I think that comic strips and graphic novels are a pretty cool form of literature in that they allow for the exploration of controversial topics by offering a more palatable medium of communicating ideas.  In my mind, I understand The Eternaut almost more as a graphic novel than a comic strip, since it has one continuous plot line that lasts over the course of the print (I guess it should be noted though that at the time it was printed it was published and read in installations, whereas now we can access the full thing all at once).  The style of the drawings, as well as the dark, apocalyptic tone and plot line, reminded me a lot of Watchmen (which was actually also originally published as a serial and later compiled as a graphic novel).  Approaching the topic of global radioactive destruction shortly after the end of World War II during the midst of the nuclear arms race, The Eternaut expresses the concerns of outside countries that could become the indirect victims of offshore testing in the Bikini Islands or US-Russia mutually assured destruction.  Not being directly involved, Argentinians may have felt little agency in swaying the outcome of US-Russian relations.  Yet, they still had much to lose as a result of nuclear warfare.  As a graphic novel, the Eternaut both depicts and manages legitimate fears of the future of the world, depicting “gently” through pictures a scary imagined future that was not out of the realm of possibility.

The Mafalda comics reminded me a lot of Calvin and Hobbes and the Peanuts cartoons in their simple, innocent sensibility.  While I think comic strips often carry a lighter feel and may be held in lower serious regard than graphic novels, their messages can sometimes be more important/relevant to day-to-day life than serious graphics.  For instance, the strip about the moms drinking tea (pg 2), the “Sorry mom I’m busy” strip (pg 4), and the “If we don’t hurry up and change the world, the world changes us!” strip (pg 3) are all very refreshing in pointing out the adult’s farcical sense self-importance and serious outlook on life.  My two favorite Mafalda comics were the tax comic and the soap opera comic on the last page.  I think the reason I like them is that 1. they made me laugh, but also 2. they demonstrate that children are much more perceptive than they are often given credit for, and can even be more attuned to some realities of life than adults.

With both The Eternaut and Mafalda, I said they reminded me of comics that I know in English.  I would be curious though if they would have the exact same feeling had I read/understood them first in Spanish as they were originally written.

Marcos and the EZLN

Guillermo Gomez-Pena’s article on Sumcommandante Marcos and the 1994 Zapatista resistance in Chiapas resonated with me on two levels. First, mythic resistance figures to me scream popular culture. You can’t walk twenty feet without seeing either a real-life or fictional example on someone’s shirt (Che, Bernie Sanders, Rosa Parks, Luke Skywalker). When discontent brews within a sector of the population, these leading figures become public templates for the people to imprint their hopes for a better future onto. Much in the same way that the Zapatista adoption of the ski mask enabled Mexicans to see themselves in the face of Marcos, similar figures become idealized figures, gaining a level of anonymity similar to that of Marcos simply by separating their public lives from their private. We don’t know what Che ate for breakfast, we don’t know if Elvis showers in the morning or at night. This public anonymity creates space for popular movements, defined more by the people and their discontent than any single figure at the front.

Second, this article interests me as not the end of popular culture and the movements it inspires but as rather the first tentative steps into a new form of popular culture. The hybridization that Canclini talked about in his article is here the source of Marcos’ hold on the popular. Close control of his public image in the media enabled Marcos to cultivate an insurrection. His failure to hold the attention of the public demonstrates the movement of popular culture into a new age. Marcos, I believe, was ahead of his time. In the internet age, popular culture entirely revolves around popular personas (we have one as the ‘president’ of the ‘free’ world for fuck’s sake). It is also possible, however, that Marcos would be entirely unable to maintain anonymity were his movement to happen now. Regardless, the rise and fall of Marcos from the public eye marks – at least for me, in the context of this class – a distinct shift in the form and attention (span) of popular culture as it entered the 21st century.

I see this Zapatista movement and the image Marcos cultivated in direct contrast to Peronism, interestingly enough. In Argentina, Juan and Evita cultivated their own images based on ideals that would resonate with the people, rather than allowing the people to see themselves in the couple. Perhaps they knew that these mythic figures were doomed to fail, at least in their own lives. For people, even in discontent masses, are afraid of change. As the article puts it, the Zapatista movement spiraled out of the spotlight because a “‘vote for no change’ was in fact a ‘vote of fear.'”

Cultural Identity and Salsa

A question I found myself asking when reading this article harkens back again to our discussions of hybridization and hybridity; when does a culture cease being what it is and become something new? And, more specifically, does an adoption – or translation – of a cultural practice into a new context carry enough weight to change the culture the practice originated from?

According to Canclini’s arguments about hybridization, the first question is truly pointless. With cultures constantly in a state of flux, there are no static cultures to measure against. Yet, on perhaps less nuanced terms than Canclini is dealing with, I found myself pre-occupied with the question in the context of Salsa dancing; When does Salsa stop being ‘Latin,’ and become ‘Latino-British’? To a certain extent it was always ‘Latino-British’ because it inherently carried the latent ability to be adopted into a British context. But it was also never ‘Latino-British’ because that as soon as Salsa dancing became that, it ceased to be ‘Latin.’ Interesting.

