Month: February 2009

I found the Cosmic Race to be a bit offensive in the way it categorizes people by their color and stresses the mixture as something intrinsically important. Mostly it just seemed out of touch with what is real and off base with it’s presupposition that eliminating the concept of race is a way towards equality. I especially found it confusing that it referred to Atlantis which I thought was widely recognized as a myth in the academic world. I don’t think that race as a general concept is worth talking about at this point in human civilization. In certain contexts it can be an interesting topic but I don’t see what can be gained by dwelling on it as a general topic. People, especially in an international city like Vancouver, have diverse backgrounds and heritage but it doesn’t necessarily have any implications on how they live their life on a day to day basis. I liked Peter Wade’s article about mestizaje because it had interesting things to say about music and culture and how they mix in relation to different influences. Instead of focusing on the racial mixture as just a result of racially diverse relations it talked about the historical mixture of food and music. What is interesting about our differences is how it affects our lives on a day to day basis. I don’t really consider my background because I’m white but when I eat some Slovak cuisine at my Grandmas or I go back to Minnesota and notice the Nordic influence on the region it’s interesting. It doesn’t have that much to do with my race as much as the transference of culture. I liked that he talked about music because it’s transference transcends race completely. You can find musical styles like reggae or the blues in all corners of the world and each has a different style and direction which it took to get there.

Originally when I started reading this weeks reading I was completely frustrated. The first reading I found very degrading and racist… I couldn’t see the point in reading it. Why were we studying this dominating ideological discourse and what purpose does it serve to our study? I realized (after reading the response from our professor after my frustrated email) that there indeed was a purpose to reading this. It came after finishing reading it, then after completing the following reading. Both presented different perspectives that I felt balanced nicely, or at least presented the opportunity for critical analysis.
I found myself in the beginning of The Cosmic Race, The mission of the Ibero American Race by Jose Vasconcelos, unable to read a paragraph without saying “What?!” But then I realized that it was written in 1948 by a man who is considered a very controversial figure, but nonetheless expressed an typical rhetorical claim surrounding the inclusivity of Mestizaje and its importance to lead the world, through in a sense plucking the best of all races to achieve the greatest civilization. Yet I could not fully appreciate this text until I understood the context of when it was written, why it was written, by whom it was written and for whom it was written for… I am still trying to answer these questions as they help explain the text in more depth.
From what I understand it seemed that this text was written to promote the ideology of racial mixing and professing that it was an inclusive strategy to unify the country through what Vasconcelos suggest, a platform based on “love”. The text however wasn’t very convincing to me. Most of all Vasconcelos’ judgments had not logical evidence attached, and his assumptions of difference races were based on constructed racial divides that did not seem to reflect any form of reality. Yet what this text ultimately serves for the benefit of understanding popular culture within Latin America, is its insight into a particular influential ideology that many hegemonic powers and political elites hold and have tried to perpetuate throughout Latin American societies. This is the notion that racial mixing with the goal of whitening and is the central aspect of the a constructed National Body.
The second article presents a more modern perspective into the analysis of the term and the context of mestizaje, one I feel was articulated more so in LAST 100 and what I presume is present in more recent geographical or anthropological research papers. Nevertheles “Rethinking Mestizaje” by Peter Wade still has its own biases and fallacies like the other article. Although it tries to resist the exclusive framework that mestizaje is built upon, (despite seemingly having an inclusive mask) and it uses the racial terms, such as black, white, indigenous, which only fortify already exclusive divides and thus Wade is not really able to get away from the exclusive connotations that mestizaje and race bring forth. A few questions to be critical about and aware is how we classify race and what that means to the individual and society.

