A. Psychological alienation.

Psychological alienation involves a deep disconnection that fractures one’s identity, leading to isolation, emotional turmoil, and estrangement from cultural norms, impacting mental health [20,34]. In T’eza and Səlä ʾänəči, this concept reveals how internal conflicts and disconnection from both self and society reflect broader cultural and societal pressures. These films emphasize the emotional distress and fragmentation caused by alienation, highlighting its deep psychological toll.

The excerpt presented here depicts the psychological alienation of the character in the film T’eza:

Anberber’s Mother: Are you alright? Who are you talking to? Are you alright? Lord help us. Father, Son, and Holy Ghost...

Anberber’s Uncle: Some evil has possessed him. Maybe he got bewitched when he was abroad. Holy water is the answer to this kind of illness.

Anberber’s Brother: We can’t just sit around while my brother suffers.

Anberber’s Mother: We need to discuss it with him. Those who’ve been abroad don’t know about holy water. ([2], 26:52-27:15)

As we have seen in the extract, Anberber’s family attributes his distress to supernatural causes, such as possession and the need for holy water, revealing a critical disconnect between his psychological reality and the traditional worldview of his family. [17] theory of projection serves as a foundational explanation for the family’s response to Anberber’s suffering. [17] argues that individuals unconsciously project their internal anxieties onto external causes to avoid confronting uncomfortable truths. Anberber’s family, unfamiliar with his lived experiences abroad and unable to comprehend the psychological distress he endures, project their fears and confusion onto culturally familiar concepts—witchcraft and possession. By externalizing his struggles, they avoid confronting their own limitations in understanding mental illness. This failure to acknowledge Anberber’s emotional pain deepens his psychological alienation, as it isolates him further from those who should offer support and understanding.

[27] adds another dimension to this analysis through his theory of the symbolic order. The family imposes traditional cultural meanings onto Anberber’s behavior—particularly through the suggestion of ‘holy water’ as a cure. In doing so, they attempt to interpret his suffering within the boundaries of their symbolic cultural system, which prioritizes religious and supernatural explanations. This symbolic imposition alienates Anberber further, as it negates his individual psychological experience in favor of collective cultural meanings. [27] mirror stage theory is also highly relevant here. Anberber is forced to see himself reflected through his family’s distorted cultural lens, which fails to recognize his true anguish. This misrecognition intensifies his fractured identity, as he struggles to reconcile his internal sense of self with the external cultural interpretations imposed upon him. The resulting emotional fragmentation reinforces his isolation and deepens his psychological alienation.

[11] contextualizes this psychoanalytic reading within Ethiopian narratives of alienation. She highlights how individuals who experience cultural displacement—such as Anberber, who returns home after years abroad—are often misunderstood by their communities. This misunderstanding arises from the cultural gap between the individual’s new experiences and the traditional frameworks that define the community’s understanding of the world. [11] underscores that such cultural misalignments aggravate psychological alienation, as individuals like Anberber are caught between two incompatible realities: the modern, global perspectives they have internalized and the traditional values of their families. In T’eza, Anberber’s alienation symbolizes a broader societal struggle to address mental health in contexts where traditional beliefs overshadow individual psychological realities.

Here is also the extract from the film Səlä ʾänəči that shows the psychological alienation of the character:

Wondwossen’s crazy friend: Don’t cry. Who makes you cry? We will not let them to make you cry. We will warn them not to do that.

Wondwossen: Who is giving a warning? My father? My mother? Fikir? The guys? Or the children in the school? Everybody is selfish and greedy. Nobody cares about me. All are cruel even Fikr herself. I couldn’t get a person who is caring for me. I don’t allow anybody to mess with me. All of them are devils even Fikir herself.

Wondwossen: But why are you crying?

Wondwossen’s crazy friend: Why are you crying? ([1], 1:18:20-1:21:05)

As we see in the given extract from the film, some elements indicate psychological alienation experienced by the character Wondwossen. In the film, Wondwossen’s dialogues with his friend vividly illustrate his deep psychological alienation. He perceives those around him, including his closest relationships, as selfish and cruel, indicating a significant emotional disconnect. This portrayal aligns with Freudian concepts of unresolved childhood traumas, where unmet emotional needs foster mistrust and detachment. [18] posits that defense mechanisms, such as emotional detachment, emerge as responses to deep-seated anxieties rooted in early experiences. Wondwossen’s belief in universal selfishness suggests unresolved conflicts that create barriers to forming healthy emotional connections.

