This reading was one of the more dense readings we’ve done all year and I think at points the complexity of the language takes away from the points Canclini is trying to make. There were points where I knew I was reading something important, but with Canclini’s jargon I had no idea what I was reading. The way Canclini justifies the use of the term ‘hybridization’ remind me of Ortiz’ justification of using ‘transculturation’ to describe a more nuanced, complex process than the words ‘hybridity’ or ‘mestizaje,’ respectively. A few ideas below:

– Hybridization transcends ‘hybridity’ in that it describes a process that is continuously happening so that there are never any static products, whereas hybridity describes the product of that process. In many ways, I think Hybridization is the culmination of a lot of what we have been talking about in class, combining every aspect of a culture while also recognizing its constantly shifting identity.

– Canclini’s theories of Hybridization seems to be a term coined ahead of its time. Much of the technology Canclini identifies has advanced exponentially over the past couple decades, and every way he says that this technology progresses the hybridization of cultures has likewise advanced. Culture and technology are so inseparable at this point in our history that hybridization is now more realized than ever. But I don’t think this is the end of hybridization, or that somehow we will begin to revert to a non-hybrid culture. Rather, I think this is only the beginning of what hybridization could look like.

I didn’t quite understand if telenovelas in general started from Por Estas Calles or if that was only one of the examples leading to the spreading of telenovelas all over Latin America. Anyhow – I find it wuite interesting how the text reported some people defining telenovelas as ‘low class’, ‘popular’ in the sense of ‘not culturated’, and some others recognizing its real life features and connection to the population. It is true: telenovelas have the connotation of being of ‘bad taste’; this text showed me a more historical side linked to the reality of a nation. I wonder how it was like to grow up in those times were Por Estas Calles was going on in the TV and actual political and social turbulences in real life. I also wonder who the majority of viewers were – the whole country, or a specific social ‘class’?

These readings were very interesting (especially the Bellos, partly because I will probably write my paper on similar material, and because of my deep set love for the beautiful game (football, never soccer, please…).

The Nelson Ortega reading was intriguing, for a few reasons…the most important being the importance of the TV, and TV programming in Latin America. However, he importantly emphasises ‘telenovelas’. As he doesn’t directly define what a ‘telenovela’ is, I did some research on it. Indeed, they are very similar to what the Western world would define as soap operas, however they are importantly NOT the same as soap operas. They are much shorter than soap operas (they rarely run for longer than a year), but they are still much longer than most serials. A telenovela is best described as a ‘serial’ drama. On p64, Ortega notes how telenovelas have become ‘much more permeable to the changes in the genre, in the country, and in the audience’ since Radio Caracas Television revolutionised the genre with ‘Por estas calles’ (by Ibsen Martinez) in the early 1990s. Ortega implies that the first wave of telenovelas were slightly less serious than late waves. He notes on p65, how at first, telenovelas customarily ‘avoided references to to contemporary social life and current history’. Ortega then goes on to discuss how these 2 phases of telenovela: the cultural phase, which started in 1973, and the urban phase, which began in 1977. Essentially there isn’t a huge amount of change between the 2 waves, and there is a lot of overlap between the two, which he duly notes. Certainly the 2nd phase built from the first as it contains a lot of the same drama of the first (things such as love, sex, violence, relationships etc.).  He emphasises how melodrama is central to telenovelas on p68 too!

What I love about the Bellos reading, is the amount of emotion that is conveyed. Many people will say, football is just a game: I would say to that try going to one of the biggest derbies in the world: for example, Arsenal v Tottenham, Man United v Liverpool, Barcelona v Real Madrid, AC Milan v Inter Milan, Boca Juniors v River Plate: the list goes on and on. For the real, hardcore fans, football is more than just a culture: it’s a religion (to quote one of my heroes Skepta there). Unfortunately I don’t have time to go into more detail here (much as I would love to!) but rest assured I will be writing a football-based paper, so there will be plenty much more to come!

Sorry about the lateness on my post, folks (but mostly prof.!).

