Theory and Practice of the Peruvian Grupo Chaski

8/12/2019 Theory and Practice of the Peruvian Grupo Chaski

1/26

http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/2011/10/theory-and-practice-of-the-peruvian-grupo-chaski.html

Film, Media & Consciousness

0

Theory and Practice of the Peruvian Grupo ChaskiSOPHIA A. MCCLENNEN | 27.OCT.11

The Peruvian cinema collective Grupo Chaski was formed in 1982 by Mara Barea, Fernando Barreto, Fernando Espinoza, StefanKaspar, and Alejandro Legaspi. Growing to over sixty members by the late 1980s, the group joins a long history of collectivefilmmaking in Latin America. Beginning with the work of the Argentine Fernando Birri who founded the Santa Fe documentary schoolin the 1950s and who made a number of socially significant documentaries that traced the lives of the lower classes, the Latin

American practice of collective filmmaking incorporates two main features: a commitment to making films with and for a marginalizedcommunity and a desire to alter mainstream commercial filmmaking practices. Such a concept of the collective, then, meant thatthese filmmakers wanted to collaborate with the communities they were filming, asking for their input and avoiding as much aspossible the imposition of their ideas on the subjects of their films. Similarly, these film collectives were attentive to the powerdynamics of filmmaking and they hoped to avoid the hierarchical structures common in Hollywood and in auteur cinema. Ifcommercial cinema conceives of film as a team project where there is a clear division of labor, and auteur cinema conceives of filmas the product of the directors creative will, then collective filmmaking, in its desire to differentiate itself from these trends,understands filmmaking as a collaborative practice whose process is organically tied to its product.

Image courtesy : Pachamama Cinema de Fronteira

Despite the fact that the practice of collective filmmaking enjoys a rich history in the Latin America, especially with regard todocumentary projects, the ideals of the practice are often grander than the realities. Similar to the history of testimonial literature[testimonio] in the region, the practice of collective filmmaking is always necessarily engaged in a complicated power relation with theprotagonists of the films. Moreover, the nature of filmmaking means that at certain stages in the film process, especially during
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/2011/10/theory-and-practice-of-the-peruvian-grupo-chaski.html#commentshttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/2011/10/theory-and-practice-of-the-peruvian-grupo-chaski.html#commentshttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/sophia_a_mcclennen.htmlhttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392923e7b970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/2011/10/theory-and-practice-of-the-peruvian-grupo-chaski.htmlhttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392923e7b970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/2011/10/theory-and-practice-of-the-peruvian-grupo-chaski.htmlhttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/sophia_a_mcclennen.htmlhttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/truth_seekers/2011/10/theory-and-practice-of-the-peruvian-grupo-chaski.html#comments


2/26

editing, an open, democratic decision-making process necessarily gives way to the aesthetic vision of only a few at most of thegroups members. Otherwise the collective runs the risk of making films with no aesthetic cohesion.

From left to right: Francisco Lombardis La Ciudad y los perros/ The City and the Dogs, based on a novel by Mario VargasLlosa, was successful both within Peru and abroad, Alberto Durants Malabrigo and banner advertising Gregorio in Limaemphasizing as a national cinema.

Especially significant in Grupo Chaski's practice of collective filmmaking is the way they have balanced the ideals of their theory withthe challenges of their practice. In a number of ways, their work represents both an expansion on and an innovation of the Latin

American tradition of collective filmmaking. One clear example of their singular achievement is their tireless effort to combine sociallyrelevant filmmaking with circuits of distribution. From the group's inception, they have consistently worked on creating alternativemodes of exhibition at the same time that they have sought to make their films available to the public via commercial releases,television screenings, videos, and other more mainstream distribution outlets. An important aspect of this effort includes theircommitment to promoting cinema in solidarity with (or at least a connection to) their vision made by different directors. For example,in 1985 they managed the Peruvian commercial release of Francisco LombardisLa ciudad y los perros(City and the Dogs) and in1986 Alberto DurantsMalabrigo; and their current catalogue for distribution includes films from across Latin America. Thiscommitment to creating a public space for Latin American cinema so that Latin Americans can see themselves reflected on screenreveals the ways that their project has been characterized by a politics of inclusion and a practice of flexibility, where no componentof the film process is overlooked, ignored, or repudiated in their struggle to facilitate film experiences of social relevance and potentialpolitical impact.

From left to right: Poster of Gregorio,Still from the film Miss Universe in Peru

Chaski's work is noteworthy, then, for its multi-pronged approach to politically progressive filmmaking that includes production,distribution, and exhibition. In addition, their three most well-known films were a tremendous success both within Peru and in theinternational community. Their first film, Miss Universo en Per (Miss Universe in Peru ; 1982), is a documentary that juxtaposes the1982 Miss Universe pageant in Lima with the lives of lower-class Peruvian women. Their first feature film, Gregorio (1984), traces theeffects of urban migration on a young boy from the Andes who joins a group of street kids only to later be rejected by them. Their
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a401543665e2e7970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a401543665dfbd970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a401543665e2e7970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a401543665dfbd970c-pi


3/26

second feature film, Juliana(1988), focuses on the life of a 13-year-old runaway girl who disguises herself as a boy in order to bepart of gang that performs music for money. Each of these films attracted a massive audience relative to other similar types of filmprojects. For example, by 1990 Gregorio reached over 1 million viewers on the big screen in Peru, 7.5 million had seen it on Peruviantelevision, and dozens of millions had seen it on television worldwide (Carpio; 6). Their films continue to run on U.S. television onchannels like IFC and they also screen regularly on the pan-national channel Cine Latino, distributed in the United States via DirectTV. Unlike many of the films associated with the New Latin American Cinema, which attracted larger audiences outside of their homecountries than within them, Chaskis films have captured the attention of both a Peruvian and an international audience. It issurprising, then, that they have received so little scholarly attention. Beyond brief mentions in articles and books, there has been noarticle length study of their work to appear in English and relatively little has been written about them in Spanish as well.[1]

Correcting this lack of attention is the primary goal of this essay.[2] In the first section, I begin by placing the group's work within thesocio-political context of Peru and within the history of Latin American film practice. This section offers background on Chaski'sfounding members and describes how the group both participated in and challenged Peruvian debates about culture and identity.The section outlines a series of key social factors that influenced Chaski's work. First, the legacy of colonial structures thatoppressed, enslaved, and abused the indigenous populations for the benefit of the Spanish-descended elite, otherwise known asthe criollos, continues to play an enormous role in debates about social inequities, identity politics, and political repression. Thesetensions also shaped the emergence of the militant Maoist revolutionary group, Sendero Luminoso or Shining Path, in the early1980s and the governments violent military response. Influenced by maoist marxist theory, Sendero Luminoso wanted to replacebourgeois social structures with a peasant revolution that would also incorporate Incan forms of life. Their approach, though, wasextremely violent and the military responded with even more violence. As a consequence of the violence in the rural areas of Peruand also as a result of the increasing turn to free market economics promulgated during the regime of Alberto Fujimori, leader of Perufrom 1990-2000, these years also witnessed massive migration to the city of Lima. After explaining how Chaski has responded tothese issues, I discuss how their work relates to the history of Peruvian filmmaking.

I then explain how Grupo Chaski can be understood within the tradition of Latin American political filmmaking with particular attentionto how their filmmaking project builds on, yet differs from, the work of the Bolivian filmmaking collective, Grupo Ukamau. The sectioncloses with a brief mention of how changes in technology, media policy, and trade agreements have affected Latin American

filmmaking today.

The second section moves from context to specific analysis of their films. I focus on Chaski's three most significant films to date Miss Universe in Peru, Gregorio, and Julianawith an eye to revealing how these films link theory and style. This section offers atheory of Chaski's aesthetic practices that comes from a combination of their own writings and a close analysis of their films. Thesection analyzes what I describe as their aesthetics of survival. Their aesthetic practice strives to represent marginalizedcommunities in a way that balances depicting the challenges poor people face, the creative ways they meet these challenges, andthe fact that despite these hardships they continue to have dreams and desires. This section offers an analysis of shots andsequences to trace in detail how this aesthetic is developed.

