In our study thus far, we know that documentary film does more than reproduce or report reality, it represents it creatively, persuasively, through the “framework” of a “plausible perspective” (Nichols, 10) Another way to think of this: a documentary, whether an essay or a film, is inherently rhetorical.
Think of it this way. Documentary tells a story, crafts a narrative, with the materials and facts and words and people and places related to its topic. In other words, documentary makes an argument that represents a plausible perspective for what’s at stake in understanding this topic, why this understanding (and not another understanding, or a lack of understanding) matters.
Classical rhetoric defined this stake or story as the “issue” or “status” of an argument: in the original Greek (used by Leith), this is known as Stasis. This rhetorical strategy used for/during invention, originally in judicial matters, is basically an early version of the journalist’s heuristic: who? what? when? where? why? We will be discussing stasis further in class; you can read more about it in this page from the Purdue OWL.
It also compares to the “narrative” exercise that was part of the progymnasmata, a way to practice the components of an oration or composition.
- Who did it
- What was done
- When it was done
- Where it was done
- How it was done
- Why it was done
And narrative, this narration of what’s at issue, is also a key part of the arrangement of a classical oration, the way an argument is established for the audience: it is part 2 of 6 parts; following and extending the exordium, the introduction, the narrative (narratio in Latin) provides a narrative account of what happened and explains the nature of the case, the issue.
Joan Didion’s essay “Sentimental Journeys,” about the Central Park jogger case, published in 1991 in The New York Review of Books not long after the crime and two trials, provides us with rich material to grasp these related rhetorical concepts of issue and narrative. We can use her essay to familiarize ourselves with the basic facts–the narrative–of the case: who, what, when, where, how, why. Our study of Sarah Burn’s book and film documentary, The Central Park Five, will expand upon this narrative. But we can get more from Didion than the basics of the story. For, an argument has to have an issue, a stake, a purpose for telling its story and narrating its material. A persuasive argument, whether an oration, an essay, or a film documentary, has to move the audience from understanding what to understanding why.
In the case of Didion’s essay, the real story is the “story.” Her essay explores and interrogates the “sentimental narratives” surrounding the Central Park case, including, and in particular, the narrative of New York City and what she calls, in her last paragraph, its “lazy criminality.” At issue, for Didion’s narrative, is the power of that narrative and the role it plays in the case. In this sense, the primary stasis question for Didion is definitional: how is the event defined and described, and why are there differing definitions of what it means?
Burns reproduces some of the same material in her narrative, but she represents a different story, a different issue. (A question we will take up later in the reading: what is the issue for Burns, the stasis question she is raising? This gives us something to think about as we continue to explore rhetorical strategies of invention and arrangement.
rhetorical concepts discussed: stasis (invention); exordium and narration (arrangement)
Further Reading:
- The Central Park Five, now known as the Exonerated Five, in the news:
Available Means 