Soy Cuba...

Soy Cuba, a 1964 film directed by Mikhail Kalatozov, presents the country of Cuba leading up to the revolution. Kalatozov divides the film into four unique stories to illustrate his revolutionary message. The first two stories depict the progression of the Cuban revolution, mainly focused on anti-American imperialism.

In the first story of the film, Kalatozov emphasizes the anti-American/ anti-capitalist sentiment in Cuba through his portrayal of the Americans. In John Charles Chasteen’s book Born in Blood in Fire, he points out that throughout the revolution Cubans wanted to deal less and less with Americans. Chasteen states that “ in Cuba, as in Latin America as a whole, 1950’s anti-imperialist attitudes focused almost exclusively on the United States, and nowhere were anti-imperialist feelings stronger than  among Cuban nationalists” (Chasteen 266). The Americans in the film were portrayed stereotypically. The men came to the city for business, stayed for pleasure, and took what they wanted at whatever cost. For example, in the film, one American comes to the city of Havana and while enjoying the nightlife meets a young woman named Betty (also named Maria). He is intrigued by her crucifix. He has no regard for the sentimental value she places on it, and purchases it from her without care. The crucifix represents the natural resources of Cuba, which the Americans sought to take. This is an example of pre-revolutionary imperialism by the United States. After the American took what he wanted, he fled through the slums of Havana, while the children of the slums cried out “money mister.” As he flees, the narrator asks the American did he get everything he wanted, and why he was running away.

The second story of the film continues the metaphor of imperialism in Cuba. The setting is a sugarcane farm run by Pedro. During the scene, Pedro is notified that his farm has been sold to an American fruit company, United Fruit. The injustices can be seen through Pedro’s actions toward his children. Pedro gives them the last of his money, to go into town and buy Coca-Colas. They are now paying for what once was free to them, sugar water. The Cuban response in this story was an escalation of first story. Instead of Pedro giving in to the Americans, he attempts to retaliate by burning his farm down. He retaliated in a passive guerrilla-like way, destroying the United States’ investment. Susan Eckstein sheds light on these circumstances in her article The Impact of the Cuban Revolution: A Comparative Perspective. Cuba was looking to move away from single crop production, and move towards agricultural diversification and industrialization. Eckstein states, “The revolution… ushered in a government more committed to economic expansion” (Eckstein 504). Che Guevara “had been foremost among those insisting that the sugar-heavy Cuban economy must diversify and industrialize” (Chasteen 271). Unfortunately, they were dependant upon trade (Eckstein 504) with the United States, and Russia was not about to lose export revenue in order to fund the industrialization Cuba. (Chasteen 271).

The last two stories depict the active rebellion of the Cubans. In the third story, there is Enrique who stops the American sailors from manhandling Gloria. This represents the Cubans finally stepping up to the Americans. In the fourth story, a farmer claims his hands are not for killing. However, by the end of the film he finds himself a part of the rebellion, killing. This represents the change in the Cuban attitude. It changed the revolution from being just an ideal, to being a part of their life. This turned something that everyone was talking about, into and idea finally being put into action. Finally, there was revolution.

Que Vive Mexico!

No me gusta la tarea de otros clases. (Hay demasiado!)Yo estoy tomando un descanso. Hasta miercoles!

Gabriela

The 1984 film Gabriela, directed by Bruno Barreto, shows the changing social structures of Brazil as the country attempts to become a more civilized one. Throughout the film the audience is given glimpses at the economy of Brazil at this time. The culture of Brazil is changing to a more economic one. Along with the economic shift, the audience also sees the cultural shift in the role of women and how gender roles evolve throughout the nation.

In Gabriela, the main character is Mr. Nacib. Mr. Nacib owns a bar where all of the men get together and gossip about everything from politics to their economic situation. In Susan Besse’s journal article, The Campaign Against Wife Killing in Brazil, she talks about how during the times when men were being tried for murder that “the courtrooms were filled to capacity with spectators who came to witness the public drama” (Besse 643). Mr. Nacib’s bar was a key element to the movie because historically at this time everybody wanted to gather and socialize about the goings on of the time.

The film starts with Nacib walking into the dentist’s home and finding that the dentist has killed his wife and her lover for their crimes. Besse’s article goes over the importance of the transition in Brazil, from being a society that kills because of passion (very barbaric) to a society that is more modernized and shows acceptance and growth of the European culture. According to John Charles Chasteens’ book, Born in Blood and Fire, he gives insight to the way Brazil looked at the other super nations at this time. Brazil was no longer thousands of miles away from Europe, because now they were connected to Europe by a trans-Atlantic telegraph system. In the movie the advancement of technology can be seen by the building of the port and the hiring of the engineer. Things were definitely changing, and these changes were essential to the views and acceptance of women and the nation.

