MovieChat Forums > The Gods Must Be Crazy (1984) Discussion > South African propaganda film?

South African propaganda film?

posted 18 years ago by tmitch-1
7 replies | jump to latest

In the mid-90's, an anthropology professor who was teaching a course I was taking said in a lecture that TGMBC was nothing more than a propaganda film produced by the same oppressive Republic of South Africa government responsible for Apartheid.

A few students questioned why the Republic of South Africa would produce a film such as TGMBC. Why would the Republic of South Africa - which has long held that civilized whites are superior to the African natives - produce a film in which the bushmen are the good guys? And why would the R of SA produce a film in which the overall theme is that civilization - which has been established and maintained mostly by whites - is corrupt and decadent; while the Black bushmen live in happiness and noble contentment?

My professor responded that the entire intent of the film was just that - to (falsely) convey the message that the bushmen of South Africa are living in happiness and noble contentment, when in fact they have been living in misery and squalor at the oppressive hands of the South African government - for decades before the film was produced.

This professor wasn't by any means a nut job, but he was an unabashed liberal (I know; a liberal university professor... hard to believe, huh?). Some of his idealogies were sound, but others were more than just a little out there. Some ten years later, I'm still not really sure if his take on TGMBC was one of his more coherent views, or if it was just a case of a guy getting carried away with his politics and seeing something that wasn't really there.

Does anyone know anything about this aspect of the film? WAS there a political motivation?

[–] Punctuality 18 years ago

I don't actually KNOW anything, but in my humble opinion, naaaah. I thought this film was made with the scenes set in Botswana or somewhere. Anyway, how can it be racist if the "white" characters are bumbling fools and the "primitive" character be wise and level headed? The only agenda I could see was to illustrate how wasteful and pointlessly busy our lives are, and how tranquil is really could be if we looked towards people like Xi, or even look in our own past.

If we're going to look for any kind of agenda, though, just for fun, what about discrimination towards women? Why was Kate always waiting for rescue? ;)

On a more serious note, I watched the part of my DVD last night entitled Return to Nyae Nyae and had my eyes opened wide with scenes of the REAL Xi living in his village, half-starving, nothing much to eat. It was heartbreaking, especially after seeing pictures of him "living it up" all over the world, promoting the film. It was quite pathetic. His situation improved, however, but it was never stated whether the narrator of this particular piece helped Xi and his family in any way. I hope so, as it states later in the piece that he (the narrator) donated a computer(s) to the local school.

*********************************
Baby, have some faith...good is as real as the evil.

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ric4ard 18 years ago

Sorry, but your professor doesn't know what he's talking about. Period. Jamie Uys and his nephew, Pieter-Dirk are THE antithesis in Afrikaans 70-80s art of the apartheid regime and were ridiculed all the time by the nationalist government for their "liberal" outlooks. Not that Uys' films were overtly political. Pieter-Dirk in paticular is most famous for his alter-ego Evita Bezuidenhout - a complete rip on the conservative Afrikaans middle-aged woman.

It is true, sadly, that the Bushmen have had the short end of the stick in modern history. Right now there's big controversy in Botswana (an otherwise very cool country just north of SA) because they are being removed from their homelands - apparently to make way for the tourist and mining industries.

One might argue that the film suffers from prejudice - the poor little bushmen who don't know anything - but Uys IN NO WAY condoned apartheid. The opposite, in fact. He's dead now, so I felt I had to stick up for him. Please tell your professor, if you can get hold of him :-). (Yes, I'm South African.)

[–] MickeyONeill 18 years ago

uhm.... i reckon that professor was smoking his socks.
thats utter BS

------------------------------
Now... dicks have drive and clarity of vision, but they are not clever...

[–] Mattthegreat01 17 years ago

This movie is from Botswana, not South Africa

[–] ManFromSanFernando 13 years ago

Article on this http://bit.ly/jt8ACO
At one point in the movie we see Xi shooting his bow and arrow at a bunch of guerrilla fighters who seem to be led by a Cuban. The metaphor is all too blunt. The guerrillas represent SWAPO (Southwest African People's Organization) who were Namibian independence fighters at the time. Namibia at this time was still South Africa, and the South African government recruited the San to fight Namibians.
"Trees cause more pollution than automobiles." Ronald Reagan

[–] kleptomanie2009 13 years ago

The movie is from South Africa, not Botswana. It was only released as Botwswanian because of the international isolation of South Africa.

And that teacher is a loon, there's no way to win with that argument. If the movie portrays bushmen as wise and whites as dumb, it's a manouvre by the government to hide their racist politics. If they portray bushmen as dumb and whites as wise, it'd be racist too.

Stop making white people feel guilty for being white, I just hate how hating white people seems to be politically correct now.

By the way, I'm not South African, nor have I ever been there.