
(Note:
Sample material is taken from uncorrected proofs. Changes may
be made prior to publication.)
Latin
America
The earliest
manifestation of the documentary instinct in Latin America occurred
in Mexico before World War I, during the Revolutionary years following
the uprising of 1911, when the immediate success of actualities
depicting the momentous events of the day helped to stimulate
the early growth of Mexican cinema. In the absence as yet of any
dominant international cinematic model for political reportagenewsreels
were only in their earliest stage and hardly provided models for
events like those in Mexico - these actualities developed
along their own distinctive lines. According to the account of
Aurelio de los Reyes (1995), film-makers stimulated by an eager
urban audience took to the battlefields, where their instinct
was to pursue a positivist belief in the camera's objectivity
and to eschew a political agenda of their own. A film of 1912
by the Alva brothers, for example, Revolución orozquista
(The Orozco Revolution), attempts to report the events from both
sides of the battlelinesthe film-makers were even caught
in crossfire which damaged their equipmentand it is difficult,
says de los Reyes, to tell where the authors' sympathies lay;
an objectivity which he adds does not survive the imposition of
censorship by the Huerta regime in 1913. But in this brief period,
Mexican film-makers quickly developed greater skill in the construction
of a documentary narrative than film makers north of the border,
and the results are what de los Reyes calls 'a local vernacular
form of representation of contemporary happenings'.
This early flowering was exceptional, the result of opportunity,
initiative, and a brief absence of repressive authority. The subsequent
evolution of cinema as a commercial institution under the tutelage
of Hollywood, which was nowhere auspicious for documentary, was
compounded in Latin America by the conditions of underdevelopment,
which stunted growth and resulted only in a series of medium to
small, sometimes tiny, local film industries, all of them plagued
by structural weakness and small markets. If early documentary
in Europe was succoured by the film society movement, born in
Paris in 1924, and the first art-houses, these did not appear
in Latin America (apart from Brazil) until somewhat later (the
1940s in Uruguay and Argentina, the 50s in countries like Chile,
Bolivia and Cuba). Nor were there para-governmental agencies and
corporate commercial interests to develop 16mm distribution of
educational documentary as happened, for example, in Great Britain,
where a strong documentary movement grew up in the 1930s as a
result. It is therefore hardly surprising that throughout the
rest of the silent period and beyond, until the rise of a new
film movement in the 1950s, Latin American documentary was confined,
with little exception, to minor examples of conventional subgenres
like the travelogue or the scientific documentary. Nevertheless,
there is evidence of a documentary instinct at work in isolated
examples uncovered by scholars. Agustin Mahieu (1966) speaks of
an Argentinean film of 1916, El último malón
(The Last Indian Uprising), shot in the province of Santa Fe by
an anthropologist called Alcides Greca, which he describes as
a kind of documentary reconstruction of an uprising that took
place at the beginning of the century, filmed in authentic locations
with the indigenous Indians as protagonists of their own story.
Paulo Antonio Paranagua (1984) speaks of a documentary made for
a copper company in Chile in 1919 by an Italian named Salvador
Giambastiani which places on display faces marked by the grim
conditions in the mines, including a number of scenes of the men
at work. More recently the same writer has chronicled the existence
of a substantial number of newsreels produced in various countries
from the 1920s to the 1950s, especially Argentina, Mexico, Brazil
and Cuba (Paranagua 2003). The main exception to this pattern
was the work of Humberto Mauro in Brazil, subsequently claimed
by Glauber Rocha as the precursor of cinema novo, who produced
a series of films under the general title Brasilianas between
1945 and 1956 celebrating aspects of the Brazilian countryside
and popular culture, as well as a number of longer films which
often contain an original mixture of fiction and documentary.
Occasionally
new finds appear. A documentary of 1993 by the Venezuelan Alfredo
Anzola, El misterio de los ojos escarlata ('The Mystery
of the Scarlet Eyes'), provides a rare glimpse of unseen images
of Venezuela in the 1920s and 30s: footage shot by the film-maker's
father, who made documentaries and two silent feature films, now
lost, in the 1920s, then acquired a 16mm camera and filmed mostly
documentary footage throughout the 30s and 40s, while working
as the director of a radio station - a radio serial written and
produced by Anzola père provides the title of his son's
film about him, a film which prompts several questions: How many
others among the all but nameless Latin American filmmakers of
the early years had similar careers? And may have left undiscovered
archives? And how many of these aficionados have not even left
their names behind? And another thing: Anzola, as portrayed by
his son, was clearly no intellectual, but a keen cineaste, an
aficionado who took his camera with him to events where he had
entry as a radio producer. The point of view is uncritical and
marked by his social class. But aficionados of the same class
in succeeding decades were the very people whose first filmmaking
efforts represent the initial stirrings of the powerful new movement
in Latin American cinema which emerged in the late 50s.
