Africa Speaks Hoefler Analysis

611 Words3 Pages

The title of the film, Africa Speaks, is a misnomer since, in very in simplistic terms, no one from Africa speaks. The white male narrator, Paul Hoefler, leaves African natives voiceless and speaks on their behalf. Therefore, the inherent issue with Hoefler’s film is that it describes the African culture through the eyes of an American during a post-colonial era. Having recently landed in Kenya, Hoefler is unfamiliar with the African values and traditions and continuously makes erroneous remarks about the Maasai tribe, the tribe being filmed (Africa Speaks). By equating Maasai culture to African culture, Hoefler generalizes the traditions of one tribe and uses them as a marketable representation of the entire continent. By speaking for the …show more content…

The word “savage” means uncivilized and barbaric; it is hard to believe that a Maasai individual would describe their own home in these terms. Throughout the film, Hoefler continuously offends the animals that are so much a part of the Maasai way of life, describing giraffes as “harmless monsters”, rhinos as “all bulk and no brain,” elephants as “the most stupid animals,” and the impala as “Mexican jumping beans” (Africa Speaks). The narrator also blurs the division between the African man and animal, commenting that they lived in a land where “men are a prey of animals, and animals are a prey of men.” (Africa Speaks).
The title, Africa Speaks, is also inaccurately named due to the fact that, even if an African had opinionated in the film, the African would have only elucidated the culture of the Massai tribe (Africa Speaks). One would not solely study New York and call the associated film, America Speaks. This mass generalization of culture is yet another example of Hoefler’s racism.
Africa Speaks is an incorrect title because the narrator never embraces the African culture, but instead tells about it in a way that is severely stained by his own biases and opinions. Nobody in the film ever speaks, as the narrator only describes “racist imagery” that suits him and elevates his social status, never allowing the audience to be captivated by the African way of life and allowing Africa to “speak” (Chris 2006,