From left to right: poster of an upcomingChaski production, a microcine screening

In the third section, I close with an analysis of Chaski's renewed activities since 2004, when they began working on a project of local,grassroots distribution and exhibition, a processs they call microcines, and later released the documentarySueos lejanos(DistantDreams; 2006). This new phase also marks the group's shift to using digital media both to create and exhibit media, a move thatcorresponds to their desire to use inexpensive formats that are easily accessible to a broad community. After the release of Juliana in1988 the group lost momentum, effectively dissolving in 1991, one year after Alberto Fujimori took power.[3] According to Kaspar,Chaski disbanded because it was difficult to maintain a democratic collective in the middle of a dictatorship (qtd. in Pitteloud; n.p.).[4]Despite the challenges of the decade of Fujimoris reign, they reconfigured in 2004 with new participants joining a number of theoriginal members in the reconstituted Groupo Chaski.[5]Using new media and digital technology as a way to further their mission,their work with the microcinesproject and their release of Sueos lejanosexemplify their dedication to creating socially relevant films,their commitment to making films with and for the people, and their desire to promote cinema that can attract an audience, provokesocial reflection, and rescue Latin American cinema from the onslaught of Hollywood.
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe794f1970d-pi


4/26

Context

The context of the Grupo Chaski film project lies at the intersection of a number of Latin American filmmaking trends and socio-political developments. The first clue to the way that their work links Peruvian history and Latin American filmmaking is their choice ofname. The group takes its name from Quechua, the native language of the Incans, and it means messenger. During the Incanempire the chaskiswere messengers that carried information between communities. Oswaldo Carpio, one of the key early membersof the group, gives this explanation for their choice of name:

Por hacer pelculas desde adentro, asume el nombre de los antiguos comunicadores del imperio de los incas, los Chaskis, sistema

que funcion y que puso la COMUNICACIN al servicio de todo un pueblo (2)

(Because we make films from within, we use the name of the ancient communicators of the Incan empire the Chaskis. TheChaskis were an efficient system that put COMMUNICATION at the service of an entire people.)[6]

Without question, one of Chaski's primary goals has been to make films that communicate about Peru to Peruvians. Building on thelong legacy of intellectuals like Jos Carlos Maritegui and Jos Mara Arguedas, who vigorously worked to defend the rights andimprove the social status of Perus indigenous communities, Chaski politically confronts the long history of racism and explo itationthat has characterized the status of Perusindigenous cultures.

Chaski Collective during the filming of Gregorio.Image courtesy of Susana Pastor and Silvia Garca

One important aspect of their films, though, is their focus on urban spaces and their interest in a broad, heterogeneous demographicof oppression that dismantles the indigenous as a monolithic category of Peruvian social concern. This reconsideration of the identitypolitics attached to Peruvian marginal communities may be accounted for, in part, by the variety of perspectives and experiences ofthe founding members:

Stefan Kaspar studied communications in Biel and Berna, Switzerland, where he also worked as an independent journalist until1978. He then traveled to Peru to work on a film project on urban migration. Four years later he participated in the foundation ofChaski.

Fernando Espinoza was one of the energetic forces behind the creation of Chaski. Prior, during, and after his work with Chaski, hestruggled for the rights of Afro-Peruvians. His dedication to highlighting the marginalization of Afro-Peruvians added an importantperspective to Chaskis approach to filming the challenges of urban life.[7] Espinoza was instrumental in recruiting Alejandro Legaspito Chaski.

Legaspi arrived in Peru from Uruguay in 1974 when he was forced into exile by the Uruguayan dictatorship. As a boy he had worked

on a number of films and had been influenced by the work of the New Latin American Cinema, especially that of the Argentinedirectors Fernando Solanas and Octav io Getino. Serving as one of the main directors for Chaskis films, he brought to the group apoetic vision combined with a clear commitment to politically relevant filmmaking.

Another key perspective was added by Mara Barea, who had worked as a producer with Luis Figueroa, one of the foundingmembers of the Cine Club Cuzco, and also with Jorge Sanjins and Grupo Ukamau on El enemigo principal(The Principle Enemy;1972). Prior to forming Chaski she had directed Mujeres del planeta(Women of the World; 1982) and had already established herselfas a director committed to filming womens issues from a feminist perspective.[8]

Chaski's founding members brought together a rich background in filmmaking and a dynamic interest in merging progressive politicswith a social commitment to the disenfranchised. This vision required Chaski to rethink the traditional parameters that had guidedidentity struggles in Peru prior to the massive urban migrations. The contrast of the rural with the urban and of the indigenous with
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40153929250a4970b-pi


5/26

the criollothat had shaped decades of debate about Peruvian identity politics no longer obtained in the hybrid, complex societies thatwere emerging as a consequence of massive waves of migration.

As Jess Martn-Barbero notes, Lima presents one of the most extreme examples of urban migration in the 1980s (198). The city'srapidly changing social landscape called for new ways of thinking about progressive action, political resistance, and the politics ofnational identity. Afro and Asian Peruvians and Andean highlanders struggled together in the land grabs that would eventually resultin new communities like that of Villa El Salvador, which was formally established as a district of Lima in 1983. Sensitive to the integralrole that women were playing in these social movements, Chaskis films attempted to reflect the changing nature of what Jos MatosMar calls a new pattern of solidarity (qtd in Martn-Barbero 198). In a 1990 document intended to reevaluate the successes and

failures of Chaski, Carpio noted that Chaskis work was a direct response to the population explosion of Lima. Even if they hadwanted to focus solely on the problems of Andean cultures, he explains, they would have been unsuccessful because that was notthe context they knew best. Carpio indicates two key points about Lima's urban explosion that drew Chaski's attention. First, thegroup understood the extraordinarily intense degree of change affecting the city, placing the mestizo in the center of Limas newidentity. Holding to the notion that cinema is one of the most significant forms of culture capable of reflecting and shaping nationalidentity, Chaski hoped to intervene in the historical marginalization of the majority of Peruvians by challenging the hegemony ofdominant Peruvian culture and offering an alternative cinematic narrative of identity.[9] According to one document defining theirgoals, they wanted to

servir de canales de expresin de aquellos sectores excluidos del sistema de comunicacin (Grupo Chaski, 1986, 3)

serve as a channel of expression for those sectors excluded from the system of communication).

Their work centers on

el desarrollo de una conciencia c vica en los sectores populares, sobre la problemtica nacional (Grupo Chaski, 1986, 3)

(the development of civic consciousness among the marginalized majority in order to promote attention to the problems of thenation).

This scene from Juliana shows womens solidarity as they take up a collection to help another member of the community

In addition, the waves of migration pointed to significant social problems beyond questions of ideology and identity. The migrationswere a direct consequence of political violence and an economic crisis devastating the agricultural economy. Caught between theviolence of Sendero Luminoso, state violence in response to Sendero, and neoliberal economic practices of the Peruviangovernment, many Andean members of rural communities fled for the cites. In the context of the increasing authoritarianism shapingeveryday life, Chaski advocated for democracy, development of civic agency, and opening of spaces for the cultural expression ofmarginalized sectors. They were opposed to

toda forma de autoritarianismo e intolerancia (Grupo Chaski, 1986, 3)

(all forms of authoritarianism and intolerance).[10]

Chaski, then, had two major themes dominating their worka constructive effort to reshape the historically hegemonic narrative ofnational identity and a politically progressive project dedicated to exposing the socio-political structures that ruled Peru.

Chaski rejected the dominant narratives of Peruvian identity offered by both the government and Sendero. Moreover, they discardednostalgic, romanticized characterizations of indigenous culture that tended to create heroic images of oppressed people. Instead,they moved outside of the reigning categories of political identities. Chaskis films do not idealize the disenfranchised, nor do theycast them as helpless victims. One example of this practice is the documentary short El taller ms grande del mundo (The LargestShop in the World), which focuses on the work of the mechanic Don Lucho. After being unable to find work in a car shop, he decidedto open his own shop on the street. Before long, he hired a number of mechanics and had such an excellent reputation that peoplepreferred coming to him over going to conventionally established mechanics. In Don Luchos story Chaski emphasizes the ways that
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392925777970b-pi


6/26

the marginalized survive through flexibility and perseverance. Their lives constantly negotiate their needs and desires, and thepossibilities afforded by Peruvian society.

Chaski explains that the group is committed to cinematic works that reflect the economic, social, and cultural reality of Peru with theparticipation of the marginalized sectors as both actors and protagonists (Grupo Chaski, 1986, 3).[11] Throughout their documentsthey return to the idea that their films develop protagonists for the people. Because these film protagonists have traits drawn from thecommunity, they hopefully will lead the audience to recognize themselves in the characters on screen and then engage in civicaction. In this sense, Chaskis self-image as social messengers indicates their interest in highlighting the process by whichcommunities identify themselves as social agents. Thus the group also has a commitment to exposing the material and ideological

forces that attempt to limit those processes.

