Emergence of Chicano Filmmaking - Essay Example

Chicano Study The film “Official Story” represents one element of a trend towards the emergence of Chicano filmmaking into mainstream cinema. The story occurs during Argentina’s military regime of the 1970s and early 1980s, before the Falklands war was instituted in order to distract the people from the atrocities that were taking place within its borders and to unite them to face an external threat – the British, as the Argentinean government moved to exert territorial rights over the Falkland islands which was under British rule. The film story of “Camila” occurs after the Falklands war had ended in favour of the British and the military, dictatorial regime in Argentina had been replaced by a so-called civilian Government, but the political background of this films is also one of oppression. Using women as protagonists, both film portray political events as witnessed through the eyes of a relative outsider, to heighten the impact of the political background on individuals and the power those events had to disrupt and change the life of those individuals. Argentina’s dictatorial regime is portrayed through a woman’s perspective, to gradually reveal the oppression of the regime, as the protagonists move from ignorance to full blown awareness of the horrors lying below the surface. The perspective used by both filmmakers to present the repressive political background of both films is that of individual women who are relatively innocent; they are not directly involved in any of the atrocities taking place by the Government, yet each one becomes the victim/target of the Government’s policies. Since Argentina is largely a state where feminism has not taken such a strong hold as the Western countries, men are the prime movers and shakers of political events and women are restricted and confined to certain occupations and are thus relatively immature and unaware in a political sense. From this perspective, they may actually represent the average ordinary citizen who is relatively ignorant in terms of political acumen and is a victim of political events rather than being one of the perpetrators. Political events form the backdrop rather than the major theme of both the films; but by using these innocent female protagonists, both film makers are able to introduce these events to the audiences as if viewed through the eyes of those protagonists – a gradual dawning of knowledge about the events which are transpiring in the background and the gathering horror as they become involved in the fallout of these political events. This only serves to underline the terror experienced by the protagonists as they slowly become aware of the atrocities being perpetrated by the Government. The protagonist of “The official story” is a history teacher Alicia, who has an adopted daughter named Gaby and a husband named Roberto who is in the military. The film commences with Alicia being quite unaware of the political undercurrents she is living with. The catalytic event is the return of her friend Ana after a period of disappearance and as Alicia talks to her late into the night, she finds out that Ana had been tortured during the period of her disappearance. The film then begins on its journey of political discovery, as Alicia begins to investigate and make enquiries, especially about the origins of her adopted daughter. She gradually becomes aware of how deeply rooted the political rot has set in, as the trial leads back to her husband and the military general he serves, condoning all manner of atrocities because he is fuelled by his greed for wealth. The film “Camila” was released in 1984 and is based on the true story of a doomed love between a beautiful young socialite and a priest. This couple eloped and ran away, living together incognito for a few months until they were discovered and arrested after a few months. The love story is based upon a historical incident and although the film focuses on the love and romance between the two lead protagonists, it is unable to avoid altogether the political oppression which formed the background for these incidents. While the storyline of “The official story” deals with the atrocities inflicted on babies, the film “Camila” deals with the atrocities inflicted on young individuals who opposed an oppressive regime. Babies is a theme in both stories, but in “The official story” babies are being taken away from parents tortured to death; in “Camila”, the unborn child of the protagonist is killed when she is executed. As Hart(2002) points out, Camila could be viewed as a love story or as a tale about nation building, and how the unborn child, representing the new wave of “unitarios” for a new Argentina, is mercilessly killed.