Monthly Archives: January 2017

Peron and Borges

Evita Peron’s My Message offered a rousing mission statement of her purposes as co-leader of Peronist Argentina. My impressions below:

-Reversal of the Platonic Philosopher: In Plato’s allegory, an enlightened philosopher breaks their shackles, escapes the cave of illusion into the light of truth and then returns from the light into the darkness to illuminate the minds of those less philosophic. Peron’s description of the “dizzying heights of power” is an inverse of this ideal. In her world, a Peronist leader leaves the light of the common people to enter a world of lies and shadows, and must realize that truth has been and will always be with the people. Thus, they must cease enjoying the lie and return from the darkness of power into the light of the people.

– An extension of experiences in Argentina to the whole world. If populism truly wishes to exist, it cannot be contained by national borders. If this was true in the 1940s and 50s, when Peron was in power, it is certainly true now. Evita’s rhetoric exemplifies this universality.

– Essentialism? That might not be the word, but Evita continually evokes the heart and soul of the people. She appeals to their will and sovereignty, but always their true power lies in their hearts. This is repeated throughout. If it needs to be an -ism, maybe Passionism is a better term.

– Hot Rulers. Not Trudeau, but rulers with passion. Rulers cannot be objective, must have a deep passion for the people. This goes against many ideals of an unbiased government/justice system. “The cold do not die for a cause, they die by accident.”

– Ownership of life. Who owns the lives of the people? Surely not themselves?

– Behind every nation is a people. Nations do not describe plots of land, they describe the people who occupy them. Behind every image of grandeur is a harsh reality of oppressed people.

– Evita repeatedly refers to an “ignominious race” and relies heavily on otherness. What better way to turn a hive mind against your opponents than to argue that it is not their ideology that you hate but their very genetic make-up?

– Evita’s plea is for the people to become fully aware of their sovereign power. Only then can actual social change occur.

My take on Borges’ story is a lot less analytical and more vibesy. Bear with me. 

-“Here begins your sorrow” would love to find/translate the Ascasubi poem this is from.

– “he’s really in touch with the inside feelings of the masses themselves” really a parody of Peron. Referring to the masses themselves as an entity whereas the object of Peronism is to find/appeal to the humanity in masses.

– It took me a while to figure out how this story worked, but once i figured it out the satire came straight through. Very Vonnegut/Heller-esque (to go full high-school).

– Relationship between the truck-driver and bus-driver is great!

– The fact that this narrator repeatedly gets duped into believing his own misery is part of some overall communal betterment for his squad is in itself a perfect critique of Peronism.

– Juxtaposition of proud marches and patriotic songs with the dumpster-divers that are the object of the story reminds me a lot of Catch-22.

– First Sentence: “it was a regular civic demonstration” Later: “It was a riot.” Sure they stoned someone to death for having their own ideas, but at least they did it with passion.

– “The Great Electric Shock that signs his name Dr. Marcelo N. Frogman”

– Power to the people. A Clockwork Orange?

Comment on: Peron

What Evita Peron wrote in her ‘last messages’ to the population of Argentina is clearly filled with passion, determination and deep sincere feelings, which is a part that I like. I could tell she wrote and spoke from her heart. What is interesting is the structure of the text; it is written almost as if the words came straight from her thoughts without being revisited, sometimes repetitions occur as well and I find it a little bit confusing. I noticed how the word “people” comes up literally in every page, almost exageratedly, which is clearly the center of the speech. It is in opposition to “the oligarchy” which came up also very often, as well as “fanatism” and “Peron” himself.

This text is also slightly a propaganda in favour of her husband. She probably wanted to make sure that the Argentines would continue to support Peron even after her death, probably because she knew how much they were affectionate towards her and that the emotional bond she created with them had to be kept alive in order to help Peron with his politics.

Interesting is as well how she talks of the ‘oligarchy’ as a race, one of its own, separate from the other common ‘people’ of the working class, and that it must be ‘destroyed’ and is even associated to the devil.

The whole speech itself is very straight-forward and she points out very bluntly her feelings, disliked and wishes for the future, accusing openly some people and confessing her endless love for others, as well as talking a lot about herself, her past and her pain.

Reaction to My message

I will explain here my reaction to the reading of My message by Eva Perón. She wrote this text shortly before her death by cancer and this was a way for her to address her final words to the Argentinian people, to justify her and her husband’s struggle, to identify the enemy and to express her dying wish.

Evita continuously explains she never forgot her poor background and has always remained loyal to the “people”, which she almost qualifies as a separate species: one that is cruder than that of the oligarchy, but also more loyal and humane. She regularly reaffirms that her husband has always fought for the betterment of their condition, instead of living a life of privilege. I think the way Evita calls to the needy and sympathizes with them aims at justifying the political movement and the leadership of her husband, but at the same time her work for them actually proves her honesty.

She warns the “people” of the main enemies they face in this battle: the military, the clergy, the oligarchs in general but also the indifferent, those who do not feel violently convinced by Peronism. She calls to the passion, to the fanaticism of the people to prevent political or military opponents from overthrowing Perón.

