Blogs

This week I am going to focus on documents 3.4 and 3.5. Document 3.4 “Brushstrokes” by Maria Eugenia Echenique strongly advocates her support for the emancipation of women. She believes that the “women of today are not the women of … Continue reading → read full post >>

  There were three documents that stood out the most for me in this weeks reading. Those documents are 3.1 "The Fetishist Animism of the Bahian Blacks" by Raimundo Nina Rodrigues, 3.4 "Brushstrokes" by Maria Eugenia Echenique, and 3.5 "Women: Dedicated to Miss Maria Eugenia Echenique" by Judith [Josefina Pelliza de Sagasta].  Document 3.1, to my understanding,  is a discussion of the evolution of fetishism and the evidence of its prevalence in Bahia, despite the claim of Christianity of the Black population. Nina Rodrigues states a position of "upmost neutrality and impartiality" however also describes the Bahian Blacks and mulattos as "inferior races". I wonder if Nina Rodrigues recognized his own hypocrisy which today seems so foolish. Such hypocrisy is evident later in his ideas that the violence placed on slaves to rid them of fetishism was due to slave owners' fears that the salves might have a will of their own. To me, this is exactly what this document is trying to do. Although it acknowledges a prevalence of fetishism, I think that it uses this finding as a tool to other and reinforce a primitive, non-human ( or at least non-christian) understanding of the Bahian Blacks in order to disempower them and give reason for any denial of citizen rights. 

  Document 3.4 by Maria Eugenia Echenique and document 3.5, which is a response to 3.4,  were in regards to women's rights in society. 3.4 surprised me, in a good way, because this is the earliest document i have read that calls for the equality of women and men. The issues Echenique discusses are still issues women fight for today around the world. However, i was surprised (mostly) that the response to Echenique's piece was written by a woman. My first reaction was that -if i read such a response to a call for the equality of women in today's Canadian context, i would think of it as 'unwomanly' however i realize that our society is quite different (but not opposite), thanks to the feminist movements which have taken place since the early 20th century up until now. My reaction was probably the reaction of Judith, in her context, which led her to such a disheartening response. Having said all of that, i would like to share something i came across in a magazine about 20 minutes after reading these two documents. It was an add for a kitchen knife -one of the big ones you need to cut the big veggies with. All the add was, was a close up of a woman's profile and the knife, sort of 'swung' over her shoulder as if it were a rifle or some other gun ( i don't know guns), and the look on the woman's face (as though looking far into the distance) expressed, bravery, empowerment, and ambition. When i saw this i laughed because to me is was saying exactly what Judith was saying -Women are free to be educated and empowered, but her power is to remain confined to the home. This is what made me rethink my first reaction to the response. Perhaps no one is saying it out loud but women are still being shown their 'place' in society, and there are still other women that would defend this position.

  I think that the all of these articles must have influenced society as much as they were  a result of it. I see an underlying theme of Christianity in all three articles which explains their reasoning and where they drew their 'facts' of what society should look like. It is evident that Christianity still held a lot of power. The first and last document are written from an essentialist point of view, that there is something about the essence of Blacks and women which make them different from whites and males. The whole discussion is still influenced by colonialism and that first question posed by Father Montesinos: "Are these not men?".
read full post >>

  There were three documents that stood out the most for me in this weeks reading. Those documents are 3.1 "The Fetishist Animism of the Bahian Blacks" by Raimundo Nina Rodrigues, 3.4 "Brushstrokes" by Maria Eugenia Echenique, and 3.5 "Women: Dedi... read full post >>

There were a number of different documents to read this this week. I’m writing about 3.1, 3.4 & 3.5. Document 3.1 “The Fetish Animism of Bahian Negros” is written by Nina Rodrigues. He is writing about many different problems that exist in understanding African Religion. He is a practitioner whose work ranges from teaching, psychiatry, […] read full post >>

The Cuadillo who were strong men of charismatic character of mixed race, African or Indigenous descent. How these men ruled during times of disaster was impeccable. Especially one man by the name of Antonio Lopez de Santa Ana the president of Mexico who was in office for 11 times but every time he got elected […] read full post >>

This week’s reading of the Caudillos Versus the Nation State as well as “The Slaughterhouse” by Esteban Echeverría helped me to better understand why post-colonial North America is currently so drastically different than post-colonial Latin America, despite sharing a similar history. In part, the vast geography that composes Latin America makes sense of the staunch […] read full post >>

This week’s reading of the Caudillos Versus the Nation State as well as “The Slaughterhouse” by Esteban Echeverría helped me to better understand why post-colonial North America is currently so drastically different than post-colonial Latin America, despite sharing a similar history. In part, the vast geography that composes Latin America makes sense of the staunch […] read full post >>

The “Caudillo vs Nation State” text portrays the violence which was unleashed in Latin America in the 19th century by the Spanish Imperial rule and the response to this mistreatment by the Caudillos, such as Ramon Castilla in Peru, which was to defend the locals against pernicious outsiders. This text shows the importance of “Caudillos” in Latin American history. They were figures in societies, which were torn by various conflicts after the collapse of the Spanish Colonial state. I found it very interesting and saddening how an exterior threat, such...read more read full post >>

The “Caudillo vs Nation State” text portrays the violence which was unleashed in Latin America in the 19th century by the Spanish Imperial rule and the response to this mistreatment by the Caudillos, such as Ramon Castilla in Peru, which was to defend the locals against pernicious outsiders. This text shows the importance of “Caudillos” in Latin American history. They were figures in societies, which were torn by various conflicts after the collapse of the Spanish Colonial state. I found it very interesting and saddening how an exterior threat, such...read more read full post >>

The position of caudillo, as Dawson describes, fills in the role traditionally occupied by the King of Spain as an intermediary between local elites and the marginalized groups of country and city. My impression is that a lot of the vitriol against the Unitarians in Esteban Echeverria's story, El Matadero is traditional Spanish colonial class tensions given an ideological paint job. The revolution transitioned Latin America from a dependent colonial society to an independent republic, but failed to address some of the basic inequities that led to revolution in the first place. One major bone of contention in the struggle between the merchant classes and the working class was when the urban intelligentsia attacked the Catholic Church, which is considered by many peasants to be a vital institution of philanthropy in their remote areas without the tax base or government initiative to provide secular public works. The role of the caudillo was to act as an advocate for the disenfranchised masses of the hinterland against the machinations of the perceived power-mongers that lived in the capitals. Unfortunately, demagoguery tends to create corrupt short-run despotisms that pay mere lip service to democratic ideals and, when a demagogue senses his end, he frequently resorts to violent scapegoating and confiscating the property of newly invented "enemies of the state" to salvage the loyalty of his followers. While the caudillo can be a vital bulwark against the exploitation of the peasantry, historical example demonstrates that it is in practice a role dedicated to repressing the natural tendencies of liberal democracy, and thus caudillo governments consistently have a benevolently autocratic flavour.
read full post >>