Close-Up is a feature that spotlights films now playing on MUBI. Jorge Thielen Armand's La Soledad (2016) will be showing March 10 - April 9, 2018 in most countries around the world.

“One might regard architecture as history arrested in stone.”
—A. L. Rowse, The Use of History
I.
End of Home. End of History.
In Jorge Thielen Armand’s La Soledad, the home holds many histories. Belonging to the filmmaker’s great-grandparents, this home, dubbed ‘The Solitude’ by its original owners, is an ancient mansion that, in its dereliction, displays its years like folds in the skin. Each crack creeping down the wall, straggling weed searching up through the paving, or unidentifiable stain spreading across the wallpaper layers the building with historical information; each tiny mark made tells a small part of a larger, continuing story. From the start of his film about this place, Armand conveys this sense of time passed (and equally, time passing) in the texture of his film, building upon the weightiness of intergenerational memory and experience that seeps out from the foundations of the home and fills the atmosphere of the filmed space.
Armand opens with home movies, a selection of Super 8 tapes found on the site of the home that detail the activities within. Narrating over the top of these minute, momentary documents of his own past and that of the place, he introduces the building and its past inhabitants by framing everything immediately within a context of nostalgia, moments marked with the fondness of recollection and (mis)remembrance. As children run around the gardens whilst adults mill around the home—all bathed in sun-bleached yellows and greens—the crackling, faded blemish of amateur celluloid blankets everything in sentimentality. “I liked rummaging through the rooms, and seeing the faces of my ancestors,” Armand notes wistfully, with a matching shot spliced in of portraits of his predecessors that hang from the walls. Place and past become interspersed and indistinguishable.

For the family, and evidently for Armand too, despite its decrepitude this place is a sanctuary. Even in disrepair, the structure retains its majesty, a small labyrinth of high ceilings, wide rooms and spiraling staircases, every self-contained space layered with an cross-generational narrative of amassed and discarded objects, each new resident adding to the family museum. The organic decay, too, lends grandeur as surrounding overgrowth penetrates the interior. Vines creep in through the cracks, moss grows up in empty pockets and vegetation climbs in through windows. Nature’s invaders lend the earthy brown clay a living green texture, animating the inanimate and breathing life into a dying space. But not everyone sees it this way. With no formalized right to the building and none of the economic status or social advantage required to fight for one, the family faces eviction and the building is due for demolition. End of home, end of history.
II.
An Archeological Process

Employing those involved directly to play themselves, Armand mounts something of an exorcism of the mansion, a sendoff for the ghosts of the countless generations passed that haunt the building’s current inhabitants, and more obliquely, for a country in crisis. In a manner that is increasingly prevalent within contemporary non-fiction filmmaking, the director uses a stylistic approach more recognizable in fiction (gliding, long duration and often elaborately staged camerawork; written or recreated scenarios; poetic visual digressions and a collaborative process shared between participants and creator) and applies them to a framework that is familiar to documentary: the examination of a real situation of direct relation to the filmmaker, and the sense of real, almost invasive, intimacy that can come with this. Armand’s film features the actors of the actual event performing their own truths, and though presumably arranged, the activities they undergo are mostly free from any sense of performance, their written dialogues as ordinary, grounded and free of self-consciousness as genuine ones would be. Participants sit and shoot beers, talk idly of the desperation of their relative situations and equally casually of extreme solutions. “We’ll do a couple of express kidnappings and you’ll have dollars in your account.”
III.
Crumbled Masonry, Peeling Paint, and Encroaching Rust

These deviations come in various forms. A night sequence that sees José lie wide awake, staring into the night sky while his family sleep. His face is riddled with angst, the dark corners of the room around him animated by the invisible ghosts of those who’ve struggled before, while his mind is occupied by the impossibility of sustaining a future. Or by day, shots of him combing the gardens with a metal detector, searching for a treasure rumored to be buried in the grounds that will lift his family miraculously from poverty and create that future. Bleaker still, his brother peeling back the wallpaper of the home, clouds of dust parting to reveal razorblades embedded in the bricks, the anamnesis of a past just as dark as this present.

Beyond the pure aesthetic appeal of these environments—and behind cinematographer Rodrigo Michelangeli’s talent for exploiting the evocative tendencies of natural light and for framing architectural spaces in a manner that highlights their picturesque qualities—is something else. By emphasizing the importance of the home as site of memory, familial histories that are continually being rewritten and reregistered, Armand loads his representation of decay with a significance that is more than purely visual. His ruins are not just nostalgic, but loaded with meaning that his film both directly registers, and indirectly hints towards. John Patrick Leary, in an essay6 on Detroit, remarks that,“so much ruin photography and ruin film aestheticizes poverty without inquiring of its origins, dramatizes spaces but never seeks out the people that inhabit and transform them, and romanticizes isolated acts of resistance without acknowledging the massive political and social forces aligned against the real transformation, and not just stubborn survival, of the city.” Fortunately, the same cannot be said for Armand’s approach to his Venezuelan ruins.
IV.
Shelter, And Ideally Sanctuary Too

Home means different things to different people, but for most, it means shelter, at the very least, and ideally sanctuary, too. A place all of your own against it all. La Soledad explores what it means to have that compromised, to face the removal of something so fundamental. For these people, destruction of the property means not just the loss of a place to live, but in many ways, the erasure of an entire intergenerational and interfamilial history. This is a legacy that is recorded as much in the physicality of the home as it is in the air that floats around it, or equally in the minds of those that have experienced it and will struggle to forget. For Armand, this building isn’t necessarily home now, and neither is Venezuela, a country he left a decade ago. To return there to author this film is almost like attending a funeral, the creation of a tribute that will fittingly lay his experience of the country to rest, but also one that will commemorate the building and the people and spirits which have lived, and continue to live, within its walls.

The set photographs included above are a selection of images taken of the home and its grounds by José Corredor during the filming of La Soledad, and were supplied by Jorge Thielen Armand for the purposes of this article.
Works Cited
1. https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2017/04/chaos-in-caracas-as-anti-government-protests-escalate/522702/
2. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/568c0fabc647ad1e518119a7/t/58dad9912994cab68ecc6628/1490737556933/FoR17-Programme-low.pdf
3. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/11/venezuela-on-the-brink-a-journey-through-a-country-in-crisis
4. http://www.tate.org.uk/whats-on/tate-britain/exhibition/ruin-lust
5. http://www.averyreview.com/issues/18/notes-on-ruin-porn#fn:9
6. https://www.guernicamag.com/leary_1_15_11/