Lacan’s theory further elucidates Wondwossen’s alienation, particularly regarding his perception of others as hostile. This negative perception disrupts his sense of self and fractures his Symbolic order, which governs social norms and language. [27] argues that individuals negotiate their identities through interactions with others; thus, Wondwossen’s crisis of self-identity reflects a fragmentation aggravated by his hostile view of intimate relationships. His characterization of even close connections as ‘devilish’ signifies a serious internal conflict that impedes his ability to trust and connect emotionally with others.

In Səlä ʾänəči, Wondwossen’s struggles embody [20] notion of alienation, where modern societal pressures disconnect individuals from their true selves, fostering deep isolation. [34] dimensions of alienation—powerlessness, meaninglessness, and isolation—resonate in Wondwossen’s life as he experiences a lack of meaningful connections and a sense of disempowerment. His emotional turmoil mirrors the breakdown of social bonds, highlighting a pressing need to resolve these inner conflicts for any hope of belonging and fulfillment. The film thus becomes a powerful portrayal of alienation, exploring the psychological costs of social fragmentation in today’s world.

This is also the extract from Səlä ʾänəči that demonstrates the characters’ psychological alienation

Father: What on earth is this? And who is this?

Wondwossen: This is Fikir’s picture.

Father: I have tried my best to please your mother with all my heart but she disgraced me and abandoned you. Women are good for nothing. My mother also disgraced my father who used to be a colonel in the army. She was flirting with the whole battalion and she abandoned us too. Women are friends of the devil. Do you hear me? Don’t be a fool they are good for nothing. I don’t want to embarrass because of you, never! ([1], 17:59-19:21)

As we see in the given extract, the father’s bitter dialogue reveals serious psychological wounds, particularly originating from his failed relationship with Wondwossen’s mother. His harsh condemnation of women can be analyzed through Freudian theory, where it represents a projection of unresolved disappointments and feelings of betrayal. [18] suggests that such defense mechanisms can create an emotionally hostile environment, intensifying Wondwossen’s alienation and disconnection from others. The father’s blame and shame further alienate Wondwossen from both his mother and society, echoing [27] concept of symbolic misrecognition, where the child’s identity is shaped by external judgments and misinterpretations, leading to a fragmented sense of self.

Moreover [20], perspective on alienation aligns with the father’s misogynistic attitudes, as his devaluation of women reflects a broader societal pathology that undermines genuine human connections. This cultural dynamic amplifies Wondwossen’s isolation, resonating with Fromm’s assertion that alienation arises when individuals are disconnected from their emotional selves and the community. Additionally [34], concept of social alienation emphasizes the father’s role in perpetuating Wondwossen’s emotional disconnection. [34] argues that societal and familial structures can lead to personal despair, illustrating how the father’s bitter worldview contributes to Wondwossen’s lack of meaningful bonds.

B. Cultural alienation.

Cultural alienation involves detachment from one’s cultural identity and social environment, often due to conflicting values or a lack of belonging [10,34]. In T’eza and Səlä ʾänəči, this concept highlights the characters’ struggles as outsiders caught between competing cultural expectations. The films explore the emotional and social consequences of losing cultural connection, emphasizing the impact of cultural alienation on identity and belonging.

This is the extract that shows the cultural alienation of the character in the film T’eza:

The priest: So you’ve come back well, Anberber. Come, I’ll take you to my students.

Anberber: My whole memory is blocked. I don’t think holy water will work.

The priest: Why do you look down on holy water?

Anberber: What good will it do?

The priest: What do you know about it? At least it will cleanse you. Try it, for your mother’s sake. What good is there in making her worry? Even your modern medicine only works if you believe in it. Try it, for your mother’s sake. Why torment her? ([2], 27:22-28:02)

As we see in the extract above from the film T’eza, Anberber’s exchange with the priest vividly captures his cultural alienation, where he doubts the efficacy of holy water—a ritual deeply rooted in his upbringing. [18] would interpret Anberber’s skepticism as a rejection of the symbolic order, where cultural symbols that once held significance no longer resonate. This reaction reveals a psychological conflict between his past beliefs and his current worldview, symbolizing a shift away from the cultural structures that once provided meaning. [27] expands on this by describing Anberber’s disbelief as a form of symbolic misrecognition, where the shared cultural language of his community no longer aligns with his identity. His alienation from traditional practices signifies a breakdown in understanding and belonging, distancing him from his cultural roots.

