Os Caminhos da Liberdade

Tizuka Yamazaki




S y n o p s i s



Gaijin - Os Caminhos da Liberdade is a Brazilian movie of 1980, directed by the Japanese-Brazilian filmmaker Tizuka Yamasaki. At the beginning of the twentieth century, Japanese families arrived in Brazil to start the process of immigration, which had the main purpose of supplying the lack of labor in the coffee plantations, replacing the working force of black slaves, then recently liberated. At that time, Japan was a miserable country and its people had few work available and, because of this tough economical and social reality, many Japanese immigrated to Brazil in search of opportunities.


As the immigration company in Brazil only accepted groups of families composed at least by a couple, the brothers Yamada (Jiro Kawarazaki) and Kobayashi (Keniti Kaneko) were admitted with one condition: Yamada should marry Titoe (Kyoko Tsukamoto), which had only 16 years old. Then, Titoe, Yamada, Kobayashi and his cousin Ueno departed to Brazil onboard Kasato Maru ship. After 52 days traveling, they arrived in Santos and they went to Santa Rosa Farm, in São Paulo: the coffee culture was growing intensively and there was too much work waiting for them.



At Santa Rosa, they found a cruel foreman who treated the immigrants with hostility, forcing them to work until exhaustion like slaves, receiving low remuneration. They were also stolen by the farm owners, being only treated with respect by some other settlers and by Tonho (Antônio Fagundes), the farm’s accountant.


Debts incurred over the price of the ship tickets already paid by the contractor, and they were also overcharged for the purchase of basic food in the farm warehouse. As their debts were continuously growing, their dream of returning to Japan – after a period of five years in Brazil and with enough money saved – was becoming impossible.


Tonho falls in love with Titoe. He faces an internal conflict because he had to accept the lack of honesty of the farm’s accounting books, while recognizing the injustices suffered by both Japanese and Italians immigrants, being this last group led by Enrico (Gianfrancesco Guarnieri), an anarchist.


Not standing the pressure, some immigrants committed suicide. And those who could not die fighting began to degrade socially. Others, like Ueno, who fled with Angelina, suffered a hard process of cultural assimilation, which contributed to the formation of the Brazilian people and culture later.


A sequence was filmed in 2005, entitled “Gaijin - Ama-me Como Sou”. It tells the story of Yoko, a Brazilian-Japanese student living at the industrial area of Kobe, in Japan. She also lives the anguish of a foreign young woman segregated, as she already belongs to another culture. And, in order to have forces to deal with the situation, Yoko remembers the reports of the difficulties faced by her great-grandmother in Brazil, the pioneer Titoe.


The promises of the elderly Titoe to return to Japan is, then, the main driving force that also leads the lives of four women of different generations: the own Titoe – now with 90 years old, her Brazilian grandmother, Shinobu, her mother Mary and, finally, the mestizo Yoko, now suffering the effects of being an uprooted in Japan.



Darcy Ribeiro



c o m m e n t a r y



The choice for “Gaijin - Os Caminhos da Liberdade” was not only because this movie represents a great practical - and more recent – example of the mass immigration of foreigners to Brazil, or due to the simple fact that the arrival of the vessel Kasato Maru, bringing the first group of Japanese workers – in compliance with the agreement signed between Brazil and Japan – completed, this year, its centennial. Moreover, this choice was also due to the fact that we are now studying, simultaneously, the novel “Brazil Maru”, by Karen Tei Yamashita, in Literature & Difference.


And from the analysis of Tizuka Yamazaki’s film, we also wish to propose a brief study about the formation of the Brazilian society, focusing its historical perspective. So, in order to have an appropriate scientific support, we decided to work with the well-known sociological treaty written by the anthropologist Darcy Ribeiro, “O Povo Brasileiro: A Formação e o Sentido do Brasil”.


