscape. A Y eib ech ai m ask appears in the film at this point,
w a n d e rin g and w a lk in g th rou gh the landscape seem in gly look
ing fo r som eth in g. T h e Y eib e ch ai w an d ers beh in d trees, seen
a lw ay s th rou gh bushes, looking at the sky, lo o k in g in all direc
tions, and is in tercu t in an ex tre m ely co m p lex m an n er with
co n tin u in g scenes o f the lan d scape and o f the legs and body of
a person dressed in w h ite. A s the Y eib ech ai m ask w an ders, the
cam era w o rk d e p ic tin g the landscape b egin s to ch an ge from
static to co m p lex circu lar, sp iral, and alm ost in d escrib ab le move
m ents. A s the hoop, and then a ro llin g ball, and then the pages
o f a notebook tu rn and m ove faster and faster, so do the m ove
m ents o f the cam era as th ey see m in g ly search alo n g trees and
rocks and bushes fo r w h a teve r the Y eib ech ai is search in g for.
N o w the sh adow s in the film are long and som e o f the scenes are
d e lib e ra tely dark. S u d d e n ly w e see w h at is v e ry cle a rly the
sh adow o f the cam era m an w a lk in g th ro u gh the lan dscape tryin g
to length en itself, and m e rg in g w ith the vario u s parts o f the
landscape, the rocks, the bushes, and the trees, u n til at the very
end the sh adow o f the man is alm ost a h un d red feet long. T h ere
fo llo w s the last shot in the film , a long shot sh o w in g the shadow
o f the hoop w h irlin g and tw irlin g fo r alm ost fifteen seconds;
su d d en ly in the co rn e r o f the fram e the hoop itse lf appears, and
as the sp in n in g, w h ich can n o w be seen as the hoop and its
shadow , g ro w s slow er, both com e into the fram e so that at the
ve ry end w e see the hoop sp in n in g and the sh ado w that it makes.
T h e film is ended a b ru p tly .

A lta K ahn : Untitled film . 10 m inutes. (Photos 44-47.)

S u sie B e n a lly undertook to teach her m oth er to m ake a movie.

S u sie taught h er to load and use the cam era and ex p o su re m eter
in one day. T h e com pleted film w as m ade in one w eek. T h e film
in m any w a y s is v e ry sim ila r to S u sie s film about her m other
w e a v in g a rug. A lta K ah n starts by sh o w in g S u sie p ick in g herbs
fo r the dyes. Sh e then has her d au gh ter d y in g the w ool and
sp in n in g it. She spends a great deal o f tim e on the sp in n in g o f
of th e w ool, w h ereas Su sie, for exam ple, spent a great deal o f tim e
on the fin din g o f the h erbs and several o f the other processes.
A fte r Susie spins the w ool she sets up her belt loom and w eaves
a belt. Som e o f the close-ups o f hands and w ool are ex tra o rd in a ry
for one w ho has n ever used or seen a m ovie before. T h e film ends
in som ew hat the w a y that S u s ie s film ends: that is, Su sie w alks
outside h old in g the belt up for the cam era to look at, and the
camera pans up and d ow n v e ry m uch as S u sie did w ith her
mothers rug.
What seem s in terestin g is that there are no titles in this film.
It is the o n ly film m ade by the N a v a jo that does not h ave titles;
and it is easy to specu late that titles n ever o ccu rred to h er m other
because she had n ever seen a film . A ll the titles on the o ther film s
are ex tre m ely long betw een tw e n ty and fo rty-five seconds.
Some o f them con tain several shots o f the sam e title spliced
together. D iscu ssions w ith the students m ade it clear that they
felt this w as the p ro p er tim e needed fo r read in g the th ree or four
words o f each title.
 Afterword to the
Revised Edition

As the field o f visual anthropology has developed and broad

ened, the topic ol indigenous media has attracted increased in
terest. As part ol this process, many observers have asked about
both short- and long-term results ol the Navajo project: W h ats
happened since the 1966 field research and the first publication
of Through N avajo Eyes in 1972? In response I will approach this
question from several directions, namely what has been written
about the project, how the project has influenced new work, and
where the Navajo filmmakers are today. As part o f this discus
sion, I will follow up 011 several references and comments made
in the foreword. Primary attention will remain with motion pic
ture media, but I also want to include several parallel references
to significant w ork in still photography and videography.

Critique o f R e v ie w s

It was probably the innovative qualities o f the Navajo research

that attracted initial notice to the project. Asking informants
to make their own filmic records was considered a radical change
in practice. In time reviews and critiques began to appear in
print. Quite correctly this project was adopted as a cross-over
effort, that is, one that appealed to several academic interests
disciplines, and specialists.' One reviewer spoke to this situation
as follows: The authors experiment involves so many disci
plines and can affect so many more, has application to so many
previous hypotheses, and encourages the possibility for so many
new experiments. . . . The authors made a seminal exploration
discovered new corridors o f investigation . . . (Scob 1977:226)
It is instructive to review how the project has been interpreted
by reviewers. The following comments come from examining
approximately fifteen reviews o f the Navajo project, reviews that
focused on either the book, the films, or both.2 T h ey were writ
ten in several contexts, from different points o f view and for
different audiences, including students of cultural and visual
anthropology, communication studies, documentary film, film
language, etc. First I will offer a critical assessment o f some
reactions and misinterpretations of the original intentions and
results of the Navajo project as stated in 1972. I will pay par
ticular attention to one provocative article written in 1979 by
filmmaker/scholar James Potts, entitled Is There an Interna
tional Film Language? and published in the British journal
Sight and Sound. The article is particularly valuable because it
raises so many important issues in interesting ways, and it offers
examples of questions that were important in the 1970s and early
1980s. Later I will indicate how theoretical and practical con
cerns can change through time, especially as we acknowledge a
different set of priorities and issues relevant to different social,
political, ethical, and cultural circumstances.
I have extracted several controversial themes and questions for
critical discussion and additional clarification. Interestingly dif
ferent types o f criticisms have developed in different time pe
riods comments made in the 1990s are unlike those expressed
in the 1970s. M ost of the points I will raise were not addressed
in the original book, and they cannot be answered simply by
viewing the Navajo-made films.
W ithin anthropology, two commentaries are immediately rele
vant, specifically Margaret M ead s 1975 review o f the book and
John Collier, J r .s 1974 review ot the films. M ead used terms such
as epoch-making and pioneering experiment ; she com
mented on the value o f hypothesis making in this experiment,
on how to conduct a controlled operation in the field and ad
vances in cross-cultural communication fieldwork (1975:122).
Here we see M ead allied to a particular tradition in the social
sciences and to a particular positivist model o f fieldwork, one
that receives much critical attention today.
M ead also connected the Navajo research to previous efforts
to look at culture through the films its members make. She
urged scholars to continue in this tradition and take the next few
steps:

This p i o n e e r in g an d i m p o r t a n t e x p e r i m e n t has g i v e n us m a n y valu ab le

things: a m o d e o f s tu d y in g the i n t ro d u c tio n ot a n e w piece o f b e h a v io r
in a form w h ic h p r o v id e s its o w n reco rd, an d in a fo rm th at is w h o l ly
manageable; a f i lm ic a c c o m p a n i m e n t to all the o th er rich m ate ria ls on
Navajo culture, fro m a m o n g w h ic h the auth ors s ele cted w i t h great care
just the m o st ap p o site s ta t e m e n ts ; an d clear sta t e m e n ts th at stim u la te
the reader to r e sp on d w i t h n e w h y p o th es es an d plans tor o ther e x p e r i
ments. I t reas serts h o w v alu ab le film is as a w a y ot r e c o r d i n g th in gs
about a culture th at can be r e c o r d e d in no o th er w a y (1975 : 124).

M ead understood the project as a great contribution to an in

creased understanding o f relationships between film and culture.
She urged scholars to use the project as a platform tor additional
inquiry:

Anyone w i s h i n g to do m o r e w o r k on the r e la t io n s h ip b e tw e e n N a v a jo
films and the rest of the cultu re s h o u ld realize th at th ere is m o re b e a u
tiful mat er ial on the sand p a in ti n g s , poetry, lin g u is tic u sage, an d social
organization w h ic h w o u ld be availa b le for s tu d en t p ro je cts, or for e x
perimenting w ith fu r th e r h y p o th e s e s w h ic h can be derived ei th er fro m
the films or fro m the rest o f the m at e r ia l on the c u ltu re (1975 : 122).

In fact several people close to the project fully expected it to

stimulate new work; however, M eads expectations for other
projects, tor new and related work, did not develop in any im
mediate sense.
In his 1974 review essay describing and discussing the seven
Navajo-made films, John Collier, Jr., also spoke in positive terms
about the groundbreaking qualities ot the research: "It is a revo
lutionary circumstance in anthropological research tor ethnog
raphers to turn their recording tools over to the people being
studied. This sharing allowed the Navajo to determine the au
thenticity ot description and gave these native filmmakers ag
gressive control over the research process (1974:4X1). Readers
are reminded that in 1966, asking people to make their own films
was new indeed; today we accept this strategy ot collaboration as
just another research possibility-.
In 1974 Collier asked, W hat could this experiment do tor the
development ot the Navajo people, as well as the evolution of
anthropology? In reference to the now famous question asked
by Sam Yazzie, C o lliers 1974 response was: Factually, it dem
onstrates that the Navajos as a group could make and control
their own media ot communication. The Navajo nation has its
own radio station. It could also create its own film and television
communication (1974:485). For some time now, the Navajo
have also had their own media center, responsible for television
and video production, located in W indow Rock, Arizona, capital
ot the Navajo Nation.
Collier added: The experiment certainly demonstrated new
roles to these filmmakers and created new expectations and self-
awareness. He then mentioned a favorite theme of critics: Had
there been follow-up funding, some of those taught could have
gone on to professional futures, but unfortunately such oppor
tunities did not materialize (1974:485). As some have said, as
soon as the funding ends, the cameras are taken awav. In retro
spect there is no evidence that the Navajo filmmakers had pro
fessional inclinations in any consistent or serious wav.
In communication and film studies, I found several comments
from authors concerned with applied communication theory and
 Several criticisms have centered on what was seen as the
p r a c t ic e .

inadequate research design, including the small sample

p r o j e c t s

size, making premature conclusions, and generalizing too much

from meager results (Callenbach 1 9 7 3 - 7 4 :6 2 ) . Several people
have voiced objections based on the fact that film was not a famil
iar medium tor the Navajo, that there was no cultural tradition
supporting camera use in Navajo communities. Writing tor the
Jo u rn a l o f Broadcasting, one reviewer questioned the use of a tech
nology unknown to the Navajo as a legitimate methodological
t o o l for studying a cultures real communication (Hickson 1975).

This perspective begs several key questions, including where

do we find real communication? Must we relv on surface char
acteristics or might we gain more by understanding less clearly
seen symbolic levels? Adair and Worth emphasized the point
o f studying film, or any pictorial form, as a symbolic system, and
they repeatedly explicated relationships between spoken, writ
ten, and visual/pictorial expressive forms. Any anthropological
perspective would insist 011 understanding these forms as cultur
ally structured systems operating in some organized and coordi
nated manner.3
Any reading of the original study reveals this attempt to see
how communicative codes are culturally interrelated. Themes of
redundancy and reciprocity underlie most theories of communi
cation and, clearly, they were important to the explicit and im
plicit paradigms o f this research. One pervasive motivation o f
the study was to examine the inherent limitations of one expres
sive system in a particular culture (or in intercultural dialogues),
namely speech, in light o f another, the pictorial. W hat could
Navajo filmic communication say about Navajo culture that
Navajo words might obfuscate when spoken to an inquiring an
thropologist? In a parallel line of questioning, how would Navajo
filmic communication reject, contradict, or negate what had
been said by anthropologists and other nonnative observers who
adhered to traditional modes of verbal inquiry and interaction?
These questions add considerable depth to anv study of cul
ture and communication. Thus the claim that no attention was
paid to something labeled as real communication is provoca
tive but misplaced. Findings on the use of film have a great deal
to do with patterns of everyday speech, storytelling, and styles
ot interaction it these areas are what is considered real.
Another author has stated that the specific findings of
Through N avajo Eyes are simply camera-specific. Th at is, the
Navajo use of cameras, their shot selection, the narrative style
that characterizes each of their films, their patterns ot shot jux
tapositions, and so on, would all have been different i f they had
used videotape equipment instead of 16mm film technology
(Potts 1979). This comment is more complex than it initially
appears, because it goes beyond the trivial realization that
some types of camera technology can record images in ways that
others cannot. However, we should avoid placing primary em
phasis on mechanical apparatus, that is, crediting cameras with
doing the recording, seemingly without conscious, selective hu
man intervention and operation. The anthropologist Paul Byerss
often quoted phrase, cameras dont take pictures, comes to
mind in this connection.4
A more subtle consideration ot this criticism involves the no
tion that certain pieces ot image-recording machinery "carry
with them, so to speak, operating instructions on both cul
tural and ideological levels. This model o f technological deter
minism is introduced by Potts as follows:

It seems unlikely that the use of an Arriflex camera automatically

imposes a Teutonic film style, that an Eclaire gives a G allic flair, or
that by toting a Japanese Super-8mm camera with a power zoom one
starts perceiving the world through the eves of an oriental (however
W esternized). B u t it is becoming generally accepted that technology is
not value-free: to some extent different technologies dictate the way in
which we see the world, the way we record and interpret reality, and
they influence the types of codes we use to communicate a message . . .
( i 9 7 9 : 74).
The term dictate may be somewhat excessive in this statement,
but o f course, some of the claim is undeniably true. Tw o points
are worth mentioning here. First, Pottss suggestion may not he
too far removed from the notion that cameras swallow cul
tures, or that media eat their voting." For instance, Edmund
Carpenter and David M acD ougall have suggested that home
movies made by people all over the world look much the same
(MacDougall 19 69:30). I for one do not believe this to be the
case. Such judgments seem premature, given the meager corpus
o f cross-cultural data on this and related questions.
Second, most anthropologists might feel more comfortable
with an alternative scenario, one grounded in cultural perspec
tives that credit the human use of mechanical apparatus as pri
mary. Without this sensitivity, we might be writing papers and
books on the culture o f the camera, meant in literal rather than
metaphorical terms, as we usually find.'
With specific reference to the Navajo materials, Potts and
several others have suggested that videotapes made by native,
nonprofessional image-making Navajo students would be very
different from their films. This point raises a number o f misper
ceptions about the research. Consider the following comment:

T h e N a v a jo In d ian s, w h o s e u lti m a te ly am a te u r is h 16111m film s were

analy zed h i1 W o r t h an d A d a i r , w o u ld have been h a p p ie r an d m u ch more
c o n fid e n t w ith v id eo. A n d I suspect we w o u ld have seen more face
c lo se-up s of th eir eld er s, s im p ly bec au se the te m p t a tio n to z o o m in
to b ig c lo s e - u p is m u c h str o n g e r w ith an e lec tr o n ic c a m e r a w ith its
m iniature I V - s c r e e n v ie w f i n d e r than the te m p t a ti o n w ith a th ree-len s
turret on his c l o c k w o r k c a m e r a to c h a n g e the lens an d to fo cus tor a
c lo se-u p . . . ( Po tts 1979 : 80).

Of course this comment implies tluit the Navajo film students

were not happy and/or confident with their 16mm Bell and
Howell cameras. Quite to the contrary they demonstrated
a confidence in their first filmmaking experiences that Worth
and I have seen missing from the filmmaking practice o f Anglo
American graduate students. As Adair has remarked in many of
his public presentations, we forgot to tell the Navajo students
how difficult it was to make movies.
In addition, there appears to be a reluctance to acknowledge
that culture can exert its own set of restraints on what I must
assume is meant bv natural temptations. Clearlv cultural forces
mav exert stronger influences than Potts expects. His stance is,
however, consistent with one of technological determinism.
Finally, these interesting speculations should be supplemented
by one less well-known project that clarifies anv hypothetical set
of predicted video outcomes. Ronald Light, an audiovisual spe
cialist, developed a project in Ramah, N ew Mexico, in which he
instructed several Navajo to make their own twentv-minute
videotape (Light and Henio 1977). More will be said about
L igh ts project below, but this Navajo-made videotape illustrated
many of the characteristics that Adair and Worth had identified
as Navajo filmmaking traits. While I do not mention this ex
ample as a definitive corroboration of the Navajo findings, I
would hope that it can counter the claims that camera tech
nology determines more than do the social and cultural charac
teristics of people who use the equipment.
In a similar frame of reference, other reviewers and commen
tators have expressed doubt and even suspicion about how the
filmmaking technology was introduced can innovators with
technological apparatus guarantee the elicitation of genuine in
digenous expression? The main criticism has been that even
when researchers are determined to teach filmmaking to novices
in value-free wavs, contamination of some sort is inevitable.
I lence anv resultant visual texts will merely reflect predisposi
tions, preferences, and image aesthetics o f the researcher-
instructors. Commentators are fond of mentioning W orths sin
gular breach of protocol when he gave advice to the Tsosie sisters
while they were filming two Navajo elders making the sand-
painting for their film The Spirit o f the N avajo (see pp. 156-65
o f th e origin al text). O f course readers o n ly know about this
in c id e n t because W o rth and A d a ir w ere d iscip lin ed enough to
in c lu d e its d escrip tion in their m onograph .
T h is dilem m a is com m on to any exam ple o f p articip an t-
in novator-observer research. T h e broader context is the ques
tionable p o ssib ility o f d oin g an yth in g in a cu ltu re-fre e
manner. Ju s t as equ ip m en t m ay not be cu ltu re-clean in som e
misplaced id ealistic way, so, too, an y process o f in n o vatio n has
fingerprints. C le a rly the best th at researchers can do is to d e
scribe in a candid and fo rth co m in g m anner as m any bits and
pieces o f the inn ovation process as p o ssib le as they, outsiders,
see and u nderstand them .
More to the p oin t, the film s th at em erged from the N avajo
project and related case studies do not in d icate a copycat effect
or one o f se lf-fu lfillin g prophesies (see C h a lfe n 1981). In one
case, we see th at Jo h n n y N e lso n s film about Jo h n B a lo o s silver-
smithing d iffers dram atically from Jo h n A d a ir s ow n film on
Navajo silversm ith in g m ade in 19 38.7 A s it turned out, d iffe r
ences far outnum ber sim ilarities. In any event, there w as no d e
termined effo rt to produce sim ilarities or differen ces. It is w orth
recalling that one o f the first questions addressed by the research
was w hether the N a va jo w ould be w illin g or interested in m aking
films at all.
Readers should also be aw are that w e m ust com pare the
Navajo w o rk to first film s m ade by other grou ps o f p reviou sly
untrained n on p rofession al film m akers. W h eth er cultural p a t
terns (differences or sim ilarities) survive and persist into later
productions, after extensive exposure to W estern film tradition s
and in d ustry conventions, is a d ifferen t m atter. Sub cultu rally
preferred alternatives in shot com position and ju x tap o sitio n , in
depictions o f com pressed, expanded, or otherw ise m anipulated
time and space, or in narrative style m ay not survive beyon d the
first film . Pressures to conform to W estern conven tio n al film
language in these cases m ay sim p ly be too great.
A n oth er criticism states that there is virtu a lly no differen ce
betw een the N a va jo film lan g u age as described by W o rth and
A d a ir and any other exam ple o f the first stage o f cam era cu l
tu re (Potts 1979). I have heard several film scholars refer to the
N a va jo -m a d e film s as little m ore than an yon es hom e m o vie s,
or ty p ic a l fo otage produced by any first-sem e ster film stu
dents. T h e im m ed iate and m ost obvious problem w ith this c riti
cism is that, in m ost cases, g e n eric hom e m ovie fo otage sel
dom resem bles student first-fo o ta g e . F ilm students th at I have
either studied w ith or ob served in A m erica n film m a k in g class
room s do th eir v e ry best to avoid u sin g both the form s and the
contents th at the N avajo students chose to use. T h e N a v a jo re
je ctio n o f facial clo se-u p shots and th eir ju m p cuts and len gth y
pan shots are selectively and p u rp o sefu lly labeled as the w ro n g
th in gs to do in film in stru ction . W e m igh t argue, h ow ever, that
the N a va jo -m a d e film s w ou ld resem ble film s m ade by N avajo
students i f tau gh t in tro d u cto ry film m a k in g by a N avajo in stru c
to r and here w e w ou ld w ant to know w here and h ow the
N a va jo film teach er had been trained. T h is p red ictio n m ust re
m ain specu lative, but the th ou gh t has im p ortan t im p lication s for
train in g and education in cross-cu ltu ral contexts.
T h e references to fam ily p h o tog rap h y also seem strained. In
one exam ple, the lack o f facial close-u p shots in the N avajo film s
is referenced to the com m on ch aracteristic o f b egin n ers [being]
shy o f the use o f the clo se-u p (Potts 1979 : 78).
L a c k in g any specific research to draw upon, P otts takes a few
exam ples from his gran d m o th ers snapsh ot collection . L e a v in g
aside problem s associated w ith gen eratio n al and tem poral v a ri
ables, he substantiates his point by statin g, the subjects are
alw ays in lo n g shot and you can h ard ly see the faces . . . (1979 :
78). A g a in , several con fu sions beg for clarificatio n .
S n ap sh ot collection s from m id d le-class A n g lo A m erican
fam ilies (from a tim e p eriod sim ilar to that o f the N avajo film s)
contain a v e ry h igh percentage o f m edium and lo n g shots o f
people. H o w ever, perhaps 95 percent o f the tim e, the hum an
subjects o f these im ages are m akin g eye co n tact w ith the p h o to g
raphers cam era, a fin d in g that m ay d iffer som ew hat w ith social
class (C h a lfe n 1987).
A s A d a ir and W orth have explained , this is h ard ly the case
w ith the N a va jo -m a d e film s. In ad d ition , w h en w e exam ine a
collection o f m id d le-class A n g lo A m erica n hom e m ovies, m ade
in the 1950s and 19 6 0 s, w e in fact fin d a tend en cy to get close to
the action, to produce facial close-u p s w ith the frequ en t o ver
use o f the b u ilt-in zoom lens. In som e circles this pattern o f
zoo m in g overuse has been m ade into a po in t o f rid icu le
som eth in g done on ly b y people w h o do not kn o w h o w to m ake
m o vies. T h e false equation o f the N a va jo -m a d e film s w ith
hom e m ovies offers evidence, first, o f a m isu n d erstan d in g as to
w h y and fo r w h om hom e m ovies are m ade and w h at they rep re
sent, in both literal and m etaph oric term s, and, second, o f an
u n derestim ation o f the structure, form , and conten t o f the hom e
m ovie gen re (C h a lfe n 1975, 1982). A com parison o f the project
film s w ith hom e m ovies m ade b y residents o f P in e Sprin gs
w ould be v e ry h elp fu l on these issues.
O th er critiques have focu sed on h ow people could or should
be able to u nderstand the N a vajo -m ad e film s. F o r instance can
these bio d o cu m en taries stand on th eir ow n w hen screened in
film festivals or art film theaters? In som e cases the prim acy o f
film -a s-film or film -a s-a rt, appreciated in a cu ltu re-free en vi
ronm ent, precludes any appreciation o f film -a s-c u ltu ra l-sta te -
m ent. W ritin g in the B ritish jo u rn al Screen, E ato n and W ard
(19 6 7 :118 ) com m ent:

The rejection (as a confidence trick) by many members o f the National

Film Theatre o f films by Navajo . . . shows that they could not be ac
commodated as meaningful or interesting. They [the films] can be
rescued by anthropology only by reducing the techniques o f the films
to expressions o f cultural ideas and practices. . . . It would appear from
this that the preconditions for the coherence o f these films lie outside
them, as with other types o f anthropological film.
Som e people have overlooked the fact that the N avajo b io d o cu -
m entaries are research docum ents; som e have not u nderstood the
con text in w h ich the film s w ere prod uced , beyon d the fact that
N a va jo w ere b eh in d the cam eras. T h e m o tivation s and objectives
o f the project have been overlooked . P erh aps w e should be ask
in g: w h y are th ey in a film theater in the first place? W h y are
th ey show n w ith o u t som e form o f an th ro p o lo gical con textu ali-
zation and in terpretation ? V iew ers can becom e b lin ded b y u n
critical senses o f interpretation . People m ay feel: I t s ju s t a
film . . . . I f its film I (anyone) can understand it. . . . H e re the
pictu res may, in deed, be w orth a thousand w ords or, as C o llie r
w ou ld say, references, but the po in t is that they are som eone
elses w ords and references.
A n o th e r gen eral critique addresses o n g o in g relatio n sh ip s b e
tw een academ ic d iscip lin es, id eo lo gies, and m odels o f research.
T h e claim is m ade that the the A d a ir/W o rth N avajo film s m ay
u ltim ately say m ore about the state o f A m erica n an th ro p o lo gy
at the tim e [ o f the research] than they do about the N a v a jo
(Feld m an 19 7 7 : 35.8 Ja m es F aris offers a related and equally p ro
vocative argum ent, b y ask in g readers to reassess the fun d am en tal
v a lid ity o f the N avajo fin d in g s:

There is experimental work, such as the W orth/Adair attempt to put

cameras in the Navajo hands to see what their view o f their culture
might be. . . . W hat, however, was interpreted by the authors as Navajo
cultural expressions must be seen in terms o f the fact that neither the
camera nor the filmic eye (I) are Navajo. Involving them reveals not
how much they are Navajo, but how very much it is our device . . .
(1992 : 261, emphasis added).

In short he is su ggestin g w e accept the project results as so m e

th in g entirely differen t.
T h e se are v e ry h ealth y and fa r-ra n g in g critiques th at address
co n tem p orary concerns w ith ch an gin g research p arad igm s and,
in deed, w ith ph ilosop h ies o f science, approved field m ethods,
eth ical concerns, and the like. M a n y observers are n ow w o rk in g
from different epistem ological bases a paradigm grounded in
positivism has been reevaluated and in many cases replaced with
a paradigm relying more on interpretivist perspectives. O bserv
ers are encouraged to be more conscious o f how they are
there prom oting a more reflective and politically sensitive
stance. W e frequently acknowledge the demise o f colonialisms
throughout the world, accompanied by increased assertions o f
self-determ ination on the part o f native peoples .9 Exam ples can
now be found in our daily newspapers. In turn anthropology ap
pears more open than ever to cross-fertilization and stimulation
from the humanities, including a privileging o f alternative, pre
viously neglected voices and gazes. It would appear that change
is the norm but the important variable is how we understand
the changes, the relationships o f the past to the present, and an
ticipations o f the future.
T h u s the claim th at the N a va jo project w as a product o f its
tim e cannot, and perhaps should not, be denied. M u ch depends
on h ow the w o rk is con textu alized. R ead ers m ust realize that
these film ic texts are products o f a particu lar kin d o f in teraction ,
bounded in tim e and space; th ey w ere gu id ed b y p rin ciples o f
culture and visu al com m u n ication , an id eo lo gy o f A m erica n an
th ropology, and a m odel o f com m u n ication research in the m id -
1960s. A d d itio n a lly it is clear that W orth and A d a ir m ade o b ser
vations (and interpretation s) o f h ow novice N avajo film m akers
in terpreted their surroun dings in film ic sym b olic term s. In deed
the fin ish ed N a va jo film s are about the p roject as m uch as they
are about N avajo so ciety and culture, but th ey are not n ecessarily
about one m ore than the other. In short I tend to agree w ith P aul
H e n ley (personal com m u nication 1992) th at these film s and the
overall project should be valued fo r their m om en t in h isto ry and
in the developm ent o f th in kin g in visual anthropology.
Som e o f these ch an gin g cond itions are reflected in m ore re
cent pu b lication s, w here w e fin d less com preh en sive critiques in
favo r o f a few b rie f and som etim es in cisive com m ents on the
1966 N avajo research. O n e exam ple com es from the pu b lication
in 19 9 1 o f a special issue o f the Visual Anthropology R e v ie w
(7, no. 2), edited by M o n ic a F eito sa and en titled T h e O th ers
V isio n : F ro m Iv o ry T o w e r to the B a rrica d e , focu sed on discus
sions o f in d igen o u s im agery. T h e 1966 N avajo F ilm m a k in g P ro j
ect w as clearly a referen ce p o in t fo r the iv o ry to w e r. Several
papers pu b lish ed in this issue sought to in tegrate A d a ir s and
W o rth s w o rk into m ore recent projects, but som e cred ib ility is
lost w h en the p roject is reduced to a su p erficial overview . C o n
sider the fo llo w in g com m ents:

Worth and A dair were interested in researching the visual grammar

that a Navaho eye would produce on film. However, from their per
spective the Navaho had never presented any particular motivation to
produce their own films they were hired by Worth and Adair to do a
job. Through Navaho Eyes expresses a scientific experiment centered
on the researchers instead o f the makers' " interests. The project did not
by itself give rise to any further film production; it neither led to
Navaho empowerment nor provided a viable means o f self-expression
through visual media (199 1: 48; emphasis added).

