Pasolini's African Safari - No Trophies, Just Food For Thought

Appunti per un'Orestiade Africana. Pasolini's attemptthe stain of colonialism. We never see a frank and
to set the Greek trilogy of plays in Central Africa is aopen discussion of the meaning of the director's
project of great promise and possibly insurmountablerelationship with his subject, Africa, no matter how
problems. In this documentary, the filmmakermany times the students dance around the problem
presents his vision, warts and all, and possibly hints atwith their inarticulate answers. It is difficult to watch.
the reason for its failure.Mercifully, the African footage comes back on,
It is 1970, a period of revolutionary fervor in Italyfollowing the storyline of the second play, The
and indeed throughout the world, and Pier PaoloLibation Bearers. The action is brutal and murder is
Pasolini is one of the filmmakers who best representsthe pivotal action in this play. The tone is different in
that spirit. In this atmosphere he makes a daringthis footage as well. There are scenes of war,
attempt to present sub-Saharan Africa from aexecutions, mourning, graveside rituals. Some of this
post-colonial, militantly leftist point of view. Can thisis newsreel from the war in Biafra, Nigeria. Pasolini
Italian, just 25 years after the end of Italy'smay be in over his head here, but he pulls it off,
disastrous imperialist adventures, really chuck all thebringing these scenes together with the help of the
cultural baggage and create something with a freshwords of the iconic Greek drama. The Africans in
point of view? No. The failure is a surprise forPasolini's viewfinder grow immensely symbolic, and he
everyone, including Pasolini, and it is to his credit thatfinds the main character, Orestes, in the person of
he was willing to put this mixed documentaryan exquisitely expressive African man who calms the
together to record the inconsistencies and paradoxesair with his powerful presence. Once again Pasolini
that lead his project to its inevitable dead-end.reminds us of his unequaled sense of cinematic art
Orestiade, or Oresteia in English, refers to a trilogy ofand his deep understanding of what is beautiful in a
Greek tragedies by Aeschylus. The idea of settingman. But then there is the musical interlude, a
the story in Africa is intriguing and full of interestingcombination of exquisitely hysterical riffs by the
symbolism, and Pasolini dives in with enthusiasm. HeArgentine saxophonist Gato Barbieri, and some
begins by giving a short synopsis of the Oresteia inexcruciatingly absurd singing by two African American
voiceover, as we see the faces of people on thesingers, Archie Savage and Yvonne Murray. He sings
streets of Uganda and several other countries. Afteroverly legato lines in a Paul Robeson bass voice that
the synopsis, he begins assigning these peoplecould be effective, but she has a problem coming to
possible roles in the first play, Agamemnon. There areterms with her segments. This is operatic, in the way
returning warriors, an unfaithful wife and plottingthat opera sounds when caricatured by someone
offspring and just like that, we are drawn in, becausewho hates opera. And Miss Murray certainly looks like
we can immediately see the larger than lifeshe hates this gig. Her voice is annoyingly shrill and
characters of Greek tragedy merging with thehollow at the same time, her melody repetitive and
throbbing humanity in these images. The magic isimpoverished. This is the exact opposite of bel canto,
powerful and there is the feeling that Pasolini couldand if there were a performance indication at the top
go on just like this with his project, narrating theof her page, it would probably say something like "a
action in voiceover, and depicting the scenes simplysquarciagola." In other words, shout like a hoarse
with the faces and gestures of the people.hyena.