—all in all i look forward to discussing the articles in class

The Cosmic Race (by José Vasconcelos) and Rethinking Mestizaje (by Peter Wade)

Throughout the first reading, it was apparent that Vasconcelos viewed the indigenous cultures as inferior to the Europeans and the mestizos. Much of his writing is devoted to predicting the formation of a ‘fifth race’, one that is the product of the fusion of “the Black, the Indian, the Mongol, and the White” (Vasconcelos, p.9). Vasconcelos takes it for granted that this fifth race would be founded upon Christianity and ‘Iberian’ culture; he viewed Christianity as being the only conceivable guiding force into this new era, and he felt that only the Iberian component of Latin America had “the spiritual factors, the race, and the territory necessary for the great enterprise of initiating the new universal era of Humanity” (Vasconcelos, p.20). To me, it appears that he is saying that this new race would remain rooted in European culture, which he feels is superior: Christianity was introduced to Latin America by Europeans; and the term ‘Iberian’ refers to the Spanish. It seems that when he is calling for a fusion of the existing races, he is not referring to a harmonious existence where distinct cultures coexist; he meant the complete assimilation of non-Westerners into a European model of civilization.

Mixture theories: Mestizaje. I found both articles quite interesting but I think it should be noted that they are completely polar opinions. Despite disagreeing with most of the text from “The Cosmic Race” I found it very invigorating and passionately argued. I was not completely surprised by what they author had to say, even though it is very controversial. Jose Vasconcelos race thoughts could be the topic of many debates, but I enjoyed how much he had to say about it. He claims that Latin’s, who got their name from Spain and Portugal, are actually more Anglo-Saxon. Page five is a prime example of his even more out there thoughts, when he talks about the Christianity as being the civilized. One of his more passive looks at the sphere of race appears on page nine, when he talks about the 5th race coming. Jose believes that 4 races are prevalent in the world and that a new one that is a hybrid of the 4 is soon to come. This hopeful look at the world shows that he is optimistic on the future studies and realities of race.

Jose does focus on one race in particular, his own. He believes that the Latinos must come together and reclaim their unity to lead this push for this ultimate race. He says that in order to do this you do not have to destroy the dominate race but instead amalgamate them. He uses LA as a prime example of a homogenized city. Mixture, since colonization, has been a fundamental building block for much of Latin America as well as Latino’s, so this is why they should lead the brigade to create this synthesized race. Despite saying that because Latin’s are trying to destroy race, there is a clear undertone in Jose’s writing that give the feel of Latin American superiority. He says that Latin’s are the only race to have integrated all the races together, which is easily contestable or deniable.

I enjoyed the approach of the second reading more. I think that it is true that we need to talk about race as not a black or white picture but as a complex system. I also found it quite interesting the Mexico example the author gives. In which the indigenous people of South America are often left out of the national body, until the government finds use or excuse to put them into it.

After this week’s readings, I find myself asking, “what is our definition of race, anyway?”  I’m well aware that as conscientious university students we are not supposed to make judgments about people based on racial difference, but no one can tell me that assumptions about race don’t exist on UBC campus…not when I hear people raving about the success of Obama’s election or joking about having to compete with all the “Asian intellectuals.”  So what is our definition of race? According to many academics, race is a social construct, not a biological truth–so why do we cling to it so fervently?

The first article, “The Cosmic Race” by Jose Vasconcelos was surely shocking for many people.  I personally had a difficult time choking that article down, yet I think that it says a lot of important things about the way that we view race in contemporary times–after all, it was only written roughly 60 years ago.  Throughout Vasconcelo’s many disturbing generalizations about racial identity and biological difference I caught glimpses of underlying trends that I believe permeate our thoughts and  speech today.  One of the initial items that piqued my interest was the author’s assertions that the “red race” or the indigenous people of the Americas have degenerated from the “extraordinary flourishment” of “Atlantean” (whatever that is…) culture to the Aztec, Inca, Maya and, later, contemporary people today and are “totally unworthy of the ancient and superior culture” (9).  Wow, what a comment…But really, this concept of indigenous people persists in the minds of many scholars and laypeople today.  How many times have we heard of the “Maya decline” from the Classic period–deemed so based on the prevalence of writing, painting and other cultural symbols so valued by the West?  Or what about Vasconcelo’s assumptions about the inherent industriousness and “clarity of mind that resembles his skin and his dreams”(22).  Can we not see later vestiges of this in mid-twentieth century development theory which assumes that the economic domination of Europe and the U.S. over states in the Global South is due to a more “developed” or advanced (white) civilization?  While I found Vasconcelos’ article incredibly strange and a little difficult to stomach, I can’t say that his opinions reflect those of a fanatic, nor that they have left no legacy for future generations.

