Sunday, April 7, 2013

9 - Myths and Ideologies


By Olivier, Hélène  and Corinne 

Introduction
            This week’s screening was an interesting documentary called If a Tree Falls, in which the environmental issues were the central theme. Daniel McGowan and other “eco-terrorists” made some drastic actions in order to make the world realize the crucial state of our planet. On our free time, we had the pleasure to watch Richard Desjardins’ documentary film L’erreur boréale. Deforestation is the main topic addressed in the film. Through those two documentaries, we had the chance to develop our understanding of environmental issues as well as many other factors involved
If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front
            If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front is a documentary film of 85 minutes and is directed by Marshall Curry and Sam Cullman. This movie was produced in the United States in 2011 and features Daniel McGowan, his friends and family and allies of the Earth of Liberation, or commonly called ELF. The film is about Daniel McGowan who was a regular kid and went to Catholic school. Child of a New York police officer, he became an activist. After college, McGowan realized the impact and the wide spread of the environmental problems and he decided to join the environmental movement. He started by writing letters and petitioning and after, he engaged himself in civil disobedience. These methods were ineffective and he decided to go further with his actions.  He and his group of activists did property destruction through arson. Nevertheless, it was well established that they would never hurt someone. They were making these gestures with the only intention to bring down the big companies.   They were targeting these companies who drastically neglected the environment; they were prioritizing profit. McGowan and his group had valid reasons to target these companies, however, their actions were too harsh. In addition, in the movie we saw many protests and we could have noticed the brutality made by the police officers towards the activists. Throughout the movie, we can see that McGowan and the ELF members are troubled and are questioning themselves. They feel this way because the gestures they are making towards the companies have serious consequences. In the end, McGowan is imprisoned because one of the members of the ELF, Jake Ferguson, denounced him to the FBI.  
            While viewing this film, we can see the different point of views and this allows us to make our own opinion on the subject. There are environmental and terrorist issues, like the co-producer Sam Cullman says in the short interview linked below.  For Daniel McGowan and the members of the ELF, the environment is a central aspect of their lives and they want to inform the population of the issues concerning this. They wanted to shock the companies. However, the methods they used were drastic and unorthodox. That is well illustrated by the famous proverb: “The freedom of one ends where the other begins”. Because of those actions, the big businesses didn’t only lose money, they lost years of constant effort and many employees lost their jobs. They were trapped in an unpleasant situation because they didn’t want to change the way they were working and they encountered a lot of issues. Similarly, the FBI and the OSP had a greater workload because of the activists and they had to review their priorities because of this crisis. The three parties should have changed the way they operated. Moreover, the movie demonstrated a bias towards Daniel because we felt sorry for him when he got arrested. The producer presented scenes where we saw Daniel’s girlfriend and family crying at the moment of his arrest and this is when we saw the authorities as the cruel characters. 
            When viewing If a Tree Falls: A Story of the Earth Liberation Front, we can make associations within the concepts learned in class such as participative democracy, capitalism, basis of our governments, ideologies, democracy and media. First of all, a participative democracy means that, to establish big projects and to achieve our objectives, teamwork is crucial. In the movie, we saw that McGowan recruited some individuals to help him protest and to make his plans possible. Also, in the protests, we clearly saw the teamwork of the authorities to try to maintain a peaceful environment. Moreover, capitalism is one of the first reasons why big companies neglected the environment. As another example of a concept, one of the two types of laws of John Locke, the natural law, explains that we cannot violate other people’s property. It has been deeply violated by the activists in the film. The companies who deprive the individuals who appreciate nature have also violated it, as well as the police who did not let the activists protest freely.  For the second type of John Locke’s law, the natural rights, it explains that individuals have the right to life, health, liberty and property. We understand that the ELF deeply violated this natural right because they destroyed the property of big companies. In addition, Locke also states that we have the right to revolt in certain circumstances, which was shown in the movie with the protests. Furthermore, we learned that ideologies were a set of beliefs, habits that shaped our comprehension of life. In the movie, we understood that there was a clash of ideologies between the ELF and the businesses. They had different opinions on the subject of environment and it is well illustrated in the documentary where we can easily present the different point of views. We can also relate the concept of media, which explains that citizens are very dependent of the media. It also says that social medias play a public service function to the movie. In the documentary film, it illustrates very well that the media shapes our understanding of the world. They name tagged the ELF as eco-terrorist, which was exaggerated. It is well structured because even though some of the scenes are not in chronological order, we still understand the story and its issues.

