The Rape of Europa and Food Inc,: The Modes Used by the Filmmakers to Create Social Change

Paper by Josh Feldman.

“Film and media are instrumental in creating and implementing shifts in viewpoints that foster change within the individual and the collective of society. The documentary is a vehicle for change serving us by facilitating our hopeful return to our own fidelity of being.”(Faulcon, 2012). Voice of the Documentary, the specific way in which an argument or perspective is expressed, is represented by the way the world is being shaped by the filmmaker from his distinct point of view. This is accomplished with ethical proof, emotional proof and demonstrative proof so that the film can be credible, convincing and compelling. The documentary film in conjunction with all of the new media opportunities for the filmmaker to expand their reach and promote social change allows for greater social impact. With the use of film, social activists are able to use the documentaries as a valuable tool to tell a story and implement shifts in society’s viewpoints. Analyzing the rhetorical proofs within the films The Rape of Europa and Food Inc. allows us to see how the films can be a credible, convincing and compelling proof to illicit social change.

The Rape of Europa (2006) and Food Inc. (2008) are both documentaries that focus on creating social change. Each of these films uses techniques to create a compelling narrative and persuade the viewer to act. “The Rape of Europa” informs the audience of the current fight to reclaim the paintings stolen by the Nazi party during World War II. While Food Inc. attempts to persuade viewers to stand up against the “big food companies” by shinning a light on how food is produced. It uses interviews and facts to paint the food companies as tyrannical and evil corporations. The filmmaker effectively used the story as a “call to action” for the audience.

The Voice of the Documentary is the specific way in which an argument or perspective is expressed. This is represented by the way the world is being shaped by the filmmaker from a distinct perspective or point of view. This point of view and picture creates one voice by making a case and presenting an argument. This is done with ethical proof, emotional proof and demonstrative proof so that the film can be credible, convincing and compelling. Speaking about the world through both sound and image are both vital ways to convey the message being conveyed in the story. Using both of these tools allows for this visual message that the filmmaker is conveying to be clear for the audience. Voice is not just about sound or lack of sound but also about the information that is conveyed to the audience. It is also the “voice” of the filmmaker and not just what is being said on the screen. An important element for a film is to be credible, convincing and compelling. These things help to support the film by providing personal accounts from those in the film to add to the overall story of the film and bringing their information and story to the audience. This also lessens the requirement for the filmmaker to produce effective proof.

The Rape of Europa by Richard Berge tells a different story of World War II than most know. Instead of focusing on heated battles and the Nazi agenda, Berge focuses on Adolf Hitler’s love of art and hate for the artists which caused precious pieces of art to be stolen, destroyed, and hidden throughout the world by the Nazis and the painstaking work done to catalog all that was lost and recover the masterpieces still out there. The filmmakers point of view is that the art belongs to the families and he is clearly creating a compelling narrative to bring about that change in his viewers.

The film displays the information utilizing interviews, historical documents, video evidence, a narrator, and firsthand accounts to create the ‘Big Picture’. All of these tools help create a complete story and lend to the directors credibility. The undertone of the film is sad and weary; the narrator even speaks in a sad and dreary tone. The tone used adds to the sadness displayed in the documentary. Using current events and a personal story such as the legal battle between Maria Altmann, a Viennese Jew who’s family’s art collection was stolen by the Nazis during World War II and the Country of Austria. Austria claimed possession of the paintings and Altmann is fighting to get her family’s art back. The documentary uses Altmann as an example of how there are still “battles” being fought today over stolen art during World War II. This can be seen as an ethical and emotional proof. Viewers are meant to sympathize with Altmann. We are also shown that she is a trustworthy person who serves as an ethical proof.

With the use of historical documents and videos, the filmmaker gives the audience a clear understanding of the events that transpired during World War II. The documentary wants viewers to be appalled by atrocities that were transgressed during The Rape of Europa. Viewers are shown houses ransacked by the Nazis. Jews, taken to concentration camps, murdered in the camps or just left to die in the streets. The audience is shown how Hitler murdered and pillaged for his love of art and how the art work was either stolen from their owners or destroyed. This historical footage also adds to the credibility and is the demonstrative proof by showing actual footage of what took place. The filmmaker doesn’t have to be questioned because he has actual footage of what took place and not a reenactment that has to be questioned as to the authenticity of what took place.

Many of the paintings were scattered throughout the world after the war. David Carol from the Utah Museum of Fine Arts stated after having to give back one of the stolen paintings, “I saw a larger moral responsibility, that we can’t make amends for the millions of lives that were taken, but we can do something simple; return something stolen, and confer a little humanity back onto all of us.” (The Rape of Europa, 2007) The documentary centralizes the idea that the stolen paintings must be returned to the living relatives of the previous owners. Thereby, bringing the ethical proof back to the film and adding credibility of a museum head reiterating the same message that the documentary is trying to convey.

