The Power of Art: A Critical Review of "The Voice of Hind Rajeb"
Literature, visual arts, and cinema have long been a powerful tool for humanity, serving as a bulwark against forgetfulness, lies, and falsifications. Aesthetically thinking about reality to heal wounds, even if only morally, is tangible proof of an artist's commitment to human causes.
We were all thrilled to hear about the film "The Voice of Hind Rajeb" by Tunisian director Kaouther Ben Hania. Eager to discover this cinematic work, which had attracted famous Western producers and won the Silver Lion at the Venice Film Festival, we attended the screening for journalists at the Colisée cinema on September 12. Unfortunately, after the projection, our enthusiasm was short-lived, and disappointment took its place. We couldn't help but think that this film wouldn't rank among the great works of history, such as Pablo Picasso's "Guernica" or Francis Coppola's "Apocalypse Now".
Incrimination or Compassion?
The film falls into the docu-fiction category, recounting the tragic fate of Palestinian girl Hind Rajeb, who, as the sole survivor among her family's corpses, called for help in vain and eventually died after hours of waiting, assassinated by 355 shots from the Zionist army. The tragedy of Hind Rajab, among many other atrocities, reached the pinnacle of Zionist monstrosity. Creating cinematic works about the reality of Gaza and Palestine is an ethical duty, a historical necessity, and a human commitment. The least that can be done is to responsibly, clearly, directly, and incisively portray the horrors of this criminal occupant on screen.
Cinema is the most powerful, influential, and concrete art form, playing a crucial role in raising awareness among the silent Western world, showing its failure towards the Palestinian cause, and highlighting the decline of universal values. It's not about evoking compassion or pity but rather developing a critical conscience in the face of what's happening in Gaza.
A Missed Opportunity
"The Voice of Hind Rajeb" by Kaouther Ben Hania appealed to the audience's emotions at the expense of their intellect, offering a cathartic experience with tears and avoiding any direct and concrete attempt to incriminate the Zionist occupant. Addressing Western public opinion doesn't mean evoking emotions and empathy but rather indignation, denouncing genocide, and challenging the silence and debasement of human values.
The Shadow of Self-Censorship
The film focused on two factors: the internal obstacles related to the Palestinian Red Crescent Center and the conflicts between Palestinians themselves, particularly the disagreement between Amr and his superior, Mahdi. These two factors dominated the film, relegating the source of evil – the Zionist entity – to the background. This, in turn, diverted the viewer's attention and turned their gaze away from the genocide and Zionist atrocities. We're not shown the devastation and ravage outside, except for a brief moment at the end, before quickly returning to the testimony of Hind's mother.
This raises questions about whether the film was pre-oriented by Western producers or if the director exercised self-censorship by choosing a closed, interior space as the setting, potentially to guarantee subsidies and international festival invitations. (Self-censorship is more severe than external censorship.) In any case, we sense the shadow of political manipulation and a diversion of attention from the Zionist occupant's monstrosity.
Cinema is First and Foremost Image
What remains of the film after the projection? Almost nothing. But cinema is first and foremost image, canvas, grand narration, acting, beautiful shots, and the creative vision of the director. Unfortunately, there's nothing exceptional in this film, except for the tragic voice of Hind Rajeb, which resonated with us since we first heard it on social media on the day of her tragedy.
In all honesty, the scenario is so simple that it resembles a sound documentary, based on audio recordings of Hind's voice. In terms of cinematic approach, the film is modest. What touched the audience was the tragedy of Hind, not the film's aesthetic qualities. It's a matter of solidarity that attracted several international producers, either to take a stance or for mercantile gain, given the shift in Western public opinion on the Gaza issue. This is why the film received a 23-minute ovation at its world premiere and won the prestigious Silver Lion at the Venice Film Festival.
