• Search for:

• Recent Posts

  • The end of popular culture?
  • The LAST Blog
  • Ftubol y telenovelas
  • Transculturacion
  • Mestizaje

• Blogroll

  • French, Hispanic, and Italian Studies
  • Latin American Studies
  • SPAN364: Survey of Spanish-American Literature to the 1820s
  • SPAN365: Magical Realism Reconsidered
  • SPAN401: Spanish-English Translation
  • SPAN404: Cinema of Mexico

• Contributors

  • Ana´s blog
  • Andrea Azcona
  • Annabelle693’s Blog
  • annamarieke
  • Cennet Bahcesi
  • Earth Lives Connection
  • El Rincon
  • Javier’s LAST 201 Blog
  • jen gebert’s blog
  • jtraynor
  • kieron_hodgson
  • L@sT 2001 –>PoPul@R CulTuRe iN L@tiN AmErIC@
  • LAST 201
  • Last two-oh-one…
  • Latin American Pop Culture
  • Latin American Studies
  • Latin American Studies 201
  • Lluvia
  • maite’s blog for LAST201
  • Mercy’s Blog
  • POPULAR CULTURE IN
  • Popular Culture in Latin America
  • Posthegemony
  • ree00
  • RF. LAST 201 pop culture in LA
  • Salvador’s Spanish Class Blog
  • Sebastian’s blog
  • Sush Mgush
  • Taylor Cole LAST 201
  • tithflo
  • Tory’s blog for LAST201

I find discussions of the people to be very interesting. Across the globe there are wealthy ruling classes which have some level of control over the masses and there is the rest of the people who are subjected to the decisions of the ruling class. The …

I don’t know about the rest of the class, but I certainly had a hard time rounding my head around the excerpt from Peron. It just seems to me that Peron as a person, and Peronism as an ideology just seem to be full of contradictions. To be honest, more than contradiction between ideology and […]

I actually quite enjoyed both of these pieces assigned for this week. Evitas message, I found, was inspiring and poetic.. however not quite realistic. She lumps together the people of an entire nation making emphasis on ‘women.’ She makes bold points about escaping imperialism and exploitation, but she does so by saying that everyone wants the […]

This week’s readings for the subject “the People” left me with a lot to consider.  Peronism as a political ideology has always been a little problematic for me in that (at least in my perception) its underlying philosophy, while supporting “the people” or the working-class, it does so at the expense of alienating a large portion of the privileged population.  It has always seemed to me that the political ideology of Peronism appears much better in theory than in execution.  The two pieces that we read this week only further contribute to this perception of Peronism for me. 

Eva Perón’s work, “My Message” also contributed to my own conflicted feelings regarding this particular controversial political figure.  Throughout the piece, her description of “the people” and the so-called “descamisados”  leads me to question her motivations for writing such a piece.  Who exactly are “the people” she writes so passionately for?  Obviously she is referring to the “race” of the lower/working-class (as opposed to the elite “race” of politicians, oligarchs, privileged clergy, etc.), yet beyond this huge generalization we get no more information about the identity of these “people” from whence she came.  These generalizations are problematic for me, not only in her use of the word “race” (a social construction in itself) to characterize groups divided by economic opportunity but in her attempt to polarize a broad spectrum of culture, backgrounded, belief, and political alignment.  I find Eva’s message to the people a bit contrived and theatricized; an attempt to unite people for a common goal which  ultimately divides a nation’s population and encourages passion without rationality, political extremists and fanaticism.  While I’m aware that Eva Perón represents a powerful political figure who attempted to represent the under-represented, this “Message” only confirms my previous assessment of her as a calculating, fervent demagogue with quite an agenda.  I’m aware that this is a controversial statement about such a famous figure, but I invite further discussion!  While I have my own impressions, she remains a mystery to me. 

In regards to the Borges piece, I have to admit that it left me a little confused.  Perhaps this is because I’m not totally used to reading Borges in English, or to reading his more political, non-fiction work.  I could probably do with a better understanding of the historical/political perspective for this piece, however I did find some parts very interesting.  I feel that in comparison to Eva’s “Message,” “In Celebration of the Monster” provides a significantly more colourful, complete image of “the people.”  The story creates an almost impressionistic image of (what I believe is) a descamisado, in a violent interaction with non-Peronists.  While the images in this piece are violent and slightly disturbing, they provide much deeper representation of human characteristics and emotion than Eva Perón’s stylized, stereotyped descamisado. 

