Larraín’s Film No and Its Inspiration, El plebiscito: Chile’s Transition to Democracy as a Simulacrum

The play El plebiscito, which celebrates the democratic transition in Chile, inspired filmmakers Peirano and Larraín to question this transition and its present repercussions in their film No. Both works focus on the historic 1988 referendum that removed the Chilean dictator Augusto Pinochet from power. For the play’s author Antonio Skármeta, the referendum is a victory of truth, of democracy, and of justice. His adman, who designs the advertising campaign and convinces his compatriots to say “No” to Pinochet, is a middle-aged man, who did not hesitate to oppose Pinochet even though it meant renouncing his profession and even risking his life. For this character, the campaign spots are a chance to take his revenge and to destroy the virtual reality of untruth and consumerism with which Pinochet’s administration had paralyzed the Chilean public sphere. The victory of the campaign is a tremendous event, a turning point in the self-awareness of Chilean society as a whole. More importantly, the campaign has a transformative impact on the adman’s young daughter: a disappointed cynic, she becomes a mature individual eager to build a new, democratic Chile. And yet, the filmmakers condemn this very campaign, which the play celebrates as the rebirth of democracy in Chile, as being such in name only. They propose to view the campaign as an empty shell of democracy that has been perpetuated ever since. Their young adman, who works with equal dedication on a soft drink advert, the “No” campaign, and a soap opera, introduces all three projects with the same words: “Hoy Chile piensa en su futuro.” The filmmakers suggest that the democratic transition is a simulacrum devoid of referent and echo those political scientists who call it “empty” or “pseudo.” The same dialogue about the democratic transition in other Latin countries takes place between the adaptations of Arráncame la vida and La fiesta del chivo and their literary sources. These cases show that we can study adaptations to identify complex and divisive issues that define contemporary societies.

The 1988 Referendum

More than three thousand people were killed and more than eighty thousand were detained and tortured over the course of Pinochet’s seventeen-year dictatorship (from 1973 to 1990). In 1988, under international pressure Pinochet agreed to a referendum in order to legitimatize his regime. If citizens voted sí [yes], Pinochet would remain in power for another eight years; if they voted no, he would step down. Confident of their victory, regime officials afforded the opposition fifteen minutes of airtime each day for the month preceding the referendum to create the semblance of a democratic campaign. The opposition coalition hired advertising experts who designed the victorious “No” campaign and whose victory Pinochet unexpectedly acknowledged. In 1990, Chile returned to democracy. Pinochet was sworn senator-for-life, which status granted him immunity from prosecution. However, ten years after the referendum Pinochet was arrested in London and held for a year and half. He was released on the grounds of ill health. He returned to Chile, but after an inadvertently self-confident television appearance in 2004, Pinochet was declared fit for trial and put under house arrest. Pinochet died in 2006, before being tried, at the age of ninety-one. More than 300 charges remained on his case, including human rights abuses; embezzlement of more than 27 million dollars in foreign bank accounts; tax evasion and fraud; the manufacture of cocaine in a military chemical plant and its subsequent sale to Europe and the United States; and illegal arms sales (Childress 140). Pinochet’s death divided the Chileans: Some felt “gratitude to the savior,” others, “anger at the assassin” (Stern 351). On the one hand, there were massive celebrations with champagne and dancing on street squares; on the other, sixty thousand people flocked to Pinochet’s funeral. Although President Bachelet denied Pinochet a state funeral, Defense Minister Blanlot attended his funeral, albeit only “as an institutional superior, not as a personal friend and mourner” (Stern 352–353).

From Play to Film

In 2008 Chilean writer Antonio...