Popular Culture in Latin America

Although a bit long-winded at times, I think this article did a great job in summing up the many facets of Latin American popular culture. I feel like the readings from the past 2 weeks have led up to the reading of this article on "The Faces of Popular Culture". It took the ideas we've discussed in class on what culture is and what the people are, and put them in the context of Latin America. 

The article describes Latin American popular culture as a certain interplay between indigenous and Hispanic elements. I've read articles in the past on this mix of indigenous and Hispanic cultures, and usually the authors stress the fact that the latter has transformed the former. In this article however, I enjoyed the argument the authors made that indigenous culture was not only transformed by Hispanic culture, but that Hispanic culture was transformed by indigenous culture as well. I feel that this argument is well-illustrated when the authors talked about the "Andeanization of international styles or an internationalization of the Andean," referring to the result of the mix of Andean music with international styles.

The article also rejects notions of Hispanic culture as taking over indigenous culture in relation to Quechua poetry. The authors state that Quechua poetry is open to "innovation, without abandonment of tradition." Again, the authors bring to light the argument that when indigenous and Hispanic cultures collide, it doesn't necessarily mean that indigenous culture has to conform to the presumably more dominant Hispanic culture, but that there can be a more equal give-and-take between the two cultures. 

I enjoyed the arguments made in the article with relation to the movement of Latin American rural popular cultural into the modern sector. The article brings up the argument that this movement isn't necessarily bad for rural pop culture, and doesn't have to mean that rural culture is diluted. Rather, the modernization of rural popular culture can provide ways for it to survive and be maintained and developed. 

Not until near to the end of the article did I begin to understand what exactly "popular culture" is. In the discussion of the telenovela, the article describes the subject matter and plots for a variety of popular telenovelas. The issues tackled in these shows tend to be current issues being experienced by society as a whole. My idea is that popular culture is a vehicle for the expression of current issues being faced by society. The article mentions "the People's Radio" which allows people, usually those oppressed by society, to express their concerns, by giving them a voice and a vehicle for expression. The article also stresses the fact that the radio is an important media in popular culture because it is practically accessible by all people in society. I believe this is a key distinction between popular culture and high culture: the fact that popular culture is able to break down barriers between the different social classes in society. As the authors mention, popular culture is able to break down these barriers as "all social groups have at their disposal the same cultural repertory."

What is the People?

The two articles assigned for this week were intended to answer the somewhat vague question of "what is the people?" After reading both articles, I have some ideas about what "the people" can be described as and how they find their legitimacy in society.

In Eva Peron's My Message, she continually refers to "the people", "her people" and "Peron's people". I believe she meant to distinguish between them, seeing them in her mind as different types of people, who may have come from various backgrounds, but all believe in a similar future for Argentina. I think she saw "the people" as those people in society oppressed by the powers of imperialism: workers, women, children, the poor, and the sick. However, I believe that the people is more than just those who are suffering due to their place in society and as a result of the powers of imperialism. When I think of the people of a nation, I think of not only those who are marginalized from society, but also those who are included.

While I loved Eva Peron's ideals, views and the strength of her beliefs in an "ideal Argentine nation", I found them to be slightly over-optimistic. To bring justice, equality and liberty to all people would be a great accomplishment for the world. However, at times I felt that Evita was overly optimistic in the power of her people, that is, those of the working class. Not that I am undermining the power of the people. However, I find it hard to ignore the power that those in higher positions of government and society in general hold, and can exercise over the rest of society. We have seen it happen in many countries, all over the world.

Eva Peron gave power to the people, by uniting them and igniting them with her passion in the fight for freedom, justice and equality. Her people, united, became a force to be wreckoned with, for the military and those opposed to "Peronism". However, I believe the second article, A Celebration of the Monster, to be a depiction of how the union and empowerment of people for a cause can quickly take a wrong turn. Peronism became a so-called Monster as those people for whom Peronism resonated with so strongly exercised their own methods of bringing about social change.