W e should also keep in m ind that ch an gin g tim es bring

ch an gin g interests. It is not unusual to criticize a research en
deavor fo r w h a t w as not done or u ltim ately accom plish ed. B ut a
p ro jects orig in al objectives should be the first criterion o f
evaluation. In the 1966 N avajo research, add itio n al production
o f film s w as not a goal. O n the one hand, such an assumption
m ig h t be an eth nocen tric ju d g m e n t m ust everyone be inter
ested in m ak in g film s because w e are? O n the other hand, should
em pow erm en t alw ays be an an th ro p o lo gical objective? C learly
em pow erm en t com es in m any varieties, in both short-term and
lo n g -term versions. R e g a rd in g the latter, w e m ay safely assume
that anyone w h o has shot and put to gether a fifteen -m in u te se
quence o f film over a tw o -m o n th p eriod w ill never see or real
iz e m otion pictu re com m u n ication in the sam e way. T h is, in
itself, is one m odel o f em pow erm ent.
F in a lly I w an t to com m ent on one statem en t (actually a con
versation and a qu otation ) that, fo r many, has becom e a standard
reference po in t for the entire N avajo project. T h e reference is to
Sam Y azzies pragm atic o rien tation to the question o f teach in g
Navajo to m ake film s; it is foun d in the p reface (p. 4) o f the
original text o f Through N a va jo Eyes, and I have repeated a re f
erence to it in m y prologu e. R ead ers w ill recall that w h en A d a ir
and W orth w ere seekin g counsel, Y azzie asked them : W ill m ak
ing movies do the sheep any h arm ? T h e text continues:

Worth was happy to explain that as far as he knew, there was no chance
that m aking m ovies w ould harm the sheep.
Sam thought this over and then asked: W ill m aking m ovies do the
sheep any good? W orth was forced to reply that as far as he knew m ak
ing movies w ouldnt do the sheep any good.
Sam thought this over, then, lo o k in g around at us he said, T h en
why make movies?

Worth and A d a ir add (p. 5): Sam Y az z ies qu estion keeps h au n t

ing us. . . . W h a t w ill th ey [the N avajo ] th in k about w h at w e
did? H o w w ill they b en e fit from our research and fin d in g s?
T h e hau ntin g q u ality o f the question ob viou sly persists; Y a z
zies com m ents are regu larly quoted, w h eth er to start an essay, in
the middle o f a paper (G in sb u rg 19 9 1, 1994 ), or to conclude one
(Faris 1992a, H a lle ck and M a g n a n 1993).
Recently Y az z ies poin t o f w isd om has com e to be used in a
critical m anner. In an overview o f recent w o rk in in d igen ou s
media, Faye G in sb u rg ( 19 9 1:9 6 ) , after citin g the Y azzie q u es
tion, says: T h e lack o f con sid eration fo r h ow m ovies m ight do
the sheep g o o d m eant th at the N avajo E y e s project w as rather
short-lived and, retrospectively, is seen as a som ew hat sterile and
patronizing experim en t. . . . S till, the notion o f d istin ct in d ig e
nous concerns fo r cin em atic and narrative represen tation was
prescient. 10 T h e context o f this com m ent is G in sb u rg s general
criticism that W orth and A d a ir failed to consid er seriou sly p o
tential cultural d ifferen ces in the social relations around im age-
making and view in g . . . ( 19 9 1:9 5 ) .11 In contrast, w e fin d a
response m ade by M a c D o u g a ll w h o com m en ts: T h a t fam ous
rem ark o f Sam Y azzie, the N avajo elder, to Jo h n A d a ir and Sol
W o rth W ill m akin g m ovies do the sheep g o o d ? is not some
sage in d ictm en t o f exploitative academ ic practices but an ac
kn ow led gm en t o f d ifferin g cultural p ractices (1992 :34 ).
T h is question is o f great importance for all models o f field
work. In much contem porary thinking, this and sim ilar research
efforts are seen as somewhere between m ildly intrusive and ethi
cally perverse, attitudes that provide another example o f the
importance o f m aintaining a historically grounded perspective.

N ew Interests in Subject-Generated. Im a g ery

These critiques open the door to a discussion o f projects under

taken since the N avajo project. Another way o f contextualizing
the project, updating previous references, and building on pre
vious critiques is to acknowledge more recent efforts that have
involved some form o f indigenous media. W hat has happened to
this interest in subject-generated im agery and how has it been
studied?
A directly related question was put to Sol W orth in an inter
view with Filmmakers Newsletter in 19 71, five years after the field
w ork and just before the publication o f Through N avajo Eyes. He
was asked: Have you, in the light o f more recent inform ation
or additional studies on your part, reached any different, new, or
further conclusions about native film m akers? (19 7 1: 29) H e in
dicated work being done by some o f his colleagues and former
as well as current students at the U niversity o f Pennsylvanias
A nnenberg School for Com m unication. For the future, W orth
stressed that one would now want to know how other groups o f
people in our culture blacks ,19white high school children ,13un
wed m others ,14amateur photographers how they would handle
film . A n d also, one would want to know how people in other
strange cultures, very different from our own would do it. 15
T h is, o f course, is where my work and W orths became very in
tertwined, and, as was then common practice, the senior profes
sors w e dominated the rhetoric. Indirectly he made flattering
references to my ongoing work at the Philadelphia C h ild G u id
ance C lin ic w ith Jay H aley, when he compared the film m aking
preferences exhibited by A frican Am erican and A n glo Am erican
teenagers living in urban Philadelphia ,16 and he drew upon an
exploratory study o f keys o f reality and fram ing devices cen
tral to m iddle-class Am erican home movies I was then doing
with E rv in g G o ffm an .17
In add ition, W orth stated th at I w ou ld like to, either me or
other peop le, use this m ethod w ith v e ry d ifferen t cultures, cu l
tures fo r instance w ith th at have very d ifferen t lin gu istic sys
tem s, th at have d ifferen t cultural system s from the N a va jo . . .
( 19 7 1:3 0 ) . In this con text, D u n can H oladay, one o f W o rth s
students, proposed to continue this line o f field research in I n
donesia (1978, 19 9 1). B u t in gen eral, W o rth s recom m endations
fo r a d d ition al cross-cu ltu ral b io d o cu m en tary film research w ere
not fo llo w ed . A s R u b y noted: T h e W o rth /A d a ir N a va jo project
should have excited other scholars to replicate the study in other
cultures. It did n ot ( 19 9 13 :3 3 9 ).
W o rth continued in his effo rts to u nderstand cultural and
sym bolic issues in the con text o f co m m u n icatio n .18 E x p a n d in g
on his w o rk w ith in d igenou s film m akers, he w an ted to inspire
research on cross-cu ltu ral in terpretation as w ell. W h o , fo r in
stance, w ould understand film s m ade by the N avajo or by other
groups o f first-tim e film m akers? W ou ld a Jap an ese p rofession al
film m ak er such as Susam i H a n i understand N a va jo -m a d e film s
b etter than m id d le-class A m erica n view ers m ight? 19 H o w w ould
poor urban A fric a n A m erican teenagers u nderstand film s made
by m ore afflu en t A n g lo A m erica n teens, and vice versa? In 1971
W orth touched on this interest, saying:

We dont really have a good way o f analyzing how people organize

themselves to make films and for what purposes, how films imply
 meaning and how people infer meaning from films. And one o f the
things that 1 think my work has begun to do is to develop precisely
those methods o f analyzing films not necessarily as works o f art but as
pieces o f human communication, as pieces o f human expression. And I
think thats the real value (1971: 34).

R e g a rd in g current interests in in d igen ou s vid eo , W o rth spoke

o f a kind o f h um anistic elem ent at the in tercu ltural and in te r
n ation al levels: the n otion o f m ak in g available b etw een people
w ays in w h ich they lo o k at the w o rld , ways in w h ich th ey feel
deeply about the w orld . O ne o f the th in gs I ve been v e ry co n
cerned w ith w as h ow to get at that, h ow to actu ally analyze this
m aterial, w h at levels to analyze it on. U p till n o w [1971] its been
m ain ly b u llsh it ( 19 7 1:3 4 ). Som e tw e n ty -five years later, w e have
to ask ju st h ow m uch clarity has been contributed to these im
portant issues.

Other Influences and Directions

T h e m ajor influ ence o f the W o rth -A d a ir program has been in
direct. It is clear th at in terest in in sid er v ie w s expressed by
cam era use has becom e quite w id espread and varied. A s one co l
league stated som e years ago, I hope you guys have n oticed that
this b io film s tu ff is sh ow in g up everyw h ere! H e w as referrin g
to several developm ents. F irst, there has been a p ro liferatio n o f
titles that start w ith T h ro u g h the E y e s o f som e hum an group
or, som etim es in hum orous w ays, nonhum ans. T h e m ost recent
d irect exam ple I have found (1994) is T h ro u g h N avajo C h il
drens E y es: C u ltu ra l In flu en ces on R ep resen tatio n al A b ilitie s ,
in w h ich art educator M a r y S to kro ck i exam ines cultural in flu
ences on d raw ings m ade by yo u n g N avajo stu den ts.20 M y co l
league w as also referrin g to m any new n eigh b o rh o od p h o to g rap h y
projects, television exposs, and even m agazine advertisem ents
fo r cam eras and tourism , as w ell as cartoons that used im ages
m ade by the people th em selves. 21 A n d , th ird, he w as referrin g
to cross-cu ltu ral ex p lo ra to ry research that puts cam eras in the
hands o f som e in d ivid u al or group o f p eop le.22
Over the past decade, anthropologists and many others have
shown a steady and increasing interest in indigenous media,
manifested in different ways. A few photographers, film m akers,
anthropologists, and other social scientists have overtly handed
over the camera to people who have traditionally been posi
tioned on the other side. In other cases generating more inter
est recently native peoples have taken cameras from visitors or
acquired them in other ways.
W h a t co n tinu ities and changes can we see in efforts like the
N avajo project and m ore recent w ork? H o w m uch teach in g has
been in volved in each process o f in n o va tio n w h at, i f any, new
kinds o f m od elin g fo r native film m ak ers have been used? H o w
m uch and w h at kind o f analysis has been done o f the results?
S everal projects u sin g both still and m otion picture p h o to g
raphy have been d irectly in flu en ced by the research parad igm
provid ed by W orth and A d a ir. V e ry little such w o rk w as noted
befo re 1966, and several com m en tators have ackn ow led ged this
fact. O th er projects have been in flu enced in less direct w ays,
w h ile still others have sp ecifica lly criticized the N avajo project
and gone in other directions. H ere I w ill review a few exam ples
that illustrate som e o f this d iversity o f influ ences and direction s.

Still Photography
M any projects have sought to encourage and enable photography
by putting cameras in the hands either o f people who have never
had a chance to express themselves photographically before, or
o f people who are o f particular interest to observers for some
reason at times even in a voyeuristic way. T h e common thread
here is to encourage underrepresented people to show how they
see their world(s) through pictures.
In the first place are studies o f autobiographical m etaphor,
from studies o f self-p h o to g rap h y as developed by social p sy ch o l
ogists and psych olo gists (see Z ille r 19 9 0 ).22 Z ille r and his asso
ciates have asked various social categories o f people, in clu d in g
shy peop le, recen tly divorced peop le, w h eelch air students, male
and fem ale A m erica n college students, and students fro m G e r
m any and Poland to explain w h o you are in th eir ow n p h o to
graph s. T h e se studies are often described in relation to Through
N a va jo E yes, B ellm an and Ju le s-R o s s e tte (1977), anc^ C h a lfe n
(1987), am on g others. R elated studies o f self-co n cep t include
K en n e y s com parisons o f A m erica n and C h in e se college students
(1993) and D a m ic o s com parative w o rk w ith A n g lo and A fric a n
A m erica n m iddle sch ool students (1985) in w h ich they exam ine
racial attitudes tow ard school.
In the second place, since the 19 60s there have been m an y e f
forts to give both still and m ovie cam eras to ch ildren fo r a v a ri
ety o f reason s.24 O ne question addressed by this lin e o f research
has been: W h a t can ch ildren tell us about th eir lives th at adults
m ight be m issing? B o th n ation ally and in te rn a tio n a lly /w e ll-
m eaning adults have arranged for ch ildren to learn enough about
ph o tog rap h y to m ake th eir ow n pictures, to convey th eir vision
o f the w o rld through the m edium o f p h o to g rap h y. L e a rn in g
en o u gh m ay range from sim ply k n o w in g h o w to press a rem ote
con trol shu tter release to b ecom in g com peten t in darkroom p ro
cedures and techniques. Such projects have differed alon g several
dim en sio n s, in clu d in g in stitu tio n al support, ages o f ch ildren in
volved , m otivations o f project d irectors, extent o f train in g, and
projected results.
In the U n ited States these efforts have taken place in class
room s (at the p rim ary and secon d ary levels), sto refro n t centers,
settlem en t and com m u n ity houses, church clubs, various w o rk
shops, art centers and in stitu tes, sum m er cam ps, m ental health
clin ics, deten tion h om es, and ja ils. In add ition to the projects
cited in C h a p te r 15 o f the o rig in al text, others have used
8mm film w ith third graders in H arlem (B ig b y 1968) and teenage
street gan gs in N e w Y o rk (B arrat 1978, F raser 1987), vid eo w ith
im m igran t ch ildren (D elg ad o 1992), still ph o to g rap h y w ith m en
tally h and icapped ch ildren (C o x 1984), P o laro id p h o tograp h y
w ith a todd ler in B o sto n (C a vin 1994), vid eos m ade b y students
at a M assach u setts h igh school (G ra y 19 9 0 ), and video in a teen
dream s project (Je tte r 1993).
In m ost cases, p roject directors have adopted fa r-ran g in g
variants o f w h at W orth labeled b iod ocu m en tary film m ak in g
tech n iq u es, but the research d im en sion is often n ot included.
A n o th er im p ortan t d istin ction is in the am ount o f direction
given to the yo u n g people u sin g cam eras fo r the first tim e. M a n y
project directors, for exam ple, assign a to p ic or them e; here I
w ould include W en d y E w a ld s w o rk (1985, 1992). In M agic E yes:
Scenes fro m an A n dean Girlhood, E w a ld says: I . . . gave them
assignm ents to p h otograp h and w rite about them selves, their
fam ilies, th eir anim als, and th eir fan tasies (1992 : 6 ).25
In som e cases, projects have attracted a great deal o f public
atten tion. O ne particu larly in terestin g exam ple and a m odel for
in trod u cin g ph o tog rap h y to children appears in a pro ject entitled
S h o o tin g B a c k (H u b b ard 19 9 1). H o m eless yo u n g people b e
tween the ages o f eigh t and seventeen liv in g in a shelter w ere
helped to m ake th eir ow n 35m m ph otograph s. A s described by
Jim H u b b ard :

There were few rules in this photography project. The idea was simple:
the children would document their world inside the shelter or within
one block o f the shelter [ the dark, dingy, and dangerous Capital C ity
Inn ]. Th ey used the professional camera after a photographer [a vol
unteer professional photojournalist] taught them the basic use o f it. The
central theme was to allow the children to look through the viewfinder o f
the camera and take pictures o f the world they perceive (1991: 4).

R eaders m ay w ish to question the m otives o f this and related

projects', w h ich o ccasio n ally have com e to be criticized either as
id ealistically naive or in trin sically exploitative. H u b b ard s sense
o f altruism is expressed as follow s:
 M y methodology is to herald the struggle o f the poor and, in particular,
the homeless. Publicizing the plight o f the homeless through the media
is important and affirms the reality o f the situation, the need for
change, and the cry for help o f the dispossessed. . . . We wanted to let
the children know that there were people out there who were willing to
spend time and teach them. . . . A ll we can do is teach photography and
other creative skills to the children. A fantasy o f mine is to pluck the
children from their environment and put them in a wonderful and safe
situation. T his remains a dream (199 1: 4).

H u b b ard prou d ly claim s that the ph o tograph s have been seen

b y m illion s o f peop le, and th at th ey have becom e great teach in g
tools for other ch ildren and adults, w h o have learned about p h o
to grap h y and h om elessness th rough the in q u isitive eyes o f the
ph otographers. In essence, the photos have served as a rarely
used p ed ago gy ( 19 9 1:7 ) .
T h e public has o b viou sly expressed an appreciation o f this
w o rk .26 B u t fo r our purposes, tw o poin ts m ake results lik e this
v e ry hard to w o rk w ith . F irst, w e are given scant in fo rm atio n
re gard in g the learn in g context: w h a t w ere these ch ildren told
about g o o d and b ad p h otographs? A n d w h at kind o f sam ple
are w e g e ttin g , either in term s o f h o w the ch ildren w ere chosen
to participate or the choice o f im ages selected fo r pu blication .
Q u estion s central to com m u n ication s research can n ot be an
sw ered in w e ll-m e a n in g projects such as this. N o r are the topics
o f this kind o f effo rt relevant in any direct w ay to project p a rtic
ipants. M u ch o f w h at is learned in research w ith d ifferen t groups
o f ch ildren is negated w h en ph otographers teach ph o to g rap h y to
in d ivid u al ch ildren w h o are already predisposed tow ard visu al
expression. F o r instance, H u b b ard s b o ok describes one eleven -
y ea r-o ld , D io n Jo h n so n , w h o loved to m ake draw in gs and to take
fam ily snapshots; D io n s m oth er even prom pted these interests
by d isp layin g his pictures ( 19 9 1:3 ) . A n y and ev ery socio cu ltu rally
defin ed grou p contains people w ith these interests and talents.
B u t h ow com m on are these attitudes in each group? A n d how
do certain im age-p ro n e ch aracteristics d iffer across groups?
 Secon d , the results o f these types o f projects seldom contain
any analysis w h atsoever o f the p roclaim ed v isio n it is all left
up to each in d ivid u al view er. M o re atten tion is given to form s
o f artistic evalu ation and presen tation , alm ost in the sense o f
w h at a great set o f ph otographs I (the project director) have put
to g e th e r. H u b b ard speaks o f the p h otograp h ic results o f his
w o rk as b ein g as diverse as the kids, as honest, sim ple, and ele
gan t: T h e y capture m om ents im p ossib le for an ou tsider to have
ever perceived or exp erien ced ( 19 9 1:5 ) . S im p ly put, this result
m eets the objectives and interests m ore fam iliar to nonresearch
contexts and closely related to the m ore p o litica lly engaged p ro j
ects discussed below.

Closer connections
It is also possible to id e n tify a flu rry o f m ore recen t w o rk co n
nected in m ore direct w ays to sp ecific ch aracteristics o f the
N a va jo F ilm m a k in g P ro ject. B o th M alc o lm C o llie r and Sarah
E ld e r have m entioned film m a k in g projects th at used the project
as startin g points (personal com m u nications). H o w ever, in these
and other cases, no one produced w ritten reports fo r com parative
use. O n the other hand, w e can locate som e exam ples th at have
o vertly b u ilt on them es and m ethods o f the 1966 research. Four
exam ples com e im m ed iately to m in d projects directed b y D u n
can H o lad ay (1978, 19 9 1), R o n L ig h t ( L ig h t and H e n io 1977),
B ellm an and Ju le s -R o s e tte (1977), and som e o f m y ow n w o rk in
P h ila d e lp h ia (C h a lfen 1981).
D u n can H oladay, fo r instance, picked up fro m w h ere the
N a v a jo project left off. H e becam e v e ry interested in the po ten
tial exh ibited by Susie B e n a lly w h en she taught her m other, A lta
K ah n , to m ake her ow n film , u sin g N avajo as the lan guage o f
in stru ction (see pp. 1 1 1 - 2 3 o f the o rig in al text). H o la d a y w en t
on to carry out research in W est Ja v a focu sed on a film m a k in g
pro ject in itiated and ob served b y the researcher in w h ich v il
lagers m ake film s and teach film m ak in g to other villag ers in
w h at m ay be called a teach in g ch ain (a person from one village
m akes a film , then teaches film m a k in g to som eone from a sec
ond villag e w h o in turn m akes a film and teaches som eone from
a th ird v illa g e ) (1978 : i) .97 B u t in contrast to the open -en ded
N avajo research, H o la d a y asked co m m u n ity m em bers in W est
Ja v a to m ake film s about d evelop m en t in th eir villages ( 19 9 1: 5).
T h e p roject that com es g eo grap h ically and cu ltu rally closest to
A d a ir s and W o rth s o rig in al w o rk w as in itiated by R o n L ig h t in
the com m u n ity o f R am ah , N e w M e x ic o . H e started w o rk in g
w ith a sm all group o f N avajo in 1973, ju st seven years after Pine
S p rin gs field w o rk . In stead o f 16m m film , L ig h t asked several
N avajo to use vid eotape equipm ent. T h e in flu en ce of the W o rth -
A d a ir research p arad igm can be clearly heard in the fo llo w in g
statem ent:

I was broadly interested in researching motion pictures made by Navajo

Indians who I would instruct in the basic operating procedures o f the
modern technology . . . to study the cultural context o f Navajo-
produced visual im agery the occurring themes, narrative styles, and
strategies for visual codification as well as the accompanying social
organization surrounding the production activities o f learning to make
videotapes (Light and Henio, 19 77:10 ).

L ig h t an ticipated one o f the m ost com m o n ly asked questions

about the results o f the N avajo P ro ject, nam ely, W o u ld n t it all
have turned out d ifferen tly i f the N a va jo ph otographers had been
u sin g a vid eo cam era instead o f 16 m m ? (see appendix, T h e T en
M o s t F req u en tly A sk e d Q u estion s about the N avajo P ro je c t. )
B u t a review o f this seldom seen series o f vid eotapes m ade by
N avajo teenagers in R am ah betw een 1974 and 1976 illustrates an
other con clu sion .98 T h e se h a lf-in c h b la ck -a n d -w h ite tapes al
th ou gh m ade under slig h tly d ifferen t circu m stan ces illustrate
several o f the sam e results as the o rig in al project. F or instance,
in one tw en ty-th ree-m in u te tape entitled R am ah Wakes Up, we
see a lot o f attention to p an n in g the landscape (in clu d in g fo liage,
w ild life, m any shots o f w ater), scenes o f sheep and horses, and a
lot o f w a lk in g w ith the cam era. W e also see m any lo n g takes,
w hich m igh t have been predicted w ith the change from a sprin g-
w ound B e ll and H o w e ll 16m m cam era to a P o rta -p a k vid eo cam
era. P arallelin g the P in e Sp rin gs m aterials, w e fin d v e ry few
close-ups o f anyth in g, m uch less any facial close-u p s, and w e do
not fin d an overuse o f the zoom lens capabilities. A t one p oin t,
my notes read: T h is could have been shot in P in e S p rin gs in
1966! . . . Parts rem ind me o f M ik e s [A n d erso n ] O ld A n telo p e
L a k e and N e lso n s N avajo S ilv e rsm ith .
T h e re is also a series o f fo u r tapes focused on tradition al
N avajo practices. T h e se include the m akin g o f yucca root soap,
hair ty in g , sheep butch erin g, and m akin g k n eel-d o w n bread.
T h is fo otage could have been in clu d ed in a m ost com patible w ay
alongside the 1966 fin d in g s from P in e Sp rin gs. T h e se depiction s
are p ro cess-o rien ted , d em onstrate pieces o f trad ition al N avajo
life as seen and u n derstood b y N a va jo , and are m ade by N avajo
students; they also reveal a sim ilar reluctance to ph otograph
N avajo faces.29
I do not present these b rief observations as a complete vin di
cation and validation o f the results o f the N avajo project. Rather
they are included here as a supplement to a range o f techno-
centric statements that were made without knowledge o f the
videotape materials from Ram ah.
Interestingly L igh t began to focus on additional questions that
emerged and developed from the Ram ah experience. For in
stance he began to ask certain questions about media effects in
the larger context o f media and society:

However, the longer I remained to teach in,Ram ah (a total o f two years

until mid-1976), what became o f greater significance to me was not my
preconceived field experiment, but instead an appreciation for the me
dia effects the media program I directed had within the school and
community . . . [I sought] to acknowledge and explore the mutual in
fluence that society and the media environment have on each other. In
 a form al sense, I becam e in creasingly concerned w ith the a pplied con
text o f m ed ia how m edia w ere used or could be used in actual situ a
tions as perceived by m em bers o f the N avajo com m u nity them selves
(L ig h t and H en io 1977 : n ; em phasis in original).

T h is in terest was m an ifested in several w ays. O n the one

hand, L ig h t sensed a sign ifican t relation ship b etw een film m a k
in g and verbal co m m u n icatio n in a sense, w h a t is described
elsew here as in term ed ia. B rad le y H e n io , L ig h t s N avajo co lla
b orator, claim ed th at one result o f m edia prod uction at the
M u lti-M e d ia C en te r in R am ah , N e w M e x ic o , w as that the v id
eotapes in spired parents and th eir teenage children to speak w ith
each other, and co m m u n ity m em bers started talk in g to each
other a g a in . In som e cases w e learn o f su b ject-gen erated film s
p oten tial fo r cultural revival: th eyre startin g to talk to each
other about the old w ays and h o w they could m ake them stron g
again ( L ig h t and H e n io 19 7 7 :12 ) . S p ecific reference w as to
an in terest in ren ew ing th eir p a rticip ation in th eir own squaw
dances and the shoe gam e.
T h e them e o f cultural revival has developed as a com m on
result o f in d igenou s im agery. In this case, T h e y [the N avajo ]
w an t to see m ore o f the trad ition al w a y o f d o in g th in gs. . . . T h e y
w an t to put it in storage, so th at w h en ever they need to learn
so m eth in g about it, they can take it b ack o u t (19 77: 2). In this
w a y L ig h t began tak in g his research agenda into interests that
now dom inate ob servation s o f co n tem p o rary in d igen ou s im age-
m aking. T h em e s o f g e ttin g it rig h t fo r th eir ow n ch ildren and
ou tsiders, as w ell as p reservin g in fo rm atio n for future ge n era
tions are often cited as key m otivation s fo r pro d u cin g film s and
vid eotapes (G in sb u rg 19 9 1).20
In 1977 another b o o k w as pu b lish ed th at reported on other
su b ject-gen erated research h eavily in flu en ced by the N avajo
project. So cio lo gists B e ry l B ellm an and B en n ette Ju le s -R o s s e tte
described and com pared th eir ob servatio n s o f in fo rm an t-m ad e
vid eotapes produced in a trad ition al K p elle villag e in W est
A fric a (B ellm an ) and in fo rm an t-m ad e film s and tapes from a
B ap o sto lo urban co m m u n ity in C en tra l A fric a (Ju le s-R o sse tte ).
B o th authors attem pted to integrate th eo ry from interpretive
film practice w ith prin ciples o f eth n o m eth o d o lo gy in a m ore ex
p licit m anner than W orth and A d a ir had done. T h e y proposed:

(1) to analyze how the ways in w h ich inform ants learn to use visual
m edia reflect already existin g com m unicative conventions w ith in each
group, (2) to exam ine the structure o f the m edia form s as statem ents
about the settings in w h ich they w ere recorded, and (3) to explore how
the form at and m anner b y w hich content is segm ented reveals structural
properties o f each grou p s cognitive system (19 77: vi).

O th er relationship s w ith the N a va jo m aterials can be seen, as

B ellm an and Ju le s -R o s e tte cited differen ces in th eir in d ividu al
objectives: T h e K p elle (B ellm an ) are analyzed w ith respect to
the relatio n sh ip b etw een vid eo ta p in g practices and the pro d u c
tion o f m eni (orders o f reality) as a key to the study o f cogn itive
system s. O n the other hand, the B ap o sto lo m aterials (Ju le s -
R o sette) are exam in ed in term s o f the com parison o f narrative
and visu al styles as w ays o f m akin g accounts (19 77: 61). H ere w e
can see a p ro liferatio n o f interests stem m in g from the N avajo
project, illu stratin g h ow fertile this area o f research could
really be.
B ellm an and Ju le s-R o s e tte discussed m any o f the problem s
that haunted the N a va jo p ro je ct h ow to introduce tech n o lo gy
in n on direct w ays, the needs for a th eoretical fram ew ork and a
n otation system to analyze results, and a clearer u n derstan d in g
o f h o w the verbal and visu al, as sym bolic system s, are related to
one another. T h e m a jo rity o f these concerns have n ot been
resolved even today.

