Rhetorical Analysis Of Patrick Henrys Speech At The...

Patrick Henry Rhetorical Analysis In 1775, the citizens of colonial America were under distress due to the pressure coming from Great Britain. The citizens wanted liberties, however, the country as a whole was reluctant to push the issue to a point of initiating war. In his speech at the Virginia Convention, Patrick Henry argues how war is crucial for Americans to gain the liberties they pursue by explaining that British invasion is inescapable and illustrating how the citizens are ready and prepared to fight. In order to persuade his listeners that an invasion by the British is inevitable, Patrick Henry uses different rhetorical devices such as pathos and repetition to show the importance of fighting. Throughout the speech, Henry uses†¦show more content†¦The only way to show they are not puppets is to fight, which is something the citizens are ready and prepared to do. Along with using pathos and repetition to show the imperative need to fight, Henry also uses anaphoras, metaphors, and rhetorical question s to prove that the colonists were ready for war. In his speech, Henry repeatedly begins clauses with the phrase â€Å"we have†, in order to emphasize how much the citizens have already done to show there is a need for a change. The people have â€Å"petitioned†, â€Å"remonstrated† and â€Å"supplicated† all to no avail. The leaders in thirteen colonial state were hesitant to jump into war with the British, so Henry brought light to this by asking the people through the rhetorical question of whether they would â€Å"resort to †¦ humble supplication.† Through the view of the people it is obvious this controversy can not be solved by just asking kindly. The people recognize the need to fight so they petition and address their arguments to the political leaders. In addition to asking if the people would have to â€Å"resort to entreaty†, Patrick Henry also asks what other terms they could find that â€Å"have not already been exhausted. † The people have done all they can within the country to regain their liberties, the only thing left is to fight the British. Henry is well aware of this throughout the entirety of his speech and in light of this, explains how there are â€Å"three millions of people† that are â€Å"armed inShow MoreRelatedPatrick Henry s Give Me Liberty1784 Words   |  8 PagesPatrick Henry’s â€Å"Give me Liberty, or Give me Death:† A Rhetorical Analysis On March 23, 1775, in the meeting hall of St. John’s Church in Richmond, Virginia, a group of important statesmen, merchants, plantation owners, military leaders, and various others met to determine the fate of their beloved colony. The colony of Virginia, under the governorship of Lord Dunmore, was tearing at its seams between monarchists, who remained loyal to the British Crown, and patriots in support of independence. Read MoreLiberty or Death1755 Words   |  8 Pagesphrase was used by both Patrick Henry and Malcolm X in their speeches. Even though these men gave their speeches almost two centuries apart their goal was the same. They both wanted to convince their audience to fight for freedom. Through the use of rhetorical strategies, Patrick Henry was successful in convincing the colonies to fight for their freedom from Britain and Malcolm X was successful in convincing African Americans to fight for their rights. To begin with, Patrick Henry was one of the firstRead MoreRhetorical Analysis Of Patrick Henry s Speech1375 Words   |  6 PagesEnglish 1101 November 11, 2016 Rhetorical Analysis: Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death! Many men were pivotal to the American cause in the War for Independence, and one of the most influential was Patrick Henry. In his famous speech â€Å"Give Me Liberty or Give Me Death† Patrick Henry delivered a powerful speech through the manipulative use of language and word choice. On March 23, 1775, the third Virginia convention was held in St. John s Church in Richmond. The convention was held to discuss relationsRead MoreThe Speech To The Virginia Convention Rhetorical Analysis883 Words   |  4 PagesRhetorical Analysis of Henry Outline Introduction Attention getter- Thesis- The rhetorical devices in the Speech to the Virginia Convention by Patrick Henry is very effective. Appeals Emotional Context and quote- This quote appears during Henry responds to the opposing argument, giving reasons to refute it. â€Å"There is no retreat, but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable and let it come! I repeat it, sir,Read MoreRhetorical Analysis Of Patrick Henry s Speech1341 Words   |  6 PagesRhetorical Analysis of Patrick Henry’s Speech in the Virginia Convention (Brainstormed with Caroline Schwanawede, written independently) Amid the early conflicts between the American colonists and the British government, in addition to their supporters, these two groups experienced the difficult reality of colliding with an opposing set of values and lifestyles to their own, leading to mutual feelings of hostility and resentment and establishing a widespread want for a revolution in the colonialRead MoreComparison of Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry: Revolutionary Tract876 Words   |  4 Pagesinflicted upon them by the British. As a result of these inflictions, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry addressed these injustices, and proved to be very persuasive through providing reasoning and evidence that moved many colonists to believe that to reach contentment and peace the colonies had to rid themselves of British rule. Henry and Paine were successful in swaying their audience, not only because of the rhetorical strategies used, but also because they were passionate about the cause they were committed

Speech Recognition Systems Essay Example

Essays on Speech Recognition Systems Essay The paper "Speech Recognition Systems" is a great example of an essay on information technology. Speech recognition has come with great communication capabilities which include conversion of text to speech, speech to text and even voice recognition.   The speech recognition technology can be applied innovatively in many ways for the benefit of our daily lives, business, and education.   Many persons need assistance and speech recognition technology has come in quite handy in a number of ways. It can aid some individuals to understand or produce spoken works; the ASL translator and Model talk are useful on this end. The technology is able to aid individuals who also understand and produce language in written form (speech to text) such as Rex and Timo Stories. Speech technologies are able to replace otherwise expensive human experts in the school and hospital settings through depression diagnosis, English X-Change, guided speech and many other innovations. The technologies can also be useful in improving clumsy difficult graphical user interfaces thanks to innovations like VoiceBox navigation and can also be employed in business environments.  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚  Ã‚   Given the continued development and continued application of speech recognition systems in our day to day lives I think the future is coming when they will eventually replace humans in common phone interactions. A salesperson in the field or in a supermarket, for instance, can innovatively convert text on a machine remotely into speech when conversing with a customer on a real-time basis. Healthcare professionals are able also to get accurate information from patients of depression by employing speech recognition as patients talking practitioners may be tempted to give false information. As such therefore I think speech recognition systems will soon take place the humans in telephone conversations with many benefits to life aspects such as education, communication, business and entertainment. This is good as it saves on the costs of hiring experts and tremendously improves the lives of many people. It also speeds up the speed and accuracy of doing things in the aspects of business particularly. The only disadvantages are the loss of jobs who would have been employed in the same roles.

