De Cesare Analysis

by Heike Liss

Donna De Cesare is a freelance photojournalist, documenter and writer and her subject is a sensitive one: she photographs children and youth who are victims of war, physical and/or sexual abuse and other traumas in Central and South America. But De Cesare sets high standards in her work ethic. In order to work with the children, Donna invests time and energy in building relationships that go both ways but the position of the committed observer is a difficult one. De Cesare aims at making a difference through her work, especially when she returns to the children with the photographs and publications. There is hope that this experience empowers the children and that it opens up the opportunity to voice their unheard stories.

But when Donna is not working on her personal projects but is instead on an assignment for UNICEF, an agency with its own agenda, things get more complicated. Often, the children have to be protected through anonymity. Their faces have to be unrecognizable, their stories have to be unidentifiable, and their names have to be changed to protect them from retribution. How effective is that kind of protection and what happens when a story is de-personalized in such a way? Who is looking at these images and why? Placed in the adequate context it can reach a broader audience, but does it make a difference? Or does it simply make us, who live in the privileged part of the world, feel better and allow us to remain in our little bubble since we don’t have to look at our own tragedies of abuse and poverty? While we can experience a moment of sympathy and reassurance about ourselves while feeling sorry but helpless in the face of such unbelievable suffering, the most that a majority of people can do is sit in their comfortable chair and sigh.

So what motivates a white, educated woman who could lead a comfortable life, to pack up her bags and go off to live in El Salvador? Why would she rather hang out with street gangs in L.A. than sit in a fancy bar in some other part of L.A., sipping Dry Martinis with a colleague or a friend? What drives her to devote her life and risk it at times for these children? But Donna simply said that she is appalled by the children’s situation. She dedicated one of her projects to “all the people in search of meaning, love and justice,” which may explain what her motivation is. Unfortunately, in this time and day it is hard not to react with a certain amount of suspicion and cynicism toward someone with such a large amount of idealism.

As an audience we are glad that somebody else is out there doing this work, so that we can stay put in our armchairs, or do whatever else it is that we have to do. It is a great thing that these stories get told but the next, big step should be getting the children to tell their own stories.

LECTURE – 4:30 PM

A Youth Perspective: Youth Produced Videos at the Educational Video Center

Torrance York

Irene Villasenor

Isaiah Miller

York, Villasenor, and Miller Analysis

by Glenn Kawabata

Torrance York, a current board member and past director of the Educational Video Center, gave the audience a clear and concise overview of the structure and mission of the EVC. However, while York’s presentation concentrated on EVC’s practical and educational benefits for the students involved, her discussion did not clearly address the pedagogical concern of how a director can refrain from projecting their own persona onto projects created by students, especially in a situation where this may be their first self-driven project. While she mentioned issues regarding difficulties in planning, the disorder of the video-making process, and perhaps most importantly the topic of the different power structure that exists in a non-traditional classroom, it really did not delve into these difficulties and their potential implications for those who might find themselves in a similar situation.

Assumedly this program serves to empower youth with their medium, knowledge and support to allow self-expression. While Isaiah Miller provided a quiet and contemplative survey of his involvement with the EVC, he never really addressed this issue nor did he present a critical analysis of the EVC and its programs.

Although in the introduction to her presentation, Villaseñor mentioned that she would address ageism and discuss getting into a manipulative situation with instructors this never really got addressed or discussed in much detail.

It should be noted that this presentation ran over, and therefore lacked in-depth critical inquiry from the audience. However, as the presenters were scheduled to appear in the following panel discussion (see Panel Discussion: Moderator: Tanya Turkovich, Donna DeCesare, Ellen Tomie, Torrance York, Irene Villaseñor, and Isaiah Miller at 7:30 PM on Wednesday June 6), it didn’t seem terribly problematic.

This presentation gave a generally positive overview of the EVC, its programs, and the experiences of some of the youth that have been involved with it. Although it seems to be fairly successful at what it does it might also have been illuminating to learn of some of its difficulties and failures. Is the program successful only because of its location in New York City or would a scaled down version of this work in other regions of the United States? It also raises questions regarding the possible emotional and psychological benefits that students may derive from the program.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly for those that may find themselves as educators in the future, how does one teach and interact in a non-traditional teaching environment, which has a different power structure? This presentation provided a ripe opportunity to explore the issue of the projection of power and persona, especially as it applies to teaching in the arts. Unfortunately the discussion did not necessarily take full advantage of that opportunity.