Whenever referring to the Brazilian people, Darcy Ribeiro theorized that such “new” people (i.e., Brazilians), basically formed by the confluence of Europeans, Black Africans and Native Indigenous, is really “new” because it effectively differs from its forming matrices. However, it is also “old” because it represents the continuity of the European expansion, being formed only to generate exportable profits (pp. 19-20).



Brazil proves that a ‘basic ethnic unity’ does not mean ‘uniformity’. The diversification here occurred not simply because of massive immigrating movements, since it was also influenced by various other factors involving the adaptation of the new human contingent, such as the necessity of overcoming the strangeness caused by the new environment, and the obligation of being used to new different economic production practices.


Thus, there were different ways of being Brazilian, as the sertanejos, from the inlands of the Northeast; the caboclos, from the Amazon; the crioulos, from the northeastern coast; the caipiras, from the Southeast and Center; and the southern gauchos, besides the Italian-Brazilians, Japanese-Brazilians, German-Brazilian etc. “All of them much more marked by what they have in common, as Brazilians, than by the differences caused by the vital need to be adjusted to regional or functional differences, or because of miscegenation and acculturation differences, as reflected in the physiognomy of a portion of the population” (p.21).


This adventure started with the native indigenous who witnessed the arrival of the Europeans, probably with much more astonishment than currently related in History books, associating them with their primitive visions of the world, dominated by the generosity. Certainly, they also found them ugly and smelling bad. Most likely, the hopes of those first natives were higher than their fears. But the fact is that they become the main commodity to be explored by the Metropolis, after the brazil-wood cycle.


And, later, “with the destruction of the entire basis of the indigenous social life – with the denial of their values, condemning them to be captives – a great number of natives just lie down in their sleeping nets and simply died, as only them have the power to do” (P.43).


Many groups of indigenous fled to the inlands, but already carrying on their bodies the contamination of white people’s diseases. Others returned attracted by the tools and ornaments offered, or by the curiosity to see that strange people, and then becoming their darters in future wars against other – more withdrawn – indigenous tribes” (pp.43-44).


Even the Jesuits, who initially had no humanitarian compunction, began to find exaggerated the ferocity of the colonization and, so, they conflicted with the settlers, who considered the indigenous as no more than “human cattle”. Hence, the priests began to consider all natives as “creatures of God” as well as the original owners of the land, with full right to survive, provided the be converted to the Catholicism.


The Portuguese Crown officially supported the missionaries, but had a blind eye to the indigenous enslavement. The black slaves were, at this time, still too expensive to be used in the poorest regions of the colony, as São Paulo (pp.53-54). It was only in the seventeenth century that the black slavery surpassed the indigenous, predominant in the previous century. But they would still remain as an option for home work or small business, besides being used in the subsistence agriculture. Costing a fifth of the price of an African slave, the indigenous have become, then, the “slaves of the poor” (pp.99-101).


“The Central Brazil and the area of forests in the states of Minas Gerais, Espírito Santo and Bahia – as well as the region of the Araucaria in southern Brazil – demanded a large supply of workers, as the settlements advanced. In all these areas, the capture of natives who resisted the expansion was decreed by the king of Portugal as legal, because such lands “had been conquered in a fair war”. But as the recaptured natives were just a part of the submitted tribe (many of them died because of the mistreatments or due to the punishments for their revolts) the process of chasing indigenous to recruit labor-force can perfectly be considered as a genocide of gigantic proportions”. (p.103).


The blacks who were brought to Brazil came mainly from very distinct cultural groups of the west coast of Africa, like the Bantos, the Yorubás and the Islamized Malês. “As it happened to the whites – who only integrated the Brazilian ethnicity much later – blacks had to learn, first of all, how to live in that Portuguese-Tupi “proto-cell” that they met upon their arrival. So, they began to plant and to cook the food of the land, calling things by their Tupi names (already embedded in the Portuguese language), while smoking long tobacco cigarettes and drinking their cauim"(p. 114).


