Theories of African Cinema: Identity, Evolution, and Hybridity

Also Read

 

(toc) #title= (Table of Content)

Introduction

African cinema continues to evolve—not just in its technology or storytelling, but also in its theoretical frameworks. As African filmmakers confront issues of identity, decolonization, modernity, and globalization, scholars and critics have developed a variety of models for understanding and interpreting this diverse and dynamic cinematic tradition. From revolutionary beginnings inspired by Third Cinema to emerging hybrid forms that defy singular classification, African cinema remains a site of intellectual, ideological, and artistic contestation.

Third Cinema and the Birth of a Revolutionary Tradition

African cinema, especially in its early postcolonial phase, was widely aligned with Third Cinema—a counter-hegemonic cinematic movement articulated by Argentinian theorists Fernando Solanas and Octavio Gettino. Third Cinema advocated for films that:

• Opposed capitalist consumerism and Hollywood escapism
• Embodied political resistance and consciousness-raising
• Represented marginalized voices and subaltern struggles

Early African filmmakers, such as Ousmane Sembene, Med Hondo, and Sarah Maldoror, saw cinema as an ideological weapon—a tool to reclaim African identity and challenge neocolonial oppression. These films emphasized indigenous culture, anti-imperialist resistance, and the lived experiences of postcolonial societies.

Identity Crisis: What Defines African Cinema?

Despite early ideological coherence, the identity of African cinema remains fluid and contested. Scholar Manthia Diawara describes contemporary African cinema as a “mélange of films made by Africans, people of African diasporic heritage and collaborative teams of African and Western directors.” This widening definition reflects both the geographical dispersion and the thematic breadth of African cinematic expression.

Several critics and filmmakers have proposed diverse frameworks for understanding African films:

• Lizbeth Malkmus and Roy Armes emphasize the need to read African films in relation to their historical, cultural, and social contexts.
• Others focus on the ideological positioning of filmmakers and how their films function—whether they are political, cultural, moral, or purely commercial.
• Some theorists advocate a functional classification, analyzing films according to their impact on audiences and their capacity to raise consciousness or instigate social change.

Teshome Gabriel’s Three Phases of Postcolonial Cinema

One of the most influential theoretical models comes from Teshome Gabriel, who adapted Frantz Fanon’s model of postcolonial evolution into a cinematic framework. Gabriel outlines three key phases in the development of African cinema:

1. Assimilation Phase

• Characterized by stylistic and thematic mimicry of Hollywood and European cinema.
• African filmmakers adopt Western models, often unknowingly reproducing colonial narratives.
• Films in this phase lack cultural authenticity and fail to challenge dominant ideologies.

2. Remembrance Phase

• Marks a shift toward cultural reclamation and control over production, distribution, and exhibition.
• Filmmakers turn to indigenous cultures, oral traditions, myths, and precolonial histories.
• Prominent examples:
  • Ousmane Sembene’s Mandabi
  • Gaston Kabore’s Wend Kuuni
• This phase is often aligned with the "return to the source" movement.

3. Combative Phase

• Represents full ideological liberation and sees filmmaking as a public service institution and a tool for political transformation.
• The focus shifts to African agency, resistance, and autonomy—both ideologically and institutionally.
• Ironically, many films with combative content are still funded by Western sources, creating a tension between ideological independence and economic dependency.

Diawara’s Thematic Classification

In contrast to Gabriel’s historical progression, Manthia Diawara proposes a content-based typology:

• “Return to the sources”: Films that explore indigenous African traditions, folklore, and precolonial heritage.
• “Africa without outsiders”: Films focused on intra-African narratives, excluding Western influence.
• “The colonial question”: Films that confront and critique Africa’s colonial history and its lingering impacts.
• “Social realist narratives”: Films that interrogate the clash between modernity and tradition, often linking Western modernity to neocolonialism while also critiquing idealized views of African traditional life.

Beyond Binary: Toward a Hybrid Cinema

While earlier African cinema aligned clearly with resistance aesthetics, contemporary African films increasingly defy neat classification. Filmmakers today blend local and global elements, creating what scholars like Keyan Tomaselli call a “cinema of emancipation”—a hybrid form that:

• Incorporates First World technologies (e.g., digital cinematography, CGI)
• Embeds African storytelling traditions, myths, and aesthetics
• Navigates both entertainment markets and political commitments

This hybridity reflects the heteroglossia of African cinema: multiple voices, identities, and gazes coexisting within one cinematic space.

The Rise of Women and Alternative Voices

African cinema is no longer dominated by male auteurs or limited to political resistance. A new generation of women filmmakers is reshaping the narrative by focusing on:

• Gender and sexuality
• Historical memory and female subjectivity
• Domestic life and personal storytelling

Notable filmmakers include:

• Assia Djebar (Algeria)
• Anne-Laure Folly (Togo)
• Salem Mekuria (Ethiopia)
• Ngozi Onwurah (Nigeria/UK)
• Moufida Tlatli (Tunisia)

Their films employ documentary techniques, personal narratives, and feminist theory to expand the thematic scope of African cinema beyond nationalist resistance.

Additionally, male filmmakers in transnational collaborations are beginning to address gendered and sexual identities, challenging traditional patriarchal representations and contributing to a more nuanced discourse on identity and representation.

Conclusion

Theories of African cinema reflect the ongoing negotiation of identity, power, culture, and aesthetics. From its revolutionary roots in Third Cinema to its contemporary hybrid forms, African film is a living, breathing archive of the continent’s struggles, dreams, and transformations.

Rather than being trapped in rigid theoretical boxes, African cinema thrives on its pluralism—a diversity of voices, gazes, technologies, and ideologies. As critics and filmmakers alike move beyond binary models of resistance versus complicity, the true beauty of African cinema lies in its ability to adapt, critique, and imagine—always in conversation with its past, but never bound by it.