IAzmadeh Ghahvie             age:

Cinematography: A Medium in International Studies
– The

Germination of a Documentary.

Cinematografía: un medio en estudios
internacionales - La

germinación de un documental.

Abstract:

“The
Genesis of a Documentary” is the opening
article of a trilogy of articles applying research and analysis to a cyclical phenomenon,
namely the germination of an idea to a film,
to turn it into
a cinematographic reality conscious of social
impact. This study concerns itself with the position of the researchers and the researched,
being part of the former. Retracing
the epistemology of an ever-evolving idea, like a kaleidoscope, the article pieces
together the memory
of key informants to get to
the germination of threads of notions, which become a solid reality manifesting itself over time to
turn into a cultural expression: a documentary film. Three authors,
one article, and voices from the past culminate in a refined
picture of the genesis of
BROKEN-the-film, an altruistic attempt to continue the implementation of International
Law for those whose voices cannot be
heard. This article is testimony to the creation of an advocacy
tool.

Keywords:
BROKEN-the-film; humanitarianism; Participative Action Research; stream of consciousness; the Researched; Verstehen

Resumen: “La
génesis de un documental” es el
artículo de apertura de una trilogía de artículos que aplican la investigación y el análisis a un fenómeno cíclico, es decir, la germinación de una idea a una
película, para convertirla en una realidad
cinematográfica consciente de impacto
social. Este estudio se refiere a la posición de los investigadores y de los investigados como
parte del primer artículo de una trilogía. Remontando la epistemología
de una idea en constante evolución, como un caleidoscopio, reconstruyendo la memoria de
informantes clave para llegar a la germinación de hilos de nociones que se
convierten en una realidad
sólida que se manifiesta, con el tiempo,
para convertirse en una expresión cultural: un documental. Tres autores, un
artículo y voces del pasado culminan en una imagen
refinada de la génesis
de BROKEN-the-film, un intento altruista de continuar
la implementación del Derecho Internacional
para aquellos cuyas voces no pueden ser
escuchadas. Este artículo es testimonio de la creación de una herramienta de promoción.

Palabras claves:
BROKEN-the-film; corriente de conciencia;
Investigación Acción Participativa; la Investigación; humanitarismo; Verstehen

Summary. 1. Introduction.
2. Theory. 2.1 Critical Theory & Phenomenology. 2.2 Action Research (AR) 3.
Applied Methodology.
3.1 Participative Action Research (PAR). 3.2 Considerations of the Researcher.
3.3 Practical Considerations. 4.
Researching the Researched – An Illustration. 5. Giving Voice to an Idea - Case Study. 5.1 Investigation. 5.2 The Germination of an Idea. 5.Solidification of an Idea. 5.4 Realisation of an Idea. 5.5 Mutation
of the Idea. 5.6 Findings
of the Case Study. 6. Conclusion & Recommendations

Como citar: Singh, S. Gordon-Bates,D & Ziegler, S. (2022). Cinematography: A Medium in International Studies-
The
Germination of a Documentary. Ñawi:
arte diseño
comunicación, Vol. 6, núm. 1, 143-159.

http://www.nawi.espol.edu.ec/ www.doi.org/10.37785/nw.v6n1.a7

This
work is under an international license Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial 4.0.

Introduction

Marx writes that “philosophers
have only interpreted the world, in various ways, the point is to change it” (11th thesis on Feuerbach, 1888).
This article is about an idea that grew in complexity and eventually evolved into a documentary film, whose primary
aim was to generate lasting
change in the lives of people affected by injustice in certain
parts of the world. The re searchers ask themselves where the idea came from, how change occurred from the subconscious level and evolved
into something as concrete
as a documentary film, and how long did this idea linger in the mind before its
material evolution. In the end,
research can only do guesswork in this kind of inquiry and narrow down these guesses to the closest thing there is to
reality. The whole idea of change is inextricably linked to the reason why this article was written.

Additionally, this opening article
forms part of “Cinematography, A Medium in International Studies – A Trilogy”. Although
all three inquiries and analyses can stay on their own feet, the Trilogy is a holistic
approach to document
the evolution of 1) an idea becoming
a film, 2) an advocacy-based film seen in the context of international law, and 3) the
taking on new meaning in a context where the origin
of the film takes on a secondary role and is appropriated and absorbed into a new culture.

“The Germination of an Idea” sets out on a journey
from Critical and Action Research
Theories via the notions of Phenomenology and Stream
of Consciousness through a methodology strong enough to withstand the critique of the researcher becoming the
researched and having his say based on reflection,
introspection, and memory. The basic assumption of this research is that this
attempt at epistemology is crucial to the deep understanding, verstehen, of how documentary film for advocacy
originates, but crucially evolves and is deemed to help filmmakers and
producers to open up to the learning inherent
in their own artistic products
and processes to embrace unintended change in their
scripts over time.

