"Every calling is great when greatly pursued": history475

This week’s movie Cocalero was not just about Evo Morales as a presidential candidate but also about the Coca farmer’s union that helped to back him up. This movie became even more interesting when compared to the movie from last week Our Brand Is Crisis, about Guni another presidential candidate. It was interesting to see how they both ran their campaigns. On the surface level the watcher receives the message that Evo is the indigenous honest figure while Guni was trying to twist the people with his multinational strategists. Through the movie we learn of Evo’s background and also the fight to keep alive the Coca leaf industry.

“The pilgrimage became an aperture through which to exhibit indigenous collective political identity and national distinctiveness.”

The Suzana Sawyer article talks about the mass indigenous protests that were discussed in the movie. It is specifically talking about the ones that took place in 1992 in Ecuador. These protests were much the same in the approval they received from other places and the way in which they went about expressing themselves. Sawyer explains this so eloquently by describing how the social movement of united indigenous progress has been fueled all over Latin America. She describes also how the indigenous groups have taken up causes that were left behind by other organizations especially the preservation of the rainforest. But, there have been consequences. One that has been only alluded to in both films is the fuel that protests have given to the theory of the indigenous barbarianism. People of non-indigenous descent and foreign birth see the indigenous protests as them acting out in their nature going along with the already engrained racism that exists in these countries. This was seen in Guni when the strategists could not understand the march that Evo was taking part in. It was seen in this movie when Evo visits Santa Cruz and people publicly call him explicit names. In Ecuador as Sawyer explains the “white” sector saw the indigenous as lazy and saw no reason to give them land because of this engrained notion. But, in response as the indigenous no longer let their political right been taken away they fight against these notions and even go as far as electing one of their own a trend on the rise in many of these countries.

“Drug policies that ignore market realities and coercive methods that undermine democratic governance are counterproductive.”

One of the largest debates that took place in the movie was from Evo Morales’ own Caco growers and the policies that have been forced on them because of the cocaine that results from the leaves. One farmer in the movie had a very insightful quote about what it means to him, he says that it is not their responsibility what people in America do with the Coca leaves. He felt that they were being faulted because of the misuse of the leaves. The last scene of the movie actually shows three women chewing the leaves, which is what the original purpose for the leaves was. Evo even describes to the military how a Harvard study has said that this is very healthy for them to do. Kenneth Lehman describes in the chapter from his book what should be done to combat illicit drug use but also not destroying indigenous livelihood and the infrastructure of Latin American countries. He says that they must be patient and begin with open dialogue. This could then avoid human rights violations also. The scene in the movie where the soldiers are ripping up the plants shows the current policy of how they are stopping the producing of cocaine. But this is not an answer. What this has created is fuel for an already marginalized sector of society to become politically active after 500 years of discontent.

It’s been a great semester,

Mattea Sanders

Friday, April 22, 2011

Our Brand is Deception

“For better or worse, neoliberalism-with a familiar emphasis on free trade, export production, and the doctrine of comparative advantage-reigned supreme in Latin America at the turn of the third millennium.”

This week’s movie “Our Brand Is Crisis” was important in explaining two policies that relate to the latest developments in Latin America. These are the United States continued blind influence on the region with no thought to the effect on the actual people. Also the other development is that the people in Latin America especially the indigenous were no longer willing to accept the status quo and were standing up against their oppressors. This neoliberalism that is talked about in John Charles Chasteen’s book “Born in Blood and Fire” had an urgent flare in Latin America. The policy was fueled in more by the United States that agreed with the policy. So how did an area fueled in nationalistic ideologies become so globalist?

To answer those questions one has to look at closer at the actual people being effected and participating. One sector of society was benefitting, the middle class and above. But, in reflection there was a whole portion of society mostly the indigenous that had not forgotten their nationalistic roots and were not willing to go along with the cogs of the neoliberal globalization politics. In the face of all of this as Chasteen explains, a reconceptulization of the race relations in the region was taking place. People used nationalist rhetoric of the past to instill their own fight for their rights in the region.

One important lesson that the movie and Chasteen touches on is that the United States understanding of the people residing in Latin America needs to be reshaped if there is going to be any kind of positive relations between the two areas. Chasteen explains that the United States sees all peoples of Latin America as Latinos. He shows how this is only a concept that applies once they immigrate to the United States where they become an amalgamated whole under the “umbrella” name Latinos. The actual people of the region see themselves as Bolivians, Mexicans, Brazilians, and so on. To understand this is to show that each country has a history that must be understood and the effect that this still has on their country today. In the case of Bolivia, the United States strategists did not understand that protesting in the street is the way that their people effect political change. In their push towards globalization in these countries they forgot the peoples that were being marginalized. They forgot these people’s histories and their engrained beliefs that they would forever stand for.

“Increasing poverty, stagnant or falling real wages, and a further and steady widening of the distribution of income in virtually every nation has also become omnipresent and largely ignored social context of the neoliberal era.”

