Hope Is of a Different Color Ending Explained – Spoiler-Forward Analysis

⚠️ Spoiler Warning: This guide contains detailed spoilers for the entire novel. Proceed only if you've finished reading or are comfortable knowing the plot.

Literal Account of the Ending

Hope Is of a Different Color does not end with a single narrative climax but with a three-part coda. The penultimate chapter, “Lesson 41: Going to Poland to Become a Moroccan Filmmaker” (Chapter 31), traces the return of three Moroccan filmmakers—Mostafa Derkaoui, Abdelkrim Derkaoui, and Abdelkader Lagtaa—from the Łódź Film School to Morocco. It covers their political activism with the Moroccan Communist Party, their attempts to navigate censorship at home, and Lagtaa’s forced deportation to Algeria. The chapter concludes with a sense of unresolved struggle: the filmmakers’ Polish training gave them tools for a socially engaged modernist cinema, but their home regimes often punished rather than rewarded that engagement.

The final chapter (Chapter 32) is a comprehensive filmography of student shorts (1961–1990) – a dry reference list that includes the title-giving short But Hope Is of a Different Color by Abdelkader Lagtaa. The book’s last substantive argument is actually in Chapter 19 (“We Want the Sun!”), which compares student shorts from the Global South to Polish art cinema models. That chapter ends with a reflection on the work of Jakub Barua, whose films fuse the oneiric and the political, and who represents the final generation of scholarship students—the “children of the program.” The book closes with the observation that the entire era of international scholarships ended with the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989–1991.

No epilogue is present. The book does not provide a final summary chapter or afterword; instead, the filmography and the concluding remarks in earlier chapters serve as the end.

The “Climax” of a Non-Fiction Work

Since this is a scholarly collection, the emotional climax occurs in Chapter 31 (Moroccan filmmakers) and especially in the final story arc of three men: Mostafa Derkaoui, Abdelkrim Derkaoui, and Abdelkader Lagtaa. Their return home from Poland is the point where all themes—Cold War internationalism, decolonization, censorship, race—collide. The “climax” is the moment of forced deportation: Lagtaa is expelled from Morocco to Algeria, a direct consequence of his political activities and the regime’s fear of his cinema as a tool of subversion. This is the most concrete instance of the “mixed outcomes” the book documents throughout.

Major Character Outcomes

Filmmaker	Outcome (as per outline and evidence)
Mostafa Derkaoui	Returned to Morocco; used Polish training to create socially engaged cinema under strict censorship
Abdelkader Lagtaa	Deported to Algeria after the promise of protection failed; his short But Hope Is of a Different Color gives the book its title
Sao Gamba (Kenya)	Established itself as a foundational figure in Kenyan film culture; his works remain largely inaccessible in U-matic archives; his later paintings and feature Kolormask valorized local culture
Jakub Barua	Made shorts Sabou (1990) and The Welcome (1990) that fuse oneiric and political models; represents the “children of the program” (born from a Polish-Kenyan couple who met as medical students in the 1960s)
José María Sánchez Ariza (student of Has)	Made documentary History of a Shot (1968) honoring Wojciech Has; outcomes not specified beyond that
Brian Scott (Guyanese journalist)	Not a Łódź filmmaker, but a source for experiences of racism in Poland; his story ends with him still facing the white gaze but having returned to the West as a journalist
Rahnama (Iranian filmmaker)	Did not continue filmmaking; became an academic at University of Warsaw, writing Farsi textbooks and Polish novels; his fiction describes refugee sickness
Idriss Karim	Sent letter to Souffles referencing Third Cinema manifesto; outcomes not tracked

Important: Many filmmakers’ final fates are not recorded. The book is explicitly about recovering lost archives and memories, so incompleteness is a deliberate theme.

Resolved vs. Unresolved Threads

Resolved

The scholarship program’s timeline: The book clearly documents that the intensive flow of Global South students to Łódź ended with the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. The program itself is a closed chapter.
The myth of race-blind Eastern Europe: The book resolves that race was never absent; racism was real and documented (e.g. Brian Scott’s tram incident, the stares in Sumiński’s photographs, the documentary Black and White).
The influence of Polish auteur Wojciech Has: His “hasówki” model (oneiric, death-obsessed, nostalgic) is shown to have directly inspired student shorts like Shadows (1982) and Miriam (1984).