The tone of the text is overly optimistic and grandiloquent. Evita appears sure that the population can form a coherent force dedicated to the common good and that the demonstration for the liberation of Perón was an example of this. However, this same event is exactly the same as the previous reading of the week, A celebration of the monster by Jorge Luis Borges: Borges stated that such dedication and unity are not to be expected.

It can partially explain why Peronism is controversial. Theoretically, it has a benevolent goal of helping the poorest of the country but it mainly relies on demagogy and fanaticism.

Reaction to A celebration of the monster

I will explain here my reaction to the short story A celebration of the monster, by Jorge Luis Borges. A celebration of the monster depicts Argentinian youths who join the Perónist movement (the “monster” regularly evoked in the short story is most likely referring to Perón) as a band of erratic and chaotic people instead of proud patriots.

They constantly seek to sell the guns they were given to participate in the demonstration, they burn down the bus that was carrying them, they need an authoritative figure using constantly punishment to keep them in line and they end up killing a Jewish student for little reason before trying to sell his clothes covered in blood. All of this does not prevent the narrator from praising the Monster from time to time and the lack of faith the student had for the Perónist figure supposedly leads to the eventual murder.

I suppose Jorge Luis Borges expresses in this short story his skepticism of the Perónist movement, or perhaps more broadly of all populist movements. This collection of young, violent and uneducated people gathered for an event dedicated to the Leader cannot become a coherent group moved only by patriotism. I think this statement is made as an irony, given the generally humorous tone of the text, written in a vulgar and incorrect way to represent the crudeness of the characters.

As for the title, the name “monster” is always used in the text when the narrator refers to the Leader. It must be Perón and Borges explicitly writes that the story takes place in Argentina but there is no explanation in the story as for why the characters refer to a figure they obviously respect with such a term. Perhaps replacing the name with this very pejorative word is a way to both insult and anonymize Perón, so that the moral of the text can also apply to other populist leaders of Latin America? Furthermore, the eponymous celebration is perhaps not the speech of the Monster, which does eventually take place in the very last lines of the text, but the excited and chaotic behaviour of the protagonists when they arrive at their destination, going as far as committing a murder: this can be interpreted as the real celebration motivated by the figure of the leader.

Thoughts on the Peron/Borges Readings

The Perón reading interested me significantly – it was intriguing to see how a humble woman had overcome struggles in order to get where she got. Page 52 in particular shows her love, and the also the duty she felt towards her husband. Page 54 is even more interesting, as she describes how ‘nearly all’ of the supposedly influential men surrounding Perón at the time ended up betraying him; so much for loyalty! It is therefore ironic on their part, as they considered he ‘little more than an opportunist’! How can they call her that when they themselves were feigning loyalty…

I feel that her tone throughout is fantastically aggressive and spirited! Indeed, it seems that the idea of passion is at the centrepiece of her ideology, and what she believes should be engrained into the minds of all true Perón supporters! She goes as far as calling herself a fanatic, as she seems to believe that fanaticism is the only way of showing true passion; for example she talks about how fanaticism is ‘the only heart that God gave the heart to win its battles’. She also notes how ‘Quasi-Peronists’ made her feel sick – these people mainly being what she would describe as ‘tepid, the indifferent and the reserved’. I am certainly a fan of the passion with which she writes as it makes for a very entertaining read!

With the Borges – ‘Celebration of the Monster’, I feel like the descriptive language used (especially on the first page at least), is deliberately ugly! Are things like ‘pump a little pasta into the guts’ said to make us feel deliberately sick? Certainly the writing style in this piece is far less formal than Perón’s, with a more casual, slangy (perhaps Americanised) twang to it.

Ultimately, it is tricky to understand who ‘the monster’ actually is? Possibly it might be the every day monster in his life? Probably for Borges, ‘the monster’ is a representation of his poor health? He certainly hints at that, especially on the first page of this article. This Nelly character keeps coming up in discussion too – and one kind of assumes that he is either referring to his wife, or even his sister with this Nelly persona…or maybe Nelly is just a fictional persona….

I feel like in some ways these texts are certainly related – maybe because Borges was famously Anti-Perón; he even refused to hang pictures of both Evita/Juan up in his house (on request of the authorities) after the death of Evita. Perhaps the monster is indeed Juan Perón himself?…

Introduction

Hi, everyone. Nice to meet you.

My name is Ziqi Ling. You can call me Vincent. I am an exchange student from Shanghai, China. I’ll study here for one term. I am now in my third year majoring in culture economics in my home university–SJTU(short for Shanghai Jiao Tong University). I take courses related to culture, architecture and anthropology here. I’m interested in reading books, watching movies and travelling. I hope I could be more brave than I used to be and try various kinds of new things. I am eager to explore the world and I’m curious about everything in Latin America. That’s exactly why I’m here.

Sincerely,
Vincent

Introduction

Hi, everyone. Nice to meet you.

My name is Ziqi Ling. You can call me Vincent. I am an exchange student from Shanghai, China. I’ll study here for one term. I am now in my third year majoring in culture economics in my home university–SJTU(short for Shanghai Jiao Tong University). I take courses related to culture, architecture and anthropology here. I’m interested in reading books, watching movies and travelling. I hope I could be more brave than I used to be and try various kinds of new things. I am eager to explore the world and I’m curious about everything in Latin America. That’s exactly why I’m here.

Sincerely,
Vincent