Secularism is a Women’s IssueHome > Resources > ’Exterminate All the Brutes,’ Reviewed
’Exterminate All the Brutes,’ Reviewed
cinema
Saturday 17 April 2021, by
Source:https://portside.org/2021-04-16/exterminate-all-brutes-reviewed
original source: https://www.newyorker.com/culture/the-front-row/exterminate-all-the-brutes-reviewed-a-vast-agonizing-history-of-white-supremacy
’Exterminate All the Brutes,’ Reviewed
Richard Brody
April 9, 2021
The New Yorker
Raoul Pecks (’I Am Not Your Negro’) four-hour documentary on HBO Max reveals the racist underpinnings of American national mythology and European society.
Drawing on archival material and the work of historians, the film distills the legacies of colonialism and racism, courtesy HBO
The new four-part series by Raoul Peck, Exterminate All the Brutes, thats streaming on HBO Max belongs to an exceptional genre: it is, in effect, an illustrated lecture, or a cinematic podcast. Which is to say that its an essay-film, a film of ideas, that are for the most part expressed by Peck himself, in his own voice-over, which nearly fills the movies soundtrack from start to finish. The four-hour film is in the vein of Pecks previous essay-film, I Am Not Your Negro, which focusses on James Baldwins work. Exterminate All the Brutes is similarly an intellectual effort. And, like I Am Not Your Negro, it introduces and distills, from Pecks own perspective, extant writings, this time by three historians who study colonialism and racism. Unlike the earlier film, though, the new one doesnt offer much in the way of film clips from the writers themselves, and doesnt (at least, doesnt claim to) quote directly from their work. It is literally a film in Pecks voice, and that strength, and that audacity, also gives rise to its artistic peculiarities.
View the series trailer of Exterminate All the Brutes here — moderator.
Exterminate All the Brutes presents a thesis that Peck takes care to frame as a narrativeand an extraordinary, powerful, urgent one. The movie borrows from the work of historiansthe late Sven Lindqvist and Michel-Rolph Trouillot, and Roxanne Dunbar-Ortizall friends of Pecks. What he extracts from their work is something that he explicitly calls a story, not a contribution to historical research. The story that he tells is a vast one, a millennial onethat of white supremacy, or, more specifically, whites presumption to supremacy, a presumption that, as he makes clear, continues, to this day, to be asserted with violence and justified with lies. Peck ranges back to the Crusades, documenting the claims of white, Christian, European superiority as the argument for conquests in Asia. These events were soon followed by the Spanish Inquisition and its persecution of Jews and Muslims, andat the same timethe voyage of Columbus to the New World and the genocidal destruction of indigenous peoples that his expedition, and the many explorers that followed, committed.
Peck gathers a set of historical atrocities of vast geographical and historical scopethe colonization of the New World by means of the genocide of Native Americans, the enslavement of Africans in the Americas, the imperial conquest of Africa by European powers, and the Holocaustand traces their inextricable connections, their shared theme of white supremacy. Exterminate All the Brutes (the title, also that of a book by Lindqvist, is a line spoken by Kurtz in Joseph Conrads novel Heart of Darkness) offers, in effect, a unifying theory of white supremacy and its manifestationsin conquest, in genocide, and in the myths and the pseudoscience by which the killers have justified themselves and continue to do so. As Peck says, The road to Auschwitz was paved in the earliest days of Christendom, and this road also leads straight to the heart of America.
Whats more, working with historians, Peck puts the very writing of history at the core of the story; he understands history as the victors record of events, and sees American national mythology as a fiction that depends on an assumed racism. A prime example is stated in a title card, The Myth of Pristine Wilderness, and Peck develops the idea, stating that land with no people does not exist and that only through killing and displacement does it become uninhabited. The foundational myth of the discovery of the Wests indigenous peoples becomes a tale of Western superiority and of white Europeans justified domination, up to and including the extermination of indigenous peopleand the cultivation of the cleared land by way of the labor of enslaved Africans. The assumption is matched by the collective will to keep the resulting crimes silenced, the crimes that are the foundation of the Western worlds wealth, Europes monumental splendors, and Americas industrial dominationfor that matter, its very essence. As Peck says, whiteness has served as an authorization for abuse, a justification for eternal immunity.
In the course of his research, Peck says, Lindqvist told him, You already know enough . . . what is missing is the courage to understand what we know and to draw conclusions. Peck evokes some crucial historical connections that rarely appear in popular culture. For instance, in the myth of the eighteenth centurys overlapping ages of ostensible enlightenment and revolution, he emphasizes that, unlike the colonial French and American Revolutions, which sought freedom for whites and subjection for Blacks, the Haitian Revolution of 1790 was undertaken in the name of liberation and equalityand was also a crucial event in the development of the United States, when Napoleon, his colonial ambitions dashed, sold off French land in the Louisiana Purchase.