Unresolved

Accessibility of student films: Sao Gamba’s entire body of work, and many other shorts, remain undigitized, locked in U-matic or on celluloid with no playback equipment. The book urges digitization but does not achieve it.
The fate of several filmmakers: After returning to their countries, many faced censorship, repression, or silence. The book cannot tell what happened to most of them after the 1990s.
The archival gaps: The filmography notes that two films are “not preserved.” The book itself is an act of recovery that remains incomplete.
The question of whether Łódź produced a true “Third Cinema”: The manifesto by Solanas and Getino was known at Łódź, and several films are politically subversive, but the book never claims a clear successor movement.

Theme Resolution

Cold War Internationalism and Educational Exchange – The system that brought students to Poland was a tool of Cold War soft power, but the students took genuine skills home. The book ends with the dissolution of that system, neither celebrating nor condemning it entirely.
Decolonization and Third Cinema – Many students did produce works that challenge colonial structures – e.g., Sabou by Jakub Barua, The Moon Children by Sao Gamba, Without Requiem by Idriss Karim. But the book’s final note is that decolonization remained unfinished; filmmakers still faced censorship, and their archives are now in danger of permanent loss.
Race, Racialization, and the Myth of Race-Blind Eastern Europe – This theme is resolved by the book’s conclusion: the myth is definitively debunked. Racism was present, interpersonal, structural, and documented (Chapter 13, Chapter 15, Chapter 19). The final chapters do not soften this.
Memory, Erasure, and Archival Recovery – The entire project of the book is an act against erasure. The ending (the filmography, the incomplete biographies) underscores that recovery is ongoing and fragile.
Hope and Solidarity Across Boundaries – The title Hope Is of a Different Color comes from Lagtaa’s short. The book’s final pages offer a kind of hope—that these films and their makers can be re-membered—but it is a “different” hope, not naive. Hope coexists with loss.

Reasonable Interpretations of the Ending

Given the book’s refusal to provide tidy closure, readers may interpret the ending in several ways:

Optimistic reading: The filmography preserves the names and works of over 100 films; the school’s legacy is now partially documented. The Barua brothers’ success suggests the program created lasting cultural bridges.
Pessimistic reading: Most filmmakers’ careers were stifled; their films are decaying; the program was a Cold War instrument that ultimately failed its stated solidarity goals, as evidenced by the racism experienced by students.
Ambivalent reading: The book deliberately withholds a grand conclusion to reflect the unresolved nature of decolonization itself. The hope is “of a different color” – it does not match Western expectations of happy endings.

6 Reader Questions and Answers

1. Did the Łódź Film School succeed in creating a generation of Global South filmmakers?
Yes and no. Many did become founders of national cinemas (e.g., Sao Gamba in Kenya), but others faced censorship or abandoned film. The book’s evidence shows “mixed outcomes” – some succeeded, some disappeared.

2. What happened to Abdelkader Lagtaa after his deportation to Algeria?
The book does not describe his later life. He is last seen being forced to leave Morocco. His short But Hope Is of a Different Color is preserved only in the filmography; no further career is noted.

3. Why is the book called Hope Is of a Different Color?
It is the title of Abdelkader Lagtaa’s student short (1972). The phrase encapsulates the idea that hope in the postcolonial context does not look like Western optimism; it is “a different color,” shaped by struggle, loss, and anticolonial resistance.

4. Are the student films still viewable today?
Most are not. The book repeatedly laments that films exist only in archives (e.g., U-matic tapes in Kenya) and that playback machines are obsolete. Two films are explicitly noted as lost.

5. Did the filmmakers face racism in Poland while studying?
Yes. The book documents multiple instances: Brian Scott was told to give up his seat because “in Africa you don’t sit, and white people stand”; Tadeusz Sumiński’s photographs capture Poles staring at a Black man; the documentary Black and White (made by an Indian student at FAMU) openly discusses racism in Czechoslovakia. The book explicitly argues that the “race-blind” myth was false.

6. What is the significance of the Barua brothers in the ending?
Jakub Barua (director) and Stanisław Barua (cinematographer) are “children of the scholarship program” – their parents met as medical students in the 1960s (a Kenyan father and Polish mother). Their shorts Sabou and The Welcome (1990) represent the fusion of the oneiric and political styles, and their family story symbolizes the human connections the program enabled. The book ends with their work as the last example before the program’s dissolution.