In the 19th century, conquering colonies was an indicator of power for European states. As a newly established state, Germany was slow to enter the colonial struggle, by the mid-1880s they became interested in acquiring colonies in Africa in an attempt to compete with established colonialists like Great Britain and France[i]. One of the colonies they acquired was in Southwest Africa, today’s Namibia. The main goal of Germany was settling the area where the Herero and Nama indigenous tribes lived. However, the tribes resisted the occupation[ii] and despite the resistance German settlers took control of a quarter of the region and planned to develop a railway line that would further divide the region in two.
The resistance of the indigenous population hurt the ego of Germany and strength of their military apparatus– the German forces resorted to extensive use of violence against the indigenous population to maintain their supremacy at all costs.[iii]They showed vengeful behavior against their enemies by killing women and children, going so far as poisoning the course of water to force them to die of thirst. Sadly, the fate of the survivors was bleak since they constituted the slave labor in the cities of German settlers in Africa[iv]. As a result, in the three years 1904-7, a robust population of 80.000 Hereros’ turned into a starving populous of 15,000[v]. The consequences of the Herero and Nama Genocide had such an impact on the German political scene that it resulted in the dissolution of parliament on the 13th of December 1906 after the calling of elections prompted by the Center Party’s rejection of a request for 29 million marks in supplementary funding for the expedition in Southwest Africa[vi]. So, it is unsurprising that Germany’s colonial policy (Weltpolitik) was the main issue[vii] in the political conflict between the two parties. On the one hand, the Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (SPD) argued for the unprofitability of colonial expenses[viii]. On the other hand, it created a political alliance that supported German colonial policy that won the election. Notably, the Deutsche Kolonialgesellschaft (DKG)[ix] used cinema as a propaganda medium to show the suffering and privation of German soldiers during the Herero War[x].
The colonial alliance drew their arguments from social Darwinism[xi] in order to justify their policy and the genocide. The phrases “non-human” and “bloodthirsty beast”[xii] were evidence that the Herero rebellion and Nama resistance were not the only factors in which German forces used such extensive violence and how racism and European superiority motivated their actions.
The line of racist reasoning allowed proponents of the genocide to present the actions of the German forces as a response to the crimes committed by the indigenous populations by targeting European civilization[xiii]. The Germans resorted to a common practice of presenting themselves as defenseless[xiv] in order to be able to justify the atrocities they committed against the Herero and Nama. A typical example of how the German settlers portrayed the situation in the colonies was that they believed the surviving indigenous were a danger to them, when in fact the German authorities were oppressing the Herero and Nama[xv] leaving them to live in miserable conditions.
[i] Norman M. Naimark, Genocide: A World History, The New Oxford World History (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2017). P. 66.
[ii] Ben Kiernan, Blood and Soil: A World History of Genocide and Extermination from Sparta to Darfur (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007). P. 381.
[vi] John Phillip Short, Magic Lantern Empire: Colonialism and Society in Germany (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2012). P. 135
[vii] Wolfgang Fuhrmann, Imperial Projections: Screening the German Colonies, First paperback edition, Film Europa, Vol. 17 (New York Oxford: Berghahn, 2017). P. 83.
[xiv] Donald Bloxham and A. Dirk Moses, eds., The Oxford Handbook of Genocide Studies, Oxford Handbooks in History (Oxford ; New York: Oxford University Press, 2010). P. 105.
it was a significant period in german history: the genocide of tens of thousands of individuals in german southwest africa following a revolt against colonial governance by the ovaherero and nama people. over a century later, a feature film delves into the violent actions carried out by germany in present-day namibia, shedding light on this dark colonial history for the first time, in that format. the director – lars kraume – aims for measures of men to raise awareness among everyday germans about this tragic chapter of their history. he stateted that “germany has denied its colonial past for 120 years, […] most people are unaware germany even had a colonial past, let alone anything about the brutality of it – it is not even taught in schools” (connolly 2023).
in the film, alexander hoffmann (leonard scheicher), a fictional young ethnologist sets out on a research expedition to the german colony of southwest africa, where he initiates the collection of human skulls for his “racial research”. during this endeavour, he observes the genocide carried out by the “deutsche schutztruppe,” the military unit responsible for upholding the german empire, against the ovaherero and nama tribes from 1904 to 1908. however, beyond merely observing these atrocities, the ethnologist progressively transitions into a perpetrator himself.
terminologies such as “moral decay” (tschierse 2023) or “moral degeneration” (connolly 2023) are quite common in reviews and media coverage regarding the character of hoffman making for a character with a bizarre image of an innocent german who just happened to be part of a genocide, something like hanna arendt’s “hanswurst”.
kraume emphasised that due to germany’s role as a perpetrator during this period there is no redeeming quality to the character. “create a film about genuine heroes wherever you find them, but it is impossible to fabricate a german hero.”
kraume sees hoffmann as a mirror of the german society, “they have chosen to flee – [reminiscent in …] how we continually handle africa, evading acknowledgment of the atrocities we have inflicted on the continent, and disregarding their issues as if they are unrelated to us” (connolly 2023).
the director tries to discover how the genocide was made possible shaped by “colonial mentality” (assheuer 2023). interesting is that the colonial mentality was also used to avoid blame by the very first apology by a german official toward the overherero and nama victims (arens 2024). the film is however attempting to show the spirit of modernity and social-darwinism prevalent in the wilhelminan era in germany. therefore, the film has been described as: “it lets us stare into our own abyss” (ttt 2023).