Darcy Ribeiro advocates the idea that it was the need for communication between the slaves themselves (dully separated from their original groups) and with their capatazes (gaffers) that made them adopt and spread the Portuguese language, even if already enriched by words of African origin and with a different way of speaking. Perhaps, without this fact, Tupi would impose itself all over the Brazilian territory, as it was already happening in places like São Paulo. The cultural influence of Africans in the formation of the Brazilian people would be, then, less disseminated in technological aspects (which were more rigidly controlled by the Metropolis), and more focused on the ideological aspects (or “symbolic”), which were much more difficult to control, such as religion, music or cuisine. (pp. 116-117)



In a system created to dehumanize people and to transform slaved ethnic groups in cargo animals, it is hardly surprising that blacks and indigenous could maintain their status of humans, not without a great deal of resistance. Their only possibilities were death or escape. Voluntary suicide was common but escaping was equally deadly (p.118). In Africa, blacks were held and traded for tobacco, spirits and ornamentals. If they survived the arduous transport in slave ships, they were sold here to work eighteen hours per day all over the year, without rights, without pleasure and in a permanent state of tension and punishment (pp. 119-120).


The identity of the Brazilian people is, therefore, a product of this mixture of origins, but not corresponding exactly to the Africans and the Europeans, nor to the native indigenous: as already said, it is a new culture, totally different from those that originally composed each individual of such groups. For Darcy Ribeiro, the first Brazilian to be identified as such was the mameluco, who despised its American (indigenous) ancestry while being also despised by the Portuguese. So, the remaining option was to recur to this new identity, which was the only thing left to all mestizos. Later, the same happened to the mulattoes, who also were Brazilian or nothing else (pp. 127-128).


The author denies the warmth as an essential feature of the Brazilian people. He recalls the numerous conflicts and wars that have marked our history, as Palmares, Canudos etc. (p.167). Not to mention the succession of conflicts called inter-ethnic, where the original population of a territory was attacked by an invader wishing to deploy new models of economic orders and society, through the imposition of very unequal forces. And the Brazilian people was, therefore, being formed in a social pyramid with a large base made up of exploited ones, humiliated by the narrow dome of prosperous people, who could enjoy the fact that Brazil had, at that time, the most prosperous economy on the planet (pp.179-185).


Indeed, the figure that would better represent the Brazilian society is not a pyramid, but an inverted funnel, very broad-based and with very few people on the top (p. 213). The difference between the living conditions from one place to the other is also very large, making Brazilians a people who will never be permanently fixed, always in search of improvement. Even in our days we will easily realize that in areas where the latifúndio (large properties with few owners) is a common practice, more social differences will be seen. On the other hand, in regions characterized by a greater land distribution – and with small farming practices – there will be a more equal access to better quality of life by a larger number of families (pp. 215-216).



According to the author, “it prevails, all over the Country, an expectation of assimilation that leads Brazilians to believe – and to hope – that blacks will gradually disappear through a progressive whitening” (p.224). The Brazilian racism is different because it is not based on the racial origin of people but on the actual color of the skin. Similarly, blacks who socially arise will receive a treatment similar to the whites, and may even marry them (p. 225). The alleged “racial democracy”, however, hides the situations of violence to which blacks are subjected and the illusion of an individual social rise takes from them the motivation for a higher struggle for equal rights to the entire race” (pp. 226-227).


Regarding the dilemma between assimilation and segregation, Darcy Ribeiro notes that all data available on growth and composition of the Brazilian population clearly show the oppression imposed by the dominant white over other races. From six million black slaves introduced in Brazil and some five million of native indigenous, at least 300 thousand of natives are left today while the total number of blacks reaches no more than six million. In opposition to these figures, from the five million white Europeans arrived in Brazil until 1950, there are today 82 million people who identify themselves as white, in addition to the 58 million self-considered pardos – a kind of mulatto claimed to be “not so dark, almost white” (p. 228).