The Rape of Europa brings awareness towards finding the stolen paintings and returning them to their rightful owners. Many films were potentially inspired by The Rape of Europa such as The Monuments Men (2014) and The Woman in Gold (2015). The documentary’s aim to increase awareness about the ordeal that these families have endured. This goal is brought to life on the screen, while the narrator tells the audience that their battle isn’t over because now they have to fight to regain property that was stolen from them and their family. This is the call to action. The documentary serves as a reminder of the atrocities committed during World War II. It aims to show viewers the injustices committed against everyone in Europe and hopes to incite a change and return paintings that are still missing.

Food Inc. displays a different approach to delivering its message. It is more forceful and displays its own views vigorously. The documentary follows Eric Schlosser and various others as they journey throughout the U.S. to uncover the truth behind food production. The documentary consists of interviews with farmers and video evidence of conditions on the farms. As Flowers points out in ‘Eating at us’, “The film is made up of a number of mini activist-conversion narratives in which ordinary people are shown as not knowing much about food, becoming more knowledgeable, and as a result becoming food activists. By informing us, the film seeks to turn us from relatively ignorant viewers into food social activists”(Flowers, 2011). Food inc. gives a very interesting perspective on the nation’s food system. It displays information in a way to persuade the viewer to stand up against big food corporations in America. Its presentation using a multitude of narrators with a specific knowledge for the “portion” they are narrating. The film is split into multiple parts with demonstrative proof of videos and evidence to support the ethical and emotional proof provided.

The film uses images of animals and their living conditions to prompt the audience to stand up against animal cruelty and potential endangerment to the consumer. The film calls upon its viewers to protest against this form of meat production. It also labels the current production of meat “unsustainable.” In addition to the visual images of the farms, the film is able to make a great visual distinction with light and color between what they consider good versus bad. “In Food, Inc., small farming nature is polarized with big, urban, industrialized corporations. Sunlit scenes of farmers and farmland are contrasted with dark scenes of food corporation as satanic mills and food industrialists, when indoors, are surrounded by technology and computers” (Flowers, 2011). Food Inc., is appealing to the audience’s emotional proof by putting the audience in the right mood and establishing a frame of mind. By showing the food we eat and then cutting to the dirty places where the animals are kept and then showing the dirty mistreated animals dying. This is how the audiences are being pulled into the story and the emotional aspect continues throughout the film.

Carol Morrison, one of the only farmers that allowed the filmmakers to view the inside of her chicken “sheds,” stated that “It doesn’t matter if the chickens are sick or ill, they all go to the plant for processing. The companies keep the farmers under their thumb, because of the debt the farmers owe. To build one poultry house is up to two hundred eighty thousand dollars to three hundred thousand dollars per house” (Food Inc., 2008). Carol describes a vicious circle that affects farmers everywhere. To build a poultry house, you essentially have to devote yourself to the companies. If you go against their word, your contract will be terminated and you will be left in a large amount of debt. This immoral business strategy displays how coldhearted the companies are.

The despicable “bullying tactics” used by these companies to pressure farmers into keeping quiet are focused on in the film. The filmmakers interview multiple farmers who would love to expose what actually transpires on these “farms,” they are suppressed by the fear that they are caught in a cycle created by the Big Companies and will be rendered homeless due to a seemingly insurmountable amounts of debt. The horrible truth regarding the farms is actively suppressed from the public using scare tactics, and fear of essentially bankrupting the farmers and these stories are very compelling.

The film focuses on Monsanto, the leading seed producer in the United States, destroying private seed farming. Those who do not license under “Monsanto” and use their “genetically modified seeds” are utterly crushed through rigorous bureaucracy. Food Inc. highlights the story of Moe Parr and his struggle with Monsanto, thus putting a face to the story and the struggle. Moe had to go to court and spend money to defend himself. Monsanto had decided to sue him and render him bankrupt and homeless, just to prove a point. The documentary spends a great deal of time displaying to viewers how unfairly Moe was treated by Monsanto. He is followed by filmmakers from the courtroom, and throughout his daily routine, his unfair treatment by the United States justice system, and the Monsanto corporation. Highlighting Moe’s story, gives the filmmaker the important element of being credible and convincing while using the emotional proof.