I feel that both readings for this week, while portraying an extremely specific facet of the Latin American pueblo, give us some interesting material to think about.  These readings show how contentious terms like “the people” are and invite us to think a little more critically about our expectations for the course.  They demonstrate that in studying a topic so broad as Latin American popular culture, we cannot be satisfied with stereotypes and generalizations. 

Las dos lecturas de esta semana fueron muy interesantes por que nos permiten ver dos posturas casi completamente opuestas respecto a una idea o régimen. Por un lado Eva Perón describe en su obra:My message, una postura un tanto radical, en la que ido…

Eva Peron’s discussion of “the people” is confusing, particular, exacting and seemingly un-populated. If she claims that her Argentina, in its true essence, is the people then perhaps she should have been more inclusive. Whatever the case may be, this term “the people” is ambiguous to me. Having read the Borges paper […]

Eva Peron’s article no doubt fits under the category of those political speeches that are written with the intention of uniting “a people”, but only result in the exposition of custom-made fictitious divides. The amount of sentiment stirring within her…

The concept of the people seems difficult to understand. Does the word it mean nation? Does it symbolize a particular class of people?
I was quite disappointed when I read the text of Eva Peron, first, because I did not find a clear answer to my questions, then, because I expected to an objective definition of […]

This week’s readings have to do with different interpretations of “the people”, as expressed by Eva Perón and then Jorge Luis Borges. The two have opposing views of what the people are, and of Perón’s government. Eva Perón’s text is very emotional and dramatic, and it seems like she has a great and genuine love for the people. She considers the people to be the ordinary citizens—the workers, the women, and the exploited. She talks a lot about how when people reach high places in society, then get “dizzy”, overwhelmed with the glamour and the status, but she never let herself get absorbed into this life, and always remained one with the people. She talks about how the government, the military, and the clergy exploit the people, and how the “enemies” of the people are deceitful. She focuses a great portion of her message on condemning the enemies of her husband, and on praising Perón’s greatness as a leader. Although Perón and his ideals are something that she is obviously passionate about, I think she goes too far in her praise of him, as it almost seems like she is blindly following him. The fact that her and her husband’s presidency was labeled a dictatorship by many shows that maybe she actually was not fully in touch with the people, or serving them the way she describes herself as doing. Besides this, there are a lot of things I liked about Eva Perón’s text. I like how she talked about love and hatred, how she never knows which one she is feeling, and that indifference is the worst thing. Passion (whether it is in the form of love or hate) is what stirs the hearts of the people and causes them to stand up for their ideals. I also really liked what she said about how religion should be used to “lift the heads of the people” not used as a tool of oppression to make the people bow. I think her opposition to the corruption of the Church, but her embracement of religion (or spirituality in general) is something that many, including me, can relate to.

Borges’ text had an opposing view to Eva Perón’s text, calling Perón’s presidency as the “Monster”. Borges tells talks about the people revolting against Perón…or at least that’s what I think he is talking about, as I couldn’t really understand what was really going on in the story. I found the part where they stone the Jewish man to death was kind of shocking, especially because I don’t really know why they did that. I am guessing that if they did have a reason for stoning him, it was because he was a supporter of Perón. Judging by this text, Eva Perón would not really be one with the people, as she repeatedly claims she is in My Message if the people are so extremely opposed to her Perón. The two readings seem to be to be on opposite ends of the spectrum, both expressing very extreme views of Perón.