[20] frames this disconnection as part of a broader alienation fueled by modernity, where societal shifts estrange individuals from communal ties and cultural heritage. This perspective resonates with [34] concept of social alienation, emphasizing that cultural displacement intensifies Anberber’s struggles with identity and belonging. Anberber’s journey aligns with [10] view that conflicting cultural values can disrupt one’s sense of belonging, reflecting the deep personal costs of navigating divergent cultural expectations. Together, these theories underscore Anberber’s struggle as he grapples with reconciling his personal identity with the evolving expectations of a rapidly changing world, illustrating how cultural alienation affects both individual consciousness and societal cohesion. So, the dialogue about holy water in T’eza symbolizes Anberber’s cultural alienation, reflecting his internal conflict and identity struggle amid cultural displacement and a rapidly changing world.

C. Political alienation.

Political alienation occurs when individuals feel disconnected from political systems, believing they do not represent their interests, leading to powerlessness, cynicism, and disillusionment [14]. In T’eza and Səlä ʾänəči, characters face political structures that marginalize them, illustrating the emotional and psychological impact of political disconnection. The films emphasize how this alienation deepens feelings of despair and disengagement from society.

Here is the excerpt that demonstrates the political alienation in the film T’eza.

Anberber: I decided to stay out of politics and immerse myself totally in my work. But even that was becoming a crime. ([2], 1:19:53-1:20:02)

As we have seen in the excerpt, Anberber’s attempt to seek refuge in his professional identity and remain politically neutral exposes the inescapable grip of dominant ideological structures that criminalize even apolitical stances. This moment becomes an entry point to analyze alienation through the interconnected lenses of [6,22,28], and [39], highlighting how systemic oppression alienates individuals from their labor, identity, and society.

[28] theory of alienation in the Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts provides a foundational framework. He argues that individuals under oppressive systems become estranged from their labor, society, and sense of self due to exploitative economic and ideological conditions. Anberber’s alienation stems not only from his inability to fully pursue his scientific work without interference but also from the broader political environment that denies him autonomy. [6] concept of interpellation further illuminates Anberber’s predicament. Anberber’s realization that even his neutral decisions are politicized demonstrates how individuals are involuntarily positioned within ideological frameworks that dictate their roles and actions. In T’eza, the ideological state apparatuses—such as the government, educational institutions, and media—continuously interpellate individuals, reinforcing a hegemonic structure that punishes dissent and marginalizes neutrality.

[22] argues that cultural, educational, and political institutions enforce the ruling ideology, ensuring that alternative perspectives are suppressed. In T’eza, the political regime employs coercive and ideological means to ensure conformity, leaving no room for personal autonomy. Anberber’s alienation becomes a reflection of this hegemonic control, where individuals are not only stripped of agency but also forced into complicity or silence, further perpetuating their estrangement. [39] analysis in Black Camera further situates T’eza within a broader global context. Thomas applies Fredric Jameson’s Marxist critique of global capitalism to Ethiopian cinema, examining how films reflect and resist ideological domination. While [39] focuses on capitalist globalization and cultural commodification, Anberber’s alienation in T’eza underscores a localized form of ideological control within Ethiopia’s political system. The film critiques the systemic oppression that alienates individuals from their cultural, professional, and personal identities.

In the context of our study, Anberber’s experience highlights the varied nature of alienation, where political disillusionment, enforced engagement, and ideological control converge to create a deep sense of estrangement. The film impressively critiques the coercive forces of political systems while illuminating the potential for resistance and transformation. By connecting these theoretical perspectives, T’eza serves as a powerful reflection of both localized and universal struggles against systemic oppression, making it a crucial text for understanding alienation in Ethiopian cinema.

Anberber: War, war, war, endless war... Yesterday government soldiers, today the opposition, hunting down young people to feed their warring culture. All they know is war! (Haile, 2008, 35:38-35:54)

As we see in the extract, Anberber’s lament— “War, war, war, endless war... All they know is war!”—captures the essence of political alienation. His disillusionment with both government and opposition forces reflects [28] concept of political alienation, where systems of governance prioritize the interests of the ruling class over societal well-being. Both factions, driven by a culture of violence, exploit the youth as tools for war, perpetuating inequality and leaving citizens powerless and disconnected from meaningful political participation.

[22] theory of hegemony provides further insight into this alienation. The warring factions maintain dominance not just through force but by normalizing war as inevitable, embedding this ideology into the collective consciousness. This hegemony suppresses alternative visions of peace and progress, alienating individuals like Anberber who see the futility of a system designed to reinforce the status quo. Similarly, [6] concept of ideological state apparatuses reveals how institutions such as the military and political parties manipulate beliefs, ensuring conformity and sustaining systemic violence. In this context, war becomes a tool of ideological domination, deepening societal estrangement.

