The recent HBO film "Sometimes in April" depicts the story of Rwanda's genocide, not only as it occurred in 1994 but also as the country was still experiencing healing and justice in 2004. The story follows two Hutu brothers through the genocide. Both survive, though one brother loses his Tutsi wife and children and the other, a radio announcer, loses his freedom when he is put on trial for fomenting hatred against the Tutsi through his radio program. The estranged brothers are trying to put the past behind them-one brother by admitting his guilt and the other by forgiving that brother, whose actions led to the death of his wife and children.
Rwanda's genocide is rapidly becoming known as one of the most horrifying spectacles of racial hatred in the 20th century. During a period of 100 days, over 800,000 Tutsis and moderate Hutus were murdered while the world turned its back. Instead of recognizing that a massacre was taking place, the U.S. and European nations started debating whether "acts of genocide" had occurred or whether "genocide" had occurred. The distinction was hair fine and an argument consisting of semantics. What is the difference between "acts" of genocide and genocide? Well, had the West decided it was "genocide," it would have been obligated to do something about it, according to treaties signed after World War II, when we claimed "never again." As eloquently stated by journalists since 1994, "never again" happened and the world stood by.
The movie explores the shame and grief of those who survived-grief for those they lost, and shame for surviving, not only because they survived when so many died but sometimes because of what they had to do in order to survive. It is a story of reconciliation and forgiveness, of coming to terms with extreme violence. It is an important story, one the world needs to hear-because we still do not fully understand the part we played in the genocide, not just by ignoring it but, through colonialism, creating the situation that led to the genocide.
Raoul Peck is making a name for himself by writing and directing movies that explore the links between the West and Africa. He is not afraid to point fingers at all the parties involved, Africans and Westerners alike. But more importantly, he is doing work in forgiveness and reconciliation. Though this is not a great movie-though I do not think this is a classic in any sense of the word-it is a movie that everybody should see.
Go To Page: 1
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Jessica Powers's African History topic, please visit the Discussions page.