2.
Theory

2.1
Critical Theory & Phenomenology

In his essay “Traditional and
Critical Theory” (1937), Horkheimer explains the differences in methodology between scientific theories,
social theories (categorized as traditional theories) as opposed to critical social theories, which will be discussed in
this article. Traditional theories can either be deductive
or analytical and are always focused on coherency. According to traditional theory,
scientific truths should always be tested empirically and those who
espouse the traditional theory are
therefore committed to the idea of an objective world in which knowledge
becomes a mirror of Reality. This
idea is firmly rejected by Critical theory. Critical theorists, such as those
of the Frankfurt School, maintained that the object of knowledge
is implanted in a historical and social process.

Our
consciousness is determined by the society
to which we belong and by our historical background, which impacts the perceived object.
There is, therefore, a connection between
the

perceiver and the perceived object. The only way to
truly know, according to Critical Theory, is from a socially embedded perspective of interdependent individuals
(interpretatively, or interpretative critical
theory). The interpretative critical theory approach allows their activities to
be practical in a moral sense, rather
than simply in an instrumental sense.
They aim to seek ‘human emancipation’, as Horkheimer puts it, acting
as a ‘liberating...influence’ and aiming to ‘create a world which satisfies the needs and powers of human beings’ (Horkheimer 1972b [1992,
246])

Social change is the objective of Critical Theory, and, for social change to occur, an understanding of society is crucial. Weber considered
that structural and action approaches were both central to developing a full understanding of society
and achieving social transformation. The concept of ‘verstehen’ (deep understanding in English), which
could translate as an empathetic understanding
or perception of the nature
and meaning of a phenomenon, was fundamental to understanding social
action and social change. Weber uses this term to refer to the attempt
of social theorists to grasp both the
intent and the context of social action. He maintains that, before confirming
the cause of any action,
the meaning the individual attaches
to this cause has to be understood first. This Weberian
idea of ‘verstehen’ will be used later in this article in an attempt
to understand the ideas and intentions behind the making of the film and why the
film came into being. It will be argued that intent is not necessarily always at the beginning of this verstehen principle, but a stream
of consciousness can help reveal
a deeper sense
of an intent that is not necessarily clear to the actor.

This article looks at ways in which an idea can be detected,
analyzed, documented, and seen in perspective. Before
looking at the idea itself,
it would be noteworthy to mention the concept of Phenomenology, the philosophy of
conscious experience, and the study of how the individual experiences things or phenomena. It is a way of understanding the germination of the idea,
by whom and for whom the documentary subject of this article
was created, as will be seen later in the case study of
this article. What interests the phenomenologist is describing consciousness
and the structures of experience as
experienced from an individual perspective. What meanings do things truly have
in an individual’s experience?
According to the adherents of phenomenology, which include Husserl and Heidegger,
the source of all meaning is the lived and perceived conscious experience of
individuals. The central structure of any experience is intentionality or intent.

As
was discussed earlier
with Weber and his concept
of ‘verstehen’, understanding the meaning of a phenomenon is crucial to understanding social
action properly. It is also crucial to understand the meaning that an individual attaches to any action in order to understand its cause. Understanding the individual is,
therefore, central to understanding society and the actions that occur within
it, and to achieving social
change.

Another important point to understand the context of the film’s origins is the idea of epistemology. How much do we truly know?
Are some things
impossible to know,
no matter how hard we try to reason? Is it possible to know how an idea came into being, how it unraveled
and evolved into

something concrete like the film we are discussing in
this article? According to Cartesian philosophy, our beliefs are unjustified, and we should always doubt them. This will be clearly illustrated in the case study part of the article.

2.2
Action Research (AR)

According to the Action Research
Network of the Americas, their research approach involves seeking to evaluate changes over time by
social actors while they are performing their political, humanitarian, social, communal, or individual actions. Their
research and continuous analysis are then
connected through critical reflection, seeking deep meaning and intent of
actors in a cyclical evaluation and re-evaluation process. Therefore, Action Research can be readily,
and to great advantage, be compounded with the ideology
or philosophy of Critical Theory as they both seek to understand social changes at their roots. They are adamant that this type of research
places the researcher inside
the actual inquiry and does not leave him/her simply as an outside observer. There is no claim of impartiality on the
side of the researcher, but rather they interpret and justify the researcher’s position in the
action and inquiry itself. This goes on to have an almost synergistic relationship with the concept of verstehen
as mentioned earlier. The emphasis on finding a deeper understanding able to be comprehended by the reader, the
audience, and the people for whom knowledge
is intended to be transferred, is conglomerated to Action Research. To take this argument even further, seeking
meaning in the concept of “stream of consciousness” for every relevant
action, opens the
researcher’s capability to expand her/his getting to the depth of meaning
possible which would be otherwise near impossible.

