also see
(re Rwanda Genocide) (produced by Alrick Brown)
(Vid clip of Aldrick or Alrick Brown speaking after the screening)..if this is cut off at the bottom, go to
http://vanderkok.posterous.com/11511-vanders-review-of-kinyarwanda-re-rwanda 11/5/11 My REVIEW of KINYARWANDA.
I just left the AFI screening of "KINYARWANDA" at the Chinese Theatre. The director/producer was Alrick Brown & he made an appearance before & after the film, with some Q&A . When he first stood up at the beginning I thought he was from Rwanda, the movie itself is about Rwana's genocide, about which I personally know very little, & even after the screening am still relatively uninformed...the movie not really being a documentary, but a semi-fictional narrative & story based on the reality of the Rwanda genocide. It's kind of difficult to explain the story, & easier to talk about the facts of Rwanda's genocide, which anybody can probably find out for themselves at wikipedia or other websites. So my question, as commercial movie season begins, as well as AFI season, HOW DOES THIS MOVIE MAKE A DIFFERENCE ? How does it impact me or potentially others. That's what I'm always asking as I watch, as I did likewise last night at the premiere of
"J. Edgar"? And how can I make a difference in the future based on my viewing of this film? Well, hopefully, it will give me a little better education on the topic so I can be more informed & compassionate. In this case, the Rwanda genocide is apparently done & over with...its not ongoing, so there's no "activism" to do now, but knowing history also helps prevent it from being repeated. I heard a few numbers & statistics, one was "1 million died in 100 days" (Wikipedia says 800,000 in 1994). It turns out that the director, Aldrick, is NOT rwandan, but was born in Jamaica & lives in Jersey (or grew up there?). He said he was in the Peace Corps in Africa, & then he went to NY film school, & somewhere along the way, he met a Rwandan named Ishmael who had a script about the genocide,which he rewrote. It was during the Q&A that Alrick said he wanted to show that these non-white kids (of Rwanda) as having dreams "as if African kids don't dream, & only whites do", & he also added "as if ALL Muslims are bad", apparently assuming he's speaking to a bunch of white hillbillies here at the AFI in Hollywood.
Please, Alrick, was that really necessary? Every documentary & non-mainstream film that comes out is about some non-white country where somebody in poverty somehow either makes it or the story is being told that they deserve a chance as much as American kids, or white American kids. We've all heard that story and there's nothing wrong with telling the story, but there is something wrong in blaming "white kids" for the problem, or accusing white people of being totally ignorant.
That's old & its not true. There's a lot of "reverse racism" around the world, and not every white kid grows up to be a happy millionaire. If you're going to be an advocate for a "people group" try to refrain from chopping other people down, or you defeat your own purpose, albeit liberal whites seem to enjoy it.
However, as a so-called "white person" who is also conservative in the audience, I'm hearing him, as a black person, ask for our help in spreading the news about the film at the same time he's taking potshots at "American whites", which actually works with the typical modern white liberal audience, many who were in the audience feeling sorry for the Rwandans
(as was I) and already blaming themselves (which I wasn't), which Alrick sensed & went with it.
He went on to say that because Rwanda doesn't have anything to export except potatoes, none of the superpowers cared what happened in '94 (he didn't say "white" but it was implied by that time; was Bush in the White House at the time? Would Obama have done anything different because he is black?). The Rwanda genocide is tragic. People of all colors & ethnicities need to be aware of it. Question: Did any of the other black African countries do anything to help?
The film showed the struggle. It talked about the Hutus &Tutsis, apparently there being tension between them (Alrick said today they are only allowed to call themselves Rwandan). I think Alrick's most profound point, with Biblical backing, was that Rwanda had to make a decision to FORGIVE.
To try to prosecute those who were involved in the killing would have torn up the country even further, & there was a good scene in the film of a girl/daughter (who was one of the main characters) who chose to forgive the man who killed her parents. And there was another scene at the "Re-Edukation" (sic) camp where forgiveness is discussed ("sometimes forgiveness is more painful than the original wound itself").
Religion also came into play with Catholics & Muslims ending up together & living (or surviving) peacefully side by side in a mosque ( Alrick said mosques happened to be one of the safest places during the genocide). There was a nice scene with the Catholics saying the Lord's prayer while the Muslims bowed & said "Allah akbar". From a socio-cultural perspective, there was the use of "cockroach" as a recurring motif...at the end Alrick compared it to being called "nigger" (or, I would add, "white boy.")
They kept calling one priest the "cockroach priest." The sequence of the movie itself was a series of flashbacks, with things later in the movie explaining earlier events. To gain a little better awareness of what happened, or as a starting point to learn more,its a decent film. It has a few light-hearted moments, some nice scenery & juxtaposition of dark moments (killings) with happier, more colorful moments. Alrick commented at the end that "It will be interesting to see how Belgium responds to it." Apparently,the roots of the genocide go back to Belgium.
I found the following online:
"...The roots of Rwanda's genocide lie in its colonial experience. First occupied and colonized by the Germans (1894-1916) during World War I the country was taken over by the Belgians, who ruled unti over by the Belgians, who ruled until independence in 1962. Utilizing the classic strategy of "divide and rule," the Belgians granted preferential status to the Tutsi minority (constituting somewhere between 8 and 14 percent of the population at the time of the 1994 genocide). In pre-colonial Rwanda, the Tutsis had dominated the small Rwandan aristocracy, but ethnic divisions between them and the majority Hutus (at least 85 percent of the population in 1999) were always fluid, and the two populations cannot be considered distinct "tribes." Nor was inter-communal conflict rife. As Stephen D. Wrage states, "It is often remarked that the violence between Hutus and Tutsis goes back to time immemorial and can never be averted, but Belgian records show that in fact there was a strong sense among Rwandans ... of belonging to a Rwandan nation, and that before around 1960, violence [along] ethnic lines was uncommon and mass murder of the sort seen in 1994 was unheard of." (Wrage, "Genocide in Rwanda: Draft Case Study for Teaching Ethics and International Affairs," unpublished paper, 2000.)..."
http://www.gendercide.org/case_rwanda.html
If you want to find out more about the movie, or where you can see it, go to their official website at http://www.kinyarwandamovie.com/ . As for any activism you can do to help Rwandans now, I don't know of anything. I suppose its like becoming more informed of the Holocaust. The more you learn, the better understanding you have (& can be sure you are not a "stupid white person"...but then walk down any street & ask the average American black what happened in Rwanda, & see what response you get...if you randomly poll 100 American blacks, & 100 American whites, who do you think will know more about Rwanda?)) & also are able to help educate others & hopefully prevent history from repeating itself. -Vander-