L’erreur boréale
            L’erreur boréale is a documentary film directed by Richard Desjardins in 1999. Desjardins is a singer, songwriter, documentary filmmaker, and social justice activist. His co-producer on the project L’erreur boréale was Robert Monderie, who is a Quebec scriptwritter and filmmaker. Filmed in Northern Quebec, this 68 minutes documentary addresses the issue of deforestation.  More precisely, Richard Desjardins discusses the devastating effects of clear-cutting on the environment. Through the documentary film, Desjardins and Monderie explain that the Quebec citizens are duped by the government as well as by the companies involved in the forest industry. The two filmmakers claim that the forest’s legislation is violated by the forestry and that the government prefers to accommodate the forest industry instead of protecting the environment. Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie denounce the atrocities committed against forests and, more importantly, try to make people understand the importance of this natural resource. With the documentary film L’erreur boréale, the filmmakers try to reach as many people as possible, so that the population will be aware of this environmental disaster, taking place in Northern Quebec. The following link brings to the complete film L'erreur boréale, which won multiple awards such as Le Prix Jutras for the best documentary film of 1999.
            Through the screening of the documentary film, it was possible to relate certain concepts viewed in class, such as the relationship between documentaries and media or myths and ideologies. In the first place, documentary films are a reliable way to propagate a set of beliefs and ideas. Through L’erreur boréale, the filmmakers Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie promote the idea that the government, concerning the forest industry and the impacts on the environment, is fooling the people of the province of Quebec. The filmmakers use their documentary film to propagate their ideas and beliefs on the deforestation and forestry in Northern Quebec. Desjardins and Monderie, also bring a critique on the government in place. The filmmakers of L’erreur boréale make a judgement on the effectiveness of the actual democratic government. As the philosopher John Locke stated, they believe that the government must govern in the interest of the governed. Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie strongly consider that the Quebec government supports and encourages the development of the forest industry, regardless the consequences on the environment. In the same vein, Desjardins and Monderie also think that the Quebec government does not respect their engagements towards society regarding of the ground rent of the forestry. In the same line of thinking, Richard Desjardins bitterly believes that the Quebec government does not govern in the interest of the population, as opposed as to the interest of capitalist companies. Therefore, the filmmakers of L’erreur boréale use the media of documentary film to propagate their ideas and beliefs concerning the development of the forest industry and clear-cutting in Northern Quebec. Richard Desjardins and Robert Monderie prove their points by using an efficient film structure stuffed with powerful images, meaningful rhetorical speeches and deep reflections. 
Personal response
            Both the viewing of If a Tree Falls and L’erreur boréale taught us about environmental issues, but also about how they are perceived by different groups of people. It was interesting to be given various points of view, which made it easier to have a greater understanding of the issue. In the documentary we have watched in class, we learned about the main activists’ motivations that lead them to do such extreme actions. We found interesting to see how Daniel’s family was involved in the situation and how they had to deal with all this. We can relate more to the human side than only seeing what the eco-terrorist did. Often, we tend to forget about the “villain’s” family because usually the “victim’s” side is more described. Though, that was not the case in If a Tree Falls.
            In L’erreur boréale, Richard Desjardins’ purpose is to spread the information about the deforestation to as many people as possible. Consequently, we had the opportunity to learn more in depth about deforestation, more precisely about the process called clear-cutting. Before the screening of the documentary, we had a vague idea of what clear-cutting was about. L’erreur boréale allowed us to truly understand this phenomenon. Also, Desjardins argues that the governmental actions are bias and tend to please the forest industry instead of protecting our environment. Once again, we were aware of those kinds of actions but it was shocking to learn more about what is really going on.
            The visioning of those two documentaries surely challenged our own perception of the world. It seems to us that even though we do hear about environmental issues quite a lot, we do not even know half of what has to be known. One of the most shocking parts of If a Tree Falls, in a certain way, was when Daniel’s wife testifies about how she perceives this hard situation. Our initial point of view was that these eco-terrorists were wrong to make such drastic actions even for a good cause. We thought they fully deserved to go to prison. However, we realized how it could affect their family and entourage. This “human perspective” challenged our solid convictions.
            It is possible to relate the common topics discussed in the documentaries to the present student crisis in our country. Like the eco-terrorists and Desjardins, the “carré-rouge” students are fighting for something they strongly believe in. Their actions aim to speak up their mind. The most drastic ones are willing to go through anything to reach their goal.  We also related the conflicts involving the police, as it happened in If a Tree Falls.
            Another possible connection would be to the documentary called Trou Story, which is also produced by Richard Desjardins. The film presents the environmental growing issue caused by mines in Quebec. The “Plan Nord” is also discussed and criticized. In the following trailer, there is a brief scene in which people are showing their disagreement. Once again, that relates to the student crisis as well as the two documentaries.
Conclusion
            All things considered, these documentary films showed us how politics and Medias are closely related to each other. We can also observe that capitalism and the protection of the environment are not meant to share the same points of views. As a team, we enjoyed our screenings because it allowed us to have a greater understanding of the different world’s ideologies. This is our retrospective on the subject of myths and ideologies; we are looking forwards to read your comments.