F ro m P in e S p rin g s to P h ila d e lp h ia

P erhaps the project that com es closest on the th eoretical level to

the o rig in al N a va jo P ro jec t and dem on strates the m ost direct in
in tech n ology affects the sign ifican ce o f the w o rk and its p o ten
tial outcom es, in term s o f both sh ort- and lo n g-term results.
T h ird , w e see that d ifferen t research questions are n ow d rivin g
the w ork. A n d lastly, w h ile som e authors have seem in gly w ish ed
to distance them selves from the 1966 N avajo research, certain
com m on alities rem ain.
M a n y o f these new er developm en ts stem from w h at has been
referen ced as the 1967 F o go P ro ject (K en n ed y 1982; L a n sin g
1989). A s described by D o n ald Sn ow d en , executive director o f
the M e m o ria l U n iv e rsity at N e w fo u n d lan d E xte n sio n S ervice,
the F o go P ro je c t was

a collaborative effort o f M em o rial U n iversity and the N atio n al F ilm

B oard o f C an ada. T h e im petus for the project was the provin cial g o v
ernm ents attem pt to relocate Fogo Islan d residents to the m ainland.
T h ro u g h the application o f an enabling organizational process and the
use o f 16m m film as a to o l for com m unity expression, C o lin Low ,
the N F B [N ation al F ilm B oard] Project D irector, successfully assisted
the island fisherm en in resisting the governm ents plan. A s a result
o f the project, they not only were allow ed to stay on the island, but they
m obilized the resources necessary to develop a fish m arketing coopera
tive and sh ip -b u ild in g yard, thereby im proving the econom ic conditions
o f the island (K en n ed y 1982 : 38).32

In one early project, T im K en n e d y traced his S k y R iv e r P ro j

ect w ith the In u it d irectly to the F o go P ro ject. K en n e d y started
as a V I S T A volu nteer w o rk in g in the A la sk an In u it villag e o f
N o o rv ik . H e su bsequently used a $ 2 0 0 ,0 0 0 O E O gran t to test
som e o f the ideas gen erated by the F o go Islan d P ro ject by b e g in
n in g a th ree-year project in 1970 in the Y u p ik E sk im o villag e o f
E m m o n a k . T h e villag e is located on the lo w er Y u k on R iv e r and
has a popu lation o f about 450 w ith a fam iliar set o f problem s: in
adequate h ou sin g, com m u n ication s, ed u cation , econom y, health,
and am bivalen t cultural identity. K en n ed y stated: I introduced
vid eo in a v e ry in fo rm al w ay by teach in g people to use the cam era,
and en cou ragin g them to m ake un scripted tapes o f fam ily,
frien d s, and villag e scenes (1982 : 41). H e en couraged local co m
m u n ity m em bers to do th eir own in terview s and ed itin g; after
K en n ed y did the cam era w o rk (in his earliest projects): T h e
people then review the rou gh film clips, edit a fin al film or video
tape and gather to vote th at the m ovie represents a real consensus
to the co m m u n ity fe e lin g (1971a : 1).
K en n e d y adopted an in te rven tio n ist approach, w h ich he later
called both fa c ilitativ e and com m u n ity an im atio n . 23 H e ad
m itted that his S k y R iv er P ro ject w as less about p ro d u cin g film s
and vid eotapes than it w as about creating a n ondirective co m
m u n ity developm en t process. H e w an ted to use in d igen o u sly
created film and vid eo as an o rgan ization al tool for rural A la sk an
com m u n ities and to estab lish a direct m eans o f com m u n ication
b etw een rural A la sk an s and the g o vern m en t.34 K en n ed y p ro
m oted w ays for local people to presen t their co m m u n ity as they
saw it, w ith o u t in terp retatio n th ro ugh an in term ed iary. Stephen
L a n sin g , w h en w ritin g in 1989 about the d ecolon izatio n o f eth
n ograph ic film , m akes a key reference to this rep o sitio n in g o f
p articip ation in m edia com m u n ication :

A n d as the Fogo process show s, there are m any w ays to restructure the
film in g process to shift a m easure o f editorial control to the people in
the film , and to engage them not as passive objects but as active colla
borators in every phase from the in itial selection o f topics to the view
in g and analysis o f the finished film s. T h e origin al Fogo film m odules
provided a catalyst for com m unities to discover them selves, in ways that
could never be possible through the m edium o f w ritten ethnography or
even conventional television docum entary (1989 :1 4 ) .35

In his ow n conversion from a role o f lib eral advocacy to one

o f increased p articip ation , w e see K en n e d y stressin g early n o
tions and m odels o f in d igen ou s m edia, o f film or video actin g as
a m edium o f personal expression, o f directed com m u n icatio n , o f
co m m u n ity involvem en t and action . In his w o rk w ith film and
video in rural A la sk a w ith people then virtu a lly w ith o u t w ritten
language and w ith great trouble expressing them selves in w ritten
form s, K en n ed y stated:
 T h e intercultural com m unication barriers betw een the villagers and
W estern governm ent decision-m akers w ere lessened because the v il
lagers were able to express them selves in a relaxed and m ore confident
m anner, w ithou t the constraints im posed by an alien public hearing
process. G overn m en t decision-m akers paid m ore attention to the v il
lagers opinions because video and film technology conveyed an aura o f
pow er and m ystique that they respected (1989 : 6).

M a n y o f these sam e them es are reappearin g in co n tem po rary

vid eo projects.
W e fin d another m odel o f in terven tio n in the 1995 repo rt by
A se n B a lik c i and M a r k B a d g e r on th eir organ izatio n o f a project
to encourage the estab lish m en t o f an eth n o grap h ic archive based
on in d igenou s In u it vid eo g rap h y in S ib eria. B a lik c is and B a d g
e rs descrip tion o f th eir m otivations form s a direct con n ection to
the N a va jo film m a k in g research:

W e believe that an indigenous vid eo-m aker w ill select subjects outside
the standard W estern repertoire and get at these as an insider. H e or
she w ill reveal m eanings and details im perceptible to the foreign ob
server. It was considered relatively unim portant w hether audiences in
other areas or countries w ould appreciate the product or not. It is the
indigenous poin t o f view that was considered im portant and the sem i
nar was to encourage its free expression (1995 :4 3).

T h e ir sem inars w ith K h an ti students w ere organ ized around

three p ed ago gical objectives:

a) b rie f instruction o f ethnographic field m ethods as recently applied

in the northern parts o f native N orth A m erica;
b) instruction o f standard observational cinem a W -in ch video tech
niques w ith reference to both shooting and editing;
c) production o f ethnographic video segm ents b y indigenous students
on local subjects o f their choice (1995 : 39).

H o w ever, w e also see th at B a lik ci and B a d g e r w ish ed to sepa

rate th eir approach from others. W ith specific reference to the
1966 N avajo project, th ey m ake this quite clear: T h e sem inar
organizers assum ed rig h t from the b egin n in g th at it w o u ld be
w ro n g to ju st give vid eo cam eras to the native trainees and let
them loose. In a sense w e did not share the research aim s o f So l
W orth and Jo h n A d a ir . . . (1995 : 43).
T h is stance raises in terestin g questions about w h at is gain ed
and w h at is p o ten tially lost b y this w h a t-b u t-n o t-h o w orien
tation. M u ch seem s to ride on such phrases as to ju s t g iv e video
cam eras, subjects outside the standard W estern re p erto ire, and
get at these [subjects] as an in sid er. W h a t does get at m ean in
this context? M o re obvious w as the research ers m ean in g o f fre e
expression o f subject m atter:

A lth o u gh it was agree that students should be free to select their own
them es, it w as thought that a prelim in ary listin g o f possib ilities m ight
help them . . . . T h is list was suggested to the students w ho w ere re
m inded that the cam eras should be used for ethnographic purposes only
leading to the constitution o f video archives illustrating elem ents o f n a
tive culture. Political them es and subjects possib ly encouraging feelings
o f hatred and discrim ination w ere to be avoided (1995 : 46).

In this and related w ays, B a d g e r and B a lik ci tried to lim it p o s

sible results and outcom es o f th eir approach, im p o sin g W estern
m odels o f eth n ograp h ic field m eth o d s and direct cinem a
video tech n iq u es as i f these w ere w ith o u t ideology, ep istem o -
lo gical o rien tation , or influ en ce. In an effo rt to im prove the
eth n ograph ic q u ality o f the p ie ce s, B a lik ci and B a d g e r m ade
sure to tell th eir In u it students w h at was w ro n g w ith th eir first
a ttem p ts incessant z oo m in g, je rk y pictures, and v e ry short
takes screened selected eth n ograp h ic film s, and stressed ru n
n in g records as a technique fo r continuous o b se rva tio n .
B u t the In u it students vo cifero u sly objected. T h e y asked: In
a h istoric p eriod w h en our people are d y in g and our cultures
d isappearin g w h y should w e restrict ourselves to film old ladies
doing bead w o rk ? T h e authors concluded: T h e native students
were b eg in n in g to realize th at th ey w ere not n ecessarily passive
recorders o f past tradition s but active participan ts in a p o litical
process (1995 : 46 - 47).
 B a d g e r and B a lik ci then sought p articip ation from adult co m
m u n ity m em bers. In com parison to student ten den cies to m ake
id eo lo gical statem ents about trad ition al K h an ti cu ltu re the
h istorical pressures it has gone through and the w ay it has su r
vived to the present day (1995 : 48) the list o f to p ic/th em e p re
ferences m ade by co m m u n ity subjects appeared in sharp con trast
to th at o f the students. It is concerned m ain ly w ith portrayin g
co n tem p o rary activities in K azim villag e. . . . C le a rly there is an
o rien tatio n tow ards p ositive, the lively, the new, the p ro d u ctive
(B a lik ci and B a d g e r 19 9 5 :4 9 ). In short, the them atic list p ro
posed by the researchers w as v e ry d ifferen t from the lists selected
by the students and other co m m u n ity m em b ers.36
T h is and related projects have valued the eth n o grap h ically
relevant con ten t o f the aud iovisu al records m ade b y ind igen ou s
m em bers o f the com m u n ity at the expense o f a m ore gen u in e
or au th en tic in d igen ou s m od el o f expression , be it in term s o f
narrative structure or eth noaesthetics. In this w ay w e are p re
sented w ith yet another m odel and set o f priorities fo r in d ig e
nous im agery.
South A m e rica has been another im p ortan t source o f projects
in in d igen ou s m edia. T h e m ost p ro m in en t and in terestin g
exam ples com e from studies by T e rry T u rn er w ith the native
peoples o f the B raz ilian rain fo rest, sp ecifically the K ayapo.
O th er exam ples com e from w o rk done by M o n ic a F eito sa (1991a)
and V in cen t C a re lli (1988). H o w ever, before review in g these e f
forts, it is w o rth m en tion in g T im o th y A s c h s w o rk am ong the
Y an om am i.
A sc h is in tern atio n ally w e ll know n fo r his career-lo n g d e d i
cation to the d evelopm ent o f eth n ograp h ic film m a k in g and the
em ergence o f a m odel o f collab oration b etw een an thropologists
and film m akers fo r the prod uction o f such film s (see Lu tk eh au s
1995).37 H e is especially recogn ized fo r his film m a k in g efforts
w ith N ap o leo n C h a g n o n am ong the Y an o m am i. O n e p articu
larly candid assessm ent especially relevant to our review o f in
digen ou s m edia w as offered by A sc h in 1991:
 U n til fairly recently, the idea o f m em bers o f relatively isolated societies
m aking their own film s did not interest me. I was com pelled to make
m y own film s, and I could not im agine the Y anom am i, fo r exam ple,
m aking film s o f their ow n. T h e y live their culture, but w ould they be
able to articulate insights about their culture [in film ] from their insider
poin t o f view that w ould interest us? (A sch et al. 1 9 9 1 :1 0 2 - 3).

T h is com m ent could be in terpreted in several w ays. O n the

dow n side, w e m ay have a genuin e statem ent o f a tradition al
stance fam iliar to m any film m ak ers, one th at stresses I am and
w ill continue to be in charge o f the rep resen tation p rocess
an d/or m y pictures and not yo u rs in short, a perspective that
an th ro p ologists have recen tly com e to d isrespect and even fear.
H o w ever, m y sense is that A sc h w as p layin g the d evils ad vo
cate. T h e phrase w o u ld interest u s is key and p ro b lem atic
w h ile w e acknow led ge m any o th e rs, w e n ow need a sense o f
m any w es. A sc h certain ly kn ew o f the N a va jo p ro ject and the
interest it attracted to u s . O n the other h an d, he m ay be saying
that results o f the W o rth -A d a ir research sim p ly did n ot interest
him personally.
T o w ard the end o f his life, A sc h w as interested in re p o sitio n
in g the n ative from in fro n t o f the cam era to beh in d the cam era.
H is altruistic m otivation s are expressed as fo llo w s:

N ow , I w ant to help them to com m unicate their story told in their w ay

to the w ider w orld , i f they so choose, and to enable them to use visual
m edia to com m unicate am ongst them selves. C om m u n icatio n m ay be
the m ost im portant survival tool in a changing w ould. M y hope is that
in teachin g them video com m unication, they have one more tool, a p o
ten tially pow erful one at that, w ith w hich to express their concerns
(A sch et al. 19 9 1:10 6 ) .

A sc h , it appears, is a sk in g basic an th ro p o lo gical q uestions re

gard in g culture and b ecom in g aware o f other perspectives, ways
o f u n d erstan d in g everyd ay life, etc., w ith o u t the overtones o f p o
litical action that ch aracterize other m ore recent projects. A sc h
m ay also have been in flu en ced m ore b y subsequent events am ong
the nearby K ayapo than by w h at h appened w ith the N avah o
nearly three decades earlier. In the sam e 1991 paper, he m akes an
in d irect but tran sparent reference to the N a v a jo project: T h e
w ay any grou p o f people chooses to represent its e lf is in trin si
cally in terestin g. In this tra in in g w e m ade no pretense about set
tin g up any pristin e laboratory. W e do not im agin e th eir tapes
w ill reveal in d igen ou s structures o f th ou gh t or lan guage u n in flu
enced by W estern con cepts (A sch et al. 1 9 9 1:10 6 ) . T h is should
be in terpreted as an exam ple o f d ifferin g interests and concerns.
F u rth erm o re A sc h circum vents several questions that becam e
central to the A d a ir-W o rth research, nam ely, w here som e o f the
narrative structures m igh t com e from . A sc h com m ents: T h e y
w ill no doubt have th eir ow n w ays o f w o rk in g w ith the narrative
structures they have becom e fam ilia r w ith th rough w atch in g
film s at the m ission (A sch et al. 19 9 1 :1 0 6 ) . T h is , o f course,
raises som e in terestin g u nexam in ed questions. F o r instance, is it
fair to rule out the p o ssib ility that the o rgan izatio n o f th eir film s
and the structures o f th eir film narratives w ill so m eh ow be re
lated to other m odels o f th eir ow n in d igen ou s sto rytellin g? W h a t
is really know n about m im ickin g film ic styles and narratives? D o
w e have any clear eth n ograp h ic account o f such behavior?
O ne fin al com m ent connects A s c h s th oughts to the projects
developed by T u rn e r and M ich a els: T o me, one o f the m ost
im p ortan t application s m ig h t be fo r the Y an o m am i to m ake
short film s that eventu ally could be aired on C aracas television
en ab lin g the people o f C aracas to kn o w m ore about Y an o m am i
life and cu ltu re ( 19 9 1:10 5 ) .
T h e them e o f sh arin g in form ation and the dynam ics o f ex
ch an gin g in fo rm ation via in d igen o u sly m ade im ages is central to
another freq u en tly cited reference, the V id eo in the V illag es
P ro ject. T h is project, w h ich is affiliate d w ith the veteran B ra z il
ian n on govern m ental o rgan izatio n C en tro de T ra b alh o In d ig e n
ista ( C T I ) , w as started by V in cen t C a re lli, an In d ian rights
activist and p h o tograp h er from Sao P aolo (C a re lli 1988; G a llo is
and C a re lli 1 9 9 3 - 9 4 ; A u fd erh eid e 19 9 5 ).58
 C a re lli w as determ ined to dem onstrate that vid eo can becom e
an im p ortan t and u seful tool for In d ia n cultural su rvival. B e g in
nin g w ith the W aiap i in 19 9 0 , C a re lli taught m em bers o f several
B raz ilian tribes to p h o tograp h them selves; he has also been in
strum ental in the creation o f vid eo lib raries fo r the tribes and has
provid ed vid eo prod uction assistance and ed itin g in stru ction s to
tribal m em b ers.39 F o r instance, in his w o rk w ith the N am b iq u ara
and the G a v ia o , he has em phasized the use o f vid eo for purposes
o f do cu m en tin g rituals and fo r cultural revivals, w ith an em ph a
sis on rep airin g o f s e lf-im a g e . H e has stressed the use o f video
as an another tool in eth n ical [sic] recovery p ro cess, to re
trieve tra d itio n , and as a re-elab o ratio n o f s e lf im a g e .
G a llo is and C a re lli stress that attention should be given to
certain im p ortan t topics:

T h e reconstruction o f ow n im ages that the Video in the Villages project

m otivated am ong diverse indigenous peoples is currently occurring
am ong the W aiapi. T h e revision and affirm ation o f a new form o f self
representation com prises cognitive aspects that are specific to the as
sim ilation o f video b y native people, and should be studied. . . . T h e
specific nature o f the experience o f the Video in the Villages project is
found in the irreversible change in the form o f aw areness, acquired
through num erous, varied and repeated screening, that corresponds to
a real transform ation in the logic o f know ledge. . . . It is also necessary
to see how, by other m eans, m otivated by the process o f im age appro
priation , the new construction that the video m akes possible leads to
new form s o f action. . . . In a unique way, video provided a conscious
ness o f change, indispensable for creating new w ays to control com plex
interethnic relations in present B ra z il ( 1 9 9 3 - 9 4 : 1 0 - 1 1 ; em phasis in
original).

W h ile C a re llis w o rk does not include a research com pon en t, it

offers great d iversity and relevance to recent developm en ts in
ind igenou s m edia. K e y features are nicely stated by P atricia
A u fd erh eid e: T h e m essage is clear: V id eo can level the sym
bolic p layin g field. T h ro u g h m ak in g social b eh avior se lf-c o n
scious, it can help reinvent trad ition al p ractice (19 9 5: 86) and,
as stated by C h ie f W ai W a i: m y gran d ch ild ren can still see me
on television . . . . N o w the yo u n g can see th eir elders and learn
from them . . . . I t s good to m eet others th rough T V (A u fd e r-
heide 1995 : 88).
Som e o f the them es su ggested above can be foun d in other
projects th at either im p licitly or exp licitly sought to distance
them selves from the 1966 N avajo research. O n e exam ple is F ei-
tosas in tro d u cto ry essay fo r a series o f papers on in digenous
film m a k in g (19 9 1a). H e r perspective is critical o f research topics
as w ell as o f approach; she objects to stu d yin g visu al gram m ar,
to m akin g film s w ith people w h o had previo u sly p rofessed no
m otivation to do so, and to not o vertly fo ste rin g a sense o f
em pow erm en t or viable m eans o f self-exp ressio n th rough visual
m edia th rough any fu rth er film prod uction (19 9 1a : 48).40
W h ile new attention w as b ein g given to in d igen ou s im agery,
the N a va jo p ro jects research parad igm had passed out o f favor,
and new interests w ere rep lacin g th at research agenda. Feitosa
com pared her w o rk w ith the K ayapo to the N avajo project, re
m arkin g that: D istin ctive ly, the M ek a ro n O p o i D jo i project
h ad as its goal en ab lin g the K ayapo to produce their ow n videos
accord in g to their interests and needs. In fact, before agreein g
to learn vid eotape techniques, the K a y a p o especially the M e -
tuktire g ro u p had dem onstrated th eir aw areness o f m edias
pow er, and interest in it (19 9 1a : 48).41 T h e im p lication is that
the N a va jo film students w ere not p articu larly m edia-aw are and
w ere sim p ly h ired hands, paid fo r their p articip ation in the re
search. I am not con vinced that this dim in ish ed the projects
results or the value o f the research in general.
F eito sa w as clear about her objectives: our g u id in g concern
w as h ow the u tilizatio n o f m odern aud iovisu al tech n o lo gy w ould
relate to K ayapo cultural and p o litica l p ro cesses, and that the
K ayapo saw th eir vid eo prod uction s as a tool o f resistance
against ever-exp an d in g form s o f fo reign d o m in atio n , and thus as
a w a y to preserve the culture o f the an cestors (cultura dos avos)'
( 19 9 13 :4 8 ) .
 R ead ers m ay recall th at th rou gh ou t th eir b ook, W o rth and
A d a ir w ere in fact cen trally concerned w ith cultural pro cesses
but in another realm o f culture. T h e y also gave atten tion to p o
litical concerns, th ou gh on a less in sisten t level. In other w ord s,
the N a va jo did sim ilar th ings on a sm aller scale. M o s t o f the
N avajo students said they w anted to m ake film s on certain topics
and subjects to get it rig h t in order to coun teract im ages that
w ere b ein g arranged b y outsiders for tourists v isitin g their
com m unities.
M o st o f the vid eo prod uction am ong, w ith , and o f the K ayapo
o f C en tra l B ra z il has becom e synonym ous w ith the w o rk o f the
an th rop ologist T eren ce T u rn er. In 1976 T u rn e r began m akin g
eth n ograph ic film s w ith the B B C and later w ith G ra n ad a T e le
vision. B u t his interests ch anged to exam in in g h ow the K ayapo
in volvem en t w ith th eir ow n vid eo prod uction could be treated
as a lab o rato ry fo r stu d yin g those processes of con sciousn ess-
form ation and cultural se lf-d e fin itio n in w h ich I had becom e
both th eo retically interested and p o litica lly in vo lved ( 19 9 1: 7 1).42
C ircu m stan ces in B raz il w ere v e ry d ifferen t from those o f the
N avajo context. T h e K ayapo have a rem arkable fa m ilia rity w ith
media g o in g b ack to the 1950s; and they have co n tin u ally sought
their ow n w ays to ga in con trol over them , in clu d in g the use o f
audio tapes, radio tran sm ission s, film s, or vid eotapes fo r b ro ad
cast purposes. T h e y have acquired th eir ow n tech n o lo gical
know ledge and equ ip m en t through a v a rie ty o f so u rces in clu d
ing the seizure o f a vid eo cam era from a B raz ilian an th ro p o lo
gist; by 1985 they w ere m akin g vid eotapes o f K ayapo cerem onies,
political encounters w ith B raz ilian s, and K ayapo speeches fo r
Kayapo audiences (T u rn er 19 9 1:6 9 ) . T u rn e r stressed that it has
been the K ayapo leaders them selves w h o in itiated the acq u isition
o f equipm ent, train in g, prod uction, and use. T h e K ayapo V id eo
Project w as found ed as a direct result o f the K a y ap o s co n
sciousness of, and in terest in, the social, p o litical, and cultural
potential o f vid eo fo r th eir ow n so ciety ( 19 9 1: 71).
T u rn er began his direct and am bitious involvem en t w ith K a -
yap o vid eo in 1987. H e focu sed on processes o f cultural self
d e fin itio n and m o b ilizatio n as em b o d ied in the concrete m edium
o f vid eo re co rd in g ( 19 9 1:7 0 ) . H e describ ed the them es and
goals o f the p roject as:

cultural self-co n scien tizatio n , p o litical em pow erm ent through cultural
self-d eterm in atio n , increased ethnic self-esteem and cultural pride, the
establishm ent o f m edia con tact w ith n ational and in ternational public
opin ion as a p olitical resource in resistin g B razilian encroachm ents, the
provision o f a relatively de-alien ated relation to an im portant aspect o f
the technolo gy o f the dom inant culture; in sum , in creasing K ayapo con
trol over the political and cultural term s o f K ayapo social life (19 9 1: 74).

T u rn e rs interests have co n tin u ed to range w idely, in clu d in g

the fo u n d in g o f a K ayap o vid eo arch ive, associated w ith ed itin g,
co p yin g , and train in g fac ilities. S tro n g con n ection s to the 1966
N a v a jo p ro ject and related research q u estion s are seen on several
fron ts:

M y interests in this respect focused m ore on the process o f video m ak

in g (the selection o f subjects, the process o f vid eotap in g, and m ost o f
all, editing) than on the analysis o f the finished videos in them selves,
but o f course I was also in terested in the structures and m eanings en
coded in the end products. . . . A s valuable as it [an encyclopedic se lf
eth n ograph y b y the K ayapo them selves] w ou ld be as a represen tation o f
K ayapo cu lture, it seem ed lik e ly to be even m ore valuable as a con
crete record o f a process o f d efin in g, con structin g and o b je ctify in g a
conscious representation o f this culture, thus revealin g the unconscious
schem ata em ployed in con structing both culture and ob jectified repre
sentation alike (19 9 1: 71).

W e can also see an overlap o f T u rn e r s m ethods o f in stru ction

w ith the N a v a jo project. F o r in stan ce, he says he m ade no at
tem p t teach W estern n otion s or styles o f fram in g, m o n tage, fast
cu ttin g , flash b acks or other n arrative or a n ti-n arrativ e m odes o f
sequ en cin g. . . . O ne o f us m ay o ccasio n a lly su ggest a go o d po in t
fo r a cut or a cutaway, but the K a yap o ed ito r rem ains free to
reject such su ggestions and retains control o f both form and co n
tent (19 9 2 :7 ). T h e m ajo r differen ce is th at he was gen erally
more in terventionist and ad m itted ly partisan:

I hoped to create a new in stitutional focus fo r intercom m unal com

munication and cooperation am ong the fourteen m utually autonom ous
Kayapo villages. . . . I hoped that the video project I envisioned w ould
provide a useful launchin g platform for a new generation o f potential
leaders into K ayapo life, in a w ay that w ould not seriously underm ine
the existing authority o f elder com m unity leaders. . . . I hoped, and still
hope, that the Kayapo V id eo P roject and V id eo A rch ive m ight in these
ways provide a channel through w h ich the in dividu alistic am bition
associated w ith video m aking and control by m any Kayapo could be
directed to constructive social ends. . . . A project designed to increase
Kayapo pow er to em ploy video for the com m unal cultural and political
ends for w hich they w ere already em ploying it thus appeared to be an
optim al w ay o f sim ultaneously satisfyin g in digen ist, theoretical and
general political goals (19 9 1: 7 1- 7 2 ) .

T u rn er carefu lly docum ented the delicate so cio p o litical rela

tionships he had to en gin eer and m aintain re gard in g his role in
the video production process. L a te r he focused on the in tern al
political problem s th at arose as a direct result o f the in trod uction
o f v id eo control issues, pow er, hierarchy, and others th at he
felt m ight be inevitable in all such cases, but w h ich seldom are
discussed w hen people present such projects. T h e K ayapo have
passed rapidly from the in itial stage o f co n ceivin g vid eo as a
means o f docu m en ting events to con ceiving o f video as the event
to be recorded (1990 :1 1 ) and m ore broadly, co n ceivin g events
and actions as subjects fo r vid eo. In fact the K ayapo have becom e
w ell-k n o w n for their m ed ia-assisted p o litical a ctivities.43
T u rn er felt that m ore attention m ust be given to relation ship s
o f techn ology and p o litical life, th at is, the unforeseen p o litical
and social effects o f in d igenou s m edia prod uction and control,
w h eth er in contexts o f in terpersonal, in tercom m un al, or g o ve rn
m ental relations. In these w ays, the K ayapo situ ation shared
m uch w ith the w o rk o f E ric M ich a els in C en tra l A u stralia
(19 9 1a, 1991b) and the critique o f ind igen ou s m edia o ffered by
Faye G in sb u rg (1991).
C o n ce rn in g conflicts on the so cio p o litical level, on several
occasions T u rn e r recounted instances w h en tap in g caused som e
form o f distu rban ce; in one case it led to ostracism . R ead ers w ill
recall the problem s A l C la h faced , w o rk in g in a co m m u n ity
w ith o u t clan m ates, or those o f Jo h n n y N e lso n w h en he film ed
several horses th at w ere ritu ally o ff-lim its to any cam era reco rd
in g (pp. 1 8 3 - 8 6 o f o rig in al text), in clu d in g the threat o f film
b u rn in g and reparation s in sheep or m oney.44 P ro b ab ly everyone
in volved in in d igen ou s m edia can recount such exam ples. T h e
lesson m ade clear by T u rn e r and later M ich a els is th at both p ro
duction processes, in clu d in g recep tion , and the im age products
them selves m ust be analyzed to geth er and u n derstood w ith in a
cultural system o f prescription s and p roscription s.
T u rn e rs w o rk is un like other studies o f in d igen ou s m edia in
the atten tion he has given to the w ay in w h ich the con struction
o f the K ayapo tapes represented K ayapo culture. T h is search
fo r eth n o grap h ically sig n ifican t results b rin gs T u rn e rs pro ject a
little closer to Through N a v a jo Eyes. In fact, he m akes a direct
connection:

an indigenous video m aker operates w ith the sam e set o f cultural cate
gories, notions o f representation, principles o f m im esis, and aesthetic
values and notions o f w hat is socially and politically im portant as those
w hose actions he or she is recording. W orth and A d air, in their early
project on N avah o film m aking, w ere the first to realize the potential
sign ifican ce o f indigenous film m aking in this respect (1992 : 8).