Hospitality Industry for Marina Bay Sands- myassignmenthelp.com

Question: Discuss about theHospitality Industry for Marina Bay Sands. Answer: Introduction Despite Singapore having a small size, the country prides itself in a pool of wealth making it a wealthy nation characterized by an open economy. According to the World Bank, it has been ranked as the best country for starting and running a business successively. The rise of Singapore was mainly attributed to exports. The hospitality industry is one of the largest as compared to other industries and has more than 200 million employees employed globally. It has been realized that the number of talents is still growing as demand increases in such an industry. One of the main key drivers in the Singapore economy is the hospitality industry which has seen the countrys reputation and fame rise. Singapore continuously offers lucrative offers regarding a destination that has a lifestyle. Singapore boasts of an integrated resort that is a world resort and a Marina Bay Sands. Other developments that are still ongoing are the orchard road, and a shopping town ranked as one of its own in Asia. With such prospects, it becomes crucial for Singapore to step up its efforts in service delivery by providing excellent service to ensure customer satisfaction. There is the need for professionals and talents in the hospitality industry to increase the pool of skills that can assume management positions as well as recruiting teams that are well trained and qualified to fill more jobs that are created as a result of the growth of the industry. The hospitality industry aims to see growth and more prospects future. Due to the expansion and growth of the business, it is the role of the human resource management to provide more workforce a dictated by business needs across all sectors. Also, the human resource ensures that there is maximization for each team.In Asia for instance, skills and techniques formed an important part in analyzing peoples performance, their engagement capacities or even getting apprenticed in various training through development programs that were meant to measure productivity at workplace. Human resources are tasked with the responsibility of ensuring the right staff is in place in the advent of a booming industry. The high demand for increasing the number of staff is a challenge for the hospitality industry at a time when the pool of labor is shrinking.To solve such a challenge, it would be prudent to identify the possible causes of such a problem, and it is, therefore, the place for the industry to work in close cooperation with the labor unions and form strategic alliances. Such a move will ensure that more time is created paving the way for resource mobilization such as money needed in developing the recruitment project. The politicians, on the other hand, need to be educated on the hospitality industry need to impact on economic and immigration policies needed in the hospitality industry. Challenges to the hospitality industry Low turnover The hospitality industry globally faces some many threats not only in Singapore but also globally such as low turnover and a shortage of skills in the workforce. For instance, in the hospitality industry, it is expected that all organizations face the same hurdle of inadequate talent to assume management and leadership roles to ensure operations and teams are lead effectively (P Spencer, 2011). The intense and aggressive competition for quality graduates among various industries has led to high demand and shortage for employees leaving the hospitality industry with inadequate talents (Chalkiti Sigala, 2010). The hospitality industry perceives the fresh graduates as inexperienced and without the necessary skills as unfavorable for employment losing them to other sectors such as outsourcing, entrepreneur and human resource (Qu Tse, 1996). Generation diversification The intensified awareness on multi-generation workforce and the implications of having variances in workplace expectations and values among workers are raising eyebrows among relevant stakeholders. There are huge disparities among the young generation regarding disparities in the so-called generation Y (La Lopa, 2010).As opposed to the older cohorts, the young generation values more self-actualization, career progression leading to high expectations.Such groups are dynamic regarding changing jobs frequently in different industries and institutions to achieve their desired goals and objectives in life (Hyun Jeong Kim, Tavitiyaman, Woo Gon Kim, 2009). Lack of appropriate infrastructure The hospitality industry also lacks sophisticated mechanisms necessary for analyzing employee engagement. It is through having long-term projections that human resource management can predict and forecast for areas that may be short of talent and thus adopt training programs in management levels needed in anticipating future demands as a result of growth. Staff needs are overstretched An industry such as hospitality is an integration of many components and departments and identifying which areas are in short of talent is another hurdle. For instance, there is the front office, food, and beverages among others. It has been discovered that the front office and food and beverage are the ones that mainly suffer from a shortage of staff. According to recent research, it was discovered that the biggest challenge facing the hospitality industry is the shortage of human resources. According to Sam Sake, MENA travel organizers, the average ration of staff needs is estimated at five staff per room. However, as of 2010, the ratio went higher putting staff needs for more than 50000, and in 2016 the ratio tripled to 150,000 number of staff needed. However, in luxury hotels, the ratio was favorable putting staff needs at seven to one. Also, there is the problem of retaining the workforce; it is estimated that only 20 percent of the staff will prefer staying their employer and i ndustry management forecasts that poaching may dominate the issue of recruiting staff (Moncarz, Zhao, Kay, 2009). Long working hours The long working hours in the hotel industry is also another issue when it comes to recruiting staff in such an industry. The hotel industry commands only a small percentage for instance out of 14,000 graduating from polytechnics only 3000 choose to join the hospitality industry representing 1.9% which is relatively a small percentage compared to what other industries absorb. As of todays graduates they would prefer being off duty I the weekends and also during the public holidays. However, looking at the hospitality industry, there is no room for such accommodations as there are no frameworks that can schedule fix offs during the weekends. Most hotels operate twenty-four hours, hoteliers, for example, are required to operate for a minimum of 198 hours monthly. Hoteliers are also expected to work overtime more so during the peak season. The overtime may be a two-hour session or may overlap the next day depending on the situation. It is a requirement that the hoteliers are given two d ays off duty, the weekends are offered on a rotation basis. It is due to the demanding nature of the hospitality industry that makes most individuals prefer working in other industries. Seasonality of the industry In Singapore, July, August, and October are the slow period for the hospitality industry.It is evident that most businesses in the hospitality industry such as tourism and hotel are seasonal.As a result of seasonal nature of such industries, it becomes a major challenge of maintaining the employees during low seasons forcing the businesses to be closed or lay off some workers due to lack of finances to run such businesses in low seasons. As a consequence, most individuals prefer working elsewhere to ensure that they have a job security in the long-run. The businesses in the hospitality industry are in most cases at a loss regarding losing experienced staff that had drained company resources regarding training.In acquiring new staff in anticipation of peak period has the effect of straining the company finances in training the new staff so as they may acquire the required set of skills thus increasing the costs of operation for such ventures. The hospitality industry in most cases is also affected by political issues in some regions making it unfavorable for some of the talented workers to move in such countries. For instance, in some countries, there are strict entries for foreign workers thus restricting entry of talents that would help in developing the industry as they possess a unique set of skills from their countries.The shortage of human resources for the hospitality industry continues to increase due to such inflexibilities in labor laws that affect the overall performance of both the foreign and nationals working in such sectors. Strategies for addressing the challenges The issue of salary and remuneration is one factor that can motivate people to enter the hospitality industry (Jeetesh K, 2015).The players in such an industry should offer lucrative and competitive salaries for employees to attract and lure top talents that are poached by other industries. Also, the issue of benefits for the employees and their families at the workplace should be many such as health and pension schemes are one way of maintaining employees in the industry (Mosley, 2007). The government should work closely with the human resource management when drafting some policies that favor the nationals and the foreigners working in the hospitality industry. For instance, in Singapore, it was noted that most of the workers working in the hospitality industry came from foreign countries and very few nationals worked in such an industry (Pizam Shani, 2009). The labor laws and policies should offer more chances to the nationals and not the other way round no wonder the country is in short supply of labor. The practical frameworks in a hospitality industry also ought to be adjusted to incorporate the freedom and flexibility for those who wish to work in such an industry. For instance, the working hours and the weekend where many people need time with their families should be balanced so that employees can work some weekends and not all of them (Yazinski, 2009). Motivation should also be offered especially during peak when people work tirelessly, and this could be offered regarding cash and work bonuses. Conclusion and recommendations As evidenced in the above discussion, it is evident that indeed there is the shortage of talent in the hospitality industry. Lack of the necessary talent may cripple the industry shortly, and thus the necessary mechanisms are needed to ensure continuity of the sector. It is important for the firms in such an industry to provide competitive salaries and packages that will attract the best talent which will increase the labor supply solving the problem of shortage of the needed workforce. It is also critical for the legislature to work with labor unions and other relevant stakeholders in ensuring that the policies in place favor the nationals and the foreign workers in the hospitality industry. As discussed, it has been pointed some of the policies are the causes of the shortage of human resources in the hospitality industry, and therefore it is necessary to review the already existing laws and policies to ensure a favorable working environment (Christensen Hughes Rog, 2008). Works Cited Bai, L. ., Bai, B. (2011). special issue on development and progress in contemporary hospitality management research. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality management. Chalkiti, Sigala. (2010). staff turnover in the Greek tourism industry. International journal of contemporary hospitality Management, 335-359. Christensen Hughes, Rog, E. (2008). Talent management. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 743-757. Hyun Jeong Kim, Tavitiyaman, P., Woo Gon Kim. (2009). The effect of Management commitment to service on employee service behaviors:the Meditating Role of Job Satisfaction. journal of hospitality Tourism Research. Jeetesh K, S. (2015). The Effects of Job Satisfaction towards Employee Turnover in the Hotel Industry: A Case Study of Hotels in Kuala Lumpur City Center. Journal of Tourism and Hospitality. La Lopa, J. (2010). Guest Editorial:Food for Thought on Management Turnover in the Hospitality Industry. journal of hospitality Tourism Education, 11-13. Moncarz, E., Zhao, J., Kay, C. (2009). An exploratory study of US lodging properties' organizational practices on employee turnover and retention. International journal of contemporary Hospitality Management, 437-458. Mosley, R. (2007). Customer experience, organisational culture and the employer brand. Journal of Brand Management, 123-134. P, C., Spencer, A. (2011). Hospitality quality:new directions and new challenges. International journal of contemporary hospitality Management, 463-478. Pizam , A., Shani , A. (2009). The Nature of the Hospitality Industry: Present and Future Managers' Perspectives. Anatolia, 134-150. Qu, H., Tse, S. (1996). An analysis of employees' expectations satisfaction levels and turnover in the Hong Kong Industry. Tourism Recreation Research, 15-23. Yazinski, S. (2009). Strategies for Retaining Employees and Minimizing Turnover. Retrieved September 30, 2017, from Hr.blr.com: Yazinski, S. (2009). Strategies for Retaining Employees and https://hr.blr.com/whitepapers/Staffing-Training/Employee-Turnover/Strategies-for-Retaining-Employees-and-Minimizing-

Operating system and Productivity software Module 3 Case

Question: Describe about the Operating system and Productivity software Module 3 case? Answer: Introduction Many people in todays generation are strongly belief that the personal computers are dead. This is partially true, because in this todays generation of advance computing many of the new technology are now launched, like cloud-centric devices, lightweight, smart phone, I-phone, tab, and Mac. This is to see now a days that the an un presented power shift from the software developer and the end user on the other hand to the vendors of operating system on to the other and those even who to PCs keep are being swept along (Rodrguez, Garca Harrison, 2012). The product service is one from the transformation. The platform that to use for purchase in the every few years like operating system that actually become to the ongoing relationships with the vendors, both from the software developers and the end users. Basically the automation system can be divided into three categories these are the Standalone System: This is the system that can run without the PC, although to use the PC for programming (Ghapanchi Aurum, 2011). PC-based system: This is depend upon the personal computer, that to run all the time. Hybrid system: That to run without the PC, but PC to use for adds more of the functionality. System type Description Personal Computer based System Classification Generally two types of PC based system are there. These are Dedicated PC: This computer is used only for the automation of home. No other programs are run. Shared PC: Run the automation software in addition, to use for other purpose by the software. The common automated products of PC based are shown below. Home director or active home HAL 2000 Cyber House Assistant of home control Seer Home PC of home version Lynx port Stand alone system In general Stand alone system includes the following things: Home Vision Home Base CPU-XA/Ocelot House Linc Time commander JDS, Plus Time Commander, and starlet Ominipro and Omini Hybrid system The system of hybrid is the one where the system of stand alone is used in PC based software with conjunction. Usually the price of standalone performs basic of the function of home automation. The most common system of standalone used in this included fashion: Ocelot/CPU- XA Based Home Vision of Home Time commander JDS, Plus time commander and the star gate (Bradley, 2015). To interface commonly used software with these kind of standalone system are include: The stand alone system that to provided by the software With the home version used ACE With the home version used and plus time commander ECS Used with the product families of JDS, Home based and Home version of HAL 2000 Ation of Home 2000 used with the version of home Comparative study There are many reasons for choosing Personal Computer than other computers like MAC. Here are the top four reasons that to prove personal computer is still not dead (Chen, Gibbons Mowry, 2011). In the very first point, this is to said that the personal computer is cheap than the Mac5. Apple attempts to differentiate personal computer vs. Mac. But in the reality this is to falls down to the operating system that used by the people. Because of the high price, low income area never use the Mac, they only use the PC. In the case of operating system these people who lived in the low or middle income areas they uses Linux, this is the strong operating system, easy to access and free to use, apart from the Mac OS or windows to use (Santos, Rodriguez Carballal, 2012). Secondly, all the personal computers are designed to built upon and expandable. The technological sliding scale is involved; this is the big advantage of the personal computer. In the context of traditional personal computers can evolve into computers that added to down slimmed and modified beyond reappear. Thirdly, the next generation PCs is the tablet to add some of the extra feature; these are like, a PC with the microphone and the camera integrated or otherwise to make it to the media center of personal computer. That to make it the anything less of the PC because of it already has the peripherals additionally (Choi Byun, 2015). Fourthly, the experience of the desktop is still a curtail part of the workplace. Tablets are the great for travelling time and also connected us. But on the psychological level to have the traditional PC fix onto the desk into the office or home that to keeps us confirmed that we are in one of our workplace (Vieira, 2012). Reference list Bradley, D. (2015). A Personal History of the IBM Personal Computer. Computer, 1-1. doi:10.1109/mc.2011.163 Chen, S., Gibbons, P., Kozuch, M., Mowry, T. (2011). Log-based architectures. SIGOPS Oper. Syst. Rev., 45(1), 84. doi:10.1145/1945023.1945034 Choi, Y., Byun, T. (2015). Constraint-based test generation for automotive operating systems. Softw Syst Model. doi:10.1007/s10270-014-0449-6 Ghapanchi, A., Aurum, A. (2011). The impact of project licence and operating system on the effectiveness of the defect-fixing process in open source software projects. IJBIS, 8(4), 413. doi:10.1504/ijbis.2011.042398 Rodrguez, D., Sicilia, M., Garca, E., Harrison, R. (2012). Empirical findings on team size and productivity in software development. Journal Of Systems And Software, 85(3), 562-570. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2011.09.009 Santos, A., Romero, J., Taibo, J., Rodriguez, C., Carballal, A. (2012). Self-tuning of disk inputoutput in operating systems. Journal Of Systems And Software, 85(1), 77-86. doi:10.1016/j.jss.2011.07.030 Vieira, M. (2012). Challenges on Developing and Operating Trustworthy and Resilient Service Software Systems. Journal Of Information Technology Software Engineering, 02(04). doi:10.4172/2165-7866.1000e112

