Arts Festival on film

By Claire Slatter

TO have captured the magnificence of the first South Pacific Festival of Arts held in May, 1972 in Suva would be beyond the power of any film, given the best director and photographers so let us not cast too dim a shadow on the film-makers’ expertise and vision on this score.

Yet one would have hoped, having participated in so fulfilling a week of cultural activities, displays and association, that those in whose hands the media lay, might have captured and transmitted, even in part, something more than the mere activity; something of the atmosphere, the pride and glory of the entire fortnight as expressed by both parti cipants and audience—might have been recorded on film; a film which would continue to invoke a spirit of pride and confidence, amongst Pacific peoples, in their own cultural heri tages, the material manifestations of which were displayed during the Festival. In the light of these ex pectations the film was a disappoint ment.

But perhaps it is unfair to judge the film against these expectations; any success or indeed failure must surely be measured against certain defined aims and goals. It appears evident that the aims of the film-makers were entirely different from the ex pectations this writer holds; against those aims the film may well be as sessed more favourably even as a tremendous success.

Made for the Government of Fiji by Pacific Hotels and Development Limited, the film is all too obviously tourist-oriented. That Fiji dominates the scene is no mere coincidence— the unique opportunity that the Festival presented for further pro moting the tourist industry in Fiji was not lost on the film-makers who made capital of the event in their own interests. Too late, the heavy tourist-orientation of the Festival was realised by the organisers, of whose motives we have little doubt. That Mr Victor Carell the principal organiser of the Festival, wrote the script for this film then was unfortunate.

On the merits of the actual filming, as such, there were several very good shots of the various activities that occurred during the Festival, including delightful foci on particular performers or spectators: a Gilbertese

child who errs in a performance with an extra clap and blushes with em barrassment; a Samoan doing a hilarious solo act, detracting attention away from the main group of dancers; a Fijian staring in puzzlement and awe at talented Aborigines perform ing a Corroboree; a lively bus scene. These scenes make a study in purpose of the film and bring the viewer’s mind reeling back to the crude reality of commercialism. There are scenes which are suspiciously faked—private performances for the cameras alone like the action song of the Cook Islanders on the grounds of the university campus; the Maoris’ action song and haka, the drama of the Solomon Islanders and the Fijian lali-beater. These were not captur ing the Festival as it was shared by the Pacific peoples. The film also gave unnecessary and lengthy cover age of the “New Caledonian” drama so called—in actuality, a classical European drama which was of no relevance to the South Pacific Festival except in the Frenchisation of the Pacific colonies. The inclusion of this drama in both the Festival and in the film was an insult to the peoples of the Pacific, If the Pacific Islander leaves the theatre satisfied, it is in the experience of having a beautiful memory partly refreshed and in the naive delight of seeing familiar faces and places on the screen; perhaps, with a keen sense of perception, he is also pain fully aware of the future commer cialisation of his cultural heritage, the seeds of which have already been sown.