Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Global Latin America Into The Twenty-First Century (Global Square) by Matthew C. Gutmann, Jeffrey Lesser
Global Latin America Into The Twenty-First Century (Global Square) by Matthew C. Gutmann, Jeffrey Lesser
Global Latin America Into The Twenty-First Century (Global Square) by Matthew C. Gutmann, Jeffrey Lesser
edited by
MATTHEW GUTmANN
JEffREY LESSER
universityofcaliforniapress
Edited by
Matthew Gutmann, Brown University
Jeffrey Lesser, Emory University
edited by
MATTHEW GUTmANN
JEffREY LESSER
universityofcaliforniapress
¶NIVERSITY OF ·A±IFORNIA ¸RESS, ONE OF THE mOST DISTINgUISHED UNIVERSITY
PRESSES IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES, ENRICHES ±IVES AROUND THE WOR±D BY ADVANCINg
SCHO±ARSHIP IN THE HUmANITIES, SOCIA± SCIENCES, AND NATURA± SCIENCES. ¹TS
ACTIVITIES ARE SUPPORTED BY THE ¶· ¸RESS ºOUNDATION AND BY PHI±ANTHROPIC
CONTRIBUTIONS FROm INDIVIDUA±S AND INSTITUTIONS. ºOR mORE INFORmATION, VISIT
WWW.UCPRESS.EDU.
25 24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
µCkNOW±EDgmENTS xVII
ÀÁ ÂÃ ÄÅ Æ:
the lati n a Çer ica n past
i n the ¿loba l pr esent
¹NTRODUCTION 15
1 • LOOkINg AT THE ¸AST AND THE ºUTURE WITHOUT ºEAR: µN ¹NTERVIEW
WITH ¼ICARDO LAgOS 19
Matthew Gutmann
2 • °E ·ONVERSION OF ºRANCIS: °E ºIRST LATIN µmERICAN ¸OPE
AND THE ÈOmEN ÉE ½EEDS 37
Nancy Scheper-Hughes and Jennifer Scheper Hughes
3 • ºIDE± ·ASTRO: °E ºIRST ²UPERDE±EgATE 58
Greg Grandin
¸OEm: “·RUCES DE FRONTERAS / ÊORDER ·ROSSINgS” 67
Renato Rosaldo
4 • ºROm ¹±±USTRATINg ¸ROB±EmS TO »ffERINg ²O±UTIONS: LATIN µmERICA
AS A G±OBA± ²OURCE OF ²OCIA± ¹NNOVATION 72
Gabriel Hetland and Peter Evans
MANgA: “·HE GUEVARA” 89
Kiyoshi Konno and Chie Shimano
pa rt t wo:
ton¿ues a n d feet
¹NTRODUCTION 93
5 • ÊORgES’S LIBRARY: LATIN µmERICA, LANgUAgE, AND THE ÈOR±D 97
Paja Faudree and Daniel Suslak
6 • LOVE, ¸ROTEST, ´ANCE, ¼EmIx 114
Michelle Bigenho
¸OEm: “LO PROHIBIDO” 129
Renato Rosaldo
7 • ÊREAkINg THE MACHINE: ²OUTH µmERICAN Fútbol 131
Brenda Elsey
8 • ¼OY ·HOI, ¼ICARDO ËáRATE, AND ¸ACIfiC ºUSION ·UISINE IN
LOS µNgE±ES 146
Sarah Portnoy and Jeffrey M. Pilcher
pa rt thr ee:
science, tech nolo¿y, a n d hea lth
¹NTRODUCTION 163
9 • °E ¼ISE OF ÊRAzI±’S G±OBA±±Y ·ONNECTED µmAzON
²OYBEAN µgRICU±TURE 167
Christopher Neill and Marcia N. Macedo
10 • ·ONSTRUCTINg ¸ARA±±E±S: ÊRAzI±IAN ³xPERTS IN
MOzAmBIqUE 187
Wendy Wolford and Ryan Nehring
¸OEm: “¸ERFECTO º±ORES” 205
Renato Rosaldo
11 • µ LONg ²TRANgE ¾RIP: LATIN µmERICA’S ·ONTRIBUTION TO
ÈOR±D ´RUg ·U±TURE 207
Paul Gootenberg
pa rt fou r :
coÇ Çu n ities
¹NTRODUCTION 221
¹NTRODUCTION TO ¼IgOBERTA MENCHú ¾Um 225
12 • ½OBE± LECTURE 227
Rigoberta Menchú Tum
13 • ²Ex ÈORkER µCTIVISm AND LABOR 240
Denise Brennan
¸OEm: “µjUSTES FAmI±IARES / ºAmI±Y µDjUSTmENTS” 253
Renato Rosaldo
14 • LATIN µmERICAN ¾RAVE±: °E »THER ²IDE OF ¾OURISm
³NCOUNTERS 256
Florence E. Babb
15 • ÊRAzI± ·IRC±ES THE G±OBE 271
Ruben George Oliven
pa rt fi v e:
a rt Çov es the wor ld
¹NTRODUCTION 287
16 • °E LATIN µmERICAN ½OVE± AS ¹NTERNATIONA±
MERCHANDISE 291
Ilan Stavans
17 • ¾RAVE±INg ME±ODRAmA: TelenoVelas AND ³xPORTINg ²OUTHERN
MORA±ITIES; OR, ÉOW ·AN ²OmETHINg ²O ÊAD ²TI±± ÊE
²O GOOD? 302
O. Hugo Benavides
¸OEm: “LOS INVISIB±ES / ¹NVISIBI±ITY” 315
Renato Rosaldo
18 • °E GIR± FROm ²HINjUkU: ÉOW A JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IAN ´IVA ÌEEPS ÊOSSA
½OVA µ±IVE IN ·HINA 316
Fabiano Maisonnave
19 • “MORE THAN A ½ATIONA±ITY”: µN ¹NTERVIEW WITH GAE± GARCíA ÊERNA±
ABOUT LATIN µmERICAN ·INEmA AND THE ÈOR±D 326
Alma Guillermoprieto
xIII
9.2. MAP INDICATINg THE ±OCATION OF MATO GROSSO STATE, ÊRAzI± 170
9.3. MATO GROSSO’S INTERNATIONA± SOYBEAN ExPORTS, 1997–2013 171
9.4A. ²OYBEAN CROP±ANDS IN MATO GROSSO, ÊRAzI±, 2001 179
9.4B. ²OYBEAN CROP±ANDS IN MATO GROSSO, ÊRAzI±, 2013
10.1A. ²TRUCTURINg PROjECTS IN µFRICA 193
10.1B. ²TRUCTURINg PROjECTS IN µFRICA
13.1. ²Ex WORkERS IN ½ITERóI, ¼IO DE JANEIRO, PROTEST PO±ICE HARASSmENT
AND I±±EgA± ARREST OF THEIR CO±±EAgUES IN FRONT OF CITY HA±± ON
µPRI± 16, 2014 242
14.1. ¹TEmS FOR SA±E IN A ÉAVANA TOURIST mARkET 257
14.2. ´ANCER PERFORmINg AT THE ¾ROPICANA NIgHTC±UB IN ÉAVANA 260
14.3. ²E±±INg TO TOURISTS BOARDINg A TRAIN TO MACHU ¸ICCHU 261
14.4. ¾OURISTS IN LImA, ¸ERU 267
15.1. ¸OSITIVIST TEmP±E IN ¸ORTO µ±EgRE, ÊRAzI± 272
15.2. ÊRAzI±IAN µmERICAN ·O±ONIzATION ²OCIETY ADVERTISEmENT IN
Crisis, MARCH 1921 275
17.1. °E ACTRESS ¾AíS µRAújO, WHO RECEIVED THE »RDEm DO ¼IO ÊRANCO,
POSES FOR PHOTOgRAPHERS WITH THEN ÊRAzI±IAN ¸RESIDENT LUIz ¹NáCIO
LU±A DA ²I±VA AND ºIRST LADY MARISA LETíCIA 311
18.1. JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IAN SINgER LISA »NO DURINg A 2011 mUSIC
FESTIVA± IN ÊEIjINg 324
xV
°ESE SHIſtS IN ECONOmIC DOmINANCE WI±± HAVE ImP±ICATIONS WE±± BEYOND
THOSE CURRENT±Y ImAgINED. Global ²Îuare BOOkS SEEk TO CAPTURE THE
DYNAmIC AND COmP±Ex gEOgRAPHIES AND CU±TURA± PO±ITICS DEVE±OPINg FROm ONE
REgION OUT AROUND THE REST OF THE WOR±D. °E WOR±D AS OUR gRANDPARENTS kNEW
IT IS BEINg TURNED UPSIDE DOWN, AND NEW CENTERS OF POWER AND INflUENCE ARE
INCREASINg±Y FOUND IN NEW ±OCATIONS WITHIN OUR Global ²Îuare.
xVII
²PECIA± THANkS TO ·ATHY AND ³±IANA, WHOSE DE±IgHT IN OUR BOOk TOgETHER
HAS mADE THIS PROjECT A±± THE SWEETER.
ºINA±±Y, WE DEDICATE THIS BOOk TO OUR CHI±DREN, WHO, WE FEE± FORTUNATE, ARE
PRACTICA±±Y COUSINS, TOO. ÊETWEEN THEm, MAYA, LI±IANA, LIANNA, JONATHAN,
µRON, AND GABRIE± HAVE A±READY ±IVED mANY YEARS IN ÊRAzI±, ³CUADOR, ¹RE±AND,
¹SRAE±, ¹TA±Y, ÌENYA, MExICO, ¸ARAgUAY, AND ²PAIN, AS WE±± AS THE ¶NITED ²TATES.
¾OgETHER THEY REPRESENT THE INTENSE AND ExTENSIVE ENgAgEmENT OF LATIN
µmERICA WITH THE REST OF THE WOR±D, jUST AS CO±±ECTIVE±Y THEY EmBODY THE
COUNT±ESS INTERCONNECTIONS THAT WE HAVE TRIED TO gATHER IN THE PAgES OF Global
Latin America.
°E PUzz±E THAT INSPIRED Global Latin America WAS, ÈHY DID WE fiND ·HE
GUEVARA’S ImAgE EVERYWHERE WE WENT IN THE WOR±D? ÈHY WAS A LATIN
µmERICAN REVO±UTIONARY OF THE 1950S AND 1960S SO POPU±AR AmONg SO mANY
PEOP±E AROUND THE g±OBE IN 2016? ÈHY WAS ·HE EASI±Y THE mOST FAmOUS LATIN
µmERICAN OUTSIDE THE REgION? ²URE, ImAgES OF THE BEARDED FACE AND BERET WERE
OſtEN DEVOID OF DEEP mEANINg, BUT THERE WAS HIS ImAgE, AND WE WANTED TO
mAkE SENSE OF IT. ¾RYINg TO UNDERSTAND g±OBA± ·HE ±ED US TO THE ±ARgER mEAN-
INgS OF g±OBA± LATIN µmERICA.
JEff THOUgHT ·HE WAS FO±±OWINg HIm IN A HIPSTER COffEEHOUSE IN »AxACA
·ITY, MExICO, SHOUTINg THE S±OgAN, “·AFé PARA TODOS.” MATT REA±IzED THAT HE
WAS FO±±OWINg ·HE WHEN HE INTERVIEWED ËHU ÈENBIN, A PROFESSIONA± mATCH-
mAkER WHO EACH WEEkEND WORkS THE CROWDS OF PARENTS IN ²HANgHAI’S ¸EOP±E’S
¸ARk ±OOkINg FOR A mATE FOR THEIR DAUgHTER OR SON. ÈHEN MATT ASkED MR. ËHU
WHY HE WORE ·HE ON HIS CAP (SEE figURE 1.2), HE ±AUgHED AND SAID HE THOUgHT
IT ±OOkED gOOD ON HIm. ÈHO kNEW THAT ·HE WOU±D BECOmE A BEACON OF SARTO-
RIA± SP±ENDOR AmONg MExICAN BARISTAS AND ·HINESE mATCHmAkERS?
JEff AND MATT TOgETHER FO±±OWED ·HE TO YET ANOTHER PART OF THE WOR±D, TO
¸A±ESTINE, WHERE WE SAW mANY YOUNg mEN P±AYINg SOCCER IN THEIR ·HE ¾-SHIRTS
IN ¼AmA±±AH AND E±SEWHERE ON THE ÈEST ÊANk. ÈE±± kNOWN AmONg REBE±±IOUS
YOUTH WHEN HE WAS A±IVE, ·HE GUEVARA BECAmE TRU±Y FAmOUS AſtER HE DIED.
³RNESTO (·HE) GUEVARA WAS BORN IN µRgENTINA IN 1928 AND P±AYED A ±EADINg
RO±E IN THE 1959 ·UBAN ¼EVO±UTION. ÉE TRIED TO ±AUNCH ANOTHER REVO±UTION IN
THE ·ONgO IN 1965, BEFORE HE WAS kI±±ED BY ·¹µ-BACkED TROOPS IN LA ÉIgUERA,
ÊO±IVIA, IN 1967. µ FORmER mEDICA± STUDENT IN µRgENTINA, ·HE mAY BE kNOWN
TO SOmE READERS FOR A FAmOUS ROAD TRIP ImmORTA±IzED IN THE mOVIE °e
Motorcycle Diaries. °AT fi±m STARS THE mAN WHO mIgHT BE THE mOST g±OBA±±Y
1
Ôi¿ure 0.1. ·ARTOON OF ·HE GUEVARA FROm A COffEE
SHOP IN »AxACA, MExICO.
·REDIT: ¸ICTURE TAkEN BY JUSTIN MC¹NTOSH, µUgUST 2004. °IS fi±E IS ±ICENSED UNDER THE
·REATIVE ·OmmONS µTTRIBUTION 2.0 GENERIC ±ICENSE. HTTPS://COmmONS.WIkImEDIA.ORg/WIkI
/ºI±E:¸A±ESTINIANS_WEARINg_·HE_GUEVARA_TSHIRTS.jPg
ÈE ARE OſtEN mORE FAmI±IAR WITH THE ImPACT OF THE WOR±D on LATIN µmERICA
THAN WITH THE ImPACT OF LATIN µmERICA ON THE WOR±D. °E THREE ·’S—
·ONqUEST, ·O±ONIA±ISm, AND ·HRISTIANITY—PROVIDE A TORTURED, IF BETTER-
kNOWN STORY, ABOUT HOW SOmE PARTS OF THE WOR±D HAVE ExERCISED CONTRO± OVER
OTHER PARTS. ÈHEN ·O±UmBUS “DISCOVERED” THE ½EW ÈOR±D IN THE ±ATE 1400S
AND THE ²PANISH AND ¸ORTUgUESE ·ONqUEST OF THE µmERICAS BEgAN, INDIgENOUS
PEOP±ES A±± OVER THE CONTINENT BEgAN ±IVINg UNDER CO±ONIA± RU±E. °EY HAD TO
CONTEND WITH STRANgE ±ANgUAgES, RE±IgIONS, AND DISEASES.
°E fiRST PART OF THE BOOk, “°E LATIN µmERICAN ¸AST IN THE G±OBA± ¸RESENT,”
BEgINS WITH AN ORIgINA± INTERVIEW WITH ·HI±EAN FORmER PRESIDENT ¼ICARDO
LAgOS AS HE CONTEmP±ATES THE RE±ATION BETWEEN PAST AND PRESENT IN LATIN
µmERICA. µS mANY READERS WI±± kNOW, A 1973 mI±ITARY COUP D’éTAT IN ·HI±E
±ED BY µUgUSTO ¸INOCHET WAS BACkED BY THE ¶.². gOVERNmENT OF ¼ICHARD
½IxON. »N 11 ²EPTEmBER OF THAT YEAR, THE DEmOCRATICA±±Y E±ECTED gOVERNmENT
OF ²A±VADOR µ±±ENDE WAS OVERTHROWN AND THE COUNTRY P±UNgED INTO YEARS
OF BRUTA± DICTATORSHIP. MORE THAN ANY OTHER INDIVIDUA±, ¼ICARDO LAgOS
REPRESENTED THE OPPOSITION TO THE ¸INOCHET DICTATORSHIP, NEVER mORE THAN
WHEN ON NATIONA± TE±EVISION IN 1988 HE POINTED HIS fiNgER AT THE TE±EVISION
CAmERA AND DENOUNCED THE “TORTURES, mURDERS, AND HUmAN RIgHTS VIO±ATIONS”
OF THE DICTATORSHIP. (µ PHOTOgRAPH OF THIS FAmOUS fiNgER IS REPRODUCED IN
CHAPTER 1.)
¹N HIS INTERVIEW WITH MATTHEW GUTmANN, ¸RESIDENT LAgOS CONSIDERS THE
HISTORY OF CO±ONIA±ISm IN LATIN µmERICA, THE REgION’S CONTEmPORARY RE±ATION-
SHIPS WITH µFRICA, AND THE ExPORT OF g±OBA± LATIN µmERICAN DEmOCRACY AND
SOCIA± CHANgE NOT ON±Y TO OTHER PARTS OF THE G±OBA± ²OUTH BUT A±SO TO ³UROPE
AND THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ÉE ARgUES THAT THESE FACTORS WERE ESSENTIA± IN CREATINg
A VIBRANT LATIN µmERICA WHOSE VOICE IN THE WOR±D IS UNmISTAkAB±E AND POWER-
FU±. LIkE OTHER CHAPTERS IN THE VO±UmE, THE INTERVIEW WITH ¸RESIDENT LAgOS
HIgH±IgHTS A CONTEmPORARY APPRECIATION FOR mU±TICU±TURA±ISm AS A POSITIVE
SOCIA±, ECONOmIC, AND CU±TURA± CHARACTERISTIC THAT A±±OWS mANY LATIN
µmERICANS TO SEE THEmSE±VES AS ESPECIA±±Y AB±E TO INTEgRATE WITH DIVERSE POPU-
±ATIONS ACROSS THE g±OBE. °E PRESIDENT’S IDEA ABOUT HETEROgENEITY, WHAT THE
MExICAN PHI±OSOPHER AND PO±ITICIAN JOSé ÍASCONCE±OS CA±±ED “THE COSmIC RACE”
IN 1925, IS AN ExAmP±E OF THE POSITIVE INTERPRETATION OF RACIA± AND ETHNIC mIx-
INg. ÓET mIxINg (BOTH REA± AND ImAgINED) HAS BEEN ANYTHINg BUT SmOOTH OR
Communities
¸ART 4 SHOWCASES LATIN µmERICAN mODE±S OF BE±ONgINg THAT ARE NOT ExC±USIVE±Y
NATIONA± OR ETHNICA±±Y BASED. ºOR ExAmP±E, THE CHI±DREN OF INDIgENOUS ·ENTRA±
µmERICAN mIgRANTS TO THE ¶NITED ²TATES OſtEN ±EARN ²PANISH AS A ±OCA± ±AN-
gUAgE IN P±ACES ±IkE µT±ANTA AND ÉOUSTON. °E ±OW COST OF COmmUNICATIONS
HAS mEANT THAT FAmI±IES ONCE PERmANENT±Y SEPARATED BY mIgRATION NOW HAVE
DAI±Y SPOkEN AND VISUA± CONNECTIONS “BACk HOmE,” CREATINg NEW COmmUNITIES
IN WHICH ACTIONS ARE ExPRESSED WITHOUT DIRECT FACE-TO-FACE ExPERIENCE. ÈHO
introduction
16 • pa rt on e
²TATES AND ·UBA (CURRENT±Y UNDER THE ±EADERSHIP OF ºIDE± ·ASTRO’S BROTHER
¼Aú±), GRANDIN’S PIECE REmINDS US THAT ¶.². PO±ITICIANS HAVE ±ONg FOUND WAYS
TO mOBI±IzE VERSIONS OF ·ASTRO TO SUIT THEIR OWN ENDS.
´EPICTINg THE mOST RECOgNIzAB±E SYmBO± OF g±OBA± LATIN µmERICA, THE
AUTHORS AND I±±USTRATORS ÌIYOSHI ÌONNO AND ·HIE ²HImANO SHOW HOW
³RNESTO “·HE” GUEVARA HAS BECOmE AN ICON FOR REBE±±ION ACROSS SPECTRUmS OF
gEOgRAPHY AND IDEO±OgY, FROm MARxIST REVO±UTIONARIES figHTINg g±OBA± CAPITA±-
ISm TO DISgRUNT±ED ADO±ESCENTS DEFYINg HEAVY-HANDED PARENTS.
·OmBININg FRESH IDEAS WITH UNFAmI±IAR NARRATIVES, THESE CHAPTERS SPUR US
TO ±OOk AT TImE AND HISTORY THROUgH THE ±ENSES OF THE LATIN µmERICAN PAST
AND THE g±OBA± PRESENT. ÈE ARE OB±IgED TO CHA±±ENgE SImP±E VECTORS BETWEEN
THE PAST AND THE PRESENT AND THE CERTAINTY OF A SEEmINg±Y mORE mODERN AND
BETTER FUTURE jUST DOWN THE ±INE. ÈE fiND PRECEDENT FOR SUCH A±TERNATIVE WAYS
OF THINkINg IN THE CYC±ICA± COSmO±OgY OF THE MExICA µzTEC ³mPIRE, WHICH
ROSE AND FE±± IN mODERN-DAY MExICO IN THE CENTURY BEFORE THE ³UROPEANS
ARRIVED IN ¾ENOCHTIT±AN (TODAY’S MExICO ·ITY) IN 1521. ÈE fiND THAT SAmE
CYC±ICA± TImE AS WE READ AND REREAD THE ½OBE± ¸RIzE–WINNINg ·O±OmBIAN
AUTHOR GABRIE± GARCíA MáRqUEz’S One Hundred Ãears of Solitude, WHICH
TRACES THE POROSITY OF TImE OVER SEVEN gENERATIONS OF THE ÊUENDíA FAmI±Y. ºOR
THOSE FAmI±IAR WITH AND NEW TO LATIN µmERICA A±IkE, “°E LATIN µmERICAN
¸AST IN THE G±OBA± ¸RESENT” ENCOURAgES ExPANSIVE THINkINg ABOUT THE PASSAgE
OF TImE AND THE BORDERS THAT SERVE BOTH TO SEPARATE AND TO CONNECT before,
now, AND then.
°is and all part introductions were written by Andrew Britt.
Ï n t roduct ion • 17
one
How has Latin America had a significant impact around the world, economi-
cally, politically, culturally?×
Ricardo Lagos: °E mOST ImPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS OF LATIN µmERICA TO
THE WOR±D HAVE NOT NECESSARI±Y BEEN IN THE SOCIA± SCIENCES BUT INSTEAD IN
±ITERATURE, IN PAINTINg, IN mUSIC, PERHAPS EVEN IN THE kITCHEN. ºROm
MExICAN TACOS DISTRIBUTED THROUgHOUT THE ¶NITED ²TATES TO THE mOST
SOPHISTICATED, CONTEmPORARY ¸ERUVIAN CUISINE, RIgHT? ÈHAT ¹ mEAN IS THAT,
AS ·AR±OS ºUENTES ±IkED TO SAY AND MARIO ÍARgAS L±OSA Ø SAYS, TOO, THE INTE±-
±ECTUA± AND CU±TURA± WOR±DS HAVE P±AYED A ±ARgER RO±E IN mAkINg LATIN
µmERICA WHAT IT IS THAN ITS PO±ITICIANS HAVE.
ÉOWEVER, ¹ WOU±D SAY THAT, DESPITE THIS, LATIN µmERICA HAS UNDERgONE A
±EARNINg PROCESS. µND WE HAVE ±EARNED, fiRST, THAT mANY OF THE THEORIES
TAUgHT ABROAD HAVE TO PASS THROUgH THE SIEVE OF OUR OWN REA±ITY. ÊEgINNINg
WITH JOHN MAYNARD ÌEYNES’S General °eory of Employment, Interest and
Money (1936)—ÌEYNES CA±±ED HIS THEORY “gENERA±,” A±THOUgH IT WAS ON±Y
gENERA± FOR COUNTRIES ±IkE THOSE IN WHICH ÌEYNES ±IVED AND NOT FOR THE REST
OF THE WOR±D. ²ECOND, IN mANY CASES WHEN THESE THEORIES PASS THROUgH THE
SIEVE OF OUR OWN REA±ITY THEY BECOmE, INSTEAD OF A gENERA± THEORY, ONE THAT IS
PARTICU±AR TO THE DEVE±OPED WOR±D. ¹T HAS BEEN HARD FOR US TO UNDERSTAND
THIS BECAUSE, IN mANY INSTANCES, WE WANT TO mECHANICA±±Y APP±Y IDEAS FROm
THE SOCIA± SCIENCES. ¹F ONE TRIES TO mECHANICA±±Y APP±Y MAx ÈEBER, WE fiND
THAT ÈEBER WAS THINkINg ABOUT A GERmAN REA±ITY THAT IS VERY DIffERENT FROm
OUR OWN.
19
latin aÇerican lessons: political econoÇies
°en what can the rest of the world learn Äom the process that Latin America
has gone through in understanding and applying external theories?
ºROm THE ECONOmIC PERSPECTIVE, TWO INTERESTINg PHENOmENA OCCURRED.
ºIRST, THE PHENOmENON OF THE TRANSITION FROm DICTATORSHIPS TO DEmOCRACIES,
A±THOUgH EVEN IN DEmOCRACY WE HAVE ±EARNED THAT IF THERE AREN’T SENSIB±E
mACROECONOmIC PO±ICIES IN P±ACE, THEN THE ECONOmY WI±± gIVE US A HARD TImE.
¹ HAVE A±WAYS SAID THAT THE mOST ImPORTANT THINg ABOUT µ±FONSíN [¼Aú±
µ±FONSíN, PRESIDENT OF µRgENTINA, 1983–89]—WHO WAS UNDOUBTED±Y ONE OF
THE mOST RESPECTED DEmOCRATS BECAUSE HE WAS AB±E REESTAB±ISH DEmOCRACY IN
µRgENTINAÙ—IS THAT HIS gOVERNmENT SUffERED FROm POOR ECONOmIC mANAgE-
mENT, WHICH OB±IgED HIm TO END HIS PRESIDENCY SIx mONTHS EAR±Y. °E RESU±T
WAS THAT WE BEgAN TO TAkE mACROECONOmICS mUCH mORE SERIOUS±Y. µND IF
YOU THINk ABOUT IT CAREFU±±Y, A±THOUgH THE ÈASHINgTON ·ONSENSUSÚ WAS IN
FASHION AT THE TImE, WE A±SO ±EARNED THAT THE ÈASHINgTON ·ONSENSUS ON±Y
mENTIONED US IN RE±ATION TO THE “TRICk±E DOWN” EffECT AND THE NEED FOR PUB-
±IC PO±ICIES. ¹T WAS ONE THINg TO ImP±EmENT SO±ID mACROECONOmIC PO±ICIES,
BUT IT WAS A±SO ImPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THE ÈASHINgTON ·ONSENSUS
WAS NOT USEFU± IN HE±PINg US ImPROVE THE SOCIA± SITUATION OF OUR PEOP±E.
°AT SAID, IT IS A±SO ImPORTANT TO NOTE THAT BECAUSE WE HAD THE ¾EqUI±A
·RISIS,Û THE CURRENCY DEPRECIATION CRISIS IN ÊRAzI±, THE CURRENCY DEPRECIATION
CRISIS IN µRgENTINA AſtER ·AR±OS MENEm [PRESIDENT, 1989–99]—EACH OF THESE
CRISES CAUSED A REgIONA± CRISIS—AND WE HAD SO mANY CRISES THAT WE ±EARNED
THE ImPORTANCE OF HAVINg AN EffECTIVE fiNANCIA± SYSTEm. ¸ERHAPS THIS
ExP±AINS WHY OUR fiNANCIA± SYSTEmS WERE AB±E TO RESIST THE 2008 fiNANCIA±
CRISIS. ¹ DON’T kNOW IF THIS mEANS THAT WE WERE AB±E TO TEACH THE WOR±D SOmE-
THINg, IT’S jUST TO SAY THAT WE HAD ±EARNED FROm PREVIOUS CRISES HOW TO ExE-
CUTE THE NECESSARY TASkS IN THE NEW ONE.
µND TODAY WE CAN SAY THAT WE DIDN’T CAUSE THIS CRISIS. ÈE CAN DEC±ARE OUR-
SE±VES INNOCENT OF THIS, THE BIggEST OF A±± THE CRISES. µ±SO, AS A RESU±T OF PREVI-
OUS CRISES—AND THIS IS AN ADVERTISEmENT—WE ±EARNED HOW TO ImP±EmENT
COUNTERCYC±ICA± PO±ICIES. ÈE ±EARNED THAT IF WE LATIN µmERICANS HAVE TO
DEPEND ON SOYA PRICES, PETRO± PRICES, COPPER PRICES, AND OTHER COmmODITIES
WHOSE PRICES flUCTUATE gREAT±Y, THERE WAS A±SO ANOTHER POSSIBI±ITY. °E POS-
SIBI±ITY TO HAVE THE SO-CA±±ED STRUCTURA± SURP±US BUDgET. ÊY THIS ¹ mEAN THAT
THE fiSCA± BUDgET SHOU±D USE STRUCTURA± DETERmINANTS OF INCOmE, ±IkE TAxES,
AS A FRACTION OF POTENTIA± G´¸ [gROSS DOmESTIC PRODUCT] ESTAB±ISHED BY AN
INDEPENDENT TECHNICA± COmmITTEE. °ESE PO±ICIES mEAN THAT WHEN COm-
20 • ch a p t er on e
mODITY PRICES ARE ±OW, WE SPEND AS THOUgH THE COST WERE THE ±ONg-TERm COST,
WHICH IS mUCH HIgHER. ÉOWEVER, WHEN THE PRICE IS VERY HIgH WE SPEND ±ESS
BECAUSE THE ±ONg-TERm PRICE IS ±OWER.
¹N ·HI±E, WE APP±IED THESE PO±ICIES IN 2000, 2001, AND 2002, WHEN THE PRICE
OF COPPER WAS ON±Y 60 CENTS PER POUND BUT WE USED THE PRICE OF 89 CENTS.
ÈHEN THIS SAmE POUND OF COPPER REACHED A PRICE OF $3.00, WE COU±D SPEND
AS THOUgH IT COST $1.19, BOTH ESTAB±ISHED BY THE ·OmmITTEE. µND WHY Am
¹ TE±±INg YOU THIS? ÊECAUSE WHEN THE 2008 CRISIS CAmE A±ONg, THE ·HI±EAN
gOVERNmENT HAD SAVINgS OF ABOUT 40, 50 PERCENT OF OUR YEAR±Y G´¸, AND
WE COU±D THEREFORE ImP±EmENT COUNTERCYC±ICA± PO±ICIES AND SPEND mORE.
ÈE SPENT 4 PERCENT OF G´¸ SUPPORTINg THE NEEDIEST SECTORS, SImP±Y WITH-
DRAWINg FROm OUR SAVINgS; WE DIDN’T HAVE TO ASk FOR fiNANCIA± SUPPORT FROm
ANYWHERE E±SE.
And these savings were not the result of the Chicago Boys Ý either?
¼IgHT, BECAUSE IT WASN’T THE ·HICAgO ÊOYS WHO ImP±EmENTED THEm. ²O, WE
HAVE TO TA±k ABOUT THE ·HICAgO ÊOYS, WHO DOmINATED THE SCENE ESPECIA±±Y
DURINg THE DICTATORSHIP [1973–90] WHEN IT WAS RE±ATIVE±Y EASY TO jUSTIFY THEIR
PO±ICIES. ÈHEN YOU ExP±AIN THEIR PO±ICIES, WHEN YOU DECIDE TO OPEN YOUR
ECONOmY AS WE DID IN ·HI±E, FOR ExAmP±E, AND YOU gO FROm 170,000 TExTI±E
WORkERS TO 30,000, WE±± THAT HAS AN ENORmOUS ImPACT FROm THE PERSPECTIVE
OF EmP±OYmENT, AND ONE THAT HAPPENS IN ±ESS THAN A YEAR, IN THE 1980S. ²O, ¹
WOU±D SAY THAT OUR PO±ICIES WERE PART ÈASHINgTON ·ONSENSUS AND PART OF
THE REESTAB±ISHmENT OF DEmOCRACY, WHICH IS WHEN WE REA±IzED THAT mANY
ASPECTS OF THE ÈASHINgTON ·ONSENSUS WERE jUST COmmON SENSE. ÉOWEVER,
THERE WERE ASSUmPTIONS THAT WERE NOT COmmON SENSE AND DID NOT WORk.
ºOR ExAmP±E, EVEN IF THE TRICk±E-DOWN EffECT ExISTED, IT WAS IN THE VERY ±ONg
TERm AND WAS THEREFORE NOT COmPATIB±E WITH OUR ImmEDIATE PROB±EmS. ½OW,
WHAT WE DID ±EARN WAS HOW TO CREATE WE±±-TARgETED SOCIA± PO±ICIES, A±THOUgH
IN THOSE YEARS THE ¹NTERNATIONA± MONETARY ºUND AND THE ÈOR±D ÊANk DID
NOT ±IkE THESE WORDS. ¹N 1990, AS mINISTER OF EDUCATION, ¹ REA±IzED THAT IN THE
mAjORITY OF SCHOO±S A±ONg THE COAST THERE WERE ON±Y gIR±S OR VERY FEW BOYS
ABOVE THE AgE OF FOURTEEN, BECAUSE THE BOYS WENT TO WORk WITH THEIR FATHERS
IN THE BOATS. ÉOWEVER, IN OTHER PARTS OF ·HI±E, SUCH AS THE ÍA±±E ·ENTRA±, ¹
ENCOUNTERED SCHOO±S WHERE THERE WERE ON±Y BOYS BECAUSE A±± THE gIR±S OVER
fiſtEEN WENT WITH THEIR mOTHERS TO HARVEST FRUIT.
°ERE WASN’T ANYWHERE FOR THEm TO WORk. ²O, BASED ON THESE ExPERIENCES, ¹
SAID, “ÈHY DON’T WE CREATE A PROgRAm FOR PEOP±E WHO ARE ExTREmE±Y POOR?
ÈE WI±± OffER A gRANT THAT WI±± A±±OW PARENTS TO SUPPORT THEmSE±VES A BIT
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 21
BETTER SO THAT CHI±DREN WON’T HAVE TO gO fiSHINg WITH THEIR FATHERS OR HAR-
VESTINg WITH THEIR mOTHERS.” °IS ExPERIENCE—“gRANT” IS A BIg WORD FOR SUCH
A SmA±± AmOUNT OF mONEY, BUT IT WAS ENOUgH TO INCENTIVIzE PARENTS TO kEEP
THEIR CHI±DREN IN SCHOO±. LATER, IN 1993, ·ARDOSO [ºERNANDO ÉENRIqUE
·ARDOSO, PRESIDENT OF ÊRAzI±, 1995–2003] NAmED ¸AU±O ¼ENATO DE ²OUzA AS
HIS mINISTER OF EDUCATION, AND ¸AU±O ¼ENATO ASkED mE, “ÈHAT CAN ¹ ±EARN
FROm ·HI±E?” µND ¹ TO±D HIm ABOUT THIS ExPERIENCE. °AT WAS THE ORIgIN OF
ÊRAzI±’S ÊO±SA ³SCO±A PROgRAm. ÊO±SA ³SCO±A THEN SPREAD TO OTHER COUNTRIES.
µNOTHER ExAmP±E IS WHEN WE DECIDED THAT TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE OF ExTREmE
POVERTY WE WOU±D CREATE A PROgRAm CA±±ED ·HI±E ²O±IDARIO, WHERE WE WOU±D
WORk WITH THE POOR TO TEACH THEm THEIR RIgHTS. °ROUgH THIS ExPERIENCE WE
DISCOVERED THAT IT IS ONE THINg TO SAY THAT WE ARE gOINg TO CREATE ±AWS TO
PROTECT THE RIgHTS OF THE POOR AND qUITE ANOTHER THAT THE POOR UNDERSTAND
THAT THERE ARE ±AWS THAT WORk IN THEIR FAVOR.
Has this been a model outside of Latin America as well?
·HI±E ²O±IDARIO? ¹ WOU±D SAY YES, THROUgH THE ÈOR±D ÊANk, WHICH DECIDED
TO DISSEmINATE THE mODE±. ¹T IS FUNNY: THE ÈOR±D ÊANk TO±D mE THEY WANTED
TO CE±EBRATE, IN qUOTATION mARkS, THE TEN-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF ·HI±E ²O±IDARIO
AT A ±ARgE FORUm THAT DID TAkE P±ACE AT THE ÈOR±D ÊANk. ²ImP±Y BECAUSE THEY
UNDERSTOOD THAT IT HAD BEEN A REA±±Y WORTHWHI±E PROgRAm. ½OW, WHY HAD IT
BEEN WORTHWHI±E? ÈHEN YOU ARE PRESIDENT AND YOU ISSUE AN INVITATION TO THE
PRESIDENTIA± PA±ACE, EVERYONE COmES. µND THERE WERE PEOP±E FROm THE ¼IgHT,
FROm THE LEſt, AND ¹ SAID, “GENT±EmEN, WE kNOW WHO THE POOR ARE IN ·HI±E,
WE kNOW WHERE THEY ±IVE, SO WHAT DO WE DO TO END POVERTY?” ²OmE SAID,
“²END THEm A CHECk,” OTHERS SAID, “²END THEm SOCIA± WORkERS,” AND IT WAS A
BIg DEBATE. ¹N THE END, ¹ DECIDED THAT SENDINg A CHECk WOU±D BE INSU±TINg TO
PEOP±E’S DIgNITY; IT WASN’T jUST ABOUT C±IENTE±ISm, IT WAS ABOUT PEOP±E’S DIg-
NITY, SO WE CHOSE THE SOCIA± WORkERS. ÈE CHOSE A DIffERENT WAY OF WORkINg.
°E RESU±T: A SOCIA± WORkER WOU±D VISIT EACH FAmI±Y AND TE±± THEm, “¹’m HERE
TO TEACH YOU WHAT RIgHTS YOU HAVE AS A RESU±T OF YOUR SOCIA± SITUATION.” µS A
WOmAN ONCE TO±D mE, “¹ NEVER kNEW THAT, AS A RESU±T OF mY POVERTY, ¹ HAD
CERTAIN RIgHTS. ¹ DIDN’T DARE gO TO THE mUNICIPA±ITY AND SAY, “ÉE±P mE, ¹’m
POOR.” ²O, ¹ THINk THAT ONE COU±D SAY THAT FROm THE ECONOmIC AND SOCIA±
PERSPECTIVES, WE HAVE ±EARNED A ±OT.
»F COURSE, THERE WAS A±SO THE fiNANCIA± CRISIS AND THE G7 THAT ·HIRAC
[JACqUES ·HIRAC, ºRENCH PRESIDENT, 1995–2007] TImID±Y WANTED TO TURN INTO
THE G14, SO HE WOU±D INVITE THE ʼ¹·S, ÊRAzI±, ¹NDIA, AND ·HINA. ÈE±±, IT
BECAmE THE G20 AſtER THE 2008 CRISIS. ¹ STI±± fiND IT PICTURESqUE THAT IT WAS
22 • ch a p t er on e
¸RESIDENT [GEORgE È.] ÊUSH WHO fiRST CA±±ED THE G20 TOgETHER IN
ÈASHINgTON, ´.·. ¹ DON'T THINk THAT THERE WAS ANYTHINg FURTHER FROm HIS
mIND BEFORE THE CRISIS THAN THE NOTION OF HAVINg A G20 RU±E THE WOR±D. ÊUT
THE DEPTHS OF THE CRISIS NECESSITATED A mUCH WIDER WOR±D.
What about the role of Argentina, Brazil, and Mexico representing the other
Latin American countries? Do you think this has been special in the G20 or not?
ÓES AND NO, YES AND NO. ¹ THINk THAT IN mANY CASES, WE HAVE HAD TO CONTRIB-
UTE TO CRITICISmS OF THE ÈASHINgTON ·ONSENSUS, BECAUSE AſtER THE CRISES THE
ISSUE WAS THE NEED TO REVIVE THE WOR±D ECONOmY. °E 2009 G20 IN LONDON
WAS VERY gOOD WHEN, IN HA±F AN HOUR, THE gROUP AgREED THAT THE
¹NTERNATIONA± MONETARY ºUND, WHICH HAD CAPITA± WORTH $250 BI±±ION,
SHOU±D BECOmE $750 BI±±ION INSTEAD. ÊECAUSE NOW THE DEVE±OPED COUNTRIES
NEEDED THE ºUND TO SAVE ³UROPE. ¼IgHT? ²OmETHINg THAT HAD BEEN ImPOS-
SIB±E TO ACHIEVE DURINg THE PAST TWENTY YEARS—THAT TO ARRIVE AT THE $750
BI±±ION, THE ²PECIA± ´RAWINg ¼IgHTS [SUPP±EmENTARY FOREIgN ExCHANgE
RESERVE ASSETS mANAgED BY THE ¹Mº] WOU±D BE $250 BI±±ION. ·HINA SUPP±IED
$50 BI±±ION OF THESE FUNDS BECAUSE ·HINA IS INTERESTED IN SPECIA± RIgHTS THAT
mAY EVENTUA±±Y A±±OW IT TO BECOmE THE INTERNATIONA± CURRENCY OF THE FUTURE,
INSTEAD OF THE DO±±AR.
°E 2009 G20 WAS DECISIVE BECAUSE SImI±AR PO±ICIES ExISTED BETWEEN THE
¶NITED ²TATES AND ³UROPE TO REVIVE THE ECONOmY. ÊUT IT WAS IN ¸ITTSBURgH
IN 2010 WHEN THOSE PO±ICIES WERE DEVE±OPED. »BAmA WAS STI±± SAYINg, AS HE
DOES TODAY, A±THOUgH PERHAPS A BIT mORE TImID±Y, THAT WE NEEDED TO REACTI-
VATE THE ECONOmY AND MERkE± [µNgE±A MERkE±, GERmAN CHANCE±±OR,
2005– ] WAS SAYINg THAT THE PROB±Em WAS INflATION AND AUSTERITY WAS THE
ANSWER. µND THIS PROVOkED THE END, ¹ THINk, OF A COmmON PO±ITICS IN THE
G20 AND IT ±OST ITS RE±EVANCE, ITS ABI±ITY TO FACE THE CRISIS. µND IT WAS THEN,
UNFORTUNATE±Y, THAT LATIN µmERICA, DESPITE BEINg IN FAVOR OF »BAmA’S PO±I-
CIES—IT DIDN’T ExPRESS THIS VIEWPOINT WITH A SINg±E VOICE, WITH ENOUgH FORCE.
¹F YOU PUSH mE A ±ITT±E BIT, ¹ WOU±D SAY THAT WE HAVEN’T REA±±Y TAkEN FU±±
ADVANTAgE OF OUR POSITION IN THE G20 WHERE, IF WE HAVE THREE COUNTRIES, WE
TECHNICA±±Y mAkE UP 15 PERCENT OF THE gROUP.
Politically, we obviously talk a lot about Latin America when we speak about
democracy, about democratic models. Many political analysts who study Latin
America suggest that it is an example for the rest of the world, including in the
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 23
sense of showing how to end dictatorships and arrive at a democracy, to achieve
real democratic participation. What do you think?
¹ THINk TWO THINgS. »NE, THE WAYS IN WHICH WE mOVED FROm DICTATORIA±
SYSTEmS TO DEmOCRACY WORkED WE±± IN SOmE CASES, BUT IT IS CERTAIN±Y A S±OW
PROCESS. ¹F WE TAkE THE CASE OF ·HI±E, ¹ mEAN, THE CONTExT IN WHICH THESE
CHANgES HAPPEN ARE VERY DIffERENT. ¹ ±IkED TO SAY TO mY ²PANISH FRIENDS,
“ÓOU WAITED UNTI± ºRANCOÞ HAD DIED.” ÈE ACHIEVED THE TRANSITION WHI±E OUR
ºRANCO WAS STI±± A±IVE AND COmmANDER IN CHIEF OF THE ARmY. ²O IT WAS A ±ITT±E
DIffERENT, RIgHT? ÊUT, THAT SAID, EACH CONTExT IS DIffERENT. ¹N µRgENTINA, THE
CONTExT WAS DIffERENT BECAUSE THE TRANSITION HAPPENED IN THE CONTExT OF THE
ImP±OSION RESU±TINg FROm THE ºA±k±AND ¹S±ANDS DISASTER.ß ¹N OUR CASE, THE
TRANSITION HAPPENED BASED ON ¸INOCHET’S CONSTITUTION BECAUSE IT CA±±ED FOR A
P±EBISCITE,â AND WE THUS DEFEATED HIm IN A P±EBISCITE INC±UDED IN HIS OWN
CONSTITUTION. ·HI±E IS DIffERENT.
¾ODAY IN ·HI±E, THE mAN WHO WAS THE HEAD OF ¸INOCHET’S SECRET PO±ICE HAS
BEEN SENTENCED TO FOUR HUNDRED YEARS IN jAI±, AND HE’S STI±± IN PRISON. ¹N
OTHER WORDS, THERE IS A±SO SOmETHINg TO SHOW. °E COmmISSIONS CREATED BY
µY±WIN [¸ATRICIO µY±WIN, PRESIDENT OF ·HI±E, 1990–94], THE ¼ETTIg ¼EPORT,
PUB±ISHED BY THE ½ATIONA± ·OmmISSION FOR ¾RUTH AND ¼ECONCI±IATION, WE±±,
THOSE WHO WORkED ON THAT ±ATER WENT TO WORk WITH MANDE±A [½E±SON
MANDE±A, PRESIDENT OF ²OUTH µFRICA, 1994–99]. µY±WIN’S COmmISSION WAS
fiRST. ÊUT WHAT THE ²OUTH µFRICANS DID WAS SOmETHINg THAT WASN’T DONE IN
·HI±E, THAT IF YOU ADmITTED TO YOUR CRImES, YOU gAINED AUTOmATIC AmNESTY.
°AT’S AN ImPORTANT POINT. ¹F ¹ gO AND ¹ ADmIT THAT THERE WAS TORTURE, THAT
YOU TORTURED, THAT ¹ TORTURED, THEY CAN’T INCRImINATE mE. ²O, FOR ADmITTINg
THE TRUTH, YOU gAINED AmNESTY. ¹T WASN’T ±IkE THAT IN THE ·HI±EAN CASE
BECAUSE THE COURTS COU±D SENTENCE YOU.
´URINg mY PRESIDENCY, WE APPOINTED A PRESIDENTIA± COmmISSION ON PO±ITICA±
PRISONERS AND TORTURE—IT IS ImPORTANT TO NOTE THAT VERY FEW COUNTRIES IN
THE WOR±D HAVE DONE INVESTIgATIONS INTO PO±ITICA± PRISON AND TORTURE. °ERE
ARE COmmISSIONS ON PO±ITICA± kI±±INgS, ON THE DETAINED-DISAPPEARED, BUT
THERE ARE SO mANY PEOP±E WHO WERE ImPRISONED AND TORTURED. ¹T’S HARD. ¹T
OPENS WOUNDS. ÉOW DO ¹ DO IT? ÈHAT WE DECIDED TO DO WAS SAY THAT THE
COmmISSION WOU±D ESTAB±ISH THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT HAD HAPPENED, BUT IT
WOU±DN’T BRINg PEOP±E TO jUSTICE. ¹T’S ONE THINg TO ESTAB±ISH THE TRUTH AND
SAY, YES, YOU WERE TORTURED AND WE mUST THEREFORE REmOVE YOUR CRImINA±
RECORD ON ¹NTERPO± BECAUSE YOU WERE IN PRISON NOT AS A CRImINA± BUT BECAUSE
YOU WERE PO±ITICA±±Y PERSECUTED BY THE DICTATORSHIP. ÍERY WE±±. ½OW, IF
24 • ch a p t er on e
YOU WANT jUSTICE IN REgARD TO WHAT YOU TESTIfiED ABOUT BEFORE THE COmmIS-
SION, YOU HAVE TO gO TO AND TESTIFY IN COURT, AND THE COURT HAS THE POWER
TO BRINg THE TORTURER TO jUSTICE IF NECESSARY. ´O YOU UNDERSTAND THE DISTINC-
TION?
°IS DISTINCTION A±±OWED US TO CREATE A REPORT ON PO±ITICA± PRISON AND
TORTURE, WHICH IS A FORm OF TEACHINg. ½OW, READINg THE DOCUmENT, READINg
THE REPORT, IT’S A TRIP THROUgH HE±±. °ERE ARE DETAI±S ABOUT THE P±ACES WHERE
PEOP±E WERE DETAINED, AND THESE P±ACES ARE C±ASSIfiED ACCORDINg TO THE kINDS
OF TORTURE THAT TOOk P±ACE IN THEm, BECAUSE THERE WERE DIffERENT kINDS OF
TORTURE IN EACH P±ACE. ÊUT, IN THIS SENSE, ¹ THINk THAT THE DEmOCRATIC
mODE±S THAT EmERgE ARE A±SO DIffERENT. ¾ODAY ¹ WOU±D SAY THAT IT IS IN A
COUNTRY ±IkE ÊRAzI± WHERE YOU HAVE THE mOST DEmOCRACY AND THE ±EAST
DEmOCRACY, WHEN YOU CHOOSE A UNION ±EADER AS YOUR PRESIDENT. ¹ DON’T THINk
THAT ANYBODY THOUgHT THAT, fiſtEEN YEARS AſtER DEmOCRACY WAS ESTAB±ISHED,
LU±A [LUIz ¹NáCIO LU±A DA ²I±VA, 2003–11] WOU±D BE THE PRESIDENT OF ÊRAzI±,
OR ´I±mA [´I±mA ¼OUSSEff, 2011– ], A WOmAN AND FORmER mI±ITANT OF A
gUERRI±±A gROUP. »R THAT YOU WOU±D HAVE IN ·HI±E, SIxTEEN YEARS AſtER
µY±WIN, THAT IS, AſtER THE TRANSITION, A WOmAN E±ECTED TWICE AS THE PRESIDENT
OF ·HI±E.
µND kEEP IN mIND THAT IN ·HI±E THERE WASN’T SERIOUS DEBATE AROUND THE IDEA
THAT A WOmAN COU±D BE PRESIDENT. ¹ THINk WHY IT HAPPENED IS BECAUSE THERE
WERE TWO WOmEN WHO WERE IN THE BEST POSITION TO SUCCEED mE. ÊOTH HAD
BEEN mEmBERS OF mY CABINET.
In Latin America there have been many women presidents. Not in the United
States yet.
½OT YET.
And why would that be?
ÊECAUSE THEY CHOSE A B±ACk mAN fiRST, AN µFRICAN µmERICAN. ¹ THINk THAT
THE 2008 E±ECTIONS WERE gOINg TO BE A fiRST BECAUSE IT WAS EITHER gOINg
TO BE AN µFRICAN µmERICAN OR A WOmAN. ²O, THERE WAS AN ImPORTANT
STEP. ½OW, ¹ THINk THAT IN LATIN µmERICA A FEW OF THESE WOmEN SUCH
AS ³VITA ¸ERóN [1919–52] IN HER TImE, THEN ¹SABE±ITA ¸ERóN [1974–76],
BOTH WERE WIVES OF ¸RESIDENT ¸ERóN. °E WIVES OF FORmER PRESIDENTS.
»NE COU±D SAY SOmETHINg SImI±AR, mORE RESPECTFU±±Y, ABOUT ·RISTINA
ºERNáNDEz DE ÌIRCHNER [PRESIDENT OF µRgENTINA, 2007– ]. ÊUT ¹ THINk
THAT, IN ANY CASE, LATIN µmERICA HAS BEEN AB±E TO ADVANCE mORE qUICk±Y
IN THIS SENSE.
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 25
Another generation, no?
µNOTHER gENERATION, A gENERATION FOR WHICH THE COUP WAS WHAT WAS IN HIS-
TORY BOOkS. µND THEY WERE SHOCkED TO SEE WHAT THEY SAW, THE mOVIE No×ã
AND A±± OF THOSE STORIES. ²O, THE qUESTION THAT ONE POSES IS, IN WHAT mOmENT
DO COUNTRIES FEE± mATURE ENOUgH OR STRONg ENOUgH TO ±OOk AT THE PAST WITH-
OUT FEAR, NOT TO HIDE ANYTHINg UNDER THE CARPET? °E ²PANISH ARE ON±Y
RECENT±Y DARINg TO ±OOk INTO WHAT HAPPENED DURINg THE ·IVI± ÈAR. °ESE
DAYS YOU CAN’T TRAVE± THE WOR±D WITHOUT DEmOCRATIC CREDENTIA±S, WITHOUT THE
CREDENTIA±S TO SAY, “¹N mY COUNTRY WE HAVE A DEmOCRACY, ¹’m A PRODUCT OF
DEmOCRACY, ¹ WAS E±ECTED PRESIDENT, ¹ DIDN’T FORCE mY WAY INTO POWER.” µND
¹ THINk THAT THIS IS AN ImPORTANT STEP FORWARD. ½OW, HOW ARE THINgS gOINg
TO PROgRESS IN THE FUTURE? ¹T’S HARD, IT’S HARD. ÈHY? ÊECAUSE THESE NEW gEN-
ERATIONS AREN’T SCARED BECAUSE THEY DIDN’T ±IVE THROUgH THE FEAR OF THE DICTA-
TORSHIP AND, THEREFORE, THEY DEmAND A ±OT mORE. ¹T’S A DIffERENT WAY OF
APPROACHINg THINgS.