I found it difficult to distinguish who the narrator of the story was, and who he was fighting for. At first, I believed he was part of the military. However, I found many clues that caused me to think he was part of the working class, and therefore a follower of Peronism. For example, the man describes himself putting on his "trusty overalls", a uniform normally associated with the working class. He also mentions that the man who owned the bus "wasn't no oligarch you had to worry about no more", and oligarchy was something Eva Peron was strongly opposed to. In any case, the men described in the story show a great display of pride, togetherness and brotherhood, characteristics that Eva Peron and Peronism wanted to spread to the people. However, the men's feeling of togetherness with one another was taken out on one young man who was not a part of their group, and was not seen as part of "the people". The men, in beating up the Jewish man, aimed to solidify and claim legitimacy to their "rightful" place in society. They took from him what they did not have, and probably would never have access to: his jeweled Bulova, Fabricant watch and Plumex fountain pen. While these men were fighting for equality and justice, they applied the platforms of Peronism in a way that Eva Peron surely had not intended.

What is Culture?

After reading both Williams' and Keesing's articles on "culture", I know have a better understanding of the ways we define, understand, and portray culture in the public realm.

The first article by Raymond Williams was rather hard to follow. The main points that I understood from the article are these. First, Williams stresses the importance of making a clear distinction between a person's culture, and the notion of a person being "cultured". Having a culture does not mean that one is "cultured" with access to and appreciation for the "finer things in life", such as art and literature. Rather, as the author repeatedly reminds us, "culture is ordinary". People all over the world, in all walks of life, have some form of culture. In other words, culture is accessible to all.

Williams also stresses the importance of education in carrying on a culture, which I agree with. Not only does education teach the various aspects of the culture, but it also provides individuals with the tools needed to question the culture, and create one's own meanings and interpretations of it.

Another point the author makes is that one cannot describe a so-called "mass-culture", as the notion of the "masses" does not exist. By describing a group of others as the "masses", we are perpetuating the "us vs. them" dichotomy. This idea is further developed in the article by Roger Keesing, which I found much easier to follow.

After reading Keesing's article, I'm reminded of a few major themes covered in my introductory course to Latin American Studies. First off, anthropologists as well as society in general seem obsessed with the need to define the "other". In defining what the "other" is, we create a definition of ourselves. We define ourselves by what we are not. This is dangerous, as we tend to perceive ourselves as better than the others, and see our ways of doing things as more sophisticated than theirs. However, more and more cultures are intermingling, and it is becoming more difficult to find this radical "other", that is so different from ourselves.

In studying other cultures, we must consider who gets to decide what is portrayed as the overall "culture" of whatever society or group of people we are studying. I've learned that there are certain people, usually those in power, and often anthropologists, who have the resources and power to shape the way the culture is portrayed. In the case of anthropologists, their portrayal of the culture of whichever society they are studying is often shaped by their search for that "radical alterity", as Keesing puts it. They therefore portray certain aspects of the culture, and may hide others, in order to show the most radically different culture they can.

In considering who exactly gets to decide what is portrayed as the culture of a society, consider Canada. Often, Canadian culture is linked with all things First Nations, like art, dance, ceremonies and rituals. However, do the First Nations people really get a say in how they are portrayed to the rest of the world? As well, who is portraying Canadian culture this way? Usually, it is not the First Nations people. I find it ironic that the culture portrayed as Canadian national culture is of the people who are most oppressed in Canada. I believe that there are many similarities between the portrayals of Canadian national culture with the cultural portrayals of many Latin American countries.

Introduction

Hello All!

Allow me to introduce myself. My name is Kayo Homma-Komori and I'm a fourth year Marketing/International Business student. Last year I took LAST 100 Introduction to Latin American Studies and absolutely fell in love with all things Latin American. I've just returned from studying abroad in Barcelona, Spain where I learned many things about Spanish culture. I am now looking forward to learning more about Latin American culture. Looking forward to a great class with you all!