Rethinking 'Democratic' Cinema: Film Legislation in SpainJara Fernndez-MenesesUniversity of KentJune 2014IntroductionThispaperexaminestherolethatlmlegislationhadintheprocessthroughwhich Spanishcinemaacquiredits identityasademocraticcinema.IwilltaketheRealDecreto 3304/1983de28dediciembre,sobreproteccindelacinematografa(theMirLaw henceforth) as a case study in order to analysewhattype of lms were regardedsuitableto receive state funding and therefore to depict the values of the new democratic Spain. The law wasnamedafterPilarMir,anauteuristlmmakerherselfinchargeofthelmpolicies between 1982 and 1985, and it was enacted at a crucial moment of Spanish history: the end ofthe Transitionperiod(1975-1982)andthebirthofthenewdemocraticSpainwhenthe SocialistPartywon the generalelections in 1982.Given thelack ofprivateinvestment,the funding policies instituted by the Mir Law werethe major means through which lms were produced in the 1980s. Therefore, as it has been widely studied by several scholars, this law enabledthecreationandlegitimationofademocraticcinemaaftertheendofthe dictatorship1.DrawingonBourdieustheoryofeld,thispaperarguesthatthefunding policiesinstituted by theMirLawwerethe resultthe success ofa particulargeneration of lmmakers, producers and lm critics to imposetheir ideas aboutthe rolethatlms had to full in order to become a truly democratic cinema. Hence, I will rst clarify how Bourdieu's theory of eld can be used to address the study of lm legislation. The eld of Spanish cinema in the 1980sThe contextin which lmlegislation is enacted willbe considered asaeld.In The RulesofArt,Bourdieudeneseldasanetworkofobjectiverelations(ofdominationor subordination,ofcomplementarity or antagonism,etc.) in which the agents are struggling to reach thepositionsthatwouldallowthemtoobtain thepowerthatis atstakein theeld ([1996] 2012:231).Applied to the Spanish case, the different funding policies established by thedifferentpiecesoflegislationovertheyearsaretheresultofthestrugglethatspecic 11 The Mir Law has been one of the most discussed pieces of legislation by scholars in the eld.Therefore, this paper is profoundly in debt with the works of Hopewell (1986 and 1991), Besas (1985 and 1995), Zunzunegui (1988), Gmez B. de Castro (1989), Losilla (1989), Heredero (1991 and 1998), Valls (1992), Monterde (1993 and [1995] 2010), Riambau ([1995] 2010), Torreiro ([1995] 2010), Trenzado Romero (1997), Fernndez Blanco (1998), Triana-Toribio (2003) and Ansola (2004).These studies are the grounds upon which I have built my own reading of the law. agents carry out to impose whattype of lms are considered to be worthy enough to receive statefunding. This struggle can onlybecarried outbywhatBourdieu calls 'theprofessional symbolic producers'(1977:115),thatis,thoseagentswhooccupythepositions intheeld whichallowthemtoaccesstothe'theofcial,orthodoxandlegitimate speech' (1991:109-113)through which the symbolic valueoflms is created.In the case of the eld ofSpanish cinema, these agents are the civil servants in charge of the lm policies, the key lm critics and the lm professionals.In the eld of Spanish cinema of the early 1980s, as it has been pointed out by several studies,the struggle was between the so-called cine de calidad(quality cinema) and the so-calledcinedeconsumo(commercialcinema),whichwerethoselow-budgetgenrelms, mainlysoftpornography,sexcomediesandhorrorlmsmadebylmmakerssuchas MarianoOzoresandproducerssuchasJosFrade.Qualitycinemawasprivilegedover commercial cinema by limiting the number of lms that were entitled to receive state funding