Which brings me to the second article we read by Peter Wade. I found Wade’s analysis of mestizaje very interesting, especially his arguments regarding the difference between academic/ideological mestizaje and the “lived experience” of mestizaje.  While I’m not sure if I totally agree that the discourse of mestizaje has so much potential for social inclusion, I do feel that this is an aspect that has generally been ignored.  And while I appreciate Wade’s use of the “mosaic” metaphor to describe national identities, I feel that this is too often the ideal and not the reality: again I refer back to my own experiences of racial discourses on UBC campus.  I’ve heard the “ethnic mosaic” line used to distinguish Canada’s approach to immigrant assimilation (in contrast to the “melting pot” of the U.S.) and I’m not really sure I buy it.  Anyway, I feel that there’s a lot more to say on this subject that could be included here, but I have a feeling that class discussion on the topic will open up all kinds of different perspectives, so I’ll leave it at that.

The idea of a cosmic race seems very appealing.  The blending of the many different “races” to create one with a common goal seems almost like wishful thinking.  This entire idea seems impossible, but it has been happening for hundreds of years (many times forced) and continues to happen frequently nowadays.  Blending, blurring…  No separation.

This weeks topic of mestizaje was very interesting to read. I enjoyed both Jose Vasconcelos and Peter Wade’s essays. The topic alone of mestizaje is one of emotion and strong opinion and thought for many people. In Vascolcelos paper i found the facts and historical information he provided to be very interesting in his referencing back to Eygpt and Greece centuries ago. His exploration of not only mestizaje but racial classification and acceptance as a whole found to be very interesting. As Vasconcelos continues, the relationship he provides between “Latinism and Anglo-Saxonism” proves not only to be relevant to centuries ago but also can still be seen to this day. I find it interesting how he compares Latinism who mixed with local residents to the English who kept to themselves and did not mix racially to the extent of Latinism.  Later on Vasconcelos comes to a conclusion of which i have personally thought of priorly to reading this paper. “The great civilizations began in the tropics and the final civilizations will return to the tropics. ” (pg 23)This point personally in my mind to hold so true. One statement of which Vasconcelos makes of which i do not agree is near the end of the paper where he says “the people that Hispanic America is forming in a somewhat disorderly manner…” Although the manner of which they have formed has been different by no means should it be classified as disorderly. As for Wades paper, I found it be very interesting. From the paper, and after analysis i personally came to the conclusion that yes mestizaje is a mixture of two cultures two races but in this mixture a new culture or race has evolved and become one of its own. However there will always be racial hierarchies and racial stereotypes which attempt to destruct these positive reformations of the term mestizaje and what it entails. Like most things in this world however no simple answer can solve issues of such large scales and misunderstanding. In conclusion I found both papers to be informative e and an extremely important part in the understanding of popular culture in Latin America.

The readings for this week are about mestizaje, an ideology of mixture in Latin America. The first one is old and obviously a little-outdated while the second is more recent and brings many of the questionable, naive arguments of the latter into a more modern perspective.

‘The Cosmic Race’ is a very nationalistic account and prediction of the result of racial mixture in Latin America (and the world). I found it interesting, but not very compelling. The author is frequently racist, despite the fact that he tries to sound unbiased; his argument is based on very simplistic assumptions and generalizations; and the whole essay or book is rife with emotionalism and contradictions. In this sense, I was very much reminded of the Eva Peron reading we had. He constantly refers to his idea of a ‘cosmic race’ as ‘the first synthetic race of the earth,’ but aren’t all races and cultures the product of synthesis? Anglo-Saxons didn’t appear out of thin air, they developed out of a complex process that includes the idea of mixture–the very fact they are called by a name that derives from two other, different names proves that. But Vasconcelos misses so much more. He has this idea of a race which will become THE dominant race on Earth, but that ignores the fact that there is a reason there are various different races on Earth; one major factor being geography, which shapes psychologically (culturally) and biologically in very profound ways. Aside from that, the belief that all of the worlds races could combine to form “a new race that will fulfill and surpass all the others”(26) is cartoonish. I just about stopped reading when he said “five races and three stages, that is, the number eight which in the Pythagorean gnosis represents the ideal of the equality of all men,” but then I realized there wasn’t even a page left.

