Politics As Sport: Ethics in INVICTUS
By BARCODE 2X
Cue the inspiring African choir music! Start the slow clap! Hook up a TV so the whole shantytown can watch: the ultra-political games have begun! Clint Eastwood has been putting out a film about every six weeks or so lately, and here comes his most problematic film to date! Better wear a cup, Clint! A2ethics is coming on the field!
It is 1990, and Nelson Mandela (a profoundly bland Morgan Freeman) is a free man. As he takes power in South Africa, he tries to coach his employees to use compassion and forgiveness in moving the country forward. The metaphor of teams and divisions are at work here. The film opens with his motorcade passing a White rugby team practicing, while an ultra-poor group of Black children play soccer in a dirt field. The fields are separated by a road, never to be crossed. Mandela will remain here in the middle of the road for the duration of Invictus.
The film dwells an awfully long time on the struggles within the President's security force. The four Black Africans who guard him are suddenly joined by jarheaded Whites from the former administration. The film spends an exorbitant and unnecessary amount of time on this subplot (the President's safety is never threatened in the film), and the security guards seem to be poised for the reconciliation Mandela has asked for. Soon, the force is high-fiving, playing rugby on the green, and Apartheid seems like a bad dream from long ago.
As a point of national pride, Mandela seeks to win over the White South African population through the game of rugby. Now that's a game! The rough, brutal sport is one of the more exciting games to be seen in a film in a long time. Eastwood has a cinematic field day with the intricate passes and hard, unpadded tackles out there on the grass. This is a man's game! As the South African Springboks lose one match after another, Mandela sees an opportunity here.
He calls their captain in for tea. Francois Piennar (Matt Damon) is a troubled golden boy, trying to inspire his team despite immense challenges. Mandela and Piennar become strong allies. They are two leaders with nothing to lose, facing giant struggles. Mandela seeks to move South Africa ahead, and he convinces Piennar that winning the World Cup will really do the trick.
Sports and politics are strange bedfellows. But they are often found together. The friendship is troubling. Sports are given an awful lot of focus in our culture, perhaps disproportionately to the good they actually do. Mandela becomes the coach here, inspiring the men and charging them with a huge responsibility. Mandela makes sweeping entrances into the stadiums, meeting with cheers, as the team rises to the championship. He uses the Springboks as a marketing tool, and an outreach program. He sends them into the poorest neighborhoods to teach rugby to the faceless Black South African youths, who adore them and hop up and down with glee, chanting their names.
Mandela puts tremendous focus on the team, smiling with pride as the marketing plan works its magic. At one point he is asked by his brilliant and ultra-capable assistant if this is a political calculation. "It is a human calculation," the President answers. He truly believes that a sporting event will unite his people. Unity is a great word, but the real motivation is gaining the White vote. Invictus is a tribute to the compassion and love of Mandela, but as he moves ahead with his political plans, he is really no different from any other politician.
He is traveling the world, charming the pants off leaders in America, in China, in Japan. He is seeking investors for his country, trying new environmental efforts, and watching the Springboks rise to glory. He is a benevolent, inspiring leader, but the film does not always make him look so good.
Sports make a lot of money. The film shows the struggle of the team, their victories, as well as their impact on the community. But besides the day they spend in the shantytown with the kiddies, and despite the large Springboks billboards that now loom over the poorest communities in Johannesburg, the impact is still a shallow one. We never see the shanties knocked down, we never see economic improvement in South Africa, we never see any improved racial relations besides interracial high-fives at the rugby match. We see Mandela put a paint job on the country, but it never goes much deeper than that. The people need proper shelter, food, clean water, schools, hospitals. He, instead, supports the almost all-white rugby team.
Black Africans are never his focus. He never has much contact with the public. He meets with middle class and powerful Black community leaders, but never spends any time in the shanty. He never has the proper perspective on the real needs of his country. In Invictus, Mandela seems to have made the biggest impact on his White constituents. They love seeing him stride across the field, to say "Good luck, son" to each player (the film has four or five such scenes). Their white guilt is alleviated; now they have a Black leader.
The final game itself is shot almost entirely in slow motion, squeezing out every ounce of male sweat and drama from the struggle. Almost ten minutes of slow-mo. Mandela watches from his box. His security force eyes everyone with suspicion, which comes off as mere paranoia, since the President is completely unthreatened the entire time. Piennar, enraged, tells his team that this is their destiny! Their country needs them! And (big surprise) they win! Mandela takes the field again. He is the victorious coach, and the country is united!
Black children are held aloft by White cops! Beer flows in every bar in town! Women dress scantily and show their undying support for male drunkenness and athleticism!
The corporate presence is everywhere too. The film is so drenched in product placement that it comes off like one big ad for Heineken. Eastwood's love of social justice is clear; he is a marvelous director who makes enough good films to overshadow his lesser ones. Invictus is a silly film, loaded with every sports cliche imaginable. At first, this seems like a new genre-bending type of film. The political sports film!
But sports films are political by nature. From the small-town politics of Hoosiers to the global politics of Invictus, the genre is, on the surface, about underdog glory on the field. But the real glory is political. The atheletes will have ruined bodies and aimless lives by the time they achieve adulthood. They are footsoldiers in political schemes. A popular sport will always have a political presence in the background. Think of Bill Clinton sitting in a box with John McEnroe. Think of Bush throwing out the first pitch at the Yankee's first post-9/11 game. Sports are a matter of national pride. The tiny glories of individual atheletes is merely a part of a much bigger corporate-political game. Mandela is an inspiring and magical leader, one of those rare politicians who leads his nation spiritutally as well as politically. He is smart, no doubt about it. Smart enough to win a championship, and to solidify his seat in the Presidency. The team wins this one for Mandela. But all good intentions aside, this is all just a game.
Mandela's impact on the world is indisputable; he is an inspiration to us all. A survivor, a political prisoner, a revolutionary, and a compassionate, peace-minded human being. But when we separate the cult of personality from the real deeds of the politician, is any single accomplishment purely "a human calculation"?