In another instance, he sum m arizes: B o th in the actual v id e o

tap in g and in ed itin g, all o f the K ayapo docum en tarian s w ere
gu id ed b y the sam e gen eral schem ata u n d erlyin g the o rgan iza
tion o f the rituals them selves . . . ( 19 9 1: 75). T u rn e r related their
prod uction habits to efforts to produce p erfectio n and b e a u ty
the suprem e K ayapo cultural valu e ( 19 9 1:7 5 ) and w ith ways
the K ayapo construct th eir in d ivid u al and collective identities
as K a y a p o . T u rn e r did give sig n ifican t new atten tion to the p ra g
m atic ends: T h e po in t is that the use o f vid eo , and the m ean in g
o f the videos produced, cann ot be conceived or understood in ab
straction from the social and p o litical dynam ics w h ich in evitab ly
accom pany th eir m akin g, sh ow in g, and v ie w in g . ( 19 9 1: 74).
In sum m ary, w h ile T u rn e rs p roject is not d irectly com parable
to the N avajo w o rk, there is a con n ection in his w illin gn ess to
u n derstan d the relation sh ip s b etw een K ayapo culture, th eir in
vo lvem en t in m edia prod uction , and the structure and content o f
th eir vid eo tapes. A lth o u g h there is less atten tion to film g ra m
m ar and cogn itive processes, T u rn e rs results add to the co m
parative perspective sought by W o rth and A d a ir .45
In central A u stra lia, E ric M ich a e ls has directed an am bitious
and fa r-ra n g in g project w ith the aborigin al W a rlp iri. H is co m
m en tary and in sigh ts, perhaps m ore than those o f any other re
searcher, cross the academ ic boun d aries o f cultural anthropology,
com m u n ication theory, m ass m edia research, film criticism , and
cultural studies. T h is p roject con sisten tly so u gh t to extend som e
o f the ideals and prin ciples th at gu id ed the N avajo project.
M ich a e ls posed the question: W h a t m ight television lo o k like
i f it have been invented b y W a rlp iri A b o rig in e s? (1987 in 19 9 1:
285). R ead ers w ill recall W o rth a sk in g w h at w ou ld N a v a jo film s
lo o k lik e i f they had ju s t found a cam era b o x and invented
film m ak in g. W e shall see that he ack n ow led ged this relation ship
at several points alon g the way. A t one poin t M ich a els cited the
N avajo project as one that anticipates the W arlp iri stu dy
(19 9 1c : 309). H is in vestigatio n o f W arlp iri use o f vid eo and tele
v isio n draw s h eavily on m odels o f in q u iry proposed in 1966: I
had in tended to introduce vid eo in the A u stralian bush in a ve ry
sim ilar fash ion [to th at o f W o rth and A d a ir], w ith the differen ce
th at I w o u ld docu m ent the process m ore th oroughly, b y re fe r
ences to the N avajo exp erim en t (R u b y 19 9 13 :3 3 0 ) . S everal fe a
tures o f this p ro ject con nect it in sig n ifican t ways to the N avajo
research, in clu d in g a perspective su ggested b y an eth n ograp h y o f
com m u n icatio n , a need fo r eth n o grap h ic d etail, the im portance
o f d o in g field w o rk on m any speculations re gard in g non-W estern
com m u n icatio n , the in tegratio n o f culture and com m unication
codes and uses, the prob lem atic o f in d igen ou s content, the social
and p o litica l netw orks th at direct prod uction , and the distribu
tion and use o f visu al m ed ia.46
H a v in g gain ed an associates p o sitio n in 1982 w ith the A u stra l
ian In stitu te o f A b o rig in a l Stud ies, in C an b erra, M ich a els began
w o rk in g w ith a group o f W a rlp iri at Y u en d u m u , in A u stra lia s
N o rth ern T e rrito ry . W o rk in g in the broad contexts o f m edia re
search and developm en t, he sought m ore sp ecifically to assess
the im p act o f the new a u ss a t satellite th at w o u ld arrive in 1985
and b rin g television to rem ote A b o rig in a l com m u n ities for the
first tim e. H e w an ted to discover w h eth er com m u n ities such as
Yu en d u m u could, and w ou ld , m ake th eir ow n television and b e
com e m edia se lf-m a n a g in g and in d ep en d en t ( 1 9 8 5 3 :1 6 - 1 7 ) .
B etw een 1983 and 1986, he described the process by w h ich they
learn ed all stages o f vid eo prod uctio n , fro m tech n ical details to
creating and m an agin g a lo w -p o w er tran sm ission facility, to
th eir fo u n d in g o f the W arlp iri M e d ia A sso ciatio n .

W h en the rem ote television project began at Yuendum u, I suppose we

expected that A b o rigin al people w ould w ant to record certain aspects
o f their lives that interest Europeans: traditional activities, cerem onies
and perhaps make some form o f hom e m ovies as w ell. Interest in using
local m edia as a m eans o f cultural preservation and a teaching tool for
the children did develop early in the project. A n d w e felt this w ould be
a valid and political process.
W e did not anticipate the passion o f people to use the m edium so
directly as an agent o f p olitical com m unication . . . (1985a: 1 7 - 1 8 ) . 47

A s in cases previou sly m en tion ed , M ich a e ls com bined o n -site

ob servatio n and facilitatio n , assistin g in m ed ia-in d u ced change.
T h e re w as an advocacy objective as w ell, su ggested by W orth
(1981) and W orth and A d a ir (1972): w o u ld an oral so ciety fin d
aud iovisu al prod uction a m ore suitable m eans o f com m u n ication
and p a rticip ation in m odern life than w ritin g ? (19 8 5 :5 0 5 ).
M ich aelss em phasis on b ein g th ere and the need fo r eth n o
graphic detail distin gu ish ed the research from an arm chair
stance, w h ich he cited as b ein g m ore fam iliar to M arsh a ll
M cL u h a n s w ritin g.

I am proposing a more utilitarian , processual defin ition , geared m ore to

media practitioners, subjects and view ers. . . . T h is requires that we
expand the critical analysis to consider evidence o f the condition o f
m aking, tran sm ittin g and view in g , and to acknow ledge that texts come
into existence and m ust be described, in terms o f social relations b e
tween in stitution ally situated audiences and producers, and that m ean
ings arise in these relationships betw een text and context in ways that
require a precise description in each case (1987, in 1991b : 279).

T h u s one stron g con n ection to the N avajo pro ject is his in sis
tence on u n derstan d in g th is enterprise as one o f com m un ication ,
stressing com parative concepts o f com m u n ication process and
the cu ltu rally recogn ized status o f in form ation .
In this regard, w e see that both M ich a els and W o rth and
A d a ir adopted an eth n ograp h y o f com m u n icatio n fo r th eir p ro
jects, th ou gh in sligh tly d ifferen t w ays. A ll three sought to u n
derstand b etter h ow cam era-gen erated im a g e ry stands as ju st
one piece in a b road er spectrum in clu d in g fa c t-to -fa ce exam ples
as w ell as exam ples o f tech n o lo gically m ediated com m un ication .
W e see both studies lo ca tin g interfaces o f the lin gu istic and the
picto rial. M ich a e ls sensed a need to know h ow visu al m edia
m ig h t ch allenge and even vio late the trad ition al com m u n ication
system already in place. H e w as lo o k in g ca refu lly at constraints
on the system : O ne can not film anybody, anyw here, at any
tim e. C e rta in events and p erform ances w ill alw ays be o ff-
lim its . . (1987, in 19 9 1: 287).48 R ead ers w ill recall that W orth
and A d a ir w an ted to m ap the terrain o f w h at w as acceptable and
unacceptable fo r the P in e S p rin gs film m akers as they m ade their
first film s.49 T h e lesson from this project and alm ost all others is
th at restriction s and reprisals m ust be ex p e cte d .50
M ich a els also stressed the effects electronic system s o f mass
m edia have on trad ition al com m u n icatio n system s, especially in
fa c e -to -fa c e com m u nities. In such a situ ation , the h an d -m aking
o f vid eotapes and p e rson -to -p erso n distribu tio n o ffers a unique
kind o f p o w e r (1985a :i8 ) . H e argued fo r m ore atten tion to is
sues o f in fo rm a tio n in clu d in g m eans o f creatin g, possessing,
sharing, and m ovin g in form ation . M ic h a e ls s w o rk is particularly
enhanced b y his com m ents on the uses and restriction s o f im
a g es as a p o litica l econ om y o f in fo rm atio n in the A b o rigin a l
context (19 85b : 509), o f in form atio n o w n ership and com m uni
cations o b lig ation s, o f an A b o rig in a l in fo rm atio n m anagem ent
tradition (1987, in 19 9 1:2 9 4 ) , and the consequences o f in fo r
m ation and m edia distribu tion .
R elatio n sh ip s o f co m m u n icatio n , in fo rm atio n , and vo ice are
central to m odels o f eth n o grap h y o f com m u n ication . W h a t we
m ay so easily overlook, h ow ever, is th at voices everyw h ere have
to be used carefully. W e need to ask w h y it m ay be inappropriate
fo r som e to say th in g s w ith pictures in a particu lar society, and,
in turn, w h y it m ay be in appropriate fo r everyon e to see or hear
th ings th rough certain m edia. In other w ord s, atten tion and re
spect m ust be given to the cultural system o f com m unication
rules already in place. M ich a els rem inds us th at w e m ay have
u n critically carried w ith us our ow n cultural norm s o f the more
voices, the b etter an d /or open com m u n ication is g o o d , w hile
o verlo o k in g the fact th at in every society, con strain ts and restric
tions on the free flo w o f in form atio n are the norm . T h e cir
cum stances under w h ich certain people m ay say certain things
and w itness or learn other th ings m ay have serious restrictions
w ith grave consequences for violatio n s.
A concern w ith social restrictions su rrou n din g com m unicative
norm s is another con nection to the N avajo fin d in g s. It is p ar
ticularly instructive to conn ect kin sh ip netw orks and o bligation s
to pattern ed con straints on com m u n icatio n . M ich a e ls notes,
T h e fun d am en tal place o f kinship w ill in flu en ce all m edia ac
tivities. A n y th in g w h ich is exem pted from k in ship w ill be as
sum ed to be E u ro p ea n in o w n ership and p u rp o se (R u b y 19 9 1a :
335). W o rth and A d a ir described the self-im p o sed restrictions
the N avajo film m akers put on th eir ow n selection o f participants
jn the pro ject and, second, on w h o could be in th eir film s. T h e
balance o f m ale and fem ale students as w ell as clan m em bership
were im p ortan t con sid eration s for participation .
A n d fin ally w e see M ich a e ls stru gglin g w ith the question o f
what m akes the con tent o f A b o rig in a l television d istin ct can
one see, feel, borrow , steal, explo it, or otherw ise use W arlp iri
culture in th eir vid eotapes? G in sb u rg sum m arizes n icely how
M ich a els, in fact, incorporated issues and questions from both
sides o f the pro d u ct-p ro cess debate:

the author argues that the substance and formal qualities o f the tapes
have a distinctly W arlpiri sensibility, marked, for example by an intense
interest in the landscapes as filled with specific meaning. But, he goes
on to point out, o f equal i f not more importance is the social organiza
tion o f media production; the ways in which tapes were made, shown
and used reflect W arlpiri understandings o f kinship and group respon
sibilities for display and access to traditional knowledge (Ginsburg
199 1 : 9 8)-

Read ers w ill recall that W o rth and A d a ir gave m ajor attention
to u n d erstan d in g N avajo culture in the N a va jo -m a d e film s. T h e y
freq u en tly referred to the eth n osem iotics o f N a va jo landscapes
as revealed in alm ost all th eir film s, but esp ecially in those by
M ik e A n d erso n {O ld Antelope Lake) and Jo h n n y N elso n (N a va jo
Silversm ith).
T h e W a rlp iri p roject paid sign ifican t atten tion to h ow the cu l
ture could be m ain tain ed in W a rlp iri m edia, w hen ind igen ou s
peoples all over the w orld w ere b ein g in flu en ced by the o ver
w h elm in g stren gths o f W estern m edia. M ich a e ls stro n gly felt
that in order to m ain tain an yth in g ap p roxim atin g A b o rig in a l
m edia, train in g, prod uction and distribu tion assistance by
E u ro p ean s be reduced to an a n cillary role. Sch em es to achieve
A b o rig in a l access to new m edia by im p ortin g E u ro p ean crew s,
or by train in g A b o rig in e s in W estern prod uction styles in urban
in stitu tion s w ill in h ib it the developm en t o f a truly A b o rig in a l
m edia (M ich aels 19 8 4 :3 4 ).
W h en review in g these m ore recent developm ents in in d ig e
nous m edia, one is rem inded o f com m ents m ade by Jo h n G rie r
son late in his life. T h e sam e year that Through N a va jo Eyes ap
peared, E liza b e th Sussex pu b lish ed an article en titled G rierso n
on D o cu m e n ta ry T h e L a s t In te rv ie w (1972). W o rth and
G rie rso n m ade in terestin g and o verlap p in g projection s. G rierso n
is perhaps best know n fo r fo u n d in g the N a tio n a l F ilm B o ard o f
C an a d a and fo r his th eoretical con tribu tion s to docu m en tary
film practice. In the in terview , G rie rso n spoke about five ch ap
ters o f d ocu m en tary film , a sequence that ended w ith the next
ch a p ter, w h ich he called m akin g film s really lo cally.

Zavattini once made a funny speech in which he thought it would be

wonderful if all the villages in Italy were armed with cameras so that
they could make films by themselves and write film letters to each
other, and it was supposed to be a great joke. I was the person who
didnt laugh, because I think that is the next stage not the villagers
making film letters and sending them to each other, but the local
film people making films to state their case politically or otherwise, to
express themselves whether its in journalistic or other terms (Sussex
1972 :30).

T h a t sam e year, W o rth and A d a ir stated in Through N a v a jo Eyes:

M a n y people today are seeking not o n ly n ew w ays in w h ich they
can kn ow one another but new ways to presen t them selves to one
a n oth er ( 19 7 2 :7 ). T h e A d a ir-W o rth project and W o rth s sub
sequent th in k in g (see W o rth 1972) o ffered tan talizin g glim pses
o f this tre n d a w o rld in w h ich local film p eop le can state
th eir ow n view s and claim s, w h ere film or vid eo co m m u n ica
tion becom es m ore com m onplace and m ore eq u ally distribu ted
am ong the w o rld s peoples.
G rie rso n , W orth , and A d a ir shared a visio n fo r the next
ch ap ter th at w e are read in g at the m om ent. Statem en ts o f cu l
tural and p o litical im p ort are b ein g m ade b y grou ps o f local
people w h en they feel the need for such action . It is becom in g
in creasin gly im p ortan t to create indexes fo r these periods o f
w ork, and to discuss the in tertextu ality o f old and new exam ples.
Perhaps w e need to in vite Z a v a ttin i b ack to m ake another fu n n y
speech about the next few chapters.

The N avajo Filmmakers in 1992

Joh n A d a ir and I have freq u en tly been asked w h at the form er

N avajo film students are d oin g today, and especially i f they have
continued to m ake film s (see append ix fo r the ten m ost fre
quently asked questions about the project). A n y revision o f this
book w ou ld be in com plete w ith o u t som e attem pt to answ er these
questions.
Sin ce the sum m er o f 1966, both Jo h n A d a ir and I have m ade
several return visits to P in e S p rin gs. In one case, A d a ir p a rtici
pated in the m akin g o f a 16m m film entitled A Weave o f Tim e
(19 8 7),51 w h ich ch ron icles his fifty -y e a r association w ith the
N avajo. I p erson ally delivered to each N avajo film m ak er 8-by-
10 -in ch enlargem ents o f portraits I shot in A u g u st o f 1966. O ne
o f these prin ts is n ow fram ed and hangs in Jo h n n y N elso n s
livin g room . In another instance, M ik e A n d erso n , M a r y Jan e
T sosie, and I presen ted several o f the N avajo film s in a sym p o
sium du ring a 1982 conference en titled T h e A m erica n In d ian
Im age on F ilm : T h e S o u th w e st, organ ized by the N ative
A m erican Studies P ro gram at the U n iv e rsity o f N e w M ex ic o .
In Ju n e o f 1992, Jo h n A d a ir and I again visited P in e Sprin gs.
W e hoped to m eet and talk w ith each o f the film m ak ers, sp e
cifically w ith questions for this revised ed ition o f Through
N a va jo Eyes in m ind. O ver the years it has proved v e ry hard to
contact the film m akers ahead o f tim e, because o f lim ited tele
phone service and the u n certain ty o f m ail addresses. B u t w e had
great lu ck this trip, and after d rivin g 1,2 0 0 m iles, w e had either
met or received news o f all the film m akers.
324 )
The Community
T h e center o f P in e Sp rin gs does not lo o k too d ifferen t today
from the w ay it appeared in 1966. O ne tragedy, how ever, is that
the P in e S p rin gs T ra d in g Post has all but burned dow n ; the
stone structure still stands, but the in terio r is ruined (see fig. 21).
T h e school house is m uch the sam e on the outside, but w ith lots
o f new com pu ter equ ip m en t on the inside. T h e roads rem ain u n
paved; at best, they have been regraded m an y tim es du ring the
past tw e n ty -five years. T h e sm all church rem ains in place. T h e
co m m u n ity now has electricity; h ow ever m an y in d ividu al hom es
have n either telephon e service nor plu m b in g. In other w ord s,
m any residents o f P in e S p rin gs can run th eir V C R s , but not
th eir w ater.
V id eo tap es o f popu lar feature film s are n o w abu n dan tly a v ail
able in m any trad in g posts and shops in n earby com m u n ities. A s
m igh t be expected, the choice o f film s is usually lim ited to p o p u
lar w estern s and recen tly released b lockbu ster H o lly w o o d film s.

Current Lives
W e found great excitem en t in P in e S p rin gs w h en w e arrived
in Ju ly o f 1992. O f course this had n o th in g to do w ith us; we
soon learned th at a fun eral and a fo u r-p atie n t squaw dance w ere
sim u ltan eou sly in p rogress. W e later discovered th at the fun eral
w as for M ik e A n d erso n s aunt.
W e first drove to Jo h n n y N e lso n s hom e and w ere g ratefu l to
fin d h im at hom e. H e still lives w ith in w a lk in g distan ce o f the
trad in g post and is the on ly one o f the fo rm er film m ak ers still
liv in g in P in e S p rin gs proper. A s m igh t be expected, he reco g
nized A d a ir im m ed iately; but w hen he saw m e, I w as pleasan tly
su rprised at Jo h n n y s salu tation o f you o l co w bo y. T h is w as a
reference to a tim e in 1966 w hen I foun d m y s e lf on a ru n -aw ay
h orse and w as forced to m ake a fly in g d ism o u n t, sch ooled by
m any im ages absorbed w h ile w atch in g an endless num ber o f
television w estern s as a yo u n g teenager. E v e ry o n e w as im pressed
and, to m y great surprise, Jo h n n y rem em bered.
Jo h n n y lives w ith his w ife and rem ains self-em p lo yed . H e has
added several room s to his hom e as w e kn ew it in 1966. A s w e
w ere ad m irin g his w a ll o f fram ed ph o tograph s o f fam ily m em
bers, Jo h n n y rem inded us that tw o o f his sons had since passed
away.
M a r y Ja n e T so sie has w orked as an elem en tary sch oolteacher
in P in e S p rin gs S ch o ol since sh ortly after the project. She lives
w ith in a short drive fro m the cen ter o f P in es Sprin gs w ith her
husband, w h o is a d irecto r o f econom ic d evelopm ent in W in d o w
R o ck , capital o f the N a va jo N a tio n . M a r y Ja n e continues to
m ake arts and crafts som e p o ttery and now w eavings.
M a x in e T so sie, one o f M a r y Ja n e s sisters, is also a sch o o l
teacher and previou sly w orked at the P in e S p rin gs B o a rd in g
S ch o ol. She then taugh t at the W id e R u in s S ch o ol and the
F ru itlan d S ch o ol (near F arm in gto n ), and fo r the past three years
has been at the H u n te rs P o in t S ch o ol, w h ich is w ith in a short
distance o f O ak S p rin gs, d irectly north o f P in e S p rin gs. M ax in e
also lives w ith her h usband, Jo e , w h o previou sly w o rked for the
gas com pany, but w h o is now on d isab ility. W e w ere not able to
m eet w ith M a x in e , because she w as aw ay on a cam p retreat w ith
teenagers w h o w ere w o rk in g through th eir alcohol and drug
problem s.
W e w ere v e ry lu ck y to fin d M ik e A n d erso n . W e learned that
M ik e , A 1 C la h , and Susie B e n a lly all lived in or around G re a se -
w o o d , a co m m u n ity about 50 m iles n orth w est o f P in e Sprin gs.
B u t w e had no details. W h en in G re ase w o o d , I spotted a man in
a drivew ay and stopped to ask fo r in fo rm a tio n ju s t by chance,
it w as M ik e A n d erso n h im self. M ik e lives w ith his w ife , M a rie ,
w h o w orks at hom e as a self-tau g h t rug w eaver. T h e y have five
b o y s one in the air force, one stu dyin g fo restry in college, two
in art school, and one still in h igh school. F o r m an y years, M ik e
has been em ployed as a m aintenance w orker, first at W id e R u in s
and now at the L o w e r G re ase w o o d B o a rd in g S ch o o l in G a n ad o .
H e lives in a ra n ch -style house w ith a b ig satellite dish m ounted
on the r o o f (see fig 22.).
M ik e w as able to tell us that the other two film m akers also
lived in the G a n ad o area. W e next traveled to the hom e o f Susie
B enally. She is rem arried , to T o n y B egay, w h o is now a disabled
V ie tn am veteran. Susie has lived in this hom e fo r the past
tw en ty years and is still an active w eaver. S u sie s m oth er, A lta
K a h n m aker o f Second N a va jo W eaver passed aw ay several
years ago (see fig 23.). F o r the m ost part, Su sie w as quiet, m uch
the sam e person as in 1966; she w as not v e ry fo rth co m in g about
her past tw e n ty -five years, but had som e in terestin g com m ents
about the 1966 film project (see below ).
A fte r m issin g him several tim es, I fin ally m et w ith A 1 C la h , at
his late sisters house on the ou tskirts o f G re ase w o o d . A 1 is also
rem arried, to a w om an nam ed L avern e. H e lives w ith tw o c h il
dren from his previous m arriage, three fro m L a v e rn e s first m ar
riage, and five adopted ch ildren from his deceased sisters m ar
riage. H e is cu rren tly ren ovatin g his late m o th ers house, w here
he n ow lives. H e splits his tim e betw een these tw o hom es. A 1
has been w o rk in g as a preacher and in terp reter/tran slato r o f
scripture fo r the P en tecostal C h u rch in G a n ad o and rem ains a
p racticin g artist, p a in tin g and, m ore recently, scu lp tin g stone
pieces (see fig. 24).
A 1 gave us a detailed ch ro n o log y o f the ups and dow ns o f his
last tw e n ty -five years. H e described h ow he had atten ded art
schools in San F ran cisco and at C en tra l W estern C o lle g e in
W ash in g to n state, w h ere he fin ish ed a fo u r-ye ar p ro g ram but
they didnt teach me en o u g h . A 1 had also lived for a w h ile in
O reg o n , had gone th rough d ifficu lt periods o f alco h o lism , and
had su ffered from deliriu m trem ens, lo sin g all his possessions
in clu d in g his film , In tre p id Shadows. A 1 even tu ally returned to
the reservation to becom e cured in the N a va jo w ays. H e jo in ed
the A m erica n In d ian C h u rc h , but peyote did him no good . It
was alm ost eighteen years ago, w hen A 1 w as nearly dead, that he
saw the great lig h t and Jesu s C h rist saved him . A s a b orn -
again C h ristia n , he began cou n selin g alcoh olics and started his
w o rk as a preacher and in terpreter o f the B ib le . H e n ow feels
a strict ob ligation to stay on the straigh t and narrow, as a role
m odel . . . bad news travels faster than good n ew s.
M o s t recen tly A 1 has resigned his preach in g resp on sib ilities,
feelin g that he m ust devote m ost o f his energies to raisin g his
m any ch ildren . H e m akes m oney raisin g som e livesto ck, rep air
in g car and tru ck en gin es, and sellin g his artw o rk sketches,
pain tin gs, and w ood and stone sculptures.

Project-Related Activities
Jo h n A d a ir and I w anted to kn ow i f and h ow each o f the form er
students m igh t have stayed connected to any form o f p h o to
graph ic activity. F o r instance, w e learned th at each o f our form er
film m akers ow ns som e m odel o f a still cam era, and several take
snapshots on occasion. W e also foun d that vid eo cassette reco rd
ers now have a place in N avajo househ olds. M ik e , Jo h n n y, A l,
and M a r y Ja n e all have V C R s , and Susie m en tion ed that she
rents one from tim e to tim e. T h e y all reported ren tin g tapes
from local trad in g posts. N o one had a vid eocam at h om e, but
Susie B e n a lly said th at her sister ow ns one. Jo h n n y N e lso n s
daughter, R o b erta, also has her ow n vid eo cam , m o stly fo r tap in g
fam ily events. Jo h n n y added that R o b erta had even taped a tra
dition al N avajo w ed d in g, held in a P in e S p rin gs hogan. R o b erta
had suggested to Jo h n n y th at he get his 16m m fo otage tran s
ferred to vid eotape. In ad d ition , M a r y Ja n e s cousin, L o rain e ,
who lives next door, has her ow n vid eo equ ip m en t as w ell.
L o rain e has been tap in g w ed d in gs and parties and reco rd in g
landscapes from a n earby canyon. She has also been m akin g
tapes o f her m other m aking je w e lry and o f another relative
w eaving.
H o w ever, it is fair to say that since 1966, cin em ato grap h y has
not occupied a central role in the lives o f these N a va jo . In terest
in the project and subsequent use o f the film s has varied , w ith
Jo h n n y N elso n and A 1 C la h sh o w in g the m ost interest.
A t one extrem e, M ik e A n d erso n {Old Antelope Lake) has on ly
show n his film to his ch ild re n he recalled h ow they m ade
jo k es about me g o in g to H o lly w o o d . H e w as not sure w here his
project film w as at present. M ik e said th at he had had no ad d i
tion al exposure to cam eras and th at he did n ot m ake snapshots.
B u t later he w en t inside his hom e to retrieve about ten P o laro id
shots he had taken o f the rugs his w ife , M a rie , had m ade
and sold.
Susie B en ally b rie fly m entioned the tim es she show ed her
film , Navajo Weaver, to the ch ildren in the G re ase w o o d S ch o ol,
and m ore recen tly to w om en in the O ak S p rin gs W eavin g P ro j
ect. Jo h n n y N e lso n recounted h ow these N avajo w o m en ex
pressed in terest in S u sies w e av in g film , because they w an ted to
kn ow m ore about the w ay certain dyes w ere m ade fo r the w ool
used in the film . B u t Susie con fessed she no lo n ger has her print.
H e r son, A n to n io , n o w m arried w ith tw o ch ild ren , b orrow ed her
film tw o years ago to show it to a sch ool in P h o e n ix, and has not
returned it since. Su sie w as pleased to show us her fam ily album
o f snapshots and sch ool pictu res; both she and her husband,
Ton y, take snapshots on an irregu lar basis. A n d T o n y asked to
take pictures o f us all before we left.
M a r y Ja n e and M a x in e T so sie have screened th eir copies o f
The Spirit o f the Navajo to th eir yo u n g students and colleagues.
Jo h n n y N e lso n reported th at every n ow and then M a r y Jan e
com es over from the P in e Sp rin gs S ch o o l and they talk about
the p ro je ct jo k in g ly , he added, they w o n d er w h at has h ap
pened to th eir teachers. Jo h n n y recalled th at w h en M a r y Jan e
show ed her film about Sam Y azzie and the cu ring cerem ony, the
other teachers and w orkers really liked it. . . . T h e y liked to
see S a m . 52
M a r y Ja n e m ade several in terestin g retrospective com m ents on
the p roject and her film , The Spirit o f the Navajo. F o r one th in g,
she felt that other N avajo liked her film because o f th eir strong
in terest in Sam Y azzie as a m edicine m an. B u t it w as hard to
learn about the cu ring cerem on y from the film , because the se
quence o f events is so out o f order. M a r y Ja n e also felt that ad d
in g sound w ou ld have helped people learn, because explan ation s
could be given fo r the cu ring process illustrated in the film
its easier to learn from film and so u n d .
Jo h n n y N elso n (Navajo Silversmith and The Shallow Well Proj
ect) was v e ry h appy to recall w h en and w h ere he had show n his
film s over the past years. F o r instance his dau gh ter, R o b erta, had
asked him to show his film s at nearby Sh ow low . People at the
n eigh b o rin g L u p to n C h a p te r H o u se also have asked him to
screen the silversm ith film , and he has show n it in the P in e
Sp rin gs B o a rd in g S ch o ol. B en n y Silversm ith , chapter president
for P in e S p rin gs and O ak S p rin gs, has also requested screenings,
in clu d in g his Shallow Well and even his practice Summer Shower
film (see page 264 o f appendix in o rig in al text) this surprised
us, because w e didnt recall that he had a p rin t o f this footage.
Jo h n n y even rem em bered som e reactions to his film s. D u rin g
the S h o w lo w screen in g, fo r exam ple, after audience m em bers
saw a film m ade b y a N avajo w ith o u t tra in in g , from that
exp erim en t, Jo h n n y reported th ey w ere v e ry im p ressed . O n
another occasion , after one screen in g o f his silversm ith film ,
Jo h n n y heard audience m em bers m akin g com parison s o f en vi
ron m en tal d e tails o f the trees, bushes, and d ry groun ds that
Jo h n B alo o w alked on w h ile lo o kin g fo r silver nuggets and cast
m a terials som e said, the earth is d ryin g u p .