A singular
example from 1930s Mexico points in another direction. The film
historian Georges Sadoul calls Redes (Nets, aka The Wave,
1934) a semidocumentary, which uses non-professional actors in
real locations, in the manner of the German film Menschen am
Sonntag (People on Sunday, dir. Robert Siodmak) of 1929, to
recount a story taken from everyday life, which in this case deals
with the struggle of Vera Cruz fishermen against exploitation.
In short, an extraordinary piece of neorealism avant la lettre,
as well as a precursor of what will later become a major tendency
of politically committed film making in every corner of Latin
America. A rare example, too, of collaboration as equals between
North and South, the film was made at the invitation of a progressive
politician, Velásquez Chávez, in charge of public
education, who wrote the original script, by a team headed by
the Mexican Emilio Gómez Muriel, which included two foreigners:
the New York photographer Paul Strand and a young émigré
from Austria, Fred Zinnemann, Siodmak's assistant director on
Menschen am Sonntag. In sum, Redes is one of those
films, like Kuhle Wampe by Slatan Dudow and Bertolt Brecht
(1932), or Jean Renoir's Toni of 1934, which impress themselves
on the imagination as spectres of a different kind of cinema that
might have been, where the simple opposition between fiction and
documentary is transcended.
The emergence
of Latin American documentary in the 1950s/60s marks the appearance
of a new generation of film-makers, who benefit from a new economic
and political conjuncture. Cinema was already thoroughly dominated
by Hollywood product, which easily commanded 80% or more of the
market, while postwar modernisation extended the US presence in
the expanding domains of radio and television. It also brought
a drive to open up markets among the Latin American bourgeoisie
for the appurtenances of the 'American way of life', which naturally
included amateur cine, for which official Washington publications
like the Industrial Reference Service (later called World
Trade in Commodities) recorded increasing sales in several
countries. The spread of film clubs and magazines, art-houses
and festivals, was part of the same process of cultural modernisation,
but produced a sting: the new generation rejected both what they
saw as the cultural imperialism of the gringos, and the
crass commercialism of local film industries, where they existed,
which together prevented the emergence of authentic autochthonous
voices. Instead they looked to new film movements in Europe for
orientation. Several of the pioneers of the 50s and 60s had taken
themselves to Italy to study cinema in Rome, bringing back with
them the ideals of both neorealism and the social documentarywhatever
would help them in the endeavour to discover the social, economic
and political undertow in the sight of immediate reality, whether
in the form of neorealist fiction or documentary.
Documentary
is a marginal form of cinema, and some of first initiatives occurred
in out-of-the-way places like Cuzco in Peru, where a film club
was set up in 1955 and Manuel Chambi and others started making
short documentaries on ethnographic and sociocultural themesSadoul
called them the Cuzco School. They were not unique, but represented
a new desire to be found throughout the continent for self-expression
beyond the bounds that were sanctioned by the ruling creole elites.
