What do you think?
Rate this book
Show Us as We Are: Place, Nation and Identity in Jamaican Film
Faced with the challenges that inevitably occur in small markets, feature film production in Jamaica has been sporadic and uneven, yet local filmmakers have succeeded in creating a small but exciting body of work that is receiving increasing attention. Organized as a series of discussions on a selection of the more well-known Jamaican films, this study employs close readings of these texts to reveal their complexity, sophistication and artistry. The focus on the politics of identity and representation, examined through the lens of place and nation, opens up a conversation on how these films have contributed to, and participate in, the discourse on Jamaican identity. Place is understood as both constituting and reflecting identity, and is explored within the context of the films’ representation of the postcolonial city, the dancehall, the north coast hotel and the great house. The concern with nation is revealed as a persistent and underlying focus that more often than not, directs our attention to the grievous gap between rich and poor in Jamaican society. These films’ often-criticized attention to marginalized communities plagued by problems of crime and violence can be understood, Moseley-Wood argues, as an expression of the postcolonial struggle to redefine place in ways that contest hegemonic discourses that define Jamaica as hedonistic paradise as well as challenge the unifying and homogenizing myths and narratives of nation.
268 pages, Paperback
Published September 27, 2019
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 of 1 review
August 13, 2026
In “Show As We Are: Place, Nation and Identity in Jamaican Film” Dr. Moseley Wood examines the ways in Jamaican films have define Jamaica. By evaluating these films, Dr. Moseley Wood was able to look at how filmmakers have interpret the experiences of Jamaicans in navigating and surviving living in a post/neo-colonial majority Black society.
The films include two documentaries, Towards Independence (1962) and A Nation is Born (1962) that spotlighted the country’s journey to independence. However, Dr. Moseley-Wood explored how the directorial decisions made in these films still propelled colonial themes and maintain the same hierarchies along race and class that was developed and foster through European colonialism. Through this, she also look at the importance and transformation of the Jamaica Film Unit.
She then tackled The Harder They Come (1972) - Jamaica’s first narrative film- and the ways in which it shows how persons, who exist outside of the elite class, are trying to survive in a post-colonial Jamaica. With this, she explores theme of race, class, exploitation of Black labour, criminality, and dreams deferred. Drawing on exploits of the real life Ivanhoe Martin as well as the fictionalise version portrayed in the movie - she also look at how badmanism has been defined in the Jamaican society and the celebrity that comes out of that.
Dr. Moseley Wood then turn to Smile Orange (1976) where she looks at the trickster persona in Jamaican society. In doing so, she draw parallels to Ringo navigating the exploitive nature of the Jamaican tourist model and how enslaved Black people use trickery to survive the plantation system. She ultimately traces this back to the West African folklore of Anancy and likewise, ponder if Black Jamaicans trickery, as a means of survival, is sustainable.
With Rockers (1978), she questions who gets to tell Jamaicans story. She makes the argument that although the film is directed by non-Jamaicans, the focus on Rastafari, with Rasta actors and their experiences at the centre, the film did its due diligence in defining Jamaica as a place and identity - thus making it a Jamaican film.
Dr. Moseley- Wood then look at how Jamaicans navigate love and intimate relationship, - in a society where race, class and gender has define its strict hierarchy - through two films: Children of Babylon (1980) and One Love (2003). With both films having a Rasta as a love interest, she looks at how one film, Children of Babylon, makes the case that love is not strange enough to challenge those aforementioned hierarchies in a former enslave plantational society while One Love offers a conclusion that romantic love can break through these hierarchies and drive national unity.
In Dancehall Queen (1998), she takes a specific look at the lower-income Black womanhood experience in Jamaican society. Through this film, the first and only full length feature with a woman at the centre of its narrative, she looks at how women are able to navigate patriarchal society. With this, she examines the erotic space of Jamaica’s Dancehall and how it use by Black women as means of expression and potential income. By doing so, she contrast it with the same navigation and survival tactics that is portrayed in Smile Orange.
Dr. Moseley-Wood then turned to how Jamaica’s lower class is portrayed on film, specifically through two films - Third World Cop (1999) and Ghett A’ Life (2011). With both films directed by Chris Browne - who did not grow up in this environment- she tackles the question of the authenticity of these stories and who gets to tell these stories and as such, what and who is left out of these stories. For one, she did critique these films as they did not position the underline issues of the socio-economic conditions created and facilitated by the elite and ruling class - this class is largely left out of these two films. Instead, she states that these films drive the narrative that upward mobility in Jamaican society is one of personal decisions; and thus these films and their authenticity in representing the Jamaican lower class and their experiences needs to be questioned.
