'Experts in the Field: Rhetoric and Aesthetics in the Agricultural Documentary'

Mark Broughton

'Experts in the Field: Rhetoric and Aesthetics in the Agricultural Documentary'

Research output: Contribution to conference › Paper › peer-review

81 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

We will watch both Ditching, made in 1942, and Foot and Mouth, made in 1955. These films belong to a subgenre of agricultural documentary – the instructional farming film, the dominant form of agricultural documentary in the 1940s and 1950s, when these two films were made. An analysis of these two films will raise historiographical questions, both about the specific cultural contexts within which the films were produced and about the way in which the canons of documentary film are constructed. In developing this analysis, the paper aims to re-examine the aesthetic contribution that key films in the subgenre made to the British documentary and agricultural discourses.

Original language	English
Publication status	Published - 12 Apr 2008
Event	Borderlines Film Festival - The Courtyard, Hereford, United Kingdom Duration: 28 Mar 2008 → 13 Apr 2008

Other

Other	Borderlines Film Festival
Country/Territory	United Kingdom
City	Hereford
Period	28/03/08 → 13/04/08

Keywords

Lindsay Anderson
Documentary
Agriculture
Foot and mouth disease
Ditching
Instructional Films
Genre
Aesthetics
Rhetoric
British cinema
The Museum of English Rural Life

Access to Document

Experts in the Field Paper
This text is copyright protected. All rights reserved.
Accepted author manuscript, 110 KB

Cite this

@conference{aa9a3afeada840cb82e9e6c87fec61ba,

title = "'Experts in the Field: Rhetoric and Aesthetics in the Agricultural Documentary'",

abstract = "We will watch both Ditching, made in 1942, and Foot and Mouth, made in 1955. These films belong to a subgenre of agricultural documentary – the instructional farming film, the dominant form of agricultural documentary in the 1940s and 1950s, when these two films were made. An analysis of these two films will raise historiographical questions, both about the specific cultural contexts within which the films were produced and about the way in which the canons of documentary film are constructed. In developing this analysis, the paper aims to re-examine the aesthetic contribution that key films in the subgenre made to the British documentary and agricultural discourses.",

keywords = "Lindsay Anderson, Documentary, Agriculture, Foot and mouth disease, Ditching, Instructional Films, Genre, Aesthetics, Rhetoric, British cinema, The Museum of English Rural Life",

author = "Mark Broughton",

note = "Mark Broughton, {\textquoteleft}Experts in the Field: Rhetoric and Aesthetics in the Agricultural Documentary', paper presented at the Borderlines Film Festival, Hereford, UK, 28 March – 13 April, 2008. ; Borderlines Film Festival ; Conference date: 28-03-2008 Through 13-04-2008",

year = "2008",

month = apr,

day = "12",

language = "English",

}

TY - CONF

T1 - 'Experts in the Field: Rhetoric and Aesthetics in the Agricultural Documentary'

AU - Broughton, Mark

N1 - Mark Broughton, ‘Experts in the Field: Rhetoric and Aesthetics in the Agricultural Documentary', paper presented at the Borderlines Film Festival, Hereford, UK, 28 March – 13 April, 2008.

PY - 2008/4/12

Y1 - 2008/4/12

N2 - We will watch both Ditching, made in 1942, and Foot and Mouth, made in 1955. These films belong to a subgenre of agricultural documentary – the instructional farming film, the dominant form of agricultural documentary in the 1940s and 1950s, when these two films were made. An analysis of these two films will raise historiographical questions, both about the specific cultural contexts within which the films were produced and about the way in which the canons of documentary film are constructed. In developing this analysis, the paper aims to re-examine the aesthetic contribution that key films in the subgenre made to the British documentary and agricultural discourses.

AB - We will watch both Ditching, made in 1942, and Foot and Mouth, made in 1955. These films belong to a subgenre of agricultural documentary – the instructional farming film, the dominant form of agricultural documentary in the 1940s and 1950s, when these two films were made. An analysis of these two films will raise historiographical questions, both about the specific cultural contexts within which the films were produced and about the way in which the canons of documentary film are constructed. In developing this analysis, the paper aims to re-examine the aesthetic contribution that key films in the subgenre made to the British documentary and agricultural discourses.

KW - Lindsay Anderson

KW - Documentary

KW - Agriculture

KW - Foot and mouth disease

KW - Ditching

KW - Instructional Films

KW - Genre

KW - Aesthetics

KW - Rhetoric

KW - British cinema

KW - The Museum of English Rural Life

UR - http://www.borderlinesfilmfestival.co.uk/sites/www.borderlinesfilmfestival.co.uk/files/Borderlines2008-web.pdf

M3 - Paper

T2 - Borderlines Film Festival

Y2 - 28 March 2008 through 13 April 2008

ER -

'Experts in the Field: Rhetoric and Aesthetics in the Agricultural Documentary'

Abstract

Other

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this