In a country where politics seems to caricature, the real political cartoons can be high
Recognition
Ideally, examinations are made public while the worthy, is still with us and active. That's why they appear on this year's centennial book Eduardo del Río, Rius, 2010, no independence and revolution (Planeta, 2010), opens the opportunity to approach this author not only to examine their ideas about the independence and the revolution but his efforts to save, via caricature and critical humor, which is essential in Mexico. Honor and Humor
is said that in 1525, and after its defeat in Pavia at the hands of Emperor Charles V, Francis I, King of France, wounded and taken prisoner, he wrote to his mother: "Everything is lost except honor." In fact, King wrote something a little longer, but eventually went down in history is cited. Well, in Mexico, the heirs of other defeated at the same time, and also subjects of Charles V, we can paraphrase the unfortunate monarch Gaul, and assert, much has been lost, minus the humor. That is, at least, what emerges from all the work of Rius, where irony is going to realize what was lost.
The warm reception that 56 years have had the cartoons, comic books and stories told by Rius using their "monkeys"-these are works that cross borders, as at least a dozen have been translated into English, has helped to maintain self-esteem of Mexicans who identify with them. With the vision, themes and characters Rius, and the other cartoonists who have gone through the same path, the dignity of citizens may be wounded but not destroyed.
quality political humor is usually one of the acids that corrode and destroy that part of the discourse of power that elites seek to hide abuses and pass on the high politics that is not nothing but demagoguery irresponsibility and arrogance combined with , arbitrariness and corruption. The cartoon-style Rius reaffirm the truth behind this challenge to Miguel de Unamuno launched the power of Franco, "will overcome but not be convinced."
the policy instrument used by Rius has strong historical roots. Cartoons against the powerful were already used in imperial Rome. The Mexican stock from which the distinguished "cartoonist" Zamora made his own living space in the press of the opinion of the early nineteenth century. That time was a bad time for Mexico but, therefore, a great moment for the cartoon of opposition. Later, and during periods of authoritarian stability, the Porfiriato and post-revolution, there was a systematic effort from the government and in relation to the press and its cartoonists for censorship and repression combined with a good dose of co-optation, to the point that the latter was already the dominant element in the PRI regime. As a result, a proliferation of examples of cartoonists willing to legitimize the power and thus help dilute the public sense of grievance. However, history has come to be generous and fair with those who risked siding with the offended and took the consequences. Rius
has always been in the ranks of the latter, suffice it to recall here two episodes: the caricature his 1964 that was presented as Policy magazine cover and was prophetic: Gustavo Diaz Ordaz unmistakable (GDO) dressed in his cassock and stole taking two swastikas, however, the cost of that gesture was gone high-Politics-but the definition of the nature of GDO was tragically successful and that is remembered. Immediately after the authoritarian coup, Rius reappeared and was overcome with this great cartoon were "The Supermachos" a microcosm of small town that served to highlight the characteristics and consequences of daily exercise of power in Mexico the PRI classic. "The Supermachos" were successful because their circulation was as high as hundreds of thousands, but decided to castrate those unforgettable characters -Calzonzin, Don Perpetual del Rosal, etc.-through the purchase, not the author-that was impossible, but the editorial, which Rius forced to abandon his creatures and they, as pure form without content, eventually into insignificance and oblivion. Our "cartoonist" returned to the charge and gave life to "The Crouching" (1968-1981). Both stories are now a prime source for anyone who wants to know or investigate the nature of life and civic culture of Mexico in the classical stage PRI authoritarianism.
The cartoonist and historian
Rius has over half a century, reflecting, via their "monkeys", a part of the Mexican reality affected by the misuse of power, but well, spreading their ideas around a broad spectrum of topics, the catalog of more than one hundred books ranging from Cuba (the first) to Christ, Marx, through philosophy and power. There are an encyclopedic Rius feverish that, perhaps because it self, has the ability to reach as wide an audience is amazed and envious of the specialists "serious."
2010, neither independence nor revolution is not the first work that addresses issues Rius Mexican political history, but this is already a summary of his interpretation of our past, one that seeks to raise awareness and explain the nature of contemporary problems via their origins.
In the 192 pages of the work discussed here deals with the Mexican past from its prehistoric origins to the present, but with emphasis on two theses own centenary this year: the nature of the processes that led both independence and the revolution, which finally led processes or effective independence or truly revolutionary change. Consequently, there is nothing to celebrate. Independence
To Rius, independence did not meet what should be its central goal, as Morelos: transforming the social structure of the colony. Seen from below, from the perspective of the Indians and part of the mestizos, the transformation of New Spain in a sovereign state means nothing to change to no change, because that was the intention of Iturbide and the Creoles who supported him. Under these conditions, a sense of fatherland simply could not develop in most Mexican formally.
The 1910 Revolution Rius
Here again hold a similar view to above, which coincides with that of American scholar Ramon Eduardo Ruiz (The Great Rebellion: Mexico 1905-1924 [Norton, 1980]): The Mexican Revolution did not was really a revolution but a rebellion - "revolucioncita", called in his book 1978 - because structures and institutions of the country did not experience major changes. From this perspective, who could have carried out a revolution, as Zapata and Villa, died in the attempt, and finally rose to power ever attempted a revolution, so "what revolution celebrated?". Of course, finishing the fight there was not effective suffrage or a significant change in ownership structures, but rather a change of characters in front of the power structures but they change their orientation, at least not before the arrival the presidency of General Lazaro Cardenas. In this view, Cardenas and Cardenas are unexpected, the notable exception that proves that what happened after 1910 was not a revolution. Conclusion
Rius's proposal is severe: in 2010 we should not celebrate independence or a so-called revolution which finally solved but only postponed the problems and contradictions that were incubated from the colonial era. Rius Not being a historian or a professional investigator, and risking page to page to make broad generalizations with little nuances, have certain information and statements which may be questioned. However, the possible exercise of critical critique makes no sense, since the objective of Rius not really make history in the sense strict and punctual of the word but, among many jokes and very earnestly, to question the very meaning of the official celebration of the centennial by a radical interpretation of our political process from the perspective of historical grievances, of which have formed the large base of the social pyramid each day.
0 comments:
Post a Comment