Don’t wound our constitution
Let’s not go backwards to the days of apartheid when the government tried to control its citizens by banning certain books and movies
DURING my short-term British Council scholarship in the UK, I had an opportunity to watch a movie, which incidentally was banned by the Nationalist Party government.
The movie was titled, The Last Temptation of Christ.
I was later informed by my friends that the movie was banned because it misrepresented the Christian faith and the majority of Christians were aggrieved by the screening of the movie.
The government took the role of “big father” and banned the movie in response to protestations by a section of the Christian community.
I later smuggled a video copy of the movie to show to my friends and family.
During the height of repression by the National Party government, it was a common practice for comrades to smuggle “Struggle literature” in and out of the country.
My friends shrugged off the banning of the movie. They were of the unanimous opinion that banning literature just because some people were offended ran contrary to a core principle of a democratic society: freedom of expression within the confines of the constitution.
Soon after 1994, a new democratic government lifted the ban on the screening and circulation of The Last Temptation of Christ and there was no public outrage from the Christian community.
In no time, the movie and its controversies were removed from the public agenda.
Adult
I think few adult Christians even remember the movie and none of those who saw the movie have deserted their faith.
The rationale for sharing this experience is to share my disillusion with the outrage of some sections of society over the screening of the controversial movie Inxeba, The Wound.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with sections of the public expressing their disapproval at the screening of a movie, but there is everything wrong when a section of the community (irrespective of the position of authority that such individuals hold) go out of their way to aggressively sabotage the screening of a movie.
In the Eastern Cape, sheer aggression was used to prevent cinemas from showing the movie.
This behaviour was wrong and should not be allowed to happen in any corner of our democratic country.
I thought that the government, by way of law enforcement, would step in to remove the angry protesters.
According to our worldacclaimed constitution, South Africa is a secular state where the state is supposed to be neutral on matters of culture and religion, and that all forms of cultural and religious expression should be treated equally.
Such a constitutional obligation on the part of the state makes a compelling case for the state to protect the screening of Inxeba in all the cinemas around country.
The state cannot stand by and allow any person to throttle freedom of expression, which we had to fight for against the apartheid system.
Our constitution makes provision for peaceful protest, and there is nothing wrong with anyone protesting at cinemas where Inxeba is being screened, but things become wrong when other people take a decision about what movie we should or should not watch.
There are mechanisms in the movie industry such as age restrictions that protect children from being exposed to material which may cause harm to them.
In the case of Inxeba, I understand that the age restriction is 18 years, which is standard practice for movies with explicit sexual scenes, use of strong language and violence.
This age restriction on movies shields the young and fragile from possible bad influence.
But for goodness sake, adults in South Africa cannot be restricted like children in a country that purports to be free and democratic.
The courts of the land remain the last resort for those who feel aggrieved by the screening of Inxeba.
Such people may approach the court and convince it that Inxeba has distorted the isiXhosa culture to an extent that after viewing the movie, the audience will automatically change their views about the initiation school practices of the Xhosa. I think courts will not agree to this position. But as they say, it’s best to try.
Like many other movie fans, I have watched so many controversial films but none of these have changed how I look at the world and other cultures.
My world view and values cannot be swayed by a single movie made by imperfect people like myself.
Films as work of art are by their very nature a reflection of the realities of our society.
In portraying such realities, filmmakers may make distortions that may compromise our own understanding of reality. This is because movie makers, like all other artists, have what is often called “an artistic licence”, which allows artists to express something contrary to the norm.
That is precisely the reason why people like movies: they show a different side of our reality. And they also may not necessarily be true.
The film-makers and actors in Inxeba have exercised their artistic licence brilliantly. No wonder it has received numerous international awards.
Instead of blindly condemning the artistic work, we need to appreciate the creativity and raw talents of our young artists.
But we are free to make constructive criticism.
There have been many controversial productions in our new democracy such as Yizo Yizo and After Nine. Both explored the theme of male to male sexual intimacy.
Evidence
These movies were criticised by many people but there is no evidence to suggest that the lives of those who watched them have changed.
As a Xhosa man, I am passionately opposed to the apparent distortion of cultural practices of isiXhosa initiation schools by Inxeba, but I am willing to defend to my best ability the right of others to watch the movie and then make up their minds about what the movie says about the contradictions of our realities.
The continued screening and distribution of Inxeba is a litmus test of how seriously we (including the state) are committed to protecting the freedom of expression guaranteed in our constitution.
If we fail this critically important test, our children will smuggle copies of Inxeba like we did during the apartheid era.
If that happens (God forbid) then someone tell us what was the struggle against apartheid about.
Dr Faleni (PhD), is a proud Xhosa and Democratic Alliance MPL in the North West. These are his own views