The reading this week painted the picture of Latin America being left in complete disarray following the departure of the Spanish. The resultant “power vacuum” was filled by the controversial Caudillos and the region was heavily divided between the new Latin America and the old. It is still unclear to me whether the Caudillos did more harm than good. Although they did provide a structure when there was none and did truly work in the best interests of their followers the Caudillos were also quick to turn to violence and only provided the “appearance of functioning states”. This is evident in the case of Peru and Bolivia when they were defeated by the poorer Chile. However, although it is easy to condemn the Caudillos as incompetent and unsuccessful if they had not stepped up into such a position of leadership anarchy could have ensued throughout the region with graver consequences.
What I found particularly interesting was the difficulties in ruling a region with such diverse geography. With such huge territories it was impossible to impose a centralised control over entire areas and so reading about the autonomy with which indigenous communities were able to live their lives gave a different perspective to that of the indigenous people who were viewed as less than in areas with a strong colonial presence. After reading this I was left with a desire to know how much of Latin America was truly under Spanish control? Were there any real attempts to expand control to more rural areas or were the Spanish content with their authority only truly upheld in urban areas and was the King and the Spanish back home aware of the limits of Spanish control in the colonies?
In Esteban Echevería’s The Slaughterhouse, the picture of a divided and corrupt Latin America is painted. The colonial institution of the Church is depicted as untrustworthy and exploitative serving only the Federalists and the elites and the portrayal of the Federalists is much the same. The gory description of the slaughter and the disorder of society depicted in the book represent the chaos of independent Latin America in the eyes of Echevería and his open support for a different regime to rule the region. Although this is a subjective and artistic representation of Latin America post colonisation I do believe it offers an insight into how one group viewed dictatorship and caudillismo.
Discussion questions
Do you think the Caudillos did more harm than good?
Were you surprised reading about the autonomous indigenous communities in colonial Latin America?
Posted in Blogs, Week 5 | Tagged with caudillos, Esteban Echeverria, The Slaughterhouse
The reading this week painted the picture of Latin America being left in complete disarray following the departure of the Spanish. The resultant “power vacuum” was filled by the controversial Caudillos and the region was heavily divided between the new Latin America and the old. It is still unclear to me whether the Caudillos did more harm than good. Although they did provide a structure when there was none and did truly work in the best interests of their followers the Caudillos were also quick to turn to violence and only provided the “appearance of functioning states”. This is evident in the case of Peru and Bolivia when they were defeated by the poorer Chile. However, although it is easy to condemn the Caudillos as incompetent and unsuccessful if they had not stepped up into such a position of leadership anarchy could have ensued throughout the region with graver consequences.
What I found particularly interesting was the difficulties in ruling a region with such diverse geography. With such huge territories it was impossible to impose a centralised control over entire areas and so reading about the autonomy with which indigenous communities were able to live their lives gave a different perspective to that of the indigenous people who were viewed as less than in areas with a strong colonial presence. After reading this I was left with a desire to know how much of Latin America was truly under Spanish control? Were there any real attempts to expand control to more rural areas or were the Spanish content with their authority only truly upheld in urban areas and was the King and the Spanish back home aware of the limits of Spanish control in the colonies?
In Esteban Echevería’s The Slaughterhouse, the picture of a divided and corrupt Latin America is painted. The colonial institution of the Church is depicted as untrustworthy and exploitative serving only the Federalists and the elites and the portrayal of the Federalists is much the same. The gory description of the slaughter and the disorder of society depicted in the book represent the chaos of independent Latin America in the eyes of Echevería and his open support for a different regime to rule the region. Although this is a subjective and artistic representation of Latin America post colonisation I do believe it offers an insight into how one group viewed dictatorship and caudillismo.
Discussion questions
Do you think the Caudillos did more harm than good?
Were you surprised reading about the autonomous indigenous communities in colonial Latin America?
Posted in Blogs, Week 5 | Tagged with caudillos, Esteban Echeverria, The Slaughterhouse
This week I would like to focus on writing about my thoughts on The SlaughterHouse and what it represented. Although I found the story interesting, it seemed to highlight the reason why the Unitarians could not gain much support from the rural people. One example is how Echeverria portrays black women in a very inhumane […]
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with el matadero, The Slaughterhouse, Week5
This weeks lecture talks about Caudillos and the old world and new world. It is established right from the onset that independence brought neither order or stability and the governing Latin America was extremely different. The lecture video also talks about how difficult it was for women to be emancipated or even to have the right to vote. Like most countries prior to independence this was common but what struck me the most was that whilst all this was going on in Latin America, in North America and Europe liberalism was part of the norm accepted by the majority of the people. Latin America, however was not part of this norm. Slavery was present until 1880 did not even correspond to appearances and men and women would still be bought and sold, in those years indigenous people would live in servitude.
Caudillos attempted to fight for reform and social change so that there would be parity for all people and so that the gap between the upper and lower class could be lessened. Caudillos fought for social and economic dependence, It was however described as a “ barbarism that blocked civilization but was still so popular.”