The management systems related to internal and external environment

Attitudes towards employees: Employee benefit Wages, Salaries, Annual Leave and Sick Leave The organization maintains these expenses on an prepayment basis. They are therefore accounted for after they fall due. This therefore implies that they are partially reflected in the books of accounts of the period concerned. In effect the report reflects the payments due for services up to the final day of the reporting period.Advertising We will write a custom report sample on The management systems related to internal and external environment specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Employee Share Plans, Long Service Leave, Long Service Leave The net value of the amount due and payable to all the employees is reflected as an expense to the employees corresponding to an increase in the organizations equity. The amount due is measured and evaluated for the period within which it is unconditionally payable. With the exceptions of un-qualifying shar es the amount is recognized in whole of the total entitlements. Defined Contribution Superannuation Plans, Defined Benefit Superannuation Plans and Employee Termination Benefit The organization adopts an individualistic strategy   that makes single and individual computations for   each plan. The present value of future benefits its therefore calculated by discounting the future benefits at a discounting rate that is a balance on the maturity dates of   government bonds. This incorporates the projected unit credit method by a certified auctorial. if   benefits that accrue to every employee increase the amount is distributed on a straight line basis implying that the employee will receive an amount of the increase immediately it falls due. This increase is also reflected in the company’s consolidated income statement of the reporting period. The past service costs on the other hand are measured as the growth in the present value of the permanent or fixed benefits that the employee is entitled to in previous and current periods. Attitudes towards Customers: Aircraft configuration meeting customer demand Like any other business the company has over the past few years faced a great increase in the number of customer as well as consumer needs. The company has therefore made a structural adjustment by increasing the number of aircraft to take care of the addition al capacity. Growing consumer demands have also forced the company to adjust the seating arrangements to improve the customer service experience. This also ensures that the customer service level meets international standards. Qantas provide their customer to combine points from flying, credit and debit card spend and retail spend into single account The technological trend in the airline industry has favored the use of plastic money. Amidst the pertinent and obvious structural concerns, the credit card system has ensured convenience security and flexibility in transactions specifically in th e transport sector. Passengers get to earn points as a form of motivation and marketing for every flight they take. The points can either be based on the mileage traveled or the amount spent. The points my be used to upgrade a ticket or purchase products at the convenience of the customer.Advertising Looking for report on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Qantas services their customer by another brand of aircraft which is called Jetstart’s The diversity of the consumers goes requires the company to make provision for all levels of income earners. The company has taken advantage of the low income segment by partnering with a smaller airline that offers alternative cheaper but equally quality service. This falls in line with the price segmentation strategy in consumer marketing Caring for customer Customer care s a fundamental and important aspect of a business. It offers a basis and rationale for the formulation of the companies strategies and policies. The company has made an initiative to ensure that their customers are satisfied and assisted in every possible means. It has engaged consumer service surveys to measure the performance and effectiveness of their customer care. This has generated alternative consumer satisfaction strategies that will allow the company to grow and offer better service ( Qantas annual report, 2010). Attitudes towards competitors: Higher performance in every thing The transport sector has over the last two decades grown to become among the most competitive volatile and revolutionary sector in the world economy. The situation is even more aggressive in the private sector with every company seeking a piece of the large consumer base. The company therefore has a competitive and visionary attitude towards its competition. It has installed strategic mechanisms that constantly review the companies performance ratings as against its competitors to ensure th at it remains in front or at least on the front line. Safety It is every customers requirement that their means of transport be safe and reliable. The government as well as industrial requirements for safety are clear and strict. The airline has therefore given paramount importance to its safety precautions and guaranteed its customers an ultimately safe experience. It has invested in health safety programs such as health surveillance monitors that ensure that the customers along with the employees operate in a safe environment. Training and development The airlines employee base attracts a variety of professional limits that allows the labor force to benefit from a wide range of skills. Majority of these employees are based locally and are therefore easily accessible to the company. Updating market needs A pertinent characteristic of the contemporary consumer market is the changing preferences and tastes. It is therefore important for every company to constantly redefine and re- ev aluate its consumer needs data to ensure that it keeps abreast with the recent trends. The airline has responded to the changing consumer needs by simplifying and easing the check in experience.Advertising We will write a custom report sample on The management systems related to internal and external environment specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Strong complementary Brand In a market full of substitutes a company needs to diversify its portfolio to increase the chances of consumer following. The company has therefore partnered with an alternate smaller airline that allows it to access the low fare market. This makes sure that it maintains a presence in all areas and segments of the market Reference Qantas annual report. (2010) The Sum. Web. Web. This report on The management systems related to internal and external environment was written and submitted by user Amy Campos to help you with your own studies. You are free to use it for research and reference purposes in order to write your own paper; however, you must cite it accordingly. You can donate your paper here.

Gender Stereotypes in Cosmopolitan

Gender Stereotypes in Cosmopolitan ity.

Linguistic Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Linguistic - Essay Example Although OED describes itself as descriptive by taking a more objective approach: allowing English users to utilize words according to which way they think is more appropriate; somehow, it is not as descriptive as other dictionaries like Merriam Webster’s or American Heritage considering that it subdues itself from adopting slang, newly-created words. For example, both Merriam Webster’s Dictionary and OED recognizes the word â€Å"skunk†; nevertheless, OED sticks with the original meaning while Merriam Webster’s Dictionary takes a new definition of the word which means â€Å"an obnoxious or disliked person† (Merriam Webster’s Dictionary, â€Å"Skunk†). OED claims that "it traces the development of English from the earliest records, and formally from 1150 AD, up to the present day" (Oxford English Dictionary, â€Å"Guide to The Third Edition of the OED†). Anyone can nod as to the looseness of the rules in this dictionary, but still, it has the slightest leanings towards prescriptivism. Acocella (5) asserts â€Å"the most curious flaw in the descriptivists’ reasoning is their failure to notice that it is now they who are doing the prescribing.† OED and other descriptivist dictionaries are becoming more of a trendsetter rather than an agency to respond to the changing needs of the society. However, OED’s belief that it’s a descriptivist dictionary but claims it â€Å"does include information on which usages are, or have been, popularly regarded as ‘incorrect’† may just be a sign that it’s not fully descriptivist

Unionization in the United States Research Paper

Unionization in the United States - Research Paper Example The most vibrant unions in the United States are usually among the public sector workers including doctors, teachers, police etc. They often targets on issues relating to the agreement and right on wages and increment on wages or if management tends to violate the laws and agreement on the rights of employees according to the contract. History of unionization in the United States: As the United States very rapidly developed various inventions and innovations, so it developed quite fast. Soon the State had been converted from a mere agricultural to a big industrial state. This change in the United States awakened the need for more and more laborers to handle the industries. these laborers were those people who were usually looked down upon in the society and the strong and powerful employers would advantage from the condition of the poor laborers and therefore, would mistreat them and take extra work, beyond their physical capabilities. Therefore, this is how the labor unions started to form so as to stand against the management to give the required right of the co-worker. Moreover, there even was a wage-bargain issue and above all, the major issue which was considered by workers at that time was the prolonged work hours which would result in workers making endless and extremely tiring efforts. The labor unions in the United States started as a protest against the long working hours. The working hours would not at all be convenient and hence this fact was realized in the 19th century and a step towards a protest was taken in the 1820s. During this period, the workers combined together to form a team to reduce the work hours from 12 hours to 10 working hours. Legislation to these workers was granted in 1837. Formation of the first labor union in the United States: According to the Illinois labor History society, after imposing this law, even then the employers would take extra work and wrong advantage of their desperate workers. The workers were poor and quite weak in power as compared to their highly strengthened employers. They realized they could not do anything alone. Therefore the minor labor unions of small cities decided to combine with the labor unions of other cities as well and form a large labor union. This is how the first labor union came into being in 1886. The first labor union was named as the â€Å"National Labor Union† (NLU). Formation of other labor unions in the United States: The working hours had now been reduced to 10 hours from 12 hours. Even this decrease was not enough for them, so, in 1886, the Nation Labor Union campaigned to reduce the work hours to a more convenient, manageable and less tiring 8 work hours. Then onwards, now labor groups started to fo rm in that era. These new labor unions included: â€Å"Knights of Labor†. â€Å"American Federation of Labor† (AFL). The founder of American federation labor was Samuel Gompers. Devaluation of the labor unions and their protest against it: As the Industrial Revolution came into soaring mechanism, the requirement for laborers once more amplified. This period was also noticeable by mass colonization numbers, which enlarged the number of laborers in the labor group. This also caused the value of the individual worker to diminish. This was due to some of the laborers, who were unskilled or not deserving were allowed to be replaced by the hard working and the

FGM among the Maasai of Kenya Term Paper Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 1000 words