In James Cypher’s article on the “Washington Consensus” explains the essential weaknesses of neoliberal economics in Latin America. One argument he makes is that the kind of funds that came into the Latin American countries was one very limited in who they helped and two did not bring the employment that they promised. This is one argument that the people in the movie make against Goni’s own policies from his first presidency from 1993 or 1997. They say that although he created social security he did not bring an increase in jobs whatsoever.

The article by John Perkins reveals the understanding these people have in what they are doing and the harmful effects that it has on these countries. But what is even more startling is that they know what they are doing. They want these countries that they are lending to, to be forever politically and economically tied to them. They do enough to make the highest elite in the countries happy and forget the rest. They willingly deceit these people to make larger loans than they know they can afford. They also in the process break down the fragile government structure in that country by alleviating the people’s trust in their government. It is very much like the movie when the strategists may not know or care if Guni was the right candidate for that country but they still made sure he got into power with deceptive tactics.

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, April 17, 2011

Streets Lined with Blood

The movie from this week La virgen de los sicaros, was a very intense look at the recurring problems in Columbia because of the drug trafficking there. It shows what the actual repercussions are on the individual people living there. The biggest way it does this is through generational gaps that show the changing society in Columbia especially in the city of Medellin. The older man Fernando knew what the city was like before the drug cartels took over. He is able to tell the story of his humble childhood. In comparison the boys Alexis and Wilmar show him the city that they are growing up in; a city where the streets, houses, and even more extremely the churches are not safe. The churches are now a place where cocaine is sold and taken. It is where deals go down and people use their religion to kill in the name of what they sell. Where little children sniff glue to the point that there bodies become lifeless. Also to these children who have more harsh experiences than most adults, death is a common occurrence. The killing of another is just a way to stake your claim of what you want. If someone looks at you the wrong way they can be shot. What is the most shocking at the end of the movie is when Fernando goes into the morgue and all of the boys around the same age are lying there. Wilmar has died but before him Alexis was killed because he killed his brother and many more before him. Their lives lost. It gives the example that a whole generation is being wiped out in this same manner of one for another. One death just leads to another. Another very important aspect of the film is the symbolism. One scene in particular is after Fernando goes and visits Alexis’ family. He is walking down the stairs and it begins to rain. The rain-washed away tons and tons of blood. It comes down the stairs and through the gutters. This is symbolic of that every household in the ghetto of Medellin has had cold-blooded murder. They all have lost young men. This bloodshed has covered the streets till that is all that is recognizable.

The first set of documents for this week, which were from the National Security Archive, discussed the United States role with funding and backing the Columbian military in 2003 immediately after the death of potential candidate Luis Carlos Galan by the Medellin drug cartel. These specific documents and the ones that follow show that the United States was only committed to funding the military when they were working at counter-drug activities. The United States was able to work under the label that they were helping to fight the guerrillas that were undermining the government in Columbia. But, there was always specific interest in the guerrillas that were working with the drug cartels. Specifically when they began to attack areas where the growers were specifically being targeted. The United States even switched from funding the government to funding a police force that they felt were busting the cartels more efficiently than the military. The United States was aware of the human rights violations of the army and in some cases was not willing to turn the other check to what was actually going on.

Ricardo Vargas’ article explains how mafia type groups are able to flourish in countries. He explains that there are certain situations within societies that fuel the existence of this. All of the examples that they give are what is occurring in Medellin. One of the parts of this is control over the city that develops because of a lack of government restrictions. The society creates a form of court and execution system develops outside of the one that already exists. This has occurred within Medellin. The system of control has now been placed on gangs that shoot out one another. Another example from the movie is how when a shipment of cocaine is processed into the United States fireworks go off. This shows the institutionalized weight that cocaine as an export has on the city. It was important for the whole city to know when it occurred.

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, April 10, 2011

Cocaine Cowboys

This week’s movie, Cocaine Cowboys talks about the evolution of the spread of the cocaine trade in Miami. It talks about the many contributing factors and the way it spread from a small trade to a huge multi-billion dollar industry. It also talked about the violence that erupted as cause of it. Then it discussed how they cracked down on it, and was able to slow the trade down. The articles that coincide with this movie support it but also show that the trade has not died and that the United States has taken unethical measures to try to eradicate this problem.

“Washington has slid down the slipper slope of increasing involvement in yet another quagmire in Latin America.”

Another problem that is discussed in this article is when the United States started trying to stop the drug problem at the source. But, through trying to do this many problems have arisen. In Coletta Youngers’ article “Collateral Damage: The US ‘War on Drugs,’” the author discusses the impact of the drug trafficking in the cities of the Andes. This ties very well into the movie because the main city they discussed was Medellin and the trade out of this city. The other part of the argument that was not discussed in the movie is the impact of the United States policies to combat the International Drug Trade. The wake that these policies have made in some countries has been extreme. One of the biggest impacts that Youngers’ states is that by the United States having a strong anti-drug military presence in the Andes it undermines local and national civilian-military relations in those countries on a good level. To the local population it is as if their country is being occupied for it’s inadequacy for their drug trafficking problems. It can also make the civilian’s distrust even more their own military because of the types of tactics their military are forced to take against them. This in turn stops the spread of democratic governments after years of militaristic governments. Even worse, the United States is helping to fund militaries that are corrupt and have extreme human rights violations. This puts the United States in a very bad position. One part that comes up in the article that has to do with the movie is that the Medellin cartel was cracked down upon in the movie was replaced by another cartel the Cali cartel. Once that was taken out it became small regional oriented trafficking. This shows that although they are able to get it once, it will always come back. Surprisingly, the cocaine trade has helped the economies of these countries. While not being a positive enforcer of the economy, it has brought about lucrative farming and employment opportunities. This is spoken about in the movie how farmers can make a lot of money by farming the leaves for cocaine. Even with efforts by the US Government to try to put money into the economies of countries that are destabilized by the eradication of Cocaine it still debases the economy significantly. Also, one point made by Youngers is that there is no way to measure success in the war on drugs.

“You will recall that over the years Manuel Noriega in Panama and I have developed a fairly good relationship.”

Another source that was in the reading for this week was declassified documents that show connections between Contras that were used during the United States back Contra War in Nicaragua in the 1980s. What is the most shocking is these documents include documents from NSC aide and Iran-contra figure Oliver North that shows that they had known knowledge of the connections between the contras and drug trafficking. One example of this is that an April 1, 1985 memo explains how two new commanders have either past or present history with drug trafficking. Another even more startling note was one of February 10, 1986, Michael Palmer who is one of the largest marijuana traffickers in the United States was given $300,000.000 to ferry supplies to the contras. This is an extreme sum especially when his economic exploits were very well known. There were also suspicions that drug money was being used to fund these United States backed contras. The United States was building a relationship with Manuel Noriega. In the documentary, Noriega is responsible for taking the money of the drug traffickers and keeping it in the bank for them. Even this alone shows that the United States was either willing to turn a blind eye to what was going on or was not doing their research. In one message sent by Oliver North to Reagan National security advisor John Poindexter he says that Noriega wants the United States to help him clean up his image.

Till next week,

matteavs

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Violence is Certain

In the article, “The Heart that Bleeds,” they discuss what occurred after the North Atlantic Free Trade Agreement was signed and the modernity it brought to Mexico. One of the main factors about this the worry that jobs will be replaced by substitutes. This ties in very well with Bus 174. As we discussed in class, after Import Substitution Industrialization had ebbed because of the rise of the domination of 1^st world powers the economic status quo that had existed before was reinforced. So that people were still in their social situations that had existed during ISI but their economic situations went away. This intense shift for Mexico from its time under ISI is emphasized in the article “I Saw a City Invincible.” During the time of ISI in Mexico the government took aggressive control to try to stop foreign competition. This was one of the worries that were talked about in the first article with NAFTA. People were worried that foreign competition would win out eventually.

In the last article that I spoke about before, the authors point out interesting trends that have been seen in the migrant urban centers. One of these is that people bring the connections that they had in the country with them to the city. This was seen in our last movie City of God when Rocket talks about how migrants will come and stay with family members till they find work and a place to stay. They also speak about the police and how they have given up on many centers of Rio de Janeiro. This is seen in the movie in talking about Sandro’s mother. In a town of effective police force this threat could have been cut down. Also this police force is attacking the problems of urban life with untrained and unqualified men. This creates such problems as what occurred at the Candelaria Church Massacre.

In the next reading for this week, Alberto Salcedo Ramos explains the innocence of a robbery occurring on a Friday night. The take that he gives is very interesting and evokes some of the same emotions that occur during the movie Bus 174. Like the people on the bus Ramos did not know the rules and what he was getting himself into when he took the taxi. One thing that occurred in the movie that also occurred in this article was the robber trying to hide their identity. At first in the movie Sandro would try to hide his face. This was very confusing and I could not figure out why he was doing this. But, in his mind he still had a chance to get out and escape. If he kept his identity hidden then people would not try to come and find him. This occurred in the article also. The robbers made Ramos keep his eyes closed the entire time. They would hit him if he opened his eyes. Both in the movie and in the article this gives the robbers an achieved authority over the person being robbed. For that time they are rulers over their lives, whether they are going to live or they are going to die. One thing that through the article is explained is that both Sandro and the robbers in the taxi did not have a personal vendetta at first against the people being robbed. It could be said that at the end Sandro had bad feelings towards Geisa because she lied about having relations in prison. But, at first he just got onto a bus of people who he had never met. It is to the same way with these men. They attack him because he seems to be a wealthy man. Because of his physical showing of wealth they almost feel that he deserves to be robbed. But, in the last section the author finds out exactly why they are robbing him. He states that they did it because someone in their group was killed and they need three million pesos. But, through him being able to keep it together and not freaking out he is let out safe. They even give him money to make it back home. What he realizes is that the society that he lives in has created this situation of mugging that the only thing you can hope for is to get kind robbers when your time comes.

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, March 27, 2011

Cidade de Deus Blog

Authority Turned On It’s Head

In Cidade de Dues or City of God the storyline they used of not telling the entire story in a linear fashion was very efficient. They were able to portray to the watcher the varying levels of the story by only showing what pertained to the person they were focusing on. One example of this is the scene where the Tender Trio goes and robs the brothel. They show that people have been shot but they do not show who has killed them. They also do not tell were Lil Dice has gone. Later on they show that Lil Dice went back in and killed the people. This shows that although the gang robbed the people they were not as vicious as shooting them. This helps to further the theme that the hoods are becoming more vicious every new generation. Another example of this generation-to-generation change is the chapter called “The Story of the Apartment.” It shows how the apartment was started basically from a woman just dealing weed to make some money but it shows how it moves from hand to hand and also how it changes. How from generation to generation the apartment goes in worse disrepair. One other part of this is that being in City of God you will eventually be pulled into the violence. The main motto for the movie would be that violence feeds more violence and that it is a tragic circle of life. One example of this is Knockout Ned. He is not involved in the hoods at the first of the movie. But, when his wife his raped for him being attractive he takes revenge and kills people in Lil Z’s gang. Then in Carrot’s gang he kills a man when robbing a bank who is an innocent bystander. This man’s son Otto eventually joins the gang and then kills Knockout Ned in revenge. This is why it was so important for Rocket to break out of this.

Another theme that runs throughout the movie is how fundamental the gang’s control of the favela has become. It has become institutional, religious, and basic in the way the favela has been run. Hart discusses this in his article, when he talks about the shamanistic ritual that changes Lil Dice’s name to Lil Z. It is a ritual that has been set up to bless these gang members, to support what they are doing and further it.

One of the most important parts of this movie is its placement in the “testimonio” genre. Because it was a novel first, many of the forms that are used in the book and translated into the movie. Hart points out that when making the movie they did not want to lose any of the poetic value of the novel. They wanted it to tell the story of the bad things that occurred in the favela but also to give many messages about it. Undercurrents of the media, religion, violence, and rising above are able to play out in the movie’s unique story line.

One important element to the story that Hart hints at is the importance of ever-changing relationships. They can mean the likelihood of life or death. One example of this is Benny. Benny grew up with Lil Dice but he meets one kid who changes the way he looks and brings him into the groovy group, he then meets a girl who changes everything for him and makes him not want to be a hood anymore. These relationships change him.

One of the underemphasized parts of The City of God in all the articles is that the authority that should have existed is undermined and twisted. The police as it turns out have been involved in racketeering. They are helping to keep the gangs going which in turn keeps the violence going. As stated in the article by Julio Cesar Pino it keeps the subprolitariat population. Because of the situation with economy and the debasing of it. Also, the City of God and the gang violence going on it has become a spectacle for the middle class. This is shown through the pictures being shown in the newspaper. They do not see the destroying of the City of God through violence.

Sunday, March 20, 2011

Che.....

"Love of humanity... of justice and truth. A real revolutionary goes where he is needed."

Building on what we have learned of Che Guevara through the Motorcycle Diaries this movie continued the perspective of Che as a protectorate of the indigenous people. That the people at the bottom were the ones who he felt had no voice whatsoever and that he needed to speak out for them. This is spoken about in his “Message to the Tricontinental” when he is speaking on the Korean War. He talks about how the United States was experimenting with the Korean people different weapons of war. He specifically uses the language cannon fodder, which evokes a certain ethos. He then continues to devolve into a discussion about the Vietnam War. He talks about how the Vietnam people are actually just a puppet in the role between imperialistic countries. What are even more interesting about this article are Che’s feelings about America. This contrasting emotion towards the United States can be seen in this article and in the movie. He believes President Johnson’s “Great Society” reforms will never actually succeed. He also believes that these weak trials are making Vietnam worse. This is very revealing about Che because one would think he would appreciate Johnson’s reforms but he does not.

Che also talks about in this speech the United State’s aggression to keep the status quo of it’s own power in the world. He emphasizes what the United States did in Panama. Which he also does in the movie during the speech at the United Nations. Che’s statements on neocolonialism are very interesting in that they keep the economic status the same as it was before. One of the remarkable things that stand out about Che in all of his works is his language. One example is from this article when he uses the words fiefs to describe the colonial holdings of these imperialistic countries.

“Violence is not the monopoly of the exploiters and as such the exploited can use it too and, moreover, ought to use it when the moment arrives.”

One of the most important parts of this movie was showing how guerilla warfare was developed in the eyes of Che Guevara. He made many distinctions during the movie about what it was and what it was not. It was not a group that wrecked havoc on the indigenous countryside. He believed that these were the people they were fighting to liberate not to destroy. These sentiments were backed up through the article “Guerilla Warfare: A Method.” He talks about what it means to do this kind of warfare. The main part is that it is a means to an end. This is a misnomer of Che Guevara as seen through the interviews with the Americans throughout the movie. He wants to accomplish a finished product through his idea of warfare. He believes in the strength of the people and that through guerilla warfare they earn back the right to govern their country. He believes most importantly in two central factors he feels are necessary. One that there has a to be a central rural basis. This is shown in the movie by their very well constructed camps. The other is the importance of education and the guerilla troops them being educated. He makes sure that the guerilla troops are taught well in these schools. He also does not believe that an urban warfare can truly work. This is shown in the movie when Castro tries to make a deal with the urban fighters and Che does not like it.

“A country that can’t read and write is easy to deceive.”

One of the most important concepts to know about Che Guevara was that he wanted to spread what had occurred in Cuba throughout South America. He felt from an early age that “this America” as he called it deserved its time. This is what he says in the end. That he wants to take it throughout Southern and Central America. As indicated by the documents about the fall of Che Guevara he did not stay in Cuba for this exact reason. He felt that his real job of creating and keeping alive the revolution was done and that he was better elsewhere. In Che’s own document he does comment that the United States wants to prevent another Cuba from happening, which would lead one to believe that he knew the United States, did not approve of what he was doing. It would also show that he knew that his life might be in danger from United States forces because of his continued revolutionary sentiment.

Sunday, March 6, 2011

Week 8-Motorcycle Diaries

I am going to take this week off.
Till next week,
mattevs

Sunday, February 27, 2011

Soy Cuba

“Rapid population growth and urbanization were creating massive shortages of the most basic social necessities.”

Soy Cuba’s strongest message was it’s anti-American, anti-imperialistic ideas. It really showed how Americans came to Cuba hoping to have a good time and suck every bit of life out of it. They did not care whether it was at the expense of the people living there. One perfect example of this was in the bar. The bar was in a Cuban indigenous theme showing the American’s misunderstanding of the Cuban culture. They just saw the statues and the costumes as a game to be consumed. But for the people working there it was real. Many times such as the girl they had to sacrifice real happiness for capitalism.

Susan Eckstein is able to show why and how the pre-revolutionary Cuba was made. One of the reasons is because of the economic suppression that Batista had on the country. She is able to portray this through her graphs by showing that economically Cuba never came up on top until 1980.

The most significant part of Eckstein’s essay was about the changes brought on by Revolution. As shown in Soy Cuba sugar was an exploitative and corporate crop. The man who has leased out his land to the man loses it to the United Fruit Company. But as Eckstein points out, “Sugar workers, enjoy more social benefits, job security, and earnings-in comparison to other workers-than before the revolution.” This showed that by the revolution occurring they were benefited. It follows well the theme of the movie that they are Cuba and have to further live and die that way. She also shows what changed for all workers, “Workers on the state farms were granted year-round employment, social benefits, and wage increases.”

That is one of the defining parts of the movie about who and what Cuba is. By using the Vignette format Mikhail Kalatozov uses a form that Eisenstein also used. The difference is that this movie is in the final format so that this movie’s point is brought across completely. Soy Cuba is a whole spectrum of the Cuban life experience. From the indigenous to the prostitute to the family in the mountains suffering from the results of revolution. It was also a very honest movie. In the scene where the man has paid the woman for sleeping with him he walks through the shantytown and is barraged with kids. This is such a strong portrayal, as if to say you have paid for the woman and also for the town in which she is from. They want the watcher to really see where she is from. What she has to deal with everyday.

This vulnerability brought on by a strong revolution could be an invitation to outside sources. So the happy exciting ending that is at the end of the movie could lead to an eventual unhappy revolutionary government.

“To anti-communists, especially in the United States but also in Latin America, the surgery of social revolution created a Frankenstein’s monster-unnatural, powerful, and frightening.”

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, February 20, 2011

The Price Paid Was Great

“But the price paid was great, and the rapid modernization contained seeds of self-destruction”

Que Viva Mexico’s cinematic history is as interesting if not more then what is portrayed inside the movie. It is a story of challenging authority and influence, just like any of the themes that are discussed in the movie. The two actually parallel one another quite perfectly. This movie as Chris Robe discusses in his article was at the center of a debate within leftist movie theater. It used critically the montage scheme, which was not accepted in Hollywood. But, that was the challenge. To take away the strong hold the Hollywood had had on cinema and show that others could do it just as well. But, in the end the dominant Hollywood culture won out. Another movie was released entitled Thunder over Mexico. This success is very much like in the movie when the plantation owners are able to put down the rebellion of the indigenous workers. In the movie business if someone outside of Hollywood tried to make a movie, especially with experimental qualities they would be put down such as Eisenstein was. The movie also takes out the historical context of the movie so that is does not have a larger meaning. The whole purpose of Que Viva Mexico was to portray a larger meaning of the Mexican Revolution. But, this does not go with a Hollywood stylized movie. Another element that affected the finished product was the power of Marxism. Eisenstein naturally had a Marxist view and that would have played into his portrayal of the indigenous workers. It can defiantly be seen in the sixth section where the masks are removed and all of the previous rulers who had cut down the lower classes are dead. It symbolizes the working class triumphing through the revolution. From than on through generations would live happier.

Because of the role of montage and in Stephen Hart’s article what he calls ideational, Eisenstein’s own emotions come out quite a bit. They do through how he is portraying Mexico. He shows his love of culture and the building of that culture. He shows that through starting at the most basic history of Mexico and that is the Mayan. It also helps to build a basis of a strong indigenous group with a strong culture. If this is described well than the death of that culture at the hands of a white European is even greater. Also, Eisenstein’s interest in ritual is shown quite a bit. In many of the sections he uses Mexican rituals to tell the story instead of himself. One of these scenes is the Fiesta, also the marriage ceremony in the third section.

Like many of the other films, the use of symbolism is strong. In the section entitled the Maquey Cactus when Sebastian comes and takes Maria back to the plantation she is riding on a donkey much like Mary and Joseph. But, instead of Maria’s son being sacrificed it is Maria herself. She will taken unfairly and have to sacrifice for the greater good. But, the message that would have been carried further in the Soldadera section is that her sacrifice one made by so many women during the revolution would have been for a greater good. Eventually generations would have escaped the rigid plantation and dictatorship that is described in The Course of Mexican History. But, through Eisenstein’s very well done portrayal the viewer is able to get the view even further that, “The dichotomies of nineteenth-century Mexican life, especially those of wealth and poverty, are almost all to be found on the hacienda.”

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, February 13, 2011

Everything in society must progress or be left behind....-Gabriela

“Many men inevitably greeted changes and threatened changes in gender roles with insecurity, frustration, and growing fears of demasculinization.”

In Gabriela, there are two contrasting scenes. As the movie goes on one grows into the other. The first is of the man coming into the house and killing the two lovers. The other is of the couple coming out of the house at the end of the movie after the husband has found them. This progression mirrors the progress of Brazil that also occurs in the movie.

Through the progress that occurs in Brazil Marriage is also progressed. As Besse stated the idea that men killed their wives, as a right was barbaric. For Brazil to be brought up to the civilized “ideal” they had to lose this old tradition. To insist on order the disorder in marriage had to be taken out. This disorder was the relentless unchecked passion. If these passions were not stopped than they would cut down the progress that they had made. As seen in the movie between Mr. Nacib and Gabriela if there is not murder than it does not stop the social progress in the town. In the beginning of the movie when the man knows that his wife is cheating he hires a man that is a peasant to go and kill them. This also contributes to violent peasant involvement. It cut down the decency in the middle class life. It also disrupted the social life in the town. After the murder is committed everyone talks about it and life is stopped. To the modern person in Europe this unchecked male vanity and control of women would have seemed uncivilized. It would be a step back from everything they had worked to.

Like everything in the town marriage had to be modernized, at the end of the movie Mr. Nacib does not kill his wife and the cheater. He says he is afraid that people will judge him but they do not. A decent break up between the two was becoming the norm in the society. To just go back to the way they were. It also helped to set back into civilization a marriage that in itself was uncivilized.

Gabriela is the incarnation of the old peasant population of Brazil. She is the population that is wild and untamed. They are affected by all of changes brought in by the invading population. They new population tries to modernize them. Such as Mr. Nacib with Gabriela. Gabriela is a wild peasant that is brought in and she is fine with the social situation that comes between her and Mr. Nacib. She does not understand the need of marriage. But, just as Brazil is becoming civilized, she is forced into marriage. She tries to fit into the very specific mold that is set for her. She tries to wear the constricting clothes especially the shoes. Her unwillingness to wear shoes is very symbolic of the fact that she cannot change into the progressive strict mold. In the end just like in Brazil there is a population that gets left behind in the modernization. They do not progress but just have to watch and even be exploited.

As Sueann Caulfield argues racial improvement was being tried throughout Brazil especially in the cities. They believed if they made the cities more progressive by bringing in Europeans that it would then make them more European and attract that kind of civilization. The police in defending this progression also promoted the family and the maintaining of it. Through a man killing his wife and her lover it created a scene in which visitors would be privy to. But, if separations were done in a progressive silent manner it would not attract attention. Another perfect example from the movie of such a separation was the professor and his lover. The Colonel went into the house and then the lovers came out and left. One man is even heard during this scene stating this is even to, “This is to progressive for me.”

Caulfield also brings up the idea that Gabriela as “the servant” could have also been constituted in society as a prostitute. This can be seen especially into movie through the contrasting clothes that she wears in the beginning then when she is married to him. Through society’s shunning of this role of prostitute, Mr. Nacib is pressured to marry her to take away this potential label.

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, February 6, 2011

Camila-Subliminal Latin America

Camila-Subliminal Latin America

Latin America duplicates the problems in Europe on a larger scale even after colonialism. They carry with them the problems of Europe and in many ways model themselves in the image of Europe. The patriarchal, familial, and governmental structural all remained the same. A ruler by the name of Juan Manuel de Rosas ruled very strongly with an iron fist. This movie comes out as a satire against the oppression that he forced on these people. Maria Luisa Bemberg is able to do this without even showing him, Stevens states “The governor remains in the shadows of the film, behind the omnipresent portraits, the universal red ribbons, and the pervasive atmosphere of red ribbons.” All of these techniques are used through the film to convey his presence in their lives. It also describes how in a volatile environment two young people who did not believe in the society would use romance to combat the governmental structure.

The character of Father Ludislao is portrayed in the movie as pure. But has Hurt says Bemberg was also a Roman Catholic so the perspective of wanting to portray a priest as spotless is very likely. He did not have strong emotions for Camila but was trying to deal with an unprecedented amount of lust in his heart.

Camila is the modern woman, the anti-colonialist woman. She goes against all of the social structures that are part of post-colonialism. By doing this she herself is a physical satire of this governmental structure. Hart discusses how Bemberg had Camilla seduce the priest not the other way around. This is a strong reversal of the social order itself in that usually a man was supposed to approach a woman. But, for her to first even put her emotions out there and then second lay her heart out to him is very significant.

The scene where she describes her erotic dream is in itself very significant to the satire that the movie is portraying and the actual movie itself. During this time it was not proper for women to talk about having any kind of sexual emotions at all especially for pleasure. Sex, in the public atmosphere was for reproduction only. Women’s discussion of this was forbidden. So for Camilla to open up about these erotic feelings in a public atmosphere was important for furthering the story line but also for showing how Camilla was different than other women. She felt she had full control of her body and that she deserved to have as much sexual pleasure from that as she saw fit. This was a very strong difference from what society felt.

Camilla also breaks the social norm through her relationship with her grandmother and the slaves. The grandmother at the beginning of the movie is as actually an ironic foreshadowing of the sexual misconduct that Camila herself will be involved in. Camilla becomes very close to the Grandmother and there is an illusion that Camilla learns to crave the love and passion that her Grandmother has experienced. She also had a very significant relationship with the slave woman. She is very close to her. This would have gone against the master slave relationship that was typical at the time.

One thing that Bemberg is very good at is comparing the love that Camila holds and Ladislao’s. Camila’s is a very strong womanly passion. She goes after him very strongly. She has strong emotions towards him. Ladislao’s does not have emotions just carnal passion it is shown through the sexual encounters between them that he has an erotic passion for her and that is it. His emotions in his heart will always belong to God.

An irony in the story is when Camila’s brother tells Adolfo that she has run away with the priest it is at the same time as they are slaughtering a cow in a very gruesome way. This is done on purpose to be an analogy with the lack of caring that the father has. He is portrayed as only being mad because this has one ruined his reputation and now soiled his daughter’s forever.

The importance of the loss of Camila as a marriage partner is also important to the story. It is not completely asserted in the movie but many wealthy families could gain political and social connections from a daughter marrying into another family. By Camila breaking the social and patriarchal structure she has destroyed this chance for her family. She has also destroyed it for her sisters because no one will want to marry them with a soiled sister.

“European norms defined what was “civilized,” “stylish,” and ultimately, “decent” in the eyes of postcolonial Latin Americans. Those at the top of the social hierarchy and most in touch with Europe obviously held the winning cards in this parlor game.”

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, January 30, 2011

La ultima cena-Blog 2

La ultima cena- Blog 2

Mass Paranoia

“To be considered ‘historical,’ rather than simply a costume drama that uses the past as an exotic setting for romance and adventure, a film must engage, directly or obliquely, the issues, ideas, data, and arguments of the ongoing discourse of history.”

This movie very directly involves the issue of slavery and confronts it with great historical accuracy. It is a startling portrayal of ignorance, influence, and most of all the power of freedom. Through plain and unclear symbolism it is able to depict all of the points of view whether they were right or wrong.

The strongest use of symbolism is through religion. The movie is full of religious symbols especially through the use of Holy Week to portray all of the events. The symbolism is also comparative, between what the Count believes and what is actually occurring. For example at the end of the movie the Count portrays Don Manuel as Jesus but Jesus is actually symbolized through the twelve slaughtered slaves and especially the slave Sebastian. Sebastian is raised again at the end of the movie through his freedom being symbolized through birds, and other animals. There is also symbolism through the Count’s bird at the beginning of the movie. He has it caged up and is trying to make it sing. This symbolizes all of his slaves who he tries to make convert to Christianity but like the bird it is not easy for them to forget everything they have always known.

The three strongest elements involve the three white men and their delusions about slaves. There is the Count, the foreman, and the priest. The Count plays the typical plantation owner who is out of touch with his plantation. He thinks that he can come in and make radical religious changes and in turn be seen as a good slave owner who has never done anything wrong. He does not see that his ignorance about the interactions on the plantation and even of the slave itself will lead to his demise. The foreman in the movie typifies what John Mraz described in his piece; he is forced by the demand constraints. But, he also is influenced by enlightenment thinking and does not see the importance of teaching the slaves religion. He above all sees the slaves as producers and nothing else. The priest is the most ignorant of all, he believes that by teaching the slaves Christianity and obedience through religion that they will see that their situation is actually somehow meant to be. All three of these men are delusional.

Through the research of Sergio Giral he is able to get into the heads of these men and describe what they were really thinking. He is able to describe to the audience how these men see the slaves as having the intellectual capacity of lower than a child. They do not see them as humans. What is even more surprising is the dehumanizing within the priests eyes. Through his eyes the slaves did not have a culture or religion before becoming slaves.

A surprising well-done portrayal in the movie is of the slaves. They do not seem like cultureless machines. They have a story of their own, and Giral describes what their lives were like before being captured. In one of the readings this week, from the website entitled “The Atlantic Slave Trade and Slave Life in the Americas,” it was very interesting to see the images of slave life. One category, which contrasted well with the movie, was the Pre-Colonial Africa. Because, one thing the movie emphasized that is so overlooked when studying the miseries of slavery is the culture that these slaves left behind in Africa. It is referenced many times in the movie especially during the dinner scene. The Count asks one of the slaves about his culture back in Africa. He responds by stating that he was a King. He describes how the culture of slavery became rooted in their culture of war with other tribes. Through the images on the website, the rich culture even civilization that these people had is witnessed. The idea that through slavery the white man was saving Africans from a life of barbarianism is not true. Comparatively the destructive factor of slavery was much like the destructiveness of the encounter with the Indians. Men and women of rich heritage were stripped of all of this and forced to work for the white man. In return the white man expected that the African conform to his customs. This forced custom is seen in the movie through the scene where the priest is making the slaves bath to make themselves clean. He gets angry with the women because they are bare-chested while washing clothes in the river. He says that they are sinners. This is what they are accustomed to, what they have done for centuries. For a white man to first force them to come to his country and then expect them to change to his needs shows the true ruthlessness of slavery from every dimension.

The most powerful element of all is the power that the slaves figure out that they have and through that take initiative. The slaves have more power than they even know they have. That is one point that Giral tries to make throughout the movie is the paranoia that the white man had. Especially the influence of the Haitian rebellion on the mindset of these people. As Kirsten Shultz points out in the example of Brazil, in the country of Brazil which was much like Cuba the sheer mass population of slaves created a climate of paranoia. This sense of paranoia would become to backbone of the way the slave owners communicated and punished their slaves. As Kristen Shultz gives the example in her article about Brazil, “Slavery dominated early nineteenth century Brazil’s economy and society, and at least half of the population was of African descent.” Through this movie Giral portrays slaves as being in a dire situation, but he does not paint a hopeless population. He shows that through the use of sheer numbers and imbedded paranoia that the slaves in many cases could succeed to freedom.

Till next week,

matteavs

Sunday, January 23, 2011

The Mission-Unchanged

Week 1-The Mission

“Thus have we made the world…thus have I made it.”

The movie we watched this week ends with this closing line. It is very fitting ending for an apologetic movie. But, at the same time it is not void of the same stereotypes that enveloped the society in which it is set in. The movie continues the always-relevant principle of the white man saving the uneducated native. This does not just apply to the Spanish invaders but also to the Jesuit missionaries. The fact that writers of the movie decided to stray from the true history of the Guarani’s self revolt to a revolt led singularly by the Jesuit priests shows that they were wanting to portray the Jesuits as solely saving the Guarani. But, were they saving them or just creating another interruption to their lives?

As Altamarino states himself maybe the natives would have been better off if none had them come. I agree with the movie that the Jesuits were trying to do better than the slave traders. But, what the movie does not explain is the ulterior motives that the Jesuits did have. They were in it for economic benefit also. Their missions were also supposed to be just a transition for the indigenous people before they would become “civilized.” What the movie forgets to portray is the culture that the people had before it. Christianity was not their first religion. They would not have given up their local religions completely and take up Christianity. It would have most likely been a combination of both of them.

Furthermore, I agree completely with James Sahoefield Saeger about the beginning of the movie. The beginning makes the Guarani look barbaric without any explanation. It is carrying on the ethnocentrism that already exists. It gives no Indian side to the story of what it would be like to have a white man come into your village and try to start changing things automatically.

The movie in general relies too much on the old plot line that has been used in movie after movie. It is seen movies from Pocahontas to Avatar. But, what is burned at the alter of this old Hollywood trick is the real story and the real history. To give the movie a heroine they do not choose one of the Guarani but a white man specifically Robert De Nero an upcoming popular actor. I feel that this movie felt that it was setting itself apart from all the others in trying to teach the viewer a lesson. It is trying to make the viewer more aware of the imprint that he or she is leaving in the world. How he or she has shaped the world and the suffering within it. While this is a wholly ethical goal, it was not reached in this movie. The viewer is left with the unchanged story, the white man’s martyrdom for an indigenous population that he himself has already altered.

Till next week,

matteavs