Analysis of Cultural Features in The Film Tsotsi

Culture is a way that a certain group of people decide to live their lives. It has been developing since the beginning of time and encompasses many things such as: religion; ceremonies; moral standards; heritage and languages, to name a few. People grow up within different cultures. The reason we all see things differently is because each of us were raised differently; taught different things and beliefs and had different environmental factors influencing us. Making films surrounding a certain culture or different cultures, with their issues and solutions are great for bringing awareness to anyone in society who may be ignorant when understanding another culture. People also enjoy things they can relate to and therefore, appreciate films which incorporate aspects of their culture to not only educate and entertain but to acknowledge the culture; its history and what it stands for. This essay aims to analyse how the topic of culture strengthens the main theme of the film Tsotsi (2005) by examining the cultural features in the film’s narrative; character and their behaviour; filmic medium and scenographic elements.

A quote from Utopia by Sir Thomas More (2012) reads: “For if you suffer your people to be ill-educated, and their manners to be corrupted from their infancy, and then punish them for those crimes to which their first education disposed them, what else is to be concluded from this, but that you first make thieves and then punish them.”This is a quote that rings true for many ruling governments from many countries, across time.

The film Tsotsi (2005) can be argued to be a Crime Drama, however, I believe it is more a Social Drama which deals with crime, being a result of social issues (such as a lack of proper education; oppression and abuse) due to politics. Tim Dirks tells us that a Drama genre film usually works with important topics that the film maker wishes the audience to be aware of. The storyline is quite deep and tend to be more true to life says Dirks. The film deals with the main theme of survival, which links to all the other themes present in the film, such as power and redemption. The name itself is a South African slang word referring to someone who is a gangster or ruffian. The film focuses on the main character, Tsotsi, and the difficulties that life has presented him with, resulting in his resort to crime.

In a journal article written by Lindiwe Dovey (2007), Tsotsi, along with several other South African films released post 1994, are being labeled as Post- Apartheid films. This means that the films being produced are directly or indirectly being influenced, culturally, by the history of the country claims Dovey (2007).

In her thesis studies addressing Apartheid; Shawndee Marie Jenkins (2013), we are reminded that colonization is a part of history that has shaped the world we know today. Several countries have been conquered by stronger nations who have forced new cultures; beliefs and languages onto the people. ‘Strength in numbers’ is a phrase that really holds truth as one of the main reasons that colonization occurs, is for a country that has power, to maintain that power and increase it. This is achieved by acquiring more land and people to support you, whether willingly or by force. One such example of this in regards to film, according to Roy Armes (2006) was the presence of France in Africa. Once France had conquered several African countries and film making was introduced, the new rulers ensured that films were only produced by the French so that the majority of the returns would still go to the French and not the African film makers, writes Armes (2006). Armes (2006) then goes on to reveal that several French and other European funders were willing to provide funding to African countries for film making as long as the films were restricted to what the funders allowed them to create, namely, namely, films which portrayed Europe in a positive way. Armes (2006) explains that no films would be allowed to freely express social issues. They could not expose how the colonisers forced their ways onto another nation and culture as it could create a rebellion or outrage. The films had to also be created with all European languages; completely neglecting the languages of the motherland and the people who created it says Armes (2006). This has destroyed a whole culture but through it, a form of cultural hybridity has formed between the French and African cultures, making an entirely new and beautiful one to be enjoyed, but never forgetting how it has formed and is still evolving.

Jenkins (2013) says that South Africa was one of those countries which was taken over by Western rule and proceeded to descend into the nightmarish regime known as Apartheid, where oppression and inequality amongst different race groups reigned. In order for the oppressors, who were actually in the minority of the community, to keep their control, propaganda was used to indoctrinate them into believing that the Apartheid system was not only okay, but good, states Jenkins (2013). Lindiwe Dovey (2007) reveals the fact that even Hollywood contributed to the creation of films which showed the Apartheid government in a good light, but eventually started making films which exposed the crimes of Apartheid, when it was realised that it received more views and more money. Even in Antonin Artaud’s writing of The Theatre and its Double (2010), he saw culture as a modern way for people to make money from it and finds it disheartening that society has lost the true meaning and value of different cultures in order to make their own progress for material gains.