FGM among the Maasai of Kenya - Term Paper Example Female Genital Mutilation (FGM) refers to the removal of an entire or a part of the external parts of the female sexual organ. In most practicing societies, the Maasai included, popular opinion towards FGM by the Maasai of Kenya is that its effects are more counterproductive than benevolent on the life of the innocent girl, and it should be disbanded. In the first place, there is a multiplicity of negative health consequences which are associated with FGM. First, FGM readily brings with it, hemorrhage, since the sponsors who preside over it are usually bereft of adequate surgical or clinical skills. Sponsors in this case are those who preside over this rite of passage. Again, the clandestine nature with which FGM is practiced makes adequate preparations for the ritual nearly impossible. This includes the failure to feature clinical tools to control bleeding as part of the sponsors’ paraphernalia. Largely, the legal proscription of the act by the Government of Kenyan 9 years ag o, underpins the clandestine nature of FGM practices. According to Maasai Rising (2013), the gravity of the matter above cannot be downplayed. Despite the Government of Kenya’s act of outlawing the FGM, the prevalence of FGM among the Maasai of Kenya remains at an appalling 95-97%. It is estimated that 5% of this population is lost annually, to hemorrhage sustained from the rite of passage. What exacerbates the situation is the fact that the age of eligible FGM candidates keeps reducing. Candidates are people who have been designated for initiation. The reason behind the reduction in the age of the potential FGM candidates among the Kenyan Maasai girls is that the Government of Kenya has appointed non-Maasai teachers to enlighten and conscientize the Maasai girl child on FGM and its dangers. These teachers usually teach in the upper years of primary school education, where most female students are considered ripe for circumcision. Because of this increased enlightenment among Maasai girls, the age of circumcision gets lowered to parry away rebellion from the girl child who is older and more enlightened. This means that presently, most candidates are not those at the onset of puberty, but those between 4 and 9 years. The crux of the matter herein is that the younger candidates are not strong enough to withstand to heavy bleeding and succumb to it. Because of the failure to make proper arrangements to deal with clinical complications that may accost FGM, there are other pitfalls that follow it as a rite of passage. Cases of urethral damage also highly and consistently accost FGM since sponsors who preside over FGM are not clinically or medically trained. Again, reports by Maasai Evangelistic Association (2012) show that FGM is inextricably concomitant with urinary tract infections, cervical infections, chronic pelvic infections and dermatoid cysts. Sometimes, the birth canal is interfered with to the point of causing dangerous childbirth in future. In mos t instances, the spread of the HIV/AIDS virus is easily aided by the practice of FGM since only one blade is used on all participating candidates. The blade is only wiped on grass and nearby vegetative undergrowth to wipe off blood. This makes it too easy for infections to pass from one candidate to another, should one candidate be a disease carrier. However, the Maasai Evangelistic Association (2012) observes that it is important to note that the malevolent nature FGM is not merely embodied by the health implications that accompany the practice. To argue otherwise