With the economy moving upwards, there were more job opportunities for the lower classes to move away from the agricultural jobs of farming and into the cities to work.  This also meant more jobs for women. This was very influential toward the gender roles changing throughout this time.An example is how Mr. Nacib, once married to Gabriela, is so happy to do structured things as a couple, like attend a poetry reading together, because it was a part of the social norm. Last week the class saw the patriarchal role of Camila’s dad, which was very traditional. This week, Gabriela shows the audience the evolution of the views of women and Brazil’s evolving social acceptance of their evolving. At the beginning of the film, it is clear that Brazil is accepting of the killing of wives who cheat on their husbands. The Brazilians evolve and become more accepting and less violent. This is shown when Nacib does not kill Gabriela or her lover when he finds them in his house together. Also, the dentist is not let off the hook for his murders in rage. This shows how the thinking of those in Brazil had evolved to a more modern view toward marriage and commitment.

Overall, the movie Gabriela, though not an actual account based on a true story, represents the history of Brazil evolving through time. The movie shows the changing and more accepting gender roles, and the evolution of the economy, and that Brazil was embracing modernization.

Camila

The 1984 film Camila, directed by Maria Luisa Bemberg, is the theatrical account of Camila O’Gorman’s fatal relationship with the priest Ladislao Gutierrez. The movie is based loosely on the actual events in the life of Camila O’Gorman with the changes made for theatrical purposes.
The film opens with the O’Gorman family welcoming home their grandmother. This scene sets the stage for the future interactions between Mr. O’Gorman and his mother. At this time in Latin American history, the father of each household had the power. The father was in control of everyone under his roof and could make decisions about them without their consent. It was his job to “establish a regulatory framework that restricted and protected women and children“(Dore 11).  According to Elizabeth Dore’s One step Forward two Steps Back she states that “Senior men governed females and younger males in their household, a system that sustained the paternalist ideologies of the men that governed the nation and community”(Dore 9). In Camila,   there are many examples of the patriarchal system. In the movie, Mr. O’Gorman has complete control over his family. He chooses the man Camila is to marry, even though she does not love him. Mr. O’Gorman decides what is best for his mother, and does not approve of Camila visiting with her. Mr. O’Gorman also does not approve of the lifestyle Camila lives. She is very free spirited and craves knowledge. Dore also noted that females were allowed a primary education but were not allowed to receive a secondary education which men were allowed to attain. Camila secretly buys books from the town book keeper, who later in the movie is murdered because he opposed the beliefs of the government. A father needed to have control over his family.  Another example of Mr. Gorman’s position  in the household is during the dinner scene. Camila is expressing her feelings about Father Ladislao’s sermon, and her father feels that her actions are out of line. He punishes her by sending her to her room. Lastly, it is important to note that the father would do whatever was needed to better himself in the eyes of the government.  This is why he writes the letter to Rosas to have Ladislao and Camila killed because of their sins.

The political situation in Argentina at this time plays a very big role in the movie.  At this time in Argentinean government changed. At the time of the conception of the movie, the government had finally returned to one being ruled by a President. This allowed Bemberg to reference the previous leader Rosas throughout the movie (Hart 113). The red ribbons that everyone wore hinted at the type of political leader that was present. The red ribbons symbolized their support of Rosas.  This political tension is also what fuels Mr. O’Gorman’s fury when he finds that his daughter ran away and got married to a priest. Mr. O’Gorman’s reputation is tarnished and has to do something to save his name.

This movie somewhat accurately portrays the true account of Camila O’Gorman’s life. According to Hart’s A companion to Latin American Film the changes that were made were for the theatrical production, and most of what the audience sees actually happened but not necessarily in the way portrayed by the movie. The story of Camila O’Gorman clearly portrays the patriarchal society that inhabited most of Latin America and the struggles the countries had when they did not have the best people ruling.

La Ùltima Cena

La Ùltima Cena, a movie directed by Tomás Gutiérrez Alea, depicts the lives of Cuban slaves working in a sugar mill during the holy week before Easter. Don Manuel is the overseer of the sugar mill, and at the beginning of the movie, he is alerted to the news that one slave, Sebastian, has tried to runaway. Sebastian is returned to the plantation and his ear is cut off because he ran away. The Count sees this action and how poorly the slaves behave and invites twelve of them to dinner where he reenacts the biblical story of the last supper. 
Once the twelve slaves are invited to dinner with the Count who owns the mill, the Count starts the supper by washing the slaves feet, just as Jesus did to his twelve disciples in the Bible.  The Count goes on to tell the slaves about obeying their master. He teaches certain things from the Bible that are relatable to the slaves’ jobs and obedience.  This shows the power that the white educated man had over the illiterate slave. The Count could pick and choose which parts he told, so that the slaves are told what to believe. As noted in John Mraz’s, recasting Cuban Slavery, each of the slaves are from different parts of Africa. A few of them share their past experiences or stories with one another. This effects the way they interact with the Count and how their different origins impact their choices and beliefs. This scene is where the audience sees that Sebastian is a magical person who puts the Count to sleep with white powder. The supper ends with all of the slaves coming together to plan the destruction of the mill, which would take place the following day. 