andbydirectingstatefundingtowardstheproductionofqualitylmsthroughtwomain mechanisms.First,throughanewadvancesubsidywhichhadneverbeenconsideredin previous Spanish lmlegislation and which was inspired bythe French avances sur recettes system introduced by Andr Malraux in 1959. The advance subsidy, to be paid in advance to producers and directors by resorting to theFilmProtectionFund andonly to berefunded if thesubsequentboxofcereturnsallowedit,wasparticularlydesignedtoencouragethe production of pelculas decalidad (quality lms) and itcould cover up to 50% ofthelm's budget.Second,thelawalsogranted25%moreoftheboxofcereturnsforthoselms considered to be de especial calidad (ofspecialquality) which was paid to the directors and producers a posteriori. Theemphasis thelawplaced onthe promotion ofqualitylmsreveals thatthenew notion ofdemocratic cinemawas directlylinked with the ideaofqualitycinema, and thus, opposedto commercialcinema. Thisdichotomy,however, has tobeframed within a wider politicalcontextthatgoesbeyondthedebateabouthighbrow(quality)andlowbrow (commercial,mass)cultureandwhichis directlyrelatedwithsymbolicvaluethatcinema acquired during theFrancoistdictatorship(1939-1975)forthegenerationthatmanagedto impose over the eld their idea ofhow democratic cinema should be. It is to this dichotomy that I now turn to in the following section of my paper.2Commercial cinema versus quality cinema. The Spanish context As professor Manuel Palacio afrms, since the mid-1950s, and particularly throughout the 1960s,cinema becameone ofthe major cultural spaces of resistance to the dictatorship ofGeneralFranciscoFranco.Belonging tocertainspecialisedlmmagazinessuchasthe cinephileNuestroCine(1961-1971)andtakingpartincine-clubsthatscreenedand reviewed those lms prohibited bythe Spanish censorship became oneofthe major means through which a generation of lm critics, directors and producers exercised its opposition to the Francoist regime and its cultural practices (2011:23). This generation has been labelled as la disidenciacinematogrca-the dissidentgroupoflmmakers,producers and lm critics- bythelmhistorianJosEnriqueMonterde([1995]2010:278-293).Iwillrefertothis generationasthedissidentagentshenceforth.Forthedissidentagents,asthelmcritic DiegoGalnarguedin1975,sincetheFrancoistlmindustryhadfailedinproducinga systematiccorpusofexplicitlyideologicallms,inotherwords,somesortofFrancoist cinema,thepopulargenresproducedbytheFrancoistlmindustry,suchasthefolkloric musical or the child-star lms,had embodied and portrayed the Francoist ideology and thus served as a major means of ideological control and state propaganda. Moreover, the dissident agentsconsidered thatsincethesepopulargenreshad notbeen perceived among Spanish audiencesas an ideologicalcinemabutjustasa mereescapistentertainmentinstead,they hadaccomplishedtheirpropagandisticfunctioninadisguisedandmoreeffectiveway. Particularly, they believe that the popular genres had succeeded in creating a cultural context thathadimpededSpanishaudiencesfromdevelopingacriticalconsciousness(Galn 1975:87-108)2.Therefore,asGalnasserted lateron,ghting againsttheFrancoistpopular genres was like ghting against the dictatorship itself (Galn 2006:61). During the Transition period,key dissidentagents reached importantpositions within the eld that allowed themto express their ideas about howtheexpected cinema produced underdemocracyshouldbe.Particularly,theydidsothroughlmandculturalmagazines suchas Triunfo(1964-1982),RevistaResea(1964-2004),NuevoFotogramas (1964-1980), Dirigido por(founded in 1972), Contracampo (1979-1987) and inuentialdaily newspapers suchasElPas(foundedin1976).Moreover,theboostintheproductionofthe 32 This was a widely shared opinion among the dissident agents, particularly exposed during the 1970s in studies such as Cine espaol: algunos materiales por derribo (Prez Merinero 1973), Cine espaol, cine de subgneros (Equipo Cartelera Turia 1974), Siete trabajos de base sobre el cine espaol (Lara (ed.) 1975), Cine y control (Prez Merinero 1975), Un cine para el cadalso. 