Analysis of JFK (1991) and Thin Blue Line

Analysis of JFK (1991) and Thin Blue Line Both films, for example, pore over minutae that may or may not be significant (umbrellas opening in JFK, a dropped thickshake in The Thin Blue Line) to draw the viewer ever more deeply into the world of the crime scene. Yet neither film stops at a simple recitation of facts: both look at the States role in events and suggest an explanation for the alleged cover up. In JFK, this is Stones highly controversial suggestion that the CIA and the military-industrial complex had a vested interest in seeing President Kennedy dead because he was shortly to scale down Americas involvement in Vietnam. In The Thin Blue Line, two related theories are suggested for the official insistence on trying Randall Adams: firstly, that David Harris account had the advantage of providing the police with an eye-witness, while if Harris was himself the murderer, no reliable witness existed; and secondly, that Harris could not be tried as an adult, thus robbing the District Attorney of the much-sought death sentence for the murder of a policeman. These theories are communicated through devices commonly associated with fictional narratives, such as a highly evocative musical score (Phillip Glass music for The Thin Blue Line invokes a melancholy sense of helplessness, while John Williams score for JFK has a more urgent tone, suggestive of furtive conspiracies and forces careening out of control). And both counterpoint different modes of filmmaking as they do so, contrasting invented material filmed in a classical Hollywood style with documentary or faux-documentary footage. The similarity in effect of the two films fast-paced juxtaposition of styles is striking, and suggests Stones approach may have been influenced by Morris work. Yet while both films have an over-riding concern with the filmmaker uncovering facts, that might be called the outer narrative, each constructs a contrasting relationship between the narrative and documentary elements within the text. In JFK, Stone uses an interior narrative of Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) investigating the case. While Garrison is essentially a surrogate for the filmmaker, so that the film cannot be considered as the story of Jim Garrison,3 this narrative is provided moments that function simply as character drama with little or no relationship to the larger argument (such as Garrisons arguments and reconciliation with his wife, or a Norman Rockwell moment4 with his children). This, then, is an example of classical Hollywood-style fictional filmmaking. This is then ruptured by the moments of documentary and faux-documentary that expand on Stones argument as it is being expressed by Garrison. This includes what we might call genuine documentary material: the Zapruder film of the assassination and archival photographs (such as of Kennedys autopsy, or the photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding the rifle). It also includes a large number of re-enactments, which are very often presented in a simulated documentary style (grainy or black and white film stock, hand-held cameras). This faux-documentary material is often juxtaposed with the genuine documentary material in a manner that blends the two together (the Zapruder footage is matched by staged footage using similar film stock, and the autopsy photographs are intercut with shots of a wax dummy of Kennedy). The Thin Blue Line shares the same outer narrative (filmmaker investigating), but the inner narrative (the story of Randall Adams) is not constructed in a classical Hollywood style. Instead, it is told through one of the standard modes of documentary filmmaking identified by Bill Nichols5: direct address by participants in an interview format (with the interviewer removed through editing). As with Stones film, this inner narrative is supported by evidence, but again the mode of presentation is reversed: the principal method used to support the witnesses testimony is through reconstructions of the crime scene that, while stylized and fragmented, are constructed as a miniature classically constructed narrative. This nesting of different modes might be tabulated as follows: My point, however, is that the films differ in mode, but use mirror-image forms of the same structure. JFK is primarily a fictional film, which employs a documentary style when re-enacting speculated events. The Thin Blue Line is primarily a documentary, but employs a style borrowed from fictional films in its re-enactments. If the two films share so much in common, and slide so fluidly from documentary to fictional modes so quickly, does this suggest the difference in the two forms might be largely cosmetic? Fiction can be used to express truths about the real world, and the documentary is can be used in ways that obscure the truth or construct falsehoods. If the fundamental difference between fiction and non-fiction is taken as the link to the real, and it is shown that documentaries and fictions share similar relationships to the real, then the two forms start to look more alike: not the same, exactly, but similar. JFK and The Thin Blue Line, by this way of thinking, are then only superficially different types of movies. They share the same structure and the fiction versus documentary dichotomy is more like a difference in genre than a fundamental distinction. This is not to invest the superficial crossover of techniques between the two forms with a significance it does not posses. Documentaries are not fictions just because The Blair Witch Project (1999) does such a good job of pretending to be a real document, or even because Rats in the Ranks (1996) works so well as a narrative. Rather, the downplaying of the documentary / fiction division is based upon a deep-seated cynicism about claims to truth in documentary. That there is such reluctance to accept truth at face value in documentary should not be surprising. Early or classic film studies was based largely on arguments about the relationships between film and reality. While this debate is too detailed to fully explore, it is important to touch upon briefly because much writing upon documentary echoes the arguments of these early writers. The direct link to reality might be seen as a defining feature of the documentary, but it was also seen in the first half of the century as one of the defining features of the film medium itself. The cinema appeared to be an even more perfect method for mechanically reproducing reality than the still photographs that preceded it. This added urgency to arguments of aesthetics that centred on whether the role of the artist was to attempt to recreate the real world, or rather to interpret or even transcend the real.6 These arguments were therefore central to classic film theory and resolved into two broad strands of argument that echo the aesthetic positions described. Thus writers such as Siegfried Kraceur and Andre Bazin had approaches that emphasised films role as a mirror to the real. Of more interest to the current discussion, however, are early anti-realists such as Rudolf Arnheim. In his Film as Art, his defence for cinemas status as serious artistic medium (rather than a mechanical process) is built a round a series of explanations of the way in which film differs from the real.7 Three dimensional surfaces are projected on a plane surface. Perception of depth is lost. In the black and white cinema with reference to which Arnheim formulated his thesis, colour is eliminated. Lighting distorts. Editing interrupts the flow of time and creates artistic possibilities through the use of montage. Non-visual stimulus is absent (or, after the coming of sound, limited), and even the visual world is limited by the edge of the screen. This catalogue of distortions is, for Arnheim, the very basis for the creation of aesthetic systems by which films can signify meanings. After establishing the above points, he sets about demonstrating how each of these limitations in depicting the real is used as a method of artistic expression8. Subsequent film theory moved beyond Arnheims formulations, but has tended to take them as a given in the sense that few would still argue that the central project of film is limited to the reproduction or reflection of reality. Given that such formulations are at the foundation of later film theory, it should not be surprising that they were echoed when subsequent theorists turned their minds to issues regarding documentary, and particularly its relation to the real. Noà «l Carroll attributes much of this writing to a backlash against premature claims by proponents of direct cinema that their method of cinema provided unmitigated access to the real.9 These documentarists attempted to avoid the filmmakers intervention and interpretation, reacting to the overt imposition of a viewpoint present in traditional Griersonian forms of documentary. However, as Carroll puts it, [d]irect cinema opened a can of worms and then got eaten by them.10 It was quickly argued that direct cinema was every bit as interpretive as Griersonian documentaries. For the distortions of reality that were identified by Arnheim are equally present in documentary cinema, but with different implications. Instead of being the unambiguously positive means to artistic expression, every limitation of the medium is instead a problematic point of mediation by the filmmaker. The limitations of the film frame, for example, force choices upon even the most non-interventionist direct cinema filmmaker. And with every choice the filmmaker is placing the film at a greater distance from reality. Carroll quotes Eric Barnouw making this point: To be sure, some documentarists claim to be objective a term that seems to renounce an interpretive role. The claim may be strategic, but it is surely meaningless. The documentarist, like any communicator in any medium, makes endless choices. He [sic] selects topics, people, vistas, angles, lens, juxtapositions, sounds, words. Each selection is an expression of his point of view, whether he is aware of it or not, whether he acknowledges it or not. Even behind the first step, selection of a topic, there is a motive It is in selecting and arranging his findings that he expresses himself; these choices are, in effect, comments. And whether he adopts the stance of observer, or chronicler or whatever, he cannot escape his subjectivity. He presents his version of the world.11 Such an argument certainly seems to cast doubt over the potential for objectivity in documentary cinema. Carried to an extreme, it is the presentation of a version of the world rather than the world itself that can be seen as rendering documentary a form of fiction. Either way, the prospects for documentary truth in such a model seem grim indeed. It should be noted that Carroll puts little faith in such an approach to documentary, and his counter-argument will be returned to. Before doing so, however, it is worth noting that more recently, Carroll has drawn the distinction between what he calls the selectivity argument (recited above) and more global postmodern scepticism of claims to truth.12 The latter is based not in the assumptions of classical film studies, but rather the wider discussions about the way any human discourse imposes meaning and structure on real events. For example, historical accounts impose a narrative structure onto events to make them intelligible, and a distinction must be drawn between the real events (which actually occurred) and the account (which lacks an independent historical existence): The states of affairs and events the historian alludes to do have a basis in historical reality, and the historians claims about those states of affairs and events can be literally true or false. But the narratives in which those states of affairs and events figure are inventions, constructions, indeed, fictions. The narrative structure in the historical recounting is not true or false; it is fictional.13 This point of such an observation may seem a little obscure. If the narrative structure imposed in a historical account is considered independently of the statements of historical fact that it is used to explain, then of course it must be considered fictional. If, however, a documentary text is considered in its entirety, then it is open to questioning about the validity of the historians factual claims (including analysis as to whether the narrative structure is an accurate or fair way of interpreting the real events) in a way that fiction is not. Certainly the argument is here being posed by Carroll (albeit following Michael Renov and Hayden White) as a prelude to arguing that it is unsupportable14. However, Carroll also refers to an alternative model for looking at the link between non-fiction and fiction, mounted by Bill Nichols in his book Representing Reality, which is more subtle and worth dealing with directly. Nichols, unlike the other theorists alluded to by Carroll, does not argue that documentaries must be considered fiction. He recognises that the existence of an external, real-world referent is an important distinction that cannot be dismissed as irrelevant. The world of a fiction film is a unique, imaginary domain, but the world of documentary is different: Instead of a world, we are offered access to the world.15 This claim to representation of the real means that documentaries are not simply narratives: they are also argumentative, if only in the sense that they make claims (even if only implicitly) about what is true. They are therefore a fiction (un)like any other.16 However, Nichols remains troubled by these claims to truth. While the documentary is distinguished from fiction by its links to the real, this representation is rendered problematic by the apparent impossibility of rendering truth objectively. Documentaries, while not fiction, share with fiction those very qualities that thoroughly compromise any rigorous objectivity, if they dont make it impossible Objectivity has been under no less siege than realism, and for many of the same reasons. It, too, is a way of representing the world that denies its own processes of construction and their formative effect. Any given standard for objectivity will have embedded political assumptions In documentary, these assumptions might include belief in the self-evident nature of facts, in rhetorical persuasion as a necessary and appropriate part of representation, and in the capacity of the documentary text to affect its audience through its implicit or explicit claim of This is so, isnt it?17 Nichols argument is reminiscent of those strands of theoretical thought that view ideology as an inescapable and all pervasive force. Documentaries do make claims about the truth that are open to evaluation, but unfortunately, according to Nichols, our institutional mechanisms for assessing such claims are themselves suspect. If such an approach is accepted, evaluation of the arguments made by Oliver Stone and Errol Morris might be highly problematic. Carroll, however, is not willing to concede that any of these arguments establish either that non-fiction is a form of fiction, or that objectivity is impossible. Firstly, he argues that the cinema does not posses any unique tendency towards bias compared to other media. The same arguments about selectivity that Barnouw raises with respect to film are equally applicable to other media and fields of enquiry.18 The particular causes of distortion may be different, but any historian for example may select, manipulate, interpret or emphasise aspects of their material just as a documentary maker can. Thus if non-fiction film is said to be subjective due to its selectivity, so must any field of