Action Research can, of course, be seen as a general
expression used for numerous practical
and intellectual efforts
which evoke or elicit change mechanisms. Its broad, and arguably democratic outlook,
characterized by fluid boundaries and interdisciplinary reach and applicability, provide both opportunities and hazards for future
development. Action Research can be further expounded as a process
taken in social
research emphasizes participation and action by those within
that community and for those outside it.

The
tools provided by Action Research
can help those,
including humanitarian practitioners as in our case, to better understand the crux of the issues at hand as it allows for immersion into the
situations, even demanding it. It can be a living, emergent process that is
impossible to be predetermined as its nature is in constant change or evolution.
The key to understanding this type of research lies in the understanding and
acknowledgment that social phenomena develop and that those who are engaged deepen
their own understanding of their problematic as they become
aware of them. Consciously
addressing this phenomenon by the researcher aids to further expanding her/ his capacity as investigator, as well as the research
teams and the research community. According to the Action Research Network of the Americas, their approach to research involves
seeking to evaluate
changes over time by social actors while they are performing their political, humanitarian, social,

communal, or individual actions. Their research
and continuous analysis
are then connected
through critical reflection, seeking deep meaning
and intent of actors in a cyclical
evaluation and re-evaluation process. This is why Action Research can be readily, and to
great advantage, be compounded with the
ideology or philosophy of Critical Theory as they both seek to understand
social changes at their roots.
They are adamant that this type of research places
the researcher inside the actual
inquiry and does not leave him/her simply as an outside observer.
There is no claim of impartiality on the side of
the researcher, but rather they interpret and justify the researcher’s
position in the action and inquiry
itself. This goes on to have an almost synergistic relationship with the concept
of verstehen as mentioned earlier. The emphasis on finding a deeper
understanding able to be comprehended by the
reader, the audience, the people for whom knowledge is intended to be transferred, is conglomerated to Action Research. To take this argument
even further, seeking meaning in the concept of “stream of consciousness” for every relevant
action, opens up the researcher’s capability to expand her/his getting
to the depth of meaning
possible which would be otherwise near impossible.

Action Research can, of course, be seen as a general
expression used for numerous practical
and intellectual efforts
which evoke or elicit some kind of change mechanisms. Its broad, and arguably democratic outlook, characterized by fluid
boundaries and interdisciplinary reach and applicability, provide both opportunities and hazards for
future development. Action Research can be further expounded as a process taken in social research which emphasizes
participation and action by those within that community and for those outside it.

The
tools provided by Action Research
can help those,
including humanitarian practitioners as in our case, to better understand the crux of the issues at hand as it allows for immersion into the
situations, even demanding it. It can be a living, emergent process that is
impossible to be predetermined as its nature is in constant change or evolution.
The key to understanding this type of research lies in the understanding and
acknowledgment that social phenomena develop and that those who are engaged deepen
their own understanding of their problematic as they become
aware of them. Consciously
addressing this phenomenon by the researcher aids to further expanding her/ his capacity as investigator, as well as
the research teams and the research communities in general individually
and collectively. But crucially, this expanded way of awareness
influences the beneficiaries! In
earlier social theoretical approaches, this would have been impossible because
seen as impartial, and most importantly value-induced, thus non-scientific. With Marx, this paradigmatic shift
offers an ethical
component to research
phenomena in the social realm.

Action Research has been applied increasingly and to ever greater effect
once its inception in the 1960s and numerous well-documented
cross-disciplinary studies have shown that this immersive process allows for far more meaningful
conclusions to be drawn than earlier theories trying to account for change,
flux, transcendence, etc. Meghna Guhathakurta writes in her article, “Theatre in Participatory Action Research: Experiences from Bangladesh,” that this method
allowed researchers to take a more involved
approach when it came to discussing issues documenting endemic
and recurrent

poverty in marginalized communities. They were able to
establish a discursive understanding of and
portray a face of poverty which humanized the poor and allowed the
researchers to even facilitate change
processes without, arguably, falling into traps of cultural insensitivity and
unintentional disrespect. Action
research empowered the research
to make changes a reality
by allowing those
who would normally
stand apart to become an insider.

Another case study by Ernie Stringer,
“This is so Democratic!! Action Research and Policy Development in East Timor,” highlights how Action
Research can be significant across
sectors shown at the example
of government performance and helping to make them more efficient. In this study, action researchers interacted with citizens as
sentient beings rather than simple expressions of statistical values or even mindless robots. This
allowed government agencies to measure their performance in a more holistic way. Capacity-building
processes were thus established consciously and merged as integral parts of the research and the
described needs by those researched. Stakeholders
of, in this case, a school
improvement project, were allowed to be part of the learning process and were
given the opportunity to acquire the
necessary knowledge, data, and information with which they could facilitate their own quest for change.