This week’s readings have to do with different interpretations of “the people”, as expressed by Eva Perón and then Jorge Luis Borges. The two have opposing views of what the people are, and of Perón’s government. Eva Perón’s text is very emotional and dramatic, and it seems like she has a great and genuine love for the people. She considers the people to be the ordinary citizens—the workers, the women, and the exploited. She talks a lot about how when people reach high places in society, then get “dizzy”, overwhelmed with the glamour and the status, but she never let herself get absorbed into this life, and always remained one with the people. She talks about how the government, the military, and the clergy exploit the people, and how the “enemies” of the people are deceitful. She focuses a great portion of her message on condemning the enemies of her husband, and on praising Perón’s greatness as a leader. Although Perón and his ideals are something that she is obviously passionate about, I think she goes too far in her praise of him, as it almost seems like she is blindly following him. The fact that her and her husband’s presidency was labeled a dictatorship by many shows that maybe she actually was not fully in touch with the people, or serving them the way she describes herself as doing. Besides this, there are a lot of things I liked about Eva Perón’s text. I like how she talked about love and hatred, how she never knows which one she is feeling, and that indifference is the worst thing. Passion (whether it is in the form of love or hate) is what stirs the hearts of the people and causes them to stand up for their ideals. I also really liked what she said about how religion should be used to “lift the heads of the people” not used as a tool of oppression to make the people bow. I think her opposition to the corruption of the Church, but her embracement of religion (or spirituality in general) is something that many, including me, can relate to.

Borges’ text had an opposing view to Eva Perón’s text, calling Perón’s presidency as the “Monster”. Borges tells talks about the people revolting against Perón…or at least that’s what I think he is talking about, as I couldn’t really understand what was really going on in the story. I found the part where they stone the Jewish man to death was kind of shocking, especially because I don’t really know why they did that. I am guessing that if they did have a reason for stoning him, it was because he was a supporter of Perón. Judging by this text, Eva Perón would not really be one with the people, as she repeatedly claims she is in My Message if the people are so extremely opposed to her Perón. The two readings seem to be to be on opposite ends of the spectrum, both expressing very extreme views of Perón.

I find Jorge Luis Borges a brilliant author. His peculiar writing guides a world of fiction and metaphors into our consciousness that naturally builds up in a complexity of cultural and political inferences. The short-story ‘A Celebration of the Monste…

While I was reading Eva Peron’s “My Message” I couldn’t help myself laugh a bit, not because I’m mocking her writing but because I’ve heard this perception of the people from many (especially politicians) over the years. “El pueblo” (as…

Who are these people that Eva Perón loves so much that their suffering causes her pain? According to her, they are the women, the workers, the poor and the humble; and she loves them all, for they are “her” people. To Eva, the wife of former Argen…

The two readings for this week represent two very differing views. The first one, by Eva Peron, Juan Peron’s extremely devoted wife, supports Peronism to the point of almost deifying Peron himself. The other, by this guy Borges, is very critical of P…

I found Evita’s article to be quite touching. She was once a powerful woman but now as she gets past that phase in her life she wants to give her country and people one last gift, TRUTH. She talks about how much people lie in politics. Her word choice is optimal and the article flows very nicely. She goes on to talk about her husband and their relationship, with each other and with politics. She compliments him saying that he was also like her, fierce, fiery and most of all passionate. She did however find he a little bit too cocky. Peron talks a lot about the ‘people’ of Argentina she is trying to show that even though these people are separated by economic and social status (especially the poor) they all have a common goal for Argentina as a whole. Peron`s views on the future of Argentina are optimal, but at the same time I feel very unrealistic. Although if it were anyone to unite the people in Argentina it would be Evita Peron, and in order for the goals she listed they must be united. Only when as a society a country wants better for itself and to achieve justice, freedom and equality can change really happen.

Unfortunately for myself I don`t know a lot about Argentina during the time that this article was published. It really showed the “Monster“ , and how the people can sometimes be the enemy. In this case the people are the army. Much of what he said reminded me of military totalitarianism that was prevalent during the most wars. I found it interesting that both these authors have opposing opinions to one another. They both also feel that they are doing the right thing, so which one is right? It is hard to determine. On the one hand people like Peron, believe they are doing right, but others may views them as reckless leaders that are only thinking of their own personal gains.

