Land Without Bread

After having seen "Land Without Bread" I believe it is a satire on the way different anthrpologists had at least written about other people and other people's cultures. Considering "Land Without Bread" was made in 1932 it's hard to imagine what ethnographies Bunuel could be mocking. However it was said that he made the film after reading the ethnographic study Las Jurdes: étude de géographie humaine of 1927 by Maurice Legendre. With the narration describing the inhabitants of this region as disgusting and pitiful, it seems quite clear from this narration alone that it must be something mocking in the way anthropolgists conducted themselves.

In Introdcution to Documentary by Bill NIchols, Nichols mentions the film "Land Without Bread" and how it had a mocking tone, but to the average viewer it seemed a repulsive portrayl of the inhabitants of Las Hurdes in Spain. He says, "On the surface of it, Land Without Bread seems to be an example of the most callous form of reporting, worse even than the hounding of celebrities by paparazzi or the gross interpretation of others in "mondo" films such as Mondo Cane. But Luis Bunuels film gradually sugeests a level of self-awareness and calculated effect that might prompt us to wonder if Bunuel is not quite the insensitive cad we initially thought." (p.7). Here Nichols illustrates that Bunuel was innovative and cleverly mocking anthropolgists reasearch. The anthropologists had this voice that distanced themselves from the people they are studying as well spoke with a arrogant aire and authoirty over all the people.

Nichols later goes on to say about Land Without Bread, "Seen from this perspective, Bunuel sounds, in 1932 an early and important cautionary note against our own tendency to believe literally what we see and hear. We risk missing the irony of a Bunuel..." (p.9) The most important idea here is the important decsion to constantly analyze and question what we are watching. For the average viewer Land Without Bread seems like an insensitive accountof a real anthropological study. It seems that it is just from the point of view of an arrogant ethnographer. Luis Bunuel seemed to have wanted to change the tone that anthropologists were using at the time to define "the other".

Bunuel was extremely innovative in that he seems to be one of the first directors to truly mock any type of anthropological investigation. This idea was very advanced for his time, especially consdiering how new ethnography even was. Im sure he had many reactions to future "Serious" anthropological work such as Margret Mead. It would be interesting to see a more modern day movie made with this same concept and idea.