Colonial Authorities in Africa and Their Attempts to Curb Leisure Activities through the Law: The Conflict between African Identity and British RuleThe British colonial administrators in Africa viewed Africans like “children” in need of training in terms of how to be more masculine ala the Western tradition: for that reason, Oliver Bell, president of the British Film Institute, wrote “the native must be treated as we treat a ten-year-old white child, i.e….he must be shown films of action of the Western type” (Burns, 2002, p. 103). While it was true that Africans enjoyed cowboy films, in the years that followed Bell’s recommendation, there occurred among the settlers the sense that cowboy films were inspiring a violent attitude among the Africans and should therefore be banned. This attempt on the one hand to cultivate a Western ethic in the African and on the other to curtail aggressive or perceived hostile behavior was evidence of the colonial authorities’ attempts to superimpose a foreign sense of self on the African people, through the force of colonial law if necessary. The colonialists recognized, nonetheless, that leisure was a way to cultivate attitudes and ethics within the African people—and for that reason film as well as sport were of immense interest to the British as they sought to develop the African people into subjects they felt would be more amenable to the colonial rule of law.

As Fair (1997) notes, “playing football for the neighbourhood team was not a passing diversion for young children but a passionate part of becoming a male adult in post war Zanzibar” (p. 243). Yet even here, as the British promoted and fostered the athletic spirit among the Africans and supported their love for football, the colonial authorities also feared a negative side effect or consequence of the deep enthusiasm that the Africans evinced and the focus on ethnicity that ultimately emanated from the various representations by teams in Africa as...

A sport meant to encourage and develop character in the Africans quickly became a source of nationalistic pride for the Africans, and this the colonial authorities worried would lead to sectarianism, racism, and in-fighting. For instance, Fair describes that “while the British actively encouraged Zanzibaris to identify and organise along ethnic lines, with the emergence of African Sports concern suddenly developed among the administration about the presence of 'racialism' in sport. This concern evolved into a panic during the early 1940s, when social and cultural organisations linked with the African Association began to organise protests against the distribution of war-rationed goods, particularly food and clothing, along racial lines” (p. 241). The rise of activism among the Africans was a serious blow to the colonial authorities’ desire to see their African subjects ruled as passive recipients of British codes of conduct.
As a result of their concern, the colonial authorities banned teams sponsored by ethnic associations from competing in the urban football league. Sports that were of less appealing character to Africans—such as cricket—were not included in this prohibition, as there was no real incentive among Africans to rally around these less attractive games. Football—like the cinema—became a way for Africans to use their leisure time to develop themselves according to their own natural and national self-interests. What the British had hoped—that these leisure activities spawn gentlemanly, submissive, pro-Western attitudes—had not come to pass. Instead, the Africans were filled with a sense of confidence and self-worth manifested in strong ethnic and nationalistic terms. For Africans in Zanzibar, football was like a rite through which all men had to pass. Fair (1997) notes that “playing…