Ortega’s article really gave me a better idea on what telenovelas mean to the Latin American world. I’ve always heard of the ‘mania’ surrounding this genre in Latin America but never really had a clear reason why it seemed so much more popular there than it does in North America. Even though some soap operas in North America have committed followers they just don’t seem to garner the same attention as telenovelas in Latin America.  It seems that the success of the genre in Latin America is melodrama “because it it insists- or tries to insist-on the dignity of the ordinary.”Perhaps that is why many people who could consider themselves as cultural connoisseurs would look down on the cultural form- it is too ordinary and therefore has no place in the realm of what we can call culture. Because it is accessible, because the themes addressed in the programs like Por Estas Calles are perhaps, relatable to the “average joe” (or José…hah) is they’re content somehow less valuable?

The concept that culture should be exceptional rather than accessible has always seemed to be an issue surrounding popular culture and because of this popular art forms such as telenovelas are devalued. I think it’s also super interesting that the folletín (newspaper serials) that lead to the telenovela was one of the first steps in which oral tradition (which we know is extremely important to pre-columbian and indigenous culture) was transcribed to print at the same time that many Latin Americans were becoming literate (p 67). Their popularity was reflective of people seeing themselves and their reality in the cultural products that were being produced and  having access to this because of increased access to education. It seems to me that those who view telenovelas as “trash” or “garbage” are those who want to retain a monopoly on cultural expression and maintain a hegemonic elitist cultural narrative. I’ll have to give some of these telenovelas a watch- maybe i’ll get hooked too.

Reading this text was very interesting. Firstly because football is the national sport in my country and growing up, football games were all around me, embedded in the Italian culture. It has been a while I have not seen any match and this article brought me back to the good old times.
Secondly: I did not know anything about the Brazilian Maracaña match of 1950! I knew Brazil was very attached to football as a nation, but this explains so much more.
It struck me how important the 1950 defeat has been for Brazilians. It sounded almost as an obsession. I can’t believe so many different literacies have been written about it. I didn’t finish reading the text so this is all I can say. All in all it was very pleasing to read as well as informing. It makes me think how sports are nowadays related to specific cultures all around the world. Almost every nation has a national sport, (I guess?), and it is so interesting to see how much they make up people’s identities as part of a country, a culture, a nation.

I love melodramatic trash TV (not necessarily saying telenovelas are trash, they sound like quite the opposite but don’t worry i will get to that ) and not in some ironic way (still seriously don’t get how it’s possible to like something genuinely and ironically?) I truly truly love it (the good trash that is.) I think everybody does to some degree (this may be my bitterness speaking but I feel as though “male” targeted trash programming is less villified/condemned than it’s “female” targeted counterparts…looking at you “history channel” you are in no way superior to Kardashianess ) there are elements of melodrama in almost all modern modes of communication from what we read in magazines, see on the news or even project with our internet “selves.” I moved to the U.S. when I was 8 and went from a tiny town with one elementary school of like 50 children straight into a giant “middle school” and more importantly into the world of television, which I only ever saw movies/cartoons/news on before (cus my cheepo parents refused to pay for things like cable and air-conditioning and still do.) My older sister and I both became obsessed with our tv because a) we had no friends after moving b) there was so much yet to be discovered on that thing c) it was all so over the top and ridiculous and exciting. Also we had our own “play room” in the basement where we could vegetate in front of our disturbing programming undisturbed by our parents and quickly hit the “last channel” button whenever we heard their footsteps down the stairs. So with one small change in circumstance my sister and i went from arguing over which one of us was D.W. and which one was Arthur to contemplating “A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila” (a google search will tell you what you need to know, the shame still haunts me.) Also we would watch reruns of american sitcoms that we didn’t even know existed before moving because most were canceled before we were born like “full house” “sister, sister” “family matters” “7th Heaven” etc, all equally awful and cheesy but it was on this very rerun channel where I first encountered soap operas and on occasion, telenovelas (which, upon reflection were probably but not certainly Mexican.)