LOOk, THE COUP D’éTAT HAPPENED IN 1973, AND 20 YEARS AſtER THE COUP, IN
1993 WITH µY±WIN AS PRESIDENT, VERY FEW IN THE mEDIA DARED TO SHOW OR WRITE
ABOUT THE PAST. µND 25 YEARS AſtER, IN 1998, THE mEDIA WERE STI±± CAREFU± TO
PRESENT THE REA± PICTURE. µſtER 30 YEARS (2003), ¹ THOUgHT THAT WE HAD TO DO
SOmETHINg TO REmEmBER WHAT HAPPENED IN THE ¸A±ACE AND WE OPENED THE
DOOR OF LA MONEDA,×× THROUgH WHICH THEY HAD CARRIED OUT µ±±ENDE’S BODY,
AND IN SPITE OF THAT FACT, THE mEDIA SHOWED A ±ITT±E BIT mORE OF THE 1973
EVENTS. ÊUT 40 YEARS AſtER THE COUP: AN ExP±OSION ON ¾Í, SUDDEN±Y THERE
WERE telenoVelas, radioteatros, THERE WAS EVERYTHINg. µND THEY SHOWED
ImAgES THAT ·HI±EANS HAD NEVER SEEN ON PUB±IC ¾Í BEFORE. ÈHY DID
·HI±EAN SOCIETY, 40 YEARS AſtER THE COUP, DARE TO ±OOk AT THE COUP THROUgH
DIffERENT EYES?
¹’VE TO±D THIS STORY A FEW TImES. ¹ WAS WITH mY gRANDCHI±DREN AT AN asado, A
BARBECUE, AND SUDDEN±Y ONE OF THEm SAYS TO mE, “ÉEY, GRANDPA, WHAT IS THIS
STORY ABOUT THE fiNgER AND ¸INOCHET?” ÈE±±, ¹’m A ±ITT±E TIRED OF THE STORY, AND
SO ¹ TO±D THEm, “¹T’S ON ÓOU¾UBE.” µND THEY SAID, “»H, ON ÓOU¾UBE, ±ET’S gO
WATCH IT ON ÓOU¾UBE!” °EY WERE ExCITED TO WATCH THE VIDEO.
ÊUT THEN YOU COU±D SEE THE DISAPPOINTmENT IN THEIR FACES WHEN THEY ±OOkED
AT mE AND SAID, “GRANDPA, WAS THAT it? GETTINg ANNOYED WITH SOmEONE
ON ¾Í ISN’T ANYTHINg SPECIA±. ³VERYONE gETS ANNOYED ON ¾Í.” ·AN YOU
26 • ch a p t er on e
fi¿ure 1.1. ´URINg A TE±EVISION APPEARANCE IN 1988, ¸RESIDENT
LAgOS TOOk THE RISk OF POINTINg HIS fiNgER IN ACCUSATION AgAINST
THE ·HI±EAN DICTATOR µUgUSTO ¸INOCHET. ¹NTERNET REPRODUCTION
FROm ¾Í BROADCAST.
BE±IEVE THAT’S WHAT THEY TO±D mE? ÊUT IT’S THE CONTExT×Ø THAT CHANgES A±±
THE mEANINg.
Do you think that there is something to learn Äom Latin America in
regard to the practice of democracy, about genuine and not only formal
participation?
ÈE±±, THAT’S A REA±±Y ImPORTANT TOPIC. ¾WO THINgS. »NE, IN mANY OF OUR
COUNTRIES WE’VE A±READY BEEN AB±E TO ESTAB±ISH STATE fiNANCIA± SUPPORT FOR
CANDIDATES IN E±ECTIONS. µND, AS A RESU±T, THEY PASSED ±AWS ABOUT THIS, AND
¹ REmEmBER VERY C±EAR±Y WHEN ¹ ASkED A DEPUTY FROm THE ±OWER HOUSE OF
·ONgRESS HOW mUCH WAS SPENT IN THE ±AST E±ECTION. ÉE TO±D mE, AND ¹ THEN
qUESTIONED HIm, IF HE COU±D REA±±Y RUN WITH SO ±ITT±E mONEY. “ÓES, IT WAS
ENOUgH,” HE SAID. “¹ DIDN’T NEED TO RAISE ANY ExTRA mONEY.” µND IN THE ±AST
PRESIDENTIA± E±ECTIONS, FOR ExAmP±E, THIS WORkED AND IT WORkED RE±ATIVE±Y
WE±±. °ERE IS PRIVATE mONEY, BUT THERE’S mORE THAN THAT, TOO.
°E SUBjECT OF PARTICIPATION IS PERHAPS mORE DIffiCU±T. ÈHY? ÊECAUSE YOU
HAVE A RISINg mIDD±E C±ASS. ¹F YOU gO AROUND THE WOR±D SAYINg PROUD±Y THAT
YOU E±ImINATED POVERTY, OR THAT POVERTY HAS DECREASED SIgNIfiCANT±Y, WE±±,
THOSE WHO RAISED THEmSE±VES OUT OF POVERTY CONSIDER THEmSE±VES mIDD±E
C±ASS AND THEY HAVE OTHER DEmANDS, OTHER NEEDS. µND THEY THUS DEmAND
PARTICIPATION. ²O, IF YOU gO AROUND THE WOR±D SAYINg, “LOOk HERE, TODAY OF
THE STUDENTS IN HIgHER EDUCATION OR HIgH SCHOO±, SEVEN OUT OF TEN ARE fiRST
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 27
gENERATION.” ÈE±±, THOSE SEVEN HAVE COmPUTERS AND THE REST OF IT, THEY HAVE A
DIffERENT SET OF DEmANDS FROm THOSE THAT THERE WERE TWENTY YEARS AgO. ÉOW
DO WE SATISFY THESE DEmANDS? ÉOW DO YOU fiND A CIVI±IzED WAY TO RESO±VE
THESE DEmANDS SO THAT IT IS NOT NECESSARY TO gO TO THE ¸±AzA TO PROTEST?
ÊECAUSE, UNTI± NOW, THE ON±Y WAY TO mAkE DEmANDS WAS TO gO THE ¸±AzA TO
PROTEST.
What about the student moVement?
ÈHAT HAPPENED IN ·HI±E WAS SHOCkINg, ESPECIA±±Y BECAUSE OF THE FORCE
THAT THE mOVEmENT HAD. µND THIS FORCE WAS DUE TO TWO FACTORS. ºIRST, IT WAS
mORE A mOVEmENT OF THE mIDD±E C±ASSES THAN THE WORkINg C±ASSES. °E
mAjORITY OF PROTESTS DIDN’T INVO±VE THE VERY POOR, BECAUSE THEY WERE ENTIT±ED
TO FE±±OWSHIPS THAT PAID THEIR TUITION. µND SECOND, WHEN IT OCCURRED TO THE
STUDENTS ONE WEEkEND TO SAY, “ÈE ARE gOINg TO mARCH THIS WEEkEND SO THAT
OUR PARENTS CAN COmE WITH US TO OUR PROTEST.” ÈE±±, IT ENDED UP BEINg A HUgE
CIVIC PARTY BECAUSE THE PARENTS WENT, OF COURSE, AND THEY BROUgHT THE BABIES
BECAUSE THERE WASN’T ANYONE TO ±EAVE THEm WITH, AND OTHERS CAmE WITH THEIR
gRANDmOTHERS. µND YOU WERE THERE, AND YOU SAW PEOP±E IN jEANS, IN UNI-
FORmS, IN EVERYTHINg. ÊUT YOU A±SO SAW PEOP±E WITH DIffERENT DEmANDS.
²O THE qUESTION WAS, WHAT DEmANDS ARE gOINg TO ARISE? ¹S IT gOINg TO BE
POSSIB±E TO SAY, ±OOk, IF A ±AW PASSES IN ¸AR±IAmENT, ¹ WANT US, THE PEOP±E WHO
ARE THE OWNERS OF POPU±AR SOVEREIgNTY, TO BE AB±E TO REVOkE THE ±AW BECAUSE
WE DON’T ±IkE IT? ¹N A FEW WE±±-ESTAB±ISHED DEmOCRACIES, IF YOU CAN gATHER A
SIgNIfiCANT NUmBER OF SIgNATURES ON A PETITION YOU CAN DEmAND A BINDINg
P±EBISCITE AND REVOkE THE ±AW. ÈOW. ÈOW. ¹ WANT TO SEE THE ±EgIS±ATION OF A
CONgRESS THAT kNOWS THAT THE PEOP±E CAN REVOkE THE ±AWS IT PASSES. ÈOW. ¹N
¸ERU, FOR ExAmP±E, OR IN ÍENEzUE±A’S CONSTITUTION, HA±FWAY THROUgH YOUR
PRESIDENCY, IN ¸ERU HA±FWAY THROUgH YOUR TERm AS mAYOR, THE PEOP±E CAN
DEmAND A REVOCATION OF YOUR mANDATE. ½OW, THE WAY ONE gOVERNS BECOmES
COmP±ETE±Y DIffERENT. ÊECAUSE EACH PO±ITICA± REFORm HAS AN ImPACT ON THE
WAY YOU gOVERN.
¹F ¹ kNOW ¹ WAS E±ECTED PRESIDENT FOR SIx YEARS AND THAT THREE YEARS INTO mY
TERm THE PEOP±E CAN REVOkE mY PRESIDENCY, WE±±, ¹’±± WAIT TO PASS CONTENTIOUS
REFORmS UNTI± AſtER THE THREE YEARS. ¹N OTHER WORDS, gOVERNANCE TAkES ON A
DIffERENT FORm, RIgHT? ¹T’S NOT FREE. ÓOU CAN’T jUST COmE A±ONg AND mAkE A
DECISION—IT SOUNDS REA±±Y DEmOCRATIC THAT HA±FWAY THROUgH YOUR PRESI-
DENCY YOU CAN HAVE YOUR POWER REVOkED. ÊUT IT HAS PO±ITICA± CONSEqUENCES.
¹T’S gOINg TO ±EAD TO A DIffERENT WAY OF gOVERNINg.
28 • ch a p t er on e
¸RESIDENT ¸EñA ½IETO [³NRIqUE ¸EñA ½IETO, MExICO, 2012– ] TO±D mE,
“ÓOU HAVE TO PASS A±± THE REFORmS IN YOUR fiRST YEAR BECAUSE IN THE NExT
fiVE YOU HAVE TO ImP±EmENT THEm. »THERWISE, YOU’RE A FAI±URE.” µND
HE’S TRIED, NO? ¾O PASS REFORmS VERY qUICk±Y. ²O, YOU REA±IzE THAT IT’S A
COmP±ICATED TOPIC. »Ì. ÈHAT IS PARTICIPATION gOINg TO ±OOk ±IkE? ÈHICH
PO±ITICA± INSTITUTIONS WI±± EmERgE? µND LATIN µmERICA HAS OffERED A FEW,
NO? ÈE±±, ÉUgO ·HáVEz’S [PRESIDENT OF ÍENEzUE±A, 1999–2013] CONSTITUTION
IN ÍENEzUE±A ESTAB±ISHED THAT HA±FWAY THROUgH YOUR PRESIDENCY YOU CAN—
AND ¹ THINk THAT NOW, mANY OF THE PROTESTERS AND WHATNOT, THEY ARE
THINkINg mORE ABOUT REVOkINg MADURO’S [½ICO±áS MADURO, PRESIDENT
OF ÍENEzUE±A, 2013– ] mANDATE AſtER THREE YEARS THAN ACTUA±±Y gOINg TO
VOTE NOW.
May we talk more about how all of this might be meaningful for the rest of the
world?
¹ THINk THAT IF THERE ARE THESE kINDS OF INSTITUTIONS IN THE REST OF THE WOR±D,
LATIN µmERICA WI±± HAVE SOmETHINg TO ExPORT. ½OTE THAT THE ¸¾ [ÈORkERS’
¸ARTY] IN ÊRAzI± INTRODUCED PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg AT THE mUNICIPA± ±EVE±
±ONg BEFORE THE ¸¾ WON THE PRESIDENCY WITH LU±A. °IS WAS A±READY A TRADE-
mARk OF THE ¸¾ IN THE mUNICIPA±ITIES THAT THEY CONTRO±±ED, ±IkE ¸ORTO
µ±EgRE. ²O THEY ASkED BUSINESSmEN, “µREN’T YOU SCARED OF LU±A?” MANY OF
THEm SAID, “½O, BECAUSE NOW ¹ HAVE PARTICIPATION IN ±OCA± gOVERNmENT WHEN
BEFORE NOBODY ASkED mE ANYTHINg.”
½OW, THIS ±ITT±E mACHINE, THE ¹NTERNET, A±SO A±±OWS FACE-TO-FACE, NO? ¹N
²ANTIAgO, ON THE WEBSITE OF mY FOUNDATION WE HAVE A THINg CA±±ED THE
äUINTO ¸ODER. »BVIOUS±Y, THIS IS BECAUSE THE PRESS IS THE ºOURTH ³STATE, SO
THE ¹NTERNET IS THE ºIſtH ³STATE. ÈE±±, IN THE äUINTO ¸ODER, THERE WAS, FOR
ExAmP±E, A DISCUSSION THAT CYC±ISTS—WHERE THERE AREN’T BIkE ±ANES, THEY CAN
RIDE ON THE SIDEWA±k, RIgHT? “ÈE±±,” ONE mAYOR SAID, “NO, THEY CAN’T RIDE ON
THE SIDEWA±k BECAUSE THERE ARE PEOP±E WA±kINg ON SIDEWA±kS.” µND THERE WAS
A DEBATE. µND THEN THE CYC±ISTS SAID, “½ExT ²ATURDAY, WE ARE A±± gOINg TO RIDE
OUR BIkES TO gO PROTEST TO THE gOVERNOR.” ÈE±±, TO EVERYONE’S SURPRISE OVER
ONE THOUSAND CYC±ISTS ARRIVED AT HIS OffiCE. ¹ DON’T NEED TO ADD THAT THE DEPU-
TIES qUICk±Y SENT A BI±± TO RESO±VE THE PROB±Em.
¹T’S ONE THINg FOR PEOP±E TO BE ANNOYED AND TA±kINg ON SOCIA± mEDIA,
ON ¾WITTER. ÊUT IT’S ANOTHER WHEN YOU SAY THINgS FACE-TO-FACE. ÈHEN
PEOP±E SAID, “ÈHY DON’T WE PROTEST ON OUR BICYC±ES?,” AND OTHERS SAW
THE PHYSICA± mAgNITUDE OF THE PROTEST, WE±±, THERE WAS A CHANgE. ¹N OTHER
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 29
fi¿ure 1.2. ·HE GUEVARA ImAgE ON THE CAP OF A mAN IN
²HANgHAI, 2013. ¸HOTO BY MATTHEW GUTmANN.
che
I’m looking for a photograph to ask you a very different kind of Question. I took
this photo in Shanghai last fall, and it prompts me to ask you why Che’s image,
his symbol, is so widely seen all over the world?
ÊECAUSE ·HE EmBODIED REBE±±ION. LOTS OF PEOP±E EmBODY REBE±±ION AND,
PRECISE±Y BECAUSE HE WAS A REBE±, HE WAS SUCCESSFU±, BUT A±SO A PRACTITIONER
WHO WAS PRESIDENT OF THE ·ENTRA± ÊANk OF ·UBA.
30 • ch a p t er on e
°at’s a part of his story many people don’t know about.
ÊUT PEOP±E DO kNOW THAT HE WAS UP THERE WITH ºIDE± AT THE PINNAC±E OF
POWER. µND THEY DO kNOW THAT ONCE HE ARRIVED AT THE PINNAC±E OF POWER HE
SAID, “¹’VE COmP±ETED mY TASk IN ·UBA, NOW ¹’m gOINg TO THE ²IERRA MAESTRA,
TO ANOTHER ²IERRA MAESTRA, TO PARTICIPATE IN THE REVO±UTION IN µFRICA.” ²O, HE
WENT TO µFRICA, AND THEN TO OTHER P±ACES, AND HE ENDED IN ÊO±IVIA; WE A±±
kNOW HOW HIS STORY ENDED. °OSE OF US WHO ARE O±DER kNOW WHERE WE WERE
WHEN ÌENNEDY WAS ASSASSINATED; WE A±SO kNOW WHERE WE WERE WHEN WE
HEARD OF ·HE’S DEATH IN ÊO±IVIA. ¹ WAS C±ImBINg A STAIRCASE AS THE RECENT±Y
APPOINTED DIRECTOR OF THE ²CHOO± OF ¸O±ITICA± ²CIENCE, AND THE PRESIDENT OF
THE STUDENTS TO±D mE, “°EY kI±±ED ·HE IN ÊO±IVIA!” ¹ COU±DN’T BE±IEVE IT.
Ï THINk THAT ABOVE AND BEYOND THE PHOTO, THE ICON, IS ANOTHER THEmE. °AT
FAmOUS PHOTO. °ERE ARE ±OTS OF STORIES ABOUT THE PHOTO, HOW IT HAPPENED,
WHY IS HE IN IT? °E PHOTO IS ABOUT UTOPIA, REBE±±ION, AND THE NEED TO TAkE
RISkS. ¹T’S C±EAR±Y NOT ON±Y ABOUT WHAT HAPPENED TO HIm BECAUSE WHEN HE
ENDS UP AS AN ImAgE ON ¾-SHIRTS AROUND THE WOR±D, IT’S NOT jUST THE PHOTO-
gRAPH. ¹T’S ·HE’S HISTORY. ·HE THE ROmANTIC. ¹T’S THE ROmANCE OF IT.
Does that apply to Latin America more generally?
°ERE ARE ±OTS OF ROmANTIC PARTS. °INk ABOUT WHAT THE REST OF THE WOR±D
THOUgHT OF ºIDE± ·ASTRO’S REVO±UTION AT THE END OF THE 1950S, BEgINNINg OF
THE 1960S. °E ·UBAN ¼EVO±UTION C±EAR±Y CAPTURED THE WOR±D’S ImAgINATION.
µſtERWARD, IT TOOk DIffERENT DIRECTIONS, OTHER PATHS.
¹º¾¶·ZµÅº
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 31
WE ARE A±± ImmIgRANTS IN LATIN µmERICA BECAUSE THE fiRST ImmIgRANTS
ARRIVED THROUgH THE ÊERINg ²TRAIT. µND NOW THEY ARE SAYINg THAT THERE WERE
OTHERS WHO CAmE FROm THE ²OUTH, NO? °ROUgH µNTARCTICA. »THERWISE IT
WOU±D BE HARD TO ExP±AIN HOW HUmAN BEINgS WERE IN ¸UERTO MONTT 14,000
YEARS BEFORE ·HRIST. °EY SAY IT WOU±D HAVE TAkEN ±ONgER TO ARRIVE IN ¸UERTO
MONTT THROUgH THE ÊERINg ²TRAIT, AND THEY’VE STARTED TO UNCOVER EVIDENCE
THAT µNTARCTICA WAS ATTACHED TO ²OUTH µmERICA AND THEY THEREFORE ARRIVED
FROm THERE ON AN ICE BRIDgE.
ÈE DO kNOW THAT THESE PEOP±E ARRIVED 15,000 YEARS AgO, AND THEY OBVIOUS±Y
DIDN’T HAVE PASSPORTS, BUT THEY ARRIVED, AND THEN THE ²PANISH CAmE ±ATER.
µND THEN THE µFRO-µmERICANS ARRIVED AS S±AVES, 400 TO 350 YEARS AgO. µND
THAT’S WHEN THE mIxINg STARTED, AND IT WAS RE±ATED TO HOW PEOP±E ADAPTED
THEmSE±VES. °EN THERE’S THAT FAmOUS SCENE WHEN THE ²PANISH CONqUERORS
SAY TO µTAHUA±PA, “°IS IS THE ÊIB±E. GOD SPEAkS IN THIS BOOk.” µND THE gUY
gRABS IT, PUTS IT TO HIS EAR AND SAYS, “¹ CAN’T HEAR ANYTHINg.” ¹T’S DRAmATIC, THIS
C±ASH OF TWO CU±TURES, THEY WERE SO STUNNED. °AT’S HOW THE TWO CAmE
TOgETHER.
ÉERE IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES, THE CO±ONIA±ISTS DIDN’T COmE TO CONqUER OR TO
EVANgE±IzE. °EY ARRIVED SImP±Y TO HAVE THE RIgHT TO A RE±IgION, A RIgHT
THEY DIDN’T HAVE IN THEIR COUNTRY. µND THEREFORE THERE WAS NO INTEREST IN
EVANgE±IzINg THE NATIVES. ÉERE THE NATIVES RAN AWAY. µND THEY WERE A±SO
mASSACRED.
µND IT IS A mestizaje THAT IS A±SO ABOUT THE ²PANISH THAT YOU SPEAk. °AT’S
WHY THE ¼EA± µCADEmIA ³SPAñO±A ACCEPTS argentinismos, chilenismos, AND
THE REST OF IT. ÊUT THERE IS ON±Y ONE ±ANgUAgE. ¹T IS DIffERENT IN ¸ORTUgUESE.
MANY BOOkS THAT ARE PUB±ISHED IN ¸ORTUgUESE ARE TRANS±ATED INTO
“ÊRAzI±IAN.” °AT IS, THE ±ANgUAgE SPOkEN IN ÊRAzI± TODAY IS DIffERENT FROm
THAT SPOkEN IN ¸ORTUgA±. °EY ARE DIffERENT BOOkS. ÊUT IN THE ²PANISH CASE,
THE ²PANISH IS THE SAmE. µND WHAT IS LATIN µmERICA FOR THE REST OF THE
WOR±D? ÈE SPEAk THROUgH THE ARTS OF OUR POETS, NOVE±ISTS, mUSICIANS, AND
PAINTERS.
cliÇate chan¿e
Climate change is a challenge that you have dedicated many years to, and it’s a
topic that is immensely important in the world. I want to know whether there
are green paradigms in Latin America Äom which we can learn in other parts
of the world?
32 • ch a p t er on e
¹ THINk THAT THE fiRST LATIN µmERICAN ISSUE HAS TO DO WITH SOmETHINg PAR-
TICU±AR TO LATIN µmERICA, WHICH IS DEFORESTATION. ¹ mEAN, OF THE TOTA± g±OBA±
EmISSIONS 20 PERCENT IS FROm DEFORESTATION, BUT IN LATIN µmERICA 49 PER-
CENT OF TOTA± EmISSIONS COmE FROm DEFORESTATION. µND ¹’m gOINg TO TE±± YOU
SOmETHINg THAT IS EVEN mORE UNBE±IEVAB±E. µ±± OF THE CARBON EmISSIONS
PRODUCED BY THE ÊRAzI±IAN ECONOmY, THAT IS, ITS G´¸, ARE 800,000 TONS OF
CARBON DIOxIDE. ´EFORESTATION ACCOUNTS FOR 1,000,000 TONS. °AT IS, DEFOR-
ESTATION IN ÊRAzI± CONTRIBUTES mORE TO CARBON DIOxIDE EmISSIONS THAN THE
EmISSIONS PRODUCED BY THE ÊRAzI±IAN ECONOmY. ¹T’S UNBE±IEVAB±E. ÈHAT ¹ DO
THINk IS THAT LATIN µmERICA COU±D TAkE A BIg STEP TO BECOmE A SORT OF SOſt
POWER TO THE REST OF THE WOR±D, TO SAY, “LOOk, ¹’VE REDUCED DEFORESTATION.”
ÈHY? ÊECAUSE REDUCINg DEFORESTATION mEANS THAT, ESPECIA±±Y IN THE
ÊRAzI±IAN CASE, DEFORESTATION HAS BEEN UNDERTAkEN mOST±Y TO CREATE SPACE FOR
AgRICU±TURE OR BIg HYDROE±ECTRIC DAmS OR mININg. »F COURSE, ÊRAzI±’S ±EADER-
SHIP IS FUNDAmENTA± BECAUSE OF THE THEmE OF THE µmAzON. ¹T’S TRUE THAT TEN
²OUTH µmERICAN COUNTRIES POSSESS A PART OF THE µmAzON, BUT THE µmAzON’S
TRUE NUmBER ONE IS ÊRAzI±. ÊRAzI± IS THE STAR, RIgHT? °ERE IS C±EAR±Y A NETWORk
OF µmAzONIAN COUNTRIES, BUT THE STAR IS ÊRAzI±.
½OW, ON THE OTHER HAND, LATIN µmERICA AS A WHO±E C±EAR±Y HAS TO P±AY A RO±E
IN THE ISSUE OF C±ImATE CHANgE. ¹ THINk THAT IN ORDER TO ADVANCE, LATIN
µmERICA A±SO HAS TO STOP PRETENDINg THAT COUNTRIES THAT AREN’T THE mOST
DEVE±OPED HAVE THE RIgHT TO kEEP EmITTINg WHATEVER WE ±IkE BECAUSE ¹ THINk
THAT IN THE FUTURE THIS WON’T BE VERY FEASIB±E. °AT IS, WE ARE A±± gOINg TO
NEED TO CONTRIBUTE, ESPECIA±±Y A CONTINENT THAT IS ECONOmICA±±Y SUCCESSFU±,
FOR WHICH THINgS ARE gOINg WE±±. °E qUESTION OF THE TWENTY-fi RST CENTURY IS
gOINg TO BE, “¾E±± mE: HOW mUCH DO YOU PO±±UTE? ÓOU gO AROUND THE WOR±D
PROUD±Y SAYINg, ‘LOOk, ¹’VE gOT A PER CAPITA OF $15,000, AND AT THIS RATE, ¹’±±
SOON ACHIEVE $20,000 PER CITIzEN.’ ÈHAT ARE YOUR gREENHOUSE gAS EmISSIONS
PER CAPITA?” °AT IS gOINg TO BE THE mARk OF YOUR CIVI±ITY OR INCIVI±ITY.
And has Latin America been a pioneer in any way with regard
to climate change?
¹ THINk THAT IN TERmS OF TECHNO±OgICA± INNOVATION, LATIN µmERICA HASN’T
CONTRIBUTED mUCH. °ERE HAVE BEEN SOmE PROCESSES OF ADAPTATION IN LATIN
µmERICA, ADAPTATION TO NATURA± PHENOmENA THAT AREN’T NECESSARI±Y RE±ATED TO
C±ImATE CHANgE. ½OW, WI±± THERE BE A PROCESS OF ADAPTATION TO C±ImATE
CHANgE OR ON±Y RE±IEF EffORTS? °E ·ARIBBEAN COUNTRIES OBVIOUS±Y HAVE A ±OT
TO SAY ON THAT TOPIC BECAUSE FOR THEm RE±IEF EffORTS ARE REA±±Y ImPORTANT,
RIgHT? ÊUT ¹ A±SO THINk THAT COUNTRIES ±IkE THE ¶NITED ²TATES ARE gOINg TO
HAVE TO START UNDERTAkINg mORE RE±IEF EffORTS. ²OmEONE TO±D mE THAT
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 33
ÉURRICANE ²ANDY HAD A BIggER ImPACT IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES THAN ONE THOU-
SAND C±ImATE CHANgE CONFERENCES. ¹T CAUSED PEOP±E TO SAY, “¹T ±OOkS ±IkE THIS
C±ImATE CHANgE mIgHT ACTUA±±Y BE SERIOUS,” RIgHT?
ÈE’±± SEE IF ANY OF THIS mEANS ANYTHINg.
34 • ch a p t er on e
THE ANSWER TOOk TImE. ÈAITINg FOR THE POSTmAN TO ARRIVE, HE SAID THAT HE
WAS ±IkE A gROOm AWAITINg HIS BRIDE. ÉE WOU±D APPROACH THE WINDOW EVERY
TImE HE SAW THE POSTmAN TO SEE WHETHER THERE WAS A ±ETTER FOR HIm. ÊUT IT
WAS ON±Y E±ECTRIC BI±±S AND THAT kIND OF THINg. µſtER ABOUT FORTY DAYS, HE
RECEIVED AN ENVE±OPE: “¼OYA± »BSERVATORY OF GREENWICH.” ÉE DIDN’T DARE
OPEN IT, BUT fiNA±±Y HE DID. °ERE HAD BEEN A FU±± mOON THAT NIgHT!
¸ERHAPS WE LATIN µmERICANS ARE, FOR SOmE REASON, RICHER IN THIS SENSE OF
ROmANTIC CU±TURE AND IN REgARD TO THE OTHER THINgS WE TA±kED ABOUT EAR±IER.
notes
Á n Ï n t erv i ew w i th  ic a r do Ü a¿os • 35
DEVA±UATION SPARkED A fiNANCIA± CRISIS THAT PU±±ED THE COUNTRY INTO A RECESSION WITH
SOARINg INflATION AND A PESO AT HA±F OF ITS ORIgINA± VA±UE. µ±SO kNOWN AS THE “¸ESO
·RISIS,” THE ¾EqUI±A ·RISIS SENT SHOCkWAVES THROUgHOUT LATIN µmERICA AND OTHER
EmERgINg mARkETS AND PROmPTED THE ¶NITED ²TATES AND THE ¹NTERNATIONA± MONETARY
ºUND TO OffER A BAI±OUT PACkAgE.
6. °E “·HICAgO ÊOYS” WERE A CREW OF ECONOmISTS FROm LATIN µmERICA TRAINED
mOST±Y AT THE ¶NIVERSITY OF ·HICAgO (UNDER MI±TON ºRIEDmAN AND µRNO±D ÉARBERgER)
AND THE ¸ONTIfiCA± ·ATHO±IC ¶NIVERSITY OF ·HI±E. ÈITH ROOTS IN THE ¶.². ²TATE
´EPARTmENT’S “·HI±E ¸ROjECT” OF THE 1950S, THE INflUENCE OF THIS gROUP ROSE ESPECIA±±Y
DURINg THE EAR±Y YEARS OF GENERA± µUgUSTO ¸INOCHET’S REIgN (1973–90), WHEN THE NEW
gOVERNmENT ADOPTED THE ·HICAgO ÊOYS’ NEO±IBERA± PROgRAm OF DEREgU±ATION, PRIVA-
TIzATION, AND OTHER FREE mARkET PO±ICIES.
7. µſtER SUCCESSFU±±Y OVERTHROWINg A REPUB±ICAN gOVERNmENT IN THE BRUTA±
²PANISH ·IVI± ÈAR FROm 1936 TO 1939, GENERA± ºRANCISCO ºRANCO (1892–1975) ESTAB-
±ISHED A TOTA±ITARIAN STATE THAT ±ASTED UNTI± HIS DEATH. ºRANCO’S SUCCESSOR, ¸RINCE JUAN
·AR±OS (gRANDSON OF ²PAIN’S FORmER kINg), INITIATED ²PAIN’S TRANSITION TO A CONSTITU-
TIONA± mONARCHY IN THE ±ATE 1970S.
8. ¹N µPRI± 1982 THE mI±ITARY jUNTA IN µRgENTINA SENT SO±DIERS TO INVADE THE
MA±VINAS, OR ºA±k±AND, ¹S±ANDS, A REmOTE CO±ONIA± OUTPOST OF ÊRITAIN. °E EffORT TO
RESUSCITATE THE flAggINg REgImE THROUgH AN ANTI-ImPERIA±IST AND NATIONA±IST CAmPAIgN
E±ICITED A SURPRISINg±Y STRONg REACTION FROm MARgARET °ATCHER’S gOVERNmENT. °E
TEN-WEEk CONflICT ENDED IN HUmI±IATION FOR THE DICTATORSHIP IN µRgENTINA, WHICH
SUBSEqUENT±Y YIE±DED TO CIVI±IAN RU±E.
9. MASS OPPOSITION TO ·HI±EAN DICTATOR ¸INOCHET mOUNTED THROUgHOUT THE
1980S. ¸RESSURE FROm THE DEmOCRATIC mOVEmENT FORCED CONCESSIONS FROm ¸INOCHET,
WHO CA±±ED FOR A P±EBISCITE—A VOTE BY A±± mEmBERS OF THE NATION—ON HIS RU±E IN
»CTOBER 1988. ·HI±EANS VOTED DOWN ANOTHER TERm FOR ¸INOCHET BY 54.6 PERCENT.
10. µ 2012 fi±m DIRECTED BY ¸AB±O LARRAíN AND STARRINg GAE± GARCíA ÊERNA± ABOUT
ADVERTISINg TACTICS USED IN THE P±EBISCITE OF 1988.
11. LA MONEDA IS A B±OCk-±ONg PA±ACE AND SEAT OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE ¼EPUB±IC OF
·HI±E. µS ¸RESIDENT, LAgOS OPENED SOmE OF THE INNER COURTYARDS TO THE PUB±IC IN
2000, AS SOON AS IT WAS INAUgURATED, AND RESTORED MORANDé 80, A DOOR ON THE SIDE OF
THE PA±ACE THAT SYmBO±IzES A DEmOCRATIC ·HI±E. ¹T WAS THIS DOOR THAT WAS OPENED IN
2003.
12. °E SPECIfiC CONTExT HERE WAS LAgOS’S 25 µPRI± 1988 APPEARANCE ON THE PRO-
gRAm De cara al país, ONE OF THE FEW SITES FOR PUB±IC PO±ITICA± DISCOURSE AND OPPOSITION
IN ¸INOCHET’S ·HI±E AT THE TImE. LAgOS, WHO HAD BECOmE ±EADER OF THE RECENT±Y CRE-
ATED ¸ARTIDO POR ±A ´EmOCRACIA (¸¸´), ±EVIED DIRECT CRITICISm AgAINST ¸INOCHET’S
ABUSES OF POWER AND URgED SUPPORT FOR A “½O” VOTE IN THE 1988 P±EBISCITE THAT WOU±D
U±TImATE±Y ±EAD TO THE DICTATOR’S REmOVA± FROm OffiCE.
36 • ch a p t er on e
two
°e Conversion of Francis
the first latin aÇerican pope and the
woÇen he needs
37
THE ·URIA. °E ÍATICAN DOUB±E STANDARD REqUIRES ITS gAY PRE±ATES TO BE CE±IBATE
OR TO BE DISCREET AND SI±ENT ExCEPT FOR TAkINg THEIR SINS TO THE CONFESSIONA±.
¾OgETHER, THESE EVENTS AND DI±EmmAS ±ED TO THE ABDICATION OF ¸OPE ÊENEDICT,
A SCHO±AR±Y AND fiERCE±Y CONSERVATIVE PRE±ATE WHO OWNED UP TO BEINg A POOR
ADmINISTRATOR. Ù
¸RIOR TO HIS PAPACY, JOSEPH ¼ATzINgER HEADED THE ·ONgREgATION FOR THE
´OCTRINE OF THE ºAITH, THE mODERN-DAY HEIR OF THE ¹NqUISITION. µS THE
gUARDIAN OF ·ATHO±IC ORTHODOxY, ¼ATzINgER WAS kNOWN AS “GOD’S ¼OTTWEI±ER”
IN HIS DEFENSE OF THE PAPACY AND HIS C±OSE FRIEND AND PAPA± PREDECESSOR, ¸OPE
JOHN ¸AU± ¹¹ (B. ÌARO± JózEF ÈOjTYł). ÊOTH mEN WERE ·ENTRA± ³UROPEANS
WHO CAmE OF AgE DURINg ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹¹ AND ROSE TO PREEmINENCE IN THE
CHURCH DURINg THE ·O±D ÈAR. °EIR WOR±DVIEW WAS ³UROCENTRIC AND FOCUSED
ON THE EVI±S OF ·OmmUNISm AND THE gOD±ESS ²OVIET ¶NION. ÊOTH WERE DEEP±Y
TROUB±ED BY A NEW MARxIST-INflECTED REVO±UTIONARY THEO±OgICA± TURN, “±IBERA-
TION THEO±OgY,” WITHIN SECTORS OF THE POST–ÍATICAN ¹¹ CHURCH IN LATIN
µmERICA.
¹RONICA±±Y, THE TWO FUTURE POPES HAD PARTICIPATED IN ÍATICAN ¹¹, WHICH WAS
±ED BY ¸OPE JOHN XX¹¹¹, WHO SOUgHT TO “OPEN THE WINDOW AND ±ET IN FRESH
AIR” AND TO REPOSITION THE CHURCH IN THE mODERN WOR±D. ¼ATHER THAN BEINg
INSPIRED, THEY BECAmE OBSESSED WITH THE “ERRORS” AND “ExCESSES” UN±EASHED BY
ÍATICAN ¹¹, AND THEIR PAPACIES WERE mARkED BY AN ATTEmPT TO REVERSE REFORmS
THAT THEY FOUND ExCESSIVE. °EY DID NOT ±IkE THE INC±USION OF SECU±AR ·ATHO±IC
SCHO±ARS IN DISCUSSIONS OF DE±ICATE TOPICS SUCH AS THE CE±IBACY OF PRIESTS, THE
ORDINATION OF WOmEN, CONTRACEPTION, AND ABORTION. µND THEY DISAPPROVED OF
ACTIVIST PRIESTS PARTICIPATINg IN ±IBERATION THEO±OgY BASE COmmUNITIES IN
LATIN µmERICA THAT qUESTIONED THE C±OSE TIES OF THE TRADITIONA± LATIN
µmERICAN HIERARCHY WITH OPPRESSIVE RU±INg C±ASSES.
µ±THOUgH ±IBERATION THEO±OgY WAS NEVER THE DOmINANT OR HEgEmONIC
·ATHO±IC THEO±OgY IN LATIN µmERICA, Ú IT WAS A STRONg AND VISIB±E SOCIA± mOVE-
mENT THAT REA±IgNED C±ERgY AND NUNS IN SUPPORT OF THE POOR AND THOSE WHO
SPOkE ON THEIR BEHA±F DURINg CIVI± WARS IN ·ENTRA± µmERICA AND mI±ITARY DIC-
TATORSHIPS IN ²OUTH µmERICA IN THE 1970S AND 1980S. ¸ROmINENT ±IBERATION
THEO±OgIANS, SUCH AS THE DIOCESAN PRIESTS LEONARDO ÊOff IN ÊRAzI± AND GUSTAVO
GUTIéRREz IN ¸ERU, WROTE INflUENTIA± BOOkS THAT RETURNED ·ATHO±IC THEO±OgY
TO ITS ORIgINS AND THE ROOTS OF ·HRISTIANITY. ÈITH THE WRITINgS OF THE EAR±Y
DESERT FATHERS AND THE GOSPE±S AND TEACHINgS OF JESUS OF ½AzARETH, THEY
BROUgHT RENEWED ATTENTION TO A FOCUS ON THE POOR, THE ±OW±Y, THE SICk, THE
STIgmATIzED, AND THE mARgINA±IzED. LIBERATION THEO±OgY WAS A UNIqUE±Y LATIN
38 • ch a p t er t wo
fi¿ure 2.1. °E ·OUNCI± ºATHERS SEATED DURINg THE ²ECOND ÍATICAN ·OUNCI±. ¸HOTO BY
LOTHAR ÈO±±EH. °IS fi±E IS ±ICENSED UNDER THE ·REATIVE ·OmmONS µTTRIBUTION 2.0 GENERIC
±ICENSE. HTTPS://COmmONS.WIkImEDIA.ORg/WIkI/ºI±E:²ECOND_ÍATICAN_·OUNCI±_BY_LOTHAR
_ÈO±±EH_003.
40 • ch a p t er t wo
OF ECOFEmINISm AND ±IBERATION THEO±OgY. ºOR NEAR±Y TWO DECADES, GEBARA WAS
A PROFESSOR AT ¹¾³¼, THE ±IBERATION THEO±OgY SEmINARY IN ¼ECIFE. GEBARA’S
THEO±OgY EmERgED FROm HER WORk WITH POOR WOmEN IN THE S±UmS AND FAVE±AS
OF ¼ECIFE IN THE ±ATE 1960S DURINg THE mI±ITARY DICTATORSHIP YEARS. ¹N HER fi RST
BOOk, Longing for Running Water: Ecofeminism and Liberation, GEBARA
ARTICU±ATED WHAT SHE CA±±ED A “THEO±OgICA± ANTHROPO±OgY” EmBEDDED IN THE
STRUgg±ES OF EVERYDAY ±IFE. °E gARBAgE IN THE STREET, THE NONExISTENT OR INADE-
qUATE HEA±TH CARE, AND, ABOVE A±±, THE REPRODUCTIVE CRISES FACED BY POOR WOmEN
±ED GEBARA TO ARgUE FOR “RE±IgIOUS BIODIVERSITY,” ONE THAT WAS INC±USIVE OF
WOmEN’S SUffERINg AND NEEDS. ²HE SAW REPRODUCTIVE RIgHTS FOR WOmEN AS ±INkED
TO ENVIRONmENTA± AND ECONOmIC SUSTAINABI±ITY AND TO THE CREATION OF A DIgNI-
fiED ±IFE.
°E PAPACIES OF JOHN ¸AU± ¹¹ AND ÊENEDICT X͹ FOUgHT TOOTH AND NAI±
AgAINST THIS LATIN µmERICAN THEO±OgICA± “HERESY.” °E TWO PREVIOUS POPES
SAW THE NEW LATIN µmERICAN RADICA± THEO±OgY AS A THREAT TO PAPA± AUTHORITY.
°EY ARgUED THAT ±IBERATION THEO±OgY WAS NO THEO±OgY AT A±± BUT A PO±ITICA±
PROjECT THAT FOCUSED ON THE “HERE AND NOW” RATHER THAN A SPIRITUA± PROjECT
CONCERNED WITH THE SOU± AND ITS AſtER±IFE. ÉOWEVER, ±IBERATION THEO±OgY’S
gREATEST THREAT TO PAPA± AUTHORITY WAS ITS EmPOWERmENT OF WOmEN AS THEO±O-
gIANS AND AT THE gRASSROOTS ±EVE± AS COmmUNITY ±EADERS, CATECHISTS, AND PASTO-
RA± COUNSE±ORS AND REPRESENTATIVES OF THE NEW CHURCH.
¸OPE JOHN ¸AU± ¹¹ AND ·ARDINA± ¼ATzINgER, ±ATER AS ¸OPE ÊENEDICT, ACTIVE±Y
DISmANT±ED LATIN µmERICAN ±IBERATION THEO±OgY. ¹N 1984, jUST AS THE ÊRAzI±IAN
mI±ITARY DICTATORSHIP WAS ENDINg, ¼ATzINgER ISSUED HIS “¹NSTRUCTION ON
·ERTAIN µSPECTS OF THE ‘°EO±OgY OF LIBERATION,’ ” WHICH ±ISTED THE mANY
DOCTRINA± ERRORS AND ExCESSES OF ÍATICAN ¹¹, INC±UDINg ITS DEDICATION TO BUI±D-
INg A CHURCH OF THE POOR.
°US, IN 1985, THE ÍATICAN SI±ENCED THE ÊRAzI±IAN ±IBERATION THEO±OgIAN
LEONARDO ÊOff AND FORCED ´Om Éé±DER ·æmARA INTO RETIREmENT. ÈHEN IN
»CTOBER 1989 ¼ATzINgER C±OSED ¹¾³¼, ´Om Éé±DER’S ±IBERATION THEO±OgY
SEmINARY, SEVERA± HUNDRED SEmINARIANS, NUNS, ±AYPEOP±E, AND PEASANTS
TRAVE±ED BY FOOT FROm THE ImPOVERISHED, DROUgHT-RIDDEN INTERIOR OF
¸ERNAmBUCO TO PROTEST, AND ONE OF US (JENNIFER ²CHEPER ÉUgHES) jOINED THE
DEmONSTRATION. °E POWERFU± SOCIA± mOVEmENT THAT WAS CA±±ED ±IBERATION
THEO±OgY WAS EVENTUA±±Y DESTROYED, AS THEO±OgIANS WERE DISCIP±INED, IF NOT
SI±ENCED, AND YOUNg C±ERgY WERE ENCOURAgED TO TAkE UP A POPU±IST AND ARTIfi-
CIA± CHARISmATIC ·ATHO±ICISm TO CONTEST THE gROWTH OF ¸ENTECOSTA± CHURCHES
IN LATIN µmERICA. »NE OF THE ±AST STRAWS WAS THE ATTACk ON THE FEmINIST
·ARDINA± ÊERgOg±IO APPROACHED THE 2013 PAPA± CONC±AVE WITH ANxIETY. ÉE HAD
COmE C±OSE TO BEINg CHOSEN POPE IN THE 2005 PAPA± CONC±AVE THAT E±ECTED
·ARDINA± JOSEPH ¼ATzINgER. ÊERgOg±IO WITHDREW FROm THE COmPETITION AND
THREW HIS SUPPORT TO ¼ATzINgER WHEN HE ±EARNED THAT OPPONENTS IN µRgENTINA
WERE UNDERmININg HIS CANDIDACY BY CIRCU±ATINg DAmNINg DOCUmENTS ABOUT
HIS HISTORY AS PROVINCIA± SUPERIOR OF THE JESUITS DURINg µRgENTINA’S INFAmOUS
DIRTY WAR (1976–83). ¹T WAS A TImE OF TERROR WHEN mI±ITANTS AND RADICA±S,
42 • ch a p t er t wo
STUDENTS AND ±ABOR ±EADERS, jOURNA±ISTS AND PSYCHIATRISTS, PRIESTS AND NUNS WHO
WORkED AND ±IVED WITH THE POOR IN BASE COmmUNITIES WERE kIDNAPPED, INTER-
ROgATED UNDER TORTURE, AND DISAPPEARED. °OSE WHO PROVED TO BE USE±ESS
INFORmANTS WERE DRUggED AND THROWN SEmICONSCIOUS INTO THE µT±ANTIC »CEAN
AND THE ¼IO ¸±ATA, AS WERE OTHERS REgARD±ESS OF WHETHER THEY PROVIDED INFOR-
mATION. °E “mETHOD” WAS SANCTIONED BY HIgH-RANkINg µRgENTINE ·ATHO±IC
PRE±ATES AS A DIgNIfiED DEATH, A DEATH AT SEA. ¹T WAS A SACRIfiCE OF SOmE qUESTION-
AB±E ±IVES TO PRESERVE THE Proceso, THE ½ATIONA± ¸ROCESS OF ¼EORgANIzATION TO
mAkE µRgENTINA CONFORm TO A RIgHT-WINg FASCIST VERSION OF ·ATHO±ICISm.
µmONg THE TENS OF THOUSANDS OF VICTImS WERE 150 ·ATHO±IC PRIESTS WHO
REFUSED TO BEND, AS WE±± AS HUNDREDS OF NUNS, ±AY CATECHISTS, AND RE±IgIOUS
PERSONS WHO EmBRACED ±IBERATION THEO±OgY.
JORgE ÊERgOg±IO’S COmP±Ex PO±ITICA± HISTORY BEgINS IN 1973 WHEN, AS A
RECENT±Y ORDAINED JESUIT PRIEST, HE WAS APPOINTED PROVINCIA± SUPERIOR OF THE
µRgENTINE JESUITS AT THE ABSURD±Y YOUNg AgE OF THIRTY-SIx. JESUITS ARE THE mUS-
CU±AR SCHO±ARS OF THE ¼OmAN ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH. »RDINATION REqUIRES mORE
THAN A DECADE OF INTE±±ECTUA± AND SPIRITUA± TRAININg, OſtEN CU±mINATINg IN TWO
DOCTORATES, ONE IN THEO±OgY AND ONE IN ANOTHER CHOSEN fiE±D. ¹T IS UNHEARD OF
THAT A mAN SO YOUNg AND INExPERIENCED COU±D BE APPOINTED PROVINCIA± SUPE-
RIOR OF THE JESUITS ANYWHERE IN THE WOR±D.
°E ÍATICAN PUT PRESSURE ON THE SUPERIOR gENERA± OF THE JESUITS IN ¼OmE TO
STOP µRgENTINE JESUITS FROm FO±±OWINg THE PATH OF THE JESUITS IN ·ENTRA±
µmERICA, ÊRAzI±, ·HI±E, AND ¸ERU IN RESISTINg mI±ITARY REgImES. °US, THE ±Eſt-
±EANINg HEAD OF THE JESUITS WAS REmOVED AND ºATHER ÊERgOg±IO TOOk HIS P±ACE
WITHOUT THE SUPPORT OF mOST OF HIS RE±IgIOUS ORDER IN µRgENTINA. GIVEN THE
C±OSE RE±ATIONSHIP BETWEEN CHURCH AND STATE IN µRgENTINA, THERE A±SO mUST
HAVE BEEN SOmE NEgOTIATION OVER ÊERgOg±IO’S APPOINTmENT WITH THE DEC±ININg
¸ERONIST gOVERNmENT AND THE µRgENTINE mI±ITARY, WAITINg IN THE WINgS.
ºATHER ÊERgOg±IO WAS A PIOUS PRIEST OF CONSERVATIVE PO±ITICA± VIEWS. ÉE WAS
NOT A POPU±AR SUPERIOR AmONg THE JESUITS, AND HE WAS FORCED OUT OF OffiCE IN 1979,
WHEN HE WAS ASSIgNED TO SERVE AS RECTOR OF THE ·O±EgIO MáxImO IN ÊUENOS µIRES,
WHERE HE TAUgHT THEO±OgY. ¹N 1986 HE WAS ExI±ED TO GERmANY UNDER THE PRETExT
OF COmP±ETINg A SECOND DOCTORA± THESIS. »N HIS RETURN TO µRgENTINA IN JUNE 1990,
HIS PERIOD OF ImPOSED REflECTION AND PENANCE WAS NOT OVER. °E FORmER JESUIT
SUPERIOR WAS AgAIN SENT INTO ExI±E, THIS TImE TO THE CITY OF ·óRDOBA, µRgENTINA,
WHERE HE SPENT TWO SO±ITARY YEARS IN A SmA±± gUEST HOUSE AT THE JESUIT RECTORY.
°IS PERIOD, WE SUggEST, WAS THE BEgINNINg OF THE CONVERSION OF ÊERgOg±IO.
´URINg HIS ENFORCED SO±ITUDE, ºATHER ÊERgOg±IO RARE±Y SPOkE TO ANYONE. ÉE
LESS NOTED IS THE FAI±ED RESPONSE OF THE FORmER JESUIT SUPERIOR ON ±EARNINg OF
THE DISAPPEARANCES OF THREE WOmEN. ¾WO OF THEm WERE ºRENCH NUNS, ORIgI-
NA±±Y CATECHISTS (CATECHISm TEACHERS) TO THE mENTA±±Y “DEfiCIENT,” WHICH
INC±UDED THEIR DEVOTED CARE FOR JORgE ÍIDE±A’S YOUNg SON WHO HAD SEVERE AND
IRREVERSIB±E DEVE±OPmENTA± PROB±EmS. µ THIRD desaparecida WAS ºATHER
ÊERgOg±IO’S FORmER BOSS AND mENTOR, ³STHER ÊA±±ESTRINO DE ·AREAgA, A CHEmIST
IN THE FACTORY WHERE THE FUTURE POPE WORkED AS A STUDENT IN 1953–54, jUST
BEFORE HE DECIDED TO ENTER THE PRIESTHOOD. »VER TImE, THE SPIRITUA± FORmATION
OF THE NUNS AND ³STHER ÊA±±ESTRINO DE ·AREAgA CHANgED AS IT WAS SHAPED BY
±IBERATION THEO±OgY. °EY SPOkE OF “AN OPTION FOR THE POOR,” WHI±E CRITICIzINg
GENERA± ÍIDE±A’S OPTION FOR “POWER, B±OOD, AND fiRE.” ÍIDE±A’S SECRETARY-gENERA±
BROkE THE NEWS OF THEIR kIDNAPPINg ON 13 ´ECEmBER 1977, A WEEk BEFORE A±±
THREE WERE DRUggED AND THROWN INTO THE µT±ANTIC »CEAN. °E BODIES OF TWO
OF THE WOmEN WASHED UP ON SHORE, TO BE BURIED IN PAUPER gRAVES. °EY WERE
±ATER ExHUmED AND IDENTIfiED BY mEmBERS OF THE µRgENTINE FORENSIC TEAm.