3.
Applied Methodology

3.1
Participative Action Research (PAR)

The core of this article describes
phenomena that are largely based on Participative Action Research in order to fully comprehend the scope and processes, both cognitive and emotionally driven,
to achieve or subject humans to change.
The film which our research uses as its vehicle is a formidable breathing ground for an inquiry
into how an idea or ideas turn into a film. From its conception to its realization, every step was immersed in
both on-ground research and drew from the expertise of its initiator, and all others who had input.
Those who will be interviewed in the course of this research will need to have varying levels of knowledge of the film, its inspiration, and its initiator. This is where Participative Action Research finds its greatest
application.

It is a type of research that is
primarily concerned with the development of practical knowledge in the pursuit of worthwhile human purposes. Its goal is to combine
action and reflection, theory, and practice, in participation with others, in the hopes of achieving applicable solutions to pressing issues,
and to enable the flourishing of individual persons
and their communities.

Participative Action Research is
critical in showcasing specific methods for attracting interested actors and strengthening the channels for knowledge sharing
and building via a repetitive process of action and
reaction. Subsequently reflection and re-reflection in a cyclical re-evaluation
of that action. Through its heavy
reliance on rigorous and iterative investigations into individual behaviour, that of entire communities or societies, and their shared problems on action research
can offer useful
and practical advice for how practitioners can perform the tasks. This
is particularly useful when, as in this study, linkages
between the worlds
of advocacy and research in a humanitarian context are to

be found and analyzed. Advocacy
is more than just trying to bring forward issues
on behalf of others, it is an ongoing process that tries to
influence those with power and capacity to bring about changes that will be able to address the issues faced by those suffering. It works hand in hand with Participative Action Research as it allows for possible avenues to analyze
and enact real change. Humanitarian practitioners
can be considered as ‘insiders’ or ‘outsiders’ in a
community of concern or understudy, such as those directly impacted
by the Wall in the West Bank.
Humanitarianism is concerned with the promotion of human well-being and Participative Action
Research is a vehicle through
which this can be achieved
in a way that leads to holistic
awareness of situations that influence the actions which are necessary to be taken.

3.2
Considerations of the Researcher

This ethnographic research considers
the researcher as central (the idea is key to the researcher but even the researcher can’t
be…sure? maybe). Also, it is important for researchers to ensure that they are not enforcing their own thinking, their
own views, and interpretations, on the individual being interviewed.
The researcher should be careful not to unconsciously steer the conversation.
It goes without saying
that the researcher has the ethical
obligation to conscientiously respect interpretation and try to understand moments of silence
and reflection, as well as gestures. The researcher should therefore always remain
alert, mindful, and sensitive. The sensitivity of the researcher proves a great
ability to analyze
with the highest
ethical considerations.

3.3
Practical Considerations

The researchers realized that the
analysis needed more time than was given by the publication deadline. In the tradition of Action
Research, the learning, and impressions inherent in carrying out semi-structured
to open-ended interviews with people directly engaged in that subject matter
needed more time and
consideration, and thus this article and its inquiry could not be finalized at
such an early date. We consciously
did not submit the final draft for publication, and an extension had to be granted because so many new issues,
knowledge, impressions, and new ways of looking at the case emerged following each interview, that our
study never actually anticipated. The theme would not have been satisfactory to us had the article
been submitted at an earlier
date.

For
this article, six people from very different social, cultural, and professional backgrounds were interviewed.
Their ages ranged from around 30 to 70 years old. This was done to incorporate
a wide variety of interpretations
and impressions about Stefan, the initiator of the documentary, and the origins of an idea that eventually gave
birth to it. He is included in this series of interviews, and his input will be added at the end of this
case study. Of these seven informants interviewed, five people are close to Stefan and knew him before
the film was even conceived. One of the interlocutors is a recent acquaintance who works with Stefan on projects related
to the documentary but had nothing to do with its making
since she first met Stefan
long after the film was complete. She was interviewed as an unbiased
outsider with a keen interest
in what Stefan
is doing, but without much knowledge of Stefan or his time in Palestine.

The first person interviewed is a British
male of South Asian descent
who is from a corporate
legal background. He met
Stefan on a humanitarian training course in Palestine at a time when he was seeking
a transition from the legal and corporate sector to the humanitarian field.
He is a close friend
of Stefan and has been helping him with a variety of projects related
to the film ever since.
The second person interviewed is a Swiss-based
Australian male, the oldest of the informants interviewed, who worked with Stefan for an NGO based in Geneva,
who was the acting director
of the NGO, and Stefan
was one of the trainers of this course.
The third person interviewed is a Palestinian female in her 30’s who is based in Ramallah and is former
Project Manager of the Barrier Monitoring Unit. The fourth person interviewed is a Swiss female of
Lebanese background and the youngest of the interlocutors. The fifth person interviewed is a female
of Central-Asian background and a former postgraduate student of Stefan.
She remains very close to Stefan and currently works with him on various
projects connected to the film, including its production.

