Like Water for Chocolate was shown on theaters in the year of 1992; its screening location was Mexico, origin country of its director. The Mexican Alfonso “Arau has had a long and fruitful career both in front and behind the camera and is one of the most prominent filmmakers of the Latino community in Hollywood. Arau was a drama disciple of Seki Sano - a Japanese teacher, classmate of Lee Strassberg with Stanislavski in Russia - and traveled the world from 1964 to 1968 with his one-man show of Pantomime Happy Madness after studying with Etienne Dacroux and Jacques Lecoq in Paris.” (www.imdb.com, 2006). The film’s adaptation and screenplay is the work of “Laura Esquivel a Mexican author. Her novels include Like Water for Chocolate and Swift as Desire. Especially in Like Water for Chocolate (published in 1989), she uses magical realism to combine the ordinary and the supernatural. For the publication of her book Laura Esquivel won international acclaim. The movie, which was based on the book, awarded her with the Mexican Academy of Motion Pictures award; she received eleven in all, from Ariel awards. The novel shows the importance of the kitchen in Laura's life, which was introduced to her from her grandmother. In fact, Laura feels that the kitchen is the most important part of the house as it is a source of knowledge and understanding that generates like and pleasure. (www.wikipedia.com, 2006).
The title serves as a metaphor that refers to the magical culinary arts and the idea of a man and a woman that are meant for each other. The film makes its case through emotional appeal, since it “relies on romantic ideals and conservative values for its success.” (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 36).
The main development of the film takes place during the Mexican revolution (1910-1917).The social and political climate were really tough; nevertheless, “the historical setting of the film could have provided a radical backdrop to the story. However, the political and social causes and effects of the conflict are ignored. The revolutionaries themselves are reduced to folkloric caricatures and are seeing drinking, dancing, and singing, rarely fighting. In addition, only one side is ever seen, that of the Villistas, so it is not clear whom they are fighting. There is one violent attack in the film, resulting in the rape of family’s servant Chencha and the murder of Mamá Elena. However, the audience is not told who is responsible for this, as the ranch hand asks the attackers in English, “What do you want?” While audiences might assume they are revolutionaries, the ranch hand would not speak to them in English if this were the case. The novel clears up the confusion, referring to the attackers as bandits, which contributes to the soft representation of the revolutionaries. Nuala Finnegan has argued that the film follows the Hollywood tradition of representing the Mexican Revolution, particularly in the emphasis of Pancho Villa as the principal revolutionary and in the invasion of political and social issues. (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 41). In other words, the political climate of that time is really overseen in order to make emphasis on the social issue of women’s place in society; but, despite this, other social aspects of the time are overseen too.The main idea of this film is to provide “an image of a country that fit the notion of the ideal tourist location for the Western filmgoer. Mexico is represented as a country unlike the metropolises in which the film was not successful. It is represented as a rural land, which has maintained its culinary and social traditions. By naturalizing and idealizing the ideology of femininity through Tita and by demonizing the masculine Mamá Elena, Like Water for Chocolate suggests that women can reach fulfillment only within patriarchal codes. This seemingly harmless romance thus conceals and antifeminist subtext. Not only does Tita seduce Pedro through her cooking, beauty, and submissiveness, as well as her brand of magical femininity, she is also used to seduce the public. She is constructed to act as a role model for implied female audiences and an ideal fantasy wife/mother for implied male audiences. (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 51). The latter brings us to the purpose of the film, “Esquivel has argued that women’s natural place is in the home, and suggests that it is time for them to return to that rightful place. She claimed in one interview that women trough their entry into workplace have abandoned the home, a “marvelous and sacred centre”.” (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 44). That is, that woman in an attempt to be equal to man, have led to a side their femininity, so they should come back to the place were they belong, the housework. I personally disagree with this point of view, I consider that is not that they leave the workplace, but that they keep their women essence, their womanly tasks, values and attitudes.
The title serves as a metaphor that refers to the magical culinary arts and the idea of a man and a woman that are meant for each other. The film makes its case through emotional appeal, since it “relies on romantic ideals and conservative values for its success.” (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 36).
The main development of the film takes place during the Mexican revolution (1910-1917).The social and political climate were really tough; nevertheless, “the historical setting of the film could have provided a radical backdrop to the story. However, the political and social causes and effects of the conflict are ignored. The revolutionaries themselves are reduced to folkloric caricatures and are seeing drinking, dancing, and singing, rarely fighting. In addition, only one side is ever seen, that of the Villistas, so it is not clear whom they are fighting. There is one violent attack in the film, resulting in the rape of family’s servant Chencha and the murder of Mamá Elena. However, the audience is not told who is responsible for this, as the ranch hand asks the attackers in English, “What do you want?” While audiences might assume they are revolutionaries, the ranch hand would not speak to them in English if this were the case. The novel clears up the confusion, referring to the attackers as bandits, which contributes to the soft representation of the revolutionaries. Nuala Finnegan has argued that the film follows the Hollywood tradition of representing the Mexican Revolution, particularly in the emphasis of Pancho Villa as the principal revolutionary and in the invasion of political and social issues. (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 41). In other words, the political climate of that time is really overseen in order to make emphasis on the social issue of women’s place in society; but, despite this, other social aspects of the time are overseen too.The main idea of this film is to provide “an image of a country that fit the notion of the ideal tourist location for the Western filmgoer. Mexico is represented as a country unlike the metropolises in which the film was not successful. It is represented as a rural land, which has maintained its culinary and social traditions. By naturalizing and idealizing the ideology of femininity through Tita and by demonizing the masculine Mamá Elena, Like Water for Chocolate suggests that women can reach fulfillment only within patriarchal codes. This seemingly harmless romance thus conceals and antifeminist subtext. Not only does Tita seduce Pedro through her cooking, beauty, and submissiveness, as well as her brand of magical femininity, she is also used to seduce the public. She is constructed to act as a role model for implied female audiences and an ideal fantasy wife/mother for implied male audiences. (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 51). The latter brings us to the purpose of the film, “Esquivel has argued that women’s natural place is in the home, and suggests that it is time for them to return to that rightful place. She claimed in one interview that women trough their entry into workplace have abandoned the home, a “marvelous and sacred centre”.” (Contemporary Cinema of Latin America, 2003, 44). That is, that woman in an attempt to be equal to man, have led to a side their femininity, so they should come back to the place were they belong, the housework. I personally disagree with this point of view, I consider that is not that they leave the workplace, but that they keep their women essence, their womanly tasks, values and attitudes.
No comments:
Post a Comment