44 • ch a p t er t wo
²EVERA± WEEkS BEFORE SHE AND HER DAUgHTER WERE kIDNAPPED, ³STHER
ÊA±±ESTRINO CONTACTED ºATHER ÊERgOg±IO ASkINg FOR HE±P WHEN SHE ±EARNED THAT
HER DAUgHTER, A UNIVERSITY STUDENT, HAD BEEN TARgETED BY THE mI±ITARY.
ÊERgOg±IO AgREED TO COmE TO THE FAmI±Y’S HOmE AND REmOVE AND HIDE ANY
BOOkS THAT mIgHT BE SEEN AS qUESTIONAB±E OR SUBVERSIVE. »NE OF THE BOOkS
ÊERgOg±IO TOOk AWAY WITH HIm WAS Das Kapital. ÉE WARNED ³STHER TO BE
PRUDENT, TO DRIVE CAREFU±±Y, TO WEAR DARk SUNg±ASSES, AND TO BE AS INCONSPICU-
OUS AS POSSIB±E. °IS ASSISTANCE PROVED TO BE NOT SO HE±PFU±. ÊOTH THE DAUgHTER
AND, ±ATER, HER mOTHER WERE kIDNAPPED. ÈHI±E HER DAUgHTER WAS RE±EASED AND
SURVIVED, ³STHER WAS DROPPED INTO THE OCEAN.
µſtER HIS PERIOD OF SEC±USION IN ·óRDOBA ENDED, ÊERgOg±IO WAS gIVEN
ANOTHER CHANCE AND APPOINTED AUxI±IARY ARCHBISHOP OF ÊUENOS µIRES IN 1992.
ÉE EmERgED AS A STRONg AND POPU±AR SPIRITUA± ±EADER AND AN EffECTIVE PO±ITI-
CIAN. ÉE mOVED qUICk±Y UP THE ±ADDER FROm ARCHBISHOP TO CARDINA± IN 1998. µ
NEW ÊERgOg±IO BEgAN TO EmERgE DURINg THIS TImE, A mORE TO±ERANT AND HUmB±E
PRE±ATE, NOT WITHOUT CONTRADICTIONS BUT C±EAR±Y ON A DIffERENT PATH. ÉE VISITED
POOR villas AND BARRIOS, HE TENDED TO THE NEEDS OF YOUNg C±ERICS, AND HE
BECAmE INVO±VED IN SOCIA± ACTION ON BEHA±F OF mARgINA± PEOP±E, INC±UDINg
mIgRANTS, STREET CHI±DREN, AND ASY±Um SEEkERS. ÉE CO±±ABORATED IN THE FOUND-
INg OF A NONgOVERNmENTA± ORgANIzATION (½G») DEDICATED TO THE RESCUE OF
DISP±ACED REFUgEES AND TRAffiCkED PERSONS. ¹N 2000, µRCHBISHOP ÊERgOg±IO
mADE THE mOST DIffiCU±T VOYAgE OF HIS ±IFE, WHEN HE PAID A VISIT TO ºATHER JA±ICS
IN GERmANY. ÊY A±± ACCOUNTS, IT WAS AN EmOTIONA± ENCOUNTER. ÊOTH mEN WEPT,
EmBRACED AND (PRESUmAB±Y) FORgAVE EACH OTHER, AND CO-CE±EBRATED THE MASS. Û
ÉOWEVER, ¸OPE ºRANCIS HAS NOT YET mADE AmENDS TO THE mEmORY OF THE
µRgENTINE WOmEN WHO DIED FOR THEIR FAITH UNDER HIS WATCH.
ÊY THE TImE ÊERgOg±IO WAS SUmmONED TO ¼OmE FOR THE PAPA± CONC±AVE THE
PO±ITICA± C±ImATE HAD CHANgED. °E DEmAND FOR A NEW DISPENSATION, A PETITE
REFORmATION OF THE ¼OmAN ·HURCH AND ITS ·URIA, WAS ON THE TOP OF THE
AgENDA. °ERE WAS TA±k OF SE±ECTINg A POPE FROm THE ²OUTH: LATIN µmERICA,
µFRICA, OR µSIA. ÉOWEVER, ·ARDINA± ÊERgOg±IO DID NOT ENTER THE CONC±AVE
AS ONE OF THE PAPA± fiNA±ISTS. ÊUT AſtER A mERE TWENTY-FOUR HOURS OF DE±IBERA-
TION THE CONC±AVE SETT±ED ON HIm. ÈHEN ASkED IF HE ACCEPTED THE VOTE,
ÊERgOg±IO DID NOT gIVE THE ExPECTED RITUA±IzED REP±Y, “µCCEPTO.” ¹NSTEAD
46 • ch a p t er t wo
WRONg,” IS ¸OPE ºRANCIS INVITINg DIVORCED ·ATHO±ICS TO PARTICIPATE IN A±± THE
SACRAmENTS, INC±UDINg REmARRIAgE? ÈHEN HE AffiRmS THE SCIENCE OF EVO±UTION
AND THE ÊIg ÊANg THEORY OF CREATION, WI±± HE RETHINk THE CHURCH’S BAN ON NEW
REPRODUCTIVE TECHNO±OgIES AND STEm CE±± RESEARCH? ÈHEN HE SAYS THAT POOR
WOmEN SHOU±D NOT HAVE TO “BREED ±IkE RABBITS,” IS HE qUESTIONINg Humanae
vitae, THE PAPA± ENCYC±ICA± THAT CONDEmNED CONTRACEPTION AND ABORTION, OR IS
HE DEmEANINg THE “SECOND SEx” AS BREEDERS?
¹S ºRANCIS A POPU±IST POPE WHO IS PROmISINg BREAD AND CIRCUSES TO THE
mASSES AT MASS? »R ARE HIS Off-THE-CUff zINgERS AN ATTEmPT TO RATT±E THE NERVES
OF THE O±D gUARD ·URIA AND ITS CONSERVATIVE AND PAmPERED CARDINA±S? ¹S HE
OffERINg AN OPEN WINDOW AND BREATH OF FRESH AIR IN THE STY±E OF ¸OPE JOHN
XX¹¹¹, OR IS HE mASkINg THE STA±E AIR TRAPPED INSIDE THE ÍATICAN? MANY
ÍATICAN WATCHERS SUggEST THAT ¸OPE ºRANCIS IS A gOOD PO±ITICIAN WHO IS TRYINg
TO P±EASE A±± SIDES. »N THE ONE HAND, HE C±EARS THE WAY FOR A POSSIB±E SAINTHOOD
FOR THE mARTYRED ±EſtIST µRCHBISHOP ¼OmERO OF ²A±VADOR. »N THE OTHER HAND,
HE NOmINATES FOR SAINTHOOD ºATHER JUNíPERO ²ERRA, THE DESPISED CO±ONIzER OF
NATIVE ·A±IFORNIANS (²CHEPER-ÉUgHES 2015).
²O, WHO IS ºRANCIS? ÈHAT CAN A LATIN µmERICAN µRgENTINE POPE DO FOR
LATIN µmERICA AND FOR THE WOR±D?
´ESPITE THE UNIFYINg SYmBO± OF THE ÍATICAN AND ITS PONTIff, LATIN µmERICAN
·ATHO±ICS ARE AN UNRU±Y ±OT. °ERE ARE mANY VERSIONS OF ·ATHO±ICISm, WITH
DIVERSE HISTORIES AND RE±IgIOUS TRADITIONS. MExICAN ·ATHO±IC PIETY, FORgED BY
THE RE±IgIOUS AND RITUA± ±ABORS OF ITS mESTIzO POPU±ATION, HAS ±ITT±E IN COmmON
WITH ·ARIBBEAN ·ATHO±IC SPIRITUA±ITY, SHAPED AS IT WAS BY µFRICAN POPU±A-
TIONS ±ABORINg WITHIN THE CONSTRAINTS OF A S±AVE SOCIETY. ·ATHO±ICISm IN
·ENTRA± µmERICA, THE µNDES, AND THE µmAzON HAS DISTINCT ROOTS THAT mIx
¼OmAN ·ATHO±ICISm WITH INDIgENOUS AND µFRICAN RE±IgIONS. µ±THOUgH ÊRAzI±,
WITH C±OSE TO 127 mI±±ION ·ATHO±ICS, HAS mORE ·ATHO±ICS THAN ANY OTHER COUN-
TRY, mANY OF THEm ARE INDEPENDENT AND “SECU±AR” ·ATHO±ICS. ÊRAzI±IANS TERm
THIS gROUP “·ATó±ICO ±ITE,” OR CU±TURA± ·ATHO±ICS (SImI±AR TO JEWS IN LATIN
µmERICA). °EY ARE ·ATHO±ICS WHO DEVOTE THEmSE±VES TO THE RITUA±S AND TRADI-
TIONS, THE SAINTS AND THE PAgEANTRY, BUT SHRUg THEIR SHOU±DERS AT THE DOgmA.
¸OOR ·ATHO±IC WOmEN IN THE FAVE±AS OF ÊRAzI± PAY SCANT ATTENTION TO THE
ÍATICAN PROHIBITIONS ON CONTRACEPTION AND ABORTION: WHAT DO CE±IBATE mEN,
POOR THINgS, kNOW ABOUT BIRTHINg AND RAISINg BABIES?, THEY OſtEN WONDER.
°E POPE CAN PREACH A UNIVERSA± DOCTRINE, BUT IT WI±± BE DIffERENT±Y RECEIVED.
ÊROAD gENERA±IzATIONS ABOUT THE ImPACT OF AN µRgENTINE POPE ON LATIN
µmERICA AND THE WOR±D mUST BE PARSED THROUgH ±OCA± AND REgIONA± HISTORIES
AND CONTExTS.
·ATHO±ICS RECEIVED THE NEW POPE DIffERENT±Y IN ÊRAzI± THAN IN µRgENTINA.
°REE AND A HA±F mI±±ION ÊRAzI±IANS gATHERED ON ·OPACABANA ÊEACH TO WATCH
ºRANCIS DRIVE BY IN HIS POPE mOBI±E. °E CROWDS WERE EUPHORIC. °E POPE WAS
SEEN AS agradável, PERSONAB±E, INTImATE, UNPREDICTAB±E, AND, mOST OF A±±, ani-
mado, FU±± OF VITA±ITY. “´ID YOU SEE HOW HE RESPONDED TO THE CROWDS, HOW HE
ACCEPTED A gOURD OF chá mate [YERBA mATE] AND S±URPED IT UP? ÉE IS A mAN IN
±OVE WITH ±IFE.” ÊRAzI±IANS FROm THE SHANTYTOWNS THOUgHT THAT THEY COU±D
TEACH THE NEW POPE ABOUT THEIR SOCIA± NEEDS AND REA±ITIES. ÉE WAS SEEN AS
flExIB±E AND TEACHAB±E.
°EIR PRESIDENT AgREED WITH THEm. µ FEW WEEkS EAR±IER, ¸RESIDENT ´I±mA
¼OUSSEff mET WITH ¸OPE ºRANCIS IN THE ÍATICAN, AND SHE EmERgED FROm THE
THIRTY-mINUTE CONVERSATION TO CONgRATU±ATE µRgENTINES ON BEINg VERY ±UCkY
TO HAVE A POPE OF THEIR OWN WHI±E jESTINg THAT NONETHE±ESS GOD, AS EVERYONE
kNOWS, IS A ÊRAzI±IAN. µ±THOUgH ´I±mA SUffERED TORTURE AT THE HANDS OF
ÊRAzI±’S mI±ITARY DICTATORSHIP, WHICH OVER±APPED WITH µRgENTINA’S BRUTA± DIRTY
WAR, SHE PRAISED ¸OPE ºRANCIS AS A CHARISmATIC ±EADER AND A POPE WHO WOU±D
SPEAk ON BEHA±F OF THE POOREST AND THE WEAkEST C±ASSES AND WHO HAS THE CAPAC-
ITY TO BE mOVED. ÉIS E±ECTION, SHE SAID, WAS REASON FOR ÊRAzI±IANS, µRgENTINES,
AND A±± LATIN µmERICANS TO BE PROUD. ÉE WAS gOOD NEWS FOR LATIN µmERICA,
AND gOOD NEWS FOR THE WOR±D AT ±ARgE.
¹N µRgENTINA, HOWEVER, THE NEW POPE’S RECEPTION WAS mORE COmP±Ex
AND mEASURED. ºAmI±IARITY WAS AN OBSTAC±E TO UNmODERATED ADU±ATION.
ÈHI±E SOmE WERE WI±±INg TO OVER±OOk ÊERgOg±IO’S SHORTCOmINgS, AND THERE
48 • ch a p t er t wo
WERE CERTAIN±Y CE±EBRATIONS IN THE STREET WITH PEOP±E SHOUTINg, “¡¶N ¸APA
µRgENTINO!,” SOmE OF HIS FORmER JESUIT CO±±EAgUES REFUSED TO ACkNOW±EDgE THE
NEW POPE AS ONE OF THEIR OWN. °EY kNEW ÊERgOg±IO C±OSE UP AND OVER TImE
AND HAD mIxED REACTIONS. °E µRgENTINE CHURCH REmAINS BITTER±Y DIVIDED
BETWEEN AN O±D gUARD EmBODIED IN POPU±AR YOUTH mOVEmENTS SUCH AS
·ATHO±IC µCTION, µCCIóN ·ATó±ICA, AND THE ·ATHO±IC ²COUTS, »PUS ´EI, AND
THE LEgIONNAIRES OF MARY AND THOSE PROgRESSIVE ·ATHO±ICS WHO REmAIN FAITH-
FU± TO THE ±IBERATIONIST CHURCH.
°E µRgENTINE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH HAS A±WAYS P±AYED A STRONg HAND IN gOVERN-
mENT AffAIRS, FROm THE CHURCH’S figHTS WITH JUAN ¸ERóN OVER THE ±EgA±IzATION OF
DIVORCE AND PROSTITUTION, FOR WHICH HE WAS ExCOmmUNICATED (AND ±ATER RECON-
CI±ED), TO THE CHURCH’S SI±ENCE AND TACIT SUPPORT OF THE mI±ITARY jUNTA OF ¸RESIDENT
ÍIDE±A. °EN-µRCHBISHOP ÊERgOg±IO DESCRIBED DISPUTES HE HAD WITH ¸RESIDENTS
½éSTOR AND ºERNáNDEz ÌIRCHNER AND OVER gAY mARRIAgE IN A ±ETTER TO ·ARmE±ITE
NUNS AS “A C±EAR REjECTION OF THE ±AW OF GOD, ENgRAVED IN OUR HEARTS.”
°ERE ARE TWO VERSIONS OF THE NEW POPE. °E fiRST IS FOUND IN A CAREFU±±Y
ORCHESTRATED SERIES OF BIOgRAPHIES, CONVERSATIONS, AND DIA±OgUES WITH JORgE
MARIO COVERINg THE PERIOD BEFORE AND AſtER HE BECAmE ¸OPE ºRANCIS. °ESE ARE
ROmANTIC HAgIOgRAPHIES THAT DESCRIBE A mAN ON HIS WAY TO SAINTHOOD. °EY
DENY THE CRITIqUE OF ÊERgOg±IO’S BEHAVIOR DURINg THE DIRTY WAR AND DESCRIBE
HIm AS A CONSISTENT, mODEST DEFENDER OF THE POOR. ¹N HIS BOOk, Bergoglio’s List
(2014), ½E±±O ²CAVO DARED TO COmPARE JORgE ÊERgOg±IO TO »SkAR ²CHIND±ER,
WHO SAVED THE ±IVES OF mORE THAN A THOUSAND mOST±Y ¸O±ISH JEWISH REFUgEES
DURINg THE ÉO±OCAUST BY EmP±OYINg THEm IN HIS FACTORIES. °E SECOND AND
OPPOSINg VERSION, A SERIES OF ESSAYS AND BOOkS BY jOURNA±ISTS AND THE POPE’S
mOST RE±ENT±ESS CRITIC, HIS BêTE NOIR, ÉORATIO ÍERBITSkY,Ý IS THAT ÊERgOg±IO WAS
A ±ACkEY OF THE gENERA±S DURINg THE DIRTY WAR (ÍERBITSkY 2006). °IS VIEW IS
HISTORICA±±Y INCORRECT, AND EVEN ÍERBITSkY HAS RETREATED SOmEWHAT.
ÈE SUggEST A THIRD VIEW, ONE OF ¸OPE ºRANCIS AS A “mAN OF TORTURED COm-
P±ExITY” (ÍA±±E±Y 2013) WHO SAVED SOmE INDIVIDUA±S, BUT HE WAS NO ²CHIND±ER.
ÉIS INTERVENTIONS WERE SO DISCREET, SO SPECIfiC, SO ±ATE IN THE gAmE, SO PERSON-
A±ISTIC (SAVINg THIS ONE BUT NOT THAT ONE), THAT IT ±Eſt THE POPE HImSE±F DEEP±Y
gUI±T-RIDDEN (²CHEPER-ÉUgHES 2013).
³VEN THIRTY YEARS AſtER THE DIRTY WAR, IN 2010, UNDER THE NEW DEmOCRATIC
DISPENSATION, WHEN ÊERgOg±IO, NOW ARCHBISHOP OF ÊUENOS µIRES, WAS CA±±ED AS
A WITNESS IN THE CRImINA± TRIA± OF EIgHTEEN OffiCERS WHO HAD WORkED AT ³²Mµ,
THE ½AVA± MECHANICS ²CHOO±, INC±UDINg µDmIRA± MASSE±A, A±THOUgH NOT A
DEFENDANT IN THE CASE, HE WAS ExTREmE±Y EVASIVE. ¹N HIS FORmA± DEPOSITION HE
50 • ch a p t er t wo
FAI±S TO FORgE A NEW SOCIA± CONTRACT OR A NEW COVENANT, AS ÉANNAH µRENDT
DEfiNED IT IN THE Human Condition. °IS NEW COVENANT IS WITH WOmEN, REmEm-
BERINg AND HONORINg THE FEmA±E VICTImS OF THE DIRTY WAR WHO WERE kI±±ED FOR
BEINg “S±UTS” AND THEIR INFANTS kIDNAPPED AT BIRTH AND gIVEN TO FRIENDS OF THE
jUNTA TO RAISE AND TO PURIFY THE NATION WHI±E THE µRgENTINE CHURCH STOOD BY,
DOINg NOTHINg TO SAVE THEm. °E FAI±URE OF THE FUTURE POPE TO SAVE HIS mENTOR
AND HIS gOOD FRIEND, ³STHER ÊA±±ESTRINO DE ·AREAgA, IS A CASE IN POINT.
¹F ÊERgOg±IO WAS NOT A ²CHIND±ER, NEITHER WAS HE A ¸OPE ¸IUS X¹¹, WHO
REFUSED ASSISTANCE TO JEWS DURINg THE ÉO±OCAUST. ÉIS WAS A WEAk RESPONSE TO
A mAjOR CATASTROPHE. ÉE WORkED BEHIND THE SCENES FOR A SmA±± NUmBER OF
µRgENTINE PEOP±E AT RISk OF BEINg DISAPPEARED. ÉE ARRANgED PASSPORTS AND
VISAS AND HID SOmE PO±ITICA± SUSPECTS IN HIS ·O±EgIO, DESCRIBINg THEm AS THEO±-
OgY STUDENTS OR VISITORS. ÉE WARNED THOSE WHO HAD BEEN IDENTIfiED TO BE CARE-
FU±, TO BE VIgI±ANT, TO NOT g±ANCE OUT OF THEIR HOmE OR CAR WINDOWS, TO WA±k
WITH THEIR HEADS DOWN, AND SO ON. ÊUT HE DID NOT CONDEmN THE mI±ITARY
DICTATORSHIP. ÉE DID NOT RAISE HIS VOICE AT MASS. ÉE DID NOT THREATEN TO
ExCOmmUNICATE THE gENERA±S. ÉE DID NOT SEEm TO RECOgNIzE THE ENORmITY OF
THE CRImE, EVEN WHEN HIS ±OYA± FEmA±E FRIEND JUDgE µ±ICIA »±IVERIA URgED HIm
TO SPEAk OUT. °E FUTURE POPE TO±D HER THAT THIS WAS NOT EASY TO DO.
µS HEAD OF THE µRgENTINE ·ONFERENCE OF ÊISHOPS BETWEEN 2005 AND 2011,
ÊERgOg±IO RESISTED PRESSURES TO ISSUE A FORmA± APO±OgY FOR THE CHURCH’S ACTIONS
DURINg THE DIRTY WAR. ºINA±±Y, IN »CTOBER 2012, µRgENTINA’S BISHOPS, UNDER
ÊERgOg±IO’S ±EADERSHIP, ISSUED A STRANgE±Y WORDED APO±OgY FOR FAI±INg TO
PROTECT THEIR flOCk ADEqUATE±Y DURINg THE DICTATORSHIP. ÊUT THE “APO±OgY” B±AmED
both THE RIgHT-WINg gENERA±S AND THE ±Eſt-WINg gUERRI±±AS FOR THE YEARS OF B±OOD-
SHED, A gROSS±Y INACCURATE DEPICTION OF WHAT HAPPENED. ¸OPE ºRANCIS HAS YET TO
ACkNOW±EDgE, ±ET A±ONE APO±OgIzE TO, THE FAmI±IES OF THE DISAPPEARED. ¶NTI± HIS
DEATH (IN µRgENTINA) ºATHER ÓORIO HE±D ÊERgOg±IO RESPONSIB±E FOR HIS
kIDNAPPINg.
ÈE COU±D USE THE SAmE WORDS THAT ºRANCIS USED IN REFERRINg TO THE PRIVATE
±IVES OF gAY ·ATHO±ICS, ÈHO ARE WE TO jUDgE? ½OT ONE OF US kNOWS HOW WE
mIgHT HAVE BEHAVED UNDER THE TYRANNY OF THE µRgENTINE jUNTA, HOW WE mIgHT
RESIST OR HIDE FROm RESPONSIBI±ITY DURINg WHAT THE ANTHROPO±OgIST MICHAE±
¾AUSSIg mIgHT TERm A CU±TURE OF TERROR, AND SPACE OF DEATH, ONE THAT DESTROYED
CIVI± SOCIETY, SO±IDARITY, AND DECENCY, WHEN ONE’S OWN ExISTENCE, AS WE±± AS THAT
OF THOSE FOR WHOm ONE IS RESPONSIB±E, IS AT STAkE. ²OmETImES COmP±ICITY IS VERY
DIRECT, BUT mORE OſtEN IT IS INDIRECT, AS, FOR ExAmP±E, IN ATTEmPTS TO NEgOTIATE
WITH THE TERRORIST, WITH THE DICTATOR, AS ºATHER ÊERgOg±IO DID ON BEHA±F OF THE
52 • ch a p t er t wo
ImPORTANT gESTURES AUgUR WE±± FOR THE g±OBA± ·ATHO±IC COmmUNITY AND FOR THE
FAmI±Y OF mAN. ÊUT THERE IS A DISTURBINg AND g±ARINg ABSENCE AT THE CENTER OF
HIS NEW PAPACY: THE FAmI±Y OF WOmEN. ÉE HAS NOT REACHED OUT TO ·ATHO±IC
WOmEN THEO±OgIANS.
µT PRESENT ¸OPE ºRANCIS IS AT A CRITICA± jUNCTURE. ÉE DEC±ARED RADICA± FEmI-
NISm ONE OF THE mOST SERIOUS DANgERS FACINg THE mODERN ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH.
ÉERE, ºRANCIS IS AT RISk OF REPEATINg THE SAmE DANgEROUS ERROR, HIS FEAR OF ±IB-
ERATION THEO±OgY PRIESTS. ÉE RISkS TURNINg FEmINIST THEO±OgIES OF ±IBERATION
AND THEIR WORkS OF mERCY ON BEHA±F OF SUffERINg mOTHERS AND CHI±DREN INTO
THEO±OgICA± ERRORS AND mORTA± SINS. ÈITHOUT A NEW COVENANT WITH WOmEN, CAN
ºRANCIS RESPOND ADEqUATE±Y TO HIS FE±±OW JESUIT JON ²OBRINO’S CHA±±ENgES TO
HIm: TO fix THE UNBEARAB±E AND UNTENAB±E SITUATION OF WOmEN VIS-à-VIS THE
CHURCH, TO RECOgNIzE AND VA±UE THE INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES OF WOR±D, AND TO ±OVE
MOTHER ³ARTH?
°US FAR, ºRANCIS HAS NOT HEARD THE “SIgH OF THE OPPRESSED” FROm WOmEN
WHO ARE TURNED AWAY FROm PUB±IC C±INICS AND DOCTORS THROUgHOUT LATIN
µmERICA BY THE ¼OmAN ·ATHO±IC BANS ON CONTRACEPTION ENSHRINED IN THE ±AWS
OF mOST LATIN µmERICAN COUNTRIES. ²OmE ARE THE VICTImS OF DOmESTIC VIO-
±ENCE, OTHERS OF PO±ICE BRUTA±ITY AgAINST THEIR ADU±T SONS, AND STI±± OTHERS ARE
±IVINg ON THE EDgE OF A REPRODUCTIVE C±Iff. ÈE kNOW THEm A±± TOO WE±± IN THE
FAVE±AS OF ÊRAzI± AND IN THE mESTIzO VI±±AgES OF MExICO, AND WE kNOW THE
CONSEqUENCES OF COERCED BIRTHS IN THE HEAD COUNTS OF TINY gRAVES WITH WHITE
WOODEN CROSSES AND IN THE mUNICIPA± ±EDgERS THAT TA±±Y THE DEATHS OF mOTHERS
AND INFANTS.
¸OPE ºRANCIS SAYS THAT THE CHURCH NEEDS TO DIVERT ITS OBSESSIVE PREOCCUPA-
TION WITH SExUA±ITY, CONTRACEPTION, AND DIVORCE AS THESE ARE NEgATIVE AND
DIVISIVE ISSUES; BETTER TO PUT THEm ASIDE. ÊUT IN SO DOINg THE POPE IS IgNORINg
THE DOCTRINA± mI±±STONE THAT IS TIED AROUND THE NECkS OF WOmEN AND THEIR
DOCTORS. ¹N STIgmATIzINg THE WRITINgS OF LATIN µmERICAN WOmEN THEO±OgIANS,
BY REFERRINg TO THEm AS FO±±OWINg “RADICA± FEmINIST THEmES INCOmPATIB±E WITH
THE ·ATHO±IC FAITH,” HE IS INVA±IDATINg THE WORk OF SERIOUS WOmEN SCHO±ARS,
PORTRAYINg THEm AS IRRESPONSIB±E, NAIVE, OR WORSE, AS DANgEROUS THINkERS.
ÉERE, ¸OPE ºRANCIS COmES C±OSE TO HIS EAR±IER SUSPICION OF THE ±IBERATION THEO-
±OgIANS HE FAI±ED TO UNDERSTAND OR TO PROTECT DURINg THE DIRTY WAR.
°E NEW PREFECT OF THE ·ONgREgATION OF THE ´OCTRINE OF THE ºAITH, GERHARDT
MUE±±ER, HAS DEC±ARED THAT “THE WAR BETWEEN ±IBERATION THEO±OgY AND ¼OmE IS
OVER” AND THAT ±IBERATION THEO±OgY SHOU±D BE RECOgNIzED AS “AmONg ONE OF THE
mOST ImPORTANT CURRENTS IN 20TH CENTURY ·ATHO±IC THEO±OgY.”ß °E TImE IS
54 • ch a p t er t wo
AVATAR, ²AINT ºRANCIS OF µSSISI, CONSU±TED THROUgHOUT HIS PUB±IC ±IFE WITH
·±ARE, FOUNDER OF THE ºRANCISCAN »RDER OF ¸OOR ·±ARES. ¸OPE ºRANCIS NEEDS
THE WISDOm OF STRONg WOmEN TO HE±P HIm NAVIgATE THE OTHER HA±F OF THE
WOR±D—SHA±± WE CA±± IT THE INVISIB±E 50 PERCENT—THE PART OF THE WOR±D THAT
STI±± PERP±ExES HIm AND WITHOUT WHICH HE CANNOT SUCCEED IN HIS REFORmATION
OF THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH IN LATIN µmERICA AND IN THE WOR±D.
µ±THAUS-¼EID, MARCE±±A
2000 Indecent °eology: °eological Perversions in Sex, Gender and Politics. ½EW
ÓORk: ¼OUT±EDgE.
µmBROgETTI, ºRANCESCA, AND ²ERgIO ¼UBIN
2010 Pope Francis: His Life in His Own Words. ½EW ÓORk: ½EW µmERICAN
LIBRARY.
ÊOff, LEONARDO
1988 Saint Francis: A Model for Liberation. ½EW ÓORk: ·ROSSROAD.
·AmARA, JAVIER, AND ²EBASTIáN ¸FAffEN
2014 AQuel Francisco. ·óRDOBA, µRgENTINA: ¼Aíz DE ´OS.
·ASTRO, ºIDE±
2006 Fidel & Religion: Conversations with Frei Betto on Marxism & Liberation
°eology. ½ORTH ME±BOURNE, µUSTRA±IA: »CEAN ¸RESS.
ºICHE±STEIN, ºEDERICO
2014 Fascism, Populism, and Dictatorship in Twentieth Century Argentina: °e
Ideological Origins of the Dirty War. »xFORD: »xFORD ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
GEBARA, ¹VONE
2002 Out of the Depths: Women’s Experience of Evil and Salvation. MINNEAPO±IS,
M½: µUgSBURg ÊOOkS.
GRIffiN, MICHAE± L., AND JENNIE ÈEISS ʱOCk, EDS.
2013 In the Company of the Poor: Conversations with Dr. Paul Farmer and
Gustavo Gutiérrez. ½EW ÓORk: »RBIS ÊOOkS.
ÌU±ISH, ½ICHO±AS
2013 “ºU±± ²TATEmENT FROm JESUIT ÌIDNAPPED BY µRgENTINE JUNTA ON ½EW
¸OPE.” New Ãork Times. HTTP://THE±EDE.B±OgS.NYTImES.COm/2013/03/15/FU±±
STATEmENT-FROm-jESUIT-kIDNAPPED-BY-ARgENTINE-jUNTA-ON-NEW-POPE/.
²CAVO, ½E±±O
2014 Bergoglio’s List: How a Ãoung Francis Defied a Dictatorship and Saved Doz-
ens of Lives. ·HAR±OTTE, ½·: ²AINT ÊENEDICT ¸RESS.
²CHEPER-ÉUgHES, ½ANCY
[1979] Saints, Scholars, and Schizophrenics: Mental Illness in Rural Ireland.
1999 ÊERkE±EY: ¶NIVERSITY OF ·A±IFORNIA ¸RESS.
notes
1. ÊENEDICT X͹ WAS THE fiRST POPE TO RESIgN IN SIx HUNDRED YEARS. ¸OPE GREgORY
X¹¹ RENOUNCED HIS PAPACY IN 1415 AmID A gREAT SCHISm IN WHICH TWO OTHER “ANTIPOPES”
IN ³UROPE WERE VYINg FOR THE PAPA± CHAIR. ÊEFORE HIm, IN 1045, ANOTHER ÊENEDICT, ¸OPE
ÊENEDICT ¹X, RESIgNED AſtER SE±±INg HIS PAPACY TO HIS gODFATHER. °E RETIREmENT OF A
POPE RAISES THEO±OgICA± qUESTIONS ABOUT THE RO±E OF THE “ÉO±Y ²PIRIT” IN gUIDINg THE
SE±ECTION OF THE POPE. µ POPE’S RESIgNATION CASTS DOUBT ON PAPA±, ±ET A±ONE DIVINE,
infallibility.
2. ¹N 1991 ²CHEPER-ÉUgHES WAS INVITED TO ADDRESS A C±OSED mEETINg IN ²AINT
JOHNS, ½EWFOUND±AND, OF PUB±IC OffiCIA±S, PO±ICE, EDUCATORS, C±ERgY, PARENTS, AND
VICTImS OF SExUA± ABUSE BY ·ATHO±IC C±ERgY AND TEACHERS FO±±OWINg THE PUB±ICATION OF
THE Royal Commission of InQuiry into the Newfoundland Criminal Justice System to
56 • ch a p t er t wo
Complaints (OF C±ERICA± SExUA± ABUSE). °E A±±EgATIONS OF ABUSE WENT BACk TO THE 1950S,
AND THE SENSE OF BETRAYA± BY THE CHURCH WAS ENORmOUS. ²EE HTTP://BISHOPACCOUNTA-
BI±ITY.ORg/REPORTS/1991_ÉUgHES_MOUNT_·ASHE±/1991_ÉUgHES_ÍO±UmE_1_¼OYA±_
·OmmISSION_OF_¹NqUIRY_¼EPORT.PDF.
3. µS SOON AS ºRANCIS BECAmE POPE, HE WAS gIVEN A SECRET REPORT COmmISSIONED
BY HIS PREDECESSOR, ÊENEDICT X͹, ON THE ±EAkS AND SCANDA±S THAT HAD P±AgUED HIS
PAPACY.
4. °E POSSIB±E ExCEPTIONS ARE ½ICARAgUA DURINg THE ²ANDINISTA REVO±UTION AND
ÊRAzI± DURINg THE E±ECTION OF ¸RESIDENT LUIz ¹NáCIO LU±A DA ²I±VA IN 1989. ¹N BOTH
INSTANCES THE INflUENCE OF ±IBERATION THEO±OgY WAS A POWERFU± PO±ITICA± FACTOR.
5. µ FU±± STATEmENT BY ºATHER ºRANz JA±ICS ON HIS ARREST AND DETENTION WAS PUB-
±ISHED ON 15 MARCH 2013 ON THE New Ãork Times B±Og. ²EE ÌU±ISH 2013.
6. ÍERBITSkY’S BOOk, PUB±ISHED ON±Y IN ²PANISH, El silencio: De Paulo ÆI a
Bergoglio. Las relaciones secretas de la Iglesia con la ESMA, IS THE mOST COmP±ETE
ASSAU±T ON THE COmP±ICITY OF ºATHER ÊERgOg±IO.
7. JAVIER ·AmARA AND ²EBASTIáN ¸FAffEN (2014) qUOTE ÊERgOg±IO AS SAYINg THAT HE
IS NO SAINT AND DESCRIBES HImSE±F DURINg HIS PERIOD IN ·óRDOBA AS “jUST A POOR gUY”
AT ±OOSE ENDS.
8. “´OCTRINA± µSSESSmENT OF THE LEADERSHIP ·ONFERENCE OF ÈOmEN ¼E±IgIOUS,”
ISSUED 18 µPRI± 2012, BY THE ÍATICAN ·ONgREgATION FOR THE ´OCTRINE OF THE
ºAITH. WWW.VATICAN.VA/ROmAN_CURIA/CONgREgATIONS/CFAITH/DOCUmENTS/RC_CON_
CFAITH_DOC_20120418_ASSESSmENT-±CWR_EN.HTm±.
Fidel Castro
the first superdele¿ate
Greg Grandin
58
¹N FACT, mONTHS BEFORE ÌENNEDY’S µUgUST SPEECH, ¸RESIDENT ´WIgHT ´.
³ISENHOWER HAD A±READY AUTHORIzED THE FUNDINg OF A CAmPAIgN OF PARAmI±I-
TARY SABOTAgE IN ·UBA, AS WE±± AS THE TRAININg OF A SmA±± ARmY OF ·UBAN ExI±ES
TO OVERTHROW ·ASTRO. ¼EPUB±ICANS HAD NO PROB±Em WITH WHAT TODAY gOES BY
THE NAmE “REgImE CHANgE,” HAVINg A±READY ORCHESTRATED TWO SUCCESSFU±
COUPS—IN ¹RAN IN 1953 AND GUATEmA±A IN 1954—AgAINST gOVERNmENTS THEY
PERCEIVED AS HOSTI±E TO ¶.². INTERESTS. °EY jUST PREFERRED TO DO IT qUIET±Y.
µS ³ISENHOWER’S VICE PRESIDENT, ½IxON WAS OB±IgATED NOT TO REVEA± HIS
ADmINISTRATION’S SECRET FOREIgN PO±ICY P±ANS, SO HE COU±D ON±Y ±AmE±Y RESPOND
TO ÌENNEDY’S TAUNTS. ·UBA, HE INSISTED, WAS NOT “±OST.” ½IxON kNEW THAT THE
ÈHITE ÉOUSE HAD STARTED TRAININg ·UBAN ExI±ES, AND HE WAS PROBAB±Y AWARE
THAT THE ·¹µ WAS WORkINg ON A P±AN TO POISON ·ASTRO’S CIgARS, BUT THE VICE
PRESIDENT COU±D ON±Y BARE±Y A±±UDE TO SUCH kNOW±EDgE, WHICH jUST mADE HIm
SOUND COmP±ACENT. “°E ¶NITED ²TATES,” ½IxON SAID, “HAS THE POWER, AND MR.
·ASTRO kNOWS IT, TO THROW HIm OUT OF OffiCE ANY DAY THAT WE WOU±D CHOOSE TO.”
ÌENNEDY, OF COURSE, WON THE E±ECTION. µS PRESIDENT, HE CARRIED OUT THE
¼EPUB±ICAN INVASION P±AN, THE BOTCHED ÊAY OF ¸IgS OPERATION. ÈHEN THAT
FAI±ED, ÌENNEDY AUTHORIzED “»PERATION MONgOOSE,” A BROAD-SPECTRUm COVERT
OPERATION THAT USED SABOTAgE, ASSASSINATIONS, AND PSYCHO±OgICA± WARFARE IN
HOPES OF SPARkINg AN UPRISINg AgAINST ·ASTRO. ÉE A±SO ImPOSED A TRADE EmBARgO
ON ·UBA. µ STICk±ER FOR ±EgA±ITY, JºÌ HE±D Off SIgNINg THE DECREE CUTTINg Off
TRADE WITH THE IS±AND UNTI± HIS PRESS SECRETARY, ¸IERRE ²A±INgER, COU±D PURCHASE
HIm A CACHE OF 1,200 ¸ETIT ¶PmANN ·UBAN CIgARS.
1964. ·ASTRO, WHO BY ONE RECENT COUNT HAS SURVIVED mORE THAN SIx HUNDRED
ASSASSINATION ATTEmPTS, NEVER A±±OWED A FREE VOTE IN ·UBA. “°E REVO±UTION,”
HE ONCE REPORTED±Y REmARkED, “HAS NO TImE FOR E±ECTIONS.” ÊUT HE mADE TImE
FOR THOSE HE±D IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ¹N 1964, THE ÉAVANA DAI±Y Revolución
CONDEmNED BOTH ¸RESIDENT LYNDON JOHNSON AND HIS ¼EPUB±ICAN CHA±±ENgER
ÊARRY GO±DWATER, WRITINg THAT THE TWO CANDIDATES REflECTED THE “STRUCTURA±
DEgENERATION” OF µmERICAN DEmOCRACY. ÊUT IN THE WEEkS ±EADINg TO THE E±EC-
TION, ·ASTRO, FEARINg GO±DWATER’S “ExTREmISm” AND CONVINCED THAT JOHNSON
WOU±D PURSUE A “PO±ICY OF mODERATION,” STEPPED UP HIS ANTI-ImPERIA±IST, ANTI-
¶.². RHETORIC, HOPINg TO SPARk A BACk±ASH IN THE PRESIDENT’S FAVOR. JOHNSON
WON IN A ±ANDS±IDE, WITHOUT THE NEED FOR A (BACk)HAND FROm ºIDE±.
1968. ´ECADES BEFORE ÈI±±IE ÉORTON, THERE WAS ºIDE± ·ASTRO—AND ºRANCE’S
PRESIDENT, ·HAR±ES DE GAU±±E, WHOSE CRITICISm OF ¶.². PO±ICIES IN ÈESTERN
60 • ch a p t er th r ee
“BITTER,” “PARANOID,” AND “DESPICAB±E” CONSERVATIVE mOVEmENT THAT WOU±DN’T
BE HAPPY WITH ANY CANDIDATE WHO WASN’T TO THE “RIgHT OF GENgHIS ÌHAN.”
°ERE WAS, AT THE TImE, ABOUT AS mUCH INTE±±IgENCE ESTAB±ISHINg A COVERT
RE±ATIONSHIP BETWEEN MCGOVERN AND ·ASTRO AS THERE WOU±D BE ±INkINg A±-
ëAEDA TO ²ADDAm ÉUSSEIN—OR ÊARACk »BAmA TO AN ¹S±AmIC mADRASSA. ÓET
½IxON DID TRY TO OB±IgE. ÉIS “P±UmBERS”—THE SECRET TEAm THAT BROkE INTO
THE ´EmOCRATIC ½ATIONA± ÉEADqUARTERS AT THE INFAmOUS ÈATERgATE ÉOTE±
COmP±Ex—WERE ±ARgE±Y mADE UP OF ANTI-·ASTRO ·UBAN ExI±ES. ¹T HAD BEEN
ORgANIzED BY ÊAY OF ¸IgS VETERAN ·¹µ AgENT ³. ÉOWARD ÉUNT, WHO SAID THAT
ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THE BURg±ARY WAS TO ±OOk FOR EVIDENCE ESTAB±ISHINg A
CONNECTION BETWEEN ·ASTRO AND MCGOVERN. ½IxON WON IN A ±ANDS±IDE, BUT
ÈATERgATE EVENTUA±±Y TOOk HIm DOWN.
1980. ¼EAgAN P±AYED HIS ´ADE ·OUNTY STRATEgY ±ARgE: ¹N THE ¼EPUB±ICAN PRI-
mARIES, HE CA±±ED FOR A B±OCkADE OF ·UBA IN RETA±IATION FOR THE ²OVIET INVASION
OF µFgHANISTAN, WHICH mADE ABOUT AS mUCH SENSE AS ATTACkINg ¹RAq IN RESPONSE
TO 9/11. ÉIS mAIN OPPONENT, Ex-·¹µ DIRECTOR GEORgE É. È. ÊUSH, CA±±ED
¼EAgAN’S PROPOSA± A “mACHO THINg,” POINTINg OUT THAT “·UBA DIDN’T INVADE
µFgHANISTAN.” ÊUT SUCH A FACT-BASED CAmPAIgN POSITION WAS A NONSTARTER. µſtER
¼EAgAN BEAT ÊUSH 2 TO 1 IN THE º±ORIDA PRImARY ON HIS mARCH TO THE NOmINA-
TION, ÊUSH, SIgNINg ON TO THE TICkET AS VICE PRESIDENT, mADE HIS PEACE WITH
¼EAgAN’S VOODOO DIP±OmACY. ¹N THE E±ECTION CAmPAIgN, ·ASTRO—PERHAPS
1992. ºO±±OWINg THE CO±±APSE OF THE ²OVIET ¶NION, mANY OBSERVERS THOUgHT
THE TImE WAS fiNA±±Y OPPORTUNE TO NORmA±IzE RE±ATIONS WITH ÉAVANA. ÊUT
º±ORIDA HAS 25 VOTES IN THE E±ECTORA± CO±±EgE, AND MIAmI’S ·UBAN ExI±ES—
ABOUT 600,000 (OUT OF A STATE POPU±ATION OF, AS OF 2008, jUST OVER 800,000
·UBAN mIgRANTS) ±IVE IN CRUCIA± ´ADE ·OUNTY—REmAINED A POWERFU± DOmES-
TIC ±OBBY. ¾OUCHED BY THE SPIRIT OF JºÌ, CHA±±ENgER ÊI±± ·±INTON HEADED FOR
MIAmI IN µPRI± 1992 TO ExCORIATE GEORgE É. È. ÊUSH FOR NOT “DROPPINg THE
HAmmER DOWN ON ·ASTRO AND ·UBA.” ·±INTON EVEN ENDORSED THE PUNITIVE
·UBAN ´EmOCRACY µCT, WHICH ÊUSH (fiNDINg HImSE±F OUTflANkED TO HIS
62 • ch a p t er th r ee
VU±NERAB±E RIgHT) SIgNED SHORT±Y THEREAſtER. µ±ONg WITH SUBSEqUENT ±EgIS±ATION
THAT ·±INTON, AS PRESIDENT, WOU±D BACk, THE ACT TIgHTENED ÈASHINgTON’S ±ONg-
STANDINg EmBARgO ON ·UBAN TRADE. °IS ON±Y SERVED TO CUT ÈASHINgTON OUT
OF WHAT WOU±D BE THE IS±AND’S POST–·O±D ÈAR PO±ITICA± AND ECONOmIC OPEN-
INg TO THE REST OF THE WOR±D. ·±INTON TOOk 20 PERCENT OF º±ORIDA’S ·UBAN
µmERICANS, ±OST THE STATE TO GEORgE É. È. ÊUSH, BUT WON THE ÈHITE ÉOUSE.
2004. ´URINg A VISIT TO ÊRAzI± IN »CTOBER, ²ECRETARY OF ²TATE ·O±IN ¸OWE±± mADE
AN OìAND REmARk THAT ·UBA WAS NO ±ONgER A mAjOR THREAT TO LATIN µmERICA.
“ÈE DON’T SEE EVERYTHINg THROUgH THE ±ENS OF ºIDE± ·ASTRO,” HE SAID. JOHN ÌERRY
THOUgHT HE SAW AN OPENINg AND POUNCED. ÉE C±AImED HE FOUND IT “SHOCkINg
THAT THE ÊUSH ADmINISTRATION IS TE±±INg THE WOR±D THAT ºIDE± ·ASTRO NO ±ONgER
POSES A PROB±Em FOR THIS HEmISPHERE.” ¸ERHAPS AſtER A mERE FORTY-FOUR YEARS AND
TWE±VE PRESIDENTIA± E±ECTIONS, THE ·ASTRO BOUNCE WAS WEARINg Off. ÊUSH WON
º±ORIDA WITH A mI±±ION mORE VOTES THAN HE HAD RECEIVED FOUR YEARS EAR±IER.
2008. °IS, HIS THIRTEENTH, WI±± mOST ±IkE±Y BE ·ASTRO’S ±AST PRESIDENTIA± E±EC-
×
TION. µſtER A PHOTO SURFACED INDICATINg THAT ONE OF ÊARACk »BAmA’S ¾ExAS
VO±UNTEERS (WHO IS ·UBAN µmERICAN) HAD HUNg A ·UBAN flAg SUPERImPOSED
notes
64 • ch a p t er th r ee
1. ·ASTRO SURPRISES. ¹ WROTE THE ABOVE IN 2008, WHEN IT SEEmED NOT ON±Y THAT HE
WASN’T ±ONg FOR THIS WOR±D, BUT THAT ÈASHINgTON’S ·O±D ÈAR STANCE TOWARD ·UBA WAS
ImmUTAB±E. ÊUT HERE WE ARE IN 2016, ON THE THRESHO±D OF YET ANOTHER PRESIDENTIA±
E±ECTION, AND THE »±D MO±E IS STI±± AROUND, STI±± COmmENTINg ON ¶.². PO±ITICS.
MOREOVER, ¸RESIDENT »BAmA HAS mADE A HISTORIC VISIT TO ·UBA TO SPEAk TO THE ·UBAN
PEOP±E AND mEET WITH ¼Aú± ·ASTRO, WHO HAD UNExPECTED±Y TEAmED UP WITH »BAmA
TO flIP THE SCRIPT, BEgINNINg, IN ´ECEmBER 2014, THE PROCESS OF DIP±OmATIC NORmA±I-
zATION BETWEEN ÉAVANA AND ÈASHINgTON. ¹N EffECT, »BAmA NATIONA±IzED THE ·UBA
qUESTION. ¸O±±S INDICATE THAT THE mAjORITY OF ¶.². VOTERS SUPPORT NORmA±IzATION, EVEN
IN º±ORIDA. °IS mEANS THAT NOW, INSTEAD OF ´EmOCRATS HAVINg TO TRAVE± TO º±ORIDA TO
P±EDgE TO AN INCREASINg±Y SmA±± gROUP OF IDEO±OgUES THAT THEY WI±± kEEP THINgS AS THEY
ARE (AS »BAmA DID IN 2008), ¼EPUB±ICANS, STI±± CHAINED TO A PO±ICY OF ISO±ATINg
ÉAVANA, WI±± HAVE TO ExP±AIN TO A ±ARgER E±ECTORATE WHY THEY WANT TO RETURN TO THE
PAST—WHY, SAY, ¹OWA SHOU±DN’T BE AB±E TO SE±± CORN IN ·UBA OR ±UNg CANCER PATIENTS
SHOU±DN’T HAVE ACCESS TO ±IFESAVINg DRUgS DEVE±OPED BY THE ·UBAN PHARmACEUTICA±
INDUSTRY.
i.
66
Cruces de Fronteras
Renato Rosaldo
i.
67
ii.
iii.
68
ii.
iii.
¼íO ARENOSO qUE CORRE RáPIDO. ÉOmBRES ±±EVARON NUESTRO CARRO CON
SOgAS,
VERANO EN MéxICO, UNA CARRETERA NUEVA, SIN PUENTES.
69
iv.
70
iv.
71
f ou r
72
ÈHI±E THE O±D SOURCES OF “mODERNITY” STRUgg±E AND BECOmE mORE BACk-
WARD-±OOkINg LATIN µmERICA HAS BEEN ExPERImENTINg WITH IDEAS THAT HAVE
BEEN TAkEN UP AROUND THE WOR±D. °ESE RANgE FROm SURPRISINg±Y EffECTIVE
ECONOmIC RESPONSES TO THE ½ORTH’S 2008 fiNANCIA± CRISIS TO THE RANgE OF NEW
CU±TURA± PRODUCTION CHRONIC±ED IN THIS VO±UmE.
ÈE ExAmINE FOUR CASES OF INNOVATION IN SOCIA± mOVEmENT STRATEgY AND
SOCIA± PO±ICY THAT HAVE REVERBERATED BEYOND THE REgION’S BOUNDARIES AND BEEN
TAkEN UP BY OTHER ACTORS IN BOTH THE G±OBA± ²OUTH AND THE ½ORTH: PARTICIPA-
TORY BUDgETINg, TRANSITIONA± jUSTICE AND HUmAN RIgHTS, NEW STRATEgIES FOR RURA±
mOBI±IzATION, AND NEW ARgUmENTS FOR ADDRESSINg C±ImATE CHANgE. °ESE
ExAmP±ES RANgE FROm WHAT mIgHT SEEm ±IkE SImP±E TECHNOCRATIC fi xES (CERTAIN
VERSIONS OF PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg) TO WHAT mIgHT SEEm ±IkE qUIxOTIC EffORTS
TO AffECT g±OBA± PO±ITICS (E.g., ÊO±IVIA’S EffORTS TO RESHAPE C±ImATE CHANgE
PO±ITICS).
°E ExTRAREgIONA± TRAVE± OF THESE IDEAS HAS NOT BEEN ENTIRE±Y STRAIgHTFOR-
WARD. ¹N mOST CASES, POWERFU± g±OBA± ACTORS HAVE P±AYED AN ImPORTANT RO±E IN
THIS PROCESS. °US, THE ÈOR±D ÊANk BEgAN PROmOTINg ITS OWN VERSION OF PAR-
TICIPATORY BUDgETINg AND THE mOST ImPORTANT SOURCE OF g±OBA± ADVICE TO COUN-
TRIES TRYINg TO ImP±EmENT TRANSITIONA± jUSTICE IS THE ¹NTERNATIONA± ·ENTER FOR
¾RANSITIONA± JUSTICE (¹·¾J) IN ½EW ÓORk ·ITY.
°E APPROPRIATION OF LATIN µmERICAN IDEAS BY g±OBA± ACTORS mIgHT SEEm TO
NEgATE LATIN µmERICAN AgENCY AND SUggEST THAT O±D STRUCTURES OF ½ORTHERN
DOmINATION HAVE NOT REA±±Y BEEN CHA±±ENgED. ÊUT SUCH A mECHANISTIC VIEW OF
HOW SOCIA± INNOVATION OCCURS IS PARTICU±AR±Y INAPPROPRIATE FOR ±OOkINg AT
g±OBA± PROCESSES. °E INfi ±TRATION AND PARTIA± SUBVERSION OF DOmINANT IDEAS
A±WAYS COExISTS WITH THE APPARENT CO-OPTATION OF POTENTIA±±Y DISRUPTIVE IDEAS
IN A DE±ICATE INTERP±AY THAT DOES NOT A±WAYS ±EAD TO REA± CHANgE BUT IS, AT THE
SAmE TImE, THE ON±Y THINg THAT DOES.
LIkEWISE, CYNICS WI±± NOTE THAT THESE LATIN µmERICAN INNOVATIONS DO NOT
HAVE THE POWER TO RESHAPE g±OBA± PO±ICY REgImES IN THE WAY THAT g±OBA± CAPI-
TA±IST PO±ICY PARADIgmS RESHAPED THE WOR±D AND ARgUE AgAIN FOR plus ça change.