Mixture of cultures has been present since the earliest civilizations, and it seems that the mixture between similar races gives a better and more beneficial effect than the mixture of different races., for example the United States and Argentina are a mix of similar cultures and are two of the most developed nations in our continent, but most of Central America and some South American countries have had side effects due to the shock between the Spanish and the natives and are not fully develop. Spanish people and anthropologist give a lot of credit to the invaders that they have help and bring all Latin America to where they are, maybe it is true, but we can’t prove it, and we don’t know what could have happen if they have never reach American soil. They think that natives didn’t have other choice than to be abused and exploited by them, but as I say before, we will never know what would’ve happen if the Europeans will stay in Europe. There are four main races that are combining to produce every culture in the world, especially in America, these are: Black, Mongol, Indian and White. The author believes that after all these races are fully mixed they will develop a new race, which he calls the fifth race… The cosmic race. He thinks that this race is going to be guided by Christianity and that all cultures will be rooted in European culture and then mold from there.

Theories of mixture I: Mestizaje
In the first reading Jose Vasconcelos writes about different issues related to “race”. At the beginning he explains that even though the Latin American countries got their independence from the “Latins”(Spain and Portugal) they became then dependant on the “Anglo-Saxon”. On page eleven he writes that “We keep ourselves jealously independent form each other, yet one way or another we submit to, or ally ourselves with, the Anglo-Saxon union.” Here one can see that Vasconcelos shows that it is just an “illusion” to think that Latin American countries are independent. I got the impression that in some parts of the article he looks at the Anglo-Saxons as the example to follow because they were kind of better organized and the Latin American leaders of independence did not have a real plan after fighting for freedom. After reading that part it made me think of “Ariel” of Jose Enrique Rodó where he admires the U.S. but at the same time wants Latin American people to be different and for its people to a vision that embraces a Latin American identity. At some point Vasconcelos also writes that it would have been better if Latin American countries fought for a “continental” fight than an autonomous one. About the mestizaje he talks about how in the Latin part of the “new continent” people embraced the intermixing but in the Anglo-Saxon part people did not mix. In think that there is more mixing nowadays in North America but in my experience after living in the U.S. maybe there are still many issues related to “race” and to what is acceptable and what is not, but that some more people embrace the idea of mixing.
I liked the approach of the second reading. I think that indeed to talk about mestizaje is really complex and that there is not like black or white. I found interesting the examples the author gives. I thought about Mexico and how sometimes Indigenous people are not part of the idea of the “national body” but that sometimes they are when it suits the government interests. It is not easy to talk about that because as the author writes on page 255 “mestizaje has both difference and sameness, homogeneity and heterogeneity, inclusion and exclusion as constitutive elements.” I also agree with the author when he writes on page 255 as well that “blackness and indigenous can still be subjected to hierarchical orderings in which they are made to occupy inferior locations and are discriminated against and/or rendered exotic.”

Before starting, I have to say that I found these two articles extremely interesting although they clearly arguing in favour of two very different opinions. Despite there are numerous points which I do not agree with, The Cosmic Race written by José Vasconcelos is a surprisingly impassioned and confident text. I was really stunned to see how confident is the author accumulating arguments that appear to me as highly controversial and contradictory. Actually, his text is full of strange and even shocking opinions for instance the so-called virtues of Christianity in terms of civilizing peoples (p5)!

The attractive theory of the author is that the four main races of our world are going to mix and create a ‘fifth universal race, the fruit of all the previous ones and amelioration of everything past’ (p 9). The destiny he sees for humanity is a pretty optimistic and brilliant one. However, the process he describes is especially focused on one race, his own. Latin America has to recover his unity and to lead the fusion ‘of all peoples ethnically and spiritually’ in a new assimilated human kind. He sees LA as an ethnically homogeneous region which sounds like an unusual conclusion. Thus this mission belongs to the Latin civilization which has proven a greater tolerance towards ethnic differences and a tradition of assimilating all peoples into the national construction rather than destroying dominated races. The mixture of races that became a fundamental characteristic of Latin America since the colonization is the example that should lead the creation of a new synthetic race and the reason why this mission has been given to Latin America.