There is something so distinct about the set/lighting/costumes/general aesthetic of these programs which makes them easily recognizable as their genre. Maybe it has to do with the powder-coloured extravagant interiors with lace curtains, high ceilings and candelabras- the obvious artificiality which provides a perfect backdrop for the very realistic elevated emotional rollercoaster which is the dialogue. Also this may be inappropriate and a mere matter of preference but I have always found the female protagonists of telenovelas to be more beautiful/better actors than in English soap operas, or at the very least better at delivering a convincing portrayal of dialogue (that i don’t even understand) and vivid emotion. Though I can’t say I ever stuck around long enough to consume a full telenovela (or that I ever knew what was going on) they are certainly visually superior to American/British soap operas. Also, interesting to note the difference between the content of “soaps” in individualist, money hungry societies, such as ours tend to focus more on business, scandal, prestige, and opulence i.e. issues of REPUTATION where the Latin American versions seem more concerned with familial dynamics and private as opposed to public forms of betrayal i.e. issues of COMMUNITY. The genre itself seems to be refined to perfection by its Latin American incarnation. They are proliferated through time by their ability to represent different kinds of people and “bridge the gap” of opera and drama portraying only the upper classes this “insists on the importance of the ordinary” – melordrama. The english name of the genre would imply this is it’s entire aim- Opera being a form of “high culture” with many conventions going along with the title, soap implying that it is being brought down to the common level (and also referencing it’s female audience) and should be consumed by everyone. Both high and low- another example of “mixture” at work! I was also really intrigued by the tropes we think of like inter-family drama and extra marital affairs being placed alongside traditional myths, stories and songs- wow, much mixture, very cool! Issues of representation are important, and the bad behaviour of only rich and untouchable people being glamourized can get stale after too long, I think people really are interested in confronting depictions (however dramatic) of issues that are real to them as well as a variety of characters which may represent them or be relatable to them. The dependency of the structure of the program on the structure of it’s society (seen in the different carnations of telenovela for different countries) as well as the many genres inside the genre (Political, ecological etc) prove how far reaching this genre is within Latin America, and just how successful it is in reflecting an artificial yet tangible mirror of reality for people to relate to and possibly learn from. Also, it’s worth noting how American reality and sitcom tv could take a nod from telenovelas, i need better, more realistic trash to consume!

I love melodramatic trash TV (not necessarily saying telenovelas are trash, they sound like quite the opposite but don’t worry i will get to that ) and not in some ironic way (still seriously don’t get how it’s possible to like something genuinely and ironically?) I truly truly love it (the good trash that is.) I think everybody does to some degree (this may be my bitterness speaking but I feel as though “male” targeted trash programming is less villified/condemned than it’s “female” targeted counterparts…looking at you “history channel” you are in no way superior to Kardashianess ) there are elements of melodrama in almost all modern modes of communication from what we read in magazines, see on the news or even project with our internet “selves.” I moved to the U.S. when I was 8 and went from a tiny town with one elementary school of like 50 children straight into a giant “middle school” and more importantly into the world of television, which I only ever saw movies/cartoons/news on before (cus my cheepo parents refused to pay for things like cable and air-conditioning and still do.) My older sister and I both became obsessed with our tv because a) we had no friends after moving b) there was so much yet to be discovered on that thing c) it was all so over the top and ridiculous and exciting. Also we had our own “play room” in the basement where we could vegetate in front of our disturbing programming undisturbed by our parents and quickly hit the “last channel” button whenever we heard their footsteps down the stairs. So with one small change in circumstance my sister and i went from arguing over which one of us was D.W. and which one was Arthur to contemplating “A Shot at Love with Tila Tequila” (a google search will tell you what you need to know, the shame still haunts me.) Also we would watch reruns of american sitcoms that we didn’t even know existed before moving because most were canceled before we were born like “full house” “sister, sister” “family matters” “7th Heaven” etc, all equally awful and cheesy but it was on this very rerun channel where I first encountered soap operas and on occasion, telenovelas (which, upon reflection were probably but not certainly Mexican.)