Darcy Ribeiro emphasizes that, even with the modernization of Brazil, there are some historical reminiscences of archaism in the Country, such as the continuity of the vast rural property in many regions; the lack of commitment with the real interests of the Brazilian people (referring to the administers of the financial system, as “the only thing that they have in mind are the profits to be sent to their bosses”); and the general opposition between the interests of the patronato (employers) and the Brazilian workers (p. 250). Yesterday and today, Brazil has always been a thriving company, but never with gains for the entire population, only to privileged minorities (p. 251).


Notwithstanding all this, he concludes that the Brazilian ethnic identity is marked exactly by the force and flexibility of the individuals and groups, as the initial matrix needed (and knew how) to be adapted to the most different areas throughout the country, creating many distinct faces of a same Brazil. “The amazing is that these nuclei so equal and so different at the same time could remain united in one only nation”. (pp. 272-273)



From this point on, the author provides a breakdown of the Country into different “brazils” in the History, nominating them as follows: the “Brazil Crioulo”, originated in the sugar mills; the “Brazil Caboclo”, linked to the area of the Amazon rainforest; the “Brazil Sertanejo”, located in the northeastern inlands, far away from the coastal strip; the “Brazil Caipira”, composed by the São Paulo’s poor people – especially those inhabitants of the valley of the Paraíba do Sul river, who lived in casebres de taipa (pug hovels); and, finally, the “Southern Brazil”, with its gauchos, matutos (hicks) and gringos.


And it is precisely in this last “Southern Brazil” that Darcy Ribeiro describes, in details, one of the historical-cultural settings of the region, formed by Brazilians of German, Italian, Polish, Japanese, Lebanese origins, among others, all of them introduced as immigrants mainly in the last decades of the nineteenth century. (p.436). These Brazilians are differentiated from the others not only because they are bilingual, using a foreign language at their homes, but, also, for cultivating certain habits of foreign origins, and for keeping the production on small farms, intensively explored through a diversified agriculture, as well as for their educational level, much higher than the rest of the population (p. 438).


Such “gringo” population, resulted from the efforts of colonization and whitening, occupies today the central area of the southern states and some regions of Espírito Santo and Sao Paulo (p. 437). They just started to master the Portuguese language as a way to communicate with immigrants from different origins and with the other Brazilians. And, as a result of the sacrifices of their pioneers, new generations followed, now with living conditions much more favorable (p. 438).


The image of these “gringos” or “nisseis” today is not identified with the marginalized populations, nor with the oligarchy, but mainly with the progressive urban populations. And as they no longer belong to the world they came from, they frankly assume an ethnic identification as Brazilians. Only the Japanese, because of their differentiating racial lines, were not immediately recognized as such, even after their self assimilation. When other Brazilians identified them as retreated, not advanced people, this differentiation was really painful. But it has totally changed with the current international prestige of Japan and the cultural and economic success of the “nisseis”, who became, perhaps, the group of immigrants that has most socially ascended and modernized Brazil (pp. 443-444).


more Sociological approaches


The choice for the film “Gaijin – Os Caminhos da Liberdade” gave us the possibility of reflecting in depth about miscegenation in Brazil. Frequently, we talk about the importance of Africans in the Brazilian History, as well as the question of slavery and the consequent cultural prejudice against blacks. However, when the abolition was proclaimed, other contingents also came to Brazil, in order to substitute that labor force in the farms. And, despite all changes, the working relations between land owners and the new immigrants were not different from those of the slavery times, in terms of the ruthless exploitation of workers.


Last year, the Japanese community celebrated one hundred years of the Nipponic immigration to Brazil. So, this moment is very appropriate to remember the difficulties faced by the first immigrants, in establishing a balance between both cultures, but preserving important cultural aspects from the Japanese tradition. Thus, the movie-maker Tizuka Yamazaki gave us a rich material which, despite being a fictional work, contains a relevant historical background, not neglecting the obvious question of cultural clashes between both countries.