Several such groups were linked to social movements which espoused
leftist and Marxist principles, like the cultural club Nuestro
Tiempo run by the Young Communists in Havana in the 50s, which
harboured several future Cuban directors. The first international
meeting place for the young filmmakers was a film festival in
Montevideo, set up in 1954 by the SODRE, Uruguay's national radio
station and a progressive cultural promoter. Among the film makers
attending in 1958, when John Grierson was the guest of honour,
were Chambi from Peru, and Fernando Birri from Argentina. The
film exhibited by Birri and his students, Tire Die ('Throw us
a dime'), a collaborative social inquiry into the shanty towns
around the city of Santa Fe, later came to be celebrated as the
founding social documentary of the new film movement. Known simply
as el nuevo cine latinoamericano (the New Latin American
Cinema), the designation dates from a meeting in 1967 of filmmakers
from across the continent hosted by a film club in the Chilean
seaside town of Viña del Mar, which had been running a
festival of 8 and 16mm with a strong documentary emphasis since
1963. Documentary, for this movement, was far from marginal, even
if documentarists everywhere (except Cuba after 1959) were forced
to work in the interstices of the system. In the desire to turn
the cameras on the actuality of the external world, to escape
the distorted imagery of the dominant cinema's imaginary, fiction
was necessarily inflected by documentary and shared the documentary
vocation to witness and testify to social reality. There is a
long list of dramatic films, from Nelson Pereira dos Santos in
Brazil in the 1950s, by way of Sanjinés in Bolivia, Peru
and Ecuador in the 60s and after, to the recent work of Víctor
Gaviria in Colombia, which represents the persistent pull which
the documentary instinct and its disciplines have exercised on
the Latin American fiction film.
The 1950s
saw a small number of initiatives in independent documentary production
including ¡Torero! by Carlos Velo in Mexico (1956),
a partly dramatised account of the career of the matador Luis
Procuña, in which Procuña plays himself, and in
Venezuela, an extraordinary film of poetic realism, depicting
everyday life in the feudal salt marshes, called Araya, by Margot
Benacerraf (1959). In the next few years, new paradigms of political
documentary began to appear, and a stream of films, in a variety
of styles and approaches, which attested to the conditions of
life from the Rio Grande to Tierra del Fuego. As one commentator
has put it, 'The rise of Marxist-inflected ideologies in Latin
America prescribed a dual quest: for a less stratified socioeconomic
system, and for authentic, autonomous, culturally specific forms
of expression' (Burton, 1990). Among the films shown at Viña
in 1967 were no less than seventeen from Brazil, where film-makers
in São Paulo were stimulated by the arrival in 1963 of
Birri and several of his associates, who had been forced to flee
their country. Benefiting from more up-to-date equipment, Brazilian
documentary established a particularly strong line in political
reportage, exemplified by films like Geraldo Sarno's Viramundo
(1964) on internal migration, which constructs a montage of multiple
voices that juxtaposes the aspirations of peasants from the drought-ridden
northeast who migrate to São Paulo in search of work with
what they find when they arrive there. A distinctive feature of
these films is the dissolution of the authoritative monologue
of voice-over narration in favour of a dialogical form of construction
which allows the film-maker to apply a dialectical, and hence
highly politicised, interpretation of the subject matter. Other
film-makers, working without the benefit of synchronous sound
recording, found imaginative solutions to the construction of
the soundtrack which also displace the voice of authority, like
the Uruguayan Mario Handler's Carlos: Cine-retrato de un caminante
(Carlos: Cine-Portrait of a Walker, 1965), which combines patiently
filmed images of a vagabond's life with his edited speech, recorded
afterwards, on the soundtrack. Here, through the aesthetic construction
of the subjectivity of an individual discarded by society, the
film exemplifies another fundamental impulse of the new documentary,
that of giving voice and image to those who have been condemned
to silence and invisibility. In this way, Latin American documentary
shared the aim defined by the Brazilian radical Christian educationalist
Paulo Freire as breaking 'the culture of silence' to which underdevelopment
condemned the subaltern classes.
Among the
films on show at Viña in 1967, and the following year at
another international meeting in Mérida, Venezuela, were
several from Cuba. If the politicisation of the 60s received a
strong fillip from the Cuban Revolution, Cuban documentary contributed
powerfully to the tendency to combine explicit political content
with an experimental aesthetic, above all in the work of Santiago
Alvarez, who reinvented the newsreel, the compilation film, the
travelogue and every other documentary genre he laid hands upon
in an irrepressible frenzy of filmic bricolage licensed by that
supreme act of bricolage, the Cuban Revolution. Cuba became unique
in Latin America in the status it awarded to its own cinema, including
documentary. Cuba was the one place in Latin America where local
documentaries were widely seen in the cinemas, since distribution
was controlled by a state film institute (ICAIC, the Cuban Institute
of Film Art and Industry), which had been created by the Revolution
within three months of taking power in 1959. ICAIC set out to
supply its own documentaries and a weekly newsreel with every
feature film, foreign or domestic, which it distributed. Newsreel
and documentary became the requisite form of apprenticeship for
new directors, a philosophy which also succoured a critical realist
approach to fiction. (Although Cuban fiction films were made with
professional actors, the directors quickly abandoned the studio,
and even their comedies and genre films are remarkable for the
documentary value of their mise en scène.) The euphoria
of revolution imbued the institute's films with an experimentalist
aesthetic, and no-one was more audacious than Alvarez, who headed
the newsreel unit, which he turned by his own example into a school
for militant documentary. Employing every kind of visual imagery,
from newsreel footage to stills, archive film to cuttings from
magazines, combined with animated texts and emblematic musicalisation,
Alvarez amalgamated revolutionary politics and kleptomania to
reinvent Soviet montage in a Caribbean setting. Best known abroad
in those years were his montage films on racism and politics in
the USA, Now (1965) and LBJ (1968); the lyrical
Vietnam films, Hanoi Martes 13 (Hanoi Tuesday 13th, 1967)
and 79 Primaveras (79 Springs, 1969), and his eulogy for
Che Guevara, Hasta la Victoria Siempre (Always Until Victory,
1967).