Although he explains that Latin America does not have an aim of racial domination but a universal mission of racial mixture, there is a clear underlying assumption about a Latin superiority. The way he speaks fosters racial hierarchy. Only Latin people have been able to integrate every race (which is easily contestable). All the qualities necessary to the formation of the fifth race are possessed by ‘the mestizo people of the Ibero-American continent’ (p38). I really felt a constant glorification of his people and its qualities. I personally have trouble with the idea that a global mestizaje has to be led by a single ethnic group; it sounds really contradictory and dangerous to me especially when he starts speaking of selection within the reproduction process.

Apart from that, what really strikes me is the idealistic mysticism that characterises this text. The author sounds like if he was preaching and many allusions are made to religion. Latin America has a ‘divine’ mission and possess ‘a fine aesthetic sensitivity and a profound love of beauty’ necessary for the process. Christianity serves as a justification and the text is extremely messianic. One should also point out how much Vasconcelos is influenced by historical determinism. He thinks that History has an aim and that there is ‘a law of history‘. The problem I have with his speech, although the idea of a universal integrated race is really attractive, is that he is presenting a complete utopia as something inevitable, necessary and dictated by the law of History and divine providence. The first example of historical determinism that comes to my mind is socialism. This theory also predicts an end to History and an historical pre-determined drive. Preaching for something that we consider as a divine mission and an inevitable outcome, especially if the carrier of the change is a racial group in particular, is a dangerous prod to authoritarianism.

Finally he has a very curious way of interpreting History. ‘Spanish colonization created mixed races, this signals its character, fixes its responsibility, and defines its future. The English kept on mixing only with the whites and annihilated the natives’. I believe that mixed race relations actually occurred in North America even if obviously the oppression he describes is true. But Spanish colons did not have a better behaviour towards indigenous. Moreover the following independent national construction that was glorifying mixed race identities has carried on raising questions of racial hierarchy and differentiation.

Rethinking Mestizaje is by contrast very academic and referenced. The reflexion presented by Peter Wade is highly complex and interesting. I think that it answers and contradicts some points made by Vasconcelos, but also goes further than that. The author explains that the concept of ‘mestizaje’ has many different meanings and possible interpretations. Basically, what Vasconcelos forgets is that a process such as mestizaje almost always contains tensions between spaces of homogenisation and differentiation.

Scholars have usually analyzed ‘mestizaje’ as an official discourse of nation formation, described as an ‘all-inclusive ideology of exclusion’ which is a very interesting formulation. This is precisely why I tried to say about Vasconcelos’ idealist view of Latin American’s mixture of races; a lot of people think that nationalist ideology of mixture perpetuated the marginalisation of racial minorities. The author explains the ‘dependence of the ideology on its excluded others’. Indeed, ideology reconstructs racial categories supposed to disappear with mestizaje because ‘it is impossible to conceive processes of mixture without recourse to ideas about origins and roots’. One can also distinguish another face of mestizaje which is a ‘resistant’ one locating ‘mestizo America within indigenousness’. I would personally tend to be more convinced by the first analysis focusing on the elite discourse and the use of the concept of mestizaje in order to serve white interests. That is why I criticized the glorification made in the first article about racial mixture in Latin America. I do agree with the author when he says that ‘the discourse of national homogenisation includes within itself complementary discourses of differentiation’.

However, his analysis is much more complex and maybe more optimistic as well. He shows how the concept of mestizaje also has a reality in everyday lives. Through different examples he describes how origins combine and shape ‘embodied persons’. Ethnic/racial differences and crossbreeding are experienced by people and constitutive of their identities. According to the author this is what provides a process of inclusion, because people share this ‘sense of shared mixed-ness’. Thus he proves that there is more in the process of mestizaje in Latin America than an underlying exclusion.