Anberber’s sense of powerlessness resonates with [34] notion of political alienation, where individuals perceive the political system as unresponsive and corrupt. This aligns with [14] observations on modern disengagement, where citizens withdraw from systems they see as unchangeable. Through Anberber’s critique, T’eza highlights the deep disconnection caused by violent and oppressive structures, urging reflection on the human cost of enduring conflicts.

D. Social alienation.

Social alienation, as defined by [34], involves isolation and powerlessness due to a lack of integration into societal norms, leading to feelings of being misunderstood and undervalued. In T’eza and Səlä ʾänəči, characters struggle to connect with others and assert their identities, illustrating how social alienation causes emotional distress and a sense of disconnection from their communities. These films emphasize how societal forces contribute to individual isolation and powerlessness.

Here is the extract taken from the film T’eza that indicates social alienation:

Mother: Where would you go now?

Azanu: Oh! Just let me go. The whole village despises me. They’ll all turn against me.

Mother: Please stay! It’s the middle of the night.

Azanu: I was put into this world to suffer and be humiliated.

Mother: Please stay. My bad luck... After living with me all this time, who can she turn to? She has nowhere to go! Poor soul, she won’t be at peace anywhere. ([2], 48:36-49:23)

In this extract from T’eza, Azanu’s lament, “The whole village despises me,” impressively conveys her deep social alienation and personal despair. Her feeling of ostracization amplifies her sense of worthlessness and fuels her desire to escape, while her mother’s pleas underscore their shared helplessness in a society that rejects those who deviate from established norms. This reflects not only Azanu’s suffering but also the broader community’s failure to embrace those who are marginalized.

From a Marxist perspective, Azanu’s alienation can be traced to the societal divisions and class inequalities that render her an outcast within the village. [28] argues that alienation arises when individuals are estranged from their social relationships due to exploitative economic structures. Azanu’s plight illustrates how economic disparities and social exclusion fracture communal bonds, leading to isolation and despair. This aligns with [34] analysis, which emphasizes that social alienation results from the breakdown of social ties and the inability to form meaningful connections within society.

The film critiques this fractured social fabric, advocating for a more inclusive and equitable community where marginalized individuals like Azanu can find acceptance and dignity. By highlighting the detrimental effects of social fragmentation, T’eza calls for a reassessment of the prevailing norms that perpetuate alienation, challenging the societal structures that reinforce exclusion and demand a collective effort to restore solidarity and inclusivity. Thus, the film critiques the social fragmentation and advocates for a society where all individuals can find acceptance and dignity, challenging the prevailing norms that perpetuate alienation and marginalization.

Here is also the extract from the film Səlä ʾänəči that reflects social alienation:

Father: In my life at the military camp, for over 35 years, I have never done a blunder. And I have never embarrassed anyone nor dared no one to touch my dignity. As long as you live with me in this house you can’t touch my belongings without my consent. I will give you one more chance. If you don’t agree with this, you can leave the house right away.

Wondwossen: Ok. [1], 58:20-59:07)

In this extract from Səlä ʾänəči, the interaction between Wondwossen and his authoritarian father vividly portrays social alienation through a Marxist lens. The father’s strict military discipline creates emotional distance, fracturing their familial bonds. His illusion of power, derived from his military background, aligns with [28] the notion of alienation, as he unknowingly perpetuates the oppressive system that exploits him. [34] assertion that individuals can enforce their own alienation is evident as the father’s control deepens Wondwossen’s isolation, highlighting the tragic cycle of complicity and self-destruction within oppressive societal structures.

So, in the film, the interaction between Wondwossen and his father vividly portrays social alienation through a Marxist lens. In the film, Wondwossen’s father suffers from a deeper form of alienation, believing he holds power and control due to his military background when in reality, the system exploits him. This illusion of authority blinds him to the fact that he is not an enforcer but a victim of the same oppressive structures that subjugate the working class, including himself. While he enforces strict control and obedience, he unknowingly perpetuates the very oppression that keeps him and his social class alienated, creating a tragic cycle of complicity and self-destruction.

E. Economic alienation.

Economic alienation refers to the estrangement individuals experience due to their relationship with the means of production in a capitalist system. [28] argues that workers are alienated in four key ways: from the products they create, which are owned and controlled by others; from the production process, as labor becomes monotonous and disconnected from personal fulfillment; from their ‘species-being,’ as work under capitalism stifles creativity and self-expression; and from other workers, as competition replaces cooperation. This alienation arises because workers sell their labor to survive, reducing them to commodities, thus fostering a sense of powerlessness and disconnection in their economic roles.