There is something so distinct about the set/lighting/costumes/general aesthetic of these programs which makes them easily recognizable as their genre. Maybe it has to do with the powder-coloured extravagant interiors with lace curtains, high ceilings and candelabras- the obvious artificiality which provides a perfect backdrop for the very realistic elevated emotional rollercoaster which is the dialogue. Also this may be inappropriate and a mere matter of preference but I have always found the female protagonists of telenovelas to be more beautiful/better actors than in English soap operas, or at the very least better at delivering a convincing portrayal of dialogue (that i don’t even understand) and vivid emotion. Though I can’t say I ever stuck around long enough to consume a full telenovela (or that I ever knew what was going on) they are certainly visually superior to American/British soap operas. Also, interesting to note the difference between the content of “soaps” in individualist, money hungry societies, such as ours tend to focus more on business, scandal, prestige, and opulence i.e. issues of REPUTATION where the Latin American versions seem more concerned with familial dynamics and private as opposed to public forms of betrayal i.e. issues of COMMUNITY. The genre itself seems to be refined to perfection by its Latin American incarnation. They are proliferated through time by their ability to represent different kinds of people and “bridge the gap” of opera and drama portraying only the upper classes this “insists on the importance of the ordinary” – melordrama. The english name of the genre would imply this is it’s entire aim- Opera being a form of “high culture” with many conventions going along with the title, soap implying that it is being brought down to the common level (and also referencing it’s female audience) and should be consumed by everyone. Both high and low- another example of “mixture” at work! I was also really intrigued by the tropes we think of like inter-family drama and extra marital affairs being placed alongside traditional myths, stories and songs- wow, much mixture, very cool! Issues of representation are important, and the bad behaviour of only rich and untouchable people being glamourized can get stale after too long, I think people really are interested in confronting depictions (however dramatic) of issues that are real to them as well as a variety of characters which may represent them or be relatable to them. The dependency of the structure of the program on the structure of it’s society (seen in the different carnations of telenovela for different countries) as well as the many genres inside the genre (Political, ecological etc) prove how far reaching this genre is within Latin America, and just how successful it is in reflecting an artificial yet tangible mirror of reality for people to relate to and possibly learn from. Also, it’s worth noting how American reality and sitcom tv could take a nod from telenovelas, i need better, more realistic trash to consume!

Big Snakes on the Streets and Never Ending Stories: The Case of Venezuelan Telenovela

Ortega begins the passage my asserting that “the telenovela is an important expression of Latin American popular culture not only because of its success with public, but also because it reflects this public’s symbolic and affective world.” In Venezuela the genre is divided into two phases, the “proto-novela” (1953-1972) and the contemporary telenovela(1973-1992). These genres break down further into the “cultural novela” and the “urban novela.” The author positions the telenovela in context to the North American soap opera claiming that both “coincide, in a general way, in thematic treatment of family, power relations, the bad woman… etc.” The distinction therein is that, “the central motivations of the soap opera are money and sex, whereas the motivation for the telenovela, according to Jose Antonio Guevara, is the continuation of a family: to fall in love, to marry, to have children.” The telenovela works to contrast extremes (rich, poor, good, and evil) to yield melodrama. The author later sites Peter Brooks regarding melodrama, claiming that, “[it] is a popular form not only because it is favoured by the audience, but also because it insists– or tries to insist– in the dignity and importance of the ordinary.” Ortega believes that, melodrama included, the purpose of the telenovela is to illuminate problems within “contemporary society” directly opposing soap opera’s entertainment purposes.  Telenovelas also depart from soap operas in their diverse audiences and evening broadcasting times

Structurally speaking, the telenovela has the classic beginning, middle, and end that characterize fully-resolved stories, unlike soap operas. Making reference to William Rowe and Vivian Schelling, the author cites these two saying, that the telenovelas origins “can be traced through a series of popular forms, beginning with folletin, or newspaper serial, itself transitional in that it was a first step whereby traditional oral themes and styles entered the medium of print at the same time as their audience negotiated literacy”.  The most important influence, according to the author, was the radio soap opera. Ultimately this passage worked to emphasize the role of telenovelas as “technological apparatus to recreate the country as fiction.”

This week I decided not to summarise the readings as much, but instead write down my personal reactions to the pieces as a whole:

For both pieces, it was incredible to see the depths at which popular culture can be embedded within a society.  In the case of Latin America, it is embedded in ways that are not detached and languid as seen more commonly within other societies. Instead it is integrated in through greatly personal and emotional attachments to the pop culture (ie. sport/telenovela). Yes, these passionate attachments to a ‘pop-culture’ are also seen within Western and other societies (most commonly in sport, politics, religion music and art) however, these attachments  are not as all encompassing in terms of the mass population. Latin American culture continues to merge and explore the polarities of their people and unite them in a love and passion for something (an aspect of pop-culture),  making that ‘something’ core to everyday life and to what it means to be  from that country.

These readings fascinated me as the lines between  the experience of the mass and the experience of the individual are very shared. On their own accord people are passionate about something and that is shared in the masses making them insanely powerful. The power of the people is seen in the political unease created by the telenovela and the mourning of Brazil’s 1950 world cup loss. It was interesting to see how emotion, passion and simply loving something A LOT, dictate to some extent the political actions, decisions and social order.