In the 70s,
researchers at ICAIC found that people sometimes went to the movies
because they wanted to see the new Alvarez, and would then stay
and watch whatever feature was put on after ita complete
inversion of normal cinema-going behaviour. Alvarez began making
feature-length documentaries at the start of decade, and their
success prompted ICAIC to produce a whole series of feature documentaries
for cinema distribution by different directors, at a time when
commercial cinema in the West had abandoned making documentaries
for the cinema altogether. Particularly notable are two films
by Jesús Díaz. 55 Hermanos (55 Brothers and
Sisters, 1978) follows a group of young Cuban-Americans, children
of émigrés returning to their country for the first
time, on a highly charged three-week trip which ends with a meeting
with Fidel. En tierra de Sandino (In the Land of Sandino,
1980), is probably the most penetrating study of the Sandinista
revolution by a foreign filmmaker. ICAIC's policy produced a paradox:
Cuba, where according to its enemies, the public sphere had been
replaced by the totalitarian control of the Communists, maintained
a space on the cinema screen for the documentary encounter with
social reality which was not to be found on the screens of the
democracies, where commercial criteria drove them out. Nor were
Cuban documentaries, or even newsreels, by any means limited to
political propaganda. The newsreels were often investigative (especially
compared to the conformism of broadcasting and the press), while
many of the documentaries were broadly didactic and to that extent
Griersonian. Others were poetic, many were devoted to celebrating
different aspects of Cuban culture. Several are portraits of individuals,
which recover their memories for the collective. Notable directors
include Manuel Octavio Gómez, Octavio Cortázar,
Pastor Vega, Sara Gómez, Melchor Casals, and Luis Felipe
Bernaza. Whenever their films were seen in Latin America, in film
festivals and film clubs, they powerfully encouraged the ambitions
of documentarists who had none of the access to an audience which
their Cuban compadres enjoyed.
If the surge
of Latin American documentary went together with social ferment
in countries where political upheaval was on the agenda, this
was nowhere more true than in Chile in the late 60s, where a small
tribe of young film-makers formed a committee of support for the
left-wing coalition of Popular Unity, and its Marxist presidential
candidate Salvador Allende. Both before and after his electoral
victory in 1970, they engaged in a cinema of urgency, producing
a range of highly inventive films from campaign propaganda and
agitational shorts to investigations of the political process
and full scale neorealist dramatisations denouncing the ills of
underdevelopment. This was the milieu in which Raúl Ruiz,
who would later make his career among the French avant-garde,
first discovered his talent for improvisationthe improvised
fiction of Tres Tristes Tigres (Three Sad Tigers, 1968)
and the improvised documentary in the case of La Expropiación
(Expropriation, 1972). The most extraordinary film to emerge from
this period, however, was Patricio Guzmán's three-part
chronicle La batalla de Chile (The Battle of Chile), a
record of the tumultuous months leading up to the coup of 1973
in which Allende was overthrown. A fertile mixture of direct cinema
observation and investigative reportage, the footage was smuggled
out immediately after Allende's fall and edited in Cuba at ICAIC,
the final part appearing in 1979. The result is a work of historical
testimony unique in the annals of documentary for its scope, density,
and poignancy.