Here is the extract taken from the film T’eza which demonstrates economic alienation:

Anberber: When I saw Worku’s mother, a child on her back, her wounded son being carried on a stretcher, I was reminded of Brecht’s play “Mother Courage”. She told me she’d found him after a long search, lying among other wounded veterans in a hospital yard in Gondar. And all he’d asked her had been to bring along his military boots, his payment for his service. In the face of Worku’s suffering, my own became less important. I realized that I did not have to know why I was attacked. Let them worry about the consequences of their act. The issues I was faced with in my village were more important now. [2], 1:52:12-1:53:10)

As we see in the excerpt above, Anberber encounters economic alienation when he sees Worku’s mother, who carries a child on her back and a wounded son on a stretcher. Worku, the wounded son, asks his mother to bring his military boots, which symbolize his payment for his service. This highlights the economic exploitation and inequality prevalent within the system. Worku’s sacrifice and service are not adequately compensated, leading to his economic alienation. The extract in the film illuminates economic alienation through the stark disparity between the sacrifices of the proletariat, represented by Worku and his family, and the systemic neglect perpetuated by the ruling class. [28] identifies the estrangement of laborers from the products of their work and the social systems they sustain. In this context, Worku’s military boots, symbolizing his only reward for service, underscore the exploitation faced by those in subordinate socio-economic positions.

[6] deepens this analysis, suggesting that institutions like the military serve to perpetuate dominant ideologies that normalize exploitation. Worku’s alienation reflects how the ideological apparatus convinces the proletariat to endure systemic inequality under the guise of duty and patriotism, while the upper class reaps the benefits of this labor without reciprocation. Worku’s suffering, normalized through cultural narratives of sacrifice, illustrates how the ruling class exerts control not only through economic means but also by shaping beliefs and values that justify inequality. The emotional and physical burden placed on Worku’s mother symbolizes the broader alienation of the proletariat from equitable social and economic systems. In T’eza, Anberber’s recognition of Worku’s plight shifts his focus from personal grievances to systemic injustices, embodying a Marxist critique of the alienation inherent in class-based hierarchies.

F. Existential alienation.

Existential alienation arises from individuals’ awareness of their existence, freedom, and mortality, often leading to feelings of purposelessness and estrangement [32]. In T’eza and Səlä ʾänəči, this theme is depicted through characters struggling with cultural displacement, personal loss, and societal pressures, reflecting their search for meaning in a changing world. These narratives echo [13] view of life’s inherent absurdity, intensifying the characters’ isolation as they confront the lack of inherent purpose in existence.

Here is the extract from the film T’eza that reflects existential alienation:

Azanu: As I watched my son’s father sitting next to his new bride, my insides burned up. I couldn’t see straight. I just sat there despondent, resenting my own existence. After killing my own son, I wandered the graveyards, where your kind mother found me and brought me back to life ([2], 55:28-56:44)

In the excerpt above from the film T’eza, Azanu’s reflection on her tragic past reveals the depth of her existential alienation following the loss of her son. Her admission, “After killing my own son, I wandered the graveyards,” captures her profound disconnection from both her moral compass and societal norms. This moment symbolizes her existential crisis, aligning with [32] concept of individuals confronting the weight of their choices and the resulting isolation. Azanu’s emotional turmoil, especially her resentment toward her son’s father and his new bride, intensifies her estrangement from herself and the community that once embraced her. Sartre’s existentialism, which emphasizes the burden of freedom and the necessity of creating meaning in an indifferent world, is echoed in Azanu’s experience as she struggles to find purpose after her irreversible actions.

Azanu’s wandering among graveyards reflects a deeper search for meaning amidst overwhelming guilt and loss, resonating with [13] argument in The Myth of Sisyphus that life, often devoid of inherent meaning, leaves individuals in a constant struggle against absurdity. Her isolation, fueled by guilt and regret, mirrors Camus’s view of the human condition as one marked by alienation and the quest for purpose in an indifferent universe. However, Azanu’s encounter with the kind mother who “brings her back to life” suggests a potential path toward redemption, emphasizing the importance of compassion and connection even in the face of despair. This moment offers a glimpse of hope, aligning with Camus’s belief in the possibility of revolt against the absurdity of life by finding meaning through human connection.