Introduction
Colonization’s effects have a strong and prolonged impact on countries, and Argentina is one of the countries that cannot forget colonial history for a long time. Argentina’s history proves that the colonial regime was permanently entrenched in the country, and its echoes can still be found today.
After the War of Independence, the formation of civil parties and the formation of elites was also not a completely stable process. In Camila, one can see how difficult the first years after independence were. Juan Manuel de Rosas practiced state terrorism and disrupted the culture and society in Argentina, and Camila fell under the machinery of this dictatorship.
Elements of Colonialism
Postcolonial Argentina gained independence but was never completely rid of its colonial past. Elements of colonialism continued to exist in postcolonial Argentina after independence. For example, many settlers developed multiculturalism because Indians and their descendants were not numerous, and marriages were formed between people (Bushnell & Macaulay, 1994). In the film, Camila is wanted in marriage for an arrangement rather than her genuine desire, a form of colonial society (Camila, 1984).
In addition, postcolonial countries had pronounced signs of Catholicism, as Spain’s influence forced the practice of only that religion. In the film, Father Ladislao Gutierrez represents Spiritualism, as the whole of Argentina under Rosas’s dictatorship had no other choice (Camila, 1984). The colonial past is not entirely gone, and the new social reality that has replaced it has not been much better.
The Dictatorship of Rosas
The figure of Juan Manuel de Rosas is shown as a dictator who did not tolerate the opinions of people who differed from his party’s beliefs. He had a significant influence on shaping Argentina’s foreign and domestic policies. His rise to power was associated with intrigues, irregularities, and bribes that did not fit with democracy and the liberal position. Camila indirectly illustrates his figure through actions and deeds, but never shows the actor (Camila, 1984). It is done to show how widespread his influence is in society.
The film shows that the dictatorship did not lead to wealth or prosperity: one sees many homeless poor people in the streets (Camila, 1984). In addition, the power of the elites and those close to Rosas is strongly expressed. For example, Camila’s father puts his service above his daughter’s life (Bushnell & Macaulay, 1994). We should also note the cruelty of citizens for violating state prohibitions and the necessity of faith, because otherwise, they will not be socially successful.
The Role of Religion
Rosas persecutes people for disobedience and expresses an extreme right-wing position. His interests are not aligned with national interests because he suppresses civil wars. The punishment for disobedience is particularly evident in the film when Camila’s father directly asks Rosas for the death penalty despite her pregnancy (Camila, 1984).
Despite prohibiting execution for pregnant women, this did not save Camila. Rosas’s cruelty directly results from his inability to accept the new postcolonial reality in which people must be free, just as they must be free to marry (Bushnell & Macaulay, 1994). His radical sentiments were based on the conviction that disobedience could lead to a new Civil War.
The dominance of military and church principles allowed Rosas to gain support, break the law, and harm even his elites because he could not allow those with connections in society to go against him (Bushnell & Macaulay, 1994). Camila did not receive a pardon because Rosas feared that her father would choose family over loyalty to the state and could not allow it.
Catholicism had taken over Argentina since the mid-18th century when Spanish settlers chose religious pressure to govern the people. Rosas continued this colonial tradition and coerced the population into religious practices, otherwise punishing them. The example of Father Ladislao shows how intimidated he was by the influence of the state. However, he obeyed the church hierarchy until Camila showed him a different reality (Camila, 1984).
Rosas fervently defended Catholic principles because it was how people were governed, and women were at the bottom of the church hierarchy (Bushnell & Macaulay, 1994). This also influenced the outcome of Camila’s fate, who went against the state and the church, making her an enemy in the eyes of even the common people.
Rosas used mercenary assassinations and terrorism and opposed the Federalists, wanting to keep the power of the elites in the center, from where he could rule personally. Religion became another instrument of dictatorship in his hands, successfully entrenched and influencing societal relations.
Transition to a National Society
The society shown in Camila does seem new at first glance, but it still carries elements of the colonial past. In the filmmakers’ vision, society remains subject to the problem of the power of the elites who determine the country’s future and govern its statehood. In the film, Camila belongs to the elites, and her father’s influence is enormous, allowing her to amass wealth and have connections to the top (Camila, 1984). This demonstrates a strong social hierarchy in which the elite have access to the best and are obliged to follow the conditions created by the relationships in society.
Camila’s father’s pact with the man in love with her is an example of how status leads to marriage and is often part of a trading relationship (Camila, 1984). The differences between the society in the film and colonial society are not noticeable because they are almost nonexistent. The departure from the colonial regime and the transition to the national regime did not ensure the achievement of national protection.
Patriarchy and social hierarchy are inextricably linked in the film because Camila has no opinion compared to other men. One could say that she does, and her figure is shown as a profeminist, but she is too subject to the patriarchal view of the world. She has typically sung feminine traits: beauty, passion for love affairs, and tragedy in love, which set her apart as a nineteenth-century woman.
Nevertheless, Camila demonstrates resistance by reading oppositional novels and letters from her grandmother that taught her to fight for her dreams and expectations (Camila, 1984). However, she is still an individual that society does not recognize, and her death becomes the culmination of a failed struggle against patriarchy, elites, and the church.
Conclusion
Juan Manuel de Rosas in Camila reflects how society had to cope with dictatorship in postcolonial Argentina and how complicated the process was. As the film’s protagonist, Camila experiences all the echoes of the colonial past: patriarchy, social hierarchy, and a pronounced ecclesiastical influence. She falls under the oppression of the dictatorship because she disagrees with Rosas’s position. Colonialism continued in Argentina in the nineteenth century because dictators used the power of elites and the church to achieve high status.
References
Bushnell, David, and Neill Macaulay. 1994. “Road to Dictatorship in the Platine Area”. In The Emergence of Latin America in the Nineteenth Century, 117-135. New York: Oxford University Press.
Camila. Directed by Maria Luisa Bemberg. Buenos Aires, Argentina: Gea Cinematrográfica, 1984.