(Hart, 2002:113). The period which the film depicts occurs just after the end of the military rule that formed the backdrop against which “the official story” is set. The Falklands War ended the military dictatorship and was replaced by the civilian President Raul Alfonsin in 1983. The film was a political statement because the love story ends in the execution of the two lovers for the crime of sacrilege; following the tyrannical traditions of the preceding Government, despite its purported claims to be a civilian one. The similarity in both the films is the political backdrop of Argentina; one occurring before the Falklands war in a military regime and the other occurring after the military regime, when a so-called civilian government was in power. Rosas’ government was similar to the earlier military regime in that it was as guilty as the former in perpetrating atrocities in order to ensure its own survival(Gonzalez, 2000:230). The theme story of the “official story” is the statement by one of the protagonist’s students: “History is written by assassins.” This was especially apt in the context of the events which form the background of the film, i.e, the torture and disappearance of numerous young people, whose babies were being adopted by members of the military. The prevailing view that was bring circulated among the people through the use of propaganda spread by various Government agents was that the existing Government was working on behalf of the citizens – the reality however, was that the Government was trying to cloak a range of nefarious activities which included the torture and disappearance of ordinary civilians who did not agree with the policies of the Government. As the film “official story” demonstrates, almost everyone was living in an atmosphere of fear; towards the end of the film, the protagonist Alicia discovers that her husband Roberto is also involved, because he knows that their adopted daughter Gaby is the child of a couple who were tortured and put to death. When she confronts him, he admits to his knowledge of the real face of the Government; he admits that some “serious things have happened. Andrada (the CEO) has vanished!....the General is raving mad!”(www.academic.regis.edu). This is a climactic moment in the film, when the protagonist is forced to face up to the reality that is quite different from her previous beliefs. Being a history teacher, she had actively promoted the government view in her classes; when young students had put forward opinions and materials to question and contradict the views, she had refused to entertain them and sent them to the principal for reprimand. But as the film progresses, she is increasingly unable to put aside the incessant stream of evidence that appears to suggest that the Government is not all that it seems to be and its propaganda might not necessarily be accurate. The military dictatorship was however, actively promoting its propaganda and eliminating dissidents in order to protect itself and ensure that it stayed in power. This was also the case in 1984, when Rosas’ so-called civilian Government was in power. It was fighting to stay in power to harnessing the support and backing of the people through the enforcement of the rule of the church and the State, in much the same way that the earlier military dictatorship had eliminated dissidents to ensure that it held sway over public opinion and ensured the continued support of the people to stay in power. The reasons for the political actions occurring in the two films were however, different. In the “official story”, the atrocities were perpetrated to eliminate dissidents to the political philosophy of the government and to throw a veil over its unsavoury activities. In “Camila”, Rosas’ government was trying to make a political support through the executions, i.e., to try and reinforce its own survival by upholding the rule of the State and of the church through the use of repressive measures (Canby, 1985). The political atmosphere of repression was similar in both the films, thereby demonstrating quite clearly that the regime in Argentina remained one that was oppressive in terms of the lack of support it actually enjoyed from its people. In the film “Camila”, the ending scenes of the film focus upon the soldiers who were carrying out the executions. They are shown crossing themselves and displaying a great deal of reluctance to shoot the beautiful young socialite protagonist, Camila – whose only crime had been to fall in love with a priest and run away with him. Both the films are thus similar in that they convey a clear message – there was a huge, underlying wave of resentment and opposition to the policies and actions of the ruling Government during both these periods, although they were several years apart. The technique used by the two directors in portraying a political subject, i.e, the repressive nature of the ruling regime is also different. “The Official story” centres around the protagonist’s investigation into the parentage of her adopted child, which leads her to uncover the trail of political horrors. The theme of the film and the direction are aligned in such a way that the objective is to uncover the parentage of her adopted child, but in the process to also uncover the political undercurrents and mysteries. This objective is set out at the very beginning with the statement of one of Alicia’s students: “history is written by assassins”, allowing the audience to get a glimpse of what is likely to unfold. It sets the entire path for the film and allows the audience to understand what the film is about, i.e, political propaganda. As opposed to this, “Camila” is presented purely as a love story, with the political background being incidental rather than the centerpoint of the film. Although the