BFB archive revisted: Ousmane Sembene on the State of African Cinema

• This interview has been re-printed with the kind permission of Ecrans D’Afrique, the cinema, television and video publication on African cinema. It first appeared in May 1992 and was translated from French into English for the BFB African Cinema Double Issue, vol. 3, issue ⅔, Summer/Autumn 1995.

The current desperation felt by UK producers struggling to salvage a national film industry, is shared by many African producers – particularly those who attended the International Conference on Cinema Production held in Niamey, Niger in 1982. These producers set themselves the daunting task of convincing 53 governments that African cinema was needy and worthy of extensive support. What resulted was the Niamey Manifesto – a firm set of legislative directives and the most fundamental document concerning the development of African cinema.

Ten years on Senegalese filmmaker Ousmane Sembene, the founder of that meeting and African cinema’s agent provocateur, reflected on the future with the African film magazine African Screens (Ecrans D’Afrique).

General Principles of Niamey Manifesto of African Filmmakers – First International Conference on Cinema Production in Africa (Niamey, Niger 1982)

The viability of cinema production is closely tied to the complementary viability of the other four main sectors of cinema, namely the exploitation of cinema theatres, Importation of films, distribution of films, technical Infrastructure and training.

There cannot be any viable cinema without the involvement of African States for the organisation, the support, the stabilisation of cinema and the encouragement and protection of private/public investment in cinema.

It is not possible to have a viable cinema Industry on a national level in Africa. The development of national cinema should take into consideration regional and pan-African co-operation by integrating cinema to political and economic ties that already exist between states.

At the present stage of development of audio-visual facilities in the world and particularly in Africa, television should be complimentary to cinema.

It is possible to finance African film productions from the present revenue from the millions who patronise cinemas in Africa. What is required is a strategy that will ensure that part of this revenue legitimately returns to the production of films. Production should not rely solely on patronage.

The full Nianey Manifesto will be published as part of a collection of essays entitled An African Cinema Reader by BFI Books.  The publication is being edited by Imruh Bakari and Nbye Cham for the Screen Griots programme and will be available in 1996.

African Screens: The first international symposium on cinematographic production in Africa, in which you actively participated took place in Niamey in 1982.  What is your assessment of the evolution of the African cinema with regard to solutions proposed in Niamey?

Ousmane Sembène: The Niamey Manifesto has been a necessary transition in the evolution of our cinema. During the preceding Pan-African Film Festival of Ouagadougou it was decided that we filmmakers should meet. We had been warmly welcomed by the Niger Head of State of that time who put some cash at our disposal. As initiators of the meeting, Paulin Soumanou Vieyra and myself had been mandated to think about the topic.  We thought it important to deal with the exhibition and distribution mechanisms. We had to ponder on a variety of problems, the advantages and the drawbacks.  How do we produce films in countries like ours, where no provisions of funds for film-making are made? A fundamental way of solving the problem seemed to be the exemption of our films from taxation. Certainly, such exemptions are significant but should not be meant for the producer alone.  A way to deal with television in each individual country should be considered.  Ten years later, what assessment can we make of the recommended tax exemption policy? Burkina, Ivory Coast, Guinea, Senegal and Mali have adopted it. The policy is gaining ground. We went beyond the individual producer tax relief with, what I call, the ‘itinerant Film show’. It consisted of travelling through Africa with our films and with prior agreement, we were welcomed into different countries where we benefited from the tax-exempt screenings.  This kind of partnership can be established between African filmmakers with common interests.

In Niamey, resolutions intended for governments were taken. Do you have the impression some perceptible change has been made?

Since then, Senegal for instance has invested a lot of money in film-making. But that has not improved the state of Senegalese film.  The question to ask though is despite the lack of resources, how do some young filmmakers manage to produce six feature films within two years? Every country has its own contradictions.

Do you think that FEPACI (the Federation of Pan-African Filmmakers) is powerful enough to contribute to the strengthening of the Niamey resolutions?

We have made a big step within two FESPACO’s concerning the re-launching of FEPACI activities. From my point of view, one of the most positive results is the introduction of the notion of partnership.  The notion, which was introduced in 1989 during the First International Days of the Audiovisual Partnership (Jipa), assumed that henceforth, relations of equality must exist between our northern and southern hemisphere partners and us.  However, FEPACI is unable to do more without a parallel revamping of national filmmakers associations. Neither regional delegates nor FEPACI, which plays a purely consultative role in these countries, can force them to apply resolutions like those taken in Niamey.

Another important resolution taken in Niamey deals with coproduction. It now seems that agreements of a new kind have been signed between Burkina and France. What do you think of new provisions that make the use of the French language a condition to receive extra funding for African films from French sources?

One must not overlook the fact that these only concern francophone countries in Africa. At Cannes last May the possibility of African films in French to gain an extra 25% of the budget was mentioned. Now, let’s face it, if they prevent us from using our languages, we must not sign such agreements. I do believe it is possible to make our Heads of States understand that our languages should be considered equally with French in the conditions of such agreements. There have been independent coproductions with other foreign states without the conditions mentioned above being laid. In Brittany quite a number of films have been written in Breton. So why should our films be denied the use of More or Wolof or other languages, films which have achieved real success among our populations? 

