Book review: Cinema and the Sandinistas

Jonathan Buchsbaum's Cinema and the Sandinistas: Filmmaking in Revolutionary Nicaragua tells the story of the short-lived Nicaraguan film industry, run by the Nicaraguan Institute of Cinema, INCINE. By virtue of being the only book out there on this topic, it is an important reference work for anyone interested in the Nicaraguan revolution and Nicaraguan cinema.

At times the book appears a bit sketchy but it is quite possible that is more a result of the short life of INCINE itself than any fault of the book. However, while important social and political background is given occasionally for those readers unacquainted with Nicaraguan history, we are left wondering a great deal about certain details of the story. Notably, much of the audience reaction is left out. Buchsbaum seems to have mostly done his research within INCINE, so the perspective he offers is that of the filmmakers and critics. It would be useful to have a better understanding of the way in which the films affected the revolutionary process.

In any case, the book brings up some important topics relevant to socialist cinema in general. One is the necessity and difficulty as part of a social development process of developing a cinematic culture--the ability of a society to understand and critically evaluate films. In Cuba, this has been partly accomplished through TV shows in which films are debated and analysed, analytical reviews of films in the press, etc. In Nicaragua as well, film criticism was seen as having an educational role to that end. In general it is hard not to be struck by the apparently sophisticated cinematic culture of Eastern Europe and the USSR and one wonders to what extent this is a result of conscious construction and to what extent it is the result of a longer-established tradition of a critical artistic intelligentsia.

Another point is the argument toward the end of the book that as a result of the rise of TV, cinema has declined in importance and is no longer relevant, particularly as a means for the development of national identity. Perhaps this is true to some extent; but one wonders whether this really might just be a contingent fact. If a cinematic culture is encouraged rather than a purely television culture, why should not cinema, as a unique medium, have its place in a society? Of course it is not what it once was, when technical restrictions forced people to go to cinemas to see moving pictures--in the same way, music is not what it once was, when people had to go to a live performance to hear any music at all. But this simply changes our reasons for going to a performance, perhaps makes it more difficult for cinema or music to capture our interest, but it does not rob these media of artistic and social significance. Surely how we value cinema depends on our worldview. Buchsbaum's argument is interesting nonetheless.