4.  Researching the Researched – An Illustration

When discussing the analysis of
thought processes and intent, as well as introspection and self- examination, it is useful
to look at the concept
of stream of consciousness to better understand the origin of the idea and how it became a film. Although the term stream of consciousness has its origins in
psychology, for the sake of this article, it is a particular type of narrative
technique or interior monologue used
in fiction that is of interest. Its intention is to depict the flux and flow of countless impressions, visual,
auditory, physical, associative, subliminal, that influence an individual’s consciousness and shape a part of their
awareness. Adepts of this technique aim to capture the ever-changing flowing consciousness of their characters, Bloom
and the Flaneur, rather than simply limiting
themselves to their rational thoughts. This provides an element of realism to
the character who is presented
as a manifestation of the author. Thus,
the author attempts
to represent the richness and complexity of a functioning mind, by including
moments of incoherency, irrational thoughts, and associative
thinking in the minds of their characters. They merge dream and imagination
with reality and rationality and subliminal thoughts
with conscious thoughts
of their characters.

A
character often used by adepts
of this narrative technique is the casual
wanderer and observer
of society, who is both an outsider, in the sense that he observes what
happens around him, but is also an insider,
in the sense that he is an integral
part of the scene. French
poet Baudelaire depicts
this casual wanderer as the
Flaneur, who tries to reach a form of transcendence by being an observer as well as someone
who is a part of his own experience. He strolls around
and observes the street life of 19th century Paris while being an
integral part of this society. He wanders the streets and arcades of the city, observing
and listening to the kaleidoscopic manifestations of Parisian
life. Three topologies that utilize and adapt the concept
of the flaneur in different
ways will now be compared: James Joyce, Walter
Benjamin, and the creator of the film.

Irish author James Joyce uses the stream of consciousness as a technique
in his novel Ulysses, in which the author uses this technique
to describe the minds of his characters. The author enters the minds of his characters, and the
characters thus become manifestations of the author himself. His main character is a prisoner of the
Hellenic maze, the meta-story, created by the author. He is a structural onlooker, a witness
with neither choice
nor free will. Bloom could be compared
to a robot, according to
the film’s creator, because the author induces all the life into him. The
character and the author are
inseparable, and the character is nothing without Joyce. He is a representation
of the author. Similarly, the idea which
will be later discussed is a representation of the researcher.

The second example is Walter Benjamin’s The Arcades Project, the flaneur, who takes the stream of consciousness a step further. Walter Benjamin uses the character of the flaneur
to explore the impact of the
modern city on the human mind. He is fleeting, thinking, observing, and
wandering. He observes people living their lives and makes inferences about them and their intentions. He is an observer like Bloom, in fact, he is Bloom, but is able to abstract
himself from his character. The difference between
Benjamin’s character and Joyce’s is that one is freer
than the other.
Benjamin’s flaneur is not confined
in a maze, he is wandering in an arcade making inferences and
interpretations. He is an integral part of this arcade but has the liberty to think and observe using different angles.
He is independent of the author, yet he is kept a prisoner of himself and his surroundings.

In
our third topology,
we have Stefan, the researcher who gave birth to the idea which
eventually germinated into
the film. Like the flaneur, he is an onlooker who is a part of his
surroundings. He wanders and observes, questioning what he sees happening around
him. He is immersed in the scene
yet is able to abstract himself, to act as the researcher who is a part
of the subject being researched. He
is looking at the world around him, questioning his position and role in this world.
Unlike the two previous examples, however, the researcher
is free from his surroundings and has free will, yet it could be said that he is a prisoner of his own memory.

For
this research project,
the two iconic
persons described above
served to illustrate the position of the inside versus the outside in
social scientific discourse. They are clearly defined. The third case illustrates a position that goes one more
level up in terms of blinding the boundaries between the researcher and the researched. It is by no means implied that our author falls into the same league as Walter Benjamin
or James Joyce.
It is the illustration in chapter 4 which affords
a thorough discussion and conversations of objectivity. The team decided to opt for some introspective approaches to learn from.

I’m Stefan, the researcher turned researched, as
well as one of the authors of this article. My direct speech finds expression in this format because it needs to stand
apart from the rest of the article and the three researchers, including me. The methodological challenge posed by this inquiry,
can, we argue only be overcome
if a) introspection is accepted as a scientific research methodology and b) the
tradition of PAR applies equally
to the researched researcher.

At the example of Joyce and Benjamin, we tried to
exemplify the conundrum of being on the outside while being on the inside. There was no deterrent from our quest to be true to all phenomena
and influences on the subject of ideas. So then, how did
my idea become reality? The hypothesis of our research was to see whether there is a clear moment of
truth traceable after years of being involved in turning an idea into a film. The short answer is there is no one idea, there is a kaleidoscope of ideas at best, and each time you try to capture
it, it changes colours, shapes and Gestalt.

The long answer
you find in the below case studies,
where long-term friends,
colleagues, and affiliates were asked the same questions as my colleagues asked me. If we
want to find the closest thing to the kaleidoscope,
it is by narrowing down an infinite number of possibilities to the ones which
stand out the most. Beyond that, we couldn’t venture,
not only because
of the lack of time and resources
at our disposal but because
the exercise runs the danger of becoming a rat’s tail and our focus is
turned away from the essential concern
of making films, not study ideas in a void.

5.
Giving Voice to an Idea - Case Study

5.1
Investigation

This case study was done through
filmed interviews, conducted separately on Zoom, with six informants, including Stefan, interviewed
subsequently. The researchers not only took into account the answers of each interlocutor but also made observations about
non-verbal communication, such as
their body language, as well as pauses and other forms of hesitation. This goes
hand in hand with the processes
within Action Research as it allows for a deeper meaning to be obtained and
ties in with the concept of
verstehen. Among the five (excluding Stefan), four were internal sources who knew Stefan before the film was made and before
his idea was first generated. To provide balance
to the choice of
interlocutors who know Stefan too well, one informant was an external source
who, being a relatively new acquaintance, did not influence
Stefan nor did she contribute
to the making of the film.
Her impressions are therefore completely unbiased. The following four
semi-structured questions were asked:

Question
One: When do you believe the idea of the film germinated? Question Two: Why do you think he pursued this idea?

Question Three: Do you think
that his aim was fulfilled?

Question Four: Do you think his idea changed
from the moment of conception till now?

The
first informant, A(male),
met Stefan when he had just left his corporate legal profession in the UK and was seeking to enter the
humanitarian field. Stefan was teaching a course and it was during this time that he wanted
to gain more knowledge about this subject
and get to know Stefan’s mission on a much
deeper level. The second informant, B(m), first met Stefan at an NGO training
session in 2014 and had a gut feeling
that Stefan’s work would eventually become something much larger. He further stated that from that moment on,
he knew that he would want to become a part of this journey.

The
third informant, C(female), was the project
manager of the Palestinian Monitoring Unit at the time
she met Stefan. He employed her for that role in Ramallah, and she worked with
him for three years, collaborating on
subsequent projects on and off during her Ph.D. The fourth informant, D(f), who is the latest interlocutor to know Stefan,
connected with him through the online networking site LinkedIn. Stefan
found out that she was working for a Palestinian non-profit and decided
to write her to
talk about his film. They talked for several hours and have been working
together since. The fifth informant,
E(f), met Stefan in 2016 in Austria when the film was still in the making. She
was taking a humanitarian course
taught by Stefan while working for an educational NGO with refugee children. While on the course, she became interested
in the Learning Alliance Project. Following that, we got involved in establishing Learning Alliances among civil society
actors. Of the six informants, two were male and two were female.

5.2
The Germination of an Idea

The exact time when Stefan conceived
the idea is difficult to say, according to A. While working for the Barrier Monitoring Unit in
Palestine, A and Stefan were both exploring new ways to deliver a message
through the use of multimedia and online material, rather than simply writing the traditional report.
At that time, there was already an exploration of alternative and non-traditional ways to make a
strong point. A is not sure exactly how this interest in multimedia, and this
exploration of non- traditional ways
to deliver a message, translated into the conception of the idea to make a
film. But he was always aware that Stefan had a very innovative mind and a desire to explore bold and unique
ways to promote
advocacy. According to A, “that spirit carried forward
to keep the discourse alive”.

On
the other hand, C thinks
that Stefan has had this idea for a long time. He had long been looking
for the best way to make people
understand the real impact of the Wall on the daily lives of ordinary
people, and he had always believed that it was his mission to promote
advocacy. He had mentioned the idea
of making visual content, such as filming presentations and interviews, several
times. Still, according to both C and B, the catalyst
for the germination of the idea was when the Barrier
Monitoring Unit was abruptly defunded
and shut down.

Although there is no evidence as to
why this suddenly happened, B believes that it was because of the new Swiss Foreign Affairs Minister,
who was quite right-leaning. The sudden news was a huge shock to Stefan, who had invested a lot of time and energy building
the Barrier Monitoring Unit, and B believes
that the idea started to take form at this point. During this time, a
master’s student from Oxford
University suggested making a film, and something clicked in his mind. Everything came together, and an idea had been born.

5.3
Solidification of an Idea

Informant A met many people in the course of three years
while he was working in the humanitarian world, and, according to him, Stefan
is one of the few true humanitarians that he has met. According
to A, Stefan believed in what he was doing in the same way a doctor believes
that its job is a vocation, a

duty. Also, according
to A, B, and C, despite a great number
of obstacles and challenges thrown
at him from all sides - from within
the UN, from stakeholders, and even from some Palestinians - he soldiered
on and did everything that he could to make this film a reality. Stefan
overcame all these obstacles in an
effort to argue against the Wall, and to give voice to the voiceless. Stefan
felt compelled to complete the film
for the sake of the humanitarian cause. Informant D agrees that Stefan saw this film as his moral duty, a mission that he
was forced to complete. Informant C believes that Stefan is an extraordinary individual who has the
ability to think outside the box, and that he found on film a way to catch people’s attention, a
way to express how politics impact international law and human rights,
and a way to “clean the mess”.

