‘Significant errors of fact’? A response to Simon Bright on nationalism, colonialism and anti-essentialism in Zimbabwe’s Cinematic Arts

This response article addresses the misinterpretations, misrepresentations and disparagements of my research by filmmaker Simon Bright. Drawing from my book, Zimbabwe’s Cinematic Arts, which is rooted in my doctoral research conducted in 2001, this response aims to rectify factual errors and clarify the nuanced arguments that were misread by Bright. While acknowledging the importance of continuously reshaping and reforming identities, as highlighted by both Bright and myself, this response underscores that my book primarily focuses on the process of identity formation rather than treating identity as a fixed entity. I emphasize the potential overlaps in our perspectives and call for a collaborative approach that builds upon existing scholarship. My response aims to foster a productive dialogue and invites Bright and other filmmakers to contribute further to the transnational history of Southern African filmmaking. By drawing on their years of experience, it is my hope that future works on this subject will enrich the field, serving to enhance and expand upon existing scholarship rather than detract from it.