Pecks thought moves with a bold and wondrous associative freedom that takes the film from the naval superiority that enabled Europe to dominate India and China to the crucial role of industrialized weaponry in colonial expansion, and to the ultimate crime of the ultimate weaponrythe use of the atomic bomb against Japan, for which President Harry S. Truman offered an expressly racist justification. Through the misuse of the theory of evolution, the successful domination by Europe and the United States of nonwhite populations shifted, from the myth of a divinely ordained mission to the grotesque fiction of a scientific necessity. Thus, colonial wars in Africa, the elimination of Native American peoples, and the practice of slavery gave rise to the Holocaustwhich then came, in the European and American imaginations, to take the place of their own crimes. Peck says, We would prefer for genocide to have begun and ended with Nazismeven as he traces the connection of Nazis to the rhetoric, the symbolism, and the violence of current-day white supremacists.
For Peck, the goal of his historical analysis isnt only to elucidate current events, its to inspire activism and to achieve change: What must be denounced here is not so much the reality of the Native American genocide, or the reality of slavery, or the reality of the Holocaust; what needs to be denounced here are the consequences of these realities in our lives and in life today. Throughout, he refers to the anti-immigrant hostility of the current nationalist right wing and the prevalence of neo-Nazis and overt white supremacists in the United States and elsewhere. He presents, plainly, the fulsome self-satisfaction of contemporary hate-mongering potentates. (Among the leaders he shows are Donald Trump, Jair Bolsonaro, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdo?an, Marine Le Pen, and Boris Johnson.) Peck calls slavery in the United States a ghost, explaining that the fact that U.S. slavery has both officially ended and yet continues in many complex forms of institutionalized racism makes its representation particularly burdensome. He looks to the prospect of reparations for Black Americans and self-determination and restitution for Native Americans, and considers that anything less will perpetuate and deepen past injustices.
Pecks method is far more complex than his mere voice-over, however. He relies on dramatic sceneswhether imagined renactments or counterhistorical fantasiesto illustrate his ideas. (Josh Hartnett plays a wide range of white-supremacist monsters, such as the American General Thomas Sidney Jesup, who violated a truce with the Seminole chief Osceola; a murderous and grotesquely cruel Belgian colonial officer; and a nightmarish doctor who kills Black people in a laboratory setting as if they were animals in a slaughterhouse.) Another sequence imagines Columbus and his cohorts slaughtered on the beach by the indigenous people of Haiti (in a scene set to Charles Minguss Haitian Fight Song); yet another imagines white children captured and enslaved by a Black slave master. These brief sequences are powerful but merely illustrativeas, too, are clips from movies, made in Hollywood and elsewhere, whether showing John Wayne in The Alamo or Adolf Hitler in Leni Riefenstahls Olympia, a fictionalized sixteenth-century report on the massacre of indigenous people in Dispute in Valladolid or the dispensing of death from the heights of a helicopter in Apocalypse Now.
Clips from some of Pecks own films, such as Haitian Corner and The School of Power, are included, toobecause Peck factors himself into the movie as well. He introduces his own story, briefly, in touches throughouthis childhood in Haiti, in New York, in Congo; his fifteen-year residence in Berlin, his wide-ranging travels. He introduces members of his family, andin some of the most moving visual clipsrelies on his parents home movies to recall his childhood and youth. With the self-conscious connection of his earlier, dramatic films to this first-person essay, he affirms that previously, as a filmmaker, he sought to stay hidden in the background, and made sure to avoid becoming the subject of his films. Here, by contrast, the enormity of the subject, he says, requires him to take conspicuous part, because neutrality is not an option.
Theres nothing neutral about Pecks voice-over; yet its a disembodied voice, one that allows itself to be no place in particular. The filmmaker speaks from nowhere. That placelessness is conspicuous in what is in the film instead: the choice and arrangement of the images that the film mainly comprises, archival drawings and illustrations, historical documents that are selected and shown in a relatively rapid montage, complete with sound effects and a conventionally load-bearing musical score. (The one extraordinary trope of visual rhetoric in Pecks choice of archival photographs is the emphasis on the gazes of subjects into the camera; the effect, which recurs throughout the film, is that of a political challenge, a call to the bearing of witness.)
Exterminate All the Brutes is a work of prodigious and passionate research that doesnt show its work; the one moment in which Peck suggests a relationship to the archivethat of Raphael Lemkin, the historian who coined the term genocide, whose archives are at the New York Public Libraryhas a physical, experiential resonance that most of the film is missing. The visual interventions (like the dramatic sequences and animated sequences, the home movies and film clips with which the series is interspersed) are either too much or too littletheyre neither sufficiently drastic to suggest an analytical reconfiguration of source documents nor sufficiently plain and hands-on to evoke the filmmakers act of discovery and selection, to the presence and survival of archives laying untapped like the subject of the movie itself, in a violent silence. Breaking that silence, however, is the basis of the film, and its great achievement. How Peck tells the story of white supremacy matters less than the fact that, at last, it is indeed being comprehensively, insightfully, compendiously told.
Richard Brody began writing for The New Yorker in 1999. He writes about movies in his blog, The Front Row. He is the author of Everything Is Cinema: The Working Life of Jean-Luc Godard.