Eva Peron’s “My Message” was an amazing essay! I thought it was passionate, insightful, real, and surprisingly easy to follow. She talked about fanaticism for the people and her country and I believe no one could be more fanatic about her people, her c…

Concerning Eva Perón’s text, I would like to highlight three main points. First of all, to define what she calls “the people”, “her people”, she uses a specific lexical field choosing terms such as “race” of the people, or “blood” of the enemies. This…

When I found out that our reading for this week were selections from Eva Peron and Jorge Luis Borges, I was very excited. Having read two short stories by Borges before, Emma Zunz and The book of sand, I thought I was prepared for this piece of writing…

I will like to start this post quoting one of the most outstanding lines of the paper: ” Fanaticism is the only force that God gave the heart to win its battles”. I feel like the first is very political and how that environment affects people, and she …

What is The People? Eva Peron and Jose Luis Borges’ pieces characterize the Argentine people during the Peronist regime. Both authors attempt to define who the people are, a task more daunting than I originally perceived. Evita wrote In My Own Word…

These two articles give us two different representations of  "the people" .  What is the people?  Who are the masses? These questions are somewhat tumultuous but continually fascinating and thought provoking.

Evas, "My Message"  was full of emotion and created a sense of national identity. Eva has the persona of a caretaker and mother figure of the exploited, under represented and basically the majority of Argentina.  She says multiple times that she loves them, the "descamisados, the women, the workers…the world’s exploited people, condemned to death by imperialisms…"  Evas charismatic manner enabled her to mobilize the masses. It is interesting to question who the people are that she is seemingly representing. It seems as though there are two groups, "the workers/the people" and "the elite". Eva was hated by the elite. Political and military members hated her power she had with the people and what she could do with it. One thing that made her a great partner to Peron was that she unlike him, came from a modest background and could directly identify with "the people". The working people saw her as an almost spiritual leader.  She identified her people and in turn took action for them where they could not. She was highly invested in workers rights especially for women in labor, and supported unionization. Ultimately  within "My Message" Eva speaks of the many evils she came face to face with  in her position of power and gives instruction to her people about what they must do and be aware of in order to liberate themselves. Eva and Peron worked as a team under the Argentine political movement of Peronism, which was basically a social justice party. Eva was beautiful and a great public speaker, which combined allowed her to capture the support of ‘the people", "her people". It seems to me that the problems that Eva wishes to abolish are still around today, all over the world. The hope to erase social lines and borders between people is very difficult, and perhaps unrealistic. The idea that a politician or leader of any sort really can be on the exact same level or page as "the people" is nice to imagine and hope for but rarely found in "real life".

The next article is about (I think) a man in the Argentine military. It seems that Eva’s speech did not have a positive effect on all people. I found this article a bit harder to follow. The man tells of "the monster", the gang or group that he is part of. They seem unorganized and chaotic, as well as dangerous. This is very different description of Argentine people. Perhaps both articles need to be looked at for exactly what they are, just one side of a story. Eva was seen by many as a saint, but there were also many discrepancies regarding her principals and then her actions.  Some people say that she was indeed a social climber despite her statements against that very thing.. she did end up in a pretty good spot at the end of the day.  For the second article, we get just another point of view, and a much harsher one at that. It could be that this is a more realistic point of view on the Argentine army/people.

Hi again, I would like to start this post by saying that I found amazing Eva Peron’s “My Message” It’s amazing how with her deeply sincere words she can transfer all the emotion and sentiment that she is feeling when she is writing. The purpose…

Under this weeks topic of What is the people? two diverse essays were presented. Both essays of, In My Own Words  by Evita Peron, and A Celebration of the Monster by Jorge Luis Borges brought with them two very different perspectives. Peron’s ext…

The two articles assigned for this week were intended to answer the somewhat vague question of “what is the people?” After reading both articles, I have some ideas about what “the people” can be described as and how they find their legitimacy in societ…

Who are the people? What do they represent? How are they incorporated into the creation of the Nation?In Eva Peron’s “My Message”, the People, above anything else, is the focus. The ultimate epicenter of her piece. Eva, taking on a somewhat mothe…

keep looking »

• 

• Categories

  • Administration
  • Arguedas and Asturias
  • Bellos and Hippolyte Ortega
  • Campbell and Taussig
  • Garcia Canclini
  • Gomez Peña etc.
  • Introductions
  • Ortiz etc.
  • Overview
  • Peron and Borges
  • Responses
  • Review
  • Rowe and Schelling
  • Vasconcelos and Wade
  • Williams and Keesing

• Recent Comments