Following the same thoughts,
informant E added that Stefan’s passion for the film was due to his persevering character and experience in humanitarian diplomacy, and that he consistently insists
on reaching even the smallest of his goals, does not mind taking risks,
and, in her words, ``he is very much a person
who doesn’t take no for an answer”. In retrospect, informant B agrees entirely
with this point of view and can now see the power in his perseverance in the pursuit
of such a venture in terms of education, communication, and delivering important messages. According to both of them, Stefan
had something akin to a revelation and felt compelled
to materialize his idea of a film.

5.4
Realisation of an Idea

Informant A puts forward
that, for this idea to become a reality, numerous
stumbling blocks had to
be overcome. Such obstacles were both internal and external, as the making of a
film is no minor feat. Informant B
echoes these sentiments as he stated that he admired the way in which Stefan managed
to stay positive in the light of missed opportunities and blockages to their progress.
Both A and B go on to further say that Stefan is incredibly resourceful when it comes to ideas he believes in, and that he has the drive and the skill to inspire others to join him in bringing the issue of the wall to the forefront. Stefan
knew that the idea of a film was an avenue that was relatively untapped when it came to this topic, according
to B, and he knew that this was a way to reach even further. o, he pursued
it and poured everything he had into this venture.

Informant D, while seeing the film,
said that Stefan’s willingness to sacrifice for what he believes in is clearly evident throughout its
duration, and that the clear voice of advocacy for the voiceless is undeniable. According to E, Stefan was
successful in turning his film into an educational tool. Also, she believes his aim has been achieved,
despite the lack of support,
especially financial, for his project
which did not deter him on his path.

5.5
Mutation of the Idea

The informants were asked if
Stefan’s idea had changed from the moment of its conception till now. Informant B believes that not much
has changed, and that Stefan is still focused on the same goal of what he had in mind at the start:
that the film could make a big contribution to the field. While informant A agrees that Stefan’s initial
instinct did not change, because
it was an “instinct of

understanding”, he stated that “the goal
post always kept moving”, and that “the ground is always moving
under our feet”. He claims that the film would not have been as successful had there been no change
and since Stefan
is very creative, had s been able to improvise and adapt, his ideas necessarily evolved. Stefan never knew what he would end up with, and
always went with his gut feeling. One example
of an unexpected change is that when Stefan first conceived of the idea,
he did not know that there would be an International Criminal
Court investigation.

As the context changes, there is always a need to adapt, and the context is indeed always
changing. Although informant
E could not say what exactly Stefan had in mind at the time of the conception of the idea, she believes that,
at some later
stage, Stefan thought
the film would also be destined for film festivals and TV stations.
Still, he continued to focus on his initial
goal of promoting advocacy through
film and education.

One of the most significant changes
that occurred from the conception of the idea till now, is that this film has led to other films, as
well as new ideas and projects. The film is thus still evolving organically.
The more people see it and the more positive feedback it receives from viewers,
the more inspired
Stefan is to find new ways to spread his message. The film, according
to A, is now an effort to strengthen
international law for the benefit of everyone on the planet, including other
communities who are suffering from
the injustice of imbalanced power, threatened by larger and more powerful neighbours. The film started off as an
effort to point out the injustices suffered by the Palestinian community on account of the Wall, but
Stefan has since understood that “the Palestinian context relates to a global context”, and
the film is a reflection of his abilities and insight, as well as his “understanding of where things need
to change”. Since its
completion, the film has turned into a springboard for education and advocacy.

5.6
Findings of the Case Study

It is firstly worth mentioning that the research findings exclude Stefan’s views, which are expressed in the box below. Then, looking at the
interviews carried out in the course of the Summer of 2021, it can be derived
that all informants, regardless of their gender, age, social background, and whether or not
they were present when the idea for the film was first conceived, all the
interviewees share the same opinions
about Stefan’s motivation and objectives. They all agree that Stefan has
been able to remain positive
and undeterred despite
the huge number
of obstacles he has had to face on the way. All agree that Stefan believed
that it was his moral
duty to give voice to the voiceless
and to promote advocacy through
film and education. Also, the three informants who were present
at the time of the idea’s
conception agree that the catalyst was the sudden defunding and closing down of
the Barrier Monitoring Unit, but that
Stefan was interested in exploring alternative ways to message the reality on the ground
before the defunding happened. Finally, all informants agree
that what pushed
Stefan to pursue and
materialize his idea was his innovative nature, his perseverance, and his
passion for advocacy.