The second question – can British interpretations of Latin culture have an impact on Latin culture itself? – I find even more interesting. You could argue that the process Ortiz names ‘transculturation’ comes into play here. Transculturation implies both a cultural inflow and cultural outflow, where a practice shared by more than one culture acts as a sort of tug-of-war between the two (although not exactly reciprocal). But could a relatively niche London Salsa scene have an impact on something as monolithic as “Latin American Culture.” It certainly informs people’s perceptions of it – both people who participate in London’s scene and those who witness it – and that’s an impact, however small. Either way, I do not see this as the end of popular culture, just a step in its widespread globalization.

jLO

When has popular culture not revolved around fetishes? I would argue that objects of popular culture are just that, objects. Of course they exist in another realm. Jennifer Lopez exists as a talented and successful actress, as a woman, as a human being. But popular culture has turned her into an object. As it has done with so many others. Many forget that Justin Beiber, when he blew up, was a sixteen year old with the ability to write and perform pop hits. Drake is like 50 and he can’t even do that. All people saw Beiber for, though, was his hair. It inspired a regrettable hair trend that seventh grade me definitely did not participate in.

Jennifer Lopez’ identity as a Latinx actress does play an important role in this. Her fetishizement in the eyes of the popular, however expected, marginalizes her as a representative of an identity that is constantly being marginalized. While Beiber and his hair moved into the realm of popular object, you could rely on ten million other white guys with guitars to fulfill any need you could have for white guy representation in the music industry. Jennifer Lopez doesn’t have that luxury. Hollywood especially hasn’t represented Latinx identities particularly well, and objectifying jLO doesn’t exactly help.

The end of popular culture? I’d again say no, that popular culture has done this before and will continue to do this until the end of time. But perhaps it is not in the realm of popular culture that Hollywood – and the media in general, to be really oblique – needs to strengthen its representation of Latinx identities, so that jLO’s butt can win TIME Magazine’s Person of the Year without further marginalizing cultures that have been shoved to the side of the road again and again.

The article about media fascination with Jennifer Lopez’s butt was interesting, thought-provoking and just as relevant today as it was in 2002. I have heard and read extensively on social media regarding exoticization/fetishization, even objectification of ethnic (nonwhite) bodies, however, none of them do the job of explaining the problematic nature of this phenomena, as well as Mary Beltran does.

The author talks about how Jennifer Lopez essentially used her butt to stay relevant, market herself in US, and create a niche for herself in the still white-dominated industry. Crossover success is defined as someone from as the process of becoming popular with a new audience. Many stars from different ethnicities have tried to crossover into mainstream Hollywood, however, their success has been largely determined by how closely they were able to embody “the ideals of whiteness”. Their appearance (skin colour, facial features, body type – in other words perceived ethnicity) determined what roles they will get in films – the “star-making” protagonist or stereotyped/ethnically centred roles. In cases where the available Latina actresses did not conform to the white standards of beauty, white actors (eg. West Side Story) portrayed these Latina roles.

What this leads to is: other races must mold themselves to gain acceptance in the Western society. That doesn’t sound too unfair. But, the same isn’t true the other way around – White actors/actresses don’t necessarily have to change/mold themselves gain acceptance within other ethnic demographics. This creates a dominant culture/subservient culture dynamic. Given such “conditional acceptance” environment, it’s not hard to imagine why Lopez decided to use her curves for publicity during the “crossover” stage. You do what you gotta do to thrive. The alternative, most likely, would’ve been slowly fading away from public eye; ‘she came, she saw, she didn’t conquer’.

Beltran asks whether commodification of nonwhite images in media is a process of losing or gaining power and agency. I can’t understand how can someone possibly gain power through this exoticization process. Like surely, it creates a platform for ethnic minorities in US and gives them voice, but of what use is that platform anymore when you can only employ it to further perpetuate and confirm pre-held stereotypical notions of your ethnicity? If anything, it further aggravates the situation and reinforces racism.

The least good that could come out of this EW photoshoot was decentralization of eurocentric beauty standards. However, it failed to achieve that too. JLo still went on to achieve the slender white-female body, shrink her butt and sport dirty blonde hair. Had she succeeded in changing perceptions (like Beltran claims on page 12), there wouldn’t have been the need to conform…

The article about media fascination with Jennifer Lopez’s butt was interesting, thought-provoking and just as relevant today as it was in 2002. I have heard and read extensively on social media regarding exoticization/fetishization, even objectification of ethnic (nonwhite) bodies, however, none of them do the job of explaining the problematic nature of this phenomena, as well as Mary Beltran does.

The author talks about how Jennifer Lopez essentially used her butt to stay relevant, market herself in US, and create a niche for herself in the still white-dominated industry. Crossover success is defined as someone from as the process of becoming popular with a new audience. Many stars from different ethnicities have tried to crossover into mainstream Hollywood, however, their success has been largely determined by how closely they were able to embody “the ideals of whiteness”. Their appearance (skin colour, facial features, body type – in other words perceived ethnicity) determined what roles they will get in films – the “star-making” protagonist or stereotyped/ethnically centred roles. In cases where the available Latina actresses did not conform to the white standards of beauty, white actors (eg. West Side Story) portrayed these Latina roles.