 
 


15 comments:

  1. Very interesting blog! You guys mentioned that the actions of the ELF were too drastic and extreme. Although I agree with that, I feel that it is necessary to mention that the actions of the lumbar companies and the police were drastic too. In my opinion both the ELF and the big companies needed to make changes in the way that they dealt with certain things. The police and the authorities also needed to make changes in the way they treated the protesters and how severely they convicted the activists like Daniel and his friends. I think that there were many things that should have been handled differently in order to maintain the peace. I believe that convicting Daniel and the other members of the ELF of terrorism was an extreme thing to do and wasn’t necessary in my opinion. I also feel that the film presented a certain bias towards the ELF so it left the viewer feeling bad for Daniel and his family and making the authorities seem like the bad guys.

    -Lianne Deguire

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nice blog entry! Watching “If a Tree Falls” shows three sides of the story: the activists, the businessmen, and the investigators. In parts of the documentary, one starts to feel empathy for the main character, David, even though what he and his group did wasn’t right. Their actions cost people their jobs, and the taxpayers had to pay the bill for the police investigations. Even though nobody was hurt, something could have gone very wrong. Of course, in some cases their actions did solve a problem. For example, ten years’ of protests against the slaughterhouse for horses had not been able to shut it down. When David and his accomplices burned down the slaughterhouse, it ended the whole business. “L’erreur boréale” showed that similar problems also occur in Quebec, and that the government here didn’t want to listen either.

    - Sarah Aspler

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great blog you guys! Very well analyzed, especially in the case of "L'erruer boréale". Governments definitely do not give the public full disclosure about just how much damage they do to our environments, and documentaries like this are necessary for us to be properly informed.
    However the ease in which you used the term "eco-terrorist" to define Daniel and his associates conflicted me. Although the term's definition has become vague in the past decade, I still believe it is one of the worst titles a person can be given; a public enemy who is connected to chaos, anarchy and death. We saw an entire hour and a half dedicated to the ELF and saw that their firmest ideal was that they would never hurt anyone; they would only attempt bring down their harmful industries. This alone should obliterate any perception of terrorism associated with the acts they commit, yet what's being said in this documentary is that property damage and the loss of money is enough to change that? If that's how vague the term is, then technically speaking, why don't we call logging companies environment-terrorists? They commit more acts of destruction and chaos than any of the examples we saw in the film, but since their work benefits our daily needs it's okay to simply turn a blind eye? As a society we are too biased in our judgment of how money-making industries function; we are driven by the need for profit. We all talk about helping the environment and doing our part but as soon as someone stands up and performs a noticeable act of protest, we tear them down and what they believe in and call them an enemy of the people. What does that truly say about us? The annihilation of entire ecosystems is absurd, but we don't care. It's just business...

    -Michael Wolvin

    ReplyDelete
  4. Very nice job!

    One of the main issues that we discussed in class and is being discussed in the comments above, is the fact that they were branded as terrorists, and I would like to share my opinion on that subject.

    If we look at the word Terrorism, it refers to the use of terror. Since 9/11 and the recent terrorist events that have happened in the past decade or so, the word terrorism has changed, and has been given many different definitions. Nevertheless, it always implies that a person, or a group of people are inflicting terror upon another person, or group of people. If we look at the documentary and the ELF's actions objectively, that's exactly what they were doing. They were, through their actions, terrorising other people. Lumber workers and business owners were living in a state of fear, never knowing if they would be the next targets.