The slaves in the movie were not treated well. (With the exception of the large dinner they were provided with in the movie). They were used for their labor until they could labor no more. In the movie, the character of Pasqual is an old slave who asks for his freedom from the Count. The Count grants Pasqual’s freedom to him, but Pasqual does not know what to do with his freedom.  Alejandro de la Fuente‘s article, “Slaves and the Creation of Legal Rights in Cuba: Coartación and Papel,” explains the same situation. Part of the article argues that a slave has always been enslaved, and thus knows nothing else but slavery.  Even after he is freed, Pasqual is treated poorly by Don Manuel who refuses to believe that the Count would have freed one of his slaves unless his judgment was impaired. Racially things were unequal.  The Count viewed himself as ultimately superior. He chose to tell his slaves pleasant things in order to keep them from revolting. The Count told the slaves they could have a day off only to have Don Manuel have them work.


Being a slave was rough at this point in time. As a slave you could not do much except work all day for your master.  Even if you were free you could not do much of anything, unless you had land or a trade. The laws made becoming a citizen very hard. According to article 94 in Fuente’s article, you could not be a member in government unless you owned profitable land. No slave would have that coming into freedom. So in turn the laws of Brazil worked against racial equality.  The Latin American culture, not unlike our own, was hesitant to the freedom of the African slaves, because just like in our own country slaves were not people, they were property.


Religion and race are two key themes throughout the film. Without the racial inequalities of the time, the relationships between the characters in the movie would not feel as unjust. It was also surprising to see that Hispanic people thought so lowly of black slaves when Hispanics were not treated as fairly as the white man. Without the religious views of the priest, Count, and the colonies, the slaves would have had an easier time assimilating, but because they bring their own native belief systems with them into their enslavement they are not treated equally. Equality for all, or just those with the right skin color and right beliefs? That is the question.

The Mission

The 1986 movie The Mission, directed by Roland Joffe, is at best “hit and miss” when judged on its representation of historical facts. I believe that the film successfully delivers its generalized message of Europeans going into indigenous land and supplanting their European culture and customs, as well as the aftermath that follows.

But when you delve into the facts it is easy to see just how much Joffe missed.

After reading part of John Charles Chasteen's Born in Blood and Fire, I was able to see part of the actual constructs of the Guaraní and Jesuits as they were viewed historically. Just as in the movie, the Jesuits were there to serve out God's purpose and help save the indigenous. The Jesuits did save people; however, in the beginning, the Jesuits were saving more indigenous from the slave traders and the Spanish/ Portuguese colonists than the temptations of the devil. Olga Merino and Linda Newson's journal, entitled "Jesuit Missions in Spanish America: The Aftermath of the Expulsion," depicts the struggles of the Jesuits very similar to the way Joffe depicts them. Merino and Newson wrote that the Jesuits dealt with slave traders, like Rodrigo, the colonizing Portuguese, and the encomenderos that wanted to use the indigenous for slave labor

Although I enjoyed reading Chasteen's book, I found that Saeger's essay, “The Mission and Historical Missions,” was more useful in determining which parts of the film were historically accurate. What took me by surprise was that the actual personalities of the two main groups, the Jesuits and the Guaraní. Both of these groups were greatly altered for the movie. In the movie, the Guaraní are depicted as the stereotypical indigenous, not smart, not spiritually saved, and easily swayed by the Europeans and their fine culture. The Jesuits are viewed as the people who made everything better, the Guaraní’s saviors. 

Historically, things were different. According to Saeger, the Guaraní did like the Jesuits that they encountered, but not because they brought the word of the Lord with them. The Guaraní were a smart people that did what they had to do in order to survive. Saeger notes that these people would not be swayed by the beautiful song of an oboe, played by a stranger in the forest.  Instead the indigenous would have formed a friendship with the Jesuits in order to have access to the resources, like iron, that the Europeans had. It was a symbiotic relationship. The Jesuits had the opportunity to preach to the Guaraní in exchange for the resources that the Jesuits would have brought with them. 

When it comes to the topic of national identity, I think that perspective is important. From the perspective of the Europeans trying to colonize the lands of the indigenous, the indigenous were animals. The indigenous clearly thought of themselves as having their own customs, beliefs, and history. Joffe actually shows both perspectives in the scene where Don Cabeza describes the singing boy. Don Cabeza describes the Guaraní as animalistic creatures that can be taught to sing, while Father Gabriel defends the Guaraní people. Saeger notes that the Europeans would not have viewed the indigenous as their equals.

The movie was definitely interesting and, after reading more on the subject, I find that the movie was made for Hollywood and not to be historically accurate.