INFORMATION TO USERS

This reproduction was m ade from a copy o f a docum ent sent to us for microfilming.
While the m ost advanced technology has been used to photograph and reproduce
this docum ent, the quality o f the reproduction is heavily dependent upon the
quality o f the m aterial subm itted.

The following explanation o f techniques is provided to help clarify markings o r

notations which m ay appear on this reproduction.

1 .T h e sign or “ targ et” for pages apparently lacking from the docum ent
photographed is “ Missing Page(s)” . If it was possible to obtain the missing
page(s) o r section, they are spliced into the film along w ith adjacent pages. This
m ay have necessitated cutting through an image and duplicating adjacent pages
to assure com plete continuity.

2. When an image on the film is obliterated with a round black m ark, it is an

indication o f eith er blurred copy because o f m ovem ent during exposure,
duplicate copy, o r copyrighted m aterials th a t should n o t have been film ed. F o r
blurred pages, a good image o f the page can be found in the adjacent frame. If
copyrighted m aterials were deleted, a target note will appear listing the pages in
th e adjacent fram e.

3. When a m ap, draw ing o r chart, etc., is p art o f the m aterial being photographed,
a definite m ethod o f “ sectioning” the m aterial has been followed. It is
custom ary to begin filming at the u p p er left hand com er o f a large sheet and to
continue from left to right in equal sections with small overlaps. If necessary,
sectioning is continued again—beginning below the first row and continuing on
until com plete.

4. F o r illustrations th at cannot be satisfactorily reproduced by xerographic

means, photographic prints can be purchased at additional cost and inserted
into y o u r xerographic copy. These prints are available upon request from the
D issertations C ustom er Services D epartm ent.

5. Some pages in any docum ent may have indistinct p rint. In all cases the best
available copy has been filmed.

University
Micit5rilms
International
300 N. Zeeb Road
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106
 8516601

D Ia w ara, M an th ia

AFRICAN CINEMA: THE BACKGROUND AND THE ECONOMIC CONTEXT OF

PRODUCTION

Indiana U niversity Ph.D. 19 85

University
Microfilms
International 300 N. Zeeb Road, Ann Arbor, Ml 48106

Copyright 1984

bV
Diawara, Manthia
All Rights Reserved
 AFRICAN CINEMA

THE BACKGROUND AND THE ECONOMIC CONTEXT

OF PRODUCTION

Manthia Diawara

Submitted t o the f a c u l t y o f th e Graduate School

in p a r t i a l f u l f i l l m e n t of th e requirements
of the degree
Doctor of Philosophy
in Comparative L i t e r a t u r e
Indiana U niv er stiy
December 1984
 ii
Date December 21. 1984

This is to certify that the thesis entitled

African Cinema

The Background and the Economic Context of Production___________

and submitted by Manthia Diawara____________________

has been accepted by the Ph.D. Advisory Committee as satisfactory

in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Ph.D. degree

in Comparative Literature.

DrVvv ames Naremore, Co-Chairman

Dr. David Bleic'

Pw
Dr. Phyllis
Phyll
[ju
Klotman
 iii

© 1984

Manthia Diawara

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

 iv

Dedication

To Franz Fanon, Mansita Dansira, and Sekou Toure, I d e dicate

t h i s work in re c o g n it io n o f the h i s t o r i c a l change they brought in

our l i v e s .
 V

Acknowledgements

I am g r a t e f u l t o Dr. James Naremore f o r h is help . When I took his

c l a s s e s on f il m c r i t i c i s m and on the novel, I was impressed by his t a l ­

en t as an i n t e l l e c t u a l who i s knowledgeable and t o l e r a n t of several

methods o f in quir y and h i s t o r y . As the c o - d i r e c t o r o f t h i s d i s s e r t a t i o n ,

Jim i s also to be p r a is e d f o r his encouragement, p a t i e n c e , and inva luab le

help.

Dr. Emile Snyder, who is the o th e r d i r e c t o r o f the d i s s e r t a t i o n , de­

f ie d several odds and was always ready t o help. I owe him a g r e a t deal

f o r the d i s s e r t a t i o n and f o r coming to my rescue in several p e r i lo u s i n ­

s tan c es.

I am g r a t e f u l to th e o t h e r members o f my d i s s e r t a t i o n , Dr. David

Bleich and Dr. P h y l l i s Klotman, f o r pla ying important r o l e s in my academic

career.

I am thankful to several i n s t i t u t i o n s f o r f a c i l i t a t i n g my r e s e a r c h ,

giving me g r a n t s , and providing me with p r o fe s sio n a l working environments.

I thank the following U n i v e r s i t i e s , I n s t i t u t e s , Departments, and Depart­

ment Heads: The Graduate School o f Indiana U n iv e r s ity ; The Black Studies

o f the Universi ty of C a l i f o r n i a , Santa Barbara; The French M in istere des

Relations Exterieures (Madame Eveline Casnave and the s t a f f o f the Service

du cinema); Jean Rouch and Francoise Foucault a t the Section Cinema of the

Musee de 1'homme; Enrico Fulccugnoni a t th e UNESCO; the African Studies

Program a t Indiana U n iv e r sity ; Dorothy C o l l i n s , who i s the A dministrative

A s s i s t a n t of the Black Studies a t the U n iv e r sit y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Santa

Barbara; Dr. Cedric Robinson; Madame Andre Daventure and the s t a f f of

ATRIA; Souleymane Cisse; Gnoan M'Bala; Ngangura Mweze; Mahama Traore;

Guy Hennebelle; Saloum Kamissoko and Mariam T. Kamissoko; and Dr. Edmond

Keller.

I am g r a t e f u l to Dorothy C o l l i n s , Deb Munson, and J e s s i e Jones f o r

typing and r etyping several p a r t s o f the d i s s e r t a t i o n .

F i n a l l y , I thank Annette, Mansita, and Daman Diawara f o r t h e i r en­

durance and persev erence;

 TABLE OF CONTENTS

In tr oducti o n

Chapter I : The P o l i t i c a l S i t u a t i o n of
Film Production in Africa ..................................

Chapter I I : Anglo,1
^ e African P r o d u c t i o n ..........................

Chapter I I I : Z a ir ia n Production ...............................................

Chapter IV: F r an ce's Contribution to the Development

o f Film Production in Africa ..........................

Chapter V: The A r t i s t as Leader of th e Revolution:

The History o f the Federation Pan-Africaine
des Cineastes ............................................................

Chapter VI: The S i t u a t i o n o f National and I n t e r n a t i o n a l

Production in Francophone Africa .................

Chapter VII: Production in Lusophone A f ric a : Toward

the Kuxa Kenema in Mozambique ..........................

Chapter V I I I : Conclusion: Toward the D i s t r i b u t i o n and

Exhibition of African Production .................

Bibliography
 1

INTRODUCTION

The purpose o f t h i s study i s p r im a r il y to provide an i n s i g h t i n to

the economics o f f ilm production in sub-saharan Afri ca. Other aspects

o f the film i n d u s t r y , such as d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n , ar e a ls o

di sc u ssed . Throughout the s tu d y , individual f i l m s , filmmakers, film

s c h o o ls , to o l s of pr oduction , and t h e o r ie s ar e d e s c r i b e d , in o rder to

given an overview o f f il m h i s t o r y as i t r e l a t e s to the s t r u c t u r e o f the

in d u st r y .

The study di vides African f il m in to Anglophone pro ductio n, Franco­

phone pr odu ction, production in the Belgian Congo, and Lusophone

production. In each c a s e , i t examines the e x te n t to which colonialism

or neo -co lo nialism influe nc ed filmmaking. I t shows why th e r e ar e more

f e a t u r e films d i r e c t e d by Francophone A fri cans , even though the

c o u n tr ie s have no f a c i l i t i e s of pro du ction; why th er e has been compara­

t i v e l y less i n t e r e s t in producing in Anglophone areas and Z a ir e , even

though the B r i t i s h and the Belgians l e f t behind some s t r u c t u r e of

production and t r a in e d personn el; and why f ilm was regarded as a "weapon"

by the l i b e r a t i o n movements in Lusophone A frica .

The r e s t o f the argument focuses on the d e c olonization o f African

f ilm , includ in g the e f f o r t s o f the Federation Pan-Africaine des

Cineastes (FEPACI) t o A fri c a n iz e production and d i s t r i b u t i o n ; the

e f f o r t s o f indiv idua l governments and t h e i r filmmakers to have national

f ilm s ; and the attempts to c r e a t e regional cinemas f o r c o u n t r ie s with

common c u l t u r e s and economic i n t e r e s t s . My e valu ation o f f a c i l i t i e s

shows what format and what equipment i s economically v ia b le in A f ric a .

F i n a l l y , the study recommends the es ta bli shm en t o f quotas in the d i s ­

t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n o f foreign f i l m s , in o rder to c r e a t e room f o r

African film s and enable the producers to recoup t h e i r c o s t s .

The study i s divided in to e i g h t c h a p te r s . The f i r s t ch ap ter i s an

h i s t o r i c a l overview o f th e s i t u a t i o n and the d i r e c t i o n o f f il m produc­

t i o n in A f ric a. Chapters two, t h r e e , and seven d e s c ri b e and ev aluate

production in Anglophone A f ric a , Z a ir e , and Lusophone Africa r e s p e c t i v e l y .

Chapters four through s ix deal with the complexities o f production in

Francophone Afri ca. Chapter f our d e l i n e a t e s the h i s t o r y of the French

government's production o f films by Francophone d i r e c t o r s . In the p a r t

o f t h i s c h ap ter dea ling with e v a l u a t i o n , I take in to account the c r i t i ­

cism o f French neo -c olonialism by f il m h i s t o r i a n s . In Chapter Five I

d e s c ri b e the p o l i t i c a l p r e ss u re put on governments by FEPACI (African

Filmmakers A s so c i a t io n ) . Although t h i s or g a n iz a tio n has members r e p r e ­

s en ti n g a l l o f the c o u n t r ie s in A f r i c a , I show t h a t i t s c h i e f impact on

production and d i s t r i b u t i o n has been in Francophone a r e a s . In Chapter

Six I descri be the e f f o r t s o f Francophone c o u n tr ie s to move from nation al

to i n t e r - A f r i c a n production and d i s t r i b u t i o n . Chapter Eight, the con­

c l u s i o n , d iscu s s es the manner in which the d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n

o f African films c o n t r i b u t e to the development o f production.

An acknowledged l i m i t a t i o n o f the d i s s e r t a t i o n i s not to have d e a l t

with production in the Arabophone c o u n t r ie s and South A f r ic a . I t will

be misleading to i n t e r p r e t t h i s l i m i t a t i o n as an attempt to w r i te the

Arab African c o u n tr ie s and South Africa out of e x i s t e n c e , or to claim

t h a t they belong to a co n tin e n t o t h e r than A f rica. The l i m i t a t i o n i s

not only determined by the amount of space a v a i l a b l e h e r e , but also by

the o r g a n iz a tio n a l s t r u c t u r e o f the d i s s e r t a t i o n , which deals with the

colonial encouragement and/or i n h i b i t i o n o f production in Afri ca.

 4

Chapter I

THE POLITICAL SITUATION OF FILM PRODUCTION IN AFRICA

The French f ilm h i s t o r i a n , Georges Sadoul, observed in 1960 t h a t

as many African c o u n t r i e s , south o f the Sahara, were re gain in g t h e i r

independence, t h e r e was not a s i n g l e f il m t h a t could r e a l l y be c a lle d

A f rican , i . e . , produced, d i r e c t e d , photographed, e d i t e d , e t c . by

Africans and s t a r r i n g Africans who spoke in African languages. I t was

Sadoul's discovery t h a t while Africans were being denied the use of t h i s

powerful means o f mass-communication and e n t e r t a i n m e n t, the B r i t i s h , the

French, and th e Americans had been making documentary and f i c t i o n a l films

in Africa and about Africans s in c e 1900, f i v e ye ar s a f t e r the in ve ntion

o f motion p i c t u r e s by the Lumifere Brothers.^

Jean Rouch, f a t h e r o f cinema v e r i t e and founder o f th e Comriiite du

f ilm ethnographigue a t the Musee de I'homne, was quick to respond and to

p o i n t to a change in the cinematographic s i t u a t i o n c r i t i c i z e d by Sadoul.

At a ro un d-t ab le d is cu s s io n on Africa and f il m organized by the UNESCO,

Rouch drew a t t e n t i o n to th e legacy l e f t the Africans by the B r i t i s h

Colonial Film U n its, the Belgian Missionary Cinema, and the Commit! du

f ilm ethnographigue in c o l l a b o r a t i o n with the French m i n i s t r y d 1o u t r e -

mer. He pointed to th e Anglophone Africans t r a i n e d a t the Accra Film

Training School and the f i r s t Francophone African graduates from the

I n s t i t u t des hautes etudes cinematographiques in P a r i s . Rouch als o un­

covered his plans to in flu e n c e the French government to i n s t a l l p a r t i a l

f ilm production u n i t s in th e e x - c o l o n i e s , and to c r e a t e a P ar is based

po st- product io n c e n t e r , where Francophone African filmmakers could come

to process t h e i r rushes and to ge t access to o t h e r post- production tech-

2
nologies which were a v a i l a b l e only in Europe and America.

Rouch pres cr ibed 16mm cameras as the most v ia b le economically f o r

any developing c o u n t r i e s , and he brought out th e f a c t t h a t the reduced

c o s t o f films made with a 16mm camera did not n e c e s s a r i l y e n t a i l a

le ss ening in q u a l i t y . For example, Chronique d'un e t e , Rouch's master­

p i e c e , was shot with a 16mm camera, and when i t was blown up to 35mm f o r

p r o j e c t i o n , "Many p r o fes sio n al s p e c t a t o r s were not even aware o f the

3
di f f e r e n c e s . 11

More than twenty years l a t e r , Med Hondo, a Mauretanian filmmaker,

s aid in Le Monde t h a t " d e s p ite the co n s ta n t e f f o r t s o f p o l i t i c i a n s and

4
men o f c u l t u r e , African cinema was t o t t e r i n g . " African cinema, to use

Sembene Ousmane's c e l e b r a te d words, i s s t i l l a t the era of "megotage".

, 5

Film processing l a b o r a t o r i e s , sound synchronizing and e d i t i n g f a c i l i t i e s

ar e lacking in A f rica. These problems and f i n a n c i a l ones forced f il m ­

makers to i n t e r r u p t t h e i r work and to wai t y e a r s befo re f i n i s h i n g one

film.

The f a c t t h a t Francophone African filmmakers have made more films

than t h e i r Anglophone c o u n te r p a rts does not mean an improvement o f the

s i t u a t i o n o f production. The f a c t a l s o , t h a t , a f t e r Sembene Ousmane,

younger filmmakers such as Souleymane C is se , Ola Balogun, and Gaston

Kabore have made film s o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l acclaim , i s not an i n d i c a t i o n

o f a developed i n d u s t r y . I f any thing, these f a c t s complicate the task

o f the f ilm h i s t o r i a n . For example, some c r i t i c s have pointed to neo­

colonial and p a t e r n a l i s t i c p r a c t i c e s in the French government's a t t i t u d e

toward th e filmmakers in i t s e x - c o l o n ie s . I t was in t h i s vein t h a t

Hannes Kamphausen, a German c r i t i c , s a i d t h a t : "A glance a t the

s i t u a t i o n o f th e cinema in Africa shows t h a t in many ways i t is a r e ­

f l e c t i o n o f the o v e r a ll s i t u a t i o n : the dependence o f African s t a t e s ,

in many f i e l d s o f a c t i v i t y , upon t h e i r former European masters."**

The Belgian c r i t i c , V ictor Bachy, explained the French input in

Francophone African f ilm production by arguing t h a t :

In the beginning one f in d s a w il lin g n e s s on the

p a r t o f the mother country t o keep r e l a t i o n s o f
co operation, exchange, and f r i e n d s h i p with i t s
former s u b o rd in a t e s ; and to i n s u r e , a t the same
time, the French presence in A f r i c a , con dition
s i n e qua non o f the c o n tin u a ti o n o f th e r e l a t i o n ­
s h ip . On the o t h e r hand, the newly independent
c o u n tr ie s accep t t h i s coop er ative r e l a t i o n s h i p
because i t guarantees them p r o t e c t i o n . 7

The h i s t o r y o f f ilm production in Africa is complicated by the

r u t h l e s s and monopolistic e x p l o i t a t i o n of the African market by the

American, the European, and the Indian films and /o r f il m d i s t r i b u t o r s .

The f ilm in d u s tr y in A f r i c a , unlik e many o t h e r p a r t s o f th e world, i s

not p r o te c te d by import quotas and the f r e e z in g o f b o x - o ff ic e r e c e i p t s .

For example, because o f taxes lev ie d from b o x - o ff i c e r e c e i p t s and import

quotas , France and West Germany, Europe's two most important f il m pro­

du ce rs, were able to emerge along si de the bombardment o f t h e i r film

market by the Motion P i c t u r e Export As so ciation o f America (MPEAA).

African c o u n tr ie s have not been able to control f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n and

e x h i b i t i o n and to r a i s e , in the manner o f France and Germany, s u b si d ie s

f o r t h e i r national f il m pr od uc tion. The block-hooking and o t h e r monop­

o l i s t i c p r a c t i c e s by fo re i g n d i s t r i b u t o r s make m atters worse by p r e v e n t ­

ing African films from being seen in t h e i r c o u n t r ie s o f o r i g i n . Many

c r i t i c s have denounced t h i s s i t u a t i o n and argued t h a t th e r e cannot be in

A frica a s e r io u s film production in d u str y u n t i l Africans themselves are

in control o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n and th e e x h i b i t i o n o f f il m s . To put i t

in Ferid Boughedir's words, "Fundamentally, African cinema does not e x i s t

p
because f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n is not in i t s hands."

C l e a r l y , film production in Africa has a complex background. A mere

l i s t i n g of films made by A f ric a n s , although h e l p f u l , cannot c l a r i f y th e

is s u e . I t does not do e i t h e r to put a l l th e blame, as the French sc hola rs

and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s have been prompted to do, on th e fo re ig n d i s t r i b u t o r s .

A more rewarding approach may be to analyze the s t r u c t u r e s o f production

s in ce th e c o lo n i a l time.

This w i l l give the r e a d e r an understanding o f th e d i f f e r e n t p o l i t i c s

of production held by governments and i n d i v id u a ls in the c o l o n i a l i s t

c o u n tr ie s and subsequently in A f ric a . The reader will a l s o see the r o l e

played by the Federation P a n - a f r i c a i n e des Cineastes (FEPACI), as well as

the new measures taken c o l l e c t i v e l y , o r by individual c o u n t r i e s , to

l i b e r a t e African cinema from i t s colo nial t r a p p in g s . F i n a l l y , one will

see how d i f f e r e n t types o f production p o l i t i c s r e s u l t e d in c e r t a i n types

o f cinema.
 8

Notes

•1

Georges Sadoul. "Le marche A f r i c a i n '1, in Afrique Action (May 1961).

Re- pr in t in H i s t o i r e du Cinema Mondial, P a r i s : Flamarion, 1973, pp. 499-
505. This and subsequent t r a n s l a t i o n s from French ar e mine, unless o t h e r ­
wise in d i c a t e d .
n
Jean Rouch. Films ethnographiques s ur 1 'Afrique N o i r e , P a r i s :
UNESCO, 1967, pp. 375-408. This s e c tio n was f i r s t presented in 1961 a t
a UNESCO round t a b l e discus s io n in Venice. The t i t l e i s " S i t u a t io n e t
tendance du cinema a f r i c a i n . "
3
I b i d . , p. 403, see note 1.

Sled Hondo, "Cinemas a f r i c a i n s , ecrans c o l o n i s e s , " in Le Monde

(Jan. 21, 1982), p. 12.
5
Guy Hennebelle, "In terv iew with Sembene Ousmane"^in Afrique
L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e No. 49. (Special is s u e : "Cineastes "d'Afrique
n o i r e 11)',' 1978, p. 125.
r
Hannes Kamphausen, "Cinema in Afri ca : A Survey," in C inea ste , v. 5,
no. 3, p. 31.

^Victor Bachy. "Panoramique s ur l e s cinemas s u d - s a h a r i e n s ," in

CinemAction, no. 26. (Special i s s u e s : "Cinemas n o i r s d 'A f r i q u e " ) , 1982,
p. 25.

^Ferid Boughedir in Afrique Noire: Quel Cinema? P a r i s : Actes due

Collogue U n iv e r sit e Paris 10 N'an'terre (Dec. 1981), p. 31.
 9

Chapter II

ANGLOPHONE AFRICAN PRODUCTION

In 1884, when the European c o u n tr ie s met in Berlin f o r the "Scramble

of A f r i c a " , they argued, to j u s t i f y themselves morally, t h a t i t was t h e i r

duty to c i v i l i z e and prepare Africans to become "evolues". I t is i n t e r ­

e s t i n g t h a t t h i s same argument i s held by most o f the pioneers who i n t r o ­

duced f ilm production in A f rica. They believed t h a t the d i f f u s i o n o f

commercial f il m s , such as those made by Charles Chaplin, was not the

r i g h t way to intro duc e Africans to such a powerful means o f persuasion as

motion p i c t u r e s . The argument went f i r s t l y t h a t these films were t e c h n i ­

c a l l y too s o p h i s t i c a t e d f o r the African mind to understand, and secondly

t h a t they were a bad in fl uen ce on Africans because they depicted the

negative aspects o f European l i v e s . In t h i s l i g h t , L.A. N otcutt, founder

o f the Bantu Educational Film Experiment, argued t h a t :

With backward peoples unable to d i s t i n g u i s h between

t r u t h and fa lse hood, i t is s u r e l y our wisdom, i f not
our obvious duty, to p r e v e n t, so f a r as is p o s s i b l e ,
the dis sem ination o f wrong id e a s . Should we stand
by and see a d i s t o r t e d p r e s e n t a t i o n o f the l i f e of
the white races accepted by m il l i o n s o f Africans
when '-e have i t in our power t o show them the t r u t h ?

What followed from these remarks was the attempt by the colon ial

governments, th e m i s s i o n a r i e s , and the a n th r o p o lo g is ts to give Africans

a d i f f e r e n t cinematic h e r i t a g e than the mainstream films o f Europe and

America. The British, opened the way, in 1935, with the c r e a t i o n o f the.

Bantu Educational Cinema Experiment. I t was sponsored by the Colonial

Office o f the B r i t i s h Film I n s t i t u t e , and financed by such i n t e r e s t

 10

groups as the Carnegie Corporation o f New York, the Roan Antelope Copper

Mines L t d . , the Rhokana Corporation L t d . , and the Mufulira Copper Mines

Ltd. The purpose o f the experiment was to educate the a d u l t African to

understand and adapt himself to the new c o n d i t i o n s , to r e i n f o r c e the

ordin a ry methods o f the classroom, t o conserve what i s b e s t in African

2
t r a d i t i o n s , and f i n a l l y to provide r e c r e a t i o n and e n ter tain m e n t.

I t was estimated t h a t the r e a l i z a t i o n o f such a p r o j e c t did not

n e c e s s i t a t e a q u a l i t y f ilm production. 35mm cameras were judged e x t r a v ­

agant and ru le d out. The sound on f il m technique was a l s o seen as not

economical enough. Clearly the team o f the Bantu Cinema opted f o r 16mm

cameras in ta king p i c t u r e s and 12 inch d is cs f o r the recording o f sound.

This way i t could economize on p r i c e and length o f f il m and on the cost

o f po st production. The team was a ls o lucky to have as i t s f i e l d d i r e c ­

t o r , Major N otcutt , who

had had African exper ien ce , and was able to t r a i n

and d i r e c t n ativ e a c t o r s . He not only wrote most
o f the s c e n a r i o s , includ in g those of the s to r y type,
photographed most o f the films and d i r e c t e d almost
a l l o f them, but he had a complete te chnical know­
ledge o f every d e t a i l o f th e work, o f producing
t a l k i e s ; and most o f the apparatus devised f o r the
experiment was designed, and some o f i t a c t u a l l y
made, by him o r under his d i r e c t i o n . 3

Notcutt and his team a r r i v e d in Tanganyika (p re sen t-da y Tanzania)

where they produced, between 1935 and 1937, approximately 35 s h o r t films

with commentaries in English, Swahili, Sukuama, Kikuyu, Luo, Ganda,

Nyanja, Bemba, and Tumbuka. Some o f the films were designed to teach

Africans to adopt European ways: Post Office Savings Bank, Tax, P r o g r e s s ,

e t c . ; oth er s to d i r e c t them toward cash-crop a g r i c u l t u r e : Coffee under

Banana Shade, High Yields from S elec ted P l a n t s , Coffee Marketing, e t c . ;

some y e t on the prevention o f d i s e a s e : A n a e s th e s ia , I n f a n t M a la ria ,

Hookworm, e t c . Notcutt even made a f il m on African f o l k l o r e : The Hare

and the Leopard.

The African p a r t i c i p a t i o n in the production o f the Bantu Film

Experiment was s i g n i f i c a n t . I t was N o t c u t t ' s i n s i g h t t h a t he could

co ns iderably reduce the c o s t o f the films by e f f i c i e n t l y u t i l i z i n g the

manpower of the Afric an s. He wrote t h a t " i n t e l l i g e n t young Africans can

be t r a i n e d to do much o f the r o u tin e work o f the darkroom and the sound

s t u d i o s , and even some o f the s e m i - s k i l l e d work."^

I t i s t h e r e f o r e to Major N o t c u t t 's c r e d i t , in the case o f the Bantu

Education Cinema Experiment, to have done the whole o f f il m production,

including pro ce ssing and e d i t i n g , in Africa f o r the f i r s t time. This

f a c t wi ll become more s i g n i f i c a n t and i r o n i c when we compare i t to the

co nd itio ns o f production p r e v a i l i n g today in A fri ca .

At the end o f t h e i r p r o j e c t , in 1937, Notcutt and his colleagues

recommended to th e Colonial Office o f the B r i t i s h Empire to s t a r t local

f ilm u n i t s in the co lo nies which would be cooperating with a c e n t r a l

or g a n iz a tio n in London. I t was deemed im pr ac tical and wasteful to have

autonomous production u n i t s s i m i l a r to the Bantu Cinema Experiment.

Instead of t h i s i t was proposed t h a t each group should have i t s "own

skeleton film-producing u n i t , concerned mainly with the photography,

and t h a t th e highly technic al and more s k i l l e d work o f completing the

5
films should be done a t a c e n t r a l o r g a n iz a tio n shared by a l l . "

In 1939 the Colonial Film Unit was s t a r t e d in d i f f e r e n t parts, of

Afri ca : an East African branch f o r Kenya, Tanganyika and Uganda; a

Central African branch f o r Rhodesia (p re sen t-d ay Zimbahwe), and

 12

Nyassaland; and a West African branch f o r Nigeria and the Gold Coast

( p re s e n t day Ghana). The Colonial Film Unit was p r e c i p a t a t e d , according

to Jean Rouch, by the United Kingdom’s i n t e n t to make Africans p a r t i c i ­

pate in World War Two. Rouch adds, however, t h a t " I f the immediate goal

o f the Colonial Film Unit was to make war propaganda, i t s o r g a n i z e r ,

W. S e l l e r s , in f a c t , had in mind, as a long range p r o j e c t , the implement­

a t i o n of a systematic way o f u t i l i z i n g f il m f o r an African audience."*’

The Colonial Film Unit was, a t f i r s t , i n t e r e s t e d in d i s t r i b u t i n g

propaganda films in A f rica. For t h i s purpose, films made in Europe and

America were r e - e d i t e d and commented on in o rder to achieve the d e s ir e d

e f f e c t on African s. In 1945, a t the end o f the war, t h i s d i s t r i b u t i o n

p o l ic y changed to one o f prod uc tion. Films, such as Mister English a t

Home and An African in London, were made to show the e t i q u e t t e o f English

life. Films were als o produced in Africa and a t the Central Bureau in

London to s e l l western products such as t r a n s i s t o r ra dios (Lusaka

Cal1i n g ) , o r to show the advantages o f western medicine over the African

ways o f healing (Leprosy). Unlike the Bantu Film Experiment which used

16mm cameras f o r i t s f i l m s , L. Van Bever r e p o r t s t h a t the Colonial Film

Unit shot i t s films with 35mm cameras.7

In 1949, following an expose f o r the UNESCO by John G rie rs on, the

Colonial Film Unit i n i t i a t e d a f ilm school in Accra, Gold Coast f o r

A f ric a n s . Grierson had come to a conclusion t h a t films made by the

Bantu Film Experiment and th e Colonial Film Unit f a i l e d to a t t r a c t African

audiences because Africans could not i d e n t i f y with them. Grierson wrote ,

"I b eliev e t h a t th e s o l u t i o n to the problem o f cinema in the Colonies i s

not the p r o j e c t io n o f films coming from the West, but the making o f films
 13
O
i n s id e the Colonies by and f o r the c o lo n ial people themselves."

The school was designed to t r a i n s tu dents f o r a period of s ix

months, a f t e r which they were divided i n t o small groups and asked to

make f il m s . A fter the f i r s t s i x months, the Film Training School was

moved to Jamaica, then to London. According to Van Bever, th e r e s u l t s

o f the t r a i n i n g school were encouraging. Several "African s tu d en ts were

t r a i n e d in t h i s manner to become e x c e l l e n t a s s i s t a n t s to the teams of

production s e n t to West Afri ca by the c e n t r a l o r g a n iz a tio n o f the

Colonial Film Unit in London."9

By 1955 th e Colonial Film Unit dec lared t h a t i t had f u l f i l l e d i t s

goal o f intro ducing an educational cinema to Afric an s. The colonies were

asked to take over th e expenses o f t h e i r own f il m production. The

Colonial Film Unit changed i t s name to Overseas Film and Te le vis ion

Centre. This c e n t e r , although no longer r e sp o n s i b le f o r the development

of cinema in the c o l o n i e s , served as a p o in t o f coordinat io n between the

autonomous production u n i t s in th e colonies and as a place to t r a i n film

and t e l e v i s i o n crews. I t was a l s o a place to buy f ilm equipment and a

plac e to do p o s t-production work. In o th e r words, while the e l im ination

o f the Colonial Film Unit had solved the economic problem o f producing

films f o r the c o l o n i e s , the dependence o f the co lonies upon the mother

country in developing t h e i r film production was assured by the Overseas

Film and T e le v is io n Centre. The change in the policy o f production was

nec essa ry, according to Rouch, because the B r i t i s h did not see any sense

in continuing to i n v e s t in the development o f f il m in c o u n tr ie s which

were due anytime to become i n d e p e n d e n t . ^

Before continuing to show the Belgian and French c o n t r i b u t i o n to

 14

the development o f Af rican cinema, i t may be useful to pause f o r a moment

and e v a l u a t e th e Colonial Film Unit in the co n te x t o f Anglophone African

cinema.

The major complaint a g a i n s t th e Bantu Film Experiment and the Colon­

i a l Film Unit i s t h a t they were p a t e r n a l i s t i c and r a c i s t . T h e ir attempt

t o t u r n back th e wheels o f f il m h i s t o r y and to develop a d i f f e r e n t type

o f cinema f o r Africans was motivated by the view t h a t the African mind

was too p r i m i t i v e to follow th e s o p h i s t i c a t e d n a r r a t i v e technique pr ev a­

l e n t in mainstream cinema. They thoug ht t h a t i t was necessary with

Af ricans to r e t u r n to th e beginning o f motion p i c t u r e h i s t o r y , to use

uncut sc e n e s, to slow down the pace o f the s t o r y , and to make th e n a r r a ­

t i v e s im p le r by using fewer a c t o r s and by adhering to one dominant theme.

The c o l o n i a l i s t filmmaker was thus t ra pped in an ideology o f Colonialism

which found i t s own l e g itim acy in denying t h a t the colonized peoples had

elementary human q u a l i t i e s . I t was t h i s ideology t h a t prevented the

filmmakers of th e Bantu Experiment and th e Colonial Film Unit from seeing

what was always obvious: t h e i r films were boring and clumsy, J . Koyinde

Vaughan, a disenchanted c r i t i c o f th e c o l o n i a l i s t f i l m s , w r i t e s :

Vet African f i l m a u diences , d a i l y growing l a r g e r ,

when faced with the choice o f s e e in g the " s i m p l i ­
f i e d screen n a r r a t i v e " produced by the "Colonial
Film Unit" and th e f o r e ig n "Commerical e n t e r t a i n ­
ment film" have overwhelmingly decided in fav or of
th e l a t t e r p r o d u c ts , in s p i t e o f t h e i r "complicated
t e c h n ic a l co n v en tio n s." In African towns l i k e
Freetown, Accra, Kumasi, Lagos, or N air o b i, Charles
Chaplin and many popular s t a r s o f th e s cr ee n ar e
alr e a d y household names.11

The a t t i t u d e s o f th e B r i t i s h r e s u l t e d a ls o in t h e i r f a i l u r e to

understand Af ric an s and t h e i r t r a d i t i o n s . They t r e a t e d ev erything

Af rican as s u p e r s t i t i o u s and backwards, v a l o r i z i n g Europe a t th e expense

 15

of A f r i c a , as i f i t were necessary to downgrade t r a d i t i o n a l African

12
c u l t u r e s in o rder to show the e f f e c t u a l r e s u l t s o f European p r a c t i c e s .

Under thes e p a t e r n a l i s t i c and r a c i s t c o n d i t i o n s , Africans could not

be adequately t r a i n e d to handle t h e i r own f il m prod uction . John

G r i e r s o n 's recommendation t h a t the s o l u t i o n to colonial cinema was to

l e t the c olonies make t h e i r own films seemed awkward in a colonial s i t u ­

a t i o n , because i f th e c o lonies could make t h e i r own f i l m s , the c o lo n ia l s

would no longer be needed. The B r i t i s h were aware o f t h i s f a c t , and i t

became the reason which led them to put an end to the Colonial Film Unit

in the e a r l y f i f t i e s , in the wake o f independence movements in Afri ca.

The impact o f the Colonial Film Unit on the c u r r e n t s t r u c t u r e s of

fil m production in Anglophone Africa can be understood in terms o f the

a n a ly s is o f co lon ia lism o f f e r e d by Franz Fanon, who argues in Sociologie

1T
d'une r e v o l u ti o n t h a t " I t i s the White who c r e a t e s the negro." In

another book, Pour la r e v o lu tio n a f r i c a i n e , Fanon draws a t t e n t i o n to the

c o l o n i z e r ' s tech n olo gic al p a te r n a li s m , and r ep ea ts the idea t h a t the

c o l o n i z e r frames th e s t r u c t u r a l p a t t e r n s o f behavior o f th e colonized.

For Fanon, the c o l o n i z e r , by maintaining his contr ol over the manners by

which technology i s used, achieves "an organized domination o f a nation

which he has conquered m i l i t a r i l y . " ^ An e v a lu a ti o n o f the s t r u c t u r e s

o f f il m production in Anglophone Africa wil l prove Fanon r i g h t and shed

l i g h t on th e determining r o l e played by th e Colonial Film Unit in A f ric a .

A f t e r independence, the Anglophone c o u n t r i e s , except f o r Ghana and

N ig e r ia , did not attempt to i n t e g r a t e f il m as an e s s e n t i a l element o f

development and /or ente r ta in m e n t. Most o f them stopped production with

the c l o s in g o f the B r i t i s h Colonial Film Units. In Ghana t h e r e were

 16

several attempts to keep a l i v e the s t r u c t u r e s o f production i n h e r i t e d

from the B r i t i s h . The Gold Coast (Ghana) Film Unit assumed i t s inde­

pendence in 1950, even before the Colonial Film Unit ceased production

in A f ric a. Under the impulse o f Sean Graham, a s tu d en t o f John Grierson,

the Gold Coast Film Unit was or gan ized , and films were produced in co­

production with independent B r i t i s h i n t e r e s t groups and masters o f the

documentary such as Grierson himself.

The purpose o f the f il m u n i t was to make educational and e n t e r t a i n ­

ment films which could be d i s t r i b u t e d in Ghana and o u tsid e th e country.

The t e c h n o - p a t e r n a l i s t i c manner o f the Colonial Film Units was abandoned

in fav or o f c u r r e n t n a r r a t i v e s t y l e s o f f i c t i o n films and documentaries.

Graham and his team made films about a c c u l t u r a t i o n (Jaguar Zpigh L i f e 7 ) ,

c i t y l i f e (The Boy Kumasenu), and independence movements ( Freedom f o r

Ghana). Graham's b ig g e s t s u c c e s s , The Boy Kumasenu (1952), was widely

d i s t r i b u t e d in Ghana and in England.

However, Graham and the f il m u n i t did not solve th e problem of

r e a l i z i n g a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d production u n i t which could be taken over by

Ghanaians a t the th re sh o ld o f independence. I t i s to Graham's c r e d i t to

have departed from th e s t y l e o f overdrawn n a r r a t i v e s , burdened with

commentaries, adapted by the Colonial Film Unit f o r i t s African audiences.

But Graham's concern with q u a l i t y n a r r a t i v e s a l s o blinded him from the

economic r e a l i t i e s o f production in Ghana. Films were shot with 35mm

cameras, processed and e d i te d in London. Thus, the dependence o f the

Ghana Film Corporation upon the Overseas Film and Te le vis ion Centre in

London was maintained. The s t u d e n t s , who came out o f the Accra Film

Training School, were never given a chance to d i r e c t t h e i r own f il m s .

 17

They remained in the background as a s s i s t a n t s o f Graham.

In 1957, Graham l e f t Ghana a f t e r the independence o f the country.

This marked a new phase in Ghanaian f ilm production. Kwame NKrumah,

the P r e s id e n t o f Ghana, n a t i o n a l i z e d both the s e c t o r s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n

and production o f f ilm s . Between 1957 and 1966 the NKrumah regime b u i l t

the most s o p h i s t i c a t e d i n f r a s t r u c t u r e o f production in A f ric a. Editing

s t u d i o s , 16 and 35mm pr oc essing l a b o r a t o r i e s were i n s t a l l e d . Ghana did

not have i t s own d i r e c t o r s y e t , but several new sreels, documentaries and

propaganda films were made by fo re ign d i r e c t o r s in Ghanaian s t u d i o s .

When NKrumah was overthrown, the new regime c o n f i s c a t e d a l l the films

produced between 1957 and 1966. The reason given f o r t h i s d i s c o n t i n u i t y

is t h a t the films put too much emphasis on the " p e r s o n a l i t y c u l t of

NKrumah." New production p o l i c i e s had again to be formulated; f o r t h i s

purpose, in 1969 Sam Aryetey, a graduate o f the 1949 Accra Film Training

School and a f ilm d i r e c t o r and e d i t o r , was named as head o f the Ghana

Film Corporation.

The Ghana Film Corporation, when Aryetey took i t o ver, in the words

o f th e foremost a u t h o r i t y on African cinema, Paul in S. Vieyra, "Has,

r e l a t i v e l y , an important equipment which is capable o f disposing a dozen

15
f e a t u r e film s a y e a r . " Aryetey himself boasted in an in te rv ie w t h a t

"we own in Ghana the b e s t cinematographic i n f r a s t r u c t u r e in t r o p i c a l

I £
Africa." The Ghana Film Corporation could a l s o use the e x p e r t i s e o f

Ghanaian t e c h n i c i a n s t r a i n e d in Accra and in London. F i n a l l y t h er e were

ten Ghanaian f il m d i r e c t o r s . Despite t h i s p o t e n t i a l r e s e r v o i r f o r the

production o f f i l m s , a r e c e n t d i c t i o n a r y on motion p i c t u r e production

c r e d i t s Ghana with only twenty films s in ce 1966, out o f which l e s s than

 18

ten a r e f e a t u r e s . ^

As the head o f the pr oduc tion, Aryetey s h i f t e d t o a policy of

co -pro duct ion, in o r d e r , in his words, to "find d i s t r i b u t i o n o u t l e t s

1Q
o u ts i d e o f A f r i c a . " In t h i s v e i n , Aryetey signed with an I t a l i a n

d i r e c t o r , Giorgio Bontempi, to make the f il m Impact (1975). This

19
f i l m , according to Guy Hennebelle, was a f in a n c i a l d i s a s t e r , seen

by very few people. Most im por tant, however, f o r th e purpose o f t h i s

stu dy, i s the f a c t t h a t Aryetey, by overlooking Ghanaian and African

d i r e c t o r s , and r e v e r t i n g to Europeans t o make films f o r Ghana, has s e t

back the progress o f f il m production in Ghana to where i t was when the

Colonial Film Units l e f t .

In s i t u a t i o n s in which government production u n i t s such as the

Ghana Film Corporation turn to f o r e i g n e r s to make f i l m s , the only hope

f o r an African cinema remains in the hands of independent filmmakers.

In Ghana, the f u tu r e o f independent cinema depends very much on

P a i n s t i l Kwa Ansah, whose film Love Brewed in an African Pot (1981)

enjoyed a wide d i s t r i b u t i o n in Ghana, Kenya, and o u t s id e o f Afri ca.

Ansah a v a ile d himself o f the equipment o f the Ghana Film Corporation

20
and the Ghanaian t e c h n ic ia n s to produce and d i r e c t h is film .

The o t h e r s i g n i f i c a n t producer -of film in Anglophone Africa is

N ig er ia, th e b i g g e s t country in A f r i c a , with e i g h ty m i l l i o n people and

more than one hundred movie t h e a t e r s . The Colonial Film Unit, which

had t h r e e o f f i c e s in N igeria, l e f t behind cameras, s tu d io s and la b o r a ­

t o r i e s in 16mm f il m producing. However, i t i s th e Nigerian t e l e v i s i o n

t h a t r e t a i n s the a t t e n t i o n o f f ilm h i s t o r i a n s . Created in 1959, before

the independence of the co untry, i t has a r e s p e c ta b le s i z e o f viewing

 19

audience a l l over the cou ntry. With Segun Olusola as i t s d i r e c t o r , the

Nigerian t e l e v i s i o n has adap ted, since th e e a r l y s i x t i e s , plays by Jean

Paul S a r t r e , Wole Soyinka, Duro Lapido, J . P . Clark, Lorraine Hansberry

and Anton Chekov, e t a l . Olusola attempted a c ar eer in f il m production

when he co-produced Son o f Afri ca in 1970 with a group o f Lebanese

businessmen who own p a r t o f th e monopoly o f f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n in N ig er ia.

According to Ola Balogun, N i g e r i a 's foremost filmmaker, Olusola and his

a s s o c i a t e s c r e a te d in h a s te a film company, Fedfilms Limited, in o rder

to produce Son o f Africa and to go down in h i s t o r y f o r "producing the

21
f i r s t Nigerian film" in 1970. Under O lu s o la , Son o f Afri ca and the

t e l e v i s i o n ada p ta ti o n s were a l l d i r e c t e d by f o r e i g n e r s . Clearly, th ere­

f o r e , Olusola had not reached the s o lu t i o n f o r a Nigerian a nd/o r an

African production.

At the same time t h a t Son of Africa was made, another important

Nigerian film producer came on the scene. Francis Oladele, founder o f

Calpenny Limited, i s , in the words of Michael Raeburn, "The f i r s t inde-

22
pendent f ilm producer in Anglophone A f r i c a . " O lad ele's dream was to

make o f Nigeria the Hollywood of Africa. He founded Calpenny Limited

with th e f i n a n c i a l suppo rt o f Americans from C a l i f o r n i a , Pennsylvania,

and New York; hence the choice of the name Cal-Pen-NY. O l a d e l e ' s aim

was to produce Af rican films which could be successful in Africa as well

as in the West. He es tim ate d t h a t for t h i s purpose he needed i n t e r n a ­

t i o n a l f il m d i r e c t o r s , a c t o r s and co- produ cer s. His f i r s t f il m was an

a d a p ta ti o n of Soyinka's p l a y , Korigi's Harvest (1971), d i r e c t e d by a

famous Afro-American d i r e c t o r , Ossie Davis, and s t a r r i n g Soyinka him se lf.

His second f il m , Bullfrog in the Sun (1972), i s adapted from Chinua

 20

Achebe's two nov els, Things Fall Apart and No Longer a t Ease. A West

German, Hans Jurgen Pohland, d i r e c t e d the f il m ; the leading s t a r is

Princess E lis a b e th o f Toro, who was once a lawyer in Uganda and a

model in New York. The film abounds with v i o l e n t wars and l i n g e r s on

th e issue o f ce ssion o f Biafra to Ibos. This l a s t element made many

Africans f in d th e f ilm in poor t a s t e . As f o r Kongi's H arvest , i t was

denounced by Soyinka himself and Davis' c r e d e n t i a l s f o r d i r e c t i n g a

23
f ilm on Africa f o r Africans was questioned . Although Oladele s t i l l

produces newsreels upon r e q u e s t , he has not produced a f e a t u r e f ilm

s in c e Bullfrog in the Sun.

I t is t o Ola Balogun t h a t one must turn in o rder to see th e f i r s t

rea l promise o f Nigerian cinema. Born in 1945, Balogun graduated from

the Par is I n s t i t u t des Hautes Etudes Cinematographiques (IDHEC) before

becoming a diplomat f o r his country between 1968 and 1971. Balogun is

al s o a n o v e l i s t and a playwright. Back in N igeria, a t the end o f his

diplomatic c a r e e r , he produced and d i r e c t e d twelve films between 1972

and 1977. Since 1977, Balogun has produced and d i r e c t e d a t l e a s t one

f e a t u r e film a y e a r , earning the t i t l e o f the most p r o l i f i c film

d i r e c t o r in A f rica. Balogun's films ar e comedies and African musicals.

They enjoy a big success in N igeria, which makes i t p o s s i b l e f o r him

to recoup his money each time and to make new fil m s . I t i s p o s s ib le

f o r a filmmaker, in a country the s i z e o f N ig eria , to s urv ive on local

consumption o f his f ilm s . This has so f a r been the case f o r Balogun;

f o r t u n a t e l y th e f u t u r e looks b r i g h t e r f o r his l a s t f i l m , Money Power

(1982), which has more un iver sal themes and i s bound to go beyond the

f r o n t i e r s o f Niger ia.
 21

Balogun's c r i t i c a l statements in i n t e r n a t i o n a l magazines, coupled

with the success o f his f i l m s , have f i r e d on o v e r a ll Nigerian i n t e r e s t

in f il m . The fed er al government has begun to sponsor s tu d e n ts abroad

to study film. The is s u e o f African cinema occupied also an important

place in the 1977 Festi val on African Cultures (Festac) organized in

Lagos. Subsequently, a seminar was organized on Nigerian Cinema, the

preceedings o f which ar e published in a book: The Development and

Growth o f the Film Industry in Nigeria (1979), e d i t e d by Alfred E.

Opubor and Onuora E. Nwuneli. The Nigeria Film Corporation, which

took the place o f the Colonial Film U n its, has s in ce been r e s h u f f l e d .

I t s general manager, Alhaji A. H a l i l u ' s d u t i e s include th e encourage­

ment o f f ilm production by Nigerians.

Aside from these weak t r a c e s o f f ilm production in Ghana and

N igeria, Anglophone Africa can be s aid to be d i e t i n g cinematograph!-

c a l l y speaking. Film s p e c i a l i s t s and amateurs a l i k e have given many

reasons as to why Anglophone Africa has not been e x te n s iv e ly involved

in producing film s . Some have argued t h a t i t is because the B r i t i s h

did not have an a s s i m i l a t i o n i s t policy toward t h e i r c o l o n i e s . Unlike

the French who ta ught "Nos a n c e s t r e s l e s gau lois" to A f ric a n s , the

B r i t i s h co lo n ia li s m , according to Ferid Boughedir, i s "supposed to

have been s t r i c t l y b u s in e s s , and has never succeeded o r t r i e d as si m i-

24
l a t i o n , which has been linke d to French economic colo nia lis m .

Boughedir expands t h i s t h e s i s f u r t h e r , and concludes t h a t i f the

Anglophone c o u n tr ie s had had such French pi oneer s o f African cinema as

*s s
Jean-Rene Debrix, " th ere would have been seve ral Anglophone f il m s . "
25

Another argument p e r t a i n in g to the poverty o f Anglophone cinema

 22

i s t h a t film i s not a p r i o r i t y in developing African c o u n t r i e s . Act­

ing out o f a pragmatism, the Anglophone c o u n t r ie s abandoned local

production with th e clo s in g o f the Colonial Film Unit. They d i r e c t e d

t h e i r en er gies i n s te a d toward more p r e ss in g problems. While they

accepted few documentaries dea ling with " r e a l i t y " , i . e . hard f a c t s ,

they shunned f i c t i o n , make b e l i e v e , and metaphysics. They were

e m p i r i c i s t s l i k e t h e i r former B r i t i s h masters. They are thus known,

according to Kamphausen, to i n s i s t "on more p r a c t i c a l and pragmatic

26
a t t i t u d e s i n h e r i t e d from the former B r i t i s h a u t h o r i t y . "

There is a f u r t h e r opinion t h a t Anglophone Africans have not

been exposed to a film c u l t u r e . In Francophone c o u n t r i e s , f o r example,

th e r e are cinematheques a t French embassies, where Africans can see and

d isc uss with a French d iscu s s io n le a d e r world c l a s s fil m s . The B r i t i s h

embassies in Africa lack such c u l t u r a l a c t i v i t i e s . The B r i t i s h were

more i n t e r e s t e d in documentaries which were d i d a c t i c and most ofte n

boring. These d i f f e r e n c e s o f approach led Michael Raeburn to w rite

t h a t "compared to Francophone African c o u n t r i e s , the Anglophone

27
African c o u n t r ie s lack in cinematic c u l t u r e . "

Ola Balogun, f o r his p a r t , believes t h a t i t i s an economic prob­

lem. Taking Nigeria as a case p o i n t , he argues t h a t during the

colo nial epoch the country consumed products made in Great B r i t a i n

and f ilm was such a product. Balogun explained t h a t the p o l i t i c a l

independence o f Nigeria was not followed by an economic independence.

He w r i t e s :

S t i l l today, f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n in Nigeria is

in the hands o f f o re ig n companies (American
and Lebanese), which d i c t a t e t h e i r w il l in
the m att er o f cinema. Since the d i s t r i b u t o r s
 23

b e n e f i t more in buying, a t a very low

p r i c e , old American, English, and Indian
f il m s , t h e i r polic y has c o n s i s t e d , then,
in discouraging a l l attempts to c r e a t e a
nationa l f il m p r o d u c t io n . 28

Having seen the experience o f Ghana and N i g e r ia , one n o t i c e s also

the techn ological and e s t h e t i c dependence o f the Af ricans on the West.

Both in Ghana and in N ig e r i a , Westerners ar e c a l l e d upon to d i r e c t

films intended f o r Afric an s. Co-productions ar e d e s i r a b l e , b u t , i f

p o s s i b l e , they should f i r s t be on an African l e v e l , and t h e r e are many

reasons f o r t h i s p o l i c y . F i r s t l y , by using African t e c h n i c i a n s , the

c o s t o f the production i s s i g n i f i c a n t l y reduced. Secondly, the f i l m ,

by i t s double or t r i p l e n a t i o n a l i t y , in c r e a s e s i t s chances t h a t i t s

c o s t w ill be recouped. An African level co- production may help bring

out o f s ta g n a ti o n some o f the equipment i n h e r i t e d from the Colonial

Film U nit, and i t helps reduce the r i s k s o f misunderstanding African

c u l t u r e s by using African d i r e c t o r s .

Another impression one may g e t , in analyzing the experiences of

Ghana and N ig eria , is t h a t they have not thought about filmmaking in

a c r i t i c a l manner. They have f a l l e n in the producing h a b its o f the

Colonial Film Unit and colo nial f ilm pioneer s l i k e Sean Graham. A

c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e would have revealed to them th e n e c e s s i t y to pro­

duce d i f f e r e n t l y . A ch o ic e , based on economic r e a l i t i e s , would have

been made between 16mm and 35mm cameras, f o r example. An e f f o r t to

t r a i n Africans in the e d i t i n g rooms and in l a b o r a t o r i e s would have

a ls o been c r u c i a l . All these choices would have helped to deniystify

f il m production and make i t a c c e s s i b l e even to A f r ic a . Let us not

f o r g e t , a f t e r a l l , t h a t in 1935, Major Notcutt and the Bantu Film

 24

Experiment had a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d u n i t , and t h a t a l l t h e i r film s were

produced on th e s p o t. This p r a c t i c e was abandoned by the Colonial

Film U nit , and u n f o r t u n a t e l y not resumed by the independent African

countries.

I f one r e t u r n s f o r a moment t o c o n s id e r th e Bantu Film Experi­

ment, one may fin d an i n s i g h t in Major N o t c u t t ' s t e c h n o - p a t e r n a l i s t i c

approach to filmmaking f o r A f ric a n s . Acting from an assumption t h a t

Africans were in capable o f a p p r e c i a t i n g q u a l i t y in th e f il m images,

N otcutt chose the 16mm camera and th e most rudimentary c o n d itio n s o f

p o s t- p r o d u c t io n to make h i s "African" f il m s . His b lin d n e ss to African

e s t h e t i c t a s t e a l s o led him to forego th e h i r i n g o f e x p e r ts in cinema­

togra phy, d i r e c t i n g , e d i t i n g , e t c . and to do a l l t h i s work, helping

him se lf with Af rican manpower.

The p o i n t I am making i s t h a t Major Not cu tt had i n v e n te d ,

s im u lta n e o u s ly , two types o f cinema: a r a c i s t and an economically

l i b e r a t e d cinema. The Anglophone Africans could have improved his

c o s t reducing methods by d i v e s t i n g t h e s e methods o f t h e i r r a c i s t

c o n t e n t. The r e s u l t s could have c o n s t i t u t e d a de m yst ified cinema,

s i m i l a r to th e kind made by t h e Argentinian filmmakers, Fernando

29
Solanas and Octavio G e t t i n o , and c a l l e d Third Cinema.

U n f o r tu n a te ly , i t i s the r a c i s t tendency o f N otcutt which seems

to have p r e v a i l e d in Anglophone Africa n cinema, long a f t e r the

Colonial Film Unit had l e f t . The p a t t e r n s o f r a c i a l i s t filmmaking

are seen in th e films of some o f the most i n f l u e n t i a l Af rican d i r e c ­

t o r s and managers o f pr oduction companies. Sam Aryetey and El haj i

Adamu H a l i l u , r e s p e c t i v e l y managers o f th e Ghana Film Corporation and

 25

the Nigeria Film Corporation, have made and defended t h i s type of

cinema. Aryetey's f i l m , No Tears f o r Ananse (1970), and H a l i l u ' s

Shaihu Umar (1976) ar e both " e s p e c i a l ly " e d i t e d , with almost no

e l l i p s i s , in o rder not to confuse t h e i r African audiences. These

30
films a r e , supposedly, film s f o r Africa ns . However, the f a c t r e ­

mains, as J. Koyinde Vaughan shows, t h a t African audiences when faced

with the ch oice, have overwhelmingly decided in favor o f economically

ed i te d n a r r a t i v e s "in s p i t e o f t h e i r 'complicated t ech n ical conven-

31
t i o n s 1." One must remember t h a t African oral n a r r a t i v e s abound in

d i g r e s s i o n s , p a r a l l e l i s m , fla s h b a c k s , dreams, e t c . Thus, an African

f ilm can co ntain a l l these elements without n e c e s s a r i l y d i s o r i e n t i n g

i t s audience.