The filmmaker waits until the end of the film, to connect the United States government and Monsanto. Many higher officials in Monsanto end up becoming members of the United States Government. By showing how Monsanto is connected with many of the US policy makers, the credibility of all those connected to it is put into question. Rather than building up the credibility of those involved in the documentary; the filmmaker has chosen to tear down the reputation of the ‘enemy’. By providing this link between the two entities, it allows the filmmaker to use the Demonstrative Proof to be credible with his audience. Food Inc. is trying to show ethical proof by showing an impression of good moral character or credibility. The filmmaker here seems to be doing the right thing by showing how horrible the large food companies are and how they are harming the individual consumers. Showing how the farmers are being hurt by the large companies and being run into the ground by being dependent on the large companies while making less and less money.

Food Inc.’s closing message urges viewers to change their eating habits and their meal choices to companies that care for the environment, safety, and what is inside their food. It then describes how our choices can help topple these seemingly insurmountable companies. Rick Flowers in his article ‘Eating at us: Representations of knowledge in the activist documentary film Food, Inc‘ states “food has become a battleground for politics, policy, reform and education in recent years. In essence, food social movements seek to get us to change what and how we eat: this includes our food production, consumption, preparation, cooking and eating habits”(Flowers, 2011). The film is arguing that the large food companies are controlling the food system and it is because of them that many people are getting sick. This film is using ‘evidence’ such as news reports and medical information linking the food companies and all the illnesses to the dirty conditions that the animals are in. By showing the lawsuits against many of the farmers plus the interviews with the farmers, the filmmaker makes the ‘truth claim’ that the food companies are hurting the consumers.

Although differing calls to action, both films urge viewers to have a specific viewpoint for social change. The Rape of Europa shows viewers the atrocities committed by the Nazi party, and the quest to retrieve lost art and return it to the rightful owners. Food Inc. displays the actual events that transpire on farms and how the large food companies pressure the farmers into keeping quiet. The Rape of Europa can be classified as a historical documentary, while Food Inc. can be classified as a investigative documentary. These are very different genres of documentary filmmaking, yet they both have one goal: social change.

Both of these films have had large influences on our society today. Food Inc. has changed the way we view food. It has largely boosted the organic food movement and has placed a great deal of pressure on large food companies like Monsanto. The Rape of Europa has a very large effect as well. It has raised public attention on stolen artwork, and has inspired multiple films such as The Monuments Men and The Woman in Gold. Both of these films have garnered even more attention from the public, which aids the goal of the documentary as well.

Food Inc. is able to be credible, convincing and compelling by showing the footage of the farms and the animals with the inside look into the barns and areas that the consumer is not allowed to see. Interviews with the actual farm owners and their take on the situations of the crops and animals brings credibility to the documentary. Interviews with victims of the food problems and the illnesses that have effected their lives and their families helps make Food Inc. so much more compelling and convincing when you can add a face to the situation.

Two strong documentary topics combined with the effective ways their filmmakers used the rhetorical proofs to support their stories and their call to action, led to important messages being told. New media has allowed for the flow of information and increased the filmmaker’s reach beyond anything that could have been imagined even 10 years ago. “Web based media has provided new opportunities for documentary to create social impact. Films are now released with websites, Facebook, Twitter and web videos increase both reach and impact” (Karlin 2011). In additional to all of the social media used to promote their social issue, many emerging film festivals all over the world are now another outlet for social impact. Thus as Elizabeth Faulcon states in ‘Creating Change Through Documentary Film’ “Documentaries inform us and hopefully engage our empathy and if all conditions are right, cause us to act or think differently. Establishing an argument and defending a position, documentary film has a specific and definitive role in creating change within the parameters of society” (Faulcon, 2012). These statements are very accurate in describing both The Rape of Europa and Food, Inc., two films that were created and touched on all of the important elements to create compelling narratives and bring about change.

Works Cited

Faulcon, Elizabeth C., “Creating Change Through Documentary Film: An Examination of Select Films” (2012). Masters of Liberal Studies Theses. Paper 24.

Flowers, Rick, and Elaine Swan. “‘Eating At Us’: Representations Of Knowledge In The Activist Documentary Film Food, Inc.” Studies In The Education Of Adults 43.2 (2011): 234-250. Academic Search Premier. Web. 16 Apr. 2015.

“Food, Inc.” IMDb. IMDb.com, n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2015.

Grierson, John. “First Principles of Documentary (1932).” Imagining Reality: The Faber Book of Documentary. Eds. Kevin Macdonald and Mark Cousins. London: Faber and Faber, 1996. 97-102.
Karlin, Beth, and John Johnson. “Measuring Impact: The Importance of Evaluation for Documentary Film Campaigns”. M/C Journal, Dec.-Jan. 2011. Web. 19 Mar. 2015.
“The Rape of Europa.” IMDb. IMDb.com, n.d. Web. 23 Mar. 2015.


About this entry