In fact, maybe Pasolini should have gone ahead inIn the second session with the students, Pasolini
just that way, making this his private Greek tragedybegins with a question about whether these Africans
overlaying a collage of fascinating African scenes. Atidentify with the character of Orestes discovering a
least then there would be an honest distinctionnew world. He gets the same cryptic and troubled
between the European fantasies and the Africananswers as before. He does manages to get them
realities. Everyone would have come together ontalking about the uniqueness of the African soul,
their own terms and would be able to go theirthough, when he switches to a discussion of the
separate ways at the end.power of traditional culture to ameliorate the effects
But Pasolini believed in the correctness of hisof modern consumerism. But when he asks them
approach, and the beneficial effects of thehow he should continue the story, and how he might
progressive forces he represented. He had highrender the transformation of wrathful Furies into
hopes for his film. However, the scenes with theforgiving Eumenides. He is back to talking about his
African students in Rome brings this high flyingproject as though it were a game or a masquerade.
project crashing back to earth.These students are talking about their destinies, the
About ten minutes into the documentary, the lightslives and deaths of their countrymen, their own
come up and we are in an auditorium at theidentity, and Pasolini wants to focus on the minutiae
University of Rome. Pasolini is there with a group ofof scene building for his film. In all, there are no smiles
African students, all male, all dressed formally, manyin this room, no enthusiastic confirmation of Pasolini's
wearing jackets and ties. He explains to them that heinsight into Africanness, no spontaneous identification
wanted to make this film in Africa because he sawwith the African Orestes.
so many similarities between modern Africa andThe African footage returns with the final play,
Ancient Greece. So the question that he puts to theEumenides, as its focus. Pasolini searches for the way
students is, should he set the story in 1960, at theto present that transformation of the Furies. He
time of independence, or in 1970, that is, in theshows scenes of street dancers, processions,
present day. The question seems incredibly banal,wedding receptions. These are wonderfully evocative
superficial and irrelevant. Doesn't he want to hear thescenes, and his possibilities seem to multiply before
students' opinions on anything they have just seen,our eyes. Truly, Pasolini could make a great film out
or is he just interested in some technical advice?of this project, in spite of it all.
The faces of the students are like stone. This isPasolini must have been profoundly disappointed by
1970, they certainly know that they are in thethe responses from the auditorium, and considering
presence of one of the great artists of the newthe depth of his knowledge and his appreciations of
"revolutionary" Italy, the part of society that is reallyirony, and his genuine humility, I don't think that the
their hosts and protectors in this storm tossedtrue nature of the problem escaped him for very
European country. Yet they seem torn, and unsurelong. His questions had ignored the real problem that
what to say. In many instances, the speaking of justwas there as plain as day. Could this Greek Orestes
a few words is enough to allow a break in thehave any significance to the African situation, and
impassivity and let through a peak at the discomfortindeed, why should it? Did he have the license to
beneath. One student from Ethiopia speaks inmake such a film, using Africans as his workers,
measured objection to the concept, and seems toforever ordered here and there and never given the
be controlling an urge to shout out his protests. Hechance to make their own decisions and create their
says he cannot comment on Africa, because heown tragedy as they saw it? Was his film simply just
personally only knows Ethiopia. You cannot generalizeanother exercise in colonialism?
about the whole continent, he tells Pasolini. AnotherFor some reason, Pasolini never completed this
student objects to the use of the word "tribes" andproject. This is a pity. He should have gone with his
wants to refer to races and nations instead. Pasolini'spersonal vision, created his unique work of art, and
response to this sounds insensitive and dismissive,let the implications lead where they may. But he
telling him that it was the European colonialists whocouldn't: he was the engaged, connected artist,
had drawn the maps of Nigeria, and thus Nigeriancommitted to an international struggle. The lack of
history was a falsehood. The student is visiblysolidarity for his project meant its doom. Still, the
frustrated, but keeps his council, and accepts thedocumentary remains, and in itself, it is a powerful
great filmmaster's observations.statement showing the tragic disconnect between
The students knew something was wrong, even ifEuropean and African, and judging from the
they couldn't quite put their finger on it. But Pasolini isdifficulties encountered by both Pasolini and his
oblivious. The rebel, iconoclast and literarymusicians, the inability of either one to truthfully
revolutionary pictured himself outside of the colonialexpress the beauty of Africa using the tools of
and imperialistic hierarchy of European and ItalianEuropean art. Perhaps someday it will be possible, but
history, as though his good intentions alone werenot in 1970, and probably still not today.
enough to subtract him and cleanse his project of