The film industry in Peru

Chaskis commitment to intervening in the politics and ideologies shaping Peruvian society in the 1980s and their firm belief thatculture and communications play an essential role in shaping social consciousness necessarily led them to confront the politics andpractices of the Peruvian media industry. At the time that Gregoriowas released in the mid 1980s, 99.5% of all films screened inPeru were foreign. Chaski indicates one of their primary goals was to develop an alternative politics of commercialization frente a lahegemona transnacional (Grupo Chaski, 1986, 4) (in order to challenge transnational hegemony).

This goal led them to work with distribution (commercial and alternative), trade unions and other areas of film training, legislativeadvocacy, promotion and marketing, and film production. Chaskis approach to the culture industry is noteworthy given that they havesimultaneously attempted to change the laws governing media communications in Peru, while also trying to function within thoselaws and around them.

Unlike Mexico, Brazil, and Argentina, Peru has never developed a strong national cinema. Consequently, Peru has had no state-sponsored legacy of nationalist films that has required rethinking, such as happened with the Mexican nationalist melodramas of the1930s-50s. This point is central to understanding Chaski, since their repeated references to creating a national cinema for the people

could sound retrograde to scholars accustomed to critiquing the ideologies of state-sponsored nationalist cinema, examining theways that directors managed to work within the parameters of state support, or analyzing the relations between nationalism andcinema. The key difference is that cinema history in Peru is not linked to the state but rather to the role of foreign films, many of whichwere Mexican, in national theaters. In fact, the contemporary invasion of Hollywood in Peruvian theaters was preceded by thedominance of Mexican films in Peru during the 30s, 40s, and again in the 60s (Bedoya 157). The lack of a strong national cinemaindustry is tied directly to the absence of state support for feature length films.

Luis Figueroa of the Cine Club Cuzco directedthe first Peruvian feature length film in Quechua, Kukuli in 1960

The best guide to Peruvian film history is provided by Ricardo Bedoya, who explains that it was not until 1972 that the Peruviangovernment passed Law 19327 to support the development of a film industry.[12] Prior to this law, Bedoya explains, there was atradition of filmmaking in Peru, but it had been sporadic and constantly overshadowed by foreign imports (187). Key precursors to the
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a401539292585b970b-pi


7/26

law for the work of Chaski were the directors associated with the Cine Club Cuzco, founded in 1955.[13] The Cuzco school combinedfilm production focusing on the rural themes of the campesinos with the establishment of a film club to show their films. They alsomade both shorts and feature length films, a practice that Chaski would later adopt as well.

Manuel Chambi and Luis Figueroa, members of the Cuzco school, formed part of the executive committee of the Peruvian Society forCinematography established in 1967 that lobbied for the passage of a law to promote state support for Peruvian filmmaking. In aclear sign of the connections between state cultural policies and the development of the communications industry, Law 19327heralded a growth in Peruvian film production. The specificities of the law, however, created an unusual pattern of production. Thelaw decreed that any foreign feature film had to be preceded by a Peruvian short of up to ten minutes. The obligatory screening of

the short resulted in a 25% return of the tax charged on theater tickets to the production company. If the theater screened a feature-length Peruvian film, the entire sum of the ticket tax was given to the production company. The result was a big bang, to useBedoyas term, in the production of shorts, which were often referred to as cortos de la ley (law shorts). Companies sprang upinstantly to take advantage of this law and COPROCI, the state body that managed the law, immediately began to favor shorts thatpromoted a self-congratulatory, stereotyped, didactic view of Peru (Bedoya 190-1). Nevertheless, the law opened a space forfilmmaking practice that had otherwise been absent, and a number of new directors emerged as a consequence. For instance,Francisco Lombardi, perhaps the most internationally recognized Peruvian director, began his career making shorts. And, eventhough the law favored the production of shorts, the number of Peruvian features increased during this period as a consequence ofthe tax revenues as well.[14]

Audience reactions to GregorioImage courtesy of Susana Pastor and Silvia Garca

Chaski understood their role in filmmaking to grow out of this tradition of trying to create a national film industry.[15] They repeatedlyreference the fact that when they began, Peru's marginalized social sectors had no history of seeing themselves reflected on screen.It is through this interest in representing local circumstances that they have come to find solidarity with filmmakers like Lombardi,whose films arguably present a far more bourgeois view of Peruvian politics than those of the more politically engaged Chaski.[16]While Chaski read Law 19327 as supportive of Peruvian filmmaking, they also took a critical stance, making a point of releasing theirfirst film Miss Universe in Peru, at a running time of 40 minutes, in a format that would challenge the existing practice of showing aten minute short before an imported feature. In practice Chaski's early years indicated the ways that they worked both within thesystem, producing a number of ten minute shorts, and outside of it. In a move that parallels Nstor Garca Canclinis argument thatstate support is both essential and problematic for the development of local culture industries, they have consistently consideredpublic advocacy for state support of filmmaking as central to their work at the same time that they have always been suspicious ofstate interference and wary of state ideology.[17] In keeping with their refusal to depend on the state, Chaski has received fundingfrom international groups and also local Peruvian philanthropists.[18] Their recent work with a number of philanthropy groups like

Ashoka and organizations like UNESCO, and their collaborations with European funding sources like the German television channelZDF, further indicate the ways that they seek funding according to the structures available. In the neoliberal model, support fornational culture comes not from the state but from private organizations. The practice of Chaski provides a model for flexibleadvocacy in the complex structure of global communications.

Grupo Chaski and Grupo Ukamau
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40153929259c6970b-pi


8/26

Thus far, I have briefly traced the political, ideological, and cinematic context within which Chaski emerged as a film collective

dedicated to influencing Peruvian society. When I began the previous section, I indicated that their choice of name linked their workto the history of Incan forms of communication and community building. Those familiar with Latin American film history, however, willhear in their name another obvious intertext that reveals an additional significant influence on their work. The name Grupo Chaskiseems like a Peruvian revision of the Bolivian Grupo Ukamau, which was named after the Aymara expression for thats the way it isthe title of Ukamau's first film. One of the most significant film groups connected with the New Latin American Cinema movement,Grupo Ukamau was founded in 1966 by Jorge Sanjins, Oscar Soria, Ricardo Rada, and Alberto Villapando. Later joined by AntonioEguino and others, the Bolivian group made three feature length filmsUkamau (Thats the Way it Is, 1966), Yawar Mallku (Blood ofthe Condor, 1969), and El coraje del pueblo (The Courage of the People, 1971) which progressively moved from fiction todocumentary-type visual style and which also progressively became more and more the product of collaborative work with thecommunities they were filming.[19][open endnotes in new window] Similar to Ukamau, Chaski is a filmmaking collective withcomparable goals. Both groups have made films with social relevance, focused on the challenges facing marginalized communities,integrated feature filmmaking with documentary, and considered the filmmaking process as integrally tied to the film experience.

Without question, Chaski has been influenced by their precursors in the New Latin American Cinema. Legaspi begins an essayreflecting on his experience with Chaski by referring to his admiration for the Brazilian cinema novodirectors Nelson Pereira dosSantos and Glauber Rocha in addition to Jorge Sanjins. In an on-line interview he mentions La hora de los hornos (Hour of theFurnaces), the ground-breaking documentary by Fernando Solanas and Octavio Getino, as the film that probably influenced him themost (Int. with Arvalo). As mentioned earlier, Barea had worked directly with Sanjins. Despite these links, though, there are anumber of ways in which the work of Chaski differentiates itself from the political filmmaking practices of the New Latin Americancineastes of the 60s and 70s. To narrow the point of comparison, it is worth noting the particular ways in which Chaski's work buildson yet differs from that of Ukamau.

Following in the practice of the Italian neo-realists, both Chaski and Ukamau sought non-professional actors and worked closely withthe populations they filmed, leaving their scripts open to adaptation by the actors from the communities. Like Ukamau, Chaski used anumber of non-professional actors to help produce their scripts. In one example of the collaborative process, the group originallywanted Gregorioto have a happy ending, with the protagonist spending the money he has at the end of the film in a socially usefulway, but Marino Leon the street child who played Gregoriosaid that ending was ridiculous and that no one in his position wouldgive away money. So the group allowed the boy to script his own ending where he takes his stolen money and treats himself to afeast that includes steak and ice-cream.
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7a307970d-pi


9/26


10/26

(forging a national cinema that expresses the feelings of the people, affirms national culture, and contributes to democratizing thecountry).