kraume uses the protagonist to show how easily one can become caught up in the dealings of a state even when you initially opposed them (assheuer 2023), thus he wants to portray the only position he can. but at the same moment, it might just be seen as a mechanism to avoid guilt and responsibility.
the film has further been criticised for pushing racism and genocide on a level of personal failure and away from a structural coloniality critique. thus, a viewing is made possible that rids germany and germans nowadays of any responsibility (kelly and malonda 2023). making for a similar argument and guilt aversion as the german government in its proposed joint declaration with namibia concerning the genocide (arens 2024).
after the premiere at the berlinale film festival of 2023, an open letter by the schwarze filmschaffende (black filmmakers) was sent to influential figures in the german cultural industry, it criticised the prevalent anti-black racism in films shown at the festival that year, including der vermessene mensch. the main points were that the genocide was only a secondary plotline rendering the victims mere extras leading to the humanising of the perpetrators whilst denying it to the victims, while simultaneously recreating images that have the potential to re-traumatise without holding educational potential (schwarze filmschaffende e.v. 2023: 4-5). the film fails even to point towards the resistance on the side of the ovaherero and nama dismissing historically important figures such as hendrik witbooi and samuel maharero (fanizadeh 2023) – making the stamen by kraume that film about heroes should be made when they are present frankly bizarre.
that presentation is rather common for german media engagement with the colonial past, usually drawing on the explorer and adventurer genre in connection with glorifying “civilising mission” (weber and weber 2020: 104). the film also fails at the portrayal of the historical events, relying on a one-dimensional account of it that lacks accuracy. it has been described as “a crude eurocentric narrowing” (fanizadeh 2023).
the only non-white actor who is afforded a role that gives her distinct features as a character is kezia kunouje kambazembi played by girley jazama who was also central to the promotion of the film and was showcased as an ovaherero woman whose ancestors were targeted by the german troops. it was however done to an extent that far exceeded her role and did leave the aftertaste of tokenism.
natasha kelly a german anti-racism activist and academic schooler was commissioned in 2021 to make an anti-racism assessment of an early script of the film, already then criticising the plotline as romanticising, far removed from reality and too much centred around the white characters (kelly and malonda 2023).
lars kraume justified the use of said perspective as a result of his position as a white german and that it would also be inappropriate for him to tell a story of ovaherero and nama resistance. he also used that to account for the passivity of the non-german characters. he further sees the film as one part of many to work against colonial amnesia in germany thus it is supposed to hold up a mirror to the german society (deutschlandradio 2023).
one of the producers added that the film aimed to bring the topic into public consciousness as well as explore the part science and universities played in the genocide (haikali and dobson 2023: 404). the idea of the film was to first tell the story and enable namibian and especially ovaherero and nama filmmakers to tell further stories, thus functioning as a gateway for funding and publicity.
the reception in namibia was also good but as there were only two screenings in windhoek, exes to the film were limited hindering any wide reception (ibid.: 109).
the question must be asked then why the film funding went to kraume and not to, let’s say ovaherero and nama directors to tell the story or why at the very least he didn’t co-direct the film with more suitable storytellers. girley jazama who is also a producer and screenwriter even expressed willingness to tell her family story (renk 2023). the unwillingness of kraume to step back or share power might be seen in line with that “most black namibians have no safe space, agency or resources to express stories of colonial oppression and atrocity inflicted on them from own perspectives and for imagining or rather telling alternative narratives” (haikali and dobson 2023: 407).
kraume said that jazama was involved, but it is hard to allocate creative inspiration, thus she is not listed as a writer in the film (deutschlandradio 2023). it was reported that other than girley jazama only one overerero was involved in the filming process, namely a costume designer (tschierse 2023).
during the above-mentioned anti-racism assessment of 2021, it was already suggested to the director to have a more diverse writers’ room to accurately tell the story and give the black characters agency. a suggestion specially made regarding the character of kezia kunouje kambazembi and the long-standing problem of white men portraying racialized women, rendering them passive objects as is the case in the film (kelly and malonda 2023).
many ways could have been explored to avoid the problem the film holds and could actually work against colonial amnesia.
the schwarzen filmschaffenden thus conclude that: “the racist murders and brutalisation of black bodies in white-majority societies are due in large part to the dissemination of such images that reinforce the belief that the lives of black people do not matter” (schwarze filmschaffende e.v. 2023: 5).
haikali, joel and dobson, stephen. 2023. understanding liminality and intangible difficult heritage through film. the historic environment: policy & practice (14)3: 402-414.
kelly, natasha and malonda, achan. der vermessene film — kolumne malonda feat. natasha a. kelly. veto mag. https://veto-mag.de/achan-natasha/. published 2023.04.18, accessed 2024.03.24.
renk. 2023. „der vermessene mensch“ ein interview mit der hauptdarstellerin girley charlene jazama. renk magazin. https://renk-magazin.de/der-vermessene-mensch/. published 2023.03.24, accessed 2024.03.26.
weber, heloise and weber, martin. 2020. colonialism, genocide and international relations: the namibian–german case and struggles for restorative relations. european journal of international relations 26(1): 91-115.
Recent Comments