The evolving field of videographic criticism has sparked considerable debate, particularly regarding the role and nature of “voice” within these audiovisual essays. In 2010, Adrian Martin ignited this discussion by questioning the authoritative “explaining voice” often employed in academic voiceovers, suggesting it overshadows the source material’s inherent qualities. Martin advocated for more nuanced vocal approaches, drawing inspiration from the poetic and resistant voices found in the works of filmmakers like Godard and expanded cinema traditions. This call for a re-evaluation of voice in videographic criticism set the stage for further exploration and experimentation within the field.
Ian Garwood’s influential 2016 video essay, ‘The Place of Voiceover in Academic Audiovisual Film and Television Criticism’, directly responded to Martin’s provocation. Garwood’s work challenged rigid categorizations of voice, such as the poetic versus explanatory dichotomy. Through its hybrid form, Garwood’s essay demonstrated the potential of blending different vocal strategies and argued for a more flexible and less prescriptive approach to voiceover in academic audiovisual work. This move towards hybridity and performative inquiry reflected a broader trend within videographic criticism to embrace more dynamic and less conventional forms of scholarly expression.
Building upon these earlier discussions, a 2019 roundtable at the Society for Cinema and Media Studies (SCMS) further delved into the scholar’s voice in audiovisual criticism. Six scholars, including Lisa Henderson and Maria Hofmann, framed their discussion around key questions about the potential of reinterpreting auteurism through video essays, the necessity of incorporating diverse voices (accented, queer) to challenge traditional academic authority, and the ongoing debate about balancing poetic approaches with pedagogical and political responsibilities. This roundtable acknowledged the crucial role of vocal performance in video essays, echoing Christian Keathley and Jason Mittell’s observation that in the absence of a physical speaker, the vocal delivery becomes paramount in engaging and sustaining viewer attention. These collective explorations highlighted the growing awareness of voice as a central, multifaceted element in the creation and reception of videographic scholarship.
These ongoing conversations about voice, coupled with an interest in the relationship between voice and auteurism, provide the context for understanding the significance of Drew Morton’s essay, “Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime: Teaching Subjectivity and Ambiguity in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: A Videographic Reflection on Pedagogy in an introductory American Film History Course.” Morton’s title itself, “Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime,” hints at the personal and pedagogical journey at the heart of his work.
Morton’s essay is ambitious in its dual focus. It offers a rich analysis of Michel Gondry’s Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, a film known for its complex narrative structure and visual inventiveness, making it particularly engaging for students. Simultaneously, the essay prompts film educators to critically examine their own pedagogical choices, questioning the underlying reasons for selecting specific films for their courses. Morton’s reflection encourages a more honest consideration of the relationship between the teacher and the chosen text. He grounds his analysis in his decade-long experience of teaching Eternal Sunshine, revealing how his evolving relationship with the film has intertwined with personal reflections on his relationship with his wife, Nicole. This intertwining of personal and pedagogical perspectives is central to Morton’s essay and resonates deeply with the broader discussions of subjectivity in videographic criticism.
The autobiographical dimension of film pedagogy and videographic essay creation becomes a key theme when considering Morton’s work. The films we choose to teach and the critical approaches we adopt are inherently shaped by our own evolving identities and experiences. The personal investment in pedagogical choices and critical interpretations is often under-acknowledged. In the context of Morton’s essay, the intensely romantic yet complex nature of Eternal Sunshine, with its exploration of memory and relationships, makes the autobiographical lens particularly relevant. Acknowledging this personal dimension, however, also introduces a degree of vulnerability, as the teacher’s or essayist’s subjectivity becomes an explicit part of the scholarly endeavor. Furthermore, in the context of relationships, personal narratives are inherently shared and interconnected.
Maria Hofmann’s recent video essay, ‘Laterally’ (2023), further explores this intricate connection between subjectivity, personal experience, and videographic criticism, albeit focusing on the essay-making process itself rather than pedagogy. Hofmann employs distorted and doubled voiceover, a technique Adrian Martin might appreciate, to invite viewers to consider video criticism as a practice situated in the liminal space between play and destruction, fiction and non-fiction. Hofmann argues that this intermediate space, populated by the film object, the video essayist, and the spectator, necessitates an active and interactive engagement, forcing our subjectivities back into the cinematic field.
Within Hofmann’s framework, the viewer becomes an active participant in the critical process. In the context of Morton’s essay, the viewer (in this case, the author of this response) is prompted to consider their own relationship to Morton, to Gondry’s film, and to the autobiographical lens through which Morton’s essay is constructed. This lens highlights themes of desire—for film, for partners—and the transformations that occur through long-term engagement with both. Morton’s revised essay, by explicitly embracing cinephilia, film analysis, and relational dynamics as autobiographical practices, effectively addresses the initial question about the status of Clementine and Nicole within the respective works of Gondry and Morton. Specifically, it raises the question of how Nicole, like Clementine, might be understood as a figure shaped by a partner’s creative process, yet also recognized as an individual beyond that representation. Through this exploration, “Everybody’s Gotta Learn Sometime” ultimately reveals the deeply personal and evolving nature of both teaching and videographic criticism, emphasizing that learning, in all its forms, is a continuous and subjective journey.
Works Cited
Garwood, Ian. 2016. ‘The Place of Voiceover in Academic Audiovisual Film and Television Criticism’, NECSUS: European Journal of Media Studies, Autumn, https://necsus-ejms.org/the-place-of-voiceover-in-audiovisual-film-and-television-criticism/
Hoffmann, Maria. 2023. ‘Laterally’. In: Zeitschrift für Medienwissenschaft, ZfM Online, Videography, 30. Mai, https://zfmedienwissenschaft.de/online/videography-blog/laterally.
Keathley, Christian and Jason Mittell. 2016. The Videographic Essay: Criticism in Sound and Image. Montreal: Caboose.
Martin, Adrian. 2010. ‘A Voice Too Much’, De Filmkrant, June, No. 322. Originally online at: http://www.filmkrant.nl/av/org/filmkran/archief/fk322/engls322.html. Now online at: https://reframe.sussex.ac.uk/audiovisualessay/reflections/adrian-martin-a-voice-too-much/.
Van den Berg, T. and Kiss, M. 2016. Film studies in motion: From audiovisual essay to academic research video. Scalar: http://scalar.usc.edu/works/film-studies-in-motion/index