I really, really enjoyed the reading Futbol this week! I felt that’s what I had in mind I would learn about when I signed up for this course, so it felt good we finally were ready to learn about football and telenovela culture.

I had read and heard numerous time that football is akin to “religion” in Brazil, but I feel I had still underestimated how magnanimously important the sport is for Brazilians. Brazilians compare the loss at the 1950 World Cup (the Maracanazo) to the bombing of Hiroshima. The event is touted as the single worst national tragedy in Brazil’s sovereign history. The reason Brazilians were and still are so deeply affected by the loss is not only because of the passion they have for football, but also because a loss was projected by the media as unthinkable, the impossible. Newspapers, politicians, and radios had already hailed the Brazilian players the new world champions. Additionally, there were no televisions, therefore, most of the Brazilians had paid to watch the team play live, and thus watched the heartbreaking goal scored by Gigghia right in front of their eyes too. It was an image that never faded away from their memories. What made the loss worse was that rather than brushing off the defeat as a freak result, the Brazilians accepted it as something they “deserved”, that the “Brazilians were a naturally defeated people”. The loss reinforced a sense of inferiority and shame.

But putting aside the heartbreak of the general populace, the three players to suffered the most in the event’s aftermath were Barbosa (the goalkeeper), Bigode and Juvenal, coincidentally, all of them black. Therefore, the event reignited theories that “Brazil’s racial mixture was the cause of a national lack of character”. I really empathized with these three players while reading the text. The entire blame for the defeat fell on Barbosa, who was never allowed to forget 1950. He was labeled as “the man that made all of Brazil cry”. I cannot fathom how difficult and heartbreaking it must’ve felt to be made to feel the cause for millions of heartbreaks. Despite being voted as the best goalkeeper during the 1950 World Cup, he was shunned by his colleagues and called bad luck. Zizinho, another member of the 1950 Brazilian squad, described how adversely the event affected Barbosa, Bigode, and Juvenal. Bigode didn’t leave his house and Juvenal left Rio for good. It’s even sadder to realize that much of the reason why the blame fell completely on their shoulders was because of their skin colour, and not so much their football. It’s also interesting how, even though Zizinho says he moved past the event, he still has drawings of football systems lying around in his house. None of the players, even half a century later, were ever able to really put the fateful match behind.

Also, it was really interesting to find that Aldyr, the man who designed Brazil’s characteristic yellow football uniform after the 1950 World Cup, actually supports Uruguay, the team that caused the need for his design in the first place. Not only this, but Aldyr doesn’t particularly take much pride in his creation. I mean, sure he grew up on the Brazil/Uruguay border, and that explains his love for Uruguay, however, he literally is the designer of the most recognizable and famous jersey in sports!! Forget gloating, he doesn’t even take any pride in it?!

Finally, it was interesting to read what Gigghia, the guy who scored that fateful goal, had to say about the event. He is the poorest of all the surviving 1950 veterans, quite an irony. As much as I right now sympathize with the Brazilians, he deserved better treatment from the Uruguay government. He doesn’t feel much guilt for scoring the goal, but that’s hard to believe. That single goal he scored thrashed millions’ of people’s hopes, morales and self-esteems. He literally is the cause of Brazil’s Hiroshima. The worst part though is that the team that won that day, Uruguay, no longer remembers the much about the event, “In Uruguay, [they] lived the moment. Now it’s over.” But 5 years later, in Brazil, they “feel it in their hearts every day”. Actually, in hindsight, it was overall a very fun sad read and Barbosa deserved more love. I think I got too into it …

It was also very interesting to read about the Telenovelas produced in Latin America. Telenovelas are different from American soap operas in that while soap operas are driven by money and sex, telenovelas revolve around more family-oriented concepts, i.e. falling in ove, marrying and having children. It reveals a lot about the culture of Latin America, and what they value the most in life. Unlike soap operas, telenovelas also have a beginning, a development and an end, “because its goal is to “solve” life and provide it with a happy ending”. Ortega discusses Venezuela’s “Por estas calles” at length as an example of a modern telenovela and its theme, structure and characters and genres. The show was so interwoven with the national/political events in Venezuela, that it never enjoyed the same success in other countries that imported it. It was “too foreign” for them, highlighting how telenovelas are usually centred around contemporary political, affective and social issues.