Narration - Bruzzi pt. 2

'The Woman's Voice - Sunless'

"The closer the text is to the image the less it seems to connote it" (Barthess 1977: 26)

• Images connotative function is reduced by literalness of text
• Audiences aren't left to make their own mind up about what's being shown
• Text tells the audience how to interpret the images

"Secondary, connotative meaning is limited"

• I agree that audiences are less able to determine their own meanings. However I believe successful documentaries should present one dominant message, through presenting evidence

In the reading, Bruzzi argues that in documentary tones of authority are usually from masculine voices. Therefore the female voice subverts this.

"Divest the disembodied male voice of its 'discursive power'" (Silverman 1988: 164)

• Man = voice of God, Woman = "woman filmmaker from behind the camera"
• Female narrator = authoritative, deep voiced, popular actress (for familiarity)

"A woman's voice embodied protest because women had traditionally been sidelined by history and documentary alike"

"Woman's voice as 'physical utterance' vs "the 'voice' as the metaphoric accessing of women's inner selves, their thoughts and identities"

 Bruzzi states that in Sunless the voice is of thoughts from letters of fictional character Sander Krasna. This creates a "fluid" relationship between words and image. It is not the voice of God but recognisable voice of the author (Horak).
"Whereas traditional voice-over documentaries are about closure, Sunless remains intentionally open, and within this openness the female narration (in its distance from both Marker and Krasna) provides a space for the interpretations"

• Bruzzi argues that it's "randomness" challenges what is a documentary