During the opening scene of the film, the establishing shot of the township does not only serve to give the viewer a sense of where the story is taking place but the high angles highlight the vulnerability and inferior position of the people living there as well as the volume of destitution existing in this part of the world. This is a direct representation of how the oppressed descendants of Apartheid still suffer; hold no power in the country and whose voices go unheard. The film is set in a township which is poverty stricken and run down, enhanced by the brown and mustard colours that automatically bring the audience the idea of ‘rural’. This is another reflection of the effects of Apartheid and several acts and laws which were passed at the time. According to Margaret Roberts (1994) The Group Areas Act is one such law that was passed and an area known as District Six, being a majority non-white area during Apartheid, saw the destruction of many homes when the area was declared a ‘white area’. Non- white residents were relocated to the outskirts of the city which became townships. This setting is placed up against that of the other two characters in the film- the parents of the stolen baby. They live in an affluent area, which is westernized. This does not mean to say that wealthy people do not commit crimes and impoverished people do, but to rather highlight the fact that, if a government does not help its entire people; the desperate do what is necessary to survive. The baby’s mother who becomes paralysed after Tsotsi shoots her, could be symbolic. This could represent that there is huge divide between the rich and the poor and that it is not enough to live life accepting it for what it is but the people need to come together and make a plan help the impoverished out of their situation. Without this kind of progress, we are paralyzing our own future.

Jordache Ellapen (2007) believes that the reason for banishing the black population to the townships during Apartheid was to inhibit their progress in life. This was not possible as the mixing of races was inevitable. People who have not been a part of the townships therefor will never see it as anything but a place in which the black population was confined too and where no progress has been made since the Apartheid times, however, Ellapen (2007) argues that through the mixing of people who travelled to the urban areas to work and the rural people; a new cultural hybridity has formed. Ellapen makes reference to a scene in the film of fowls eating in the dirt right next to a very modern car- a direct reference to the results of cultural hybridity.

Ellapen (2007) states that even years after Apartheid has ended, the effects still remain. The conditions of the townships have not improved, with rudimentary housing; poverty; hunger; lack of proper education and crime still playing a large enough role to convince people that these aspects are what make up a township- even though it is a stereotype. A film like Tsotsi (2006) shows the audience that even though the ‘struggle has ended, it will take a long time, if ever, for full equality to exist for everyone.

The theme of survival is evident throughout the film. (2013) states that Tsotsi, whose real name is David, has been trying to survive since childhood when he lost his mother and rejected his drunkard father after witnessing his father abuse their dog. Jenkins (2013) brilliantly likens the abused dog to the youth of Apartheid by stating that they are just as defenseless and innocent but are nonetheless inflicted with pain and have to either adapt to the situation or die. Tsotsi has had to grow up committing crime daily in order to get food or money to go on living. Members of society itself have to try and survive the crime that gangsters like Tsotsi deal out every day. In one of Tsotsi’s hijackings, he steals a car with a baby in it. Now, not only does Tsotsi have to fend for himself but in a moment of sympathy, he decides to care for the child and help it to survive too.

The theme of redemption is also witnessed in the narrative, however, it is rather contradictory or ironic says Dovey (2007). Dovey (2007) points out that during Apartheid, the religion of Christianity was forced onto the native people. One of this religion’s teachings is to find redemption and the narrative focuses on Tsotsi doing just that, for his crimes, however, it conveniently forgets to address that the Apartheid government and the injustices it committed, needed to redeem itself and acknowledge that perhaps it is the cause behind many crimes being committed.

Antonin Artaud (2010) talks about culture as being a pure thing which gets corrupted over time and needs a devastating event in order to start over and revisit what the culture really stands for. Tsotsi’s character shows development as we see Tsotsi go from being a cold-hearted criminal who would commit murder, to one that suddenly feels remorse for his actions. Even though he harasses another mother to breastfeed the child, he does so with only good intentions for the baby. Tsotsi sees much of himself in the baby and begins to think about where he came from, who he really is and his identity. When confronting the old man, Morris, in the wheelchair, Tsotsi is faced with the fact that he has a lot of power and could take the Morris’s money and life in an instant, but he however realises that he also has the power to spare the life, after recalling his father’s abuse towards his dog. Another instance is when Tsotsi shows remorse for violently attacking his friend, Boston, and reminds him that he was always a friend to him and wants to help him- Tsotsi’s version of an apology. Tsotsi also takes the life of his own partner, Butcher, in order to save the life of the baby’s father, John, as he knew killing John was the wrong thing to do. In a final act of redemption, Tsotsi decides to give the baby back to its parents; surrendering to the law in the process. If the low angle here as mentioned by Dovey (2007) does not directly show the redemption of Tsoti’s character and his remorse, then there is a visual apology in the tears rolling down his face which certainly do.