Interests In Additional Filmmaking

W e also to o k som e tim e to inquire as to any th ou ghts they m ight
have about n ew film m ak in g. A lfre d C la h respond ed th at i f given
a chance to rem ake the 1966 versio n o f Intrepid Shadows , he
w ould give it a deeper sense o f sp iritu ality. H e recalled that
Jo h n A d a ir had w an ted him to add a sound track. A 1 assured us
that his th eo ry o f shadow s (see C h a p te r 14 o f orig in al text) is
still alive and w ell: the shadow s are alw ays there they ju st
hide or disappear w hen the sun is o u t. A 1 recalled fo r us his
th oughts on h ow m uch can be seen in shadow s i f you lo o k at
them for a lo n g tim e, ju s t as im ages o f the A n a sa z i can be seen
in the cliffs lo o kin g b ack at us.
A s w e m igh t have expected, Jo h n n y N elso n also had som e in
terestin g com m ents and ideas fo r m akin g new film s i f he could
get the appropriate fu n d in g. T h e ch apter ch airm an , B en K ahn ,
told Jo h n n y in a recent conversation that any project fun d in g
w ou ld be delayed by a preoccu pation o f o fficials w ith N avajo
N atio n p olitics, sp ecifically w ith the new elections in W in
dow R ock.
Jo h n n y said he w ou ld like to m ake a film about the Squaw
D an ce, because yo u nger m em bers o f the co m m u n ity w an t to
kn ow w h at to d o . W e im m ed iately recalled h ow he g o t h im self
in trouble and, indeed, je o p ard ized the entire project, w hen in
1966 he in ap p ro p riately film ed several horses decorated for a
dan ce.53 T h is prom pted A d a ir to ask Jo h n n y i f the elders and
other m edicine m en in the co m m u n ity w o u ld be ve ry upset i f
this happened. Jo h n n y replied th at both B en K ah n and Ben
S ilversm ith told him th at m aybe its too hard to keep an yth in g
anym ore and that its all out in the open n ow . G iv e n these
circu m stances, he felt that film in g special cerem onies w ould
be okay.
B u t it appeared th at Jo h n n y w as n ot advo catin g a system o f
com p letely open co m m u n icatio n he had som e specific ideas
regard in g the con trol o f in form ation . Jo h n n y th ou gh t these film s
should be m ade available on ly to certain p e o p le but only for
a certain gu y w h o really w ants [to learn it] can see it. In other
w ord s, these film s w ou ld not be distribu ted in any way, but kept
p riv a te he [a gen u in ely interested person] can com e over here
[to N e lso n s house] to learn it or I can go over there and he can
really learn it w ith use o f the film . 54
Jo h n n y also expressed a desire to m ake film s about little
th in gs and b ig th in g s. H e b rie fly sketched out film s regarding
the ch an gin g earth and environ m en t and changes that have re
sulted from the in trod uction o f electricity. F in a lly Jo h n n y d e
scribed a film about the problem th at som e o f the old people in
the co m m u n ity have trouble tak in g care o f the m oney they re
ceive as old age b en efits from the g o vern m en t they seem to
spend it too freely. H e added th at w h ite people seem to kn ow
certain things about this subject th at In d ian s dont w ith w hite
people its d ifferen t. T h e y have kn ow led ge o f h ow to handle this
m oney and stretch it, but in ours [the N a va jo co m m u n ity], its
sort o f d iffic u lt w hen the check com es every th irty days, they
cash it [righ t aw ay], m aybe five h undred or seven h undred d o l
lars, and the cash starts b u rn in g holes in th eir pockets. In a day
or a couple o f hours they spend it a ll.
B u t A 1 and Jo h n n y w ere the on ly ones w h o had any interest in
m akin g future film s. W h en w e asked M a r y Ja n e i f she had had
any aspirations fo r film m a k in g since the project, she u n eq u ivo
cally stated: N ever even th ou ght about it.

S om e C o n c lu d in g T h o u g h ts

It is clear th at in terest in in d igenou s m edia, in clu d in g co n tem

porary exam ples o f in d igenou s film m a k in g and vid eograph y, is
at a h igh le v e l.55 Sch olars in volved in film and visu al studies,
visual an th rop o logy/so ciolo gy, in d igenou s narrative, visu al co m
m unication, m ass m edia, h om e-m od e com m u n ication , p o litical
com m unication, and m edia developm ent, am ong other en d eav
ors, are all o ffe rin g ob servation s, com m en ts, and opin io n s on
such topics. N o tio n s o f w ritin g culture, p ictu rin g culture, m ul
tiple auth orship and shared authority, d ialo gic and polyphon ic
construction o f eth n ograph ic film , au tob iograp h ical eth n o gra
phies, m ulticu ltu ral m edia, ethics and p olitics o f represen tation ,
participatory cinem a, p rivileged gaze and represen tatio n al crises,
and m edia h egem ony all have connections to w h at h appened in
Pine S p rin gs in 1966. In short, the N avajo F ilm T h em selves
P ro ject adum brated m any co n tem p o rary concerns and rem ains a
key reference fo r m uch o f this accelerated activity and interest.
A great deal o f the new er co m m en tary is based on several
them es now central to visu al anthropology. F o r in stance, w e see
th at relation sh ip s b etw een subject and object have been reco n
ceptu alized , and th at a m ore h um an istic approach has replaced
an older scien tistic m odel o f w o rk. N o tio n s o f lab o rato ry and
hypotheses are out o f fash io n . In som e cases, w e have seen at
tem pts by authors to distance them selves from Through N a va jo
Eyes instead o f seeing the project as the result o f another set o f
interests relevan t to anoth er period o f tim e. P arts o f the m eth
od o lo gy are n o w in fact seen as p o litica lly in correct. T o ask na
tives to do an yth in g fo r you r exp erim en t certain ly an yth in g
un n atu ral is seen as a breach in m oral and eth ical behavior.
I f people do not o vertly profess a desire to m ake film s or v id eo
tapes, w ith o u t you r su ggestion, it is not the place o f the an th ro
p o lo gist to introduce or im pose the technology, esp ecially for
the sake o f ob servation . A s R u b y states: W e have b lith ely gone
into the field assu m ing w e have the rig h t, p rivilege, and license
to study others often w ith o u t m uch th ou g h t as to our im pact
upon them . W e introduce new tech n o lo gies and ideas from
literacy and dem ocracy to scien tific m edicine w ith o u t much
th ou gh t as to w h eth er the id eologies that created these tech
nologies are in destructive co n flict w ith the w o rld o f the ben e
ficia rie s ( 19 9 1a : 336).
W e also see several shifts in p riorities and values attached to
u n d erstan d in g in d igen ou s m edia b oth as expression and p rac
tice. O ne is the sh ift aw ay from stu dyin g the fo rm al qualities o f
film or vid eo as tex t tow ard one o f process and m e d ia tio n
less on the film ic and m ore on the social (see G in sb u rg 19 9 1). A
related sh ift is seen from an interest in b etter u n derstan d in g how
pictorial en co d in g m ig h t be in tim ately related to other codes o f
expression and com m u nication tow ard increased u n derstan d in g
o f the dynam ics o f local p o litical advocacy w h en film or vid eo is
used by m em bers o f native com m u n ities. M u ch m ore atten tion
is n ow given to the ram ification s o f in terven in g as a p articip an t-
o b se rv e r-fa cilita to r. In sh ort, social scientists w o rk in g in this
area are m ore p o litica lly attuned and in te rven tio n a lly active.
A th ird sh ift in atten tion is tow ard the in terp retatio n o f in
digenous vid eo m ak in g as a process o f id e n tity (re)form ation
and tra n sfo rm a tio n .56 In this regard, Sam Y a z z ie s fam ous ques
tion about film m a k in g h elp in g sheep is b ein g su pplem en ted and
partially replaced by a statem en t m ade by M o k u k a , a K ayapo
vid eo grap h er: Ju s t because I hold a w h ite m ans cam era, that
doesnt m ake me a w h ite m an. I f you w ere to hold one o f our
head-d resses, w ou ld th at m ake you an In d ia n ? (E a to n 1992 :4 ;
see also G in sb u rg 1994 : 9; C ra w fo rd 1995 :16 ) . A n d a fourth shift
is tow ard fo cu sin g new atten tion on v ie w e r/re ad er/listen er re
sp o n se th at is, to the reception side o f the com m u n ication
p ro cess th ou gh few com m entators seem com fortab le w ith the
term co m m u n icatio n . S u g gestion s are b ein g m ade fo r d eter
m in in g h ow a va riety o f possible audiences see and in terpret or
o therw ise consum e these vid eo products. T h is interest raises new
and d ifficu lt questions regard in g the m eaning o f id en tity and, o f
course, in terpretatio n accord in g to w hom ?
In gen eral, these new er in d igen o u s m edia projects increase the
depth and b readth o f th is su bfield o f visu al anthropology. T h e y
illustrate the value o f treatin g this m aterial w ith in an an th ro p o l
ogy o f visu al com m u n ication and, m ore gen erally, w ith in an an
th ro p o lo g ical p o litics o f sym b olic fo rm s (W o rth 1972). T h e re is
adequate evidence th at these perspectives are ga in in g increased
am ounts o f atten tion and acceptance in the field . In cre asin g im
portance is attributed to such topics as critiq u in g the privileged
an th ro p o lo gists gaze or lens, the fascin atio n w ith exploration o f
alternative discourses, the relative m erit o f d isco verin g altern a
tive m odels o f represen tation , and authority, tran slation , the
revelation o f local expression , and listen in g to new voices.
C le a rly the N avajo project can serve as a reference p o in t fo r each
o f these issues. T h e questions and speculations o ffered by W orth
and A d a ir w ere ahead o f th eir tim e. In this respect, the 1966
N avajo project w ill continue to p lay a v ita lly im p ortan t role in
the d evelopm ent o f m an y co n tem p o rary interests.

N o te s

1. Although, as o f 1974, the project was not mentioned in the volume

Principles o f Visual Anthropology , edited by Paul Hockings. Neither the
Navajo Project nor Sol Worth is listed in the index, although there is some
very brief mention o f the work in several o f the compilations papers.
2. M uch earlier versions o f this section were presented in a paper at the
annual meetings o f the American Anthropological Association held in Los
Angeles in 1981, and another version was given during the 1986 Navajo
Studies Conference in Albuquerque, New M exico.
3. For another version o f this perspective, readers should consult W ith
erspoons (1977:3) theoretical approach to understanding relationships o f
Navajo art, language, and philosophical orientation.
4. A n interesting variation on the question o f camera/people priority
has appeared in a discussion o f Kayapo-made videotapes: Just as the visual
anthropologist without a camera is still an anthropologist, the Kayapo
cameraman depends on his social and cultural Kayaponess, rather than his
camera. . . . I f he depends entirely on his camera as a symbol o f identifi
cation he might end up as a nobody in the long line o f unemployed cam
eramen (Philipsen and Markussen 1995 : 4, 4 - 5 ) .
5. For a longer discussion o f Carpenters stance and counterpoints, see
Chalfen 1992.
6. For instance, camera culture (B elo ff 1985), Kodak culture (C h al
fen 1987), and the culture o f im aging (Blackman 1986).
7. See comments on this topic by M ead (1975 :122).
8. Predictably, Feldman also notes that in 40 years, we may be able to
view the products o f Challenge for Change as useful self-portraits o f the
1960s National Film Board o f Canada and perhaps the 60s attitudes sur
rounding the many wars on poverty (1977:35).
9. In a rather extreme position regarding mediated colonialization,
M ick Eaton, a self-proclaimed exiled exanthropologist, writes that a de
termination o f a post-Renaissance, Western way o f seeing and organising
reality that . . . the process o f representation is, by its very nature, a
colonizing project, that it is the simulacrum of, perhaps even the very
agency of, our own alienation: we represent ; other uncontaminated cultures
merely present (1992 : 4; emphasis in original).
10. The criticism was repeated as recently as 1994 (Ginsburg 1994 :10 ).
11. Later, however, Worth gave considerable attention to an anthro
pological politics o f symbolic form s (1972), in which he addressed this and
many related concerns.
12. During this time some o f W orths students were inspired to do their
M A research on some aspect o f biodocumentary filmmaking. For instance,
Ben Achtenberg (1967) began working with a group o f African American
teenagers in West Philadelphia, and I initiated a series o f sociodocumen
tary projects, starting in 1967, at the Houston Comm unity Center, in
South Philadelphia (Chalfen 1972).
13. See comments on male and female teenage filmmakers from white,
middle-class backgrounds in Chalfen (1981).
14. Reference here is to the making o f the film D on't M ake a Good G ir l
Go B a d (Chalfen and H aley 1971).
15. On several occasions, for instance, Worth cited the experiments with
media being carried out by Edmund Carpenter in New Guinea (cf. C a r
penter 1973).
16. See Chapter 15 o f the original text o f Through N avajo Eyes fo ra par
tial account, or Chalfen (1989).
17. See Cinem a Naivete: A Sociovidistic Approach to the Home Mode
o f Visual Communication (Chalfen 1973).
18. For an excellent account, see Sol Worth and the Study o f Visual
Communication (Gross 1981: 1 -35).
19. See interview with Sol Worth in Film m ak ers N ew sletter (1971:33).
20. Stokrocki makes a curious but I feel flawed criticism o f the Navajo
Project: The completed [Navajo-m ade] film was a fabrication o f Navajo
idealized perceptions rather than a recording o f the actual world around
them. Because Worth and A dair were interested in obtaining a product,
based in American realistic cinema, they nearly failed to understand the
Navajo way o f viewing the world (1994:48). First, study o f process was
centrally important to Worth and A d airs research, and second, there may
be a semantic and/or epistemological problem with the notion actual as
used here.
21. Examples include the image o f a scantily clad Australian aborigine
taking a picture o f you while you take a picture o f him and cartoons that
feature a koala bear taking a picture o f tourists or a kangaroo and tourists
taking pictures o f each other simultaneously. In other cases it is possible
to find cartoons and comic strips that show views o f everyday family life
as recorded on film by a baby still crawling.
 22. A n extreme example appears in a film entitled Self-Portraits made
for the Showtime Entertainm ent network. Producers Skip Lane and
Robert E . Altm an gave video cameras to a hundred people in twenty-five
countries, with an invitation to create video letters about themselves.
But, as Walter Goodm an notes, it is not clear how these people were cho
sen. Goodman describes the hour-long show as a grab bag o f m ini
autobiographies, imaginings and reflections that begins with a birth and
ends with a funeral. . . . For fullest enjoyment o f Self-P ortraits , you have
to love other peoples home movies (1993).
23. I have not included work by phototherapists, who sometimes assign
self-photography to their clients (see W eiser 1983, 1993).
24. The Polaroid Corporation has generously supplied project directors
and classroom teachers with complimentary instant cameras for these
projects.
25. Wendy Ewald received a M acArthur grant (a genius award ) in
1990 for her work helping poor children to photograph their lives.
26. T his project has received national exposure, including a seven-page
layout in L ife M agazin e, a tour to France, T V talk shows (including Good
M orn in g Am erica), other appearances in N ew York, a videotape, and the
Flubbards 1991 book Shooting Back: A Photographic View o f L ife by Homeless
Children. Since that time, Hubbard has established a nonprofit organiza
tion, The Shooting Back Education and M edia Center, in W ashington,
D .C . Royalties from book sales go to Shooting Back, Inc.
27. For details, see H oladays 1984 P h .D dissertation, M aking M edia
Fit: Short Term Adjustm ent to a New Communication Technology in a
W est Javanese V illage.
28. A ll tapes were part o f the T itle V II Bilingual Education Program at
Ramah Navajo H igh School and Pine H ills Schools, operated by the
Ramah Navajo School Board.
29. These four student-made presentations were later edited into a
compilation tape for exhibition at the Festival o f Am erican Folklife in
Washington, D .C .
30. A s one additional note, we also know that video cameras became
part o f school life in some o f the Navajo Reservation schools. Eleanor
Velarde, who initiated camera work at Rough Rock Com m unity High
School, in Arizona, says: I saw video as a way for such students to prove
to themselves and others that they could communicate by expressing them
selves visually and then getting immediate feedback. . . . Its a thrill for
them to stand behind the camera and to know that what theyre focused
on will be seen by others, to know theyre making a mark. The teacher
added: The Navajo language contains a lot o f visual imagery which may
be the reason why they adjust so easily to communicating with video (text
in a Sony advertisement 1979; emphasis in original).
31. M uch o f this work was completed at the Philadelphia Child G u id
ance Clinic, with grants from the National Institute o f M ental Health.
These projects became the core o f my dissertation at the Annenberg
School for Communication and several subsequent publications.
32. For more information on the Fogo Experiment, see Sandra Gw yns
1972 Cinem a as Catalyst: F ilm , Videotape, an d Social Change (St. Johns,
Newfoundland: M em orial University o f Newfoundland Extension Service,
March) and Fogo Process in Communication: A Reflection on the Use o f
Film as an Inter-Com m unity Com m unication, n.a. (St. Johns, N ew
foundland: M em orial University o f Newfoundland Extension Service).
33. For a discussion o f the Sky River Project as an example o f applied
social research, see W illiam Foote W hytes 1984 paper, The Sky River
Project in L ea rn in g From the F ie ld : A G uide fro m Experience (Beverly H ills,
C al.: Sage), pp. 17 4 -8 1. W hyte concluded: The Sky River project pro
duced an extraordinary series o f changes in relation between the Eskimos
and the government and among the Eskimos themselves (19 8 4 :17 9 -8 1).
34. Kennedy noted in 1971: It is the first successful program o f its kind
in the United States. For the first time Alaskans will be able to commu
nicate on their own terms and government w ill receive information it could
never obtain otherwise (19 7 1:1).
35. In his discussion o f the significance o f the Fogo Project, Lansing
also mentions a project in Nepal: The most provocative results o f the
Fogo process can be seen in a video called Our Community, Our M essage,
which was produced, directed, shot and edited by a group o f literate
women from a village in western Nepal. W hen the Canadian team pro
posed to teach them how to shoot and edit video footage, the women were
at first highly skeptical. They asked, W hy us? W hat will people think?
An anthropologist predicted that the project would fail because the women
were visually illiterate. But within a matter o f months, the women were
producing videos on subjects they chose themselves: nutrition, medicine,
childrens lives. As before in Canada, these videos soon found their way
into government offices, and officials responded with video letters to the
villagers (1989 :12 -13 ) .
36. Others have noted similar reactions. In a paper published earlier the
same year, Holaday noted while describing his introduction o f cameras and
filmmaking to a village in West Java, Indonesia: W hatever agenda the
purveyors o f a communications technology may have in mind, the recipi
ents will have their own (19 9 1:5).
37. For a collection o f papers organized in honor o f Asch by N ancy Lut-
kehaus, see Visual Anthropology R e v ie w i i ( i ) , 1995. A n acknowledgment o f
A sch s efforts in still photography appears in Cape Breton Z952: The Photo
graphic Vision o f Timothy Asch, compiled and edited by Douglas Harper,
distributed as a special issue o f Visual Sociology 9(2), 1994.
38. Carelli described the C T I, or Brazilian Indian W ork Center, as a
non-profit organization established in San Paolo. Founded in 1979, it is
composed o f anthropologists and indigenists who propose to support and
promote the struggle for autonomy o f the Indian people, who are the sub
ject o f their work. . . . Although each o f the projects is coordinated by one
member o f C T I . . . all o f them follow a basic orientation: to create long
term conditions for the Indian groups to reproduce themselves, preserving
their differences (Carrelli 1988 :10 ).
39. According to Judith Shulevitz: Carelli, who studied anthropology
for a year before he dropped out to move in with the tribes, has obviously
learned his lessons, taking Jean Rouchs notion o f ethnographic filmmak
ing through participant observation and doing it one better. H es divorced
him self from outside ethnographic aims and stuck to a single political goal:
empowering these tribes through video (1990 : 4).
40. Readers are reminded that additional film production was not a
central objective for the W orth-Adair project, though such possibilities
were not ruled out. Several observers have adopted a mediacentric attitude,
virtually assuming that everyone must be interested in making films, in
part, perhaps, because we are.
41. The history o f Kayapo interest and involvement in media is docu
mented in Turner (1990).
42. The film D isappearing World: The Kayapo (Granada 1987) gives much
attention to both audio and video media use by the Kayapo.
43. The politico-media wisdom o f the Kayapo was seen in the much
discussed intertribal meeting at Altam ira to protest the building o f a
hydroelectric dam in the Xingu River valley by the Brazilian govern
ment a situation that was planned both as a demonstration and as a
video-media event.
44. In a related incident from the Philadelphia Project (Chalfen 1981), a
group o f African American teenagers called the Dedicated Soul Sisters
made a film entitled D on't M ake a Good G ir l Go Bad. A group o f commu
nity workers, actively supporting the Black is Beautiful ideology, de
manded the film for burning (cf. Chalfen and H aley 1971). Also in Phila
delphia, a tragic incident surrounded the making o f The Ju n g le by a group
o f African Americans living in gang-contested territories o f North Phila
delphia in the late 1960s. We know that the cameraman named Peacock
was killed by rival gang members who felt he and his gang had gained too
much notoriety from their filmmaking achievements and subsequent local
and national celebrity status.
45. Turners approach and those o f related projects are not without their
own problems. For one critical review o f Turners comments, see Radio
active Waste, Indigenous M edia and Anthropological Transparency: A
Response to Turner by Jam es C. Faris (1993). A s an elaborated echo o f
Potts (1979), we hear Fariss concern that Western technologies are not
benign, that there is more West in Western products than has been care
fully discussed in the anthropological literature on the subject, especially
if they are scopic devices and technologies o f recording and im aging
(1993). Faris defends his cautionary stance: To urge caution in the expan
sion o f our scopic technologies to subalterns for their empowerment is
not passive quietism, it is based on some experience with my own re
presentational conventions and the study o f the entire im aging process,
including consumption (1993).
46. M any o f the criticisms and problems indicated by James Faris
(1:993), for instance, were anticipated, answered, and explicated by
M ichaels in his work with the Warlpiri. Faris argued, for instance, that
too much attention is given to the production side o f the im aging process
at the expense o f studying the entire imaging process, including
consumption.
47. Here we see a connection to H oladays finding in W est Java: For
the people we are seeking to describe, there are far more important things
to do with these devices [camera equipment] than to describe themselves
to us. In my experience, these people wish to use the technology as media
within their own national and other local or extra-local contexts. That is,
they wish to use them to communicate within existing institutional struc
tures to achieve desired results, and these structures and effects have little
to do with the presence o f anthropologists (Holaday 19 91: 4; emphasis in
original). For additional details, see Holaday (1989).
48. The same kinds o f ideas were expressed by Victor Masayesva, Jr.,
during a discussion centered on representational accountability. He em
phasized the need to reclaim our im age. Masayesva stressed that all in
formation does not belong to everybody; we should be more careful about
who is saying what to/for whom. Everything is available for the white
man. We (Native Americans) restrict our information. . . . Theres a lot o f
stuff we dont talk about. He added that selling information has become
a big business, with regard to Hollywood in particular (Conference at New
York University, A pril 24, 1993).
 49. For a discussion o f what topics, people, or events should and should
not be included in certain indigenous tapes to be seen by certain audiences,
see Gallois and Carelli (19 9 3-9 4 ).
50. A s a sociovidistic proposition, Chalfen has asked: W hile it is the
case that we can take a picture o f anyone at any time in any place for any
reason and subsequently show that picture to anyone in any time and any
place for any reason, do we, in fact, behave in this manner? M any examples
o f restricted uses o f such harmless pictorial forms as snapshots can be
found in Chalfen (1987).
51. See John Adair, S. Fanshel, and D. Gordon, A Weave o f Tim e (1987),
Navajo Film Project, New York, 60 minutes (available through Direct
Cinem a Ltd., Los Angeles, Cal.).
52. Perhaps here is one answer to Sam Yazzies early and frequently cited
question o f why make movies? These movies make the people o f Pine
Springs feel very good.
53. See description o f Nelsons short film The N avajo Horse, in the ap
pendix (pp. 2 6 4 -6 5) o f original text o f Through N a va jo Eyes.
54. Comments such as this regarding the control vs. free flow o f infor
mation through verbal and/or visual channels make for interesting com
parisons to what E ric M ichaels found in his work with the W arlpiri (see
M ichaels 1985b, 1991a).
55. However, these approaches and related projects are not without their
own critics. For instance, after critically evaluating the notions o f reflex-
ivity, self-photography, and transparency within the general context o f
ethnographic film, James Faris says: It seems to me that there are particu
lar delusions, illusions, and hoaxes associated with these projects. Yet they
are projects which today seem to receive particular attention (199 2:171).
W ith specific reference to self-photography, Faris notes that cameras
(or camcorders) in the hands o f others do not necessarily privilege their
voices any more than reflexivity, as the naive view has it, obliterates the
inherent power differentials o f the ethnographic encounter. The subjective
voice o f the object is a figment o f the same dialogical imagination that
thinks reflexivity is a facile possibility in ethnographic research (1992 :
174). A nd later, Like the photographic dialogic having them undertake
their own film and video taping this strikes me as an attempt to keep our
hands on, to secure access, to keep the old ties that bind, although now
ostensibly on their terms. Beware the white man celebrating something
you do (1992 :176).
56. Ginsburg states in a straightforward way: W hether it be Inuit,
Yupik, Hopi, Nambiquara, Kayapo, W arlpiri, or Pitjanjajare (to name a
few groups) almost always, the initial activities engaged in with the cam-
 ACSO-Biblioteca

Afterword to the Revised Edition (3 4 1

era are simultaneously assertive and conservative o f identity: documenting
injustices and claiming reparations, making records o f the lives and knowl
edge o f elders who witnessed the often violent destruction o f life as they
had known it from dramatizing mythic stories, to recreating historically
traumatic events for the camera, to the always popular recording food
gathering and hunting techniques (19 9 1:10 4 ).
The fo llo w in g f i v e photos w ere taken
by R ichard Chalfen in 1992, unless
otherwise noted.

21. John Adair standing in front of

the what remains o f the Pine
Springs Trading Post, 1992. The
post suffered a debilitating fire in
the late 1980s.
22. M ike Anderson standing be
tween John Adair and D ick C h al
fen, in front of M ikes home in
Greasewood, 1992 (photo by Karen
Chalfen).

21
 23. John A dair and Susie Benally,
just to the side o f her home in
Greasewood, 1992.
24. A 1 Clah and D ick Chalfen in
front o f A ls home in Greasewood,
1992 (photo by Karen Chalfen).
25. On the highway, just a few mi
les from Pine Springs, Arizona, we
find new encouragement to Take
Pictures!

