Comments on: One slick mess: An interview with H2Oil’s Shannon Walsh

By: Laurence Miall

Laurence Miall — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:35:28 +0000

Agreed! It's a fine film. Every Canadian should see it. And American. And Mexican. In fact, any inhabitant of planet earth who hopes to bequeath said planet to his or her descendants.

By: Ezra Winton

Ezra Winton — Sat, 28 Nov 2009 18:52:20 +0000

Ah, misquoted again – such is my lot. I said quibbling over truth, not "the truth." I meant that a quasi-philosophical discussion about truth and objectivity takes away from excellent, compelling, arguments against the tar sands, such is H2Oil. And boy Laurence, we are wasting some time on this, especially since we agree.

By: Laurence Miall

Laurence Miall — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 21:18:26 +0000

Well, fair enough, but almost impossible to argue against in a way because my own argument is shaped by my own social reality, so it's just as valid or equally invalid as any other. This is my big problem with the near relativistic path we seem to be walking down. How are we to gauge the merits of any given argument, in this case, for or against the tar sands?

I think quibbling over the truth is quite important –devastatingly important — when it comes to the tarsands because there is proof required to make the case against them. Proof of habitat destruction, of the link to climate change.

I don't know in what other way one can argue against the tarsands. I should dislike the tarsands because they offend my social reality?

And believe me, they do offend me!

By: Ezra Winton

Ezra Winton — Thu, 26 Nov 2009 08:24:40 +0000

Objectivity and truth are not synonymous. My statement is not an objective statement, it is my opinion: a perspective shaped from my social reality, just like a documentary film. Quibbling over truth doesn't win sides but derails the whole discussion about shared social realities such as climate change, terrorism, or the tar sands. These matters aren't about truth, they are, and always have been, about perspective and politics. Documentary is the manipulation and interpretation of social reality, and while it has a propensity to lean toward truth-telling, I'd like to go with the awkward verb "truthing" instead. That gives us all a little piece of the pie. Now we can all keep consuming "facts" and try to deny our own blinders for the bigger picture. (I'm writing this from the International Documentary Film Festival of Amsterdam – an event dripping with debates around truth and objectivity, but alas, it's refreshing to meet so many filmmakers who are reflexively aware of their own prejudices and performances).

By: Laurence Miall

Laurence Miall — Wed, 25 Nov 2009 19:46:55 +0000

I agree with Ezra, except that "objectivity does not exist" seems, on the face of it, to be an objective statement. It also doesn't seem a fruitful way to win allies in the vital fight against the tarsands: it's kind of like saying "Well, this doc tells our truth, but you know, there are other truths, so choose yours."

It is THE truth, and not just a supposition, that the tarsands have been responsible for environmental degradation. People can quibble over the scale of the degradation, and whether or not it's been worth for humankind, but that it IS happening is the objective truth, as evidenced by a lot of empirical evidence and stuff.

Forgive excessive uppercase. I should use italics.

By: Ogtog

Ogtog — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 22:48:21 +0000

"Objectivity does not exist, nor should we expect it to." A true artist! LOL. Your credibility just went into the talinings pond.

By: Ezra Winton

Ezra Winton — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 18:18:09 +0000

Ogtog: I'd definitely be interested so see the "good side" of industry and government on the tar sands!! What is the good side of one of the largest environmental disasters that has graced the globe? And I disagree that some semblance of objectivity needs to be mustered in this or any documentary. Objectivity does not exist, nor should we expect it to. This doc focuses on the negative impacts of the tar sands for good reason: government and corporate media has all but ignored it. When audiences want both sides, they can look for the critical perspective in documentaries like H2Oil and the pro-industry, pro-commercial and pro-government side in mainstream media. Lastly, every doc can't cover every angle of every issue – so oil consumption and alternatives is indeed a crucial conversation and it is indeed happening in other excellent documentaries. Look for them and you'll find them!

By: Ogtog

Ogtog — Mon, 23 Nov 2009 17:18:29 +0000

Industry and government have a good side of this story that needed to be more objectively presented in this doc. It is easy to say "let's stop the tarsands" but much harder to stop using petroleum products for every single aspect of our daily lives, as we do now.