In contrast to the call to arms that accompanied Ukamau's films, Chaskis films aimed their militancy in a different direction, one thatnever advocated violence of any kind. In an internal document they described their cinematic militancy in these terms:

"El cine que el Grupo ha pretendido hacer es militante en la lucha por alcanzar la independencia y la identidad histrica y cultural. Esmilitante porque se forja en la lucha contra una cinematografa dominada por las trasnacionales de la comunicacin, contra unaforma establecida de hacer cine que prescinde de las particularidades nacionales, que manipula al espectador, que tiene cnones

rgidos de creacin, que tiene como objetivo esencial la ganancia o el lucro, y no la liberacin del hombre." (2; Experiencia de sieteaos del Grupo Chaski)

["The cinema that the Group has tried to make is militant in its struggle to achieve independence and to reflect historical and culturalidentity. Our films are militant because they struggle against the dominant filmmaking of transnational communication companies.Our films are militant because they challenge the established forms of filmmaking that disregard national specificities, manipulatespectators, and seek profit rather than the liberation of man."]

The transitional nature of Chaskis politics is evident here. A continuation of 60s leftist thinking remains in their obvious ly radicalsense of film as an essential part of social struggle and their emphatic desire to combat capitalist media. And yet, unlike theircounterparts in the 60s, Chaskis films also acknowledge that the lure of consumer society and the attraction of mass media are oftenfar more seductive for the disenfranchised than social commitment a concession to the realities of political ambivalence that wasless common in the revolutionary era of the 60s and 70s.

Perhaps one of the most significant differences between Chaski and Ukamau lies in their commitment to using both alternative andmainstream forms of distribution. Ukamau and Chaski were each concerned with their access to the public and their ability tocompete with alienating forms of mass media. In 1976 Sanjins wrote:

La principal debilidad del cine revolucionario latinoamericano ha sido, y es an, su imposibilidad prctica de llegar cuantitativamentea sus destinatarios (82)

(The principal weakness of Latin American revolutionary cinema has been, and still is, the practical impossibility of getting largenumbers of our desired audience to see our films).

Ukamau had begun the early practice of public screenings accompanied by members of the group, who led after-screeningdiscussions, a practice that Chaski also used as a way to disseminate their work and provide communal spaces for debate andreflection around their films.

Chaski often held community screenings in open, public spaces.They accompanied the film and held discussion afterwards.

Similar to accounts by Ukamau of their experiences in these screenings, Chaskis Ren Weber recounts a story of a screening in asmall rural village where later the community referred to la pared que habla (the talking wall) (9). In addition to bring ing cinema tospaces that had no experience with film, Chaski also set up screenings in urban shantytowns, showing films in public squares andcommunity centers. Where their interest in distribution radically differs from Ukamau's has been in their work with mainstreamformats. Their participation in commercial avenues of distribution signals a difference in approach from that of the early period of theNew Latin American Cinema, which had considered any contact with commercial media to be a form of bourgeois contamination.Chaskis films appear on television in Peru and in the United States and Europe, and they have extensive distribution on video andnow on DVD.

Further, they have taken advantage of the low cost and easy access provided by digital technology. Thus, they have worked in digitalvideo since the 1990s and use digital technology for screenings. They also fully use the open access of the Internet via their ownwebsite, connections with blogs, and video source sites like YouTube.[22] In contrast, Sanjins suspicion of media imperialism has
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7ad2d970d-pi


11/26

kept Ukamaus films from being distributedon video and DVD, and Ukamau has not used the Internet as fully as they could to accessthe public.[23] Arguably Sanjinss decision to avoid any contact with what he considers imperialist forms of media communicationhas had a negative impact on his work's potential political influence, since refusing to use digital technology radically restricts accessto his work, especially by marginalized communities with limited resources. Interestingly, in an interview in 1990 Sanjins reiteratedhis concern about access to the public, but now added his worry that Hollywood films had pushed out commercial films from

Argentina and Mexico; the latter, he said, while objectionable, were still preferable to Hollywood films. In an almost direct paraphraseof Chaskis commitment to films for and by Latin Americans, Sanjins argued that it was essential for Latin Americans to have accessto films where the actors spoke their language and affirmed una identidad latinoamericana (qtd. Mesa Falcn; in 3) (a Latin

American identity).

This last point indicates yet another significant shift between the political filmmaking practices of the 60s and 70s and those of the80s, 90s and today. In the 1960s national cinemas still had a chance of competing with Hollywood, but by the 1980s, with television,cable, and multiplexes primarily screening Hollywood movies, the possibilities for bringing political films to a broad spectatorship hadradically changed. These changes in exhibition and technology were accompanied by massive deregulation and by tradeagreements that granted the U.S. and Europe greater opportunities for saturating Latin American media markets. Prior to the NAFTAand WTO agreements, 50% of Latin American countries had film quotas that protected national cinema. In Mexico post NAFTA, forinstance, 85% of all films shown in theaters were from the U.S. and 80% of all videos in video rental stores were U.S. in origin. Only10% of video rentals available were Mexican. By the late 80s politically engaged filmmakers in Latin America were coming torecognize that any film that could draw Latin American audiences to see a film by Latin Americans and about Latin America was itselfa political act.

An aesthetics of survival

The context of Chaskis collective film project reflectsthree major shifts in the possibilities for socially progressive filmmakers in LatinAmerica. First, progressives rethought left strategies after the experiences of the 60s and 70s, away from violent militancy towardsdemocracy, and away from clear-cut paths of resistance to more complicated, nuanced appreciations of micro-rebellions. Second,they dealt with the changing shape of the media industry: the rise of television, the deregulation of the film market, and increased

access to new media technologies. Third, they reconsidered notion of personal identity and social agency. While former theories ofthe marginalized imagined the poor as either hopelessly victimized and/or essentially heroic, groups like Chaski advocated for a newaesthetic for filming marginalized communities, one which simultaneously emphasized marginalized people's strength and resiliencewhile also pointing to the concrete ways in which neoliberal economics, entrenched racism, and capitalist ideology created materialconditions that threatened these communities.

According to Chuck Kleinhans and Julia Lesage, who saw Miss Universe in Peru andGregorioin 1986 at the Havana Film Festival:

"All of this kind of narrative development and characterization might distress a critic stuck in the standard Marxist political andaesthetic categories of fifty years ago. [] As Grupo Chaski has analyzed it, the models of fully developed capitalism have to berethought to account for the Third World. This implies a different aesthetic as well, one which doesn't simply see the poorest peopleas desperate or as a negative example, but which acknowledges the unemployed poor's strength in the face of harsh circumstancesand their role as an essential component of revolutionary transformation. (n.p.)

Thus, Chaskis films reflect a new political aesthetic that heralds a transition in the ways that progressive filmmakers imagine theirwork. According to Martn-Barbero, Latin American spectators, who are inundated with mass media, do not passively absorb theseimages. He explains that the 1980s witnessed a transformation in Latin American debates about national identity; now these debates

called for rethinking the notion of civil society and reconceptualizing the idea of a political subject (208). Martn-Barberos theory ofcultural mediation is especially salient in Chaski's case. The paradigm of the spectator as either a passive victim or a liberatedrevolutionary fails to account for the complex ways that communities respond to alienating images. As a way of rethinking thesecategories, Chaski has developed what might best be called an aesthetic of survival.[24] Two of the most significant features of thisaesthetic are their scripting of social protagonists, what the collective refersto as personas-personajes, and their emphasis onspectatorship as a process of knowledge and recognition, or conocer-reconocer.[25] While each of their films reflects these aestheticstrategies, the following analysis traces their appearance in the group's three most well-known films: Miss Universe in Peru,Gregorio, andJuliana.

Miss Universe in Peru

Miss Universe in Peru, Chaskis first film, was hastily organized when Mara Barea saw in the pageant an excellent opportunity forChaski. In a brilliant use of Eisensteinian montage, the documentary juxtaposes images of the pageant with images of girls andwomen watching the pageant. The contrast between the European features of the contestants, especially when these hail from Latin

American countries, and the indigenous features of the spectators highlights the ways that conflicting value systems cause socialdamage. Kleinhans and Lesage note that the films explicit feminism and anti-imperialism ask the spectator to consider:

What does this celebration of European standards of beauty and consumption have to do with the majority of Peruvian women?