ÈE WOU±D ARgUE THAT THIS IS EVIDENCE OF THINkINg TRAPPED IN THE PAST. ¾O THE
ExTENT THAT LATIN µmERICA IS gENERATINg A NEW mODE± FOR THE g±OBA± flOW OF
IDEAS, THIS mODE± IS ±ESS ABOUT ImPOSINg LATIN µmERICAN IDEAS ON THE REST OF
THE WOR±D, EVEN IF THAT WERE POSSIB±E. ¹NSTEAD, IT IS CONTRIBUTINg TO NEW PAT-
TERNS OF g±OBA± flOWS THAT ARE PART OF A DIVERSE SET OF “COUNTERHEgEmONIC” CUR-
RENTS INVO±VINg A HORIzONTA± ExCHANgE OF IDEAS AND PRACTICES AmONg RE±ATIVE±Y
EqUA± PARTNERS.
74 • ch a p t er fou r
°E ANSWER IS “BOTH” AND “IT DEPENDS.” °E TRANSFORmATIVE POTENTIA± OF ¸Ê
APPEARS TO BE SHAPED, ABOVE A±±, BY THE ±OCA± AND NATIONA± CONfigURATIONS OF
C±ASS AND PO±ITICA± POWER IN WHICH PARTICU±AR ¸Ê ExPERImENTS ARE EmBEDDED.
µS ONE mIgHT ExPECT, ¸Ê APPEARS TO BE mOST TRANSFORmATIVE AND EmPOWERINg
WHEN ImP±EmENTED BY A RADICA± LEſt PARTY THAT IS C±OSE±Y ±INkED TO AN AUTONO-
mOUS AND mOBI±IzED SOCIA± BASE. ÊUT “±ESS RADICA±” CASES OF ¸Ê CAN HAVE
ImPORTANT CONSEqUENCES AS WE±±. ¾O I±±USTRATE THIS, WE BRIEflY DISCUSS TWO
CASES OF ¸Ê THAT HAVE OCCURRED IN mARkED±Y DIffERENT CONTExTS.
¹N 2005, ¾ORRES, A SEmIRURA± mUNICIPA±ITY IN THE CENTRA± WESTERN ÍENEzUE±AN
STATE OF LARA, INITIATED AN ExPANSIVE PARTICIPATORY BUDgET THAT gIVES ±OCA± RESI-
DENTS CONTRO± OVER 100 PERCENT OF THE mUNICIPA±ITY’S INVESTmENT BUDgET
(¶²$6.8 mI±±ION IN 2006). °OUSANDS (AND PROBAB±Y TENS OF THOUSANDS) OF
±OCA± RESIDENTS HAVE PARTICIPATED IN THIS PROCESS, mOST VIA ONE OF ¾ORRES’S SIx
HUNDRED COmmUNA± COUNCI±S AND OTHER CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS. ¾ORRES’S PARTICIPA-
TORY BUDgET WAS INTRODUCED BY JU±IO ·HáVEz, A SE±F-DESCRIBED SOCIA±IST REVO±U-
TIONARY WHO WAS E±ECTED mAYOR IN 2004. ¶N±IkE THE ÈOR±D ÊANk, ·HáVEz SEES
¸Ê NOT AS A FORm OF gOOD gOVERNANCE BUT AS AN INTEgRA± COmPONENT OF “TWENTY-
fiRST-CENTURY SOCIA±ISm.” µS mAYOR, ·HáVEz (NO RE±ATION TO ÉUgO ·HáVEz) WAS
C±OSE±Y ±INkED TO ¾ORRES’S POWERFU± URBAN AND RURA± SOCIA± mOVEmENTS. °IS
A±±OWED ¾ORRES’S PARTICIPATORY BUDgET TO SURVIVE fiERCE RESISTANCE FROm AgRARIAN
E±ITES AND THE ºIſtH ¼EPUB±IC MOVEmENT, ÉUgO ·HáVEz’S PARTY (THROUgH 2007,
WHEN IT WAS REP±ACED BY THE ¶NITED ²OCIA±IST ¸ARTY OF ÍENEzUE±A), WHICH CON-
TRO±±ED ¾ORRES’S mUNICIPA± COUNCI± DURINg JU±IO ·HáVEz’S TENURE AND REPEATED±Y
TRIED (AND FAI±ED) TO B±OCk THE mAYOR’S AgENDA DURINg HIS fiRST TWO YEARS IN
OffiCE.
¹N 2012, ÍA±±EjO, WHICH gAINED NOTORIETY IN 2008 BY BECOmINg THE ±ARgEST
CITY IN ·A±IFORNIA HISTORY TO DEC±ARE BANkRUPTCY, BECAmE THE fiRST CITY IN THE
¶NITED ²TATES TO ImP±EmENT A CITYWIDE PARTICIPATORY BUDgET. ÍA±±EjO’S DECI-
SION TO ImP±EmENT ¸Ê, IN A CONSIDERAB±Y mORE mODEST FASHION COmPARED TO
¾ORRES (OR ¸ORTO µ±EgRE), IS AN INDIRECT CONSEqUENCE OF THE CITY’S BANkRUPTCY,
WHICH IN 2011 ±ED VOTERS TO APPROVE A ONE PERCENT SA±ES TAx INCREASE, PROVIDINg
THE CITY WITH $10 mI±±ION PER YEAR. µT THE BEHEST OF AN ENTREPRENEURIA± CITY
COUNCI±OR (INSPIRED BY STORIES OF ¸Ê IN ·HICAgO AND ¸ORTO µ±EgRE), $3.2 mI±-
±ION OF THIS WAS DEVOTED TO ¸Ê. °OUgH ±ESS THAN 2 PERCENT OF ÍA±±EjO’S BUDgET,
THIS IS THE ±ARgEST ¸Ê AmOUNT A SINg±E gROUP OF VOTERS HAS DECIDED ON IN THE
¶NITED ²TATES. GIVEN THE CITY’S fiSCA± WOES, DEARTH OF CIVIC ASSOCIATIONS, AND
THE mAYOR’S OPPOSITION, THE FACT THAT ¸Ê CAmE TO ÍA±±EjO AT A±± IS qUITE REmARk-
AB±E. ÊUT THERE ARE DOUBTS ABOUT THE ImPACT AND ±ONg-TERm SUSTAINABI±ITY OF
¹N THE 1970S STATE OffiCIA±S gUI±TY OF VIO±ATINg THE HUmAN RIgHTS OF THEIR CITI-
zENS WERE STI±± BENEfiTINg FROm A ±EgA± INSTITUTIONA± FRAmEWORk THAT WAS
“RATHER NEW AND STI±± qUITE INERT” (²IkkINk 2011: 90).Ø »VER THE COURSE OF THE
1980S AND 1990S, WHAT ÌATHRYN ²IkkINk CA±±S A “jUSTICE CASCADE” TRANSFORmED
g±OBA± NORmS FOR THE PROSECUTION OF STATE OffiCIA±S RESPONSIB±E FOR mURDER,
TORTURE, AND DISAPPEARANCES UP TO AND INC±UDINg HEADS OF STATE. °E PROCESS
OF CHANgE WAS g±OBA±, BUT LATIN µmERICA WAS THE INNOVATIVE FOCA± POINT.
°E STORY OF HUmAN RIgHTS PROSECUTIONS IN µRgENTINA IS THE BEST ±ENS FOR
I±±USTRATINg THIS mOmENTOUS CHANgE, BOTH BECAUSE OF µRgENTINA’S CRUCIA± RO±E
AND BECAUSE ²IkkINk HAS DOCUmENTED THE CASE SO WE±±. ²IkkINk SUCCINCT±Y
SUmS UP THE BOTTOm ±INE AS FO±±OWS: “µRgENTINA HE±PED INVENT THE TWO mAIN
78 • ch a p t er fou r
OF g±OBA± SUPPORT WERE CRUCIA±. ÈHI±E THE ENERgY OF THE RANk-AND-fi±E ACTIVISTS
CAmE PRECISE±Y FROm THE FACT THAT THEY WERE ±OCA±±Y ROOTED, mANY OF THE kEY
±EgA± ACTORS HONED THEIR SkI±±S AND ExPERTISE WHI±E IN ExI±E. °E ¹NTER-µmERICAN
·OmmISSION ON ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS (¹µ·É¼), WHICH WAS jUST BEgINNINg TO P±AY
A SIgNIfiCANT RO±E IN DEFENDINg HEmISPHERIC HUmAN RIgHTS IN THE ±ATE 1970S,
PROVIDED INVA±UAB±E SUPPORT IN THE FORm OF A 1980 REPORT BASED ON RESEARCH
DONE IN µRgENTINA.
µRgENTINA’S CONTRIBUTIONS WERE A±SO UNExPECTED±Y g±OBA± IN TERmS OF THEIR
ImPACT. ¶N±IkE THE 1970S PROSECUTIONS IN GREECE AND ¸ORTUgA±, WHICH BARE±Y
mADE RIPP±ES IN THE g±OBA± PANORAmA OF HUmAN RIgHTS INSTITUTIONS, THE
µRgENTINE PROCESS WAS PROjECTED AROUND THE WOR±D. °E mOST ImPORTANT ±INk
mAY HAVE BEEN THE ²OUTH-²OUTH NETWORkS THAT CONNECTED µRgENTINE ACTIVISTS
AND ±AWYERS TO ²OUTH µFRICAN ACTIVISTS WHO THEN INCORPORATED THE LATIN
µmERICAN ExPERIENCE IN THE DEVE±OPmENT OF THEIR ¾RUTH AND ¼ECONCI±IATION
PROCESS. °E LATIN µmERICAN ExPERIENCE A±SO SPREAD TO THE ½ORTH, BOTH IN
TERmS OF ITS INflUENCE ON g±OBA± NORmS AND VIA INDIVIDUA±S WHO TOOk THEIR
ExPERIENCES WITH THEm AS THEY P±AYED RO±ES IN g±OBA± INSTITUTIONS. ºOR ExAm-
P±E, LUIS MORENO-»CAmPO, WHO WAS THE ASSISTANT PROSECUTOR IN THE TRIA±S OF
THE µRgENTINE gENERA±S IN THE 1980S, ENDED UP THREE DECADES ±ATER AS THE CHIEF
PROSECUTOR OF THE ¹NTERNATIONA± ·RImINA± ·OURT (¹··). µND WHEN THE ²OUTH
µFRICAN ¾RUTH AND ¼ECONCI±IATION mODE± WENT g±OBA± WITH THE ESTAB±ISHmENT
OF THE ¹·¾J IN ½EW ÓORk, ITS RESEARCH DIRECTOR WAS ¸AB±O DE GREIff, FROm
·O±OmBIA.
G±OBA± HUmAN RIgHTS INSTITUTIONS TODAY BEAR THE INDE±IB±E ImPRINT OF LATIN
µmERICAN CONTRIBUTIONS OVER THE COURSE OF THE PAST THREE DECADES. LATIN
µmERICA STI±± ±EADS THE WOR±D IN TERmS OF NUmBERS OF HUmAN RIgHTS PROSECU-
TIONS AND IS THE ON±Y REgION OF THE WOR±D IN WHICH THERE HAS BEEN A C±EAR
DEC±INE IN AVERAgE ±EVE±S OF REPRESSION OVER THE COURSE OF THE PAST qUARTER CEN-
TURY, PROVIDINg A g±OBA± mODE± FOR THE EffiCACY OF HUmAN RIgHTS ADVOCACY.
¸ERHAPS EVEN mORE ImPORTANT, HOWEVER, IS THE INflUENCE OF LATIN µmERICA’S
PIONEERINg ExPERIENCE ON THE SHAPE OF THE g±OBA± jUSTICE CASCADE THAT EVO±VED
IN THE 1990S AND THE fiRST DECADE OF THE TWENTY-fiRST CENTURY.
°E mOmENTUm OF THE jUSTICE CASCADE IN THE ½ORTH A±SO REVERBERATED BACk
TO LATIN µmERICA, ENAB±INg kEY BREAkTHROUgHS IN THE REgION. °E ÊRITISH
ARREST OF µUgUSTO ¸INOCHET IN 1998, IN RESPONSE TO A ²PANISH REqUEST FOR HIS
ExTRADITION UNDER THE ·ONVENTION AgAINST ¾ORTURE, HE±PED CATA±YzE NEW
PROgRESS IN HUmAN RIgHTS PROSECUTIONS BACk IN ·HI±E. °E µ±IEN ¾ORT ·±AImS
µCT IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES HAS BEEN USED TO PROSECUTE LATIN µmERICAN TORTURERS
80 • ch a p t er fou r
¹N ORDER TO gUARANTEE THE INDEPENDENCE AND FOOD SOVEREIgNTY OF A±± OF THE
WOR±D’S PEOP±ES, IT IS ESSENTIA± THAT FOOD BE PRODUCED THROUgH DIVERSIfiED,
FARmER-BASED PRODUCTION SYSTEmS. ºOOD SOVEREIgNTY IS THE RIgHT OF PEOP±ES TO
DEfiNE THEIR OWN AgRICU±TURE AND FOOD PO±ICIES, TO PROTECT AND REgU±ATE DOmES-
TIC AgRICU±TURA± PRODUCTION AND TRADE IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE SUSTAINAB±E DEVE±OP-
mENT OBjECTIVES, TO DETERmINE THE ExTENT TO WHICH THEY WANT TO BE SE±F RE±IANT,
AND TO RESTRICT THE DUmPINg OF PRODUCTS IN THEIR mARkETS. ºOOD SOVEREIgNTY
DOES NOT NEgATE TRADE, BUT RATHER, IT PROmOTES THE FORmU±ATION OF TRADE PO±ICIES
AND PRACTICES THAT SERVE THE RIgHTS OF PEOP±ES TO SAFE, HEA±THY AND ECO±OgICA±±Y
SUSTAINAB±E PRODUCTION. (MCMICHAE± 2005: 291)
¹N ADDITION TO ITS WORk IN ÊRAzI±, THE M²¾ HAS P±AYED A CRUCIA± RO±E IN THE
g±OBA± mOVEmENT FOR FOOD SOVEREIgNTY. °IS HAS TAkEN P±ACE IN SEVERA± WAYS.
°E M²¾ IS ACTIVE IN INTERNATIONA± NETWORkS ±INkINg SmA±± AND mEDIUm AgRI-
CU±TURA± PRODUCERS IN THE ½ORTH AND ²OUTH. LA ÍíA ·AmPESINA, WHICH WAS
FOUNDED IN 1993 BY PEASANTS’ AND FARmERS’ mOVEmENTS FROm ·ENTRA±, ²OUTH,
AND ½ORTH µmERICA, IS THE ±ARgEST SUCH NETWORk, ENCOmPASSINg OVER 150
NATIONA± AND SUBNATIONA± RURA± SOCIA± mOVEmENT ORgANIzATIONS FROm fiſtY-SIx
COUNTRIES AROUND THE WOR±D. °E M²¾ IS A±SO AN INflUENTIA± mEmBER OF THE
LATIN µmERICAN ·OORDINATION OF ¸EASANT »RgANIzATIONS (·L»·). ²INCE THE
1990S, LA ÍíA ·AmPESINA AND ·L»· HAVE P±AYED A kEY RO±E IN A NUmBER OF
INTERNATIONA± CAmPAIgNS: FOR ExTERNA± DEBT FORgIVENESS FOR POOR NATIONS,
AgAINST THE ºREE ¾RADE µREA OF THE µmERICAS, AND IN THE “ANTI-g±OBA±IzATION”
mOVEmENT OF THE ±ATE 1990S AND EAR±Y 2000S, mADE FAmOUS BY PROTESTS IN
²EATT±E, ¸RAgUE, AND GENOA.
¹N ADDITION TO BEINg PART OF THESE FORmA±IzED INTERNATIONA± NETWORkS, THE
M²¾ HAS DEVOTED SIgNIfiCANT RESOURCES TO DIRECT ExCHANgES BETWEEN ITS mEm-
BERSHIP AND OTHER mOVEmENTS IN THE G±OBA± ²OUTH. ²IgNIfiCANT±Y, THE M²¾
HAS ESTAB±ISHED INTERNATIONA± BRIgADES—OſtEN IN CO±±ABORATION WITH LA ÍíA
·AmPESINA—IN ÉAITI, ·ENTRA± µmERICA, ²OUTH µFRICA, ÍIETNAm, ¸A±ESTINE,
AND SEVERA± OTHER COUNTRIES. °E M²¾ HAS A±SO CREATED NUmEROUS ºRIENDS OF
THE M²¾ COmmITTEES IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES, ·ANADA, AND ³UROPE. °ESE COm-
mITTEES WERE SET UP AS A WAY FOR ½ORTHERN ACTIVISTS TO SUPPORT THE M²¾’S
ACTIVITIES. »VER TImE, HOWEVER, THE M²¾ DISCOVERED THAT ITS ORgANIzATIONA±
CAPACITY OſtEN ExCEEDS THAT OF ITS INTERNATIONA± SUPPORTERS, ±EADINg TO RECENT
DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HOW THE M²¾ CAN PROVIDE SUPPORT to ½ORTHERN ACTIVISTS.
ºINA±±Y, THE M²¾ HAS EDUCATED RURA± ACTIVISTS FROm THROUgHOUT LATIN
µmERICA AND TO A ±ESSER ExTENT THE WOR±D. ²INCE 2005, THESE EDUCATIONA± INITIA-
TIVES HAVE OſtEN TAkEN P±ACE IN THE M²¾’S º±ORESTAN ºERNANDES ½ATIONA±
²INCE THE 1992 “³ARTH ²UmmIT” IN ¼IO DE JANEIRO, WHICH ESTAB±ISHED THE
¶NITED ½ATIONS ºRAmEWORk ·ONVENTION ON ·±ImATE ·HANgE (¶½º···),
LATIN µmERICA HAS P±AYED AN ImPORTANT RO±E IN INTERNATIONA± EffORTS TO
ADDRESS C±ImATE CHANgE.Þ LATIN µmERICA HAS HOSTED (OR WI±± HOST) FOUR OF THE
TWENTY ANNUA± ¶½º··· ·ONFERENCES OF THE ¸ARTIES, THE mOST ImPORTANT
OffiCIA± gATHERINgS ADDRESSINg C±ImATE CHANgE. LATIN µmERICA HAS A±SO P±AYED
A kEY RO±E IN A±TERNATIVE EffORTS TO ADDRESS C±ImATE CHANgE, WHICH HAVE SPRUNg
UP IN RESPONSE TO THE FRUSTRATION FE±T BY ACTIVISTS AND PO±ITICA± ±EADERS (mOST±Y
FROm THE G±OBA± ²OUTH) AT mANY ½ORTHERN COUNTRIES’, AND ESPECIA±±Y THE
¶NITED ²TATES’S, INABI±ITY AND UNWI±±INgNESS TO COmE UP WITH mEANINgFU±
WAYS TO REDUCE g±OBA± gREENHOUSE EmISSIONS.
²INCE ³VO MORA±ES’S 2005 E±ECTION AS HIS COUNTRY’S fiRST INDIgENOUS PRESI-
DENT, ÊO±IVIA HAS ASSUmED A ±EADINg (BUT NOT FU±±Y CONSISTENT) RO±E IN THE
EffORT TO FORgE A NEW TYPE OF g±OBA± C±ImATE CHANgE PO±ITICS. °IS IS DUE, IN
PART, TO THE FACT THAT, AS »xFAm HAS NOTED, ÊO±IVIA IS AmONg THE COUNTRIES THAT
ARE ±EAST RESPONSIB±E FOR g±OBA± WARmINg YET mOST ExPOSED TO ITS EffECTS.
ÊO±IVIA’S ACTIONS HAVE TAkEN P±ACE ON THREE FRONTS: DISCOURSE REgARDINg C±ImATE
CHANgE, FOSTERINg INTERNATIONA± gATHERINgS AND NETWORkS ±INkINg SOCIA± mOVE-
82 • ch a p t er fou r
mENTS AND ²OUTHERN STATES, AND COORDINATED INTERSTATE ACTION THROUgH THE
GROUP OF 77 (G77), WHICH INC±UDES 133 DEVE±OPINg NATIONS.
MORA±ES HAS REPEATED±Y USED THE g±OBA± P±ATFORm PROVIDED BY ¶½ GENERA±
µSSEmB±Y mEETINgS AND INTERNATIONA± C±ImATE CHANgE CONFERENCES TO ENUmER-
ATE THE DANgERS OF C±ImATE CHANgE. ÉE IS ESPECIA±±Y CRITICA± OF ½ORTHERN POW-
ERS, ±IkE THE ¶NITED ²TATES, WHICH BEAR THE gREATEST HISTORICA± RESPONSIBI±ITY
FOR C±ImATE CHANgE BUT HAVE FAI±ED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE AND ACTIVE±Y B±OCkED
g±OBA± EffORTS TO DO SO. ¹N MORA±ES’S VIEW, THE ½ORTH OWES THE ²OUTH A “C±ImATE
DEBT.” ¹N CONCRETE TERmS, THIS WOU±D mEAN THAT COUNTRIES ±IkE THE ¶NITED
²TATES WOU±D PAY A DISPROPORTIONATE AmOUNT OF THE COSTS THAT NATIONS ±IkE
ÊO±IVIA AND THE MA±DIVES (I.E., THOSE BEARINg ±ITT±E RESPONSIBI±ITY FOR g±OBA±
WARmINg BUT SUffERINg ITS WORST EffECTS) FACE IN ADjUSTINg TO C±ImATE CHANgE.
»ffiCIA± EffORTS TO ADDRESS C±ImATE CHANgE HAVE FOCUSED, IN ±ARgE PART, ON
HOW mARkETS COU±D BE USED TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE (E.g., THROUgH THE CREATION OF
CARBON mARkETS). MORA±ES, BY CONTRAST, IS HIgH±Y CRITICA± OF mARkETS AND, ±IkE
OTHER LATIN µmERICAN ±EADERS SUCH AS THE ±ATE ÉUgO ·HáVEz, VIEWS CAPITA±ISm
AND C±ImATE CHANgE AS C±OSE±Y CONNECTED:
·OmPETITION AND THE THIRST FOR PROfiT WITHOUT ±ImITS OF THE CAPITA±IST SYSTEm
ARE DESTROYINg THE P±ANET. ¶NDER ·APITA±ISm WE ARE NOT HUmAN BEINgS BUT
CONSUmERS. ¶NDER ·APITA±ISm MOTHER ³ARTH DOES NOT ExIST, INSTEAD THERE ARE
RAW mATERIA±S. ·APITA±ISm IS THE SOURCE OF THE ASYmmETRIES AND ImBA±ANCES IN
THE WOR±D. ¹T gENERATES ±UxURY, OSTENTATION AND WASTE FOR A FEW, WHI±E mI±±IONS
IN THE WOR±D DIE FROm HUNgER. ¹N THE HANDS OF CAPITA±ISm EVERYTHINg BECOmES
A COmmODITY: THE WATER, THE SOI±, THE HUmAN gENOmE, THE ANCESTRA± CU±TURES,
jUSTICE, ETHICS, DEATH . . . AND ±IFE ITSE±F. ³VERYTHINg, ABSO±UTE±Y EVERYTHINg, CAN
BE BOUgHT AND SO±D UNDER CAPITA±ISm. µND EVEN “C±ImATE CHANgE” ITSE±F HAS
BECOmE A BUSINESS. (MORA±ES 2008)
84 • ch a p t er fou r
FORgINg mODE±S FOR A NEW SORT OF g±OBA± REgImE, ONE IN WHICH INNOVATIVE IDEAS
CAN SPREAD AND BE USED BY gOVERNmENTS AND SOCIA± mOVEmENTS IN COUNTRIES
AROUND THE WOR±D, REgARD±ESS OF WHERE THEY ORIgINATE, AS ±ONg AS THEY OffER
SO±UTIONS.
ÈE HAVE DESCRIBED A SmA±± SAmP±E OF LATIN µmERICA’S g±OBA± CONTRIBUTIONS.
³xP±AININg THE HISTORICA± CHANgES IN THE REgION AND IN THE WOR±D THAT HAVE
mADE LATIN µmERICA’S NEW RO±E POSSIB±E WOU±D BE A TASk OF mUCH ±ARgER mAg-
NITUDE, BUT A COUP±E OF OBVIOUS OBSERVATIONS ARE WORTH mAkINg. ÈITHIN THE
REgION, THE CONNECTION BETWEEN INNOVATION AND DEmOCRATIzATION IS UNDENI-
AB±E. °E PO±ITICA± EffERVESCENCE ASSOCIATED WITH THE OVERTHROW OF AUTHORITAR-
IAN REgImES UN±EASHED A WAVE OF PO±ITICA± CREATIVITY FROm WHICH BOTH LATIN
µmERICA AND THE REST OF THE WOR±D HAVE BENEfiTED.
»DD±Y ENOUgH, THE ½ORTH’S ROmANCE WITH ExTREmE FORmS OF PO±ITICA±±Y
±IBERA± CORPORATE CAPITA±ISm PROBAB±Y A±SO HE±PED OPEN THE DOORS FOR LATIN
µmERICAN INNOVATIONS IN TWO qUITE DIffERENT WAYS. ºIRST, OF COURSE, UNREgU-
±ATED CAPITA±ISm’S FAI±URE AS A SOCIA± AND ECONOmIC DOCTRINE CREATED A g±OBA±
PO±ICY VACUUm INTO WHICH PEOP±E WITH DIffERENT IDEAS COU±D STEP. ²ECOND, AND
AT THE SAmE TImE, EffORTS TO APPROPRIATE O±D EmANCIPATORY IDEAS ±IkE DEmOC-
RACY AND HUmAN RIgHTS PROVIDED g±OBA± ±EgITImATION TO THOSE WHO WANTED TO
INSTANTIATE THEm IN PROgRESSIVE WAYS. LATIN µmERICANS TOOk ADVANTAgE OF THIS
OPPORTUNITY.
ÈE HAVE FOCUSED ON ON±Y FOUR INNOVATIONS HERE. MANY OTHERS COU±D HAVE
BEEN DISCUSSED. LATIN µmERICA’S INNOVATIVE RO±E IN ExP±ORINg THE POTENTIA± OF
CONDITIONA± CASH TRANSFERS AS AN ANTIPOVERTY STRATEgY IS ONE OBVIOUS ExAmP±E.
µND EVEN WITHIN THE SmA±± SAmP±E WE HAVE CHOSEN, THERE IS gREAT DIVERSITY,
mAkINg IT DIffiCU±T TO DRAW gENERA± ±ESSONS. ½ONETHE±ESS, WE WOU±D ±IkE TO
SUggEST THAT THERE ARE SOmE THREADS THAT RUN THROUgH THE FOUR CASES AND TIE
THEm TOgETHER. ÈE WI±± UNDER±INE fiVE.
ºIRST, THESE INNOVATIONS DO NOT jUST INVOkE DEmOCRATIC VA±UES AS AN IDEO-
±OgICA± ±EgITImATION, BUT HAVE A DEEP±Y DEmOCRATIC CHARACTER IN THEIR ORIgINS
AND THEIR PRACTICES. ´EmOCRACY IN LATIN µmERICA HAS HISTORICA±±Y BEEN mORE
NOTAB±E FOR ITS PERSISTENT FAI±URES THAN FOR ITS OCCASIONA± SUCCESSES, AND IT
REmAINS PROB±EmATIC. ÊUT THESE ExAmP±ES SUggEST THAT OVER THE COURSE OF THE
REgION’S CHECkERED PO±ITICA± HISTORY, LATIN µmERICANS HAVE DEVE±OPED AN
ImmENSE SET OF SkI±±S USINg DEmOCRATIC PRACTICES AND INSTITUTIONS FOR PROgRES-
SIVE ENDS. ¸ARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg mAY BE THE mOST OBVIOUS ExAmP±E, BUT
INNOVATIVE DEmOCRATIC PRACTICES ARE INTEgRA± TO A±± OF OUR CASES. GIVEN THE
g±ARINg “DEmOCRATIC DEfiCIT” IN OUR CURRENT STRUCTURES OF g±OBA± gOVERNANCE,
86 • ch a p t er fou r
IN THE FACE OF THE PRESSINg PROB±EmS CONFRONTINg LATIN µmERICA AND THE
WOR±D.
notes
88 • ch a p t er fou r
MANgA: “·HE GUEVARA,” BY ÌIYOSHI ÌONNO AND ·HIE ²HImANO.
(Upper leſt) ¾ODAY, NO mATTER WHERE WE gO
(Upper right) µ±± AROUND THE WOR±D
(Lower) ÈE CAN SEE “HIm.”
(Upper leſt) “ÉI THERE, DO YOU kNOW WHAT kIND OF PERSON HE IS, BY THE WAY?”
(Upper right) “ÓOU kNOW, THE FACE ON YOUR ¾-SHIRT”
“´O YOU kNOW, DUDE?”
“½AH”
(Middle) “»H, THEN WHY ARE YOU WEARINg IT?”
“ÈE±±, YOU SEE, THIS mAN . . .”
(Lower) “¹ DON’T kNOW WHY BUT HE’S jUST SO COO±”
(Upper) °E mAN’S NAmE IS—
(Lower) ³RNESTO ¼AFAE± GUEVARA DE ±A ²ERNA
(Upper) ¸EOP±E CA±± HIm ·HE GUEVARA
(Lower) ÉIS ImAgE HAS SPREAD AROUND THE WOR±D ±IkE AN ICON IN mANY WAYS.
pa r t t w o
introduction
94 • pa rt t wo
AN ENTRY IN THE ¼OYA± ²PANISH µCADEmY’S DICTIONARY. °ESE ARE THE REA±ITIES OF
g±OBA± INgENUITY, AND THEY BECkON AN AUTHENTIC APPRECIATION FOR CREATIVE RE/
PRODUCTION.
“¾ONgUES AND ºEET” ASSEmB±ES SCHO±ARS FROm HISTORY, ANTHROPO±OgY, ±AN-
gUAgE STUDIES, ±ITERATURE, AND ±INgUISTICS TO gRAPP±E WITH ONE OF mOST POWERFU±
AND ENDURINg mETAPHORS OF A REFRIED g±OBA± LATIN µmERICAN CU±TURE. °E FOUN-
DATION OF NUmEROUS NATIONA± IDENTITIES AND A TOPIC OF SCHO±AR±Y INqUIRY, THE
CE±EBRATION OF mIxTURE AND SYNCRETISm HAS PERSISTED OVER THE ±ONg DURATION AND
IN DIVERSE P±ACES THROUgHOUT LATIN µmERICA. °E INCREASINg±Y UNCERTAIN ±INES
BETWEEN LATIN µmERICA AND E±SEWHERE AND THE SEARCH FOR AUTHENTICITY IN A
SEEmINg±Y HOmOgENIzINg WOR±D mAY U±TImATE±Y RESHAPE THE PREmIUm ON THE
B±ENDED. ¹N ANY CASE, THE g±OBA± INTERP±AY BETWEEN THE CREATORS AND CONSUmERS
OF LATIN µmERICA REmAINS, AT ±EAST FOR THE mOmENT, AS ±IVE±Y AS EVER.
Ï n t roduct ion • 95
five
Borges’s Library
latin aÇerica, lan¿ua¿e, and the world
Paja Faudree and Daniel Suslak
Ïn the faÇous story by the µRgENTINE AUTHOR JORgE LUIS ÊORgES, THE
LIBRARY OF ÊABE± CONTAINS EVERY BOOk EVER WRITTEN AND DESTINED TO BE WRITTEN,
IN EVERY HUmAN ±ANgUAgE. °E ENTIRE ±INgUISTIC HISTORY OF HUmANITY IS CON-
TAINED IN THAT mAgICA± ±IBRARY—A VAST HExAgON THAT REmAINS HIDDEN, PERHAPS,
SOmEWHERE IN A FORgOTTEN qUARTER OF ÊUENOS µIRES. ¹T IS AN APT mETAPHOR FOR
LATIN µmERICA ITSE±F: A ±IVINg REPOSITORY OF g±OBA± CONVERSATIONS AND A CATA±Og
OF HUmAN ±IVES AND ENCOUNTERS. µND ±IkE THE RE±ATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE WORDS
PRESERVED IN THE LIBRARY’S BOOkS AND WHAT IS SAID BEYOND ITS mIRRORED WA±±S,
LATIN µmERICA’S ±INgUISTIC BIOgRAPHY IS A±WAYS BEINg REWRITTEN.
¾O BETTER UNDERSTAND THE ±INgUISTIC ±EgACY OF LATIN µmERICA AND ITS CON-
TRIBUTION TO OUR SHARED g±OBA± ±ExICON, WE START WITH THE CORNER OF THE ±IBRARY
DEDICATED TO LATIN µmERICA’S PRE-·ONqUEST ROOTS AND THE ±INgUISTIC CONSE-
qUENCES OF THE CO±ONIA± ±EgACY, TRACINg THE mOVEmENT OF PEOP±E IN AND OUT OF
THIS REgION AND THE WORDS THAT mADE THE jOURNEY WITH THEm. ÈE FOCUS ON
THREE kEY COmmUNICATION PRACTICES, BEgINNINg WITH HOW THE INDIgENOUS RESI-
DENTS OF THE µmERICAS AND THE ³UROPEAN CO±ONIzERS NAmED THE NEW THINgS
THEY ENCOUNTERED. ÈE THEN CONSIDER HOW THEY PUT TO WORk BOTH INDIgENOUS
mODES OF WRITINg AND ³UROPEAN A±PHABETIC WRITINg TO CAPTURE ±ANgUAgE AND
REACH OUT TO (OR ExC±UDE) NEW AND ±ARgER AUDIENCES. ºINA±±Y, WE DISCUSS HOW
fiVE CENTURIES OF ENgAgEmENT gENERATED DISTINCTIVE±Y LATIN µmERICAN VARIETIES
OF ²PANISH AND ¸ORTUgUESE, FUNDAmENTA±±Y CHANgED HOW INDIgENOUS LATIN
97
µmERICAN ±ANgUAgES ARE SPOkEN, AND gAVE BIRTH TO WHO±±Y NEW ±ANgUAgES,
SUCH AS ÉAITIAN ÌREYò±. µ±ONg THE WAY WE A±SO HIgH±IgHT THE ImPORTANCE OF
RE±IgION AND RE±IgIOUS INSTITUTIONS IN SHAPINg LATIN µmERICAN IDEAS ABOUT
±ANgUAgE.
¹N THE SECOND HA±F OF THIS CHAPTER WE TURN TO THE AREA OF THE ±IBRARY WHERE
NEW ACqUISITIONS ARE kEPT. ÉERE WE fiND EVIDENCE OF THE gROWINg PRESENCE OF
LATIN µmERICAN ±ANgUAgES AROUND THE WOR±D, AS THEIR SPEAkERS TRAVE± AND
THEIR CU±TURA± PRODUCTIONS CIRCU±ATE EVER mORE WIDE±Y. ÈE PAY PARTICU±AR
ATTENTION TO LATIN µmERICAN ENTANg±EmENTS WITH THEIR µNg±OPHONE NEIgH-
BORS IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ÈE A±SO PAUSE TO CONSIDER WHAT THE FUTURE HO±DS IN
STORE FOR ²PANISH AND ¸ORTUgUESE, AS µmERICAN VARIETIES OF THESE ±ANgUAgES
FURTHER OUTPACE THEIR ³UROPEAN COUNTERPARTS IN NUmBERS OF SPEAkERS AND
PO±ITICA± INflUENCE.
µS WE ExP±ORE THE mIRRORED HA±±S OF THIS ±IBRARY, WE CE±EBRATE THE mYRIAD
WAYS THAT LATIN µmERICAN ±ANgUAgES HAVE INflUENCED HOW PEOP±E SPEAk IN
OTHER CORNERS OF THE g±OBE. °E CO±±ECTION OF STORIES fi±±INg ITS SHE±VES DEmON-
STRATE HOW ±ANgUAgE AND CONflICTS ABOUT ±ANgUAgE HAVE P±AYED ESSENTIA± RO±ES
IN SHAPINg THIS REgION’S COmP±Ex HISTORY, gIVINg VOICE TO ITS PO±ITICA±±Y FRAUgHT
CURRENT CONDITION AND FORETE±±INg ITS FUTURE, WHICH WI±± CONTINUE TO BE ONE OF
POROUS AND SHIſtINg BORDERS, DYNAmISm, AND g±OBA± ENgAgEmENT.
98 • ch a p t er f i v e
AND ¸ORTUgA± AT THE END OF THE fiſtEENTH CENTURY AND THEIR SUBSEqUENT EffORTS
TO CONqUER AND CO±ONIzE THOSE ±ANDS. ¸OPE µ±ExANDER ͹ BROkERED TREATIES
BETWEEN ²PAIN AND ¸ORTUgA± THAT DIVIDED THE g±OBE IN TWO. ¸ORTUgA± WAS
AWARDED EVANgE±ICA± RESPONSIBI±ITY FOR A TERRITORY STRETCHINg FROm THE EASTERN
SHORES OF ²OUTH µmERICA TO JAPAN, AND ²PAIN A SWATH OF THE WOR±D STRETCHINg
FROm º±ORIDA TO THE ¸HI±IPPINES. ³CHOES OF THIS TREATY CAN BE HEARD TODAY IN
THE NAmES OF CITIES ±IkE LOS µNgE±ES AND ÊOmBAY (FROm ¸ORTUgUESE bom
baim) AND IN WORDS ±IkE arigato IN JAPANESE (FROm ¸ORTUgUESE obrigado,
“THANk YOU”) AND THE ³Ng±ISH WORD peon (FROm ²PANISH peon, “FOOTmAN OR
FOOTSO±DIER”). µS IS WE±± kNOWN, ±ARgE SWATHS OF THE ½EW ÈOR±D, FROm ½EW
²PAIN TO THE µmAzON, WERE NAmED AſtER »±D ÈOR±D ±OCA±ES AND mYTHS. ÊUT
AT TImES THE PO±ITICS OF NAmINg WAS mORE COmP±Ex. ¹N 1510, FOR ExAmP±E, THE
²PANISH WRITER GARCI ¼ODRígUEz DE MONTA±VO—HIS HEAD fi±±ED WITH REPORTS
FROm ·O±UmBUS AND ·ORTéS—WROTE A POPU±AR NOVE± FEATURINg A WARRIOR
qUEEN NAmED ·A±AfiA, FROm A mYTHICA± IS±AND IN THE ¹NDIES NAmED
“·A±IFORNIA.” °AT EVOCATIVE NAmE, IN TURN, IS THOUgHT TO BE THE SOURCE OF THE
NAmE gIVEN TO THE ±ONg STRETCH OF THE ½ORTH µmERICAN ¸ACIfiC COAST RUNNINg
FROm THE ¶.². STATE TO THE TIP OF THE ÊAjA PENINSU±A. ¾ODAY, ±IkE COUNT±ESS
OTHER LATIN µmERICAN P±ACE-NAmES, IT HAS BEEN TAkEN UP IN NAmES FOR PUB±IC
P±ACES AND BUSINESSES FOUND ACROSS THE WOR±D.
ÈE±± OVER A THOUSAND DISTINCT TONgUES WERE SPOkEN IN LATIN µmERICA
WHEN THE fiRST ³UROPEANS ARRIVED ON ITS SHORES, A±± OF THEm RADICA±±Y DIffERENT
FROm THE ±ANgUAgES SPOkEN IN ³UROPE. ´URINg THE ·ONqUEST, AN ImmENSE
COmmUNICATION gU±F ExISTED BETWEEN THE ³UROPEANS AND THE µmERICAN
INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES. MISCOmmUNICATIONS ABOUNDED. »NE SUCH STORIED CASE
INVO±VED THE NAmE ÓUCATáN, WHICH NOW REFERS TO A SINg±E REgION OF MExICO BUT
INITIA±±Y DESIgNATED A VAST STRETCH OF ²PAIN’S ½EW ÈOR±D DISCOVERIES, ExTEND-
INg FROm MExICO TO ¸ANAmA. °E ²PANISH CONqUISTADOR ÉERNáN ·ORTéS
C±AImED THAT THE NAmE FOR THIS mARVE±OUS ±AND WAS mISTAkEN±Y DERIVED FROm
A MAYA ExPRESSION mEANINg “¹ DON’T UNDERSTAND”—A REP±Y BY MAYA ±OCA±S
WHEN NEW±Y ARRIVED ²PANIARDS ASkED WHAT THEIR HOmE±AND WAS CA±±ED. ²OmE
mODERN SCHO±ARS HAVE TAkEN A SImI±AR VIEW, WHI±E OTHERS HAVE C±AImED THAT
·ORTéS’S STORY WAS ITSE±F PROBAB±Y BASED ON A BAD INTERPRETATION. ¹N EITHER CASE,
ACCOUNTS AgREE THAT NONE OF THE mU±TIP±E POSSIB±E SOURCES FOR THE NAmE COR-
RESPOND WITH ANY MAYA P±ACE-NAmE. ·OUNT±ESS OTHER mISUNDERSTANDINgS OF
THIS SORT ARE ±OST TO HISTORY. ·O±ONIzATION DECImATED mANY INDIgENOUS PEO-
P±ES, WHO TOOk THEIR ±ANgUAgES WITH THEm TO THEIR gRAVES. ½EVERTHE±ESS, SEV-
ERA± HUNDRED INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES ARE SPOkEN TODAY. µT ·ONqUEST, TWO OF
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 99
THE mOST WIDE±Y SPOkEN WERE ëUECHUA (PRINCIPA± ±ANgUAgE OF THE ¹NCA
³mPIRE) AND ½AHUAT± (PRINCIPA± ±ANgUAgE OF THE µzTEC ³mPIRE); SEVERA± mI±-
±ION PEOP±E SPEAk mODERN VARIETIES OF THOSE ±ANgUAgES TODAY. ÓOU CAN ±EARN TO
SPEAk THEm, TOO, IN COURSES OffERED AT UNIVERSITIES ACROSS THE g±OBE.
100 • ch a p t er f i v e
LATIN µmERICA A±SO BECAmE “LATIN” µmERICA VIA THE USE OF THE LATIN A±PHA-
BET. °E PRODUCTION OF WRITTEN TExTS—RE±IgIOUS, ±EgA±, SCHO±AR±Y—WAS CENTRA±
TO THE CO±ONIA± ENTERPRISE. ÊUT WRITINg IN THE µmERICAS HAS A PREVIOUS HISTORY
AS WE±±: SEVERA± OF THE WOR±D’S O±DEST AND mOST SOPHISTICATED WRITINg SYSTEmS
BEgAN DEVE±OPINg SOmE TWENTY-fiVE HUNDRED YEARS AgO IN MESOAmERICA
(ROUgH±Y, MExICO AND ·ENTRA± µmERICA). MANY WERE STI±± WIDE±Y USED UPON THE
ARRIVA± OF THE ²PANISH AND FOR mANY DECADES AſtER. ÊUT AS CO±ONIA± RU±E TOOk
HO±D IN THE µmERICAS, THE ²PANISH ±AUNCHED CONCERTED EffORTS TO gATHER AND
DESTROY TExTS WRITTEN IN INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES, VIEWINg THEm AS IDO±ATROUS.
µ±THOUgH THIS SAVAgE REPRESSION OF INDIgENOUS RE±IgION NEAR±Y WIPED OUT THE
REgION’S ANCIENT WRITINg TRADITIONS, THE REmAININg TExTS HAVE COmE OVER THE
PAST CENTURY TO ATTRACT WIDESPREAD ATTENTION. °E MESOAmERICAN CODICES THAT
SURVIVED THE PURgES ENDED UP STASHED IN ±IBRARIES IN ¸ARIS, LONDON, AND E±SE-
WHERE IN ³UROPE. ÓURI ÌNOROzOV, THE mAN WHO CRACkED THE “MAYA CODE,” WAS
BORN IN ¶kRAINE AND STUDIED ETHNO±OgY AND ³gYPTO±OgY IN MOSCOW. ÉIS
SEmINA± WORk ON MAYAN WRITINg, PUB±ISHED IN 1952, WAS BASED ON CODICES THAT
THE ²OVIET ¼ED µRmY SNATCHED UP FROm ÊER±IN’S NATIONA± ±IBRARY IN THE AſtER-
mATH OF ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹¹. ÌNOROzOV’S WORk A±SO DREW HEAVI±Y FROm THE WRITINgS
OF A SIxTEENTH-CENTURY ²PANISH BISHOP NAmED ´IEgO DE LANDA. ´E LANDA
HE±PED PURgE THE ÓUCATAN OF MAYAN WRITINg, BUT IN AN IRONIC TWIST, HIS NOTES
PROVIDED THE kEY TO REDISCOVERINg ITS ±OST mEANINg. ºOUR AND A HA±F CENTURIES
±ATER, MAYAN COmmUNITIES IN MExICO AND GUATEmA±A HAVE REC±AImED THEIR
SYmBO±S AND NOW PUT THEm TO USE IN STREET SIgNS, ±OgOS, AND OTHER DISP±AYS OF
±OCA± IDENTITY—EVERYTHINg FROm TATTOOS TO ON±INE AVATARS. µND THE mI±±IONS
OF TOURISTS FROm AROUND THE WOR±D WHO VISIT THE MAYAN REgION EVERY YEAR TAkE
PIECES OF THAT ANCIENT WRITINg HOmE WITH THEm, AS MAYAN g±YPHS EmB±AzONED
ON ¾-SHIRTS, jEWE±RY, AND OTHER SOUVENIRS.
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 101
INVENT NEW WORDS FOR THESE. »NE STRATEgY WAS TO ExTEND THE mEANINg OF
A±READY ExISTINg NATIVE WORDS, SUCH AS USINg THE WORD FOR “DEER” TO REFER TO
HORSES AS WE±±. ¹N A NUmBER OF CASES, SPEAkERS DISTINgUISHED NATIVE THINgS
FROm ImPORTS BY ADDINg castellano TO THE NAmE. ºOR ExAmP±E, IN THE MExICAN
±ANgUAgE MAzATEC, THE WORD FOR “BREAD”—A FOOD DATINg FROm CO±ONIA± DAYS—
IS ñoxtila (·ASTI±IAN TORTI±±A); THE WORD FOR “CHAIR,” A TYPE OF FURNITURE ±IkEWISE
OF CO±ONIA± PROVENANCE, IS yaxile (·ASTI±IAN WOOD[EN THINg]).
·ENTURIES OF MOORISH PRESENCE IN ¹BERIA A±SO gIſtED ²PANISH AND ¸ORTUgUESE
WITH HUNDREDS OF µRABIC ±OANWORDS FROm DIVERSE REA±mS OF ExPERIENCE; FROm
RE±IgION, ojalá (FROm law šhaʾ allāh, “GOD WI±±INg”); FROm ARCHITECTURE, adobe
AND alcoba (A±COVE); FROm mATERIA± CU±TURE, almohada (PI±±OW); FROm AgRICU±-
TURE, café, azúcar, zanahoria, aceituna, AND algodón (COffEE, SUgAR, CARROT, O±IVE,
AND COTTON, RESPECTIVE±Y); FROm PO±ITICS, asesino (ASSASSIN) AND alcalde (mAYOR);
FROm mATHEmATICS, algebra AND cero (zERO); AND FROm COmmERCE, tarifa (TARIff).
MANY OF THESE µRABIC ±OANS mADE THEIR WAY INTO ³Ng±ISH, BY WAY OF CONTACT WITH
²PANISH, AND THEY WERE INCORPORATED INTO INDIgENOUS LATIN µmERICAN ±AN-
gUAgES AS WE±±. ºOR ExAmP±E, THE WORD FOR “COIN” OR “mONEY” IN mANY OF THESE
±ANgUAgES IS DERIVED FROm tumn, AN µRABIC ±OANWORD FOR “SI±VER COIN,” AS IN THE
½AHUAT± WORD tomin OR THE MIxE WORD meen.
MEANWHI±E, DIffERENT NATIONA± VARIETIES OF ²PANISH EmERgED ACROSS LATIN
µmERICA AS THEY ACqUIRED DISTINCTIVE RHYTHmS AND VOCABU±ARY TAkEN IN FROm
THE INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES SPOkEN A±± AROUND THEm. °IS, IN TURN, SOWED THE
SEEDS OF ±INgUISTIC CONflICT, AS THE DIVERgENCE OF LATIN µmERICAN ²PANISH FROm
ITS PENINSU±AR PARENT ±ED TO THE FORmATION OF THE ¼EA± µCADEmIA ³SPAñO±A
(¼OYA± ²PANISH µCADEmY), WHICH WAS CHARgED WITH PO±ICINg THE ±ANgUAgE’S
BOUNDARIES AND CODES OF CONTACT. ³AR±Y CONTACT BETWEEN ²PANISH AND ¾AíNO
(A ±ANgUAgE WIDE±Y SPOkEN IN THE ·ARIBBEAN BEFORE ·ONqUEST) gAVE ²PANISH
THE WORDS canoa (CANOE), barbacoa (BARBECUE), hamaca (HAmmOCk), AND
caciQue (CHIEF, BOSS), NOT TO mENTION THE NAmES OF TWO ESSENTIA± g±OBA± FOOD
STAP±ES: maíz (CORN) AND patata (POTATO). ½AHUAT± HEAVI±Y INflUENCED MExICAN
²PANISH, WHICH ABSORBED NAmES FOR P±ACES (¾±AxCA±A, µCAPU±CO), P±ANTS
(tomate, chili), ANImA±S (ocelote, coyote), CUISINE (tamales, chocolate), AND OTHER
THINgS PREVIOUS±Y UNkNOWN TO ³UROPEANS, SUCH AS hule (RUBBER) AND copal
(THE CRYSTA±±IzED SAP OF A ½EW ÈOR±D TREE USED AS INCENSE). µ SImI±AR PROCESS
TOOk P±ACE WITH ëUECHUA WORDS ADOPTED INTO µNDEAN ²PANISH, AmONg THEm
llama, jerky (AS IN BEEF jERkY, FROm ëUECHUA ch’arki), condor, puma, AND THE
FASHIONAB±E gRAIN Quinoa. ·HE GUEVARA gOT HIS FAmOUS NICkNAmE FROm THE
INTERjECTION che (mAN! DUDE!) USED IN µRgENTINE AND OTHER VARIETIES OF ²OUTH
102 • ch a p t er f i v e
µmERICAN ²PANISH. »NE POPU±AR BUT CONTESTED NARRATIVE HO±DS THAT IT, TOO, IS
AN INDIgENOUS ±OANWORD, ORIgINATINg IN MAPUDUNgUN, THE ±ANgUAgE OF THE
MAPUCHE PEOP±E OF SOUTHERN ·HI±E AND µRgENTINA. ¹N THE TERRITORIES CONTRO±-
±ED BY ¸ORTUgA±, CONTACT BETWEEN ¸ORTUgUESE AND INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES SUCH
AS ¾UPí WAS ±ESS ExTENSIVE, A±THOUgH THEY NEVERTHE±ESS ±Eſt AN INDE±IB±E mARk
ON ÊRAzI±IAN ¸ORTUgUESE. ¸ONDER THAT AS YOU SIT ON THE BEACHES OF ¹PANEmA
(“fiSH±ESS WATER”), DRINkINg YOUR caipirinha (“±ITT±E HI±±BI±±Y”).
°US LATIN µmERICAN WORDS HAVE BEEN ExPORTED OUT OF THE REgION FOR CEN-
TURIES AND HAVE TAkEN UP RESIDENCE IN ±ANgUAgES AROUND THE g±OBE. °E
²PANISH CO±ONIzERS BROUgHT mANY ¾AíNO AND ½AHUAT± ±OANWORDS WITH THEm
TO THE ¸HI±IPPINES, WHERE THEY ENTERED INTO ¾AgA±Og. µmERICAN ³Ng±ISH
ABSORBED A ±ARgE NUmBER OF INDIgENOUS TERmS AS WE±±, THROUgH CONTACT WITH
MExICAN ²PANISH. °E ±IST OF ½AHUAT± ±OANWORDS IN ³Ng±ISH INC±UDES STAP±E
CROPS SUCH AS mAIzE, POTATOES, TOmATOES, AND TOBACCO. ²OmE OF OUR FAVORITE
FOODS AND DRINkS—SUCH AS gUACAmO±E, CHOCO±ATE, AND TEqUI±A—ARE A±SO ±OANS
FROm ½AHUAT±. µND THERE ARE OTHER PARTIA±±Y OBSCURED ½AHUAT± gEmS IN
³Ng±ISH SUCH AS ·HIC±ET gUm (FROm tzictli), CHIA PETS (FROm chian), AND
SHACk—AS IN ¼ADIO ²HACk OR “SHACkINg UP” (±IkE±Y FROm xacalli, “HUT”).
