SALUTE
Australia, 2008, 105 minutes, Colour.
Directed by Matt Norman.
Salute as the subtitle The Peter Norman Story.
The title of the film refers to the symbolic movement of John Carlos and Tommie Smith on the victory dais after the two hundred-meter sprint at the Olympic Games in Mexico, 1968. They gave the Black Power salute. Carlos had won the race, Smith had come third. The Australian, Peter Norman, had come second. This was an image that went around the world, especially significant for the year 1968 and the race issues in the United States and the death of Martin Luther King earlier as well as that of Robert Kennedy. The Olympics were intended to be non-political, especially in the views of the IOC chief Avery Brundage (who is condemned by people in the film as an unpleasant and dominating man). Brundage intervened with the Americans, the trainer defending them because they had done what he asked, but the threat to the team was to send them home if the two offending athletes were not removed. In fact, both athletes suffered discrimination when they went home, John Carlos’s brothers, fighting in Vietnam, were even dismissed from the army.
The film offers a great deal of detailed background to race issues in the United States, an interesting and judicious use of background footage. It explains that the black American athletes had issues about how they would express their identity as well as their cause for their concern for freedom in the Games at Mexico.
The film also focuses on race situations in Australia, the White Australia Policy, the lack of rights for Aborigines.
It is in this context that the film is a tribute to Peter Norman. Born to a Salvation Army family in Melbourne, living poorly, he began to excel at running and so was selected for training for the Mexico Olympics. The film shows the Australian coach and the rather naïve attitude of Australians going off to Mexico with its altitude. However, Peter Norman excelled in the various races and came second. Because he wore the badge for the Olympians for Racial Freedom, he himself was not allowed to go to the Munich Olympics and was not even invited, along with other Olympic medal winners, to the Games in Sydney in 2000. (However, the Americans invited him and gave him a great tribute for his solidarity with them at a difficult period.)
The film has a great deal to offer in terms of reflection on the role of the Olympic Games, the politicising of the Games, the consequences.
The film was also very strong in its use of talking heads, especially fine interviews with Peter Norman who emerges as a very strong character, a decent man with great principles. He is pictured talking with John Carlos and Tommie Smith in debate. They are also pictured at the dedication of a statue in 2004 at the University of San Jose of the historic moment with the two African Americans.
The film, written and directed by Peter Norman’s nephew Matt Norman, offers insights into race issues of the 20th century, the history of the United States in terms of race, the role of the Olympic Games. It is also a portrait of men of principle.
1.A fine documentary? Awards? Humanitarian? Human rights?
2.Audience knowledge of the civil rights issues in America, in Australia? 1968? The difficulties in the United States, assassinations, protests, separation of races? The Olympic Games? The gesture? Peter Norman’s presence and role?
3.The aim of the documentary, the nephew’s tribute to his uncle? 20th century issues in the US, racism, the Games, treatment, portraits, the assessment forty years later?
4.The quality of the footage, helping audiences to appreciate the times? The US and the 60s, riots, violence, the Vietnam War, Australia and the Aborigines, the footage of the Games themselves, training and races, the historical feel to the film?
5.The importance of the interviews, characters and portraits, discussions, the dedication of the statue? The coaches and the athletes? Television commentators and Tony Charlton? The portrait of the officials, Avery Brundage and Judy Patching?
6.The assembly of all the elements, the structure of the film, offering the background, the narrative, climax and crises, the talking heads, the score?
7.1968, the assassinations, the 1963 march on Washington? The heritage, the student riots, the police? Glimpses of the Klan? The black athletes, their meetings, the association? The gestures? Avery Brundage? Death threats to the athletes in Mexico? (And the background of riots and student unrest in Mexico City at the time?)
8.Peter Norman and his story, Melbourne, a poor family, his father a butcher, the sandshoes, the relay race, his skills, football, training, chosen? The camps and the altitude? Mexico and the heats, his memories and the tactics to put off the other athletes, relaxing on the block, getting second place, on the dais? His life and values, parents, the important role of the Salvation Army and its principles? His decision to wear the medal on the dais? The consequences, his not being chosen for Munich, not being invited to Sydney 2000? A kind man, forgiving? The experience of 2000, the Americans and the honour? The dedication of the statue, the speeches? The noting of Peter Norman Day? A fine and ordinary Australian?
9.John Carlos and Tommie Smith, in themselves, their speeches, the passing of the years, God values, memories, involvement in issues, the training, the heats, the expectations, the dais, the gloves (and there only being two and Peter Norman’s advice for each to wear one)? The salute? The silent crowd? Brundage, the sacking, Carlos’s brothers in Vietnam, sacked? The later lives?
10.The American coach, his stance, supportive? The Australian coach and his reminiscences?
11.Paul Hoffman, the American athlete, his memories, the white perspective – traces of inherent racism?
12.The IOC officials and judgment on them?
13.The salute, an icon of the 20th century, its long-lasting influence and symbolism?