human enquiry, such as history and science. In the earlier of the two articles I have discussed (written in 1983), Carroll is confident that such a wide-ranging scepticism would not be seriously proposed.19 As we have seen, by 1996 that was exactly the argument Carroll was responding to. Nevertheless, in 1983 his defence against the selectivity argument is based upon the notion of objectivity. In any given field of argument, at any given time, there are patterns of reasoning, standards for observation, and methods for assessing evidence which are used for getting to the truth.20 A piece of research is considered objective insofar as it abides by these norms. Likewise, non-fiction films may be assessed against similar codes, and will be considered biased or subjective if they fail to meet them. That selectivity may make bias possible, or even likely, does not preclude the possibility of a film according with established standards of objectivity. The obvious differences between the real world and the filmed presentation prevent film from substituting for lived experience, but they do not prevent documentaries from being objective. This central assumption of this argument that there are standards of objectivity that can be used to judge the truth is exactly the assumption that we have seen Bill Nichols question. Carroll, however, disputes all of Nichols contentions that are cited above. Firstly, he does not accept that objectivity demands that a film call attention to its processes of construction. After all, the fact that a non-fiction film is constructed is understood by any audience and does not need to be spelt out. Self-reflexive analyses of the filmmaking process or the authors own subjectivity might be a feature of many recent documentaries, but for Carrol this is an artistic device, rather than a necessary benchmark for objectivity. Nor does he accept that any standard for objectivity has embedded political assumptions, even accepting Nichols very broad definitions (outlined above) of what constitutes a political assumption. A belief in the self-evident nature of facts, for example, might be a political assumption when the facts being presented are politically charged falsehoods. Yet the acceptance that some claims of self-evident truth are suspect does not mean that there can be no self-evident facts. With regards to rhetorical persuasion, he argues that films can either eschew such devices altogether (he cites nature documentaries as an example),21 or employ rhetorical structures in the service of objective discourse. Similarly, he regards the implicit claim that this is so, isnt it as present in virtually any assertion and hence neither a political assumption nor a barrier to objectivity. Carrolls approach to these arguments about the prospects for truth or objectivity in documentary is often to return to examples where the truth claimed by the documentary seems clear and uncontentious (as with his common use of nature documentaries as discussion points). The linking thread of the arguments he presents is that the theorists he criticises have mistaken the difficulty in presenting objective truth for an impossibility, often by focussing on exactly the texts where the truth is most problematic.22 It is worth returning to The Thin Blue Line and JFK at this point, since these films both explore events that are subject to considerable conjecture. Neither could be accused of assuming the truth about these events is self-evident (quite the opposite), yet both nevertheless ultimately make vital factual claims. As noted already, these claims question state-sanctioned verdicts, and both films led to a public discussion that forced official re-examination of the cases: The Thin Blue Line forced the retrial of Randall Adams, while JFK contributed to the passing of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, which appointed an Assassination Records Review Board (AARB) to re-examine unreleased information about the assassination.23 More than a decade later, with Randall Adams freed from jail, it seems fair to say that Morris case has been widely accepted as true. Oliver Stone, too, has been partially vindicated by subsequent re-examination of the case, with records released by the AARB that support some of his allegations (such as tampering with records of Kennedys autopsy).24 Yet, despite such small victories, and acceptance by many filmgoers of Stones theory of the assassination, JFK remains subject to fierce scholarly criticism of both its methods and conclusions that stands in contrast to the reception of The Thin Blue Line. Linda Williams, in her discussion of the two films, dismisses JFK as paranoid fiction,25 and the widespread condemnation of Stones film by both popular and academic press is well documented.26 Clearly this has much to do with the nature of the case Stone discusses. The Kennedy assassination, for obvious reasons, is a much more familiar event and one that had been the subject of considerably more public discussion than the Randall Adams prosecution. Furthermore, while The Thin Blue Line avoids underlining the political implications of its own conclusions, JFK is explicitly critical of the government and media, calling the assassination a coup detat and coming very close to suggesting former president Lyndon Johnson was involved.27 However, the difference in the reception of the two films cannot be explained simply through reference to the argument each presents. Within the very similar structures outlined at the start of this essay, there are also crucial differences that also explain much of the negative response to Stones film compared to Morris. In his consideration of JFK, Robert Rosenstone notes that there are considerable constraints over the depiction of historical events on the screen.28 In particular, he sees the need to invent detail and compress events to shape a narrative as a limitation that must be negotiated by any historical film. While he is referring to narrative features such as JFK, his argument is equally applicable to the summaries of and suppositions regarding events in The Thin Blue Line. This argument has clear overtones of the discussions of documentaries distortions of truth through selectivity that have already been cited. Like Carroll, Rosenstone argues that when a historical filmmaker such as Stone invents or compresses events, he or she is exercising the same type of discretion that the author of any written history must.29 Such inventions can be considered true (at least to a point) in the sense that they can be verified, documented, or reasonably argued. The problem, notes Rosenstone, is that the verification must occur outside the world of the film. When Stone argues in JFK that President Kennedy was about to withdraw troops from Vietnam, the information is justified by reference to a real memorandum (National Security Action Memo 263), but a fictitious character makes the reference. Assuming no foreknowledge of the case, the audience has no way while watching the film of even knowing that the memorandum really existed, let alone being sure that it supports the conclusion Stone draws. If Stones conclusion is to be examined, the audience must go beyond viewing and read the relevant documents (or scholarly discussion of them) for themselves. If they do so, they will, as Rosenstone states, be undertaking the same kind of critique and review that a work of written history is subjected to. This process of measuring a film against standards of objectivity is exactly that which Carroll highlights as the means of linking non-fiction films to the truth. Stone has actively sought to enter into such debates, mounting extensive defences of the historical accuracy of JFK and his other works.30 That JFK was so controversial was perhaps partly due to the fact that audiences do not necessarily judge films within such evaluative frameworks: unlike the target audience for written history, they may assume that what they see is true and not enter into the debates as to the films veracity. Even assuming an engaged, sceptical audience, however, it is also the case that Stones film does not make the separation of truth from fiction a straightforward task. I have already suggested that the film possesses three layers of exposition: an outer narrative (Stones case), an inner narrative (Garrisons story), and evidence (presented as documentary material and re-enactments). The inner narrative story of Jim Garrison (which is likely to be understood by most audiences as at least partially fictional and not taken as literally true) is often weaved seamlessly in with the evidence (more likely to be seen as Stones presentation of true material). Garrison, for example, meets the mysterious Mr X (Donald Sutherland) in Washington, who outlines a hypothesis about who killed Kennedy and why. This calls forth a series of re-enactments of high level discussions between officials that are weaved into Mr Xs account. The narrative is calling forth evidence, but the difficulty with this sequence is in separating what material is a fictional narrative device, what is speculated, and what is documented truth. For example, are we to accept that Garrison really did meet an anonymous official who told him this information, and take that as evidence that Stones case is true? Or are we to take this as simply part of the inner narrative, a method of presenting evidence? As mentioned, Mr X talks in detail of a real memorandum in order to put Stones case that Kennedy wished to withdraw from Vietnam. An audience might correctly surmise that the existence of such a memo (putting aside its meaning) is a documented fact. However, this quickly leads into discussions of the reaction to this memo within high levels of the government, and the point at which history slides into speculation in this sequence is by no means readily apparent. The re-enactment portions of the sequence are presented in a stylised style using black and white photography, but this does not flag them as conjectural, since Stone switches between film stocks throughout the film without drawing such distinctions. (Elsewhere in the film, for example, the Zapruder film of the assassination, is alternated with simulated footage shot in the same style.) The effect of these aesthetic decisions by Stone is to confuse the boundaries between non-fiction and fiction in a way that makes application of objective standards for assessing truth difficult. The audience can only infer which sections of the film are intended to be read as non-fiction and subject to such examination. Written in October 2001 for the Melbourne University subject Ethnographic and Documentary Cinema. Notes 1. This is the concluding sentence of Eric Barnouw, Documentary: A History of the Non-Fiction Film, (Oxford University Press, New York Oxford, 1993, 2nd Revised Edition), p. 349. 2. The list of similarities between the two films that follows draws partly on Linda Williams, Mirrors without Memories: Truth, History and The Thin Blue Line in Barry Keith Grant Jeanette Sloniowski (eds), Documenting the Documentary: Close Readings of Documentary Film and Video (Wayne State UP, Detroit, 1998), p 381. 3. The films Garrison, for example, has access to information the real Garrison did not, in order to allow Stone to communicate it to audiences. For example, In the movie we attributed to Garrison the information about Shaws background but in real life Jim did not have access to that information at that time. (Oliver Stone audio commentary, JFK DVD, Region 4 Special Edition Directors Cut release, Warner Brothers, 1 hour 28 mins approx.) 4. This phrase is Stones own: JFK audio commentary, op. cit., 2 hours 10 mins approx. While these scenes are also used to communicate information about the larger case, this is an example of narrative efficiency, and does not contradict my point that they do contain aspects (such as the melodromatic touch of Garrisons children asking Dont you love us any more?) which function simply as domestic drama, with no relation to the case against Clay Shaw. 5. Nichols has revisited and slightly reformulated these modes over time, but they can be summarised as expository (ie voice-of-God documentaries that use direct address to tell the audience a truth), observational (cinema verite style films that aim to observe events without participating), interactive (interview based films that allows for direct address by participants, while allowing for filmmakers interaction through questioning), reflexive (films that draw attention to the documentarys own methods), and performative (stressing an individual, subjective position, while downplaying objective or referential aspects). See Bill Nichols: The Voice of Documentary, Film Quarterly 36, no 3 (Spring 1983); Representing Reality: Issues and Concepts in Documentary (1991, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis), Chapter 2; and (for the perfomative mode) Performing Documentary, Blurred Boundaries: Questions of Meaning in Contemporary Culture (c. 1994, Indiana UP, Bloomington), pp 92-106. 6. This point and the subsequent discussion of classical film theory draw on the discussions in the anthologies Gerald Mast et al. (eds.), Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings, (Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 1992), pp. 3-7, and Antony Easthorpe, Contemporary Film Theory (Longman, London New York, 1993), pp. 2-5. 7. Rudolf Arnheim, Film as Art (Faber Faber, London, 1958), esp. pp. 17-37. 8. Ibid., p. 37-114. 9. Noà «l Carroll, From Real to Reel: Entangled in Nonfiction film, in Noà «l Carroll, Theorizing the Moving Image (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996), p. 224-252. (Originally published in Philosophic Exchange in 1983, and will be cited in future as Carroll (1996/1983) to distinguish it from his piece in Post-Theory cited below). Reference to direct cinema is p. 225. 10. Ibid. 11. Ibid., p. 226. Carroll is quoting from the first edition of Barnouws Documentary, citing p. 287-288 of that edition (Oxford University Press, New York, 1974). The nearest equivalent to this quote I can find in the third edition (op. cit.) is at p. 344. 12. Noà «l Carroll, Nonfiction films and Postmodernist Skepticism in Noà «l Carrol David Bordwell (eds.), Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies, (University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1996), pp. 283-306. 13. Ibid., p. 288. Emphasis is Carrolls. 14. Carroll is frequently belligerent about the texts he discusses but is particularly so about Renovs Theorizing Documentary, describing it as a state of the art compendium of received thinking about the documentary film, and dismissing Renovs argument as a red herring. Ibid., p. 285 291. 15. Both quotes Nichols, 1991, op. cit., p. 109. Emphasis is Nichols. 16. This is the title of the second part of Nichols book. How helpful this argumentative nature is as a distinction between fiction and documentary (and how unlike any other form of fiction documentary can be said to be) is debatable given that fiction can be every bit as argumentative as documentary (as JFK demonstrates). 17. Ibid., p. 195. 18. Carroll (1996/1983), op. cit., p. 226. 19. Carroll: I mention this because I do not think that commentators who conclude that the nonfiction film is subjective intend their remarks as a mere gloss on the notion that everything is subjective. But that, I fear, is the untoward implication of their attack. Ibid., p. 226. 20. Ibid., p. 230. See also Carroll, 1996, op. cit. pp. 283-285. 21. Carroll, 1996, p. 294. 22. See, for example, Ibid., p. 293, regarding film scholars focus on art-documentary. 