23
 Appendix B

The Ten Most Frequently

Asked Questions about the
Navajo Project

Question i: I f the Navajo filmmakers had been using videotape,

would all o f the results have been different?
A n sw er: T h is is a com plicated qu estion, and several authors
have speculated about it. B asically, the answ er m ust be both
probably yes and p ro b ab ly no. T h e form er w o u ld favo r a tech n o -
d eterm inist p o sition ; the latter w o u ld gain favo r fro m an in te
grated cu ltu re-a n d -co m m u n icatio n perspective. B u t the closest
em pirical answ er is found in the p ro ject developed by R o n L ig h t
and B rad le y H e n io in R am ah , N e w M e x ic o , w here N a va jo w ere
asked to m ake vid eotapes for the first tim e (see L ig h t and H e n io
1977). W h en I review ed th eir tapes, I saw a lot o f overlap w ith
the P in e Sp rin gs film s. R ead ers w ill fin d a fu ller response to this
question in the A fte rw o rd , esp ecially in reference to com m ents
put fo rw ard by P otts (1979).

Question 2: How many film s had each Navajo seen before starting
the project?
A n sw er: M o s t o f this answ er is scattered th ro ugh o u t the o rig in al
text o f Through Navajo Eyes. R ead ers shou ld also rem em ber that
accurate num bers are u sually d ifficu lt to ob tain , and scales o f
N e v e r S e ld o m F re q u e n t V ery F req u en t are alw ays rela
tive to som e h yp oth etical con trol grou p. B u t, in gen eral, the
N a va jo stu dents film v ie w in g experien ce w as v e ry lim ited ; A 1
C la h had seen the m ost, and A lta K a h n , the least.
S everal assum ptions u n d erlyin g this question are actu ally m ore
in terestin g than accurate film counts or vie w in g freq u en cies. It
m ay be better to b egin an answ er w ith an oth er q u estion , nam ely,
W h y do you ask? T h is w o u ld be one w a y to ge t at certain
questionable assu m ptions. F o r instance, w h at do w e really kn ow
about the in flu en ce o f v ie w in g experience seeing feature film s
or d o cu m en tary film s on the actual m akin g o f film s? A re
people prone to cop y or try to m im ic w h at they have seen? O r,
in other contexts, to avoid w h at th ey have seen others do? A s a
sim ple exam ple, it does not appear th at the m ajo rity o f 8mm
h om e m ovie m akers tried to copy other genres o f film s. T h e re
cent w ave o f w an nabe fu n n iest hom e vid eo s attached to cash
rew ards m ay be an exception to this gen eralizatio n .
S econ d , I am rem inded o f another in terestin g question : H ave
cultural an th ro p ologists or fo lk lo rists asked th eir in form an ts
h ow m any stories from the o u tsid e they had heard befo re so
lic itin g th eir fo lk ta le s, m yth s, fam ily stories, etc. (person al co m
m u n ication , D en n is T e d lo ck , 1982)?

Question j : Did the Navajo filmmakers make more film s after you
left? I f so, how many have been made since the conclusion oj the
project?
A n sw er: T h e N a va jo film m ak ers did not contin ue to m ake film s
after A u g u st 1966. T h e 16m m equ ip m en t w as returned to the
A n n e n b e rg S ch o ol in accordance w ith p ro visio n s in the grant
aw arded by the N a tio n a l Science F o u n d atio n . R ead ers should
recall that unlike m any co n tem p o rary projects, the N a va jo p ro j
ect w as never d esigned fo r continu ance. F rom the ou tset stu
dents and m em bers o f the P in e Sp rin gs co m m u n ity u n derstood
that this w as a research project. H o w ever, A d a ir and W orth
m en tion ed th at Jo h n n y N e lso n show ed som e in terest in co n tin u
in g (see pp. 5 5 - 5 6 , 136 o f o rig in al text). A d a ir and I pursued this
qu estion in 1992, and m uch o f the answ er to this q u estion ap
pears in the later sections o f the A fte rw o rd .

Question 4: Did the Navajo filmmakers say why they wanted to

make film s ?
A n sw er: A g a in , readers should be rem inded th at u n like p a r
ticipan ts in m any co n tem p o rary projects, the N a v a jo w h o p a rtici
pated in this p roject as student film m ak ers had n ot previo u sly
p rofessed any stron g desire to m ake m ovies or other form s o f
m edia prod uction b efore Ju ly o f 1966. T h e exception w as A 1 C la h ,
w h o had received train in g in p a in tin g and sculpture in C a lifo rn ia
and N e w M e x ic o before the p roject began (see pp. 60 62 o f
o rig in al text). H e w as selected as a p articip an t in the p ro ject for
this reason. Several o f the students said th ey w an ted to jo in the
p ro ject to learn som eth in g new and to su pplem en t th eir in com es.
H o w ever, after the m o vie -m a k in g o p p ortu n ities w ere in tro
duced, interest grew, and the N a va jo film m ak ers cited reasons
that have been echoed in other m ore recent projects (see C h a p
ter 6 o f o rig in al text). F o r instance, th ey m en tion ed a desire to set
the record straigh t, esp ecially w ith regard to th eir crafts p ro d u c
tion. T h e y w an ted to help tourists and other outsiders kn ow
about N avajo trad ition s, to realize the hard w o rk in volved in p ro
d u cin g th eir arts and crafts, to get it rig h t as th ey k n ew their
own lives, and to preserve this in form atio n fo r later gen eratio n s
o f N avajo . N e lso n even m entioned it m igh t increase th eir sales o f
N a va jo crafts (for ad d ition al com m ent and d etail, see C h a lfe n
1988: 179).

Question 3: Why dont their film s have any sound?"

A n sw e r: T h e op tion o f ad d in g sound to each film w as m en
tion ed to each o f the stu dent film m akers in a n on directive m an
ner. W e explain ed the n on sync features o f the equ ip m en t, but
th at a separate sound track could be m ade and added. In ad d i
tion , they saw th at w e w ere m akin g qu arter-in ch tape record in gs
fo r the research on a d aily basis. In one case, A d a ir open ly
su ggested to C la h that he add sound (perhaps a break in re
search pro to co l), but this w as not accom plish ed . T h e film m ak ers
elected not to add sound, g e n erally feelin g it w as not necessary.

Question 6: Were the Navajo-made film s really any different from

anyone elses fir st film s or even home movies?
A n sw e r: M y first short answ er m ust be: Yes. B u t again , this
seem in gly sim ple qu estion is rather com plicated , so the response
m ust be fa irly lengthy. In terestin gly, several authors have either
referred to h om e m ovies or cited the relevance o f hom e m ovies
to ind igen ou s m edia (see M a c D o u g a ll 1969; P o tts 1979; T u rn e r
1992), as I have in d icated in the A fte rw o rd .
F irst, there is the qu estion o f d e fin itio n and h o w one u n d er
stands the h om e-m o vie gen re o f represen tatio n . F o r instance,
h ow are hom e m ovies and ind igen ou s m ed ia related to one
a n o th er h ow are variou s exam ples o f n ative/su b ject-gen erated
m o vies/vid eo s b ein g u n derstood or categorized? So m e observers
have tried to fin d a place fo r in d igenou s m edia by con ceptu ally
p lac in g these exam ples at the in tersection o f o ther fo rm s, in clu d
in g eth n ograp h ic film , stu d ents first film s, n arrow casted d o cu
m entaries, and hom e m ovies. O ne problem is th at each o f these
form s is not p articu larly w ell studied.
In com p arison to som e exam ples o f in d igen o u s m edia, hom e
m oviem akers are g en erally s e lf-ta u g h t, un paid, and u nheralded
fo r th eir activities. In cases that have been exam in ed , hom e m o v
ies are seldom , i f ever, ed ited . S tu d en t film m ak ers are not stu d
ied as they learn th eir craft, and th ey do w h atever p ossib le to
avoid the aesthetic or lo o k o f hom e m ovies. T h e pattern s o f
com m u n icatio n are quite d iffere n t in each o f these cases.
H o w is the m edium o f hom e m ovies u n derstood as a pattern
o f visu al com m u n ication ? M o s t statem ents presum e a u n iversal
lo o k o f hom e m ovies. B u t are w e ta lk in g about som eon es first
or later hom e m ovies? T u rn e r h im s e lf says th at the first stage o f
K ayapo video rem ained at the hom e m ovie leve l (1992 :7 ). D o
these m ovies have sound? Is the cellu loid fo rm b ein g lum ped
w ith the m ore recent vid eo form ?
O bservers often confu se or con flate the prod u ct w ith the p ro
cess. F o r in stance, after v ie w in g a selection o f the K ayapo videos
presen ted at a conference at the U n iv e rsity o f M a n c h e ste r in
19 9 1, and m ak in g a fo u rfo ld categorization o f the vid eo w o rk,
M ic k E a to n cyn ically related the K ayapo vid eo to w h at I p re
sum e he m eans as an A n g lo -A m e ric a n version o f hom e vid eo :

W hy should the Kayapo have any problems with the process o f repre
sentation? Th eyre a lot better at it than we are. I f we white folk are
stupid enough to point a video camera at an offspring or pet crawling
across the carpet to send to antipodean relatives at Christmas tide, why
should we deny this crassness to the Amazonians? (1992 :4)

R e tu rn in g to the initial qu estion, the lon ger version o f m y an

sw er rem ains: Yes.

Question 7: What happened to the footage Chalfen was shooting

during the project?
A n sw er: N o t m uch. R ead ers should u nderstand th at m ak in g a
film about the project w as not a form al part o f the research design
(see pp. 123 - 27 o f the o rig in al text). T h is led to a rather u n o rg a
nized com pon en t o f the p roject, w h ich , in turn, resulted in fo o t
age rather than film (see S co tt 1994 fo r oth er problem s w ith
this kind o f task.) In short, no film resulted from this w o rk , and
n o th in g has been released for any form of d istribu tion .
 T h e 16m m fo otage has been ro u g h -ed ited and tran sferred to
vid eotap e. I use the m aterial in visu al a n th ro p o lo gy classes at
T em p le U n iv e rsity and in other lectures, m ostly as evidence ot
h avin g been th ere . Som e kinds o f in fo rm atio n are better p re
served in stills, and this is one reason I have in cluded m ore p h o
tograph s in this revised ed ition .

Question 8: Why havent there been more projects like this, with
other groups with the same methodology, and so on?
A n sw e r: S everal people felt th at the W o rth -A d a ir p ro ject should
have excited other scholars to replicate the study in other cu l
tures. B u t clearly it did not. A c c o rd in g to Ja y R u b y: In stead it
becam e fash ion ab le to obtain gran ts fo r native gen erated film s.
M o s t o f the fa c ilita to rs o f the projects w ere film m ak ers or lib
eral d o -g o o d ers w ho w an ted to h elp the dow n trodd en gain ac
cess to the m edia. T h e result w as a num ber o f p seu d o -n ative
film s from in ner city gh ettos o f the U .S . (19 9 1a: 339).
In truth the N avajo p roject started w ith a set o f in tellectu al
o bjectives and a research p rotocol th at have not been m atched
since the p u b lication o f Through Navajo Eyes in 1972. W e m igh t
co n sid er som e or all o f the fo llo w in g con d ition s as reasons or
obstacles:
T h e re is a relatively sm all num ber o f people w ith backgroun ds
th at com bine kn ow led ge o f b oth an th ro p o lo gical th eo ry and
com m u n ication theory, experience in field w o rk as w ell as a
w o rk in g know led ge in the tech n o lo gical aspects o f film p ro
duction.
T h e re has been relatively little train in g in the research q u es
tions re g a rd in g culture and visu al com m u n icatio n th at underlie
this m odel o f in qu iry, in clu d in g the eth n o grap h y o f sym bolic
fo rm s, eth n o grap h ic sem iotics, and com parative co n ven tion al
film la n g u a g e , am on g others.
T h e re has been a reluctance on the part o f social scien tists and
ph otograph ers to h and over the cam era to the ob served , to
o th e rs, and to reform u late the p o litics o f research in terac
 tions. Sarah E ld e r fin d s a sim ilar resistance w ith her student
film m akers and adds: R e lin q u ish in g con trol is a ch allen ge to
W estern film m akers. People cant believe th at b y g iv in g up
con trol, there is so m eth in g greater to be g a in e d (1995: 10 1).
F o r som e, this d isarm in g o f the in vestigator m ay have been
too th reaten in g.
T h e re is a reluctance b y an th ro p o logists to w rite bud gets fo r
research proposals th at m ust include line item s o f co stly tech-
n o logy in addition to standard costs o f tran sp o rtatio n , su bsis
tence, con su ltation , etc.
T h e re has been a h esitan cy on the part o f funders to support
the prod uction o f m ovies th at m ay not be regarded as
film s the prod uction o f the m odel o f research film s is
less w ell ackn o w led ged than the p rod u ction , fo r in stance, o f
eth n ograp h ic film s.
T h e re has been a bias in favor o f products at the expense o f
process.
A n d fin ally, it is u n dou b tedly easier to becom e an o b server and
com m en tato r than one w h o initiates o rig in al, com parative,
and creative research alon g the lines su ggested by W o rth and
A d a ir.
W h ile m ost, i f not all, o f these con d ition s m ay sound u n ju stified
as o f 1996, the situation was quite d ifferen t th irty years ago.

Question 9: What are the filmmakers doing today?

A n sw er: T h e m ost com plete answ er to th is question can be
foun d in the latter sections o f the A fte rw o rd to this ed ition o f
Through Navajo Eyes.

Question 10: Where are Sol Worth and John Adair today?"
A n sw er: S o l W orth died u n exp ected ly in 1977, w h ile atten d in g
the F la h e rty F ilm F estival (see C h a lfe n 1979). Su b seq u en tly a
collection o f his essays w as ed ited b y L a r r y G ro ss and publish ed
in under the title Studying Visual Communication. Jo h n A d a ir is
currently p ro fesso r em eritus from San F ran cisco State U n iv e rsity
and lives in San F ran cisco . In 1987 a fd m en titled A Weave o f
Time w as m ade o f A d a ir s fifty years o f w o rk w ith the B u rn sid es
fam ily in P in e Sp rin gs, A riz o n a . T h is film in cludes som e o f
A d a ir s fo otage m ade as early as 1938. In ad d itio n , he has been
p lan n in g several pu b lication s u sin g m an y o f his ow n p h o to
graph s o f early and recent N a va jo life.

And, finally , o f course, we should ask: Has anyone satisfactorily an

swered Sam Yazzies seminal question about how filmmaking can
help or hurt the sheep?
A n sw er: N o , but hints are p rovid ed in both the F o rew ord and
A fte rw o rd o f th is revised ed ition .
 Bibliography

A c h t e n b f .r g , B e n
1967. M aking Not Much To Do: an experim ent in the use o f docum en
tary film m aking as a tool in com m unication research. U npublished
m asters thesis, A nnenberg School o f Com m unications, U n iversity
o f Pennsylvania.
A d a ir , J o h n
1944. T h e N avajo and Pueblo silversm iths. N orm an: U n iversity of
Oklahom a Press.
A d a i r , J o h n and E v o n Z . V o g t
1949. N avajo and Z u n i veterans. A m erican A nthropologist 51: 547-
561.
A lbert, E th el M .
1956. T h e classification o f values: a method and illustration. A m eri
can A nthropologist 58: 221-248.
A m e r ic a n F il m I n s t it u t e
1969. A F I N ew sletter 1(5 & 6).
A stro v, M argot
1950. T h e concept o f motion as the psychological leitm otif o f
N avaho life and literature. Jou rn al o f A m erican Folklore 63:45-56.
B a r n e t t , H o m e r G.
1953. Innovation: the basis o f cultural change. N e w York: M cG raw
H ill.
B i r d w h i s t e l l , R a y L.
1952. Introduction to kinesics. Louisville, K entucky: U n iversity o f
K entucky Press.
1970. Com m unication and context. Philadelphia: U n iversity o f
Pennsylvania Press.
 C.
B o u m a n , J an
1954. B ibliography on film ology as related to the social sciences.
Reports and Papers on Mass Com m unication, N o. 9. U N E S C O .
B r it is h F il m I n s t it u t e
1966. Film m aking in schools and colleges. P. H arcourt and P.
Theobald, eds., B F I Education Departm ent. London: Shenval
Press.
C h a l f e n , R ic h a r d
1969. It is the case that anyone can take a picture o f anyone at any
time, in any place for any reason, but one doesnt. Mimeo.
C h a i . f e n , R i c h a r d and J a y H a l e y
1971. Reaction to socio-docum entary film m aking research in a men
tal health clinic. A m erican Jou rn al o f O rthopsychiatry 4i(i):9i-ioo.
1969. Challenge for change. M ontreal: Canadian Film Board.
C h o m sk y, N o am
1965. Aspects o f the theory o f syntax. Cam bridge: T h e M IT Press.
1968. Language and mind. N ew Y ork: H arcourt, Brace & World.
C o l l ie r , J o h n , J r .
1967. V isu al anthropology: photography as a research method. N ew
York: H olt, Rinehart & Winston.
C u l k i n , J. M.
1966. I was a teenage m ovie teacher. Saturday R eview 49:51-53.
D e p a r t m e n t o f H e a l t h , E d u c a t io n a n d W e l f a r e
1968. T h e arts, youth and social change. O ffice o f Ju venile D elin
quency and Youth Developm ent.
E is e n s t e in , S e r g e i
1949. Film form: essays in film theory. J. Leyda, ed. and trans. N ew
Y ork: H arcourt, Brace & Com pany.
E km an, P aul
1965. Com m unication through nonverbal behavior. In A ffect, cog
nition, and personality. S.S. T o m kins and C .E . Izard, eds. N ew
York: S p rin ger Publishing Co.
F er g u so n , R o bert
1969. G ro u p filmm aking. London: Studio Vista.
G ard n er, R o bert
1957. A nthropology and film. Daedalus 86:344-352.
G e r b n e r , G eo rg e
1970. C ultural indicators: the case o f violence in television drama.
Annals o f the A m erican A cadem y o f Political and Social Science
388:69-8!.
G il b e r , G .
1967. A s p h a lt d o cu m e n tary . U .S . C am era 30:70-71.
G o l d s c h m i d t , W a l t e r and R o b e r t B . E d g e r t o n
1961. A p ic tu re tech n iq u e fo r the stu d y o f valu es. A m e ric a n A n
th ro p o lo g ist 63(i ):26-47-
G o m b r ic h , E r n e s t H .
1961. A r t an d illu sio n . N e w Y o r k : P an th eon .
G o oden o u gh , W ard H .
1965. C o o p e ra tio n in ch an g e; an an th ro p o lo g ica l ap p ro ac h to com
m u n ity d eve lo p m e n t. N e w Y o r k : R u ssell S ag e F o u n d atio n .
G o o d m an , N e ls o n
1968. L a n g u a g e s o f art. In d ia n a p o lis: B o b b s-M e rrill C o m p a n y .
H a r r is o n , R a n d a ll P.
1964. P ic tic an aly sis: to w a rd a v o c a b u la ry an d sy n ta x fo r the p ic
to rial code; w ith research on fac ial co m m u n icatio n . U n p u b lish e d
P h .D . th esis, D e p a rtm e n t o f C o m m u n ica tio n , M ich ig a n S tate U n i
v e rsity .
H o uer, H arrv
1951. C u ltu ra l im p licatio n s o f som e N a v a h o lin g u istic categories.
L a n g u a g e (Jo u rn a l o f th e L in g u is tic S o c ie ty o f A m e rica) 27:111-120.
1954. T h e S a p ir W h o rf h yp o th e sis. In L a n g u a g e in c u ltu re. H .
H o ije r, ed. C h ica g o : U n iv e r s ity o f C h ica g o Press.
R.
H o lm b e r g , A l l a n
i960. C h a n g in g co m m u n ity attitu d es and valu es in P eru . In So cial
ch an g e in L a tin A m e ric a tod ay. R .N . A d am s et al., eds. N e w Y o rk :
H a rp e r & R o w .
H ym es, D ell
1964. T o w a r d e th n o g ra p h ie s o f co m m u n icatio n . In T h e e th n o g ra
p h y o f co m m u n icatio n . J. J. G u m p e r t and D . H y m e s, eds. Sp e cial
p u b licatio n , A m e ric a n A n th ro p o lo g ist 66 (6, pt. 2).
1967. W h y lin g u istic s needs th e socio logist. Jo u r n a l o f S o cia l R e
search 34(4).
1970. L in g u is tic m odels in arch aeo lo g y. In A rc h e o lo g ie et cal-
cu late u rs. P aris: E d itio n du C e n tre N a tio n a l de R e c h e rc h e Scien -
tifique.
K e s s l e r , H o pe
1970. T h e effect o f v a r y in g the len gth o f edem es related to m ean in g
in fe ren ce s fro m film s. U n p u b lish e d m asters thesis, U n iv e r s ity o f
P e n n sy lv a n ia .
K l u c k h o h n , C l y d e a n d D o r o t h e a L e ig h t o n
1946. T h e N a v a jo . C a m b rid g e : H a rv a rd U n iv e rs ity Press.
L a n g er , S u sa n n e
1953. F e e lin g and fo rm . N e w Y o rk : S c r ib n e r s.
L arso n , R o d ger an d E l l e n M ea d e
1966. A gu id e fo r film teach ers to film m ak in g b y teen agers. N e w
Y o r k C it y A d m in istra tio n o f P ark s, C u ltu ra l A ffa ir s F o u n d atio n ,
D e p a rtm e n t o f C u ltu ra l A ffa irs.
L a y b o u r n e , L a w r e n c e C h r is t o p h e r
1968. F ilm m a k in g in se co n d ary ed u cation . U n p u b lis h e d m a ste rs
thesis, U n iv e r s ity o f C a lifo rn ia at L o s A n g eles.
L e ig h t o n , A l e x H. and D o ro th ea C. L e ig h t o n
1944. T h e N a v a jo d oor, an in tro d u ctio n to N a v a jo life. (F o re w o rd
b y Jo h n C o llie r) C a m b rid g e : H a rv a rd U n iv e r s ity Press.
L v i- S tr a u s s , C la u d e
1964. M y th o lo g iq u e : le cru et le cru it. P aris: P lon .
L id s t o n e , J o h n a n d D o n M c I n t o sh
1970. C h ild r e n as film m akers. N e w Y o rk : V a n N o s tra n d R e in h o ld
C om pany.
L o m ax, A lan
1968. F o lk so n g sty le and c u ltu re. W ash in g to n , D .C .: A m e rica n
A sso ciatio n fo r the A d v a n ce m e n t o f Scie n ce, P u b lica tio n N o . 85.
M a l i n o w s k i , B.
1922. A rg o n a u ts o f the w e ste rn P acific. L o n d o n : G e o r g e R o u tle d g e
& S o n s, L td .; N e w Y o r k : E .P . D u tto n & C o m p a n y .
M a t t h e w s , W a s h in g t o n
1910. N a v a h o m yth s, p ra y e rs, and so n gs; w ith te xts and tran slatio n s.
P .E . G o d d a rd , ed. C a lifo rn ia U n iv e rs ity P u b lica tio n s in A m e rican
A rc h e o lo g y and E th n o lo g y 5(2), 1907-10. F .W . P u tn am and A .L .
K ro e b e r, eds. B e rk e le y : T h e U n iv e rs ity Press.
M c N e i l l , D a v id
1966. D e v e lo p m e n ta l p sy ch o lin g u istics. In T h e gen esis o f language.
F . S m ith and G .A . M ille r, eds. C a m b rid g e : T h e M I T Press.
M e a d , M a r g a r e t and R h o d a M e t r a u x
1953. T h e stu d y o f c u ltu re at a distan ce. C h icag o : T h e U n iv e r s ity o f
C h ic a g o Press.
M e y e r , L eo nard
1956. E m o tio n and m e an in g in m usic. C h ic a g o : U n iv e rs ity o f
C h ica g o P ress.
M il l s , G eo rg e
1959. N a v a jo art and c u ltu re. T h e T a y lo r M u seu m o f the C o lo rad o
S p r in g s F in e A r ts C e n tre .
O sg o o d , C h a r l e s E .
1966. D im e n s io n a lity fo r the sem an tic space fo r co m m u n icatio n
via facial e xp re ssio n s. P a p e r p re se n te d at M ich ig a n State U n iv e r
sity.
P a n o f s k y , E r w in
1939. S tu d ie s in ic o n o lo g y. L o n d o n : O x fo rd U n iv e r s ity Press.
P eav y , C h a r le s
1969. C in e m a from the slu m s. C in a ste 3(2).
P o r t e r , E d w in
1914. T h e M o v in g P ic tu re W orld . J u ly 11.
R e ic h a r d , G l a d y s
1950. N a v a h o re lig io n : a stu d y o f sym b o lism . B o llin g e n S e rie s 18.
N e w Y o rk : P an theon .
R o b b in , D a n
1966. F ilm m ak in g as a yo u th p ro g ra m tool. R ich m o n d , C a lifo rn ia :
N e ig h b o rh o o d H o u se, m im eo.
R o uch , J ean
1955. C in m a d e x p lo ra tio n et eth n o g rap h e . C o n n aissan ce du
M o n d e 1:69-78.
S a p ir , E d w a r d
1942. N a v a h o texts. (S u p p le m e n ta ry texts b y H a r r y H o ijer). H .
H o ije r, ed. L in g u is tic S o c ie ty o f A m e rica . Io w a C ity : U n iv e rs ity o f
Io w a P ress.
S c h o l t e , B ob
1970. T o w a r d a se lf-refle ctiv e a n th ro p o lo g y : an in tro d u ctio n w ith
som e e xam p le s. P a p e r p resen ted to the I S A R e se arch C o m m ittee
on the S o c io lo g y o f K n o w le d g e , 7th W orld C o n g re ss o f S o cio lo g y ,
Y 'arn a, B u lg a ria , S e p te m b er.
S k i n n e r , B. F.
1957. V e r b a l b eh av io r. N e w Y o r k : A p p le to n -C e n tu ry C ro fts.
S o r e n s o n , E .R . and D . C . G a j d u s e k
1966. T h e s tu d y o f ch ild b e h a v io r and d e ve lo p m e n t in p rim itiv e
cu ltu res. P e d ia trics 37(1,pt. 2).
S p e n c e r , K a t h e r in e
1957. M y th o lo g y and valu e s; an a n a ly sis o f N a v a h o c h a n tw a y
m yth s. M e m o irs o f the A m e ric a n F o lk lo re S o c ie ty , 48. P h ila d e l
phia: A m e ric a n F o lk lo re S o cie ty .
S p i c e r , E d w a r d H . (e d .)
1952. H u m a n p ro b lem s in te ch n o lo g ial change. N e w Y o rk : R u ssell
S ag e F o u n d atio n .
1961. P e rsp e c tiv e s in A m e ric a n In d ian c u ltu re ch an g e. C h icag o :
U n iv e r s ity o f C h ica g o Press.
S p i n d l e r , G e o r g e D.
1955. S o c io c u ltu ra l and p sy ch o lo g ica l processes in M e n o m in i accu l
tu ratio n . B e rk e le y : U n iv e r s ity o f C a lifo rn ia P ress.
S t e w a r t , D o u g l a s C.
1965. M o v ie s stu d en ts m ake. H a rp e rs 231:66-72.
S to d d ard , R o ber t
1967. N o t m uch to do. C o n c e rn M a y -Ju n e .
V o g t, Evon Z.
1961. N a v a jo . In P e rsp e ctiv e s in A m e ric a n In d ian c u ltu re change.
E .H . S p ic e r, ed. C h icag o : U n iv e r s ity o f C h ic a g o P ress. 278-336.
W h o r f , B .L .
1952. C o lle cte d p ap e rs on m e talin g u istics. W ash in g to n , D .C .: D e
p artm e n t o f State, F o re ig n S e rv ic e In stitu te.
W o l f e n s t e in , M a r t h a a n d N a t h a n L e it e s
1957. M o vie s. G le n c o e , Illin o is: G le n c o e F re e P ress.
W o rth , S ol
1963. S tu d e n t film w o rk sh o p . F ilm C o m m en t (Sum m er).
1965. F ilm co m m u n ic atio n s a stu d y o f the re actio n s to som e stu
d en t film s. S c re e n E d u ca tio n Ju ly - A u g u s t .
1968. C o g n itiv e A sp e cts o f S e q u e n ce in V is u a l C o m m u n icatio n .
A u d io V is u a l C o m m u n ica tio n R e v ie w i 6(2):i -25.
1969. T h e D e v e lo p m e n t o f a S e m io tic o f F ilm . S e m io tica 1(3)1282321.
1969. T h e N a v a h o as film m ak e r: a b r ie f re p o rt on som e recent
re search in the c ro ss-cu ltu ral aspects o f film com m u n ication .
A m e ric a n A n th ro p o lo g ist 69:76-78.
1970. N a v a jo film m akers. A m e ric a n A n th ro p o lo g ist 72(0:9-34.
1972. T o w a r d an A n th ro p o lo g ic a l P o litics o f S y m b o lic F o rm . In
R e in v e n tin g A n th ro p o lo g y . D . H y m e s, ed. N e w Y o r k C ity : P an
theon.
 New References fo r the
Revised Edition

A IBEL, ROBERT

1976. Communication, Cognitive M aps and Interpretive Strategies:

Filmmakers and Anthropologists Interpret Films Made by Navajo
and A nglos. M asters thesis, Annenberg School for Com m unica
tion, University o f Pennsylvania.
ASCH , T IM O TH Y , ET AL.