intent and message of the film is to highlight the political oppression which was taking place, the film is not as directly confrontational as the Official Story. The nature of the political oppression is the upholding of the rule of church and state through the repressive measure of execution of the protagonist, but the political background is suggested rather than directly stated. This is different from the Official Story, where the dialogues and events describe are overtly political. Moreover, as Stevens (1992) has pointed out, there are some questions that could be posed in terms of the film’s historical accuracy, such as for example the mention that Camila is the fifth of six children, and two older siblings are her brothers Carlo and Enrique, who do not appear in the film and are never mentioned. Her younger brother Eduardo is featured in the film however – as a priest, which gives rise to the important question of why a rich, socialite family would send its only remaining son and heir into the priesthood (Stevens, 1992:85-102). Ladislo, who is Camila’s lover, is also portrayed as a Jesuit, which may not be strictly accurate in a historical sense, because Rosas had already decreed the expulsion of the Jesuits four years earlier. Both these films thus represent Chicano discourse in slightly different ways. As Chabram-Dernerstestan has pointed out, the nature of Chicano discourse had experienced some changes over the intervening period between the early 1970s and the late 1980s. Chicano cultural studies are reflected in the “very heart of the social text” through its engagements of social “history, ideology, social movement and social reproduction.”(Chabram-Dernesesian:6). The films depict political oppression which became an integral part of the social framework and the manner in which the common people were forced to perceive themselves and their governments. In essence, it was a separation into an “us” versus “them” – namely, the common people like Alicia or Camila versus the government and its agents like Roberto or the soldiers who were responsible for the execution. It is significant to note however, that since the era of oppression that characterized the 1970s and 1980s, the 1990s reflected a change in the Chicano dialogue and culture, with social texts being pressured to rearrange themselves, so that political interests and social groups were changed around and arranged differently. The changing perspective is also reflected in “Camila”, so that the political background is only suggested in the background rather than made an actual part of the film, as it is in “the Official Story”. The dictatorial regimes of Argentina have played an important role in the history and culture of this group of Chicanos, and the constant association of the people with the militia and their awareness of the existence of the subtle threat is evident in both films. For example, in the film Camila, an overhead shot is shown wherein Camila needs to enter the church to plan her wedding, but the decapitated head of a bookseller has to be passed. This shot is shown from an overhead angle in soft focus, with the lighting directed at Camila and her family to distinguish them from the rest of the crowd, while the soldiers in the background remain ominously dark, shadowy figures. Similar tactics are also used in the “official story” – the change in the character of Alicia and her growing knowledge are revealed through non verbal cues – such as tears, a hysterical fit from Gaby which suggests a repressed memory and Alicia wearing her hair differently as she begins to do more and more on her own. All of this leads into the point in the story towards its end when she decides to leave her husband. Thus, both characters start off innocent and are brought into contact with the sheer horror of the ugly political realities that exist. Both of them achieve release from those unpleasant circumstances – Camila through death and Alicia by leaving her husband and the child who is not legitimately hers to keep as a daughter. The net effect of both films therefore is to make them both cognisant of the realities and then allow them to release themselves from it, thereby signifying their power of independent thought, irrespective of whether or not the regime they are suppressed under is dictatorial or not. Both the films fall within a genre of films that were produced before the Third Wave of films, as described by Ramirez-Berg (2002:187), in which Chicano oppression was not an important theme. Bibliography Canby, Vincent, 1985. “Screen: “Camila”, story of love in Argentina”, The New York Times, December 13, 2010; retrieved December 13, 2010 from: http://movies.nytimes.com/movie/review?res=9407E6DD1F39F936A25750C0A963948260 Chabram-Dernersesian, Angie, 2006. “The Chicano/cultural studies reader”, Routledge Gonzalez, Juan, 2000. “Harvest of Empire: A history of Latinos in America”, Penguin Books. Hart, Stephen, M, 2002. “A companion to Latin American film”, Boydell and Brewer Ltd Ramirez-Berg, Charles, 2002. “Latino images in film: stereotypes, subversion and resistance”, University of Texas Press. Stevens, Donald F, 1997. “Passion and Patriarchy in Nineteenth-Century Argentina.” Based on a True Story. Wilmington: Scholarly Resources, Inc. Read More