C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , the ideology o f Aryetey and H a li lu i s both

r a c i s t and economically w a s t e f u l . The q u a n t i t y o f f il m put in to

No Tears f o r Ananse and i n t o Shaihu Umar could have gone in t o the

making o f f our or f i v e films o f equa lly good s c e n a r i o s . These

African d i r e c t o r s can l ear n from Sembene Ousmane, Emitai (1971), and

Gaston Kabore, Wend Kuni (1982) t h a t motion p ic tu re s d o n ' t have to be

s i m p l i f i e d , and the wheels o f e d i t i n g h i s t o r y d o n ' t have to be turned

back, in o rder to make cinema a c c e s s i b l e to Afric an s. Franz Fanon i s

r i g h t in p o i nti n g o u t , as I have shown e a r l i e r , t h a t the co lo n iz e r

invents th e colonized. Aryetey and H a l i l u , t r a in e d a t the Colonial

Film Training School in Accra and the Overseas Film and Te lev ision

School in London, r e p r e s e n t t h i s f i r s t s ta g e o f the encounter between

Europe and A f r i c a . A m e t a c r i t i c a l approach to filmmaking in Anglo­

phone Africa w il l undo t h i s s i t u a t i o n and lead to the rea l independence

o f African cinema.
 26

Notes

7
L.A. N otcu tt, e t a l , e d s . , The Af rican and the Cinema. London:
The Edinburgh House P r e s s , 1937, p. 23.

2I b i d . , pp. 27-28.

3I b i d . , p. 186.

4 I b i d . , pp. 183-184.

5 I b i d . , p. 187.
C y
Jean Rouch, Films ethnogr aphiques, p. 390.

Van Bever, Le Cinema Pour A f r i c a i n . B rus se ls : G. Van

Campenhout, 1952, p. 32.
Q
I b i d . , pp. 16-17. Quoted by Bever.

9 I b i d . , p. 23.

^9Jean Rouch, Films ethno graphiques, p. 390.

^ J . Koyinde Vaughan. "Africa South o f the Sahara and th e Cinema."

Presence A fric a in e No. 14-15 (June-Sept. 1957), p. 218.
12 y
-
Jean Rouch, Films ethnogr aphiques, p. 392, note 1.
1 *3
Frantz Fanon, So ciologie d'une r e v o lu ti o n ( L'ari V de la re v o lu tio n
Alg erienne) . P a r i s : Francois Maspero, 1959, p. 29^ See also Albert
Memrni, P o r t r a i t du Colonise, precede du P o r t r a i t du C o l b n i s a t e u r . P a r is :
J . J . Pauvert, e d i t e u r , 1966.

14 -•
Frantz Fanon, Pour l a r e v o lu ti o n a f r i c a i n e . P a r i s : Francois
Maspero, 1964, p. 92.
15 ^ -
Paul in Vieyra, Le cinema a f r i c a i n : des o r ig i n e s a 1973. P a r is :
Presence A f r i c a i n e , 1975, p. 103.

16 '
Michael Raeburn, "Interview with Sam Aretey" in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e
y
e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 49, p. 19.
 27

^ V i c t o r Bachy, "D ic ti o n n a ire de 250 Cineastes" in CinemAction,

No. 26, pp. 185-201.
IO
Michael Raeburn, "Inter view with Sam Aretey," p. 19.

19I b i d . , p. 19, note 1.

9n
Mbye B. Cham, "Film Production in West Africa" in Presence
A f r i c a i n e , No. 124 (1982), p. 173.

2^01 a Balogun, "Les t r o i s longs metranger n ig ^ r i a n s " in Afrique

L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 20. (Special i s s u e : "Les Cinemas
A fri cains en 1972" , 1972, p. 251.
on
Michael Baeburn, "Le Cinema p i e t i n e encore dans l e s pays
d'A fr iq u e n o ire anglophone" in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e ,
No. 20, p. 254.

23I b i d . , p. 255.

2^Ferid Bougedir, Afrique Noire: Quel Cinema?, p. 34.

23I b i d . , p. 34.

Hannes Kamphausen, "Cinema in A f ri c a : A Survey," p. 31.

97
Michael Raeburn, "Le cinema p i e t i n e . . . , " p. 254.

28
01a Balogun, "Les t r o i s longs mStrages n i g e r i a n s , " p. 252.

29
Fernando Salanas and Octavio G e t tin g , Cine Cultura y des co loni-
zacion.

30
Aryetey defends his f ilm on grounds t h a t i t was not made f o r
Europeans, but f o r Africans only. He concedes, however, t h a t i t was "a
mistake to have taken 65 minutes f o r a sc enari o which should not have
gone beyond 25 minutes." See his interv iew with Raeburn al ready c i t e d
in note 24.

As f o r H a l i l u , he ar gues, during a showing o f his f il m a t UNCLA

(October 1983), t h a t he only had African audiences in mind when he made
the film .

31
See Vaughan above, note 19.
 28

Chapter I I I

ZAIRIAN PRODUCTION

In regards t o c o lo n ia l cinema in o t h e r areas o f A f r i c a , Belgian

c olon ial f ilm production began much l a t e r than production by B r i t i s h

Colonial Film Units. In f a c t , the Belgians used th e B r i t i s h Colonial

Film Units as a s t r u c t u r a l model f o r t h e i r own f il m production in the

Belgian Congo ( Z a i r e ) . As the f i r s t to have introduced f ilm product­

ion f o r A f ric a n s , the B r i t i s h not only marked i n s i d i o u s l y the Anglo­

phone c o u n t r i e s , they a l s o snared the Belgians in t h e i r colo nial pro­

duction h a b i t s . An a n a l y s is o f the p o l i t i c a l context o f the h i s t o r y

o f the Belgian c o lo n ia l cinema w il l c l e a r l y show, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t

Zair ian cinema, t o o , has been determined, and mis-en-abime, by colonial

p r e s c r i p t i o n s s i m i l a r to the ones seen with the B r i t i s h Colonial Film

Units.

The Belgian Gouvernment General hecame a c t i v e in matters o f cinema

in th e Belgian Congo (Zaire) by intro ducing a s e r i e s of laws. In 1936,

a l e g i s l a t i o n was enacted to fo rb id unauthorized filmmakers from film -

i
ing in the Belgian Congo. The Belgian c o lo n ia l o f f i c e made t h i s law

e f f e c t u a l in se ve ral ways. I t was used to obta in dues from the commer­

c i a l films shot in the t e r r i t o r y , and to contr ol the c o n te n t o f a n th r o ­

pological films made on the d i f f e r e n t e th n i c groups in the Congo. In

1945, the Gouvernement General o f Belgium passed another law i n t e r d i c t ­

ing anyone to "admit in movie t h e a t e r s , pub lic o r p r i v a t e , people o t h e r

2
than the Europeans and the Asian r a c e s . "
 29

Following in the id eo lo g ic al f o o ts t e p s o f the B r i t i s h , the Belgians,

t o o , concluded t h a t commercial films were not good f o r African s. P ie rr e

Piron, d i r e c t o r o f the S e c r e t a r i a t General du Congo Beige, argued t h a t :

The Study o f the r e a c t i o n o f the s p e c t a t o r s

{Congolese), supported by s i m i l a r s tu d i e s under­
taken in neighboring t e r r i t o r i e s , leads to a
d isap p o in tin g o b s e r v a t io n : The African i s , in
g e n e r a l , not mature f o r cinema. Cinematographic
conventions d i s r u p t him; psychological nuances
escape him; r a p id succession o f sequences submerge
him.3

By t h e se means, th e Belgians hoped to keep t h e i r grip on the c i n e ­

matic h e r i t a g e o f the Congolese. The committee o f ce nso rship had always

to approve th e degree o f involvement o f th e Congolese in f il m a c t i v i t i e s .

During World War I I , the approved films f o r the Congolese, who were then

c a l l e d "non-evolu^s" o r " in d ig e n e s " , were war propaganda d e p ic ti n g the

Nazis as th e enemies o f the human r a c e , in cluding African s.

A fte r th e war, in 1947, a branch o f the Belgian M in is tr y o f Inform­

a t i o n , L§_Bureau_CijTe^ began a p o lic y o f producing films e s p e c i a l l y

conceived f o r Congolese. L. Van Bever, Chief of the Bureau Ciiie-Photo,

was convinced t h a t the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f film s from Europe and America

alone could not answer the emerging need to provide Africans with t h e i r

own cinema. Bever wro te, "For th e g r e a t m ajo rity o f Africans i t would

be necessary to apply a s pe cial tech nique, s i m p l i f i e d to the extreme.

We must, t h e r e f o r e , make, o u r s e l v e s , the l a r g e s t share o f films d e s tin e d

f o r A f r i c a n s ." 4

The p r o j e c t s o f th e Bureau Cine-Photo included th e production of

educational films f o r Af ricans and newsreels and documentaries ahout

Africa f o r the Belgians. The film s were s h ot with 16mm cameras and

most o f the p o s t- p r o d u c tio n , except f o r the pr ocessing o f r u s h e s , was

 30

done on the spot in the Belgian Congo. Bever, in comparing his product­

ion to t h a t o f the B r i t i s h Colonial Film U n its , boasted t h a t a l l the

a s s i s t a n t s o f the Bureau Cine-Photo were A fri cans . He s a id t h a t the

Belgians were aware t h a t in the f i e l d o f film pro ductio n, as in f a c t

in a l l f i e l d s , A f ri c a n s , as soon as t h e i r education improved, would be

c a l l e d upon to r ep lace t h e i r ed uca tors. Thus, in the Belgian Congo,

although the "indigenes"

Have not been t r a i n e d as in th e Gold Coast (Ghana)

to know a l l the s te p s o f f il m pr od uctio n, they have
been i n s t r u c t e d , each, to p e r f e c t l y accomplish a
determined work: e l e c t r i c i a n , a s s i s t a n t t o the
d i r e c t o r , . . . a s s i s t a n t to the e d i t o r . 5

Bever a ls o mentioned the e x i s t e n c e , in 1952, o f a Cine-Club

Congolais i s L e opoldville (Kinshasa), where Africans were taught how

to make film s . He s t a t e d t h a t alrea dy t h e s tu d e n ts (Mongita, Dokolo,

Boumba, Lubalu, Katambwe, e t c . ) had made a film : Une Lecon du Cinema.

Bever, then , enunciated his p r id e in the f a c t t h a t one day th e Cine-

Club Congolais would be c r e d i t e d with the t r a i n i n g o f many indigenous

filmmakers. 6

Before proceeding to ev aluate the impact o f the Belgian colonial

cinema on the Z a ir i a n f ilm prod uction, i t is necessary f o r one to look

a t another company which was e s t a b l i s h e d a t the same time as the Bureau

Cine-Photo in the Belgian Congo. Called the Centre Congolais d 1Action

Catholigue Cinematoqraphique (C.C.A.C.C.) , i t was the r e s u l t o f the

efforts o f Catholic m iss io n a rie s r e p r e s e n t in g the S c h e u t i s t Church in

Belgian Congo. Here is how Father Alexandre Van den Heuvel, d i r e c t o r of

the C.C.A.C.C., explained i t s o r i g i n :

 In 1945, I i n s i s t e d with the bishops to see the
Cinema u t i l i z e d in r e l i g i o u s propaganda; I con­
t a c t e d the Office Catholique I n te r n a t i o n a l du
Cinema ( O . C . I . C . ) , the c e n tr a l headquarters of
which was in Belgium. In September t w e n t y - th i r d ,
1946, th e bishops o f Congo, during a plenary con­
f e re n c e , inaugurated the Centre Congolais d'Action
Catholique Cinematograph!que (C.C.A.C.C.).7

The purpose o f th e C.C.A.C.C. was to convert Africans to C h r i s t i a n ­

i t y , to r a i s e money, and to use f il m to earn African sympathy and f r i e n d ­

s hip toward the Belgians and the Church. The C.C.A.C.C. was funded by

the Fond du Bien-Etre Indigfene ( F . B . I . ) , which was an or g a n iz a tio n with

the o b j e c t to "repay the Congo i t s e f f o r t during the war. A big e f f o r t

which c o n s is t e d in supplying war time Europe with rubber, palm o i l , food

s t u f f , copper, and most o f a l l uranium."^

Under the C.C.A.C.C., th er e were t h r e e major film production ce nter s

in the Belgian Congo. Father Heuvel was in Leopoldville (Kinshasa) with

the production company, Edisco-Films. Beside his duties as d i r e c t o r of

the C.C.A.C.C., Father Heuvel produced a s e r i e s of "animated cartoons

f o r Africans" c a l l e d Les Palabres de MBoloko. These were s h o r t 16mm

c o l o r f i l m s , s t a r r i n g "MBoloko la p e t i t e antelo ppe," and i l l u s t r a t i n g

vice and v i r t u e according to the ideology o f the church. Father Heuvel

was c r e d i t e d f o r his usage o f African music on the sound t r a c k o f his

carto ons. His ideas o f producing African cartoons was a ls o seen as

O
r e v o lu tio n a r y in f il m production in Afri ca.

There was a l s o Father Van H aels t, who was the manager o f the Lulua-

films production in Luluabourg (Kananga), Western Kasai. According to

Bever, he was the most a c t i v e among the producer/members o f the C.C.A.C.C.,

producing more than f i f t y s h o r t films which were b e t t e r in q u a l i t y , and

more succ es sfu l in s y n th e s iz in g i n s t r u c t i o n and e n ter tain m e n t. His s i l e n t

 32

comedies, th e s e r i e s of Matamata e t P i l i p i l i were s h o rts about a Chaplin-

l i k e c h a r a c t e r , Matamata, "stubborn and s l i g h t l y p r e t e n t i o u s , but ex-

g
tremely kind."

The l a s t major missionary pro duction, A f r i c a - f i l m s , was in Bukavu

and Kivu, and was headed by Fath er De VIoo, who was s aid to be a g r e a t

d i r e c t o r and s o c i o l o g i s t o f Af rican t r a d i t i o n s ; "His profound knowledge

o f African symbols and c u l t u r e , t o g e t h e r with his p e r f e c t mastery o f the

cinematographic tech n iq u es , enabled him to make some remarkable educa­

ti o n a l f il m s .

In 1960, when Zaire became independent, both the C.C.A.C.C. and the

Bureau Cine-Photo stopped t h e i r African film production. The value of

the t h re e c e n t e r s of missionary production had been discuss ed by many

h i s t o r i a n s o f African cinema. Compared to the o f f i c i a l Belgian prod uct­

ion of the Bureau Cinfe-Photo, th e productions o f the C.C.A.C.C. were, in

the eyes o f some h i s t o r i a n s , the most s i g n i f i c a n t production o f films

f o r Africans. Jean Rouch, f o r example s t a t e d t h a t whereas th e films by

the Bureau Cin6-Photo were naive and disarmingly p a t e r n a l i s t i c , the

missionary films were more advanced in q u a l i t y . Rouch was p a r t i c u l a r l y

impressed by the missionary f il m d i r e c t o r s ' a b i l i t y to tra nspo se African

f o l k t a l e s , such as Les Palabres de MBoloko, on film. This made Rouch

wonder, "What would have been th e evolution o f missionary cinema had i t

been allowed to continue producing films.

The m erit o f missionary cinema in Zaire had als o been underlined by

P ie rr e Haffner. Taking note o f F ather Heuvel's cinematographic prowess,

Haffner p r aised him as a model to be im itat ed by the "Cineastes A f ric a in s

e t les c i n e a s t e s m i l i t a n t s " in search of an a l t e r n a t i v e cinema. For

 33

Haffner, Father Heuvel was "an ingenious filmmaker who had been f o r the
17
Belgian Congo what Carl Laemle or Adolf Zukor were f o r Hollywood."

Haffner, h im self, was th e f i r s t to admit t h a t t h i s comparison was f l a b e r -

g a s ti n g ; however, he argued t h a t one might keep in mind th e tremendous

work accomplished by Father Heuvel and h is f r i e n d s with t h e i r l im it e d

means o f production.

H is to r i a n s o f African cinema, such as V icto r Bachy, had even attem pt­

ed to l i s t the Belgian m iss io n a rie s as th e f i r s t African filmmakers. One

reason f o r Bachy's s e l e c t i o n o f the m iss io n a rie s as th e only a u t h e n t i c

African filmmakers, out o f a l l the colo nial f il m producers, was based on

the assumption t h a t the m is s io n a rie s understood Africans b e t t e r . Bachy

argued t h a t i f Costa-Garvas1 Missing (1982) was an American (Hollywood)

f i l m , why c o u l d n ' t the missionary cinemas be African? The f a c t t h a t

Hollywood has a t r a d i t i o n of absorbing world famous d i r e c t o r s and t h a t the

missionary cinema was imposed on A f ric a n s , did not stop Bachy from making

such a s i m p l i s t i c comparison. He went on to p r a i s e the missionary cinema,

s t a t i n g t h a t i t s content was African because i t borrowed m a te r ia ls from

the African f o l k t a l e s . For Bachy, the missionary cinema was African

because i t was loved by A fri cans ; he s a i d , "The films spoke a simple

13
language which was d i r e c t , r e c e i v e d , understood, a p p r e c i a t e d , r e q u e ste d ."

Another reason why Bachy saw a d i f f e r e n c e between the missionary

cinema and o t h e r colo nial films was t h a t the m is s io n a rie s were not s a t i s ­

f i e d with the s o - c a l l e d sp ecial films f o r A fri cans ; they c r e a t e d , i n s t e a d ,

an "African cinema", which d i f f e r e d from documentaries, ethnographic films

and commercial f i l m s , and which was c u l t u r a l and e n t e r t a i n i n g . Pointing

to Les Palabres de MBoloko and o t h e r f il m s , Bachy s t a t e d t h a t the mission­

 34

a r i e s had l e f t the Z a ir ian a cinematic legacy which would soon be d i s ­

covered and r e v a l o r i z e d . He s a i d , ‘'With them (the m i s s i o n a r i e s ) they

( Z a i r ia n s ) have discovered the cinema, one which could be t h e i r s .""*4

For th e purpose o f t-this s tudy, what can one say, today, of the

Belgian o f f i c i a l cinema o f the Bureau Cine-Photo and the p r iv a te pro­

ductions o f the m i s s s i o n a r i e s , in terms o f t h e i r impact on a nation al

Za irian f ilm production? What r o l e have they played in determining the

f u tu r e o f Z a ir ian cinema? Paulin S. Vieyra had in d i c a t e d t h a t a t the

time o f independence, in July 1960, t h e r e was not a s i n g l e Z a ir ia n film

d i r e c t o r prepared to take over a f t e r the Belgians. Tt was Vieyra 's

discovery t h a t whereas in colonial time i t was common knowledge t h a t an

important i n f r a s t r u c t u r e o f film a c t i v i t i e s e x i s t e d in the Belgian Congo

( Z a i r e ) , no African was involved as producer and/or d i r e c t o r in these

f ilm a c t i v i t i e s . Vieyra wrote, "In the p r i v a t e s e c t o r , as well as in

the government s e c t o r , the African remained as an a u x i l i a r y f o r whom one

15
pretended to work."

Ngangura Mweze, a p r iz e winning filmmaker in Z a ir e , and a pr o fe s so r

o f film a t the I n s t i t u t National des Arts ( I . N . A . ) , was also convinced

t h a t , c o n tr a ry to what might have been s a i d , n e i t h e r the m is s ionari es nor

the Belgian government prepared the Z a ir ia n s to have a f il m production

in d u s tr y . P rofe sso r Mweze argued t h a t although the Za ir ian s were unique

among many Africans in having a f l o u r i s h i n g film in d u s t r y c r e a te d ex cl u­

s i v e l y f o rt hem , the colon ial s t r u c t u r e s o f production precluded a s e ri o u s

African p a r t i c i p a t i o n . I t was. Mweze/s i n s i g h t t h a t th e Belgian mission­

a r i e s and o f f i c i a l s a l i k e , under the guise o f e d ucating, i n s t r u c t i n g ,

and /or ev a n g e liz in g , were laying the groundwork f o r a t o t a l colonial

 35

domination. Z a i r i a n s , who were then considered "evolues" and "non-

e vo lu es ", could not be t r u s t e d to make fil m s . Mweze s a id t h a t when one

analyzed the f i l m s , "One sees c l e a r l y , through the themes they t r e a t e d ,

the form, and th e s t r u c t u r e s o f production and d i s t r i b u t i o n , t h a t every-

1 fi
thing was very c o l o n i a l . "

A look a t the Cine-Club Congolais, r e f e r r e d to e a r l i e r in t h i s study,

wi ll prove P r ofe s so r Mweze r i g h t . According to Bever, Z a ir ian s were

t r a i n e d a t the Cine-Club and o t h e r places in o rder f o r them to re place

t h e i r Belgian educators in film production. However, a f t e r independence,

a l l the s tu d e n ts o f the Cine-Club except one, Mongita, turned to o th e r

activities. Dokolo became the f i r s t Z a ir ia n to own and p r e s id e over a

bank. General Boumba was f o r a while c h i e f of Mobutu's army. Other

s tu d e n t s o f th e Cine-Club, such as Lubalu and Katambwe, had als o taken up

non-filmic a c t i v i t i e s . As f o r Mongita, he kept one f o o t in f ilm and the

o t h e r in t h e a t e r , and since independence he has been involved with th e

making o f only one documentary, Les tamtams du Congo (1963), i t was t h i s

d i sp e r s io n o f the s tu d en ts o f the Cine-Club which led Mweze to argue t h a t

the Belgians had not adequately t r a in e d Z a ir ian s to take over as filmmakers.

Mweze did not b e lie v e t h a t any o f the s t u d e n t s , i n clu ding Mongita, were

s u f f i c i e n t l y t r a i n e d to become a film d i r e c t o r or producer. He suspected

t h a t the Belgian i n s t r u c t o r s stood in the way o f the s tu d e n ts and prevented

them from f u l l y r e a l i z i n g the importance o f cinema, and making t h e i r own

f ilm s . I t was in t h i s vein t h a t Mweze challenged the d i r e c t o r i a l r o l e

a t t r i b u t e d to Mongita and o t h e r s . He s t a t e d t h a t :

In the making o f Une 1econ du cirtema (1952), l e s

ptieus qonfle s (1953), and l e s tam-tams du Congo
(1963), one never knows, e x a c t l y , the r o l e played
 36

by th e Belgian i n s t r u c t o r s and/or a d v i s o r s ,
and the r o l e played by the s o - c a l l e d Z a ir ian
di r e c t o r s .17

The p o in t here is t h a t the Belgian o f f i c i a l s and m is s io n a rie s were

producing a p a t e r n a l i s t and r a c i s t cinema, and in the process they shot

out the Z a ir ia n as filmmaker. Their f e t i s h i z a t i o n and/or m y s t i f i c a t i o n

o f the tec hno lo gica l apparatus prevented them from having a human to

human ra p port with Z a ir i a n s . They t r e a t e d Z a ir ia n s as "non -e volue s",

with lower mental c a p a c i t i e s ; i t would t h e r e f o r e have been c o n t r a d i c t o r y

f o r them to p i c t u r e these Africans in unsupervised p o s it i o n s o f filmmakers

and producers. No one was, in t h i s sense , as p a t e r n a l i s t as th e d i r e c t o r

o f the C.C.A.C.C. and a u th o r o f the s e r i e s , Les P alabres de MBoloko,

Father Heuvel. His r a t i o n a l e behind the making o f the animated c a r t o o n s ,

Les Palabres . . . , was t h a t Africans were l i k e c h i l d r e n who were not

mature enough f o r r e g u l a r f e a t u r e f i l m s . In a paper pr esented a t the

Recontres I n t e r n a t i o n a l e s de Br uxel le s: Le Cinema e t 1 'Afrique Noire

(1958), and e n t i t l e d , "Convient-il de f a i r e du 'Film pour A f r i c a i n ' , "

Father Heuvel reaffirm ed in w r i t i n g what he always s t a t e d in his f ilm s .

He wrote:

For t h i s audience t h a t we c a l l p r i m i t i v e , we must

make films f o r African s. The sc enari o w il l be
simple, and w i ll deal with few c h a r a c t e r s . The
c h a r a c te r s w il l e a s i l y be d i s t i n g u i s h a b l e from one
a n other, and they each w il l have w e ll- d e fin e d
h a b i t s . The s p e c t a t o r must be a b l e , without g r e a t
e f f o r t s , t o i d e n t i f y with the heroes whom he wi ll
i m i t a t e . There i s an advantage, t h u s , o f having
Congolese a c to r s performing in a Congolese s e t t i n g .
The technique f o r such films w ill g e n e r a l l y be
analogous to th e one used when f ilm ing f o r c h i l d r e n .
The conten t w il l however be d i f f e r e n t . The p r o j e c t ­
ion time, as f o r c h i l d r e n ' s f i l m s , must not be long.
F ift een minutes to h a l f hour p r o j e c t io n may be
followed by an e n t r a c t which w ill be used to explain
what has been shown and what w ill follow. The
 37

scenes w ill follow each o t h e r in a chronological

manner; no flashback o r fla sh fo rw ar d. Dream s e ­
quences wi ll be banished. The ideal i s a film
in which the a c tio n takes place in one d a y .18

Father Heuvel‘s metaphor o f Africans as c h il d re n n e c e s s a r i l y implied

the e x i s t e n c e o f a permanent f a t h e r who would provide p r o t e c t io n and

guidance f o r them, and e x e r c i s e control over them. During the p r e s e n t a ­

t i o n o f his paper, Father Heuvel was c a l l e d a p a t e r n a l i s t by some o f his

own countrymen. I t was pointed out to him t h a t the time had come to stop

doing things f o r A fri cans , and to teach them how to do th i n g s themselves.

As r e c e n t l y as 1978, Father Heuvel defended his views, maintaining t h a t a

p a t e r n a l i s t i c a t t i t u d e was th e most s e n s i b l e "consider ing the evolution

19
o f the population a t t h a t tim e." I n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, in 1978,

Sen eg al's le ading filmmaker, Sembene Ousmane, saw the octogenarian

Father Heuvel in Kinshasa ( Z a i r e ) , while he was r e p a i r i n g a f il m pro­

j e c t o r f o r a church. Haffner re port ed t h a t Sembene wondered why ther e

20
was not a Z a ir ia n a s s i s t i n g him and le a r n in g from him?

One way to answer Sembene's q u e s ti o n , and a t th e same time to shed

l i g h t on the te c h n o c r a t i c pat ernalism o f the m i s s i o n a r i e s , is t h a t they

saw in th e pro duction, d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n o f films a way to

r e c r u i t converts f o r t h e i r r e l i g i o n and to make more money. Training

Africans to become filmmakers and producers could have caused the

m i s s io n a rie s to lose t h e i r audience, and/or to compete f o r i t . In t h i s

l i g h t one understands why Father Heuvel and th e C.C.A.C.C. were w i l l i n g

to go beyond d i s t r i b u t i n g specia l film s f o r A f ric a n s , and to produce

"African f il m s " ; but a t th e same time they were never anxious to t r a i n

Africans to take over f ilm production in Za ir e. Th eir b l i n d n e s s , or

must one say t h e i r d e l i b e r a t e te chno-patern ali sm and racism, ough.t to be 1

 38

pointed o u t, a t th e same time t h a t refe r e n c e i s made to t h e i r c r e a ti o n

o f "African Cinema".

I t i s no s u r p r i s e , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t Z a i r e , a t independence, did not

take up f il m as an i n t e g r a l p a r t o f development. Although in 1957, a t

the peak o f t h e i r f ilm a c t i v i t i e s , the Belgian o f f i c i a l s and miss ion­

a r i e s reached nine m il l i o n s p e c t a t o r s with f i f t e e n thousand e x h i b i t i o n s

21
in Z a i r e , in 1960 the new Zair ia n government had very l i t t l e cinematic

experience which could enable i t t o keep in o p e r a t i o n , a t l e a s t , a p o r tio n

o f t h i s important f il m i n d u s t r y . The Z a ir ia n s were regarded p r im a r i ly as

consumers o f films t h a t were e s p e c i a l l y manufactured f o r them. Those

Z a ir ians whose involvement was necessary f o r the production { a c to r s ,

a s s i s t a n t s and p o r t e r s ) were t r e a t e d as chain gang employees, and kept

from understanding f il m as an a s s e t f o r growth. At independence, these

s o - c a l l e d a s s i s t a n t s had not learned t o a p p r e c i a t e cinema as a powerful

tool which they could use f o r an i n d e f i n i t e number o f purposes; they

tu rn e d, t h e r e f o r e , to o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s with more ta n g i b l e o p p o r t u n i t i e s .

A look a t the p r esen t s i t u a t i o n o f f i l m production in Zaire s t i l l

shows colonial in f lu e n c e . In 1960, when th e Belgian Bureau Cin£-Photo

ceased pro duction, a Z a ir i a n m i n i s t r y , Le Departement de 1 ‘O r i e n t a t io n

N a t i o n a l , was put in charge o f the m a t e r ia ls and the s t r u c t u r e s l e f t

behind. This m in is t r y c a l l e d upon the French and the Belgians from the

p r i v a t e s e c t o r to come and manage the production o f films which c o n s is te d

of newsreels and documentaries. In 1967, f il m production was r e l e g a t e d

to th e nation al t e l e v i s i o n , La Voix du Z a i r e , which had j u s t opened i t s

doors. La Voix du Zaire was augmented in 1973 with the c r e a t i o n of a

department in charge of the production of educational f il m s : Regie

 39

Nationale de Productions Educatives e t Cu lture! es (RENAPEC).

Despite th ese changes, no d e c is io n was made in the government which

could a f f e c t the c r e a t i o n o f a na tional cinema. Except f o r the product­

ion o f a few b io g ra p h ie s , new sreels, and films o f p o l i t i c a l propaganda,

the Zairian t e l e v i s i o n has so f a r contended i t s e l f with the a i r i n g of

fo re ign productions such as the American n ig h t time "soap opera" s e r i e s ,

Dallas (CBS). The RENAPEC has not y e t made a f u l l use o f the important

i n f r a s t r u c t u r e l e f t behind by the Belgians. In 1975, a group of Z a ir ian

t e c h n ic i a n s attempted to breack the ic e . Organized under the name

"Images de I ' a u b e " , they made a c o l l e c t i v e f ilm c a l l e d Le Hasard n ' e x i s t e

pas (1975). This f ilm i s considered as th e f i r s t a u t h e n t i c Z a ir ian

f e a t u r e film. U n f ort unate ly, "Images de I 'a u b e " did not re ceive from the

n ational t e l e v i s i o n the support i t needed to continue i t s c o l l e c t i v e f il m

pr oduction. The f a i l u r e o f th e nation al t e l e v i s i o n t o s u s t a i n a p r o l i f i c

f il m production has led some c r i t i c s to argue t h a t a government sponsored

cinema was not v iab le under Mobutu's regime, which had so f a r allowed only
22
propaganda film s .

On the p r i v a t e s i d e , anot he r r e l i g i o u s group, Editions Saint-Paul

Audiovisuel (E.P.A.) has replaced the missionary production o f the

C.C.A.C.C. sin ce 1975, when i t began pro ductio n, the E.P.A. has made

r e l i g i o u s propaganda which i t e x h i b i t s throughout Zaire in the e x i s t i n g

channels o f d i s t r i b u t i o n l e f t behind by the C.C.A.C.C. The films are

s hot with Super 8mm cameras and processed in the s tu d i o s of the Z a ir ian

n ational t e l e v i s i o n . Z a ir ian f il m d i r e c t o r s ar e used in the production

o f most o f the f i l m s . So f a r , two f i l m s , Le Bon Samaritain (1976) and

Soeur AnnUarite, une vie pour Dieu (1978), produced by the E.P.A. have
 40

become national su cc es ses . The l a s t one, Soeur fln n u a rite , was coproduced

with the Za ir ia n t e l e v i s i o n , and d i r e c t e d by a Z a i r i a n , Madenda Kiese.

Recently, th e E.P.A. has come under a t t a c k from the Organisation

Z a ir o is e des Cineastes (OZACI). The E.P.A. is being accused o f e x p l o i t a ­

t i v e p r a c t i c e s because i t s c o n t r a c t s with Za ir ia n f ilm d i r e c t o r s do not

include d i s t r i b u t i o n b e n e f i t s . With Soeur Annuarite . . . , f o r example,

Madenda was paid a small s a l a r y to d i r e c t the film. I t was coproduced

with the n ational t e l e v i s i o n , so the equipments and the t e c h n ic ia n s were

used f o r f r e e . The f il m i s now a big success and i t s d i r e c t o r , Madenda,

23
is not sharing in the p r o f i t s .

The OZACI i s als o f i g h t i n g to reorganize the s t r u c t u r e s o f film

24
production in Z a ir e, and to c r e a t e an " a uthenti c natio nal cinema."

For t h i s purpose, i t s members have asked the Mobutu government to a u t h o r ­

ize th e c r e a t i o n o f a Centre National du Cinema, which w i ll levy taxes

on the d i s t r i b u t i o n of fo re ign films in Z a ir e , and use the money to

promote a natio na l cinema. The OZACI has a l s o appealed to Za ir ian

25
businessmen t o i n v e s t in the c r e a t i o n o f a natio na l cinema.

I f the Mobutu regime cooperates with the OZACI, one can look forward

to the emergence o f a natio na l cinema in Zaire which has not y e t produced

a s i n g l e f i c t i o n a l f ilm s in ce the dep arture o f the Belgians. The OZACI

alrea dy counts among i t s members many young d i r e c t o r s t r a i n e d in Belgium,

in France, and in the cinematheque o f the French embassy in Kinshasa.

Such documentary filmmakers as Kwami Mambuzinga, Moseka (.1972), and

Ngangura Mweze, Kin Kiesse (1982), are al ready known throughout A f r ic a ,

and in Western f e s t i v a l s and u n i v e r s i t y c i r c l e s .

One would l i k e to see the Za ir ian filmmakers put to a f u l l use the

s t r u c t u r e s o f pr odu ction, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n , l e f t by the

colo nia l African f ilm producers. They can a ls o lear n from th e e x p e r i ­

ences o f producing in Africa by the same colonial producers. However,

they must be sure to r i d these colonial experiences o f t h e i r r a c i s t

elements. Father Heuvel's example o f producing African cartoons can,

f o r i n s t a n c e , be followed; but the production w il l be intended f o r

children. The Z a ir ian filmmakers can a l s o lear n from the cost-red uce d

productions o f th e E.P.A. which shoots with Super 8mm cameras.

Meanwhile, u n t i l Za ire gets i t s Centre National du Cin&ma and

Z a ir ia n businessmen to i n v e s t in f il m , the filmmakers w ill do the same

as t h e i r c o u n te r p a rts in o t h e r Francophone African c o u n t r i e s , depending

on France f o r the production o f most o f t h e i r f il m s . Their p r o sp ectiv e

coproducers ar e the French A c t u a l i t i e s N atio n a le s , which serves the

French t e l e v i s i o n ; the French M inisteres des Relations E x t S r ie u re s , which

is p r e s e n t l y the b ig g e s t producer o f African cinema; the United Nations

Educ atio na l, S c i e n t i f i c , and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), and o t h e r

such o r g a n iz a t io n s .
 Notes

Van Bever, Le Cinema Pour A f r i c a i n . B russe ls : G. Van Campenhout,

1952, p. 56.

^ I b i d . , p. 55.

3I b i d . , p. 6 .

4 I b i d . , p. 16.

5 I b i d , , p. 23.

6 I b i d , , p. 23.
7
P i e r r e Haffner, " E n tr e tie n avec le p&re Alexandre Van den Heuvel."
In Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 48, 1978, p. 8 8 .

8 1b i d . , p. 88.

9Ibid., p. 92, see note 33.

^°Ibid., p. 92, see note 31. See a l s o Bever, p. 34.

^Bever, p. 34.
12
Jean Rouch, Films ethnographiques s u r V A fri qu e N oire, p. 394.

13Haffner, " E n tr e tie n avec . . . , " p. 86.

^ V i c t o r Bachy, "Panoramique s u r le s cinlmas s u b - s a h a r i e n s ," pp. 23-24

15I b i d . , p. 24.
1
Paul in S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n . . . , p. 222.

^7Ngangura Mweza, Unpublished I nte rv iew , recorded by the a uthor o f th i

study. Los Angeles: Uni versi ty o f C a l i f o r n i a , Los Angeles, 1983.
 43

■^9Haffner, " E n tr e tie n avec . . . , " p. 91, see note 28.

20I b i d . , p. 91.

21 I b i d . , p. 8 6.
??
Jean Rouch, Films ethnographigues s ur 1 'flfrique N oir e, p. 394.

23
Victor Bachy, "Panoramique su r l e s c i n § a s te s s u d - s a h a r i e n s ,"
p. 39.

24
Ngangura Mweze, Unpublished Interview.
nc
Unir Cinema, Revue du c in e m a 'A f r ic a in . No. 5, March/April 1983,
p. 24.

26I b i d . , p. 24.
 44

Chapter IV

Fran ce 's Contr ibution to th e Development of

Film Production in Africa

Films d i r e c t e d by Africans in the former French colonies ar e s up er ­

i o r , both in q u a n tit y and in q u a l i t y , to those by d i r e c t o r s in o t h e r sub-

Saharan African c o u n tr ie s formerly colonized by th e B r i t i s h , the Belgian,

and the Portuguese. The f o u r - f i f t h s o f Black African films ar e made by

Francophone Africans.^ In 1974, s i x f e a t u r e films were made by d i r e c t o r s

2
in Senegal alone. In 1982, Francophone Africans made as many as t h i r t y

s h o r t and f e a t u r e f il m s , a g a i n s t t h i r t e e n made by t h e i r c o u n te r p a rts put

3
t o g e t h e r in Anglophone and Lusophone A f r i c a , and Zair e. While Haile

Gerima (Ethiopia) and Ola Balogun (Nigeria) ar e the only i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y

known d i r e c t o r s o u t s id e o f Anglophone A f r i c a , such Francophone filmmakers

as Sembene Ousmane (Senegal), Oumarou Ganda (Nige r), Dikongue Pipa (Came-

roun), Safi Faye (S enegal), Med Hondo (Mauretania), Souleymane Ciss£ (Mali),

to name only a few, ar e famous f o r winning awards a t f ilm f e s t i v a l s in

Ouagadougou (Upper V o lta ) , Carthages ( T u n i s i a ) , Cannes, P a r i s , Rome, and

Moscow.

For a f il m h i s t o r i a n , i t is a complex ta s k to exp lain the emergence

of Francophone African filmmaking. One would have to determine th e r o le

played by the French government and i n d i v i d u a l s in f u r t h e r i n g f ilm produc­

t i o n in t h e i r former colonies in a manner t h a t has not i n t e r e s t e d o th e r

e x - colonial powers such as England and Belgium. One would a l s o have to

c l a r i f y the e x te n t to which the French involvement is p o l i t i c a l , and

 45

merely reproducing in th e domain o f cinema, t o o , the s t r u c t u r e s o f neo­

c o lo n ialism as i t has been the case in o t h e r areas o f the t r a n s f e r o f

technology between North and South.

In the c o lo n ia l e r a , th e French, unlike the B r i t i s h and th e Belgian

who had colonial African f ilm u n i t s , had no policy o f producing films

t h a t were e s p e c i a l l y intended f o r t h e i r s u b je c ts in A f rica. The only

d e c i s io n made by France concerning film in the colonies was the imple­

mentation o f a law, in 1934, c a l l e d "Le Decret Laval". Paul in S. Vieyra

had argued t h a t th e discovery o f sound (1928) which could accompany films

was what prompted the French government to take measures to control film

a c t i v i t i e s in the c o l o n i e s , l e s t the involvement of Africa in these

a c t i v i t i e s become subversive or a n t i - c o l o n i a l i s t . Vieyra s aid t h a t while

in the s i l e n t f il m era France was i n d i f f e r e n t to the s t a t e of cinema in

the c o l o n i e s , a t the end o f t h i s e r a , P i e r r e Laval, the French m i n i s t e r

o f the c o l o n i e s , changed h is a t t i t u d e toward the u n c o n t r o lla b le develop-

. . . 4
ment o f f il m in Africa.

The purpose o f the Laval decree was to con trol the content o f films

t h a t were shot in A f ri c a , and to minimize the c r e a t i v e r o le s played by

Africans in the making o f the film s . I t gave L a v al' s m inistr y the r i g h t

to examine the s c r i p t s and the people involved in th e production before

giving i t s a u t h o r iz a t io n f o r f il m ing. I t was c l e a r l y s t a t e d in the law

that

any person who d e s i r e s to make cinematographic images,

or sound r e c o rd in g s , must address a w r i t t e n re quest to
the Lieutenant Governor o f the colony where the a p p l i ­
ca nt intends t o o p e r a t e . To t h i s r e q u e s t , which must
include a l l th e information ahout th e c i v i l r i g h t and
the p rofe s sional r e fe r e n c e s o f the a p p l i c a n t , he will
add the s c r i p t o f the f i l m , o r , i f he i s making s l i d e s ,
the t e x t of th e musical accompaniment.5
 46

Although the h i s t o r i a n s o f African f il m agree t h a t La va l's decree

was .rarely applied a g a i n s t filmmakers, they a ls o b e l ie v e t h a t i t had the

e f f e c t o f postponing the b i r t h o f Francophone African f ilm . I t i s in

t h i s vein t h a t Rouch argued t h a t "while the r u le was p r a c t i c a l l y never

applied a g a i n s t French filmmakers, i t served as a p r e t e x t to deny young

A fri cans , judged to be too t u r b u l e n t by th e colonial a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , the

6
r i g h t to f il m t h e i r own c o u n t r i e s . "

Furthermore, a look a t the few times the Laval decree came in to

ac ti o n a g a i n s t filmmakers wi ll show Fra nce 's d eter m in a tio n , in colonial

times, to keep cinema from playing a r e v o l u ti o n a r y , and/or ev ol uti onary

r o l e in A fri ca . The f i r s t f il m censored was Afrique 50 (1950), made by

a Frenchman, Robert Vautier. Afrique 50, c l a n d e s t i n e l y filmed in Ivory

Coast, i s about the French r e p r e s s io n of an African l i b e r a t i o n movement,

Rassemblement Democratique A f ric a in (R.D.A.). The second time the Laval

decree was summoned a g a in s t a f ilm was in 1955, when Chris Marker and

Alain Resnais, two famous French filmmakers of the New Wave got t o g e t h e r

to make Les s t a t u e s meurent a u s s i , which was produced by th e famous

African p u b lic a tio n house. Presence A f r i c a i n e . Marker and Resnais' film

was about African s t a t u e s which were taken out o f contex t and put in

European museums. The f ilm d e p ic ts the way th e s t a t u e s l o s t t h e i r mean­

ing and were mummified as soon as they were cut o f f from t h e i r a c t i v e

environment and put in European museums as o b j e c t d ' a r t . Les s ta t u e s

meurent aussi also pointed out th e European e s t h e t i c in fl uen ce on the

newly carved African s t a t u e s . The v i o l e n t montage technique with which

the f il m was made t o denounce the b r u t a l i t y o f colo nia lism was p r aised

by .th e c r i t i c s / The French government con f i sc a t e d Les s t a t u e s . . . f o r

ten years before r e l e a s i n g i t .

 47

During the same time t h a t Les s t a t u e s . . . was censored, permission to

f ilm Africa was denied Paulin S. Vieyra, the f i r s t African graduate of

Ecole des Hautes Etudes Cinematographiques (IDEHC). In the face o f t h i s

i m p o s s i b i l it y t o f il m t h e i r own c o u n t r i e s , Vieyra and his f r i e n d s , Le

groupe Africain du cinema, resigned themselves i n t o making a f i l m , Afrique

s ur scene (1955), about Af ricans in P a r i s . The f ilm is c i t e d in h i s t o r y

as the f i r s t d i r e c t e d by a Black African.

C le arly, t h e r e f o r e , the r e s t r i c t i o n s imposed by the Laval decree were

a t th e r o o t of the postponed b i r t h o f Francophone African f il m production.

In the colonial epoch, the French government was as determined to ban

Africa from th e films o f African d i r e c t o r s as i t was to stop a n t i - c o l o n i a l ­

i s t s , l i k e Marker and V a u ti e r , from showing t h e i r African f il m s . Futher-

more, the Laval decree is an i l l u s t r a t i o n o f the French colon ial system

which had no economic, p o l i t i c a l , or c u l t u r a l policy encompassing the

majo rity o f i t s s u b j e c t , and which was l im it e d to a s s i m i l a t i n g few A fri ca ns,

such as Vieyra and Le groupe African du cinema, a t the top. Thus., in

regard to the development o f f ilm in th e c o l o n i e s , where one may say t h a t

the B r i t i s h and the Belgian colonial f ilm u n i t s f a i l e d hecause o f racism

and p aternalism v i s - a - v i s th e A f ric a n s , one can als o say t h a t the French

were opposed to an African cinema.

I t would be i n c o r r e c t , however, to give the impression t h a t both

Francophone Africans and p r i v a t e Frenchmen waited f o r the Laval decree to

be l i f t e d , in ord er to r a i s e the i s s u e of African cinema. The Laval

decree was denounced throughout the f i f t i e s by Vieyra and Le groupe

A f ric a in du cinema, who could not make films in A f rica. For example,

in 1955 they asked t h e i r p r o f e s s o r , the famous A f r i c a n i s t Marcel G r i a u le ,

 48

to a c t on t h e i r b e h a l f in o r d e r to convince the m i n i s t e r o f France

g
d'Outre-mer to l i f t the ban. Also, in the f i f t i e s , Rouch, who i s to

African cinema what Jean-Paul S a r t r e was to N eg r i tu d e , was busy in Niger

and Ivory Coast, de-m yst ify ing, with a p o r ta b le 16mm camera, the t e c h ­

niques o f filmmaking. Rouch employed his African a c t o r s as his a s s i s t ­

a n t s , and, in the p rocess , he discovered and helped two pioneers of

African cinema, Oumarou Ganda and Mustapha Alassane. I t is t r u e a l s o

t h a t , in the f i f t i e s , the Laval decree did not c o n s t i t u t e an o b s ta c le to

Africans who majored in f il m a t French u n i v e r s i t i e s , and those who

learned th e techniques o f filmmaking a t French cinematheques, and the

c u l t u r a l c e n t e r s of the c o lo n ial a d m i n i s t r i a t i o n . F i n a l l y , one must not

f o r g e t th e c r i t i c i s m of the famous French f ilm h i s t o r i a n , Georges Sadoul,

who denounced Fr an ce's f a i l u r e to provide Af ricans with the o p p o r tu n i t i e s

of filmmaking. Sadoul wrote:

In 1960, s i x t y - f i v e years a f t e r the invention o f

motion p i c t u r e , t h e r e h a s n ' t been, to rny knowledge,
a s in g l e f e a t u r e f ilm which is t r u l y Afri can; I
mean a f ilm which s t a r s A f r i c a n s , is cinematographed,
w r i t t e n , d i r e c t e d , e d i t e d , e t c . , by b l a c k s , and
speaking, o f course , an African language. Thus, two
hundred m il l i o n men have been denied the use o f the
most advanced o f modern a r t s . Before the end o f the
s i x t i e s , I am convinced t h a t th in gs w i ll change, and
t h a t t h i s scandalous s i t u a t i o n wi ll become nothing
but a bad souv enir. 9

C l e a r l y , t h e r e f o r e , the c o l l a b o r a t i v e e f f o r t o f African f ilm stu den ts

and Frenchmen l i k e Rouch and Sadoul is a f a c t o r which influen ced France,

in the e a r l y s i x t i e s , to change i t s p o l i c i e s toward African involvement in

f ilm . The o t h e r determining f a c t o r in such a change o f policy i s Fra nc e's

i n t e n t i o n to form binding economic, p o l i t i c a l and c u l t u r a l r e l a t i o n s with

i t s former c o lo n ie s . I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t France began i t s

 49

production o f African f il m , a f t e r most African c o u n tr ie s assumed t h e i r

independence from i t . The f i n a n c i a l and tech n ical support from the

French Ministry of Cooperation was s e r i o u s enough to s t a r t in 1963, with

the r e l e a s e o f Sembene Ousmane's Borom S a r r e t , the emergence o f Franco­

phone African film and to c a t a p u l t the Cooperation on top as th e big g est

producer o f African cinema.

In the post-independence e r a , Fra nc e's f i r s t cinematic a c t io n in

Africa began in 1961 with the c r e a t i o n in P aris o f the Consortium Audio­

visual I n te r n a t i o n a l ( C . A . I . ) . The purpose o f the C.A.I. was to help the

newly independent African c o u n tr ie s in the f i e l d of Communication. Now

t h a t France was w i l l i n g to support African film pr oduc tion, i t was pointed

out t h a t f ilm c o n s it u t e d an i n v alu ab le tool o f development and education

f o r people who, f o r the most p a r t , were i l l i t e r a t e s . Since these people

had n e i t h e r the equipment nor the necessary funds, nor the tech n ical ex­

p e r t i s e , France decided to interv e n e "by pro vid ing, a t a shared c o s t of

the newsreels and education programs, the African and Malagachy s t a t e s

with the t e c h n ic a l o g ic a l a s s i s t a n c e needed. "1^ Following, t h e r e f o r e , the

example of the B r i t i s h Overseas Film and Te le vis ion C en tr e, i t was estimated

too c o s t l y to build autonomous production complexes in each African country.

Thus a de cisio n was made to i n s t a l l p a r t i a l production u n i t s in Francophone

African c a p i t o l s and the C.A.I. in P ar is where the films were s e n t f o r the

post- product io n p has e.11 By o p e r a tin g in t h i s manner, the C.A.I. and i t s

African production u n i t s made f our hundred and s ix t e e n (416) newsreels and

12
documentaries each y ear between 1961 and 1975.

In 1963, the French Cooperation made a second and more important move

in ,A fr ic a n f ilm pr oduction. Jean-Rene D£brix, former Adjunct General

 50

D ir e c to r o f the IDHEC, was named as d i r e c t o r o f the newly c r e a t e d :Bureau

du cinema a t the Cooperation. Before Debrix came to the Cooperation, the

emphasis o f France's aid to i t s former co lonies was in the domain of

l i t e r a t u r e , t h e a t r e , music, and dance. The Franco-African c u l t u r a l r e ­

l a t i o n s were h ig h li g h te d by a branch o f the Cooperation, Association pour

le developpement des e c h a n g e s a r ti s t i q u e s e t c u l t u r e l s (ADEAC), which assumed

the d i f f u s io n o f French c u l t u r e ( L i t e r a t u r e , filmed t h e a t r e ) in A f r i c a , and

the promotion o f African a r t and a r t i s t s in France.

When Debrix took over his new p o s t , his f i r s t p r i o r i t y was to change

the emphasis o f the ADEAC from l i t e r a t u r e , music, and dance to film. He

succeeded in convincing people a t the Cooperation t h a t the b e s t way to

help Africans to regain t h e i r c u l t u r a l i d e n t i t y was through "the f i e l d of

cinema, a p r ed estin ed means o f e x p r e ss io n , an ideographic language which

1?
i s favored by these image-starved A f r i c a n s ."

Whereas the C.A.I. was geared toward helping African governments to

produce newsreels and documentaries, the aim o f th e Bureau du cinema was

to provide independent African filmmakers with the op portu n it y to c r e a t e .

Generous funds were suddenly made a v a i l a b l e t o a s p i r i n g d i r e c t o r s ; a

la b o r a t o ry and an e d i t i n g room in 16mm production were i n s t a l l e d a t the

Cooperation to complement the al ready e x i s t i n g 35mm post-prod uc tion

f a c i l i t i e s a t the C.A.I. The a ddress , 20 rue de la Boetie, e d i t i n g room

o f the Cooperation, became a Centre d 'a c c u e i l f o r African filmmakers.

There they found p r o fes sio n al e d i t o r s such as Bernard Lefevere, Daniele

14
Tess.ier, Paul Sequin and Andree Daventure, who were p a t i e n t and f r i e n d l y .

Debrix, who des cribed him se lf as as s tu d e n t o f Abel Gance and Andre

Malraux, wanted to be a t th e o r i g i n o f a new cinema c r e a te d by A f ric a n s ,

s i x t y f i v e y e a r s . a f t e r the i n v e n t i o n . o f motion p i c t u r e s . In his mind,

Western filmmakers had reached an impasse because they allowed r h e t o r i c a l

and d i a l e c t i c a l s t y l e s to take over t h e i r f i l m s , s u b j e c t i n g , in t h i s

manner, the a r t of cinema to Cartesianism and to the pr ecepts o f l i t e r a ­

t u r e and t h e a t r e . Under the s p e ll o f a notion t h a t an African c o n t r ib u ­

t io n could save cinema by r e s t o r i n g to i t the " so r c e r y " , the "magic",

and the "poetry" which Debrix thought f ilm had l o s t in the West, he seized

the oppor tun ity o f f e r e d him by his new job to become the a r c h i t e c t and/or

the pioneer o f t h i s new cinema. I t was In t h i s l i g h t t h a t the doors of

the Cooperation were opened to a l l the p r o sp ecti v e Francophone African s.

To put i t in Debrix1s words, "any African d i r e c t o r , who t h i n k s , as Louis

Malle puts i t , t h a t he 'has. a f il m in his stomach’ , can f in d th e means to

/ 15
make t h a t film in freedom a t the Bureau du cinema.11

The aid to the growth o f African f il m was c a r r i e d out by the Bureau

du cinema a t the Cooperation in two ways. The Cooperation could e i t h e r

a c t as the producer o f a f ilm and provde the African d i r e c t o r with the

f i n a n c i a l and tech n ic al means, as well as the t e c h n i c i a n s ; or the

Cooperation could wait u n t i l an independent d i r e c t o r made th e f i l m , then

pay f o r the c o s t of production in r e t u r n f o r some o f the r i g h t s of d i s t r i ­

bution o f the f il m . In the f i r s t c a s e , in which the Cooperation assumed

the r o le o f producer from the beginning, th e filmmaker was req uired to

submit a s c r i p t , with a d e t a i l e d ex planation o f th e sequences, which were

c a r e f u l l y examined by a committee. According to Debrix, the committee's

r o l e was l i m i t e d to determining whether the s c r i p t was cinematograph.ical ly

f e a s i b l e or n ot. Thus, on the le ve l o f the c o n te n t, the d i r e c t o r s were

f r e e to choose any s u b j e c t they wanted. The only s c r i p t t h a t Debrix

 52

r e j e c t e d on the b a s is o f the s u b j e c t m atter was La n oir e d e . .. (1966) by

16
Sembene Ousmane, In La n oir e de . . . , Sembene equated the way the

French Assistance Technique used cheap African la bor to a new form of

s la v e ry . I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t the Cooperation bought the r i g h t s of

La no ire d e . . . a f t e r Sembene managed to produce i t independently. Some

o f th e f i r s t films f o r which th e Cooperation acted as producer from the

beginning were: Point de Vue I (1965) by Urbain Dia-Moukori (Cameroun),

Concerto Pour un Exil (1967) by Desire Ecare (Ivory C o a s t ) , Cabascado

(1968) by Oumarou Ganda (N ig er ), and Diankhabi (1969) by Mahama Traore

(Senegal).