In the last film examination, Dr. Moseley Wood looks at how Betta Mus Come (2010) tackles telling story steep in Jamaican history. She looks at the directorial decision made; and in the same examination of badmanism that is portrayed in prior mention films, she elaborates on how the film gives nuance to the creation and motivations of the badman in Jamaican society. In the same contrasting manner, she states how unlike Third World Cop and Ghett A’ Life, Betta Mus Come positions the elite and ruling class at the centre of the problem of Jamaica’s ghetto and offer criticism in the ways the nation’s upper echelon maintain the hierarchies that restrict upward mobility of the urban Black poor.
With this, given Dr. Moseley-Wood is an academic by profession (she is a professor of English Literature and Film Studies at UWI Mona) the book is academic in its structure which might not be for easy consumption. Still, if one is able to make the time and patience, the pay off is worth it. Not only does Dr. Moseley-Wood explore the aforementioned themes in Jamaican society and how these films visualise them, she also offers some background to their creation. The latter is also one of the issues I had with the text as a bit more information on the making of these films and how they influence certain directorial decisions in addressing certain themes. Still, to be fair, in the introduction of the text, Dr. Moseley-Wood did mentioned that this book is not a historical book.
Nevertheless, I really enjoyed the book; and subsequently will view these films in a new light. I think anyone who is interested in film studies, art history, cultural critic and Caribbean history should definitely give it a read. This is extremely paramount as people outside of the Caribbean, rarely if ever, watch or even interact with Caribbean films. Specifically to Jamaican films, this definition, according to Dr. Moseley-Wood, is:
“the frequent use of Jamaican Creole and the assumption of a certain familiarity of the viewer with things Jamaican suggest that the films are primarily directed at a Jamaican audience”.
And this is what makes this books so important and in some way revolutionary as its one of the few modern text that gives West Indian art the level of criticism, interpretation and analysis that it deserves. Even more frustrated is that even if persons do interact with our visual media at this level, it’s usually those that are given a diasporic lens which takes them out of the definition of a Caribbean film. With this said on the continuous conversation for regional filmmakers to cater to overseas market, Dr. Moseley-Wood recalls a 2016 industry conference where one filmmakers makes the case that Caribbean filmmakers needs to cater to overseas markets to survive and that ultimately means to dilute their national culture. As she stated,
“At a panel discussion on 20 April 2016 at Edna Manley College for the Visual and Performing Arts in Kingston, titled “Film: A Catalyst for the Creative Economy”, Jamaican-Candain filmmaker Jeremy Whittaker emphasised that in order to survive in the business, Jamaican filmmakers need to make films that appeal to multiple markets. An important condition for doing so, he stated, is the use of Standard English rather than Jamaican Creole in local films. This is not a singular opinion; the recommendation that Jamaican Creole or Jamaican language should be reduced or “toned down” in order to facilitate local films’ entry into overseas markets was reiterated at another forum in October 2016 at the National Gallery in Kingston, this time by a respected local producer who has worked in the sector for many years.”
Still, I share the same thought on this with Dr. Moseley Wood. As she stated and what I think is one of the aphorism in the entire book,
“A film sector which privileges the needs and demands of an external market cannot be reasonably expected to participate in this process of cultural empowerment”
There is a lot more to say about this book but again for anyone who considers themselves a cinephile, and with the Caribbean films at the bottom of the hierarchy in what is greenlit, marketed and given support in the global cultural space, this is definite read. I end here by say: interact with Caribbean art, engage with Caribbean storytelling
The films include two documentaries, Towards Independence (1962) and A Nation is Born (1962) that spotlighted the country’s journey to independence. However, Dr. Moseley-Wood explored how the directorial decisions made in these films still propelled colonial themes and maintain the same hierarchies along race and class that was developed and foster through European colonialism. Through this, she also look at the importance and transformation of the Jamaica Film Unit.
She then tackled The Harder They Come (1972) - Jamaica’s first narrative film- and the ways in which it shows how persons, who exist outside of the elite class, are trying to survive in a post-colonial Jamaica. With this, she explores theme of race, class, exploitation of Black labour, criminality, and dreams deferred. Drawing on exploits of the real life Ivanhoe Martin as well as the fictionalise version portrayed in the movie - she also look at how badmanism has been defined in the Jamaican society and the celebrity that comes out of that.
Dr. Moseley Wood then turn to Smile Orange (1976) where she looks at the trickster persona in Jamaican society. In doing so, she draw parallels to Ringo navigating the exploitive nature of the Jamaican tourist model and how enslaved Black people use trickery to survive the plantation system. She ultimately traces this back to the West African folklore of Anancy and likewise, ponder if Black Jamaicans trickery, as a means of survival, is sustainable.
With Rockers (1978), she questions who gets to tell Jamaicans story. She makes the argument that although the film is directed by non-Jamaicans, the focus on Rastafari, with Rasta actors and their experiences at the centre, the film did its due diligence in defining Jamaica as a place and identity - thus making it a Jamaican film.
