Transculturation

I seem to have gotten behind on my blog in the midst of due dates, essays, exams, etc. But better late than never. In Oritz's article, he brings to light the concept of transculturation, even suggesting that he is the one to coin the term. He poses this term during the rise of peoples growing usage of 'acculturation' suggesting that this phrase is too limiting in its scope. He uses the world 'transculturation' to "express the highly varied phenomena that have come about in Cuba as a result of the extremely complex transumtations of culture that have taken place here." He describes that Cuba's history is defined by a mixing of people, cultures, ideas, etc. The Spaniards mixed with the indigenous populations, killing the majority, but the remainders nonetheless influenced eachother. In description of this, Ortize writes: "A revolutionary upheaval shook the Indian peoples of Cuba, tearing up their institutions by the roots and destorying their lives." As the slave trade ferociously brought Africans to Cuba, though marked by incredibly injustices perhaps on par with the treatement of indigenous populations, Africans and Africans culture mixed with indigenous and European cultures creating more cultural mixtures. Ortiz feels that 'transculturation' is a better way of describing the phenomanon that took place in the way of cultural mixing in Cuba, as the process of transistion from one culture to another does not consist of merely 'acquiring' another's cultures, but is undeniable also the result of an uprooting and loss of previous culture. I agree with him here; cultural mixing is not merely a result of one taking up the ways of another, but is also the result of the loss that comes along with coercion, subordination, and violence in the process.

In response to this, Millington feels that we must examine this term more closely as he feels that it is being overused. He feels that "these terms seek to excercise some critical leverage on the heirarchichal binaries of imperialism/neo-colony, centre/periphery, identity/otherness, which apparently hold Latin America in their iron grip. The sense is that what is produced by transcultuation or hybridisation does not fit within neat binaries, that it straddles, mixes and disrupts." Millington feels that bunching many terms together under one 'master term' is confusing and at times, inaccurate. What I liked most about this article was when Millington puts into question that optimistic views of marginilized sectors of society as a basis of resistance, when he feels that their marginalization is at best an urgent reminder "of what needs to be done." While on one hand, in looking at marginilized groups throughout history, we do not want to remove their agency and reciliency in maintianing their own culture in the face of oppression, at the same time, is this triviallizing the injustices they underwent and looking upon the situation too optimistically? Is the idea of culture resiliency in the face of oppression too easy and an optimistic of a conclusion? I thought it was interesting that he actually presented a conclusion on how he felt these issues are to be better addressed: "In my view, the best way of redrawing the cultural-political map is not to shrink back into narrow self-affirmations but, on the one hand, to expose what the dominany cultures are and how they work and are transformed...[and] on the other hand, in order to find and define emancipatory spaces we need to continue trying to understand how specific processes of transculturation function..."

Futbol y telenovelas

I found both of the articles for this week interesting and well written. I will admit, while I appreciate soccer to a degree, I am not a huge sports fan in general, and have never really understood the craze and obsession that goes along with it. However, after reading the article about futbol, I feel that I have finally come to understand the reality of the importance that futbol means to people. To many people in around the world, with Brazil being an epicenter to the excitment, futbol is not nearly just a game but rather is a canvas for which great cultural meaning and identity is constructed. Futbol is not mearly people kicking a ball around a field for entertainment sake, but is a site in which people come together to create a larger narrative about their lives and identities. In the example of the game in the 1950's, for Brazilians, this does simply represent a game that was lost, but rather is highly symbolic of greater loss. It was an event that came to speak as a national narrative of the people. The staduim that was built in preperation of the game was also not mearly a fancy staduim but rather a symbol of progress and pride for the Brazillian people at a time when they were constructing their national identity for themselves and the world to witness. I think this quote sums it up well: "the 1950 game is perhpas the greatest tragedy in contemporary Brazilian history. Because it happened collectively and brought a united vision of the loss of a historic oppurtunity. Because it happened at the beginning of a decade in which Brazil was looking to assert itself as a nation with a great furutre. The result was a tireless search for explications of, and blame for, the shameful defeat.' Reading this article made me think about how popular culture in general can come to have great signifigance when it is taken in by the people a symbol of national pride, nation and identity constructing.