40 aos de censura cinematogrca en Espaa (Gubern and Font 1975), Cine espaol: una reinterpretacin (Prez Merinero 1976) or El aparato cinematogrco espaol (Marta Hernndez 1976), among others. aforementioned low-budgetgenre lms during the Transition years, lms that constituted the 40percentoftheSpanishproductionoutputin1982(Heredero1998:43) andwhich,as Triana-Toribio has pointed out, were seen as the remnants of the Francoist popular genres by the dissident agents, triggered a shared claim among them for the need to promotea quality cinemainordertoendwiththoselow-budgetgenrelmsthatcametobelabelledas subproductos (sub-products).Thesedemandswereendorsedbythe SocialistPartys lmpoliciesin 1982because PilarMir wasadissidentagentherself. Thedissidentagents understoodcinema notas an entertainment industry but as a cultural good. Namely, as a vehicle for culture which had to serve to thedevelopmentofacriticalconsciousnessamong Spanishaudiencesinorderto free them from any ideological control or state propaganda3. Thus, it had to be a cinema that addressed themes in a committed way far removed from the evasive manners ofthe popular genres.Hence,whentheSocialistPartycameintopowerin1982,thedissidentagents acquiredthepositionsofpowerwithintheeldthatallowedthemtoimposethefunding policiestheywanted.Thisistosay,thepromotionoftheso-calledqualitycinema.This concept of quality cinema, as proposed by the Mir Law,and the lms thatcame to embody it,hasbeencontroversialamongmanySpanishculturalcommentatorsandlmscholars. Thus,I willnowbriey examinesuch controversy in order to propose a differentreading of what I believe was the truly aim of the lms that embodied the concept of quality cinema.The controversy of the quality cinemaThepromotionofthequalitycinemayieldedbytheMirLawhasbeenseenasa failure by most lm scholars in the eld for two main reasons. First, because the lms funded throughtheadvancesubsidyprovedtobeunsuccessfulamongthenationalaudiences: statistics conrm this criticism since the market share for Spanish lms went down during the MirLaw'syears(1984-1989)from21%in1984to7.5%in1989(Ansola2004:120). Second,sincetheadvancesubsidywasawardedbyaSub-committeeforTechnical Valorisation which evaluated the projects and allocated the money on the basis of the quality oftheapplications,thelmmakersconceivedtheirprojectspurelytosatisfythesub-committee'stastesratherthantosatisfythetastesofmainstreamaudiences.Therefore,a standardised production based on the quality criteria emerged.This standardised production, asithasbeenwidelystudied,tooktheformofhigh-budgetliteraryadaptationsthat 43 This idea of cinema as a cultural good was exposed in the Primer Congreso Democrtico del Cine Espaol (First Democratic Conference on Spanish Cinema), summoned by the Socialist Party in 1978. See Llins 1987. combinedhistoricalSpanishthemes,likethepost-CivilWarperiod,withAmericanhigh-standardproductionvalues,madebyrecognisedauteursandstarredbyfamousSpanish actors(Riambau[1995]2010:424-425).Theepitomeoftheselms,accordingtothe aforementioned scholars,is Mario Camus'Los santos inocentes (The Holy Innocents, 1984). ForlmhistorianandcriticRiambau,wholabelledthisstandardisedproductionascine polivalente(multipurposecinema),thebestexampleisElreypasmado(The Dumbfounded King,ImanolUribe,1991),because ofthe following reasons:itis aliteraryadaptation ofa novelbyGonzaloTorrenteBallester,ahighlyregardedandliberalSpanishwriter;itisa historicallmwhich portraysthedarkand inquisitorialambientoftheeighteen centuryin Spain(whichcanbeseenasametaphoroftheFranco'sdictatorship);thedirectorhada consolidated careeras an auteur,and thelmfeatured well-known actors fromtheSpanish star system ([1995] 2010:424).However,in order toreach abetterunderstanding ofwhatqualitycinema meantfor PilarMirandwhythefundingpoliciestheMirLawestablishedledtotheseliterary adaptations,her promotion of the quality cinema has to be considered in relation to a wider context. First, as it has been amply pointed out, the imminent entry of Spain in the European EconomicCommunity (EEC),which took place on the rstofJanuaryof1986,was going to make Spanish lms to have to compete in a free European market. Therefore,Pilar Mir had tosettheconditionswhichwouldallowSpanishcinematofacecompetitionfromother European lm industries. She believed that with higher budgets Spanish lms would be more competitiveandarguablythisisoneofthereasonswhyqualitywaslinked withthelms costs:besidestheaforementionedsubsidies,thelawalso grantedanother25% ofthebox ofcetakingsforthoselmsbudgetedatmorethan55millionpesetas(around300.000 pounds).Besides,asTriana-Toribiohasargued,theentranceintheEECwastheperfect scenariowhereSpanishcinemacouldlegitimateandpresenttotheworldthenew democraticSpainthroughtheparticipationofSpanishlmsininternationallmfestivals (2003:113). Hence,Iwantto arguethatPilar Mir aimed to position Spanish cinema within awiderEuropeanstrategythatwastrying tocounteractthecompetitionofwhatBalio has named theHollywood 'ultra-high budgetlm'of the 1980s (1996:24-25). This strategy, as it can be seen in the British and French production of the1980s and 1990s,took the formof theso-called heritagelm,described byHigsonaslms that'operateprimarily asmiddle-classqualityproducts,somewherebetweenthearthouseandthemainstream[]These lmstendtobevaluedfortheirculturalsignicanceratherthantheirbox-ofce takings'(1996:233).Theheritagelmhashistoricalorliteraryinspiration,tendstobe 5classicalinformandplacestheemphasisonhighproductionvalues.Hence,theliterary adaptationspromotedbytheMirLawinthe1980sshouldbeconsideredastheSpanish version of the European heritage lm. As Wood remarks in her book Contemporary European Cinema, from the 1980s onwards, the notion of quality cinema shifted from the auteurist art-cinematraditionofthe1960stothedevelopmentofhigh-budgetlmsdirectedbywell-known auteurs but rmly directed at a mainstream audience (2007:44). Second,I also want to arguethatthese costly literary adaptations served the purpose ofcinemaasavehicleofculture,whichwasoneofthemainobjectivespursuedbythe dissidentagentsduringthedictatorshipandcontinuedduringthedemocracywiththe SocialistPartygovernment.Moreover,toa largerextent,thistypeoflmalso respondedto theaimsoftheSocialistParty'sculturalpolicy. TheSocialistPartyunderstoodcultureasa majormeansmeanthroughafairerandfreersocietycouldbeachieved.Therefore,the SocialistParty'smainaimintheculturalarenawastoguaranteeboththeproductionof culturalgoodsandthefreeanduniversalaccess tothem. Thus,theobsession foradapting writers suchas BenitoPrezGalds,Leopoldo Alas Clarn,Ramn de Vall-Incln,Camilo JosCelaorMiguelDelibeswentbeyond theretrievalofboththehistoricalpasthijacked and refashioned by Francoism and the liberal culture those writers belonged to that had been neglectedbyFrancoism,as Jordan and Morgan-Tamosunashavenoted(1998:15-60);those literaryadaptationswereaimedtopopularisehighbrowSpanishculturebecauseitwas believed thatby producing lms thatembraced andportrayedhighbrowculturalvaluesthe Spanishaudiences willacquirethe necessarycriticalconsciousness thatwould makethem getovercommercialcinemaand,byextension,thetypeofcinemaassociatedwith Francoism, and they will actively participate in the consumption of quality cultural goods. Conclusion ThenotionthatthepopulargenresproducedundertheFrancoistdictatorshiponly served to the dissemination of the fascist propaganda has been widely challenged by scholars such as Jordan (1995),Labanyi (1997), Smith (1998), Triana-Toribio (2003) orLzaro-Reboll and Willis (2004), among others, and itis not the aim of this paper to take partin the debate aboutthevalueofthepopularcultureproducedunderFrancoism.However,whatthe Francoist popular culture meant for the dissidentagents is a key elementto understand how theidentityofdemocraticcinemawasforgedbytheMirLaw.Fromacontemporary perspectivetheideaofademocraticstatepromoting acinemaconceivedasavehicleof highbrowcultureandneglectinganyculturalvaluetothepopularcinemamightseem 6paternalistic and elitist. Nonetheless, itis worth pointing outthatfor the dissident agents, the popularcinematheywereghtingagainstwasnotperceived,usingRaymondWilliam's denitions,as acinema made by thepeopleforthepeople,noteven a cinemawhich was theresultofamassproducedculture(1976).Onthecontrary,itwasperceivedasa repressivecinemathathad beenimposedbytheFrancoisttotalitarianregime.Therefore,a democraticcinemacouldonlyacquireitsownidentitybypositioningitselftopopular cinema. 7ReferencesAnsola,Txomin(2004),'EldecretoMir:unapropuestaambiciosaperofallidapara impulsar el cine espaol de los 80', Archivos de la Filmoteca 48, pp.102-121. Balio,Tino(1996),'AdjustingtotheNewGlobalEconomy.Hollywoodinthe1990s'in Moran,Albert(ed.) FilmPolicty.International,NationalandRegionalPerspectives. London and New York: Routldege, pp.23-38. Besas,Peter(1985),BehindtheSpanishLens:SpanishCinemaunderFascismand Democracy. Denver: Arden Press----------------(1995),'TheFinancialStructureofSpanishCinema'inKinder,Marsha(ed.) ReguringSpain.Cinema,Media,Representation.DurhamandLondon:Duke University Press, pp. 241-259. FernndezBlanco,Victor(1998),ElcineysupblicoenEspaa:unanlisiseconmico. Fundacion Autor, Sociedad General de Autores y Escritores.Galn, Diego (1975), 'El cine "poltico" espaol' in Lara et.al 7 trabajos de base sobre el cine espaol. Valencia: Fernando Torres Editor, pp.87-108. ------------------ (2006) Pilar Mir. Nadie me ense a vivir. Barcelona: Plaza JansGmez Bermdez de Castro, Ramiro (1989),La produccin cinematogrca espaola.De la Transicin a la Democracia (1976-1986). Bilbao: Ediciones Mensajero.Gubern,RomanyFontDomnec(1975),Uncineparaelcadalso.40aosdecensura cinematogrca en Espaa. Barcelona: Editorial EurosHeredero, Carlos F. (1991), 'Elcine espaolde los 80:cineastas en la periferia'in Luengos, Javier(ed.)1975-1990.Lamoralidaddelcine.Oviedo:FundacinMunicipalde Oviedo, pp. 96-125.-------------------------(1998),'LaLeyMir.Lucesysombrasdeunapolticaparaelcine espaol', Nosferatu 28, pp.42-51. 8Higson, Andrew (1996), 'The Heritage Filmand the British Cinema'in Higson, Andrew (ed.) DissolvingViews.KeyWritingsonBritishCinema.LondonandNewYork:Cassell, pp.236-249. Hopewell,John(1986),OutofthePast.Spanish CinemaafterFranco.London:British Film Institute.