The formal structure of Trek to Mashomba follows a number of other Children’s Entertainment Films. Introduced by a British boy, who is writing a story – much like Pen Pictures from Rhodesia – the film clearly outlines its narrative techniques to the audience, as the boy’s father suggests ‘why don’t you begin with a map just to make it clear where everything is’. The film presents a central child protagonist, assuming adult responsibilities – ‘Now it all depended on Dick’ – and encourages the audience to identify with this boy.

Mary Field, in considering the overseas productions of C.E.F., argued that ‘our audiences were ready to find pleasure in the screen company of children from other lands… to identify themselves with film children of other nations whom they recognize as human beings like themselves’ (Field, 1952, 155). However, while other C.E.F. films set in Africa – for example Basuto Boy – may present an African protagonist, in Trek to Mashomba the audience is positioned alongside the British families and in direct opposition to the local Africans, as the Matabele kill one of the British travellers.

Indeed when the British ambush the Matabele, the camera is alongside the British, as they fire at the Africans below. The Matabele are presented as an inherently savage group – ‘once the Matabele had these modern rifles they would be a danger to anyone within reach’ – in contrast to the Europeans, who are offering a family prayer when they are first attacked. These clear racial divisions are apparent even with the corrupt white men, Hargreaves and Young, as they ultimately recognise that their loyalty must be defined in racial terms – ‘we can’t let these devils attack white people. Come on let’s stop them’. This depiction of an inherently dangerous Matabele enemy, nearly 60 years after the first Matabele War, serves as part of a very traditional narrative of British imperial expansion, colonial adventure and racial division. While a more liberal imperialism was propagated after the War, Trek to Mashomba illustrates the continuance of Victorian modes of imperialism, celebrating conquest and expansion, within British popular culture.

There are other more sympathetic African characters, but they are again depicted in ways that are consistent with a racist politics. First, there are the child-like, loyal subjects – for example the African ‘boy’ who says ‘yes, Boss. I take letter to boss Martin’ – and the comic fools, exemplified by the man who accidentally destroys the boiler and then hides in his tent. The most prominent African character is Sam – not listed in the credits – who is again defined purely in relation to the British characters. Sam ‘begged’ his father to help defeat the Matabele as they had ‘attacked Europeans’. This again privileges the Europeans, and this is further evident in the battle scene, as the two African groups fight in combat on the ground while the British men shoot from above.

The representation of Sam and the loyal Africans relies on assumptions about racial hierarchies, popularly held by many of the British. For example, the African chief is said to have ‘asked the witchdoctor what they should do’, while another African character ‘says he can make rain’. This British representation of the Africans – racially defined as different from, and subservient to, the Europeans – endorses the film’s traditional colonial history. The film offers an absolute celebration of British exploration and conquest. For example, when the Matabele cross into Mashonaland, the European states indignantly ‘but that’s Rhodes country – not his at all’. The initial voiceover further illustrates that this is a celebration of a traditional, unchallenged colonial history, as the commentator states that ‘this is a story of British achievement, of British men and woman, boys and girls who opened up unknown parts of the world’.

Tom Rice (June 2008)