It’s a film worthy not only of our praise, but of our thanks.

Rating

* * * * * 4 1/2

Rarely has the ability of a documentary to utterly transform one’s appreciation of a historical event been so superbly harnessed as in Matt Norman’s extraordinary film about the “black power” salute given at the 1968 Olympic Games in Mexico City – and about the remarkable Australian scrupulously sidelined by his own country’s history.On the winners’ dais after the men’s 200-metre final, Americans Tommie Smith and John Carlos defied protocol by raising their fists to signal to the world the racial tension ripping through the heart of the US. The image became an iconic gesture of defiance and pride.

The third man on the podium was silver medallist Peter Norman, the director’s uncle. Though he did not feel it was his right to salute, Norman was deeply involved in what occurred. He, too, was troubled by race relations back home. He had become friends with his competitors and wore a badge in support of their cause.

For that, Norman would be punished for the rest of his life. Australian officials diligently set about ensuring that he be blackballed from anything that brought him recognition, whatever the cost to the country. Despite representing a strong chance to take out his event at the 1972 Olympics in Munich, Norman was denied a spot.

The campaign against him even carried through to the Sydney 2000 Olympics, to which he received no invitation from the Australian organisers. Given the racial motive behind the salute, this alarming fact adds a distinctly bitter twist to the story, with the film’s archival images of Catherine Freeman proudly holding aloft the Olympic torch now laced with irony.

From the outset, Matt Norman’s aim is clear. He wisely presumes nothing on behalf of the audience and so methodically builds from scratch the interweaving strands of the entire story – from the event itself, to the socio-political context, to the racial conflicts in the US and Australia, and the protracted aftermath.

It’s here the film’s emotional power increases. The director clearly wants to enrage us, and by that measure Salute is an unqualified success. In detailing the campaign against Peter Norman, the film serves up a sound backhander to the Australian character by exposing the ugly flipside to our beloved “fair go” image.

Chief among the film’s implicit themes is that the larrikin image so popular in Aussie folklore is something of a fraud. Rather, the film seems to declare that such behaviour will exact a huge price as it runs counter to our actual instinct, which is to conform.

The official hostility against Norman suggests Australia is a nation not of larrikins, but of middle managers and bureaucrats who resent any act of defiance, however noble its motive.And the film makes no bones about contrasting Australia’s shunning of Norman with the way he has long been embraced by the Americans. Smith and Carlos were also deeply hurt by the aftermath of the protest, but recognition and official acknowledgement of their place in history did eventually come. And they happily included Norman.Easily the most sobering note in the film is that while Norman was snubbed by Australian authorities at the Sydney Olympics, he was part of the event thanks to the Americans, who invited him once they heard how his own country was trying to ignore him.Say what you like about Americans, Saluteshows how, in this case at least, their capacity for appreciating a person’s honour can far outstrip our own. It’s a point made subtly, but it makes it no less embarrassing.Saluteis also a timely reminder that, whatever the shortcomings of our feature films, Australian filmmakers have a world-class knack for documentaries.This goes back to 1942, when Damien Parer’s nine-minute Kokoda Front Line! won Australia’s first Oscar, and we’ve had a recent spate of Oscar-calibre docos such as Forbidden Lies, Taxi to the Dark Side and Global Haywire.The fact that Salute needed to be made at all is a measure of just how successful the campaign to scrub Peter Norman’s name from the collective memory has been.This film corrects that. The director wisely designed his film for those who have no idea who he is, by shedding light on an important national story that should never have been shrouded from view.

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]