battle of algiers

i watched this movie with the sociology department at their "social movements film series" the other night. and i finally felt like i could properly analyze a social movement! finally. after a whole semester of feeling lost - i was now armed with tools.

let me rewind - i took a social movements class last semester. my first semester in graduate school and i ventured outside of my department. this was, ultimately, a good idea. but i was originally freaked out. i dreaded going to class. i never spoke. i spent hours upon hours reading. i wasn't even sure what in god's name i was reading. i felt like a bit of a disaster. i wrote my final paper and swore i'd spend more time over the summer trying to understand it all.

and then i got an e-mail about a film series sociology was sponsoring and i thought, i love film. i love all sorts of film. and i do love social movements. and social movements and art, so, why not?

so i went and i am so glad i did.

i assumed that the battle of algiers was a once time event. good guys against the bad. but i was wrong. it was a bunch of tiny events that dragged out for years. in the end, with the f.l.n. all killed and in prison, the actual action didn't even start until two year later. we spent the majority of our time talking about terrorism and if it works and is it necessary in a social movement. i have to say no. i have to believe that there are other and better ways of getting people to join and stay in a movement. but what i wanted to talk about was the cultural change with the people of algiers. why, after the leaders of the movement were killed or imprisoned, did the movement still occur? and two years later! what does that say about the elite involvement? i think it has a lot to do with cultural changes. the "elite", the leaders, of the f.l.n created, through terrorism and strikes, a sense of community. there was a shared cultural understanding that algiers was entitled to their own freedom. there was a sense that if you hurt one of us, you hurt us all. it was also interesting to see the women involved with this movement. what were the roles that women played? they were integral to the success and longevity of the movement, for sure. at checkpoints that the french set up they were not allowed to touch the women. this allowed for women to hide guns and bombs inside their clothing. they played into the own cultural beliefs about women to further their cause. without this, i completely believe their cause would not have been so successful. again, a cultural aspect that helped them.

there has to be some sort of structural importance here. and there was with the elites and the leaders and, even that little boy that was shouting encouraging things over the microphone. but, without that cultural understanding to bind them all the terrorism, the strikes, the imprisonment, the deaths - would not have been possible.

as a side note - while they didn't use art in their promotion of a cultural understanding, it sure would have helped the cause. just saying.