The Screen; "Bullfight"

Because it was the christmas holidays and also my mock examinations recently, I haven't completed a blog post in a while because my time has been devoted elsewhere. However, I have still been consistently reading on the internet and finding possible sources and materials of interest in my spare time, and one which particularly stands out is an article in "The New York Times". It is in "The Screen", a column where film or docmentary reviews were written. This particular review is called "Bullfight", and I believe it to be extremely useful in my study of bullfighting. It is from an issue on the 4th July, 1956, with the headline; "Documentary Encompasses the Colourful Details of an Ancient, Brutal Sport". (Crowler, Bosley, The New York Times, 1956, pg0 21st Jan 2022.) https://www.nytimes.com/1956/07/04/archives/the-screen-bullfight-documentary-encompasses-the-colorful-details.html 

I have found this article very reliable since it is a contemporary piece that reviews a film; there are no persuasions or forcing of opinions, only an account of what the documentary shows and honesty surrounding the subject of bullfighting. Being from 1956, I think it is helpful in showing me a contemporaneous view on the “sport” instead of modern day accounts which have been influenced by media. 

The journalist has an interesting tone and way of describing the bullfight; immediately in the first sentence this is clear. He states: "The brutal sport of bullfighting - if a sport it may be called, considering the complicated torment that is inflicted upon the bull", already demonstrating the conflicting views on this subject and its brutality is clear. He goes on to write that is "has never been shown so absolutely and unrelentingly as in the documentary film called 'Bullfight'". It would seem that this documentary exposes the truth behind the sport and was peraps intended to make people aware of the harsh reality that it is in fact not a beautiful art. 

He states that many things happen and are shown in the film; "the charge of the proud bull into the bullring to the killing of animals to the goring of horses and men." His language choices are interesting as he chooses negative verbs to describe the events, with the lexical field emphasising the bloody nature of the sport to his readers.  He also mentions a particular bullfighter, Rafael Ortega, who is "gored" and "painfully hustled from the ring". Evidently, the uncontrollable nature of bullfights is something that has not changed or improved over time.  He explains that in this moment, “the beauty and sudden shock that make up the pounding fascination of this ancient and fatalistic sport” is shown, using an alliteration to emphasise his opinion that it isn’t easy to watch, and the way perhaps the extent of the brutality is unexpected as people initially believe they are going to watch a show, but end up seeing a bloody competition between a matador and the bull. It can even be said that it isn’t a competition, as there is no chance for the hill to win.

On top of this, we gain an insight into the life of bullfighters in this review. The writer explains that in the film there are “countless views of matadors in action,” and they show “their various styles with the cape” and “individual methods of driving the death dealing sword”, so it’s clear here that matadors strive to be different from the rest. In this sense, it is a competition since they want to be better not only than the bull but the other matadors. However, that does not mean that it is an ethical sport, there is still bloodshed and death spilled causing the “wobbling throes of the animals” and “death lunges” as they struggle to stand and have to accept death. To enable them to become “the best”, it’s insinuated that the animal has to make the sacrifice. Bullfighters are raised into the sport, which he claims the film shows with the “raising of bulls and bullfighters,the preparations for a corrida or fight program, the dressing of a matador for the ordeal and the ritual attendant upon the running-off of a bullfight in a major ring in Spain.” Much like an athlete, they devote all of their time to their profession and train for it basically all of their lives. 

The writer admits, however, that the documentary is not well structured and “is somewhat clobbered and confusing”, and that “It doesn't carry the description in a straight line, but jumps forward and backward through the pattern of bullfighting, without showing clearly how one is routined”, therefore meaning that I wouldn’t use this source to help me describe the process of a bullfight, but would still use it for all the other useful information that I gained. 

Source Evaluation:

 It has been extremely useful reading this article as it is contemporary and features the views of an onlooker of the sport; the fact that the writer is writing for an American audience (and is American himself) and chooses to describe it in this negative way tells me that, while in Spain people see tradition and culture, outside of Spain people recognise the unnecessary brutality of the “art” and they are shocked by it. In the past (1956 to be specific) when there was less awareness of the correct treatment of animals and animal rights, they still recognised that it was horrible and inhumane. Therefore, it helps me because it consolidates my understanding that through out history bullfighting has always been seen as bloody, and in current times now that animal rights groups exist and there is legislation to protect animals, the view on bullfighting and the treatment of the bulls will be even more strongly felt. I will look into the views of animal rights groups more to further this understanding.