First of all, cinema is a juxtaposition of images and creativity. Our ancestors, those artists who influenced Picasso and others, were not speaking French or Portuguese when they conceived their art. The creator the filmmaker, must also bear in mind that his responsibility is great.  Cinema is the last refuge for our languages.  Even our songs are being absorbed and only the harmony is left.  African filmmakers who agree with such conditions must do so alone, because creativity is an individual action.  With cinema, we run the risk of stressing that separation between Africans speaking their native languages.

With reference to the CAMP THIAROYE experience, what do you think could be done for such collaborations to develop?

I am ready to embark again on an experience like CAMP THIAROYE which associated Algeria, Tunisia and Senegal. It is the best experiment ever. The cost of the Film is reduced and a wide circulation made possible. It shares the nationalities of contributor countries and a wider network of theatres. Profits of the films will be shared according to the terms of the agreements. With a coproduction, a producer, for example, can be chosen from several countries which means, the work will no longer be an individual action by producer-filmmakers. We want our products to be successful and well distributed. By collaborating and pooling resources, we can control our own markets.

What are the opportunities and dangers facing African cinema at a time when our countries are increasingly invaded by foreign images brought through satellites?

Some invasion is occurring but I believe most of our governments are ready to help us achieve the opposite. At present, we have Canal France International (Cfi) and the Canal 5 project pouring images into Africa from France.  But, after reading about those agreements, did we African Filmmakers ring the alarm bell to call upon FEPACI and our states?  Sometimes silence can be connivance. I am certain that, if some countries or associations could draw attention to this, they will be heard. But now, we have our own publications Fepaci Info and Ecrans d’Afrique which alert our filmmakers and our countries to the possible dangers those images of the sky represent. That is to say, we must lead a permanent and sustained battle. To me, it is the lack of strategic campaigning in the interest of the present generation of African filmmakers that is part of the problem.

Is Sembene Ousmane too tired to lead the battle?

Now a new generation has taken over but I did not say that I am giving up the battle.  I remain available while leaving the young ones to take initiatives.

You have said that African cinema must be an ‘evening school’ for Africans. Today do you feel those remarks are obsolete when faced with African films made by young filmmakers who are against your conception of the role of African cinema?

Our cinema will always be an evening school for Africans. But unfortunately, all filmmakers cannot be made to think that way. A film is an industry, and we meet with a lot of difficulties including the funding of our films which, once finished, are received by our public who either like or dislike them. I am against making European coproductions. Do they deal with the evolution of Africa? Do our filmmakers have any cultural or political affinities? In fact, I believe that we must think about associating among ourselves to produce works acceptable both to Africa and the outside world.

At Cannes in 1991, Africa was widely represented by films made mostly by young directors. Does that express a legitimate acknowledgement of our cinema?

It was an event of prime importance. Unfortunately, how many of those films will be seen in our countries, and even in the respective countries of the productions? We continue expending energy on Europe, instead of diverting it toward Africa.  Within that new dynamic the neo-colonial spirit controls cinema. Our French partners, in particular, inject money, but contracts offered trap our young filmmakers. Our film industry is being organised through the French speaking community. Is it not time for us to draw the attention of the youngest to thinking about what they can do to help distribute our films, especially in our countries for the benefit of our public? The presence of our films at Cannes is a good thing. It’s the first good advertisement at Cannes in 20 years. The public gathered there is not found anywhere else. However Cannes is a “flash in the pan”. Once Cannes is over, African films are no longer exhibited.

We must consider taking advantage of the publicity gained at Cannes in order to show the films in our own African countries.  We must work like business company managers. Making a film and keeping it in a box until we are invited to a festival is not a great effort on our part. The entire range of francophone African countries were represented at Cannes with four films as compared to three films for Poland alone. However, that in itself is not bad. Before, we were only allowed in the laundry room. Today, we are near the dining-table. We must be pleased with the successes of African film festivals like Milan which opened in February 1991 and revealed a new way of approaching our films.

One of the reproaches young filmmakers level against you elder ones is your being too individualistic and not creatively helping them?

Be it in Dakar or elsewhere, I have always been available to African filmmakers.

Why don’t you make films with a number of them as with CAMP THIAROYE?

I have already tried. It did not work. But I repeat, I am available to them.  Many filmmakers are easily flattered by glory gained at a festival for a first work.  But humility is very necessary to us.

What main flaws do you find in most African films, especially, those made by the younger generation?

Whenever, I see a film, I always learn something. Unfortunately, a lot of our young filmmakers do not learn much. They do not work enough on their films starting from the script. A film does not only need dialogue. Metaphors and symbolisms exist, which if properly used add strength to a film. In Europe or America, for instance, a graduate in cinema must be an assistant on at least three films before starting on his own short feature.  Here in Africa, we embark upon the direction of full-length feature films straight away on the basis of theoretical knowledge, obsessed only with the desire to imitate those made by famous filmmakers. Personally, I made four short dramatic films before directing a feature.  Besides, when I look at conditions imposed by the financiers on our film directors, I protest! We must have the courage to refuse these impositions.  Our filmmakers must command respect, while at the same time they must work hard and, in a professional manner, draw the cinematographic techniques out for themselves.