As with other
countries which fell to the right, Chilean filmmakers were among
those who were forced into exile disappeared (the latter included
Guzmán's cameraman Jorge Müller). Thanks to international
solidarity, Chileans became the leading practitioners of a cinema
of exile which grew up in the 70s and contributed a new genre
to the history of world cinema, as a number of films took the
experience of exile as their subject matter, including Ruiz's
semidocumentary Dialogo de exilados (Dialogue of Exiles,
France, 1974), and Marilú Mallet's highly personal Journal
inachevé (Unfinished Diary, Canada, 1982), an early
paradigm of a new mode of feminist autobiographical documentary
just then emerging in first world film-making.
Dictatorship
and repression also hit Brazil after the golpe de estado
of 1968, and Argentina after that of 1976, which brought the guerra
sucia (dirty war) against the left in which thousands disappearedamong
them Raymundo Gleyser, leading member of the militant group Cine
de la Base. At the same time, authoritarian rule often had the
counter-intentional effect of stimulating self-activity among
those it held down. Across the continent, as military regimes
took power, popular organisations developed at community level
to deal with the problems of inadequate housing, food, health
care, water and electricity, and became the locus for resistance
to military repression, or simply the practice of popular democracy
by those neglected by the state. Film-makers, seeing these organisations
as the natural audience for their work, created alternative exhibition
circuits using portable equipment, on the rural model established
in the 60s in Bolivia by the Ukamau collective, or the urban form
of independent distribution collectives like Zafra in Mexico,
supplying films to groups like film clubs and shanty town residents.
In short, Latin American documentary became involved in the creation
of an alternative audio-visual public sphere parallel with popular
organisations within the community, and sharing the same preoccupation
to give voice to people normally excluded from public speech and
outside the political power structures. In some cases, films were
made and exhibited within the orbit of particular political groups,
sometimes banned ones. The most famous example is a mammoth three-part,
four-hour political testimony called La hora de los hornos
(The Hour of the Furnaces, 1968), a product of the Peronist movement
in Argentina. The film was accompanied by a manifesto, Hacia
un tercer cine (Towards a Third Cinema), by two of its makers,
Fernando Solanas and Octavio Getino, which offers a blueprint
for militant film-making and was rapidly reprinted across the
world.
La hora
de los hornos was not only filmed clandestinely, it was also
shown clandestinely. It was designed for an audience of the politically
engaged, and while it might seem to be lecturing at them, it included
strategically placed intertitles inviting the projectionist to
pause the film to allow for debate among the audience. It thus
exemplifies another essential characteristic of the movement to
which it belongs, the intentional mode of address. Where independent
documentary remains outside the world and discourse of television,
and alternative distribution constructs a parallel public sphere
for its circulation, the documentarist has the advantage of a
direct relationship with small but particular sectors of the public.
In Latin America, this was reflected in the elaboration of a distinct
vocabulary for the discussion of documentary in the journals and
publications of the film movement they belonged to: terms like
cine didáctico, cine testimonio, cine denuncia, cine
encuesta, cine rescate, and not least, cine militante.
This list is not exhaustive or definitive and there is no single
source from which it is drawn. These are only the most frequently
used of a series of terms which occur across the whole range of
radical Latin American film writings which express its preoccupations
and objectives. They are found in film journals from several countries,
with titles like Hablemos de Cine, Cine al Día, Primer
Plano, Octubre and Cine Cubano (from Peru, Venezuela,
Chile, Mexico and Cuba respectively). The distinctive feature
of all the terms listed is precisely their intentional character.
They indicate a variety of purposes which can all be construed
in political terms: cine didáctico is to teach,
testimonio to offer testimony, denuncia to denounce,
encuesta to investigate. Cine rescate is to bring
history alive, celebrativo to celebrate revolutionary achievement.
Cine ensayo is the essay film, to provide space for reflection.
Cine militante or cine combate, militant cinema
or cinema of combat, is the most explicit expression of the revolutionary
imperative of those years.