In the second case , in which the Cooperation bought the r i g h t s of

a f ilm which was f in i s h e d o r almost f i n i s h e d , the filmmaker acted as his

own producer and t r i e d to fin d funds from var ied sou rces . This route was

a painful one s in ce African filmmakers had l i m i t e d resources and could

not get help from t h e i r own c o u n t r ie s where filmmaking was considered an

extravagance, a subversive a c t i v i t y , and not a p r i o r i t y . I t o f te n took

years to f i n i s h one f ilm . Sembene r i g h t l y r e f e r r e d to t h i s system of

production as the m e g o t a g e " . ^ Thus, when the Cooperation o f f e r e d i t s

he lp, e i t h e r to f i n i s h the f i l m or to pay f o r some o f the c o s t o f produc­

t i o n in r e t u r n f o r the r i g h t s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n , the filmmaker always took

i t as a r e l i e f . The f i r s t d i r e c t o r s to have received t h i s form o f aid

from the Cooperation were Semhene - Borom S a r r e t (1963), Hi aye (.1964),

La Noire d e . . . (1966); Mustapha Alassane (Niger) - Adlire (1962), La Bague

du roi Koda (1964), Le Retour de 1 'A venturi er (1966); Timite Bassori

(Ivory Coast) - Sur l a dune de la s o l i t u d e (1964) and La Femme aii couteau

(1968).
 53

C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , th e a id provided by the Cooperation gave many

Francophone Africans the op portu nity to r e a l i z e t h e i r dreams as f il m ­

makers. Within the f i r s t f i v e y ears o f th e c r e a t i o n o f the Bureau du

Cinema, i t co n t r ib u te d to th e production o f t h i r t y - n i n e films (mostly

18
s h o r t s ) by African d i r e c t o r s . By 1975, one hundred and e i g h t y - f i v e

(185) s h o r t s and f e a t u r e s were made in Francophone A f r i c a , f o u r - f i f t h s

o f which were produced with the f in a n c i a l and tech nical help o f the

Cooperation. ^ In a word, the b e s t African filmmakers made t h e i r debut

with Debrix a t the Bureau du Cinema, even though, today, d i r e c t o r s such

as Sembene have stopped asking f o r the Cooper ation' s help and have

accused i t s members o f paternalism and imperialism. Sembene's p o s i t i o n

and t h a t o f o t h e r c r i t i c s o f the Cooperation will l a t e r be d e a l t with in

t h i s study.

When Debrix died o f a h e a r t a t t a c k in 1978, the French production of

African f il m , o f which he was th e a r c h i t e c t , continued without a s i g n i f i ­

cant s t r u c t u r a l and conceptual change. In f a c t , Fran ce 's de cisio n in

1979 to put an end to African f ilm production and to clos e down the e d i t ­

ing l a b o r a t o r i e s a t the Bureau du Cinema was l e s s due to D^brix's absence

and more to the pr ess u re on the Giscard government by some African p o l i t i ­

cal leaders who were worried about th e in flu e n c e o f African films on t h e i r

p o p u la ti o n s . Giving in to t h i s p r e s s u r e , th e Giscard government gave

or der s to the a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t the Cooperation to freeze the aid to

African f il m . Jacques Gerard, the man who took D£brix's p l a c e , was given

the following ex planation:

We're not here t o decide what must be done and what

m u s tn ' t. And w e' re not here to make de ci sio ns which
always end up having p o l i t i c a l i m p l i c a t i o n s . In
 54

o t h e r words, w e 're not here to produce a f ilm

which, tomorrow, may bring us t r o u b l e . 20

One o f the films a f f e c t e d by the f r e e z i n g o f funds was Firiye (1982),

C i s s e ' s prize-winning f ilm . The Cooperation had o r i g i n a l l y agreed to

handle th e p o s t-productio n c o s t o f Finye in r e tu r n f o r the r i g h t s to d i s ­

t r i b u t e i t on a non-commercial b a s i s . I f a l l had gone as agreed upon,

Finy^ would have been completed in 1980. But the f r e e z i n g o f funds and

work t o o l s l e f t Cisse unable to make progress on his film .

Finye i s , in f a c t , an h i s t o r i c a l f il m to i l l u s t r a t e the many French

policy changes toward African f ilm pr odu ction. I t is a p o l i t i c a l f ilm

d e p i c t i n g the weakness o f m i l i t a r y regimes, s tu d en t s t r i k e s , and African

t r a d i t i o n versus modernity. The Giscard government could not accomodate

such p o l i t i c a l films and m a t e r i a l s a t th e same time f r i e n d l y r e l a t i o n s

with African l e a d e r s who had been made unhappy by the fil m s . Since the

Cooperation could not induce r a d i c a l filmmakers such as Sembene and Cissfc

to make " e s c a p i s t " f il m s , i t was ordered to suspend i t s aid to the whole

Francophone f il m production.

I r o n i c a l l y enough, when the Mitterand government came t o power in

1980 and the aid to African f ilm was resumed, Finye was the b i g g e s t r e c i p ­

i e n t of t h i s ai d. The s o - c a l l e d "p ro gres si ve" African d i r e c t o r s became

fa sh ionab le with th e new s o c i a l i s t government in France. Furthermore, the

new a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t th e Cooperation began to c r i t i c i z e the old s t r u c t u r e s

o f African f il m production and to put forward new ideas f o r improving the

FrancoAfrican c u l t u r a l and economic r e l a t i o n s .

According to the Mitterand a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , t h e i r predecessors had not

s u f f i c i e n t l y addressed the iss u e o f Af rican f ilm produc tion. The argument

 55

was t h a t the G i s c a r d i s t s did not attempt to develop an African f ilm

i ndustry by bu ilding in Africa f a c i l i t i e s o f production and d i s t r i b u t i o n .

They merely helped produce independent filmmakers whose films could not

even be seen in t h e i r c o u n tr ie s of o r i g i n . No e f f o r t was made to i n t e ­

g r a te African f il m production in th e o v e r a ll c u l t u r a l , p o l i t i c a l , and

economic development o f the c o n t i n e n t . I n s te a d , few Africans were

chosen and a s s i m i l a t e d as filmmakers in the dominant French hegemony.

J e a n - P i e r r e Mounier, M it t e r a n d 's tech n ical a d v i s e r a t the Cooperation,

desc rib ed the old regime's c o n t r i b u t i o n to African f il m as "le mal

developpement," c h a r a c t e r iz e d by a neo -co lonial m e n ta li ty "to have a

Francophone community, which is made of ex-colonized peo ple, around

France."

A new French policy o f African f il m production was t h e r e f o r e neces­

s a ry . This new p o l i c y , Mounier argued, must be g l o b a l i s t in o rder to

include the economic aspec ts o f development as well as t h e c u l t u r a l . It

was thus decided t h a t the b e s t way to help an African f il m in d u s tr y was

to pass F r an ce's f i n a n c i a l and te chnical aid through an i n t e r - A f r i c a n

o r g a n i z a t io n such as Organisation Commune A f ric a in e e t Mauritienne (OCAM),

22
which regrouped a l l the Francophone c o u n tr ie s in A f rica. An i n t e r -

African f ilm i n d u s tr y was deemed more r e a l i s t i c than a national one, since

i t gave the filmmakers a l a r g e r spectrum o f c u l t u r a l exposure and b e t t e r

chances o f recouping the production c o s ts o f the fil m s . I t was in t h i s

vein t h a t the Cooperation de-emphasized i t s aid to independent d i r e c t o r s

and made more funds and equipment a v a i l a b l e to OCAM sponsored f il m schools

such as I n s t i t u t A f ric a in d'Education Cinematographique (INAFEC) in

Ouagadougou. The Cooperation a l s o decided to support such branches o f OCAM

as Consortium I n t e r - A f r i c a i n de D i s tr i b u t i o n Cinematographique (CIDC),
 56

andConsortium I n t e r - A f r i c a i n de Production du Film (CIPROFILMS). The

r o l e o f OCAM wi ll l a t e r be discu ssed in t h i s study.

In t h e i r r e f o r m i s t approach to African f il m , the a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t

the Cooperation had als o begun the promotion o f fil m s . The idea was to

go beyond the old regime's policy o f confining African films to academic

c i r c l e s , cinematheques, and f e s t i v a l s , to e x h i b i t i n g them in commercial

French movie t h e a t e r s and a i r i n g them on French t e l e v i s i o n . This new

d e c is io n could b e n e f i t both the filmmakers and the French people. It

gave wider exposure to African d i r e c t o r s , and i t provided the French

people with the op portu n it y to get educated about Africa from an o r ig i n a l

perspective. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to n o t i c e , here a g a in , t h a t C is s d 's f i l m ,

Fin ye , was the f i r s t b e n e f i c i a r y o f t h i s promotion p o l ic y . Cisse was

given ten m il lio n francs (about twenty thousand U.S. d o l l a r s ) to a d v e r t -

23
i s e his f ilm . As a r e s u l t , Finy& was s e le c t e d to compete in Cannes

(1982), and i t ran in French t h e a t e r s f o r s i x months. Cisse*s o th e r

f i l m , Baara (1978), was a i r e d on French t e l e v i s i o n in a new program c a l l e d

"Cinema sans V i s a . " 24

A f t e r t h i s h i s t o r i c a l overview, i t i s important to pause f o r a moment

to ev a lu a te the impact o f Fra nc e's aid on the development of African f il m .

The p o in t here i s not to d is p u te the f a c t t h a t th e Cooperation is the

number one producer of African film. C le a r ly , f o r f il m h i s t o r i a n s , i t is

obvious, as Boughedir has s a i d , t h a t "Francophone African f il m was aided

25
by France." The purpose o f t h i s e v a lu a tio n is to shed l i g h t on the

p o l i t i c a l and economic co nte xts o f such an a i d .

Since the beginning of i t s involvement with African f i l m , the

Cooperation had come under a t t a c k by f il m h i s t o r i a n s , filmmakers, and new

 57

government o f f i c i a l s . As i t has been suggested above, the new S o c i a l i s t

a d m i n i s t r a t o r s a t th e Cooperation are the f i r s t to be c r i t i c a l o f the

p o l i c i e s o f t h e i r pre d e c e ss o r s. They r e g r e t , f o r example, th e aid the

Cooperation, under Giscard, gave d i r e c t l y to independent filmmakers. Be­

sid es the f a c t t h a t such an a i d .c o u ld have provoked a p o l i t i c a l c r i s i s

between France and some African c o u n t r i e s , they argued t h a t i t did not

c o n t r ib u t e to the formation o f an African f i l m in d u str y . Clearly, there­

f o r e , a sound French p o lic y should have been based on helping African

governments and i n t e r - A f r i c a n o r g a n i z a t i o n s , such as OCAM, t o c r e a t e

t h e i r own f ilm i n d u s tr y . Independent d i r e c t o r s would then have to be

recommended by t h e i r government or the OCAM before France could help them.

I t is in t h i s l i g h t t h a t some argue t h a t th e Cooperation, from 1963 to

1979, was l e s s r e s p e c t f u l to the independent s t a t u s o f the former c o l o n i e s .

By extending i t s help d i r e c t l y to filmmakers to make films t h a t may turn

out to be c r i t i c a l o f the African governments, the Cooperation was, in

the words o f Jacques Gerard, "taking th e r i s k o f annoying the governments

26
from which the filmmakers came."

The d i r e c t a i d , which independent Af rican filmmakers have been en­

joying a t the Coo per ation, has al s o been c r i t i c i z e d hy Frenchmen. Some

argue t h a t the Francophone African focus i s too narrow and u n f a i r to

o t h e r deserving a r t i s t s around the world. Thus, as Gerard Desplanques

s a i d , "the time time has come f o r th e Cooperation to think in terms o f

27
Third World f i l m , not j u s t f il m in th e e x - c o l o n i e s . Others b eli ev e

t h a t the Cooperation has aided African f i l m f o r too long. The pioneering

days o f Rouch and Debrix a r e over. The Cooperation cannot help every

African who comes with a s c r i p t . A fter a l l , as Haffner put i t , in France,

 58

to o , " t h e r e are d i r e c t o r s who commit s u ic i d e because they cannot do t h e i r -

work."28

The Cooperation's aid has also been perceived as a French neo­

c o l o n i a l i s t tool by some h i s t o r i a n s o f African film. According to Bachy,

f o r example, the French production o f African f ilm i s p a r t o f the s t r u c ­

t u r e o f an unchanged economic, p o l i t i c a l , and c u l t u r a l dependency of the

African s t a t e s on France. Bachy argues t h a t the French have lu re d t h e i r

e x - s u b j e c t s with dream-like o p p o r tu n i t i e s which they ar e led to bel iev e

are only a v a i l a b l e in P a r is . Since these o p p o r t u n i t i e s , such as film -

making o r the ownership o f a r e f r i g e r a t o r , f o r example, have no economic

b as is in A f rica, France i s dependent on f o r t h e i r maintenance. Bachy and

o t h e r f il m c r i t i c s have f u r t h e r explained t h a t Fra nce 's o t h e r method o f

maintaining i t s hegemony over Francophone Africa is by r u t h l e s s l y punish­

ing those African c o u n tr ie s t h a t decide to break completely with France.

Guinea-Konakry is one such warning. Since i t s independence in 1958,

Guinea has t r i e d to acq uire an autonomous f ilm i n d u s t r y , in th e same way

t h a t i t has t r i e d in o th e r modern i n d u s t r i a l f i e l d s . The country has

equipped i t s e l f with l a b o r a t o r i e s in 35mm production. I r o n i c a l l y enough,

unlike i t s neighbors such as Mali, Senegal, and Ivory Coast which go to

France f o r help and, as a r e s u l t , can boast o f several f e a t u r e s , Guinea

has y e t t o produce anything beyond newsreels and documentaries. I t i s in

t h i s l i g h t t h a t Bachy s a id t h a t France had economically and c u l t u r a l l y

pq
induced Guinea to " r e v e r t to the dark ag es ."

There i s another argument t h a t Fra nc e's aid to African films has

made i t e a s i e r f o r French d i s t r i b u t o r s to maintain t h e i r monopoly on the

African market. C r i t i c s such as Tahar Chariaa, Ecrans d'ahondances ou

 59

cinemas de l i b e r a t i o n (.1974), and Boughedir, Cinema A f ricain e t dec olon i­

s a ti o n (1975), have denounced the monopoly o f African t h e a t e r s by Euro-

30
pean, Indian, and American f ilm s . Since I am devoting a s pe cial study

on d i s t r i b u t i o n , I am only d isc u s s in g here th e way French African film

production is perceived in the co n te xt o f French f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n in the

Francophone ar eas.

Boughedir argues t h a t whereas American films dominate in o t h e r areas

o f A f r ic a , France has succeeded so f a r in maintaining the edge f o r the

number o f films seen in Francophone Afri ca. C l e a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , Boughedir

saw Fra nc e's aid to African filmmakers as an i n d i r e c t way to p r o te c t the

monopoly o f French d i s t r i b u t o r s . By aidin g African d i r e c t o r s , France

kept them from r e a c t i n g r a d i c a l l y a g a i n s t th e ta k e - o v e r of t h e i r market

by f o r e i g n e r s . One must understand t h a t th e Cooperation's a id i s a

guarantee which keeps the d i r e c t o r s from worrying about a market where

they can recoup the co st of t h e i r f ilm s . I t i s in t h i s l i g h t t h a t one

sees th e g i s t of Boughedir's paradoxical statement t h a t "Francophone

African f ilm e x i s t s because o f France and a l s o does not e x i s t because of

France.

Francophone filmmakers themselves have complained ahout the cond­

i t i o n s and the ways France has given i t s a id to African f ilm . They have

accused Debrix o f imposing his own e s t h e t i c views o f Africa as a way of

judging f il m s . His open admiration f o r Pousse Pousse (1975) by Daniel

Kamwa (Cameroun), f o r example, i s judged by many as p a t e r n a l i s t i c and

ethnocentric. Pousse Pousse i s a comedy about the s e tt l e m e n t o f dowry in

modern Camerounian s o c i e t y . I t i s considered by many African d i r e c t o r s as

naive and i c o n o c l a s t i c toward African t r a d i t i o n s and l e s s c r i t i c a l toward

 60

the French, c u l t u r a l imperialism in Cameroun. The film is als o ed it e d

l o o s e l y , which makes i t u n a r t i s t i c a l l y r e p e t i t i o u s . Debrix's p r e fe rence

f o r such a f ilm over the films o f Sembene, Pipa, and Mahama Traore leads

African d i r e c t o r s to say t h a t he de spis es African film and t h a t he is

opposed to the id e o lo g ic a l and the a r t i s t i c m atu rity o f th e filmmakers.

Sembene goes beyond t h i s c r i t i c i s m . o f Debrix as p a t e r n a l i s t and

e t h n o c e n t r i s t to a t t a c k the condition o f e x is te n c e o f th e e n t i r e French

aid to African f il m . Sembene speaks from ex per ienc e following the pro­

duction o f his f i l m , Mandabi (1968), by the famous French Centre National

du Cinema (CNC). I t must be pointed out t h a t befo re Sembene, the CNC's

aid was r e s t r i c t e d to French n a t i o n a l s , such as Godard and T r u f f a u t of

the New Wave. But Andre Malraux, the French m i n i s t e r o f c u l t u r e in 1968,

granted a special permission to Sembene to compete f o r the CNC's a i d .

Having won the a i d , Sembene was r e quire d to take a French producer,

Robert Nesle, who c o n t r o l l e d the budget.

Sembene's exper ience with h i s producer was such t h a t he decided,

following the completion o f Mandabi, not to acc ep t any aid from France in

the f u t u r e and to produce his films in Africa with African money. The

f i r s t c o n f l i c t Sembene had with Nesle concerned the choice o f c o l o r f o r

the f il m . Sembene wanted to shoot i t in black and white because he was

worried about the s e n s a ti o n a l e f f e c t a c o lo r f ilm could bring to his

story. He was als o unsure about the way people would look in a c o lo r

f ilm under African s k i e s . But the producer wanted Mandabi in c o l o r and

he imposed i t . One time the production was a l s o stopped because Sembene

had refused to include sexual and e r o t i c scenes in the f ilm . Sembene was
32
forced to go to c o u r t to s e t t l e t h i s m a t te r . I t is in t h i s sense t h a t
 61

one understands Sembene when he s a id

Co-production with the West i s o fte n t a i n t e d with

pa te r n a li s m , and i t is an economic dependency
which, as such, gives the West the r i g h t to view
Africa in a way t h a t I cannot bear . Sometimes,
one is a l s o coerced in to consenting to commercial
concessions. In a word, Europeans ofte n have a
conception o f Africa t h a t i s not o u r s . 33

Another reason behind Sembene's d ecis io n to stop co-producing with

the French is his d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n with the Cooperation in the way i t

d i s t r i b u t e s African f il m s . The Cooperation being a n o n - p r o f i t d i s t r i b u ­

t o r , i t a t t r a c t s people o f var ied i d eo lo g ical i n c l i n a t i o n s who want to

use African films to r e i n f o r c e t h e i r b e l i e f s . Thus the same f ilm can

beused to i l l u s t r a t e i n t e g r a t i o n and p a r t i t i o n , t r a d i t i o n and feminism,

r e v o l t and feudalism. Sembene f e l t t h a t t h i s u n r e s t r i c t e d d i s t r i b u t i o n

o f his e a r l i e r f i l m s , which the Cooperation owns, bes ides being e x p l o i t ­

a t i v e , was c o unter-p roductive to and manipulative o f his views. Since

34
1970, t h e r e f o r e , Sembene has managed to produce his films in A frica .

Even among African d i r e c t o r s who s t i l l accept the tech n ical and

f i n a n c i a l aid from the Cooper ation, t h e r e ar e th o s e , l i k e Cisse , who ar e

not s a t i s f i e d with the way i t has molded African films i n t o "so cio lo g ical

or anth ropo logical documents." A f te r the independence o f most African

c o u n t r i e s , when a n th r o p o lo g is ts such as Rouch could no longer f r e e l y make

film s in A f r ic a , the Cooperation used films by Africans to f i l l the void.

Thus, f o r th e general p u b l i c , African f i l m s , l i k e the films o f Rouch, ar e

not u s u a ll y considered as e n t e r t a i n i n g ; they ar e reserved f o r sociology

classrooms which Cisse r e f e r s to as " c u l t u r a l g h e t t o s . " Cisse be liev es

t h a t t h i s s i t u a t i o n o f African f ilm is t i e d to the Cooperation1s c o n t r a c t

which gives i t the r i g h t to d i s t r i b u t e i n d i s c r i m i n a t e l y on a non-commercial

 62

b as is th e films f o r f i v e y e a r s . C lear ly t h i s c o n t r a c t discourages b u s i ­

nessmen from developing i n t e r e s t in th e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f African film .

Ciss£ argues t h a t the s i t u a t i o n can be r e p a i re d i f the Cooperation

reduces i t s r i g h t s to d i s t r i b u t i n g the films only in French embassies

and c u l t u r a l c enters in Africa and pushes f o r a commercial d i s t r i b u t i o n

. c 35
in Europe.

One sees c l e a r l y with, the above e v a lu a ti o n t h a t the o verri din g

statem ent a g a i n s t th e French a id i s i t s n e o - c o l o n i a l i s t a s p e c t. There

are two ways o f i d e n t i f y i n g neo -c olonialism in French African film

production. One way i s through, t r a c i n g the e x t e n t to which the French

have t r i e d to a s s i m i l a t e African filmmakers and f i l m s , thus making i t

d i f f i c u l t f o r them to stand on t h e i r own. The o t h e r i s the. Cooperation's

monopoly o f the to o l s o f work by c e n t e r in g them in P a r is .

A ssi m ilat ion i s an important f a c t o r in French African f il m a c t i v i ­

t i e s as i t is in o t h e r Franco-African r e l a t i o n s . I t i s based on the

premise o f s e l e c t i n g few Af ricans a t the top and giving them the same

p r i v i l i g e s as French men and women. D irec ting films i s one such p r i v i ­

lege. In t h i s l i g h t one sees t h a t even though the Laval decree was

opposed to Africans filming A f r i c a , i t was not opposed to Africans be­

coming d i r e c t o r s o f French mainstream fil m s . For example, Vieyra and

the Groupe A f r ic a in du Cinema were allowed to f il m P a r is in Afrique s ur

Seine while they were denied the permission to make a f il m in Afri ca.

The s t r u c t u r e s o f an a s s i m i l a t i o n i s t policy are also seen in the

way th e CoopeVation produces and d i s t r i b u t e s African fil m s . By monopo­

l i z i n g th e domain o f African f ilm production ( fi n a n c in g , technical

equipment, t e c h n i c i a n s ) , the Cooperation conditions the d i r e c t o r s to

 63

conform t h e i r s c r i p t s to acce ptab ly French cinematographic s ta n d a rd s . It

i s in t h i s sense t h a t c o n t r o v e r s i a l and a n t i - c o l o n i a l i s t s c r i p t s such as

La Noire d e . . . are r e j e c t e d . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , those d i r e c t o r s who had

the Cooperation as the producer o f t h e i r films had French re ad ers in mind

while they wrote t h e i r s c r i p t s .

J u s t as i t c o n d i t i o n s , through pr odu ction, the con tent o f s c r i p t s ,

the Cooperation can als o determine, through d i s t r i b u t i o n , the f u t u r e of

f ilm s . Since i t cannot stop the production o f a n t i - a s s i m i l a t i o n i s t and

a n t i - c o l o n i a l i s t films such as La Noire d e . . . and Emitai (1972) by

Sembene, S o le il 0 (1969), and Les Bicots N e g r e sv o s Voisins (1975) by

Med Hondo, N a t i o n a l i t e : immigre (1974) by Sidney Sokhona, th e Cooperation

c o n tr o ls t h e i r impact by buying the r i g h t s and d i s t r i b u t i n g them. This

i s a c l e v e r way to absorb counter-hegemonic products and even a s s i m i l a t i n g

them to the apparent concern o f the Cooperation which i s to promote

African film . La Noire d e . . . i s again a good example o f t h i s maneuver:

r e j e c t e d by the production s e c t o r , i t was r ecu pe ra ted through th e d i s t r i ­

bution s e c t o r .

F i n a l l y , the Cooper ation' s c o n cen tr ati o n of the po st- product io n

f a c i l i t i e s in P ar is and i t s f a i l u r e to t r a i n Africans as e d i t o r s , camera­

men, sound-engineer s, e l e c t r i c i a n s , convinced many c r i t i c s o f the

Cooperation' s i n t e n t i o n to keep African f ilm dependent on France. Thus,

while the Cooperation has made i t p o s s i b l e f o r Sembene and Cisse to

mature as f ilm d i r e c t o r s and to re pla ce the d i r e c t o r s o f the colonial

e r a , such as Rouch, i t made no e f f o r t to decolonize th e t o o l s o f produc­

t i o n in o rder f o r Sembene and Ciss6 t o work autonomously in Africa..

The Mitterand government's r e c e n t d e cis io n to help th e OCAM build

 64

a f ilm in d u s t r y in Africa i s c e r t a i n l y a hopeful s i g n , which i s watched

with g r e a t i n t e r e s t hy the FEPACI. T h e . e f f o r t to t r a i n , in f ilm techno­

logy, Africans a t i n s t i t u t e s such as th e INAFEC is also praiseworthy.

Meanwhile, u n t i l these a c t io n s m a t e r i a l i z e i n t o pr oduct io n , d i s t r i b u t i o n

and e x h i b i t i o n s t r u c t u r e s in A f ric a , African d i r e c t o r s wi ll need the

Cooperation' s ai d.
 65

Notes

^Guy Hennebelle, " E n tr e ti e n avec Jean-Rene Debrix" in Afrique

L i t t ^ r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 43, T975, p. 82.

2Paulin S. Vieyra, "Le Cinema au Senegal en 1976", in Presence

A f r i c a i n e , No. 207, 1978, p. 207.

3V ictor Bachy, Cin£mAction, No. 26, pp. 186-201.

4Paulin S. Vieyra, "Propos su r l e Cinema A f ric a in " om Presence

A f r i c a i n e , No. 23, 1958, p. 109.

5I b i d . , pp. 109-110.

6Jean Rouch, Films ethnographiques s u r 1 'Afrique N oir e, p. 21.

^ I b i d . , p. 396. According to Rouch, t h e r e i s a commercialized

version o f Les s t a t u e s . . . which Marker and Resnais do not endorse.

8 I b i d . , p. 21.

9Georges Sadoul, H i s to i r e du Cinfema Mondial, p. 499.

^Jean-Rerfe Debrix, "Dix ans de Cooperation Franco-Africaine ont

Permis La Naissance du Jeune Cinema d'A fr iq ue Noire," in S e n t i e r s ,
vol. 1, 1970, p. 15.

^Guy Henebelle, "E n tr e tie n avec Jean-Rene Debrix," p. 80.

12I b i d . , p. 81.

13I b i d . , p. 79.

14I b i d . , p. 80.

^5Jean-Rene Debrix, "Dix ans d e . . . , " p. 16.

1c
Guy Hennebelle, " E n tr e ti e n avec Jean-Rene Debrix," p. 80.

17
See note above, no. 5.
 18 ^ ✓
Jean-Rene Debrix, "Dix ans d e . . . , " pp. 16-10.

^Guy Hennebelle, " E n tr e tie n avec Jean-Renef Debrix," p. 82.

?fl
Jacques Gerard in Afrique Noire: Quel Cinema?, p. 36.

21 I b i d . , pp. 18-21.

22I b i d . , p. 37.

23
Unpublished interv ie w with Cisse, recorded by the author o f t h i s
study. Los Angeles, 1983.
?4
French National T e l e v is i o n , FR3, 1982.

Ferid Boughedir, Afrique Noire: Quel Cinema?, p. 33.

26I b i d . , p. 70.

27
Conversation with Gerard Desplangues who is the new "Chef du
Bureau de la Cooperation Cinematographique."
pa
P i e r r e Haf fner, in Afrique Noire: Quel Cinema?, p. 74.

29 **
V icto r Bachy, "Panoramique s u r l e s Cinemas Sud-Sahariens," p. 25.
See also Paulin S. Vieyra, in l e Cinema A f r i c a i n . . . , p. 104.

30 * * *
Tahar Cheriaa, Ecrans d ‘abondance ou Cinemas de L i b e r a t i o n .
Tunis: Editions Sindbad, 1974; and Ferid Bouqhedir, Cinema A f ric ain e t
Decolon is ation , Unpublished Doctorat 3e Cycle, P a r i s : U n iv e r s it y Paris
I I I , 1976.
31
Ferid Boughedir, in Afrique Noire: QUel Cinema?, p. 31.

32
Siradou D i a l l o , "Jeune Afrique F a i t P a r l e r Sembene Ousmane," in
Jeune A f r i q u e , No. 629, 1973, pp. 48-49.

33
Emile James, "In terv iew with Sembene," in Jeune Afrique, No. 499,
1970, p. 41.
34 .
Ferid Boughedir, in Afrique Noire: Quel Cinema?, p. 31-32.

35 . ✓
Cis se , unpublished inter view .
 67

Chapter V

. THE ARTIST AS LEADER OF THE REVOLUTION:

THE HISTORY OF THE FEDERATION PAN-AFRICAINE DES CINEASTES

The h i s t o r y o f th e Federation P a n a f ric a in e des Cin^astes (FEPACI) i s

cr u c ia l to an understanding o f the development o f African f ilm production

in gen er al . However, i t is in Francophone Africa t h a t the p o l i t i c a l

leverage o f filmmakers has met with more su ccess . The e f f o r t s . o f the

FEPACI in Francophone Africa co n tr ib u te d to the c r e a t i o n o f nationa l film

c e n te r s in the d i f f e r e n t c o u n t r i e s ; to the s e t t i n g up of an in te r A f r ic a n

f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n (CIDC); to production (CIPRO Film); and to the c r e a t i o n

o f the F e s tiv a l o f Ouagadougou as a way o f prompting African f il m s . This

ch apter i s a study of th e FEPACT with an emphasis on the r o le o f Franco­

phone filmmakers in the development of f ilm in t h e i r c o u n t r i e s ,

African filmmakers are d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d by th e lack, o f national and

in t e r n a t i o n a l i n d u s t r i e s which include the s t r u c t u r e s o f pr oduction,

d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n . In th e absence o f such money generating

f a c i l i t i e s , and because f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n ar e monopolized

by foreign c a p i t a l i s t s whose primary concern i s to make p r o f i t , Franco­

phone d i r e c t o r s ar e not only forced to depend on the French Ministry o f

Cooperation and s i m i l a r o f f i c e s f o r th e production o f t h e i r f i l m s , they

als o fa ce problems o f programming the films in movie t h e a t e r s o f t h e i r

own c o u n tr ie s and d i s t r i b u t i n g them elsewhere. Such African c l a s s i c s as

La Noire d e , Mandabi, Le R e t d u r v d e ' l 1a v e n t u r i e r , Concerto pour un e x i 1 ,

and Cabascado were never shown in the movie t h e a t e r s o f the c o u n tr ie s o f

 68

the a r t i s t s who made them. African d i r e c t o r s are a ls o producers o f t h e i r

own f il m s , and, as i f t h a t i s not enough, they ar e f o rc e d , as in the

e a r l i e r days o f the invention o f motion p i c t u r e s , to c a r r y t h e i r films

from place to place f o r e x h i b i t i o n .

Since the m i d - f i f t i e s , Francophone filmmakers, organized in national

and i n t e r n a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , have been f i g h t i n g to change t h i s s i t u a ­

t i o n , which Tahar Cheriaa c a l l s "les ecrans c o l o n i s e s , " and to s e t up new

plans f o r the development o f f ilm i n d u s t r i e s in A fri ca . The s t r a t e g y

c o n s i s t s o f denouncing the block-booking system o f the fo re ign c a p i t a l i s t s

who prevent African films from being seen in A f r i c a . The filmmakers also

p o in t out th e neg ative infl uenc e on people o f American, European and

Indian films which ar e unchallenged in A f ric a . Their advice to African

governments i s to n a t i o n a l i z e f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n , to help fund African

films by r a i s i n g taxes on the. import o f fo re ign films and t i c k e t s a l e s ,

and to encourage p r i v a t e investment in the production o f African film s .

Although the FEPACI. i s the most s i g n i f i c a n t o r g a n iz a tio n to have

influe nc ed governments and i n t e r n a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s in the development

o f Af rican f ilm , i t i s important to look f i r s t a t the e f f o r t s o f i n d i v i d ­

ual filmmakers and/or small o r g a n i z a t i o n s o f filmmakers which paved th e

way f o r the FEPACI. In the essay on F r a n c e 's c o n t r ib u t i o n to the

development of Francophone f i l m , I. des crihed how Le Groupe A f r i c a i h du

Cindma attempted to conceive, o f an African cinema even hefore African

independence. Vieyra, the l e a d e r o f t h i s small o r g a n i z a t io n o f f i l m ­

makers from Senegal and Dahomey (Benin)., put f o r t h , in 1958, t h e . p l a n s

f o r a f u t u r e African f il m i n d u s t r y . f o r the Francophone African c o u n t r ie s

which were dependent on France (only Guinea-Kbnakry was independent a t

ft •'
 69

the tim e). However, he argued t h a t the c o u n tr ie s o f the Corhmunaute

Francophone should g et t o g e th e r to s e t up an i n t e r n a t i o n a l f i l m c e n te r

which would have i t s h ead qu ar ters in Dakar (Senegal). This c e n t e r was

t o serve f o r the production o f e d u c a t i o n a l , i n s t r u c t i o n a l and f e a t u r e

film s and was to be funded in the beginning by e i t h e r the governments of

the in dividual c o u n tr ie s or by the c e n tr a l government o f the Francophone

community, o r by both.

A f te r the independence o f most African c o u n t r ie s in the e a r l y

s i x t i e s , th e filmmakers could s t i l l not have access to production f a c i l i ­

t i e s and to the movie t h e a t e r s f o r the p r o je c t io n o f t h e i r films in t h e i r

own c o u n t r i e s . They consequently incr ea se d the p o l i t i c a l pr es sure on

t h e i r governments to i nte rv e ne and r e s t r u c t u r e the o r g a n i z a t io n o f film

a c t i v i t i e s in a manner t h a t would encourage African pro duct io n s. Blaise

Senghor, ex-member o f Le Groupe A f ric a in du Cinema and d i r e c t o r o f Le

Grand Magal a Touba (1962) c r i t i c i z e d the s i t u a t i o n by s t a t i n g t h a t a l ­

though th e r e were filmmakers in Africa who were authors o f some f il m s ,

t h e r e was no such t h in g as African cinema because the s e c t o r s o f pro­

d u cti on, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n were c o n t r o l l e d by f o r e i g n e r s .

Senghor believed t h a t African c o u n t r i e s , to o , must c r e a t e government

sponsored organizations: such, a s th e Office National du Film 'Canadian

which produces and d i s t r i b u t e s se ve ral s h o r t films on c u l t u r e , education

and r e s e a r c h , o r the French. Centre National de l a Oinematograph.i& (CNC).

which c o n t r o ls f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in France and disposes

of funds to help produce French, f il m s . Similar o rg a n i z a t io n s were

necessary f o r the c r e a t i o n of an a u t h e n t i c African cinema which, could be

comparable to the New Wave and th e French, films of Art e t e s s a i ; a l l

 70

sponsored by the CNC. Senghor w r i t e s

. . . i t i s necessary t h a t s eri ous measures be taken

to enable the c o u n t r i e s to begin a p o l i t i c s o f
f ilm p r o ductio n , d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n which
is rea l and which b e n e f i t s a l l . The f i r s t measure
from which a l l the r e s t f oll ow s , i s the c r e a t i o n
o f an autonomous a d m i n i s t r a t i v e o f f i c e , which is
l i k e th e Centre National de la Cinematographie,
and which covers a l l th e is s ues concerning f i l m . 2

Timite B a s s o r i , a filmmaker from Ivory Coast, a l s o wrote in the

e a r l y S i x t i e s to c r i t i c i z e the s t a t e o f f il m a c t i v i t i e s in Afri ca.

Bassori argued t h a t African film could not grow as long as i t s f u tu r e

depended upon such organisms as th e African m i n i s t r i e s o f inform ation ,

which produced only newsreels; th e Compagnie A fric a in e Cinematographique

I h d u s t r i e l l e e t Commerciale (C0MACIC0); and th e Societ£ d 1Exp!oitation

Cinematographique A f ri caine (SECMA), which d i s t r i b u t e d fo re ign films

and saw in the production of African films an i n t e r f e r e n c e with t h e i r

p r o f i t making. (The C0MACIC0 and the SECMA w i ll be discussed a t length

in t h e ch apter on d i s t r i b u t i o n ) . African d i r e c t o r s were forced to work

as government employees in the making o f newsreels a t th e m i n i s t r i e s o f

information because the C0MACIC0 and the SECMA were not i n t e r e s t e d in

producing and /or d i s t r i b u t i n g t h e i r f ilm s . Bassori argued t h a t the

imagination and th e c r e a t i v i t y o f the filmmakers were s t i f l e d a t the

m i n i s t r i e s of in fo r m ati o n , which were a l i t t l e more than a photo s e r v i c e .

C l e a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , i t was important t h a t governments in Africa change

the s t r u c t u r e o f th e film i n d u s t r y . Bassori believe d t h a t such a change

was a l l th e more c r u c i a l s in c e an a u t h e n t i c African cinema could be used

to d i f f u s e national c u l t u r e and enhance n ati o n al p r i d e , and to r e p r e s e n t

3
African c u l t u r e on o t h e r c o n t i n e n t s .
 From the m id -S ix ties and a f t e r , o t h e r filmmakers, such as Sembene

and Med Hondo, became vocal in denouncing the monopolistic p r a c t i c e s of

the COMACICO and the SECMA and in applying p r e ss u re on t h e i r governments

to r e s t r u c t u r e f ilm a c t i v i t i e s . Between 1965 and 1967, filmmakers,

grouped in national and i n t e r n a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , took the i ss u e of

African f ilm a t the Collogue de Genes (1965), the Premier Festiv al Mon­

d ia l des Arts Negres de Dakar (1966), and the Table-Ronde de Paris (1967).

The filmmakers a t each o f th ese conferences and f e s t i v a l s gave advice to

t h e i r governments on how to r e s t r u c t u r e th e f il m market. An e la b o r a te

plan f o r change was submitted, f o r example, a t the F es tiv al Mondial des

Arts Negres in Dakar. The filmmakers recommended the c r e a t i o n o f an

i n t e r - A f r i c a n f il m o f f i c e which would have as i t s purpose the gather ing

and diss em in atin g of information about African cinema (film c a t a l o g s ,

s t a t i s t i c s on numbers o f e x h i b i t i o n s , in v e n t o r i e s o f th e to o l s of pro­

d u c ti o n , and l i s t s o f f ilm t e c h n i c i a n s in A f r ic a ) .

The new o f f i c e would propose l e g i s l a t i o n f o r the c r e a t i o n of national

cinemas which would be economically and c u l t u r a l l y o r ie n t e d . I t would

accomodate d i f f e r e n t departments on educational f i l m s , commerical f i l m s ,

and films of a r t and es sa y. There would be an e f f o r t , as much as p o s s i ­

b l e , toward a complete t r a n s f e r to Africa o f the f a c i l i t i e s o f production

and p o s t- p r o d u ctio n . The f ilm market would be r e s t r u c t u r e d so t h a t a

system could be put in place to account f o r the bo x - o ff ice revenues in

each country and on the African l e v e l . The o f f i c e would also reorganize

the block-booking system which was used to d is c r im in a t e a g a i n s t African

f il m s . In t h i s vein the c u r r e n t programming system which allowed t h e a t e r

owners to show two f e a t u r e f il m s , one a f t e r the o t h e r , would be changed to

 72

one f il m a seance. The t h e a t e r owners would be re quire d to improve the

c o n d i t i o n s ; o f the t h e a t e r s , and more African film s would be on the agenda.

Other recommendations o f the filmmakers a t the F es tiv al Mondial des

Arts, NSgres included the c r e a t i o n o f funds to s u s t a i n African f il m pro­

d u ction, the bu i ld i n g o f cinematheques and arch ives f o r the p r e s e r v a ti o n

o f f i l m s , and the or g a n iz a tio n o f f e s t i v a l s to promote African cinema

and allow the a r t i s t s to exchange t h e i r views. Schools and i n s t i t u t e s

were also needed in Africa where filmmakers, t e c h n i c i a n s , a c t o r s , and

c r i t i c s could be t r a i n e d . The filmmakers believ ed t h a t the funds f o r

thes e proposals could come from taxes o f f the import, pr oductio n, and

e x h i b i t i o n o f fo re ig n f ilm s . Some a d d it io n a l funds could come from the

4
tic k e t sales.

The i n t e r v e n t i o n o f the filmmakers a t these conferences and f e s t i ­

vals was s i g n i f i c a n t because i t underscored the need to control film

a c t i v i t i e s which, in the eyes o f the filmmakers, c o n s t i t u t e d an in d u str y

f o r the development of Africa . The filmmakers' plan t o r e s t r u c t u r e and

to base f il m a c t i v i t i e s in Africa as an economic and c u l t u r a l f a c t o r in

the development o f the c o n ti n e n t gained support from many heads of s t a t e s

and s p e c i f i c a l l y from N ig er 's p r e s i d e n t , Hamani D i o r i , who was then

a c t i n g - p r e s i d e n t o f the major economic grouping o f Francophone A f ric a n s ,

the Organisation Commune A f ric a in e e t Mauricienne (OCAM).^ Furthermore,

the filmmakers used the conferences and f e s t i v a l s as platforms f o r p r e s ­

suring African governments to stop compromising with the e x p l o i t a t i v e

measures o f the COMACICO and the SECMA. They also posed an e t h i c a l

problem f o r the French government, which, on the one hand was producing

in dividual African filmmakers and or ganizing f e s t i v a l s to promote t h e i r

 73

f il m s , and on the o th e r hand was not making an e f f o r t to stop the French

owned COMACICO and the SECMA.

Clear ly the ground was prepared f o r an o r g a n iz a tio n such as the

FEPACI, which was cr eated in Ouly 1969 in A l g ie r s . The governments were

made sympathetic to the idea o f nationa l cinemas, the OCAM had made

obvious i t s i n t e n t i o n s to c r e a t e an i n t e r - A f r i c a n f il m i n d u s t r y , and the

monopoly of the f il m market by the COMACICO and the SECMA was weakening

as c o u n t r ie s such as Upper Volta and Mali made moves to n a t i o n a l i z e t h e

d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in 1969. An o r g a n i z a t io n such as; the FEPACI

was necessary f o r the filmmakers to c o ordinate t h e i r e f f o r t s and be more

effective. As they were f o r the most p a r t l e f t i s t s and i d e a l i s t s who

were committed t o th e notion of Pan-Africanism, the new memhers o f th e

FEPACI saw as t h e i r pro phetic mission to u n i t e and to u s e . f i l m as a tool

f o r the l i b e r a t i o n o f the colonized c o u n t r ie s and as a s te p toward the.

t o t a l unity o f A f rica. I t was in t h i s sense t h a t in i t s e a r l y days the

FEPACI sought to be a f f i l i a t e d to i t s s i s t e r a s s o c i a t i o n , the Organization

o f African Unity (QAU).

In 1969, a t the F e s ti v a l Panafri.cain de la Culture in A l g i e r s ,

African filmmakers gathered to c r e a t e an i n t e r - A f r i c a n o r g a n i z a ti o n . In

1970, during the t h i r d meeting o f the f e s t i v a l , Journees Ctnematographigues

de Carthage ( T u n i s i a ) , the filmmakers inaugurated the o r g a n iz a ti o n and

c a l l e d i t La FedeVation Pa n a f ric a in e des Cine'astes (FEPACI). Clear ly the

filmmakers in sub-Saharan Africa were b e n e f i t t i n g from the experiences of

t h e i r c o u n t e r p a r t s in Algeria and Tunis ia who had alr ea dy n a t i o n a l i z e d

t h e i r film i n d u s t r i e s . By 1970, hoth. Algeria and Tunisia had w e ll - d e fin e d

p o l i c i e s o f pr oduct io n, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n . The Office National

 74

pour l e Commerce e t 1 1I n d u s t r i e CinematOgraphiques (ONCIC) in A lg e r ia ,

and the S e c r e t a r i a t aiix A f f a i r e s - C u lt u r e ! le s e t a 1 'in forma tion (SACI)

in Tunisia were e s t a b l i s h e d f o r the r e s t r u c t u r i n g o f the film in d u str y

in favor o f natio na l cinema. The n a tio n a l f il m in d u s tr y in Algeria had

already produced such war ep ics as L'aube des damnes (1964) by Ahmed

Rachedi, Vent des Aures (1966) by Mohamed Lakdhar-Hamina, and La Voix

(1968) by Slim Riad. In T u n is ia , th e r e was th e Journees Cinematograph­

iques de C ar thag es , the f i r s t and only f ilm f e s t i v a l devoted to Arab

and African cinemas.

The FEPACI was designed t o be an a s s o c i a t i o n o f natio na l organiza­

ti o n s of filmmakers. Unlike the Groupe A f ric a in du cinema, i t was not

f o r i n d i v i d u a l s who had no base in the nation al a s s o c i a t i o n s o f t h e i r

c o u n t r ie s . Filmmakers were f i r s t encouraged to form national o r g an iza­

ti o n s and to a f f i l i a t e them with th e FEPACI. In t h i s manner, in o rder

f o r a filmmaker in Senegal, f o r example, to become a member o f FEPACI,

he must f i r s t become a member o f 1 'A ss ociatio n Senegalais e des C i n e a s t e s .

This was g e n e r a lly the r u l e except f o r cases in which th e filmmakers

were from an occupied country such as South A f r i c a , or a colonized one

such as Mozambique in 1970. Because i t had become the a s s o c i a t i o n of

a s s o c i a t i o n s , the FEPACI hoped to be more l e g i t i m a t e in the eyes of

governments and o t h e r o r g a n i z a t i o n s . From i t s i n c e p t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , the

FEPACI was recognized by the OCAM, the OAU and UNESCO, and i t increased
g
i t s membership to t h i r t y - t h r e e c o u n t r ie s between 1970 and 1975.

At the inaugural meeting in Carthages, the FEPACI s e t as i t purpose

to be committed to th e p o l i t i c a l , c u l t u r a l , and economic l i b e r a t i o n of

A f r i c a , to f i g h t the Franco-American monopoly q f f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n and

 75

e x h i b i t i o n in A f r i c a , and to encourage the c r e a t i o n o f natio na l cinemas.7

The commitment to the l i b e r a t i o n o f Africa meant f o r the filmmakers the

c r e a t i o n of e s t h e t i c s o f d i s a l i e n a t i o n and c o l o n i z a t i o n . Filmmakers were

t o l d to use semi-documentary forms to denounce co lo nia lism where i t e x i s t ­

ed, and d i d a c t i c f i c t i o n a l forms to denounce the a l i e n t a t i o n of c o u n tr ie s

which were p o l i t i c a l l y independent but c u l t u r a l l y and economically

dependent on the West.

The second purpose o f the FEPACI, which was to f i g h t a g a i n s t the

Franco-American monopoly o f the f il m in d u s tr y in A f r i c a , was supposed to

be achieved by p r e ss u rin g the governments to n a t i o n a l i z e the s e c to r s of

d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . At t h i s sta ge o f the development o f f il m

in A f r i c a , the filmmakers did not t r u s t p r i v a t e businessmen whom they

suspected o f c o l l a b o r a t i n g with the French companies o f COMACICO and

SECMA, and the M.P.E.A.A. in the United S t a t e s . C l e a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , the.

FEPACI could only work with governments to achieve the goal o f breaking

fo reig n monopolies and giving African films the chance o f heing seen in

African t h e a t e r s . However, the filmmakers could not t r u s t the govern­

ments enough to ask them to n a t i o n a l i z e the s e c t o r o f pr oductio n, too.

They needed the freedom t o express themselves in manners which were not

always f l a t t e r i n g to the governments. For t h i s rea so n, they wanted to

keep control over th e small production houses, such, as Film Domirev with

Sembene, and S o l e il 0 films with Med Hondo. For economic r easons , they

wanted th e governments to take control over the d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h ib i-

O
t i o n so t h a t they might have the chance to recoup the c o s t o f t h e i r films..

The l a s t goal o f the FEPACI's inaugural meeting, which was; to c r e a t e

n a ti o n a l cinemas, was to be achieved by r a i s i n g the level o f p o l i t i c a l

 76

consciousness o f the filmmakers so t h a t they might i ncrease t h e i r lobby­

ing power with t h e i r governments and in su re the emergence and maintenance

of African cinemas. The filmmakers were also to persuade the governments

to c r e a t e more meeting places l i k e th e JCC and the F e s tiv a l Pan-A fricaine

de Ouagadougou (FESPACO) 1969, which could permit them to meet r e g u la r ly

to exchange ideas and to promote t h e i r film s.

Between 1970 and 1975 the FEPACI achieved s i g n i f i c a n t progress in

the a p p l i c a t i o n o f i t s inaugural r e s o l u t i o n s . In Francophone A f r i c a ,

national film i n d u s t r i e s were emerging. In 1970, the Upper Volta re acte d

to the u n f a i r monopoly of the COMACICO and SECMA and decided to n a t i o n a l ­

ize i t s f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n by c r e a t i n g the S ociete Nationale

d 'I m p o r t a t i o n - D i s t r i b u t i o n (S0NAV0CI). The same y e a r , Mali followed s u i t

with the c r e a t i o n o f 1 'O ff ic e Cinematographique National du Mali (OCINAM).

In 1974, Senegal and Benin got t h e i r own d i s t r i b u t i o n houses, the S ociete

Nationale Se'negalaise de D i s t r i b u t i o n , and the Office Beninois de Cinema

(OBECI). Senegal went as f a r as to c r e a t e a Societe National du Cinema

q
(SNC) which is famous f o r producing fo ur f e a t u r e films in 1974 alone.

F i n a l l y , in 1975, Madagascar n a t i o n a l i z e d the movie t h e a t e r s and cr eated

the Office du Cinema Malqache.

The French government, to o , was forced to r e a d j u s t i t s a t t i t u d e toward

the i s s u e of African film development; f o r f e a r t h a t a l l the c o u n tr ie s

would n a t i o n a l i z e t h e i r f ilm import and t h e r e f o r e develop an an ti-F ren ch

a t t i t u d e , ^ th e government in France intervened with the COMACICO and SECMA

which i t forced to adapt i t s colon ia l s t r u c t u r e s of f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n to

the pr esen t r e a l i t i e s of A f rica. In 1972, the COMACICO and SECMA were

bought out by the French Union General du Cinema (UGC) and the Societe de
 77

P a r t i c i p a t i o n Cinematographique A fric a in e (SOPACIA) was c r e a t e d to over­

see f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n in A f r i c a . ^

In 1975, the FEPACI met in Algiers again to disc uss the f u tu r e of

African cinema. This meeting, which i s now r e f e r r e d to as the Second

FEPACI Congress of A l g i e r s , was concerned with the r o l e of film in the

politico-economic and c u l t u r a l development o f A f ric a. The filmmakers

decided t h a t given the need to r a i s e the consciousness o f the African

masses and l i b e r a t e them from the economic and id eo lo g ical domination of

the i m p e r i a l i s t c o u n t r i e s , they could not indulge themselves in manufact­

uring films o f purely commercial value. They s aid t h a t African filmmakers

should u n ite with the p rog re s siv e filmmakers in o t h e r c o u n t r ie s and j o i n

the a n t i - i m p e r i a l i s t f i g h t . I t was time to emphasize th e i n s t r u c t i o n a l

value o f film s . The filmmakers should ques tio n the images o f Afri ca and

the n a r r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e s received from the dominant cinema. The question

f o r the FEPACI was how to i n s e r t f ilm as an o r ig i n a l f a c t in the process

of l i b e r a t i o n , how t o put i t a t the s e r v i c e of l i f e , ahead o f " a r t f o r

a r t ' s sake." In o t h e r words, how to f ilm African r e a l i t i e s in manners

t h a t could not be absorbed by the dominant cinema. I t was in t h i s l i g h t

t h a t se veral filmmakers condemned Le Bra celet de Bronze (1974) by Tidiane

Aw, and Pousse Pousse (1975) by Daniel Kamwa, f o r being overwhelmingly

spectacular and l e s s committedto demystifying neo-co lonialism . On the

o th e r hand, the films of Sembene, Med Hondo and Mahama Traore were praise d

f o r de-emphasizing the s e n s a t io n a l and commercial aspec ts and emphasizing

the i n s t r u c t i o n a l values.

This Second FEPACI Congress also addressed the i s s u e of ce nsorship.

The filmmakers argued t h a t the governments had to l e t them work in freedom

 78

in o rder f o r them to c o n t r ib u t e t o the development o f the c o u n tr ie s in

c r e a t i v e and c r i t i c a l manners. The FEPACI believed t h a t

The S t a t e must play a promotional r o l e in the

e d i f i c a t i o n o f a cinema f r e e of the shackles
o f censorship and o t h e r means o f coercion
which can a f f e c t the c r e a t i v e freedom o f the
filmmaker and repress the democratic and
r es p o n s ib le e x e r c is e o f t h i s p r o fe s s io n . The
filmmaker’s freedom o f expression i s , in f a c t ,
one o f the indisp ensable con dit ion s of his
c o n t r i b u t i o n to the development o f the c r i t i ­
cal senses o f the masses.12

After the second FEPACI Congress in 1975, the filmmakers did not

meet again u n t i l 1982 in Niamey (Niger) where they proposed what i s known

as "Le Manifeste de Niamey." The 1982 meeting in Niamey was necessary and

ur gently needed f o r several reasons. Although the membership o f the

FEPACI was growing and th e r e were more films by A f ric a n s , th e r e w e r e n 't

African i n d u s t r i e s o f pro ductio n, d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . This was

ir o n i c a l because the Francophone co u n tr ie s grouped around the OCAM had

c r eated in 1979 the Consortium I n t e r a f r i c a i n de D i s t r i b u t i o n Cinemato­

graphique (CIDC) and the Centre I n t e r a f r i c a i n de Production de Films

(CIPRO Films) to re pla ce the Union A f ri caine de Cinema.(UAC) which was

13
c r i t i c i z e d f o r r e p r e s e n tin g French neo- colonial i n t e r e s t . A meeting

of th e FEPACI was t h e r e f o r e necessary to remind the CIDC of i t s r o l e in

the promotion and d i s t r i b u t i o n o f African fil m s . Another reason f o r the

meeting was to re a s s e s s the r o l e played by governments in f ilm a c t i v i t i e s .

The FEPACI had noticed t h a t most African governments had doubled or

t r i p l e d taxes from th e revenues of f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n .

Some c o u n tr ie s even took as much as h a l f the c o s t of the t i c k e t . Since

these ta x revenues were spent on a c t i v i t i e s which were o u ts id e the film

i n d u s t r y , the FEPACI found them o b s t r u c t i n g to the growth o f national

 79

cinemas. The FEPACI also r e a l i z e d t h a t in those c o u n tr ie s where film

a c t i v i t i e s were completely n a t i o n a l i z e d , the c r e a t i v i t y of filmmakers

were s t i f l e d by governments who only sponsored propaganda f ilm s . Finally,

in c o u n tr ie s such as Senegal and Ivory Coast, the governments in a r e v e r ­

sal o f r u l e s , cu t the funds s e t up to encourage th e c r e a tio n o f national

cinemas.

A t h i r d reason the FEPACI had to convene as soon as p o s s ib le was the

d i s s e n s io n , a t the 1981 Ouagadougou F e s t i v a l , o f young filmmakers who

c a l l e d themselves Le C o l l e c t i f l ' O e i l V e r t , The young filmmakers charged

t h a t the FEPACI did l e s s to help the filmmakers than to involve them with

a d m i n i s t r a t i v e red tapes and v i s i t s o f the o f f i c i a l s o f FEPACI in foreign

14
c o u n t r ie s . I t was g e n e r a l ly agreed t h a t the FEPACI had l o s t i t s dyna­

mism of the year s 1970-1975. The young filmmakers, by c r e a t i n g Le Collec-

t i f l ' O e i l V e r t , had hoped to bring back t h i s dynamism. Headed by the

Senegalese d i r e c t o r , Cheik N'Gaido Ba, Le C o l l e c t i f l ' O e i l Vert wanted to

take an "immediate and empirical ac tio n " toward th e s o l u t i o n o f African

f ilm production. The filmmakers decided t h e r e f o r e to begin by l o c a t i n g

and making an inventory o f a l l the equipments of filmmaking t h a t e x i s t e d

in A f rica. This way they could help cu t the c o s t of production by lending

the equipments to each o t h e r . They would also become l e s s dependent on

France and o th e r European c o u n tr ie s where they had been r e n tin g equipment.

