Jacknis - Meg

Jacknis writes about Margaret Mead and Gregory Bateson and how they pioneered the way ethnographic research was documented and recorded. It turns out that some photographs were posed and some film was staged and edited. For example, their film of trance dances was staged during the day when in reality it was a night ritual. This is a dilemma similar to museum exhibits on how to attract viewers' attention and still maintain some cultural education. Another issue was that one of the rituals filmed was not an ancient ritual but one created during their fieldwork. Because the ritual filmed was not an ancient one does not make it any less real. This change in the ritual is like "culture" that is always changing due to outside influences.
Faye Ginsburg writes that in some instances ethnographical film has been used by indigenous activists for claims on their cultural continuity, land claims and cultural property rights. Yet if the film has been edited in a certain way, does it not to some extent create observer bias? How do you really know if it portrays the truth? Since movie film was limited and expensive, it was used for the most interesting moments. Does this also create a bias so as to not waste expensive film? Who decides what is interesting?
Ginsburg also mentions that Mead was a well known anthropologist but did not have the respect of her male contemporaries. Mead was interested in and studied areas that were about women and their daily lives (bathing babies, childbirth and families). Most likely the men did not consider these areas important and worthy of any attention and a result did not respect her work.