In one instance, the audience is presented with a flashback to reveal who Tsotsi really was before he became a criminal. He was an innocent child. After life’s experiences pushed him down the wrong path, he became the terror that he is in the film and only after a jarring event of realizing he has stolen something as pure as a baby and could have possibly killed its mother, does Tsotsi begin to revisit his identity and begin to make a change for the better as Artaud (2010) suggested.

An aspect of this film which helps portray this transformation is the medium of sound. The film cleverly makes use of music rich in a part of South African culture which enhances the themes further. According to Michael Hatton (nd), at the start of the film, while Tsotsi is the ruthless gangster he seems to be; the use of rough and gruff Kwaito music is used to reveal just what type of character Tsotsi really is. The audience will have an understanding that he is someone not to be trifled with. This contrasts with the end of the film when Tsotsi feel remorse for what he has done and returns the child. The music playing is almost operatic or orchestral and invokes emotion. This represents how Tsotsi is feeling; how he is changing and foreshadows perhaps, who he will become if he can get a second chance.

The transformation Tsotsi make does however show us that even though he was a product of the life experiences of his childhood, he still had a choice. A person, no matter the circumstances can still choose to do the right thing because there is good and bad inside of them. An example of this is through the aesthetic value and meaning of the hanging ornaments she makes. It shows that there is a simple honour in her poverty and that she takes pride in making things, that someone might see as junk, into something beautiful. She even sells her art to make money instead of resorting to theft. Tsotsi sees the colourful hanging glass as just broken pieces of glass, but Miriam tells him that the colours reflect onto him and is beautiful. The audience understands this to mean that there are many different facets to a person which one may not see at first. She could have seen Tsotsi as a criminal and bully but she could also see that he has a softer, caring nature. This reminds one to not judge a book by its cover and to not immediately place a negative judgment upon another before understanding who there are and what has influenced their lives.

The use of film can be seen as an effective and entertaining way to enlighten people about the different cultures that exist and the issues that certain cultures face and have faced throughout history. The word ‘difference’ has always carried with it a negative connotation. Once society is able to see difference for what it is and not as something good or bad, it will subsequently allow for greater understanding; acceptance; humanity and tolerance to be born, taking us one step closer to a reality of world peace.

Reference List

• Artaud, A. 2010. The Theatre and its Double. United Kingdom: Oneworld Classics Ltd.
• Armes, R. 2006. Africa Filmmaking North and South of the Sahara. Edinburgh. Edinburgh University press Ltd.
• Dercksen, D. 2015. Genre and genre conventions. https://writingstudio.co.za/what-type-of-story-are-you-writing/ (accessed 30 July 2019).
• Dirks, T. nd. Drama Films. https://www.filmsite.org/dramafilms.html (accessed 30 July 2019).
• Dovey, L. 2007. Redeeming features: from Tsotsi (1980) to Tsotsi (2006). Journal of African Cultural Studies 19(2): 143-164.
• Ellapen, J. 2007. The Cinematic Township: Cinematic Representations of the ‘Township Space’ and Who Can Claim the Rights to Representation in Post-Apartheid South African Cinema. Journal of African Cultural Studies 19(1): 113-137.
• Jenkins, S. 2013. THE UNSPOKEN VOICES OF APARTHEID: CONFESSIONS OF THE INTERREGNUM. Mastersthesis. Western Carolina. Western Carolina University.
• More, T. 2012. Utopia. London. Penguin Classics.
• Roberts, M. 1994. The Ending of Apartheid: Shifting Inequalities in South Africa. Geography 79(1): 53-64.

Filmography

• Tsotsi. [Film]. 2005. Hood, G (dir) & Fudakowski, P (prod). The UK Film & TV Production Company.