Whilst reading the slaughterhouse, which talked about the pain and anguish that a lot of people faced during lent in the 1830s in Buenos Aries was extremely insightful. The motif of blood is used a lot within the passages as he aims to disgust the readers with events that he witnessed. He used this as a way to show the barbarism in the way that Argentinian people were being treated. The slaughterhouse was meant to represent Argentina and the cattle were supposed to be the people.
“Strange that there should be privileged stomachs and stomachs subjected to an inviolable law, and that the church should hold the key to all stomachs! But it is not so strange if one believes that through, meat the devil enters the body and that the Church has the power to conjure it. The thing is to reduce man to a machine whose prime mover is not his own free will but that of the Church and the government” (Echeverria 212-213).
He explains a time where the church decided who would eat what and how the church has the power to conjure everything. It is clear that religion plays an important role in the lives on people then and even today, but to this extent is a bit shocking. Another quote that showed the authority that the church had on the people was “A time may come when it will be forbidden to breathe fresh air, take a walk, or even to have a conversation with a friend, without first obtaining permission from the competent authorities”. Showing that people at that time had little to no power.
This leaves me pondering about whether we have any such situations in today’s time- or any “Caudillos” in this age.
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with caudillos, independence, The Slaughterhouse
This weeks lecture talks about Caudillos and the old world and new world. It is established right from the onset that independence brought neither order or stability and the governing Latin America was extremely different. The lecture video also talks about how difficult it was for women to be emancipated or even to have the right to vote. Like most countries prior to independence this was common but what struck me the most was that whilst all this was going on in Latin America, in North America and Europe liberalism was part of the norm accepted by the majority of the people. Latin America, however was not part of this norm. Slavery was present until 1880 did not even correspond to appearances and men and women would still be bought and sold, in those years indigenous people would live in servitude.
Caudillos attempted to fight for reform and social change so that there would be parity for all people and so that the gap between the upper and lower class could be lessened. Caudillos fought for social and economic dependence, It was however described as a “ barbarism that blocked civilization but was still so popular.”
Whilst reading the slaughterhouse, which talked about the pain and anguish that a lot of people faced during lent in the 1830s in Buenos Aries was extremely insightful. The motif of blood is used a lot within the passages as he aims to disgust the readers with events that he witnessed. He used this as a way to show the barbarism in the way that Argentinian people were being treated. The slaughterhouse was meant to represent Argentina and the cattle were supposed to be the people.
“Strange that there should be privileged stomachs and stomachs subjected to an inviolable law, and that the church should hold the key to all stomachs! But it is not so strange if one believes that through, meat the devil enters the body and that the Church has the power to conjure it. The thing is to reduce man to a machine whose prime mover is not his own free will but that of the Church and the government” (Echeverria 212-213).
He explains a time where the church decided who would eat what and how the church has the power to conjure everything. It is clear that religion plays an important role in the lives on people then and even today, but to this extent is a bit shocking. Another quote that showed the authority that the church had on the people was “A time may come when it will be forbidden to breathe fresh air, take a walk, or even to have a conversation with a friend, without first obtaining permission from the competent authorities”. Showing that people at that time had little to no power.
This leaves me pondering about whether we have any such situations in today’s time- or any “Caudillos” in this age.
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with caudillos, independence, The Slaughterhouse
This weeks lecture talks about Caudillos and the old world and new world. It is established right from the onset that independence brought neither order or stability and the governing Latin America was extremely different. The lecture video also talks about how difficult it was for women to be emancipated or even to have the right to vote. Like most countries prior to independence this was common but what struck me the most was that whilst all this was going on in Latin America, in North America and Europe liberalism was part of the norm accepted by the majority of the people. Latin America, however was not part of this norm. Slavery was present until 1880 did not even correspond to appearances and men and women would still be bought and sold, in those years indigenous people would live in servitude.
Caudillos attempted to fight for reform and social change so that there would be parity for all people and so that the gap between the upper and lower class could be lessened. Caudillos fought for social and economic dependence, It was however described as a “ barbarism that blocked civilization but was still so popular.”
Whilst reading the slaughterhouse, which talked about the pain and anguish that a lot of people faced during lent in the 1830s in Buenos Aries was extremely insightful. The motif of blood is used a lot within the passages as he aims to disgust the readers with events that he witnessed. He used this as a way to show the barbarism in the way that Argentinian people were being treated. The slaughterhouse was meant to represent Argentina and the cattle were supposed to be the people.
“Strange that there should be privileged stomachs and stomachs subjected to an inviolable law, and that the church should hold the key to all stomachs! But it is not so strange if one believes that through, meat the devil enters the body and that the Church has the power to conjure it. The thing is to reduce man to a machine whose prime mover is not his own free will but that of the Church and the government” (Echeverria 212-213).