(n.p.).

The film further exposes other sources of conflicting views of Peruvian and Latin American identity when it contrasts the voices of thePeruvian elite and pageant officials against those of indigenous women organizing a protest of the pageant. These contrasts serve toshow how official state-sponsored culture promotes racist, neocolonialist, and sexist ideologies that fail to account for the Peruviannation.


12/26


13/26

An activist speaks abouthow the Miss Universe pageantdemeans all women.

Later, as though the organizer's words scripted the filmmakers' moves, the contestants are interviewed. Their complaints about thepageant's long hours and harsh conditions serve not only to demystify the aura of the beauty queen, but also to establish tentativelines of solidarity between them and the lower class women activists.

The third and most significant aesthetic technique is a shot-reverse shot repeated as a motif throughout the film. A television set

broadcasting images of beauty contestants, advertisements, or news announcers cuts to the image of a woman with indigenousfeatures watching those images. She is in center frame in a medium-close-up that reveals only her body surrounded by blackness.Her face shows little expression. The images of the contestants and the advertisements that follow them display all of capitalist mediaculture's grotesque trappings. The contrast between these images and that of the woman is so extreme that it creates an intensedialectic of social conflict.

Above: (a & b) Exampleof shot-reverse shot. An image from television cuts to an indigenous-featured woman

framed in black watching the television. (c & d) In another example,an image on TV of Michelle Pfeiffer in a soap ad cuts to another woman watching.

The montage of these images offers a powerful critique of western ideals of beauty, of consumer society, and of the ways that theseimages both attract and reject the Peruvian marginalized majority. But Chaskis aesthetic pushes the critique even further byaddinga few key twists to this form of political montage. First, the editing holds on the face of the indigenous-featured woman longer thanone might expect. This slowing down of time coupled with the unclear expression on the womans face and the absence of a contextfor her viewing, produces a profound unease in the viewer. Unlike the images on the television that proceed at a rapid rate for facile
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7b3e2970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436660271970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7b3e2970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436660271970c-pi


14/26

consumption, the image of the woman resists standard viewing techniques.

Remembering that the film's intended audience was a population similar to that of the woman framed in the darkness, we can thennote how this technique is an example of Chaskis aesthetic of knowledge-recognition, or conocer-reconocer. The shots provideviewers with information, raise their consciousness of the contradictions that rule Peruvian society, and then move to a process ofrecognition. Chaski emphasizes repeatedly that one of the group's main goals is to provide images of reality and to offer informationthat challenges official discourse. Consciousness raising, though, is not the end of their project. The key to political filmmaking forChaski is to ask the viewer to see him or herself in relation to the images. They explain their goal this way:

Esto se expresa en la posibilidad de que el espectador reflexione, tome conciencia, asuma un sentido crtico, y que sobretodo lacomprenda, se comprometa con ella y busque actuar en su transformacin (Experiencia de siete aos; 2).

(We hope that the spectator will reflect on reality, become conscious of it, and will assume a critical stance. Above all wehope thespectator will understand reality, will commit to it, and will look to be active in its transformation).

Chaskis emphasis on recognition over identity politics as a source for political engagement and social transformation is in keepingwith a similar critical move made by Garca Canclini, who following the arguments of Paul Ricouer argues that it is better toemphasize a politics ofrecognitionover a politics of identity since recognition permits a dialectic of same and other (Consumers13).

Spectator shot

Above left: Spectator shot fromGregorio when the boys are at the movies. The boys expressions range from delight to bewilderment, but at all times theyare engrossed with what they are watching. Above right: When the viewer sees what the boys are watching, the images

alternate between sex and violence. The first reaction of the viewer is to appreciate how these mass media images demeanthe boys who watch them. Soon, though, the viewer realizes that this audience is also consuming the same images. The

effect is to create both distance between the viewer and the boys and affiliation with them.

One way Chaski provokes the process of recognition is by repeatedly screening images of spectators. In addition to the motif of thewoman watching the pageant in Miss Universe, Gregoriohas a scene where a group of street children watch a Hollywood movie fullof violence and sex, and Juliana has a scene where Juliana watches a telenovela.[27] [open endnotes in new window]These scenesare complemented by various occasions when the audience watches Gregorio or Juliana's gaze as the young protagonists observeadvertisements, shop displays, video games, billboards, magazines, or other forms of media culture. The technique of the spectatorshot allows Chaski to highlight the pervasive existence of mass media culture and the problematic ways the consumption of thisculture influences Peruvian people. When the viewer watches a spectator watching alienating images of mass media, a series ofcritical reflections emerge. First, in an obvious way, the spectator who appears on screen is demeaned and alienated by the medias/he consumes, but the almost immediate connection between the spectator watching the film and the image of the spectator withinthe film does not allow that impression to persist. It is instead followed by recognition. Film viewers translate the experience viewedon screen to their own experience, and they also critically distinguish both the affinities and distance between the on-screen kind ofspectatorship and their own. In this way the audience both identifies with the image of the spectator onscreen and refuses thatidentification. Merging a technique of distanciation with one of recognition, Chaski creates an intricate web of relations to mediaprocesses that does not allow for one-to-one associations or absolute representations of power dynamics. The viewer recognizes thelure of media society with its offer to distract people from practical reality while also being repulsed by it. By showing the viewing ofmedia as a process, one which is alienating but not necessarily devastating, Chaski exemplifies Martn-Barberos description of theconsumption of media as mediation (187).

Towards a social bildungsroman

Added to the aesthetic effects of screening spectators, in their two feature films Chaski framed their child protagonists in four keytypes of shots: gaze shots, walking shots, testimonial close-ups, and contextual sequence shots. Together these shots create asocial bildungsromanthat narrates these childrens identities as caught between the alienating forces of society and an individualdesire to develop a sense of self.[28] Both Gregorio and Julianafocus on the stories of two children who face extraordinary obstaclesto their survival. Living in a hostile world and virtually abandoned by their parents (their fathers are dead and their mothers seemincapable of caring for them), Gregorio and Juliana are forced to take care of themselves. Both of them undergo radicaltransformations as a result.
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392926dc6970b-pi


15/26

Above left: Early images ofGregorio represent his life in the sierra as based on community, family and

an appreciation of nature. His family arrives in Lima and experiences massive culture shock. Above right: A spectator-imageof Gregorio as he stares in a store window. He is in awe of the products on display.

Gregorio must abandon his Andean way of life, including his language and mode of dress, in order to adapt to life in the city. Hisfamily is forced to migrate to the city because they are unable to survive in the Andean village of Recuayhuanca. Prior to Gregoriosdeparture we see him working, enjoying nature, and learning from his grandfather. As he leaves on a truck to join his father in thecity, we see him facing backwards towards the sierra in an obvious sign of loss. Here the bildungsromanis troubled by forcedmigration with Gregorio shown as a passive victim of social forces. Once the family arrives in Lima they encounter the shock of urbanlife and in reaction, Gregorios father, Jacinto, chastises his mother, Juana, for continuing to speak in Quechua.

The economic hardships of the city force Gregorio immediately to seek work as a shoeshine boy, forcing a rapid immersion in urbanlife that requires him to mature practically overnight. In one crucial scene he approaches a group of street performing boys. Whileenjoying the show, he becomes the butt of one of their jokes due to his migrant status and indigenous looks. He immediately leavesin shame, his first moment of urban community shattered by the reinforcement of his outsider status. Meanwhile his fathers health isdeteriorating and he can no longer work, causing the family to be forced to abandon their apartment and participate in the land grabof Villa el Salvador. There they live in a shack made of straw and are forced to endure the sands that the winds blow into their homeand the constant police raids that terrorize the community. Shortly after this, Gregorio's father dies.

Once his mother begins a relationship with another man, Gregorio feels abandoned. The street performer boys who had initiallymocked him soon become his friends, and he spends more and more time with them, returning home later and later with less andless money to offer his mother. Eventually, conflicts with his mother lead him to move in with the boys, who live in an abandoned bus.With the boys, he takes drugs, plays video games, goes to the movies, looks at porn magazines, and steals, but he also has a senseof community that he had not had since arriving in Lima.[29] After a robbery in an amusement park causes the group to scatter, hetakes the stolen money to his mother. When she refuses it, he spends it on himself. Later when he sees the boys again, they beathim up, telling him,

No sirves para esto, qutate (you are no good at this, get away).