ÍIRTUA±±Y A±± OF THESE INDIgENOUS TERmS ENTERED ³Ng±ISH INDIRECT±Y, VIA
²PANISH. °ERE IS, THOUgH, AT ±EAST ONE ³Ng±ISH WORD THAT POSSIB±Y mADE THE
jUmP FROm AN INDIgENOUS LATIN µmERICAN ±ANgUAgE DIRECT±Y INTO ³Ng±ISH VIA
S±AVE TRADERS WHO PASSED THROUgH THE GU±F OF MExICO IN THE mID-SIxTEENTH
CENTURY: A SEA CREATURE WITH RAzOR-SHARP TEETH THAT MAYANS CA±±ED xook. ¾ODAY,
³Ng±ISH SPEAkERS CA±± IT shark.
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 103
INHABITANTS WERE A±mOST COmP±ETE±Y WIPED OUT DURINg THE INITIA± DECADES OF
·ONqUEST, ARE NOW PREDOmINANT±Y INHABITED BY µFRO-DESCENDANT PEOP±E.
ÊRAzI± HAS A SImI±AR DEmOgRAPHIC PROfi±E: ITS SmA±± INDIgENOUS POPU±ATION,
WHI±E PO±ITICA±±Y AND SYmBO±ICA±±Y ImPORTANT, IS DWARFED BY µFRO-ÊRAzI±IANS.
°ERE ARE AUDIB±E ±EgACIES OF THE S±AVE TRADE AS WE±±. ·REO±E ±ANgUAgES ARE
SPOkEN THROUgHOUT THE ·ARIBBEAN AND COASTA± REgIONS OF ²OUTH µmERICA.
·OmBININg E±EmENTS OF ³UROPEAN, µFRICAN, AND µmERINDIAN ±ANgUAgES,
THESE ±INgUISTIC HYBRIDS EmERgED DIRECT±Y OUT OF THE ±INgUISTIC REA±ITIES OF S±AV-
ERY. ²±AVE TRADERS AND OWNERS TRIED TO DISRUPT DE±IBERATE±Y THE TRANSmISSION OF
µFRICAN ±ANgUAgES SUCH AS ¹gBO AND ÓORUBA FROm ONE gENERATION TO THE NExT
BY SEPARATINg SPEAkERS OF THE SAmE ±ANgUAgE. ÉUNDREDS OF µFRICAN ±OAN-
WORDS—SUCH AS marimba, merengue, mucama (HOUSEmAID), guineo (BANANA),
AND mandinga (DEVI± OR gOB±IN)—CAmE TO INFUSE NOT ON±Y LATIN µmERICAN
VARIETIES OF ²PANISH AND ¸ORTUgUESE, BUT EVENTUA±±Y THEIR ³UROPEAN COUNTER-
PARTS, TOO. µND IN LATIN µmERICA’S SYNCRETIC RE±IgIONS SUCH AS ²ANTERíA AND
·ANDOmB±é, µFRICAN ±ANgUAgES AND CREO±IzED VARIETIES SERVE VITA± ±ITURgICA±
FUNCTIONS. ¹N THE WAkE OF S±AVE REVO±TS AND NINETEENTH-CENTURY WARS OF INDE-
PENDENCE, A NUmBER OF THESE CREO±ES ROSE TO BECOmE OffiCIA± ±ANgUAgES OF THE
NEW NATIONS, SUCH AS ÉAITIAN ·REO±E AND GUYANESE ·REO±E. ¹N THE TWENTIETH
CENTURY, JAmAICAN ¸ATWA—A RICH B±END OF ³Ng±ISH, THE ÈEST µFRICAN ±AN-
gUAgE µkAN, AND PARTS OF OTHER µFRICAN, ³UROPEAN, AND INDIgENOUS
·ARIBBEAN ±ANgUAgES—HAS HAD AN ENORmOUS INflUENCE ON g±OBA± POP CU±TURE
VIA THE RISE AND SPREAD OF ¼ASTAFARIANISm AND REggAE mUSIC. µ ±ESS WE±± kNOWN
BUT FASCINATINg STORY IS THAT OF THE µFRO-ÊRAzI±IAN PRESENCE IN GHANA. ¹N THE
fiRST HA±F OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY, SEVERA± THOUSAND FORmER S±AVES RETURNED
TO GHANA, BRINgINg THEIR VARIETY OF ¸ORTUgUESE WITH THEm. ²TI±± kNOWN TODAY
AS THE ¾ABOm PEOP±E (FROm ¸ORTUgUESE ta bom, “IT’S OkAY”), THEIR ¸ORTUgUESE
SURNAmES ARE SCATTERED ACROSS SOUTHERN GHANA AND THE CITY OF µCCRA. ·ONTACT
BETWEEN THE ·ARIBBEAN AND ÈEST µFRICA IS ONgOINg AS ·UBAN mEDICA± BRI-
gADES WORk WITH ÈEST µFRICAN HEA±TH OffiCIA±S TO CONTAIN OUTBREAkS OF DIS-
EASES ±IkE ³BO±A.
»VER THE PAST THREE CENTURIES, DEVE±OPmENTS IN LATIN µmERICA HAVE SHAPED
THE WOR±D’S ±INgUISTIC ±ANDSCAPE IN OTHER WAYS, TOO. MIgRANTS FROm ACROSS THE
g±OBE CAmE TO LATIN µmERICA flEEINg RE±IgIOUS AND PO±ITICA± PERSECUTION OR
SEEkINg ECONOmIC OPPORTUNITY. µS A RESU±T, THERE ARE POCkETS OF mINORITIES
ACROSS THE REgION WHO SPEAk ±ANgUAgES THAT ARE NEITHER INDIgENOUS NOR STEm
DIRECT±Y FROm CO±ONIA±ISm OR THE µFRICAN S±AVE TRADE. ¹N THE NINETEENTH CEN-
TURY, FOR ExAmP±E, ¾AmI±-SPEAkINg ±ABORERS WERE BROUgHT TO ·ARIBBEAN
104 • ch a p t er f i v e
ºRENCH CO±ONIES, ÉINDI SPEAkERS TO ÊRITISH GUYANA, AND ·HINESE ±ABORERS,
BOTH INDENTURED AND CONTRACT, TO VARIOUS PARTS OF THE REgION THROUgH THE
COO±IE TRADE; ·HINESE–½EW ÈOR±D CU±INARY FUSIONS—chifa FOOD IN ¸ERU AND
comida China-Cubana IN ½EW ÓORk—REPRESENT A WE±±-kNOWN ±EgACY OF THIS
CONTACT. ºROm THE MIDD±E ³AST, LEBANESE DESCENDANTS IN LATIN µmERICA
INC±UDE SOmE OF THE REgION’S mOST INflUENTIA± PEOP±E: FROm MExICO’S RICHEST
mAN, THE ºORBES ±IST–TOPPINg BI±±IONAIRE ·AR±OS ²±Im ÉE±ú, TO THE ·O±OmBIAN
POP STAR ²HAkIRA. ´IVERSE gROUPS OF ³UROPEANS A±SO mIgRATED TO THE REgION IN
SIzAB±E NUmBERS, WITH ±INgUISTIC CONSEqUENCES THAT CONTINUE TODAY. ¹N THE
1860S AND 1870S, SEVERA± THOUSAND ÈE±SH NATIONA±ISTS mOVED TO ¸ATAgONIA TO
ESTAB±ISH A CO±ONY THERE, FAR FROm THE REACH OF THE ³Ng±ISH-SPEAkINg WOR±D;
¸ATAgONIAN ÈE±SH CONTINUES TO BE SPOkEN IN THE ·HUBUT PROVINCE OF ÓR
µRIANNIN (THEIR NAmE FOR “µRgENTINA”). ·OmmUNITIES OF GERmAN SPEAkERS
ExIST IN A±mOST EVERY LATIN µmERICAN COUNTRY, INC±UDINg MENNONITES IN
MExICO AND ¸ARAgUAY AND COffEE P±ANTATION OWNERS IN MExICO AND GUATEmA±A.
ÊUENOS µIRES BECAmE A g±OBA± CENTER FOR ÓIDDISH THEATER IN THE fiRST HA±F OF
THE TWENTIETH CENTURY AND TODAY HAS ONE OF THE WOR±D’S FEW REmAININg DAI±Y
NEWSPAPERS IN THE ±ANgUAgE.
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 105
¸ERU. ÊY THE 1960S IT HAD P±ACED ÊIB±E TRANS±ATORS IN COmmUNITIES ACROSS
LATIN µmERICA AND HAD BEgUN mAkINg FORAYS INTO µFRICA AND »CEANIA. °EIR
WORk HAS P±AYED A CRUCIA± RO±E IN SUBVERTINg “±INgUISTIC RACISm” BASED ON
BE±IEFS THAT INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES ARE INHERENT±Y INFERIOR TO ³UROPEAN ONES.
°E ²¹L HAS A±SO BEEN AN ImPORTANT IF CONTROVERSIA± FORCE OF CHANgE, PARTICI-
PATINg IN AND mAkINg POSSIB±E THE DRAmATIC RISE OF ¸ROTESTANT EVANgE±IzATION
ACROSS LATIN µmERICA OVER THE PAST CENTURY.
LATIN µmERICA’S ±INgUISTIC INflUENCE ON THE WOR±D HAS BEEN PARTICU±AR±Y
TIED TO THE EVO±UTION OF THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH. ¾ODAY, fiVE CENTURIES AſtER THE
·ATHO±IC ·HURCH DREW A DIVIDINg ±INE THROUgH THE µmERICAS THAT gRANTED ONE
PIECE TO ²PAIN AND THE OTHER TO ¸ORTUgA±, THE CHURCH HAS ITS fiRST ½EW ÈOR±D
POPE (SEE ²CHEPER-ÉUgHES AND ²CHEPER ÉUgHES, THIS VO±UmE). ÉE, ±IkE
ÊORgES, IS µRgENTINE. µND ±IkE THE RENOWNED AUTHOR, ¸OPE ºRANCIS SPEAkS A
VARIETY OF ²PANISH THAT IN mANY WAYS CONFORmS TO THE STANDARDS PROmOTED BY
²PAIN’S ¼OYA± ²PANISH µCADEmY—WHOSE mOTTO, TE±±INg±Y, STATES ITS gOA± TO
“LImPIA, fijA Y DA SP±ENDOR” (·±EAN, SET, AND gIVE SP±ENDOR [TO]) THE ²PANISH
±ANgUAgE. ÓET HIS ²PANISH A±SO DEPARTS FROm THOSE NORmS, AS WHEN THE POPE
RECENT±Y SAID, “´IOS NOS PREmEREA,” DRAWINg ON porteño (ÊUENOS µIRES) SOCCER
±INgO, THAT COU±D BE g±OSSED AS “GOD gOES OUT TO mEET US, HE gETS OUT AHEAD OF
US, HE SURPRISES US.” °IS REflECTS THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH’S ONgOINg REORIENTATION
OVER mUCH OF THIS CENTURY TOWARD IDEAS AND AgENDAS ANCHORED IN LATIN
µmERICA.
°E CHURCH WAS mASSIVE±Y INflUENCED BY ±IBERATION THEO±OgY; A±TERNATIVE±Y
EmBRACED AND REjECTED BY THE CHURCH HIERARCHY, THE mOVEmENT ORIgINATED IN
LATIN µmERICA IN THE ±AST HA±F OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY AND CA±±ED FOR
·HRISTIAN TEACHINgS TO BE DIRECTED TOWARD ±IBERATION FROm UNjUST SOCIA± CON-
DITIONS. ¸OPE ºRANCIS’S RECENT DECISION CONCERNINg THE ASSASSINATED PRIEST
çSCAR ¼OmERO REflECTS THE POWER OF LATIN µmERICAN CONCERNS TO SHAPE THE
CHURCH’S DIRECTION: A ²A±VADORAN AND ±EADINg ±IBERATION THEO±OgIAN, ¼OmERO’S
±EſtIST VIEWS PREVIOUS±Y HAD BEEN THE gROUNDS FOR CHURCH OffiCIA±S IN ¼OmE TO
B±OCk HIS BEATIfiCATION. °IS SHIſt IN THE BA±ANCE OF POWER WITHIN THE CHURCH,
±IkE THE POPE’S USE OF µRgENTINE ²PANISH, IS A±SO PART OF BROADER REA±IgNmENTS
IN THE gEOPO±ITICA± ORDER AND THEIR ±INgUISTIC ENTAI±mENTS: AS SOmE LATIN
µmERICAN COUNTRIES HAVE mOVED PAST THEIR FORmER CO±ONIzERS IN THE CONfigU-
RATION OF g±OBA± POWER RE±ATIONS, ½EW ÈOR±D VARIETIES OF ²PANISH AND
¸ORTUgUESE HAVE INCREASINg±Y COmE TO EC±IPSE THEIR PENINSU±AR COUNTERPARTS
IN THE g±OBA± “mARkETP±ACE OF ±ANgUAgES.” °IS HAS ImP±ICATIONS FOR THE g±OBA±
106 • ch a p t er f i v e
STANDINg OF LATIN µmERICA’S OTHER ±ANgUAgES AS WE±±. ²INCE TAkINg OffiCE, FOR
ExAmP±E, ONE OF ¸OPE ºRANCIS’S mOST REmARkAB±E DECISIONS HAS BEEN TO APPROVE
A REqUEST FROm THE ´IOCESE OF ²AN ·RISTóBA± DE LAS ·ASAS (IN ·HIAPAS,
MExICO) TO OffiCIA±±Y APPROVE THE USE OF MAYAN ±ANgUAgES FOR mASS, CONFES-
SION, AND OTHER ·ATHO±IC RITUA±S.
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 107
Migration
¸EOP±E HAVE BEEN mOVINg TO LATIN µmERICA FOR CENTURIES. ÓET THE REgION IS
mORE OſtEN PORTRAYED NOT AS A DESTINATION FOR mIgRANTS BUT AS A mASS PRODUCER
OF THEm. »NE OF THE BEST-kNOWN—AND HEAVI±Y STEREOTYPED—VECTORS OF LATIN
µmERICAN ±INgUISTIC INflUENCE ON THE WOR±D CONCERNS THIS mOVEmENT OF LATIN
µmERICANS INTO OTHER COUNTRIES ACROSS THE g±OBE. LATIN µmERICANS CARRY THEIR
±ANgUAgES WITH THEm ON THEIR jOURNEYS; BADgES OF IDENTITY, THEY ARE A±SO SYm-
BO±IC RESOURCES USEFU± IN ESTAB±ISHINg AND mAINTAININg CONNECTIONS IN THEIR
DESTINATION COUNTRIES. LATIN µmERICAN mIgRANTS HAVE SUCCEEDED, TO VARYINg
DEgREES, IN PRESERVINg THE USE OF THEIR ±ANgUAgES ACROSS mU±TIP±E gENERATIONS
AND IN ESTAB±ISHINg PUB±IC P±ACES FOR THEm. ¸OPE ºRANCIS’S FAmI±Y HISTORY
ExEmP±IfiES SUCH TRENDS. ÊORN JORgE MARIO ÊERgOg±IO IN ÊUENOS µIRES IN 1936,
HE WAS A CHI±D OF ImmIgRANTS WHO flED TO µRgENTINA TO ESCAPE THE FASCISm OF
ÊENITO MUSSO±INI’S ¹TA±Y. µND ±IkE COUNT±ESS LATIN µmERICANS, HE HAS
“RETURNED” TO A P±ACE WHERE HE HAS ROOTS THAT ARE NOT ON±Y CU±TURA± AND HIS-
TORICA± BUT A±SO ±INgUISTIC. µS LATIN µmERICANS HAVE mOVED IN ±ARgE NUmBERS
TO COUNTRIES WHERE THEY SHARE THE NATIONA± ±ANgUAgE—¸ERUVIANS AND
³CUADORANS mIgRATINg TO ²PAIN, ÊRAzI±IANS TO ¸ORTUgA±—THEIR mOVEmENT
mIRRORS IN REVERSE CO±ONIA±-ERA mIgRATIONS FROm ³UROPE TO THE µmERICAS.
°E PATTERN HAS BEEN ECHOED BY PEOP±E WITH TIES TO COUNTRIES OTHER THAN
THE ¹BERIAN CO±ONIA± POWERS. °US TODAY THERE ARE ±ARgE gROUPS OF ²PANISH-
SPEAkINg µRgENTINES, ·HI±EANS, AND ÍENEzUE±ANS IN ¹TA±Y, GERmANY, AND
ºRANCE; IN JAPAN, THERE ARE SIzAB±E NUmBERS OF ¸ERUVIANS AND ³CUADORANS.
°OUgH mANY DO NOT SPEAk THE NATIONA± ±ANgUAgE OF THE DESTINATION COUNTRY,
THEY HAVE NEVERTHE±ESS BEEN ExPOSED TO IT IN mYRIAD WAYS THROUgH THE PRES-
ENCE OF ±ANgUAgES SUCH AS GERmAN, ¹TA±IAN, AND JAPANESE IN LATIN µmERICA.
ÊORgES’S OWN HISTORY ECHOES SImI±AR ENgAgEmENTS WITH OTHER COUNTRIES AND
THEIR ±ANgUAgES. °E AUTHOR WAS RAISED IN A BI±INgUA± ²PANISH-³Ng±ISH HOUSE-
HO±D (ONE gRANDmOTHER WAS ³Ng±ISH) AND SPENT HIS FORmATIVE YEARS AT SCHOO±S
IN ²WITzER±AND AND ²PAIN.
108 • ch a p t er f i v e
NOTWITHSTANDINg OffiCIA± VIEWS TO THE CONTRARY—TO BE ±ITT±E mORE THAN A NEW
FORm OF ImPERIA±ISm. ÊUT HOWEVER ONE INTERPRETS ¶.². PO±ITICA± INVO±VEmENT
IN THE REgION—FROm THE MONROE ´OCTRINE THROUgH THE ·O±D ÈAR INTO THE
PRESENT—THAT HISTORY HAS POSITIONED ³Ng±ISH AS AN INVA±UAB±E ±INgUISTIC
RESOURCE ACROSS LATIN µmERICA. ÈHI±E A RE±ATIVE±Y SmA±± PERCENTAgE OF LATIN
µmERICANS SPEAkS ³Ng±ISH AS A fiRST ±ANgUAgE, ³Ng±ISH HAS BEEN OF CRITICA±
ImPORTANCE FOR LATIN µmERICANS mOVINg BACk AND FORTH BETWEEN THE REgION
AND THE ¶NITED ²TATES (AND ·ANADA) OUT OF ECONOmIC NECESSITY. ¹T HAS A±SO
P±AYED A CRUCIA± RO±E IN THE ±IVES OF E±ITE LATIN µmERICANS, WHO OſtEN PURSUE
UNIVERSITY EDUCATION, SHOP, VACATION, AND DO BUSINESS IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES.
ÈITHIN LATIN µmERICA, ³Ng±ISH HAS BEEN AND CONTINUES TO SERVE AS A mEDIUm
FOR PO±ITICA± AND ECONOmIC TRANSACTIONS AND AS A gATEWAY TO µNg±OPHONE CU±-
TURE. LATIN µmERICANS HAVE BECOmE ADEPT AT VARYINg THEIR SPE±±INg AND PRO-
NUNCIATION WITH gREAT PRECISION IN ORDER TO INDICATE WHETHER BORROWED BITS OF
³Ng±ISH ARE mEANT TO BE UNDERSTOOD AS USEFU± ADDITIONS TO ±OCA± VOCABU±ARY
OR AS EVIDENCE OF µmERICAN ImPERIA±ISm. ¹T mAY BE Halloween FOR A SCHOO±
±ESSON ON µmERICAN HO±IDAYS, BUT IT qUICk±Y BECOmES Jalowín IN A SARCASTIC
RANT ABOUT THE µmERICANIzATION OF MExICO’S ´AY OF THE ´EAD FESTIVITIES.
ÓOUNg PEOP±E ACROSS LATIN µmERICA (“FRESAS” IN MExICO, “CHETOS” IN ¶RUgUAY)
PEPPER THEIR SPEECH WITH ³Ng±ISH S±ANg IN ORDER TO STRIkE A COSmOPO±ITAN,
UPPER-C±ASS POSE. µ WI±D±Y POPU±AR MExICAN-ÍENEzUE±AN CHI±DREN’S TE±EVISION
PROgRAm CA±±ED La CÉ HAS TEENAgE gIR±S A±± OVER LATIN µmERICA YE±±INg,
“¡ºOCUS, CHICOS! ¡ºOCUS!”
µNg±O µmERICANS DO COmPARAB±E SYmBO±IC WORk WITH BAD±Y mISPRO-
NOUNCED AND UNgRAmmATICA± ²PANISH. »ſtEN IT gETS USED IN C±EAR±Y PEjORATIVE
WAYS, AS WHEN A USED CAR IS SO±D “FOR PESOS.” ²OmEHOW A SIESTA SOUNDS mORE
DECADENT THAN AN AſtERNOON NAP, A fiESTA WI±DER THAN A FESTIVA±. µT OTHER
TImES, mOCk ²PANISH SEEmS TO EVOkE A FUN-±OVINg CASUA± STANCE: “½O PROB-
±EmO, mAN” (THE gRAmmATICA±±Y CORRECT VERSION IS “½O HAY PROB±EmA”). µND
OF COURSE, THERE IS A ±ONg AND STORIED ASSOCIATION IN THE µmERICAN ImAgINATION
BETWEEN ²PANISH AND THE “ÈI±D ÈEST.” °IS INC±UDES P±ACES, SUCH AS THE
¸ONDEROSA AND LAREDO; PEOP±E AND ANImA±S, SUCH AS BUCkAROO (vaQuero, “COW-
BOY”) AND mUSTANg (mesteño); AND INSTITUTIONS, SUCH AS RANCH, RODEO, AND
HOOSEgOW ( juzgado, “jAI±”).
´IVERSE COmmUNITIES OF LATIN µmERICAN mIgRANTS HAVE P±AYED A PROmI-
NENT RO±E IN µmERICAN PUB±IC ±IFE. »VER THE PAST CENTURY, ´OmINICANS, ¸UERTO
¼ICANS, ÉAITIANS, AND ·UBANS HAVE A±± mIgRATED TO THE ¶NITED ²TATES IN ±ARgE
NUmBERS FOR REASONS RANgINg FROm PO±ITICA± REPRESSION AND UPHEAVA± TO
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 109
ECONOmIC NECESSITY. LATIN µmERICAN mIgRANTS HAVE A HIgH±Y VISIB±E COmmER-
CIA± PRESENCE, WITH RESTAURANTS AND STORES CATERINg SPECIfiCA±±Y TO mIgRANTS AND
OſtEN TARgETINg CUSTOmERS BY COUNTRY OF ORIgIN; THEIR INflUENCE IS A±SO FE±T
THROUgH NUmEROUS CU±TURA± AND RE±IgIOUS ORgANIzATIONS AND EVENTS. °EIR
ExISTENCE HAS ±INgUISTIC ImP±ICATIONS AS WE±±. ²UCH BUSINESSES, INSTITUTIONS,
ORgANIzATIONS, AND ACTIVITIES REVO±VE AROUND THE USE OF LATIN µmERICAN ±AN-
gUAgES. °EY CREATE PUB±IC SPACES WHERE USINg LATIN µmERICAN ²PANISH AND
¸ORTUgUESE, ·ARIBBEAN CREO±ES, AND µmERINDIAN ±ANgUAgES ARE ±EgITImIzED
AND gIVEN VA±UE. °IS SUPPORTS THEIR TRANSmISSION ACROSS gENERATIONS AND EVEN
RECRUITS NEW SPEAkERS. °EIR USE IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES CREATES NEW SPACES FOR
±INgUISTIC mINg±INg, WHERE THE DYNAmICS OF ±INgUISTIC AND CU±TURA± COExIST-
ENCE CAN BE WORkED OUT IN PRACTICE.
¹mmIgRANTS ARE DRAWN TO PARTICU±AR PARTS OF THE ¶NITED ²TATES NOT ON±Y BY
NETWORkS OF kINSHIP BUT A±SO BY OTHER FORmS OF A±±IANCE THAT INC±UDE SHARINg
A ±ANgUAgE, EVEN IF NOT A COUNTRY OF ORIgIN. °US mOST ¸ORTUgUESE-SPEAkINg
ImmIgRANTS TO THE ¶NITED ²TATES mOVED TO ½EW ³Ng±AND: INITIA± mIgRANTS
FROm ¸ORTUgA±, WHO ARRIVED TO WORk IN THE fiSHINg AND WHA±INg INDUSTRIES,
WERE ±ATER jOINED BY mIgRANTS FROm ÊRAzI±, ·APE ÍERDE, AND EVEN µNgO±A, A±±
BRINgINg A±ONg THEIR OWN VARIETIES OF ¸ORTUgUESE AS WE±± AS ±OCA± CREO±ES.
GUATEmA±ANS AND ²A±VADORANS, FOR ExAmP±E, HAVE TENDED TO SETT±E IN REgIONS
WITH ±ARgE COmmUNITIES OF MExICANS AND MExICAN µmERICANS—IN A FEW
CASES, THROUgH CONNECTIONS mADE DURINg THEIR jOURNEY TO THE ¶NITED ²TATES,
WHICH gENERA±±Y INVO±VES PASSINg THROUgH MExICO fiRST.
µS THE SINg±E ±ARgEST gROUP OF LATIN µmERICAN ImmIgRANTS TO THE COUNTRY,
THE TENS OF mI±±IONS OF MExICANS AND MExICAN µmERICANS ±IVINg IN THE ¶NITED
²TATES ARE PERHAPS A SPECIA± CASE. ¹N SOmE ±OCA±ES—·A±IFORNIA, ¾ExAS, AND
º±ORIDA, AS WE±± AS mAjOR CITIES ±IkE ·HICAgO AND ½EW ÓORk—THEIR NUmBERS
ARE ESPECIA±±Y ±ARgE. ÊUT THERE ARE A±SO SIzAB±E POPU±ATIONS IN NEAR±Y EVERY
STATE. °EIR RE±ATIONSHIP TO THE ¶NITED ²TATES IS CONDITIONED NOT ON±Y BY COm-
P±Ex PO±ITICA± AND ECONOmIC DYNAmICS BUT A±SO BY gEOgRAPHIC ONES BORN OF
SHARINg—AND figHTINg OVER—A COmmON BORDER. »ffiCIA±±Y THE DIVIDINg ±INE
WHERE LATIN µmERICA ENDS, THE ¶.².-MExICO BORDER IS A±SO ONE OF THE ±ONgEST,
mOST PO±ITICA±±Y FRAUgHT, AND mOST ECONOmICA±±Y UNEqUA± INTERNATIONA±
BOUNDARIES IN THE WOR±D.
ÓET IN THE CONTExT OF ±IVED DAI±Y ExPERIENCE, THE BOUNDARY BETWEEN
MExICAN ImmIgRANTS AND THE REST OF THE ¶.². POPU±ATION IS ±ARgE±Y mARkED—
AND PO±ITICIzED—BY ±ANgUAgE. MOST MExICAN ImmIgRANTS SPEAk ²PANISH,
RE±ATIVE±Y FEW ARRIVE SPEAkINg ³Ng±ISH, AND mOST WI±± CONDUCT THE BU±k OF
110 • ch a p t er f i v e
THEIR PROFESSIONA± AND PERSONA± ±IVES IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES IN ²PANISH, EVEN IF
THEY SETT±E IN THE COUNTRY PERmANENT±Y. °E SHEER SIzE OF THE ²PANISH-SPEAkINg
POPU±ATION IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES mAkES THIS POSSIB±E. ·OmBINED, MExICANS
AND OTHER ²PANISH-SPEAkINg ImmIgRANT COmmUNITIES SUPPORT A VAST ARRAY OF
²PANISH-DOmINANT WORkP±ACES, BUSINESSES, SERVICE AND CU±TURA± ORgANIzA-
TIONS, AND mEDIA OUT±ETS. °EIR OVERWHE±mINg NUmBERS, gEOgRAPHIC SPREAD,
PUB±IC PRESENCE, AND PO±ITICA± PROmINENCE HAS mADE ²PANISH A DE FACTO SEC-
OND ±ANgUAgE IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES—A TREND A±TERNATE±Y ±AUDED AND ATTACkED.
LESSER kNOWN IS THE ExTENT TO WHICH mANY MExICAN mIgRANTS ARE INDIgENOUS,
AND mAY SPEAk ±ITT±E OR NO ²PANISH—SOmETImES RESU±TINg IN TRAgIC SITUATIONS
WHERE INDIVIDUA±S HAVE BEEN COmmITTED TO mENTA± INSTITUTIONS OR DENIED ±EgA±
RIgHTS. ¹N OTHER WAYS, HOWEVER, INDIgENOUS MExICAN ±ANgUAgES HAVE A DEmON-
STRAB±E IF mODEST PUB±IC PROfi±E. °E CITY OF LOS µNgE±ES, FOR ExAmP±E, HAS BOTH
ËAPOTEC AND MIxTEC NEWSPAPERS AND RADIO STATIONS. µND AS WITH LATIN
µmERICAN NATIONA± ±ANgUAgES, mIgRATION PATTERNS BETWEEN THE ¶NITED ²TATES
AND MExICO ARE SHAPED BY INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES: INDIgENOUS MExICANS OVER-
WHE±mINg±Y TEND TO mIgRATE TO AREAS WHERE THERE ARE SIzAB±E gROUPS OF mIgRANTS
WHO SHARE THEIR NATIVE ±ANgUAgE, AS IS THE CASE WITH COmmUNITIES OF INDIgENOUS
MExICANS IN »xNARD, ¸OUgHkEEPSIE, AND ¼A±EIgH-´URHAm.
Language Debates
´EBATES ABOUT THE PRESENCE OF LATIN µmERICANS IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES HAVE HAD
AN OUTSIzED EffECT ON CONVERSATIONS ABOUT LATIN µmERICA’S ENgAgEmENT WITH
THE WOR±D. »N THE ONE HAND, IN µmERICAN POPU±AR CU±TURE, LATIN µmERICAN
±ANgUAgES AND THEIR SPEAkERS SERVE AS STAND-INS FOR THE qUINTESSENTIA± »THER.
°EIR USE IN µmERICAN fi±mS IS PARTICU±AR±Y EVOCATIVE: IN THOUSANDS OF fi±mS,
SPANNINg DECADES, ²PANISH-SPEAkINg LATIN µmERICANS AND LATINOS ARE POR-
TRAYED AS VI±±AINS. »N THE OTHER HAND, THE PRESENCE OF LATIN µmERICAN ±AN-
gUAgES IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES HAS BEEN A TA±E OF INCREASINg ACCEPTANCE. ²PANISH
HAS PERmEATED ³Ng±ISH TO THE POINT, FOR ExAmP±E, THAT “ÉASTA ±A VISTA, BABY!”
CAN BE UTTERED WITHOUT TRANS±ATION IN A ÉO±±YWOOD B±OCkBUSTER.
ÓET THE INCREASINg±Y PUB±IC PRESENCE OF ²PANISH ON EVERYTHINg FROm VOTINg
BA±±OTS TO BI±±BOARDS HAS A±SO BEEN THE TARgET OF POINTED CRITIqUES. ÈHI±E SUCH
ARgUmENTS mAY BE UNDERgIRDED BY ANTI-ImmIgRANT OR EVEN OUTRIgHT RACIST
SENTImENT, THEY TAkE ±ANgUAgE USE AS AN ACCEPTAB±E SITE FOR ExPRESSINg xENO-
PHOBIC VIEWS. µ WIDE±Y CIRCU±ATINg ¹NTERNET mEmE HAS AN ImAgE OF JOHN
ÈAYNE IN FRONT OF AN µmERICAN flAg SAYINg, “½OW jUST WHY IN THE ɳLL DO
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 111
¹ HAVE TO PRESS ‘1’ FOR ³Ng±ISH???” LANgUAgE USE IS AN ARENA WHERE BROADER
CONflICTS ABOUT ImmIgRATION ARE WAgED, AS REflECTED IN DEBATES ABOUT THE
ACCEPTABI±ITY OF SUCH PHRASES AS “I±±EgA± ImmIgRANT” AND “UNDOCUmENTED
WORkER.” ÈHI±E THE CHOICE BETWEEN THEm mAY BE CAST AS A DISPUTE ABOUT ±ABE-
±INg, THE ARgUmENT IS ANImATED BY DEEP±Y CONflICTINg PO±ITICA± VIEWS ABOUT THE
RE±ATIONSHIP BETWEEN LATIN µmERICANS AND THE ¶NITED ²TATES.
²OmETImES THESE DEBATES mOVE IN UNPREDICTAB±E DIRECTIONS AND SPAWN
UNExPECTED CONSEqUENCES. »NE STRIkINg ExAmP±E INVO±VES THE WAY THAT
MExICAN gANg mEmBERS IN ¶.². PRISONS USE ½AHUAT± AS A PRIVATE FORm OF COm-
mUNICATION AND DEmAND ACCESS TO mATERIA±S ABOUT THE ±ANgUAgE ON CU±TURA±
gROUNDS. µNOTHER RE±EVANT ExAmP±E CONCERNS THE DEPORTATION OF PEOP±E WHO
ARRIVED IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES AS CHI±DREN AND HAVE SPENT THE mAjORITY OF THEIR
±IVES THERE. ÊECAUSE THEY SPEAk flUENT AND “UNACCENTED” µmERICAN ³Ng±ISH—
OſtEN SPEAkINg IT BETTER THAN THEY DO ²PANISH—THEY HAVE BECOmE COVETED
EmP±OYEES FOR µmERICAN COmPANIES SEEkINg TO CUT COSTS BY ±OCATINg CUSTOmER
CA±± CENTERS OUTSIDE THE ¶NITED ²TATES.
°E CIRCU±ATION OF THINgS LATIN µmERICAN HAS BOOSTED THE WOR±DWIDE
INflUENCE OF ÊRAzI±IAN ¸ORTUgUESE AND LATIN µmERICAN VARIETIES OF ²PANISH.
°OUgH ±ONg TREATED AS INFERIOR TO THE VERSIONS ONE HEARS IN ¸ORTUgA± AND
²PAIN, LATIN µmERICAN VARIETIES NOW DOmINATE SECOND ±ANgUAgE INSTRUCTION,
BOWINg TO THE REA±ITY THAT 90 PERCENT OF THE WOR±D’S ²PANISH SPEAkERS AND 75
PERCENT OF ITS ¸ORTUgUESE SPEAkERS RESIDE IN THE µmERICAS. ³ACH YEAR, THE
¼OYA± ²PANISH µCADEmY’S DICTIONARY INC±UDES AN EVER ±ARgER PERCENTAgE OF
WORDS WITH ½EW ÈOR±D ORIgINS. ÈHEN THE µCADEmY DECIDED TO ADD THE TERm
espanglish TO ITS 2014 DICTIONARY, ADVOCATES OF THIS ³Ng±ISH-²PANISH HYBRID
WERE P±EASED. ÊUT WHEN THEY FOUND OUT THAT THE µCADEmY INTENDED TO DEfi NE
IT AS “a form of speech used by some Hispanic groups in the United States, in
which they mix deformed elements of vocabulary and grammar Äom both
Spanish and English,” THE REACTION WAS SWIſt AND ±OUD. °E µCADEmY fiNA±±Y
RE±ENTED AND AgREED TO REmOVE THE WORD deformed FROm THE DEfiNITION.
»NE OF THE mOST DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OF SOmE VARIETIES OF LATIN µmERICAN
²PANISH IS THE voseo—THE WIDESPREAD USE OF vos, “YOU,” AS A FORmA± SECOND-
PERSON PRONOUN. ¹T IS A mORE ARCHAIC FORm THAN THE usted FORm OF “YOU” FOUND
IN ·ARIBBEAN AND ¹BERIAN ²PANISH. Æos flOURISHED, ESPECIA±±Y IN ²OUTH
µmERICA, DURINg AN ERA OF RE±ATIVE±Y ±ITT±E CONTACT BETWEEN THE ½EW ÈOR±D
²PANISH CO±ONIES AND ³UROPE. ²OmETHINg COmPARAB±E HAPPENED WITH
ÊRAzI±IAN ¸ORTUgUESE. Æos-fi±±ED ²PANISH IS THE STY±E THAT ÊORgES USED IN HIS
WRITINg AND THAT ¸OPE ºRANCIS HAS NOW BROUgHT TO THE ÍATICAN. ÈE ±IVE IN AN
112 • ch a p t er f i v e
ERA WHEN THE CENTERS OF ±INgUISTIC INflUENCE HAVE SHIſtED FROm MADRID TO
MExICO ·ITY AND MIAmI, FROm LISBON TO ¼IO DE JANEIRO AND ½EW ÊEDFORD.
¹F THE LATIN µmERICAN vos EVENTUA±±Y FADES OUT OF USE, IT WI±± BE BECAUSE OF THE
POPU±ARITY OF MExICAN SOAP OPERAS—AND THE vos-FREE VARIETY OF ²PANISH SPO-
kEN IN THEm—RATHER THAN THE EDICTS OF THE ¼OYA± ²PANISH µCADEmY’S “±AN-
gUAgE COPS.”
LANgUAgE HAS SHAPED LATIN µmERICA AS A REgION AND mEDIATES ITS CONNEC-
TIONS WITH THE REST OF THE WOR±D. ÉEATED DEBATES ABOUT ±ANgUAgE—ABOUT WHAT
±ANgUAgES TO SPEAk AND WHO SHOU±D BE SPEAkINg THEm—ARE TAkINg P±ACE RIgHT
NOW IN LATIN µmERICA, jUST AS THEY ARE ACROSS THE BORDER IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES
AND IN P±ACES AROUND THE g±OBE WHERE LATIN µmERICANS RESIDE. ²HOU±D WE
RAISE BI±INgUA± CHI±DREN? ÉOW CAN WE mAINTAIN THE VITA±ITY OF LATIN µmERICA’S
HUNDREDS OF INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES? ¹S IT OkAY TO CODE-SWITCH, USE BORROWED
WORDS, SPEAk ²PANg±ISH OR ¸ORTUñO±, USE vos RATHER THAN usted? ²UCH qUESTIONS
ARE SImU±TANEOUS±Y ABOUT ±ANgUAgE ±OYA±TIES AND THE SOCIA± ±ANDSCAPE WRIT
±ARgE. °E LATIN µmERICAN “LIBRARY OF ÊABE±” IS kA±EIDOSCOPIC, UNPREDICTAB±E,
CONflICTIVE, AND VIBRANT: AN ARCHIVE OF LATIN µmERICA’S HISTORY, IT IS A±SO A STORY
ABOUT THE REgION’S g±OBA±IzED FUTURE, TO±D IN A THOUSAND DIffERENT TONgUES.
su¿¿ested readin¿
·±EmENTS, ·±ANCY
2009 °e Linguistic Legacy of Spanish and Portuguese: Colonial Expansion and
Language Change. ·AmBRIDgE: ·AmBRIDgE ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
·OE, MICHAE± ´.
2012 Breaking the Maya Code. 3RD ED. LONDON: °AmES & ÉUDSON.
¼OmERO, ²ImON
2012 “µN ¹NDIgENOUS LANgUAgE WITH ¶NIqUE ²TAYINg ¸OWER.” New Ãork Times, 12
MARCH. HTTP://NYTI.mS/1²W3XO6.
²TAVANS, ¹±AN
2004 Spanglish: °e Making of a New American Language. ½EW ÓORk:
ÉARPER·O±±INS.
¾ERáN, ÍICTOR, AND ´AVID ²HOOk, EDS.
2015 Like a New Sun: New Indigenous Mexican Poetry. LOS µNgE±ES, ·µ: ¸HO-
NEmE MEDIA.
Òor¿es’s Üi br a ry • 113
siô
´EPENDINg ON ONE’S AgE, mUSIC FROm LATIN µmERICA PRODUCES IN THE mIND’S
EAR AND EYE DIffERENT SOUNDS AND ImAgES. »NE mIgHT SEE AND HEAR ´ESI µRNAz
P±AYINg HIS DRUmS IN A “LATIN” ACT ON TE±EVISION’S I Love Lucy. »NE mAY HEAR
·ARmEN MIRANDA, THE ¸ORTUgUESE-BORN ÊRAzI±IAN-IDENTIfiED “BOmBSHE±±,”
SINgINg SAmBA, A gENRE WITH µFRO-ÊRAzI±IAN ROOTS. »F COURSE, ONE IS PERHAPS
mORE ±IkE±Y TO REmEmBER ·ARmEN MIRANDA BY HER mOVIE ImAgE—THE ACTRESS
114
WHO WORE A FRUIT HEADDRESS THAT SEEmED TO ExTEND END±ESS±Y TO THE SkY. ¹T’S
BANANAS A±± THE WAY UP! ÉER SINgINg TA±ENTS SECURED A TICkET TO ÊROADWAY AND
ÉO±±YWOOD. ²HE EVEN PARTICIPATED IN ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹¹–ERA ¶.². FOREIgN PO±ICY
ON LATIN µmERICA. ÉO±±YWOOD AND THE ¶.². ²TATE ´EPARTmENT SWEPT HER UP
IN fi±mS AImED AT LATIN µmERICANS. µSSUmINg WHAT WOU±D BECOmE A STEREO-
TYPICA± LATINA RO±E, SHE STARRED IN SEVERA± fi±mS THAT SHOWED A mISHmASH OF
CU±TURA± CUES FROm ÊRAzI±, MExICO, ·UBA, AND µRgENTINA. ½O WONDER
ÊRAzI±IAN AND µRgENTINE AUDIENCES REjECTED fi±mS ±IkE Down Argentine Way,
IN WHICH MIRANDA SANg NOT THE µRgENTINE TANgO BUT A RENDITION OF ·UBAN
RUmBA. µ±THOUgH MIRANDA’S SIgNATURE FRUIT HEADDRESS P±AYED Off STY±ES WORN
BY µFRO-DESCENDANTS WHO ±IVE IN ÊAHíA—±EgACIES OF FORCED µFRICAN DISP±ACE-
mENTS VIA THE ±ONg HISTORY OF THE ¸ORTUgUESE ÊRAzI±IAN S±AVE TRADE—HER
ÉO±±YWOOD REPRESENTATIONS WERE mORE ³UROPEANIzED VERSIONS OF LATIN
µmERICA. ºOR THE ¶.². ²TATE ´EPARTmENT, THESE fi±mS WERE AImED AT LATIN
µmERICA’S ³UROPEAN-DESCENDANT E±ITES, WHO TENDED TO BE WHITE. µFRO-
DESCENDANTS HAD NO P±ACE IN THAT PICTURE.
¸ERHAPS ONE REmEmBERS THE mID-1990S BRIEF mACARENA FAD, A gROUP DANCE
THAT HAD PUB±ICS IN ENTIRE STADIUmS DOINg A ROUTINE WITH SET STEPS ANYONE
COU±D ±EARN. ÈHI±E THE mACARENA WAS mARkETED ±IkE OTHER LATIN DANCE
CRAzES—TANgO, RUmBA, mAmBO, AND CHA-CHA-CHA—IT WAS ORIgINA±±Y RECORDED
BY THE ²PANISH DUO LOS DE± ¼íO.
¸ERHAPS ONE HEARS THE 1990S SOUNDS OF NOSTA±gIA FOR AN O±D ·UBA. »NE SEES
E±DER±Y ·UBAN mUSICIANS WANDERINg THE STREETS OF ÉAVANA AND ½EW ÓORk
·ITY, AS IN THE 1999 DOCUmENTARY Buena Æista Social Club. °IS RECORDINg
INITIATIVE WAS PRECEDED BY THE ÍIEjA ¾ROVA ²ANTIAgUERA, fiNANCED BY THE
²PANISH ENTREPRENEUR MANUE± ´OmíNgUEz AND PROmOTED THROUgH HIS WOR±D
mUSIC ±ABE±, ½UBENEgRA. ²UCH PROjECTS A±±OWED ÈESTERN AUDIENCES THE P±EAS-
URES OF HEARINg AN “O±D” ·UBAN mUSIC WITHOUT BEINg INTERRUPTED BY THE IDEO-
±OgICA± DISPUTES BEHIND THE ·UBAN ¼EVO±UTION AND WITHOUT HEARINg THE
SOUNDS OF CONTEmPORARY ·UBAN HIP-HOP AND REggAETóN. G±OBA± LATIN
µmERICAN mUSIC HAS A±WAYS gONE DOWN mU±TIP±E PATHS OF P±EASURE, PO±ITICS,
AND BUSINESS.
116 • ch a p t er si ô
DIVIDINg HIS TImE BETWEEN P±AYINg mUSIC AND WORkINg AT HIS OffiCE jOB WITH
THE mAgAzINE. ¹N 1982, WHEN HIS BOSS FORCED HIm TO CHOOSE BETWEEN DOINg
mUSIC AND WORkINg AT THE mAgAzINE, HE qUIT HIS jOB AND WENT TO ÊO±IVIA FOR
THREE mONTHS. ÉE DESCRIBED THIS TRIP AS A TRANSFORmATIVE ExPERIENCE IN WHICH
HE mET mUSICIANS IN THE ±EgENDARY ¸EñA ½AIRA, A FO±k±ORE NIgHTC±UB IN LA ¸Az
THAT WAS C±OSE±Y ASSOCIATED WITH THE EAR±IER PERFORmINg DAYS OF THOSE WHO,
SINCE THE 1960S, WERE ±EgENDS IN THESE mUSIC TRADITIONS. “¾AkAATSU [ÌINOSHITA]
WAS THE fiRST JAPANESE TO ENTER THE ¸EñA ½AIRA. ¹ ARRIVED AſtER HIm BUT DURINg
THE SAmE YEAR. µſtER THAT, mANY JAPANESE WENT TO ÊO±IVIA. ¾AkAATSU AND ¹ ARE
PART OF THAT HISTORY.” ÌAWAmOTO DESCRIBED HANgINg OUT AT ¸EñA ½AIRA, gETTINg
TO kNOW THE PERFORmERS, AND EVEN SUBSTITUTINg FOR SOmE OF THEm WHEN THEY
DID NOT ARRIVE FOR AN EVENINg’S PERFORmANCE. ÌAWAmOTO SET UP AN µNDEAN
mUSIC ACADEmY IN ¾OkYO, AND HE HAS mADE A NAmE FOR HImSE±F AmONg ÊO±IVIAN
mUSICIANS WHO HAVE TOURED JAPAN AND AmONg JAPANESE WHO ARE INVO±VED IN
µNDEAN mUSIC.
JAPANESE FANS OF µNDEAN mUSIC mENTION AgAIN AND AgAIN THEIR ±OVE FOR THE
SONg “³± CóNDOR PASA.” ¹T ±ITERA±±Y OPENED THEIR EARS TO A SOUND THAT WAS AT
THE SAmE TImE DIffERENT AND SOmEWHAT FAmI±IAR—THE WINNINg FORmU±A IN THE
WOR±D mUSIC SCENE. ÉOW DID THIS SPECIfiC SONg BECOmE THE g±OBA± CA±±INg CARD
FOR µNDEAN mUSIC? ¹N THE 1960S, ²ImON AND GARFUNkE± SHARED A ¸ARIS STAgE
WITH AN µNDEAN FO±k±ORE ENSEmB±E THAT WAS fiRST kNOWN AS LOS ¹NCAS AND
±ATER AS ¶RUBAmBA. ²ImON AND GARFUNkE± BECAmE INTRIgUED BY THIS BAND’S
PERFORmANCE OF “³± CóNDOR PASA.”Ø °E PIECE THEY P±AYED HAD BEEN ON±Y A
SmA±± PART OF A mUSICA± THEATRICA± PRODUCTION (zarzuela) THAT WAS COmPOSED
BY THE ¸ERUVIAN ´ANIE± µ±OmíA ¼OB±ES IN 1913. ¹N ¸ERU, THE EAR±Y TWENTIETH-
CENTURY PRODUCTION’S P±OT ±INE WAS ABOUT FOREIgN ExP±OITATION OF INDIgENOUS
mINERS IN ¸ERU’S CENTRA± HIgH±ANDS. ¹N ITS HEYDAY, THIS WAS AN ExTREmE±Y POPU-
±AR THEATRICA± PRODUCTION IN LImA, AND IT WAS PRESENTED SOmE THREE THOUSAND
TImES IN fiVE YEARS. µ±OmíA ¼OB±ES’S COmPOSITION WAS ±IkE THE OTHER indigeni-
sta ARTISTIC ExPRESSIONS OF THE TImE, mUSICA± COmPOSITIONS THAT FO±±OWED
³UROPEAN PATTERNS AND AESTHETICS WHI±E DRAWINg INSPIRATION FROm INDIgENOUS
mUSIC OF THE µNDEAN COUNTRYSIDE. ºAST FORWARD TO ²ImON AND GARFUNkE±’S
1960S ¸ARIS ENCOUNTER WITH LOS ¹NCAS-¶RUBAmBA, AN ENSEmB±E COmPOSED
PRImARI±Y OF µRgENTINE mUSICIANS. ¸AU± ²ImON SET HIS OWN ±YRICS TO THE OPEN-
INg mE±ODY, AND THUS WAS BORN ONE OF THE mOST CONTROVERSIA± TUNES THAT FUE±ED
THE µNDEAN mUSIC BOOm, A C±ASSIC CASE OF A fiRST WOR±D mUSICIAN SUPPOSED±Y
“DISCOVERINg” AND THEN SHAPINg THESE SOUNDS INTO mARkETAB±E FORm. ¸ERUVIANS
HAVE BEEN INDIgNANT ABOUT ²ImON’S PURPORTED THEſt OF THE TUNE, AND THEY
• • •
¹NTI-¹±±ImANI TOURED µUSTRA±IA IN 1977. ¾EN YEARS ±ATER, OTHER ·HI±EAN ExI±ES
±IVINg IN ¾ASmANIA FORmED THE BAND µRAUCO LIBRE. ÈHI±E ·HI±EAN ExI±ES
ARRIVINg IN µUSTRA±IA HAD TO DISRUPT THE ÉO±±YWOOD STEREOTYPES OF LATIN
µmERICANS THAT HAD BEEN ESTAB±ISHED SINCE THE DAYS OF ·ARmEN MIRANDA,
BANDS ±IkE µRAUCO LIBRE CREATED THEIR OWN ImAgINARIES TOO. ºOR ExAmP±E,
THEIR NAmE, µRAUCO LIBRE (ºREE µRAUCO), REFERENCED INDIgENOUS PEOP±E WHO
HAD VERY ±ITT±E TO DO WITH THOSE FROm WHOm THE NOW WE±±-kNOWN µNDEAN
SOUND HAD BEEN APPROPRIATED. °E BAND’S NAmE REFERENCED THE “µRAUCANIANS,”
THE ²PANISH CO±ONIzERS’ TERm FOR THOSE WHO WERE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PRESENT-
DAY MAPUCHE INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES IN ·HI±E AND µRgENTINA, PEOP±ES WHO HAD
NEVER COmE UNDER ¹NCA RU±E. ¹N ½EW ËEA±AND, OTHER ·HI±EAN ExI±ES FORmED
THE BAND ÌANTUTA (REFERENCINg THE NATIONA± flOWER OF ÊO±IVIA AND ¸ERU), BUT
THIS ENSEmB±E PRESENTED A BROADER LATIN µmERICAN REPERTOIRE, PERFORmINg
WARHORSES ±IkE “GUANTANAmERA” AND “LA CUCARACHA,” AND EVENTUA±±Y mOVINg
INTO ROmANTIC SA±SA.
118 • ch a p t er si ô
ÈHEN ·HI±E RETURNED TO DEmOCRACY IN 1990, PROTEST mUSIC IN µUSTRA±IA
HE±D ON TO THE INDIgENOUS ASSOCIATIONS THAT THEN ENTERED A WOR±D mUSIC STAgE.
²ECOND-gENERATION mIgRANTS IN ME±BOURNE mUSICA±±Y DEVE±OPED NOT THEIR PAR-
ENTS’ THEmES OF DIS±OCATION, PROTEST, AND ExI±E BUT THEIR OWN CONCERNS ABOUT
SEEkINg A LATIN µmERICAN IDENTITY. °E BAND ¹NkA MARkA, FORmED IN 1997, DID
SO BY TAkINg A NAmE THAT CONjURED UP CONNECTIONS TO THE ANCIENT ¹NCA ³mPIRE.