As in Chapter 4: Researching the Researched, Stefan’s voice comes into the findings of this chapter
expressing first-hand the impressions from his observation point. His personal
introspective approach reflects all the interviews presented
beforehand and summarises the deep meaning in a profoundly Gestaltist and holistic way:

Being not only part of this study,
its inquiries and deliberations, but of its derivation of meaning, speak
analysis, I am conscious of the researched being researched.

I am obviously not afraid of making
very personal remarks
and deviating from others being researched, but, of course,
apprehensive about the distortions of meaning I attribute to what is being said and how the research
takes its course.

First, I am absolutely grateful to those who have been
interviewed without my presence for their generous
reflections which went into their responses and the honesty they induced in
them. Of course, all of the
interlocutors are very well known and very dear to me. Nonetheless, reading
their transcripts and the analytical
work my two other co-authors have brought to the study I am astounded at the
depth of emotions and analysis they
express in their statements. A’s assessment of how I would finally
concentrate on film while involved
in applying new technologies in the monitoring and documentation process of the BMU, it was revelatory! So were the expressions of others that I had never thought
of myself.

Each respondent brought something personal and special
to the conversation with my two co-authors, Siddiqa and Dorian.
They shared not only the how but also the why my film has become a reality, including
the germination of the project and the struggle to realize it. Of
course, they knew quite intricately of the various steps to which they were privy, but their
expressions of making sense in the process have added value to
the study and me personally: They have verified
me! They are the testimony to my story,
which appears now, in retrospect, and given this study, is continuously in flux and undergoing new evaluations, depending on the standpoint and moment of the kaleidoscope.

The findings and understandings (verstehen) contained
in the above chapters are brought to the conclusion below. They all add up to the final analysis
of the overall interpretative, critical,
textual, and

linguistic discussion of this project.

6.
Conclusion & Recommendations

Conclusion

This article chronicles an idea that
developed and transformed into a documentary film to give voice to
those who have been silenced and suffer injustices globally. The introspective
dimension of this article allows for the researchers to understand how this film came into being, from conceptualization to realization. As mentioned earlier in the article, when contextualizing verstehen,
to understand the cause of an action, it is crucial to
first understand the meaning that an individual attaches to it, or the way the individual perceives it.
The concept of phenomenology thus gave the interviewers a better insight into how each informant
personally experienced, perceived, and understood Stefan’s idea and its germination. The findings show that the informants agreed with each other, despite
their difference in gender,
age, and background. The findings also show that those who had not met Stefan
at the time of the idea’s conception also agree that the successful materialization of the film was, in a

large part, due to Stefan’s character. In addition, they believe that Stefan felt it was his moral duty to pursue
this idea and achieve his goal, which was to give voice to the voiceless using the medium
of film. The people interviewed were not aware of
each other’s answers. They gave their personal accounts, describing
their own experience and interpretations from an individual perspective. The findings show that they responded in very similar ways to the questions
asked. With the conclusion to Article One, the cycle opens up to the two following
articles in the Trilogy to take up the thread
and make the three whole greater than the sum of its parts.

Recommendations

•
Ideas for documentary films of
value to advocates or humanitarian diplomacy are not stable or inviolable.

•
Learning is part of the cycle of an idea and/or ideas turning
into film. It is important
to bear that in mind since the beginning of such projects.

•  Advocacy is an inherently pedagogical activity and to suppress
change is futile.

•
Budgets and administrative production processes need to adapt to change and embrace it to stand the test of time and ethics.

References

Bohman, J. (2008). Critical Theory.
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Bradbury, H. (2015). The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. Los Angeles: SAGE.

Brown, L., Tandon, R., &
Covey, J. (2008). Action Research, Partnerships and Social Impacts: The
Institutional Collaboration of PRIA and IDR. In H. Bradbury, & P. Reason,
The SAGE Handbook of Action Research. London: SAGE. https://dx.doi.org/10.4135/9781848607934.n21

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. (2020). stream of consciousness. Britannica: https://www.britannica.com/ art/stream-of-consciousness

Rowell, L. L., Polush, E. Y., Riel, M., & Bruewer, A. (2015). Action researchers’ perspectives about the distinguishing characteristics
of action research: a Delphi and learning circles mixed-methods study. Educational Action Research, 23(2), 243-270.
https://doi.org/10.1080/09650792.2014.990987

Seal, B. (2013, November 14). Baudelaire,
Benjamin and the Birth of the Flâneur. Psychogeographic Review: https://
psychogeographicreview.com/baudelaire-benjamin-and-the-birth-of-the-flaneur/

Spacey, A. (2021, June 12). How James Joyce Developed his Stream of Consciousness Novels. Owlcation: https:// owlcation.com/humanities/Edouard-Dujardin-James-Joyce-and-Stream-of-Consciousness-Writing

Image: Stefan Ziegler