At the end of the film, he has returned home, but he will never be the nave boy he was when he came to Lima. The last scenepresents Gregorio describing his experiences in an interview that has been shown in pieces throughout the film. His final words are,A veces tengo ganas (sometimes I wish). Indicating the ways that the film is a narrative of becoming, Gregorio has not onlylearned how to survive in the city, he has learned how to express his desires.

Bedoya compares Gregorio to De SicasSciuscia(Shoeshine, 1946) and Julianato Miracolo a Milano(Miracle in Milan, 1950)suggesting that Gregoriosdocumentary realism gives way in Juliana to a utopian, marvelous ending, but that both films also havemany parallels (278). Juliana lives in greater comfort than Gregorio and is at home in the city, but her abusive stepfather forces her torun away from home. Since her options as a young girl on the street are not appealing, she hopes to join Don Pedros group ofstreetperformers with whom her bother Clavito also lives, but to be accepted she must disguise herself as a boy. The disguising of hergender adds narrative tension that was absent in Gregorio, but this element does not overtake the central theme of the challengesthat poor young children face in Lima. After being admitted to the group, she is shown working hard singing on buses for money andtrying to avoid the regular punishments of Don Pedros Fagen-like personality. Like the gang that Gregorio joins, the solidarity amongthe boys is fragile, devolving into racist slurs against the two afro-Peruvian boys and breaking down into cliques. But, in contrastto Gregorio, rather than bonding over drugs, they bond over music, responding to the harshness of their lives with jam sessionswhere they create music that they will perform later on the buses. Similar to those in Gregorio, documentary-like scenes allow theboys to tell their stories, which often include abusive, alcoholic parents, or the sudden death of a father. In keeping with the lighter

nature of Juliana, they also recount their dreams, a tactic they use when they are depressed, frightened, or sad.
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392926f68970b-pi


16/26


17/26

left: This shot frames Julianas defiant gaze as a source of knowledge and resistance. right: A gaze shot of Juliana lookingin the mirror, taking pleasure in looking at herself.

Taking the stills on the sidebar and below as examples of Chaskis gaze shot, a number of significant features of this aestheticpractice emerge. While many of Gregorios gaze shots early in the film reveal his wonder at the city, a shot from near the end of thefilm shows him looking at a park attraction and taking pleasure in what he sees. Another still showing Juliana is from the first part ofthe film, before she has cut her hair. What is significant about this shot is the way that it captures her looking back returning thegaze defiantly. When we consider that in Peruvian society children like Gregorio or Juliana would have been overlookedor looked at,but never considered to be a source of visual power, such shots produce an extraordinary impact. Add to that the fact that

representations of children like Gregorio or Juliana were either non-existent in v isual media or dominated by stereotyping, and wecan begin to appreciate the significance of these kinds of shots. At a very simple level these shots emphasize the children's identityas sources of the gaze and as individuals who acquire knowledge, form judgments, and feel pleasure. Building on recognition ratherthan difference as a political strategy, these shots demand that the characters be viewed not as incomprehensible others but ratheras social actors who use the power of looking to construct their own views of the world.

Walking shots and testimonial shots

The next two types of shotsthe walking shot and the testimonial shotcomplement the aesthetics of the gaze shot. Like the gazeshot, which at times reinforces identity only through a recognition of the character's marginalization, these shots similarly project adialectic between becoming and alienation. They create identity while also reflecting on the fragile ways in which these identitiessuffer. The walking shot is used to best effect in Gregorio, given the films focus on the effects of migration. Th is shot quite simplyfollows the footsteps of the character, sometimes taking a long view to show the character moving through space, and other timesfocusing solely on the feet. In the early parts of the film, this shot serves to reinforce the idea of Gregorios forced displacement, hismovement in foreign, hostile urban settings. In these shots, Gregorio is carrying his shoeshine box, which practically dwarfs him,coding his walking as not only an encounter with the city but also as a forced movement caus ed by his need to commute to work.Later, though, the shot includes him walking with his friends, where their movement is purposeful and determined. These sceneshave Gregorio walk by choice in the city for the first time. The end of the film returns to the walking shot, but now Gregorio walks

alone in the sandy plains outside of Lima. His movement is not forced as in the opening scenes, nor is it celebratory as in the scenewith his friends. In keeping with his character's development as a social protagonist, Gregorios walk balances between revealing thehostile forces that affect his life and expressing his own personality.

Above left: Everything inLima is new to Gregorio. We see a number of images of him looking in awe or confusion

at the new sites. Above right: Gregorio quickly has to begin work shining shoes. This image of Gregorio working includesonly the customer's lower body. The framing of Gregorios head places the boy in the center of this relation.

In Julianathe walking shot has less weight given the different ways she develops as a character, but it is still used to significanteffect, especially in three key moments. First in the opening of the film, as the camera traces her morning routine, she walks with hermother to the opening gate of their community, then they both part and turn in opposite directions. Julianas steps as she wa lks awayfrom her mother are still purposeful, revealing her jubilant personality, but there is also a clear sense of loss as the 13-year old girlmust walk to her job at a cemetery tending graves. The second key use of the shot shows her approaching Don Pedro's hangoutwhile trying out her identity as a boy for the first time. Her walking combines confidence with fear. Later the walking shot shows herleaving with her partner for a days work singing on buses. In each case, her movement reveals her need to move. Chaskis useof
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392927e6a970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436661567970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392927e6a970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436661567970c-pi


18/26

the walking shot is a subtle technique that reveals a complex aesthetic. It reveals the daily displacements of the mass of poorPeruvians who must travel, often on foot, for hours to arrive at work. This movement, however forced by the urgencies of daily life, isone carried out by the individual's physical will. Moreover, the same movements that comply with the need to work are later balancedwhen the characters use their bodies to walk according to choice.

Walking shot from near the end of Gregorio, showing his increasedconfidence, loss of innocence, and solitude.

Walking shot from early on in Juliana. She walks with confidence to thecemetery where she works.

Juliana walks as a boy for the first time. Her hands by her side and theframing of her legs suggest her nervousness.

Juliana as Julian walks to work with her partners. She moves more
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436662723970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392928b1d970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40153929289c5970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d1ae970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436662723970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392928b1d970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40153929289c5970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d1ae970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436662723970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392928b1d970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40153929289c5970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d1ae970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015436662723970c-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392928b1d970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40153929289c5970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d1ae970d-pi


19/26

fluidly now that she is confident in her new role.

Disguised as Julian, Juliana sings on a bus for money. While the workis hard, the children also actively enjoy

their work. They are shown as neither victims nor heroes, but rather as survivors.

Juliana works tending graves. Her cheerful disposition and singingcontrast with her work conditions.

If the walking shot locates the dialectic between social oppression and resistance in the moving body, the testimonial close-up shotexposes that dialectic through voice and face. Balancing documentary technique with that of feature film, Chaski uses documentaryinterview shots in both films as a way to let the characters address the audience directly. Carpio describes the shot this way:

Este corte da lugar a un tratodirecto con el pblico, y contribuye a desmontar los mecanismos de comunicacin del cine tradicional,que muchas veces impide momentos de reflexin en el pblico (8)

(This shot allows us to directly engage the public, and it contributes to dismantling the traditional modes of communication used infilm that often impede reflection).

The testimonial shots incorporate an interplay of distanciation, where the spectator is distanced from what is seen, and recognition,where the spectator perceives a connection to the image on screen, similar to the of the spectator shot. Distanciation occurs as thetestimonial ruptures the narrative flow. The children can no longer appear as fictional characters but demand recognition as socialactors. Both JulianaandGregorioincorporate scenes that allow the groups of children to tell their stories to an off-screen interviewer.The interviewer's absence from the shot produces the effect of placing the audience in the role of interviewer and confidant, a placeof distance and power v is--vis the speaking subject. That distance breaks down, though, as the children themselves speak withgreater and greater intimacy. Their power of self-expression is the power of testimonial. The previously ignored story of themarginalized lower classes becomes at once representative of larger social trends and also highly personal and specific to theindividual. In a context within which the faces and stories of these children were repressed and ignored not only by the Peruvian eliteand middle classes but also by lower class adults (i.e. their parents), these sequences are a powerful effort to demand that thesechildren be regardedas human beings with rights, needs, and social value.