They c a l l e d t h e i r s t r a t e g y a cooperation "South-South", as opposed to the

"North-South" cooperation which e x i s t e d between the developed and d ev el­

oping c o u n t r i e s . ^

Even before the Niamey Congress in 1982 which r e u n ite d the FEPACI,

the veteran o f African Cinema, Sembene, had s aid t h a t the s o l u t i o n to the

 80

problems was not in the c r e a t i o n of a new o r g a n i z a t i o n , but in convening

1 fi
a meeting and d is c u s s in g th e i s s u e s .

Thus, whereas the 1975 Congress o f Alg iers emphasized the need for

the filmmakers to put the i n s t r u c t i o n a l value of films ahead o f t h e i r

commercial v alues , the Niamey Congress was to emphasize the economics and

the s ur vival o f the FEPACI i t s e l f . The Niamey Manifesto introduce d new

economic clauses in the development o f African f ilm which, as Boughedir

17
put i t , "co n t ra d ic te d th e r a d i c a l views of the 1975 FEPACI Congress."

The expression "Operateur economique" was used, f o r example, to des ig na te

businessmen and p r i v a t e c a p i t a l i s t s . While in the Second FEPACI Congress

of A l g i e r s , businessmen were seen as a l l i e s o f the i m p e r i a l i s t co u n tr ie s

who were not to be t r u s t e d , the Niamey Manifesto described th e "Operateur

economique" as necessary to the growth o f African f il m and asked govern­

ments to introd uc e p r o t e c t i o n i s t laws which could guarantee the investment

o f the "Operateur economique", and thus encourage him/her to produce more

fil m s.

Another important measure in the Manifesto was to l i n k f il m product­

ion with the f our o t h e r major elements of f il m a c t i v i t i e s , namely the

d i s t r i b u t i o n , the e x h i b i t i o n , the means of production (equipment, la b o r a ­

t o r i e s , and s t u d i o s ) , and the t r a i n i n g o f the t e c h n i c i a n s . Without the

te c h n ic ia n s and the means o f pro duction, films made by African d i r e c t o r s

w ill continue to depend on European t e c h n ic ia n s and pos t- productio n

facilities. Without an African d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in d u s t r y ,

the filmmakers w il l not only have to depend on European governments and

o rg a n i z a t io n s f o r f i n a n c i a l s u p p o rt , but once they have f i n i s h e d f i l m s ,

they w il l not have a market in Africa to show them.

 A t h i r d proposal in the Manifesto was to go beyond the idea of

n ational cinema in o rder t o promote i n t e r - A f r i c a n and/or regional cinemas.

This id e a , t o o , was economically motivated. The FEPACI knew t h a t i t was

not p o s s ib l e f o r a filmmaker t o recoup the c o s t o f h i s / h e r f il m in h i s /

her country alone where the t o t a l number of t h e a t e r t i c k e t s sold was l e s s

than the number o f t i c k e t s sold in the Latin Quarter alone in Par is f o r a

comparable time. In A f ric a , the population of most c o u n tr ie s is under 15

m i l l i o n , and because o f so c ia l and economic re as ons , many people do not

go to the movies. Clear ly an i n t e r - A f r i c a n movie in d u s tr y o f f e r e d b e t t e r

chances f o r filmmakers to recoup the c o s t o f t h e i r f il m s . In Francophone

Ig
A f r i c a , the CIDC is one such i n d u s t r y grouping fo urt een c o u n t r i e s . In

the p e r s p e c ti v e o f in c r e a sin g the chances f o r filmmakers to recoup the

c o s t o f t h e i r f i l m s , the FEPACI a l s o asked African national t e l e v i s i o n

s e r v i c e s to work with the filmmakers in co-producing and a i r i n g fil m s .

The fo urt h proposal o f the Niamey Manifesto concerned the n e c e s s i t y

to put in place n atio n al control systems which could account f o r the

number of t h e a t e r t i c k e t s sold a t the box o f f i c e s in A f rica. In Franco­

phone A f ri c a , f o r example, i f the o f f i c e s of the CIDC knew e x a c t ly the

box o f f i c e revenues in each country a t any given time, i t would be e a s i e r

to di vide the se revenues to the s a t i s f a c t i o n o f the filmmakers, the

businessmen, and the governments f o r tax purposes. The filmmakers would

not t r u s t the t h e a t e r owners, they would have no o th e r p r e c i s e way to

measure the audiences ' responses to t h e i r f il m s . C l e a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , the

implementation of a s t r u c t u r e to control the box o f f i c e revenues would

help th e growth of African film.

F i n a l l y , the Niamey Manifesto proposed a tax reform plan which would

 82

enable the African film i n d u s t r i e s such as th e CIDC to be s e lf - s u p p o r t i n g .

In t h i s c l a u s e , the FEPACI argued t h a t p a r t of the money spe nt by African

movie-goers, both in f o re ig n and domestic f i l m s , should be invested in the

production o f new f il m s , the r e f i t t i n g o f old movie t h e a t e r s , andthe con­

s t r u c t i o n of new ones, the s e t t i n g up of f il m ar ch iv es and cinematheques,

the o r g a n iz a ti o n of f e s t i v a l s and o t h e r promotional a c t i v i t i e s , the t r a i n ­

ing of f il m t e c h n i c i a n s , and th e a c q u i s i t i o n o f new equipment. The govern­

ments were asked on the one hand to reduce taxes as an in c e n tiv e f o r

t h e a t e r owners to use the a d d it io n a l revenues to improve th e condition o f

the t h e a t e r s and to c o n s tr u c t new ones. On the o th e r hand, i t was pro­

prosed t o the governments t o begin using the remaining t a x revenues in

busines ses r e l a t i n g to th e development o f f il m . I t was in t h i s sense t h a t

the FEPACI s t a t e d in th e Niamey Manifesto t h a t

The funds which go i n to producing African f i l m s ,

whether they ar e n a t i o n a l , regional or i n t e r -
African f i l m s , should come from the twin s e c t o r s
of d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n , not from the
government's budgets. I t is only in t h i s manner
of f ilm b e g e tti n g f il m t h a t a cinema in d u s t r y i s
p o s s i b l e . 19

A f t e r t h i s panoramic look a t the FEPACI, from i t s c r e a t i o n to the

Niamey Manifesto, what cati one say o f the o r g a n iz a tio n ? The FEPACI is

unique because i t i s a movement o f the filmmakers o f a whole c o n t i n e n t ,

as opposed to such national cinematic movements as the Cinema Novo and

the New Wave. The FEPACI is also unique because i t i s l e s s a cinematic

movement aimed a t d eco n s tru cti n g t r a d i t i o n a l f ilm n a r r a t i v e s , as i s the

case with the New Wave, and more a politico-eco no mic movement committed

to the t o t a l l i b e r a t i o n o f A fri ca . As such, the FEPACI has more in

common with i t s s i s t e r Pan-African movement, the OAU, than with "purely"

 83

cinematic movements such as the New Wave and the I t a l i a n Neo-realism.

The success and the c o n t r a d i c t i o n s o f the FEPACI should t h e r e f o r e be

measured in terms o f i t s achievements as a 1 i b e r a t i o n i s t movement which

i s committed to the independence and the unity o f Afri ca.

As the above h i s t o r y o f the organization shows, the FEPACI has

achieved many of i t s goals. As a 1i b e r a t i o n i s t movement, i t has led th e

African governments in breaking the monopoly of such foreign d i s t r i b u t i o n

companies as COMACICO and SECMA. I t has influenc ed the governments to

c r e a t e national production ce n t e r s and take f ilm s e r i o u s l y as a means of

development. The e f f o r t s o f the filmmakers led to the c r e a t io n of the

F e s t i v a l s of Ougadoudou (1969) and Mogadishu (Somalia, 1980). One can

a ls o say t h a t in ad d it io n t o the economic advantages, i t i s the s p i r i t

o f Pan-Africanism t h a t led the FEPACI in th e Niamey Manifestor to go

beyond nationa l to regional and i n t e r - A f r i c a n cinemas.

As a 1i b e r a t i o n i s t movement, the film d i r e c t o r s o f the FEPACI have

al s o made several su cc es sful films which r a i s e the consciousness of the

audiences. Using documentary and d i d a c t i c f i c t i o n a l forms to denounce

neo-c olonialism and a l i e n a t i o n , the filmmakers saw as t h e i r prophetic

mission to employ f il m as "a weapon as well as a means o f expression f o r

20
the development o f the awareness o f c l a s s s t r u g g l e . " In r e t r o s p e c t ,

one sees a t l e a s t t h r e e types of cinema which developed out o f t h i s

1 i b e r a t i o n i s t movement: the semi-documentary, the d i d a c t i c - f i c t i o n a l ,

and the f il m of r esear ch . The semi-documentary d e p ic ts and denounces

co lo n ialism and/or s e t t l e r r u le and shows th e progress of the fo rces o f

liberation. Typical examples of the semi-documentary form ar e the epics

o f the Algerian war, Sarah Maldoror's Sambizanga (1972), Haile Gerima's

 84

Harvest 3000 Years (1974), the films by the Mozambican National I n s t i t u t e

o f Cinema such as These Are The Weapons (1979), and the films on a parth eid

in South A frica .

The second type of f il m , the d i d a c t i c - f i c t i o n a l , opposed good and

e v il in Africa in a Manichean manner. The films of t h i s genre show the

s t r o n g , us ually from European o r i g i n s , ta king advantage o f the weak,

symbolized by Afri ca. Sometimes Islam and/or African governments re place

the West as the oppressor in the fil m s . The genre i s more p revalent in

Senegal, with Sembene Ousmane as i t s masterful p r a c t i t i o n e r . Another

general t r a i t o f the films i s a qu es t (mostly symbolic) to the West,

c h a r a c t e r iz i n g a l i e n a t i o n , and a r e t u r n to the sources as a way o f solving

the problem. Typical examples o f the form are the films by Sembene and

Mahama Traore, Touki Bouki (1973) by D ji b r i l Diop Mambeti, Kodou (1971)

by Ababacar Samb-Makharam, S ol e il 0 (1969) by Med Hondo, and Le Bra cele t

de Bronze (1974) by Tidiane Aw.

The t h i r d form, th e f ilm of r e s e a r c h , i s an outgrowth of the d i d a c t i c -

f i c t i o n a l form. Emphasizing l e s s the Manicheanism of t h e i r p r edecess ors,

the filmmakers look f o r combinations o f s o l u t i o n s to African problems.

They d e p i c t socia l changes, breaks and c o n t i n u i t i e s in h i s t o r y and c u l t u r e .

They pose as challenges the ways in which t r a d i t i o n and modernity, educa­

ted and i l l i t e r a t e can be r e c o n c il e d . Examples o f t h i s genre ar e the films

by Souleymane Cisse , L e tt r e Paysanne (1975) by Safi Faye, Jom (1981) by

Ababakar Samb-Makharam, Wend Kuni (1982) by Gaston Kabore, the powerful

documentary Zo Kwe Zo (1982) by Joseph Akouissonne.and Djeli (1981) by

Lancine Fadiga.

I t i s important to n o ti c e here t h a t a l l the th r e e genres ar e s t i l l

 being p r a c tic e d in African cinema. I d e a l l y , the f i r s t type coincides

with the inaugural manifesto o f the FEPACI which p o s t u l a t e s th e need to

u n i te and f i g h t a g a i n s t c o lo n iali sm and s e t t l e r r u l e in South Africa.

The second type, to o , i s symptomatic of the a n t i - n e o - c o l o n i a l i s t and

i m p e r i a l i s t slogans o f the Second FEPACI Congress, and the the t h i r d

ty p e , including such popular films as Djeli and Finye (1982), seems to

r e p r e s e n t th e Niamey Manifesto which emphasizes f il m more as anin d u str y

andl e s s as an a n t i - c a p i t a l i s t weapon. The presence o f a l l t h r e e genres

a t the same time i n d i c a t e s on the one hand the h i s t o r i c a l s i t u a t i o n of

Africa and on the o t h e r the ideological d i f f e r e n c e s o f th e filmmakers.

As regards the c o n t r a d i c t io n s of the FEPACI, they emanate, t y p i c a l l y ,

from an i n s u f f i c i e n t a n a l y s is o f the blending o f p o l i t i c a l , economic and

a r t i s t i c r e a l i t i e s in A f rica. As Cheriaa put i t

In a place (Africa) where t h er e h a d n ' t been a

s t r u c t u r e and a t r a d i t i o n o f national cinemas
b ef o re, they (filmmakers) had believ ed t h a t
a l l t h a t was needed, in ad d i tio n to t h e i r own
commitment to making f i l m s , was the support of
the S ta te which they thought was determined to
c r e a t e nationa l cinemas. Feeling very strong
about what they had to say and imagining them­
selves f r e e to express i t , they believed the
s t a t e s , to o , were in a d i s p o s i t i o n to work with
them. They did not doubt t h a t a l i m i t could be
put on t h e i r freedom to a c t . 21

The FEPACI, as a P a n - A fr ic a n is t movement, worked to help individual

c o u n t r ie s gain con trol over the channels of d i s t r i b u t i o n , e x h i b i t i o n and

sometimes even the production. The FEPACI believ ed t h a t i t was making a

progress toward an autonomous f ilm in d u s t r y every time t h a t a country

n a t i o n a l i z e d i t s f il m a c t i v i t i e s . However, i t soon became c l e a r t h a t the

i n t e r e s t o f the FEPACI could not always be rec onci led with t h a t of the

c o u n tr ie s i t had helped. There were id eological c o n t r a d i c t io n s which were

 86

determined by the f a c t o f the African c o u n t r i e s ' economic and c u l t u r a l

dependence on the West. Thus, although p o l i t i c a l l y i t was p r e s t i g i o u s

f o r the governments to have natio na l cinemas, economically they could not

af fo r d them without the consent o f th e Western c o u n t r i e s . For p o l i t i c a l

re as ons , they exported independently made films by Sembene and Cisse (to

c i t e only two), p r esen tin g them as n atio n al f il m s , even though they had

not been d i s t r i b u t e d n a t i o n a l l y . For economic rea so ns, they c o l l e c t e d

taxes on f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n , and they used the tax revenues

f o r o th e r problems a f f e c t i n g the c o u n t r i e s .

In those c o u n tr ie s where the economic i s s u e s were temporarily over­

come and national f ilm production ce n te r s were c r e a t e d , the governments'

p o l i t i c s of production were d i f f e r e n t from those of the FEPACI. Where

the FEPACI was committed to making l i b e r a t i o n i s t and P an - A fr i c a n ist f i l m s ,

the governments were i n t e r e s t e d in propaganda f il m s . Where the FEPACI

de-emphasized the profit-m aking aspec ts of the f il m s , the governments

emphasized the need f o r non-propaganda films to recoup a t l e a s t t h e i r c o s t

o f production. The low box o f f i c e revenues o f national films led to the

c lo s in g in the mid-Seventies o f the government-sponsored production u n its

in Ivory Coast and Senegal.

C le a r ly , these c o n t r a d i c t io n s between the government's national

i n t e r e s t and the FEPACI's r a d ic a l l i b e r a t i o n i s t i n t e r e s t are s e r i o u s i ss u e s

t h a t kept s e t t i n g back the progress o f the movement. In Francophone A f ric a ,

f o r example, sin ce the CIDC took over film d i s t r i b u t i o n from the COMACICO

and SECMA, many problems have sur fac ed which have prevented i t from func­

t i o n i n g on a f u l l swing in the fo urt een member c o u n t r i e s . Some govern­

ments have f a i l e d to pay p a r t of the tax revenues from the f ilm market as
 87

membership fees to the CIDC. Some have f r u s t r a t e d the e f f o r t s of the

CIDC to d i s t r i b u t e African films by f in d i n g new customers in Switzer ­

land, Society Commerciale de films (SOCO Films) which s p e c i a l iz e d in

22
d i s t r i b u t i n g American fil m s . F i n a l l y , some governments defended the
'j

r i g h t o f t h e a t e r owners who r e j e c t e d African films on the grounds t h a t

the s p e c t a t o r s p r e f e r r e d American and European f ilm s . The botton l i n e

was, as Cheriaa put i t , t h a t t h e r e were African filmmakers and f i l m s ,

which he compared to heads, without the f a c i l i t i e s o f prod uction, d i s -

23
t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n , which he compared to bodies.

Another point o f weakness in the FEPACI's endeavor to develop an

African film in d u s tr y i s the o v e r - r e l i a n c e of the o r g a n iz a ti o n on

governments and f o re i g n c o u n t r ie s such as France f o r the production o f

the f il m s . Thus, i t i s doubtful whether the filmmakers had as s e r i o u s l y

thought about the means o f production as they had about the need to

n a t i o n a l i z e the f il m market and to r a i s e the consciousness o f the

audiences with African f i l m s . The need to r e f l e c t more on the t o o l s o f

production led to the c r e a t i o n o f the Le C o l l e c t i f L'Oeil Vert in 1981,

which declared i t s i n t e n t i o n to make an inventory o f a l l the e x i s t i n g

equipment in Africa and to fin d ways to make films more independently

from Western c o u n t r i e s .

The d i s i l l u s i o n m e n t o f Le C o l l e c t i f L'Oeil Vert in the super-

s t r u c t u r a l ideology o f the FEPACI helps to c l a r i f y the e x t e n t to which

i t had f a i l e d to i n t e g r a t e the means of production in the t o t a l l i b e r a ­

t io n o f African cinema. Thus, on the s u p e r s t r u c t u r a l l e v e l , Francophone

filmmakers have put a l o t o f p r e ss u re on t h e i r governments and on France

to improve the conditions o f production and d i s t r i b u t i o n . I t i s also

 88

c l e a r here t h a t the filmmakers ar e dynamic, p i o n e e r in g , and inventive.

To be sure o f these s u p e r s t r u c t u r a l q u a l i t i e s , i t i s enough to look a t

Sembene's o r ig i n a l use o f Wolof in Mandabi (1968) and his a t t a c k on Islam

in Ceddo (1976), D j i b r i l Diop Mambetti's e d i t i n g s t y l e in Touki-Bouki,

Dikongue P ip a 's camera angles and mise-en-scene in Muna Moto (1975),

C i s s e ' s s y n th e s is between t r a d i t i o n and modernity in Baara (1978) and

Finye.

But on an i n f r a s t r u c t u r a l l e v e l , where the fo rc es of production and

the means o f production are concerned, i t is c l e a r t h a t the filmmakers

have not done a s u b s t a n t i a l r e s e a r c h . The number o f cameramen, e l e c t r i c ­

i a n s , soundmen, and e d i t o r s i s not i n c r e a s i n g p r o p o r t i o n a l l y with t h a t of

directors. For the most p a r t , a f t e r the d i r e c t o r i a l d u t i e s , French man­

power is used to f i n i s h th e f ilm s . A look a t the t o o l s of production

a l s o shows t h a t the filmmakers u s u a ll y acc ep t equipment without thinking

of t h e i r s p e c i f i c needs. For example, the 35mm cameras with c o l o r and

f a s t film stock ar e used in s p i t e o f t h e i r high c o s t and r e l a t i v e unwield-

liness. In t h i s reg ard , Sembene's candid response to the cr ucial iss ues

o f 35mm versus 16mm i s r e v e a li n g :

Now, as f a r as 16mm or 35mm i s concerned, i t

v a r ie s according to the filmmaker. I t i s t r u e
t h a t I have always worked in 35mm, but i t was
j u s t chance t h a t t h a t happened because I have
a 35mm camera. On the o t h e r hand, we have
found a new method. The young people whom we
have t r a i n e d l i k e 16mm c o lo r because i t i s much
more mobile, the crew i s s m a l l e r , and i t can
be blown up to 35mm. 24

The young filmmakers Sembene i s r e f e r r i n g to are none o t h e r s than

Cheik N'Gaido Ba (S enegal), Sanou Kollo (Upper V o l t a ) , Lancine Fadiga

(Ivory Coast), and many oth er s who got t o g e t h e r to c r e a t e Le C o l l e c t i f

 89

L'Oeil V e r t. I t is hard to understand why an a s t u t e man such as Sembene

does not get r i d of his 35mm f o r a 16mm which wi ll cut in more than h a l f

the c o s t o f his long awaited f il m , Samori.

The FEPACI is to be c r e d i t e d f o r the d i s i n t e g r a t i o n of such fo re ign

monopolies as the COMACICO and SECMA and the c r e a t i o n o f natio na l cinemas

and such in te r A f r ic a n o rg a n i z a t io n s as the f e s t i v a l s and the d i s t r i b u t i o n

and production u n i t s as the CIDC and the CIPRO Films. Moreover, the

FEPACI has co n tr ib u te d to world cinemas by c r e a t i n g a Pan - A fr i c a n ist and

l i b e r a t i o n i s t cinema toward the t o t a l independence o f A f rica. I t is

t h e r e f o r e to be hoped t h a t the young, such as Le C o l l e c t i f L'Oeil V e r t ,

will in co r p o rate the to o l s o f production as a r e a l i s t i c economic f a c t o r

in f il m production. In colonial times , L.A. N otcu tt , with his Bantu Film

Experiment, invented an economically l i b e r a t e d cinema, although i t was

25
racist. Rouch, to o , made s t y l i s t i c and economic breakthroughs with his

16mm camera in A f rica. F i n a l l y , in Latin America, Sol anas and Gettino give

an important place to the 16mm or even much l e s s expensive and p r a c t i c a l

2g
cameras in t h e i r d e f i n i t i o n o f Third Cinema or a l t e r n a t i v e cinema.

African filmmakers, too, i f they want to be l i b e r a t e d , must do more r e ­

search i n to the t o o l s o f production.

 90

Notes

V a u l i n S. Vieyra, "Propos su r le Cinema A f r i c a i n , " in Presence

A f r i c a i n e , No. 23, 1958, pp. 114-115.
n
Blaise Senghor, "Pour un authentique cinema A f r i c a i n , " in Presence
A f r i c a i n e , No. 49, 1964, p. 109.

V i m i t e Bassori, "Un cinema mort-ne?" in Presence A f r i c a i n e , No. 49,

1964, pp. 111-114.

Vean-Rene Debrix, "Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , " in Afrique Contemporaine,

No. 40, Nov.-Dec. 1968, p. 6.
5
OCAM is an economic and c u l t u r a l o r g a n iz a ti o n grouping the follow­
ing Francophone African c o u n t r i e s : Senegal, Mali, Mauretania, Guinea,
Ivory Coast, Upper Volta, N iger, Benin, Toga, Cameroun, Gabon, Tchad, and
the Central African Republic. For a c r i t i q u e o f OCAM, see B r ig e t te
Nouaille-Degorge, "OCAM: An Outdated O r g a n iz a tio n ," in UFAHAMU, Vol. 5,
No. 2, 1974, pp. 135-147.

®Ferid Boughedir in Afriqu e Noire, Quel Cinema?, P a r is : Actes du

Collogue U n i v e r s ite P a r is 10 Nanterre, Dec. 1981, p. 63.
•7

P i e r r e Pommier, Cinema e t Developpement en Afrique Noire Francophone,

P a r is : Editions A. Pedone, 1974, p. 153.

®Ferid Boughedir in Afriqu e Noire, Quel Cinema?, p. 63.

V e r i d Boughedir, "La ( t r o p ) longue marche des c i n e a s t e s A f r i c a i n s , "

in CinemAction No. 26, 1983, pp. 156-157.

10I b i d . , p. 155.

^ I b i d . , p. 156.

12Guy Hennebelle, "La Charte d 1Alger du Cinema A f r i c a i n , " in Afrique

L i t t ^ r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 49, (Special I s s u e : "Cine'astes d'Afrique
N oire"), 1978, p. 165.

^ F e r i d Boughedir, "La ( t r o p ) longue marche des c i n e a s t e s A f r i c a i n s , "

p. 157.
 ^ F e r i d Boughedir, in Afrique Noire, Quel Cinema?, p. 65.

15I b i d . , p. 65.

16I b i d . , p. 65.

^ F e r i d Boughedir, "Le^nouveau credo des c i n e a s t e s A f r ic a in s : le

Manifeste de Niamey" in CinemAction No. 26, p. 168.

18
See note 5 on the member c o u n tr ie s of OCAM.

19 *
Ferid Boughedir, Le nouveau c r e d o . . . , " p. 172.

20Teshome G abrie l, Third Cinlma in the Third World: The Ae sthetics

of L i b e r a t i o n , Ann Arbor: UMI Research P ress , 1982, p. 107.
pI
Tahar Cheriaa, "Le cinema a f r i c a i n e t les 'r e d u c t e u r s de t o t e s ' , "
in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e No. 49, p. 9.
pp
Ferid Boughedir, "La ( tr o p ) longue m a r c h e . . . , " p. 158.
po
Tahar Cheriaa, "Le cinema a f r i c a i n e t l e s 'r e d u c t e u r s de t e t e s ' , "
p. 8.
OA
Teshome G a b r i e l , Third Cinema in the Third World: The Aes thet ic s
of L i b e r a t i o n , p. 115.

25
Fernando Sol anas e t a l , Cine Cultura .y d es c o l o n iz a c io n , Buenos
Aires: Siglo 21 e d i t o r e s , 1973.
 92

Chapter VI

THE SITUATION OF NATIONAL AND INTERNATIONAL

FILM PRODUCTION IN FRANCOPHONE AFRICA

The h i s t o r y of nationa l f ilm production in Francophone Africa began

with the independence o f the c o u n tr ie s in the e a r l y s i x t i e s . The f i r s t

equipment f o r f il m production and e x h i b i t i o n was received as g i f t s from

t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n tr ie s de sir ous o f i n i t i a t i n g economic and

c u l t u r a l t i e s with the newly independent c o u n t r i e s . I t was in t h i s vein

t h a t th e United S ta t e s of America gave a s e l f - c o n t a i n e d movie van to the

Republic o f Togo as a means o f c o n g r a t u l a t in g t h i s country f o r becoming

independent.^ Guinea and Mali received equipment from such e a s t e r n bloc

c o u n t r ie s as Poland, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. In 1966, West

Germany o f fe r e d Guinea l a b o r a t o r i e s and o t h e r equipment f o r 35mm product-

. 2
ion.

This i s not to imply t h a t France played l i t t l e r o l e in the develop­

ment o f national f ilm production in i t s former c o lo n ie s . I t simply i n d i ­

ca te s t h a t nationa l f ilm production in Francophone Africa grew out of the

need to produce indigenous news reels, educational films and propaganda.

As an independence phenomenon, th e h i s t o r y of production als o began with

the withdrawal o f France from these c o u n tr ie s in the l a t e f i f t i e s and

early s ix t i e s . Thus, with the advent o f s e l f - r u l e , a l l the c o u n t r ie s

became equipped with minimal production apparatus such as 16mm cameras,

sound-p ick er s, e l e c t r i c a l cords and l i g h t s , f i l m s to c k , vans, and pro­

jectors. The filmmakers and t e c h n ic ia n s were u s u a ll y from the c o u n tr ie s

 93
which had donated the equipment, and the p o s t- pro ductio n also took place

in the donating c o u n t r ie s .

In t h i s c h a p te r , I wi ll show f i r s t the manner in which France

3
reversed i t s colonial policy and became a c t i v e in her former colonies

in s e t t i n g up s k ele to n production s t r u c t u r e s f o r the making o f newsreels,

documentaries, and propaganda. I w ill then de scri be the s t r u c t u r e s of

na tional cinema in those Francophone c o u n tr ie s which have them. Finally,

I w i ll t a l k about th e Consortium I n t e r - A f r i c a i n de Production de film

(CIPROFILM) as an example o f i n t e r n a t i o n a l production in Francophone A frica .

The French African t e r r i t o r i e s were introduced to f il m a c t i v i t i e s

as e a r l y as 1905 when L ' a r r i v e e d'un t r a i n en gars de la C i o t a t and

L ' a r r o s e u r a r ro s e by th e Lumiere Brothers were ex h ib ite d in Dakar

(Senegal) by a French c i r c u s group and filmmakers. At the same time,

the f il m pio n eer , Georges Melies, shot s h o r t films in Dakar, two o f which,

Le marche de Dakar and Le Cake-walk des Nenres du Nouveau Cirque, can be

. - 4
seen a t the Cinematheque F r a n c a i s e . Since then , fo re ign d i s t r i b u t o r s

and producers developed f il m a c t i v i t i e s in Africa as a s eri ous i n d u s tr y .

The A fri cans , however, did not p a r t i c i p a t e as conscious h i s t o r y makers in

t h i s development o f f il m a c t i v i t i e s . They remained e i t h e r as consumers

o f fo re ign films or as o b j e c t s o f s t e r e o t y p i c a l images f o r commercial and

anth ro po logical filmmakers. The s i t u a t i o n was worse in Francophone

Africa where the Laval decree was a g a i n s t the African p a r t i c i p a t i o n in

5
d ec is io n s concerning f il m . As Rouch saw i t , the French were f a r behind

the B r i t i s h and the Belgians in involving t h e i r s u b je c ts in f ilm a c t i v i ­

ties. Citin g Ghana, a former B r i t i s h colony, and Ivory Coast, a former

French colony, two c o u n tr ie s with comparable economies and p o p ulations,

 94

Rouch s t a t e d t h a t i t was a shame t h a t , in 1957, next to Ghana's more than

twenty power-wagons and 16mm p r o j e c t o r s , the Ivory Coast only had an old
g
16mm p r o j e c t o r which was not even f i t f o r f il m s .

However, in 1958, in an e f f o r t to maintain i t s a s s i m i l a t i o n i s t po licy

and slow down the independence process in the c o l o n i e s , th e French govern­

ment ordered the production o f films intended f o r A fri ca ns. As i s well

known to African h i s t o r i a n s , 1958 was the ye a r in which General de Gaulle

him se lf t r a v e l e d to Africa to seek the a l l i a n c e o f the Africans o f the

Communaute Francaise f o r an upcoming referendum on whether the colonies

should continue with France or break from her. Film, t o o , was suppposed

to play a propaganda r o le f o r the French government in 1958. I t was in

t h i s vein t h a t P i e r r e Fourre, a co o r d in a t o r of film f o r the c o l o n i e s , was

asked to produce a s e r i e s o f films e s p e c i a l l y made f o r African s. Accord­

i n g l y , Fourre produced Bonjour P a r i s , L'elevage du Mouton, Un p e t i t p o r t

de peche f r a n c a i s , e t c . , films which p r a is e d the French c i v i l i z a t i o n ,

know-how, and beauty. According to Rouch, th ese films intended f o r

Africans were very simple, in an elementary French, and rem inisce nt of

the B r i t i s h co lonial f i l m s , such as Mister B r i t i s h a t Home, which had

been made ten years e a r l i e r and which had been intended to teach the
7
Anglophone Africans the advantages o f being B r i t i s h .

However, F o u r r e 's experiment came a l i t t l e too l a t e . By September

1958, Guinea-Konakry became independent and in 1960 the o t h e r Franco­

phone c o u n tr ie s gained t h e i r autonor^y. I t is obvious, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t

the French colon ial production was not s i g n i f i c a n t enough to leave a

s t r u c t u r a l legacy of production which could be compared t o th e production

s t r u c t u r e s l e f t behind in Anglophone Africa and Zaire by the B r i t i s h and

 95

the Belgians. The French produced the films o f the Fourre experiment in

France and s e n t them to Africa f o r e x h i b i t i o n , unlike the B r i t i s h and the

Belgians who had production f a c i l i t i e s in t h e i r c o lo n ie s .

I t was not u n t i l the post-independence e r a , when, i r o n i c a l l y , France

was driven out o f A f r i c a , t h a t the Francophone c o u n tr ie s began to acquire

some s t r u c t u r e s o f f il m prod uction , given by France and o t h e r c o u n t r ie s .

The r e t u r n o f France to i t s former colonies in th e form o f th e i n s t a l l a ­

t i o n o f film production f a c i l i t i e s was s e rio u s enough to make the e f f o r t s

o f o t h e r t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n tr ie s seem t r i v i a l . The exception

to t h i s t r u t h might be West Germany which has demonstrated her commitment

to the development of African f ilm by bu i ld i n g autonomous production

f a c i l i t i e s in 35mm in both Anglophone and Francophone Africa in the coun-

Q
t r i e s o f Ghana and Guinea-Konakry.

In th e post-independence era o f the e a r l y s i x t i e s , th e Francophone

c o u n tr ie s were faced with the d i f f i c u l t y o f d i f f u s i n g information and ex­

p l a i n i n g t h e i r p o l i t i c a l programs to t h e i r populatio ns. The newspapers

were o f l i t t l e help s in ce fewer than one f i f t h o f the c i t i z e n s in any one

country could read. Film was, t h e r e f o r e , with the r a d i o , the b e s t tool

f o r reaching the people. However, unlike the radio s t a t i o n s which a ll

th e new governments a c q uir ed, f il m was not w ith in reach of the independ­

e n t c o u n t r ie s f o r two reasons: a l l the Francophone c o u n tr ie s lacked

production s t r u c t u r e s and the means to acq uire them. The c o u n tr ie s a ls o

lacked f ilm t e c h n ic ia n s and, in many i n s t a n c e s , d i r e c t o r s . I t was under

the se conditi ons t h a t any help from th e te c h n o l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n t r i e s ,

be i t donations o f movie p r o j e c t o r s or o f f e r s to f il m th e independent

c e l e b r a t i o n of a co untry, was welcomed.

 96

France understood b e t t e r than any o t h e r country the des per ate s i t u a ­

t i o n o f her former c o lo n ie s . She o f f e r e d them, ac co r d in g ly , a plan which

was to e li m i n a t e any competition from o t h e r i n d u s t r i a l i z e d c o u n t r ie s . In

1961, the French government asked the fo ur l a r g e s t producers o f filmed-

news in France, Les A c t u a l i t e s F r a n c a is e s , E c l a i r - J o u r n a l , Gaumdnt-Actual-

i t e s , Path£-Magazine, t o s u b s i d i z e a f i f t h one, the Consortium Audivisuel

I n te r n a t i o n a l ( C.A .I.) which would sign a c o n t r a c t with the former colonies

to produce t h e i r new sreels, educational f il m s , and documentaries. As the

C.A.I. was crea ted in Par is with p o s t-production f a c i l i t i e s , p a r t i a l pro­

duction equipment was s e t up in the c a p i t a l s o f the Francophone African

c o u n t r ie s . In t h i s manner, the newsreels were shot in the member c o u n tr ie s

in A f r ic a , s e n t to the C.A.I. in Paris to be f i n i s h e d , and sent back to

Africa f o r p r o j e c t i o n . The filmmakers and t e c h n ic ia n s were u s u all y employ­

ees of the A c t u a l i t e s Fran ca ise s and o t h e r such o rg a n iz a tio n s t h a t sub­

s id i z e d the C.A.I. The c o s t of production was paid f o r by the French

government and the African c o u n t r ie s . According to Debrix, these a g r e e ­

ments were made on a commerical b a s i s , "France pays h a l f the cost of

producing the filmed-Af rican- new s, and she gets in r e t u r n h a l f the revenues

corresponding to her investment in the pr oduction. The system has worked

f o r f i f t e e n years (1962-1977) without a problem."9

As e a r l y as 1964, l a r g e l y because o f the C . A . I . , a l l the Francophone

c o u n t r ie s had a production s e c t io n a tta c h e d to t h e i r m i n i s t r i e s o f inform­

ation. As Rouch pointed o u t , thes e production s e c t i o n s included plans to

make f e a t u r e films and documentaries, even though t h e i r emphasis was to be

"films d ' a c t u a l i t e . " ^ ° Some c o u n tr ie s such as Niger, Ivory Coast, and

Mali i n v i t e d world famous d i r e c t o r s from Canada, France, and Holland to

 97

film documentaries and educational films f o r them. Rouch and Claude

J u t r a were i n v i t e d on several occasions to make films in Niger. Rouch

a l s o made films f o r Mali and the Ivory Coast. J u t r a made be N iger, jeune

republigue (1960), a coproduction by Niger and the Office National

Canadien du Film, to c e l e b r a t e the independence o f Niger. Such Canadien

masters of the documentary as Norman MacLaren, Michel B r a u l t , and J u t r a

were also involved in the making o f the f i r s t films o f Mustapha Alassance

from Niger. As e a r l y as 1961, Mali, to o , cr eated a Centre Malieh de

*
Cinema f o r th e " p o l i t i c a l education o f the c i t i z e n and th e worker."
11

The Malian government i n v i t e d J o r i s Ivens to t h i s c e n t e r to make Demain a

Nanguila, an educational f il m about the evolu ti on of a young man and his

country. This f il m i s considered by Rouch as the b e s t o f i t s kind made

12
by f o r e i g n e r s on Afri ca.

However, before showing how some c o u n tr ie s developed national f il m

produc tion, i t is important to p o i n t out the l i m i t a t i o n s of the newsreel

production c e n te r s o f th e m i n i s t r i e s o f information which led to the

s ta g n a tio n of th e equipment and personnel in many c o u n t r i e s . F irs t of a l l ,

i t i s c r u c ia l to understand, as Rouch remarked, t h a t the methodology o f

producing newsreels is d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f producing r e g u l a r f ilm s ,

although the newsreel production can provide the f ilm t e c h n ic ia n with the

t r a i n i n g necessary f o r making film s . The newsreel production ope ra tes on

dea dlines which r e q u i r e a d i v i s i o n of l a b o r and a s o p h i s t i c a t e d technolog­

ical apparatus f o r sh ooti ng, e d i t i n g , and recordin g. These exigencies of

dea dlines and s p e c i a l i z e d technology make the newsreel production seem

mechanical while the production o f r e g u l a r films involved individ ua l de­

c i s i o n s and c r e a t i v e a c t s . These d i f f e r e n c e s led Rouch to argue t h a t

 98 ■

"because they did not understand the d i f f e r e n c e between the methods of

producing newsreels and r e g u l a r f i l m s , many African governments employed

young and t a l e n t e d filmmakers in the m i n i s t r i e s of information to make

newsreels, thus d r iv i n g thes e filmmakers to an impasse as f a r as a r t i s t i c

13
ex pr ession was concerned."

A Francophone African filmmaker working f o r the m in is t r y o f informa­

t i o n o f h i s / h e r country was f r u s t r a t e d in o t h e r ways as w e l l. Because

he/she only had s k e le to n production f a c i l i t i e s in Africa f o r the shooting

o f images and the l a b o r a t o r i e s and e d i t i n g t a b l e s were a t the C.A.I. in

P a r i s , h i s / h e r r o l e was reduced to t h a t o f d i r e c t o r of photography. To

put i t in B a s s o r i 's words, the filmmaker a t the m i n i s tr y o f information

was "doomed to covering o f f i c i a l and p o l i t i c a l meetings. In t h i s manner,

14
he s ta g n a te s and f a l l s in a b u r e a u c r a ti c r o u ti n e t h a t i s alar m ing ."

Another predicament o f the filmmaker a t the m i n i s t r i e s of informa­

t i o n was t h a t fo re ign d i r e c t o r s were c a l l e d to make documentaries and

f e a t u r e films in h i s / h e r plac e. The use o f fo re ign d i r e c t o r s was some­

times j u s t i f i e d by the c o n t r a c t s o f co-production between Africa and the

t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n t r ie s which signed up t h e i r filmmakers and

te c h n ic ia n s as p a r t o f t h e i r end o f the c o n t r a c t . In a co-production

between the C.A.I. and i t s member c o u n tr ie s in A f r ic a , f o r example, French

d i r e c t o r s and t e c h n i c i a n s o f such sponsoring o rg a n iz a t io n s as Les Actual­

i t e s Francaises were used.

Another reason fo re ign d i r e c t o r s were employed by th e m i n i s t r i e s o f

information was the b e l i e f t h a t they were th e only e xperts in the f i e l d .

The m i n i s t r i e s of information v a l o r iz e d them over t h e i r African c ou nte r­

p a r t s , and assured themselves t h a t a documentary or a f e a t u r e f il m made

 99

by these fo reig n e xperts would be an i n s t a n t s ucc es s. I t i s in t h i s vein

t h a t a Frenchman, Claude Vermoel made Yao (1968) f o r the Ivory Coast. As

r e c e n t l y as 1982, th e P r e s i d e n t o f Gabon, Bernard Bongo, c a l l e d Serge

Gainsbourg, a c o n t r o v e r s i a l filmmaker in France, to make a f ilm c a lle d

Equateur. Gainsbourg was seen by many French people as a maker of porno­

graphic f il m s . Unaware o f t h i s as p ect of Gainbourg's a r t , Bongo gave him

a huge budget (200 m i l l i o n French f r a n c s ) to make Equateur, hoping t h a t

15
the f ilm would be p u b l i c i t y f o r Gabon.

C l e a r ly , such as p ects as the dependence o f the African newsreel pro­

duction on the C.A.I. in P a r i s , the d i f f e r e n c e s between the production of

newsreels and of f e a t u r e s , the r e s o r t to f o re ig n d i r e c t o r s f o r the making

o f documentaries and educational f i c t i o n a l films must be taken in t o account

when one co nsiders the reasons why natio na l production did not grow n a tu ­

r a l l y out o f the newsreel production s t r u c t u r e c r eated by the C.A.I. in

Francophone c o u n t r i e s . Because they were r e l u c t a n t to re-examine these

i s s u e s , some c o u n t r ie s considered f il m as an expensive hobby which was

b e s t l e f t in the hands of independent African filmmakers and t h e i r spons­

ors in France. This b e l i e f led such c o u n tr ie s as Niger, Senegal, and

Cameroon to encourage independent filmmakers with occasional government

s u b si d ie s and/or tax r e l i e f , and never to attempt to i n s t a l l national

production f a c i l i t i e s . With the advent o f national t e l e v i s i o n s , o t h e r

co u n tr ie s such as Ivory Coast, Gabon, and Congo, placed f il m production

as a s u b s i d i a r y to t e l e v i s i o n s t a t i o n s . A t h i r d group o f Francophone

co u n tr ie s such as Tchad, Mauretania, Benin, e t c . , did nothing concr ete to

r a i s e national f il m production above the level o f the newsreels of the

m i n i s t r i e s of inform atio n. Only.such c o u n tr ie s as Guinea, Upper Volta,

 100

and Mali made e f f o r t s to c r e a t e nationa l s t r u c t u r e s o f pr oduction. How­

ev e r , as i t will be seen l a t e r in t h i s stu dy, these natio na l s t r u c t u r e s ,

too, contain some of the same c o n t r a d i c t io n s as mentioned in the newsreel

production ce n te r s o f th e m i n i s t r i e s o f inform ation.

In t h i s p a r t o f my s tu d y , I will focus on the d i f f e r e n t types o f

production which developed out o f th e f a c i l i t i e s o f the newsreels. Be­

cause of the lack of the t o o l s , o f produc tion, th e f i n a n c i a l means and the

li m i te d number o f q u a l i f i e d t e c h n i c i a n s , Francophone African c o u n tr ie s

employed complex and d i f f e r e n t s t r a t e g i e s in o rder to g e t access to the

use o f the seventh a r t . However, i t i s p o s s i b l e to t r a c e the evolutio n

o f nationa l cinemas along t h r e e l i n e s in the former French c o lo n ie s .

F i r s t th er e is the l i n e o f the Francophone c o u n t r ie s which p r a c t i c e

l a i s s e z - f a i r e o r a l i b e r a l economic system. The m ajori ty of the former

French colonies belong in t h i s ca teg ory. They ofte n view n a t i o n a l i z a ­

t i o n o f production as a r e p r e s s io n o f f r e e e n t e r p r i s e . Because o f t h i s

negative connotation o f the concept o f n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n and the lack of

autonomous f a c i l i t i e s o f pr oductio n, some c o u n t r ie s in t h i s category have

y e t to go beyond the making of newsreels. However, because o f the

pr ess ure on the governments by the FEPACI and local filmmakers, two types

o f s ta t e - s p o n s o r e d production emerged in some o f the s o - c a l l e d l i b e r a l

c o u n t r ie s . The f i r s t type in Senegal, Niger, and Cameroon was c h a r a c t e r ­

ized by governments f a c i l i t a t i n g the production o f films with s u b sid ie s

in one form or another . The o t h e r type in Ivory Coast, Gabon, and,

r e c e n t l y , Niger and Congo c o n s is t e d in th e production and co-production

o f occasional films by the nati o nal t e l e v i s i o n .

The t h i r d type o f production which emerged in Francophone Africa i s

 101

a s s o c ia t e d with Guinea, Mali, and Upper Volta, c o u n t r ie s which had defied

16
economic t r a d i t i o n s i n h e r i t e d from France. These c o u n tr ie s attempted

very e a r l y to n a t i o n a l i z e pr od uctio n, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n , as

they made plans to c r e a t e n a tio n a l cinemas. However, most o f the plans

did not m a t e r i a l i z e f o r reasons I hope to explain l a t e r . Because of the

abortio n o f some of t h e i r plans (Guinea with her f a c i l i t i e s o f production

in 16 and 35mm has produced fewer films than Ivory Coast and Senegal), i t

i s hard to determine which p o l i t i c s o f production i s the r i g h t course for

developing national cinemas. However, an in-de pth look a t the s t r u c t u r e

o f each one of them may help answer the q u es ti o n .

When one looks f i r s t a t those c o u n tr ie s which did not have t e l e v i s i o n

f a c i l i t i e s in the s i x t i e s o r a production s t r u c t u r e o f another kind to

enable them to make films on the s p o t, but t h a t managed to have nation al

f il m s , one n o tic e s the following f a c t s about them: they depended on the

tech no logical support o f France and they drew too much money from govern­

ment funds. Senegal, Niger, and Cameroon, which ar e the b e s t examples of

t h i s ca te gory, s t i l l do not have production s t r u c t u r e s . Yet they have

more film s than o t h e r Francophone c o u n t r ie s and t h e i r filmmakers ar e among

the b e s t known in A f ric a . As I showed in the ch apter on Fra nc e's c o n t r i b u ­

t i o n to African f ilm prod uction, the Cooperation and the C.A.I. played

important r o l e s in producing the films from these c o u n t r i e s , but the

governments, too, had p o l i t i c s o f production which, although i t did not

involve f a c i l i t i e s o f pr oduction, kept the filmmakers busy. For example,

according to Mahama Tra ore , p r e s i d e n t o f the Association des Cineastes

S e n e g a l a i s , a l l the films made in Senegal, between 1972 and 1983, were

s ubsidized in one way or another by the g o v e r n m e n t.^ In Cameroon, the

 102

Fonds d ' a i d e a 1 ' i n d u s t r i e cinematQgraphigue, which was funded by tax

revenues from f il m import and t i c k e t s a l e s , helped to produce some

18
f il m s . Up u n t i l r e c e n t l y , when Niger acquired a t e l e v i s i o n which co­

produced some f il m s , the I n s t i t u t de Recherche en Scien ce s,:Humaines of

the Ministry o f Education, and th e Centre Culture! Franco-Nigerien were

19
the main co-producers o f f il m in Niger.

One could continue c i t i n g th e d i f f e r e n t ways th ese c o u n t r i e s , w it h ­

out national production equipment, managed to have record numbers of

films financed f o r t h e i r filmmakers or f o r educational and documentary

purposes. However, such a task would be r e p e t i t i o u s and unnecessary in

view of the f a c t t h a t th e r e a d e r would have a c l e a r e r sense of the s i t u a ­

t i o n i f examined, f o r an example, in only one country. Such an examination

could focus on the lack o f production s t r u c t u r e which i s common to a l l

th e s e c o u n tr ie s and which determines the turn to France f o r technological

and /or f i n a n c i a l a s s i s t a n c e f o r the production of t h e i r fil m s . Because

Senegal leads the s o - c a l l e d l i b e r a l governments in th e number of films

she has fin a nced, the h i s t o r y o f how she acquired national f i l m s , which

ar e produced in a d i f f e r e n t tec hnologica l and a r t i s t i c s e t t i n g than the

newsreels of th e m i n i s t r i e s o f info rm ation, is a p p r o p r i a t e f o r providing

the re ader with a c l e a r view o f th e s i t u a t i o n . Hopefully, too, the

r e a d e r w ill be saved from the t r o u b l e of going through the endless s u rf a c e

d i f f e r e n c e s in f in a n c in g s t r a t e g i e s in th e s e c o u n t r ie s where the p o l i t i c s

o f production i s not supported by f a c i l i t i e s o f prod uction.

Senegal was the f i r s t Francophone country to sign a newsreel product­

ion agreement with the C.A.I. According to Vieyra who was head o f Les

A c t u a l i t e s Serie gala ise s, the agreement was such t h a t th e C.A.I. provided

 103

Senegal with a cameraman/reporter who was in charge o f filming the c u r re n t

even ts . The filmed events were sent to P aris to be developed and e d ite d

with o t h e r African and world events which were also provided by the C.A.I.

Vieyra explained t h a t the e d i t i n g and the added commentaries were done

according to the wishes o f the Ministry o f Information o f Senegal. "The

c o s t o f production was s p l i t h a l f and h a l f between the C.A.I. and Senegal.

The same agreement was l a t e r signed by the Ivory Coast, Dahomey, Togo,
20
Madagascar, Upper Volta, and Cameroon."

At f i r s t the C.A.I. was making two newsreels a month f o r the

Actualites Senegalaises. Vieyra s aid t h a t beginning in April 1962, the

demand was in cr ea se d to one newsreel a week. The t o t a l length o f the

f ilm was 250 meters, o f which 100 meters were devoted to Senegalese
21
news. However, even the one newsreel a week soon proved i n s u f f i c i e n t

because i t could not include a l l the a c t i v i t i e s which were deemed news­

worthy by the d i f f e r e n t m i n i s t r i e s . There was a l s o a need f o r educational

films and documentaries which could not be replaced by the newsreels.

F i n a l l y , one must not f o r g e t t h a t Senegal was the home of such pioneers

of African cinema as Blaise Senghor and Vieyra, who were a l l graduates

o f the French I n s t i t u t des Hautes Etudes Cinematographiques (IDHEC), and

22
who were anxious to make films in A f r i c a , now t h a t they were independent.

Les A c t u a l i t e s Senegalaises made p lan s, t h e r e f o r e , to c r e a t e a

Service de Cinema which would be involved in producing and co-producing

documentaries. Vieyra argued t h a t the plans were f i r s t l im it e d to

23
documentaries because, a f t e r the new sreels, they were the l e a s t expensive.

Under the d i r e c t i o n o f Vieyra, h im se l f , several s h o r t films were financed

by th e Service de Cinema. They were film s on s pec ial t o p i c s which were

 104

financed by the Service de Cinema. They were films on s p ecia l t o p ic s

which were ordered by d i f f e r e n t branches o f the government. Vieyra

d i r e c t e d Une Nation e s t Nee (1961, 35mm c o lor) on th e ann iver sa ry c e l e ­

b r a t io n of the independence and Lamb (1963, 35mm c o lo r ) on w r e s t l i n g ,

which i s a popular s p o r t in Senegal. Vieyra also made f il m s , such as

Voyage P r e s i d e n t i e l en URSS (1962), which were on p r e s i d e n t i a l v i s i t s

and which were more l i k e newsreels than documentaries. Blaise Senghor,

too, d i r e c t e d a s h o r t f i l m , Grand Magal a Touba (1962, 35mm c o l o r ) , on

Islam, the most important r e l i g i o n in Senegal.

But un ti l the l a t e s i x t i e s when Sembene came on the scene, Senegal

did not give her own n a t i o n a l s the chance to d i r e c t f e a t u r e s and /or

major documentaries. I t was in t h i s sense t h a t Les A c t u a l i t e s Senegal­

a i s e s h ire d Ives Ciampi, a Frenchman, to d i r e c t Liber te I (1960). A

Franco-Senegalese production, th e f il m was to explore the c o n f l i c t s

between t r a d i t i o n and modernity. According to Debrix, the filmmaker

24
f a i l e d in t h i s r e s p e c t . Another Frenchman, dean-Claude Bonnardot,

was a l s o c a l l e d to d i r e c t a major documentary, Senegal ma pirogue (1962).

J u s t as the A c t u a l i t e s Senegalaises had to depend on the C.A.I. f o r the

p o s t-prod uctio n o f i t s newsreels and on French d i r e c t o r s f o r the making

of f e a t u r e s , th e Service de Cinema, t o o , depended on the French f a c i l i ­

t i e s o f production and p o s t- p r o d u c tio n . When th e Service de Cinema was

c r e a t e d to remedy the urgent need f o r documentaries and educational f i l m s ,

the p r o j e c t did not include the buying o f production f a c i l i t i e s which, in

the long run, would have saved Senegal a l o t of money. C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e ,

the Service de Cinema was l i t t l e more than a bank which financed films or

t r i e d to f in d f i n a n c i e r s f o r them. In i t s r o l e as a f i n a n c i e r , the
 105

S ervic e de Cinema generously spent th e money o f the d i f f e r e n t m i n i s t r i e s

to produce films with 35mm cameras and o th e r such expensive equipment

from France. In i t s double r o l e as a f i n a n c i e r and an a g e n t, i t co­

produced with th e French m in is tr y o f Cooper ation, through th e Bureau du

Cin&na and the C . A . I . , the films o f such Senegalese d i r e c t o r s as Sembene,

Babakar Samb, and Vieyra.

C le a r ly , the emergence o f Senegalese cinema in the l a t e s i x t i e s with

Sembene and Hahama Traore was due l e s s to the a v a i l a b i l i t y o f a s t r u c t u r e

provided by the Service de Cirifema and more to Fr an ce's w ill in g n e s s to

produce African film s . Although I have explained in an e a r l i e r chapter

some o f the n e o - c o l o n i a l i s t as pec ts o f such a French v e n t u r e , i t is

important to add here t h a t because French equipment o f production and

po s t-production were used by both the A c t u a l i t e s Senegalaises and the

Service de Cinema i t was c l e v e r o f France to have cr eated a system which

s y s t e m a t i c a l l y helped the production o f African films and, a t the same

tim e, kept such c o u n tr ie s as Senegal from having autonomous production

facilities. I n t e r e s t i n g l y enough, some independent filmmakers adapted

themselves to t h i s s i t u a t i o n and c r e a te d t h e i r own production companies,

without equipment of production and went d i r e c t l y to the Cooperation for

25
help. Thus, they were unw it tin g ly postponing th e day Senegal would be

independent from France in matters of equipment.

However, in the e a r l y s e v e n t i e s , the As so ciation des Cineastes Sene­

gal a i s began to r e t h i n k the r o le o f the Service de Cinema and to put

pr ess u re on t h e i r government to improve the con dit io ns o f production in

Senegal. The filmmakers' a c tio n was determined by se ve ral f a c t o r s .

D irectors such as Sembene had become d i s i l l u s i o n e d with fo re ign aid which

 106
26
they had r e a l i z e d was " t a i n t e d with p a te r n alism and n eo-colonialis m ."

Because o f the increase in the number of African d i r e c t o r s , France, t o o ,

was beginning to f in d i t d i f f i c u l t to produce a l l t h e i r f il m s . Finally,

the Pan-African Federation o f Filmmakers had stepped up th e press ure on

African governments to l i b e r a t e pro duct io n, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n

27
o f f ilm in Africa.