If the politics
of the movement were voluntaristic, the films generally paid scant
attention to political programmes, but rather evince an anthropological
respect for their subjects combined with a sense of aesthetic
search for anti-authoritarian modes of address. The film-makers
understood well enough that this required them to radicalise their
own practices and develop collective working methods. It is no
accident, but one of the features that justifies the designation
of this variegated activity as a movement, that a strong tendency
can be found from one end of Latin America to the other to work
in groups, who often adopted declarative names like the two which
called themselves Grupo Cine Testimonio: the first founded in
Mexico in 1969 by Eduardo Maldonado, the second in Argentina in
1982. There was also a strong propensity to individual experiment,
which might take several forms. The anthropological method is
taken furthest in Chircales (Brickmakers, 1972), by the
Colombian documentarists Marta Rodríguez and Jorge Silva,
who spent five years to achieve a quite exceptional fusion of
politics, poetry and visual anthropology in the portrayal of workers
in the brickyards on the outskirts of Bogotá. Even the
most idiosyncratic experiments remain rooted in political reality,
like the Mexican director Paul Leduc's ABC del Etnocidio
('ABC of Ethnocide', 1976), an A to Z of indictments against the
modern Mexican state which breaks completely with the conventions
of documentary exposition. Another tack is represented by Ciro
Durán's Gamin (1978), a provocative and interventionist
version of direct cinema which uses the technique to reveal what
is under everybody's nose but is never seen: the private life
of the Bogotá street urchin.
The 80s brought
a renewal of the political documentary across the continent, but
in less strident forms. The forms of documentary that were cultivated
in Nicaragua, where the Sandinistas took power in 1979 and immediately
set up a film institute, and even El Salvador in the early 80s,
where a military junta was challenged by a guerrilla movement
with its own film-makers, gave considerable latitude for poetic
expression. Elsewhere, liberalisation brought a new thematicdocumenting
the repression of the years of military dictatorships. One of
most thoughtful testaments of this history, its repressions and
aporias, can be found in Eduardo Coutinho's Cabra Marcado para
Morrer (Man Marked To Die, 1984), which is not only an investigation
into the assassination of a peasant leader in the north-east of
Brazil twenty years earlier, but a film about its own history,
recuperating the first abortive attempts to make the film over
twenty years earlier, juxtaposing actuality footage from 1962,
re-enactment from '64, and contemporary testimony from the early
80s, all showing the same social actors at different ages and
in different roles. As reflexive an aesthetic as anyone could
want, the result was a documentary about documentary with few
to compare. In the 1990s, Coutinho, now working on video, would
produce a number of deceptively simple but remarkable documentaries
(Boca de Lixo, 1993; Babilonia 2000, 2001; Edificio
Master, 2001), each presenting a cross-section of people at
a particular location (scavengers on a rubbish tip; inhabitants
of a favela or a middle-class apartment block) which amount to
an anatomy of the social classes of contemporary Brazil.
Another context
was provided by the rise of feminism, which allowed a new generation
of women film-makers to transcend class barriers through the solidarity
of gender, for which one of the first paradigms was an Argentinian
film memorialising the victims of military neofascism, Las
Madres de la Plaza de Mayo (Mothers of the Plaza de Mayo,
1985) by Lourdes Portillo and Susana Munoz. Meanwhile, women's
film groups appeared in countries like Mexico and Brazil, producing
work on feminist themes like the struggle for abortion. Nevertheless,
by the mid-1980s, the movement as a whole found itself in a growing
crisis of both confidence and identity. For a cinema founded on
a political conception of itself, the transformation of the political
space in which it operated as a result of the democratic turn
of the decade, threatened to cast it adrift. Revolutionary militancy
and its rhetoric was slipping away, even before the collapse of
the socialist camp shifted the balance of global power. Convictions
remained, but the old prescriptions no longer served. Some Latin
American documentarists were now in receipt of funding from European
television stations, which also required a shift in the mode of
address. Britain's new Channel Four, for example, supported a
film by the exiled Argentinean Jorge Denti, Malvinas, Historia
de traiciones (Malvinas, Story of Betrayal, 1983), which made
a strength of conforming to British requirements of political
balance by comparing the adventurism of Galtieri and Thatcher.
A few years later they supported two films by the Chilean Ignacio
Agüero: 100 niños esperando un tren (100 Children
Waiting for a train, 1989), which discovers an entrancing world
among children in a shanty town learning about the invention of
cinema, and Sueños de hielo (Dreams of Ice, 1992),
a remarkable fantasy documentary about the lump of Antarctic ice
which Chile sent to the World Fair in Seville.
