JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Sunday, March 30, 2025

Inward Hunger: The Movie

by

20111014

Two things can be said with cer­tain­ty about Mariel Brown's doc­u­men­tary, In­ward Hunger, on Er­ic Williams. First, it's a good il­lus­tra­tion of what lo­cal film­mak­ers and arts fun­ders could be do­ing: pro­duc­ing work of lo­cal in­ter­est and val­ue. Sec­ond, it il­lus­trates the se­ri­ous prob­lems of the pol­i­tics of cul­tur­al pro­duc­tion. But the movie: it is a three-part opus that tells Williams's sto­ry from his birth in 1911 to death in 1981. The script (by Alake Pil­grim) gets the his­to­ry large­ly cor­rect. Williams's ear­ly life, his an­ces­try, his QRC and Ox­ford ex­pe­ri­ences are rea­son­ably well il­lus­trat­ed. Much of this ma­te­r­i­al comes from Williams's au­to­bi­og­ra­phy, which gives the doc­u­men­tary its name. And a few in­ter­est­ing, risky facts which were not as well known-like Williams's aban­don­ing his first fam­i­ly in the US, and hav­ing to get a quick­ie di­vorce to mar­ry his sec­ond wife, Soy-were in­clud­ed.

For its fac­tu­al fi­deli­ty, the doc­u­men­tary de­serves to be seen wide­ly in schools, and I imag­ine many adults would find it ed­i­fy­ing. Whether the main tar­get au­di­ence (teenagers, young adults) could be in­duced to sit still for three hours for this is an­oth­er mat­ter. (More on this lat­er.) As to the nar­ra­tive con­struc­tion of the life, some bits are giv­en more weight than oth­ers. Wil-liams's time at Howard in the US, and how he fit in­to the in­tel­lec­tu­al canon of the pre-na­tion­al­ist era, along­side fig­ures like Ralph Bunche and Alain Locke, are glossed over. This is one of the ma­jor weak­ness­es of the doc­u­men­tary-the in­abil­i­ty to as­sess, or even enu­mer­ate, Williams's con­sid­er­able in­tel­lec­tu­al achieve­ments. As if to re­dress this de­fi­cien­cy are a few lengthy di­gres­sions, like the bit on the 1930s labour sit­u­a­tion in Trinidad, to es­tab­lish the main so­cial and in­tel­lec­tu­al cur­rents of the pre-War era.

Oth­ers are Black Pow­er and lengthy in­ter­views with Williams's nieces and daugh­ter about the day of Williams's death. These are dis­tract­ing tan­gents-in­ter­est­ing, but re­dun­dant giv­en the sto­ry as pre­sent­ed.

This leads to an­oth­er weak­ness: the doc­u­men­tary qua struc­tured nar­ra­tive. It fol­lows the facts rather than guid­ing them in­to a pur­pose­ful arc. Even a bi­og­ra­phy can be or­ches­trat­ed (and the three sub­ti­tles show an aware­ness of this pos­si­bil­i­ty), but the gush of facts was over­whelm­ing, and formed an un­man­age­able nar­ra­tive. Some skilled edit­ing could have cut and re­or­gan­ised the ma­te­r­i­al in­to a more sat­is­fy­ing work. A sat­is­fy­ing work would have pre­sent­ed a the­sis on Williams-what he was, meant, was not, and so on, and used ma­te­r­i­al to ar­gue it. In­ward Hunger tries to get every­thing in, but leaves big gaps. As men­tioned, Williams's great love was schol­ar­ship, yet the doc­u­men­tary is weak on this. Lloyd Best and the New World Group-the PNM's an­tithe­sis-are men­tioned in pass­ing. Nei­ther are Williams's re­la­tion to Caribbean in­tel­lec­tu­als and his de­struc­tive in­ter­ven­tions in­to UWI ex­plored.

How­ev­er, many con­tro­ver­sial is­sues are broached-Williams's racial pol­i­tics, PNM cor­rup­tion, and his ma­nias (para­noia, vin­dic­tive­ness)-but the per­spec­tive veers be­tween po­lit­i­cal cor­rect­ness and re­ac­tionary mid­dle class sen­ti­ment. Apro­pos of this, there's an in­ter­est­ing film with­in the film which the film­mak­ers ei­ther didn't see or couldn't touch, be­cause they were im­pli­cat­ed in it. This is the role of Er­i­ca Williams-Con­nell. Er­i­ca man­han­dles the nar­ra­tive-like say­ing the Black Pow­er peo­ple should be on their knees be­fore her dad for not shoot­ing them. She over­lays a car­ing, lov­ing fa­ther, of her and the na­tion, rewrit­ing the sto­ry as it was be­ing told. That aside, this han­dling of the ma­te­r­i­al leaves us no bet­ter or worse off in terms of our knowl­edge of the man, what he did, and what he meant. His­to­ry, es­pe­cial­ly told via film, has many pos­si­bil­i­ties: none of them was ev­i­dent in the film­mak­ing-ei­ther in the script or the vi­su­al nar­ra­tive.

The first hour rolls like a sound­track with pic­tures. Much of it re­lies on cam­era pans on stills, and gloomy full-frontal in­ter­views with aca­d­e­mics, Williams con­fi­dants, and rel­a­tives. When more footage be­comes avail­able as Wil-liams's ca­reer blos­soms, it is laid down as em­bell­ish­ment to the sound­track, rather than as part of the dis­course/text. This is the fa­tal de­fi­cien­cy: the pover­ty of the "film­mak­ing" bit: style, tech­nique, tech­ni­cal com­pe­tence. Com­par­ing In­ward Hun-ger with suc­cess­ful doc­u­men- taries like last year's Acad­e­my Award-win­ning In­side Job, Mor­gan Spur­lock's Su­per­size Me, Black Box's Hack­ing Democ­ra­cy, and Ni­na Pa­ley's Si­ta Sings the Blues (to name a few) is re­veal­ing and dis­heart­en­ing. Un­like In­ward Hunger, ev­i­dent in all these are cre­ativ­i­ty, wit and in­tel­li­gence.

In­ward Hunger shares its de­bil­i­ties with many lo­cal films I've seen over the years. The per­ma­nent ex­cuse of Tri­ni film­mak­ers is "Oh Gord, we tryin'". But what is miss­ing from the films, in­clud­ing In­ward Hunger, is much more ba­sic than re­sources and train­ing. Miss­ing are imag­i­na­tion and the abil­i­ty to think past the lo­cal. You have to won­der what movies lo­cal film­mak­ers watch. Quentin Taran­ti­no learned to make movies by watch­ing movies. Kevin Smith made movies in an emp­ty con­ve­nience store with his friends as ac­tors. Rashomon was made with a low bud­get, min­i­mal sets and cast, and no CGI. The in­ten­tion here is not to heap all this on Mariel Brown's shoul­ders. This is an epis­temic is­sue: What is known, know­able, and ac­cept­able to of­fi­cial in­sti­tu­tions since it is ac­cess to in­sti­tu­tions, and the abil­i­ty to re­as­sure them their po­lit­i­cal or epis­te­mo­log­i­cal lim­its will not be breached, that de­ter­mine the art pro­duced.

If In­ward Hunger is what comes out of the Tri­ni fi­nan­cial-cre­ative, po­lit­i­cal-artis­tic nexus, the prob­lems are as bad as I think they are. The main prob­lem is (to re­peat): A small, un­de­serv­ing group seems to have a mo­nop­oly of cul­tur­al fund­ing and pro­duc­tion in Tri­ni-dad. But if In­ward Hunger is, in fun­ders' opin­ion, good stuff, then, well, what do I know?


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored