Primer Plano: the Popular Face of Censorship
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
NOTEBOOK · DESIRE AND EROTICISM IN DICTATORIAL TIMES PRIMER PLANO: THE POPULAR FACE OF CENSORSHIP ALBERT ELDUQUE CRITICISM AS CENSORSHIP but its content brought together many other formats at times quite disparate: texts on cine- Any discussion of Spanish cinema in the early matographic techniques; reports on the recently years of the Franco regime must necessarily in- created Círculo Cinematográfico Español (CIRCE), clude a consideration of Primer Plano, given its a kind of film club founded to promote quality status as the regime’s reference guide to cine- cinema; contributions by prominent intellectuals ma. Founded in 1940 by Manuel Augusto García of the era, such as Eugeni d’Ors and Camilo José Viñolas, a Falange member who at the time was Cela; an attractive repertoire of articles and photo the Director of Spain’s National Department of montages on cinematic images, etc. All of this, of Cinematography, the magazine served as the of- course, was in the interests of promoting Spanish ficial channel of communication between the film cinema, extolling German and Italian cinema, but industry authorities of the Spanish State and the for the most part paying tribute to the glitz and general public. Censorship had its place in the glamour of Hollywood.1 magazine in the form of short official notices and In this article it is my intention to explore how lists of the films assessed, with the corresponding Primer Plano reflected the censorship of eroticism determinations. However, this was a negligible in the early years of the Franco regime, which part of its content, which was amazingly varied coincided with the Second World War, from the and aimed at many different readerships: the first appearance of the magazine in October 1940 publication included sections typical of any film through to the end of 1945. To do this, however, I magazine, such as interviews with actors and di- will not examine the brief and colourless official rectors, reports on film shoots and short reviews, communiques on censorship, but the publication L’ATALANTE 23 january - june 2017 49 NOTEBOOK · DESIRE AND EROTICISM IN DICTATORIAL TIMES as a whole, from its opinion pieces to its gossip ing and definitive criterion must be established columns. Indeed, the articles dedicated strictly with precision is on the subject of love” (SÁNCHEZ, to censorship occupied a very small space in the 1941: 3). 24 pages of the magazine, yet the whole publica- Both the ambiguity of the regulations and tion could be considered a vehicle for censorship. this decisive declaration of principles suggest that As can be confirmed from the numerous official Primer Plano was a valuable instrument of cen- regulations documented by Román Gubern and sorship of eroticism not only because of its official Domènec Font in their book Un cine para el cadal- communiques, but also because of the ideology re- so, film censorship in Spain was not governed vealed in its content. In this article I will examine by any specific rules until the order issued on 9 different editorials, opinion pieces, reports and February 1963, with the explicit prohibition of news to consider how Primer Plano addressed a elements such as “the presentation of sexual per- topic which, due to its dangerous nature and its version as the focal point of the plot,” or “any im- frequent presence on film screens, simply could ages or scenes that could provoke low passions in not be ignored. This will make it possible to sketch a normal spectator” (GUBERN and FONT, 1975: 347).2 out the faint eroticism of an ideology, marked by In the face of such ambiguity, Primer Plano, firm convictions about nation, gender and the re- owing to its partially official dimension, played an lationship between art and its audience. important censoring role. The magazine’s editors were fully aware of this fact, as reflected in the IMPORTED GESTURES editorial for Issue 46, written by Alfonso Sánchez under the title “Peligros del espectáculo cine- Primer Plano often associates sexuality with a for- matográfico” [Perils of the Film Spectacle]. In this eign enemy that must be contained. Erotic libera- editorial Sánchez begins by arguing that cinema tion and base habits had nothing to do with Span- is potentially dangerous for the public, both for ish identity; they belonged to other nations which, its captivating and suggestive power and for the through commercial channels, were trying to at- lack of spiritual education of its spectators, and he tack the spiritual bastion of the Iberian Peninsula. proposes an interesting idea: that the best weap- In the second instalment of “Manifiesto a la cine- on in this moral battle would not be censorship, matografía española” [Manifesto for Spanish Cine- but criticism: “[t]o address this peril a stringent ma], a kind of foundational text for the magazine, preventive strategy is required, which cannot be García Viñolas asserts that “[t]he vices and virtues limited to censorship, because it does not affect that we find in American cinema are the vices and the interpretations that each spectator gives to virtues of the United States; the charm and the the images he views. Rather, it is the mission of danger that French cinema brought us was the reasoned and stringent criticism, in-depth and in- dangerous charm of the whole life of France. No dependent criticism that dissects the specific case national cinema exists in isolation from the life of of each film, guiding and directing the reactions its nation; rather, it is an image of it, even when of the individual. Only in this way may the im- it deals with universal or foreign themes. And it age be divested of all of its impressionistic power.” is not out of cynical cost-cutting that our cinema It can thus be a bulwark against all the evils that turned to the local colour of Andalusia or sought celluloid brings, but especially eroticism, which refuge in the gloominess of rural dramas, but for according to Sánchez was the most dangerous of the supreme reason that all Spanish life was an all: “where the mission is most arduous, due to the Andalusian comedy, when it was not a gloomy ru- vastness of the battlefield, where a just, unswerv- ral drama” (GARCÍA VIÑOLAS, 1940: 3). Thus, on one L’ATALANTE 23 january - june 2017 50 NOTEBOOK · DESIRE AND EROTICISM IN DICTATORIAL TIMES side is foreign cinema, and on the other is Span- and carefree frivolity.” And as noted above, this ish cinema. This idea, which was fundamental for threat is manifested in the realm of the gesture, as Primer Plano, acted as a battle cry for a crusade young spectators want to imitate the movements that was as spiritual as it was commercial. An ar- of the stars so that they can seduce members of ticle published in January 1944, which present- the opposite sex like those stars do: “readying ed an overview of the films of the previous year, themselves to catch what so excites them, our cal- raised this issue with absolute explicitness: for- low youth end up spending whole hours in front eign films are a moral and economic peril, which of the mirror practising affectations and inanities, threatened to destroy both the principles of public leading them to produce a lot of foolish gesticu- life in Spain and its industrial structures (1944: 5). lating and gibbering, which they believe to be so In the case of eroticism, this double-edged very ‘interesting’, whenever they want to attract threat comes, first and foremost, in the form of attention.” (YUSTE, 1942: 6). gestures. Antonio Valencia, in his editorial “Los These articles do not make an abstract attack modales del cine” [The Manners of the Cinema], against a foreign enemy, but an astute critique of examines two of these, the kiss and the punch, a specific, identifiable phenomenon: gestural ed- to discuss how cinema, by showing them on its ucation through cinematic images. Yuste goes multiplicity of screens, has got spectators around on to explore this issue by considering different the world trying to imitate them. Valencia thus countries and explaining how love is represent- denounces a homogenisation of the gesture, in ed in each one. The references to Americans and which he also sees a strong commercial dimen- the French that García Viñolas made in his man- sion (VALENCIA, 1943: 3). Along the same lines, ifesto give way here to a merciless diatribe, even although focused only on depictions of amorous against Spain’s cinematic production: for Yuste, the exchanges, we find the virulent article “La enfer- American film is vulgar, “charming nonsense that medad del cine” [The Disease of the Cinema] by appeals to the masses with its coarseness posing Tristán Yuste, dedicated to the spectator’s gestur- as ‘straightforwardness’,”3 whose love stories gen- al experience. Opening with the blunt assertion erally involve two women fighting over the same that the most worn-out topic in cinema is love, man; the French film is “a depravity which in its Yuste suggests that this phenomenon is harmless passion for pleasures stops at nothing, not even at when it constitutes merely one of many images Bishop Jansen”; Spanish films are maudlin mush, of life, but becomes dangerous when it consti- “the sickly sentimentalism of sagas in instalments, tutes the main plot of the film. For Yuste, “a film squeezed into four scenes with no substance, in with an exclusively amorous theme, in jiggling its which the characters possess no more personality irresistible little marionettes across the screen, than that which the narration affords them,” while bewitches and captivates the masses, a mob of their plots, characterised by villainy and muckrak- simple humans who are easily excited by the per- ing, generally involve a woman being pursued by formance of facile flirtations of dashing stars and a virtuous hero and by a brazen, contemptible se- stunning starlets.” These public masses, acritical ducer; and Mexican films are similar to the Span- and easily influenced, receive a bad example from ish, due to the obvious cultural connection, but the movie screens: “what these movie spectators without the sentimentality.