He explains a time where the church decided who would eat what and how the church has the power to conjure everything. It is clear that religion plays an important role in the lives on people then and even today, but to this extent is a bit shocking. Another quote that showed the authority that the church had on the people was “A time may come when it will be forbidden to breathe fresh air, take a walk, or even to have a conversation with a friend, without first obtaining permission from the competent authorities”. Showing that people at that time had little to no power.
This leaves me pondering about whether we have any such situations in today’s time- or any “Caudillos” in this age.
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with caudillos, independence, The Slaughterhouse
This weeks lecture talks about Caudillos and the old world and new world. It is established right from the onset that independence brought neither order or stability and the governing Latin America was extremely different. The lecture video also talks about how difficult it was for women to be emancipated or even to have the right to vote. Like most countries prior to independence this was common but what struck me the most was that whilst all this was going on in Latin America, in North America and Europe liberalism was part of the norm accepted by the majority of the people. Latin America, however was not part of this norm. Slavery was present until 1880 did not even correspond to appearances and men and women would still be bought and sold, in those years indigenous people would live in servitude.
Caudillos attempted to fight for reform and social change so that there would be parity for all people and so that the gap between the upper and lower class could be lessened. Caudillos fought for social and economic dependence, It was however described as a “ barbarism that blocked civilization but was still so popular.”
Whilst reading the slaughterhouse, which talked about the pain and anguish that a lot of people faced during lent in the 1830s in Buenos Aries was extremely insightful. The motif of blood is used a lot within the passages as he aims to disgust the readers with events that he witnessed. He used this as a way to show the barbarism in the way that Argentinian people were being treated. The slaughterhouse was meant to represent Argentina and the cattle were supposed to be the people.
“Strange that there should be privileged stomachs and stomachs subjected to an inviolable law, and that the church should hold the key to all stomachs! But it is not so strange if one believes that through, meat the devil enters the body and that the Church has the power to conjure it. The thing is to reduce man to a machine whose prime mover is not his own free will but that of the Church and the government” (Echeverria 212-213).
He explains a time where the church decided who would eat what and how the church has the power to conjure everything. It is clear that religion plays an important role in the lives on people then and even today, but to this extent is a bit shocking. Another quote that showed the authority that the church had on the people was “A time may come when it will be forbidden to breathe fresh air, take a walk, or even to have a conversation with a friend, without first obtaining permission from the competent authorities”. Showing that people at that time had little to no power.
This leaves me pondering about whether we have any such situations in today’s time- or any “Caudillos” in this age.
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with caudillos, independence, The Slaughterhouse
This weeks lecture talks about Caudillos and the old world and new world. It is established right from the onset that independence brought neither order or stability and the governing Latin America was extremely different. The lecture video also talks about how difficult it was for women to be emancipated or even to have the right to vote. Like most countries prior to independence this was common but what struck me the most was that whilst all this was going on in Latin America, in North America and Europe liberalism was part of the norm accepted by the majority of the people. Latin America, however was not part of this norm. Slavery was present until 1880 did not even correspond to appearances and men and women would still be bought and sold, in those years indigenous people would live in servitude.
Caudillos attempted to fight for reform and social change so that there would be parity for all people and so that the gap between the upper and lower class could be lessened. Caudillos fought for social and economic dependence, It was however described as a “ barbarism that blocked civilization but was still so popular.”
Whilst reading the slaughterhouse, which talked about the pain and anguish that a lot of people faced during lent in the 1830s in Buenos Aries was extremely insightful. The motif of blood is used a lot within the passages as he aims to disgust the readers with events that he witnessed. He used this as a way to show the barbarism in the way that Argentinian people were being treated. The slaughterhouse was meant to represent Argentina and the cattle were supposed to be the people.
“Strange that there should be privileged stomachs and stomachs subjected to an inviolable law, and that the church should hold the key to all stomachs! But it is not so strange if one believes that through, meat the devil enters the body and that the Church has the power to conjure it. The thing is to reduce man to a machine whose prime mover is not his own free will but that of the Church and the government” (Echeverria 212-213).
He explains a time where the church decided who would eat what and how the church has the power to conjure everything. It is clear that religion plays an important role in the lives on people then and even today, but to this extent is a bit shocking. Another quote that showed the authority that the church had on the people was “A time may come when it will be forbidden to breathe fresh air, take a walk, or even to have a conversation with a friend, without first obtaining permission from the competent authorities”. Showing that people at that time had little to no power.
This leaves me pondering about whether we have any such situations in today’s time- or any “Caudillos” in this age.
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with caudillos, independence, The Slaughterhouse
For this week’s blog, I wanted to focus on Esteban Echerría’s “The Slaughterhouse” because of its depiction of caudillos and metaphors for the ways Latin American people behaved after their nations became independent. I really loved the tone and writing style that Echerría employs, and found myself very enthralled with the story and its gruesome … Continue reading WEEK 5 CAUDILLOS: The Slaughterhouse →
Posted in Blogs, Week 5 | Tagged with caudillos, The Slaughterhouse