Bowing to the p r e s s u r e , the government c r e a t e d , in 1973, a Societe

National de Cinema (SNC) w i t h i n . t h e m in is t r y o f c u l t u r e . The purpose of

the SNC was to encourage natio na l production in f i c t i o n and documentary

f il m s . Filmmakers were requested to submit s c r i p t s on t o p ic s ranging

from j u v e n i l e delinquency and urban problems to l i t e r a c y campaigns. The

b e s t s c r i p t s were s e l e c t e d by a group o f re ad ers who were designed by the

28
p r e s i d e n t of th e NSC. In t h i s manner, s i x f e a t u r e films were produced
29
and/or co-produced by the SNC in 1974. They were Xala by Sembene,

l e Bra celet de Bronze by Tidiane Aw, Baks by Momar Thiam, Njanqaan by

Mahama Traore, L1Option by Thierno Sow, and Borom Xam Xam by Maurice Dores,

a French p s y c h i a t r i s t . Because o f t h i s unprecedented number o f films pro­

duced by a na tional o r g a n iz a ti o n in one y e a r , 1974 is considered as the

golden age of Senegalese cinema.

The SNC a l s o worked with the As so ciation des Cineastes Seneqalais in

manners which enabled young filmmakers to d i r e c t s h o r t f ilm s . According

to Mahama Traore, the SNC and the filmmakers1 a s s o c i a t i o n agreed to give

the newcomers the opp o rtu nit y to express themselves by a s sig n in g them to

the s h o r t f ilm p r o j e c t s o f the d i f f e r e n t m i n i s t r i e s , i n s te a d of l e t t i n g

30
the m i n i s t r i e s choose t h e i r own d i r e c t o r s . I t was in t h i s way t h a t new

and t a l e n t e d d i r e c t o r s , as Moussa B a t h i ly , Ben Diogaye Beye, and Cheikh

 107

N'Gaido Ba, made t h e i r f i r s t film s . Moussa B a th il y , who had been the

a s s i s t a n t o f Sembene Ousmane, had s in ce become the master of the docu­

mentary form with such priz e-w inning films as Tiyabu Biru (The Circum­

c i s i o n ) (1978) and Le C e r t i f i c a t d 1Indi gence (1981), a documentary on

h o s p i t a l s and the c o r ru p ti o n o f the medical p rofe s sion in Dakar. Cheikh

Gaido Ba became the l e a d e r of Le C o l l e c t i f 1 *Qei 1 V e r t , an a s s o c i a t i o n

o f young African filmmakers who were defying the FEPACI and reth in k in g
31
the s t r u c t u r e of production o f African film .

However, the SNC, t o o , l i k e th e preceding o r g a n iz a ti o n s in charge

of Senegalese cinema, did not ac quire the equipment of production as

p a r t o f i t s p o l i t i c s o f developing natio na l production. The SNC merely

took money from governmental budgets which i t gave to filmmakers. With

t h i s money, th e filmmakers bought f ilm stocks from P a r i s , ren ted cameras

and o t h e r production equipment from t h e r e , i f they d i d n ' t have them, and

sometimes used French f il m t e c h n i c i a n s . The s tu d io s of Par is were also

used f o r f ilm process in g, e d i t i n g and sound-synchronizing.

Because only t h re e f i l m s , Xala, Le B r acele t de Bronze, and Njangaan

were commercially s ucc es sfu l fromthe films produced by the SNC, the pro­

j e c t was phased out by 1976. The co nten ts o f Xala and Njangaan, two of

the most successful films made under the SNC, were a l s o burdensome to th e

government, and p a r t l y instrumental in shaping the d e c is io n to sh ut down

th e SNC. Several p ortio ns o f both films were cut out before they were
32
shown to Senegalese audiences. Njangaan i s an indictment of Islam

which i s the main r e l i g i o n in Senegal; Xala d e p i c t s the impotence of

p o litic a l leaders.

Besides th e f a c t s t h a t the SNC a t e the government's money and produced

 108

films t h a t made th e lead er s uncomfortable, i t was als o in c o n f l i c t with

a no ther governmental s o c i e t y , the Society d 1Importation de D is tr i b u t i o n

e t d 1E x p l o i t a t i o n Cinfematographique (SIDEC). Where the SNC accused the

SIDEC f o r not promoting and d i s t r i b u t i n g i t s f i l m s , the SIDEC charged

the SNC f o r i n t e r f e r i n g with d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n , and thus i l l e -

33
g a i l y a p p r o p r i a t i n g the funds o f the SIDEC. The c o n f l i c t could have

been e a s i l y avoided had the government put t o g e t h e r the two or g a n iz a tio n s

under one m in is tr y i n s t e a d o f having th e SNC a t the Ministry o f Culture

and the SIDEC a t th e Commerce in charge o f d i s t r i b u t i n g p rim arily foreign

fil m s . Had they been conceived t o g e t h e r , the SIDEC would be d i s t r i b u t i n g

fo re ign films with a long range plan o f c r e a t i n g a subsidy from the tax

revenues to buy equipment, produce, promote and d i s t r i b u t e n ational fil m s .

In e f f e c t , the SIDEC could have been s u b s id i z in g the SNC. In Francophone

c o u n tr ie s which have l i b e r a l economic systems, only Cameroon, with the

Fonds d'flide a I 1I n d u s t r i e Cinematographique (FODIC), dispos es o f such a

subsidy funded by ta x revenues from f ilm import and e x h i b i t i o n . However,

the FODIC, to o , had not managed to ac quire the f a c i l i t i e s o f production

in Cameroon. I t i s i r o n i c t h a t France, which is the model o f the so-

c a l l e d l i b e r a l economic system which the Francophone c o u n tr ie s had adopt­

ed, had her own Centre National de Cinematographic (CNC) which subsid ized

the production and d i s t r i b u t i o n of French film s . Under the e x i s t i n g

s i t u a t i o n in Senegal, the SNC took the government money to produce f il m s ,

and the SIDEC a t the m i n i s t r y of Commerce, took the tax revenues from

d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n which i t spe nt elsewhere.

A fter the d i s s o l u t i o n o f the SNC, th e government t r i e d to c o n t r ib u t e

to natio na l production by co -si gning d i r e c t o r s a t banks. The A c t u a lite s

 109

Senegalaises and the Service de Cinema also resumed t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s as

producers o f s h o r t film s . Furthermore, according to Tra or e, th e r e i s a

new production plan devised by the government and the filmmakers which,

when unveiled, w ill have important consequences both in Senegal and the
34
r e s t o f West A fri ca . Perhaps t h i s plan involves acquir ing equipment

of production and s u b s i d i e s from d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n which w ill

be used to help filmmakers. Meanwhile, production has dropped in Senegal.

Some filmmakers ar e r e t u r n i n g to the Cooperation f o r a s s i s t a n c e ; o t h e r s ,

such as Safi Faye and B a th ily , ar e t r y i n g co-production with the Swedish

and German t e l e v i s i o n s .

When one turn s to th e s t r u c t u r e of production in o t h e r l i b e r a l

c o u n t r ie s such as Ivory Coast, Gabon, and Niger, e t c . , one no tic e s t h a t

they f i r s t depended on s i m i l a r s t r u c t u r e s as Senegal and Cameroon, and

when they acquired natio na l t e l e v i s i o n f a c i l i t i e s , they used them to

produce fil m s . Unlike o th e r Francophone c o u n tr ie s who did not have t e l e ­

v is i o n u n t i l the m id -s e v e n tie s , both Ivory Coast and Gabon had t e l e v i s i o n

f a c i l i t i e s as e a r l y as 1963. One ye a r a f t e r the c r e a t i o n of the Ivorian

t e l e v i s i o n , Timite Bassori made f o r i t Sur La dune de la S olitude (1964),

a s h o r t f i l m in 16mm which t o l d the s to r y of Mamy Water, a famous myth in

West Af ric a about a s i r e n . Since t h a t tim e, the S oc iete Ivorienne du

Cinema has been known f o r making i t s important films with the equipment

and the manpower o f t e l e v i s i o n . In Gabon, the films of P ierre -M ar ie Dong,

Carrefour humain (1969), Sur l e S e n t i e r du Requiem (1971), and those of

P hi lippe Mory, Les tam-tams se sont tus (1972), to c i t e only t h e s e , were

produced with the f a c i l i t i e s of the national t e l e v i s i o n . Recently,

Niger, t o o , had put the t e l e v i s i o n in charge o f f il m production. Since

 110

then , i t has produced Kankamba (1982) by Moustapha Alassans, Si le s

c a v a l i e r s (1982) by Mahamane Bakabe, Le medeciri de Gafire (1983) by

Moustafa Diop, and co-produced Sar ra ounia, tine r ein e a f r i c a i n e ( f o r t h -

or
coming) by Med Hondo.

T elevisio n was g r aduall y placed in charge of film production in

these c o u n t r ie s f o r several reasons. For economic reasons and because

o f t h e small number of t e c h n ic ia n s a v a i l a b l e in A f r i c a , the c o u n t r ie s

employed filmmakers as cameramen and d i r e c t o r s o f news production a t

the t e l e v i s i o n , and o c c a s io n a l ly gave them the means to author films

which were a l s o used by the t e l e v i s i o n . By thus employing t h e f i l m ­

makers, the governments reduced the expenses which had been prev io us ly

inc urre d by the natio na l production cente rs which had replaced the

c e n t e r s f o r producing newsreels. This was the case in Ivory Coast where

the Soci^te Ivorienne du Cinema ( S . I . C . ) was seen as a "budget-divor e",

e a t e r - o f - b u d g e t , and d iss o lv e d to c l e a r the way f o r the c r e a t i o n of a

36
new s o c ie ty which would merge f ilm and t e l e v i s i o n .

Another reason th e t e l e v i s i o n c e n t e r s produced some films was the

r e l u c t a n c e of the governments to acknowledge film production as a serio us

industry. Such an acknowledgement would e n t a i l a r e s t r u c t u r i n g o f the

twin s e c t o r s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n to allow the national films

to recoup t h e i r c o s ts of production. Consequently, the governments p r e ­

f e r r e d to produce films through the t e l e v i s i o n f a c i l i t i e s and not worry

about th e problems o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . This way they avoid­

ed c r e a t i n g autonomous n ati o n al production c e n t e r s , the s u rv iv al o f which

would depend upon n a t i o n a l i z i n g d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . I t was no

a c c i d e n t , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t a f t e r a l l the press ure e x er ted by the FEPACI

 Ill

on governments to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n , e x h i b i t i o n , and pr oduc tion,

Ivory Coast, Gabon, and Niger did not comply f u l l y . Of co ur se , o th e r

c o u n t r i e s , too, were r e l u c t a n t to comply with a l l th e recommendations o f

the FEPACI, but because they d i d n ' t have t e l e v i s i o n f a c i l i t i e s , they

d e a l t with the is s ues o f national production in a d i f f e r e n t manner.

In o rder to give a c l e a r idea of how t e l e v i s i o n became important in

the production o f f i l m , i t i s important h e r e , to o , to focus on the dev el ­

opment o f film production in one country as an example. Ivory Coast i s a

good choice because she does not only lead the o t h e r c o u n tr ie s o f t h i s

category in the number o f films produced by her t e l e v i s i o n , but she a ls o

has had a t e l e v i s i o n s in c e 1963. Furthermore, the h i s t o r y of production

i s more complex in Ivory Coast because she has had both a nationa l pro­

duction c e n t e r and a t e l e v i s i o n which produced and co-produced films f o r

Iv orians and fo re ig n d i r e c t o r s . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , an understanding of

the reasons which led Ivory Coast t o d i s s o l v e the f il m production c e n t e r

and put t e l e v i s i o n in charge o f producing film wi ll shed l i g h t on both

the advantages and l i m i t a t i o n s of a merging o f f ilm and t e l e v i s i o n .

Like Senegal, Ivory Coast enlarged her newsreel production f a c i l i ­

t i e s as e a r l y as 1960 to include a s e r v i c e de cinema which made document­

a r i e s and education s h o r t s . The d i r e c t o r s were from France and the films

v/ere s hot on o r d e r , ranging from such t o p ic s as p r e s i d e n t i a l v i s i t s and

independence c e l e b r a t i o n s to s p o r t a c t i v i t i e s , economic i n s t r u c t i o n ,
37
hygiene, and ethnography. The films were g e n e r a lly in 16mm and the post

production was done by th e C.A.I.

Soon a f t e r the c r e a t i o n o f s e r v i c e de cinema, however, i t was d i s ­

mantled in fav or o f a new production network which had more national

 112

ambitions, the Societe I v o r i e n n e d u Cinema ( S . I . C . ) . As a matter of f a c t ,

a young I v o rian , Timite Bassori , had j u s t re turn ed home a f t e r earning a

degree from th e Ecole P ra tique de Hautes Etudes Cin^matographiques in

Paris. Bassori assumed the management o f the S . I . C . and became one of

the f i r s t Ivorians t o d i r e c t f i l m s , w r i t e s c r i p t s , a s s i s t , and co-produce

fo reign d i r e c t o r s . According to the Belgian f il m h i s t o r i a n , Victor Bachy,

the purpose of the S . I . C . was f i r s t to continue the production of news­

r e e l s which i t sold to d i f f e r e n t government branches, to commercial

t h e a t e r s and to o t h e r c o u n t r i e s . The second p r o j e c t of the S . I . C . i n ­

cluded th e production o f s h o r ts on ed uc ation, info rm atio n, and propaganda.

38
F i n a l l y , the S . I . C . planned to help produce f e a t u r e s .
*
From 1962 to 1967, the production a t the S . I . C . was dominated by

French d i r e c t o r s . Only Bassori played a s i g n i f i c a n t r o l e as he wrote the

s c r i p t f o r Croyances e t Survivances (1965), d i r e c t e d by Yves Colmar; and

made Sixifeme Si 11 on (1966), a f il m c e l e b r a t i n g the s i x t h ann iver sa ry of

39
the independence. Bassori als o a s s i s t e d C h r is tia n - J a q u e in d i r e c t i n g

Le Gentlemen de Cocod.y, a co-production between the S . I . C . and France,

which s t a r r e d the famous French a c t o r , Jean Marais.

In 1963, one y ear a f t e r th e inau gu ration of the S . I . C . , the Ivory

Coast i n s t a l l e d t e l e v i s i o n f a c i l i t i e s with l a b o r a t o r i e s and s tu d io s in

16mm. Consequently, the S . I . C . l o s t Bassori to the t e l e v i s i o n where he

became the u n d e r - s e c r e ta r y o f programming. Bassori made t h re e s h o r t

documentaries (Les F o r e s t i e r s , L’Abidjan-Niger, and Amedee P i e r r e ) f o r

the t e l e v i s i o n in 1963, before d i r e c t i n g his f i r s t s h o r t f i c t i o n , Stir la

dune de l a s o l i t u d e . The t e l e v i s i o n competed with the S . I . C . in other

ways, as w e l l. In 1964, i t produced a two hour f i l m , Korogo, d i r e c t e d by

 113

Georges Keita on the myth o f "Queen Pocou", a legendary heroine who

s a c r i f i c e d her own son to appease the angry gods. The f il m was run sev­

er al times on t e l e v i s i o n , and, according to Vieyra, i t i s to date the

most important t e l e v i s i o n f i l m made in A f r i c a . ^

According to Bachy, i t w a s n 't u n t i l 1967 t h a t the S . I . C . was able

to a s s e r t i t s e l f . Then i t was g e t t i n g Iv orians to d i r e c t films t h a t

would have been d i r e c t e d bef or e by French filmmakers. Bassori had r e -

42
turned to the S . I . C . , as p r o j e c t s f o r f e a t u r e s were underway. In f a c t ,

from 1967 to 1972, production a t the S . I . C . was dominated by Bassori and

another Ivorian d i r e c t o r , Henri Duparc. Within t h i s time, Bas sori, work­

ing with 35mm equipment, d i r e c t e d several documentaries: Kossou I ,

Kossou I I , on bridge c o n s t r u c t i o n ; Feux de b r o u s s e , on bush f i r e ;

Bondougou an 11, Odienne an 12, and Abidjan ( p e r le de l a g u n e ) , on nation al

promotion. On his s i d e , Duparc used a 16mm to make Recolte du Coton (1,2)

on a g r i c u l t u r e , and P r o fil I v o r i r i e n , Achete I v o i r i e n , Tam-tam I V o i r e , and

J ' a i e dix a n s , on nation al promotion. The S . I . C . a l s o produced f e a t u r e s

by Duparc, Mouna ou l e r3ve d'un a r t i s t e (1969, 16mm), and Abusan (The

Family) (1972, 16mm); and co-produced La femme au couteau (1969, 16mm) by

B a s s o r i.

The period 1967-1972, which Bachy c a l l e d the 5ge d ' o r o f Ivorian

cinema, was a ls o a period o f c o n t i n u i t y with France. La femme au couteau

and o t h e r films of th e S .I . C . were e d i t e d a t the Bureau du cinema of the

Cooperation in P a r i s . C h r is t ia n Lacoste, the French cameraman who shot

th e p i c t u r e s of Borom S a r r e t and La Noire de by Sembene, was cameraman f o r

Abusuan and the s h o r t documentaries o f Bas sori , before d i r e c t i n g some

43
s h o r t s himself. F i n a l l y , the C.A.I. continued u n t i l 1971 to handle the
 114

po s t-production o f newsreels and documentaries. In 1971, the C.A.I.

put an end to the c o n t r a c t o f co-production with Ivory C o a s t , a n d

the S . I . C . was f r e e to go to o t h e r companies in France f o r th e p o s t ­

production o f i t s f ilm s.

Meanwhile, the t e l e v i s i o n was in tro d u cin g young t a l e n t s as d i r e c ­

tors. In 1970, Gnoan M'Bala re turn ed home a f t e r f il m s tu d ie s in P ar is

and Sweden. He went to work f o r th e t e l e v i s i o n in s te a d of th e S . I . C .

because, in his own words, "Upon my r e t u r n home, t h e r e w e r e n 't produc-

45
ti o n f a c i l i t i e s ( a t the S . I . C . ) . " M'Bala proceeded to d i r e c t f o r the

t e l e v i s i o n s h o r t f i c t i o n films which were well received in Ivory Coast

and by i n t e r n a t i o n a l f il m c r i t i c s and h i s t o r i a n s . He is one o f th e few

African a r t i s t s (Ferdinand Oyono in l i t e r a t u r e ) who used comedy and

s a t i r e in his a r t . His n a r r a t i v e s evolve around such motifs as decep­

t i o n , mistaken i d e n t i t y and th e naivety of people. In La Biche (1971,

16mm), a black woman i n v i t e s h e r s e l f to a mixed co u p le 's homewhere she

passes f o r th e cousin o f th e husband who is black and becomes his mis­

t r e s s without the w if e , who is w h ite , knowing i t . Amenie (1972, 16mm)

i s about a peas ant who moves to Abidjan and fo ols people by passing f o r
46
a r ic h diplomat. The f ilm i s considered as the a u t h o r ' s best work.

M'Bala went on to make Valisy (1974, 16mm), Le Chapeau (1976, 66mm), and

Ablakon (1983), a l l of which were popular in Ivory Coast. The o t h e r

young t a l e n t a t the t e l e v i s i o n i s N'dabian Vodio who spent f our y e a r s a t

the Gorki I n s t i t u t e of Cinema (V.G.I.K.) in Moscow. Less p r o l i f i c than

M'bala, he d i r e c t e d two f i c t i o n films f o r t e l e v i s i o n : Le c r i du muezin

(1972, 16mm) and Les Collegiennes (1976, 16mm).

Besides th e f a c t t h a t new t a l e n t s l i k e M'Bala were p r e f e r r i n g t e l e ­

v is io n to the S . I . C . and the o t h e r f a c t t h a t the C.A.I. was no longe r

 115

co-producer o f the films o f th e S . I . C . , t h e r e was a f e e l i n g of d i s s a t i s ­

f a c t i o n with the o r g a n iz a ti o n a t the m in is tr y o f information. The f i c ­

t i o n films which the S . I . C . produced were not commercial enough to recoup

the co sts o f pr oduction. Furthermore, as i t can be seen by the l i s t o f

fil m s d i r e c t e d by Bas sori , th e S .I .C . was developing the 35mm to th e

detrim ent o f the 16mm. This f a c t o r incr ea se d the c o s t o f production to

a point t h a t the Ivorians began to d e s ig na te th e S .I . C . as a budget-

.. 47
divore.

In 1975, Bassori was placed as d i r e c t o r o f the S .I . C . to replace an

50
a d m i n i s t r a t o r who was incompetent in matters r e l a t i n g to f ilm production.

According to Bachy, th e new head o f the S .I . C . d i r e c t e d about f i f t y news­

r e e l s and documentaries between 1975 and 1979. Bassori also produced a

f e a t u r e , L'herbe sauvage (1978) by Duparc, and co-produced with France

and Germany La v i c t o i r e en chantant (1975) by Jean-Jacques Annaud. The

t i t l e o f La v i c t o i r e en ch antant was l a t e r changed to Noirs e t blancs en

couleurs ( Black and White in Color) which won the best foreign f ilm p r iz e

in 1977 a t the Academy Awards.

These l a s t e f f o r t s by Bassori to save the r e p u ta t io n of the S .I . C .

as a coherently-managed profit-m aking e n t e r p r i s e did not succeed. Al­

though L'herbe sauvage ran f o r th r e e months in Abidjan, the ca p it o l c i t y ,

48
i t was poorly received o u t s i d e the country and by c r i t i c s . As f o r

Noirs e t blancs en c o u l e u r s , according to Bachy, d e s p it e the bes t foreign

f i l m award in Hollywood, i t was a f in a n c i a l f a i l u r e as were a l l the o th e r

49
co-productions the S . I . C . did with f o r e i g n e r s . In 1979, t h e r e f o r e , the

m i n i s t e r of information put an end to the S . I . C . , arguing t h a t i t made no

s i g n i f i c a n t c o n t r ib u t i o n to the t r a i n i n g of filmmakers and t e c h n i c i a n s ,

 116

t h a t i t a t t r a c t e d l i t t l e i n t e r n a t i o n a l exposure because o f the q u a l i t y

o f the f il m s , and t h a t i t ignored commercial c o n s id e ra t io n s and had,

50
t h e r e f o r e , become a f i n a n c i a l burden to the government. A new govern­

mental s o c i e ty was c r e a te d to make film production a s u b s i d i a r y - t o t e l e ­

visi on programming. The Centre de Production des A c t u a l i t e s Audio-

V is u ell es e t du Perfectionnement Permanent (CPAAPP) had as a task to

make the film needs o f the d i f f e r e n t branches of the government coincide

with those o f the t e l e v i s i o n . For t h i s purpose, i t could make document­

a r i e s , s e r i a l s , and newsreels which could address the i s s u e s which the

51
d i f f e r e n t branches o f the government wanted filmed. I t was in t h i s

vein t h a t the CPAAPP became the new employer o f such d i r e c t o r s o f the

S .I . C . as Bassori and Duparc, and those o f th e t e l e v i s i o n as M'Bala,

Vodio, and Kobinan Adou. A r e c e n t c a t a l o g , L'Audio-Visuel en Cbte

d ' I v o i r e : Annuaire 1984, als o c i t e d the CPAAPP as having autonomous

f a c i l i t i e s in 16mm, black and white pr odu ction, and p a r t i a l f a c i l i t i e s

52
in 35mm production.

C le a r ly , the end o f the S .I . C . and the in c o r p o ra t io n of i t s d i r e c ­

t o r s in the s t a f f o f the CPAAPP i n d i c a t e t h a t a l i b e r a l government l i k e

Ivory Coast i s in a weak p o s it i o n to promote nationa l cinema. Conceived

as an i n d u s t r y , a national cinema cannot grow without a r a d ic a l r e s t r u c ­

t u r i n g of the p r i v a t e s e c t o r which c o n t r o ls d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n .

D i s t r i b u t i o n quotas would have t o be fix ed f o r f o re ig n films in ord er to

leave room f o r natio na l ones. Taxes would als o have to be levied on

fo reig n f ilm import and e x h i b i t i o n in ord er to s u b s id iz e th e production

o f nati onal ones. Since Ivory Coast, l i k e the o t h e r l i b e r a l c o u n t r i e s ,

i s opposed to most o f these measures, an easy way out f o r her i s to keep

 117
the filmmakers a t bay by employing them a t the CPAAPP, and by occa sio n­

a l l y a s s i s t i n g them with equipment and personnel in t h e i r independent

production.

The Ivorian d i r e c t o r s had s in ce learned to count l e s s on the govern­

ment as a major producer and more on t h e i r independent r eso u r ces. In

1981, a newcomer, Fadika Kramo Lancine, r ev ea led him se lf with Djeli {16mm

blown in t o 35mm) which won the b e s t f ilm award a t the f e s t i v a l of Ouaga­

dougou. Djeli was financed and produced in a t h r e e y e a r span during

which Lancine used his personal funds, those o f his family and f r i e n d s .

He f i r s t had an agreement with the S .I . C . to use the equipment and the

technicians. A fter the S . I . C . was d i s s o l v e d , he renewed the same agree-

53
ment with the CPAAPP and f in i s h e d the f ilm . Other independent d i r e c ­

t o r s , proceeding in a s i m i l a r manner as Lancine, had become t h e i r own

producers and made f il m s . Jean-Louis Koula and Leo Kozoloa c r e a te d t h e i r

own production house, Les Films de la Montagne, which s p e c i a l i z e s in

a d v e r t i s i n g and had sin ce produced Adja Tio (1980, 16mm blown in to 35mm),

a f e a t u r e on the t r a d i t i o n a l forms o f i n h e r i t a n c e , d i r e c t e d by Koula,

and Petangin (1983, 35mm) on c o r r u p t i o n , d i r e c t e d by Kozoloa.

According to M'Bala, i t was not impossible f o r Ivorian d i r e c t o r s to

have a p r o l i f i c independent production a t the same time t h a t they and the

FEPACI were p u t t i n g pr ess ure on the government to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in o rder to c r e a t e s u b s id i e s f o r national prod uction .

M'Bala argued t h a t Ivorian filmmakers were more f o r t u n a t e than t h e i r

c o u n t e r p a r t s in o t h e r francophone area s because t h e r e were more f a c i l i ­

t i e s o f production in Ivory Coast. The branches o f the government such

as th e M in istere de T E du cati o n Nationale e t de la Recherche S c i e n t i f i q u e ,

 118
the M inis tere de 1 ' Information where the CPAAPP was, and the Ministfere

des A f fa ir e s C u l t u r e ! l e s , e t c . , disposed of cameras, tape r e c o r d e r s ,

l a b o r a t o r i e s in 16mm pr oduct io n, e d i t i n g t a b l e s (the CPAAPP a l s o had

f a c i l i t i e s in 35mm), and t e c h n i c i a n s . With the agreement o f these

a gencies , the filmmakers could borrow both the t e c h n ic i a n s and the

equipment. M'Bala added t h a t the filmmakers could a ls o gain f i n a n c i a l

s uppo rt’ from p r i v a t e businessmen in r e tu r n f o r i n s e r t i n g some o f t h e i r

products i n t o the f ilm s . To give an example o f the way independent

d i r e c t o r s / p r o d u c e r s maneuver, M'Bala c i t e d his most r e c e n t f il m ,

Ablakon, which he made by a v a i l i n g himself o f the cameramen and the

equipment of the CPAAPP in r e tu r n f o r some copies f o r th e t e l e v i s i o n ,

the support from the p r i v a t e s e c t o r to be paid a f t e r the commercial

d i s t r i b u t i o n o f th e f i l m s , and the p o s t-productio n f a c i l i t i e s o f France

in r e tu r n f o r some copies which would be d i s t r i b u t e d on a non-commercial

54
b a s is . F i n a l l y , th e success of D j e l i , which both the S . I . C . and the

CPAAPP helped to produce, led the M in ister of Information, to o , to say -

55
t h a t "the government has not turned i t s back on the filmmakers."

A fte r t h i s survey o f production in the s o - c a l l e d l i b e r a l c o u n t r i e s ,

i t i s im po rta nt, f o r comparative purposes, to postpone the e v alu atio n

and look f i r s t a t production in Guinea, Upper Volta, and Mali, where the

governments had opted f o r n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n . The r a d ic a li s m o f thes e

c o u n tr ie s came from the f a c t t h a t they de fie d the French d i s t r i b u t i o n

and e x h i b i t i o n companies, COMACICO and SECMA, and attempted to s e t up

t h e i r own pr odu ction, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n . Their originality

lay in t h e i r b e l i e f t h a t they must f i r s t con trol d i s t r i b u t i o n and ex­

h i b i t i o n in ord er to nur tu r e pr oduction. As e a r l y as 1958, the newly

 119

independent Guinea cr eate d Sily-Cin&na, a s t a t e organism, to control

produc tion, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and e x h i b i t i o n . For f e a r t h a t o t h e r African

c o u n tr ie s would follow Guinea's example, the COMACICO and SECMA re ac ted

v i o l e n t l y by r e fu s in g to provide th e country with fo re ig n f il m s . Guinea

overcame t h i s o b s ta c le f o r awhile by showing films from the e a s t e r n bl ocs .

But in o rder to comply with th e t a s t e o f a pub lic which had been used to

American and West European f i l m s , she had to make some concessions to

COMACICO and SECMA. The compromise was mainly in the s e c t o r o f e x h i b i ­

t i o n where the tw en ty - eig h t movie t h e a t e r s o f t h e ’ country were divided

between Sily-Cinema and the f o re i g n companies. The arrangement was such

t h a t th e COMACICO and SECMA, by maintaining fo urt een t h e a t e r s , agreed to

l e t Sily-Cinema have access to t h e i r f ilm s . By allowing the foreign

companies to maintain t h e a t e r s in th e cou ntry , Guinea, t o o , posed the

con dition t h a t the p r o f i t from the t i c k e t s a le s be spent in the country.

This h i s t o r i c a l move by Guinea, although not completely s u c c e s s f u l , i s

seen by f il m h i s t o r i a n s l i k e Guy Hennebelle as an important gain in the

56
d e co lo n iz ati o n of African cinema.

In 1979, Upper Volta n a t i o n a l i z e d a l l the s i x movie t h e a t e r s o f the

countr y, renewing th e challenge Guinea had launched ten years before

a g a i n s t the COMACICO and SECMA. The French companies re acted again by

57
c u t t i n g the c o u n t r y 's f il m supply f o r more than e i g h t months. As in

the case with Guinea, a deal was f i n a l l y arranged between Upper Volta and

the two companies in which the COMACICO and SECMA kept t h e i r monopoly on
58
d i s t r i b u t i o n and Upper Volta was allowed to keep the t h e a t e r s . The

government subsequently c r e a te d the Soci^te Nationale Voltaique du Cinema

(SONAVOCI) to manage the s i x t h e a t e r s in favor of a national produ ction.

In sp ir ed by Upper Volta, Mali r a d i c a l i z e d her a c t i o n to take charge of

d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . A fter 1962, the Office Cinematographique

National du Mali (OCINAM) made plans to control the d i s t r i b u t i o n and

e x h i b i t i o n o f fo re i g n films and to produce and d i s t r i b u t e national ones.

Cautioned, however, by the way the COMACICO and SECMA d e a l t with Guinea,

Mali devised a l e s s r a d i c a l s t r a t e g y which c o n s is te d in f i r s t bu ilding

her own t h e a t e r s where th e r e were none and taking over , p r o g r e s s i v e l y ,

those owned by the French companies. In 1970, a f t e r Upper V o l t a 's coup,

M a ii j - t o o , put the OCINAM in charge o f a l l twen ty-fo ur t h e a t e r s , twelve

59
o f which were owned by the COMACICO and SECMA. I t is also important

to n o tice t h a t f ilm occupied a primary p o s it i o n in these c o u n t r i e s , un­

l i k e the secondary o r marginal p o s i t i o n i t occupied in francophone areas

where the governments were r e l u c t a n t to deal r a d i c a l l y with the COMACICO

and SECMA. The p o l i t i c s o f production of the s o - c a l l e d r a d ic a l c o u n tr ie s

went beyond attempts to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n to i n ­

clude plans to produce film s on the sp ot. As e a r l y as 1960, Guinea had

s tu d io s and l a b o r a t o r i e s in 16mm f o r the production of weekly newsreels.

In 1966, West Germany o f fe r e d to buil d in Konakry (the c a p it o l c i t y )

60
f a c i l i t i e s in 35mm. Although the governments o f Upper Volta and Mali

had not y e t acquired the equipment o f p o s t- p r o d u c tio n , they had put aside

funds to financ e the production o f national films.®'* The commitment of

the government o f Upper Volta to national and African cinema led the

African filmmakers t o choose one of her c i t i e s , Ouagadougou, as the s i t e

r

o f a bi-annual African f il m f e s t i v a l . There i s als o in Ouagadougou the

I n s t i t u t e A f r i c a i n d ' E d u c a t i o n Cinematographique (INAFEC), th e only

i n s t i t u t e o f i t s kind where s tu d e n ts from a l l over Africa are t r a i n e d in

 121

film and t e l e v i s i o n pr oduction. Among o th e r f a c e t s o f African cinema,

Upper Volta is a ls o the home o f the CIDC, th e CIPROFILMS and the Societe

Af ri cain e de Cinema (CINAFRIC), th e f i r s t p r i v a t e production and p o s t ­

production f a c i l i t y in A f rica.

In or de r to give a b e t t e r sense o f th e i t i n e r a r y of production in

the c o u n tr ie s which did not h e s i t a t e to n a t i o n a l i z e the in d u s tr y of

f il m , I will proceed in a d i f f e r e n t manner than I did with production

in th e s o - c a l l e d l i b e r a l c o u n t r i e s . My reason f o r t h i s d i f f e r e n t

approach i s determined by the f a c t t h a t the h i s t o r y o f production in

Guinea is not s i m i l a r to the one in Upper Volta in the same manner t h a t

one can speak o f the s i m i l a r i t i e s o f production between Senegal and

Cameroon, Ivory Coast and Gabon, or Mali and Upper Volta. C learly,

t h e r e f o r e , while I can save the reader time by focussing on Upper Volta

as a type r e p r e s e n tin g Mali, I must deal with Guinea as a s i n g u l a r type.

The Guinean cinema began with the r e v o lu tio n t h a t the country led
CO
a g a i n s t France a f t e r 1958.. According to Vieyra, the p o l i t i c a l courage

o f the Guinean l e a d e r , Sekou Toure, to break with France and s e t an

example f o r o t h e r Francophone lea d er s who wanted to assume t h e i r own

d e s ti n y led the country to have, in the e a r l y days o f i t s independence,

63
such nation al i n d u s t r i e s as a production c e n t e r . Unlike the o th e r

Francophone c o u n tr ie s which depended on the C.A.I. to make t h e i r news­

r e e l s , Guinea b u i l t , with the help of such Eastern bloc c o u n t r ie s as the

Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, and Poland, f a c i l i t i e s in 16mm black and white

production. With these f a c i l i t i e s in p la c e , Guinea was able to produce

in the e a r l y s i x t i e s one newsreel every week, while th e o th e r c o u n tr ie s

were going a t th e r a t e o f one newsreel a month because of the time i t

 122

took in P aris to develop and e d i t the f ilm and add the sound t r a c k and/

or c o - e n t a r y . 65

Between 1960 and 1966, the Guinean production c e n t e r als o produced

several s h o r t films documenting the r e v o l u ti o n . Because th e country did

not y e t have i t s own d i r e c t o r s , these s h o r t f il m s , La Revolution en

Marche (16mm), Au Regis tr e de I ' h i s t o i r e (16mm), C r o i s i e r e de 1 ' a m iti e

(16mm), e t c . , were made by f o r e i g n e r s .

By 1966. important changes had taken place in the s t r u c t u r e o f

Guinean cinema. The country now had more than s i x d i r e c t o r s who took

t h e i r t r a i n i n g in the Soviet Union and th e United S t a t e s . The d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n and p a r t o f the e x h i b i t i o n were n a t i o n a l i z e d and Sily-Cinema was

cr eated with Bob Sow as head o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n and Mohamed Lamine Akin

as head o f production. I t was also in 1966 t h a t West Germany made an

o f f e r to bu ild 35mm f a c i l i t i e s . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , the f u t u r e o f Sily

Cinema was guaranteed.

A look a t films made by Guineans between 1966 and 1970 wi ll show

t h a t the m ajo rit y o f them were documentaries, educational and propagan-

d i s t i c f il m s , as opposed to o th e r c o u n tr ie s where t h e r e were no s t r u c ­

tu r e s o f production and the filmmakers made mostly f i c t i o n f i l m s . Be­

cause the Guinean cinema was inco rp orated a t i t s b i r t h in the develop­

ment o f the co untry, f il m was assigned the f unc tion o f disseminating

the dominant hegemony o f the government. C learly, t h e r e f o r e , the

Guinean filmmakers had l i t t l e use f o r " f i c t i o n a l , e s c a p i s t " f ilm s . The

documentary and education forms, to the c o n t r a r y , were p e r fe c te d by

such Guinean d i r e c t o r s as Costa Diagne ( Peau Noir e, 1967, 16mnn Huit e t

V ingt, 1967, 16mm; Hi e r , A ujourd 'hui, Demain, 1968, 16mm), Mohamed

 123

Lamine Akin ( Le Sergeant Bakary Woulen, 1966, 35mm; Mary Narken, 1966,

35mm; Dans la vie des peuples, i l y a des i n s t a n t s , 1966, 16mm), Bary

Sekou Omar ( Et v i n t l a l i b e r t e , 1969, 35mm), G i l b e r t Minot, Sekou Camara

and Moussa Kemoko D iakite. Diagne's f ilm , Hier, Au jo urd'h ui, Demain,

n a r r a te d with masterful usage o f e l l i p s i s and a l l u s i o n the p a s t , p r e s e n t

and f u t u r e o f Guinea. This led Guy Hennebelle to d e s c ri b e Diagne as

66
" p o t e n t i a l l y one o f the g r e a t African filmmakers o f the f u t u r e . " The

film won the J o r i s Ivens p r iz e in 1968 a t the f e s t i v a l o f Leipzig.

In the e a r l y s e v e n t i e s , Diagne and Akin disappeared from the film -

67
making scene, but the documentary and educational t r a d i t i o n continued

with newcomers l i k e Minot and D ia kite. Minot made Le F e s tiv a l Pan-'

A f r ic a i n d 1Alger (1968, 16mm) and several o t h e r s h o r ts on p r e s i d e n t i a l

v i s i t s , p o l i t i c a l le a d e r s (T o l b e r t , General Gowon, and Ami 1car Cab ra l) ,

environment, and sex edu ca tion . Diakite made documentaries on a g r i c u l ­

t u r e (R i z i - c u l t u r e dans le Bogata, 1969), the funeral ceremonies of

Kwame Nkrumah (1972), and education (L ' u n i v e r s i t e a la campagne, 1975).

As Boughedir s t a t e d , Sil.y-Cinema als o produced several c o l l e c t i v e films

in the s e v e n t i e s . There were t h e a t r i c a l plays on f il m (La n u i t s ' i l l u m -

i n e , 1971; El Hadj M i l l i o n , 1972) which d e a l t with re v o l u ti o n a r y sub-

CO
jects. F i n a l l y , i t is i n t e r e s t i n g to n o tic e t h a t Sily-Cinema produced

some d i d a c t i c f i c t i o n a l films in the e a r l y s e v e n t i e s . Moussa Camara,

who made Arne perdu in 1968, c o - d i r e c t e d with Alpha Adama Un Amour Radical

(1972) and Un Grand Pere dans le vent (1973).

The second h a l f o f the s e v e n t i e s , to o , was dominated by c o l l e c t i v e

fil m s . Individual d i r e c t i o n s included Une a u t r e vie (1976) by Camara

and documentaries on s p o r t s , Hafia, T r ip le Champion and Le Sport en Guinee

 124

(1978) by Dia kite.

Because o f t h e i r d i d a c t i c and n a t i o n a l i s t i c o r i e n t a t i o n , the pro­

ductions o f Sily-Cinema o f the s i x t i e s and s e v e n t ie s were l i m i te d to

Guinean t h e a t e r s and the t e l e v i s i o n which was c r e a t e d in 1977. However,

in th e e a r l y e i g h t i e s , Sily-Cinema made i n t e r n a t i o n a l news through a

co-production with Morocco, Amok (1982), and a music al, Naitou (1982),

d i r e c t e d by D iakite. Amok is a film on a p a r t h e i d in South Africa and on

the 1973 Soweto massacre. I t i s d i r e c t e d by Souhel Ben Barka (Morocco)

and i t s t a r s Marian Makeba, the famous s in g e r from South Afri ca.

Guinean t e c h n i c i a n s , using equipment from Sily-Ciriema, worked on the

film . Camara Dan Soko, who was the a s s i s t a n t o f Ben Barka on Amok,

d i r e c t e d Ouloukoro (1983). D i a k i t e ' s Naitou is a musical about a young

g i r l , Naitou, whose mother i s a s s a s s i n a t e d by a je a l o u s stepmother. The

stepmother abuses Naitou and prevents her from ta k in g p a r t in th e t r a d ­

i t i o n a l i n i t i a t i o n f o r a l l young g i r l s . The stepmother i s f i n a l l y

punished by an old lady who symbolizes j u s t i c e . The o r i g i n a l i t y o f the

fil m l i e s in the f a c t t h a t i t is a l l n a r ra te d through dance and music by

the B a l l e t National de Guihee. C r i t i c s p r a i s e d i t f o r breaking language

69
b a r r i e r s in A f rica. Naitou won the UNESCO p r i z e a t the f e s t i v a l o f

Ouagadougou in 1983.

E a r l i e r in t h i s survey, I s aid t h a t Sily-Cinema was p a r t o f the

Guinean r e v o l u t i o n , and, as such, i t was conceived as a n ati o n al i n d u s tr y .

As a s t a t e organism, Sily-Cinema was supposed to be f r e e from ou tsid e

in f l u e n c e , as fas as the means o f production and the fo rc es o f production

were concerned. I pointed out t h a t in o rder to achieve t h i s s e l f -

d e t e r m in a tio n , Sily-Cinema acquired f a c i l i t i e s in 16mm, n a t i o n a l i z e d

 125

d i s t r i b u t i o n and p a r t o f e x h i b i t i o n , and signed an agreement with West

Germany to i n s t a l l 35mm f a c i l i t i e s . I t must now be pointed out t h a t

Sily-Cinema f a i l e d in some r e s p e c t s . Despite the presence o f the 16mm

f a c i l i t i e s , according to Minot, the rushes o f Guinean production had to

be s e n t out f o r l a b o r a to r y work.
Minot a l s o pointed out t h a t mainten-
70
ance was lacking f o r the equipment. I t i s als o u n f o rtu n ate t h a t West

Germany had not y e t f in i s h e d the i n s t a l l a t i o n o f the 35mm equipment she

had begun in 1966. C le a r ly , while t h i s equipment was in s to r a g e rooms

unused and growing r u s t y , Sily-Cinema depended upon o u ts i d e help f o r the

35mm produc tion, too. The misuse o f equipment i s t h e r e f o r e a l i a b i l i t y

which may turn out too c o s t l y f o r Guinean cinema.

When one tu rn s to Upper Volta, the o t h e r example of n a t i o n a l i z e d

pr odu ction, one n o t ic e s a t l e a s t two s t r i k i n g d i f f e r e n c e s between her

cinema and Sily-Cinema. While Guinea n a t i o n a l i z e d d i s t r i b u t i o n and p a r t

o f e x h i b i t i o n and b u i l t production f a c i l i t i e s , Upper Volta j u s t n a t i o n ­

a l i z e d the movie t h e a t e r s and did not build production f a c i l i t i e s , a l ­

though such a plan was in the c o u n t r y 's p o l i t i c s o f n a tio n a l cinema.

The o t h e r d i f f e r e n c e between Sily-Cinema and the S oc iete Nationale

Vo l t a i q u e du Cinema (SONAVOCI) i s t h a t the former i s completely owned by

the s t a t e , while the s t a t e is a major share holder and manager of

71
SONAVOCI. Thus, in Upper Volta th e r e ar e independent filmmakers whose

films the government produces or co- produces, while in Ghinea, the empha­

s i s is on c o l l e c t i v e cinema, or government films which ar e d i r e c t e d by

the s t a f f of Sily-Cinema. As I pointed out e a r l i e r , th e r e is also in

Upper Volta a p r i v a t e production company, CINAFRIC, with equipment and

s tu d i o s in 16 and 33mm t while in Guinea t h e r e i s only the s t a t e organ of

 126

production. As f o r the n a t i o n a l i z e d Malian cinema, I b e li e v e t h a t while

i t shares some common grounds with the Guinean p o l i t i c s o f pr oduc tion,

i t has more s i m i l a r i t i e s with the cinema in Upper Volta.

When Upper Volta became independent in I960, th e new government

planned to build both a t e l e v i s i o n s t a t i o n and f a c i l i t i e s in 16mm in

d r d e r ' t o produce s h o r t d i d a c t i c and educational f il m s . In 1961, the

M inis try o f Information b u i l t s tu dios which were supposed to become

montage and sound-synchronizing rooms. However, because the C.A.I. was

g e t t i n g ready in 1962 to sign a c o n t r a c t with most Francophone c o u n tr ie s

in o rder to handle p a r t of the production and the p o s t-productio n of

72
t h e i r newsreels and documentaries, Upper Volta did not get the neces­

sary cooperation from France which must have seen a d u p l i c a t i o n o f the

f a c i l i t i e s of the C.A.I. in the c o n s tr u c ti o n o f s tu d i o s in Upper Volta.

According to Vieyra, the p r o j e c t was thus abandoned a t midpoint, leaving

73
behind the acquired equipment to s ta g n a te . In 1963, France went on,

however, to help Upper Volta b u ild a t e l e v i s i o n s t a t i o n “which only works

t h r e e hours a day, fo ur days a week, a i r i n g programs provided by France.

Only the news events are f il m in Upper Volta.

Unlike Senegal and Ivory Coast where national d i r e c t o r s , t r a in e d

in the l a t e f i f t i e s and e a r l y s i x t i e s , took over the Se r v i c e de Cinema

a t independence, in Upper Volta t h e r e was no one t r a i n e d to assume t h i s

duty. C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , a French d i r e c t o r , Serge R i c c i , dominated

the n atio n al production o f new sreels , documentaries and educational films

from 1960 to th e e a r ly s e v e n t i e s . Working with a 16mm camera, Ricci made

medium length films on the independence movement (F iere Volta de nos

Aieux, 1961), economics ( Espoir d'une n a t i o n , 1961; Operation a r a c h i d e s ,

1962 and Culture a t t e l e e t f e r t i l i s a t i o n , 1964); hea lth education ( Les

grands marigots mangent l e s yeux, 1964, Comment n o u r r i r e mon e n f a n t ,

1966, e t c . ) * and from 1971 to 1972 t h r e e films on geography.^5

The f i r s t national filmmaker is Sekou Ouedraogo who began as a

cinematographer o f Ricci in a h e a lth education f i l m , L'usage du savon

(1967). From 1969 to 1970, Ouedraogo made two films documenting the

regional f a i r s , Foire re g i o n a le s v o l t a i q u e s . The most important event

in th e h i s t o r y o f the development o f the Vo lt aic cinema, however, was

the n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of th e t h e a t e r s in 1970 and the c r e a t i o n o f the

SONAVOCI. As Vieyra c o r r e c t l y s t a t e d i t , in the beginning the SONAVOCI

was only an o r g anization in charge of e x h i b i t i o n . ^ 6 Nonetheless, i t s

c r e a t i o n signaled an h i s t o r i c break between African cinema and the two

French monopolist companies, COMACICO and SECMA, and th e beginning of

n a t io n a l p o l i t i c s o f production su bsi dized by revenues from d i s t r i b u t i o n

and e x h i b i t i o n , a p o l i t i c s which had been proposed by the Federation of

African filmmakers. As the Volt aic m i n i s t e r o f information saw i t , the

e f f e c t o f the SONAVOCI went beyond the country and pushed o th e r co u n tr ie s

to admire Upper Volta and to r e f l e c t upon the f u tu r e o f t h e i r own cinema.

Within one ye a r of the c r e a t i o n o f the SONAVOCI, a Fonds de Develop-

pement du CinSma Voltaique was s e t up to promote national production.

Such an i n i t i a t i v e was encouraged by th e f i n a n c i a l success generated by

the n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of the t h e a t e r s . According to the m i n i s t e r , Upper

Volta recorded "from the s t a r t , f i n a n c i a l r e s u l t s which ar e very s a t i s ­

factory. Aside from the f a c t t h a t we contr ol the revenues from the d i s ­

t r i b u t i o n market, we have c r e a t e d a Fonds de De'veloppement du Cinema

78
Voltaique which i s completely s ubsid iz ed by t h i s market."
 128

Although the SONAVOCI did not i n v e s t , r i g h t away, in equipment, i t

financed, from 1971 to the e i g h t i e s , the production o f several s h o r t and

f e a t u r e length f il m s . In ad d iti o n t o f ina ncin g the d i d a c t i c films

d i r e c t e d by Ricci between 1971 and 1973, in 1972 the fonds de Dev61oppe-

ment du Cinema Voltaique financed le sang des pari as which stands in

h i s t o r y as the f i r s t natio na l f e a t u r e film d i r e c t e d by Djim Mamadou Kola.

The period of the s e v e n tie s was also the time f o r the emergence of new

V oltaic f i g u r e s as d i r e c t o r s . In 1973, a hea lt h education f i l m ,

H i s to r i e s de la tuber cu lose was made by H i l a i r e Tiendrebeogo, r a t h e r than

by Ricci who had u n t i l then been the only d i r e c t o r o f such films f o r the

government. In 1975, Augustin R.T. Taoko produced and d i r e c t e d the

second f e a t u r e film from Upper Volta, M1Ba Raogo on the abuses o f t r a d i -

79
tion. Other new d i r e c t o r s included Rene-Bernard Yonly, whose f e a t u r e ,

Sur le chemin de la r e c o n c i l i a t i o n (1976) was produced by the government;

Gaston Kabore, Paul Zoumbara, Sanou Kollo, and I d r i s s a Ouedraogo.

In 1977, because of the in c r e a sin g number o f d i r e c t o r s and the funds

provided by SONAVOCI, Upper Volta cr eated the Centre National du Cinema

(CNC) and s e t a filmmaker, Kabore, a t i t s head. According to Bachy, the

fu n ctio n of the CNC was to continue the "production o f 16mm educational

and d i d a c t i c films and the e x h i b i t i o n , with the means of c in e - b u s e s , of

80
these films in the ru ral a r e a s . " In ad d it io n to these d u t i e s , the CNC

was to promote na tional cinema by ai ding the production o f s h o r t and

f e a t u r e films o f f i c t i o n and documentaries. The CNC produced such s h o r t

films as Poko (1978) by I d r i s s a Ouedraogo, Yikyan (1978) by Hamidou B.

Ouedraogo, a Voltaic filmmaker l i v i n g in Cannes (France), Beogho Naba

(1979), and Les dodos (1980) by Kollo. Kabore him se lf assumed the
 129

p r in c ip a l r o l e o f government filmmaker which, as I pointed out e a r l i e r ,

had been taken by Ricci. Since i t s c r e a t i o n , the CNC has also produced

two f e a t u r e s , Wend Kuuni (35mm, 1982) by Kabore and Jours de Tourmentes

(16mm, 1983) by Zoumbara. Wend Kuuni i s s e t in p r e - c o l o n i a l Africa and

deals with such is s ues as marriage and th e concept o f fam il y, s ex, and

love. The manner in which the d e f i n i t i o n of these i ss u e s (themes)

change in the evolution o f th e n a r r a t i v e d e c o n s tr u c ts th e s te r e o t y p i c a l

view of pre -c o lo n i a l Africa as a s ta g n a ti n g place or a p r im iti v e par a­

d i s e o f "y 'e n a bOn banania." The f il m is i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y p r a is e d f o r

i t s s e n s i b l e tre a tm e n t o f c h ild re n and f o r i t s cinematography ( i t s use

o f long shots and long t a k e s ) , e d i t i n g s t y l e and n a r r a t i v e use o f the

sound-track.

In the beginning o f the survey o f the p o l i t i c s o f production in

Upper Volta, I s aid t h a t the government t r i e d to build f a c i l i t i e s of

production but did not succeed. Even a f t e r th e c r e a t i o n of the SONAVOCI,

no s t a t e production f a c i l i t i e s were put in pla ce. Clearly, th erefore,

the SONAVOCI, l i k e th e SNC in Senegal, depended upon French f a c i l i t i e s

f o r the production of the film s which i t fin an ced . I t was only in 1981

t h a t a change occurred in t h i s p a t t e r n . A p r i v a t e businessman, Martial

Ouedraogo, in vest ed more than $300,000 in equipment o f production and

po s t-production (16 and 35mm cameras, l a b o r a t o r i e s , e d i t i n g t a b l e s ,

soundtrack f a c i l i t i e s , props, e t c . ) and c r eated the Societe*'Africaine

de Cinema (CINAFRIC) Although CINAFRIC was a p r i v a t e venture con­

ceived to make a p r o f i t , Martial Ouedraogo's i n t e n t i o n was to p a r t i c i ­

pa te in the l i b e r a t i o n o f African cinema. In Upper Volta, the CNC could

r e n t the equipment and t e c h n i c i a n s o f CINAFRIC and, t h u s , produce l e s s

 130

expensive films on th e s p o t. The same t h in g would be t r u e f o r o t h e r

African productions and f o r e i g n e r s f ilm ing in A f rica. I t was in t h i s

sense t h a t Moustapha Ky, th e a d m i n i s t r a t i v e d i r e c t o r o f CINAFRIC,

argued t h a t "CINAFRIC i s a business f o r the Voltaics and a l s o f o r

82
Africans since i t s b e n e f i t s reach beyond national c o n f i n e s . " C le a r ly ,

t h e r e f o r e , CINAFRIC i s the only one o f i t s kind in A f r ic a ; although some

f ilm c r i t i c s c a l l e d i t the "Hollywood on the V olta," i t is c l e a r a ls o

t h a t i t s goals o f l i b e r a t i n g African film from i t s t ec hno logi ca l depen­

dence on the West coincides with the goals o f African filmmakers and

some governments.

According to Ky, the purpose o f CINAFRIC was " f i r s t to produce

films of a l l genres and len g th s. I t also c o l l a b o r a t e s with in d iv id u a ls

and o rg a n iz a ti o n s to co-produce film s . F i n a l l y , i t r e n t s equipment and

83
s tu d i o space to people f ilming in A f r i c a . " Since i t opened i t s doors

in 1981, CINAFRIC has produced two f e a t u r e s , Paweogo (16mm, 1981) by

Kollo and Le Courage des a u t r e s (16mm, 1982) by C h r i s ti a n Richard, a

French p r o f e s s o r o f film a t the INAFEC. CINAFRIC had several p r o j e c t s

in 1983, some o f which included the sig ning o f a c o n t r a c t with such

QC
African d i r e c t o r s as Sembene to make a f il m f o r the company. I t is

curious t h a t French f a c i l i t i e s v/ere used in the e a r l y e i g h t i e s to f i n i s h

such CNC films as Wend Kuuni and Jours de Tourmentes. CINAFRIC's doors

were opened t h e n , and i t s f a c i l i t i e s could have been used to reduce the

c o s t o f production o f these fil m s .

However, before expounding on the c o n t r i b u t i o n to i n t e r - A f r i c a n

cinema by CINAFRIC and o th e r Ouagadougou-based i n s t i t u t e s and organisms

such as the INAFEC, the CIPROFILM and the FEPACI, i t i s important to

 131

e v aluate the natio na l productions j u s t surveyed. The e v a lu a t io n of some

o f the problems connected with national cinemas w il l make i t c l e a r t h a t

t h e i r s o l u t i o n can be found in i n t e r n a t i o n a l cinema. As the above survey

shows, t h e r e are f our main problems with th e nati onal production c e n t e r s .