1991. The Story We N ow Want to Hear Is N ot Ours to Tell: R elin

quishing Control over Representation: Toward Sharing Visual C o m
munication Skills with the Yanomami. Visual Anthropology R e v ie w
y{ 2):io2 - 6.
A U F D E R H E ID E , PA T RIC IA

1995. The Video in the Villages Project: Videomaking with and by

Brazilian Indians. Visual Anthropology R e v ie w 11(2): 8 2 -9 3 .
BA LIK C I, A SEN , AN D M A R K BA D G ER

1995. A Visual Anthropology Seminar for the Native Peoples o f

Siberian and A laska. Pp. 3 9 - 5 4 in Advocacy a n d Indigenous F ilm -
M aking, ed. Hans H enrik Philipsen and Birgitte Markussen.
H ojbjerg, Denmark: Intervention Press.
BANTA, M E L IS S A , A N D C U R TIS M . H IN SLEY, EDS.

1986. From Site to Sight: Anthropology, Photography an d the P ow er o f

Imagery. Cam bridge, M ass.: Peabody Museum Press/H arvard U ni
versity Press.
BARRAT, M A RT IN E

1978. V ick i. Sem iotext 3(2): 7 4 - 8 1.

 N ew References
BELLM A N , BERYL, AND BEN N ET TE JU LES-RO SETT E

1977. A Paradigm f o r Looking: Cross C ultural Research w ith Visual M e

dia. Norwood, N .J.: Ablex Publishing Corporation.
BELOFF, H ALLA
1985. Camera Culture. New York: Basil Blackwell.
B IG BY, JO H N
1968. Fade to Black: Seeing Harlem through 8mm E yes. Take One
1(12): 20 - 21.
B L A C K M A N , M A R G A R E T L.
1986. Introduction. Pp. 1 1 - 1 6 in From Site to Sight: Anthropology,
Photography, a n d the P ow er o f Im agery, eds. M elissa Banta and Curtis
M . Hinsley. Cam bridge, M ass.: Peabody Museum Press/H arvard
University Press.
C A L L E N B A C H ,E R N E S T

: 973 74 - Review o f Through N a va jo Eyes. F ilm Quarterly 22(2): 61

62.
C A R E L L I, V IN C E N T
1988. Video in the Villages: Utilization o f Videotapes as an Instru
ment o f Ethnic Affirm ation among Brazilian Indian Groups CVA
N ew sletter (May): 10 - 15.
CARPEN TER, EDM UND
1973. Oh, What a B lo w that Phantom G ave M e! New York: H olt,
Rinehart 8c Winston.

1975. The Tribal Terror o f Self-Awareness. Pp. 451 - 61 in Principles

o f Visual Anthropology, ed. P. Hockings. Paris: M outon Publishers.
C A V IN, E R IC A
1994. In Search o f the Viewfinder: A Study o f a C h ilds Perspec
tive. Visual Sociology 9(1): 2 7 -4 2 .
C H A LFEN , RICH A RD
1973. Cinm a Navit: A Sociovidistic Approach to the Home M ode
o f Visual Comm unication. P I E F N ew sletter 4(3): 7 11.

1975. Cinm a Navit: A Study o f Home M oviem aking as Visual

Com m unication. Studies in the Anthropology o f Visual Communica
tion 2 (2): 8 7 -10 3 .

1979. Obituary: Sol Worth 19 2 2 -19 7 7 . Am erican Anthropologist

81(1): 9 1-9 3 .
 1981. A Sociovidistic Approach to Childrens Filmmaking: The
Philadelphia Report. Studies in Visual Communication 7(i):2~33.

1987. Snapshot Versions o f L ife. Bowling Green, Oh.: Popular Press.

1988. Navajo Film m aking Revisited: Problematic Interactions.

Pp. 16 8 -8 5 ' n N a tiv e N orth Am erican Interaction Patterns, ed. Regna
Darnell and M ichael K. Foster. Quebec: Canadian Museum o f
Civilization.

1989 Native Participation in Visual Studies: From Pine Springs to

Philadelphia. Pp. 7 1- 7 9 in Eyes Across the Water, ed. Robert M .
Boonzajer Flaes. Amsterdam: Flet Spinhuis.

1992. Picturing Culture through Indigenous Imagery: A Telling

Story. Pp. 2 2 2 -4 1 in F ilm as Ethnography, ed. Peter Crawford and
David Turton. Manchester: University o f M anchester Press.
C H A L F E N , R IC H A R D , A N D JA Y H A L E Y

1971. Reaction to Socio-Docum entary Film Research in a M ental

Health C lin ic. Am erican Jo u rn a l o f Orthopsychiatry 41(1): 9 1 - 1 0 0 .
C H E R E M , G A B R I E L J . , A N D D A V ID E. T R A W E E K

1977. Visitor Em ployed Photography: A Tool for Interpreting Plan

ning on River Environm ents. Pp. 2 3 6 -4 4 in Proceedings: Symposium
on R iv e r M anagem ent an d Research, M inneapolis, M inn., January
2 4 -2 7 .
C O LLIER , JO H N , JR .

1974. Review o f Seen through N a v a jo Eyes: N a va jo F ilm Themselves.

Am erican Anthropologist 76: 481 - 86.
COX, G EO FFR EY

1984. M artins Gate Self-Portraits. C reative Camera 234 (June):

1418 - 1 9 .
C R A W F O R D , P E T E R IA N

1995. Nature and Advocacy in Ethnographic Film : The Case o f

the Kayapo Im agery. Pp. 7 - 2 2 in Advocacy a n d Indigenous F ilm -
M akin g, ed. Hans H enrik Philipsen and Birgitte Markussen.
H ojbjerg, Denmark: Intervention Press.
D A M I C O , S A N D R A B.

1985. The Two W orlds o f School: Differences in the Photographs

o f Black and W hite Adolescents. Urban R e v ie w ly : 2 10 -2 2 .
D ELG A D O , LUZ

1992. Teaching Empowerment via Technology: Videographer Uses

Cable Program to Help Youths. Boston Globe , November 22.
EATO N, M IC K

1992. Amazonian Videos. Sight a n d Sound 2(7): 4.

E A T O N , M IC K , A N D IVAN W A R D

1976. Anthropology and Film . Screen 17(3): 1 1 3 - 18 .

EDITO RS

1971. Interview with Sol Worth. Film m akers N ew sletter 4 (3): 2 9 -3 4 .

E LD ER , SARAH

1995. Collaborative Film m aking: A n Open Space for M aking

M eaning, A M oral Ground for Ethnographic Film . Visual Anthro
pology R e v ie w 11(2): 9 4 - 10 1.
E V A N S , G E R A L D B . , R O B E R T A . S T E E R , A N D E R I C W. F I N E

1979. A lcohol Value Clarification in Sixth Graders: A Film -M aking

Project. Jo u rn a l o f Alcohol an d D ru g Education 24(2): 1 - 1 0 .
EW ALD, W EN D Y

1985. Portraits an d D ream s: Photographs an d Stories by Children o f the

Appalachians. U K: Writers and Readers Publishing Inc.

1992. M agic Eyes: Scenes fro m an A ndean Girlhood. Seattle: Bay Press.
F A R I S , J A M E S C.

1992a. Anthropological Transparency: Film , Representation and

Politics. Pp. 17 1-8 2 in F ilm as Ethnography, ed. Peter Ian Crawford
and David Turton. Manchester: University o f M anchester Press.

1992b. A Political Primer on Anthropology/Photography. Pp. 253-

63 in Anthropology a n d Photography i860 - ig 2o , ed. Elizabeth E d
wards. N ew Haven: Yale University Press.

1993. Radioactive Waste, Indigenous M edia and Anthropological

Transparency: A Response to Turner. Anthropology Today 9(1):
12 -13 .
FE IT O S A , M O NICA

1991a. The O thers Vision: From Ivory Tower to the Barricade

(guest editorial). Visual Anthropology R e v ie w 7(2): 48 - 49.
--------------, E D .

1991b. Other Visions? Problems and Prospects o f Indigenous M e

dia. Special section. Visual Anthropology R e v ie w 7(2): 4 8 -10 6 .
FELD M A N , SETH

!977. Viewer, Viewing, Viewed: A Critique o f Subject-Generated

New References ( j 6i
Documentary. Jo u rn a l o f the U niversity F ilm Association 29(1): 2 3 -
26, 35 - 36 .
F R A S E R , C. G E R A L D
1978. Videotapes o f South Bronx Youth Gangs by French Film
M aker in W hitney Series. N ew York Times, June 4.
FUCS, VIC TO R
1989. Feedback Interviews and Reflexivity. SVA N ew sletter 5(1):
24 - 28.
G A LLO IS, D O M IN IQ U E T ., A N D V IN C E N T C A R E L L I

19 9 3-9 4 . Video in the Villages: The Waiapi Experience. CVA

N ew sletter 93(2)-9 4 (1): 7 - 1 1 .
G A N ZEL, B ILL
1984. D usthow l Descent. Lincoln: University o f Nebraska Press.
G IN S B U R G , FAYE
1991. Indigenous M edia: Faustian Contract or Global Village? C u l
tural Anthropology 6(1): 92 112.

1993. Aboriginal M edia and the Australian Im aginary. Public C u l

ture 5: 557-78.

1994. Culture/M edia: A (Mild) Polem ic. Anthropology Today 10(2):

5 - 15-
GOODMAN, W ALTER
1993. Dear Camcorder Diary: M em oirs From A ll O ver. N e w York
Times, M arch 4.
G R A Y , A.
1988. Indigenous Peoples and Video. CVA N ew sletter (May):
2 2 - 24.
GRAY, C Y N T H IA
1990. Collaborative Video as a Tool o f Inquiry in Education.
E d .D . dissertation proposal, H arvard Graduate School o f Education.
G R I F F O N E , R . , A N D B. W E I L F . R
1992. The Learning Experience on Educational Travel Programs: A
Case Study o f Travel Learn Australia. Pp. 2 6 5 -7 0 in Ecotourism,
Incorporating the G lobal Classroom, ed. B. Weiler. International C o n
ference Papers. Canberra, Australia: Bureau o f Tourism Research.
GROSS, LA R RY
1981. Sol Worth and the Study o f Visual Com m unication. Pp. 1 -
35 in Studying Visual Communication, ed. L arry Gross. Philadelphia:
University o f Pennsylvania Press.
GRO SS, LA R R Y, A N D JA Y RU BY, EDS.

1980. Special issue on Robert Flaherty. Studies in Visual Communica

tion 6 (2).
G U TM A N , JU D IT H M ARA

1994. Through Indian Eyes: Indigenous Photography in the Sub

continent. Impact o f Science on Society 168: 34 5-56 .
GW YN, SAN DRA

1972. Cinem a as Catalyst: F ilm , Videotape, a n d Social Change.

St. Johns: M em orial University o f Newfoundland Extension Ser
vice, March.
H A LLEC K, D EE D E E , AND N A TH A LIE M AGNAN

1993. Access for Others: Alter(Native) M edia Practices. Visual An

thropology R e v ie w 9(1): 15 4 -6 3 .
H A M M O N D , JO Y C E

1988. Visualizing Themselves: Tongan Videography in U tah. Vi

sual Anthropology 1: 379 - 400.
H AYW OO D, K. M.

1990. Visitor Employed Photography: A n Urban Visit Assessment.

Jo u rn a l o f T ra vel Research 29(1): 2 5 -2 9 .
H IC K SO N , M A R K

1975. Review o f Through N avajo Eyes. Jo u rn a l o f Broadcasting 19(2):

2 49 -50 .
HOLADAY, D UNCA N

1978. Educative Processes and the Adaptation o f a New Medium o f

Communication: Teaching Film m aking in Rural W est Java. Ph.D.
dissertation proposal, Annenberg School o f Communication, Uni
versity o f Pennsylvania.

1984. M ak in g M ed ia F it : Short-Term Adjustm ent to a N ew Communi

cation Technology in a West Javan ese Village. Ph.D . diss., University
o f Pennsylvania.

1989. Adjusting M edia: A N ew Perspective on the Diffusion o f

Communication Technology. M ed ia A sia 16(4).

1991. Self-Presentation to M ajority Others: Toward M edia Anthro

pology. CVA R e v ie w (Spring): 4 - 6 .
H U BBA R D , JIM

1991. Shooting Back: A Photographic View o f L ife by Homeless Children.

San Francisco: Chronicle Books.
JE T T E R , A LEXIS
1993. D o-It-Yourself Autobiography, Ready for Prime T im e. N ew
York Times , February 28.
JH A L A , JA Y A SIN H JI
1989. Videography as Indigenous Text and Local Comm unity. CVA
R e v ie w 6: 8-16.
KENNEDY, T IM O T H Y
1971a. sk y r iv e r : A n Experiment in Change. Village Voice 1(4):
1-2 .

1971b. The Skyriver Project: The Story o f a Process. Access (N a

tional Film Board o f Canada Challenge for Change Program) 12
(Summer): 3 - 21.

1982. Beyond Advocacy: A Facilitative Approach to Public Partici

pation. Jo u rn a l o f the U niversity F ilm an d Video Association 34(3):
33-4 6 .

1989. Com m unity Anim ation: A n Open Ended Process. M edia

D evelopm ent 3: 5 - 7 .
KENNEY, K EITH
1993. Using Self-Portrait Photographs to Understand Self-Concepts
o f Chinese and American University Students. Visual Anthropology
5 (3 -4 ): 245-6 9 .
LA N SIN G , J. ST E P H E N
1989. The Decolonization o f Ethnographic Film . Pp. 1 0 - 1 7 in
Eyes Across the Water (Robert M . Boonzajer Flaes, ed.) Amsterdam:
H et Spinhuis.
LEAHY, JA M E S
n.d. Some Notes on the Navajo Film s. Cam bridge Anthropology
(Special issue on ethnographic film): 1 - 21.
LIG H T , RO N ALD , A N D B R A D L E Y HENIO
1977. The Role o f M edia in Ramah Navajo S o ciety. A u dio visu al I n
struction 27(10): 1 0 - 1 2 , 45.
LU TK E H A U S, NANCY, ED.
1995. Tribute to Tim othy Asch (Special section). Visual Anthropology
R e v ie w 11(1): 2 - 9 1 .
M A C B E A N , JA M E S ROY
1983. Two L a w s from Australia, One W hite, One Black. Film
Quarterly 36(3): 3 0 - 4 3 .
M A C D O U G A L L , D AVID

1969. Prospects o f the Ethnographic Film . F ilm Quarterly 23(2):

16 - 30.

1992. W hose Story Is It? Pp. 2 5 -4 2 in Ethnographic F ilm Aesthetics

an d N a rra tive Traditions, ed. Peter I. Crawford and Jan K. Siminsen.
Arhus, Denmark: Intervention Press.
M A H A R ID G E , D A LE, AN D M IC H A E L W ILLIA M SO N

1989. A n d Their Children A fter Them. N ew York: Pantheon.

M A R K S, D A N IE L , ED.

1989. Section on Forest o f B liss. SVA N ew sLetter 5 (1): 2 - 1 4 .

M EAD, M ARGARET

1975. Review o f Through N a va jo Eyes: A n Exploration o f F ilm Com

munication an d Anthropology." Studies in the Anthropology o f Visual
Communication 2(2): 12 2 -2 4 .
M IC H A E L S , ERIC

1985a. H ow Video Has Helped a Group o f Aborigines in Australia.

M ed ia D evelopm ent 1: 16 - 18.

1985b. Constraints on Knowledge in an Economy o f Oral Inform a

tion. Current Anthropology 26(4): 5 0 5 - 10 .

1991a. A Primer o f Restrictions on Picture-Taking in Traditional

Areas o f Aboriginal Australia. Visual Anthropology 4 (3 -4 ): 259-75.

1991b. Aboriginal Content: W h os G ot I t W ho Needs It? Visual

Anthropology 4 ( 3 -4 ): 2 77 -30 0 .

1991c. A M odel o f Teleported Texts (with Reference to Aboriginal

Television). Visual Anthropology 4(3 4): 301 24.
P H ILIPSF.N , H A N S H E N R IK , A N D B R I G I T T E M A R K U S S E N

1995. Introduction: The Professional Native and Technological

Broker. Pp. 1 - 6 in Advocacy an d Indigenous F ilm -M a k in g , ed. H. H.
Philipsen and B. Markussen. H ojbjerg, Denmark: Intervention Press.
M IC H A E L S , E R IC , W IT H FR A N C IS JU P U R R U L A K ELLY

The Social Organization o f an Aboriginal Video W orkplace. A us

tralian A b o rig in a l Studies 3: 26 - 3 4 .
PO TTS, JA M E S

1979. Is There an International Film Language? Sight a n d Sound

48(2): 7 4 - 8 1.
RUBY, JA Y
1991a. Eric M ichaels: An Appreciation. Visual Anthropology 4(3-4):
325- 4 4 -

1991b. Speaking For, Speaking About, Speaking W ith, or Speaking

Alongside: An Anthropological and Documentary D ilem m a. Visual
Anthropology R e v ie w 7(12): 5 0 -6 7 .

1996. Visual Anthropology. Encyclopedia o f C ultural Anthropology ,

ed. D. Levinson and M . Ember. Lakeville, Conn.: American R efer
ence Publishing Co.
------------- , E D .
1992. The Cinema o f John M arshall. New York: Harwood Academic
Publishers.
RUSSELER, EVELYN
1994. On Some Concepts o f Reality in Ethnographic Film -
M aking. CVA N ew sletter 94 (2): 1 1 - 1 4 .
S C O B , R. P.
1977. Review o f Through N avajo Eyes. Jo u rn a l o f Communication 27(3):
225 - 26.
SCOTT, CHUCK
1994. Lesotho Herders Video Project. Hojbjerg, Denmark: Intervention
Press.
SH U LE V IT Z , JU D IT H
1990. Tribes and Tribulations. F ilm Comment (January - February):
2. 4-
SONY VID EO C O M M U N IC A T IO N S
1979. Sony Advertisement. E ducational In d u strial Television 11(12).
S M A L L , E D W A R D S.
1981. Through Schizophrenic E yes. Paper presented at the T hirty-
fifth Annual University Film Association Conference (with Janice
Platt).
S T O K R O C K l, M A R Y
Through Navajo Childrens Eyes: Cultural Influences on Represen
tational A bilities. Visual Anthropology y(i): 4 7 -6 7 .
STU A RT, SARA
1989. Access to M edia: Placing Video in the Hands o f the People.
M edia D evelopm ent 4: 8 - 1 1 .
 New References
SUSSEX, E LIZ A B E T H

1972. Grierson on Documentary: The Last Interview. F ilm Quar

terly (Fall): 24 - 30.
T O M A S E L L I, KEYAN

1989. Transferring Video Skills to the Comm unity: The Problem of

Power. M ed ia D evelopm ent 4: n - 15.
TURNER, TERENCE

1990. Visual M edia, Cultural Politics and Anthropological Practice:

Some Implications ot Recent Uses of Film and Video among the
Kayapo of B razil. CVA R e v ie w (Spring): 8 - 13 .

1991. The Social Dynamics of Video: M edia in an Indigenous So

ciety: The Cultural M eaning and the Personal Politics of Video
making in Kayapo Com m unities. Visual Anthropology R e v ie w 7(2):
6 8 -76 .

1992. Defiant Images: The Kayapo Appropriation o f Video. A n

thropology Today 8(6): 5 - 16.
W EA TH ERFO RD , E LIZ A B E TH

19 88-8 9. Native Visions: The Growth o f Indigenous M edia. A p

erture 119: 58 61.
W F. IS F. R , J U D Y

1983. Using Photographs in Therapy with People W ho Are D iffer

ent. Pp. 17 5 -9 9 in Phototherapy in M en tal Health, ed. D. A . Krauss
and J. L. Fryrear. Springfield, Ilk: Charles C. Thom as.

1993. Photo Therapy Techniques. San Francisco, C A : Jossey-Bass.

W H Y T E , W I L L I A M F O O T E ( W I T H K A T H L E E N K IN O W H Y T F . )

1984. The Sky River Project. Pp. 17 4 - 8 1 in L earn in g fro m the F ield:
A Guide fro m Experience. Beverly H ills, Cal.: Sage Publications.
W ITH ERSPO O N , GARY

1977. Language and A rt in the N avajo Universe. Ann Arbor: Univer

sity ot M ichigan Press.
W O R T H , SO L

1972. Toward an Anthropological Politics o f Symbolic Forms.

Pp. 335 65 in R ein ven tin g Anthropology, ed. Dell Hymes. New York:
Pantheon.

1980. M argaret M ead and the Shift from Visual Anthropology to

the Anthropology ot Visual Com m unication. Studies in Visual
Communication 6: 15 -2 2 .
f l e w References

1981. Studying Visual Comm unication , ed. L arry Gross. Philadelphia:

University o f Pennsylvania Press.
Z I L L E R , R O B E R T C.
1990. Photographing the Self. Newbury Park, Cal.: Sage.
 Index
Aboriginals, 3350.21; media and,
320, 32 1-2 2
Achtenberg, Ben, 229, 235, 249,
335 n -12
actors, Navajo, 139, 18 1-8 9
A dair, John, v ii-x , 2, 279, 301, 313,
329, 345; alcoholism and, x v i-
xvii; ceremony filming and, 330;
collaboration and, xiii; commu
nication and, 319; criticism of,
281-84, 288-90, 335 n.20; film by,
283; film language and, 284;
Navajo filmmaking and, xvi, 282-
83, 285, 286, 287, 321; photo of,
26, 27, 29, 342, 343; research pro
tocol of, 293, 298, 302, 307, 309,
310; return to Pine Springs by,
324; sound and, 346; work of, 317,
318, 322, 327, 334, 3380.40, 348,
349-50
Albert, Ethel, 75, 131
alternative television/video, xviii
Altm an, Robert E .: film by, 336 n.22
American Anthropological A ssocia
tion, 334 n.2
American Indian Image on Film:
The Southwest, T h e (confer
ence), 323
analysis o f data from this study,
13 2 -4 1
Anderson, M arie, 325, 328
Anderson, M ike, 54-57, 69, 79, 82,
95-96, 10 5 - 6 , 17 1-7 9 , 18 6 -8 9,
193, 206, 209, 226, 238, 264, 266,
271, 321, 323, 324, 328; film by,
299; photo by, 6, 14; photo of, 4,
25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 342; work of,
325-26, 327
Anderson, Terry Lee, 69
Annenberg School for Com m uni
cation, 174, 181, 197, 239, 246, 290,
345
Antelope Lake, 129, 171, 205, 206, 271
anthropologys use o f film, 12 -2 0
The Ants, 266
Appalshop, xviii
Appeal o f film, 55, 257-58
art, bio-documentary film as a form
of, 2 6 1-6 2
Asch, Tim othy, x, xi, x v -x v i, 13,
337 n.37; on culture in film, 309;
on indigenous media, 3 0 8 -9 ,
310
Astrov, M argot, 199
Aufderheide, Patricia: on videos, 311
A U SS A T satellite, 318
Australian Institute o f Aboriginal
Studies, xv
autobiographical metaphor, 293-94
Badger, M ark; indigenous film m ak
ing and, xvii; project by, 3 0 6 -8
Balikci, Asen, xi, 13; indigenous
filmmaking and, xvii; project by,
3 0 6 -8
Balinese Character (M ead and B ate
son), x
Balinese People: A R einvestigation o f
Character , The (Jensen and Sur-
yani), xii
Baloo, A lta, 148
Baloo, John, 146, 148, 283, 329
Bapostolo community, project at,
301
Barnett, Homer G ., 30
Bateson, Gregory, x, xii, 13
Begay, Tony, 326
Bellm an, Beryl, xvi, 297; endometh-
odology and, 301; Navajo video
tapes and, 300; self-concept
studies and, 294
Benally, Antonio, 328
Benally, Floyd, 68
Benally, Susie, 14, 56-57, 6 7-6 9 ,
8 0 -8 4 , IOI> 10 8 -2 6 , 144, 14 8 -
49, 155, 178 -79 , 183, 19 2-9 8 , 202,
236, 250, 260, 2 6 6 -6 8 , 272-73,
325, 326, 327, 328; film by, 297;
photo by, 4, 7; photo of, 11, 25, 27,
29.343
Bergman, Robert: Navajo alcohol
ism and, x vi-x v ii
biodocumentaries, 286
biodocumentary films: as art form,
2 6 1-6 2 ; as a communication
mode, 19 -2 0 ; defined, 24; as dis
tinct from documentary films,
24 -27 ; group-made, 228-51; as a
tool in culture study, 256-57
Birdwhistell, Ray L ., 14
black teenagers films, 4 7-48, 101,
16 9 -7 1,18 9 , 228-51
Boston Neighborhood Network,
xviii
Bouman, Jan C ., 13
The Boys on the Seesaw, 265-66
Brazilian Indian W ork Center. See
Centro de Trabalho Indigenista
Brown-Lennenberg study, 175
Burnsides, Husky, 4
Burnsides, M abel, 67
Burnsides, M ark, 72
Burnsides, Ruby, 72
Byers, Paul: on cameras, 280
cademes, 89-93
camera, teaching Navajo to use, 8 1-
86
camera culture, 281, 284, 334 n.6
Chomsky, Noam, 17, 44, 137
Carelli, Vincent, 308; C T I and, 310,
338 n.38; on video/cultural sur
vival, 311
Carpenter, Edmund, xvi, 335 n.15
Center for Documentary A nthro
pology, xi
Centro de Trabalho Indigenista
(C T I), 310, 338 n.38
Chagnon, Napoleon, x, 308
Chalfen, Karen: photo by, 342, 343
Chalfen, Richard, viii, 2, 294, 302,
340 n.50; film by, 347-48; photos
by, 25, 34 2-4 3; photo of, 11, 27,
342 , 343
Challenge for Change program, xi,
xv, 334 n.8
children; filmmaking by, 294, 295;
See also teenagers