23. Michael L. Kurtz, Oliver Stone, JFK, and History, in Robert Brent Toplin (ed), Oliver Analysis of JFK (1991) and Thin Blue Line Analysis of JFK (1991) and Thin Blue Line Both films, for example, pore over minutae that may or may not be significant (umbrellas opening in JFK, a dropped thickshake in The Thin Blue Line) to draw the viewer ever more deeply into the world of the crime scene. Yet neither film stops at a simple recitation of facts: both look at the States role in events and suggest an explanation for the alleged cover up. In JFK, this is Stones highly controversial suggestion that the CIA and the military-industrial complex had a vested interest in seeing President Kennedy dead because he was shortly to scale down Americas involvement in Vietnam. In The Thin Blue Line, two related theories are suggested for the official insistence on trying Randall Adams: firstly, that David Harris account had the advantage of providing the police with an eye-witness, while if Harris was himself the murderer, no reliable witness existed; and secondly, that Harris could not be tried as an adult, thus robbing the District Attorney of the much-sought death sentence for the murder of a policeman. These theories are communicated through devices commonly associated with fictional narratives, such as a highly evocative musical score (Phillip Glass music for The Thin Blue Line invokes a melancholy sense of helplessness, while John Williams score for JFK has a more urgent tone, suggestive of furtive conspiracies and forces careening out of control). And both counterpoint different modes of filmmaking as they do so, contrasting invented material filmed in a classical Hollywood style with documentary or faux-documentary footage. The similarity in effect of the two films fast-paced juxtaposition of styles is striking, and suggests Stones approach may have been influenced by Morris work. Yet while both films have an over-riding concern with the filmmaker uncovering facts, that might be called the outer narrative, each constructs a contrasting relationship between the narrative and documentary elements within the text. In JFK, Stone uses an interior narrative of Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) investigating the case. While Garrison is essentially a surrogate for the filmmaker, so that the film cannot be considered as the story of Jim Garrison,3 this narrative is provided moments that function simply as character drama with little or no relationship to the larger argument (such as Garrisons arguments and reconciliation with his wife, or a Norman Rockwell moment4 with his children). This, then, is an example of classical Hollywood-style fictional filmmaking. This is then ruptured by the moments of documentary and faux-documentary that expand on Stones argument as it is being expressed by Garrison. This includes what we might call genuine documentary material: the Zapruder film of the assassination and archival photographs (such as of Kennedys autopsy, or the photograph of Lee Harvey Oswald holding the rifle). It also includes a large number of re-enactments, which are very often presented in a simulated documentary style (grainy or black and white film stock, hand-held cameras). This faux-documentary material is often juxtaposed with the genuine documentary material in a manner that blends the two together (the Zapruder footage is matched by staged footage using similar film stock, and the autopsy photographs are intercut with shots of a wax dummy of Kennedy). The Thin Blue Line shares the same outer narrative (filmmaker investigating), but the inner narrative (the story of Randall Adams) is not constructed in a classical Hollywood style. Instead, it is told through one of the standard modes of documentary filmmaking identified by Bill Nichols5: direct address by participants in an interview format (with the interviewer removed through editing). As with Stones film, this inner narrative is supported by evidence, but again the mode of presentation is reversed: the principal method used to support the witnesses testimony is through reconstructions of the crime scene that, while stylized and fragmented, are constructed as a miniature classically constructed narrative. This nesting of different modes might be tabulated as follows: My point, however, is that the films differ in mode, but use mirror-image forms of the same structure. JFK is primarily a fictional film, which employs a documentary style when re-enacting speculated events. The Thin Blue Line is primarily a documentary, but employs a style borrowed from fictional films in its re-enactments. If the two films share so much in common, and slide so fluidly from documentary to fictional modes so quickly, does this suggest the difference in the two forms might be largely cosmetic? Fiction can be used to express truths about the real world, and the documentary is can be used in ways that obscure the truth or construct falsehoods. If the fundamental difference between fiction and non-fiction is taken as the link to the real, and it is shown that documentaries and fictions share similar relationships to the real, then the two forms start to look more alike: not the same, exactly, but similar. JFK and The Thin Blue Line, by this way of thinking, are then only superficially different types of movies. They share the same structure and the fiction versus documentary dichotomy is more like a difference in genre than a fundamental distinction. This is not to invest the superficial crossover of techniques between the two forms with a significance it does not posses. Documentaries are not fictions just because The Blair Witch Project (1999) does such a good job of pretending to be a real document, or even because Rats in the Ranks (1996) works so well as a narrative. Rather, the downplaying of the documentary / fiction division is based upon a deep-seated cynicism about claims to truth in documentary. That there is such reluctance to accept truth at face value in documentary should not be surprising. Early or classic film studies was based largely on arguments about the relationships between film and reality. While this debate is too detailed to fully explore, it is important to touch upon briefly because much writing upon documentary echoes the arguments of these early writers. The direct link to reality might be seen as a defining feature of the documentary, but it was also seen in the first half of the century as one of the defining features of the film medium itself. The cinema appeared to be an even more perfect method for mechanically reproducing reality than the still photographs that preceded it. This added urgency to arguments of aesthetics that centred on whether the role of the artist was to attempt to recreate the real world, or rather to interpret or even transcend the real.6 These arguments were therefore central to classic film theory and resolved into two broad strands of argument that echo the aesthetic positions described. Thus writers such as Siegfried Kraceur and Andre Bazin had approaches that emphasised films role as a mirror to the real. Of more interest to the current discussion, however, are early anti-realists such as Rudolf Arnheim. In his Film as Art, his defence for cinemas status as serious artistic medium (rather than a mechanical process) is built a round a series of explanations of the way in which film differs from the real.7 Three dimensional surfaces are projected on a plane surface. Perception of depth is lost. In the black and white cinema with reference to which Arnheim formulated his thesis, colour is eliminated. Lighting distorts. Editing interrupts the flow of time and creates artistic possibilities through the use of montage. Non-visual stimulus is absent (or, after the coming of sound, limited), and even the visual world is limited by the edge of the screen. This catalogue of distortions is, for Arnheim, the very basis for the creation of aesthetic systems by which films can signify meanings. After establishing the above points, he sets about demonstrating how each of these limitations in depicting the real is used as a method of artistic expression8. Subsequent film theory moved beyond Arnheims formulations, but has tended to take them as a given in the sense that few would still argue that the central project of film is limited to the reproduction or reflection of reality. Given that such formulations are at the foundation of later film theory, it should not be surprising that they were echoed when subsequent theorists turned their minds to issues regarding documentary, and particularly its relation to the real. Noà «l Carroll attributes much of this writing to a backlash against premature claims by proponents of direct cinema that their method of cinema provided unmitigated access to the real.9 These documentarists attempted to avoid the filmmakers intervention and interpretation, reacting to the overt imposition of a viewpoint present in traditional Griersonian forms of documentary. However, as Carroll puts it, [d]irect cinema opened a can of worms and then got eaten by them.10 It was quickly argued that direct cinema was every bit as interpretive as Griersonian documentaries. For the distortions of reality that were identified by Arnheim are equally present in documentary cinema, but with different implications. Instead of being the unambiguously positive means to artistic expression, every limitation of the medium is instead a problematic point of mediation by the filmmaker. The limitations of the film frame, for example, force choices upon even the most non-interventionist direct cinema filmmaker. And with every choice the filmmaker is placing the film at a greater distance from reality. Carroll quotes Eric Barnouw making this point: To be sure, some documentarists claim to be objective a term that seems to renounce an interpretive role. The claim may be strategic, but it is surely meaningless. The documentarist, like any communicator in any medium, makes endless choices. He [sic] selects topics, people, vistas, angles, lens, juxtapositions, sounds, words. Each selection is an expression of his point of view, whether he is aware of it or not, whether he acknowledges it or not. Even behind the first step, selection of a topic, there is a motive It is in selecting and arranging his findings that he expresses himself; these choices are, in effect, comments. And whether he adopts the stance of observer, or chronicler or whatever, he cannot escape his subjectivity. He presents his version of the world.11 Such an argument certainly seems to cast doubt over the potential for objectivity in documentary cinema. Carried to an extreme, it is the presentation of a version of the world rather than the world itself that can be seen as rendering documentary a form of fiction. Either way, the prospects for documentary truth in such a model seem grim indeed. It should be noted that Carroll puts little faith in such an approach to documentary, and his counter-argument will be returned to. Before doing so, however, it is worth noting that more recently, Carroll has drawn the distinction between what he calls the selectivity argument (recited above) and more global postmodern scepticism of claims to truth.12 The latter is based not in the assumptions of classical film studies, but rather the wider discussions about the way any human discourse imposes meaning and structure on real events. For example, historical accounts impose a narrative structure onto events to make them intelligible, and a distinction must be drawn between the real events (which actually occurred) and the account (which lacks an independent historical existence): The states of affairs and events the historian alludes to do have a basis in historical reality, and the historians claims about those states of affairs and events can be literally true or false. But the narratives in which those states of affairs and events figure are inventions, constructions, indeed, fictions. The narrative structure in the historical recounting is not true or false; it is fictional.13 This point of such an observation may seem a little obscure. If the narrative structure imposed in a historical account is considered independently of the statements of historical fact that it is used to explain, then of course it must be considered fictional. If, however, a documentary text is considered in its entirety, then it is open to questioning about the validity of the historians factual claims (including analysis as to whether the narrative structure is an accurate or fair way of interpreting the real events) in a way that fiction is not. Certainly the argument is here being posed by Carroll (albeit following Michael Renov and Hayden White) as a prelude to arguing that it is unsupportable14. However, Carroll also refers to an alternative model for looking at the link between non-fiction and fiction, mounted by Bill Nichols in his book Representing Reality, which is more subtle and worth dealing with directly. Nichols, unlike the other theorists alluded to by Carroll, does not argue that documentaries must be considered fiction. He recognises that the existence of an external, real-world referent is an important distinction that cannot be dismissed as irrelevant. The world of a fiction film is a unique, imaginary domain, but the world of documentary is different: Instead of a world, we are offered access to the world.15 This claim to representation of the real means that documentaries are not simply narratives: they are also argumentative, if only in the sense that they make claims (even if only implicitly) about what is true. They are therefore a fiction (un)like any other.16 However, Nichols remains troubled by these claims to truth. While the documentary is distinguished from fiction by its links to the real, this representation is rendered problematic by the apparent impossibility of rendering truth objectively. Documentaries, while not fiction, share with fiction those very qualities that thoroughly compromise any rigorous objectivity, if they dont make it impossible Objectivity has been under no less siege than realism, and for many of the same reasons. It, too, is a way of representing the world that denies its own processes of construction and their formative effect. Any given standard for objectivity will have embedded political assumptions In documentary, these assumptions might include belief in the self-evident nature of facts, in rhetorical persuasion as a necessary and appropriate part of representation, and in the capacity of the documentary text to affect its audience through its implicit or explicit claim of This is so, isnt it?17 Nichols argument is reminiscent of those strands of theoretical thought that view ideology as an inescapable and all pervasive force. Documentaries do make claims about the truth that are open to evaluation, but unfortunately, according to Nichols, our institutional mechanisms for assessing such claims are themselves suspect. If such an approach is accepted, evaluation of the arguments made by Oliver Stone and Errol Morris might be highly problematic. Carroll, however, is not willing to concede that any of these arguments establish either that non-fiction is a form of fiction, or that objectivity is impossible. Firstly, he argues that the cinema does not posses any unique tendency towards bias compared to other media. The same arguments about selectivity that Barnouw raises with respect to film are equally applicable to other media and fields of enquiry.18 The particular causes of distortion may be different, but any historian for example may select, manipulate, interpret or emphasise aspects of their material just as a documentary maker can. Thus if non-fiction film is said to be subjective due to its selectivity, so must any field of human