F i r s t , in c o u n tr ie s where production f a c i l i t i e s ar e l a c k in g , the films

r e q u ir e a co n s id e rab le ex penditure o f governmental funds which should be

s pen t on o t h e r p r i o r i t i e s . Second, because d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n

are not organized in most c o u n t r i e s , the governments and/or independents

must assume a l l th e expenses o f prod uction . T hir d, in c o u n tr ie s with

f a c i l i t i e s o f pr oduct io n, the equipment i s not maintained in good con­

d i t i o n o r u t i l i z e d a t f u l l c a p a c i ty . Sometimes the p r o j e c t to build

f a c i l i t i e s is never completed, thus lead ing to a r u s t i n g o f the equip­

ment which has been purchased. The f o u rth problem is t h a t the govern­

ment attempts to con trol the co ntent o f f i l m s , thus pl acing r e s t r i c t i o n s

on th e filmmakers' c r e a t i v i t y . C le a r ly , the lack o f the f a c i l i t i e s o f

production i s a s e r io u s problem concerning many areas o f development in

A f rica. I t s immediate consequence is to make Africa dependent on the

t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n t r i e s . The c o s t o f t h i s dependency i s so

high t h a t some developing c o u n tr ie s have become s e l e c t i v e about what i s

necessary to t h e i r s u rv iv al and what is a secondary p r i o r i t y o r a luxury.

Thus, i n s t e a d o f q u es tioning dependency and planning s y s t e m a t i c a l l y to

r i d themselves of i t , they have normalized and/or f e t i s h i z e d i t . I t is

in t h i s vein t h a t seve ral Francophone c o u n t r i e s considered f ilm a luxury

which they could not a f f o r d . In th ese c o u n t r i e s , production i s lim it e d

to newsreels and educational documentaries made f o r them by the C.A.I,

on c o n tr a c tu a l b a s is or by th e UNESCO and th e l i k e s as a form o f a id .

 132

Even in those c o u n tr ie s in which the filmmakers make i t impossible

f o r the governments to completely tu rn t h e i r backs on national cinema,

the r e s u l t s are not encouraging. As the survey shows, both Senegal and

Ivory Coast closed down t h e i r national production c e n t e r s because they

absorbed government budgets without being able to recoup t h e i r c o s ts o f

production. Beside the f a c t t h a t these national production ce n te r s

depended on th e C.A.I. and th e Cooperation to complete t h e i r f i l m s , they

were not a t t e n t i v e t o o t h e r means o f production which could have s i g n i f ­

i c a n t l y reduced th e c o s t . U nfort unately , both Vieyra and B as s ori , two

important f i g u r e s in Senegalese and Ivorian cinema, produced with 35mm

f a c i l i t i e s as soon as they had replaced the French d i r e c t o r s . I t is

f a i r , t h e r e f o r e , to say t h a t both the filmmakers and t h e i r governments

f a i l e d to ground t h e i r p o l i t i c s o f national production in an economically

v ia b le plan. While the filmmakers made the governments face t h e i r

r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s to help national productio ns , they did not ques tion the

to o l s i n h e r i t e d from the C.A.I. f o r t h e i r high c o s t s . As f o r the govern­

ments, they chose to remain b lin d to several f a c t o r s which could have

been b e n e f i c i e n t in the long run. Because they depended on France in

several areas o f development, they continued to t i e t h e i r f ilm production

to the C.A.I. They blamed African d i r e c t o r s f o r making high budget films

which were not p r o f i t a b l e . But, in Bachy's words

Can one r e a l l y speak o f the p r o f i t a b i l i t y o f national

film s in a country where nothing is done to p r o t e c t
them? Where no legal d i s p o s i t i o n is taken to impose
quotas on the import o f fo re ign film s? Where th e ex­
h i b i t i o n o f national films i s only p o s s ib le in one-
t h i r d o f the t h e a t e r s ? Where th e r e i s n ' t an o r g a n i ­
z a t i o n to s e l l them o u ts i d e of the country? 86

This leads one to the problems o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in

 133

A frica . Although t h e r e w i ll l a t e r be a c h a p te r on thes e s u b j e c t s , i t i s

important to point out here t h a t they should not be se para ted from the

iss ues o f national pr oduction. I f well conceived, the d i s t r i b u t i o n and

e x h i b i t i o n o f both fo re ig n and national films can s i g n i f i c a n t l y c o n t r i ­

bute to pr oduction. By s e t t i n g quotas on the number o^ fo re ign films

t h a t can be shown, th e t h e a t e r owners c r e a t e a d d itio n al space f o r nation al

film s . By applying a percentage of tax revenues from d i s t r i b u t i o n and

e x h i b i t i o n to funds t o help produce f i l m s , th e chances of production can

be incr ea se d and the c o s t be made l e s s burdensome to the governments.

In o r d e r to encourage national produ ction, few c o u n tr ie s have d e a l t ,

in one way or a n o th e r , with these i s s u e s . Without n a t i o n a l i z i n g her

t h e a t e r s , Cameroon helps production by p u t t i n g a c e r t a i n percentage o f

the taxes on t i c k e t s a le s in the funds o f the FODIC which su b sid izes

production. Ivory Coast encourages independent production by exempting

nationa l filmmakers from production and e x h i b i t i o n t a x e s . The SONAVOCI

in Upper Volta and th e OCINAM in Mali are n atio n al o rg a n iz a ti o n s which

own t h e a t e r s . The productions o f the CNC in Upper Volta and th e Centre

National de Production Cinematographique (CNPC) in Mali ar e subsid ized

87
by a percentage from the revenues of th e SONAVOCI and OCINAM. In

Guinea, Sily-Cinema c o n t r o ls produc tion, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and p a r t o f the

exhibition. The Guinean p o l i t i c s of production is s p e l l e d out by Minot

who s t a t e s t h a t

From a l l the movies shown in a given country a

c e r t a i n per centage should go toward promoting
production. The money t h a t i s c o l l e c t e d will
then be a v a i l a b l e f o r d i f f e r e n t filmmakers who
have produced screen plays to produce t h e i r
fil m s . We're doing ( t h i s ) in Guinea, but t h a t
i s a l s o because we con trol th e pr odu ction, the
d i s t r i b u t i o n , and most of the movie t h e a t e r s .
 134

The government c o n t r o l s th e national f il m

e n t e r p r i s e (which) i s r e sp o n s ib le f o r im­
po r ti n g a l l the films which ar e shown in
Guinea. 88

When one tu rn s now to look a t th e few f a c i l i t i e s o f production t h a t

e x i s t in Francophone A f r i c a , the following f a c t s become obvious: they

s t i l l r e q u ir e fo re i g n a s s i s t a n c e because they ar e e i t h e r incomplete or

they d o n ' t have a l l the t r a i n e d personnel necessary to run them. The

equipment i s o f te n u n d e r - u t i l i z e d and not well maintained. They o f te n

d u p l i c a t e equipment in 16 and 35mm i n s t e a d o f s p e c i a l i z i n g in one format

and thoroughly e x p l o i t i n g i t s economic and e s t h e t i c p o t e n t i a l s .

The argument t h a t th e s o - c a l l e d autonomous f a c i l i t i e s of production

a r e incomplete i s t r u e wherever one looks in A f ric a. In Guinea, the

i n s t a l l a t i o n o f 35mm f a c i l i t i e s , begun in 1966 by the West Germans, is

not y e t in f u l l s e r v i c e . Despite the resources of th e t e l e v i s i o n and

the d i f f e r e n t m i n i s t r i e s in Ivory Coast, the 16mm f a c i l i t i e s o f S i l y -

Cinema in Guinea, and the INAFEC in Upper Volta, Minot argued t h a t "The

s i t u a t i o n r i g h t now in p r a c t i c a l l y a l l African s t a t e s . . . i s t h a t when you

shoot your f ilm you have to send i t to a European l a b o r a t o r y to have i t

88
p r oce ss ed ." Despite the presence o f the f a c i l i t i e s , African films ar e

a lso taken to Europe f o r e d i t i n g and f o r the plac in g o f th e soundtrack

on them. M'Bala from Ivory Coast argued t h a t although he could have

f in i s h e d Ablakon, his l a s t f i l m , in th e co untry, he chose to mount the

89
sound and e d i t the f il m in Europe hecause i t was more convenient. As

I pointed out e a r l i e r , in Upper Volta, to o , the films of the CNC were

f in i s h e d in France, not a t th e CINAFRIC's supposedly complete f a c i l i t i e s .

C l e a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , I can make two types o f in fe re n c e s here: the

 135

f a c i l i t i e s in Africa ar e e i t h e r inadequate to work w it h, or the f i l m ­

makers and producers d o n ' t want t o use them f o r reasons I do not under­

stand a t t h i s moment. Meanwhile, the equipment s ta g n a te s because i t is

not being f u l u s e d or properly maintained. As Minot concludes, "Get­

t i n g i t i n to top technic al condition is d i f f i c u l t because o f the weather

c o n d i t i o n s , humidity, heat and so on. So when you have tech nical prob­

lems with your equipment i t can be d i s a s t r o u s because then you have to

90
send i t back to be r e p a i r e d . "

Another problem with th e s o - c a l l e d autonomous f a c i l i t i e s i s t h e i r

f a i l u r e to focus on one type o f equipment and production. Unlike Holly­

wood which p r i v i l e g e d s tu d i o production over a l l o t h e r s , the d i f f e r e n t

schools in France which e i t h e r s p e c i a l i z e d in 35mm production and never

91
used 16mm, or v i c e - v e r s a , production companies in A f r i c a , whether

governmental or p r i v a t e , ac quire in an in d i s c r i m i n a t e manner equipment

and f a c i l i t i e s in a l l formats. Besides la ck ing c h a r a c t e r , t h i s approach

to production i s w a s te fu l. The equipment is d u p li c a t e d and the techno­

l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n t r i e s t h a t make them ar e in c r e a s i n g l y depended

upon to r e p a i r the cameras or to render o t h e r s e r v i c e s t h a t are only

a v a i l a b l e from them.

There ar e methods t h a t the c o u n tr ie s could have used to avoid d u p l i ­

c a t io n o f equipment and thus economize on the cost of production. In

Ivory Coast, f o r example, where the t e l e v i s i o n and several branches of

the government own f a c i l i t i e s , the government could regroup the equip­

ment and q u a l i f i e d personnel in one or two places o f pr oduction. I f the

government decided on two l o c a t i o n s i n s t e a d o f one, the f i r s t one could

c o n s i s t o f 16mm f a c i l i t i e s which s p e c i a l i z e d in documentaries, e d u c a t i o n a l ,

 136

and r e a s e a r c h - o r i e n t e d fil m s . As has been shown in t h i s study, the 16mm

i s also adequate f o r f i c t i o n a l film s . However, the second s i t e could

have 35mm f a c i l i t i e s f o r f i c t i o n a l films only. In t h i s c a s e , the govern­

ment must r e a l i z e t h a t the c o s t o f producing 35mm film s cannot be r e ­

couped on a national level alone. No m atter how su cc es sful th e f ilm

might be, i t must be d i s t r i b u t e d i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y in o rder to stand any

chance o f recouping i t s c o s t . The d i f f i c u l t i e s o f recouping the co st of

pr oduction with 35mm is c l e a r l y , t h e r e f o r e , a good reason f o r th ese

c o u n t r ie s to work with the 16mm u n t i l they ar e ab le to f u l l y develop

i n t e r - A f r i c a n prod uction s. Thus, f o r Sily-Cinema, t o o , i t would have

been b e t t e r to deal with West Germany on improving the condition o f the

16mm f a c i l i t i e s and t r a i n i n g Guinean te c h n ic ia n s than to attempt to s e t

up 35mm f a c i l i t i e s .

Another way to avoid d u p l i c a t i o n o f equipment is to allow CINAFRIC

to play the r o l e t h a t the C.A.I. played in the production o f newsreels

and documentaries. I t was the C . A . I . ' s m er it to have proven t h a t one

production c e n te r could s e r v e r th e f il m need of a l l th e Francophone

c o u n t r ie s . An African production f a c i l i t y , such as CINAFRIC, can serve

the same f u n c tio n . What i s more, i t can do i t without the neo-colonial

reasons which determined th e C . A . I . ' s a c tio n s and do i t b e t t e r because

i t has African filmmakers and do i t cheaper because of the African s e t ­

ting. While th e C.A.I. emphasized neo -colonial dependencies v i s - a - v i s

i t s African customers, o r g a n iz a t io n s such as CINAFRIC w i ll emphasize

A f r i c a ' s independence from France. The prospects o f i n t e r - A f r i c a n

cinema will be discus sed below in the s e c t io n on CIPROFILM.

The f i n a l problem with the n atio n al production c e n t e r s is t h e i r

 137

r e p r e s s i o n o f counter-hegemonic views o r a l t e r n a t i v e hegemonies in the

films they produce o f co-produce. I have already mentioned t h a t in

Senegal the government used i t s r i g h t as producer to cu t out p a r t s i t

d i d n ' t l i k e in Xala and Njangaan. In o t h e r c o u n t r i e s , t o o , the govern­

ments, as producers, determine the c o n ten t of the fil m s . In Ivory

Coast, the films (Abusuan, Amenie, le s c o l l S g i e n n e s , 1 'herbe sauvage,

and D j e l i , e t c . ) work with th e government t o combat migration from the

v i l l a g e to the c i t y , i l l i t e r a c y , c o r r u p t i o n , and c a s t e systems. Before

D j e l i , the Ivorian cinema was c r i t i c i z e d f o r being a p o l i t i c a l , i . e . , f o r

92
not c h allengin g th e s t a t u s quo. In Upper Volta, th e films are e i t h e r

s e t in the d i s t a n t and safe p a s t (Wend Kuuni) or about n a tio n alism (sur

l e chemin de l a r e c o n c i l i a t i o n ). As I have mentioned above, Sily-Cingma

only produced propagandas and documentaries about the progress o f the

Guinean r e v o lu tio n .

The c r i t i c i s m here i s not a g a i n s t the government's attempt t o make

film p a r t i c i p a t e in the development. On th e c o n t r a r y , a conception of

f ilm as a tool o f development is r e v o lu tio n a r y and praisewor thy. What

i s being c r i t i c i z e d here i s the s e l f - s e r v i n g approach the governments

tak e to the use o f f ilm . Because they r e p re s s opposing views, the f i l m ­

makers must always say the same things about the p r e s i d e n t s , t r a d i t i o n

and modernity, e t c . I f the filmmakers d e p i c t th ese s u b je c t s in a d i f f e r ­

e n t manner, then they e i t h e r go to j a i l , as Cisse did a f t e r his c o n t r o ­

v e r s i a l f il m , Den Muso (1978), o r the film s are censored l i k e many of

Sembene's films in Senegal. The extreme case o f r e p r e s s io n is found in

Guinea where the government did not even allow independent cinema to

e x i s t s id e by s id e with S il y Cinema.
 138

Even though th e governments have no experience in filmmaking, they

must r e a l i z e t h a t d i r e c t o r s ar e not mindless people who simply arrange

convenient things in f r o n t o* the camera. The African c o u n t r ie s gain a

b e t t e r i n s i g h t o f themselves by cons iderin g the c o n t r ib u t i o n o f such

t a l e n t e d d i r e c t o r s as Sembene and Ciss6 as c o n s t r u c t i v e c r i t i c i s m , i n ­

stea d o f anti-government produ cts. The governments should r e a l i z e t h a t

i t i s e a s i e r to a p p r o p r ia t e an opposing view and control i t s overflow

than to r e p re s s i t . They can take a lesson from France which bought and

d i s t r i b u t e d a l l the a n t i - c o l o n i a l i s t films o f Sembene, in ste a d of t r y i n g

to stop them. Recently, Mali, to o , understood the advantage o f appro­

p r i a t i n g a r t i s t s and t h e i r work. The government shocked many people by

helping Cisse in the production and e x h i b i t i o n o f Baara and Finye, two

films on African t r a d e unions and on the weakness o f m i l i t a r y regimes.

As a r e s u l t , the m i l i t a r y regime in Mali is seen as r e s p e c t f u l of the

freedom o f ex pres sio n.

To turn now to i n t e r - A f r i c a n cinema, i t is easy to see in i t the

answers to some o f the problems posed by national f a c i l i t i e s . The prob­

lem o f depending on the p o s t-produ ctio n f a c i l i t i e s o f P a r is will be

solved once the African c o u n t r ie s o f one c u l t u r a l reg io n , or or the whole

c o n t i n e n t regroup the main f a c i l i t i e s of production in one country. In ­

stea d o f being f a c i l i t i e s which c r e a t e needs f o r Africans in ord er to

make them depend on European technology, the i n t e r - A f r i c a n f a c i l i t y w ill

93
emphasize an "inter-dependence" of the c o u n t r ie s upon each o t h e r .

Such a s t r a t e g y , beside reducing the c o s t o f pr oductio n, w ill a l s o p r e ­

vent the wasteful d u p l i c a t i o n o f equipment. By regrouping the filmmakers

and o t h e r t e c h n ic ia n s to work in one p la c e , the s t r a t e g y wi ll provide

 139

them with the op p o r tu n ity to exchange views and to formulate e s t h e t i c s

t h a t might c h a r a c t e r i z e an African f ilm school. The governments, to o,

will use the f a c i l i t i e s f o r co-producing among themselves.

The idea o f a regional or i n t e r - A f r i c a n pro duction, d i s t r i b u t i o n ,

and e x h i b i t i o n is not new. As th e c h a p te r on the FEPACI shows, the

filmmakers have been f i g h t i n g sin ce the e a r l y s i x t i e s f o r a u n i f i e d and

l i b e r a t e d African cinema. As r e c e n t l y as 1982, th e C o l l e c t i f L1Oei1

Ve r t , which is a r a d ic a l f a c t i o n of the FEPACI, de clared t h a t African

d i r e c t o r s were t i r e d o f depending on, and o f being patro nzied by the

French, and t h a t they "wanted to make co-production on the African level

and to put t h e i r s t r e n g t h t o g e t h e r in o rder to have f a c i l i t i e s o f pro-

94
d u c t i o n ." Although d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n w i ll be d e a l t with in

a d i f f e r e n t c h a p te r , i t i s important to poin t out t h a t the CIDC, which

took over the d i s t r i b u t i o n of f ilm in Francophone Africa a f t e r 1979,

had concluded in one o f i t s s tu d ie s t h a t i n t e r - A f r i c a i n cinema i s

necessary because, co nsid e ri ng the revenues from t i c k e t s a l e s , no indi-

95
vidual country among the group i s capable of s u s t a i n i n g a f ilm i n d u str y .

In anot he r study, the seminarians o f the CIDC argued t h a t

There cannot be a v ia b le African cinema on the

nation al level alone . There can only be one on
the re giona l and i n t e r - A f r i c a n l e v e l . Th erefo re ,
any e f f o r t to organize and develop f il m on a
nation al level must be done by counting on the
help o f a regional and i n t e r - A f r i c a n co-op er atio n
and s o l i d a r i t y . Film in d u s t r y , to o , must be i n ­
co rporated in the p o l i t i c s and the s e t s o f econ­
omic development which are al ready in place
r e g i o n a l l y and i n t e r n a t i o n a l l y . 96

The idea t h a t an i n t e r - A f r i c a n cinema i s not new can al s o be seen

through the e f f o r t s o f the FESPACO and th e INAFEC. Created a f t e r 1969,

the Fe s t i v a l Pan A f ric a in de cinema a Ouagadougou (FESPACO) had as i t s

 140

purpose to c o n t r ib u t e to the development o f African cinema. Convinced

t h a t f il m c o n s t i t u t e d a c u l t u r a l as well as a developmental t o o l , the

government o f Upper Volta c r e a te d the FESPACO in o rder to f a c i l i t a t e

the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f a l l African pr odu ction , and to r a i s e the conscious-

97
ness o f people toward the i s s u e s and problems o f African f ilm . The

f i r s t y e a r o f the FESPACO only included films from the region (Mali,

Senegal, Ivory Coast, Niger, and Upper V olta). Since 1969. however,

th e FESPACO has become b igge r and big g er . Today i t r e p r e s e n t s , with

the Journees Cinematographiques de Carthages ( J . C . C . ) , th e most import­

a n t occasions f o r African d i r e c t o r s to screen t h e i r f i l m s . The success

o f the FESPACO has a l s o i n s p ir e d the c r e a t i o n o f the t h i r d c ontinental

f ilm f e s t i v a l , the Mogadiscio Pan-African Film Symposium (MOGPAFIS).

The I n s t i t u t A f ric a in d 1Education Cinematographique (INAFEC) is

ano ther e f f o r t on r e g i o n a l i z a t i o n and i n t e r n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f African

film . Created in 1976 in Ougadougou with the help of the UNESCO and

the French m i n i s tr y o f Cooper ation, th e INAFEC i s a f ilm and t e l e v i s i o n

school with th e purpose of t r a i n i n g African s tu d e n ts to become f ilm

c r i t i c s and j o u r n a l i s t s , sound e n g in eer s, e l e c t r i c i a n s , cameramen, and

edi t o r s .

The tre nd toward r e g i o n a l i z a t i o n and i n t e r n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f f il m ,

begun by the formation of the FEPACI, the c r e a t i o n o f f e s t i v a l s , f il m

i n s t i t u t e s , and d i s t r i b u t i o n , led to the c r e a t i o n in 1979 o f the

Consortium I n t e r a f r i c a i n de production de f il m (CIPROFILM). Based a ls o

in Ouagadougou, the CIPROFILM has on i t s agenda to produce educational

and commercial films f o r th e member c o u n tr ie s of the d i s t r i b u t i o n com­

pany, CIDC. The CIPROFILM w ill be funded, p r im a r i l y , with the p a r t of

 141

the revenues from the d i s t r i b u t i o n of films by the CIDC. I t will be­

come s e l f - s u p p o r t i n g in the long run. The plans include the build ing
98
o f f a c i l i t i e s o f production and pos t-pr odu ction in 16 and 35mm.

However, unlike CINAFRIC (discussed above), the CIPROFILM has not

y e t b u i l t i t s f a c i l i t i e s and no film has been produced. The delay in

the CIPROFILM p r o j e c t imay be due to several f a c t o r s . As i t will be

seen in the ch apte r on d i s t r i b u t i o n , the CIDC, which i s the main

sponsor of CIPROFILM, does not y e t f u l l y con trol th e d i s t r i b u t i o n market

in Francophone A f rica. I t i s a ls o d i f f i c u l t f o r the c o u n tr ie s in the

region to break with France which they have depended upon as long as

they can remember. F i n a l l y , the equipment o f the CIPROFILM wi ll d u p l i ­

c a t e those o f CINAFRIC and thus c r e a t e competition in the same c i t y .

I d e a l l y , the CINAFRIC and CIFROFILM should work t o g e t h e r . According to

Bachy, th e r e is an agreement betweent the two to divide the r e s p o n s i b i l ­

ities. Since CINAFRIC has everything but film processing l a b o r a t o r i e s ,

CIPROFILM wi ll build these f a c i l i t i e s . "

There is no doubt t h a t Francophone African cinema has come a long

way. I t has made progress in ac quiring more equipment and in becoming

l e s s dependent upon France. There ar e more and more African names on

the generics of African films as cinematographers, sound p i c k e r s , e d i t ­

o r s , and producers. There ar e co- productions and plans are being made

f o r regional produ ctions . Most c o u n t r ie s now have p o l i t i c s o f produc­

t i o n which cover d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n and which encourage national

production. More im port an tl y, the young d i r e c t o r s such as th e group

around the C o l l e c t i f 1 'Oeil Vert ar e inventorying th e equipment o f pro­

duction in Africa in order to emphasize inter-dependence between the

 142

Af ricans and to de-emphasize the dependence upon France. I t is possible,

t h e r e f o r e , to close t h i s ch apte r with optimism. Ouagadougou is going to

re place Par is as the c e n t e r o f production and p o s t-productio n o f African

film.
 143

Notes

^Jean Rouch, Films ethnographiques stir 1 'Afrique N o ir e , P a r is :

UNESCO (1967), p. 395.
2
Paul in S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n : des Origine a 1973, P a r is :
Presence A f ri c a i n e (1975), pp. 104-105.
3
See above ch apter on " F ran c e's C ontr ibution to African Film."

4Jean-Rene Debrix, "Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , " in Afrique Contemporaine

No. 38-39 (July-O ct. 1968), p. 7.
5
See above c h a p te r on " F ra nc e's C ontr ib ution to African Film."
0
Jean Rouch, Film ethnog rap hique s. . . , p. 395.

7I b i d . , p. 399.
Q
On the German c o n t r i b u t i o n to Ghanaian p r o ductio n, see the ch ap ter
above on production in Anglophone A f rica. See a l s o : John C o l l i n s ,
"NAFTI Leads the Way: Interview with Kweku Opoku, d i r c t o r of the Nation­
al Film and T e le v is io n I n s t i t u t e in Ghana," in West Africa No. 3477
(April 9, 1984), pp. 769-770.

9 / *
Guy Hennebelle, " E n t r e ti e n avec Jean-Rene Debrix," in Afrique
L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e Vol. 43 (1975), p. 81.

^°Rouch, Films ethnographiques , p. 395.

11 I b i d . , p. 396.

12I b i d . , p. 396-401.

13I b i d . , p. 402.

^ T i m i t e B a s s o r i , "Un Cinema Mort-ne?", in Presence A f ric a in e No. 49

(1964), p. 114.

"*3 I learned t h i s from a co nversa tion a t the Cinematheque de la

Cooperation with Feli x Diagne (filmmaker from Sen eg al), Joseph Akouissonne
 144

(Central A f r i c a ) , and Evelyn Casnave (Manager o f the Cinematheque) .

^6 I am not using the word "defy" l i g h t l y . Guy Hennebelle, to o , is

o f th e view t h a t "Only t h r e e c o u n t r ie s have t r i e d to take th e d es ti n y of
t h e i r cinema in t h e i r own hands: they ar e Guinea, Upper Volta, and Mali,"
in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e ( speical is s u e on "Les Cinemas A f r i ­
ca! n r e n i g T F T r N o T T T T T W y r p T -197.

^Unpublish ed in te rv ie w with Tra ore , recorded by the author o f t h i s

s tu d y , Los Angeles, 1983.

18 ^
Ferid Boughedir, "Le cinema A f r i c a i n , pays par pay s ," in Jeune
Afrique P l u s , No. 6 (April 1984), p. 72.

19I b i d . , p. 77.

20
Paul in S. Vieyra, Le Cinema e t V A f r i q u e , P a r i s : Presence A f ric a in
(1969), p. 184.

21 I b i d . , p. 184.

22
Francophone African d i r e c t o r s were forbidden t o f ilm Africa by the
Laval Decree. See c h a p t e r above on "France's Contribution to African
Production."

^3Paulin S. Vieyra, Le Cinema e t 1 'A f r i q u e , p. 186.

^ J e a n - R e n e Debrix, "Le Cinema A f r i c a i n . " in Afrique Contemporaine

No. 38-39, p. 10.

25
According to Bachy, "the s t r u c t u r e o f production was lacking every­
where (in A f r i c a ) . Filmmakers who, one must admit,' were i d e a l i s t s c r eated
t h e i r own production houses. Besides t h e i r courage they had no o t h e r means
o f pr odu ction, but they counted, p a r t i a l l y , on the help of the Cooperation
f r a n c a i s e . Their production companies had as names: Pascal Abikanlou:
Abiscal Films in Cotonou; Daniel Kamwa, D.K.7 films in Douala and P a r i s ;
Desire Ecare, Les Films de l a Lagune in Abidjan; Oumarou Ganda, Cabas
Films in Niamey; P h i lip p e Maury, Les Films Philippe Maury in L i b r e v i l l e ;
Sembene Ousmane, Les Films Domirev in Dakar; Med Hondo, L e sT il m s du
S o le il 0 in P a r i s ; and o t h e r s , " in Cin£mAction No. 26 ( sp ecia l i s s u e s :
7lCinemas n o irs d ' a f r i q u e " ) , 1982, p. 27.
pC
See ch apter above on "F ra nc e's Contribution to African Production. "

27
See the c h a p te r on the FEPACI.
 145

28
Paulin S, Vieyra, "Le cinema au Senenal en 1976" in Presence
A f r i c a i n , No. 207 (1978), p. 207.

29I b i d . , p. 207.

30
Unpublished in terv iew with Traore.
31
See above ch apter on FEPACI. See a l s o Farida Ayari, "Vers un
renouveau du cinema a f r i c a i n : F a u t - i l d is s o u r d re la FEPACI?" and "L'Oeil
V e r t ," in Le Continent (March 9 and 10, 1981). No page numbers in d i c a t e d .

32
Paulin S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n . Notes 4, p. 172. See also
p. 187 f o r more d e t a i l s on censor ship in Senegal.

33Paulin S. Vieyra, "Le Cinema au Senegal en 1976," pp. 210-217.

34
Unpublished in te rv iew with Traore.

35 *
Ferid Bouqhedir, "Le cinema a f r i c a i n , pays par pays," pp. 73 and
77.

36 *
Unpublished in terv ie w with Gnoan M'Bala. Los Angeles, 1983.

37
V icto r Bachy, Le Cinema en cSte d ' i v o i r e , Brus se ls : Cinemedia
(1982), pp. 27-34.

3®Ib id ., p. 20.

39I b i d . , p. 28.

49Paulin S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , p. 54.

41 - A
V ictor Bachy, Le Cinema en Cote d ' i v o i r e , p. 22.

42I b i d . , p. 29.

Chemin de f e r de la R.A.N. (16mm), Kossou I I I (16mm). For f u r t h e r

information see Bachy, pp. 29-30.

44I b i d . , p. 19.

45 - .
Guy Hennebelle and Catherine Ruelle in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t
A r t i s t i q u e , No. 49 (sp e c ia l i s s u e s : "Cineastes d 1Afrique n oire ’1')' 1978, p. 93.
 146

46
I b i d . , p. 93. See als o Bachy, p. 59. Anemie won awards a t the
F esti val o f Dinard and a t JCC.

47
Unpublished in terv iew with M'Bala.

48Bachy, p. 57.

49I b i d . , 22.

50I b i d . , 22.

51 I b i d . , 24.

52 *
L ' a u d io - v is u e l en Cote d ' i v o i r e - Annual re 1984, Abidjan;
M inist^re de 1 ' Education National e t Recherche S c i e n t i f i q u e , e t al (1984),
pp. 11-53.
53
Unpublished inte rv ie w with M'Bala.

55
Bachy, p. 24.

88Guy Hennebelle, in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 20

( special is s u e : "Les Cinemas A f r i c a m s en 1972)', p. 1'97.
57
Paulin S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , pp. 114-115. For more
d e t a i l s , see Hennebelle in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 20,
p. 197, and Bachy, La Haute Volta e t le Cin&ma, Paris: Ed itions OCIC/
L'Harmattan (1983), pp. 11-14.

58I b i d . , Vieyra, Hennebelle, and Bachy.

59 -
Hennebelle, p. 197. See p a r t i c u l a r l y Bachy, Le Cinema au M ali,
P a r i s : Editions OCIC/L'Harmattan (1973), pp. 12-13.

68See note two above.

8^For information about films produced by the Malian government, see

Bachy, Le Cinema au M ali. See below in t h i s c h ap ter for fil m s produced
by the government o f Upper Volta.

62
Guinea was the f i r s t Francophone Afri can country to become
 147

independent in 1958. The move so s u r p r i s e d and humiliated General de

Gaulle t h a t he vowed to punish t h e Guineans. The independence did not
only r e s u l t in a r e v o l u ti o n of a l l aspec ts of l i f e in Guinea, but i t
a ls o brought about an i s o l a t i o n o f the country from i t s pro-France
neighbors. This i s o l a t i o n is a t the root o f the f a i l u r e o f many economic
and development ven tures o f the country. I t is because o f t h i s economic
boycotting t h a t c r i t i c s , such as Bachy, blame France f o r punishing those
Francophone c o u n tr ie s t h a t attem pt to break with her. I t i s important,
t h e r e f o r e , to look a t th e d i f f i c u l t i e s in the development o f Guinean
f il m pr od uc tion, to o , in t h i s l i g h t .

^ P a u l i n S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , p. 104.

64I b i d . , p. 105.

65 t
Rouch, Films ethn ogr ap hiques , p. 402-403. According to Rouch,
Ivory Coast and Senegal were some o f the Francophone co u n tr ie s which were
i l l - a d v i s e d in t h e manner in which they produced t h e i r monthly and b i ­
monthly newsreels. They used 35mm f a c i l i t i e s to make newsreels which
r e q u ir e d the l a b o r a t o r i e s o f P ar is to be f i n i s h e d . This did not only
c o s t a g r e a t deal o f money, i t a l s o took a long time. In t h i s sense ,
one can e a s i l y see th e advantages of the 16mm f a c i l i t i e s which Guinea
has.

66Guy Hennebelle, in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e No. 20, p. 240.

cn
Paulin S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , note 3. p. 108. According
to Vieyra, Mohamed Lamine”Akin, Costa Diagne, and o th e r filmmakers were
accused of p l o t t i n g a coup d ' e t a t a g a i n s t the p r e s id e n t o f Guinea in
1970. They were a r r e s t e d and put in j a i l . By 1970, the Guinean p r e s i ­
dent was notorio us f o r his d i c t a t o r i a l and unp red ictable behavior.
fift
Ferid Boughedir, "Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , pays par pays," pp. 73-74.

69I b i d . , p. 74.

^ G i l b e r t Minot, "Toward th e African Cinema," in UFAHAMU Vol. XII,

No. 2 (1983), p. 47.

^ B a c h y , La Haute Volta e t l e Cinema, p. 13. In the beginning, the

S0NAV0CI was completely owned by th e government. According to Bachy.
"Today, the S0NAV0CI i s an anonymous s o c ie ty with a j o i n t economy. The
a s s e t s c o n s is t o f 20 m i llio n CFA Francs, divided as follows: 74.65% f o r
th e government and 25.35% f o r d i f f e r e n t p r i v a t e s o u rc e s ."

7?
Paulin S. Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n , p. 115 and Victor Bachy,
La Haute Volta e t le Cinema, p. 19.
 148

73Vieyra, p. 115.
74
Bachy, p. 8 .

75I b i d . , p. 22.

76Vieyra, p. 116.

77Quoted by Bachy, p. 14.

78I b i d . , p. 12.

79I b i d . , p. 72.

80I b i d . , p. 24.

81
I b i d . , pp. 61-69. See a l s o "Inter view with Moustapha Ky,
D irecteur o f CINAFRIC." Author not l i s t e d in L'Qbservateur: Quotidien
Voltaique d 1information No. 2520 (Feb. 2, 1982), pp. 10-14.

82I b i d . , p. 10.

83I b i d . , p. 10.

84I b i d . , p. 10- 11.

88Conversation with Sina Boli (filmmaker from Upper V o lt a ) , ATRIA,

P a r i s , 1983.
O C

Bachy, l e Cinema en Cote d ' i v o i r e , p. 23.

87 *
See Bachy, Le Cinema au M ali, f o r f u r t h e r information.

88G i l b e r t Minot, "Toward the African Cinema," p. 42.

89Unpublished interv iew with M'Bala.

98Minot, p. 41.
Q1
Rouch, Films ethnog ra phiques , pp. 379-381. Rouch s aid t h a t a t
the IDHEC they i n s i s t e d t n a t a l l films be made with 35mm equipment.
"However, a t the same time, t h i s i n s t i t u t e was i n t e r e s t e d in p a r a l l e l
 149

experiences o f young filmmakers (1946) with the 16mm," p. 381.

92
Bachy, Le Cinema en Cote d ' i v o i r e , p. 73.

93
C.I.D.C. f i l e s , "Note su r l a f i s c a l i t e cinematographique en
Afrique Noire Francophone," Ouagadougou: unpublished document, p. 5.

94
Farida A y a r i, "Vers un rdnouveau du cinema A f r i c a i n . " No page
indicated.

" " N o t e s sure la f i s c a l i t e cinematographique en Afrique Noire

Francophone," pp. 4-6.

" c . I . D . C . f i l e s “Fin du colloque su r l a production cinematograph­

iq u e ," in Le Sahel (Niamey, Niger) (5-3-1982), p. 2.

97B. Hubert Pare, "8 EME FESPACO: Symbole de l ' U n i t S A f r i c a i n e , "

in Carrefour A f r ic a i n (Ouagadougou, Upper Volta) No. 765 (11-2-1983),
p. 23.
no
Bachy, La Haute Volta e t l e cinlm a, p. 60.

" i b i d . , p. 68.
 150

CHAPTER VII

PRODUCTION IN LUSOPHONE AFRICA:

TOWARD THE KUXA KENEHA IN MOZAMBIQUE

The purpose o f t h i s ch ap te r is to shed l i g h t on the progress of

f il m production in Lusophone A f rica. I will show t h a t th e background

of natio na l cinema in Angola, Guinea-Bissau, and Mozambique i s in the

documentaries and r e v o l u ti o n a r y films made f o r the l i b e r a t i o n movements

by such f o re ig n d i r e c t o r s as the Yugoslave Dragutin Popovic, the Guade­

loupean Sarah Maldoror, and the Afro-American Robert Van Lierop. The

r e s t o f the ch ap ter wi ll be devoted to Mozambican cinema, not only be­

cause i t i s the most important in the a r e a , but a l s o because i t embodies

the experiences o f such i n t e r n a t i o n a l d i r e c t o r s as Ruy Guerra, Jean

Rouch and Jean-Luc Godard.

Unlike the B r i t i s h and th e Belgians who s e t up f a c i l i t i e s in the

colonies to produce c o lo n ial films and to t r a i n t h e i r s u b je c ts to make

such f i l m s j th e Portuguese lim ited production to monthly newsreels which

were made f o r c o l o n i a l i s t propaganda, and pornographic films produced in

2
the co lonies by Portugal and South A frica . They s e t up a lim it e d i n f r a ­

s t r u c t u r e o f production f o r the purpose of shooting the newsreels and the

pornographic films which they s e n t to Madrid or Johannesburg f o r the po st-

3
production. They were not i n t e r e s t e d in African c u l t u r e s except to show

t h e i r i n f e r i o r i t y to European c u l t u r e s . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e 5 a t th e end

o f the Portuguese co l o n i a l is m , t h e r e were no production f a c i l i t i e s or

t e c h n i c i a n s which the independent s t a t e s could i n h e r i t . Everything had

 151

to be b u i l t from the s t a r t . To put i t in Pedro Pimente's words, "in

terms o f pro du ction, we s t a r t e d from nothing. Not one Mozambican f il m ­

maker e x i s t e d in 1975. We s t a r t e d t r a i n i n g people and g e t t i n g te c h n o l­

ogy."4

The films about such l i b e r a t i o n movements as the P.A.I.G. in

Guinea Bissau, th e M.P.L.A. in Angola, and the F.R.E.L.I.M.O. in Mozam­

bique ar e the f i r s t films in which th e Lusophone Africans assumed d e c i ­

sion-making r o le s as to the s e l e c t i o n o f the image, the ideology o f the

f i l m ' s d i s c o u r s e , and the audience f o r which the films were made. Al­

though the filmmakers were f o r e i g n e r s , the films were used as weapons

a g a i n s t the oppress or. To use a terminology from Solanas and Gettino

in t h e i r theory and p r a c t i c e o f Third Cinema, i t was with these " g u e r r i l a "

film s t h a t Lusophone Africans f i r s t r e a l i z e d the importance of cinema.

P r i o r to these f il m s , productions were o b je c ts of colon ial r e p r e s e n t a t i o n .

The films were used in several ways by the l i b e r a t i o n movements.

The documentaries exposed to the o u tsid e world the a t r o c i t i e s committed

by Portugal on the African people. They served a diplomatic purpose by

informing people "about what was going o n , " 6 and by arguing f o r the r i g h t

o f the African people to s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n . In the e a r l y days o f i t s

formation, the FRELIMO, f o r example, i n v i t e d filmmakers from Europe and

America to f il m the r e v o l u ti o n . Vinceremos (1965), by the Yugoslav

Dragutin Popovic, and Viva FRELIMO (1969), by a team from Holland, are

s h o r t documentaries made c l a n d e s t i n e l y on the b a t t l e f r o n t to show the

progress o f th e l i b e r a t i o n s t r u g g l e . Viva FRELIMO contains an interv iew

with Samora Machel, then l e a d e r o f the movement and now P r e s i d e n t o f

Mozambique. In Guinea-Bissau, the P.A.I.G. i n v i t e d filmmakers from France,

I t a l y , England, Cuba, Sweden, and Holland. In 1968, the B r i t i s h j o u r n a ­
 152

l i s t , Basil Davidson, made a s h o r t documentary, T e r r o r i s t s A t t a c k , on

the Portuguese invasion of the headquarters o f the Freedom F i g h t e r s . In

1970, a French group made No Pincha, a 70mm documentary on the people of

Guinea-Bissau and t h e i r overwhelming support o f the program of the P.A.I.G.

Sim ilar films were made in Angola, on the M.P.L.A.'s l i b e r a t i o n s t r u g g l e .

The films a l s o served an i n s t r u c t i o n a l purpose. In t h i s r eg ard , the

l i b e r a t i o n movements used films as a school to teach people about the

s i g n i f i c a n c e o f the r e v o l u t i o n , the importance o f ed uc ation, and about

the v i c t o r i e s of the l i b e r a t i o n f r o n t . As s t a t e d above, th e films con­

t a i n interview s with leaders who, as id e from addressing th e o u ts i d e world,

spoke to t h e i r own people about r i g h t s such as ed ucation, which were

denied them by the Portuguese co lo n ia li s m , and which the r e v o l u ti o n pro­

vided them. Before independence in Mozambique, when the FRELIMO had i t s

headquarters in Tanzania, a French group, C inethique, was asked to make

E tu d ie r , p r o d u ir e , combattre (1971), a s h o r t f ilm which shows "in a did­

a c t i c manner the teaching methods o f a FRELIMO school in T anz an ia."7

The same y e a r , a Swedish team, Lennart Maimer and Ingelo Romare, made

Dans n otr e pays, le s b a l l e s commencent a f l e u r i r , filmmakers from the

People's Republic o f China made Le peuple du Mozambique avance, and the

Afro-American Lierop d i r e c t e d A Luta Continua, a l l o f which ar e s h o r t

films in support of the r e v o l u ti o n . Lierop desc rib ed his f il m as a

"media-treatment" o f the l i b e r a t i o n s t r u g g l e which showed to th e Mozam­

bicans "how people in o t h e r p a r t s o f the country or in o t h e r p a r t s of

the world who have s i m i l a r problems are dealing with those problems, so
g
t h a t they can use those as models to t r y to change t h e i r l i v e s . "

L i e r o p 's d e s c r i p t i o n o f the f u n c t io n o f his f il m i s r eminis ce nt of

 153
Sol anas and G e t t i n o ' s d e s c r i p t i o n o f the e f f e c t o f Third Cinema on people.

They s t a t e d t h a t t h i s cinema c r eate d "with each showing, as in a r ev olu­

t i o n a r y m i l i t a r y i n c u r s i o n , a l i b e r a t e d space, a decolonized t e r r i t o r y .

The showing can be turned i n to a kind o f p o l i t i c a l ev en t, which, accord­

ing to Fanon, could be 'a l i t u r g i c a l a c t , a p r iv i l e g e d occasion f o r human

g
beings to hear and be h e a r d 1."

F i n a l l y , the films served a c u l t u r a l and en te rta inm e nt purpose. To

achieve t h i s e f f e c t , the filmmakers had to tra nscen d the documentary form,

the mere recording and ar ranging o f f a c t s to be exposed. They had to make

i n t e r v e n ti o n s which manipulated the events in o rder to achieve a g r e a t e r

e s t h e t i c e f f e c t on the audiences. For example, s t o r y - t e l l i n g time of

heroic moments were longer and more b e a u t i f u l than usual in order to allow

the viewer time f o r i d e n t i f i c a t i o n . The co ntent o f such her oic moments

a l s o included h eroes/heroines and value systems which were supposed to •

have l a s t i n g e f f e c t s . Maldoror did ex a c tl y t h i s in her f i r s t f e a t u r e ,

Sambizanga (1972). Based on the s t r u g g l e o f the M.P.L.A. in Angola, the

f ilm d e p i c t s a woman coming to a r e v o lu ti o n a r y consciousness. I t also

c r e a t e s super-heroes who s a c r i f i c e t h e i r own l i v e s f o r the l i b e r a t i o n

s tr u g g l e . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , the e s t h e t i c i n t e n t i o n o f the filmmaker

was to c r e a t e a p o s i t i v e r o le f o r women in the re v o lu tio n and to es se n-

t i a l i z e the l i b e r a t i o n s t r u g g l e as the most important element in p e o p le 's

lives. Sambizanga had been c r i t i c i z e d f o r being "too b e a u t i f u l " and

t h e r e f o r e l e s s a u t h e n t i c to African r e a l i t i e s . ^ 0 Apparently, such

c r i t i c i s m , while i t i s f a i t h f u l to the c o n s t r a i n t s o f s o c i a l i s t re a lism ,

remains blind to the need of the filmmaker t o c r e a t e i d e a l i z e d r o l e models

who ar e necessary f o r the new r e v o lu ti o n a r y s t a t e . Before Sambizanga,

 154

Maldoror made a s h o r t f il m on th e l i b e r a t i o n movement in Angola,

Monangambe (1970), with purpose to teach and to e n t e r t a i n . The f il m is

about the v i s i t o f an Angolan woman to her husband who is j a i l e d by the

Portuguese colonial a u t h o r i t y . The theme is an emergent re v o lu tio n a r y

Angolan c u l t u r e , th e sign system o f which is d i f f e r e n t from t h a t o f the

oppressor's culture.

I t is c l e a r , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t even before independence, f il m played

an important r o le in the l i v e s o f Lusophone Africa ns . Unlike o t h e r

African c o u n t r ie s where f il m production was c o n t r o l l e d by the colonial

mast ers, in the Portuguese co lonies th e g u e r r i l l a movements were involved

in the production o f films which they used as t o o l s o f l i b e r a t i o n . Des­

p i t e t h e i r l im it e d r e s o u r c e s , i t was because they were aware o f f il m as

a p o t e n t i a l tool o f work and en ter ta in m e n t t h a t the Lusophone co u n tr ie s

in general and Mozambique in p a r t i c u l a r , soon a f t e r t h e i r independence

in 1975, continued t o use i t as one o f the key ar eas f o r development.

During the f i r s t y e a r o f independence, Angola produced se ve ral films

on h i s t o r y , c u l t u r e , and work. The filmmakers were from France and

B r a z i l , but t h e r e were a ls o some Angolans who got t h e i r t r a i n i n g by

a s s i s t i n g foreig n filmmakers during th e l i b e r a t i o n s tr u g g l e . They were

Luandina V i e i r a , a n o v e l i s t and poet whose works were adapted by Maldoror

(Monangambe and Sambizanga) , Rue de Carvalho, who was born in Portugal

but decided f o r an Angolan c i t i z e n s h i p , Abrantes Menas and Antonio Ole.

The film s made in 1975 included Angola, guerre du pe uple, a s h o r t film

on the s tr u g g l e o f the M.P.L.A. by a French d i r e c t o r , Bruno Muel, and

Geracao 50, a documentary on t h r e e Angolan poets (Agostino Neto, Antonio

J a c i n t o , and V i r i a t o da Cruz) by Ruy de Carvalho. But the most ambitious

 155

f il m p r o j e c t o f t h a t ye a r was Sou Angolano Trafaalho come f a r c a , a s e r i e s

of eleven documentaries on workers. The films were made by Angolan

d i r e c t o r s (Ole, de Carvalho, e t a l ) with the help o f Muel and the Collec ­

t i v e U nicite from F r a n c e . ^

The Angolans a l s o acquired t e l e v i s i o n the same y e a r they became i n ­

dependent. However, they did not c r e a t e f a c i l i t i e s o f f il m production.

They continued to r e l y on European f a c i l i t i e s as in the time o f the

lib e ra tio n struggle. U nfort unate ly, t h e r e f o r e , the Angolan production

decreased a f t e r 1975, perhaps p a r t l y because filmmaking was only a second­

ary occupation o f some Angolans who were t r a i n e d during the r e v o l u ti o n

and p a r t l y because o f the lack o f the f a c i l i t i e s o f production. Now t h a t

Angola was independent, t h e r e was als o the economic problem o f recouping

the c o s t o f production o f the f ilm s . In t h i s regard the country needed

to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n , a t a s k which has so f a r

eluded many c o u n t r ie s in the Third World where American, In dian, and

Kung Fu films dominate the s c re e n s . In o r d e r to a l l e v i a t e the problem,

Angola jo i n e d Mozambique and o t h e r r e v o l u t i o n a r y c o u n tr ie s in Africa to

c r e a t e in 1977 the A s soc iation A fri c a i n e de Cooperation Cinematographique

(AACC). The purpose o f the AACC was to s to p th e fo re ign monopoly on d i s ­

t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n by n a t i o n a l i z i n g the movie t h e a t e r s and c r e a t i n g

an i n t e r - A f r i c a n d i s t r i b u t i o n company which would use films from African

and o t h e r r e v o l u t i o n a r y c o u n t r i e s .
However, according t o P i e r r e Haffner,
12
the plans o f th e AACC have not y e t gone i n t o e f f e c t . Meanwhile, in

Angola, only two d i r e c t o r s , Ole and de Carvalho, have been working con­

sisten tly . Filmmaker l a u r e a t o f Angola, de Carvalho, makes most o f the

documentaries needed by the country. In 1979-81 alone he d i r e c t e d

 156
13
Presentz Angolans/Tempo Mumuila, which included a s e r i e s o f ten f il m s .

As f o r Ole, his important works include Learn in Order to Serve B e tt e r

(1976), The Rhythm o f N'Gola Ritriios (1977), Pathway to the S tar s (1980),

and Mayombe which i s unfin ished and c o - d i r e c t e d with Guerra in Mozambique.

Guinea-Bissau had no s i g n i f i c a n t post-independence production which

can be discussed in t h i s study. In h is book, Le Cinema A f r ic a in : des

o r i g i n e s a 1973, Paulin Vieyra mentioned some filmmakers from Guinea-

Bissau who were g e t t i n g t h e i r t r a i n i n g in the Soviet Union, Cuba and

14
Senegal. Since independence, however, these filmmakers must have t u r n ­

ed to o t h e r a c t i v i t i e s . A r e c e n t d i c t i o n a r y e s t a b l i s h e d by V icto r Bachy
1^
on African filmmakers and t h e i r film s included nobody from Guinea-Bissau.

The e x t e n t to which the post-independence f il m production slowed down in

a l l Lusophone c o u n tr ie s except Mozambique, in s p i t e o f the awareness in

these c o u n tr ie s o f the persu as ive p o t e n t i a l s o f f i l m , may a l s o be blamed

on the lack o f l e a d e r s h i p and p o l i t i c s of production. For example, un like

Angola and Guinea-Bissau, Mozambique is e s p e c i a l l y lucky to have a t the

head of the National I n s t i t u t e of Cinema Ruy Guerra who was a ls o a chef-

d e - f i l in the B r a z i lia n Cinema Novo. As f o r th e p o l i t i c s of pr oduc tion,

the Mozambicans a l s o c a l l e d upon such masters as Rouch and Godard to r e ­

search t o g e t h e r what image, what equipment o f pro duction, what producers

would be r i g h t f o r a young country l i k e Mozambique. This is n o t , however,

to imply t h a t everything went smoothly f o r the Mozambicans, once they had

brought t o g e th e r a g i a n t from Cinema V e r i t e , one from the New Wave and one

from Cinema Novo. In f a c t , th e r e were c o n f l i c t s and f r u s t r a t i o n on the

p a r t o f the filmmakers. However, as the remainder o f t h i s c h a p te r w ill

show, th e Mozambican f il m gained by the presence of th ese t h r e e filmmakers.

 157

Although a t one point they coordinated t h e i r e f f o r t s , G u er ra, Rouch,

and Godard were in Mozambique f o r d i f f e r e n t reasons . Guerra was a t the

National Film I n s t i t u t e , Rouch was working on a Super 8mm p r o j e c t with

the Department o f Communication a t the U niversity o f Mozambique, and

Godard and the French t e l e v i s i o n producer Sonimage had a two y e a r con­

t r a c t to study on video the t e l e v i s i o n needs of the country before th e

arrival of television. Although Guerra and Rouch l a t e r dis ag ree d on

such i ss u e s as the way s tu d e n ts were t r a i n e d to become filmmakers, the

d e f i n i t i o n o f mise -e n- scen e, the format of the equipment and th e i n t e n t ­

ions o f th e filmmaker, and although Rouch was forced to leave Mozambique

because o f these disagreements, i t must be pointed out t h a t both Rouch

and Godard were i n v i t e d to Mozambique by the government with the guid ­

ance o f Guerra and the National Film I n s i t u t e . As i t w ill become c l e a r

with the h i s t o r y of each o f the th re e p r o je c t s and the e v a lu a t io n t h a t

w ill follow, no m atter what complications took place by br inging t o g e th e r

filmmakers who were r a d i c a l l y d i f f e r e n t in t h e i r conception of produc tion,

Mozambican cinema has become r i c h e r . Some c r i t i c s compare i t to Cuban

cinema, while oth er s simply see i t as unique in A f r i c a . 1*’

The Mozambican Film I n s t i t u t e was c r e a te d in November 1975, f i v e

months a f t e r the country became independent. The speed with which the

I n s t i t u t e was c r e a te d shows t h a t i t was among th e top p r i o r i t i e s of the

young country. To put i t in Pimente's words

. . . i t was c l e a r to our leaders t h a t cinema could

be very important f o r the new n a t i o n ' s develop­
ment. T h a t's why some months a f t e r Independence
and in a moment when Mozambique was facing very
d i f f i c u l t proble ms--f or example, a ll the Portu­
guese were f l e e i n g the country and f o r twelve
m il l i o n people th e r e were only f o r t y d o c t o r s - -
 158

the government decided to found a f ilm i n s t i t u t e ,

j u s t a f t e r i t s t a r t e d a l i t e r a c y campaign.17

In th e beginning t h e r e were two reasons f o r c r e a t i n g The National

Film I n s t i t u t e : "The d e co lo n izatio n o f film d i s t r i b u t i o n " and the pro­

duction o f natio na l film s and t h e i r d i s t r i b u t i o n in Mozambique and out-

1 O
sid e the country. In the area of f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n , th e new l eaders

of Mozambique were concerned about the q u a l i t y o f films they received

from America, I t a l y , Hong Kong, and India. These f i l m s , beside being a

negative infl u enc e on the people, were a l s o used to undermine the Mozam­

bican economy. I t was in t h i s sense t h a t Pimente argued t h a t the d i s t r i ­

bution companies based in "Mozambique and South Africa used f il m to ex-

19
p o r t currency in a c l a s s i c s i t u a t i o n o f economic dependence." The

f i r s t p r i o r i t y of th e Film I n s t i t u t e was, t h e r e f o r e , to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s ­

t r i b u t i o n , not only so t h a t "the films d i s t r i b u t e d in Mozambique were in

20
accord with th e p o l i t i c a l , c u l t u r a l , and human values" of th e country,

b u t , a l s o , so t h a t the revenues could be used to produce national films

21
and to build new e x h i b i t i o n f a c i l i t i e s in the c o u ntr yside.