Cinem a o f Joh n M arshall, 77 >e(Ruby),
xii
Clah, A 1 (Alfred), 2, 4, 50, 52, 5 6 -
57, 6 0 -6 2 , 75, 79, 82, 86, 94 97>
10 1- 9 , 127, 144, 154-59. i78 i83>
2 0 2-3, 208-27. 266, 271-72, 316,
325, 32 6 -27, 328, 345; films seen
by, 344; future filmmaking and,
329, 331; photo by, 12, 13; photo
of, 26, 27, 29, 343; sound and, 346
Clah, Laverne, 326
close-up shots, 284, 299
close-ups o f faces, 152-65
code: analysis of, 14 0 - 4 1; in visual
communication, 4 3-4 7
codes in context theory, 13 3 -4 1, 233
cognitive processes: Navajo, 19 3 -
98; and visual communication, 28
collaboration, x iii-x iv , 278, 308
Collier, John, 34
Collier, John, Jr., v ii-v iii, x, xii, 13,
46, 286; on Navajo media, 278;
review of, 277
Collier, M alcolm ; filmmaking proj
ects and, 297; Visual Anthropology
and, xii
communication, 3 3 0 -3 1, 332; ap
plied theory of, 278-79; break
down between different groups,
251; codes, 17 -2 0 , 4 3-4 7 . 133 ~
41; and cognition, 28; cross-
cultural, 12 - 13 ; cultural/sym
bolic issues and, 279, 291, 318,
320; and dream interpretation,
258-6 0; ethnography of, 3 17 -18 ;
filmmaking and, 11- 2 0 , 279, 300;
information status and, 319; in-
tercommunal, 315; participation
in, 3 0 5 -6 ; patterns of, 34 6 -4 7;
real, 279, 280; reception side of,
333; research on, 6, 13 - 14 , 4 3-4 7;
( 371
verbal v. visual, 258; video, 309;
visual, xii, xix, 287
community: how chosen for this
study, 47-52; response to films,
12 8 -3 1, 140
Com m unity Film Workshop Coun
cil, 229
community media, xviii, xxi n.8
Conference on Visual A nthropol
ogy. See C O V A
consciousness-formation, 313
content analysis o f films, 4 6 -4 7
context: and code theory, 13 3 -4 1;
as filmmaking element, 233; this
studys observations on, 13 9 -4 1
Cornell University M edical College
research, 29
C O V A (Conference on Visual A n
thropology), xi
C T 1. See Centro de Trabalho In
digenista
cultural revivals, 300, 311
cultural studies, 317
cultural survival, 286; video and, 311
cultures: communication between,
12 - 13 ; and structuring ol reality,
253-54; variance in filmmaking
among, 228-51, 256-57; and vi
sual communication, 28
data analysis for this study, 13 2 -4 1
D ead Birds (Gardner), x
Dedicated Soul Sisters, film by, 234,
25 . 335 n-H. 338 n -44
deep dish television, xviii
developmental structure o f a film,
89-93
Documentary Educational R e
sources, xi
Documentary Film Laboratory, 250
documentary films: biodocumen-
 taries, 19, 2 4 -27 , 228-51, 256-
57, 2 6 1-6 2 ; group-made, 228-
51; influence of, 344; socio
documentary, 24 -27 , 231; as a
tool in culture study, 256-57
D o n t M ake a Good G ir l Go B a d
(Dedicated Soul Sisters), 234,
250, 335 n-H, 338 n.44
dream interpretation, and film,
258-60
Eaton, M ick; on Kayapo videos/
home videos, 347; on Navajo
filmmaking, 285; on representa
tion, 334-35 n.8
economic obligations, Navajo view
of, 182-89
edemes, 89-93
Edgerton, Robert B., 13
editing o f film, 8 6 -8 9 , 16 6 -8 0 ,
19 0 -9 8
Eisenstein, Sergei, 21
Ekman, Paul, 14
Elder, Sarah, xv, xxi n.7; filmmak
ing projects and, 297, 349
Emmonak, project at, 304
equipment handling, 19 0 -9 8
Ethnographic F ilm (Heider), x
ethnographic filmmaking, xiii, 2 31-
33, 248, 313, 338 n.39, 349; devel
opment of, 305, 307, 308
Ethnography o f Com m unication,
133
eventing, 19 9 -2 0 7
Ewald, Wendy; grant for, 3360.25;
on self-photography, 295
expression, codes of, 332
face close-ups, 152-6 5
Faris, James C., 303; on imagining
process, 3390.46; indigenous film-
making and, xvii; on Navajo film-
making, 286; on self-photography,
340 n.55; on technology, 339 n.46
Farm Security Administration,
xx n.4
feature films, influence of, 344
Feitosa, M onica, 288, 303; indige
nous filmmaking and, 308, 3 12 -
D
Fejos, Paul, 13
Feldman, Seth, 302
Ferguson, Robert, 229
field research, suggestions on fur
ther, 252-62
fieldwork, models of, 290, 307
film: cademes, 89 -9 3; code, 4 3-47;
communication via, 16 -2 0 ; 4 3 -
47; content analysis, 4 6 -4 7 ; de
velopmental structure of, 89-93;
and dream interpretation, 258-
60; edemes, 8 9-93; editing, 8 6 -
89, 16 6 -8 0 , 19 0 -9 8 ; ethnogra
phy of, 231-33, 248; grammar of,
45; locations, 238 -4 1; motion as
pects of, 19 9 -2 0 7; motivating
appeal of, 55; Navajo taught to
use, 74 -12 7 ; parallel to language?
2 1-3 0 , 4 3-4 7 ; primitive peoples
use of, 2 6 0 -6 1; how is reality
presented in? 11- 2 0 , semiotics
of, 27; sequencing of, 16 6 -8 0 ;
splicing, 88-89; structuring of,
11- 2 0 , 89-93, 16 6 -8 0 , 244-48;
symbolism of, 16 6 -8 0 ; themes
in, 248-51; universal appeal of,
257-58; vidistics of, 27
film -as-art/film -as-film , 285
film language; conventional, 283;
Navajo, 284
Film m akers Newsletter , 290
filmmaking; anthropological, xv;

children and, 294, 295, 300; cul
tural revival through, 300; eth
nographic, 305, 308, 313, 338 n.39,
349; indigenous, xvii, 308, 3 12 -
13; interests in further, 32 9 -31;
Navajo, 283, 284, 285, 306, 32 3-
31, 34 4 -4 6 ; self-taught, 346; stu
dent, 281-8 2, 34 6 -4 7, 349; teen
agers and, 291, 302, 335 n.13;
teaching, 282; verbal communi
cation and, 300
F ilm Q uarterly, on Through N avajo
Eyes, 303
films: documentary, 19, 24-27,
228-51; group-made, 228-51;
In trep id Shadows analyzed at
length, 208-27; Navajo, summa
rized, 263-73 o f Navajo making
films, 12 3-2 7; new cinema, 247-
48; practice, 26 3-6 7; premiere o f
N avajos, 12 8 -31; where available,
8 -9
Flaherty, Robert, x, xv, 261
Flaherty Film Seminars, 61
Fogo Island Project, xi, 304,
337n n-3 2, 35
framing devices, 291
Fucs, Victor: Waiapi Indians and,
xvii
Gajdusck, D. C ., 14
Gardner, Robert, x, xii, 13, 46
Gavio, 311
Gerbner, George, 47
Ginsburg, Faye, 303, 340 n.56; in
digenous media and, 316; Navajo
Eyes project and, 289; on prod
uct-process debate, 321
Goffm an, Erving, 291
Goldschm idt, Walter, 13
Gom brich, Ernest H ., 19
(373
Good-bye O ld M an (M acDougall),
xv
Goodenough, Ward H ., 30
Goodman, Nelson, 21
Goodman, Walter: on S elf-P o r
traits, 336 n.22
Good M o rn in g America, Navajo
Project on, 336 n.26
grammar o f film, 45
grammaticality, 23, 138
Granada Television, ethnographic
films by, 313
Grenada Center for Visual A nthro
pology, xi
Grierson, John: indigenous media
and, 322
Grierson on Docum entary The
Last Interview (Sussex), 322
Gross, Larry, xii, 349
group filmmaking, 228-51
guerrilla television, xviii
H aile, Berard, 213
Haley, Jay, 229, 234, 291
H all, Edward, no, 156
handling o f equipment, 19 0 -9 8
Hani, Susami, 62, 291
Harrison, Randall P., 14
H eider, Karl, x
Henio, Bradley, xvi; project by, 300,
343
Henley, Paul: visual anthropology
and, 287
Hockings, Paul, 3340.1
H oijer, Harry, 178-79 , 200, 204
Holaday, Duncan, xvi, 29^ 337n.36,
339 n-47> project by, 297-98
Holm berg, Allan R ., 29, 30
home movies, 284, 291; indigenous
media and, 34 6 -4 7; Kayapos
and, 347
Houston Com m unity Center, proj
ect at, 233, 250, 335 n.12
Hubbard, Jim : project by, 295-97,
336 n.26
H unters , The (M arshall), x
Hymes, Dell, 132 -33, 230
image: in group films, 244-48; or
ganization, 19 5-9 8; study o f the,
r5
imagery, xii; indigenous, xiv, 308,
312; subject-generated, xiv, 2 9 0 -
92
indigenous media, xiv, xvii, 3 0 8 -9 ,
310, 331; control/production of,
3 15 -16 ; development of, 3 2 1-2 2 ;
home movies and, 34 6 -4 7; in
creased participation in, 3 0 5 -6 ;
interest in, 293; understanding,
332-33; visual anthropology and,
333
information; control/free flow of,
3400.54; culturally recognized sta
tus of, 319
innovation, 283, 293; guided, 29;
Navajo acceptance of, 74-75
interdisciplinary research, 132-33
In trep id Shadows (Clah), 4, 130, 154,
205, 208-27, 26i, 271-72, 326,
329; frames from, 12, 26
Intrepid shadows (poem), 1 0 1 - 2
Inuits, 304; fdmmaking by, xvii, 307
Is There an International Film
Language? (Potts), 276
Ja g u a r (Rouch), xv
Japanese, and Navajo as alike, 6 1-
62
Jensen, Gordon D ., xii
Jero on Jero : A Balinese Trance Se
ance" Observed , xvi
Joh n A d a ir Hangs Out the L au n d ry,
265
Johnson, Dion: pictures by, 296
Jo u rn a l o f Broadcasting, criticism in,
279
Jules-Rossette, Bennette, xvi, 297;
endomethodology and, 301; Navajo
videotapes and, 300; self-concept
studies and, 294
jump cuts, 284
Ju n gle, The (film), 250, 338 n.44
Kahn, A lta, viii, 67, 84, 101, 111-2 6 ,
14 8 -4 9 , 250, 260, 272-73, 297,
326; film by, 11; films seen by, 344;
photo of, 7, 29
Kahn, Ben, 330
Kamerling, Leonard, xv
Kayapos, x v ii-x v iii, 308, 310,
334 n.4, 338 n.41; audio/video me
dia use by, 338 n.42; cultural val
ues of, 3 16 -17 ; political/media
wisdom of, 338 n.43; video ar
chive for, 314, 315; videos by, 3 12 -
16, 347
Kennedy, T im ; on community in
volvement, 30 5-6 ; Sky River Proj
ect and, 304-5
Kessler, Hope, 18
keys o f reality, 291
Killing o f Tracking Bear, T h e ,
148
kinship, importance of, 320
Kluckhohn, Clyde, 39
Kpelle village, project at, 3 0 0 -3 0 1
Krao Indians, xviii
Lane, Skip: film by, 336 n.22
Langer, Susanne, 259
language: acquisition, 17, 4 3-4 7,
137; film as if it were, 2 1-3 0 ; how

term used in this study, 138; ver
bal v. visual, 258
Lansing, Stephen: on ethnographic
film, 305
Larson, Rodger, 7, 229 -30 , 249
Laybourne, Lawrence, 7
learning situation, 139
Leighton, A lex H ., 13
Leighton, Dorthea C ., 13, 39
Leites, Nathan, 47
Lenneberg-Brown study, 175
Les M aitres Fous (Rouche), x
Lvi-Strauss, Claude, 14 3-4 4
L ife M agazine, Navajo Project and,
336 n.26
Light, Ronald, xvi; project by, 282,
297, 298-300, 343
linguistic approach to film, 2 1-3 0
locale restrictions in Navajo film,
18 1-8 9
locations, cross group comparison
of, 238-4 1
long journey myth, 2057
Lutkehaus, Nancy, 337-38 n.37
M cCabe, M aurice, 85
M acD ougall, David, xv, 290, 303
M acD ougall, Judith, xv
M cLuhan, M arshall, 319
M cN eill, David, 44
M A C O S (Man: A Course o f Study)
Project, xi
M agic Eyes: Scenes fro m an A ndean
G irlhood (Ewald), 295
M alinowski, Bronislaw, 12, 262
Man: A Course o f Study Project.
See M A C O S Project
M arshall, John, x, xi, xii
M arriage Counselling Service, 257
Masayesva, Victor, Jr.: on represen
tational accountability, 339 n.48
(375
mass media, 317, 3 19 -2 0 , 331
M atthews, Washington, 213
M ead, M argaret, x, xii, 13, 47, 302;
on film and culture, 277; review
by, 277-78
M ead, Ellen, 7, 229
M edium Cool, 245
Mekaron Opoi D joi project, 312
Message fro m B ra zil, A (Stoney),
xviii
M essaris, 2 4 6 -4 7
M etraux, Rhoda, 47
M etuktire group, 312
M ichaels, Eric, xviii, 339 n.46; on
Aboriginal television, 321; com
munication and, 319; on kinship,
320; on mass media, 3 19 -2 0 ; pro
ject by, 310, 315 -19 , 340 n.54
M ills, George, 13
M o i un N o ir (Rouch), xv
M okuka, filmmaking and, 333
M onkey Bars, The, 266
M organ, W illiam , 84
motion in Navajo films, 19 9-207,
217- 255
motion pictures. See films
M t. Sinai M edical School, 7, 257
movies. See films
M ulti-M edia Center, 300
Museum o f M odern A rt, Navajo
films at, ix
M y L ife at the Bottle (Sakatero), xvii
M ythical analysis, 14 2-4 3
M yths, Navajo: in films, 225-26;
on long journey and origin,
2 05-7; walking in, 14 7-4 8 , 150
Nambiquara, 311
Nanook o f the N orth (Flaherty), x,
xv, 261
narrative style o f Navajo films: face
 close-ups, 152-6 2; mythical analy
sis, 14 2-4 3; walking, 144-52
narrowcasting, xviii
N ational Film Board o f Canada, xi,
304 , 3 22>3 34 n -8
National Institute o f Mental Flealth,
256; grants from, 337 n.31
National Science Foundation, 345
natural environment in Navajo films,
10 7 -8
Navajo: actors, 139, 18 1-8 9 ; avoid
ance o f face close-ups, 152-6 5;
balance as important to, 57-58;
culture, 3 1- 4 1; curing ceremo
nies, 37-38; dexterity in equip
ment handling, 19 0 -9 8 ; economy,
36 -37; history, 33-34 ; identity
crisis, 40; innovations accepted
by, 74-75; and Japanese as alike,
6 1-6 2 ; language, m -2 3 ; life de
scribed, 3 1- 4 1; motion as central
to, 199-207, 217; mythology, 14 2 -
43, 147-50, 205-7, 225-26; reli
gion, 37-39; social organization,
35-37; students backgrounds, 6 3 -
73; taught to use film, 74 -127;
tribal government, 34-35; value
systems, 28-29, 5758, 131; why
chosen for this study, 27-28
Navajo Film m aking Project, 288,
297, 298, 334 n.i; criticism of, 293,
335 n.20; impact of, 3 0 1- 2 ; locat
ing, x - x iii
Navajo Film Themselves Project,
vii, 331-32
N avajo Horse, The (Nelson), 2 6 4 -
65; frames from, 3
N a va jo Silversm ith, A (Nelson),
2 0 4 -5, 268, 299, 321; frames
from, 8; showing, 329
N avajo Weaver, A (Benally), 8, 11,
26, 204 -5, 267-68 ; frames from,
7; showing, 328
N avajo Weaver Two (Kahn), 326;
frames from, 29
Negro. See black
Nelson, Johnny, 3, 8, 27, 41, 51-56,
7 1-7 2 , 78-79, 82, 86, 93, 96 -9 8 ,
10 1- 3 , 10 7 -10 , 130, 136, 14 4 -4 6 ,
ISI - SS> 183-88, 19 3-9 6 , 2 0 1-9 ,
213, 217, 222-27, 25> 2^2 264_
65, 268-70, 316, 321, 323, 325, 327-
29; on communication, 330 -31;
film by, 283, 299; future film
making and, 33 0 -3 1, 345-46;
photo by, 5, 8,10; photo of, 4,12, 26,
27, 29
Nelson, Roberta, 327, 329
N etsilik Eskimo series, xi
new cinema, 247-48
N ight Chant, 147, 149
Noble Teens, The, 234
nonverbal communication, 13. See
also visual communication
N oorvik, project at, 304
N ot M uch to D o, 48, 101, 240, 242,
250
Oak Springs W eaving Project, 328
O ld Antelope L ake (Anderson), 28,
299, 321; frames from, 6, 14;
showing, 328. See also Antelope
Lake
origin myths, 20 5-7
Osgood, Charles E ., 14
Other's Vision: From Ivory Tower
to the Barricade, T h e (Feitosa),
288
Our Community, Our Message (film),
337 n -35

Oxford Film m aking Cooperative,
235, 250
Panofsky, Erwin, 19
participant-innovator-observer re
search, 283, 333
participation, x iv -x ix , xxin.8, 308;
increase in, 3 0 5 -6
Pavatea, Dorothy, 71
Pavatea, Tom , 71
Pavatea, Tom Jr. ., 71
Peacock, death of, 338-39 n.44
People o f Tununak (Elder and Ka-
merling), xv
perception: differences in, 95; pro
cesses o f Navajo, 19 3-98
peyote cult, 39
Philadelphia Child Guidance Clinic,
234 . 257. 3O I- 3 > 338 n.44; project
at, 291, 337 n.31
Philadelphia group fdmmaking,
228 -5 1
photographs, children and, 295-
97
Piliau, 30 2 -3
Pine Springs, Arizona, 3, 4 0 - 4 1,
49, 255, 285, 298, 299; photo of,
25; return to, 32 3-31
Pine Springs Trading Post, 25, 324;
photo of, 342
Pin Tree, The , 264
Polaroid Corporation, cameras from,
336 n .24
Porter, Edwin, 9 0 -9 1
Potts, James, 276, 284; on cultural
forces, 282; on student video
tapes, 281; on technological de
terminism, 280
practice fdms, 9 3-10 8
premiere o f fdms, 12 8 -31
(377
primitive peoples use o f film, 2 6 0 -
61
Principles op' Visual Anthropology
(Hockings), 334 n.1
processing equipment, 261
property rights, Navajo, 182-89
Ramah, project at, 298-300, 343
Ram ah Wakes Up (tape), 298-99
reality, how structured through
film? 11- 2 0 , 253-54
research; collaboration and, 278; con
tent analysis o f visual materials,
4 6-4 7; cross-cultural, 292-93;
interdisciplinary, 132-33; method
used in this study, 4 2 - 62; protocol
for, 275, 280, 293, 298, 302, 303,
307, 309, 310, 332, 348; participant-
innovator-observer, 283,333; prob
lems with, 279; similar to this proj
ects, 256-57; socio-documentary,
233-37; suggestions for further,
252-62; on visual code, 4 3-47; on
visual communications, 6 -8 , 13 -
14
research films, 349
Robbery, The , 234
Robbin, Dan, 249
Rouch, Jean, x, xv, 46; ethnographic
filmmaking and, 338 n.39
Rough Rock Com m unity High
School, video project at, 336 n.30
Rough Rock Demonstration School,
3 9 -4 0
Ruby, Jay, xii, 303; on anthropologi
cal study, 332; CO V A and, xi; na
tive generated films and, 291, 348
Sakatero, Johnny, xvii
Sapir, Edward, 28, 177, 180, 207
Scholte, Bob, 6
Schw artz, Theodore: P iliau and,
3 0 2 -3
Screen (jo u rn al), 285
self-defin ition , cultural, 313, 314
self-im age, repairing/re-elaboration
of, 311
self-photography, 294, 295, 311,
336 n.23, 340 n.55
Self-Portraits (L ane and A ltm an),
m aking of, 336 n.22
sem antics of film , 167
sem iotics o f film , 27
sequencing film events, 16 6 -8 0
settings, cross-group comparisons
of, 238-4 1
Shallow Well, The (N elson), 130,
250, 269-70 ; frames from, 10, 27;
show ing, 329
Sh ip ley School Project, 235
Shooting Back: A Photographic View
o f L ife by Homeless Children
(H ubbard), 295, 3360.26
Shulevitz, Ju d ith : on C arelli,
338 n.39
Sight an d Sound, Potts in, 276
Silversm ith, Ben, 329, 330
Skinner, B. F., 44
Sky River P roject, 3 0 4 -5, 3370.33
Snowden, D onald: on Fogo Island
Project, 304
socio-cultural context of film m ak
ing, 228-51
sociodocum entaries, 231-37, 302
Sorenson, E. R ., 14
sound, adding, 346
speech. See language
Spencer, K atherine, 226
Spicer, Edward H ., 30
Spindler, George D ., 13
S p irit o f the N avajo, The (Tsosie
and Tsosie), v ii-v iii, 5, 28, 130,
269, 282-83; frames from, 9;
showing, 328-29
splicing, film, 88-89
Squaw Dance, film about, 330
status in filmmaking activity, 2 44 -
48
still photography, xxn.4, 275, 293-
97
Stoddard, Robert, 235
Stokrocki, M ary, 292; criticism by,
335 n.20
Stoney, George C ., xviii, xi
story line in group films, 248-51
structure o f films: developmental,
8 9-93; o f group-made, 244-48;
and reality, 253-54; and symbol
ism, 16 6 -8 0
Stryker, Roy, xx n.4
students used in this study: back
grounds of, 6 3-73; how chosen,
4 9 - 59 . 139
Studies in Visual Communication
(Gross and Ruby), xii
Studying Visual Communication
(Gross), 349
subject matter: free expression of,
307; o f group films, 241-4 4 ,
248-51; o f Navajo films, 139,
18 1-8 9 ; restriction on range of,
256
Summer Shower, The (Nelson), 264,
329
suspense in Navajo films, 205
Sw in g, The, 266
Suryani, Luh Ketut, xii
Sussex, Elizabeth, 322
SVA Newsletter, xii
symbolic structure o f films, 16 6 -
80, 19 6 -9 7
syntax o f film, 16 7-6 8

Tabernacle Film Project, 235, 250
teaching another culture to use
film, 254-55, 259
teaching Navajos to use film, 7 4 -
I2 7
technology, 332, 339 n.46; electronic
imaging, 303; filmmaking, 282,
306; indirect introduction of, 301;
scopic, xix; variations in, 280
teenagers films, 47-48, 101, 16 9 -
71, 189, 228-51, 291, 302, 335n.13.
See also children
teen dreams project, 295
themes: o f group films, 241-4 4 ,
248-51; o f Navajo films, 139, 18 1-
89; restricted range of, 256
Through Navajo Childrens Eyes:
Cultural Influences on Represen
tational Abilities (Stokrocki),
292
Through N a va jo Eyes (Worth and
A dair), vii, 290, 316, 322, 344;
criticism of, 288, 289; research
protocol since, 275, 280, 303, 332,
348; revision of, xii, 323; signifi
cance of, x, xix
Tomaselli, Keyan, 303
Tracking Bear, 148
Tsosie, Juan, 41, 5 6 -6 0 , 63, 65, 72
Tsosie, Loraine, 327
Tsosie, M ary Jane, 56, 58, 6 3-6 8 ,
8 0 -8 2 , 86, 10 3 - 4 , l 72 2^9.
3 23 > 3 25> 3 27> 3 28~ 29 i fllm by,
v ii-v iii, 282-83; future film-
making and, 331; photo by, 9, 10;
photo of, 4, 9, 25, 28, 29. See also
Tsosie sisters
Tsosie, M axine, 56, 58, 6 3 -6 8 , 8 0 -
82, 9 3-9 4, 9 8 -10 0 , 10 3 - 4 , 171,
199, 226, 2 6 5-6 6 , 269, 325, 32 8 -
29; film by, v ii-v iii, 282-83;
(379
photo by, 5, 9; photo of, 1, 4, 26,
28, 29. See also Tsosie sisters
Tsosie sisters, 128,130, 14 4 -4 5,15 6
65, 172, 183, 250
Turkana, xv
Turner, Terence, 308, 339 n.45; eth
nographic films by, 3 13 -14 ; on
indigenous media, 316; Kayapo
Indians and, x v ii-x v iii, 316, 347;
work of, 303, 310, 314, 317
12th and Oxford Film m aking C o
operative, 235, 250
Tw o L a w s (Cavadini and Strachan),
xv
universal appeal o f film , 257-58
u niversals in film com m unica
tion, 134-35
U niversity Settlem ent Film Club,
230
value system s: Navajo, 57-58, 131; as
revealed in film , 28-29
Velarde, E leanor: on videos, 336
37 n-3
verbal v. visual com m unication, 258
Video in the V illages P roject, 310,
311
video libraries, creating, 311, 314, 315
videos; children and, 294, 295, 300;
cultural survival and, 311; indige
nous, 282, 331; interpretation of,
333; making, 34 3-44 ; potential
of, 313; themes from, 3 0 5 -6
vidistics, 27
visual anthropology, xii, 287; in
digenous media and, 333; themes
of, 275, 332; urban, 302
Visual Anthropology: Photography
as a Research M ethod (Collier),
x, xii
Visual Anthropology R eview , 288, W ild er, M itch ell, 150
303 W olfenstein, M arth a, 47
vis u al c o m m u n i c a t i o n , xix, 287; a n workshops, film , 2 2 8 - 5 1
th r o p o lo g y of, xii; an d cod es in world p rem iere, 1 2 8 - 3 1
con te x t th eory, 137-41; c o d in g W orth, M rs. Sol, 1 2 4 - 2 5
of, 17-20; an d c o g n itiv e pro W orth, Sol, v ii- x , 2, 1 0 , 14, 279,
cesses , 28; c r o s s- c u lt u r a l, 1 2 - 1 3 ; 3 0 1 , 313, 335 n . 11, 345; c o l la b o r a
an d e t h n o g r a p h y o f film , 2 3 1 - 3 3 ; tion an d, xiii; com m unication
im a g e se le c tion in, 258; research an d, 3 19 ; c ritic is m of, 281-84 ,
on, 6, 1 3 - 1 4 , 4 3 - 4 7 2 8 8 - 9 0 , 335 n . 20; on cultu ral s y s
vis u al m e d ia , 319; na tive p a r t ic i p a te m s / f i l m m a k i n g , 291; de a th of,
tio n in, x i v - x i x ; s e lf- e x p r e s s io n 349 ; film la n g u a g e an d, 284; f i l m
th r o u g h , 312 m aking and, 282-83, 285 87,
V o g t, E v o n Z . , 3 0 , 74 291, 295, 32 1, 335 n .12 ; N a v a jo
P r o je c t an d, xv i, 334 n . i ; p h o t o
W a i a p i , xv ii; s e l f - p h o t o g r a p h y by, by, 4, 29; p h o t o of, 25, 26, 27, 29;
311 resea rc h protocol of, 293, 298,
W a i W a i , C h i e f , 312 302 , 307 , 3 0 9 , 3 1 0 ; on vis u al a n
w a l k i n g , in N a v a j o film s, 1 4 4 - 5 2 , th ro p o lo g y , xii; w o r k of, 317, 318,
204 , 205 322, 33 4 , 338 n . 4 0 , 348, 349
W a r lp ir i, xviii, 317, 3 1 8 - 1 9 , 3 3 9 0 . 4 6 ;
vid eos by, 321 Yanom am i, 308, 3 1 0 ; film m aking
W a r lp i r i M e d i a A s s o c i a ti o n , f o u n d by, 309
in g of, 318 Yazzie, Florence, 71
W e a t h e r f o r d , E l i z a b e t h , 303 Yazzie, Sam , 3 - 5 , 50, 58, 65, 69,
Weave o f Time, A ( A d a ir ) , 323, 350 1 0 3 - 5 , I2 9, 1 5 6 - 6 5 , 172, 183, 290,
What we Do . . . on Saturday . . . , 328, 329, 3 40 n . 52; curing cere
234, 250 mony by, v iii; film m aking and,
w h i t e v. b la c k te e n ag e fi lm m a k e r s , 289, 333, 3 5 ; photo of, 5, 9, 10 ,
239-51 28, 29; questioning, 278
W h o r f , B . L . , 28, 199 Yeibechai, photo of, 12
W h o r f Sapir h y p o th e s is , 28, 177, Yuendum u, television for, 318
18 0, 207, 258
Wife Am ong Wives, A ( M a c D o u g a l l Z i l l m a n n , 18
an d M a c D o u g a l l ) , xv zo o m in g overuse, pattern of, 285
 riginally published in 1972 , this pioneering book has

O becom e a classic in visual anthropology. Worth and

Adair set out to answer the question, W hat would happen if
someone from a culture that makes and uses motion pictures
taught people who have never made
or used motion pictures to do so for
T R X F R E E C IG R R E T T E S S l6.3
the first time? Th ey taught filmmak
ing and editing to a group o f six Na-
E PICT
K O D A K FILM
vajos in Pine Springs, Arizona. This
U.S. POST OFFICE
book explains what happened, what C O M W L -F A S T R A K c h e c k s Cashet

they and the Navajos said and thought

about what happened, and how they
analyzed the films in a cultural con
text. The films, still available for rent,
are described in detail and illustrated
with still photographs, giving the reader an opportunity to see
through the eyes of people from a different cultural background.
Richard C halfen, a research assistant on the original project
in 1966 , has updated the book with a thorough discussion o f
the importance of the Navajo project and a critical assessment
o f the reactions to it. He has included a new section o f refer
ences and an appendix offering answers to the ten most fre
quently asked questions about the project.
Through N avajo Eyes is a study of truly cross-disciplinary
interest. Its influence on the fields o f visual anthropology and
film and com munications studies can be felt to this day. This
updated edition o f the book is long awaited and much needed.
T h e late Sol Worth was professor o f visual com munication
at the Annenberg School o f Com m unications, University of
Pennsylvania. John Adair is professor emeritus of anthropology
at San Francisco State University. Richard Chalfen is professor
o f anthropology at Tem ple University.
978082631771190000
ISBN
0-8263-1771

University of N e w Mexico Press

1- 8 00- 2 4 9 - 7 7 3 7

Cover design by Sue Niewiarowski

V