enquiry, such as history and science. In the earlier of the two articles I have discussed (written in 1983), Carroll is confident that such a wide-ranging scepticism would not be seriously proposed.19 As we have seen, by 1996 that was exactly the argument Carroll was responding to. Nevertheless, in 1983 his defence against the selectivity argument is based upon the notion of objectivity. In any given field of argument, at any given time, there are patterns of reasoning, standards for observation, and methods for assessing evidence which are used for getting to the truth.20 A piece of research is considered objective insofar as it abides by these norms. Likewise, non-fiction films may be assessed against similar codes, and will be considered biased or subjective if they fail to meet them. That selectivity may make bias possible, or even likely, does not preclude the possibility of a film according with established standards of objectivity. The obvious differences between the real world and the filmed presentation prevent film from substituting for lived experience, but they do not prevent documentaries from being objective. This central assumption of this argument that there are standards of objectivity that can be used to judge the truth is exactly the assumption that we have seen Bill Nichols question. Carroll, however, disputes all of Nichols contentions that are cited above. Firstly, he does not accept that objectivity demands that a film call attention to its processes of construction. After all, the fact that a non-fiction film is constructed is understood by any audience and does not need to be spelt out. Self-reflexive analyses of the filmmaking process or the authors own subjectivity might be a feature of many recent documentaries, but for Carrol this is an artistic device, rather than a necessary benchmark for objectivity. Nor does he accept that any standard for objectivity has embedded political assumptions, even accepting Nichols very broad definitions (outlined above) of what constitutes a political assumption. A belief in the self-evident nature of facts, for example, might be a political assumption when the facts being presented are politically charged falsehoods. Yet the acceptance that some claims of self-evident truth are suspect does not mean that there can be no self-evident facts. With regards to rhetorical persuasion, he argues that films can either eschew such devices altogether (he cites nature documentaries as an example),21 or employ rhetorical structures in the service of objective discourse. Similarly, he regards the implicit claim that this is so, isnt it as present in virtually any assertion and hence neither a political assumption nor a barrier to objectivity. Carrolls approach to these arguments about the prospects for truth or objectivity in documentary is often to return to examples where the truth claimed by the documentary seems clear and uncontentious (as with his common use of nature documentaries as discussion points). The linking thread of the arguments he presents is that the theorists he criticises have mistaken the difficulty in presenting objective truth for an impossibility, often by focussing on exactly the texts where the truth is most problematic.22 It is worth returning to The Thin Blue Line and JFK at this point, since these films both explore events that are subject to considerable conjecture. Neither could be accused of assuming the truth about these events is self-evident (quite the opposite), yet both nevertheless ultimately make vital factual claims. As noted already, these claims question state-sanctioned verdicts, and both films led to a public discussion that forced official re-examination of the cases: The Thin Blue Line forced the retrial of Randall Adams, while JFK contributed to the passing of the President John F. Kennedy Assassination Records Collection Act of 1992, which appointed an Assassination Records Review Board (AARB) to re-examine unreleased information about the assassination.23 More than a decade later, with Randall Adams freed from jail, it seems fair to say that Morris case has been widely accepted as true. Oliver Stone, too, has been partially vindicated by subsequent re-examination of the case, with records released by the AARB that support some of his allegations (such as tampering with records of Kennedys autopsy).24 Yet, despite such small victories, and acceptance by many filmgoers of Stones theory of the assassination, JFK remains subject to fierce scholarly criticism of both its methods and conclusions that stands in contrast to the reception of The Thin Blue Line. Linda Williams, in her discussion of the two films, dismisses JFK as paranoid fiction,25 and the widespread condemnation of Stones film by both popular and academic press is well documented.26 Clearly this has much to do with the nature of the case Stone discusses. The Kennedy assassination, for obvious reasons, is a much more familiar event and one that had been the subject of considerably more public discussion than the Randall Adams prosecution. Furthermore, while The Thin Blue Line avoids underlining the political implications of its own conclusions, JFK is explicitly critical of the government and media, calling the assassination a coup detat and coming very close to suggesting former president Lyndon Johnson was involved.27 However, the difference in the reception of the two films cannot be explained simply through reference to the argument each presents. Within the very similar structures outlined at the start of this essay, there are also crucial differences that also explain much of the negative response to Stones film compared to Morris. In his consideration of JFK, Robert Rosenstone notes that there are considerable constraints over the depiction of historical events on the screen.28 In particular, he sees the need to invent detail and compress events to shape a narrative as a limitation that must be negotiated by any historical film. While he is referring to narrative features such as JFK, his argument is equally applicable to the summaries of and suppositions regarding events in The Thin Blue Line. This argument has clear overtones of the discussions of documentaries distortions of truth through selectivity that have already been cited. Like Carroll, Rosenstone argues that when a historical filmmaker such as Stone invents or compresses events, he or she is exercising the same type of discretion that the author of any written history must.29 Such inventions can be considered true (at least to a point) in the sense that they can be verified, documented, or reasonably argued. The problem, notes Rosenstone, is that the verification must occur outside the world of the film. When Stone argues in JFK that President Kennedy was about to withdraw troops from Vietnam, the information is justified by reference to a real memorandum (National Security Action Memo 263), but a fictitious character makes the reference. Assuming no foreknowledge of the case, the audience has no way while watching the film of even knowing that the memorandum really existed, let alone being sure that it supports the conclusion Stone draws. If Stones conclusion is to be examined, the audience must go beyond viewing and read the relevant documents (or scholarly discussion of them) for themselves. If they do so, they will, as Rosenstone states, be undertaking the same kind of critique and review that a work of written history is subjected to. This process of measuring a film against standards of objectivity is exactly that which Carroll highlights as the means of linking non-fiction films to the truth. Stone has actively sought to enter into such debates, mounting extensive defences of the historical accuracy of JFK and his other works.30 That JFK was so controversial was perhaps partly due to the fact that audiences do not necessarily judge films within such evaluative frameworks: unlike the target audience for written history, they may assume that what they see is true and not enter into the debates as to the films veracity. Even assuming an engaged, sceptical audience, however, it is also the case that Stones film does not make the separation of truth from fiction a straightforward task. I have already suggested that the film possesses three layers of exposition: an outer narrative (Stones case), an inner narrative (Garrisons story), and evidence (presented as documentary material and re-enactments). The inner narrative story of Jim Garrison (which is likely to be understood by most audiences as at least partially fictional and not taken as literally true) is often weaved seamlessly in with the evidence (more likely to be seen as Stones presentation of true material). Garrison, for example, meets the mysterious Mr X (Donald Sutherland) in Washington, who outlines a hypothesis about who killed Kennedy and why. This calls forth a series of re-enactments of high level discussions between officials that are weaved into Mr Xs account. The narrative is calling forth evidence, but the difficulty with this sequence is in separating what material is a fictional narrative device, what is speculated, and what is documented truth. For example, are we to accept that Garrison really did meet an anonymous official who told him this information, and take that as evidence that Stones case is true? Or are we to take this as simply part of the inner narrative, a method of presenting evidence? As mentioned, Mr X talks in detail of a real memorandum in order to put Stones case that Kennedy wished to withdraw from Vietnam. An audience might correctly surmise that the existence of such a memo (putting aside its meaning) is a documented fact. However, this quickly leads into discussions of the reaction to this memo within high levels of the government, and the point at which history slides into speculation in this sequence is by no means readily apparent. The re-enactment portions of the sequence are presented in a stylised style using black and white photography, but this does not flag them as conjectural, since Stone switches between film stocks throughout the film without drawing such distinctions. (Elsewhere in the film, for example, the Zapruder film of the assassination, is alternated with simulated footage shot in the same style.) The effect of these aesthetic decisions by Stone is to confuse the boundaries between non-fiction and fiction in a way that makes application of objective standards for assessing truth difficult. The audience can only infer which sections of the film are intended to be read as non-fiction and subject to such examination. Written in October 2001 for the Melbourne University subject Ethnographic and Documentary Cinema. Notes 1. This is the concluding sentence of Eric Barnouw, Documentary: A History of the Non-Fiction Film, (Oxford University Press, New York Oxford, 1993, 2nd Revised Edition), p. 349. 2. The list of similarities between the two films that follows draws partly on Linda Williams, Mirrors without Memories: Truth, History and The Thin Blue Line in Barry Keith Grant Jeanette Sloniowski (eds), Documenting the Documentary: Close Readings of Documentary Film and Video (Wayne State UP, Detroit, 1998), p 381. 3. The films Garrison, for example, has access to information the real Garrison did not, in order to allow Stone to communicate it to audiences. For example, In the movie we attributed to Garrison the information about Shaws background but in real life Jim did not have access to that information at that time. (Oliver Stone audio commentary, JFK DVD, Region 4 Special Edition Directors Cut release, Warner Brothers, 1 hour 28 mins approx.) 4. This phrase is Stones own: JFK audio commentary, op. cit., 2 hours 10 mins approx. While these scenes are also used to communicate information about the larger case, this is an example of narrative efficiency, and does not contradict my point that they do contain aspects (such as the melodromatic touch of Garrisons children asking Dont you love us any more?) which function simply as domestic drama, with no relation to the case against Clay Shaw. 5. Nichols has revisited and slightly reformulated these modes over time, but they can be summarised as expository (ie voice-of-God documentaries that use direct address to tell the audience a truth), observational (cinema verite style films that aim to observe events without participating), interactive (interview based films that allows for direct address by participants, while allowing for filmmakers interaction through questioning), reflexive (films that draw attention to the documentarys own methods), and performative (stressing an individual, subjective position, while downplaying objective or referential aspects). See Bill Nichols: The Voice of Documentary, Film Quarterly 36, no 3 (Spring 1983); Representing Reality: Issues and Concepts in Documentary (1991, Indiana University Press, Bloomington and Indianapolis), Chapter 2; and (for the perfomative mode) Performing Documentary, Blurred Boundaries: Questions of Meaning in Contemporary Culture (c. 1994, Indiana UP, Bloomington), pp 92-106. 6. This point and the subsequent discussion of classical film theory draw on the discussions in the anthologies Gerald Mast et al. (eds.), Film Theory and Criticism: Introductory Readings, (Oxford University Press, New York and Oxford, 1992), pp. 3-7, and Antony Easthorpe, Contemporary Film Theory (Longman, London New York, 1993), pp. 2-5. 7. Rudolf Arnheim, Film as Art (Faber Faber, London, 1958), esp. pp. 17-37. 8. Ibid., p. 37-114. 9. Noà «l Carroll, From Real to Reel: Entangled in Nonfiction film, in Noà «l Carroll, Theorizing the Moving Image (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1996), p. 224-252. (Originally published in Philosophic Exchange in 1983, and will be cited in future as Carroll (1996/1983) to distinguish it from his piece in Post-Theory cited below). Reference to direct cinema is p. 225. 10. Ibid. 11. Ibid., p. 226. Carroll is quoting from the first edition of Barnouws Documentary, citing p. 287-288 of that edition (Oxford University Press, New York, 1974). The nearest equivalent to this quote I can find in the third edition (op. cit.) is at p. 344. 12. Noà «l Carroll, Nonfiction films and Postmodernist Skepticism in Noà «l Carrol David Bordwell (eds.), Post-Theory: Reconstructing Film Studies, (University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, 1996), pp. 283-306. 13. Ibid., p. 288. Emphasis is Carrolls. 14. Carroll is frequently belligerent about the texts he discusses but is particularly so about Renovs Theorizing Documentary, describing it as a state of the art compendium of received thinking about the documentary film, and dismissing Renovs argument as a red herring. Ibid., p. 285 291. 15. Both quotes Nichols, 1991, op. cit., p. 109. Emphasis is Nichols. 16. This is the title of the second part of Nichols book. How helpful this argumentative nature is as a distinction between fiction and documentary (and how unlike any other form of fiction documentary can be said to be) is debatable given that fiction can be every bit as argumentative as documentary (as JFK demonstrates). 17. Ibid., p. 195. 18. Carroll (1996/1983), op. cit., p. 226. 19. Carroll: I mention this because I do not think that commentators who conclude that the nonfiction film is subjective intend their remarks as a mere gloss on the notion that everything is subjective. But that, I fear, is the untoward implication of their attack. Ibid., p. 226. 20. Ibid., p. 230. See also Carroll, 1996, op. cit. pp. 283-285. 21. Carroll, 1996, p. 294. 22. See, for example, Ibid., p. 293, regarding film scholars focus on art-documentary. 23. Michael L. Kurtz, Oliver Stone, JFK, and History, in Robert Brent Toplin (ed), Oliver