This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Strange, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Hybrid history and the retrial of the painful past

Australian National University, Australia

If ‘the primary impetus’ of reality television is to entertain (Holmes and Jermyn, 2004: 2), what ethical implications flow from its inherently hybrid aesthetics? This article addresses this question by examining the 2002 televised ‘retrial’ of Louis Riel, a man executed by the Canadian government in 1885. The retrial's producers encouraged viewers to vote (through a website) on the merits of Riel's conviction ‘according to the laws of Canada today’. As an aesthetic form that diverted and informed the audience, the programme was a test of ‘post-documentary's’ ethical dimensions. In this case it was not hybridity of form and intent that undermined the programme's potential to effect corrective justice; rather the deliberate insertion of false information about the death penalty's application misrepresented the criminal justice past and present.

Key Words: aesthetics • capital punishment • ethics • reality television • re-enactment

References

• Agnew, V. (2004) ‘Introduction: What is Re-enactment’ , Criticism 46(3): 327–339 .[CrossRef]
• Andrejevic, M. (2004) Reality TV: The Work of Being Watched. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield .
• Atwood, M. (1972) Survival: A Thematic Guide to Canadian Literature Toronto: Anansi .
• Barnsley, P. (2003) ‘Should Canada Pardon Riel, or Should the Métis Pardon Canada?’ , Wind Speaker 21(5): 1–1 .
• Biressi, A. and H. Nunn (2005) Reality TV: Realism and Revelation. London: Wallflower Press .
• Brants, K. (1998) ‘Who's Afraid of Infotainment’ , European Journal of Communication 13(3): 315–335 .[Abstract]
• Braz, A. (2003) The False Traitor: Louis Riel in Canadian Culture. Toronto: University of Toronto Press .
• Brenton, S. and R. Cohen (2003) Shooting People: Adventures in Reality TV. London: Verso .
• Casey, B., N. Casey, B. Calvert, L. French and J. Lewis (2002) Television Studies: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge .
• Cook, A. (2004) ‘The Use and Abuse of Historical Re-enactment: Thoughts on Recent Trends in Public History’ , Criticism 46(3): 487–496 .[CrossRef]
• Corner, J. (2000) ‘Documentary in a Post-documentary Culture? A Note on Forms and Their Functions’. Available at: http://www.boro.ac.uk/changing.media/John%Corner%20paper.htm
• Corner, J. (2002) ’Performing the Real: Documentary Diversions’ , Television and New Media 3(3): 255–269 .[Abstract]
• Corner, J. (2004) ‘Afterword: Framing the New’, in S. Holmes and D. Jermyn (eds) Understanding Reality Television, pp. 290–299. London: Routledge .
• Coyne, A. (2002) ‘An Exercise in Virtual Rielity’, National Post, 25 October, p. A9-A9.
• Dovey, J. (2000) Freakshow: First Person Media and Factual Television. London: Pluto .
• Fishman, M. and G. Cavender (eds) (1998) Entertaining Crime: Television Reality Programs. New York: Aldine de Gruyter .
• Fiske, J. (1989) Reading the Popular. London: Unwin Hyman .
• Fiske, J. and J. Hartley (2003) Reading Television. London: Routledge .
• Hartley, J. (1999) Uses of Television. London: Routledge .
• Hight, C. (2001) ‘Debating Reality-TV’ , Continuum: Journal of Media Culture 15(3): 389–395 .[CrossRef]
• Hight, C. (2004) ‘"It Isn't Always Shakespeare, but it's Genuine": Cinema's Commentary on Documentary Hybrids’, in S. Holmes and D. Jermyn (eds) Understanding Reality Television, pp. 233–251. London: Routledge .
• Hill, A. (2005) Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television. New York: Routledge .
• Holmes, S. (2004) ‘"But This Time You Choose!" Approaching the "Interactive" Audience in Reality TV’ , International Journal of Cultural Studies 7(2): 213–231 .[Abstract]
• Holmes, S. and D. Jermyn (eds) (2004) Understanding Reality Television. London: Routledge .
• House of Commons, Canada (2002) Bill C-324, ‘An Act Respecting Louis Riel’, 4 December.
• Hunt, T. (2004) ‘How Does Television Enhance History?’, in D. Cannadine (ed.) History and the Media, pp. 88–102. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan .
• Izzo, K. (2002) ‘For Queen and Country: Never Heard of the Dominion Institute? You'll Want to’ , Flare 24(10): 2–2 .
• Madden, J. (2003) ‘The Hunt for Justice: An Update on Métis Rights’, Ontario Bar Association Institute, Aboriginal Law Section, 21 March.
• Métis National Council (2002) ‘CBC Betrays Mandate with Airing of "The Re-trial of Louis Riel"’, 21 October. Available at: http://www.metisnation.ca/PRESS/RETRIAL/home.html
• n.a. (1886) The Queenv Louis Riel. Ottawa: Queen's Printer .
• Nichols, B. (1991) Representing Reality: Issue and Concepts in Documentary. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press .
• Nichols, B. (1994) Blurred Boundaries: Questions of Meaning in Contemporary Culture. Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press .
• Osborne, Brian S. (2002) ‘Corporeal Politics and the Body Politic: The Re-presentation of Louis Riel in Canadian Identity’ , International Journal of Heritage Studies 8(4): 303–322 .[CrossRef]
• Podhoretz, J. (2000) ‘"Survivor" and the End of Television’ , Commentary 110(4): 50–52 .
• Radstone, S. (2001) ‘History and Trauma: Reviewing Forrest Gump’, in M. Rossington and A. Whitehead (eds) Between the Psyche and the Polis: Refiguring History in Literature and Theory, pp. 177–190. Aldershot: Ashgate .
• Roscoe, J. and C. Hight (2001) Faking It: Mock-documentary and the Subversions of Factuality. Manchester: Manchester University Press .
• Seaton, J. (2004) ‘Writing the History of Broadcasting’, in D. Cannadine (ed.) History and the Media, pp. 141–159. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan .
• Surette R. and C. Otto (2002) ‘A Test of a Crime and Justice Infotainment Measure’ , Journal of Criminal Justice 30(5): 443–453 .[CrossRef]
• Teillet, J. (2004) ‘Exoneration for Louis Riel: Mercy, Justice, or Political Expediency?’ , Saskatchewan Law Review 67(1): 359–392 .
• Tincknell, E. and P. Raghuram (2004) ‘Big Brother: Reconfiguring the "Active" Audience of Cultural Studies?’, in S. Holmes and D. Jermyn (eds) Understanding Reality Television, pp. 252–269. London: Routledge .
• Wattie, C. (2002) ‘87% vote to Acquit Riel, Defence Lawyer to Seek Pardon’, National Post, 24 October. Available at: http://www.mmf.mb.ca/coranto/viewnews.cgi?id=EpZVkkVuFpgHMaJEHC

CiteULike

Connotea

Del.icio.us

Digg

Reddit

Technorati

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Strange, C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?