• • •
• • •
ÈHI±E µNDEAN mUSIC, ±IkE mOST mUSIC OF THE WOR±D, IS mEANT FOR DANCINg, IT
IS NOT THE kIND OF LATIN µmERICAN mUSIC THAT DRAWS THE mOST NON–LATIN
µmERICANS TO THE DANCE flOOR. °AT HONOR HAS gONE TO TANgO AND SA±SA. °E
µRgENTINE TANgO ARRIVED IN JAPAN VIA 1920S ¸ARIS AND THEN IN ÊRITISH INSTRUC-
TION mANUA±S.Û ¸ARIS WAS CONSECRATINg LATIN µmERICAN mUSIC FOR THE WOR±D
±ONg BEFORE THE “³± CóNDOR PASA” SAgA. ¹N THE 1930S, THE ºRENCH MOU±IN ¼OUgE
¾ANgO ÊAND P±AYED IN ¾OkYO’S º±ORIDA ÊA±±ROOm. µND DURINg ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹¹,
TANgO CONTINUED TO BE P±AYED IN JAPAN, EVEN THOUgH mOST FOREIgN mUSIC WAS
BANNED THERE AT THE TImE. ²OmE FORm OF “THE TANgO” IS NOW PART OF THE BA±±-
ROOm DANCE SCENE IN mANY PARTS OF THE WOR±D. ¹TS DANCE STEPS, ±IkE A SERIES OF
COmP±ICATED BA±ANCINg ExERCISES, HAVE EVEN BEEN SEEN AS POTENTIA±±Y THERAPEU-
TIC FOR THE E±DER±Y AND THOSE SUffERINg FROm ¸ARkINSON’S DISEASE.
• • •
MANY PEOP±E AgREE THAT SA±SA mUSIC gETS A ±OT OF PEOP±E DANCINg, BUT FEW
PEOP±E AgREE ON THE mUSIC’S ORIgINS. ·UBAN? ¸UERTO ¼ICAN? ·O±OmBIAN?
ÍENEzUE±AN? ½UYORICAN (½EW ÓORk ¸UERTO ¼ICANS)? °E SYmBO±IC CONflICTS
OVER THE ORIgINS OF SA±SA REflECT PO±ITICA± HISTORIES. ¾O SUmmARIzE VERY BRIEflY,
IN THE 1960S, THE ½EW ÓORk–BASED ºANIA ¼ECORDS STARTED USINg “SA±SA” AS A
mARkETINg ±ABE±, BUT SOmE PEOP±E SAID THAT THESE RECORDINgS WERE NOTHINg
mORE THAN ·UBAN mUSIC DRESSED IN NEW C±OTHES.
³VEN IF ONE WANTS TO REmAIN OUT OF THE FRAY IN THIS ORIgIN WAR, THREE POINTS
ARE WORTH kEEPINg IN mIND. ºIRST, ¶.².-·UBAN RE±ATIONS, BEgINNINg WITH THE
1960 EmBARgO, RESHAPED THE PREVIOUS mUSICA± flOWS BETWEEN THE IS±AND AND
THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ²ECOND, ½UYORICAN SA±SA FORmED AS A VITA± PART OF 1960S
AND 1970S gRASSROOTS mOVEmENTS FOR LATINO IDENTITIES AND CIVI± RIgHTS. °IRD,
THE ±ACk OF AgREEmENT ON THE NATIONA± ORIgINS OF SA±SA mUSIC IS IN ITSE±F SIgNIfi-
120 • ch a p t er si ô
CANT, REflECTINg THE mUSIC’S ±ONg-TERm HISTORICA± ROOTS IN CO±ONIA±ISm AND THE
·ARIBBEAN-BASED µFRICAN DIASPORA.
°E SA±SA ORIgIN WARS HARD±Y kEPT NON–LATIN µmERICANS AWAY FROm DANC-
INg THIS mUSIC, WHICH ExPERIENCED A mAjOR CROSSOVER IN THE 1980S AND 1990S.
ÈHEN ¹ WAS STUDYINg FOR A mASTER’S DEgREE IN LImA, ¸ERU, ¹ REmEmBER DANC-
INg TO »RqUESTA DE ±A LUz, A JAPANESE SA±SA BAND THAT IN 1990 HAD A NUmBER
ONE A±BUm ON ÊI±±BOARD’S TROPICA± CHART. °E 1989 flASH-IN-THE-PAN FAmE OF
±AmBADA SET Off A RENEWED INTEREST IN COUP±E-BASED DANCINg. ºOR THOSE WHO
DID NOT ExPERIENCE OR WHO CANNOT REmEmBER THIS mOmENT, ±AmBADA WAS A
gENRE BRIEflY POPU±ARIzED BY THE ºRENCH ÊRAzI±IAN BAND ÌAOmA IN A±BUmS ±IkE
World Beat AND Tribal-Pursuit. ÍIDEO PRESENTATION OF ±AmBADA SHOWED A
DANCE IN WHICH WOmEN IN SHORT SkIRTS AND REVEA±INg UNDERWEAR gYRATED THEIR
CROTCHES AgAINST THE THIgHS OF THEIR mA±E PARTNERS, A±± WHI±E kEEPINg THE HIPS
IN CONSTANT mOTION. ÈHAT ±OOkED gREAT IN THE VIDEOS SEEmED ImPOSSIB±E TO
REP±ICATE IN THE ±AYPERSON’S SOCIA± DANCINg ENCOUNTER. ²OmE ATTEmPTS ±ED TO
DANCINg DISASTERS, ±ONg BEFORE “MI±EY ·YRUS” AND “TWERkINg” CO±±IDED IN THE
¶.². NATIONA± ±ExICON. ¹F AWkWARDNESS DID NOT COmP±ETE±Y kI±± THE TREND, THE
±AW DID. °E ÊO±IVIAN µNDEAN BAND LOS ÌjARkAS SUCCESSFU±±Y SUED ÌAOmA FOR
THE UN±ICENSED COVER OF “L±ORANDO SE FUE.” °E ÉERmOSA BROTHERS OF LOS
ÌjARkAS HAD COmPOSED THIS TUNE, WHICH HAD BECOmE THE SINg±E SONg mOST
ASSOCIATED WITH ±AmBADA.
ÈHI±E ±AmBADA FE±± flAT, SA±SA TOOk Off AS A g±OBA± DANCE PHENOmENON
AmONg NON–LATIN µmERICANS. ¹F NON–LATIN µmERICANS WERE DRAWN TO THE
SOUNDS OF STOIC ¹NDIANS IN AN ImAgINED µNDEAN INDIgENISm, IN SA±SA THEY
WERE DRAWN TO ImAgINED TROPICA±IzED SOUNDS. ¸ARTICIPATINg IN THIS SCENE
mEANT gOINg TO C±UBS, TAkINg C±ASSES, AND ATTENDINg CONgRESSES IN ½ORTH
µmERICA AND ³UROPE. ¹N THE CROSSOVER, SA±SA DANCINg WENT FROm BEINg ImPRO-
VISED TO BEINg CHOREOgRAPHED. ¹N mARCHED A DE-µFRICANIzED BA±±ROOm AES-
THETIC THAT INVO±VED mOVES TO BE ±EARNED AND A HIP FETISH THAT IgNORED THE
NECESSARY CORRESPONDINg kNEE AND RIBCAgE mOVEmENTS. MEN WHO HAVE TAkEN
SA±SA C±ASSES mAY FEE± THE NEED TO SHOW Off A±± THEIR ±EADINg mOVES, EACH ONE
STUDIED, mEmORIzED, AND PU±±ED OUT TO ImPRESS. »N THIS SA±SA flOOR, ONE CAN
FORgET TOO EASI±Y THE VERY P±EASURAB±E FEE±INg OF SImP±Y gETTINg IN A gOOD
gROOVE AND STAYINg THERE FOR A ±ONg TImE. ¹N CITIES ±IkE MONTREA±, SA±SA ROU±ETTE
HAS TAkEN THIS gENRE IN YET ANOTHER DIRECTION. ¹N THIS FORm, SEVERA± COUP±ES
DANCE TOgETHER, CHANgINg PARTNERS AND COmP±ETINg mOVES ACCORDINg TO THE
CA±±S OF A ±EAD mA±E DANCER. °INk HERE ABOUT SqUARE DANCINg OR CONTRA DANC-
INg, BUT SA±SIfiED.
• • •
ÈHEN THE REggAETóN ARTIST “³± GENERA±” TRAVE±ED TO ·HI±E, OffiCIA±S CONfiS-
CATED HIS PERFORmANCE COSTUmES. ¸INOCHET, WHO WAS NOT A FAN, HAD THE SINgER
UNNAmED AND DEROBED. ÈI±± THE REA± GENERA± P±EASE STEP FORWARD? ³± GENERA±,
THE ARTIST, WOU±D ON±Y BE A±±OWED TO PERFORm IN CIVI±IAN C±OTHES AND UNDER HIS
BIRTH NAmE, ³DgARDO ºRANCO. ³± GENERA± WAS BORN IN ¸ANAmA BUT BEgAN HIS
SINgINg CAREER WHEN HE WENT TO ½EW ÓORk IN 1985. ÉIS TRAjECTORY ExEmP±IfiES
122 • ch a p t er si ô
THE TRANSNATIONA± AND mU±TI±INgUA± ASPECTS OF THE REggAETóN gENRE WHOSE
gRASSROOTS ORIgINS ARE IN ¸ANAmANIAN AND ¸UERTO ¼ICAN ²PANISH-±ANgUAgE
REggAE, ¶.². HIP-HOP, AND JAmAICAN DANCEHA±±. °E gENRE HAS BEEN SHAPED
HEAVI±Y IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES BUT A±SO HAS ROOTS IN ÈEST ¹NDIAN ImmIgRATION,
JAmAICAN PATOIS, AND ¼ASTAFARIANISm. ¾ODAY’S DIgITA± RECORDINg TOO±S HAVE
FACI±ITATED REggAETóN’S REmIx, PRODUCTION, AND DISTRIBUTION ACROSS A WIDE SEC-
TION OF ¶.². AND LATIN µmERICAN CREATORS AND AUDIENCES. ¶N±IkE mANY OTHER
g±OBA± LATIN µmERICAN gENRES THAT HAVE BECOmE mORE ³UROPEANIzED, REggA-
ETóN STI±± EmBRACES ITS B±ACk ROOTS. ÓOUNg PEOP±E IN ·UBA ARE ±ISTENINg AND
DANCINg NOT TO THE NOSTA±gIC ÊUENA ÍISTA ²OCIA± ·±UB SOUNDS THAT ENCHANT
FOREIgNERS BUT TO THE TRANS-µmERICAN AND TRANS-·ARIBBEAN SOUNDS AND ±AN-
gUAgES OF REggAETóN.
• • •
¹F THE G±OBA± ½ORTH’S APPROACH TO SA±SA ³UROPEANIzED THE DANCE, SA±SA A±SO
HAD ITS CIRCUITS OF RE-µFRICANIzATION—PROCESSES THAT OCCURRED BETWEEN ·UBA,
½EW ÓORk ·ITY, AND ÈEST µFRICA.Þ ¹N 1931, THE ·UBAN “¸EANUT ÍENDOR ²ONg”
(“³± mANICERO”) ARRIVED IN ÈEST µFRICA VIA ¼·µ ÍICTOR’S RECORDINg BY ´ON
µSPIAzU AND HIS ÉAVANA ·ASINO »RCHESTRA. ÈHEN ¼ADIO ´AkAR WENT ON AIR
IN 1949, ITS PROgRAmmINg A±SO REflECTED THE ºRENCH CO±ONIA± ±OVE FOR LATIN
µmERICAN mUSIC. ÊY THE TImE OF THE ·UBAN ¼EVO±UTION, AN µFRICAN-BASED
RECORDINg INDUSTRY WAS BOOmINg, µBIDjAN HAD BECOmE A SHOW BUSINESS
CENTER, AND WEA±THY ¹VORIANS WERE SPONSORINg TOURS OF THEIR FAVORITE ARTISTS
FROm ·UBA AND ½EW ÓORk. °E µFRICAN RECORDINg INDUSTRY A±SO CATERED TO
µFRICAN STUDENTS WHO HAD STUDIED IN ·UBA AND THEN RETURNED TO THE CONTI-
NENT WITH A THIRST FOR ·UBAN mUSIC.
°E ²ENEgAmBIAN SINgER LABA ²OSSEH OCCUPIED A PRImE P±ACE IN THIS RE-
µFRICANIzATION PROCESS. ÊUT ²OSSEH A±WAYS DENIED THAT HE WAS A SA±SA mUSI-
CIAN. ÊORN INTO A gRIOT FAmI±Y IN GAmBIA IN 1943, ²OSSEH CAmE TO SEE µFRO-
·UBAN mUSIC AS A SOUND OF ±IBERATION. ÉE HAD NO INTEREST IN THE ·UBAN
¼EVO±UTION BUT TOOk SERIOUS±Y THE B±ACk ANTICO±ONIA± A±±IANCES HE ESTAB±ISHED
WITH mUSICIANS FROm ·UBA AND ½EW ÓORk ·ITY. ºANIA ¼ECORDS STARS, ±IkE
“MONgUITO” (¼AmóN ²ARDIñAS ëUIáN), P±AYED WITH ²OSSEH, fiNDINg COmmON
CONNECTIONS THROUgH B±ACk CU±TURA± E±EmENTS THAT WERE THEN REROOTED IN
µFRICA. ÈHEN ²OSSEH TRAVE±ED TO ·UBA, HOWEVER, AROUND THE TURN OF THE
TWENTY-fiRST CENTURY, HE FACED CHA±±ENgES BECAUSE OF HIS FOCUS ON B±ACkNESS.
• • •
»THER SOCIA± AND mUSICA± REmIxES SHOW TIES THAT DO NOT fiT NEAT±Y IN THE USUA±
CRITIqUES OF HOW THE G±OBA± ½ORTH AND ÈEST ExOTIFY THE G±OBA± ²OUTH AND
³AST. °E ·HINESE ARE INVESTINg mORE IN LATIN µmERICA, TAkINg mORE VACA-
TIONS TO THE REgION, AND HEARINg AT HOmE mORE SOUNDS FROm LATIN µmERICA,
WHETHER AS PART OF THE ·HAOYANg ¹NTERNATIONA± ¸OP MUSIC ºESTIVA±, AS ENTER-
TAINmENT AT AN µRgENTINE-THEmED BAR IN ²HANgHAI CA±±ED ÊOCA, OR AS PART OF
THE REPERTOIRE PERFORmED BY THE ·HINESE ½ATIONA± »RCHESTRA. ¹N THIS ±AST
CASE, THE ·HINESE mUSICIANS P±AYED LATIN µmERICAN mUSIC ON TRADITIONA±
·HINESE INSTRUmENTS AND A±SO PAIRED UP WITH A ·O±OmBIAN DANCE TROUPE,
²ANkOFA, WHICH EmPHASIzES THE µFRICAN ROOTS OF ·O±OmBIAN mUSIC AND
DANCE.
¹N ¹NDIA, ONE CAN ENCOUNTER LATIN µmERICAN mUSIC IN THE EVERYDAY gYm
WORkOUT. ËUmBA AND THE “µFRO-·UBAN ´ANCE ¼OUTINE” NOW SIT NExT TO OTHER
±OCA± gYm C±ASS OffERINgS ±IkE “MASA±A ÊHANgRA” AND “ÊO±±YWOOD ÈORkOUT.”
ºOR THOSE WHO WANT TO BECOmE DANCE ENTHUSIASTS, THEY mAY TAkE SA±SA DANC-
INg AT STUDIOS ±IkE THE ÉOT ²HOE ´ANCE ·OmPANY IN ·HENNAI, WHERE JEffERY
GERARD ÍARDON TEACHES SA±SA AſtER HAVINg RECEIVED C±ASSICA± BA±±ET TRAININg IN
¼USSIA AND SA±SA DANCE TRAININg IN ME±BOURNE, µUSTRA±IA. ¹N ADDITION, ¹NDIAN
ARTISTS HAVE BEEN WORkINg ÊO±±YWOOD–LATIN µmERICAN FUSIONS. ¾ANVI ²HAH,
AN ¹NDIAN SINgER-SONgWRITER, WON A GRAmmY AWARD FOR ²PANISH ±YRICS IN A
SONg FROm THE fi±m Slumdog Millionaire. ²HE BEgAN ±ISTENINg TO LATIN
µmERICAN RHYTHmS IN HER CO±±EgE DORmITORY WHEN SHE STUDIED AS AN UNDER-
gRADUATE IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ÊACk IN ¹NDIA, SHE NOW SINgS IN ²PANISH AND
¸ORTUgUESE (AmONg mANY OTHER ±ANgUAgES) AND C±AImS TO BE INSPIRED BY THE
±IkES OF ·E±IA ·RUz AND G±ORIA ³STEFAN; THE fiRST ARTIST WAS WE±± kNOWN FOR HER
STUNNINg SA±SA CAREER, NOTAB±Y DEVE±OPED OUTSIDE ºIDE± ·ASTRO’S ·UBA, AND THE
SECOND ARTIST IS A ·UBAN-BORN ¶.².-BASED SINgER-SONgWRITER WHOSE FAmI±Y flED
REVO±UTIONARY ·UBA WHEN SHE WAS qUITE YOUNg.
• • •
µS mANY ÊO±IVIAN mUSICIANS SAY, “°E µNDEAN mUSIC BOOm IS OVER.” °EY TA±k
FRANk±Y ABOUT HOW THEIR TOURS OF ³UROPE AND NOW JAPAN WI±± NOT ±AST FOREVER.
124 • ch a p t er si ô
°EY ARE SCRAmB±INg FOR NEW PROPOSA±S, AS ECONOmIC NECESSITY FORCES SOmE OF
THEm TO CONSIDER WHAT THEY THEmSE±VES ±ABE± AS COmP±ETE±Y FAkE—DRESSINg IN
THE STEREOTYPICA± ImAgE OF A NATIVE ½ORTH µmERICAN ¹NDIAN AND gIVINg A
TECHNO ½EW µgE SPIN TO ONE’S mUSIC. °EY CA±± THIS, OR ANY OTHER kIND OF
mUSICA± FAkINg, vendiendo la pomada (SE±±INg THE POmADE), WHICH TRANS±ATES
AS SOmETHINg ±IkE “SE±±INg SNAkE OI±.” ´IgITA± TOO±S HAVE mADE SE±±INg SNAkE OI±
A±± THE EASIER.
ÈHEN ¹ WANTED TO kNOW mORE ABOUT THIS NEW gENERIC ½ATIVE µmERICAN
STY±E, ¹ WAS TO±D TO ±OOk UP SOmE ¸ERUVIAN gROUPS ON ÓOU¾UBE, ARTISTS WHO ARE
SHOWN AS SINgERS OR flUTE P±AYERS, STANDINg ON BOU±DERS IN THE mIDD±E OF RIVERS.
°E ARTISTS WEAR THEIR HAIR ±ONg AND ±OOSE, WITH HEADBANDS AND SOmETImES
FEATHERS. ²OmE OF THEm DON A STEREOTYPICA± ½ATIVE µmERICAN BUCkSkIN SUIT
WITH DECORATIVE DETAI±S AND FRINgES. ÊO±IVIANS TO±D mE THAT ARTISTS ±IkE THESE
SE±± THEIR RECORDINgS TO STREET mUSICIANS, WHO THEN USE P±AYBACk PERFORmANCES
TO PROmOTE THE SA±E OF THE RECORDINgS IN ³UROPE. »NE PERSON CONFESSED THAT
A ÊO±IVIAN RESIDINg IN GERmANY ASkED HIm TO mAkE A RECORDINg IN THIS STY±E;
THE PRODUCER ASkED HIm TO A±TER HIS P±AYINg, TO PERFORm IN A “flAT” (plano) WAY,
WITHOUT THE USUA± DYNAmICS AND INflECTIONS HE WOU±D gIVE A PHRASE. ÉE IN
TURN SPECIfiCA±±Y ASkED THAT HIS NAmE NOT BE ±ISTED AmONg THE RECORDINg mUSI-
CIANS. µNOTHER mUSICIAN ADmITTED HE WANTED TO USE HIS OWN STUDIO TO mAkE
THESE kINDS OF RECORDINgS, BUT HE WANTED TO ±EAVE IT TO OTHERS TO PERFORm THIS
mUSIC ON THE STREET, TO ACTUA±±Y “SE±± THE SNAkE OI±.”
°E ÊO±IVIAN mUSICIANS’ DISDAIN FOR THESE NEW STY±ES AND THEIR EmBARRASS-
mENT ABOUT PARTICIPATINg IN THEIR PRODUCTION SHOW THE COmP±ICATED POSITIONS
OF mUSICIANS AS THEY FACE THE SHIſtINg DEmANDS OF A g±OBA± mARkET. ÊO±IVIANS
PERFORm WITH PRIDE THEIR INTERPRETATION OF ÊO±IVIAN INDIgENOUS REPRESENTA-
TIONS, BUT “¹NDIAN” HERE IS NOT UNIVERSA±±Y INTERCHANgEAB±E. ÊO±IVIANS FEE±
SI±±Y A±TERINg THEIR mUSICA± AND SARTORIA± AESTHETICS IN ORDER TO ±OOk AND SOUND
±IkE A NATIVE ½ORTH µmERICAN, AND PERHAPS EVEN mORE PROB±EmATICA±±Y, ±IkE
THOSE FROm THEIR RIVA± NEIgHBORINg COUNTRY, ¸ERU. ¾O PARTICIPATE IN THIS NEW
mUSIC ECONOmY THAT mEETS AN ExTERNA± SHIſt IN THE DESIRED ExOTIC, SOmE
ÊO±IVIAN mUSICIANS HAVE PREFERRED THE ANONYmITY THE RECORDINg STUDIO A±±OWS.
ÈHI±E ÊO±IVIAN mUSIC PRODUCTION USED TO BE CONCENTRATED IN THE HANDS OF A
FEW ±ARgE ±ABE±S, TODAY SmA±± PRIVATE RECORDINg STUDIOS ARE FOUND IN mANY
ÊO±IVIAN mUSICIANS’ HOmES, SOmETImES EVEN AT THE CENTER OF THAT HOmE. ß
µ±THOUgH NOT WITHOUT THEIR OWN SET OF PROB±EmS, IN THESE STUDIOS mUSICA±
AND CU±TURA± REmIxES HAVE BECOmE SO mUCH EASIER WITH DIgITA±±Y ASSISTED
mOVES.
LATIN µmERICAN mUSICS HAVE TRAVE±ED THE g±OBE THROUgH ±OVE, PROTEST, DANCE,
AND REmIx. ¾RAffiCkINg IN NOSTA±gIA AND THE ExOTIC, g±OBA± LATIN µmERICAN
mUSIC DEPENDS ON FRAmES OF TROPICA±IzATION AND NATIVIzATION. ÊUT THESE
FRAmES DO NOT CAPTURE THE SINCERITY WITH WHICH mANY NON–LATIN µmERICANS
BECOmE PARTICIPANTS IN THESE mUSICA± WOR±DS. ¹N THE POST–PROTEST SONg ERA,
NON–LATIN µmERICAN ENTHUSIASTS ARE ±ESS ENgAgED IN SO±IDARITY PO±ITICS AND
mORE ATTUNED TO fiTNESS CRAzES AND TECHNIqUES OF SPECIfiC DANCE mOVES,
A±THOUgH RE-µFRICANIzATION CIRCUITS ARE ExCEPTIONS, CA±±INg FORTH COmmON
HISTORIES OF CO±ONIzATION, S±AVERY, AND DIASPORA. MOREOVER, FOR LATIN
µmERICANS ±IVINg OUTSIDE THE REgION, P±AYINg ONE’S OWN mUSIC CAN STI±± BE A
DEEP±Y PO±ITICA± ACT, AS PEOP±E FORgE A SENSE OF SE±F AND COmmUNITY IN FOREIgN
AND OſtEN A±IENATINg CONTExTS.
su¿¿ested readin¿
notes
126 • ch a p t er si ô
2. ¹N THE FO±±OWINg DISCUSSION, ¹ DRAW ON THE WORk OF LYNN µ. MEISCH, JOSé
µNTONIO L±óRENS µmICO, AND µNAHID ÌASSABIAN.
3. ¹N THIS SECTION, ¹ DRAW ON THE WORk OF ºERNANDO ¼IOS, JAN ºAIR±EY, AND ´AN
ÊENDRUPS.
4. ¹N THIS SECTION, ¹ DRAW ON THE WORk OF ¼ICHARD º±ORES, JOSé ³. LImóN, AND ³±IjA
ÈA±D.
5. ¹N THIS SECTION, ¹ DRAW ON THE WORk OF MARTA ²AVIg±IANO MARíA DE± ·ARmEN DE
±A ¸EzA, MADE±EINE ³. ÉACkNEY, ²VET±ANA ÌANTOROVICH, AND GAmmON M. ³ARHART;
LOUIS µ. ¸éREz; ¼OBIN MOORE; ºRANCES µPARICIO AND ·áNDIDA º. JáqUEz; ²HUHEI
ÉOSOkAWA; ½ORmAN ¶RqUíA; ºRANCES µPARICIO AND ²USANA ·HáVEz-²I±VERmAN;
JONATHAN ²kINNER; ²HEENAgH ¸IETROBRUNO; JOANNA ÊOSSE; AND ¸ATRIA ¼OmáN
ÍE±ázqUEz.
6. ¹N THIS SECTION, ¹ DRAW ON THE WORk OF ·HRISTOPHER ¾WICkE± AND ³± GENERA±;
¼AqUE± Ë. ¼IVERA, ÈAYNE MARSHA±±, AND ´EBORAH ¸ACINI ÉERNáNDEz; AND GEOff REY
ÊAkER.
7. ¹N THE FO±±OWINg SECTION, ¹ DRAW ON THE WORk OF µRIANA ÉERNáNDEz-¼EgUANT
AND ¼ICHARD ²HAIN.
8. ÉERE ¹ DRAW ON THE WORk OF ÉENRY ²TOBART.
129
seven
131
ÊRAzI±, WAS fiRST A NICkNAmE FOR THE ²OUTH µmERICAN STY±E OF FOOTBA±± AND ±ATER
FOR THE SPORT ITSE±F. ·HARACTERIzED BY SPEED, gRACE, AND CREATIVITY, THIS STY±E HAS
BEEN INTERPRETED BY FANS AS A REBE±±ION AgAINST THE mECHANIzATION OF ±EISURE.
°IS STY±E OF P±AY HE±PED TO POPU±ARIzE THE gAmE IN µSIA, µFRICA, AND THE
MIDD±E ³AST. ³UROPEAN FOOTBA±± C±UBS FAVORED SPATIA± STRATEgIES, mECHANICA±
SET P±AYS, AND U±TRA-DEFENSIVE TACTICS. ºOOTBA±± PUB±ICS, NOT ON±Y P±AYERS, CRE-
ATED STY±ES OF P±AY. ¸ASSION FOR FOOTBA±± HAS BEEN FUE±ED BY THIS RE±ATIONSHIP
BETWEEN gROUP ExPERIENCE AND INTERPRETATION. °E STORY OF ²OUTH µmERICAN
STY±E IS mUCH mORE COmP±ICATED AT THE ±EVE± OF ORgANIzATION AND gOVERNANCE.
»ff THE PITCH, SCHO±ARS HAVE CRITICIzED THE RO±E OF FOOTBA±± IN STATE PROPAgANDA,
CONSUmERISm, AND SOCIA± INEqUA±ITIES.
132 • ch a p t er sev en
ÊRAzI±. °US, IN FOOTBA±±’S EAR±Y YEARS, DIRECTORS TIED THE SPORT TO EUgENICS AND
RACIA± HIERARCHIES.
ÈAVES OF ImmIgRANTS TO ²OUTH µmERICA BETWEEN 1880 AND 1920 CROSS-
PO±±INATED FOOTBA±± fiE±DS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE µT±ANTIC. ½EWCOmERS FOUND
THAT PARTICIPATINg IN FOOTBA±± C±UBS EASED THE TRANSITION INTO THEIR NEW HOmES
AND HE±PED THEm mAINTAIN TIES TO ONE ANOTHER. ÊY 1914, HA±F OF ÊUENOS µIRES
WAS FOREIgN BORN, WITH THE mAjORITY ARRIVINg FROm ²PAIN AND ¹TA±Y. ¹mmIgRANT
FOOTBA±± C±UBS BUI±T STADIUmS, OffERED ±ITERACY C±ASSES, AND HOSTED PO±ITICIANS.
¹N ADDITION TO SOUTHERN ³UROPEANS, µSIAN AND MIDD±E ³ASTERN ImmIgRANTS
SHAPED FOOTBA±± IN ²OUTH µmERICA. ·±UB ¸A±ESTINO IN ·HI±E AND ³SPORTE
·±UBE ²íRIO IN ÊRAzI± ARE A TESTAmENT TO THIS HISTORY. ·HINESE ±ABORERS FOUNDED
C±UBS AS WE±±, INC±UDINg THE POPU±AR ¸ERUVIAN INSTITUTION, ·±UB µ±IANzA LImA.
¾O APPRECIATE THE INflUENCE OF ²OUTH µmERICA ON THE g±OBA± gAmE, ONE mUST
CONSIDER THE PO±ITICS OF C±UB ORgANIzATION, WHICH CONTRAST STARk±Y WITH THE
ÊRITISH mODE±. ¹gNORINg THE P±EAS OF FOOTBA±± PATRIARCHS TO kEEP PO±ITICS OUT OF
SPORT, ANARCHISTS AND SOCIA±ISTS ORgANIzED C±UBS AS VEHIC±ES TO BUI±D SO±IDARITY
AmONg WORkERS. ´URINg TImES OF REPRESSION, FOOTBA±± C±UBS ACTED AS mAkESHIſt
HEADqUARTERS OF ±ABOR UNIONS. ÊY 1906, THERE WERE ENOUgH OF THESE C±UBS IN
²ANTIAgO A±ONE TO FORm THE ·HI±EAN ÈORkERS’ ºOOTBA±± µSSOCIATION, WHICH
FOUgHT DISCRImINATORY PRACTICES IN PUB±IC PARkS AND CREATED WORkER-CONTRO±±ED
gOVERNANCE IN C±UBS. ¹NflUENCED BY THESE ±EADERS, FOOTBA±±ERS IN ²OUTH µmERICA
STRUCTURED C±UBS AS NONPROfiT, AmATEUR, AND CO±±ECTIVE±Y OWNED ENTITIES.
MEmBERS OF THESE C±UBS gAINED VA±UAB±E PO±ITICA± SkI±±S, INC±UDINg PUB±IC
SPEAkINg, WRITINg PETITIONS, AND ±OBBYINg PO±ITICIANS. ºOOTBA±± C±UBS P±AYED A
PARTICU±AR±Y ImPORTANT RO±E WHEN THE STATE FAI±ED TO PROVIDE PUB±IC SERVICES.
°E ORgANIzATION OF INTERNATIONA± TOURNAmENTS E±EVATED FOOTBA±±’S ImPOR-
TANCE AND INTENSIfiED ITS TRANSNATIONA± CHARACTER. °IS PROCESS WAS FACI±ITATED
BY INNOVATIONS IN COmmUNICATIONS, ESPECIA±±Y fi ±m AND THE TE±EgRAPH. ¹N
ADDITION, TRAINS, OCEAN ±INERS, AND CARS mADE IT POSSIB±E FOR P±AYERS TO TRAVE±
FASTER AND FARTHER THAN EVER. ¹N THE VERY EAR±Y 1900S, ON±Y THE WEA±THIEST P±AY-
ERS REPRESENTED NATIONA± TEAmS. ÊY THE 1920S, FOOTBA±± HAD BECOmE A YARDSTICk
FOR NATIONA± PROgRESS AND THE PRESSURE TO WIN PROVED STRONgER THAN THE DESIRE
TO ExC±UDE. °AT P±AYERS FROm HUmB±E BACkgROUNDS COU±D ±EAD NATIONA±
SqUADS REVERSED SOmE OF THE SHAmE ASSOCIATED WITH POVERTY. ¾A±ENTED FOOTBA±±
STARS CONSTRUCTED A±TERNATIVE mASCU±INITIES THAT DEmONSTRATED THE STRENgTH,
RATHER THAN THE DECADENCE, OF THE WORkINg-C±ASS mA±E BODY. °E FOOTBA±± ICON
PRESENTED A COUNTERPOINT TO THE mI±ITARY mAN, THE DOmINANT mODE± OF mAS-
CU±INITY IN THE REgION.
134 • ch a p t er sev en
AS AN ESCAPE FROm DOmESTIC ±IFE. ·ARTOONISTS CARICATURED WOmEN AS ANgRY
WIVES WAITINg FOR THEIR HUSBANDS TO ARRIVE FROm THE FOOTBA±± C±UB OR AS TRANS-
gRESSORS IN THE STANDS. ÉUmOR BASED ON VIO±ENCE AND RIDICU±E OF WOmEN WAS
A mAINSTAY OF SPORTS mAgAzINES.
´ESPITE THESE OBSTAC±ES, WOmEN’S FOOTBA±± TEAmS AND FAN C±UBS DEVE±OPED
IN fiTS AND STARTS. LEgIS±ATORS IN ÊRAzI± FOUND WOmEN FOOTBA±±ERS THREATENINg
ENOUgH TO PROHIBIT THEm FROm P±AYINg BETWEEN THE 1940S AND THE 1970S. °E
DICTATORSHIPS THAT CAmE TO POWER IN ²OUTH µmERICA HAmPERED EffORTS TO
DEVE±OP WOmEN’S SPORTS. MI±ITARY jUNTAS PROmISED THE RESTORATION OF TRADI-
TIONA± gENDER RO±ES. ³VENTUA±±Y, INCENTIVES TO ORgANIzE WOmEN’S FOOTBA±± CAmE
FROm ABROAD, PARTICU±AR±Y WITH THE INTEREST OF º¹ºµ IN DEVE±OPINg, AND CON-
TRO±±INg, WOmEN’S PARTICIPATION. ²OUTH µmERICAN WOmEN P±AYERS HAVE
RECENT±Y TAkEN ImPORTANT POSITIONS ON ³UROPEAN AND ¶.². WOmEN’S C±UB
TEAmS. ÈITHOUT ANY INFRASTRUCTURE TO SPEAk OF, ÊRAzI± HAS PRODUCED THE mOST
DECORATED FOOTBA±± P±AYER IN HISTORY, mAN OR WOmAN, IN MARTA ÍIEIRA DA ²I±VA.
LIkE HER mA±E COUNTERPARTS, MARTA’S STY±E HAS BEEN INflUENTIA± IN REFRAmINg
FOOTBA±± FROm A DISCIP±INARY TO A CREATIVE SPORT.
136 • ch a p t er sev en
µmERICAN AND ³UROPEAN ACCOUNTS OF ²OUTH µmERICAN P±AYERS IN ²PAIN, THEY
ARE TOTA±±Y AT ODDS. °ERE ARE OmNIPRESENT COmP±AINTS ABOUT THE REFEREES
FAVORINg ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER. °US, THE qUESTION OF STY±E IS DISTORTED BY PRES-
SURES OF THE PRESS TO DEFEND THEIR OWN.” °E ¶RUgUAYANS, AND TO A ±ESSER ExTENT
THE µRgENTINES, DOmINATED THEIR ³UROPEAN COmPETITORS IN A WAY THAT SUR-
PRISED EVEN THEmSE±VES. °E ³UROPEAN PRESS SEEmED TO AgREE THAT ²OUTH
µmERICAN P±AYERS BROUgHT A ±IgHTNINg-qUICk, SHORT-PASS gAmE THAT BEFUDD±ED
THEIR OPPONENTS.
µS ³UROPEAN C±UBS TOURED ²OUTH µmERICA WITH gREATER FREqUENCY, THE
FOOTBA±± FAN CU±TURES mADE AN ImPRESSION ON VISITORS. ºANS INTEgRATED OTHER
CU±TURA± FORmS INTO THEIR gAmE RITUA±S. ÍISITINg SPORTSmEN SAW FANS P±AYINg
NATIONA± mUSICA± STY±ES, ±IkE THE TANgO, WHICH BECAmE A SENSATION IN THE
¶NITED ²TATES AND ³UROPE. °E FAmED TANgO SINgER ·AR±OS GARDE± VISITED THE
µRgENTINE FOOTBA±± SqUAD DURINg BOTH THE 1928 »±YmPICS AND THE 1930 ÈOR±D
·UP. ¹N µRgENTINA AND ¶RUgUAY, TANgO mUSICIANS DEDICATED SONgS TO FOOT-
BA±±ERS, AS DID SAmBA mUSICIANS IN ÊRAzI±. °E INTImATE CONNECTION BETWEEN
DANCE AND FOOTBA±± ExISTED IN THE mINDS OF P±AYERS, WHO FREqUENT±Y ATTRIBUTED
THEIR PROWESS ON THE FOOTBA±± fiE±D TO THEIR DANCINg.
°E fiRST TRANSAT±ANTIC FOOTBA±± TRANSFERS flOWED IN THE OPPOSITE DIRECTION
OF ±ABOR mIgRATION, FROm ²OUTH µmERICA TO ³UROPE. ¹TA±IAN C±UBS TOURINg
²OUTH µmERICA mET TA±ENTED P±AYERS WHO WERE EAgER TO EARN A DECENT WAgE
P±AYINg SPORTS. µS A RESU±T, JU±IO LIBONATTI mADE THE fi RST “OffiCIA±” TRANSFER IN
1925, FROm ½EWE±±’S »±D ÊOYS IN µRgENTINA TO ¾ORINO º· IN ¹TA±Y. LIBONATTI
REPRESENTED BOTH THE ¹TA±IAN AND µRgENTINE NATIONA± TEAmS. °IS WAS ±EgA±
UNTI± THE 1960S, WHEN º¹ºµ PROHIBITED P±AYERS FROm REPRESENTINg mORE THAN
ONE NATION. ¼EPRESENTINg ¹TA±Y PRESENTED CHA±±ENgES FOR THOSE WITH mORE DIS-
TANT TIES TO THE COUNTRY. ºAmED STRIkER FOR JUVENTUS, ¼AImUNDO »RSI, FOR
ExAmP±E, COU±D NOT UNDERSTAND ¹TA±IAN. ²TI±± THE µRgENTINES mADE AN ImPOR-
TANT ImPACT ON ¹TA±IAN FOOTBA±± AND POPU±AR CU±TURE. °E µRgENTINE FORWARD
¼ENATO ·ESARINI INSPIRED THE ¹TA±IAN PHRASE, THE zona cesarini. ¹T REFERS TO THE
WANINg mOmENTS OF A mATCH, WHEN ·ESARINI ±OOkED TO SCORE. ¹N PO±ITICS OR
jOURNA±ISm, IT IS A COmmON TERm FOR A DECISIVE ±AST-mINUTE mANEUVER.
²OUTH µmERICAN P±AYERS WHO TRANSFERRED TO ²PAIN AND ¹TA±Y BECAmE
kNOWN AS THE oriundi. °E HISTORIAN JOHN ºOOT HAS ARgUED THAT THE RETURN OF
THE DIASPORA fiT WITH ÊENITO MUSSO±INI’S AgENDA TO ExPAND THE BOUNDARIES OF
¹TA±IAN IDENTITY. »N MUSSO±INI’S ORDERS, FOUR µRgENTINES P±AYED FOR THE ¹TA±IAN
TEAm THAT WON THE ÈOR±D ·UP OF 1934. ¼AImUNDO »RSI, BE±OVED AmONg FANS,
FEARED FOR HIS ±IFE DURINg THE TOURNAmENT. µCCORDINg TO »RSI, MUSSO±INI
138 • ch a p t er sev en
ERATION mADE mEDICA± CARE AN ImPORTANT PART OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN STRATEgY. ¸±AYERS
CAmE TO TRAININg WITH A HOST OF PROB±EmS, FROm PARASITES TO TOOTH DECAY. °E
FOCUS ON “TOTA± CARE” BECAmE A SIgNATURE OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN TEAm.
´URINg THE 1960S, ¸E±é, FAmOUS FOR HIS BA±ANCE AND BA±± CONTRO±, BECAmE
THE FACE OF FOOTBA±± AND ²OUTH µmERICA. ÉE REPRESENTED ATH±ETIC ExCE±±ENCE IN
A B±ACk BODY THAT SHAPED THE VISUA± ±ANDSCAPE OF SPORT. µ NATIONA± DECREE
mANDATED THAT ¸E±é REmAIN WITH THE ÊRAzI±IAN ·±UB ²ANTOS. µſtER RETIREmENT,
HE P±AYED FOR THE ½EW ÓORk ·OSmOS, DRAWINg mI±±IONS OF FANS TO FOOTBA±± IN
THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ÈHETHER AS THE CHARACTER IN µTARI’S fiRST FOOTBA±± VIDEO
gAmE OR AS THE mUSE FOR AN µNDY ÈARHO± PIECE, ¸E±é CAmE TO BE IDENTIfiED IN
SPHERES OUTSIDE OF FOOTBA±± AS THE “BEST EVER,” AND IT WAS ImPORTANT THAT THE
“BEST EVER” WAS B±ACk.
¸E±é TRANSCENDED NATIONA± IDENTITY TO EmBODY AN ImAgE OF ¸AN-µFRICAN
SUCCESS. ÈHEN ASkED ABOUT THE ImPORTANCE OF ÊRAzI± TO µFRICAN FOOTBA±±, THE
HISTORIAN ¸ETER µ±EgI ExP±AINED THAT IN THE mIDST OF DECO±ONIzATION, VISITS OF
RACIA±±Y INTEgRATED TEAmS TO µFRICAN COUNTRIES “ExCITED THE ImAgINATION ABOUT
WHAT WAS POSSIB±E ON AN INTERNATIONA± SCA±E.” ¸E±é AND HIS TEAmmATES AT ·±UB
²ANTOS TOURED MOzAmBIqUE AND ½IgERIA IN THE ±ATE 1960S. µ±EgI SAID, “°AT
FOOTBA±± WAS AN ARTISTIC ENDEAVOR AND AN ExPRESSIVE CE±EBRATION, NOT jUST THE
mORA± PACkAgE OF THE ÊRITISH, WAS INflUENTIA± IN FORgINg DIffERENT P±AYINg
STY±ES AND CU±TURES ACROSS THE CONTINENT.” °AT THE ±EADERS OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN
TEAm A±SO CAmE FROm ImPOVERISHED NEIgHBORHOODS AND DIffiCU±T CIRCUm-
STANCES CREATED SO±IDARITY WITH P±AYERS ACROSS THE G±OBA± ²OUTH.
ÊRAzI±IAN ±EADERS ExPANDED THE POWER OF ²OUTH µmERICAN FOOTBA±± BEYOND
THE STADIUmS TO THE INTERNATIONA± gOVERNINg BODY, º¹ºµ. ÊASED IN ²WITzER±AND,
º¹ºµ OPERATED AS A ³UROCENTRIC, PATERNA±ISTIC, AND PROVINCIA± ORgANIzATION FOR
mOST OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY. ´URINg THE 1960S, º¹ºµ’S REPUTATION SUffERED
FROm ITS PRESIDENT ²TAN±EY ¼OUS’S DECISION TO SUPPORT THE APARTHEID-ERA
²OUTH µFRICAN ºOOTBA±± µSSOCIATION. JEAN-MARIE “JOöO” DE ÉAVE±ANgE, PRESI-
DENT OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN ºOOTBA±± ·ONFEDERATION, ±AUNCHED THE fiRST PUB±IC CAm-
PAIgN TO BECOmE THE SEVENTH PRESIDENT OF º¹ºµ IN 1974. JOöO ÉAVE±ANgE
mOBI±IzED ²OUTH-²OUTH SO±IDARITY TO WOO µFRICAN AND µSIAN DE±EgATES. ÉE
TOURED APPROxImATE±Y NINETY COUNTRIES DURINg HIS CAmPAIgN, FREqUENT±Y
APPEARINg WITH ¸E±é. ÉAVE±ANgE SUCCESSFU±±Y POSITIONED HImSE±F AS A CANDI-
DATE FROm THE “DEVE±OPINg WOR±D,” DESPITE HAVINg BEEN EDUCATED IN ºRANCE
AND BENEfiTINg FROm A ³UROPEAN IDENTITY IN ÊRAzI±. ÉE PROmISED, AND DE±IV-
ERED, DEVE±OPmENT mONEY, TECHNICA± TRAININg, AND ExPANDED BERTHS IN THE
ÈOR±D ·UP.
140 • ch a p t er sev en
·HI±EAN ACTIVISTS ORgANIzED SO±IDARITY TOURNAmENTS IN ³THIOPIA, ³AST
GERmANY, ºRANCE, AND ¹TA±Y. °EY REFUSED TO A±±OW THE mI±ITARY gOVERNmENTS
TO mARSHA± THE POPU±ARITY OF FOOTBA±± WITHOUT A figHT.
°OSE WHO HAVE SOUgHT TO PROTEST AUTHORITARIANISm, CONSUmERISm, RACISm,
AND SExISm IN SPORT HAVE FOUND INNOVATIVE CAmPAIgNS IN ²OUTH µmERICAN
FOOTBA±±. ¹N ÊRAzI±, ·±UB ·ORINTHIANS ±AUNCHED A RADICA± ExPERImENT TO
DEmOCRATIzE C±UB gOVERNANCE BY EmPOWERINg P±AYERS TO VOTE ON DECISIONS.
¸±AYERS ExTRAPO±ATED THEIR CRITICISm OF C±UB gOVERNANCE TO NATIONA± mI±ITARY
RU±E. LED BY “´R. ²OCRATES,” AN ATTACkINg mIDfiE±DER WITH A mEDICA± DEgREE,
·ORINTHIANS BUCkED THE TREND OF APO±ITICA± ATH±ETES IN THE ±ATE 1970S. ¹N 1982,
·ORINTHIANS’ P±AYERS WORE SHIRTS THAT URgED FANS TO VOTE, AND ²OCRATES SPOkE
E±OqUENT±Y ON THE SUBjECT OF OPPRESSION IN ÊRAzI±. ³xAmP±ES ±IkE ·ORINTHIANS
WERE POWERFU±. ²TI±±, mANY FANS TURNED AWAY IN DISgUST AS FAN VIO±ENCE
INCREASED AND mI±ITARY gOVERNmENTS INTERVENED IN FOOTBA±±.
µS ÊRAzI± DEmOCRATIzED, THE COUNTRY DEBATED ONE OF THE mOST RADICA±
PIECES OF SPORT ±EgIS±ATION IN HISTORY. ¹N THE EAR±Y 1990S, PUB±IC CRITICISm OF THE
±ACk OF ACCOUNTABI±ITY OF PROjECTS OVERSEEN BY THE ·ONFEDERATION OF ÊRAzI±IAN
ºOOTBA±± (·Êº) gREW STEADI±Y. ¹N REACTION, ¸RESIDENT ºERNANDO ÉENRIqUE
·ARDOSO APPOINTED ¸E±é AS mINISTER OF SPORT, mAkINg HIm THE fiRST B±ACk
CABINET mEmBER IN ÊRAzI±. ¸E±é PUB±IC±Y ACCUSED THE ·Êº PRESIDENT ¾EIxEIRA
AND º¹ºµ PRESIDENT ÉAVE±ANgE OF DEmANDINg PERSONA± BRIBES FOR TE±EVISION
RIgHTS. ¹N 1998, HE INTRODUCED A ±AW THAT ±ImITED THE POWER OF THE ·Êº
OVER P±AYERS, OPENED ACCESS TO STADIUmS, AND REqUIRED TRANSPARENT ACCOUNTA-
BI±ITY. ÊEFORE IT COU±D BE ImP±EmENTED, HOWEVER, ¾EIxEIRA AND ÉAVE±ANgE
CONVINCED A NUmBER OF ±EgIS±ATORS TO HACk AWAY AT IT. ·URRENT±Y THE ±AW IS
ON±Y A FRACTION OF ITS ORIgINA± SIzE AND SCOPE. ¹F THE ±AW HAD REmAINED AS PRO-
POSED, THE 2014 ÈOR±D ·UP IN ÊRAzI± WOU±D HAVE DRAINED FEWER PUB±IC
RESOURCES.
²O IT WAS IN kEEPINg WITH THE HISTORY OF FOOTBA±± ON AND Off THE PITCH THAT
THE PROTESTS IN ÊRAzI± BEgAN DURINg PREPARATIONS TO HOST THE 2014 ÈOR±D ·UP.
ÊEgINNINg AT THE 2013 ·ONFEDERATIONS ·UP, PROTESTERS DREW INTERNATIONA±
ATTENTION. ºROm BANNERS THAT READ “º¹ºµ GO ÉOmE” TO STRIkES OVER WORkER
SAFETY, ÊRAzI±IANS USED THE ÈOR±D ·UP AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO PROTEST THE INE-
qUA±ITIES UNRESO±VED BY A DECADE OF ·ENTER-LEſt gOVERNANCE. ¸ROTESTERS A±SO
CRITICIzED THE CHANgES TO THE ±EgA± INFRASTRUCTURE DEmANDED BY º¹ºµ. ²TARS
WHO HAD PREVIOUS±Y VOICED CRITICISm, ¸E±é INC±UDED, APPEARED AS mINIONS OF THE
ÈOR±D ·UP mACHINE, EVEN CHASTISINg PROTESTERS DEmANDINg REASONAB±E BUS
FARES AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF HOSPITA±S. ¼EA± ESTATE SPECU±ATION WAS RAmPANT,
¿lobaliZed talent
ºOOTBA±±’S ±ABOR mARkET HAS g±OBA±IzED A±ONg WITH ITS PO±ITICS. ¹N A RECENT
REPORT, THE ¹NTERNATIONA± ·ENTER FOR ²PORTS ²TUDY STATED THAT THE PROPORTION
OF FOOTBA±±ERS WHO HAVE mIgRATED INTERNATIONA±±Y IS AT AN A±±-TImE HIgH,
APPROxImATE±Y HA±F OF A±± PROFESSIONA± P±AYERS. °ESE fiNDINgS CONfiRm AN
ACCE±ERATION OF THE INTERNATIONA±IzATION OF FOOTBA±± P±AYERS’ ±ABOR mARkET. °E
³Ng±ISH ¸REmIER LEAgUE ImPORTS APPROxImATE±Y 60 PERCENT OF ITS FOOTBA±±ERS.
¶N±IkE A CENTURY AgO, ²OUTH µmERICANS ARE NOT ExC±USIVE±Y HEADED TO ³UROPE.
MANY fiND THEmSE±VES IN ·HINA, ONE OF THE P±ACES WITH THE HIgHEST WAgES, AS
WE±± AS ¹NDONESIA AND THE ¶NITED µRAB ³mIRATES. °E µRgENTINE ¼OBERTINO
¸Ug±IARA, WHO P±AYED IN JAkARTA, WAS SHOCkED TO fiND THAT HIS ¹NDONESIAN
TEAmmATES A±READY DRANk THE TRADITIONA± ²OUTH µmERICAN TEA, mATé.
¹T is STRIkINg THAT ²OUTH µmERICA CONTINUES TO PRODUCE THE WOR±D’S BEST
FOOTBA±± P±AYERS IN SPITE OF DEEP ECONOmIC INEqUA±ITIES, PO±ITICA± TURBU±ENCE,
AND THE DECAY OF ITS ±EAgUES. °EY ARE jOINED BY AN INCREASINg NUmBER OF
µFRICANS. LIkE THEIR PREDECESSORS, THESE P±AYERS TEND TO BE gOA± SCORERS WHO
ExCE± AT PASSINg AND BA±± CONTRO±. LEADINg THE CURRENT gENERATION IS THE
µRgENTINE FORWARD LIONE± MESSI. ¹T IS DIffiCU±T TO ExP±AIN MESSI’S SUB±ImE
TA±ENT TO THOSE UNCONVERTED TO FOOTBA±± FANDOm. °E ESTImATED COST FOR A C±UB
jUST TO HIRE HIm IS OVER $331 mI±±ION. µNA±YSTS FREqUENT±Y FA±± BACk ON THE
COmmON AxIOm THAT FOOTBA±± IS POPU±AR BECAUSE IT IS CHEAP AND THAT POOR
PEOP±E ARE gOOD AT IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE ±ITT±E E±SE TO HOPE FOR. °ESE SImP±ISTIC
ExP±ANATIONS REPRODUCE AN UNFOUNDED ASSUmPTION THAT POOR PEOP±E’S TA±ENT
COmES FROm INNATE PHYSICA±ITY OR DESPERATION.
