Who is Exploiting Whom? Documentaries and their Subjects

"A serious concession to make," Young concludes, "I don't usually hear filmmakers offering that kind of editorial input to their subjects. We felt that because they were young people and because this was such a personal subject, we had to give them that out, that safety net."

Although the New York Times article tried to effectively investigate the bargain struck between subject and filmmaker, Young asserts a major error in that this "out" offered to the Faces kids was completely ignored in the article, making them look insensitive and the process of documentary filmmaking appearing innately exploitative. Young claims the writer's point seemed to be, "If you want to make a good documentary, you have to burn your subjects in the process."

In talking about their relationship with the kids in the Faces group, Todd speaks of it as a complex one, "You do develop a relationship with them and it's as complicated as any, and even more complicated as in your non-work life. There are times when you misunderstand each other, there are times when you might want to do something where the other person doesn't. It's all about feelings. Our bottom line here is we're making a film about a difficult subject and we're looking for people who want to take part in that journey. And that challenge. And these were kids who really wanted to do that."

The article focused on one member in the group, Brian Teglio, who the writer felt was especially manipulated by the filmmakers. Young admits it was uncomfortable for Brian to open up. And that ironically the New York Times article which singled him out continued the process of awareness beyond that of the making of the documentary. "But was he ashamed and sorry that he did it? Well, he wouldn't be coming to the screenings next week if he did." Additionally, Teglio also wrote a letter to the magazine, published a few weeks after the article, explaining how pleased he was with the finished film.

The question arises, "Who is exploiting who?" The documentarians for exposing their subjects or now, one step further, the writer for judging the filmmakers and their subjects in order to make some preconceived point about documentary filmmaking. Young says, "I think the thing that really disappointed me is that [Conover] felt that there's something fundamentally wrong with what we were doing... He's taking the point of view that to reveal yourself in a documentary, to let your guard down and be open, is fundamentally self-destructive... And I flatly disagree with that point of view and there's remarkable proof in Brian himself, that he's grown tremendously through this experience."

Young explains, "When we're interviewing Brian, and he makes some comment about the size of his penis and the writer says, 'One wonders if he should have had his lawyer present,' and I thought Gosh, if we can't talk about the size of our penis without having our lawyer present what does it all come down to?"

Young and Todd are proud of their film and the relationships they now have with their new friends in Faces. Not just subjects, the people in their documentaries are human beings; they both give and gain with their participation in a project. In their previous film "Children of Fate", Todd speaks fondly of a woman who thrived on the filmmakers' company, "it turned her on and made her feel important."

There are many kinds of relationships between filmmaker and subject, some resistant, some participant, some passive, but to categorize documentary filmmaking as a singular relationship, either innately exploitative or not, is a claim that Young and Todd are committed to refute. "People are definitely affected by the camera, I would never suggest that they're not," Young admits, "People are ON when we're filming... but even when it happens, it's not what you're capturing is untrue; it's often that it's very revealing about somebody."