What this leads to is: other races must mold themselves to gain acceptance in the Western society. That doesn’t sound too unfair. But, the same isn’t true the other way around – White actors/actresses don’t necessarily have to change/mold themselves gain acceptance within other ethnic demographics. This creates a dominant culture/subservient culture dynamic. Given such “conditional acceptance” environment, it’s not hard to imagine why Lopez decided to use her curves for publicity during the “crossover” stage. You do what you gotta do to thrive. The alternative, most likely, would’ve been slowly fading away from public eye; ‘she came, she saw, she didn’t conquer’.

Beltran asks whether commodification of nonwhite images in media is a process of losing or gaining power and agency. I can’t understand how can someone possibly gain power through this exoticization process. Like surely, it creates a platform for ethnic minorities in US and gives them voice, but of what use is that platform anymore when you can only employ it to further perpetuate and confirm pre-held stereotypical notions of your ethnicity? If anything, it further aggravates the situation and reinforces racism.

The least good that could come out of this EW photoshoot was decentralization of eurocentric beauty standards. However, it failed to achieve that too. JLo still went on to achieve the slender white-female body, shrink her butt and sport dirty blonde hair. Had she succeeded in changing perceptions (like Beltran claims on page 12), there wouldn’t have been the need to conform…

Latinas in mainstream North American media have always seemed to be portrayed as hot-headed, curvy, sassy- with that certain ‘ethnic flavour’. Another big part of their “latina-ness” comes from the sexualization of their bodies. Celebrities like Jennifer Lopez have had great success playing into this stereotype and I have a somewhat divided opinion on whether this is helpful. Does this demonstrate the ability of Latinas to “cross-over” into the mainstream while proudly retaining that certain latin-ness or does it limit mainstream medias ability to view latina women as anything but these over-used stereotypes? Is it a source of pride or is it actually a limitation? Being a half-latina who really does not look “latina” and for the most part white (or Italian, I’ve been told) it’s been a struggle in coming to terms with my identity when I’ve been told I’m supposed to look and act a certain way. The reality is me and many many other latina women do not and never will conform to those ideals. And that’s fine. I’d say since Lopez’s time Hollywood has changed a little bit, but I still see this stereotype being played over and over again- like Modern Family’s Gloria- with her curvy body, sassy flare, passionate outbursts in Spanish. Maybe that’s just who she is-but maybe she has conformed to this ideal because it’s an easier pill to swallow and success in mainstream North American media has been built on this image before.

As of 10:40pm, I have not yet read the Gomez-Pena topography piece.  While I plan to have it done by class tomorrow, I will only focus on the Roman-Velazquez and Beltran readings in this post.

I found the Roman-Velazquez reading on salsa to be particularly interesting in part because I am in UBC’s Latin Dance club and have been taking beginner salsa classes this term.  From this experience, I think that there is a lot to be said for music and dance as a point of entry into a culture.  As Roman-Velazquez comments on page 121, the initial biases associated with ethnicity often vanish quickly in salsa; evaluations of talent and level of integration are instead based on capability.  Thus, while salsa follows “Latin” rhythm and instrumental patterns, neither performance of the music nor dance is restricted to those of Latin American backgrounds (except in the area of vocals, where language and native level of fluency in Spanish still presents a barrier to entry for singers).  In my salsa class, neither of my teachers are Latin American.  Sebastian, the lead, is a caucasian man no taller than 5’3″.  Yuki, the follower, is a heavy set woman with an accent I would guess is from Southeast Asia.  I would not peg either one of them as a salsa dancer if I saw them walking down the street, yet their sense of rhythm, style, and familiarity is immediately apparent the instant you dance with them.  Also, amongst the other students in the class, it is very clear that a Latin background in no way implies an inherent salsa talent; the male lead who can out-salsa most of the other guys in the class is from Eastern Europe, while one guy who grew up in Mexico as a kid often struggles to stay on top of his feet.

The lack of obstacles involved in creating music and dancing make them two elements of culture that are fairly universally accessible and thus make them transportable, as seen in Roman-Velazquez’s example of salsa culture in London.  However, different locations have distinct styles, exemplified in the story of Colombian Roberto Pla, who had to alter his percussion style so those in Britain could “digest it” (p.122).  On page 120, Roman-Velazquez writes that “places are important sites for the meeting and exchange of different cultural practices and possible cultural transformations.”  This made me curious about a hypothetical situation: what if mestizaje mixture of White, Latin, and African cultures took place in a location other than South America.  If Portugal and Spain had decided to bring natives from South America to labor on settlements in Africa, would the resulting culture be radically different from what was created in Latin America??

I didn’t intend to write for that long on salsa.  The one thing I will say on Jennifer Lopez is that it would be interesting to compare the construction of her “cross-over” stardom to the construction of male Latin-American cross-over stars, mainly in terms of the emphasis placed on physicality vs. personality and talent.