¹F IT IS DIffiCU±T TO PROVE THAT DEmONSTRAB±E DIffERENCES ExIST BETWEEN ²OUTH
µmERICAN AND ³UROPEAN P±AYERS, HOWEVER, IT IS EASY TO SEE THAT COACHES, P±AY-
ERS, AND FANS believe IT TO BE TRUE. ÈHEN ASkED WHY HE ±Eſt µRgENTINA, THE
mIDfiE±DER JORgE ÍA±DANO REP±IED THAT HE P±AYED “±IkE A GERmAN.” ÉE CONTIN-
UED, “°E µRgENTINEAN gAmE FEATURES AgI±ITY AND mOBI±ITY. ÈE A±± kNOW THE
STOCk ImAgE: U±TRA-ImAgINATIVE, U±TRA-CREATIVE . . . ¹ WAS NO MARADONA. °E SAD
TRUTH IS THAT, AS A FAN, ¹ TOO WOU±D HAVE RATHER WATCHED MARADONA THAN
142 • ch a p t er sev en
ÍA±DANO.” ²OUTH µmERICAN FOOTBA±± WAS SUPPOSED TO BE SPONTANEOUS, CREA-
TIVE, AND gENIUS. µN INflUENTIA± gROUP OF ÊRITISH jOURNA±ISTS ATTRIBUTES SOmE
OF THE ²OUTH µmERICAN SUCCESS TO CHEATINg. °E SPECTACU±AR HANDBA±±, DUBBED
“THE HAND OF GOD,” OF ´IEgO MARADONA IN THE 1986 ÈOR±D ·UP IS ONE OF
mANY ExAmP±ES THEY CITE. ²OUTH µmERICAN ATH±ETES, FANS, AND jOURNA±ISTS
COUNTER THAT CHEATINg IS ON±Y “DIRTY” IF YOU ASSUmE THE SYSTEm IS C±EAN. ºOR
gENERATIONS THAT gREW UP UNDER mI±ITARY DICTATORSHIPS, THIS WOU±D HAVE BEEN
BOTH A DANgEROUS AND A DAſt ASSUmPTION.
²O HOW mIgHT WE ExP±AIN ²OUTH µmERICAN ExCE±±ENCE WITHOUT RE±YINg ON
E±ITIST ASSUmPTIONS ABOUT WHAT POOR AND B±ACk PEOP±E ARE gOOD AT? ¹N THE fiRST
P±ACE, THE INFORmA± SPACES OF FOOTBA±± IN THE REgION HAVE BEEN FERTI±E gROUNDS
FOR DEVE±OPINg TA±ENT. ºINANCIA± INVESTmENT HE±PS WITH YOUTH CAmPS, mEDICA±
BI±±S, AND EqUIPmENT. ÉOWEVER, FOOTBA±± CAN BECOmE TOO REgImENTED FOR
YOUNg BODIES. ¹N ²OUTH µmERICA, FOOTBA±± IS HIgH±Y SOCIA± AND ±ESS COmPART-
mENTA±IzED. ¹T IS P±AYED ON TRIPS TO THE BEACH AND AT PICNICS AND PARTIES.
µCCORDINg TO SPORTS THERAPISTS, THESE OPPORTUNITIES PREVENT EAR±Y BURNOUT
AND INjURY. ¸±AYERS A±SO DEVE±OP BA±± CONTRO± IN SmA±±ER SPACES. MOREOVER,
²OUTH µmERICAN ExCE±±ENCE EmBODIES A UNIqUE HISTORY OF FOOTBA±± PUB±ICS.
²OUTH µmERICAN AUDIENCES VA±UE INNOVATION, INDEED DEmAND IT. ÈHEN THE
µRgENTINE ·±UB ³STUDIANTES DE ±A ¸±ATA ADOPTED A HIgH±Y DEFENSIVE STY±E IN THE
1960S, µRgENTINES CA±±ED IT antifútbol. “µNTI-FOOTBA±±” HAS COmE TO mEAN ANY
TACTIC THAT ImPEDES THE flOW OF THE gAmE, INC±UDINg PREmEDITATED VIO±ENCE.
²OUTH µmERICAN PUB±ICS ExPECT THEIR TA±ENTED SUPERSTARS TO ExHIBIT SOCIA±
CONSCIOUSNESS, A±THOUgH THEY ARE FREqUENT±Y DISAPPOINTED. ¹N AN INDUSTRY
WORTH TRI±±IONS OF DO±±ARS, WHICH USUA±±Y SERVES TO REPRODUCE AND OBFUSCATE
INEqUA±ITY, IT IS STRIkINg WHEN ATH±ETES SIDE WITH PO±ITICA± CAUSES ±IkE HUmAN
RIgHTS CAmPAIgNS. ´ESPITE THE DECAY OF ²OUTH µmERICAN PROFESSIONA± ±EAgUES,
THERE IS A STRONg gRASSROOTS STRUCTURE THAT CONNECTS FOOTBA±± TO BROADER ISSUES
OF SOCIA± jUSTICE. ºOR ExAmP±E, mANY OF THE µRgENTINE P±AYERS HAVE jOINED IN
THE EffORTS TO fiND THE CHI±DREN ABDUCTED BY THE mI±ITARY DURINg THE 1970S AND
1980S. ÊRAzI±IAN WUNDERkIND, ½EYmAR JR., WAS ExPECTED TO SHOW SUPPORT FOR
THE PROTESTERS OF THE 2014 ÈOR±D ·UP, EVEN IF HE WAS A±SO SUPPOSED TO WIN THE
TOURNAmENT FOR ÊRAzI±. JOURNA±ISTS ASk FOOTBA±±ERS TO COmmENT ON ISSUES RANg-
INg FROm CONgRESSIONA± E±ECTIONS TO MIDD±E ³ASTERN DIP±OmACY. °EY FRE-
qUENT±Y COmP±Y, AT TImES TO THEIR OWN DETRImENT. °IS CONTRASTS SHARP±Y WITH
THE TRADITIONS IN ³UROPE AND ½ORTH µmERICA.
¹N RECENT YEARS, FAN INTEREST IN FOOTBA±±’S mEgASTARS HAS gROWN ExPONEN-
TIA±±Y AND IN AREAS WITHOUT A ±ONg FOOTBA±± TRADITION. µN I±±USTRATIVE ExAmP±E
OCCURRED IN 2013 WHEN A JAPANESE gAmE SHOW CHA±±ENgED LIONE± MESSI TO TRY
TO SCORE AgAINST A ROBOT BUI±T TO B±OCk PENA±TY SHOTS. °E SHOW TIT±ED THE SEg-
mENT IN ³Ng±ISH, “MAN VERSUS THE MACHINE.” MESSI, WHO ENgENDERS SYmPATHY
BECAUSE OF HIS SmA±± STATURE A±ONE, IS NOTORIOUS±Y SHY AND SUBDUED. ÈHI±E HIS
PERSONA±ITY ±ACkS THE CHARACTERISTIC BRAVADO OF ²OUTH µmERICAN STRIkERS, HIS
P±AYINg STY±E fiTS THE mODE± PERFECT±Y. MESSI STARED DOWN AT THE BA±±, DRIBB±ED
A FEW TImES, AND TOOk HIS fiRST SHOT. °E ROBOT VEERED TO ITS RIgHT AND B±OCkED
IT. MESSI RESPONDED TO THE ROBOT WITH A ±OOk OF SURPRISE. ÉIS SECOND ATTEmPT
HIT THE gOA±POST. µT THIS POINT, THE “mAN” ExHIBITED SOmE DEgREE OF FRUSTRA-
TION. ¸±AYERS OF MESSI’S CA±IBER ARE ACUTE±Y AWARE OF gEOmETRY, AND HE APPEARED
TO CA±CU±ATE THE mECHANICS OF THE ROBOT. »N THE THIRD ATTEmPT, MESSI SCORED
BY gROUNDINg THE BA±± IN FRONT OF THE ROBOT, CAUSINg IT TO BOUNCE BEHIND IT.
ÉE ±OOkED A±mOST AS ExCITED AS IN A REA± gAmE. MESSI SCORED IN HIS NExT
ATTEmPT AND APPEARED SATISfiED WITH HIS PERFORmANCE. °E VIgNETTE OF LIONE±
MESSI’S VICTORY OVER THE ROBOT CREATED TO DESTROY HIm WAS CONTRIVED.
½ONETHE±ESS, IT REmAINS INCREDIB±Y ATTRACTIVE. ¹T IS A gOOD I±±USTRATION OF ²OUTH
µmERICAN FOOTBA±±’S UNIVERSA± APPEA±. ÈE ARE A±± STANDINg IN FRONT OF A
mACHINE THAT WE HAVE CREATED, SOmEWHAT HAP±ESS AND HOPINg INgENUITY WI±±
HE±P US.
144 • ch a p t er sev en
²INCE FOOTBA±±’S DIffUSION, ²OUTH µmERICANS HAVE SOUgHT OUT THE WOR±D. ¹N
mAgAzINES, C±UBHOUSES, AND STADIUmS, FOOTBA±± HAS BEEN A SITE WHERE HIERAR-
CHIES OF RACE, gENDER, AND C±ASS ARE CREATED, REPRODUCED, AND, SOmETImES, CHA±-
±ENgED. MANY HAVE TRIED TO mOBI±IzE PASSION FOR THE gAmE TO PROmOTE SOCIA±
jUSTICE AND TRANSNATIONA± SO±IDARITY. »VER THE COURSE OF A CENTURY, FOOTBA±± HAS
BECOmE INTERTWINED WITH NATIONA± IDENTITIES. ¹T SHOU±D gIVE US PAUSE TO WON-
DER WHAT THE WOR±D WOU±D ±OOk ±IkE IF mORE NATIONA± IDENTITIES WERE FOUNDED
ON CREATIVE BRI±±IANCE, gRACE, AND ENgAgEmENT WITH THE WOR±D, WIN OR ±OSE.
¸ERHAPS THAT IS ²OUTH µmERICA’S mOST BEAUTIFU± CONTRIBUTION TO THE BEAUTIFU±
gAmE.
µRCHETTI, ³DUARDO
1998 Masculinities: Football, Polo, and the Tango in Argentina. »xFORD: ÍERSO.
ÊOCkETTI, GREgg
2016 °e Invention of the Beautiful Game: Football and the Making of Modern
Brazil. GAINESVI±±E: ¶NIVERSITY OF º±ORIDA ¸RESS.
³±SEY, ÊRENDA
2011 Citizens and Sportsmen: Fútbol and Politics in Twentieth-Century Chile.
µUSTIN: ¶NIVERSITY OF ¾ExAS ¸RESS.
GAffNEY, ·HRISTOPHER
2010 Temples of the Earthbound Gods: Stadiums in the Cultural Landscape of Rio
de Janeiro and Buenos Aires. µUSTIN: ¶NIVERSITY OF ¾ExAS ¸RESS.
GO±DB±ATT, ´AVID
2008 °e Ball Is Round: A Global History of Soccer. ½EW ÓORk: ¼IVERHEAD.
ÌITT±ESON, ¼OgER
2014 °e Country of Football: Soccer and the Making of Modern Brazil. ÊERkE±EY:
¶NIVERSITY OF ·A±IFORNIA.
½ADE±, JOSHUA
2014 Futbol! Why Soccer Matters in Latin America. GAINESVI±±E: ¶NIVERSITY OF
º±ORIDA ¸RESS.
¼ICHEY, JEff
N.D. “¸±AYINg AT ½ATION: ²OCCER, ¼ACIA± ¹DEO±OgY, AND ½ATIONA± ¹NTEgRATION IN
µRgENTINA.” ¶NPUB±ISHED mANUSCRIPT.
Üos Án¿eles, a city lon¿ kNOWN FOR ITS CU±TURA± DIVERSITY, HAS BECOmE
A CENTER FOR ONE OF THE mOST ImPORTANT RECENT CU±INARY TRENDS, THE UPSCA±E
FOOD TRUCk PHENOmENON. °E ICONIC ÌOgI TRUCk, SERVINg ÌOREAN BARBECUE
TACOS, WAS THE CREATION OF ·HEF ¼OY ·HOI, WHO WAS BORN IN ²EOU± AND gREW
UP IN LOS µNgE±ES. ¶NEmP±OYED AſtER THE fi NANCIA± CRASH OF 2008 AND DESPER-
ATE TO DO SOmETHINg ExCITINg, HE COmBINED HIS ÌOREAN HERITAgE AND kNOW±-
EDgE OF MExICAN STREET FOOD, THEREBY gENTRIFYINg THE WORkINg-C±ASS MExICAN
lonchera (FOOD TRUCk). ÉIS INNOVATIVE CREATIONS TOOk Off WITHIN A YEAR AND SET
A NATIONA± TREND, AS ÌOgI COPYCATS BEgAN POPPINg UP IN CITIES ACROSS THE
¶NITED ²TATES, INC±UDINg ½EW ÓORk, µUSTIN, AND ²AN ºRANCISCO. MEANWHI±E
IN 2009, A ¸ERUVIAN-BORN CHEF NAmED ¼ICARDO ËáRATE, WHO HAD TRAINED IN
LONDON AND WORkED AT A JAPANESE RESTAURANT IN LOS µNgE±ES, OPENED A SImP±E
FOOD STA±± CA±±ED MO-·HICA IN THE MERCADO LA ¸A±OmA, A COOPERATIVE NON-
PROfiT mARkET SOUTH OF DOWNTOWN LOS µNgE±ES. ¹N ANOTHER VERSION OF ¸ACIfiC
FUSION, ËáRATE’S CUISINE mIxES ¸ERU’S TRADITIONA± criollo (CREO±E) DISHES WITH
THOSE OF THE COUNTRY’S SIzAB±E JAPANESE POPU±ATION. ÈORD SPREAD qUICk±Y
AmONg FOODIES, AND THE CHEF BECAmE A NATIONA± PHENOmENON; IN 2011, Food
& Wine Magazine AWARDED HIm THE TIT±E “ÊEST ½EW ·HEF, ¸EOP±E’S ·HOICE.”
¹S IT A COINCIDENCE THAT THESE TWO VERY DIffERENT CHEFS BEgAN THEIR RISE TO
PROmINENCE IN LOS µNgE±ES WITHIN A YEAR OF EACH OTHER WITH µSIAN-LATINO
FUSION CREATIONS? ³xP±AININg THE PHENOmENON OF ¸ACIfiC FUSION CUISINE BOTH
IN LOS µNgE±ES AND g±OBA±±Y RAISES TWO ImPORTANT qUESTIONS: ÉOW DOES CU±I-
NARY INflUENCE mOVE WITHIN THE TRANSNATIONA± CIRCUITS THAT CONSTITUTE g±OBA±
LATIN µmERICA? ÈHY DID THESE FUSION FOODS TAkE Off WHEN THEY DID, AND WHAT
DOES THAT TE±± US ABOUT OPPORTUNITIES FOR ImmIgRANT AND ETHNIC ENTREPRE-
NEURS? ÈITHIN LOS µNgE±ES, A CONjUNCTURE OF SPACE AND TImE—ETHNIC
146
fi¿ure 8.1. ÌOgI TRUCk, LOS µNgE±ES. ¸HOTO BY ²ARAH ¸ORTNOY.
148 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
CO±ONIES IN THE µmERICAS AND THE ¸HI±IPPINES. ¹N THE NINETEENTH CENTURY,
mIgRATION flOWED ±ARgE±Y FROm µSIA TO LATIN µmERICA WITH THE DEmAND FOR
±ABOR ON TROPICA± P±ANTATIONS FO±±OWINg THE ABO±ITION OF THE µFRICAN S±AVE
TRADE. ´ESPITE RESTRICTIONS ON “COO±IE” WORkERS, µSIAN mIgRANTS BECAmE PROm-
INENT IN THE gROCERY AND RESTAURANT TRADES, THEREBY CONTRIBUTINg TO LATIN
µmERICA’S DIVERSE criollo AND mESTIzO CUISINES, TERmS THAT REFER TO POPU±AR
CU±TURA± mIxINg AND ±OCA± IDENTITY. ÊY THE END OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, HOW-
EVER, THE g±OBA± PROmINENCE OF LATIN µmERICAN CUISINES HAD BEgUN TO REVERSE
THIS CU±INARY flOW, ESTAB±ISHINg A PROmINENT P±ACE FOR MExICAN AND ¸ERUVIAN
RESTAURANTS IN µSIA AS IN OTHER REgIONS OF THE WOR±D.
·O±ONIA± TRADE IN FOODSTUffS BETWEEN LATIN µmERICA AND µSIA WAS gENER-
A±±Y mEDIATED BY ³UROPEAN mERCHANTS, AND AS A RESU±T, CU±INARY TECHNIqUES
WERE OſtEN ±Eſt BEHIND IN THE ExCHANgE. ¸RO±IfiC AND NUTRITIOUS LATIN µmERICAN
STAP±ES SUCH AS mAIzE, SWEET POTATOES, CASSAVA, AND PEANUTS CONTRIBUTED TO
EAR±Y mODERN POPU±ATION gROWTH IN µSIA, WHI±E CHI±E PEPPERS, TROPICA± FRUITS,
AND OTHER µmERICAN CONDImENTS A±SO BECAmE INDISPENSAB±E IN THE CUISINES OF
¹NDIA, ²OUTHEAST µSIA, AND PARTS OF ·HINA (ÉO 1955; MAzUmDAR 1999). ²PANISH
AND MExICAN COOkINg STY±ES HAD SOmE INflUENCE IN THE ¸HI±IPPINES, BUT ON THE
WHO±E, THE NEW CROPS WERE COOkED USINg INDIgENOUS µSIAN RECIPES (¸I±CHER
2012: 33–45). MEANWHI±E, ²PANISH OffiCIA±S HAD ±ImITED SUCCESS IN THEIR CAm-
PAIgN TO TRANSP±ANT µSIAN SPICES TO THE µmERICAS; ON±Y RE±ATIVE±Y COmmON AND
UNPROfiTAB±E SPICES SUCH AS CINNAmON, gINgER, AND TAmARIND ACCU±TURATED,
A±THOUgH THEY mADE ImPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO ±OCA± CUISINES (DE ÍOS 2006).
µSIAN TRAVE±ERS ON THE MANI±A GA±±EON DID INTRODUCE SOmE COOkINg TECH-
NIqUES, INC±UDINg TANDOOR OVENS A±ONg MExICO’S ¸ACIfiC COAST, BUT POPU±AR
ATTRIBUTIONS OF mANY CU±INARY INflUENCES ARE mISTAkEN. LATIN µmERICAN RICE IS
NOT A ·HINESE ImPORT BUT RATHER DERIVES FROm A ¸ERSIAN “PI±AU” INTRODUCED
TO ²PAIN BY mEDIEVA± µRABS. ·EVICHE, THE PROCESS OF “COOkINg” RAW fiSH
WITH CITRIC ACID, COmES NOT FROm JAPANESE SUSHI—A NINETEENTH-CENTURY
INVENTION—BUT INSTEAD FROm THE µRABIC PRESERVINg mETHOD, “SEBICH” (ÊAUER
2001: 87–90).
LATIN µmERICAN CU±INARY COSmOPO±ITANISm OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY WAS
DIVIDED A±ONg C±ASS ±INES; WHI±E E±ITES ±OOkED TO ºRANCE FOR fiNE DININg, POPU-
±AR CUISINE WAS INflUENCED BY PRO±ETARIAN mIgRANTS FROm AROUND THE WOR±D.
µSIANS WERE PROmINENT AmONg THESE NEW mIgRANTS, DRAWN BY THE ECONOmIC
OPPORTUNITIES OF THE ·A±IFORNIA GO±D ¼USH AND THE P±ANTATION ±ABOR CON-
TRACTS OF ¸ERU AND THE ·ARIBBEAN. ·HINESE gROCERIES AND RESTAURANTS, THE
±ATTER CA±±ED chifas IN ¸ERU, AT TImES INCITED NATIVIST FEARS OF RATS AND OTHER
150 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
BUT IT PROVED WI±D±Y POPU±AR WITH TOURISTS, INC±UDINg BOTH THE NATIONA± BOUR-
gEOISIE AND FOREIgNERS IN SEARCH OF µzTEC AND MAYA ExOTICISm. ÊY THE TURN OF
THE TWENTY-fiRST CENTURY, PATRIOTIC MExICAN FOOD CRITICS COU±D TAkE DE±IgHT AS
“AUTHENTIC” TACO TRUCkS AND CHI±E SAUCES (moles) SPREAD AROUND THE WOR±D, DIS-
P±ACINg ¾Ex-MEx VERSIONS THAT HAD BEEN PROPAgATED BY RESTAURATEURS AND FOOD
PROCESSINg COmPANIES FROm THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ¾O ACHIEVE THIS gOA±, THE
MExICAN gOVERNmENT AND PRIVATE gROUPS INVESTED IN A NATIONA± CU±INARY INFRA-
STRUCTURE OF FOOD mEDIA AND COOkINg SCHOO±S TO COUNTER THE INflUENCE OF THE
MICHE±IN GUIDE AND THE “OTHER ·¹µ”—THE ·U±INARY ¹NSTITUTE OF µmERICA.
°E ENORmOUS SUCCESS OF THIS TOURISm DEVE±OPmENT CAmPAIgN BECAmE A mODE±
FOR OTHER LATIN µmERICAN NATIONS.
¸ERUVIANS HAVE CREATED THE mOST SUCCESSFU± RIVA± TO MExICO’S gOURmET
mOVEmENT WITH THE ±ESS NATIONA±IST SOUNDINg cocina novoandino (NOUVE±±E
µNDEAN CUISINE). ¸ERU’S CU±INARY INFRASTRUCTURE WAS DE±AYED BY THE ECONOmIC
CRISES AND THE ²HININg ¸ATH CIVI± WAR OF THE 1980S, BUT THE COUNTRY HAS mADE
UP FOR ±OST TImE, OPENINg A TOTA± OF fiſtY CU±INARY SCHOO±S IN LImA A±ONE, P±US
ANOTHER THIRTY IN THE PROVINCES. GASTóN µCURIO, THE SON OF A PROmINENT PO±ITI-
CIAN, IS THE ±EADINg figURE OF THE novoandino mOVEmENT; TRAINED AT LE ·ORDON
ʱEU IN ¸ARIS, HE RETURNED TO ¸ERU IN 1994 WITH HIS GERmAN-BORN PASTRY CHEF
WIFE, µSTRID GUTSCHE. °EIR CO±±ABORATIVE RESTAURANT, µSTRID Y GASTóN, WON
POPU±AR ACC±AIm FOR ITS INNOVATIVE, SIgNATURE CEVICHES AND SPAWNED A g±OBA±
FRANCHISE WITH OUTPOSTS IN MADRID, MANHATTAN, MIAmI, ÊOgOTá, AND MExICO
·ITY. °E INTEREST IN ¸ERUVIAN flAVORS HAS RECENT±Y INSPIRED PI±gRImAgES BY SUCH
INTERNATIONA± CE±EBRITY CHEFS AS ºERRAN µDRIà, ¼ENE ¼EDzEPI, MICHE± ÊRAS, AND
´AN ÊARBER. °E REVERED SUSHI CHEF ½OBUYUkI MATSUHISA ACTUA±±Y DEVE±OPED
HIS UNIqUE FUSION STY±E WHI±E WORkINg IN LImA.
LATIN µmERICA’S g±OBA± CU±INARY INflUENCE HAS gONE THROUgH TWO DISTINCT
PERIODS, THE EAR±Y mODERN SPREAD OF CU±TIVARS AND A CONTEmPORARY FASHION
WITHIN THE RESTAURANT INDUSTRY. °E FORmER PERIOD ±ED TO THE g±OBA±IzATION OF
mAIzE, POTATOES, TOmATOES, AND CHI±ES, WHI±E SHOPS TODAY INCREASINg±Y STOCk
TOmATI±±OS, qUINOA, TEqUI±A, AND PISCO, ¸ERU’S fiERY gRAPE BRANDY. ÓET LATIN
µmERICANS HAVE RECEIVED ±ITT±E CREDIT FOR THESE gIſtS; EAR±Y mODERN P±ANTS WERE
OſtEN ATTRIBUTED TO THE ³UROPEAN mERCHANTS, AND THE CONTEmPORARY INTEREST IN
LATIN µmERICAN FOOD HAS COmE AS PART OF A g±OBA± FASHION FOR PEASANT AND STREET
FOOD. °E SUDDEN INTEREST IN qUINOA, FOR ExAmP±E, HAS mEANT THAT mANY ¸ERUVIAN
FARmERS CANNOT EVEN AffORD TO EAT THEIR OWN STAP±E gRAIN, AND mOST TEqUI±AS ARE
BOTT±ED IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES, WITH ±ITT±E PROfiT FOR MExICAN AgAVE gROWERS.
MARkET AND C±ASS INEqUA±ITIES THUS DETERmINE WHO BENEfiTS FROm FOOD FADS.
¼OY ·HOI’S ÌOgI TACO TRUCkS I±±USTRATE BOTH THE CROSS-CU±TURA± INflUENCE OF
LATIN µmERICAN CUISINE AND THE ImPORTANCE OF CU±INARY INFRASTRUCTURE FOR
ACHIEVINg SUCCESS EVEN FOR STREET FOOD. ¹N ESTAB±ISHINg HIS BUSINESS, ·HOI DREW
ON THE RESOURCES AND CU±TURA± CAPITA± OF HIS ENTREPRENEURIA± ÌOREAN FAmI±Y,
TRAININg AT THE ·U±INARY ¹NSTITUTE OF µmERICA, PROFESSIONA± ExPERIENCE IN
±EADINg RESTAURANTS, AND mEDIA-SAVVY BUSINESS PARTNERS. ¾ImINg WAS jUST AS
ImPORTANT, FOR THE mARkET CRASH AND RECESSION OF 2008 ±Eſt COUNT±ESS YOUNg
mEmBERS OF THE mIDD±E C±ASS DESPERATE FOR NEW FORmS OF STATUS AND ENTERTAIN-
mENT BASED ON CU±TURA± AND mEDIA kNOW±EDgE. ÉIP YOUNg PEOP±E USED THEIR
CE±± PHONES TO FO±±OW THE SEEmINg±Y RANDOm TWEETS OF THE ÌOgI TRUCk AND
THEN WAITED IN ImPOSSIB±Y ±ONg ±INES WITH ±IkE-mINDED FO±k. °E ÌOgI TRUCkS
THUS BECAmE A BEACON FOR A gENERATION THAT COU±D NO ±ONgER AffORD THE FANCY
RESTAURANTS THAT HAD DEfiNED STATUS IN THE PRE-CRASH ERA BUT YEARNED FOR A SImI-
±AR FORm OF DISTINCTION. ¹T A±SO REPRESENTED THE SHIſtINg WOR±D OF SOCIA± mEDIA
IN WHICH FOOD TRENDS ARE NOT DISCOVERED BY FOOD CRITICS BUT VIA ¾WITTER,
¹NSTAgRAm, AND ÓE±P. ¹N THIS WAY, THE ÌOgI TRUCk PAVED THE WAY FOR A NATIONA±
TREND OF mOBI±E DININg TRACkED THROUgH SOCIA± mEDIA. °E “±UxE-±ONCHERA”
WITH AN EDgY µSIAN flAVOR FO±±OWED THE COO± STY±E PIONEERED BY THE CHEF–
WRITER–TE±EVISION PERSONA±ITY µNTHONY ÊOURDAIN, WHO IN TURN PUB±ISHED
·HOI’S mEmOIR-COOkBOOk, L.A. Son: My Life, My City, My Food (2013), IN HIS
FOOD-CENTERED SERIES.
ÌOgI FUSION gREW FROm ·HOI’S CHI±DHOOD IN THE CU±INARY AND SOCIA± BORDER-
±ANDS OF LOS µNgE±ES. µ±READY BY THE EAR±Y TWENTIETH CENTURY, THE AREA EAST OF
DOWNTOWN, PARTICU±AR±Y ÊOY±E ÉEIgHTS, WAS A gATHERINg P±ACE FOR DIVERSE
mIgRANTS, INC±UDINg MExICANS, ¹TA±IANS, AND JEWS, AS WE±± AS ÌOREANS, JAPANESE,
·HINESE, AND ºI±IPINOS. ·HOI ARRIVED AS A TODD±ER IN THE EAR±Y 1970S AS PART OF
THE BOOm IN µSIAN mIgRATION FO±±OWINg THE 1965 ¹mmIgRATION ¼EFORm µCT. ÉIS
PARENTS STRUgg±ED TO mAkE A ±IVINg FOR mANY YEARS, OPENINg A ÌOREAN RESTAURANT
IN GARDEN GROVE THAT DID NOT SUCCEED A±ONg WITH A SERIES OF OTHER UNSUCCESSFU±
BUSINESS VENTURES. µ ±ATCHkEY CHI±D, ·HOI ATE HIS WAY A±ONE THROUgH ÌOREATOWN’S
BARBECUE RESTAURANTS, JEWISH DE±IS, ²A±VADORAN pupuserías, AND MExICAN
taQuerías. ·HOI’S TASTE BUDS WERE INFORmED BY THESE YEARS OF WA±kINg THE STREETS
OF LOS µNgE±ES, WHERE MExICAN FOOD B±ENDS SEAm±ESS±Y WITH µmERICAN FARE
THROUgH CROSS-CU±TURA± mARkETINg AND INTERmARRIAgE. ½EON SIgNS ADVERTISE
HISTORIC INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS LUCY’S MExICAN-µmERICAN ºOOD, SE±±INg HAmBURg-
152 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
ERS AND TACOS, OR ÌOSHER ÊURRITO, A DOWNTOWN FOOD STAND OPENED BY A JEWISH
mAN mARRIED TO A ²ONORAN WOmAN. ¹N THIS WAY, A ÌOREAN BOY WOU±D HAVE EASI±Y
UNDERSTOOD MExICAN FOOD AS PART OF THE mOSAIC THAT mAkES UP µmERICAN FOOD.
¹F ETHNIC CUISINES mIxED EASI±Y ACROSS THE NEIgHBORHOODS OF LOS µNgE±ES, THE
DIVERSE PEOP±ES OſtEN CAmE INTO CONflICT. ¹N 1992, THE CITY ERUPTED IN VIO±ENCE
WHEN WHITE PO±ICE OffiCERS WERE ACqUITTED OF BRUTA±±Y ASSAU±TINg AN µFRICAN
µmERICAN NAmED ¼ODNEY ÌINg. ÌOREAN BUSINESS OWNERS WERE A PARTICU±AR
TARgET OF VIO±ENCE OF THE PREDOmINANT±Y B±ACk CROWD. ¹N AN INTERVIEW WITH
µNTHONY ÊOURDAIN ON HIS POPU±AR TE±EVISION SHOW, Parts Unknown, ·HOI
DESCRIBED WATCHINg THE RIOTS FROm THE ROOF OF A BUI±DINg AND FEE±INg BESIEgED
FOR THREE DAYS UNTI± PO±ICE fiNA±±Y RESTORED ORDER.
·HOI REBE±±ED AT fiRST AgAINST THE PROFESSIONA± ExPECTATIONS OF HIS ImmI-
gRANT PARENTS BUT ±ATER FU±fi±±ED THEm IN AN UNORTHODOx mANNER BY TRAININg
AS A CHEF AND ACqUIRINg THE TECHNIqUES OF ºRENCH HAUTE CUISINE. µſtER CO±±EgE,
HE WORkED FOR A FEW YEARS AS A STOCkBROkER, THEN ATTENDED ÈESTERN ²TATE
¶NIVERSITY LAW ²CHOO± FOR A SINg±E SEmESTER, IN 1994, A±± THE WHI±E ABUSINg
DRUgS AND A±COHO±. ÉE FOUND NEW PURPOSE IN ±IFE WITH A DECISION TO BECOmE
A CHEF, WORkED EVENINgS TO gAIN THE BASIC SkI±±S, AND EVENTUA±±Y, IN 1998, gRADU-
ATED FROm THE ·U±INARY ¹NSTITUTE OF µmERICA. ÉE INTERNED IN MANHATTAN AT
THE MICHE±IN THREE-STARRED LE ÊERNARDIN, THEN PASSED THROUgH A STRINg OF
HIgH-PROfi±E RESTAURANTS BEFORE ±ANDINg A COVETED POSITION AS CHEF DE CUISINE
AT THE ÊEVER±Y ÉI±±S ÉI±TON IN 2007. ÉIS PROFESSIONA± ExPERIENCE REINFORCED
HIS CHI±DHOOD ImPRESSIONS FROm THE STREETS OF LOS µNgE±ES; A±THOUgH THE
RESTAURANT DININg ROOmS SERVED AN ExC±USIVE C±IENTE±E, THE kITCHENS WERE
mIxED WITH A PREDOmINANCE OF LATINO ±INE COOkS AS A RESU±T OF CU±INARY ±ABOR
mARkET TRENDS. ·HOI TOOk ADVANTAgE OF HIS COWORkERS’ kNOW±EDgE OF MExICAN
STREET FOOD; ON ONE mEmORAB±E OCCASION, WHI±E WORkINg AT A ¸A±m ²PRINgS
RESORT, HE HE±PED BUTCHER A gOAT AND mAkE birria AT A MExICA±I RESTAURANT
OWNED BY THE FAmI±Y OF ONE OF HIS COOkS.
°E CRASH OF 2008 PROVIDED ·HOI WITH THE OPPORTUNITY—AND THE NEED—
TO FUSE THE PO±Yg±OT STREET FOODS OF HIS YOUTH WITH HIS YEARS OF PROFESSIONA±
TRAININg. ÉAVINg jUST BEEN ±AID Off FROm A HIgH-END RESTAURANT, HE gOT TOgETHER
WITH A ÉI±TON CO±±EAgUE, THE ºI±IPINO µmERICAN MARk MANgUERA, WHO SUg-
gESTED THE IDEA OF A ÌOREAN BARBECUE TACO TRUCk. ·HOI BEgAN HIS RESEARCH IN
THE AIS±ES OF THE ÌOREAN mARkETS, WHI±E MANgUERA ARRANgED THE ±EASE ON A
FOOD TRUCk. ÈITH PROFESSIONA± CREDENTIA±S, THEY EASI±Y PASSED THE ±ICENSINg
AND INSPECTIONS THAT CAN BE SO TROUB±ESOmE FOR ImmIgRANT ENTREPRENEURS.
ÌOgI HIT THE STREETS IN ±ATE 2008, FEATURINg A mENU OF SHORT RIB TACOS, kImCHI
154 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
TO IRRITATE mANY O±D-TImERS BUT A DRAW FOR A YOUNgER, mORE DIVERSE CROWD.
·HOI’S SUCCESS HAS E±EVATED HIm BEYOND THE ±EVE± OF POPU±AR CHEF TO A TE±EVI-
SION HOST. ¹N µUgUST 2014, ·½½ ANNOUNCED THAT ·HOI WAS jOININg THE NET-
WORk AND WOU±D BE HOSTINg HIS OWN SHOW TIT±ED Street Food.
µ±THOUgH ·HOI ImAgINED ÌOgI AS A DEmOCRATIzINg FORCE THAT COU±D BRINg
gOURmET FOOD TO THE mASSES, THERE WERE ±ImITS TO HOW FAR THE TRUCkS AND THEIR
CUSTOmERS WOU±D gO ACROSS LOS µNgE±ES’S SOCIA± AND SPATIA± BOUNDARIES, AS THE
SOCIO±OgIST »±IVER ÈANg HAS RECENT±Y DISCOVERED. ¶SINg ¾WITTER’S PUB±IC DATA-
BASE, ÈANg mAPPED THE STOPS mADE BY ÌOgI’S FOUR TRUCkS FROm 2009 TO 2011.
ÉE FOUND THE mAjORITY OF STOPS IN TWO REgIONS, NORTH FROm ÍENICE TO
´OWNTOWN, AND SOUTH, IN »RANgE ·OUNTY. °E SPACE IN BETWEEN, DUBBED
“°E ÍOID” BY ÈANg, “ENCOmPASSED ±ONg-STANDINg zONES OF C±ASS AND RACIA±
SEgREgATION IN THE AREA, INC±UDINg THE ²OUTH ÊAY, ÉARBOR, ²OUTH L.µ.,
²OUTHEAST L.µ., AND ³AST L.µ.” (ÈANg 2013: 85). °E FEW STOPS IN THIS zONE
WERE ExCEPTIONA±, AS WHEN A TRUCk BROkE DOWN AT THE CORNER OF ºIgUEROA AND
ºIſtY-NINTH. °US, ÌOgI HAS PURSUED AN AUDIENCE OF YOUNg, mIDD±E-C±ASS WHITES
AND µSIAN µmERICANS.
ºOR ¼OY ·HOI, THE ÌOgI TACO TRUCk HAS BECOmE A mETHOD OF “µmERICANIzINg”
THE CUISINE OF HIS HOmE COUNTRY. °E CHOICE IS A SIgNIfiCANT ONE, DISDAININg
THE P±AINNESS OF A SANDWICH, WHICH HAS ±ONg BEEN A TRADITIONA± PATTERN OF
ImmIgRANT ASSImI±ATION, AND INSTEAD CHOOSINg TO EmPHASIzE ITS ExOTIC ROOTS
AND SPICY flAVOR BY WAY OF THE TACO, THEREBY APPEA±INg TO CONSUmERS HUNgRY
FOR BORDER-CROSSINg NOVE±TY. °E COO± OF THE TACO TRUCk SCENE IS NEVERTHE±ESS
BACkED UP BY THE PROFESSIONA± INFRASTRUCTURE OF THE RESTAURANT INDUSTRY, IN
CONTRAST TO THE AD HOC VERSION OF THE TRADITIONA± lonchera. µND WHEREAS OTHER
RESTAURANTS HAD RE±IED ON THE fiCk±E OPINION OF CRITICS, THE ÌOgI TEAm ±EVERAgED
NEW SOCIA± mEDIA TO DEfiNE THEIR OWN ImAgE AND APPEA± TO A CROWD OF SURFERS,
HIPSTERS, AND DIgERATI. MEANWHI±E, ANOTHER ImmIgRANT CHEF, ¼ICARDO ËáRATE,
HAS SOUgHT RECOgNITION FROm FOODIES BY E±EVATINg AND TRANSFORmINg STREET AND
BAR FOOD INTO HIS OWN PROFESSIONA±±Y REfiNED CUISINE.
156 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
µNgE±ES AND IN 2007 FOUND WORk IN A ÍENICE SUSHI SHOP WHI±E P±ANNINg HIS
VENTURE.
ËáRATE WAS RIgHT ABOUT THE OPPORTUNITIES IN LOS µNgE±ES FOR A gENTRIfiED
VERSION OF ¸ERUVIAN STREET FOOD. ¹N 2009, WHI±E STI±± WORkINg EVENINgS IN
ÍENICE, HE OPENED MO-·HICA AS A FOOD STA±± IN THE ÈAREHOUSE DISTRICT MERCADO
LA ¸A±OmA. °E mENU INC±UDED criollo DISHES SUCH AS papas a la Huancaina
(POTATO SA±AD), THE chifa STANDBY lomo saltado, ¸ERUVIAN FRIED CHICkEN, AND AN
ExCE±±ENT, FROTHY ¸ISCO SOUR. °E STAND WAS SUCH A SUCCESS THAT HE qUIT HIS jOB
AND WITHIN A FEW YEARS HAD PUT TOgETHER THE fiNANCINg FOR A mOVE TO A TRENDIER,
DOWNTOWN ±OCATION. °E RESTAURANT OPENED IN 2012 TO A PACkED CROWD IN A
NEW±Y REVITA±IzED AREA OF LOS µNgE±ES. ÊY THAT POINT, HE HAD A±READY OPENED HIS
SECOND RESTAURANT, ¸ICCA, IN ÊEVER±Y ÉI±±S, A FAR mORE UPSCA±E ESTAB±ISHmENT
THAT ATTRACTED A DIffERENT C±IENTE±E. ËáRATE mAINTAINED HIS STREET FOOD mOTIF
EVEN IN THIS NEIgHBORHOOD, CA±±INg THE RESTAURANT A CANTINA, WITH THE CONNOTA-
TION OF A ±OWBROW WATERINg HO±E BUT A±SO ImP±YINg A TRADITIONA± gATHERINg P±ACE
SERVINg STREET FARE, SUCH AS anticucho corazón (BEEF HEART) AND anticucho culito
(CRISPY CHICkEN TAI±). ¹N 2013, HE OPENED A THIRD RESTAURANT, ¸AICHE, IN MARINA
DE± ¼EY, AS A ¸ERUVIAN VERSION OF AN izakaya, ESSENTIA±±Y A gENTRIfiED JAPANESE
CANTINA. µS AN ExAmP±E OF THIS ¸ACIfiC FUSION, ËáRATE SERVES CEVICHE CUT IN SmA±±
PIECES, SASHImI STY±E. ³ACH OF HIS RESTAURANTS REPRESENTED A DIffERENT CONCEPT,
DEmONSTRATINg THE flExIBI±ITY OF ¸ERUVIAN CUISINE.
ËáRATE’S CU±INARY ARTISTRY WAS CAREFU±±Y CA±CU±ATED TO APPEA± TO FASHIONAB±E
DINERS AND PARTICU±AR±Y TO CRITICS. °E Los Angeles Times RESTAURANT REVIEWER
JONATHAN GO±D DESCRIBED HIm AS A “CHEF’S CHEF” AND HIS CUISINE AS “ARTFU±±Y
DECONSTRUCTED VERSIONS OF ¸ERUVIAN DISHES ±IkE PAPAS A ±A HUANCAINA, WHICH IS
PRESENTED AS A BACON-WRAPPED TERRINE OF NEAT POTATO S±ICES ±IgHT±Y DRIzz±ED
WITH THE TRADITIONA± SAUCE OF CHEESE AND AmARI±±O CHI±E.” °E mARkET STA±±
BECAmE NOT ON±Y A FOODIE DESTINATION BUT A±SO PART OF A g±OBA± TREND FOR ¸ACIfiC
FUSION. »NCE HE HAD mOVED MO-·HICA BEYOND ITS FOOD COURT ORIgINS, ËáRATE
ARRANgED FOR A FASHIONAB±E POSTINDUSTRIA± DéCOR, INC±UDINg AN ExPANSIVE mURA±
RESEmB±INg STREET gRAffiTI AND ¸ERUVIAN figURINES DESIgNED BY ±OCA± CE±EBRITY
CHEFS, A±± ACCOmPANIED BY PU±SATINg SA±SA mUSIC. °US, THE OPENINg OF ¸AICHE,
NAmED AſtER AN ENDANgERED µmAzONIAN fiSH, IN 2013 IN A DISTANT OUTPOST NEAR
THE OCEAN, MARINA DE± ¼EY, WAS mUCH HYPED AND ANTICIPATED BY THE gROWINg
NUmBER OF FOOD B±OggERS FO±±OWINg ËáRATE’S RISE TO STARDOm; EVERYONE FROm
THE LA Times FOOD WRITERS TO ³ATER.COm B±OggED ABOUT OPENINg NIgHT. ¹N
2013, EsQuire mAgAzINE NAmED ¸AICHE ONE OF THE BEST NEW RESTAURANTS OF 2013.
ÓET THINgS DID NOT CONTINUE SO SmOOTH±Y FOR ËáRATE. µ YEAR ±ATER, AſtER THE
158 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
ÈHI±E HOPINg THAT ¸ERUVIAN CUISINE WOU±D FO±±OW THE SUCCESS OF JAPANESE
RESTAURANTS, ËáRATE A±SO ExPRESSED CONCERN THAT gROWINg POPU±ARITY COU±D
HAVE A NEgATIVE SIDE EffECT. ÉE FEARS THAT RAPID ExPANSION COU±D ±EAD ¸ERUVIAN
CUISINE, ±IkE MExICAN, TO BE SEEN AS INExPENSIVE, µmERICANIzED, AND ±OWBROW.
¹NSTEAD, HE HOPES THAT ¸ERUVIAN CHEFS WI±± CONTINUE TO USE ON±Y THE fiNEST
INgREDIENTS AND SET THE BAR HIgH TO ENHANCE THE g±OBA± REPUTATION OF THEIR
NATIONA± CUISINE.
LATIN µmERICAN FOODS HAVE SPREAD AROUND THE WOR±D WITH REmARkAB±E SPEED
IN THE TWENTY-fiRST CENTURY. µ±THOUgH ¾Ex-MEx fiRST gAINED A FOOTHO±D IN
³UROPE AND µUSTRA±IA IN THE 1960S AND 1970S, MExICAN CHEFS DID NOT BEgIN TO
REP±ACE µmERICANIzED TACO SHE±±S AND BURRITOS WITH REgIONA± COOkINg UNTI±
AROUND 2000. ¸ERUVIAN CUISINE WAS SCARCE±Y NOTICED UNTI± THE EAR±Y 1990S AND
HAS NOW BECOmE A±mOST UBIqUITOUS. ¹N ²EPTEmBER 2013, LONDON’S LImA
¼ESTAURANT RECEIVED A MICHE±IN STAR, A fiRST FOR LATIN µmERICAN CUISINE, WHI±E
SEVERA± OTHER ¸ERUVIAN RESTAURANTS HAVE RECEIVED CRITICA± ACC±AIm ACROSS THE
¶NITED ²TATES AND ³UROPE. ÈITH THEIR gROWINg PRESENCE, EVEN IN µSIAN
AND µFRICAN TOURIST DESTINATIONS, MExICAN AND ¸ERUVIAN FOODS HAVE COmE TO
REPRESENT A FORm OF g±OBA± mODERNITY. °IS PRESENCE IS A±± THE mORE IRONIC
BECAUSE LATIN µmERICAN FOODS ORIgINA±±Y BECAmE POPU±AR AS “AUTHENTIC”
COUNTERPARTS TO THE STANDARDIzED PRODUCTS OF THE INDUSTRIA± FOOD SYSTEm. µS
“UNDISCOVERED” REgIONA± CUISINES BECOmE mORE SCARCE, BOHEmIAN TREND-
SETTERS SUCH AS µNTHONY ÊOURDAIN mORE AVID±Y PURSUE—OR INVENT—THEm.
ÈHI±E THE FASHION FOR FUSION CUISINE HAS PUT LATIN µmERICA IN A g±OBA±
SPOT±IgHT, FEW HAVE TRIED TO ExP±AIN THESE CU±TURA± INflUENCES, BEYOND SEEINg
THEm AS A SUPPOSED±Y NATURA± PRODUCT OF A CU±TURA± mE±TINg POT. ·HOI HAS
DESCRIBED HIS CUISINE BY SAYINg SImP±Y, “°IS IS WHAT LOS µNgE±ES TASTES ±IkE.”
ÓET AS THE ANTHROPO±OgIST ¼ICHARD ÈI±k (2006: 112) HAS OBSERVED, THE “mE±T-
INg POT” DOES NOT jUST HAPPEN; CREO±E CUISINE IS THE PRODUCT OF ±ABOR AND CREA-
TIVITY. °ERE mAY BE DIVERSE mOTIVATIONS FOR CU±INARY mIxINg, USINg FOOD FOR
STATUS, CONVENIENCE, AND COmFORT. ²IDNEY MINTz (1985: 186) EVEN DEfiNES A
CATEgORY OF FOOD AS DRUgS, WHICH WOU±D SURE±Y INC±UDE CHI±E PEPPERS A±ONg
WITH SUgAR AND CAffEINATED STImU±ANTS. ºUSION CUISINE CAN ImPART STATUS IN
mANY FORmS, AS ·HOI AND ËáRATE DEmONSTRATE, WHETHER THROUgH TECHNIqUES
SUCH AS THOSE OF ºRENCH HAUTE CUISINE OR THROUgH THE ASSOCIATION WITH
160 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
NATIONA± IDENTITY, ÈESTERN ExPECTATIONS FOR µSIAN AND LATIN µmERICAN FOODS
±ARgE±Y DICTATED THE PRESENTATION OF THEIR DISHES AS ExOTIC FARE. ÓET DESPITE THESE
±ImITATIONS, TACOS AND CEVICHE HAVE ACHIEVED A REmARkAB±E g±OBA± PRESENCE IN
A FEW SHORT DECADES, AND THEY ARE jUST THE APPETIzERS. LATIN µmERICAN CUISINE
HO±DS EVEN gREATER RICHES FOR DINERS OF THE WOR±D TO DISCOVER.
µBOUT ÌOgI.
N.D. HTTP://kOgIBBq.COm/ABOUT-kOgI/.
ÊA±BI, MARIE±±A
1999 Los chifas en el Perú: Historia y recetas. LImA: ¶NIVERSIDAD ²AN MARTíN DE
¸ORRES.
ÊAUER, µRNO±D J.
2001 Good, Power, History: Latin America’s Material Culture. ·AmBRIDgE: ·Am-
BRIDgE ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
·HOI, ¼OY
2013 L.A. Son: My Life, My City, My Food. ½EW ÓORk: ÉARPER·O±±INS.
DE ÍOS, ¸AU±A
2006 “°E ²CIENCE OF ²PICES: ³mPIRICISm AND ³CONOmIC ÊOTANY IN THE ³AR±Y
²PANISH ³mPIRE.” Journal of World History 17 (´ECEmBER): 399–47.
´RINOT, ¸AU±O
2005 “ºOOD, ¼ACE, AND ÈORkINg-·±ASS ¹DENTITY: ¼ESTAURANTES ¸OPU±ARES AND
¸OPU±ISm IN 1930S ¸ERU.” °e Americas 62.2: 245–70.
ÉO, ¸INg-¾I
1955 “°E ¹NTRODUCTION OF µmERICAN ºOOD ¸±ANTS INTO ·HINA.” American
Anthropologist 57.2: 191–201.
JOHNSTON, JOSéE, AND ²HYON ÊAUmANN
2010 Foodies: Democracy and Distinction in the Gourmet Foodscape. ½EW ÓORk:
¼OUT±EDgE.
MAzUmDAR, ²UCHETA
1999 “°E ¹mPACT OF ½EW ÈOR±D ºOOD ·ROPS ON THE ´IET AND ³CONOmY OF
·HINA AND ¹NDIA, 1600–1900.” ¹N Food in Global History, EDITED BY ¼AY-
mOND GREW, 58–78. ÊOU±DER, ·»: ÈESTVIEW ¸RESS.
MINTz, ²IDNEY È.
1985 Sweetness and Power: °e Place of Sugar in Modern History. ½EW ÓORk:
ÍIkINg ¸RESS.
MODERN ¸ERUVIAN ·UISINE
N.D. WWW.CHEFzARATE.COm/.
»PIE, ºREDRICk ´OUg±ASS
2008 Hogs and Hominy: Soul Food Äom AÄica to America. ½EW ÓORk: ·O±UmBIA
¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
162 • ch a p t er ei¿ht
pa r t t h r e e
introduction
164 • pa rt th r ee
mUCH, AS SHIſtINg gEOPO±ITICA± A±±IANCES AND TRADE CONfigURATIONS—“PIVOTS” TO
THE EAST AND WEST, TOWARD THE ¸ACIfiC ¼Im AND TOWARD µFRICA—mAkE SUCH
CASES EVEN mORE RE±EVANT.
°ESE CHAPTERS DO NOT BRUSH ASIDE THE SOCIA± INTERSECTIONS AND ImP±ICATIONS
OF NEW ADVANCES IN SCIENCE, TECHNO±OgY, AND HEA±TH. µ kEY THREAD RUNNINg
THROUgH THEm, ESPECIA±±Y IN ¸AU± GOOTENBERg’S CHAPTER ON g±OBA± DRUg CU±TURE,
ENCOURAgES US TO RETHINk NOTIONS OF WHO BE±ONgS AT THE TAB±E IN CONVERSATIONS
ABOUT g±OBA±±Y SIgNIfiCANT PO±ICIES AND CHA±±ENgES. GOOTENBERg DRAWS OUR
ATTENTION TO THE PROgENITORS OF CURATIVE SUBSTANCES FROm MExICO TO THE µNDES
WHO HE±PED PRESERVE HERBA± CURES—SOmE NOW CONSIDERED “mIRAC±E DRUgS”—
OVER CENTURIES IN THE FACE OF PERSECUTION AND CRImINA±IzATION. MEmBERS OF
THOSE SAmE INDIgENOUS POPU±ATIONS HAVE ASSUmED ImPORTANT RO±ES IN DEBATES
ABOUT g±OBA± C±ImATE CHANgE, WITH SOmE RESIDENTS OF THE µmAzON HE±PINg DRAW
ATTENTION TO THE ±OCA± REA±ITIES OF DEFORESTATION. µS THEY BROADEN THE DEfiNITION
OF ExPERT, CHAPTERS ±IkE GOOTENBERg’S SHOU±D INSPIRE PO±ICY mAkERS TOWARD
gREATER INC±USION IN BOTH ADDRESSINg g±OBA± PROB±EmS AND FORgINg BROAD±Y RE±-
EVANT SO±UTIONS.
“²CIENCE, ¾ECHNO±OgY, AND ÉEA±TH” PROVIDES A g±ImPSE AT INNOVATION IN
g±OBA± LATIN µmERICA AND WI±± TEmPT READERS TO SEEk FURTHER ExAmP±ES. °EY
mAY ENCOUNTER THE BIO±OgISTS AT THE ¶NIVERSITY OF ÊUENOS µIRES WHO SEqUENCED
THE gENOmE OF qUINOA AND FOUND ITS NUTRITIONA± DENSITY AND RESISTANCE TO SA±TY
SOI±S CRUCIA± TRAITS IN THE TWENTY-fiRST-CENTURY figHT AgAINST FOOD INSECURITY.