Above left: Juliana fears
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d981970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d717970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392928c1c970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d981970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d717970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392928c1c970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d981970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7d717970d-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392928c1c970b-pi


20/26

her stepfather as she watches him abuse her mother. The lighting on her eyes stressesthe impact of what she sees on her identity. Above right: Bathed in blue light, Juliana describes her dreams of a magical bus.

Chaskis use of the sequence shot

Sequence shots, or very long takes, play an integral role in Chaskis aesthetic of the persona-personaje. This practice is reinforcedby the use of a sequence shot that shows the protagonist in social context. The contextual sequence shot orplano secuenciaforChaski differs from its use by Sanjins in Ukamau films. For Sanjins, the plano sequenciais a single shot of long duration that in its

attention to the characters interaction with his surroundings is preferable to c lose-ups that alienate and isolate the individual. Thesequence shot would become the trademark aesthetic of Grupo Ukamau since Sanjins argued that the close-up provided anartificial view of the individuala view more intimate than that of everyday human interaction and one which inevitably created anaura around the films protagonist and reinforced Western individualism at the expense of indigenous communal identity. When theclose-up is used, according to Sanjines, it must respect the distance of real, everyday life:

To cut to a detail shot is to brutally impose the point of view of an author who stamps and imposes significations to be accepted(qtd. in Garca Pabn; n.p.).

These aesthetics are most manifest in Ukamaus,The Courage of the People(1971) a film that reenacts the 1967 massacre ofminers in the town of Siglo XX.

Chaskis practice differs from Ukamaus shot selection in films likeThe Courage of the Peoplewhere the close-up indicatedbourgeois alienation and the sequence shot represented the collective identity of the indigenous. Chaski Informaexplains thatLegaspi developed the sequence shot to show the movement of the children in context (7). Because Chaski created their charactersin a political context of social democracy that seeks both a collective and an individual sense of self, their shot selection alternatesbetween showing the films' protagonists as individual agents and as members of a group. For instance, inGregorio, long sequenceshots are used during a scene when Gregorio is ridiculed by the street performance actors for being from the sierra. Here the long

context shot shows the hostile world in which Gregorio lives while the close-ups serve to register Gregorios pain and to reinforce hisneed to assert his own identity in an antagonistic environment. Long sequence shots are used again when Gregorio is accepted bythe group of boys and they collaborate together. Then the testimonial close-ups reflect Gregorios developing sense of self and hispower to narrate his life.

Above (left to right): Longcontext shot of Gregorio watching the street performance. Gregorio is

on the left-hand side of the group, Long shot, part of a long take that shows Gregorio leaving the group after beinghumiliated, Long shot, part of a long take that reveals Gregorios isolation and his loss of innocence.

Chaski employs a flexible use of both the distance between the camera and the subject and also the length of time the camera holdson the subject before cutting to the next shot. Chaski alternates both the timing and the distance to create an effect, occasionallyshooting a long take from a long distance or a long take of a close-up. Unlike the use of theplano secuencia in Ukamau, which was along shot of long duration meant to represent the indigenous community, Chaski occasionally holds on a subject to emphasize acharacter's solitude and loss. In this way, long shots alternate between, on the one hand, recording the ways that the masses of Peruhave been marginalized and, on the other hand, indicating that collective collaboration is essential to democracy. Similarly, close-upsindicate the alienation as well as the coming-into-consciousness of these children. Such a technique reflects the fact that thesechildren have long been completely absent from public consciousness.

Above left: Close up of himshowing his pleasure at being part of the group.

Above right: Close-up registering his anguish when singled out as object of joke.

The use of the close-up in the development of a central character, which completely contrasts to Ukamaus association of the shotwith Western individualism, indicates a significant feature of Chaskis cinematic storytelling. Whereas Ukamau sought to narrate the
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392929163970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392929068970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392929163970b-pihttp://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392929068970b-pi


21/26

story of a community, Chaskis work refuses the binary between the individual and society and rejects the assumption that the socialagent is necessarily a vehicle for Western modes of being. In a visual world saturated by Hollywood images, a close-up of anindigenous child, especially when it is linked to a visual bildungsroman, creates an alternative narrative that holds political potential.

Chaskis aesthetics in these three films highlight the question of how film art can speak to social issues. These films also callattention to relations between the process and product of filmmaking. Have audiences found these films more moving or morepolitically powerful because of the collective, collaborative filmmaking process? As has been the case with testimonial literaryprojects that dream of rescuing the voice of the marginalized from historical oblivion, but often find that those dreams are impossibleto realize, the ideals of collective filmmaking are often grander than the realities. For instance, Chaskis films have had most success

with the urban, indigenous community, but they have tended to alienate the Peruvian middle class, a problem for films that soughtdemocratic transformation rather than armed rebellion. As Pat Aufderheide explains:

Within Peru, the film [Gregorio] has drawn dramatically different reactions among different classes. According to members of GrupoChaski, who often accompany the film, middle class audiences often criticize the film for harping on the ugly and depressing sides ofnational reality. In the slums, audiences often get engrossed in the main character's problems, with heated discussions afterwards ofhow he ought to have solved them (n.p.).

Chaskis focus on child protagonists requires the viewer to see the social crisis of street children in personal, intimate terms thatundermine Peruvian societys historical indifference tosuch children. The group's films ask the audience to remember that socialstruggle depends on possibilities for self-narration. For Chaski, media activism requires images of self-reflection and recognition.Chaskis films ask us to consider how the stories of individuals and their communities are scripted, screened, and remembered.

Not so distant dreams

Chaskis most recent phase of activity has focused on its microcines project and documentarySueos lejanos(Distant Dreams;2006). According to their website:

EL MICROCINE es un espacio de encuentro y participacin donde se exhiben pelculas que fomentan valores, reflexin y sanoentretenimiento. Es gestionado por lderes de la comunidad que son capacitados para desempearse como promotores culturalesque buscan la autogestin y la sostenibilidad (Informacin de Microcines; n.p.)

(THE MICROCINE is a meeting place and a space for community participation where films are shown that promote values,reflection, and healthy entertainment. They are organized by community leaders who are trained as cultural promoters. The goal is toempower them to be able to sustain the projects on their own).

The microcinesproject expands on their earlier work with alternative forms of distribution and exhibition while also taking advantageof advances in digital technology. As Paola Reategui explains in a 2007 document describing the early years ofthe microcinesproject, the viewing practices and possibilities of the Peruvian public have radically changed the screeningopportunities for Latin American cinema. Neoliberal economic policy has resulted in a national film industry controlled by anincreasingly smaller number of transnational corporations. The biggest change, one that Garca Canclini notes in relation to Mexicoas well, regards the reduction in movie houses and shift in their location (Consumers; 99). Reategui notes that from 1990 to 2007Peru went from 240 movie theaters spread out across the country to 35 multiplexes (with 150 screens), of which 30 are in Lima withonly 5 movie theaters in the rest of the country. The location of these theaters is typically close to supermarkets and malls and 95%of tickets are sold to U.S. films. Ticket prices have risen, putting them out of reach for the majority of the population. Instead, many

lower class communities have completely abandoned the custom of attending public film screenings, favoring instead homescreenings of television or video. Film v iewing has been reduced through centralismo, exclusin, discriminacin, consumo pasivo,dominacin econmica y cultural (Reategui; 6) (centralism, exclusion, discrimination, passive consumption, economic and cul turaldomination).

Alongside these increasingly dire prospects for Peruvian filmmaking and socially committed media, though, the rise in digitaltechnology and decreased costs of projection equipment has opened a space for intervention. Seizing this opportunity and building
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40153929293cf970b-pi


22/26

on their years of experience with distribution and exhibition, Chaski has conceived of an innovative way to reconnect progressivefilms with marginalized communities via microcines. In a transition from Chaskis earlier work with exhibition and distribution,themicrocinesproject envisions far greater collaboration with communities and far greater local initiative. Their goal is to establishthroughout Peru, and eventually throughout Latin America, small, local screening sites where it is possible to see films by and aboutLatin Americans at reasonable prices. These screening sites are to be in already-existing community spaces easily converted intotheaters. Tickets cost about two soles or less than one U.S. dollar, and audiences typically range from 50 to 200. Proceeds go to thelocal microcineorganizers, to pay local taxes, to pay modest exhibition rights for the films screened, and to support Chaski (Reategui;16).