In the film, cultural identity is very well represented in the character Yamada, one of the Japanese immigrants. He was a man of strong personality, who did not accept the exploitation from the farm owners, silently. According to his principles, a man could not live in a humiliating condition, without any dignity. Yamada is, thus, an unhappy person, and he knew that it was practically impossible to change his bad condition, as he did not speak any Portuguese, making the search for a new occupation something almost impossible. And, to make his situation even worse, he did not have enough money to go back to his homeland, the distant Japan.



So, Yamada was a man in crisis, since his principles, meanings and symbols did not make any sense in Brazil – and no one seemed to be interested in his cultural values. This character could represent Stuart Hall’s concepts of individual identity, according to the idea of the Enlightenment subject, who is “based on a conception of the human person as a fully centered, unified individual, endowed with the capacities of reason, consciousness and action, whose ‘centre’ consisted of an inner core which first emerged when the subject was born (…) while remaining essentially the same (…) throughout the individual’s existence” (“Modernity and Its Future”: Chapter 6 – “The Question of Cultural Identity”, p.275).


But Hall also mentions the ‘Symbolic Interactionism’, a point of view which has become a classic sociological conception, stating that identity is formed in the interaction between ‘self’ and ‘society’. (p. 276). Therefore, far away of any theoretical lines – and immersing in the rash reality described by Tizuka Yamazaki, we will realize that such ‘interactionalism’ is something that happens not only in a positive way, being many other factors involved, such as History and, almost ever, human suffering.


Also, Stuart Hall describes how a national culture functions as a system of representation, “being composed not only of cultural institutions, but of symbols and representations” (p.292), constituting a kind of discourse that constructs meanings and which “influences and organizes both actions and our conception of ourselves” (pp. 292-293). All characters in the film bring these features, but, again, Yamada’s case is, particularly, very representative of these concepts.


And considering Hall’s five main elements of discursive strategy (pp. 294-295), which construct the narrative of a nationality, we may outline four of them as being the most present in the film: the emphasis on origins (2nd); the invention of a tradition (3rd); the narrative of the foundational myth (4th); and the idea of a pure, original people or ‘folk’ (5th).



         Taking now Clifford Geertz’s concepts of ‘Thick Description’, described in his “The Interpretation of Cultures”, we will also realize that Tizuka Yamazaki explained not only the human behavior of those Japanese immigrants but, also, the new context in which they were inserted, emphasizing the interaction with others, in a search for a new meaning that could fit to all of them.


Geertz argued that, whenever influenced by the otherness, human behavior may be understood in accordance to his concepts of ‘thin’ and ‘thick’ descriptions, being the first idea taken from Gilbert Ryle’s concepts, which stated that if someone winks at us without a given context, we will not be able to know what he/she exactly means. Geertz, then, theorized that his ‘thin description’ would describe only the wink itself, while a ‘thick description’ would explain the context of all practices and discourses within a society, being the efforts in giving ‘thick descriptions’ to all social facts, the main task of a committed anthropologist.


Another theoretical concept, in our course bibliography, that could positively help in the analysis of the film, is Walkyria Monte-Mór’s essay “Lingua e Diversidade Cultural nas Américas Multiculturais” (in “Interfaces Brazil/Canada”), in which the author describes the interrelationship between ‘identity’ and ‘authenticity’, taking the example of Chinese immigrants’ assimilation in Canada, since this country would have “assumed its multi-racial” characteristic (p. 153). According to Monte-Mór (quoting Derrida), it is possible to “redeem the theory of contamination, in order to discuss authenticity” (p.154). However, “perhaps, it no longer makes sense to think about ‘authentic’ identity, since we are permanently contaminated by the cultures of those we live or interact with” (id., ibid.).


