Mr. Bill Nichols

I really enjoyed reading Nichols view on fictional characters as compared to social actors, especially within a documentary. He thinks (his opinion) that people do not relate to fictional characters as they do with social actors. Thinking back in relation to many of the documentaries we've viewed in class, I never really wanted to see a fictional character anyway - I wanted someone with truth, and a problem, that we could follow and try to help them fix (or watch them fix, if you will). Nichols recognizes this, and states that because this person is true to life and relatable, though their purpose may or may not be ballooned up to be something much bigger than it really is, as an audience, we care, and will stay involved with their feat. Therefore, we are drawn to charcters that share relatable components and relate easier.






Bill Nichols’ brings up an interesting point of documentaries. Nichols says that people seem to pay less attention to fiction characters than to social actors. At first I did not agree with him. Look at the crazes of such films as Star Wars, Lord of the Rings and any Disney film. People love those characters and their story world. When watching a documentary you do tend to “prepare ourselves not to comprehend a story but to grasp an argument” (Nichols 5). The social actors are real so their status in the film is not only acting as a symbol for the greater society, but showcases an example from the story they are trying to highlight. Because the person is actual, no matter how the story is formed by the director, we care. Nichols brings up the point that because the character experiences similar “sounds and images…a distinct bond to the world we all share” (Nichols 5). So, though the documentary may be trying to expose a truth, the most important part that draws the viewer into the story is the fact that the story is true and all components are found in our own life. The more one can relate, the closer to the story one can feel.