Outpost at War illustrates the value of Rhodesia to the imperial war effort. This contribution is divided along racial lines, first showing the industrial work performed by the Africans, before the commentary and tone shifts – with shots of war and air battles – to the work of the Empire Air Training Scheme. Despite the contribution of local labour to the establishment of these bases, the ‘brotherhood of youth’ shown here is – aside from a brief shot of Africans and whites marching – all white.

The film attempts to position Rhodesia within the Empire. This is achieved, in part, by relating Rhodesia to England – Salisbury has ‘all the virtues of a charming county town’ while in the production of cotton ‘Lancashire’s example is followed’ – but also in emphasising the shared battle as ‘England’s wars are our wars’. The commentator represents Rhodes’ arrival in the country as an earlier victory over the Germans, stating that ‘the gross glare of Germany had already fastened upon this country when Rhodes and his companions annexed it in the great Queen’s name’. The commentator ignores any pre-colonial history here, stating that the country was ‘just 49 years old when war broke out’.

The film’s racial attitudes appear symptomatic of the views expressed by Gale and others within the Public Relations Department. The Africans are assigned inherent characteristics and discussed as ‘primitive’. Their instinct is ‘a precious faculty which more civilised people have long since cast away, but their understanding is limited. It is like a young pup’ the commentator states, ‘which must be watched and encouraged but never, never forced’. Repeated shots of industry highlight British ‘development’, while Africans are ‘naturally’ – again indicating inherent racial characteristics – ‘adapted’ to work with machines. ‘There is nothing he likes better than to do exactly the same thing at every hour of every day. He glories in routine. Moreover he has no idea of time as we understand it’. The Africans are depicted as almost inhuman alongside the machines, devoid of emotion and benefiting from British control. The language used is particularly striking as the commentator asserts that ‘we are the slaves of time, but he [African] knows no such tyranny and so is spared considerable inconvenience’. Later when two Africans join the black police, the commentator states that this will provide them with ‘self-respect, an emotion which until now they have never known’.

This racial stereotyping supports the film’s message of imperial unity and its promotion of traditional British paternalism. First, the Africans are all happy under British rule – they ‘show forth a contentment seldom encountered in more civilised communities’. Secondly, they all wish to help the war effort: two local men join the fleet because ‘it is better than whiling away the days by playing at work and eking out an existence that is really unworthy of the name’. Indeed the commentary claims that ‘conscription had to be introduced to keep men out’ as the desire to join the forces threatened the ‘very life of the colony’. Thirdly, they are fortunate to have British assistance – the two men are ‘so proud to be the King’s men’ and it is their ‘privilege to help’. While it is very easy to discredit the validity of these claims, it is significant that a government film, seemingly intended for overseas distribution, should offer such a representation. Indeed the film’s defiant conclusion suggests a battle not simply against Germany but against a changing Empire. The film is framed by shots of Rhodes’ grave – ‘the nightmare will pass, but these views will not pass’ – defending traditional colonialism and suggesting that such ideals can continue beyond the war.

Tom Rice (May 2008)