    I am not saying that the ELF is composed of horrible, bloodthirsty, and psychopathic people, however, they where indeed committing terrorist activities. They had convictions, and decided to take a chance and stand up for what they believed in. All throughout that process, they where aware of the possible consequences of their actions, and that is a risk they decided to take.

    I think that what Daniel did was extremely courageous, and I admire him for how strong he is for standing up for what he believed in. Nevertheless, he now has to face the music, and I believe that being branded a "Terrorist" was merited.

    Sebastian Molina Calvo

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great job on the blog entry!
    Even though the Elf were trying to stop people from committing environmental crimes, I believe that there could have been a more legal way of doing so. The ELF did not have to go around burning down buildings, they could have done legal protests in the streets in front of the factories or something along those lines. I think that burning down buildings went way too far, because it hurt those companies financially, due to the fact that they had to rebuild the buildings. There were also some unexpected consequences, when they burned down the farm of somebody who wasn't even doing anything wrong and when they burned down the library. I think that Daniel and the rest of the ELF should be considered terrorists, due to the fact that they were using terror to get their point across.
    -Ryan Quinn

    ReplyDelete
  6. Good blog entry! If a Tree Falls in my opinion was one of the best documentaries we watched in class. The only part I disliked was the fact that they focused too hard on Daniel's family to try to make us feel that what he did was not as bad as it was. I like how you examined the 3 different parties and agree with your saying: “The freedom of one ends where the other begins.” I bekieve that in this case the only way they could get what they wanted was too completely eliminate the other party like they did with the horse killing company. In my opinion, the best solution would have been that all parties would have to change their way of functioning but it will probably never happen because for the business group a lot of money is involved. Good job on your analysis!

    Alexandre Vallée

    ReplyDelete
  7. "If a Tree Falls" is a quit interesting documentary. The fact that the film maker made the culprit a victim to make us become more aware of the environmental issue is quit brilliant. Because of all the damaged caused, the ELF had a reputation as a eco-terrorist. However, a person who took act was in the film the one who we pity and somehow connect best to. I agree to the idea of the ELF to act to stop, but to kill and damage innocent people for their incompetence is unacceptable. However, I must say that this film is somehow a brain washing machine to hate all the huge industries. We must not forget there is a new law to protect the environment. ( Even thought the industries manage to contour the law...) I think there is an other way to save the world with out destroying the capitalism we live in now. Also, we mustn't forget that the destruction the ELF caused had a negative impact to the environment too.

    Great Job Guys!

    -Mee-So Chung

    ReplyDelete
  8. It's an interesting blog! Not only observe two different activists in different countries, I think to see how media makes these people works for environment - although the way of if a tree falls was bit tough - to be 'terrorists' while what they did was totally opposite what terrorists do. And the story of Quebec singer, another activist, against big powers to protect planet. We all know that we have to protect the environment, but on the other side sometimes economy that we can feel it right on our bank account seems more important right now. I think that's one of the reason some people know that 'terrorist' is a wrong named but let them be because these people might would know that behind many media, only few powers move the media just like we saw during the class. 'If a tree falls' addresses how the media made them 'eco-terrorist' - although I don't think word 'eco' would suit with terrorism - and show that these people are same people as people around us are they are just young and full of ambitious to safe planet. I think another movie would show similar contents.

    Good job!!
    Jaeho Lee

    ReplyDelete
  9. Perception is very important in terms of fully understanding a film, as the way we see something can completely change our opinion on the situation. The way Daniel was showcased in If a Tree Falls made the audience feel bad for him and side him in the situation versus the higher power who was against him. I think that what everybody did was very drastic and could have been dealt with in other ways in order to avoid such events. Although Daniel wanted to promote a good message, the methods employed weren't the best choices. Had the filmmakers decided to portray Daniel more in the offender's point of view rather than the victim, then the audience also would have had a different connection to the film and its characters.

    Ramandeep Padda

    ReplyDelete
  10. If a Tree Falls really allows viewers to see the priorities of our society. Of course, it all comes down to the economy. But the economy is something invented by humans,we are the only species to run on such a superficial system. When those who try to stand up for what is blatantly wrong, the destruction of the environment, they're shunned from society, and labeled "terrorists"? How does one who is trying to raise awareness for the most eminent problem on Earth deserve such a title? Without the environment we have nothing, and there won't be anymore resources to deplete and sell off to be made into unnecessary items. The entire idea of capitalism seems to be entirely backwards. While, yes, we can all agree that arson is not something that should be condoned,no one was hurt, and there comes a time when someone has no choice but to take action.