Having said that, he does recognize that whiteness remains favoured and that hierarchies of power still exist, ‘which tend to limit the nature of the space blackness and indigenousness can occupy’. I think that this last sentence is a nice answer to the first article; ‘Mestizaje is a space of struggle and contest. It is not a reason for automatic optimism or for Latin Americans to feel benevolent about their societies simply because mestizaje can have inclusive effects’.

I’ve covered the topic of “mestizaje” in my previous Latin American Studies course, and what I got out of previous discussions was that this idea of mestizaje is a complex topic. My perceived complexities of mestizaje were furthered confirmed after reading the articles for this week. I felt like the articles were good compliments for each other, and provided varying views on the topic of mestizaje.

Within the first few pages of “The Cosmic Race” by Vasconcelos, I was already astonished by some of the arguments and views taken by the author. For example, to end off the Prologue, Vasconcelos mentions that “A religion such as Christianity made the American Indians advance, in a few centuries, from cannibalism to a relative degree of civlization.” There are so many aspects of this quote that I have a problem with. First of all, the author doesn’t take a neutral stance in regards to Christianity and religion, basically saying that without Christianity, these people would be lost. The author also perpetuates the dichotomy of uncivilized vs. civilized. What, exactly, does it mean to be civilized? And how did this “relative degree of civilization” manifest itself within the American Indian community? Cannabalism has long been associated with certain indigenous peoples, and it seems the author is saying that cannabalism is an uncivilized practice, as it is not practiced by people of the Western world. However, who are we to judge those people with customs different to our own? Just because we may not practice certain customs, does not make those customs uncivilized or inferior to ours.

Vasconcelos also argues that “Even the pure Indians are Hispanized, they are Latinized, just as the environment itself is Latinized.” However, to reflect back on the article written by Rowe and Schelling, they presented a different argument on the topic of mixing. Rowe and Schelling argued that while Indians may be Hispanized, Hispanics are also, and equally so, Indianized. A reciprocated exchange exists between cultures. However, Vasconcelos seems to believe that one culture is more dominant than the other (Hispanic culture dominates Indigenous culture).

I believe that many of the argmuents brought up by Vasconcelos were rather idealized and fantastical. He describes a world where “the aesthetics of cloudiness and grays will be seen as the sickly art of the past.” He seems to believe that the mixing of races will bring about not only a so-called “cosmic race” but also a utopian land as well. Vasconcelos argues that with the creation of this cosmic race, racism and prejudism and other such “isms” will be erased, as there will be no racial divides anymore. The thought of this is quite appealing, however, Vasconcelos seems to contradict himself when describing various races. While he believes in a future without racial divides, he describes certain races as an “inferior race,” presumably the black and indigenous. In his description of the various races, he perpetuates racist discourse. In conclusion, I found the overall article quite contradictory as Vasconcelos is describing how mestizaje will bring about a cosmic race, eliminating racism and racial divides, but in his descriptions of the various races that will mix to create this cosmic race, he continues to use racist and prejudist discourse.

I found Wade’s article easier to read, and also more optimistic in its discussion of mestizaje. I liked how he stressed the fact that mestizaje is not just an ideology for creating a national identity, but is rather a way of living for the people. I think this is an important point to keep in mind. In overlooking the fact that living people are actually involved in the process of mestizaje, we ignore the implications and effects that processes of mestizaje have on the people. I feel like this is an aspect that was missing from Vasconcelo’s article. He didn’t touch on the profound effects and power struggles that occur under the processes of mestizaje. Wade, on the other hand, takes the discussion of mestizaje to a more grassroots level. I enjoyed the specific examples he gave of music and dance in the Colombian coast as well as mestizaje within families in Brazil and Colombia. Through examples, I had a clearer view of how racial mixing affects the people who are actually mixing. It is not as simple as mixing two different races together. There are issues with mixing cultures as well. “Mestizaje is a space of struggle and contest.” This is a key point in the discussion of mestizaje. In mixing races and cultures, there are certain perceptions of which is the more ideal race and which is the more inferior. Wade’s article brought to light the many difficulties that arise through mestizaje; difficulties which Vasconcelo’s article seemed to gloss over.