As far as soap operas go...I will admit...I used to watch All My Children for many years when I was a child, namely because my Mom was into it, but I can definitly see the appeal. I mean, if you are going to watch bad television, why not just go all out for the aweful stuff rather that the mediocre stuff that tries to present itself as 'good' ? Soap operas and telenovelas get a lot of criticism, most of which is entirely valid, but I feel that they do play a role in bringing to light (an an entirely overly exagerated way) real issues that people face within society. In the case mentioned in the article, Por estas calles even acted as a mirror for political reality that people in Venezuela faced at the time. According to the article, "Por estas calles cannot be understood outside the context of Venezuela's political, economic, and social situation in the last decades of the twentieth century." Likewise, the author suggests that, "all feel affected by the world created in the telenovela, as long as it raises problems they beleive they have gone through themselves." Telenovelas can be a medium that bring family together to view characters and stories as they experience real drama that is often, an exaggerated version of problems rooted in reality. As we discussed in class, telenovelas often bring up isses in society that are highly taboo. They flirt with these issues, but almost always tend to be intensely moral; wrong doers will not come out on top in the end. These shows raise forbidden topics in order to demonize them.

Folk Culture and Modernity

While I found both articles very interesting and insightful, they were long, and at points difficult to understand, so I admit that I did some skimming to get through them. With that said, I think that both articles were good representations of many of the themes we have discussed in class in action. Murals symbolically represent many of the elements that we have discussed in relation to popular culture, counter hegemonic discourse, relationships of power, high culture and low culture, and a contestation of public space. Murals in Mexico are both a literal and metaphorical canvasses of self and societal expression. In them are embedded complex notions of history, oppression, and marginalization, resistance, struggle, and solidarity. Interestingly, figures such as Diego Rivera, who painted murals to challenge status quo ideas in somewhat controversial ways have since become figures of Mexican culture and nationhood, and their art which at one time acted as a canvass of expression of celebrating the people (in the Evita Peron context of the word) has since been elevated to the status of high art.

This article brought up notions of public space; what is public space and whom exactly does this space belong to? There seems to be a contestation on who can have total access to this space, as much if it is sanctioned by the state and thus has limitations on the extent of self-expression deemed acceptable. Likewise, this article shows that when this expression goes too far, it can be in fact taken back by the state, and as a result, like much of popular culture exists within the context of struggle. According to Campbell, "The current public visibility of Mexican muralism is afflicted with a bewildering duality. On the one hand, mural art continues to be accorded great national prestige as a public cultural form. On the other, the great bulk of the country's mural production...is destroyed (29)". Mexican Muralism, much like popular culture in general, is often a representation of the current struggles of the time. The author points out that today, as neoliberalism and privatization ensues and causes further inequalities, many of these themes are reflected within the sphere of public art.

I thought that the idea of "colonization of urban space by commercial advertising," was very interesting, as I have never really thought of it like this before. While here in North America we may not consider the state to be an instrument of blatant coercion or propaganda, at the same time, we have no choice in constantly being exposed to advertising everywhere we go. I suppose this advertising is a form of ideological indoctrination into the capitalist system. It is interesting to see how through taking over these spaces, public art acts as an arena for cultural contestation.

While reading this article, I kept thinking of my two trips to Oaxaca, one in June of 2006, and the other, last summer. During my first trip I unknowingly found myself in the midst of a very heated political conflict between the teachers of Oaxaca and the government. It was a time of a lot of chaos, violence, and police brutality, but was met with great organization of the people through huge rallies and public dissent. What started as a teachers strike was elevated as a reaction to state oppression to become a unified struggle between indigenous groups, activists, students, women, and many other supporters throughout Mexico against a political regime they perceived as corrupt and illegitimate. When I left Oaxaca the first time, the situation was very chaotic and much of the city was left in shambles. However, when I returned two years later, I was amazed at the amount of street art that seemed to blossom in the wake of this tense situation. The walls of the city seemed to become literal canvasses for cultural contestation, solidarity, and self-expression. Oaxaca is a very artistic city in general, but I was truly taken aback by the stories that were told in these walls. As the article mentioned, there were many layers of paint on these walls as many of the murals had been painted over by the state to be then taken back by the people, and so on and so forth. But in this contestation is a history of the struggle for power and self-expression; something that is very telling about popular culture in Latin America all together.