    Autumn Cadorette

    ReplyDelete

  11. Great blog Guys!

    “If a Tree Falls” was an exceptional documentary that discusses the governmental and activist point of view of the deforestation of our forests. The documentary covers the entire ELF and how they began with little things then expanded to major destruction in order to protect the forest. Daniel McGowan was branded by the US as a terrorist however I do not agree with this because it was due to his actions that major companies were forced to either halt their production of goods and reduce the clear cutting of trees. Daniel McGowan is an exception person who did not want for any of this to happen and now he will be branded as a terrorist for life.

    ReplyDelete
  12. If a Tree Falls does a good job of showing the different perspectives of society. We are able to see the situation from the various standpoints of the environmentalists, cooperate business owners, and the law enforcement officers. The business owners were principally interested in making money, so from their point of view the ELF were terrorists. The law enforcement officers, on the other hand, were unsure of whether what the ELF were doing was right or wrong. And finally, the members of the ELF were convinced that their actions were necessary. The ELF is a very extremist group of people. Although they had the right idea and their methods were effective, there must have been a better and less aggressive way for them to get their point across.
    Good job on the blog!

    Emily Tooker

    ReplyDelete
  13. Nice work, I really like what you said about the different points of view presented in "If a Tree Falls". It was hard to form an opinion when every side was presented so equally. Ultimately I could not find one side I agreed with, none of the sides really seemed in the right to me. The police used too much force on the peaceful protesters, the ELF destroyed property and ruined the jobs of many people, the court's verdict for Daniel seemed too harsh and the forestry companies still destroy vast amounts of forest. That said, the police were just following orders, the ELF was doing what they were doing because peaceful action was getting their cause nowhere, Daniel was by no means innocent and was rightfully declared guilty and the forestry companies made sure to follow regulations set by laws in order to preserve the environment, which included planting more trees than they cut down. It is hard to tell who is right and who is wrong in situations like this, when the issue is so complicated. Where is the line between doing your job (or pursuing your cause) and going too far?
    - Chris Naccache

    ReplyDelete
  14. I have to say that out of all the documentaries watch in class so far "If a Tree Falls" is probably the one that i enjoyed the most. It has a interesting subject that affects us all and some personal stories. This particular movie also shows us what are some of the things that we us a society give importance too. For the bast majority this is economy. But what happens when a group of people try to defend nature, and keep forest from being destructed, they get called "terrorist." So we ask ourself is this the proper term we should be using? And yes I will agree with Autumn when she say that without the environment we have nothing and we should raise awareness of what is happening, but is it really necessary do destroy private property? I believe that even if what the ELF did was for a "good cause" yes the the "terrorist" was properly used.

    ReplyDelete
  15. A very interesting entry and topic as well. If a Tree Falls is quite an intriguing documentary structurally, since the filmmakers managed to divide the screen time to equally present both sides of the story, Daniel McGowan’s as well as the FBI’s struggle to catch the members of the ELF all while providing clear and concise segments that gave the viewer a certain context of the situation. Since the documentary tried so hard to be unbiased, I found myself being without a clear opinion towards the end of the movie. I don’t agree with ELF’s actions but I do believe in their cause. On the other hand, I condemn the police brutality showcased in the film towards peaceful protestors, but at the same time, appreciate their willingness to keep our society safe and in control. However, if I look at the situation presented in the movie from a logical point of view and factor in the values that I’ve been taught, I sincerely think that Daniel was wrong and was rightfully declared guilty for his actions. However, it’s very unjust for him to go down while Jake Ferguson walked free even though he was equally, if not, more guilty than Daniel. With so many issues and opinions presented, it becomes quite hard to tell who is the hero and the victim here. However, I applaud the director’s efforts of creating a documentary that forces the viewer to think about the situation and formulate his own stance on the matter.
    Great Job on the entry by the way!
    Nabeel Ali

    ReplyDelete

Your comments should address at least one of the following topics:
- The content of the entry (if there is anything you’d like to add, to precise, to nuance, to correct);
- Your understanding and experience of the films (ideas or emotions you didn’t have a chance to share or develop fully in class);
- Some comments on other films (fiction or non-fiction), which you feel are relevant to the entry and the weekly topic;
- Links to your personal experiences.

Don't forget to include your name!

(The comment feature is reserved to members from the Documenting Myths course - thank you for respecting this...)