But there
were also other developments, in the shape of video, where once
again Latin America would discover new forms of practice which
punctured repression and the norms of representation. Indeed video
was put to such uses in Latin America with no greater delay than
community video experiments in first world countries, and usually
at much greater risk. In Chile, for example, the early 80s saw
clandestinely shot videos reporting on mass opposition to the
rule of the junta which would have been otherwise impossible to
produce. The paradox is that video technology arrived in Chile
as part of the neoliberal modernisation of the country's economy
which included investment in the advertising industry. In Argentina,
the Grupo Cine-Ojo (in salute to Vertov's Kino-Eye), which began
working in 1982 in Super8, made their first video documentary
in 1984 (though they continued to work on 16mm as well). In Brazil,
by the end of the decade, video was being taken up by indigenous
groups in order to document their traditions and organise themselves
in the face of the indifference of the wider society. The indigenous
video movement, which organises regional and national meetings
and has spread to other countries including Bolivia, constitutes
a new catalyst within both documentary and the public sphere,
as it enables its participants to speak to each other, and sometimes
to their Others, in a direct mode of address. This is not documentary
in the old sense, but its extension into new collective spaces,
where the former subjects of anthropological and political documentarists
now wield the camera themselves and assert ownership of their
own image. Stereotypical notions of cultural and technological
backwardness are exploded by the speed with which indigenous video
established itself, and even started inventing new genres and
tropes of video-speech.
A final example
is the reflorescence of documentary in Argentina in the midst
of the country's nightmare of economic collapse. Once again we
see the same phenomenon, the rapid adoption of the newest technologies
for purposes perhaps still best described by the old-fashioned
word of 'liberation', in a way that demolishes the notion that
underdevelopment means backwardness in anything other than an
economic sense. Thus, the same global capitalism that produces
computerisation and digital telecommunication, also produces the
digital video cameras and computers which, during Argentina's
neoliberal experiment of dollar parity, found eager buyers among
a new generation of aspiring film-makers. Came the collapse of
the banks and the result was that documentary was boosted by an
explosive reality. Film-makers, many of them trained in the film
schools which blossomed in Argentina during the preceding decade,
and often militants of one or other political association, now
in full possession of the means of production, needed no funding
or commissions to go out on the streets and film. Spontaneous
and uncredited videos, recording popular mobilisations and cacerolazos
(casserole-bashing), were sold on the streets from stalls piled
with copies, while others rediscovered a certain Argentinean documentary
tradition going back to the work of Raymundo Gleyser in the 60s.
The upsurge began before the economic collapse of December 2001.
Earlier that year, at Mar de Plata, an alternative festival of
contemporary political documentary attracted the attention of
Solanas, who withdrew from an official screening of La hora
de los hornos to join the counter-event, calling the new groups
the heirs of third cinema. Political opportunism? Wishful thinking?
A year after the bank collapse, as many as forty groups of video
film-makers were working alongside the assemblies and piqueteros,
the women's movement, and the workers co-operatives who were taking
control of bankrupt firms. Their work was shown at factories,
community movement assemblies, and festivals, but not on television
or in the cinemas. The world's eyes, or rather, the global media,
may have turned away from Argentina's plight, but not the new
documentarists, for whom their cameras are once again weapons
in a struggle of survival which testifies to resistance in the
face of adversity.
Michael
Chanan
Further
Reading
Burton, ed., Julianne (2000), The Social Documentary in Latin
America, Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press
Chanan, Michael
(1984), The Cuban Image, Cinema and Cultural Politics in Cuba,
London: BFI
de los Reyes,
Aurelio (1995). 'The Silent Cinema', in Paulo Antonio Paranagua,
ed., Mexican Cinema, London: BFI.
Mahieu, José
Agustín (1966). Breve historia del cine argentino,
Buenos Aires: Editorial Universitaria, 1966.
Paranagua,
Paulo Antonio (1984), O Cinema na América Latina,
Porto Alegre: L & PM Editores
Paranagua,
Paulo Antonio (2003), Cine documental en América Latina,
Madrid: Catedra.
With thanks
to Guillermo de Carli, University of Buenos Aires, for information
on Argentina.
Sample
Entries
Description
| Introduction | A-Z
Entries List | Thematic List of Entries
Contributors | Reviews
| Order
Information | Order Online
| Contact Us
Routledge
Library Reference Home