Analysis Of Words From The Last Generation

Now, after analysing the two documentaries this paper focuses on, it is time to compare and further analyse how climate change and the people affected by it are represented in a general sense.
To sum up the main points addressed in Words From the Last Generation and to answer the three questions this paper focuses on, I will elaborate on every of question individually. First of all, the documentary predominantly represents climate change as a natural process. The role western countries play is not mentioned once and it is only focused on how to make the best out of the situation or how to repair already existing damages. The only visual aid viewers get on climate change is flooded houses and a disappearing coastal line. Second, the people affected
Nevertheless, the students themselves realize there is nothing they can do to prevent the island from drowning because of their own weakness. All of them talk about their culture disappearing along them and the viewer is left with the impression nothing can be done to counteract this process. Lastly, the documentary contributes to discourses of environmental justice. As explained above, professor Teaero talks about the concept that climate change and its effects are used to exploit people and that this form of domination is a new form of colonialism called neo-colonialism. However, the documentary still does not seem to back this point of view because it does not comment on the statement at all and leaves the professor alone with his idea.
Turning to Kiribati: A Drowning Paradise in the South Pacific, the whole documentary resembles the feeling of a modern-day safari for westerners. The citizens of Kiribati are represented as helpless and weak, yet again. They are the victims to a relentless enemy, climate change. This enemy is represented as an imminent threat, even being talked and taught about in primary school [32:40 – 35:40] and still, the
Documentaries should educate people in a way that they depict people, a situation or an issue rightfully and do their best to conform to this standard. As already assessed by others, documentaries about the South Pacific do not always reach this standard and misrepresent the people, situation or issue. DeLoughrey did not condemn those documentaries for misrepresenting the islanders because it might still be an effective way to reach those people who “are indifferent to climate except during vacations when they rediscover the world in a clumsy, arcadian way” (Rosaldo qtd. in DeLoughrey 245), though. However, I do take a different stand on that. By misrepresenting those islanders and belittling their problems the viewer might perceive climate change and its effects as exaggerated or he envisions it differently. This could result in people contesting climate change, spreading further doubt and, eventually, not even would people care less about climate change and its effects, but they would not come forward anymore to force the state to lessen emissions or pass bills against those who harm the environment because they do not see the urge to do so. Though, she is right when stating these documentaries still fulfil a purpose for those rather ignorant people, so would good ones which represent the people the way they should. The fact that Kiribati: A Drowning