The Slaughterhouse

I thought that The Slaughterhouse was a very powerful piece, depicting the major divide within colonial Buenos Aires and the greater Latin America as a whole. The major contrast that Echeverría explores is that of "civilization" versus "barbarianism." He also criticizes the violent rule of de la Rosas through grotesque scenes of meat and murder. 
I found the most interesting concept that he explored to be about people under the pressure of survival when trying to stay "moral." He states, "...the Church holds the key to all stomachs!" and continues in saying that on the "civilized" side, it is about reducing a man to the exact moral code or structure of the Church and the government. I agree that this can make people "machine" like when they look to the law or their religion for each and every decision. 
I think that the wild bull symbolizes the "Unitarian savages," fighting back to be wild and free even when roped up. Many people fear the wild bull, and would rather it be contained and slaughtered. 
Another topic thoroughly explored is racism. The races are distinct, and the young man who is murdered is done so on unjust terms with them saying, "Cut his throat, Matasiete; he was going for his pistols. Slit his throat like you did the bull's." 
In the conversation that follows between the Federalist and the Unitarian, the Federalist compares the man to an animal because of his strength, poking fun and dehumanizing him. The man responds in saying that he'd rather be torn to pieces by a tiger than plucked apart one by one like a crow. I thought that this was a very powerful image. How slaughter is a well thought out, cruel way to kill with ropes and devices. 
When he finally dies, a Federalist says immediately, "A report must be filed. Untie him, and let's go." Showing how unsympathetic and rule-bound they have become. In the end he calls the Federalists the barbarians, the butchers, and the thieves. He then refers to the "savages" as friends of enlightenment and freedom, showing how subjective "barbarianism" is. 

INDEPENDENCE NARRATIVES: PAST AND PRESENT

The first chapter of this textbook lays out a very important message that I did not completely realize before reading. That is that Latin American independence was not gained all at once but created in a long standing process, each region having its own struggle and solutions. 

Having grown up in the United States, I learned about the American revolution much like Dawson describes with the “Shot Heard Round the World.” It has always given me an image of a unified front, a common history. Yet as  brought up in the text, this was only freedoms for a small percent of the population which was over represented. 

I really agree with what Michel-Rolph Trouillot says about history, that it is “not what happened, but is what is said about what happened.” It’s important that we don’t over simplify the history of Latin America, and that it is not told through only a small percentage of sources. 

That said, the sources reviewed in this chapter, Simon Bolivar, Jose Marti, and Hugo Chavez, were from different backgrounds and time periods, but all shared a very common goal.

Simon Bolivar claimed Latin America to be stuck in “permanent infancy” due to a lack of legislation. He explains that this is because the citizens of Latin America have been enslaved into blindly following the rules and regulations of their Spanish conquerers, unable to put their own ideas and values into practice. I think that Bolivar is right in that Latin Americans have been forced into following so many other people’s rules, that they do not know where to begin in creating their own. 

Jose Marti follows up this idea with stating that governing is an “art” that is learned through education. I think he brings up a strong point in explaining that a European education must fall second to American. That citizens must learn every detail of their own history and culture, instead of being washed out by facts about ancient Europe. This way, America can claim its own identity, and unite as a more common force. I agree with him in that people should put aside their small mindset and trivial issues in order to join hands and see the big picture. 

Hugo Chavez discusses the “abyss” that begins to form between the North and the South, a more modern freedom that South America must fight for. I thought it was powerful how he began his speech with all of the universally great aspects of South America such as the beautiful, rich land. He seems to have done this to form a common ground and positive hope for listeners. I agree that Neo-liberalism has been the cause for broken economic promises. Innovation brings wealth to a very small percentage of the population, and the rest are under represented and part of a widespread, fast-growing poverty. He also references the importance of education, and the lack of education that citizens of South America have access to. He ends his speech with an idea that reminds me of what Trouillot says about history and sources. He essentially asks, “what if South America was the voice of the news?” 

What if South America was given the chance to write its own history, and see it for what it really is? What if what is said about what happened is closer to what actually happened? 

I think that all three leaders referenced in this chapter would hope for this, and the only way for this to become possible is for South American citizens to form a strong, unified front.

Catalina de Erauso, Lieutenant Nun

WEEK 3-

Catalina de Erauso, Lieutenant Nun

The story of the Lieutenant Nun from her own perspective is extremely fascinating. As the translator says, she is a "perfect colonialist" before anything else. I found it incredible that even in that time period, Catalina was rewarded by King Philip IV for her services rather than punished for disobeying the strict boundaries of gender. The story itself is riveting, and dramatic as she narrowly escapes being recognized, even by her own father. In a Spanish colonial world with so many feelings of superiority and strict classifications (such as presented in the Casta paintings) I find it very uplifting to see that with a strong will and determined cause, people were able to go above the fact that she was a woman, and respect what she did. 

Casta Paintings

The Casta paintings reveal an intriguing light on where the Spanish colonial and Latin American worlds met. What I find most interesting about the Casta paintings is how unknown their purpose and audience still is. The images distinctly place racial roles of the coexisting cultures on a hierarchy. I agree with Arce y Miranda that the paintings seem damaging to the Spanish outlook on creoles, making them appear "mixed" and literally lower than a "pure" Spanish man. The paintings seem to establish a form of superiority, and send the message back to Spain that all is well, productive and orderly systemized. This is quite the contrast to the chaos and
violence that existed. Also, although the images appear peaceful, there are underlying disruptive messages which place a stereotype on each ethnic group. 

-Week 2 Readings-

It was very fascinating to read primary sources from both a Spanish and Native perspective upon the arrival of the European people in Latin America. Although written a couple centuries apart, the two texts focus on similar interactions between the groups that occurred during the time of Spanish conquest. 

Columbus's journal focused on reassuring the king and queen that they would gain their worth in funding his expedition. He promises gold, silver, extraordinary sights and land, and potential Christian converts. In order to maintain order within his crew and avoid being seen as a failure, he uses signs and over-exaggerated positive word choice to glorify his goals and actions. 

The words from Guama Poma on the other hand, bring to light the true violence and miscommunication that occurred between the two cultures. It highlights several deaths and the greed of the Spanish which is overlooked in Columbus's writing. 

Introduction

Hi, my name is Krista. I am originally from Northern California. I started my studies in Geography at Arizona State University, then took a year to travel and perform music, and next transferred here to UBC where I study Social Sciences. I love to travel and learn about new cultures through history, language, music, and art. I have never been to Latin America, but want to learn more about the region's history and visit there someday in the future.