Is There Blood on Your Hands?

Last week, we talked about Martin Scorsese’s recent film Silence. Matching the intensity of last week will be Edward Zwick’s Blood Diamond. Released in 2006, this film looks at Sierra Leone’s civil war and its ties to the diamond market run through wealthy European buyers. Depicting various divisions like class, race, and age, this movie if a barrier breaker and does a wonderful job of raising awareness about an issue that no one wanted to concern themselves with.

A quick synopsis for those of you who haven’t seen this one: an African rebel group, the RUF, takes away a man named Solomon Vandy’s son. Vandy works in a labor camp mining for diamonds upon being captured by the same thugs who took his son. Vandy finds a massive diamond and hides it. He is discovered, but a government attack provides him with the opportunity to escape death. He meets Leo Dicaprio and Jennifer Connelly, who seek the diamond for different purposes against the government and the rebel group.

While I’m sure many film critics had various things to say about this film, I’d like to approach it like a piece of literature and examine some of the juxtaposition present within the screenplay. The most obvious example of this was, to me, that of social classes. Breaking news: Africa and most of the global south are not very wealthy compared to the rest of the world. Dutch investment bankers, however, are quite the opposite. Surprising nobody at all, the Africans in this movie are exploited by the Dutch and various others, doing almost all of the work and receiving none of the profits.

Yet, even within Africa, there are the “higher ups” amongst the generally impoverished. Sierra Leone’s civil war helps illustrate these differences. Amongst the rebel groups, there are clearly those who hold power – usually depicted with large muscles, large guns, and expensive beer. Conversely, the children that these leaders use as soldiers and laborers are often shown wearing no shoes, tattered rags, and subserviently obeying every order.

These differences go to show that humans will be humans, regardless of social class, economic stability, or skin color. People seek power, and serve no one but themselves; especially in times of danger and peril. This is why Leo Dicaprio’s character, Mr. Archer, undergoes such a beautiful transformation. At the beginning of the film, he seeks to find the diamond that Vandy hid for his own interest: a boatload of cash. As the film progresses, though, his concern becomes his and Solomon’s safety, as well as helping Solomon find his son. Eventually, it is Archer that goes against those who employ him, and Archer that sacrifices his own life for that of Solomon’s family.

In exploring both sides of human nature so nakedly, this film is truly in a league of its own. While it shows that humans will fight for only themselves in times of desperation, it also shows that the human heart is truly unpredictable and full of compassion. What upsets me, though, is the fact that people still live the way they’re depicted in this film. Sure, it’s great to take a message from two hours of watching a screen, but what are any of us doing to make a difference in places we cannot see? Maybe then, the most valuable thing about this film is its ability to serve as a wakeup call, especially for those not residing in the global south.

 

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *