Flor Silvestre is able to affirm the traditional values of the melodrama – the family and fatherland – at the same time that it affirms radical social changes’ (Mistron). Analyse and discuss the film in light of this comment, giving concrete examples to illustrate your answer.

Essay received positive feedback. 

A traditional melodrama usually affirms domestic values which focuses on the individual, social stability and the maintenance of the status quo.[1] In contrast, a revolutionary melodrama was influenced by the Mexican revolution during 1910-1920. It represented societies desire for change and the creation of a new social and political Mexico.[2] The film Flor Silvestre was released in 1943 during the period of Mexico’s ‘Golden Age’ of cinema when the government gave the industry investment for their films. This helped to consolidate the subgenre of a revolutionary melodrama while at the same time promoting the image of a positive and unified Mexico which extolled the benefits of the revolution[3].   These two genres enshrine a ‘paradox[4]’ because they offer contradicting opinions, leading one to question which genre, if anyone, is more applicable to the film.

Flor silvestre was set in a small town in Jalisco which is significant because the focus of the Mexican revolution in the south and the central regions was on land reform[5]. The peasants wanted to be able to own their own land. Under the conservative government of Diaz, in 1910 land was concentrated in the hands of a select group of elite landowners and foreign investors which became known as haciendas. Campesinos and peasants had their own land taken away from them under the ‘liberal reforms’ of the 1850’s and 1860’s which allowed commercial landowners to take over. Peasants were forced to work under the landowners under debt peonage in order to continue to survive.[6] They could barely survive and were squeezed into the margins even more. The two peasant men that serve Jose Luis and his father represent the lower-class men in their town who were born there and had lived there their whole lives. Their decision to fight in the revolution for Jose Luis demonstrates their loyalty towards their landowners while at the same time indicating that they were discontented with the current social situation which was also revolutionary in its nature as the peasants were not supposed to rebel against their superiors.

While the concept of owning land was a traditional one, the Mexican revolution and the way in which they fought towards attaining that goal suggests that the film conforms more to a revolutionary melodrama. It was analyzing the issue of the current land situation and the discontentment felt by the peasants towards it rather than showing them working the land in harmony under the landlords. The peasants and revolutionaries were willing to use violent methods to achieve their aims such as burning down the haciendas and killing the landowners inside them. The desire for land reform triggered a violent and radical social change.

The peasant’s preoccupation with land is introduced right in the beginning of the film by the older Esperanza in the flashback scene, 'el amor de la tierra es el mas grande de los amores[7]’. There was a connection between the people and the land, “the traditional Mexican nationalist sentiment, a sentiment of solidarity [was] with the land itself[8]”.  The peasants could not survive without the land because they depended on it for their livelihood and their survival. The line was accompanied by wide, sweeping panoramic angles of the Mexican countryside, highlighting the beauty of the landscape which takes place after the events of the revolution. Under article 27 in the 1917 constitution it claimed that there would be a restoration of land to the peasants who had been despoiled of their communally held properties before the revolution.[9] Under the presidency of Lazaro Cardenas (1934-40) there was a renewal of agrarian reform. A total of 44 million hectares of land passed into the hands of the peasants which was more than had happened under previous governments.[10] Therefore, the sweeping scenes of the countryside give a sense that the peasants own all the land that is seen. The peaceful atmosphere of the landscape in the flashback scene transfers the values of a traditional melodrama because it shows the peasants being at one again with ‘la Patria’ and the return of social stability as there is no more fighting.      

The fight for land reform is also linked to the desire for social equality which was led by the upper- and middle-class people such as Jose Luis and was another radical form of social change in the film. Jose Luis marries Esperanza for love even though he is socially above her. His father owns a hacienda while she is the daughter of a peasant farmer on his estate. The marriage is met by opposition from Jose Luis’s parents because one was not supposed to marry outside of their own class. The relationship between Jose Luis and Esperanza can be contrasted against the relationship between his parents who come from an older generation and do not understand the concept of marrying for love. The Mexican government was corrupt and favoured the politically privileged. Most of the upper and middle-class people did not have much room for political participation in government positions because all appointments were controlled by Diaz himself. Marriage was used as a political tool in order to gain more influence or it was arranged by their parents. Jose Luis is willing to give everything up for Esperanza- he becomes estranged from his father, loses his wealth and even decides not to fight in the revolution when Esperanza becomes concerned for him. His love for Esperanza has left him with no material wealth yet they are happy because they have each other. While the interclass marriage between Jose Luis and Esperanza conforms with the traditional, family driven plot line of a traditional melodrama, the political implications behind it conform much more to a revolutionary melodrama because it wanted to change the social structure that existed in Mexico.

Just as there are familial allegories in the film that symbolise radical change, there are also those that represent stasis and the continuation of traditional social behaviours. After the death of his father, Jose Luis returns to the Hacienda to try and kill the revolutionaries that he had previously supported and seek his own revenge. This decision shows that his political judgement has been hindered by his emotional judgement because families were at the heart of the Mexican national identity. In the first half of the film there is a focus on the relationship between the Jose Luis and Esperanza but in the second half the focus shifts towards the increasing violence of the revolution and the danger that it now poses to these family units. As the critic Noble suggests, family is “functions as a unit on which the destructive force and violence of the revolution is played out[11]” and this scene is a key moment in which Jose Luis himself experiences the negative sides of the revolution. The threat of violence also represents the revolutionary threat towards the family values of the traditional melodrama.

Jose Luis’s upper-class background continues to influence his life even though he has attempted to move away from it, indicating that there are flaws with his revolutionary attitude. The eerie shots of his destroyed childhood home acknowledge that there has been social change, but at the same time the individual people are suffering from it. It also continues to promote the stereotype that the revolutionaries and peasants were punished for killing those in a higher rank to them and that there was no social equality, especially since this desire prompted Jose Luis to leave both his wife and son behind and vulnerable to their own attacks. Despite their differences Jose Luis and his father continue to have strong family ties that bind them together, a value which conforms to the genre of a traditional melodrama which emphasises the importance of family.

If the father presented opposition to social change than Esperanza fulfilled the traditional role of women who were subservient to their male counterpart. Women were the traditional ‘nucleus’ of the family and relegated to the domestic sphere because Mexico was a patriarchal society that was dominated by men. In the film most of the characters are male revolutionary figures and the two women that are present are both mothers. While it is possible to argue that there is a feminine framing and narrative of the film because Esperanza is responsible for telling the story as seen during the flashback scenes, it does not add up to a feminist point of view[12]. Her work as a woman is excluded throughout the film as she is only seen in a supporting role to Jose Luis and she does not seem to have her own separate story line. The film does not detail the process of her giving birth to her son and one does not see the strain that giving birth has caused her because she continues to look radiant in the shots and her cloths and bedding are immaculate with no stains of blood.[13] Child birth was a symbol of the strength of women, they were creating life while men were killing each other. This element is not explored in the film and takes away from a powerful portrayal of women.  Esperanza does not join the other revolutionaries to fight and in the end, she needs to be saved by Jose Luis when she is attacked by bandits. This weak portrayal presents an idealised version of femininity and female passivity that conformed to the definition of a traditional melodrama. The role of women and the status quo had not been changed.

Jose Luis and Esperanza were a ‘revolutionary couple[14]’ and from this interclass union they gave birth to a son who was a symbol of this post-revolutionary future that they had fought for and the symbol of a ‘New Mexico’. He is a healthy, strong and young man, the personification of the new society that the revolution had created. Their family has been able to grow and survival during the years of social stability after the revolution which can be linked to the portrayal of a traditional melodrama. This was an image that the government itself wanted to portray to indicate the positive changes that the Mexican revolution had influenced on society. Art, including the cinema, was seen as an ideological means to promote these political ideas. It could reach a widespread audience and convey a simple message that the uneducated peasants could also identify with. It was an effective piece of political propaganda which conforms with the aims of the revolutionary melodrama. In essence, the symbol of the healthy son glorifies the image of the revolution because it gives the peasants a sense that they have fought for a better future for their families in the new and modern society. The film promotes the idea of the revolution even though in the flashback scene it appears to be creating a peaceful image from a traditional melodrama.     

There were also issues with the utopian post-revolutionary world that the government had attempted to convey, suggesting that there would continue to be violence and radical social changes. The son is wearing uniform in contrast to the normal cloths that the revolutionaries wore when they were fighting. This shows some order has been instilled into the country, which can be seen as a reference to a traditional melodrama because the army were regimented and followed government order instead of the revolutionary group that had no clear aim or leaders. Another interpretation of the uniform suggests that it is a reference to the violence that the revolutionaries suffered during the revolution which is shown in “la historia de toda de la tierra de Mexico[15]”. Blood has been spilt in that ground, Jose Luis was eventually killed by a firing squad and there were countless deaths of revolutionaries and innocent civilians. They are buried in the land that they fought so hard to own. The ‘triumph of the revolution’ did not alter the low status[16] of Mexico. Much of the infrastructure had been damaged during the years of fighting and there had been a lack of farming which led to food and good shortages. The 1917 constitution did not lead to the transfer of power between the different social classes as Jose Luis had wanted.[17] The military uniform that the son is wearing can be interpreted therefore in the context of either a traditional melodrama in the sense that the government is once more in control over the country while at the same being a reference to the socially unstable nature in a revolutionary melodrama.    

Flor Silvestre does not conform either to the ideas of a revolutionary or traditional melodrama but rather it contains elements of both, reflecting the complex nature of the Mexican revolution itself. It also offers both a negative and positive interpretation of the revolution through the focus on its increasing violence while at the same time demonstrating the strong ties that bind families together. Jose Luis and Esperanza marry each other despite their difference in class, yet Jose Luis can’t escape from his upper-class background as seen when he goes back to revenge his father and his eventual death at the hands of the revolutionaries.  Esperanza was the traditional symbol of a good and obedient wife who would have done anything for her husband but she is strong enough to survive the violence of the revolution and bring her son up into a man that she can be proud of. The government supported the growth of the revolutionary melodrama because they wanted to promote a new national Mexican identity that had been born out of the revolution. This was done by creating a post-revolutionary world in the flashback scenes that coincided with the social stability seen in a traditional melodrama but one cannot entirely trust this view.

Bibliography:

Journals:

Burton- Carvajal, Julianne, ‘Mexican melodramas of patriarchy: Specificity of a transcultural form’ in Framing Latin American Cinema: Contemporary Critical Perspectives, ed Ann Marie Stock (Minnesota: University of Minnesota press, 1997)

ed Erica Segre, Peter Lang, ‘Residual Presences of the Revolutionary Melodrama in Contemporary Mexican Cinema in Ghosts of the Revolution’, Academia (2013)

Guerrero, Consuelo María, “La revolucionaria en el cine mexicano”, Hispania, Vol. 95, No. 1 (2012)

Books:

Hellman, Adler Judith Mexico in crisis (London: Heinemann Educational, 1978)

Film:

Dolores del Rio, Flor silvestre, DVD. Directed by Emilio Fernandez. Mexico: Clasa Films mundiales, 1943

Noble, Andrea, Mexican National Cinema (London: Routledge, 2005)

Tuñón, Julia ‘Between the nation and utopia: The image of Mexico in the films of Emilio `Indio' Fernandez’ Latin American Popular Culture 1993, Vol. 12

Williamson, Edwin, The Penguin history of Latin America (London: Penguin Books, 2010)

Handout:

Maria D’argenio, Flor Silvestre (Handout received in Cultural responses to the Mexican revolution with Professor Maria D’argenio, London, 2019)

---

[1] María Consuelo Guerrero, “La revolucionaria en el cine mexicano”, Hispania, Vol. 95, No. 1 (2012), pp.38

[2] Ibid, p. 38

[3] ed Erica Segre, Peter Lang, ‘Residual Presences of the Revolutionary Melodrama in Contemporary Mexican Cinema in Ghosts of the Revolution’, Academia (2013), p. 243

[4] Andrea Noble, Mexican National Cinema (London: Routledge, 2005), p. 61

[5] Judith Adler Hellman, Mexico in crisis, (London: Heinemann Educational, 1978) p. 6

[6] Ibid, p. 6

[7]Dolores del Rio, Flor silvestre, DVD. Directed by Emilio Fernandez. Mexico: Clasa Films mundiales, 1943

[8] Julia Tuñón ‘Between the nation and utopia: The image of Mexico in the films of Emilio `Indio' Fernandez’ Studies in Latin American Popular Culture 1993, Vol. 12, p159.

[9] Hellman, Mexico in Crisis, p. 21

[10] Edwin Williamson, The Penguin history of Latin America (London: Penguin Books, 2010) p. 397

[11] Noble, Mexican National Cinema, p. 62

[12]Julianne Burton- Carvajal, ‘Mexican melodramas of patriarchy: Specificity of a transcultural form’ in Framing Latin American Cinema: Contemporary Critical Perspectives, ed Ann Marie Stock (Minnesota: University of Minnesota press, 1997) p. 189  

[13] Ibid, p. 189

[14] Maria D’argenio, Flor Silvestre (Handout received in Cultural responses to the Mexican revolution with Professor Maria D’argenio, London, 2019)

[15] Flor Silvestre, DVD

[16] Hellman, Mexico in Crisis, p. 12

[17] Williamson, The Penguin history, p. 399