Blog 4: Cecilia

This week when we were reading Cirilo Villaverde’s Cecilia Valdés, I couldn’t help but thinking of the song, “Cecilia,” by Simon & Garfunkel. I made this connection for obvious reasons, but when I thought about the lyrics of the song, I found that some parallels can be drawn between Cecilia Valdés and “Cecilia.” In “Cecilia,” they sing “Celia, you're breaking my heart/
You're shaking my confidence daily.” In the song, Cecilia is a heartbreaker, one who captures the attention of many men, and causes the singer to sing: “Cecilia, I’m down on my knees/I’m begging you please to come home.” Likewise, Cecilia Valdés is a heartbreaker. All of the men at the party in chapters four through six, white men and mulattos alike, are attracted to her. But, I think the connection between these two works can go further, and my following ideas are based off what we discussed in class today.

In Cecilia Valdés, Cecilia is depicted as superficial, a person who doesn’t have a great personality or a lot of values. In fact, Villaverde describes her by saying that “she had a small mouth and full lips, indicating voluptuousness rather than strength of character.” He then goes on to describe her beautiful appearance, and it seems as though her appearance is the only thing that matters. Later, after Cecilia has grown up and is attending the party, she is described again as a beautiful creature. However, she isn’t really portrayed as more than an object of desire, desired by both white men and colored men. Similarly, in the song “Cecilia,” Cecilia isn’t given much character. She is simply an object that the singer wants to attain, as he begs her “please to come home.”

This objectification of women makes me think more specifically about the situation in Cuba in the nineteenth century. Back then, white men desired mulatto girls like Cecilia. But why? Because they were beautiful? I think it goes beyond that. Because mulatto women were of a different race and therefore of a different social class, it was more acceptable for white men to shamelessly pursue them. Last semester we talked about the concept of “honor.” These lower class mulatto girls wouldn’t have had any honor. Thus, maybe white men thought they would have more luck seducing mulatto women who had no honor to lose, than white, upper class women who did have honor to lose.

My Reaction to Ian's "Blog 3 More Comparisons?"

What Ian said:

"This week we read Echeverria's "The Slaughter House" and discovered that it is filled with a bunch of analogies and symbolism. One certain part of this reading really interested me and reminded me of something else, which I am kind of surprised no one mentioned...

The part that I related to and caught my attention was the story of the killing of the young Unitarian man. Many parts of this scene reminded me of the Crucifixion of Jesus that appears throughout the Gospels of the New Testament in the Word of God. In "The Slaughter House", Echeverria clearly states this analogy to the death of Christ in this line from the reading: "...they finally dragged the unfortunate young man to the bench of tortures just as if they had been the executioners of the Lord themselves." I believe "executioners of the Lord" is pretty clear. It is also interesting to consider the fact that Echeverria opposes the church, yet he relates this event in Catholicism, his enemy's religion, to a character he uses to get the readers on his side, against the Federalists.

These were a few of the connections that popped into my head while reading this part of the story:

First of all, just as Jesus is brought before and judged by Pontias Pilate and the Jews (Matthew 27:11-26), the young Unitarian is brought before and judged by Matasiete and the Federalist people. Just like the way they treated the Unitarian with their "Death to the savage Unitarians!" chant, reminded me of the death of Christ and the people yelling "Crucify him!" in Matthew 27:22-23. Again, the people of the Slaughter House were chanting "Long live Matasiete!" while the Jews similarly chanted "We have no king but Caesar!" in John 19:15. The mocking of the Unitarian also reminds me of the people and soldiers mocking Jesus (Matthew 27:27-31). In "The Slaughter House", the Federalists mock the Unitarian by cutting his hair and taking off his clothes. Similarly, the soldiers take off Jesus's robe and place a crown of thorns on his head while continually mocking Him. Along with this, the Unitarian was beaten and tied down to a table, which again is somewhat similar to how Jesus was beaten and nailed to the cross to die.

I normally struggle with making connections and comparing different readings, but this actually caught my attention and reminded me of something I was very familiar with, the Bible and my faith. Again, these might be somewhat loose connections but they completely made sense to me and worked in my head so I hope you too can see a little similarity between these two completely different readings and events." (http://ianfelt.blogspot.com/2014/01/blog-3-more-comparisons.html#comment-form)


My response:

"Wow, these are some really good connections that you made! I wonder if Echeverría did this on purpose. If he did, I can see how contradictory it seems: why would he use Jesus as a metaphor, if he was anticlerical? I think there might be two possible answers to that question. First, although he was opposed to the influence the Catholic Church had in politics, he still might very well have been religious. One can be in favor of the separation of Church and state and still be devout. Second, I think that maybe Echeverría was trying to make a point to the Federalists; if the Federalists reading this story recognized the metaphor, then maybe it would help them see that they were wrong in persecuting the Unitarians, whom Echeverría portrays as as innocent, good, and pure as Jesus."

Blog 3: Cowboys and Sherlock Holmes

This week when I was reading chapter II of Sarmiento's Facundo: Civilization and Barbarism, and Sarmiento was describing the different types of gauchos, or cowboys, of nineteenth century Argentina, I couldn't help but think that Sherlock Holmes would make a great gaucho.

One of my favorite TV shows is BBC's Sherlock, which is a revamp of Sir Arthur Conan Doyle’s stories, set in present-day London. Sherlock has incredible powers of deduction; that is, he can tell you your whole life’s story just by looking at you. He is incredibly smart, and uses a tool called a “mind palace” to store away information; theoretically, he can “never forget anything.” The following clip is of Sherlock deducing Dr. John Watson, whom he has just met:

It is later explained just how Sherlock knew all of those things about John (if you want to find out you should watch the series, it’s pretty greatJ). Obviously, Sherlock has astonishing observational and memory skills, skills which rastreadors and baqueanos also have. A rastreador is a type of gaucho who is an incredibly skilled tracker. When a theft occurs, “The rastreador is called in immediately; he looks at the tracks and follows them, only looking at the ground from time to time, as if his eyes were seeing a relief of that footprint, imperceptible to others. He follows along the streets, crosses through gardens, enters a home, and coldly says, pointing out a man he finds there, ‘He’s the one!’” Rastreadors, just like Sherlock, have the ability to see what others can’t or overlook, and to follow trails that lead to criminals.“The rastreador is a serious, circumspect person, whose pronouncements are accepted as evidence in the lower courts.” Similarly, Sherlock has caught numerous criminals, and has had to testify many times in court.

The second type of gaucho is a baqueano, which is a sort of guide who “knows twenty thousand square leagues of plains, forests, and mountains like the palm of his hand.” “A baqueano comes upon a little path crossing the road he takes, and he knows to which remote water hole it leads; if he comes upon a thousand, and this happens in the space of a hundred leagues, he knows them all, he knows where they come from and where they go. He knows the hidden ford in the river, above or below the usual passage, and the same for a hundred rivers and streams; he knows of a path, in the extensive marshland, where it can be crossed without difficulty, and the same for a hundred different marshes.” Similarly, Sherlock knows every street in London. In fact, during the first episode, he and John are able to chase a cab around London and deduce which way it will go based on what types of streets and traffic lights it encounters. The first video in this entry is part of this cool scene.

Thus, I think that Sherlock Holmes would make a great cowboy. However, to bring some deeper analysis to this blog entry, I will compare their characters. Both Sherlock and the gaucho are social outcasts: most people think Sherlock is a “freak,” and he has very few friends (he is sort of a jerk). Gauchos also tend to be outsiders—they are disdained by city folk, are intimidating to the average person, and generally tend to be loners by choice. Nonetheless, both are respected. The gaucho is respected because he is useful to a variety of different people in a variety of different ways. Likewise, people respect Sherlock; even though they may dislike him as a person, they begrudgingly accept that he is brilliant and is always very helpful in solving crimes. Thus, both Sherlock and rastreadors/baqueanos stand apart in society due to their extraordinary skills, and though they don’t fit in well with society, society needs and respects them.

My Reaction to Alexis's "Blog Two"

What Alexis said:

"After talking this week about newly independent Latin American nations, and the way the elites took advantage of the indigenous people, I began to see connections from our readings to present day United States. I know all of you are stuck on the jungle book analogy, but I'd like to try and be somewhat original and take my own approach to the subject. Whether what I say sounds legitimate or not, is for you to decide.

After reading Burns and Sarmiento, I began to think about the occupy Wall Street movement. Think about it for a second: the so called "1%" is just the same as the elites, and the other 99% would be comparable to the peasants and every other person living in Latin America who was receiving no benefit from the rich elites' decisions.

The elites grew wealthy and lived luxurious lifestyles in Latin America while the poor commoners had children growing up in no better living conditions than the dirty family dog. some of the decisions the elites made, like trying to Europeanize the countries, often made the peasants' living conditions even worse. The elites did not care, however, because meanwhile they were basking in all the glory that came from being a rich white person of the nation.

The same argument can be made for the top 1% of the U.S. population. From what I have heard in my high school civics class, and what I looked up on the internet, this 1% of the population holds anywhere from 30 to 40 percent of our wealth. No wonder the other 99% of people in our country grew so frustrated and started the occupy Wall Street movement.

I don't know much about the situation in the U.S., but I feel like the relation between it and Latin America in the past is similar. To me, it is even a little ironic, considering the fact that people in Latin America saw the U.S., and wished to be more like it." (http://alexislaciv.blogspot.com/2014/01/blog-2.html#comment-form)

 

My response:

 

"While I do see the parallels you are drawing between 19th century Latin America and present-day United States, I would like to identify several important differences. First, I agree that the elites' efforts to modernize Latin America had negative effects on the lives of the lower classes. However, in the United States today, poor people are not poor because rich people are rich, and rich people are not rich because poor people are poor. The rich 1% are not hoarding away their wealth, making it impossible for lower class people to move up the social ladder. In this country, it is possible for everyone to enjoy an increase in wealth at the same time; that is the nature of a capitalist economy.

Also, you said that "the other 99% of people in our country grew so frustrated and started the occupy Wall Street Movement." I should point out that not 99% of the nation's population are liberals, are against capitalism, and supported Occupy Wall Street. Also, the "99%" in the United States is not the same as the 98-99% of Latin Americans who weren't rich, white elites. Yes, in Latin America most of the people in this group were extremely poor. However, the United States has a much larger middle class than Latin America did in the 19th century, and so the "99%" of people in the U.S. includes many middle-class people who do enjoy a relatively high standard of living."

Blog 2 (sorrynotsorry I made this whole post about Disney)

For my second blog entry, I was inspired by a fellow classmate, who suggested that the song "I Wanna Be Like You" from the Disney movie The Jungle Book is similar to the situation in Latin American countries in the 1800s, shortly after they won their independence from Spain. In the song, the king orangutan is analogous to these newly independent Latin American countries. Like Latin American countries wanted to be like European countries and the United States, the king orangutan wanted to be like humans, and so he sought Mowgli for help, because he believed Mowgli could teach him how to make fire. Latin American countries wanted to copy the industrialization, urbanization, infrastructures, liberal ideology, and overall "progress" of European countries and the United States, hence: “I wanna be like you!”

For this blog entry, I was inspired to find other Disney songs that are (partly) analogous to the era of Europeanization and nation-building in Latin America. I found four:

1.      The first song I came up with is “Part of Your World,” sung by Ariel in The Little Mermaid.  In it, Ariel expresses her desire to become a human, and leave her life as a mermaid behind. She thinks that life will be better “up where they stay all day in the sun.” Sebastian, her crab guardian/mentor, however, is disdainful of humans, which he sings about in his song “Under the Sea." Thus, in this situation, Ariel is the white, intellectual elite of the Latin American countries who wanted Europeanization, and wanted to be part of that European/United States world; Sebastian, on the other hand, would be the majority of the citizens of the Latin American countries who were apprehensive about modernization, and wanted to stick to traditional ways of life.

 

 

2.      The second song I thought of is “Gaston,” from Beauty and the Beast. After Gaston proposes to Belle and she turns him down, Gaston is “down in the dumps,” and his friend, Lefou, tries to cheer him up by listing all the things Gaston is best at. After the song, Gaston concludes that he is the best person for Belle, and that he will do anything to get her to marry him. In this situation, Gaston is the European ideologies forced by elites onto newly independent Latin American nations. Even though it would have been more effective to “adapt” these new ideologies rather than “adopt” them, the countries tried to copy them exactly. The elite were convinced that these were the best strategies for the new nations, when actually they had some negative consequences (discussed later); Gaston was convinced he was the best for Belle, when really he was a jerk.

 

3.      In the next song I found, I just focused on one quote, and my analogy is kind of obvious: “You think I’m an ignorant savage/And you’ve been so many places, I guess it must be so.” This song is “Colors of the Wind”, sung in Pocahontas, in which Pocahontas is singing to John Smith. The intellectual elite of Latin American countries considered the people of the countryside to be barbarians, while the people of cities were modern, "civilized," cultured, and knew better; Domingo Sarmiento wrote in his Facundo: Civilization and Barbarism that the Native Americans of Argentina were savages, and should be destroyed.

 

 

4.      The final song I came up with was “Following the Leader," from Peter Pan. It is sung by Michael and the Lost Boys as they play “follow the leader,” with John as their leader. They sing: “We’re following the leader, the leader, the leader/We’re following the leader, wherever he may go.” In this case, “the leader” is European countries/the United States, and the Lost Boys are Latin American countries. The Latin American countries (the ruling elite, at least) were so eager to follow the lead of their European models that they did so almost blindly, and before they knew it, they had created economic dependency on the European market, the majority of the population was impoverished, and there was a cultural clash between those who wanted “progress,” and those who didn’t.

Blog 1

Hi everybody! It seems like we already know each other pretty well, since we've already been in the same class for a whole semester. Nonetheless, here is some information you may not know about me: I am a Spanish major and a Chinese language minor. I’m not exactly sure what I want my career to be, but right now I am thinking about adding an English major, and possibly eventually teaching English to speakers of other languages.

I chose to take this class because it fits in perfectly with my Spanish major. Languages aren’t spoken in a vacuum, and so the more cultural information you know about a place where a language is spoken, the better and more effectively you can communicate with native speakers in that language. I learned bits of cultural information about Spanish-speaking countries here and there throughout the five years that I studied Spanish before starting college, and I saw taking this class as an opportunity to get a more extensive understanding of Latin American civilization and culture.