The Song of Ceylon

I'm not familiar with the historical context of it, but it is beautifully shot, and expertly sounded. A true gem among early documentaries.

Even that Robert Flaherty made the very first documentary, Nanook of the North (1922), Basil Wright has often seen as the man who defined what documentary was. His films might have been the first ones that were actually called documentaries. So he defined the term, what is the philosophy behind it, what should it entail and what is the purpose of it. The Song of Ceylon is an early documentary with commentary tracks, it deals with a colony of the United Kingdom.

The Song of Ceylon is divided into four sequences. Through these sequences Basil Wright has the time to describe the living, the religion and the working of the colony. It's a lyrical film that tries to build a picture of a colony under the management of the empire and succeed in that. Today and in the 1930's this genre, traveling films weren't successful and the genre was hopeless. So the people of that time were amazed when they saw The Song of Ceylon, which was a perfect film risen from the ashes of the genre.

What is very untypical of The Song of Ceylon is that it doesn't look down on the people who are portrayed at all. 1934 this is the time of imperialism, the political, economical and cultural exploitation of the colonial possessions. But Basil Wright shows the life of the colony with honor without thought of superiority. And the main thing that should not be forgotten while watching The Song of Ceylon is that its maker is British. The man behind the camera is a citizen of the empire, this is part of the philosophy of documentary and should be noticed while enjoying this gem.

The film's criticism is hidden, it may be hard to see, but it is there. Why it is hard to see today is the reason that the film won't surprise its audience as much as it did in 1934. It was unbelievable for an European to look and observe the people living in their colonial possessions without thoughts of superiority. For instance in The Song of Ceylon the religion, Buddhism is portrayed as it is. The film does not laugh at it or point out the flaws of it. It shows it just as it would show Christianity. To me The Song of Ceylon was a very touching film, because it shows how similar we are and there is no room for superiority, we're all equal, no one is better than the other. The criticism towards imperialism is hidden behind the pictures we see.

Ah now this look on work by the British overseas was one the GPO Film Units finest pieces of work (along with Night Mail)

I sensed that there was more love, care and ambition was put into this project!

If you're not a student of film or the media in general the odds of watching this are very low... however I much suspect anyone reading this is doing research about the GPO!!!!

A better documentary!

7/10

When film comes to you, it has all sorts of possible stances. Whether its possible of as many nuances as the writer of text is up to you, but its surely of roughly the same nature in extent. And there's a similarity in the number of stations. No matter how you define a spectrum, say from teacher to codiscoverer, it cannot be a smooth line. For some hardwired reason, both we as the reader/viewer and the writer/filmmaker snap to only a small number of stations along those lines.

Being a lucid viewer means, I think, in part being aware where you have snapped to an a similar set of lines and where you suppose the narrative stance to be anchored. Clever writers can play with ambiguities, but even if they are not, clever viewers can play. We can play from our end.

But that means we have to explore all the stations, to reference each one by the others. Its one of my complaints against TeeVee: it has little narrative variety: its peanut butter for every meal.

And that's why you might find yourself watching this. You need some of the clear, unambiguous teacher mode, the business about being guided and explained to. Its remarkably hard to find these days, so you have to dip back into a time before the condescension repulse was strong.

Its ideal if you are seeing something the viewer is presumed to know nothing about, but you do.

So this, my friends will be a good adventure for you. By itself, its lame film-making; its flat out inaccurate factually. It has an overt racism in its perspective. Dietary conventions are presented as deviant. Religion is presented as devilworship. These people clearly need the sort of white educator we have for the period of watching.

Its offensive, sure. But that helps you see the snap to that location, and its something you can use in your own world tour.

Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

It is becoming increasingly evident that several documentaries once considered great have lost much of their lustre with the passage of time. With the film under review, it is possible that the acclaim – and accolades (proudly cited in the opening title-card) – received upon release was due to its exclusive (though not artistically innovative, or even all that engaging!) look into a culture which, at the time, was foreign to Western eyes in more ways than one.

Of course, over the years, many another notable film-maker (Robert Flaherty, Louis Malle, Roberto Rossellini, Pier Paolo Pasolini, etc.) has been drawn to making documentaries about the Indian 'lifestyle'. Incidentally, the use of the word "song" in the title here suggests a celebration of the topic involved (its various facets tackled, for what it is worth, in individual chapters) but, as I said, the end result – not aided by narration that is barely audible through the hiss-riddled soundtrack! – is mainly drab and only just tolerable at best.