As the Day of the Dead approaches, I am making my way through the readings for the first part of the Argentina case study. Nouzeilles and Montaldo’s chapter introduction gave me a better grasp on the timelines and characters of the horrific events that traumatized Argentina during the post-Peron dictatorship period, starting in the early 70s. The introduction, among other things, hinted at one of the great paradoxes inherent in ‘free’ market economics: in a large chunk of the world, the policies of free markets ,built on philosophies of ‘Modernization’, have best been employed by ruthless dictators. The freedom of the market is in many instances predicated on the slavery of peoples, in different guises, be it maquiladora workers or Special Economic Zone ‘employees’. Reading about the discourses through which the Argentine state justified its terrorizing ways, I could not help but to be reminded of a peculiar perception of its neighbor to the the West, (and fellow dictatorship victim) Chile, which growing up I heard from a couple of voices (young and old, for politics seeps into all ages and places in Colombia). The kind of thought boiled down to: ‘Yes, Pinochet did some horrible things, but look at Chile now!’ Just to make it clear, I think that link of thought is barbaric. I believe it is good to keep in mind, as we continue next week with the Argentine case study, that it is one among several in the region in which the tactics of government form a discernible pattern.
Ricardo Piglia’s excerpt from Artificial Respiration led me to feel that, at least within the very little Argentine literature that I am familiar with, the deconstruction of national culture (and literature specifically), wether for praise or condemnation, seems to be a theme. I found interesting the way in which the discussion between Tardewski and Renzi addressed the role of Europe in shaping Argentine national identity, within a dialogue about literature. The disappeared professor is said to have interpreted Argentine culture as doomed in its obsession with Europeanness and its inability to sincerely duplicate it. This brought back to mind Galeano’s passages about the British influence in the history and shaping of the Southern Cone’s economic patterns (in his view, dependency), and even its land colonization imperatives. The role of the Guerra de las Malvinas in the events surrounding this week’s readings also exposes the curious continuation of this influence/relationship. I don’t think I will shock anyone if I say that I believe this cultural/geographic relationship has not only largely shaped Argentina’s perception of itself, but also the perception that it’s neighbors hold of it. Basically, it is as if Argentina deals on the one hand with an inferiority complex due to Europe’s perception of it as too colonial, too native. On the other hand, it deals with a superiority complex due to the rest of Latin America’s (erroneous) perception of Argentina as an all-white, all-European country, and the dynamics that this implies. This might construe Argentina as an Island, out of place in either continent.
To close this post, Bonafini and Sanchez’ “The Madwomen at the Plaza de Mayo” relates an aspect of this period of Argentine history with which I was much more acquainted, in a large part perhaps due to something that is explored in the text, which is the fact that the Mothers where, at one point, embraced by the world’s media. One thing I was not aware of, was the role of the World Cup in the repression of the Mothers and Grandmothers. It is curious how the Cup’s sponsorship of the dictatorship, as well as the Olympics' approval of Hitler’s government, have been so thoroughly sanitized in our current, over-the-top embracing of said events. Also, in a kind of feminist reading, I found very interesting the goal which the Mothers, (themselves symbols of what, in traditional societies such as Catholic, mid 20th century Argentina is perceived as the pinnacle of womanhood), tried to reach in order to defy the paternalistic, patriarchal state, embodied in the Dictator: the incredibly obvious symbol that is the obelisk.
Peace.
No comments:
Post a Comment