In terms o f pro duct io n, in 1975, Mozambique had n e i t h e r filmmakers

nor f a c i l i t i e s of production. The f il m need o f the country was, t h e r e ­

f o r e , f i l l e d by fo re ig n d i r e c t o r s l i k e Lierop from the U.S.A., Fernando

S i l v a , Cel so Luccas, and Jose Celso-Correa from B r a z il. There were a ls o

Cuban and L e f t i s t filmmakers from Europe. S ilv a made a documentary de­

p i c t i n g the h i s t o r y of the s tr u g g l e which led to independence, Un ano de

independencia (1975). In 1976, he d i r e c t e d Mapai on th e a t t a c k of such

Mozambican v i l l a g e s as Mapai by th e Rhodesian army o f Ian Smith. The

f ilm e xplains t h a t the t e r r o r i s t a t t a c k s were motivated because o f the

support given by Mozambique to the l i b e r a t i o n movement o f Zimbabwe. In

 159

1977, Luccas and Correa d i r e c t e d a 150mm documentary, 2E[, on "a l l the

stages o f the l i b e r a t i o n s tr u g g l e led by the FRELIMO s in ce June 25, 1962,

when the movement was founded, to June 25, 1975, when the country became

independent, passing through September 25, 1964, the date of th e f i r s t

cl ash with the colonial regime, to April 25, 1974, when the colonial
22
regime was d e f e a t e d . " The same y e a r , Lierop f i n i s h e d h i s second s h o r t ,

0 Povo Qrganizado, on Mozambique. When the f ilm was premiered in the

U.S.A., Lierop r a i s e d over $48,000, which he s e n t to Mozambique f o r the

23
co n s tr u c tio n o f a h o s p i t a l .

While f o re ig n d i r e c t o r s were making the f i r s t films f o r Mozambique,

the Film I n s t i t u t e was t r y i n g t o acquir e i t s own f a c i l i t i e s o f production

and to take the necessary s te p s so t h a t Mozambican d i r e c t o r s could re place

f o r e i g n e r s . With the help o f f o r e i g n d i r e c t o r s such as Lierop and Haile

Gerima, the Film I n s t i t u t e d i s t r i b u t e d i t s films in American u n i v e r s i t i e s

and o r g an izatio n s in o rder to r a i s e funds which could buy equipment in

16 and 35mm. The I n s t i t u t e als o b e n e f it e d from donations o f equipment

by f r i e n d l y c o u n t r ie s and i n s t i t u t i o n s . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , by 1978 i t

had reached i t s goal o f making film s with Mozambican f a c i l i t i e s of pro­

duction. As Pimente put i t , "Since 1978, we have had the bas ic techn ical
24
f a c i l i t i e s to produce, in black and w hite, 16mm and 35mm f i l m s . " The

Film I n s t i t u t e was a ls o successful in p u t t i n g t o g e th e r a Mozambican team

o f filmmakers. Some, l i k e Camille de Sousa, Luis Simoa, and Goao Costa,

were t r a in e d on the s p o t. Others, l i k e Pimente, got t h e i r t r a i n i n g in

Cuba and P a r i s , while s t i l l o t h e r s , l i k e Guerra, ar e vete ran filmmakers

25
who returned to Independent Mozambique a f t e r y e a r s of e x i l e .

In 1978, on his r e t u r n home, Guerra became d i r e c t o r o f the Film

 160

Institute. Now t h a t th e r e was equipment, a s e m i- nati o nalized d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n which generated some revenues, and a q u a l i f i e d pe rso nnel, the Film

I n s t i t u t e began the production of a monthly s e r i e s c a l l e d Kuxa Kenema,

26
o r "Birth of the Image." According to Bachy, thes e s e r i e s were d i f ­

f e r e n t from the newsreels o f the colo nial er a because "they analyzed,

each, one s u b je c t in depth, in stead o f covering s u p e r f i c i a l l y several

27
topics a t the same tim e." As the t i t l e of the s e r i e s , Kuxa Kenema,

i n d i c a t e d , the purpose was to c r e a t e a new kind o f cinema which could

r e f l e c t r e a l i t y in Mozambique; a cinema which was a "freedom t o o l " ,

which made people ask "questions about themselves and the world, about
28
all situ atio n s." The c r e a tio n of Kuxa Kenema a ls o provided the Film

I n s t i t u t e with a f i r s t h a n d experience of the way a f il m in d u s t r y could

develop even in the poorest o f c o u n t r ie s . According to Jacques D'Arthuys

e t a l , the Film I n s t i t u t e , by n a t i o n a l i z i n g h a l f of the d i s t r i b u t i o n and

e x h i b i t i o n , was ab le to r a i s e funds in the big c i t i e s where the t h e a t e r s

were lo ca ted and to produce th e s e r i e s o f Kuxa Kenema, which were shown

29
in r ura l ar eas. The Film I n s t i t u t e arranged s pec ial p r o je c t io n f a c i l ­

i t i e s such as cine-b uses and church area s to show the films in the

coun tryside where people had never before seen motion p i c t u r e s .

C le a r ly , the advantages which could be derived from the experience

o f Kuxa Kenema were many. On the one hand, the films were used to d i f f u s e

the government's ideology in th e r u ra l a r e a s , and on the o t h e r , a new

cinema was being born as Kuxa Kenema, the v i l l a g e r s ' f i r s t c o n ta c t with

f il m . As Pimente put i t

For most o f our people, cinema i s a d i r e c t f r u i t of

Independence. When we a r r i v e in a very remote v i l l a g e
and show a f il m , people will t e l l us, "This is a r e ­
s u l t o f Independence because before Independence is
 161

v i l l a g e never saw a f i l m . " So most o f our people

have not been a l i e n a t e d by dominant i m p e r i a l i s t
cinema, and we can c r e a t e a new audience which w il l
use f il m o t h e r than to d i g e s t i t to escape from
d a i l y problems.30

However, the scope o f Kuxa Kenema was too l im ite d to f i l l a l l the

needs o f a nati onal cinema. The films were documentaries, mostly on

government propaganda and on South African and Rhodesian invasions o f

Mozambican v i l l a g e s . Among the ten films produced by Kuxa Kenema be-

tween 1978 and 1979, not one was a f e a t u r e film. To compensate f o r t h i s

la c k , the Film I n s t i t u t e developed a d d it io n a l p r o j e c t s which p r i o r i t i z e d

the production o f f e a t u r e s and educational f ilm s . Elsewhere in 1978,

the French government, which was anxious to c r e a t e c u l t u r a l and economic

t i e s with the new Marxist s t a t e o f Mozambique, o f f e r e d to do re se arch on

31
the new image Mozambique was c r e a t i n g f o r h e r s e l f , with th e Super 8mm

a t the U n iv e r sity o f Mozambique and with the video f o r a forthcoming

t e l e v i s i o n a t the m i n i s tr y of information. The p r o j e c t s o f Super 8mm

and video will be discussed l a t e r in t h i s chapter. At t h i s p o i n t , i t

i s important to complete the d e s c r i p t i o n o f the production endeavors of

the Film I n s t i t u t e .

In 1978, the I n s t i t u t e of Film produced i t s second major h i s t o r i c a l

documentary a f t e r 25_. The f i l m , Estas sao as armas (These Are the

Weapons), was a l s o d i r e c t e d by a f o r e i g n e r , Murilo S a l l e s . I t i s an

important documentary which r e c o n s t r u c t s , by using footage from old

news reels, the succ essive s i t u a t i o n s in Mozambique during the Portuguese

co lo n ia li s m , the L ib er atio n S tru g g le , and Independence. The f il m de­

nounces the colon ial regime f o r not educating th e peo ple'and f o r keeping

them a t the margins o f th e tec hn ol og ica l b e n e f i t s of the country. It

 162

p r a i s e s the FRELIMO f o r having l i t e r a c y campaigns even befo re Independ­

ence and thus helping people to maximize t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y and to com­

bat d is e a s e s which were contagious. The f ilm also d e p ic ts the c u r r e n t

problems o f the country and the measures taken by the government to

solve them. According to Bachy, E s t a s s a o as armas was presen ted in

1978 a t the F e s tiv a l de Lepzig where i t r ec eive d p r a i s e f o r being a

good example, "confirming in a c l e a r manner how f ilm could be used to

i n t e r p r e t pas t events (to denounce c o lo n ialism without hatred ) and to

32
d i r e c t f u tu r e a c ti o n s toward the tra nsform atio n o f the s o c i e t y . "

From 1975 to 1978, although Mozambican d i r e c t o r s a t the I n s t i t u t e

of Film p a r t i c i p a t e d c o l l e c t i v e l y in the production o f the s e r i e s , Kuxa

Kenema, they had not had the o p p o rtu nit y to d i r e c t a f e a t u r e f il m . In

1979, however, Guerra made h i s t o r y by d i r e c t i n g Mueda: memoria e massacre

(Mueda: Memorial and Massacre) , 35mm, B&W, the f i r s t f e a t u r e by a Mozam­

bican filmmaker. Mueda i s a f i c t i o n a l account of the 1960 massacre of

s i x hundred people by the Portuguese army in Mueda, a Mozambican v i l l a g e

in th e North, near the f r o n t i e r o f Tanzania. Filmed on l o c a t i o n , Mueda

is a mise-en-scene f ilm which i s e f f e c t i v e because o f the way in which

the population o f Mueda united to reclaim i t s freedom and the way i t was

massacred by the Portuguese army. The c o n t i n u i t y in the d i e g e s is i s i n ­

te r r u p t e d from time t o time by eye witness accounts o f the surv iv o r s o f

the massacre. Guerra als o draws from his experience in Brazil as a d i r -

33
e c t o r o f Cinema Novo to ca ptur e the rnyth a s s o c i a t e d with the massacre

o f Mueda. Knowing t h a t the people o f Mueda gath er every y e a r to commem­

o r a t e the massacre, Guerra filmed t h e i r reenactment o f the event. He

thus ele v a te d the event to the level o f a popular myth which had c a t h a r t i c
 163

e f f e c t s such as br ing in g people t o g e t h e r and r e i n f o r c i n g them in t h e i r

s t r u g g l e f o r independence.

After Mueda, Guerra f in i s h e d a s h o r t f i l m , Unity in Feasts (1980),

which he had begun in 1978 on the f i r s t n ati o n al f e s t i v a l o f music and

dance. The f il m brought t o g e t h e r musicians and dancers from a l l over

the country. In 1980, the I n s t i t u t e of Film produced another f il m by a

Mozambican d i r e c t o r , de Sousa. The f i l m , The O f f e n s i v e , is a medium

length f il m about the government's campaign a g a i n s t the misuse o f i t s

funds and th e co r ru p ti o n of b u r e a u c ra ts . Using the Cinema Verite s t y l e ,

the camera s u r p r i s e s people a t work in d i f f e r e n t s e c t o r s o f the govern­

ment and gives an account of t h e i r p r o d u c t i v i t y o r n o n - p ro d u c ti v it y .

A f te r t h i s survey o f production by the I n s t i t u t e o f Film, I wi ll now

turn to the c o n t r ib u t i o n of Rouch and Godard to Mozambican cinema. Rouch

f i r s t v i s i t e d Mozambique in 1977. An old f r i e n d , D'Arthuys, who had be­

come the Attache Culture! of France in Mozambique, i n v i t e d Rouch, asking

him to br in g along his Super 8 camera. During the v i s i t , he met with

Guerra and o t h e r d i r e c t o r s a t the I n s t i t u t e o f Film. He took some people

a t the I n s t i t u t e and made a s h o r t f i l m , Les Chanteurs de 1 ' usirre de b i e r e

de Maputo, about a b i e r f a c t o r y ' s employees who "dance and sing about

34
t h e i r l i f e s t o r y in South A f r ic a . " When Rouch r e t u rn e d to France, he

f in i s h e d the f ilm and sen t i t back to Mozambique f o r Guerra and o t h e r

people concerned to see. They l i k e d th e f il m and expressed t h e i r i n t e r e s t

in seeing more.

In 1978, the n e g o t i a t i o n s between Rouch, D'Arthuys and Guerra r e s u l t ­

ed in a major Super 8 p r o j e c t between France and Mozambique. France want­

ed to e s t a b l i s h f r i e n d l y r e l a t i o n s with Mozambique, which was only th r e e

 164

year s old. She did not want to be c a l l e d a n e o - c o l o n i a l i s t country in

the same manner t h a t she had been c a l l e d in many Francophone c o u n t r ie s .

At the same time, she did not want to be too obvious with a country t h a t

was Marxist and had clo se t i e s with the Soviet Union and o th e r Eastern

bloc c o u n t r i e s . She decided, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t i t would be b e t t e r to l i m i t

her involvement in Mozambique to a p r o j e c t l i k e the Super 8 , which, a f t e r

a l l , had not y e t demonstrated economic p o t e n t i a l . This is implied by

D'Arthuys when he s aid to Rouch: "They ar e ready a t the Foreign A f f a ir s

to give us plenty o f money. I t (Super 8 p r o j e c t ) i s almost the only area

OC
where France's aid will go. The re fore , we can do what we want."

In o rder to understand Rouch's involvement in t h i s p r o j e c t , one must

r e a l i z e t h a t i t had always been a dream o f his to demystify th e expensive

productions a la Hollywood with heavy equipment, lar g e crews, e l a b o r a t e

mise-en-scenes and ar m-chair d i r e c t o r s . I t was in t h i s vein t h a t in the

f i f t i e s and s i x t i e s he used the 16mm a g a i n s t the 35. Today, with the

Super 8mm, he b e li e v e s t h a t t h e r e ar e even more p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f demysti­

fying the s o - c a l l e d sup er- p ro d u ctio n s . He compares the Super 8 t o a pen

with which one w r i t e s . Thus, people who do not know how to w r i t e with a

pen can use the Super 8 "to w r i te l e t t e r s . " I t was in t h i s sense t h a t

Rouch used th e term c a r t e p o s t a l e , p o s tc a r d , to r e f e r to films made with

the Super 8 . I t was a l s o in t h i s sense t h a t he sa id

The th in g is t h a t I have f i n a l l y r e a l i z e d t h a t i t
is not a dream t o teach people to w r i te with a
camera. One may not make a G o d a r d - - l e t ' s not say
a Godard, l e t ' s say a Hitchcock!—one may not make
a Gance, but one can make people who know how to
w r i te with a camera, and w r i te s im p le - th in g s.3 6

Rouch's dream led him to become d i r e c t o r o f re se arch a t th e Centre

National de Recherches S c i e n t i f i q u e s (CNRS), Universite^ de P a r is X Nan-

 165

t e r r e , where he and J e a n - P i e r r e Beauviala prepare s tu d e n ts f o r advanced

37
degrees in Super 8 f ilm production. Before going to Mozambique, Rouch

had also worked on the Super 8 in Boston with Leacock. I t was, t h e r e ­

f o r e , an opportu nity f o r him to take his p r o j e c t to Africa where the

Super 8 was considered not as a toy t o make family movies, but as a tool

f o r development.

As f o r the Mozambicans, the p r o j e c t seemed a t t r a c t i v e because i t

could be used to inform people about the l i t e r a c y campaigns, the proper

use o f a g r i c u l t u r a l equipment, h e a lth e d ucation, t r a n s p o r t a t i o n , and

culture. An agreement was t h e r e f o r e made f o r Rouch and his crew to go

to the U niv ersit y o f Maputo in th e Communication Department, to produce

f il m s , and t r a i n Mozambicans to work with the Super 8 . The French Minis­

t r y o f Cooperation provided $200,000 in funds, a l a b o r a to r y complete with

Kodak equipment, ten e d i t i n g t a b l e s , ten p r o j e c t o r s , ten cameras, ten

tap in g d e v ic e s , and s i x gen er at ors f o r p r o je c t i o n in ru ral a r e a s . There

were f our French i n s t r u c t o r s and Rouch himself; they had twenty s t u d e n t s ,

39
which they divided in t o teams o f two.

In fo ur months th e Super 8 group produced se veral s h o r t fil m s .

According to Rouch, th e group worked in the following manner:

They sh ot in the morning, processed a t twelve

o ' c l o c k , looked a t th e f il m a t one, did the
e d i t i n g between t h r e e and f i v e . In the even­
ing they r e tu rn e d to the market p l a c e , s e t the
e l e c t r i c a l f a c i l i t i e s in p l a c e , and p r o je c t e d
the f il m f o r the people they filmed in the
morning.40

The films were about wood choppers, market p l a c e s , h o s p ita l employ­

ees and p a t i e n t s , government o f f i c e s . The p r o je c t i o n was used as a means

to inform people about t h e i r own p r o fe s s io n or t h a t of o t h e r s . For example,

 166

film s o f the h o s p it a l o f Maputo were shown in the ru ral areas while the

doctors in the c i t y saw films about the r u ra l h o s p i t a l s . There were

a lso film s about p a t i e n t s i n t e r a c t i n g between themselves, which were

shown t o the d octo rs.

In the films o f the f i r s t fo ur months, twenty were r e t a i n e d , s i x of

which Rouch li k e d and wanted to keep. But since they only had o r i g i n a l s

which they were p r o je c t in g f o r the people, th e films were being used up.

A fter a l l , Rouch him se lf had compared the Super 8 f il m to a c a r t e p o s ta l e

which one reads and throws away. Now t h a t th e r e were e x c e l l e n t "po st­

c a r d s " , th er e rose the problem of saving them. Rouch t r i e d to r e - f i l m

them as they were being p r o je c t e d on the sc re en. This method y i e l d e d ,

as one would ex pect, poor q u a l i t y p r i n t s . F i n a l l y , the Super 8 group met

with the video group o f Godard, who worked on the o t h e r sid e o f the town.

They decided to c o l l a b o r a t e , f o r a t t h a t time, Godard, to o , was having

d i f f i c u l t y with ta king d i r e c t images on the video. A fter recording the

Super 8 films f o r Rouch, Godard's group r e a l i z e d t h a t i t was b e t t e r to

41
f ilm with the Super 8 f i r s t and to put i t on the video l a t e r .

However, by t h a t time, the French filmmakers were coming under heavy

c r i t i c i s m by Guerra and the I n s t i t u t e o f Film. They argued t h a t the

video and the Super 8 p r o j e c t s were c o s t l y and c o u n te r -p r o d u c t iv e . Be­

f o re going i n t o the c r i t i c i s m s and the e v a lu a tio n of the p r o j e c t s , how­

ev e r , i t is important to survey the video p r o j e c t , too.

In 1978, a t th e same time th e I n s t i t u t e of Film c r e a te d Kuxa Kenema

and the Super 8 p r o j e c t was launched, Godard, to o , signed a two-year con­

t r a c t with the Mozambican government to stu dy, with the video production

company, Sonimage, the e f f e c t o f t e l e v i s i o n p r i o r t o i t s a r r i v a l in

 167

Mozambique. I t i s c l e a r t h a t Mozambique, which was a new cou ntry, need­

ed such a study as much as i t needed th e Super 8 p r o j e c t and the I n s t i ­

t u t e of Film. Because the experience o f t e l e v i s i o n in neighboring

c o u n tr ie s such as Zaire had been to make them dependent t e c h n o l o g ic a ll y

and i d e o l o g i c a l l y upon th e Western c o u n t r ie s which had provided them

with the equipment and the image, Mozambique welcomed th e study not only

as a means to avoid the tr a p s and p r o t e c t her independence but a l s o to

discover t h a t us efulness of t e l e v i s i o n to the young and underdeveloped

country t h a t she was.

But, in ord er to understand why Godard was i n t e r e s t e d in the study ,

one must look back, as Colin MacCabe s ugg es ted, a t his old preoccupation

with the r e l a t i o n s h i p between t e l e v i s i o n and movies, between t e l e v i s i o n

and video, and how t h e i r n a r r a t i v e s address people. According to MacCabe,

sin ce 1964 Godard had been i n t e r e s t e d in working f o r t e l e v i s i o n . Since

1968 he had made a s e r i e s of programs f o r the French t e l e v i s i o n , and

43
" a ll but one o f the Dziga-Vertov films were financed by t e l e v i s i o n . 11

As a New Wave d i r e c t o r , Godard wanted to di scover new n a r r a t i v e

forms by s ub ver ting th e c l a s s i c a l Hollywood n a r r a t i v e , and as as a pro­

gram d i r e c t o r f o r Sonimage, he questioned the accepted forms o f " d i r e c t

44
address" used by conventional t e l e v i s i o n . For him, the use of d i r e c t

address determined the form and co ntent of conventional t e l e v i s i o n and

reduced every program to a s t e r e o t y p e . Thus, as MacCabe put i t

I t i s , a f t e r a l l , a standard s t r a t e g y o f t e l e v i s i o n
documentary to co ns ide r the l i v e s o f ' o r d i n a r y 1
people. But such c o n s id e r a tio n s are normally r i g o r ­
ously determined in advance. We wi ll look a t t h a t
couple because they ar e ty p ic a l of th e upper-middle
income b r a c k e t, we wi ll look a t t h i s ad ol escent in
o rder to understand changing a t t i t u d e s to violence.
In every case the in dividual r e p r e s e n t s a ty pe,
 168

understood in r e l a t i o n to an agreed image of

s o c i e t y , 45

Godard wanted the viewer to p a r t i c i p a t e in the production o f images,

i n s te a d o f being a mere r e c e i v e r o f messages s e n t by th e producer.

C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , j u s t as Rouch's chance to change the fu nctio n o f th e

Super 8 was o f f e r e d to him on the road to Mozambique, Godard, t o o , was

being o f f e r e d an o p portu nity to c r e a t e a new t e l e v i s i o n in a " v ir g i n

land". To put i t in Godard's own words, he proposed to the Mozambicans

"to take advantage o f the audio-vis ua l condition o f the country and

study t e l e v i s i o n befo re i t e x i s t s , befo re i t f l o o d s . . . a l l th e socia l

46
corpus and geography of Mozambique."

In 1978, t h e r e f o r e , Godard, Anne-Marie M ie vil le and the video

equipment of Sonimage a r r i v e d in Mozambique. They worked with Carlos

Gambo, who was in charge o f t e l e v i s i o n a t th e m i n i s tr y o f information.

They s e t to work on f i v e f i l m s , th e f i r s t and l a s t of which were n a r r a ­

ted from the combined po in ts o f view of Godard (the producer) and

M ie ville (the commentator o f th e f i l m s ) . The second, t h i r d , and fo u rth

films were t o l d from the po ints o f view o f the producer, a businessman,

and the commentator, r e s p e c t i v e l y . Godard believed t h a t i t was p o s s i b l e ,

a f t e r looking a t these f i v e f i l m s , to disco v e r "how a s o c i e t y i s formed

and informed, and how i t formed th e independence o f t h i s information a t

47
the same time with the formation o f the s o c i e t y ' s independence."

While in Mozambique, Godard a l s o addressed such is s ues as the main­

tenance o f th e equipment, what image/sound to choose, whose image/sound

i t was, what format of tape (pal o r secam) to choose f o r th e video, and

whom to t r a i n . He was concerned about leaving the Mozambicans with some­

thing they could use themselves; he did not want the equipment to r i s k
 169
4ft
becoming a b s o le te once he and M ieville l e f t the country.

However, as I pointed out e a r l i e r , Godard, l i k e Rouch, came under

a t t a c k because of the high c o s t o f h is p r o j e c t s . Before the ye a r was

over , Godard's video p r o je c t was c a n c e lle d . Te le vis ion a r r i v e d in

Mozambique in 1979 without him r e a l i z i n g his dream.

A fte r t h i s survey, what can one say o f the I n s t i t u t e of Film, the

Super 8 and the video p r o j e c t s , and the s i t u a t i o n o f f il m in Mozambique?

I t is c l e a r t h a t the I n s t i t u t e o f Film succeeded in c r e a t i n g a nation al

cinema whereas o th e r c o u n tr ie s in Lusophone Africa achieved l i t t l e .

When one compares the n a tio n a l production in Mozambique to o t h e r coun­

t r i e s in A f ric a , one r e a l i z e s , a l s o , t h a t in a s h o r t time i t accomplish­

ed more than i t s c o u n t e r p a r t s . For example, the I n s t i t u t e o f Film has

acquired bas ic f a c i l i t i e s in 35mm and 16mm, Black and White pr oduc tion,

whereas c o u n t r ie s l i k e Senegal and Kenya s t i l l depend upon the techno­

lo g i c a l f a c i l i t i e s o f Europe and America. Even though Guinea-Konakry

and Ghana have b e t t e r and more complete equipment o f production than

Mozambique, the I n s t i t u t e of Film is ab le to produce more film s than

i t s c o u n ter p arts in Guinea and Ghana. I t is also i n t e r e s t i n g t h a t the

I n s t i t u t e of Film has produced educational and documentary films as well

as f e a t u r e s whereas Sily-Cinema in Guinea-Konarky, which is comparable

in many ways to the I n s t i t u t e o f Film, has not y e t been able to produce

49
even one s i g n i f i c a n t f e a t u r e f ilm . The I n s t i t u t e also t r a i n s people

in filmmaking and, as a r e s u l t o f t h i s t r a i n i n g , th e s t a f f has increased

from s ix people in 1975 to e ig h ty today. I t was in t h i s sense t h a t

Pimente s aid

Even a f t e r twenty years o f independence, several

African c o u n t r ie s d o n ' t have a f ilm i n s t i t u t e .
 170

Since Independence, we have made seventy

documentaries and four f e a t u r e f ilm s . I t is
our v i c t o r y . We are not modest, we are not
h y p o c r i te s ; i t is our v i c t o r y . 50

Because o f the accomplishment o f th e I n s t i t u t e o f Film, one may ex­

pect an e v a lu a t io n to stop a t the p o s i t i v e points mentioned above. How­

e v e r , i t would be misleading to i n d i c a t e t h a t the I n s t i t u t e does not need

c r i t i c i s m simply because i t has accomplished more than i t s c o u n te r p a rt s

in A f ric a. There a r e , in f a c t , weak areas in the conception o f the

I n s t i t u t e , some o f which were uncovered by th e presence o f Rouch and

Godard. Rouch and his Super 8 group were s p e c i f i c a l l y more c r i t i c a l o f

the I n s t i t u t e . Rouch believ ed t h a t developing c o u n tr ie s l i k e Mozambique

should be pragmatic and move f a s t i f they wanted to catch up with the

t e c h n o l o g i c a l l y advanced c o u n t r i e s . For t h i s rea so n, he thought t h a t

they should choose the most e f f i c i e n t , l e a s t cumbersome, and l e s s expen­

s iv e equipment. For example, i f given a ch oice, they should take the 16mm

befo re th e 35 and the Super 8 before the 16 and video. Rouch a l s o thought

t h a t "the filmmakers from the developing c o u n tr ie s should p a r t i c i p a t e in

51
the designing o f the equipment they intended to use l a t e r . " Finally,

f o r Rouch, a filmmaker was a l s o a b r i c o l e u r ; he should be able to patch

t h i n g s , to r e p a i r the equipment, and to le a r n to do without a missing p a r t .

Rouch c r i t i c i z e d the I n s t i t u t e f o r lack ing these c a p a b i l i t i e s . He pointed

out t h a t th e I n s t i t u t e had taken t h r e e yea rs to t r a i n filmmakers, when two

52
months had been enough f o r the Super 8 group to t r a i n i t s s tu d e n t s . He

b el ie v e d , a l s o , t h a t the filmmakers a t th e I n s t i t u t e , l i k e many o th e r

filmmakers in A f r ic a , did not want to use the Super 8 because they were

a f r a i d i t would make t h e i r work seem simple and, t h u s , open production to

others. I t was in t h i s sense t h a t Rouch argued t h a t his in tro d u c t i o n of

 171

the Super 8 in Africa was a dangerous game, but a hea lthy one. While he

was tea ch in g everybody how to make a f i l m , he was a ls o breaking the

African filmmakers' monopoly on t h i s form o f knowledge. He s a i d : "I

play a very dangerous game because i t is a s t r u g g l e a g a i n s t th e young

53
co r p o ratio n o f cinema in the developing c o u n t r i e s . "

Godard, to o , was concerned about th e equipment of production in

Mozambique. He believe d t h a t because Mozambique was a government, the

equipment and th e production should be chosen with her independence in

mind. Thus, he saw a place l i k e the Centre de E l e c tr o n i c a , where t h e r e

were people who re p a i re d cameras and video s, as more important than the

Institute. He argued t h a t

The audi o-visua l beginning in Mozambique should,

t h e r e f o r e , be a t the e l e c t r o n i c c e n te r where
maintenance would be provided and a l l the equip­
ment gathered in one plac e. There would a l s o be
c l a s s e s in theory and p r a c t i c e which would give
everyone the o p p ortu nity to share in the e x p e r i ­
ence of o t h e r s . 54

Godard recognized t h a t a young country l i k e Mozambique faced many

problems in c r e a t i n g her natio na l cinema. But he t r u s t e d t h a t Guerra--

"a filmmaker who has directed several ' g r e a t 1 films f o r an i n t e r n a t i o n a l

audience"—could meet and overcome th es e problems. He s a id :

In G uerra 's p r e c i s e and f in e movements, although

f u l l o f an u n r e s tr a i n e d energy, which ar e slowly
r eleased in order to take good measurements, one
f e e l s t h a t h e r e , in t h i s s id e o f th e world, th e r e
is a t b e s t a chance to f in d an answer.55

C le a r l y , t h e r e f o r e , what one learn s from the presence o f both Rouch

and Godard in Mozambique i s t h a t f o r the I n s t i t u t e i t i s not enough to

ac quir e equipment, to t r a i n filmmakers, and to make more f il m s ; in o r d e r

f o r i t to be independent, i t must also ques tio n the t o o l s o f production.

 172

People must be t r a i n e d to r e p a i r the equipment and i f necessary to r e ­

design i t to meet the needs o f Mozambique.

As f o r the Super 8 and video p r o j e c t s , they ended in 1979, and Rouch

and Godard re tu rn ed home, leaving the equipment behind. Rouch and the

Super 8 group were the most c r i t i c i z e d . They were a u t o m a ti c a l ly seen as

n e o - c o l o n i a l i s t s s in ce the label had al ready been applied to Rouch by

56
some Francophone f ilm c r i t i c s and h i s t o r i a n s . The I n s t i t u t e argued

t h a t the p r o j e c t was using Mozambicans as guinea pigs to t e s t the Super 8

57
equipment, which they were marketing around the world. The I n s t i t u t e

a l s o accused Rouch o f wasting film. A lar g e sum of money was spen t on

productions which Rouch hi m se lf c a l l e d c a r t e - p o s t a l e . The c r i t i c s argued,

t h e r e f o r e , t h a t a r e v o lu tio n a r y country l i k e Mozambique could not af fo rd

such waste. F i n a l l y , Guerra s a id t h a t Rouch's cinema v e r i t e s t y l e was

too simple-minded and detrim en tal to mise-en-sc ene. He pointed out t h a t

"when one makes a film in 16 o r 35mm, i t take s one some time to th ink

about i t . With the Super 8 , however, t h i s time of conception is cu t

69
out." Because th e Super 8 filmmakers did not take time out to th ink

about the f ilm , Guerra argued t h a t they were " k i l l i n g one o f the funda-
58
mental r u le s o f cinema, which i s m ise- en - scen e. "

Godard was the b e s t c r i t i q u e o f h is own video p r o j e c t in Mozambique.

He admitted t h a t i t was b e t t e r to f il m with the Super 8 f i r s t and t o put

th e film on video l a t e r . This admission undermined his o r i g i n a l idea

t h a t the video system provided more freedom and t h a t i t was more p r a c t i -

59
cal and l e s s expensive. On the id eo lo g ical l e v e l , Godard a l s o r e a l i z e d

t h a t he could not in ven t a new t e l e v i s i o n in Mozambique because the area

was occupied by a government and, as he had learned p r e v io u sly in France,

 173
fin
w ithin the governments, c r e a t i v i t y i s not p o s s i b l e .

In 1979, the t e l e v i s i o n opened in Mozambique and the f i r s t films

a i r e d were those made by the Super 8 group. C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , a l ­

though th e p r o j e c t s had been f r u s t r a t i n g to Rouch, Godard, and Guerra,

they had not been a t o t a l l o s s . Furthermore, the Mozambican cinema

b e n e f i t e d , and wi ll continue to b e n e f i t , from the exp er ience s.

 174

NOTES

1
For the colonial p o l i t i c s o f production in Anglophone c o u n t r ie s
and Z a ir e , see a p p r o p r i a t e ch apters above.
2
V icto r Bachy, "Panoramique s ur l e s cinemas S u d - S a h a r i e n s i n
CinemAction No. 26 ( sp ecial is s u e : "Cinemas n o i r s d ’A f ri q u e " ) , 1982,
p. 42.

Clyde Taylor, "Inter view with Pedro Pimente: Film Reborn in

Mozambique" in Jump-Cut, No. 28, 1983, p. 30.

^ I b i d . , p. 30.

8See t h e i r important e s sa y , "Toward a Third Cinema" in Movies and

Methods, e d i t e d by Bill Nichols, Los Angeles: U n iv e r sity of C a l i f o r n i a
P ress , 1976, pp. 56-58.
c
Clyde Taylor, "In terv iew with Pedro Pimente," p. 30.
7
Victor Bachy, "P an ora mique. .. ", p. 41.

8Gary Crowdus and Udayan Gupta, "A Luta Continua: An Interview

with Robert Van Lierop" in C i n e a s t e , Vol. IX, no. 1, p. 31.
g
"Toward a Third Cinema" in Movies and Methods, p. 61.

^8Paulin Vieyra, Le cinfema A f r i c a i n : des o r ig i n e s a 1973, P a r is :

Presence Afri caine (1975), p. 42. Although Vieyra admits t h a t the beau-
t i f u l scenes and framing are not o b s t a c l e s to the s t o r y , he says t h a t
the a c t i n g was awkward and the dance scene a t the end unnecessary.
V ie y r a 's c r i t i c i s m , however, f a i l s to show t h a t Maldoror i n t e n t i o n a l l y
used non-pro fes ssiona l a c t o r s and t h a t the dance scene was supposed to
underlin e the importance o f the r e v o lu ti o n and prevent i d e n t i f i c a t i o n
with the mourners. For Maldoror's response to th e e s t h e t i c q u a l i t y of
her f i l m , see: Guy Hennebelle, "In terv iew with Sarah Maldoror" in
Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 49 ( sp ecial i s s u e , "Cineastes
d'A fr iq ue n o i r " ) , 1978, pp. 90-91.

11
Guy Hennebelle, "Chronologie de la production A f ric a in e par pays
e t par ann£e" in Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e , No. 49, p. 168.

12
Some of the rev o l u ti o n a r y c o u n t r ie s organized around the AACC were
Tanzania, Guinea-Konakry, Guinea-Bissau, Congo B r a z z a v i l l e , Benin, e t c .
 175

See P i e r r e Haffner in Afrique N oire: Quel Cinema?, P a r i s : Actes du

Collogue U n i v e r site P ar is 10 Nanterre (December 1981), p. 53.

13.
^Victor Bachy, " D ic tio n n aire de deux cent cinquante c i n e a s t e s "
in CinemAction, No. 26, p. 192.

14See p. 114.

15" D ic tionnair e d e . . . , " pp. 186-201.

1 fi
See Gary Crowdus and Udayan Gupta, "A Luta C o n tin u a . . . p. 29;
Clyde Ta ylor , "In terv iew with Pedro Pimente", p. 30; V icto r Bachy,
"P an o ra mique... ," pp. 42-43.

^ C l y d e T aylor, p. 30.

18I b i d . , p. 30.

19I b i d . , p. 30.

20I b i d . , p. 30.
oi
J e a n - P i e r r e Oudart and Dominique T e r r e s , "Enquete: Super 8 au
Mozambique" in Cahiers du Cinema, No. 296, January 1979, p. 57.

22
Guy Hennebelle, " C h r o n o l o g i e s . . . , " p. 173.

23
Gary Crowdus and Udayan Gupta, p. 26.
24
Clyde Taylor, p. 30.

25
Ruy Guerra was born in 1931 in Mozambique. S hor tly a f t e r his
t r a i n i n g a t the I n s t i t u t des Hautes Etudes Cinematographiques ( P a r i s ) ,
he went to Brazil where he became a founding member of Cinema Novo.
His f i l m s , 0s Cafoje s te s (The Beach o f D e s i r e , 1962) and Os Fuzis (The
R i f l e s , 1964)" are considered among the b e s t films o f Cinema Novo. For
more d e t a i l s on Gu er ra 's c o n t r i b u t i o n to B r a z il ia n Cinema Nova, see
Guy Hennebelle and Alfonso Gumucio-Dagron, Les Cinemas de VAmerique
L a t i n e , P a r is : Editio ns Lherminier (1981); Randal Johnson and Robert
Stam, B r a z i l i a n Cinema, Brunswick: Associated Uni versi ty P r e s s , 1982.
A f t e r independence, Guerra re turn ed to Mozambique and became head of
the I n s t i t u t of Film.

25
Bachy, "Panora m ique... ," p. 42. According to Bachy, Kuxa means
" b i r t h " in Runga, a d i a l e c t o f the North of Mozambique, and Kenema means
 176

"image" in Makua, a d i a l e c t o f th e South.

27I b i d . , p. 42.

28Clyde Taylor, p. 30.

29
J e a n - P i e r r e Oudart and Dominique T e r r e s , "Enquete: Super 8 au
Mozambique," p. 57.
in
Clyde Ta ylor, p. 30.

31
See Jacques D'Arthuys, "Les independants du cinema d i r e c t , " in
Le Monde Diplomatique (August 1980), p. 23.

32
Bachy, " P anora m ique... ," p. 43.

33
The s t y l e o f Mueda is s i m i l a r to t h a t o f Os Fuzis which Guerra
made in 1964, a t a per iod considered by c r i t i c s as the matura tion stage
of Cinema Novo. J u s t as th e f i c t i o n a l c o n t i n u i t y o f Mueda i s ofte n
d is r u p te d by i n t e r v e n t i o n s o f rea l e v e n t s , in Os F u z i s , t o o , th e r e i s a
documentary s t y l e which i s i n t e r r u p t e d by sudden eru p t io n s o f f i c t i o n a l
c h a r a c t e r s and ev en ts . Os Fuzis i s considered by Paulo Antonio Paranagua
as one o f th e t h r e e b e s t film s o f the maturation er a o f Cinema Novo. See
Les Cinemas de I'Amerique L a t i n e , pp. 146-148.

34 * *
P ie r r e Haffner, "Comment f i l m e r la l i b e r t e : e n t r e t i e n avec Jean
Rouch," in CinemAction, No. 17 (sp ecial is s u e : "Jean Rouch, un g r i o t
g a u l o i s " ) , 1982, p. 20.
16
I b i d . , quoted by Rouch, p. 21.

36I b i d . , p. 25.

37
For more d e t a i l s on the Super 8 program a t th e U n iv e r s ite Paris X
Nanterre, see I b i d . , pp. 17-18. See als o Le Monde Diplomatique (August
1980), p. 23; and Cahiers du Cinema, No. 296, January 1979, pp. 54-59.

38
Louis M arc orelles, "16 e t Super 8 : De Boston au Mozambique,
E n tr e tie n avec Rouch," in CinemAction, No. 17, pp. 35-37.
39
P i e r r e Haf fner, "Comment f il m e r l a l i b e r t e , " p. 21.

40
I b i d . , pp. 21-22.
 177

^ J e a n - L u c Godard, "Le d e r n i e r reve d'un prod uct eu r, " in Cahiers du

Cinema, No. 300, p. 116.

42
For more d e t a i l s on technology and dependence, see Colin MacCabe
e t a l , Godard: Images, Sounds, P o l i t i c s , Bloomington, Indiana Uni ver si ­
ty P r e s s , 1980, ppT 138-140.

43I b i d . , p. 133.

440n the concept o f " d i r e c t address" see I b i d . , pp. 139-141.

45I b i d . , p. 145.
AC
Jean-Luc Godard, "Le d e r n i e r reve d'un p roducteur, " p. 73.

47I b i d . , p. 77.

48I b i d . , pp. 81-116.

49 *
For more d e t a i l s on Sily-Cihema, see the above ch apter on Franco­
phone production.
to
80Clyde Taylor, p. 30.

51P i e r r e Haffner, "Comment f ilm e r l a l i b e r t e , " p. 26.

52
I b i d . , p. 24. See also J e a n - P i e r r e Oudart and Dominique T e rr es,
"Enquete: Super 8 au Mozambique," p. 59.

88P i e r r e Haffner, p. 26.

84Jean-Luc Godard, p. 116.

55I b i d . , p. 117.

56
T h e re 's a famous sta tem en t by Sembene Ousmane which s t a t e s t h a t
Rouch's camera d e p i c t s Af ricans as i n s e c t s . Because Rouch works with
the French M in is te re des Relations E x t e r i e u r e s , the Musee de 1 'Homme and
the U niversity de P ar is X N a n t e r r e , many African filmmakers see him as
an i m p e r i a l f s t and a n e o - c o l o n i a l i s t . For more d e t a i l s on how African
d i r e c t o r s perceive Rouch, see: "dean Rouch Juge par s i x c i n e a s t e s
d'A fr iq u e n o i r e , " pp. 66-76; "Jean Rouch—Sembene Ousmarie: 'Comme des
i n s e c t e s ' , " pp. 77-78 in CinemAction, No. 17.
 178

5V i e r r e Haffner, "Comment f ilm e r la l i b e r t e . . . " , p. 28.

^ L o u i s M ar corelles, "16 e t Super 8 : De Boston au Mozambique," '

p. 37. Rouch1s comments on framing and mise-en-scene are p a r t i c u l a r l y
i n t e r e s t i n g in t h i s inter view .
59
Colin MacCabe, Godard, Images, Sounds, P o l i t i c s , p. 134.
fid
I b i d . , pp. 156-157. Rouch, to o , had argued t h a t the video was
not p r a c t i c a l compared to the Super 8 because of i t s small s cr ee n. In
his inte rv ie w with Haffner, Rouch s a id : "The video is l i m i t e d ; you
have a small s c re e n , you have f i f t e e n people (watching t o g e t h e r ) . Here
(with the Super 8 ) you have two hundred (people watching), and i t ' s
ou td oors ," p. 25.
 179

CHAPTER VIII

CONCLUSION: TOWARD THE DISTRIBUTION AND

EXHIBITION OF AFRICAN PRODUCTIONS

Throughout t h i s study I have t r i e d to unde rlin e th e importance of

d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n to the development o f production. One

cannot speak o f the f il m i n d u s tr y without d es crib in g d i s t r i b u t i o n and

exhibition. The lack o f f a c i l i t i e s f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n not

only prevents African productions from having an impact on audiences,

but i t a l s o prevents the filmmakers from recouping production c o s ts .

Because African films ar e not normally d i s t r i b u t e d through commercial

t h e a t e r s , t h e i r s t a t u s i s reduced to t h a t of c u l t u r a l documents such as

books and records which ar e kept in archives and u n i v e r s i t y l i b r a r i e s .

The f a c t t h a t African films are not shown in the t h e a t e r s of th e coun­

t r i e s where the d i r e c t o r s are from explains why such d i r e c t o r s r e v e r t to

p r i m i t i v e methods of showing film s . Thus, l i k e Meliks o r the Lumi&re

Brothers t r a v e l i n g with c ir c u s groups in ord er to in su re audiences f o r

t h e i r f i l m s , African d i r e c t o r s l i k e Sembene and Cisse , in o rder to keep

t h e i r films a l i v e , c a r r y them under t h e i r arms to v i l l a g e s , to special

c u l t u r a l e v e n t s , and to u n i v e r s i t i e s in Europe, Asia, and America.

The purpose of t h i s l a s t ch apte r is to p r e s e n t an overview of the

pr esen t s i t u a t i o n o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n and to show the manner

in which they c o n t r i b u t e to the development of production. I w il l des ­

c r i b e th e d i f f e r e n t government's adjustments in the s e c t o r s o f d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in o r d e r t o accommodate national and African fil m s .

I w i ll a ls o d e s c ri b e th e emergence o f i n t e r - A f r i c a n d i s t r i b u t i o n companies,
 180

l i k e the Consortium I n t e r A f r i c a in de D i s t r i b u t i o n CinSmatographigue (CIDC)

and the attempts to r e s t r u c t u r e d i s t r i b u t i o n in o rder to show more

African film s.

My aim here is to go beyond the c r i t i c i s m o f the monopoly o f African

markets by fo re ign d i s t r i b u t o r s and to show area s where progress has been

made by African d i s t r i b u t o r s . Such an approach i s useful not only because

i t avoids th e polemicism and the f r u s t r a t i n g tone o f previous works which

t r i e d to d e l i n e a t e the s t r u c t u r e o f d i s t r i b u t i o n monopolies in Africa

owned by Europeans, Americans, and Asians, but i t also provides a model

f o r o t h e r regions which have not y e t taken contr ol o f the film in d u str y

in t h e i r c o u n t r i e s . This i s in no way a denial o f the us efulne ss of past

c o n t r ib u t i o n s or a downplay o f the d i f f e r e n t ways authors approach the

iss ues o f d i s t r i b u t i o n . Tahar Cheriaa, the spokesman o f the FEPACI, des­

c r i b e s the i n t e r n a t i o n a l f il m in d u str y in Ecrans d'abondance ou cinemas

de l i b e r a t i o n ^ in o rder to show t h a t the n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f d i s t r i b u t i o n

i s the key to the development of f ilm in Arab and Black African c o u n t r i e s .

Cheriaa bel iev es t h a t he/she who c o n tr o ls d i s t r i b u t i o n also c o n t r o ls pro ­

du ction; he, t h e r e f o r e , recommends the red uc tion of the 10,000 films a

y e a r , imported by African c o u n tr ie s from Europe and America, to 6,000 to

7,000. According to Cheriaa, n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f d i s t r i b u t i o n will gen­

e r a t e funds to produce 150 to 200 African films a ye a r and th e imposition

o f quotas w ill allow African productions to f i l l in 30% o f th e f ilm need

o f the s p e c t a t o r s .

P i e r r e Pommier, in Cinema e t developpement en Afrique n oire franco-

2
phone, c o n t r a d i c t s C h er ia a's t h e s i s on n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n and proposes c e r ­

t a i n r e v i s i o n s o f the s t r u c t u r e o f d i s t r i b u t i o n which wi ll b e n e f i t the

 181

socio-economic development in A f rica. Pommier c r i t i c i z e s the SECMA and

COMACICO—the two main d i s t r i b u t o r s in Francophone Africa u n t i l 1972—

f o r not using t h e i r p r o f i t s to produce film s by African d i r e c t o r s and to

improve the co ndition o f movie t h e a t e r s and bu il d new ones. According

to him, the fo re ign f il m i n d u s tr y in Africa was not c o n t r i b u t i n g to the

socio-economic or s o c i o - c u l t u r a l welfa re o f the people because, in s te a d

o f in v e s ti n g in A f ric a , the SECMA and COMACICO took t h e i r revenues out.

Pommier argued, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n by SECMA and COMACICO

had two negative e f f e c t s : i t took badly needed money out of Afri ca and

the Westerns and Films Noir, which c o n s t i t u t e d th e m ajo rity o f shows in

A f r i c a , a f f e c t e d th e youth by a l i e n a t i n g them from the c o n s t r a i n t s of

African socia l s e t t i n g s . I t was in t h i s sense t h a t Pommier recommended

t h a t i t was not n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n t h a t was so much needed as i t was r e ­

v i s io n s of the s t r u c t u r e s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n . Pommier's t h e s i s coincided

with the o f f i c i a l po li cy of the French government which blamed the slow

development o f African production on the greed of f o re ig n d i s t r i b u t o r s ,

and which moved in 1972 to r e p la c e the SECMA and COMACICO bythe S oc iete

de p a r t i c i p a t i o n cinematographique a f r i c a i n e (SOPACIA).

P i e r r e Haffner, took in his two volumes, Essai s ur le s fondements

' 4
du cinema a f r i c a i n and Palabres s u r le cinematographe, argued a g a i n s t

nationalization. He believ ed t h a t the p r e s e n t s t a t e o f d i s t r i b u t i o n in

Africa was conditioned by th e law o f supply and demand. C l e a r ly , t h e r e ­

f o r e , f o r Haffner, the I t a l i a n Spaghetti Westerns, the American war f i l m s ,

and the Indian melodramas were also African because they were demanded by

African audiences. Haffner did not b e l i e v e , l i k e Pommier, t h a t foreign

films could have negative e f f e c t s on African youth. Unlike Cheriaa, to o ,

 182

he did not th ink t h a t Western films were imposed on African s p e c t a t o r s ;

he s aid t h a t movie t h e a t e r s were not prison houses in which people were

kept a g a i n s t t h e i r w i l l s . On th e c o n t r a r y , people went to movies in

Africa because they love the King Fu f i l m s , the b ar b arian s and the gang­

sters. I t i s in t h i s sense t h a t Haffner devoted his two volumes to the

study o f the s p e c t a t o r in d i f f e r e n t African c o u n t r i e s .

In Anglophone Africa very l i t t l e is w r i t t e n about f ilm . The only

s ustained work on d i s t r i b u t i o n t h a t I could f in d is The Development and

5
Growth o f th e Film Industry in N i g e r i a , a s e r i e s o f seminar papers com­

p i l e d and ed i te d by Alfred E. Opubor and Onuora E. Nwuneli. The book

seeks to answer why, a f t e r the I n d ig e n iz a t io n Decree o f 1972 which "gave

e x clus iv e monopoly f o r d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n o f f e a t u r e films to

Nigerians with the c a p i t a l and business c o n t r a c t s , " the industry is s t i l l

c o n t r o l l e d by the American Motion P i c t u r e s Exporters and Cinema Associa­

t i o n (AMPECA) f o r American and European films and by NDO Films and CINE

Fi1ms f o r Indian and Egyptian f ilm s . Some c o n t r ib u t o r s to the book

recommend t h a t the government n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and production and

7
s e t quotas f o r the import o f fo re ig n f ilm s . Others argue t h a t n a t i o n a l i ­

z a t i o n will e n t a i l en dles s government l i m i t i t s involvement to guaranteeing

banks which lend money to p r i v a t e businessmen in Nigeria. In t h i s manner,

new t h e a t e r s wi ll be b u i l t by Nigerians both in urban and r ura l areas

g
which wi ll show African film s .

The way I plan to go beyond these s t u d i e s i s by d e s c ri b in g the e f f o r t s

o f indiv idua l c o u n tr ie s which have n a t i o n a l i z e d d i s t r i b u t i o n and, f i n a l l y ,

by focusing on the h i s t o r y o f the CIDC as the f i r s t su cc es sful i n t e r -

African d i s t r i b u t i o n company. The ques tion I am concerned with i s what

 183

s t r u c t u r e o f d i s t r i b u t i o n e x i s t s f o r African pro duct io ns. Before answer­

ing t h i s q u e s t i o n , however, i t i s important to give some examples of

c olon ial f ilm d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . In o rder to provide t h e i r

colonies with an a l t e r n a t i v e cinema, the B r i t i s h and the Belgians did

not only have to produce "specia l African f i l m s , " they a l s o had to c r e a t e

d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n means which were d i f f e r e n t from standard

commerical c i r c u i t s . They used mostly cine-mobiles f o r rural a r e a s , the

f a c i l i t i e s o f churches, co lo nial a d m in i s t r a ti o n compounds, h o s p i t a l s and

outdoor t h e a t e r s . In some i n s t a n c e s , they t r a i n e d Africans as d r iv e r s

and p r o j e c t i o n i s t s whom they used to show film s in remote areas with

g
more frequency. They did not need to compete with the commercial f ilm

d i s t r i b u t o r s f o r se veral reasons. Because the films were educational

and d i d a c t i c , t h e i r intended audiences were the s o - c a l l e d "non-evolues"

who lived in r ura l a r e a s . The commercial t h e a t e r s were in big c i t i e s

and open only to whites and "e v o lu § s . Because the c o lo n ia l films

were e s p e c i a l l y produced or r e - e d i t e d with p a t e r n a l i s t i c commentaries

f o r A f ric a n s , they acquired poor n a r r a t i v e q u a l i t i e s which made them

11
u n a t t r a c t i v e to people who had access to commercial t h e a t e r s .

One can get an idea o f how important the co lonial d i s t r i b u t i o n and

e x h i b i t i o n f a c i l i t i e s were by looking a t the example o f the Belgian Congo.

According to L. Van Bever, as e a r l y as 1945 the Gouvernement General of

Belgium "had put t o g e t h e r an embryonic cinematheque which d i s t r i b u t e d

12
educational films among i t s c o rre s pondents." In 1946, the Belgian

M inis try o f Information had twenty-two cor respondents in Congo who r e ­

ceived film s intended f o r African audiences. There were twenty-nine

l o c a t i o n s f o r f il m p r o j e c t i o n , and t h e r e were, in t h a t y e a r alon e, 238

 184
13
shows f o r an es tim at ed audience o f 345,198 Congolese. By 1950, the

number o f co rre spo nde nts, or local f il m d i s t r i b u t o r s , jumped to 160, i n ­

cluding government o f f i c e r s , agents f o r mining companies, school adminis­

t r a t o r s , m i s s i o n a r i e s , and o t h e r p r i v a t e s e c t o r s . The number of p r o je c ­

t i o n s i t e s , t o o , incr ea se d to 278 and the shows to 2893, with an estima-

14
ted audience o f 2,112,640 Congolese. According to Rouch, by 1957, the

Belgian system of d i s t r i b u t i o n reached nine m il lio n people with as many

as 15,000 s h o w s . ^

The d i s t r i b u t i o n o f films intended only f o r Af ricans developed a t

the margins o f commerical t h e a t e r s which were conce ntrated in the big

cities. C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , a t the time o f independence, African coun­

t r i e s had several choices f o r d i s t r i b u t i n g t h e i r f il m s . There was the

choice o f n a t i o n a l i z i n g both the commercial and the non-commercial

s t r u c t u r e s of d i s t r i b t u i o n . Guinea-Konakry and Upper Volta f i r s t opted

for th is solution. Another choice was the s e m i - n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of the

commercial s e c t o r , and th e n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n and commercialization of the

non-commercial s e c t o r . Mali and Mozambique used t h i s system which they

hoped would g r aduall y enable them to completely n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n

and e x h i b i t i o n . Other c o u n t r ie s l i k e Senegal, Benin, Ghana, Nig eria,

and Madagascar t r i e d to n a t i o n a l i z e th e commercial d i s t r i b u t i o n , but were

15
unsucc es sfu l. The m ajori ty o f the African c o u n tr ie s control only the

non-commercial s e c t o r which they use to show government propaganda and

educational f il m s . U n f ort unately, these c o u n tr ie s made no e f f o r t s to

e i t h e r improve the con di ti on s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n above the

l e v e l s t h a t th e c o l o n iz e r s l e f t them, or to help African d i r e c t o r s to

show t h e i r films in these "marginal s e c t o r s " as a way o f c r e a t i n g a market

 185

f o r them before they conquer the c i t y markets.

So f a r I have t r i e d to show t h a t t h e r e i s , beside the normal market

o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in the emerging African c i t i e s , a poten­

t i a l market made of ci ne-m obil es , church f a c i l i t i e s , and outdoor s e t t i n g s

in th e r u ra l a r e a s . These f a c i l i t i e s , which were marginal and motivated

by colo nial and r a c i s t need to c r e a t e a cinema only f o r A f ri c a n s , can be

turned i n to a s s e t s in independent A f rica. Because the m ajo rity o f the

population in any given African country l i v e s in the r u ra l a r e a s , i t is

a gain t o begin showing films by African d i r e c t o r s in th ese area s f i r s t

and to move toward the c i t i e s . I t i s in t h i s manner t h a t what was mar­

ginal and r a c i s t in the colonial time can turn in to mainstream and hege­

monic in independence time. This i s not to suggest t h a t the markets in

the c i t i e s should be l e f t to foreig n d i s t r i b u t o r s and film s . I t is

simply to show the economic, p o l i t i c a l , and c u l t u r a l a s s e t s o f r ura l film

d i s t r i b u t i o n which had been ignored by African c o u n tr ie s sin ce independ­

ence.

