Please use categories or tags when writing your blog posts. Use categories to indicate the week (Week 3 or Week 10 etc.), and tags for key concepts or topics covered.
Week 8: Did Zapata Look Uncomfortable to You?
Posted by: feedwordpress
For this week's reading I actually found the text to be a lot more intriguing than the articles, I think it situated the theme of this class in a context I could better understand. One of the more memorable lines Dawson writes in the chapter was that “Latin Americans lived in a fragmentary world, one person's boom was another person's crisis.” A lot of our in class discussions always revolve around arguing if the ends justify the means, if one person’s boom is worth another person’s crisis, if we can overlook the brutality of tyrants by measuring their overall progress (President Diaz comes to mind when I write this). I disagree with any ends justify the means discourse, so I say no, but I’m curious to what you think. Do you disagree or agree?
One of the really interesting things from the text i read was Dawson's take on the photographs of the Zapistas eating at Sanborns, and Villa and Zapata in Mexico City. If you look in the Sanborns one, there's a man dressed in a three piece tuxedo suit staring directly at the back of the soldiers and he looks soooo uncomfortable — it’s really something else. In the beginning, I did disagree with Dawson’s proposed theory that the Zapistas and Zapata look uncomfortable to be there but the more I thought about it, it does make sense. I’ve met real country people and they’ve always seemed uncomfortable to be in the city, it’s not their home. They don’t really relate to what city folk think about or the customs or their fashion. Although it seems like a large presumption to make about a photo taken from over a century ago, I think it’s a rational one. The rural and peasant class never went to the city, and I know they were gawked at, stared at, probably even had expletives yelled at them while they seized Mexico city. So yes, I think Zapata and the Zapistas may have been uncomfortable there. And Dawson draws up a good theory that the way the peasantry occupied the city (through force, terror and violence) served as a reminder they did not belong there. If you belong to something you shouldn’t have to force yourself on it. They’re people who have been on the margins looking in, and once they’re finally in they realize they still aren’t in it. But i'm not sure, did Zapata look uncomfortable to you?
read full post >>
Week 8: Did Zapata Look Uncomfortable to You?
Posted by: feedwordpress
For this week's reading I actually found the text to be a lot more intriguing than the articles, I think it situated the theme of this class in a context I could better understand. One of the more memorable lines Dawson writes in the chapter was that “Latin Americans lived in a fragmentary world, one person's boom was another person's crisis.” A lot of our in class discussions always revolve around arguing if the ends justify the means, if one person’s boom is worth another person’s crisis, if we can overlook the brutality of tyrants by measuring their overall progress (President Diaz comes to mind when I write this). I disagree with any ends justify the means discourse, so I say no, but I’m curious to what you think. Do you disagree or agree?
One of the really interesting things from the text i read was Dawson's take on the photographs of the Zapistas eating at Sanborns, and Villa and Zapata in Mexico City. If you look in the Sanborns one, there's a man dressed in a three piece tuxedo suit staring directly at the back of the soldiers and he looks soooo uncomfortable — it’s really something else. In the beginning, I did disagree with Dawson’s proposed theory that the Zapistas and Zapata look uncomfortable to be there but the more I thought about it, it does make sense. I’ve met real country people and they’ve always seemed uncomfortable to be in the city, it’s not their home. They don’t really relate to what city folk think about or the customs or their fashion. Although it seems like a large presumption to make about a photo taken from over a century ago, I think it’s a rational one. The rural and peasant class never went to the city, and I know they were gawked at, stared at, probably even had expletives yelled at them while they seized Mexico city. So yes, I think Zapata and the Zapistas may have been uncomfortable there. And Dawson draws up a good theory that the way the peasantry occupied the city (through force, terror and violence) served as a reminder they did not belong there. If you belong to something you shouldn’t have to force yourself on it. They’re people who have been on the margins looking in, and once they’re finally in they realize they still aren’t in it. But i'm not sure, did Zapata look uncomfortable to you?
read full post >>
Week 8: Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age
Posted by: melissa prado
This signs of crisis in Latin America were previously announced to us in the previous chapter. One of the things I found most interesting is the fact that while reading the “Plan de Ayala” you can see a very strong contrast with the description made by James Creelman about mexico and how progressive it was, […] read full post >>
Week 8: Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age
Posted by: feedwordpress
This signs of crisis in Latin America were previously announced to us in the previous chapter. One of the things I found most interesting is the fact that while reading the “Plan de Ayala” you can see a very strong contrast with the description made by James Creelman about mexico and how progressive it was, […] read full post >>
Week 8 – Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age
Posted by: sara pastro
The modernization of Mexico under Porfirio Diaz’s rule seemed like a step in the right direction on the surface and I think that the vast improvements made were beneficial but I also think they the uneven development of the country lead to more problems. While the elite in the country were able to reap the […] read full post >>
Week 8 – Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age
Posted by: feedwordpress
The modernization of Mexico under Porfirio Diaz’s rule seemed like a step in the right direction on the surface and I think that the vast improvements made were beneficial but I also think they the uneven development of the country lead to more problems. While the elite in the country were able to reap the […] read full post >>
Week 9: Commerce, Coercion, and America’s Empire
Posted by: feedwordpress
I was most intrigued by this week’s reading pertaining to the UFCO and Guatemala’s specific relationship with it. I had... read full post >>
Week 9: Commerce, Coercion, and America’s Empire
Posted by: feedwordpress
I was most intrigued by this week’s reading pertaining to the UFCO and Guatemala’s specific relationship with it. I had... read full post >>
Week 9: Commerce, Coercion, and America’s Empire
Posted by: feedwordpress
OHHHH OKAY Maybe it was just me…but I so enjoyed that Journey to Banana Land VIDEO! Firstly, I truly believe I was meant to be a monkey and somehow ended up being human (kinda boring) but I love bananas!!! But I never really thought where or how they come to be in our supermarkets! It … More Week 9: Commerce, Coercion, and America’s Empire read full post >>
Week 8: Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age
Posted by: feedwordpress
In this weeks reading I found Darío’s “To Roosevelt” reading quite interesting. This poem is filled with allegories that reflect people and moments in history to create stereotypes in the minds of its readers. This is effective in foreshadowing the possible relationship between the United States and Latin America. His use of allusion begins by … More Week 8: Signs of Crisis in a Gilded Age read full post >>
