Blog 12: The Last Post....

First of all I thought I would end saying that you are all rather fantabulous people and it has been a pleasure getting to know all of you throughout this course. Throughout this semester I have learned one thing above all others......my history teachers did not teach me anything in high school. I have had to accept the fact that when Stark or Serrata mentioned some famous figure in history, unless they are a president, I was not going to have any clue who they were talking about. After a full school year of Latin American history though, I feel as if I actually know something. Which is pretty cool. This class helped to alter my previous saying of "I hate history and all things history" to "Ya know, history isn't all that bad." My writing has definitely improved as well. Not only do I feel as if I am a faster reader/note taker, I have also become a speedier writer. This is pretty cool for me because it used to take me ages to put words down on a paper, and I would have very little time to edit. Now I have at least a day or two, and I would have more if I didn't procrastinate. Though I would slap a warning label on it about the amount of reading and writing that is required, overall, I would recommend this sequence to any newcomers.

In Response to Caitlin's Blog 11

I think it is amazing that you found this video so quickly. I think that the fact that this video is still around speaks to how important media can be. Your point concerning how this video served to open up peoples eyes rather than reinforce what the population already knew is a really valid great one.It seems crazy to me that the men who beat and murdered Bill Stewart did not bother with the camera man. I do think agree that the fact that the Somoza dictatorship was partially ended with this video is amazing, but I also think that it is a bit ironic. The video made such an impact because of the actions shown in it brutality and disregard for the law. This obviously shocked the United States, including our president. So it does not make sense to me how we can them turn around and justify the funding of the Contra's to destabilize the Sandinista government. The fact that in just a few years we went from being horrified in the face of Bill Stewart's murder to funding the attack on schools and hospitals is astounding. I wonder what the reaction would have been if the rest of the United States had been aware of what was happening?

Blog 11: Salsa Dancing

So in lieu of our salsa dancing lessons tomorrow, for which I am SO EXCITED if you could not tell, I thought I would look up some background information on the salsa. The music originated in Cuba as a blend of African drums and the Spanish guitar. The music really took off in the United States in New York City. Salsa itself refers to a specific brand of music that was developed in the 1960s and 1970s by Cuban and Puerto Rican immigrants. There is more than one genre of salsa music. These include the Cuban son montuno, guaracha, chachacha, and the mambo. Here is a quick clip for all you lovely people to watch.

I also wanted to make sure that I covered what to wear while salsa dancing because as Jacqueline pointed out, we are sadly uninformed. Here are the dos and don'ts of salsa. You want something that flows and moves. Red is a good color to fall back on. Now on ruffles I have received some conflicting information ranging from a "definitely not" to "heck yes." So I guess use your best judgement on that one. As for shoes, make sure you aren't going to break your ankles but heels are in ladies. I understand that is mainly centered on women and for that I apologize to the men. Again, flowy is best for you and apparently deep V necks are in.



and just to make us feel bad about ourselves here is what it is supposed to look like

See you all tomorrow!!!!!

In Response to Matt's Blog 10

I also found the Winn book to be somewhat enjoyable to read. He actually used real quotes and sometimes it read closer to a story of the Yarur workers rather than the Chilean Revolution. In regards to the three patrons of the mill, they cracked me up as well. I wish that it went more into detail about Jorge Yarur's mill and if it was filled with the same distrust and scared atmosphere that was found under Amador. At least Jorge knew he was not going to get away with the fake "father" image. Amador himself cracked me up as well. It was almost like he was a mob boss with all of his informers and strong-arm squads. I do not understand why he thought he was going to be able to stay in power. It also makes me wonder what would have happened in Juan had not died when he did and was faced with the problems seen in Jorge and Amador's times. Would things have been much different?

Blog 10: Many Death's

As part of our discussion in our groups today. the line "and not one death would come to each and every one, but many deaths"  from section III came up. I was trying to explain what I thought it meant and (as my group members can attest to) I was struggling hard core to make sense of my thoughts. So please bear with me as I try to figure it out here. I saw two different interpretations. The first one I came up with was that every person dies a little every day that they are not living the best quality of life they can. The line "from eight to four or nine to five" represented a work day for me and the mention of the many deaths following this line lent my to believe that it was the thoughtless repetition that was slowing killing each and every one of us. But then today when the question was posed concerning the shift from a self-centered individual to a communal society, Alex pointed out that if everyone is stuck in the repetition, then are they not moving as a group, which makes a lot of sense. I think we all agreed in class that the poem shifts from the negative, individual base to a more community one, so my previous theory is flawed. This lends me to believe that there has to be a second option for interpretation. Perhaps, instead of looking at the problem as each individual dying a little bit, it would be more appropriate to view it as the society as a whole. Every day more and more people die but they die by themselves, individually of one another. This makes more sense if the one true death mentioned later is referencing the disappearance of the of the people of Machu Pichu. So those are the two theories I have come up with. I am definitely aware that they are flawed so if anyone has any more thoughts on the subject I would love to hear them. Thanks!

In Response to Leah's Blog 9

I really wanted to respond back after reading your blog for this week because you brought up many details that I did not consider in my previous blog, and I concur that I could have definitely used some that you mentioned to expand my own. I think the point you made concerning the fact that he brought part of current day ( the book ) into the past with him is a valid one. To me it is almost like an anchor. I also found your suggestion that we are looking for a balance between our "civilized" self and our "barbaric" one interesting. In class Stephanie mentioned how the boarder between the city and The South is blurred in the story. We really do not know where one truly ends and the other begins. Perhaps this is a statement that we often find ourselves in that area of confusion one which way we should go. My conclusion is that, as you said, the past belongs in the past. We can venture back into the past to learn from it, but ultimately  we need to live our lives pushing forward into the future. Another point that comes to mind is that he went to the South to die. Technically he did not know he was going to perish there, and technically we do not know if he actually did, but the way I have interpreted the story was that he imagined the South and went there to die. So therefore, it might be appropriate to step out of the blurry area and into the past, and the "barbaric" way of life, when we are going to soon become a part of it.

Blog 9: When Someone Says Freedom....

This week I wanted to expand on one of the discussion questions for Chomsky that we did for Professor Stark. One of the first ones that he asked was to compare the definitions of freedom held by the United States and that by Cubans. So I got to thinking. My definition of freedom usually follows along with the rights laid out in our Constitution "freedom of speech", "freedom of press" and the many others that our nation was built upon. And eagles. I always think of eagles. But what I found interesting was that in the book the United States viewed freedom as specifically pertaining to foreign private enterprises. Are they going to have the freedom they need to make a profit? Or  will they freedom to trade with whomever they choose? In Cuba however, they defined freedom as no longer being dominated, constricted, and veritably ruled by a foreign country. In this case, the United States. I want to point out the irony of this. As I see it, in the most simplistic way of explaining it possible, our wonderfully free country got mad at and turned the entire world against Cuba because they desired what we had. It's like an argument that would be overheard on an elementary school playground. How can we as a country claim to be based upon people's rights and freedoms when we do not allow others to do the same? How can we start one of the most historical pieces of our time with "We the people," if we show so little compassion for any "people" who are different from us, who have a different definition of freedom? All in all I agree with a lot of your postings considering the lack of education concerning Cuba. I had next to none in high school and absolutely zero before that unless you consider learning its geographical location an education. I almost feel as if the United States has almost censored that part out of our curriculum because I am certainly not impressed. And if that is the case, I'm not sure my definition of freedom really holds up to reality.