I wi ll now d e s cri be some o f the experiments of n a t i o n a l i z e d d i s t r i ­

bution as mentioned above before moving on to the A f r i c a n i z a t i o n o f the

market by the CIDC. The f i r s t attempt a t n a t i o n a l i z i n g film in d u str y in

sub-saharan Africa took place in Guinea-Konakry. In 1958, Guinea became

the f i r s t Francophone country in sub-saharan Africa to assume i t s autonomy.

As i s i s well known, the Guinean independence was determined by the n a t i o n ­

a l i s t ideology of Sekou Toure, who r e a c te d v i o l e n t l y to the f a c t t h a t the

French owned ever ythin g in his country. C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , Toure led

Guinea to s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n by breaking with France and t u rn in g the

ownership of production and in d u s t r y to the s t a t e . I t was in t h i s sense

 186

t h a t Sily-Cinema was cr eated to take over the in dustr y o f film. I have

shown how Sily-Cinema managed production in th e ch ap ter above on produc­

t i o n and Francophone c o u n t r i e s . However, i t i s in the area o f d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n t h a t the impact o f Sily-CiriSma on the h i s t o r y o f African film i s

more ev iden t.

In 1959, when Sily-Cinema made i t s h i s t o r i c a l move to nation al d i s ­

t r i b u t i o n , the f i r s t r e a c t i o n o f such monopolistic companies as SECMA

and COMACICO was to completely cu t the supply of f ilm to Guinea and force

Sily-Cinema t o come back on i t s d e c is io n . The P a r is ia n owners o f SECMA

and COMACICO knew t h a t the tw en ty -ei ght movie t h e a t e r s in Guinea were not

s i g n i f i c a n t enough to i n t e r e s t f ilm deale rs in the Guinean market. They

b e l i e v e d , t h e r e f o r e , t h a t Sily-Cinema, to o , would soon come to t h i s r e a l ­

i z a t i o n and change i t s mind. According t o Guy Hennebelle, the t h e a t e r s

in Guinea remained closed f o r one y e a r f o r lack o f f i l m s . ^ Bob Sow, who

was d i r e c t o r o f Sily-Cinema, was able to fin d some films with the Soviet
18
bloc s u p p l i e r s . But these were n e i t h e r s u f f i c i e n t to keep the t h e a t e r s

open, nor popular with the Guinean audiences who, l i k e audiences a l l over

A f r ic a , were used to Hollywood n a r r a t i v e s and Indian melodramas.

A y ear l a t e r , Sily-Cinema came to the n e g o t i a t i n g t a b l e as pr e d ic te d

by SECMA and COMACICO. But the cond itions were such t h a t f il m h i s t o r i a n s

and observers r e a l i z e d t h a t th e SECMA and COMACICO had weak s p o ts . It

was decided t h a t Sily-Cinema would become the d i s t r i b u t o r o f the films

o f the two companies in Guinea; fourtee n o f the tw en ty-ei ght t h e a t e r s ,

which were owned by the French companies, would go to Sily-Cinema, and

both the p r i v a t e and the n a t i o n a l i z e d t h e a t e r s would show films which were

d i s t r i b u t e d by the s t a t e . The gains by Sily-Cinema were many. By becoming

 187

the d i s t r i b u t o r , even though the films were supplied by the SECMA and

COMACICO as in o t h e r Francophone c o u n t r i e s , Sily-Cinema was f r e e to

choose from the s e l e c t i o n proposed by these companies, unlike the o t h e r

c o u n tr ie s who had no choice in th e m a t te r . In t h i s manner, i t did not

only control the q u a l i t y o f films shown in Guinea, i t a l s o could show,

whenever p o s s i b l e , films from Africa and elsewhere. Through the d e a l ,

Sily-Cinema had als o insu red t h a t the p r o f i t s made by SECMA and COMACICO

would not be t r a n s f e r r e d ou ts id e the co untry, but in vest ed in the r e -

19
modeling o f t h e a t e r s and the production o f natio na l f ilm s .

One way to explain why SECMA and COMACICO agreed to deal with S i l y -

Cinema i s to say t h a t they did not want to lose a market no m atter how

i n s i g n i f i c a n t i t was. Because SECMA and COMACICO were not film pr oducers,

and because they only rented a t a lower c o s t films which had al ready been

d i s t r i b u t e d in America and Europe, any deal f o r them was a gain. A fter

a l l , Sily-Cinema paid f o r the films i t s e l e c t e d the same amount t h a t the

French companies got by d i s t r i b u t i n g them f o r comparable time in o th e r

countries. This led some f il m h i s t o r i a n s to argue t h a t Sily-Cinema had

not r e a l l y gained autonomy in d i s t r i b u t i o n , t h a t the SECMA and COMACICO

s t i l l c o n t r o ll e d t h i s s e c t o r in Guinea, as they did elsewhere in Franco-

20
phone A f ri c a . Another reason the French companies agreed to th e deal

might have been t h a t they were anxious to close the case l e s t i t a t t r a c t

the a t t e n t i o n and sympathy o f the neighboring c o u n t r i e s which were be­

coming independent in th e e a r l y s i x t i e s . They had hoped t h a t the o th e r

c o u n tr ie s would understand the new agreement as a h u m il iatio n f o r S i l y -

Cinema which had re tu rn ed to the same s u p p l i e r s and as a r e a s s e r t i o n of

the power o f the French companies. One could see t h a t the SECMA and
 188

COMACICO wanted to convey to the newly independent c o u n tr ie s the f e e l i n g

t h a t they would be as s e v e r e ly i s o l a t e d and punished as Guinea i f they

t r i e d to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . The f e a r o f r e t a l i a ­

t i o n by the SECMA and COMACICO pushed Mali, f o r example, to postpone

from 1960 to 1971 her i n t e n t i o n to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i ­

tion. Despite the p r e ss u re on African governments by the filmmakers to

n a t i o n a l i z e these s e c t o r s , th e SECMA and COMACICO reigned unchallenged

u n t i l 1970 when Upper Volta n a t i o n a l i z e d her movie t h e a t e r s .

In 1970, when Upper Volta n a t i o n a l i z e d her s i x movie t h e a t e r s as a

r e s u l t o f an i n c r e a s e in t i c k e t c o s ts by the SECMA and COMACICO, th e two

companies r e a c t e d again by c u t t i n g the supply o f f il m s . Upper Volta

c r e a t e d the SONAVOCI to manage the t h e a t e r s , but i t soon encountered the

same d i f f i c u l t i e s as Sily-Cinema. With only s i x t h e a t e r s , the SONAVOCI

could not i n t e r e s t th e d e a le r s in i t s market. I t , to o , l i k e Sily-Cinema,

was forced to work out a deal with the two companies whereby Upper Volta

would control the t h e a t e r s and r e n t films from th e COMACICO on a y e a r l y

. . 21
basis.
Here, a g a in , i t seems the French companies had l i t t l e to lose since

they s t i l l c o n t r o l l e d d i s t r i b u t i o n . But the n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f e x h i b i t i o n

by Upper Volta proved b e n e f i c i a l in several ways. The revenues from the

t i c k e t s a le s were used to remodel th e t h e a t e r s and to c o n s tr u c t new ones.

The SONAVOCI a l s o used ten per ce nt of i t s revenues to c r e a t e the Fonds de

Developpement du Cin&ma Voltaique which s ubsidized n a tio n a l production.

As e a r l y as 1972, the Fonds de Developpement was able to finance the pro­

duction o f the f i r s t f e a t u r e f ilm o f th e co untry, Le sang des p a r l a s by

Djim Mamadou Kola. I t l a t e r produced such films as Sur l e chemin de la

 189

r £c on ci 1i a t i o n (1976) by Rene-Bernard Yonly, Wend Kuuni (1982) by Gaston

Kabore, and Jours de tourmentes (1983) by Paul Zoumbara. The n a t i o n a l i ­

z a t i o n a l s o enabled the SONAVOCI to show African films in Upper Volta

when i t wanted t o .

The n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n in Upper Volta and the impressive record o f the

SONAVOCI als o led to several n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n s in th e s e v e n t ie s in Franco­

phone Africa and to the downfall o f th e SECMA and COMACICO. In 1971,

Mali re acte d to the poor c o ndition of the t h e a t e r s owned by th e COMACICO

and close d them down. The Office Cinematographique National du Mali

(OCINAM), which was c r e a t e d a f t e r 1962 and which was al ready managing

t h r e e commercial t h e a t e r s , n a t i o n a l i z e d four more pr eviousl y owned by

COMACICO.^ The SECMA, f o r f e a r t h a t i t would be put out o f business by

n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n , began to remodel i t s t h e a t e r s . However, the OCINAM pro­

g r e s s i v e l y took over the t h e a t e r s owned by SECMA, to o. In 1976, th e r e

were tw en ty - eig h t t h e a t e r s in Mali, tw e n ty - fiv e of which were n a t i o n a l ­

ized and managed by the OCINAM and th e remaining t h re e were owned by a

23
Malian businessman.

In 1972, the SECMA and COMACICO closed t h e i r accounts in Francophone

A f r i c a , d ef ea ted mainly by the p o l i t i c a l i n t e r v e n t i o n of the FEPACI, the

t h r e a t s o f n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n , and the French government which did not want

to e s tr a n g e i t s former c o lo n i e s . The Union G e n e r a l e d u Cinema which

oversaw film a c t i v i t i e s in France, c r e a te d an African branch, the Societe

de P a r t i c i p a t i o n Cinematographique A f r i c a i n e , to take over the stocks of

24
the SECMA and COMACICO. However, the trends of n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n were no

longer r e v e r s i b l e . In 1974, Senegal and Benin n a t i o n a l i z e d d i s t r i b u t i o n

and e x h i b i t i o n , and in 1975, i t was Madagascar's t u r n .

 190

In Anglophone A f r i c a , f il m d i s t r i b u t i o n did not follow the same

ev olution f o r several reasons. Except f o r Nigeria and Ghana, the o t h e r

c o u n t r ie s have no f e a t u r e f ilm d i r e c t o r s to put p r e s s u re on th e govern­

ment to n a t i o n a l i z e d i s t r i b u t i o n . Because o f the lack o f d i r e c t o r s who

could denounce the fo re ign d i s t r i b u t i o n companies, these c o u n t r ie s are

blind to the economic and c u l t u r a l importance of d i s t r i b u t i o n and exhib­

ition. Another reason these s e c t o r s ar e not n a t i o n a l i z e d in Anglophone

Africa i s t h a t the c o u n t r ie s subsc ribe to the s o - c a l l e d l i b e r a l economic

systems. C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , they p r e f e r to leave them to p r i v a t e local

businessmen. In N ig eria , f o r example, the I n d ig e n iz a tio n Decree o f 1972

"gave e x clus iv e monopoly f o r the d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n o f f e a t u r e

25
film s to Nigerians with the c a p i t a l and business c o n t a c t s . " However,

as Opubor e t a l l s t a t e d , because the government had not y e t made an

e f f o r t to r e i n f o r c e the I n d ig e n iz a tio n Decree, "the f e a t u r e films pro-

26
duced in Nigeria by Nigerians ar e having marketing d i f f i c u l t i e s . "

F i n a l l y , i t i s a ls o p o s s ib le t h a t the Anglophone c o u n t r ie s are not

i n t e r e s t e d in n a t i o n a l i z i n g because they can show the governments' docu­

mentaries and propaganda without the help of the commercial t h e a t e r s .

They show t h e i r f il m s , f r e e of cha rg e, through the i n f r a s t r u c t u r e l e f t

behind by the Colonial Film Units and through the n ati o n al t e l e v i s i o n .

Because o f t h i s s e p a r a t io n o f th e p r i v a t e and commercial d i s t r i b u t i o n and

the public and n o n - p r o f i t d i s t r i b u t i o n , th e governments l i m i t t h e i r

involvement in the commercial f il m in d u s t r y to levying taxes which go to

n on-film ic a c t i v i t i e s .

In Lusophone A f r ic a , Mozambique leads the way in the decolonization

o f f il m in d u s tr y . In 1975, soon a f t e r independence, the Mozambique

 191

n a t i o n a l i z e d pro duction, d i s t r i b u t i o n , and p a r t o f the e x h i b i t i o n . The

I n s t i t u t e of Film was c r e a te d to manage and develop national cinema. It

was in t h i s sense t h a t the Film I n s t i t u t e showed fo re ign films in the

c i t i e s , and used t h e revenues from th e e x h i b i t i o n to produce low budget

27
films which were shown in the c o u n t r y s id e . In 1977, Mozambique also

hosted a meeting o f r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s o f such s o c i a l i s t c o u n t r ie s as

Tanzania, Angola, Guinea-Bissau, and Guinea-Konakry to form an i n t e r -

African d i s t r i b u t i o n company, the aim of which was to de colonize African

28
s c re e n s .

So f a r , I have t r i e d on the one hand to descri be the emergence of

the n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n in several African

c o u n t r i e s , and on the o th e r hand to i n d i c a t e t h a t because o f th e small

s i z e o f the markets, the e f f e c t s o f such n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n were li m i t e d .

The African c o u n t r i e s need foreign films to keep the t h e a t e r s open and

s a t i s f y the f il m needs o f t h e i r p o p u l a t io n s . The monopolistic tendency

o f the "Majors" makes i t d i f f i c u l t f o r c o u n t r ie s to f in d new s u p p lie r s

once they n a t i o n a l i z e f il m in d u s tr y . C l e a r l y , t h e r e f o r e , they have to

go back to work o u t a deal with th e same s u p p li e r s they kicked out when

they n a t i o n a l i z e d d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n . Because n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n

a l s o tends to i s o l a t e the country t h a t p r a c t i c e s i t , i t can a f f e c t

production in a det rim en tal manner. The c u t in fo re ign f il m supply can

lead to a le s s e n in g o f funds to produce f il m s . I f nationalization in­

h i b i t s the c r e a t i v i t y o f indigenous, independent d i r e c t o r s , t h i s , too,

can a f f e c t pr oduc tion. Such was the case in Guinea-Konakry where

n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n did not lead to an i n c r e a s e in production.

However, n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n is in the long run a s te p toward r e g io n a l-

 192

i z a t i o n and A f ri c a n i z a t i o n o f the f il m in d u s tr y . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , i t s

advantages outweigh th e l i m i t a t i o n s . With the n a t i o n a l i z e d markets, i t

i s e a s i e r to form an i n t e r - A f r i c a n d i s t r i b u t i o n . Whereas in the markets

monopolized by foreign d i s t r i b u t o r s and e x h i b i t o r s th e r e i s no room to

show African f il m s , the n a t i o n a l i z e d markets c r e a t e room f o r thes e film s .

Because one aim o f n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n i s to prevent the divestment of the

funds which ar e generated by the film i n d u s t r y , i t is c l e a r t h a t such

funds will be in vested in the production o f African fil m s . An example

o f such an advantage of n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n i s provided by Upper Volta which

has incr eased the production o f f e a t u r e films sin ce the c r e a t i o n of the

SONAVOCI. Another aim of n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n is to organize the in d u str y in

such a way t h a t the b o x - o ff ic e revenues, the s t a t i s t i c s on attendance

and on the films shown ar e known to i n t e r e s t e d p a r t i e s . Such an o r g a n i­

za t io n will not only determine the way th e governments tax the film

in d u s tr y , but i t wi ll a l s o keep down the cost of t i c k e t s and provide the

producers, d i s t r i b u t o r s , and e x h i b i t o r s with t h e i r f a i r share o f the

revenues. The o r g a n iz a ti o n can also lead to the remodeling and the

c r e a t i o n of new t h e a t e r s . In o th e r words, i t provides the i n t e r - A f r i c a n

d i s t r i b u t o r s with b e t t e r and l a r g e r markets. Since n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n in

Mali, f o r example, the t h e a t e r s have been in b e t t e r cond ition and t h e i r

number increased from eighteen t o tw enty-eight.

The p o in t I am making i s t h a t while s e p a r a t e l y th e n a ti o n a l i z e d

i n d u s t r i e s appear lim ite d and i n s i g n i f i c a n t , t o g e t h e r they c o n s t i t u t e an

important market f o r the development of African film. I t is in t h i s

sense t h a t one understands th e FEPACI's press ure on the governments to

n a t i o n a l i z e the f ilm in d u s t r y . The u l t im a te aim o f the FEPACI is to

 193

have regional and i n t e r n a t i o n a l markets where the filmmakers can show

t h e i r film s . Because the f o re ig n d i s t r i b u t o r s and e x h i b i t o r s ar e hos­

t i l e to African productions which are not as l u c r a t i v e as the foreign

films rented a t wholesale p r i c e s , n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n i s the most e f f i c i e n t

means o f g e t t i n g African films to the sc reen s. Once the filmmakers get

t h e i r governments to n a t i o n a l i z e f il m i n d u s t r y , they w il l ask them to

organize among each o t h e r to form d i s t r i b u t i o n monopolies which will

re place the f o r e i g n e r s . In order f o r African cinema to develop i n t o an

i n d u s t r y , th e r e must be, to put i t in C h er iaa's words

. . . g r o u p i n g and c o l l e c t i v e a ctio n on a regional

plan, everywhere t h a t a l i n g u i s t i c and c u l t u r a l
unity pe rm it s. (As in the Moghreb or in the
Arabic speaking c o u n tr ie s o f North A f r ic a , in
French speaking black A f r i c a , in English speak­
ing black A f ri c a , e t c . . . ) . Founding big d i s ­
t r i b u t i o n companies on a regional b a s i s will
permit a complete and p o s i t i v e change in the
above-mentioned monopoly market and consequently,
would lead th e film d i s t r i b u t i o n system in Africa
to a d i r e c t i o n p ro g re s s iv e ly more compatible with
African i n t e r e s t s . 29

Although t h e r e ar e several p r o j e c t s o f i n t e r - A f r i c a n d i s t r i b u t i o n
30
formation, only one, the Consortium I n te r - A f r ic a n de D i s tr i b u t i o n

Cinematographique (CIDC), has begun to f u n c t io n , supplying the Franco­

phone c o u n tr ie s with African and i n t e r n a t i o n a l fil m s . I w ill, there­

f o r e , close t h i s study with a b r i e f h i s t o r y o f the CIDC and i t s c o n t r i ­

bution to the development o f African film.

In t h i s study I have s t a t e d seve ral times t h a t both th e n a t i o n a l i ­

z a t i o n o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and the CIDC/CIPROFILMS were born because o f the

p r e ss u re o f the FEPACI and the n a tio n a l o rg a n iz a t io n s o f filmmakers on

the governments. The pr ess ure was not only p o l i t i c a l , in th e sense t h a t

i t showed how the African markets were being e x p lo ited by foreign

 194

i m p e r i a l i s t s and th e neg ativ e e f f e c t o f American and Kung Fu films on

audiences, but i t was a l s o socio-economical in th e way i t showed African

cinema and f i l m in d u s t r y as t o o l s o f development and c u l t u r a l dissemina­

tion. Thus convinced o f the importance of f i l m , th e African heads of

state, who were members o f the OCAM, met f o r the f i r s t time in 1972, in

Lome(Togo), to di sc uss the p o s s i b i l i t i e s o f c r e a t i n g an i n t e r - A f r i c a n

d i s t r i b u t i o n company. In 1974, they met again in Bangui (Central

African Republic) and cr eated th e CIDC. The purpose o f the CIDC was to

f a c i l i t a t e the im portation and d i s t r i b u t i o n o f f il m in i t s member coun­

tries. I t was a l s o i t s aim to

...e mpha si ze th e promotion o f African f il m s , and

to r e a s s u re the African d i r e c t o r s t h a t t h e i r films
wi ll not only be d i s t r i b u t e d in A f r i c a , but also
abroad. In a word, the CIDC was not only concerned
about providing African audiences with q u a l i t y
f i l m s , i t was als o making e f f o r t s t o f in d o u ts id e
markets f o r African f i l m s . 31

F i n a l l y , the r o l e o f the CIDC was to advise the n ational d i s t r i b u ­

t i o n companies in ta king the b e s t decis io ns regarding t a x e s , ce n s o rs h ip ,

c r e a t i o n o f new t h e a t e r s , and the p r i c e of t i c k e t s . I t will encourage

those c o u n tr ie s t h a t have not n a t i o n a l i z e d f ilm a c t i v i t i e s to do so. In

the long run, i t w il l s u b s i d i z e , through CIPROFILMS, the production of

32
films by African d i r e c t o r s . C le a r ly , t h e r e f o r e , the CIDC needed to

control a l l the markets in Francophone Africa in o rd er to be e f f e c t i v e

in i t s p r o j e c t i o n s .

When the CIDC was c r eated in 1974, the d i s t r i b u t i o n in Francophone

Africa was dominated by the SOPACIA which r ep lace d th e SECMA and COMACICO.

There were a l s o such minor d i s t r i b u t o r s as.AFRAM, a branch o f AMPECA,

and SOCOFILMS which have appeared on the scene s in c e the monopoly of the
SECMA and COMACICO was ended. The f i r s t move o f the CIDC was to buy out

the SOPACIA and to deal l a t e r with the s m all er companies. Between 1974

and 1980, the French Union G£ri6ra1 de Cinema, which owned the SOPACIA,

eluded the CIDC by making reforms which in d ic a te d i t s i n t e n t i o n to s ta y

in A f rica. I t p a r t i c i p a t e d , f o r example, in the development of the

SIDEC in Senegal. By in v e s t i n g in a nation al d i s t r i b u t i o n company l i k e

the SIDEC in o rder to become a s h a r e h o l d e r , the SOPACIA was c l e a r l y

undermining the commitment o f Senegal and o th e r such governments to the

CIDC. I t was in t h i s sense t h a t Boughedir accused the SOPACIA o f maneu­

vering in a n e o - c o l o n i a l i s t manner to keep the SIDEC dependent upon i t s

fil m s u p p li e s . Boughedir s t a t e d t h a t

even though Senegal seemed, on th e s u r f a c e , inde­

pendent to run i t s f il m a c t i v i t i e s , in p r a c t i c e
the SOPACIA was s t i l l , with i t s 20% share in the
c a p i t a l o f the SIDEC, the only s u p p l i e r of f il m to
Senegal. The SOPACIA e f f e c t i v e l y c o n t r o l l e d the
market even though i t did not seem to a f f e c t i t s
s u rf ace p o l i t i c s o f s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n in Afri ca.
I t was a p e r f e c t example of a neo-colonial ad ap ta­
t i o n to the s i t u a t i o n . 33

In1979, the m i n i s t e r s in charge o f f ilm i ndustry in the OCAM coun­

t r i e s met in Ouagdougou to work out a plan a g a i n s t the fo re ign monopolies.

They denounced the Union General du Cinema's lack of commitment to

African independence. The French company re acted by d i s s o lv in g the

SOPACIA in 1980. However, in s t e a d of s e l l i n g out the stocks and s t r u c t u r e

to the CIDC, i t c r e a t e d a new s o c i e t y , the Union Afric ain e de Cinema (UAC),

34
which wanted t o play s i m i l a r r o le s in Africa as the CIDC.

I t was not u n t i l 1981 t h a t the CIDC bought out the UAC and began to

operate as the major d i s t r i b u t o r in Francophone A f ric a. This i s not to

say, however, t h a t the CIDC has achieved complete monopoly in the member
 196
35
countries. While i t has no problem d i s t r i b u t i n g African and o t h e r

films in c o u n t r ie s such as Benin, Congo, Guinea, Mali, Senegal, and

Upper Volta, which have national s t r u c t u r e s o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and ex­

h i b i t i o n , i t encounters some problems in o t h e r c o u n tr ie s such as Ivory

Coast, Gabon, and Cameroon where th e r e are no s t r u c t u r e s . In th e l a t t e r

c o u n t r i e s , the CIDC has to compete with SOCOFILMS and s u rr o g a te s of

AMPECA.

I t i s c l e a r from t h i s survey o f the CIDC and the study t h a t African

films have come a long way. The production is more and more Africa-bas ed

and the film s ar e d i s t r i b u t e d and shown in more and more African c o u n t r i e s .

With the c r e a t i o n o f pan-African f e s t i v a l s in such Anglophone c o u n t r i e s as

Somalia and the holding o f seminars on production and d i s t r i b u t i o n in

Niger ia, i t is c l e a r t h a t Anglophone Af ric a has become more i n t e r e s t e d in

African cinema. A p r o j e c t l i k e the CIDC in Anglophone Africa wi ll open

more doors f o r African f il m s . The Lusophone c o u n tr ie s have al ready organ­

ized themselves f o r the A f r i c a n i z a t i o n o f d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n .

The I n s t i t u t e o f Film in Mozambique is also doing a pioneering work by

f i r s t conquering the countr ys ide with i t s films and moving toward the

cities. Because the m ajori ty o f Africans ar e from the countrys ide and

because they ar e not y e t as co nditioned by Western films as are the

Africans in the c i t i e s , they c o n s t i t u t e a p o t e n t i a l audience f o r African

f il m s , both in terms o f c u l t u r a l formation and o f market c r e a t i o n . I t is

hoped, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t the African d i s t r i b u t i o n and e x h i b i t i o n companies

wi ll include in t h e i r program th e use o f c i n e - m o b il e s , outdoor f a c i l i t i e s ,

and o t h e r means a v a i l a b l e in the c o u n t r y - s id e . They should en r ic h t h e i r

d i s t r i b u t i o n methods not only with some of the methods of the "Majors"

 197

and t h e i r s u r r o g a t e s , the Colonial Film Units and the m i s s i o n a r i e s ,

but als o with those o f the proponents o f Third Cinema in Argentina.

 198

NOTES

, Tahar Cheriaa, Ecrans d'abondance ou cinemas de l i b e r a t i o n . Tunis:

E d i tio n s Sindbad, 1974^ For an approach s i m i l a r to C h er iaa‘s , see Ferid
Boughedir, Cinema A f r i c a i n e t D ecolonizatio n. Unpublished Doctorat 3-
Cycle, P a r i s : U n i v e r s i t e P ar is I I I , 1976.

2
P i e r r e Pommier, Cinema e t developpement en flfrique noire f ra nco­
phone. P a r is : Editio ns A. Pedone, 1974.
3
For an updated d e s c r i p t i o n o f the French o f f i c i a l policy toward
d i s t r i b u t i o n in A f r i c a , see Afrique Noire, Quel Cin§ma? P a r is : Actes
du Collogue U n iv e r si te Paris 10 N anterre , 1981.

4
P i e r r e Haffner, Essai su r le s fondements du cinema a f r i c a i n .
Abidjan/Dakar: Les Nouvelles Editio ns A f r i c a i n e s , 1978, and PalaFras sur
l e cinematographe, Kinshasa: Les Presses A f r i c a i n e s , 1978.
5
Alfred E. Opubor and Onuora E. Nwuneli, E d i t o r s , The Development
and Growth of the Film Industry in N i g e r i a . Lagos: Third Press I n t e r ­
n a t io n a l Division o f Okpaku Communications Corporation, 1979.

6 I b i d . , p. 9.

7I b i d . , p. 20.
Q
I b i d . , Sanya Dosumu, "The Shortcomings o f Film Production in
N i g e r i a , " pp. 61-72.

^L. Van Bever, Le Cinema pour A f r i c a i n . Bru ssels : G.Van Campenhout,

1952, p. 46.

10I b i d . , p. 55.

^ F . Koyinde Vaughan has shown t h a t the Africans p r e f e r the commer­

c i a l f i l m s to films s p e c i a l l y made f o r them by the colonial masters.
See " A f ric a South o f th e Sahara and the Cinema." Presence A f r i c a i n e ,
No. 14-15 (June-Sept. 1957), p. 218.

12
L. Van Bever, pp. 40-41.

13I b i d . , p. 41.
 199

14I b i d . , p. 41.
15 ...............
Jean Rouch, Films ethnoqraphiques s ur 1 'Afrique lioire. Paris:
UNESCO, p. 394.
1 fi
Unlike Guinea, Upper Volta, and Mali, which obtained s e rio u s
concessions from th e SECMA and COMACICO and reorganized d i s t r i b u t i o n
and e x h i b i t i o n , Senegal and Benin changed l i t t l e in the e x i s t i n g s t r u c ­
t u r e o f d i s t r i b u t i o n . The SIDEC in Senegal ad th e 08ECI in Benin be­
came u s e f u l , however, once the CIDC took over the stocks o f the U.A.C.

^Guy Hennebelle, in Afrique L i t t g r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e (Special

is s u e on "Les Cinemas A fri caines en 1972"), No. 20, 1972, p. 197.

18 * *
Paulin Vieyra, Le Cinema A f r i c a i n : des Oriqines a 1973. Paris:
Presence A f ric a in e s (1975), p. 105.

^Guy Hennebelle, p. 197.

on
P i e r r e Haffner in Afrique Noire, Quel Cinema?, p. 53.
21
Victor Bachy, La Haute-Volta e t le Cinema. P a r i s : Editions
OCIC/L'Harmattan, 1983, p. 12.
22
Victor Bachy, Le Cinema au M aii. P a r i s : Editions OCIC/L'Harmattan,
1983, p. 12.

23I b i d . , p. 13.

Ferid Boughedir, in CinemAction, No. 26 (Special i s s u e s : "Cinemas

Noirs d 'A f r i q u e " ) , 1982, p. 156.

2^See Note 6 above.

26I b i d . , p. 9.

27
J e a n - P i e r r e Oudart and Dominique T e r r e s , "Enquete: Super 8 au
Mozambique" in Cahiers du Cinema, No. 296 (Jan. 1979), p. 57. According
to Jacques D'Arthuys, one of the respondents in the in te rv ie w , the people
in the r u ra l ar eas were not y e t acquainted with the Kung Fu and Gangster
f ilm s . I t was t h e r e f o r e e a s i e r f o r them to a p p r e c ia te the Mozambican
p r odu ctions.
OQ „
The Organization was c a l l e d Association A fri c a i n e de Cooperative
 200

Ciriematographique (AACC). For a c r i t i q u e of the AACC, see P ie r r e

Haffner in Afrique Noire: Quel Cinema?, p. 53.
29 ...
Tahar Cheriaa, "Film D i s t r i b u t i o n in T u n i s i a ," iri The Cinema
in the Arab C o u n tr i e s , e d i t e d by Georges Sadoul, B e ir u t: I n te r a r b
Center o f Cinema and T e le v is i o n , 1966, p. 162.

30
For a d e t a i l e d d is c u s s io n o f the f u tu r e p r o j e c t s toward a
Pan-African f ilm i n d u s t r y , see Segun Oyekunte, "The promises of
Mogadishu" in West A f r i c a , December 19-26, 1983, pp. 2938-2940.

31
CIDC F i l e s : "Le Consortium I n t e r a f r i c a i n de D i s t r i b u t i o n du
Film." Ouagadougou: Unpublished document, 1981, p. 2.

32I b i d . , p. 4.

33Ferid Boughedir, in CinemAction No. 26, p. 156.

34I b i d . , p. 157.
35
Some o f th e d i f f i c u l t i e s fa cin g th e CIDC ar e o f a p o l i t i c a l n a tu r e .
Some member c o u n t r ie s a r e s o c i a l i s t , some ar e Marxist L e n i n i s t , and some
ar e c a p i t a l i s t . I t i s in t h i s sense t h a t Bachy argues t h a t i t i s d i f f i ­
c u l t to conceive t h a t " P o l i t i c a l regimes as d i f f e r e n t as those o f the
Benin, and the Ivory Coast, Guinea and Senegal w ill follow the advice of
the same m u lt i - n a t i o n a l i n d u s t r y . " See V ictor Bachy, La Haute Volta e t
le Cinema, p. 55.
 201

BIBLIOGRAPHY

/ /
Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e . "Charte d'A lger du cinema a f r i c a i n . "
No. 35 (1975), pp. 100- 101.

Af r i q u e L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e . No. 20 (1972). (Special i s s u e : "Les

Cinemas A fri cains en 1972).

Afrique L i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e . No. 49 (1978). (Special is s u e :

Cineastes d 'A fr iqu e n o i r e " ) .
/ ^
Afrique n o ir e : quel cinema? Paris: Actes du Coll ague, U n iv e r sit e Paris
10 Nanterre 1981.

A l b e r t i n i , Rudolf Von. Decolonization: The Administration and Future o f

the Colonies, 1914-1960. Trans. Francisca Garvie. New York:
Africana Publishing Co., 1982.

A lth u s s e r , Louis. Pour Marx. P a r is : Francois Maspero, 1975.

Amin, Samir, J. Nyerere, and D. Peren. Le dialogue in e g a l: ec uei l du

nouvel ordre ^conomique i n t e r n a t i o n a l . Geneve: Editions Cetim, 1979.

D'Arthuys, Jacques. "Les independants du cinema d i r e c t . " In Le Monde

Diplomatique (Aug. 1980):23.

L'Audio-Visue! en cote d 1i v o i r e - a n n u a i r e 1984. Abidjan: M inister e de

T E ducation e t Recherche Scientifi'q'ue. 1984.
/ / / /
Aumont, Jacques. " E ntretien avec Desire Ecare," in Cahiers de cinema,
No. 203. (Aug. 1968), pp. 21-22.

A y a r i, Far ida . "Vers un renouveau du cinema a f r i c a i n . " In Le C o n tin e n t.

(March 9 and 10, 1981). No page in d i c a t e d .

Bachmann, Gideon. "In Search o f S e l f - D e f i n i t i o n : Arab and African Films

a t the Carthage Film F e s t i v a l , " in Film Q u a r t e rly , Vol. x x v i , No. 3,
(1973), pp. 48-51.
/ / *
Bachy, Victor. "Le cinema du Cameroun",in Revue du Cinema, Imaqe e t Son,
No. 351 (June 1980), pp. 87-94.
/
--------------- - La Haute-Volta e t l e cinema. Bru xelles: Cinemedia. 1982.

--------------- - Le cinema en c6t e d ' I v o i r e . B ruxelles: Cinemedia, 1982.

--------------- - Le cinema au Maii. Bruxelles: Cinemedia, 1982.

Baudry, Jean-Louis. "Ide ological Effec ts o f the Basic Cinematographic

Apparatus," in Film Q u a r t e r l y , Vol. 28, 2 (1974-75).
 202

Bazin, Andre. What is Cinema. 2 vols. Berkeley and Los Angeles:

U n iv er sity o f C a l i f o r n i a P r ess , 1967.
/
Bever, L. Van. Le cinema pour a f r i c a i n . Bru sse ls: 6 . Van Camoenhout,
1952.

Beye, Ben Diogaye. " S i t u a t i o n du cinema A f r i c a i n , " in Cinema ( P a r i s ) ,

No. 221, May 1977, pp. 64-69.

Binet, Jacques. "La natu re dans le cinema A f r i c a i n , " in Afrique

l i t t e r a i r e e t A r t i s t i q u e . No. 39 (1976), pp. 52-59.

"Classes s o c i a l e s e t cinema A f r i c a i n s , " in P o s i t i f . No. 188

(Dec. 1976), pp. 34-43.

--------------- . "The Con tributio n and the Influence of Black African Cinema,"
in Diogenes. No. 110 (1980), pp. 66-82.

Bonitzer , Pascal. "Ousmane Sembene: Le Mandat," in Cahiers du Cinema,

No. 209 (Feb. 1969), pp. 57-58. '

Boudjedra, Rachid. Naissance du cinema A l g e r i e n . Paris: Francois

Maspero, 1971.

Boulanger, P i e r r e . Le cinema c o l o n i a l : de l ' a t l a n t i d e a'lawrence

d ' a r a b i e . P a r i s : Editions Seghers, 1975.

Bosseno, C h r i s t i a n . "Le cinema en A l g e r i e ," in Revue du Cinema, Image e t

Son, No. 327 (Apr. 1978), pp. 55-96.

Burch, Noel. Theory o f Film P r a c t i c e . Trans. Helen R. Lane. New York:

Praeger P u b l i s h e r s , 1973.

Cabral, Amilcar. National L ib er ati o n and C u l t u r e . Trans. Maureeen

Webster. Syracuse: Syracuse U n iv e r sity Program of Eastern African
S tu d ie s, 1970.
/
--------------- . L'arme de la t h e o r i e . P a r i s : Francois Maspero, 1975.

Caughie, John ed. Theories o f Authorship. London: Routledqe and Kegan

Paul, 1981.

Caute, David. Frantz Fanon. New York: Viking P r ess , 1970.

Ce saire , Aime^. Discours su r le colonialism e. Paris: Presence A f r i c a i n e ,

1955.

Cham, Mbye B. "Film Production in West A f r i c a , " in Presence A f ri cain e

No. 124 (1982): 168-187.

CIDC. "Note s u r la s f i s c a l i t e cinematographique en Afrique noire

francophone." Ouagadougou. 1981.
 203

C in e a s t e . "Sembene Ousmane: Filmmakers have a Great R e s p o n s ib ili ty to

Our People." Vol. VL, No. 1 ( m .d .) , pp. 26-31.

Cinemaction No. 14 (1981), (Special i s s u e : "Cinemas du Maghreb").

Cinemaction No. 26 (1982), (Special i s s u e : "Cinemas noirs d'A friq u e").

Cinemaction No. 17 (1982, (Special i s s u e : "Jean Rouch, un g r i o t g a u l o i s . ) " .

/ / s
Cluny, Claude Michel. " A c t u a lit e du cinema a r a b e ," in Cinema ( P a r i s ) ,
No. 222 (June 1977), pp. 31-40.

--------------- - "Les nouveaux cinemas a r a b e s , " Cinema ( P a r i s ) , no. 240

(Dec. 1979), pp. 41-53.

C o l l i n s , John. "NAFTI Leads the Way: Inte rview with Kweky Opoku,
D ir e c to r o f th e National Film and Te le v is ion I n s t i t u t e in Ghana."
In West Africa No. 3477 (Apr. 9, 1984): 769-771.

Crowdus, Gary and Udayan Gupta. "A Luta Continua: An Interview with
Robert Van Lierop." In C i n e a s t e . 9/1 (1978-1979): 26-31.

Dancy, Serge. "Ceddo," in Cahiers du Cinema. No. 304, (Oct. 1979),

pp. 51-53.
/ ■ • / *

Debrix, Jean-Rene, "Le cinema a f r i c a i n . " In Afrique Contemporaine.

No. 38-39 ( J u l . - O c t . 1968): 7-12.

--------------- - "Le cinema a f r i c a i n . " In Afrique Contemporaine. No. 40

(Nov.-Dec. 1968): 2-6.

"Dix ans^de cooperation Franco-Africaine o n t permis la

naissan ce du cinema d 1a f r i q u e n o i r e , " in S e n t i e r s .

--------------- - " S i t u a t io n du cinema en a f r i q u e francophone." In Afrique

Contemporaine. No. 81 (S ept. -O ct. 1975): 2-7.

D i a llo , Siradou. "Jeune Afrique f a i t p a r l e r Sembene Ousmane." In Jeune

A f ri q u e . No. 629, (1973): 44-49.
s >
Diop, Cheick Anta. Les fondements economiques e t c u l t u r e l s d'un Etat
Federal d ' A f r i q u e . P a r is : Presence A f r i c a i n e , 1974.

Dubois, W.E.B. The Souls o f Black Folk. Chicaqo: A.C. McClunq and Co.
1903.

Enc kell, Monique and Smail Benassin, "Noua, un c h e f -d 'o e u v re du cinema

d j i d i d a l q e r i e n . " In Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e . No. 28
(1973), pp. 88-94.

E i s e n s t e i n , S er gei . Film Form, ed. and t r a n s . Jay Leyda. New York:

Harcourt Brace, 1949.
 204
t
Frantz Fanon. Peau n o i r e , masques b lancs . Paris: Editions du s e u i l ,
1952.

--------------- L*an V de l a r evoluti on a l g e r i e n n e . P a r i s : Francois

Maspero. 1959.
/ t
--------------- - Les Damnes de la t e r r e . P a r i s : Francois Maspero. 1961.

--------------- - Pour la re v o l u ti o n a f r i c a i n e . Pans: Francois Maspero.

1964.
/ /
Fouca ult, Michel. L 'ar ch eo loqie du s a v o i r . P a r is : Editions Gallimard.
1969.

G a b r ie l, Teshome H. "Xala: A Cinema o f Wax and Gold," in Presence

A f r i c a i n e , No. 116 (1980), pp. 202-214.

--------------- - Third Cinema in the Third World: The A es th etic s o f Libera­

t i o n . Ann Arbor: UMI Research P r e s s , 1982.

---------------- "Teaching Third World Cinema," in Screen, Vol. 24, No. 2.

(March/April 1983).

Garcia Espinosa, J u l i o . "For an imperfect cinema," in Afterimages No. 3

(Summer 1971).

Geismer, P eter. Fanon: The Revolutionary as P ro ph et. New York: Grove

P res s. 1971.

Gendzier, Irene. Frantz Fanon: A C r i t i c a l Study. New York: Pantheon,

1973.

Gerima, Haile. "On 3000 Year Harvest," in Framework, No. 7/8 (Sprinq
1978), pp. 30-35.
/ ✓
Ghali, Noureddine. " E n t r e t ie n s avec Moumen Smihi," in Cinema ( P a r i s ) ,
No. 205 (Jan. 1976), pp. 92-101.
x
"Ousmane Sembene," in Cinema ( P a r i s ) , No. 208 (Apr. 19/b),
pp. 83-95.
A y
Godard, Jean-Luc. "Le d e r n i e r reve d'un pr o d u cte u r," in Cahiers du cinema,
No. 300 (Mai 1 9 7 9 /s p e c ia l) : 70-129.

Gutsche, Thelma. The History and Social S i g n if ic a n c e o f Motion P ictu res

in South A f r i c a . Cape Town: Howard Timmis, 1972.
/ \
Haffner, P i e r r e . "E n t r e t ie n avec l e pere Alexandre Van den Heuvel,
p io n n i e r d'un 'cinema m i s s i o n n a i r e ' , in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t
a r t i s t i q u e , No. 48 (1978), pp. 86-95.
 205
r ,

Haffner, P i e r r e . Essai su r l e s fondements du cinema A f r i c a i n . Abidjan:

l e s Nouvelles Editions AFricaines, 1978.

--------------- - Palabres su r l e cinematographe ( n . p . ) : Les Presses

A f r i c a i n e s , 1978.

H aus tr ate, Gaston e t a l . 11Le cinema a l g e r i e n , " in Cinema. (Paris),

No. 207 (Mar. 1976), pp. 36-92.
/
------------- and Claude Michel Cluny. "Le cinema T iers Mondiste," in
Cinema ( P a r i s ) , No. 242 (1979), pp. 59-65.
/
Hennebelle, Guy. "Sembene Ousmane: Pour moi l e cinema e s t un moyen
d 1acti o n p o l i t i q u e , mais . . . " i n Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t
a r t i s t i q u e , No. 8 (1969), pp. 73-83.

--------------- - "Table rpnde: Pour ou contre un cinema A f ri caine engage?"

in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e , No. 19 (1971), pp. 87-93.

--------------- - "Recontre a Dinard avec des responsables de la Federation

P a n a f ri c a i n e des C in d as tes," in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e
No. 24 (1972), pp. 92-98.

--------------- - E n t r e t i e n avec Moumen Smihi," in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t

a r t i s t i q u e , No. 38 (1975), pp. 99-106.
/ / /
" E n t r e t ie n avec Mahama T raore," in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t
a r t i s t i q u e , No. 35 (1975), pp. 91-106.
/ /
- . Deux films Senegalais de Ben Diogaye Beye," in Afrique
-

l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e . No. 41 (1976), pp. 92-97.

--------------- - "Ou va l e cinema a l g e r i e n , que dev ient l e cinema d j id id ? "

in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e a r t i s t i q u e , No. 40 (1976), pp. 83-96.

" E n t r e t ie n avec Jean-Rene Debrix," in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t

a r t i s t i q u e , No. 43 (1977), pp. 77-90.

. Cinemas de 1 'emmigration. Cine'maction, No. 8 (Special

-

i s s u e ) , 1979.

--------------- - "The Adventure o f P o l i t i c a l Cinema," in C i n e a s t e , Vol. x,

No. 2 (Spring 1980), pp. 20-25.
j
--------------- - Le T iers Monde en films in Cinemaction (Special i s s u e ) , 1982.

--------------- - Les cinemas de 1 'Amerigue L a t i n e . Paris: Editions

Lherminier. 1981.

Hennebelle, Monique. "Sambizaqa," in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e ,

No. 28 (1973), pp. 78-88.
 206

Hennebelle, Monique. "Coup de to n n e r re dans l e cinejna a l g e r i e n : le

cinema d j i d i d f a i t i r r u p t i o n , " in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e ,
No. 29 (1973), pp. 1—XL-

------------"Mass^Media e t Culture t r a d i t i o n e l l e en Afrique Noire: Le

Cinema une th ese de Mohamed Diop," in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t
a r t i s t i q u e , no. 33 (1974), pp. 74-78.

Hondo, Med. "Med Hondo" i n Framework. No. 7/8 (Spring 1978), pp. 28-30.

--------------- - "Cinemas A f r i c a i n s , ecrans c o l o n i s e s . " In Le Monde

(Jan. 21, 1982): 2.
/ /
Huanou, Adjien. "Sembene Ousmane, Cineaste e t e c r i v a i n , " in Afrique
l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e , No. 32 (1974), pp. 35-41.

"Sembene Ousmane, Cineaste e t e c r i v a i n , " in Afrique

l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e , No. 33 (1974), pp. 24-29.

"Xala: une s a t i r e c a us tiq ue de l a s o c i e t e bourgeoise

s e n e g a ! a i s e ," in Presence A f r i c a i n e , No. 103 (1977), pp. 145-158.

Jalee, Pierre. L'imperialisme en 1970. P a r is : Francois Maspero, 1970.

Jinadu , Adele L. Fanon: In Search o f the African Revolution. Enugu:

Fourth Dimension P u b l i s h e r s , 1980.

Johnson, Randal and Robert Stam. B r a z i l i a n Cinema. London: Associated

Un iversi ty P r ess , 1982.

Kamphausen, Hannes. "Cinema in A f r ic a : A Survey," in Cinea ste, Vol. V,

No. 2 (Spring 1972), pp. 28-41.

Kamwa, Daniel. "Dans Pousse-Pousse, j e denoncerai l a p r a t iq u e de l a dot

au Cameroun," in Afrique l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e , No. 33 (1974),
69-74.
/ * *
K h l i f i , Omar, H i s to i r e du cinema en T u n i s i e , Tunis: Societe Tunisienne
de D if fu s i o n , 1970.

Legum, Colin. Pan-Africanism: A Short P o l i t i c a l Guide. London Pall

Mall P r e s s , 1962.
/ f
Leprohon, P i e r r e . L'exotisme e t l e cinema. P a r is : Les Editions J . Susse,
1945.

MacCabe, Colin e t a l . Godard: Images, Sounds, P o l i t i c s . Bloomington:

Indiana Uni versi ty P ress , 1980.

Martin, Guy. "Fanon's Relevance to Contemporary P o l i t i c a l Thought" in

UFAHAMU. Vol. IV, 3 (Winter 1973).

Maynard, Richard A. Africa on Film: Myth and R e a l i t y . Rochelle Park:

Hayden Book Company, I n c . , 1974.
 207

McBean, James Roy. Film and Re volution. Bloomington: Indiana U niver isty
P r e s s , 1975.
/ ✓ / /
Memmi, Albert., P o r t r a i t du co lo n ise precede du p o r t r a i t du c o l o n i s a t e u r .
P a r i s : Editions Buchet, 1957.

Minot, G i l b e r t . "Towards the African Cinema." In UFAHAMU. 12/2 (1983);

37-43.

Mi t r y , Jean. D i c ti onnaire du cinema. P a r is : Larousse, 1963.

Moore, Carrie D. Evolution o f an African A r t i s t : Social Realism in the

Works o f Ousmane Sembene. Bloomington: Indiana U n i v e r s i ty ,
unpublished d i s s e r t a t i o n .

Nichols, Bill ed. Movies and Methods. Berkeley and Los Angeles:
U n iv er sity o f C a l i f o r n i a P r e s s , 1976.

--------------- - Ideology and the Image. Bloomington: Indiana Universi ty

P r e s s , 1981.

Nkrumah, Kwame. Neo-Colonialism: The Last Stage o f Imperialism. London:

Heineman 1965.

N o tcu tt , L.A. and G.C. Latham, The African and the Cinema. London: The
Edinburgh House P r e s s , 1937.

L'Observateur: Quotidien Voltaigue d 1inform ation . "Moustapha Ky,

D ir e c to r de CINAFRIC." No. 2520 (Feb. 2, 1983): 10-14.

O la d ita n , O la l e r e , "Une l e c t u r e fanonieene du roman a f r i c a i n : vue

d'ensemble d'une approache," in Presence A f r i c a i n e , No. 104 (1977).

Opubor, Alfred E. and Onuora E. Nwuneli. E d ito r s . The Development and

Growth o f the Film Industry in N i g e r i a . Lagos: Third Press
I n t e r n a t i o n a l . 1979.

Oudart, J e a n - P i e r r e and Serge Daney. " E n t r e ti e n avec Sidney Sokhona," in

Cahiers du Cinema. No. 285. (Feb. 1978), pp. 48-54.

--------------- and Dominjque Te rr es . "Enquete: Super 8 au Mozambique." In

Cahiers du Cinema No. 296 (Jan. 1979): 54-59.

Oyekunte, Sequn. "The Promises of Moqadishu." In West Africa (Dec. 19-26,

1983): 2938-2940.

Paquet, Andrei "Toward an Arab and African Cinema: The 1974 Carthage
Film F e s t i v a l , " in C i n e a s t e , Vol. V I I, No. 1, pp. 119-26 ( n . d . ) .

Pare, Hubert. "8eme FESPACO: Symbole de 1 'U nite A f r i c a i n e . " In

Carrefour A f ri cain No. 765 (Nov. 2, 1983): 23.
 208

Pearson, Lyle. "Four Years o f African Film," in Film Q u a r t e r l y ,

Vol. XXVI, No. 3 (Summer 1973), pp. 42-47.

---------------- "Four Years o f African Film," in Film Q u a r te rl y ,

Vol. XXVI, No. 4 (Summer 1973), pp. 19-26.

--------------- - Perry, G.M. and P a t r i c k McGilligan. "Sembene Ousmane," in

Film Q u a r t e r l y , Vol. XXV, No,. 3 (Spring 1973), pp. 36-42.

P f a f f , Francoise. "De q u e lle moisson s ' a g i t - i l ? Dialogue avec Haile

Gerima" in P o s i t i f , No. 198 (Oct. 1977), pp. 53-56.

--------------- - " E n t r e t ie n avec Ousmane Sembene," in P o s i t i f , No. 235

(Oct. 1980), pp. 54-58.

Pommier, P i e r r e . Cinema e t development en Afrique Noire Francophone.

P a r i s : Editions A. Pedone, 1974.

P o u i l l a d e , Jean-Luc. "L'embl&ne (su r Ceddo)," in P o s i t i f , No. 235

(Oct. 1980), pp. 50-54.

P r £ d a l , Rene ed. Jean Rouch, un g r i o t g a u l o i s . Cinemaction No. 17

(Special i s s u e ) , 1982.

Presence A f r i c a i n e . "Le r o l e du c i n e a s t e A f ri c a i n dans l ' e v e i l d'une

conscience de c i v i l i s a t i o n n o i r e . " No. 90 (spec ial i s s u e ) , 1974,
pp. 3-203.

Rouch, Jean. Films ethnographiques s ur 1 ' a f r i q u e n o i r e . P a r is :

UNESCO, 1967,

Sadoul, Georges. The Cinema in the ArabC o u n tr i e s . Beirut: In te ra r a b

Center o f Cinema and T e le v is io n , 1966.

H i s to i r e du cinema mondial. P a r is : Flamarion, 1973.

Le Sahel. "CIDC: Fin du colloque s ur la production cin£matographique."

(May 3, 1982): 2-4.

Salmane, Halor e t a l . eds. Algerian Cinema. London: BFI 1976.

S a r r i s , Andrew. The American Cinema: Direc tors and Direc tion s 1929-1968.
New York: E.P. Dutton, 1968.

S a r t r e , Jean-Paul. Search f o r a Method. Trans. Hazel Barnes. New York:

Random House, 1968.

Senghor, B l a is e . "Pour un authen tique cinema a f r i c a i n e , " in Presence

A fri c a i n e No. 49 (1964): 104-110.

Senghor, Leopold S. Liber te I I : Nation e t voie a f r i c a i n e du s o c i a l i s m e .

P a r i s : Editions du s e u i l T 1971.
 209

Sokhona, Sidney. "Notre Cinema," in Cahiers du Cinema, No. 285.

(Feb. 1978), pp. 55-57.

Sol anas, Fernando E. and Octavio Gettino. Cine' Cultura y Descoloniza-

c i o n . Buenos Aires: Siglo 21 e d i t o r e s , 1973.

Sumo, Honor! de. "Genese e t av e n ir du cinema Camerounais in Afrique

l i t t e r a i r e e t a r t i s t i q u e , No. 39 (1976), pp. 59-63.

Taylor, Clyde. "Film Reborn in Mozambique," in Jump Cut, No. 28 (1983):

30-31.

Timite^ Bassori. "Un cinema mort-ne?" in Presence Africaine No. 49

(1964): 111-115.

Toure*, Sekou. L1a c t i o n p o l i t i q u e du p a r t i democratique de quince en faveur

de 1 'emancipation de l a jeu nes se Guineenne. Vot. V III . Konakry:
Imprimdrie P a t r i c e Lumumba, ( n . d . ) . .
Traore, Mahama. "Cinema in Africa Must be a School," in Cin eas te,
Vol. VI, No. 1, pp. 32-35.

Unir cinema revue du cinema A f r i c a i n , No. 5 (March-April 1983).

Vaughan, J. Koyinde. "Africa South o f the Sahara and the Cinema." In

Presence A f r i c a i n e . No. 14-15 (June-Sept. 1957).

Vauthier, Claude. L1a f r i q u e des a f r i c a i n s : i n v e n t a i r e s de l a N egritude.

P a r is : Editions du s e u i l , 1964.

Vieyra, Paulin S. "Propos su l e cinema a f r i c a i n , " in Presence A f r i c a i n e ,

No. 23 (1958): 18-23.

--------------- - Le cin&na e t 1 ' A f r i q u e . P a r i s , Presence A f r i c a i n e , 1969.

--------------- - Sembene Ousmane C i n d a s te . P a r is : Presence A f r i c a i n e , 1972.

--------------- - Le cinema A f r ic a i n : des o r ig i n e s a 1973. Paris: Presence

A f r i c a i n e , 1975.

--------------- - 11Le deuxieme congres de la FEPACI," in Presence A f r i c a i n e ,

No. 97 (1976), pp. 165-174.

"Le cinema au Senegal en 1976," in Presence A f r i c a i n e ,

No. 207 (1978), pp. 207-217.

Zahar, Renate. L'oeuvre de Frantz Fanon. Trans. Roger Dangerville.

P a r i s : Francois Maspero, 1970.
 Vita

Born: December 19, 1953 in Bamako, Mali

Degrees: B.A. American U n iv e r s ity , 1977

M.A. American U n i v e r s i ty , 1978

Ph.D. Indiana U n iv e r s ity , December 1984.

Teaching P o s it io n :

A s s i s t a n t P rofe s sor of Comparative L i t e r a t u r e and Film

in the Departments o f Black Studies and F r e n c h / I t a l i a n

U n iv e r s i ty of C a l i f o r n i a , Santa Barbara