Two documentary tales of “Ukrainian revolution”

Abstract

The primary purpose of the article is to demonstrate the expediency of applying the categories of narrative theory, namely, point of view, focalization, and frame, to the analysis of documentary films. The article approaches narrative journalism as a relatively new field of research and practice, defines the concept of publicist narrative documentary and the importance of the three narrative categories named above for its production and perception. On the practical side we analyze two recent documentaries about the events of the 2013–2014 Euromaidan. The analysis aims to show how these documentaries construct different types of frames, points of view and techniques of focalization to convey conflicting tales about the same historical event — the “Ukrainian revolution”. In Sergey Loznitsa’s “Maidan” the static camera, unaccompanied by a narrator’s voice, generates a slow, epic rhythm of cinematic narration with the people of Ukraine as its collective agent. Using Dziga Vertov’s formalist aesthetics Loznitsa forms up a story about the heroic people, though the author’s ideological point of view is disguised by the seemingly detached kino-eye. Igor Lopatyonok-directed and Oliver Stone-produced “Ukraine on Fire” is a publicist narrative presenting Euromaidan not as an expression of the people’s free will, but as the result of Washington’s politics. The anticipated perception of this ideological stance is secured by a complex meta-frame and the rigorous logic of the plot presenting revolutionary events as a consequence of historical events. The dynamics of points of view following particular heroes and anti-heroes and the precisely centered focalization reinforce the logic of narration, while the voice of the narrator plays the role of its open “ideological mouthpiece”.