In reference to the various immigrants arrived to Brazil, Darcy Ribeiro (in his “O Povo Brasileiro”), stated that the image of such “gringos” or “nisseis” today, is not anymore identified to the marginalized populations, nor with the oligarchy, but mainly with the progressive urban populations. And as they no longer belong to the world they came from, they frankly assume an ethnic identification as Brazilian.



But among all other immigrants, only the Japanese were not immediately recognized as Brazilians – even after their self assimilation, particularly because of their differentiating racial lines. And when other Brazilians identified them as retreated, not advanced people in the past, this differentiation was really painful. However, their situation has totally changed, mostly because of the current international prestige of Japan, as well as the cultural and economic success of the “nisseis”, who became, perhaps, the group of immigrants that has more socially ascended and modernized Brazil (443-444).


The concepts of culture are always developed towards an acceptance of cultural multiplicity. Even the British anthropologist Edward Burnett Tylor (1832-1917), a representative of the Cultural Evolutionism, taught us that Culture is a complex block which includes knowledge, belief, art, morality, law, customs and other capabilities and habits acquired by man, as a member of society” (in his “Primitive Culture”). And, most recently, new theories – like Geertz’s – consider culture as “simply a series of stories that we tell us about ourselves”, consecrating the idea that an individual must be always understood according to a given context and environment.


Nowadays, we can say that both Japanese and Brazilian developed an interesting and positive cultural integration, which reflects respect and tolerance for both cultures. And Tizuka Yamazaki’s “Gaijin” is an important register of this integration, as the film clearly showed all the identity crisis experienced by the immigrants, as a result of a painful process of change and adaptation of those who were uprooted together with their values, meanings and symbols, being in constant conflict with a new, different way of seeing and understanding the world.




c o n c l u s i o n  



Watching nowadays Japan society, with its advanced technology and first-world economy, it is hard to believe that, a hundred years ago, this country lived a disastrous situation that forced a huge migration to distant places, with culture, language and very different behaviors from their own, in order to survive.


It was from this problematic Japan that thousands of immigrants came to Brazil, in 1908. And despite being obliged to create new roots here, they did not loose many of their traditions, which passed from father to son.



The first waves of immigrants were formed by peasants, who came with the hope of working hard in the coffee crops for a few years, in order to pay their travel expenses and to save some money to take with them when they return to Japan. Something similar to the goals that many Dekasseges – Brazilian japanese descendants – have now, doing the inverse path of their forefathers.


The initial group of 781 immigrants (325 of them from Okinawa) embarked in Kobe and reached the Santos Harbor on June 18, 1918, aboard the ship Kasato Maru, after 52 days traveling crossing the Atlantic and Pacific oceans. They were, then, conducted to the coffee farms in the Upper Mogiana region, and soon all hopes for a better life faded away.


The work was strenuously hard, with many working hours per day, under the sub-tropical sun. The wages were below the agreed and they were treated almost like slaves. Thirteen months later, many of them fled the farms, and some came to Santos, a city that reminded their homeland, Okinawa, with its beaches and hot weather.


The way Brazil has been founded and governed – always in function of external interests – did not permit that rights could be granted to all its inhabitants throughout the History. There was always the precedence of profit over the needs, making business prosperity and misery of the population to live side by side.


However, the racial fusion allowed the growth of a human mass that lost its face, in search of a new ethnicity that could encompass everyone. And here, despite the multiple origins, these people do not bring any separatist rancid clearly opposed to the national macro-ethnicity, being the class stratification the factor that effectively separates and distances Brazilians.


What effectively exists now – and that has always existed – is a mass of exploited workers, commonly humiliated and harassed by a dominant minority, who is amazingly efficient in formulating and maintaining their own project of prosperity, always ready to crush any threat to reform the existing social order.



Finally, as Darcy Ribeiro remembered, Brazil is different from other American nations where there are European people transplanted, like the U.S.A. and Canada – or even Argentina and Uruguay –, as here, despite of all past and present injustices, no one is trying to reproduce Europe.