Dr. Moseley- Wood then look at how Jamaicans navigate love and intimate relationship, - in a society where race, class and gender has define its strict hierarchy - through two films: Children of Babylon (1980) and One Love (2003). With both films having a Rasta as a love interest, she looks at how one film, Children of Babylon, makes the case that love is not strange enough to challenge those aforementioned hierarchies in a former enslave plantational society while One Love offers a conclusion that romantic love can break through these hierarchies and drive national unity.
In Dancehall Queen (1998), she takes a specific look at the lower-income Black womanhood experience in Jamaican society. Through this film, the first and only full length feature with a woman at the centre of its narrative, she looks at how women are able to navigate patriarchal society. With this, she examines the erotic space of Jamaica’s Dancehall and how it use by Black women as means of expression and potential income. By doing so, she contrast it with the same navigation and survival tactics that is portrayed in Smile Orange.
Dr. Moseley-Wood then turned to how Jamaica’s lower class is portrayed on film, specifically through two films - Third World Cop (1999) and Ghett A’ Life (2011). With both films directed by Chris Browne - who did not grow up in this environment- she tackles the question of the authenticity of these stories and who gets to tell these stories and as such, what and who is left out of these stories. For one, she did critique these films as they did not position the underline issues of the socio-economic conditions created and facilitated by the elite and ruling class - this class is largely left out of these two films. Instead, she states that these films drive the narrative that upward mobility in Jamaican society is one of personal decisions; and thus these films and their authenticity in representing the Jamaican lower class and their experiences needs to be questioned.
In the last film examination, Dr. Moseley Wood looks at how Betta Mus Come (2010) tackles telling story steep in Jamaican history. She looks at the directorial decision made; and in the same examination of badmanism that is portrayed in prior mention films, she elaborates on how the film gives nuance to the creation and motivations of the badman in Jamaican society. In the same contrasting manner, she states how unlike Third World Cop and Ghett A’ Life, Betta Mus Come positions the elite and ruling class at the centre of the problem of Jamaica’s ghetto and offer criticism in the ways the nation’s upper echelon maintain the hierarchies that restrict upward mobility of the urban Black poor.
With this, given Dr. Moseley-Wood is an academic by profession (she is a professor of English Literature and Film Studies at UWI Mona) the book is academic in its structure which might not be for easy consumption. Still, if one is able to make the time and patience, the pay off is worth it. Not only does Dr. Moseley-Wood explore the aforementioned themes in Jamaican society and how these films visualise them, she also offers some background to their creation. The latter is also one of the issues I had with the text as a bit more information on the making of these films and how they influence certain directorial decisions in addressing certain themes. Still, to be fair, in the introduction of the text, Dr. Moseley-Wood did mentioned that this book is not a historical book.
Nevertheless, I really enjoyed the book; and subsequently will view these films in a new light. I think anyone who is interested in film studies, art history, cultural critic and Caribbean history should definitely give it a read. This is extremely paramount as people outside of the Caribbean, rarely if ever, watch or even interact with Caribbean films. Specifically to Jamaican films, this definition, according to Dr. Moseley-Wood, is:
“the frequent use of Jamaican Creole and the assumption of a certain familiarity of the viewer with things Jamaican suggest that the films are primarily directed at a Jamaican audience”.
And this is what makes this books so important and in some way revolutionary as its one of the few modern text that gives West Indian art the level of criticism, interpretation and analysis that it deserves. Even more frustrated is that even if persons do interact with our visual media at this level, it’s usually those that are given a diasporic lens which takes them out of the definition of a Caribbean film. With this said on the continuous conversation for regional filmmakers to cater to overseas market, Dr. Moseley-Wood recalls a 2016 industry conference where one filmmakers makes the case that Caribbean filmmakers needs to cater to overseas markets to survive and that ultimately means to dilute their national culture. As she stated,
“At a panel discussion on 20 April 2016 at Edna Manley College for the Visual and Performing Arts in Kingston, titled “Film: A Catalyst for the Creative Economy”, Jamaican-Candain filmmaker Jeremy Whittaker emphasised that in order to survive in the business, Jamaican filmmakers need to make films that appeal to multiple markets. An important condition for doing so, he stated, is the use of Standard English rather than Jamaican Creole in local films. This is not a singular opinion; the recommendation that Jamaican Creole or Jamaican language should be reduced or “toned down” in order to facilitate local films’ entry into overseas markets was reiterated at another forum in October 2016 at the National Gallery in Kingston, this time by a respected local producer who has worked in the sector for many years.”
Still, I share the same thought on this with Dr. Moseley Wood. As she stated and what I think is one of the aphorism in the entire book,
“A film sector which privileges the needs and demands of an external market cannot be reasonably expected to participate in this process of cultural empowerment”
There is a lot more to say about this book but again for anyone who considers themselves a cinephile, and with the Caribbean films at the bottom of the hierarchy in what is greenlit, marketed and given support in the global cultural space, this is definite read. I end here by say: interact with Caribbean art, engage with Caribbean storytelling
Displaying 1 of 1 review