by Lindsay Goodall - Documentary Filmmaker in Residence
Today I started as Documentary Filmmaker in Residence at the ESRC Genomics Forum. I was so thrilled to be offered this post – I even came out of the interview last week buzzing with what I’d learned and full of curiosity at the world around me. I was also really excited that Forum had decided to appoint two filmmakers, and so today I would meet my new filmmaking colleague, the animator Cameron Duguid
Cameron and I spent most of the morning talking about our past work, what we hope to do in this role, the people we both know, and how to approach the residency. We then got stuck in to our research. I started with The Gen – the ESRC Genomics Network’s newsletter – and a brand new notebook in which to take notes.
The first note I wrote was “social and ethical consequences”. I need to keep this at the forefront of my mind whenever I am reading, researching and chatting to EGN colleagues about their work.
As an anthropologist I do not need to learn about the technicalities of the science, but want to look at the people and communities that the science affects and what implications this has for the world around us.
There are so many common assumptions about the life sciences, and genomics in particular, that as a filmmaker there is a vast opportunity to enter into some very heated, topical and pertinent debates where the science clashes with real life humans, and tempers can flare, issues are contested and conflicts arise. This is one of the reasons why I really wanted to undertake this role.
For example, I have a real interest in the global food industry, and as a bit of a lefty, greeny, almost-vegan have always assumed that GM food is ‘a bad thing’ for people, animals and the environment. These feelings were compounded by everything I read in the press about Monsanto’s killer seeds impoverishing impoverished farmers in impoverished countries even more.
And so I have decided one of the areas of research I want to look at more closely is food, and in particular to look at the flip side of GM foods – the advantages of the science, the communities who are empowered by drought resistant crops, the farmers crying out for disease free corn. I want to leave my Guardian-reading-Euro-vegan-centric assumptions aside and look at both sides of the debate.
Today I made tentative steps by going on the EGN website’s people section and filtering my results to ‘food’, ‘farmers’, ‘agriculture’, ‘food and genomics’, ‘genetics and food’, ‘in vitro meat’ and ‘nutrition’. I have now compiled a stack of articles, papers, chapters and entire books to read over the next few days and weeks.
Aside from reading about all things food-related, my research today has touched on the following: genetic traits as mitigating factors to violent behaviour; the Nagoya Protocol; bio-banking; syn-bio; DIY-bio; the bar-coding of life; bio fuels; the use of human cells to replace animal experiments; Margaret Lock’s ‘Gene’s as tools for the prevention of Alzheimer’s disease’; art-science vs science-art; the selling of genetic tests direct to the consumer…. The list of topics and subjects I want to learn about continues on and on, and it’s only day 1!
On the train on the way home tonight I was reading a copy of The Gen from March 2010. I realised that, not for the first time today, I had had to read one paragraph a few times before the meaning had sunk in. I wasn’t sure if I was just tired, too old, or if my brain no longer worked on an academic level, though having been at uni for 7 years in the noughties it surely must have at some point. I decided to text a couple of friends who I went to uni with to check:
Me: I have to read this kind of thing in my new job: “Genetic determinism and other such theories that seek to identify a single well or source from which the actuality of things originates rely on a specific western set of metaphysical premises. They invite a mode of thinking and a political grip on the world that has been identified by critics from different perspectives as either reductionist or patriarchal in various senses. Such hegemonic concepts lead to strongly territorial and discriminative politics. I would like to bring an understanding of this to the general audience.” Did we used to write stuff like that?!?! Lx
N (politics graduate, works in the government): Holy fuck.
Me: yeah, you’re speaking my language. My brain hurts. Lx
N: Scrambled. In London, off to Mekong. Yumm. X
Me: Have a side dish or some extra chillis for me. So v jealous. I could defo go a Thai right now. Yumm. Lx
****
Me: I have to read this kind of thing in my new job: “Genetic determinism and other such theories that seek to identify a single well or source from which the actuality of things originates rely on a specific western set of metaphysical premises. They invite a mode of thinking and a political grip on the world that has been identified by critics from different perspectives as either reductionist or patriarchal in various senses. Such hegemonic concepts lead to strongly territorial and discriminative politics. I would like to bring an understanding of this to the general audience.” Did we used to write stuff like that?!?! Lx
J (1st class honours, creative director): Wow, I would like to be able to read things like that again, so hard to imagine being able to write them!
Me: But it is really good to be learning lots of new and exciting things, even if I have to read everything 12 times!
J: That’s just the booze…
Me: Wonder if it’s reversible?
J: Hmmm
****
So, having carried out research amongst my peers I have concluded that we probably eat, drink and swear too much. But also that it’s ok if I’m a little out of practice in my academic reading.
No comments:
Post a Comment