Key to the microcines' success is the development of local organizers. While Chaski is pleased to organize local screenings,the microcineproject seeks a more integral notion of film and communityone that depends on the microcineas a locally drivencultural space. Chaski's goal is not only to reacquaint Peruvians with Latin American cinema and attending pubic screenings, but alsoto promote the film experience as a moment of reflection, debate, and critical exchange. To this end, they organize workshops totrain community organizers. These workshops cover a range of issues including how to promote screenings, how to use screeningsas a means to discuss and debate topics of importance to the community, how to develop critical media literacy skills, and more. Theoutside funding Chaski has received has helped cover the costs of buying projection equipment, organizing initial screenings, andrunning workshops.

Another major component of the project relates to expanding their catalogue of films for distribution and working to develop kits thatpackage groups of films together. Each kit includes one short, one feature, one documentary and one film for children. It isaccompanied by a copy of Chaski's magazine Nuestro Cine (Our Cinema) with information about the films, a guide to promotingthe screenings, and a screening license. By 2007 they had developed seven kits and had over 60 films for digital distribution. Thearray of films available varies from gritty documentaries to more mainstream-styled features like those of Lombardi, but the commonthread that links all of these films together is that they each exemplify the goal of cine latino para gente latina (LatinAmerican filmfor the Latin American people).

El Grupo Chaski defiende desde sus inicios, una actitud y una metodologa ante un cine responsable, inmerso en lo cotidiano,conpersonajes autnticos y con la experiencia social compartida de todos los das. Es all donde se encuentra las bases de susconceptos, fundados en la expresin de lo real, lo autntico, lo social (Reategui; 10)

(Since its founding Grupo Chaski has maintained an attitude and a methodology of responsible cinema, one that is immersed intheeveryday, that has authentic characters and that reflects the shared social experience of daily life. Our work is based on anexpression of the real, the authentic, and the social).

In some ways globalization has had an ironic effect on Chaski's success. After they'd worked for over twenty years to reach aPeruvian audience, by the turn of the twenty-first century the possibilities for alternative filmmaking seemed grimmer than ever. WhenChaski began the microcinesproject there were only 35 movie theaters in the country and the experience of watching films on the bigscreen was reserved for a small minority of the population. But just as globalization has meant the homogenizing of media culture, ithas also brought technological innovation that has opened a space for alternative media access. Digital technologies and flexibledistribution rights have allowed Chaski to match in numbers the exhibition venues (but not yet the screens) of commercial theaters.Chaski currently supports 35microcinesthroughout Peru and six more elsewhere in Latin America. The microcinesproject hasproven that it is possible to circumvent the centralization of media access, creating a true alternative to the neoliberal model.

The microcinesproject has also considerably expanded the local participation of communities, who now take an active role in theirfilm experience from the moment of promotion on. Moreover, the considerable exposure that Chaski has on the Internet via their ownwebsite, on video sites like YouTube and Daily Motion, and through bloggers and Peruvian film sites further indicates the ways thattheir project has benefited from the development of Internet technologies unavailable to them in the 1980s.[32][open notes in newwindow]

In the context of this resurgence, Legaspi, who was teaching a course on documentary at the Pontificia Catlica Universidad dePer, asked all of his students to bring in a documentary to analyze. One student brought in an early Chaski documentary short thatLegaspi had directed, entitled Encuentro de hombrecitos (Encounter with Little Men, 1988). What struck Legaspi during the post-screening conversation was the fact that rather than discuss the techniques used in making the documentary, the class focused onwhat had become of the little boys. Proving to a certain extent the success of Chaskis aesthetic commitment to using film as amedium through which Peruvians could connect with Peruvians, the students were immediately engaged with the people on thescreen rather than mesmerized by the filmmaking apparatus.

Flyer announcing a screening of Sueos lejanos in Lima to be followed by discussion.

After class Legaspi began talking about trying to find the boys, who would be in their 30s, and shooting a documentary about howtheir lives had changed. Once they had found the boys, Legaspi was intrigued by the fact that one of themEl Gringohad
http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a4015392929549970b-pi


23/26

remained in El Agustino Lima district all his life, while the other El Negrohad traveled extensively both outside of and within Peru.Contrasting how the boys lived over the past twenty years with the dreams they had had as young boys, Legaspi imagined SueosLejanosas a documentary that would trace the changes in their personal lives and in Peruvian society. Mixing footage from theoriginal documentary, especially the scene where each boy describes his dreams for the future, with archival footage of historicalevents during those years, Legaspis goal was to create ventanas a la memoria (Legaspi Proyecto; 4) (windows onto memory).

And, in keeping with Chaskis aesthetics, these memories both reinforce the sense that the boys are representative of a larger socialgroup at the same time that the memories expose their individual identities and the different paths their lives have taken. Many of the

shots are taken from moving buses or taxis that are meant to capture the protagonists point of view as they are looking out at thePeruvian landscape, indicating, like the walking shots of Gregorioand Juliana, the ways that the majority of Peruvians engage indaily displacements that are both forced and willed.

Alejandro Legaspi minutes before the IDFA presentation ofSueos lejanos in Amsterdam.

The project received funding through an award by CONACINE, the Peruvian national film board, in 2006 and was released in the fallof 2007. Shortly after its first screenings in Peru, it was screened at the International Documentary Film Festival in Amsterdam(IDFA), one of the biggest and most important documentary festivals worldwide. The IDFA screening will likely mean that thedocumentary will receive European distribution on television and possibly in theaters. Most importantly, the film will travel the circuitsof Chaskis distribution, hopefully screening on Peruvian television. While the commercial venues will be a struggle, one site ofexhibition is guaranteed: the microcines. As a fi lm that promotes reflection on the process of making documentaries about Perusmarginalized class and that reflects on Chaski's film project, the ultimate triumph of Sueos lejanoswill be the way it offers localPeruvian audiences yet another opportunity to use the film experience as a means to engage in recognition, reflection, and critique.Perhaps Chaskis dreams are not so distant now.

Notes:

1. Sources in English include a brief mention in John Kings Magical Reels, a section of Chuck Kleinhans and Julia Lesagesreport from the Havana Film Festival in 1986 and a film guide by Pat Aufderheide. Sources in Spanish are article-lengthpieces by Ricardo Bedoya and Jos Luis Ramos Salinas. These scholarly sources are complemented by numerousinterviews, reviews, and articles in periodicals.

2. As is common with research on film groups of this nature, my research has included screenings of Chaskis films andreadings of published work on them, but it has also been shaped by contact with members of the group itself. While on aFulbright to Lima, Peru, in 2003, I had the opportunity to interview three of the founding members of Chaski (Stefan Kaspar,

Alejandro Legaspi, and Mara Barea), one of the early additional members of the group (Susana Pastor), and the two leadingactors of their feature films (Marino Leon and Rosa Isabel Morfino). I was also given access to their archives and internaldocuments, most of which had never circulated publicly. Stefan Kaspar was extremely generous with his time and withoffering news clippings and other documents that helped me to trace the history of Chaski. After I returned to the U.S., Imaintained email contact with Kaspar, Legaspi, and Pastor, who continued to share important information and documents

with me.

3. When I was in Lima in 2003, all former members of Chaski whom I interviewed considered the group to no longer exist. Incontrast, their website states that they have worked continuously since 1982.

(http://www.grupochaski.org/index.php?id=576,0,0,1,0,0)In a sense both versions are true, since no film projects carriedthe groups name from 1991-2003, but Kaspars work regarding distribution and production continued tirelessly. In 1992 afterthe waning of Chaski, he founded Casablanca Latin Films, a project that focused on distributing Latin American (largelyPeruvian) features and documentaries. He also worked as a producer during this period, most notably associate producingthe award-winning documentary Choropampain 2001 that traces the devastation wrought by a mercury spill on a small ruraltown in Peru. In 2003 he started the Fundacin Cine Latino, which later led to the resurgence of Chaski and the microcinesproject. Legaspi had also continued to work in documentary films during this period. His reconnection with Kaspar for thedocumentarySueos Lejanos(Distant Dreams) indicates Chaskis return to the full range of its former activities.
http://www.grupochaski.org/tchaski/http://www.grupochaski.org/tchaski/http://www.grupochaski.org/tchaski/http://www.grupochaski.org/tchaski/http://www.grupochaski.org/tchaski/http://truthseekers.cultureunplugged.com/.a/6a011279022a6e28a40162fbe7e191970d-pihttp://www.gr

Documents

Theory and Practice of the Peruvian Grupo Chaski