Nichols writes, "The fact that there is more than one mode of documentary film strongly suggests that the representation of reality is not an objective, cut-and-dried affair. Although there may be only one historical world, and even if certain facts about it can be agreed upon as objectively true, the ways of seeing and representing that world, like the ways of interpreting it, vary considerably."
Based on this statement, blog about what exactly you think this means and how the 6 modes of documentary film factor into this idea.
I believe that what Nichols it saying is that using one (or more) of the six modes of documentary film is leading into an alternative reality that exists in the director's mind. Reality is in the eye of the beholder, or in this case, in the eye of the director/producer of the film. But, also in using the however many of the six modes in making a documentary, the reality of it can be warped even more by who the viewer is and how they interpret the film that they are viewing.
Expository film is based on the idea of "the voice of God," where the unseen voice delivers commentary or describes the film. This mode uses the "voice" to guide the viewer.
Poetic film has no commentary, interviews, or clear-cut view on where it is coming from.
Observational film avoids using voice-over and interviews to get the point across.
Participatory film uses interviews that would only occur if the camera is there and the interviewer influences the person they interview.
Reflexive film often has the director interacting with the subjects, but makes it seem like a normal occurrence, not forced.
Performative film relies on conveying emotion.
These film modes all rely on how reality is seen by the director and by the viewers as well.