--------------------(1991)'ArtandaLackofMoney:TheCrisesoftheSpanishFilmIndustry, 1977-1990' Quarterly Review of Film Studies, 13:4, pp.113-122.Jordan,Barry (1995),'Genre Cinema in Spain in the 1970s: The Case ofComedy' in Revista Canadiense de Estudios Hispnicos 20, 1: Autumn, pp.127-141. ----------------- (2000), 'The Spanish lm industry in the 1980s and 1990s' in Jordan, Barry and Morgan-Tamosunas,Rikki(eds.)ContemporarySpanishCulturalStudies.London: Arnold, pp.179-192.Jordan,BarryandMorgan-Tamosunas,Rikki(1998),ContemporarySpanishCinema. Machester: Manchester University Press. Labanyi,Jo(1997),'Race,GenderandDisavowalinSpanishCinemaoftheEarlyFranco Period: The Missionary Film and the Folkloric Musical' in Screen, 38:3, Autumn, pp.215-231.Lara,Fernando(1975),'Elcineespaolanteunaalternativademocrtica'inLaraet.al7 trabajos de base sobre el cine espaol. Valencia: Fernando Torres Editor, pp. 219-244. Losilla,Carlos(1989),'Legislacin,industriayescritura'inBenet, VicenteEscritossobreel cine espaol (1937-1987).Valencia: Filmoteca Valenciana, pp.33-43.Llins,Fancesc(ed.) (1987),4aosdecineespaol1983-1986.Madrid:Festival Internacional de Cine de Madrid, pp.174-193. Maqua,JavierandPrezMerinero,CarlosyDavid(1976),Cineespaol.Idayvuelta. Valencia. Fernando Torres Editor.Marta Hernndez (1976), El aparato cinematogrco espaol. Madrid: Akal Editor.9Monterde,JosEnrique(1993),Veinteaosdecineespaol(1973-1992).Uncinebajola paradoja. Barcelona: Paidos.-------------------------------([1995]2010)'Continuismoydisidencia(1951-1962)inGubern, Romn. et al. Historia del cine espaol. Madrid: Ctedra, pp.239-294.Palacio, Manuel (2011), 'Marcos interpretativos, Transicin democrtica y cine. Un prlogo y tres consideraciones' in Palacio, Manuel (ed.) El cine y la Transicin poltica en Espaa (1975-1982). Madrid: Biblioteca Nueva, pp.20-30. PrezMerinero,CarlosyDavid(1973),Cineespaol:algunosmaterialesporderribo. Edicusa. Cuadernos para el dilogo.--------------------------------------------- (1975), Cine y control. Madrid: Castellote Editor.---------------------------------------------(1976),Cineespaol:unareinterpretacin.Barcelona: Anagrama.Riambau, Esteve ([1995] 2010), 'El perodo socialista (1982-1995)'in Gubern, Romn. et al. Historia del cine espaol. Madrid: Ctedra, pp.399-454.Smith, Paul Julian (1998), 'Homosexuality, Regionalism and Mass Culture: Eloy de la Iglesia's CinemaofTransition'inJenaro,TalensandSantosZunzunegui(eds.) Modesof RepresentationunSpanishCinema.Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress, pp.216-251. Torreiro, Casimiro ([1995a] 2010), 'Del tardofranquismo a la democracia (1969-1982)' in Gubern, Romn. et al. Historia del cine espaol. Madrid: Ctedra, pp.341-398.-----------------------([1995b]2010),'Unadictaduraliberal(1962-1969)'inGubern, Romn et al, Historia del cine espaol. Madrid: Ctedra, pp. 295-340. Trenzado Romero,Manuel(1999), Cultura de masas y cambio poltico: el cine espaol de la Transicin. Madrid: Centro de Investigaciones Sociolgicas & Siglo XXI.Triana-Toribio, Nria (2003), Spanish National Cinema. London and New York: Routledge 10Valls Copeiro del Villar, Antonio ([1992] 2000),Historia de la polticadel fomento del cine espaol. Valencia: Filmoteca de la Generalitat Valenciana. Williams,Raymond(1976),Keywords:AVocabularyofCultureandSociety.Glasgow: FontanaWood, Mary P. (2007), Contemporary European Cinema, London: Hodder Arnold. Zunzunegui,Santos(1987),'Informegeneralsobrealgunascuestionesdeintersparauna proyeccin pbllica o el cine espaol en la poca del socialismo' in Llins, Fancesc (ed.)4aosdecineespaol1983-1986.Madrid:FestivalInternacionaldeCinede Madrid, pp.174-193. 11