Instead of it, what is being done is to reinvent a human genre from the merger of many others. “A mestizo people in the flesh and spirit, since mixing races has never been a crime or sin here” (p. 453). And, “despite of all racial fusion, Brazililians are, today, one of the most culturally and linguistically homogeneous – and one of the most integrated people on Earth”. (p. 454).



TECHNICAL Information




   Original Title: Gaijin

   Genre: Drama

   Length: 104 minutos

   Year (Brazil): 1980

   Studio: CPC - Centro de Produção e Comunicação/Embrafilme

   Distribution: Embrafilme

   Direction: Tizuka Yamasaki

   Argument: Tizuka Yamasaki e Jorge Duran

   Production: Carlos Alberto Diniz

   Music: John Neschling

   Photography: Edgar Moura

   Art Direction: Yurika Yamasaki

   Edition: Lael Rodrigues e Vera Freire






     Kyoko Tsukamoto (Titoe)

     Antônio Fagundes (Tonho)

     Jiro Kawarazaki (Yamada)

     Keniti Kaneko (Kobayashi)

     Gianfrancesco Guarnieri (Enrico)

     Álvaro Freire (Chico Santos)

     Louise Cardoso (Angelina)

     José Dumont (Ceará)

     Yuriko Oguri (Sra. Nakano)

     Clarisse Abujamra (Felícia)

     Carlos Augusto Strazzer (Dr. Heitor)

     Dorothy Leirner (Grazziela)

     Maiku Kozonoi (Keniti Nakano)

     Celso Saiki (Ueno)

     Sady Cabral (Sogro do Dr. Heitor)

     Fábio Tomasini (Imigrante italiano)

     George Arnold Vigar

     Paulo Yamaguti

     Kiyoharu Yokoi

     Kunio Suguimoto

     Horácio Russo

     Yutaka Saeki

     Mii Saki

     Shinobu Gotu

     Tadeu Hiroshi

     Yosiaki Hirota

     Denise Kiyomoto

     Vanda Marchetti

     Mika Matsuzake

     Tima Mizumoto

     Cuberos Neto

     Carlos Costa

     Lineu Dias

     Hiroshi Banno

     Oswaldo Barreto

     Mauro David Bonde


a w a r d s



·     Cannes Film Festival 1980 (France): Received the Award FISPRECI – with Special Mention;


·     Festival of Gramado 1980 (Brazil): Won the categories of Best Film, Best Supporting Actor (Jose Dumont), Best Sound Track, Best Argument and Best Design Production;


·     La Habana Film Festival 1980 (Cuba): Won the category of Best Film;


·     New Delhi Film Festival 1980 (India): Won the category of Best Film.


·     CNBB – Conferência Nacional dos Bispos do Brasil (National Conference of Brazilian Bishops) 1980 (Brazil): Received the Trophy “Margarida de Prata”.


·     Honolulu Film Festival (Hawaii, USA): Acclaimed with a Special Mention.












·    YAMAZAKI, Tizuka. Gaijin – Os Caminhos da Liberdade – Brasília, DF: Embrafilme – Centro de Produção e Comunicação, 1980.


·    RIBEIRO, Darcy. O Povo Brasileiro: A Formação e o Sentido do Brasil. São Paulo, SP: Companhia das Letras, 2001.


·    ISHIKAWA, Tatsuzô. Sôbô – Uma Saga da Imigração Japonesa. Tradução de Maria Fusako Tomimatsu, Monica Setuyo Okamoto e Takao Namekata. Cotia, SP: Ateliê Editorial, 2008.


·    GEERTZ, Clifford. The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. Cambridge, MA; Perseus Books Group, 2002.


·    HALL, Stuart. The Spectacle of the Other - Representation: Cultural Representations and Signifying Practices. London, GB: Sage Publications, 2003.