°EY mAY fiND REFERENCES TO bacillus megaterium uyuni, A BACTERIUm SCIENTISTS
ENCOUNTERED IN ÊO±IVIA’S SA±T flATS THAT CAN BE USED IN THE PRODUCTION OF PO±Y-
mERS THAT gENERATE “NATURA±” P±ASTIC. µ BROAD VIEW OF THESE DISCOVERIES AND
INNOVATIONS SUggESTS THAT IN THE YEARS AHEAD ExPERTISE WI±± SERVE AS A VA±UAB±E
ExCHANgE gOOD HE±PINg TO FUE± NEW gEOPO±ITICA± A±IgNmENTS WITH LATIN
µmERICA AT THE CENTER. ÈHI±E UNEqUA± ½ORTH-²OUTH RE±ATIONSHIPS OF YESTER-
DAY mAY mORPH INTO ²OUTH-²OUTH INEqUA±ITIES OF TOmORROW, THESE CHAPTERS
SHOWCASE HOW CENTURIES-O±D AND DECADES-NEW LATIN µmERICAN kNOW-HOW IS
mAkINg A g±OBA± ImPACT.
167
(A)
(B)
(C)
(D)
fi¿ure 9.1. Opposite page: (µ) µERIA± VIEW OF MATO GROSSO SOYBEAN fiE±D SHOWINg
µmAzON FOREST IN THE BACkgROUND AND UNCU±TIVATED BUT DEgRADED RIPARIAN VEgETATION IN
THE FOREgROUND. (Ê) ¾RUCkS WAITINg TO BE ±OADED WITH SOYBEANS TO BE TRANSPORTED TO PORT.
AboVe: (·) ²OYBEAN fiE±D AſtER HARVEST. ºIE±DS HAVE ±ITT±E P±ANT COVER DURINg THE DRY SEASON,
AND THE NExT YEAR’S CROP IS P±ANTED IN THE STUBB±E OF THE PREVIOUS CROP USINg mINImUm TI±±AgE.
(´) ¼AIN OVER A MATO GROSSO SOYBEAN fiE±D. ¼EDUCTIONS IN RAINFA±± ARE PROjECTED BECAUSE OF
REgIONA± DECREASES IN FOREST COVER, BUT THEIR mAgNITUDE AND TImINg ARE STI±± UNCERTAIN. ¹mAgE
µ BY ¸AU±O ÊRANDO, OTHERS BY ·HRISTOPHER ½EI±±.
Atlantic
Ocean
Santarém, PA
reviR ugniX
re
v
Amazon
iR
s
ój
Forest
361-RB
p
a
T
Porto Velho, RO
Cerrado
Santos, SP
Pacific Paranaguá, PR
Ocean
fi¿ure 9.2. MAP INDICATINg THE ±OCATION OF MATO GROSSO STATE, ÊRAzI± (OUT±INE). MATO
GROSSO ENCOmPASSES BOTH µmAzON FOREST (gREEN) AND ·ERRADO SAVANNA (ORANgE) VEgETATION.
MAP BY ¸AU± LEFEBVRE.
FOREST IN THE NORTH (fig. 9.2). °E REgION HAS A TROPICA± mONSOONA± C±ImATE WITH
A ROUgH±Y SIx-mONTH RAINY SEASON AND TOTA± ANNUA± RAINFA±± THAT RANgES FROm
ABOUT 1,700 TO S±IgHT±Y mORE THAN 2,000 mI±±ImETERS. ¹N ±ESS THAN THIRTY YEARS
ÊRAzI± HAS TRANSFORmED ITSE±F FROm A FOOD ImPORTER TO ONE OF THE WOR±D’S gREAT
AgRICU±TURA± POWERHOUSES AND gRAIN ExPORTERS—THE ON±Y TROPICA± NATION TO
BREAk INTO THAT E±ITE gROUP. °E AREA OF SOYBEAN CROP±AND IN MATO GROSSO
INCREASED FROm ±ESS THAN 2.0 mI±±ION HECTARES IN 1990 TO 7.5 mI±±ION HECTARES
IN THE 2012–13 CROPPINg SEASON. »VER THE SAmE TImE, SOYBEAN PRODUCTION ROSE
FROm ±ESS THAN 2 mI±±ION mETRIC TONS PER YEAR TO mORE THAN 24 mI±±ION mETRIC
TONS PER YEAR. ·OmPARED TO CHANgES IN AgRICU±TURA± PRODUCTION IN THE
TEmPERATE NORTH, THAT’S AN ASTOUNDINg RATE OF CHANgE. ÊETWEEN 2008 AND
170 • ch a p t er n i n e
20
18
)snot cirtem noillim( stropxE yoS
16
14
12
10
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
°ERE ARE mANY ROOTS OF MATO GROSSO’S TRANSFORmATION FROm ExTENSIVE CATT±E
FARmINg TO INTENSIVE PRODUCTION OF gRAINS FOR g±OBA± mARkETS. ²OmE OF THESE
ROOTS ARE g±OBA±, BUT OTHERS HAVE THEIR ORIgINS INSIDE ÊRAzI±. °REE ±ARgE±Y
ÊRAzI±-gROWN ADVANCES WERE AgRONOmIC: (1) OVERCOmINg THE HIgH ACIDITY AND
±OW FERTI±ITY OF NATIVE SOI±S, (2) DESIgNINg VARIETIES OF SOYBEANS ADAPTED TO HOT
TEmPERATURES AND ±OW ±ATITUDES, AND (3) DEVE±OPINg SOI± mANAgEmENT PRACTICES
FOR TROPICA± SOI±S THAT mAINTAIN SOI± STRUCTURE AND gOOD INfi±TRATION CAPACITY.
µgRONOmISTS HAVE ±ONg RECOgNIzED POTENTIA±±Y SEVERE ±ImITATIONS FOR CON-
TINUOUS CROP PRODUCTION ON mOST OF THE NATURA± terra firme (NONflOODP±AIN)
SOI±S OF THE ±OW±AND µmERICAN TROPICS. »NE OF THOSE ±ImITATIONS IS ACIDITY.
°IS DERIVES PART±Y FROm THE NATURA±±Y ACIDIC gRANITE BEDROCk THAT UNDER±IES
mOST OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN ²HIE±D OF MATO GROSSO. °E REgION A±SO HAS gENERA±±Y
±OW TOPOgRAPHIC RE±IEF AND HAS BEEN COVERED WITH NATURA±±Y ACID-PRODUCINg
FOREST AND SAVANNA VEgETATION THAT HAS ExISTED IN A RE±ATIVE±Y HIgH-RAINFA±±
ENVIRONmENT FOR HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF YEARS. ÈITHOUT mAjOR TECTONIC
UP±Iſt OR OTHER gEO±OgIC PROCESSES THAT CAN DEPOSIT NEW SOI±S OR ExPOSE SOI±S TO
mORE A±kA±INE ROCkS, THESE FEATURES PRODUCED DEEP, O±D, AND HIgH±Y WEATHERED
SOI±S THAT ARE HIgH IN IRON AND A±UmINUm C±AY mINERA±S BUT ±OW IN PÉ (A
mEASURE OF ACIDITY; ±OW PÉ INDICATES gREATER ACIDITY).
°IS COmBINATION OF HIgH A±UmINUm AND ±OW PÉ IS TOxIC TO SOYBEANS AND
mANY OTHER CROPS. MANY OF THE SOI±S IN THE SOYBEAN-gROWINg REgIONS OF MATO
172 • ch a p t er n i n e
GROSSO ARE C±ASSIfiED AS “LATOSSO±OS” THAT CAN BE TENS OF mETERS DEEP, CONTAIN
ANYWHERE FROm 20 PERCENT TO mORE THAN 70 PERCENT C±AY, AND HAVE A PÉ OF ±ESS
THAN FOUR. ¹N CONTRAST, SOI±S IN mUCH OF THE SOYBEAN-gROWINg REgIONS OF THE
¶NITED ²TATES HAVE A mUCH SmA±±ER PROPORTION OF C±AY AND A mUCH mORE CROP-
FRIEND±Y PÉ C±OSER TO SIx. °E SAmE WET CONDITIONS AND ANCIENT SOI±S THAT
CREATED ±OW SOI± PÉ A±SO CAUSED VERY ±OW ±EVE±S OF SOI± PHOSPHORUS, AN ESSENTIA±
CROP NUTRIENT. °IS IS BECAUSE A±mOST A±± OF THE PHOSPHORUS CONTAINED IN THE
ORIgINA± BEDROCk HAS BEEN DISSO±VED AND ±EACHED AWAY. ½ATURA± INPUTS OF
PHOSPHORUS TO THE µmAzON REgION ARE SO ±OW THAT EVEN VERY SmA±± INPUTS,
DERIVED FROm THE FA±±OUT OF DUST TRANSPORTED ACROSS THE µT±ANTIC »CEAN FROm
THE ²AHARAN REgION OF ½ORTH µFRICA, ARE SUSPECTED OF P±AYINg AN ImPORTANT
RO±E—OVER mI±±ENNIA± TImE SCA±ES—IN mAINTAININg THE PHOSPHORUS FERTI±ITY
OF terra firme µmAzON RAIN FORESTS.
°E RECOgNITION THAT AmENDmENTS OF ±ImE AND PHOSPHORUS AND POTASSIUm
FERTI±IzER COU±D OVERCOmE ±OW PÉ AND ±OW PHOSPHORUS FERTI±ITY WAS A kEY
BREAkTHROUgH THAT A±±OWED SOYBEAN CROP±AND ExPANSION—AND SImU±TANE-
OUS±Y CREATED ±ARgE DEmANDS FOR ImPORTED FERTI±IzER—IN MATO GROSSO. °IS
ADVANCE ORIgINATED A±mOST COmP±ETE±Y WITHIN ÊRAzI±, AND WAS ±ARgE±Y THE OUT-
COmE OF THE FOUNDINg IN 1973 OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN AgRICU±TURA± RESEARCH AgENCY,
³mPRESA ÊRASI±EIRA DE ¸ESqUISA µgROPECUáRIA (³mBRAPA), AND THE FORmATION
IN 1975 OF THE SOYBEAN-SPECIfiC ³mBRAPA ²OYBEAN. ³mBRAPA OPERATES UNDER
ÊRAzI±’S FEDERA± MINISTRY OF µgRICU±TURE, LIVESTOCk AND ºOOD ²UPP±Y (Mµ¸µ).
¹T HAS REmAINED A mAjOR INNOVATOR OF AgRICU±TURA± TECHNO±OgY IN ÊRAzI± AND IN
2013 HAD AN ANNUA± BUDgET OF APPROxImATE±Y $1 BI±±ION ÊRAzI±IAN REAIS, WITH
2,400 RESEARCHERS (OF WHOm mORE THAN THREE-FOURTHS HAVE ¸H´S) AmONg ITS
APPROxImATE±Y 9,600 EmP±OYEES.
³mBRAPA CONTRIBUTED OTHER mAjOR AgRO-TECHNICA± ADVANCES THAT ImPROVED
PRODUCTION AND mADE IT PROfiTAB±E TO gROW µmAzON SOYBEANS FOR g±OBA± mAR-
kETS. »NE WAS THE DEVE±OPmENT OF SOYBEAN VARIETIES THAT TO±ERATE BOTH THE
SHORT TROPICA± DAYS AND THE WARm TROPICA± C±ImATE THAT OCCUR BE±OW 20 O ±ATI-
TUDE. ²OYBEANS HAVE THEIR BIO±OgICA± ORIgIN IN ·HINA AND UP UNTI± THE 1980S
WERE gROWN A±mOST ExC±USIVE±Y AS A TEmPERATE CROP, PRImARI±Y IN ½ORTH
µmERICA, ³UROPE, AND THE STATES OF ¸ARANá, ²ANTA ·ATARINA, AND ¼IO GRANDE
DO ²U± IN SOUTHEASTERN ÊRAzI±. ¹mPROVED CU±TIVARS fiRST A±±OWED SOYBEAN CU±TI-
VATION TO SPREAD TO THE HIgHER E±EVATION AND S±IgHT±Y COO±ER PORTIONS OF THE
·ERRADO REgION OF MATO GROSSO IN THE 1980S. ²ECOND- AND THIRD-gENERATION
CU±TIVARS FO±±OWED IN THE 1990S AND 2000S, TOTA±INg mORE THAN THREE HUNDRED
VARIETIES TAI±ORED TO DIffERENT CONDITIONS, WHICH A±±OWED THE mORE RECENT
174 • ch a p t er n i n e
³UROPEAN ¶NION (20 PERCENT), THE ¼USSIAN ºEDERATION (15 PERCENT), AND ¹SRAE±
(12 PERCENT); OTHER COUNTRIES ACCOUNT FOR 4 PERCENT. ÊRAzI±’S INTERNA± CAPACITY TO
PRODUCE BOTH PHOSPHATE AND POTASSIUm FERTI±IzERS IS NOW ExPANDINg RAPID±Y.
¾RANSPORTINg HARVESTED SOYBEANS FROm THE RE±ATIVE±Y REmOTE INTERIOR OF
MATO GROSSO TO THE COAST REmAINS A mAjOR INFRASTRUCTURA± CHA±±ENgE. µ±mOST
A±± OF MATO GROSSO’S SOYBEANS TRAVE± BY TRUCk BETWEEN 900 AND 1,300 mI±ES TO
µT±ANTIC PORTS. µ mUCH SmA±±ER AmOUNT TRAVE±S WEST TO ¸ORTO ÍE±HO, WHERE IT
IS ±OADED ONTO BARgES THAT WI±± TRAVE± DOWN THE MADEIRA ¼IVER TO PORTS IN
¹TACOATIARA OR ²ANTARém—SITE OF A NEW DEEPWATER PORT BUI±T BY ·ARgI±± AT THE
CONflUENCE OF THE µmAzON AND ¾APAjóS ¼IVERS—WHERE SOYBEANS CAN BE
±OADED ONTO OCEANgOINg SHIPS. µN EVEN SmA±±ER AmOUNT TRAVE±S DIRECT±Y NORTH
BY ROAD FROm MATO GROSSO TO ²ANTARém ON THE CONTROVERSIA± ʼ-163, THE STI±±
PARTIA±±Y UNPAVED “SOYBEAN HIgHWAY” THAT CUTS A SWATH THROUgH REmAININg
µmAzON RAIN FOREST (SEE fig. 9.2).
¹N 2012, IT COST ABOUT ¶²$50 TO SHIP A mETRIC TON OF SOYBEANS TO ²HANgHAI,
·HINA, FROm ²ANTOS, ÊRAzI±’S ±ARgEST SOYBEAN PORT IN THE STATE OF ²öO ¸AU±O. ¹T
COSTS mORE THAN TWICE THAT TO gET THE SOYBEANS TO ²ANTOS FROm MATO GROSSO
BY TRUCk OVER ÊRAzI±’S ROAD NETWORk, 86 PERCENT OF WHICH IS STI±± UNPAVED. ÊUT
BECAUSE DRIED SOYBEAN gRAIN IS NONPERISHAB±E AND CAN BE SHIPPED IN ±ARgE
TRAI±ER TRUCkS, THIS TRANSPORT COST IS STI±± A VERY SmA±± PROPORTION (ABOUT ONE
PERCENT) OF THE TOTA± COST OF MATO GROSSO SOYBEAN PRODUCTION. ¾RUCk TRANS-
PORT COSTS REmAIN AN ImPORTANT CONSTRAINT ON ÊRAzI±’S SOYBEAN ExPORTS AND ARE
ONE ±INk IN THE ExPORT CHAIN WHERE SOYBEAN ExPORTS FROm THE ¶.². MIDWEST
HAVE A PRICE ADVANTAgE. ¹N 2012, IT COST $87 TO SHIP A TON OF SOYBEANS FROm
´AVENPORT, ¹OWA, TO ²HANgHAI, ·HINA, ON THE MISSISSIPPI ¼IVER VIA THE ¸ORT OF
½EW »R±EANS, COmPARED TO $161 FOR THE SAmE TON SHIPPED FROm ²ORRISO, MATO
GROSSO, TO THE ¸ORT OF ²ANTOS. °IS WI±± SOON CHANgE BECAUSE CONTRACTS WERE
SIgNED IN 2014 TO fiNISH PAVINg THE ʼ-163 ROADWAY, WHICH WI±± ±OWER THE COST
OF TRUCkINg MATO GROSSO SOYBEANS NORTH TO THE PORT AT ²ANTARém.
176 • ch a p t er n i n e
gENETIC ±INES OF CATT±E, ARTIfiCIA± INSEmINATION, AND ImPROVED PASTURE mANAgE-
mENT THAT A±±OWED gREATER CATT±E PRODUCTION PER HECTARE OF ±AND. µmAzON
S±AUgHTERHOUSES NOW ExPORT A gROWINg PROPORTION OF THEIR PRODUCTS FROm THE
REgION, AND IN JUNE 2015 THE ¶²´µ’S µNImA± AND ¸±ANT ÉEA±TH ¹NSPECTION
²ERVICE AmENDED ITS RU±ES TO A±±OW ImPORT TO THE ¶NITED ²TATES OF CHI±±ED OR
FROzEN BEEF FROm SEVERA± ÊRAzI±IAN REgIONS, INC±UDINg MATO GROSSO.
¹NCREASINg THE SUPP±Y OF SOYBEANS TO mEET THIS gROWINg DEmAND REqUIRED
CAPITA± INVESTmENTS OF AN UNPRECEDENTED SCA±E, BUT DURINg A DECADE OF fiNAN-
CIA± CRISIS IN THE 1980S THE ÊRAzI±IAN gOVERNmENT HAD ±ITT±E CAPACITY TO PROVIDE
NEW ±INES OF CREDIT FOR THE AgRICU±TURA± SECTOR. ²TARTINg IN THE mID-1990S, HOW-
EVER, PRIVATE BANk fiNANCINg INCREASED SHARP±Y AND THE OVERA±± AVAI±ABI±ITY OF
CREDIT ExPANDED RAPID±Y. ´URINg THIS PERIOD, A NUmBER OF INNOVATIONS ENA-
B±ED NEW SOURCES OF fiNANCE, INC±UDINg THE DEVE±OPmENT OF THE “²OjA ÍERDE”
PROgRAm FOR fiNANCE AND PRODUCTION OF SOYBEANS IN THE ·ERRADO DURINg THE
1980S, AS WE±± AS THE gRANTINg OF PRIVATE ±AND TIT±ES. »NCE THESE mECHANISmS
WERE IN P±ACE, TRADINg ON THE INTERNATIONA± mARkETS BEgAN TO P±AY A kEY RO±E
IN PROVIDINg CAPITA± TO PRODUCERS, WHO IN TURN gUARANTEED A CERTAIN ±EVE± OF
FOOD SUPP±Y AND SECURITY. °ESE mECHANISmS gREAT±Y INCREASED THE CREDIT
AVAI±AB±E TO THE AgRICU±TURA± SECTOR BY gIVINg PRODUCERS IN THE REgION ACCESS TO
INTERNATIONA± CREDIT ±INES. ¹T A±SO PROVIDED A WAY FOR PRODUCERS TO HEDgE THEIR
BETS THROUgH CONTRACTS IN INTERNATIONA± COmmODITIES ExCHANgES.
178 • ch a p t er n i n e
2001
Legend
Soy
Soy/Cotton
N
Soy/Corn
Reserves
2013
Legend
Soy
Soy/Cotton
N
Soy/Corn
Reserves
180 • ch a p t er n i n e
ecolo¿ical costs and opportunities of
a¿ricultural intensification
182 • ch a p t er n i n e
ACTIVE INgREDIENTS. °E ±ARgEST SINg±E C±ASS OF PESTICIDES IS g±YPHOSATE-BASED
BROAD-SPECTRUm HERBICIDES USED TO kI±± WEEDS BEFORE P±ANTINg AND TO SPEED
DRYINg OF SOYBEAN P±ANTS BEFORE gRAIN HARVEST. ÉERBICIDE USE IS gREATER THAN
THAT OF INSECTICIDES AND FUNgICIDES COmBINED. G±YPHOSATE HAS A HA±F-±IFE OF
ABOUT SIxTY DAYS IN SOI±S AND A FEW DAYS IN WATER. ¹T ADHERES STRONg±Y TO SOI± AND
DOES NOT BIOACCUmU±ATE IN FOOD CHAINS. LARgE FARmS NOW USE FEWER OF THE
PESTICIDES mOST TOxIC TO HUmANS THAN DO SmA±±ER FARmS, AND THE OVERA±± USE OF
mOST HIgH±Y TOxIC COmPOUNDS HAS DEC±INED SINCE 2002. °ERE HAVE BEEN SOmE
REPORTS OF PESTICIDE ImPACTS WITHIN THE XINgU ¹NDIgENOUS ¸ARk DOWNSTREAm
OF ±ARgE SOYBEAN gROWINg AREAS IN THE BASIN’S HEADWATERS, BUT THERE HAVE BEEN
NO COmPREHENSIVE SCIENTIfiC STUDIES OF PESTICIDE ImPACTS IN MATO GROSSO.
ÈHI±E SOYBEAN CROPPINg POSES ENVIRONmENTA± PROB±EmS, gAINS IN PRODUCTIV-
ITY AND A STRONg CONNECTION TO g±OBA± mARkETS A±SO PRESENT OPPORTUNITIES—AS
I±±USTRATED BY THE ²OY MORATORIUm—TO SHAPE PRODUCTION SYSTEmS AND AgRICU±-
TURA± FRONTIER ±ANDSCAPES IN WAYS THAT CONSERVE SOmE ExISTINg NATURA± ±AND AND
REDUCE ENVIRONmENTA± RISkS. ²OmE mECHANISmS CURRENT±Y ExIST FOR REDUCINg THE
BIODIVERSITY CONSEqUENCES OF AgRICU±TURA± ±AND CONVERSION. »NE OF THE STRONgEST
SUCH mECHANISmS IS THE ÊRAzI±IAN ºOREST ·ODE, WHICH mANDATES THE CONSERVA-
TION OF ±ARgE B±OCkS OF FORESTS, PROTECTION OF FOREST BUffER zONES A±ONg STREAmS,
AND RESTORATION OF I±±EgA±±Y DEFORESTED AREAS ON PRIVATE FARmS. µ HOT±Y CONTESTED
REVISION TO THE ºOREST ·ODE IN 2012 mAINTAINED A PROVISION INSTITUTED IN 1996
THAT µmAzON PROPERTY OWNERS mAINTAIN 80 PERCENT OF THE TOTA± AREA AS INTACT
FOREST, BUT IT REDUCED THE REqUIREmENT FOR RESTORATION TO 50 PERCENT OF THE FARm
AREA FOR ±ANDS DEFORESTED (I±±EgA±±Y) BEFORE 2008 AND REDUCED THE WIDTH OF
REqUIRED STREAm FOREST BUffER zONES ON SmA±± PROPERTIES. °IS REDUCED THE TOTA±
FOREST AREA TO BE RESTORED BY 41 PERCENT, COmPARED TO THE PREVIOUS (PRE-2012)
ºOREST ·ODE, AND RENDERED IT mORE DIffiCU±T TO RESHAPE FOREST CONNECTIVITY AND
HABITAT CONSERVATION AT ±ANDSCAPE SCA±ES.
µS mANY AS 18 BI±±ION mETRIC TONS OF CARBON—A NUmBER EqUIVA±ENT TO
mORE THAN HA±F THE WOR±D’S ANNUA± CARBON DIOxIDE EmISSIONS—COU±D U±TI-
mATE±Y BE EmITTED FROm THE APPROxImATE±Y 88 mI±±ION HECTARES OF PRIVATE
PROPERTY IN ÊRAzI± THAT COU±D BE DEFORESTED ±EgA±±Y UNDER THE NEW ºOREST
·ODE. ²EVERA± mECHANISmS mIgHT REDUCE THIS TOTA±, BUT THEY ARE ±ARgE±Y
UNTESTED. »NE IS THE INTRODUCTION OF AN ENVIRONmENTA± RESERVE qUOTA—A
TRADAB±E ±EgA± TIT±E TO AREAS WITH INTACT VEgETATION THAT ExCEED ºOREST ·ODE
REqUIREmENTS—THAT COU±D BE TRADED TO COmPENSATE FOR A FOREST AREA DEBT ON
ANOTHER PROPERTY. ³xCHANgE OF THESE qUOTAS COU±D BE A COST-EffECTIVE WAY TO
INCREASE ºOREST ·ODE COmP±IANCE WHI±E PROTECTINg AREAS THAT mIgHT OTHER-
184 • ch a p t er n i n e
THAT COU±D OCCUR IF ±ESS WATER IS RECIRCU±ATED TO THE ATmOSPHERE THROUgH NATIVE
VEgETATION. ·URRENT mODE±S INDICATE THAT IN THE XINgU ¼IVER BASIN DECREASED
RAINFA±± CAUSED BY ±OSS OF FOREST COVER HAS APPROxImATE±Y COmPENSATED FOR HIgHER
DISCHARgE CAUSED BY ±OWER EVAPOTRANSPIRATION. ²O THE ±ACk OF OBVIOUS NET
CHANgES IN THE XINgU ¼IVER flOW mAY mASk ExISTINg CHANgES TO THE BASIN’S OVER-
A±± WATER DYNAmICS. °OSE SAmE mODE±S PROjECT A 16 TO 26 PERCENT REDUCTION IN
SOYBEAN CROP PRODUCTION DUE TO CHANgINg RAINFA±± REgImES BY 2040 TO 2050.
´OUB±E-CROPPINg mAY BE THE fiRST VICTIm OF THESE C±ImATE SHIſtS BECAUSE THE
gROWINg SEASON ±ENgTHS FOR COmBINED SOYBEAN AND CORN CROPS REqUIRE NEAR±Y
THE FU±± ANNUA± PERIOD OF REgU±AR RAINS.
¹N »CTOBER, TA±k IN THE FARm OffiCES AND FARm TOWNS OF CENTRA± MATO GROSSO
OſtEN CENTERS ON THE APPEARANCE OF THE A±±-ImPORTANT fiRST RAINS THAT WI±± DETER-
mINE THE TImINg OF THE NEW CROPPINg SEASON’S SOYBEAN P±ANTINg DATES. µ±± OF THE
INVESTmENTS—IN SOI± mANAgEmENT, CROP VARIETIES, ROADS, AND INTERNATIONA± FER-
TI±IzER SUPP±Y CHAINS THAT mADE THE RISE OF THIS REmARkAB±E µmAzON FARmINg
SYSTEm POSSIB±E—FOR THE mOmENT SEEm SECONDARY. °E SAmE qUESTION NOW
CONFRONTS C±ImATE SCIENTISTS. ½EW EVIDENCE SUggESTS THAT THE fiRST EffECTS OF
DEFORESTATION-INDUCED C±ImATE CHANgES WI±± BE AN ExTENSION OF THE DRY SEASON,
BUT BY HOW mUCH AND HOW SOON ARE STI±± UNANSWERED qUESTIONS. ºOR NOW A FARm-
INg SYSTEm CARVED FROm THE EARTH’S gREATEST ExPANSES OF RAIN FOREST AND SAVANNA
STI±± DEPENDS—TO A VERY REA± DEgREE—ON HOW mUCH OF THOSE FORESTS AND WOOD-
±ANDS REmAINS STANDINg. ³xACT±Y HOW ±ONg THIS REmARkAB±E AgRICU±TURA± BOOm
CAN CONTINUE A±mOST CERTAIN±Y RESTS ON THE ANSWER TO THAT qUESTION.
µ¼Ì¸³Á²º¿±¹º¸¶¾
°IS WORk WAS SUPPORTED BY gRANTS FROm THE ½ATIONA± ²CIENCE ºOUNDATION (½²º
´³Ê 1257391, ½²º ¹·³¼ 1342943, ½²º ¹»² 1457662). ÈE THANk ¸AU± LEFEBVRE
FOR PRODUCINg THE figURES, ²TEPHANIE ²PERA FOR DATA ON DOUB±E-CROPPINg IN MATO
GROSSO, AND ÌATHIJO JANkOWSkI FOR COmmENTS ON EAR±IER DRAſtS.
µNONYmOUS
2010 “°E MIRAC±E OF THE ·ERRADO.” Economist, 26 µUgUST.
LATHUI±±IýRE, M. J., M. ². JOHNSON, G. L. GA±FORD, AND ³. G. ·OUTO
186 • ch a p t er n i n e
ten
Constructing Parallels
braZilian eôperts in ÇoZaÇbiÎue
Wendy Wolford and Ryan Nehring
187
REPRESENTS A mEANS FOR ÊRAzI± TO ACqUIRE mORE gEOPO±ITICA± INflUENCE IN THE
REgION, A gOA± THAT mANY µFRICAN ±EADERS SUPPORT. µS THEN-PRESIDENT OF ·APE
ÍERDE, ¸EDRO ¸IRES, SAID AT A mEETINg IN 2010, “ÊRAzI± IS A COUNTRY THAT IS
RESPECTED AND ±ISTENED TO, AND ITS PRESIDENT IS A gREAT DEFENDER OF µFRICA’S
INTERESTS. ¹T SHOU±D HAVE A PERmANENT SEAT ON THE ¶NITED ½ATIONS ²ECURITY
·OUNCI±.”
¹N mANY WAYS, IT IS ±OgICA± FOR ÊRAzI± TO BE TAkINg UP THE REINS OF ²OUTH-
²OUTH DEVE±OPmENT. °E COUNTRY HAD REmARkAB±E SUCCESS IN THE fiRST DECADE
OF THE NEW mI±±ENNIUm COmBATINg POVERTY, HUNgER, mA±NUTRITION, AND I±±IT-
ERACY. »NE OF THE kEY FACTORS BEHIND THIS SUCCESS HAS BEEN THE gROWTH AND
SPREAD OF THE COUNTRY’S AgRO-INDUSTRIA± SECTOR. ºROm 1975 TO 2010, ÊRAzI± WENT
FROm BEINg A NET FOOD ImPORTER TO ONE OF THE TOP PRODUCERS AND ExPORTERS IN
THE WOR±D OF kEY COmmODITIES SUCH AS CORN, WHEAT, SOY, SUgAR, AND COTTON.
µgRICU±TURA± ExPORTS FROm THE AgRO-INDUSTRIA± SECTOR ACCOUNTED FOR A THIRD OF
A±± ExPORTS IN 2010 AND mORE THAN A fiſtH OF G´¸, WHICH HAS HE±PED TO OPEN
fiSCA± SPACE FOR PUB±IC WE±FARE PROgRAmS ±IkE THE POPU±AR ÊO±SA ºAmí±IA CASH
TRANSFER SCHEmE, WHICH PROVIDES mONTH±Y PAYmENTS TO POOR FAmI±IES, CONDI-
TIONA± ON CHI±DREN ATTENDINg SCHOO± AND gETTINg VACCINATED.
µS ÊRAzI± INVESTS IN DEVE±OPmENT ABROAD, A kEY COmPONENT OF THE COUNTRY’S
WORk BUI±DS ON ITS SUCCESSES IN AgRICU±TURA± PRODUCTION AND PRODUCTIVITY,
PARTICU±AR±Y IN SUB-²AHARAN µFRICA. ¹N 2006, LU±A INAUgURATED THE µFRICAN
HEADqUARTERS OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN µgRICU±TURA± ¼ESEARCH ·ORPORATION (³mBRAPA),
IN µCCRA, GHANA, AND BY 2015, NINE mORE ³mBRAPA TRAININg, RESEARCH, AND
DEVE±OPmENT CENTERS HAD BEEN ESTAB±ISHED THROUgHOUT THE CONTINENT.
µCCORDINg TO THE STATE-OWNED AgENCY, ITS SCIENTISTS ARE “ExPORTERS OF kNOW±-
EDgE” WHO PROmOTE AgRICU±TURA± DEVE±OPmENT THROUgH gERmP±ASm ExCHANgES,
CAPACITY TRAININg WORkSHOPS, TECHNO±OgY DEVE±OPmENT AND TRANSFER, AND mAR-
kET INTENSIfiCATION. ÊRAzI± IS WE±± RECOgNIzED AS HAVINg BUI±T ONE OF THE mOST
SUCCESSFU± ±ARgE-SCA±E AgRO-INDUSTRIES OVER THE PAST FORTY YEARS AND IS “PAYINg
ITS AgRICU±TURA± SUCCESS FORWARD,” ACCORDINg TO ONE ¶²µ¹´ REPORT.
°E SECRETS OF ÊRAzI±’S SUCCESS WITH AgRICU±TURA± PRODUCTION ARE PARTICU±AR±Y
DESIRAB±E INTERNATIONA±±Y IN THE WAkE OF mU±TIP±E FOOD CRISES SUCH AS THE DOU-
B±INg OF g±OBA± FOOD PRICES IN 2007–8 AND AgAIN IN 2011. ¼EPRESENTATIVES OF
THE ¶NITED ½ATIONS SUggESTED IN 2008 THAT FOOD PRODUCTION NEEDED TO DOU-
B±E IN THE NExT THIRTY YEARS. °IS HAS SPURRED A mASSIVE HUNT FOR NEW ±AND AND
TECHNO±OgIES AROUND THE g±OBE. ºOR INVESTORS OF VARIOUS kINDS, FROm STATE-
OWNED ENTERPRISES IN THE MIDD±E ³AST AND µSIA TO PRIVATE INVESTORS, CORPORA-
TIONS, AND ±ARgE RETIREmENT FUNDS ±IkE ¾¹µµ-·¼³º, ±AND HAS BECOmE ONE OF
madlaV
laV
mK
seliM 051 01 05 0 enababM gniginereV
sretemoliK 05101 05 0
DNALIZAWS grubsenahoJ
reivir
0051 057 511 0
otupaM
daoR -itamoK
OTUPAM airoterP
daorliaR tiarpsleN
iaX-iaX acihnaM ACIRFA HTUOS
latipac ecnivorP
mortslyN
latipac lanoitaN
éwkohC reivir
emirahnI -stnafilO sursreteigtoP
yradnuob ecnivorP
yradnuob lanoitanretnI enabmahnI
rignisaM grubsreteiP
euqibmazoM
ne
po
ga
po
AZAG
an
m
Li
Ch
eypalaP
iL
o
m
Ri
euqibmazoM
ognivsaM oyawaluB
Lu
iR
arieB
o
ebmoD
izùB
ai
Gw
eu
ve
od aliV amuvM
io
eratuM
R
ALAFOS enapuL
èo diomihC
asognoroG
g
n EWBABMIZ inagnahS
S °71
úP
o
iR
agnimahnI
eraraH ewkoG
enamileuQ acidnataC
agniB
aneS ACINAM
enabeP ed aliV
okotuM it abiraK
avmahS ewaZ
a
y
M
enamileuQ
n ekaL
a
za
abucoM ed aliV S
o
aragnahC
w
AIZEBMAZ niwraD
e
ha
maD abiraK
ezitaoM tnuoM abiraK
Ligon
go
aliV udnurihC
ehcognA egnaliM eteT
un
iz
Rio
Lic
L
u
rutaC ijnihcM
a
atapihC
n
K
g
zeupetnoM IWALAM ejnereS
fa
w
eu
a
agnihciL atok
abmeP iR apuraM alodN ewtiK
S °31 se
M
o ASAIN
osodraC
atohkN
o
la AIBMAZ
ODAGLED iR otsuguA
Lo
gu
ne asayN spmawS
OBAC ad uluewgnaB
abucoM ed aliV
ekaL akipM ihsabmubuL
yaB atahkN
adeuM
asnaM
oiR urudnuT uzuzM
oR uR
uL
uv uv ERIAZ
em em
pa
aegnoS
uluewgnaB
alu
isasaM hC ekaL
arawtM
AINAZNAT a
AIZEBMAZ
bm
NAECO
e
nha
s
ih
NAIDNI amasaK
ezitaoM
aliV
Ligo
go
erytnalB
Rio
eucóloM otlA
oi
Li
R
abmoZ
alupmaN
aurihC ETET
obmuL
euqibmaçoM ogaL
ALUPMAN abmauC
alacaN
ewgnoliL
R
oi agneS
rúL
oi rutaC
zeupetnoM IWALAM
S °31
apurraM agnihciL atok
abmeP iR
o ASSAIN atohkN
lizarB
seratceh noillim 41
:alacaN fo troP ot rodirroC
EUQIBMAZOM - TCEJORP HANNAVAS ORP
CATEgORIES SUCH AS THE TROPICS, SAVANNAS, AND CORRIDORS. ³mBRAPA IS CARRYINg OUT
A SATE±±ITE mONITORINg PROjECT, APT±Y NAmED paralelos (PARA±±E±S), TO gENERATE AN
ECO±OgICA± AND gEOgRAPHIC DATABASE THROUgH G¹² THAT mAPS OUT MOzAmBIqUE’S
NATURA± FEATURES WITH SPECIfiC DETAI±S ON THE ½ACA±A ·ORRIDOR. °E ÊRAzI±IANS
INVOkE PARA±±E±S BECAUSE THE REgION OF THE COUNTRY’S gREATEST AgRICU±TURA± SUC-
CESS SITS AT ROUgH±Y THE SAmE ±ATITUDE AS THIS PART OF MOzAmBIqUE, THE REgION
CONSIDERED TO SUSTAIN THE ±ARgEST HIgH-YIE±D gAP.
ÉISTORICA±±Y, ÊRAzI±IAN FOREIgN PO±ICY AND TERRITORIA±ITY WAS PREmISED ON THE
NOTION OF “±IVINg BORDERS,” WHICH EmPHASIzED ENgAgEmENT WITH NEIgHBORINg
COUNTRIES AND RHETORICA±±Y FAVORED COOPERATION OVER SEPARATION. °E ÈOR±D
ÊANk HAS TAkEN THIS NOTION TO AN ExTREmE, INVOkINg THE SUPERCONTINENT OF
¸ANgAEA (300 mI±±ION–200 mI±±ION YEARS AgO) TO SUggEST THAT ±IVINg BORDERS
ONCE ExISTED (IN gEO±OgIC TImE) BETWEEN ÊRAzI± AND µFRICA. ÊECAUSE OF THIS
PREHISTORIC PROxImITY AND ±ATITUDINA± EqUIVA±ENCE, ÊRAzI± AND MOzAmBIqUE
ARE THOUgHT TO SHARE ECO±OgICA± CHARACTERISTICS SUCH AS TROPICA± C±ImATE AND
±ANDSCAPE, WHICH SUPPORTS THE IDEA THAT THE TRANSFER OF ExPERTISE AND TECHNO±-
OgY IS A “NATURA±” PARTNERSHIP.
°E SECOND SET OF SImI±ARITIES BEINg INVOkED BETWEEN ÊRAzI± AND MOzAmBIqUE
DERIVE FROm THEIR COmmON CO±ONIA± HERITAgE. °IS IDEA OF “±USOTROPICA±ISm,” OR
SEEINg µFRICA AS AN ExTENSION OF ¸ORTUgUESE SOI±, IS A kEY PIECE OF THE ARgUmENT
THAT “FUTURE ÊRAzI±S” CAN ExIST IN FORmER ¸ORTUgUESE CO±ONIES. °E SHARED ExPERI-
ENCE OF ¸ORTUgUESE CO±ONIzATION WOU±D PERHAPS BE mEANINg±ESS gIVEN THE
ExTREmE DIffERENCE IN THE ExPERIENCES OF ÊRAzI± AND MOzAmBIqUE AND THE ±ACk OF
REA± INSTITUTIONA± COHERENCE OR CONVERgENCE AS A RESU±T. ÉOWEVER, THE TWO COUN-
TRIES DO SHARE A COmmON ±ANgUAgE, AND mANY PEOP±E INTERVIEWED IN MOzAmBIqUE
SUggESTED THAT THIS SImI±ARITY WAS THE kEY ÊRAzI±IAN ADVANTAgE IN THEIR COUNTRY.
MOST OF THE OTHER DEVE±OPmENT WORkERS, ONE WOmAN FROm ¶²µ¹´ SAID, SPEAk
³Ng±ISH, SO WHEN ÊRAzI±IANS SPEAk ¸ORTUgUESE, IT’S “±IkE THEY’RE NOT COmINg IN
FROm THE OUTSIDE IN THE SAmE WAY.”
°E THIRD SImI±ARITY BETWEEN ÊRAzI± AND MOzAmBIqUE gOES BEYOND CO±O-
NIzATION TO THEIR COmmON ROOTS IN INDIgENOUS µFRICA. °AT THESE ROOTS CAmE
TO ÊRAzI± THROUgH FOUR CENTURIES OF S±AVERY IS NOT USUA±±Y DWE±±ED ON; RATHER,
OffiCIA± DISCOURSE—PARTICU±AR±Y THAT PROVIDED BY FORmER PRESIDENT LU±A—
INVOkES CU±TURA± SImI±ARITIES BETWEEN ÊRAzI± AND µFRICA THAT CAN ON±Y BE
ExP±AINED BY THEIR SHARED B±OOD. “°E ÊRAzI±IAN PEOP±E,” LU±A SAID AT THE
INAUgURATION OF ³mBRAPA’S µFRICAN HEADqUARTERS IN 2006, “OWE THEIR CO±OR,
THEIR HAPPINESS, THEIR DANCES, AND A ±ARgE PART OF THEIR CU±TURE TO OUR µFRICAN
BROTHERS.” °E SUggESTION THAT S±AVERY HAS CREATED A BOND BETWEEN THE TWO
critiÎuin¿ descartes:
froÇ parallels to privatiZation
Creating Land
°E fiRST DIffERENCE BETWEEN ÊRAzI± AND MOzAmBIqUE IS IN THE RE±ATIONSHIP
BETWEEN PEOP±E AND THE ±AND. LAND IS PERHAPS THE mOST ImPORTANT E±EmENT
Creating Labor
°E SECOND ImPORTANT DIffERENCE BETWEEN ÊRAzI± AND MOzAmBIqUE IS THE
ISSUE OF ±ABOR AND, SPECIfiCA±±Y, WHO WI±± WORk THE ±AND BEINg DEVE±OPED UNDER
¸RO²µÍµ½µ. »NE OF THE mUCH-ADmIRED EffECTS OF THE PRIVATIzATION OF ±AND
IS THE RE±EASE OF ±ABORERS WHO WERE FORmER±Y SUBSISTENCE FARmERS BUT WHO WI±±
SUBSEqUENT±Y WORk FOR A WAgE. ºROm THE PUTTINg-OUT SYSTEm IN SEVENTEENTH-
CENTURY ³UROPE TO INDUSTRIA± AgRICU±TURE, THE PRO±ETARIANIzATION OF AgRICU±-
TURA± ±ABOR HAS HISTORICA±±Y BEEN CONSIDERED ESSENTIA± FOR RURA± AND URBAN
DEVE±OPmENT A±IkE. ¹N MOzAmBIqUE TODAY, A±mOST 80 PERCENT OF THE POPU±A-
TION ±IVES IN RURA± AREAS, AND mORE THAN HA±F OF THE RURA± POPU±ATION ±IVES
BE±OW THE ABSO±UTE POVERTY ±INE. ³DUCATION ±EVE±S ARE ExTREmE±Y ±OW, HUNgER
AND mA±NUTRITION ±EVE±S ARE HIgH, AND VERY FEW PEOP±E HAVE ExPERIENCE WITH
±ARgE-SCA±E, TECHNO±OgICA±±Y INTENSIVE FARmINg mETHODS. µ ÊRAzI±IAN OffiCIA±
TO±D US THAT “µFRICANS ARE 40 PERCENT I±±ITERATE” AND THAT “ANY PROjECT mUST
Creating Capital
°E THIRD kEY DIffERENCE BETWEEN MOzAmBIqUE AND ÊRAzI± IS ACCESS TO CAPITA±.
¹N ÊRAzI±, AgRO-INDUSTRIA± DEVE±OPmENT WAS fi NANCED BY A RE±ATIVE±Y STRONg
mIDWIFE STATE THAT HAD A±READY FOSTERED SIgNIfiCANT INDUSTRIA±IzATION BEgIN-
NINg IN THE 1930S. ÊO±STERED BY mI±ITARY AUTHORITY, THE ÊRAzI±IAN STATE IN THE
1970S WAS AB±E TO CENTRA±IzE DEVE±OPmENT PROgRAmS INTO kEY PO±ES OF ACTIVITY
SE±ECTED FOR EffiCIENCY RATHER THAN PO±ITICA± ExPEDIENCY. ¹N MOzAmBIqUE, ON
THE OTHER HAND, THE STATE IS SEEN AS TOO WEAk TO SHEPHERD THIS DE±ICATE DEVE±OP-
mENT PROCESS. µ CENTURY OF CO±ONIA± RESOURCE ExTRACTION FO±±OWED BY TWO
DECADES OF CIVI± WAR AND PO±ITICA± INfigHTINg AmONg A SmA±± E±ITE HAVE ±Eſt THE
²O, FAR FROm ²OUTH-²OUTH CO±±ABORATION, ONE COU±D BE FORgIVEN FOR SEEINg IN
¸RO²µÍµ½µ THE TRIANg±E TRADE OF O±D. °E ±ARgEST FARmERS’ ORgANIzATION IN
MOzAmBIqUE, ¶NIöO ½ACIONA± DE ·AmPONESES (¶½µ·), PUT IT B±UNT±Y,
“¸RO²µÍµ½µ CAN BE SUmmED UP IN THIS SImP±E EqUATION: MOzAmBIqUE SUP-
P±IES THE ±AND, ÊRAzI± DOES THE FARmINg, AND JAPAN TAkES THE FOOD. ¹T IS A VAST
PROjECT BEINg COORDINATED BY THE gOVERNmENTS OF THE THREE COUNTRIES THAT
INVO±VES BI±±IONS OF DO±±ARS AND mI±±IONS OF HECTARES OF ±AND. ¹T mAY AmOUNT TO
THE BIggEST FARm±AND gRAB IN µFRICA.” ÊRAzI±’S DIRECTOR OF ²OUTH-²OUTH DEVE±-
OPmENT COUNTERED THIS STATEmENT, DESCRIBINg ±OCA± RESISTANCE TO THE ÊRAzI±IAN
PRESENCE AS “A SmA±± PORTION OF THE CIVI± SOCIETY IN THE REgION THAT DOESN’T HAVE
notes
°E AUTHORS THANk THE SCIENTISTS, PO±ITICIANS, AND ACTIVISTS IN ÊRAzI± AND MOzAm-
BIqUE WHO AgREED TO BE INTERVIEWED FOR THIS PIECE. ÈE RECEIVED VERY HE±PFU± COm-
mENTS FROm CO±±EAgUES IN THE ·ONTESTED G±OBA± LANDSCAPES THEmE PROjECT AT ·OR-
NE±±, AS WE±± AS FROm TWO ANONYmOUS REVIEWERS FOR THE Canadian Journal of
Development Studies, WHERE THE PIECE ORIgINA±±Y APPEARED. ºUNDINg FOR THIS CHAPTER
CAmE FROm THE ½ATIONA± ²CIENCE ºOUNDATION (´IRECTORATE FOR ²OCIA±, ÊEHAVIOURA±
AND ³CONOmIC ²CIENCES / ´IVISION OF ²OCIA± AND ³CONOmIC ²CIENCES, µWARD ½O.
1331265) AND THE ¹NSTITUTE FOR THE ²OCIA± ²CIENCES AT ·ORNE±± ¶NIVERSITY. ºINA±±Y, THE
205
eleven
Paul Gootenberg
psychedelic civiliZations
207
SPOTS IN MESOAmERICA AND WESTERN µmAzONIA.× °EY INC±UDE WE±±-kNOWN SOſt
STImU±ANTS ±IkE COCA ±EAF, mATE, TOBACCO (THE mOST A±±- AND PAN-µmERICAN OF
INTOxICANTS), AND CACAO, THE ACTIVE INgREDIENT IN CHOCO±ATE. °ERE WERE A±SO
SCORES OF ½ATIVE µmERICAN RITUA± HA±±UCINOgENIC P±ANT-DRUgS SUCH AS PEYOTE
BUTTONS (mESCA±INE), “mAgIC mUSHROOmS” (USUA±±Y PSI±OCYBIN), ololiuhQui
(MExICAN B±UE mORNINg-g±ORY SEED), salvia divinorum, AYAHUASCA (YAjé OR
CAAPI), YOPO AND VIRO±á SNUffS, SAN PEDRO CACTUS (A ²OUTH µmERICAN mESCA-
±INE), AND THE COUNT±ESS DATURA, BRUgmANSIA, AND OTHER NIgHTSHADE SPECIES
BREWED BY mEDICINE mEN IN THE RAIN FORESTS OF TODAY’S ·O±OmBIA AND ³CUADOR.
²OmE PEOP±ES TAPPED TOxINS OF BRI±±IANT±Y CO±ORED POISON FROgS FOR SACRED CER-
EmONIES, ECSTASY, AND HEA±INg. °IS CORNUCOPIA WAS PART±Y ECO±OgICA± ACCIDENT:
mIND-BENDINg A±kA±OIDS, WHICH mAkE US HIgH, EVO±VED AS BUI±T-IN P±ANT INSEC-
TICIDES AgAINST THE VORACIOUS BUgS ON YEAR-ROUND TROPICS FO±IAgE. °E RAPID RISE
OF µmERICAN AgRICU±TURE kEPT INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES, WHO ±IkE±Y TREkkED IN
mUSHROOm CU±TS FROm ²IBERIA, FORAgINg AND DISCOVERINg THE ½EW ÈOR±D’S
WI±D DIVERSITY OF P±ANTS. µ±COHO± WAS kNOWN—mAIzE-BASED CHICHA BEER, AgAVE
PU±qUE (THE OCT±I “WINE” OF THE µzTECS)—BUT ITS ±OW POTENCY WAS UN±IkE±Y TO
DROWN OUT kNOW±EDgE OF ENTHEOgENIC DRUgS AS OCCURRED IN ANCIENT ³UROPE
AND THE MIDD±E ³AST.
ÈHEN THREE THOUSAND YEARS AgO STATE-±ED AgRARIAN CIVI±IzATIONS AND
EmPIRES AROSE IN THE µmERICAS, »±mECS, MAYAS, MExICAS (AkA THE µzTECS), AND
A kA±EIDOSCOPE OF PRE-¹NCAN STATES IN THE µNDES, EAR±IER DRUg CU±TURES BECAmE
SUBSUmED AND REgU±ATED BY PRIEST±Y CASTES. °EY AmP±IfiED AND REmADE IN STI±±
UNExP±ORED WAYS SHAmANISTIC PRACTICES, VISIONS, AND BE±IEFS AS THEIR SACRED
“¸±ANTS OF THE GODS.” °E µzTEC PRIESTHOOD, FOR ExAmP±E, INSTITUTED THE
“´IVINE flESH” ¾EONANáCAT± AND ololiuhQui (WHICH CONTAINS L²´-±IkE ±YSERgIC
ACIDS) IN SPECIfiC flOWER gODS, XOCHIPI±±I, USED FOR OffiCIA± DIVINATION AND SAC-
RIfiCIA± RITES AND TO STEE± THEIR DOmINANT mI±ITARY CASTES. °E TRANSCENDENT
INTE±±ECTUA±ISm OF THE MAYAN NOBI±ITY WAS ENERgIzED BY CACAO, mUSHROOmS,
AND TRANCE STATES INDUCED BY A NARCOTIC WATER ±I±Y (´OBkIN DE± ¼IOS 2009).
²ERIOUS ARCHAEO±OgY A±SO SUggESTS THAT THE DRUg-mOTIF OBE±ISkS OF ·HAVíN—
THE mOTHER OF µNDEAN CIVI±IzATIONS—RE±ATE TO PRIEST±Y CONTRO± OVER REmOTE
µmAzONIAN PSYCHEDE±ICS. »N THE ¸ACIfiC, THE mI±ITARIST POWER OF THE MOCHE
STATE—mOST±Y REmEmBERED TODAY FOR THE CU±TURE’S STUNNINg±Y EROTIC
POTTERY—A±SO CHANNE±ED THE COSmIC POWERS OF DRUg P±ANTS.
¹N A WAY, THEN, TODAY’S g±OBA± FASCINATION WITH THE COSmO±OgICA± COmP±ExI-
TIES AND VISIONARY AESTHETICS OF ANCIENT µmERICAN PEOP±ES ±IkE THE MAYANS
AND µzTECS IS, UNWITTINg±Y, A FASCINATION WITH THEIR ExOTIC DRUgS. µND ON THE
208 • ch a p t er elev en
mARgINS OF THESE CIVI±IzATIONS, COUNT±ESS SmA±± mOBI±E PEOP±ES CONSERVED A
WOR±D OF RE±IgIOUS AND CURATIVE PRACTICES AROUND DRUgS, SUCH AS NORTHERN
MExICO’S ÉUICHO± WITH THEIR STI±± CENTRA± PEYOTE CU±T. µS INTOxICANTS HAD
mEDICINA± VA±UES, EVEN THE EAR±Y AND OſtEN SICk±Y ²PANIARDS (WHO DISDAINED
mOST THINgS NATIVE) SHOWED AN INTEREST IN SUPERIOR HERBA± CURES. °E UNTAPPED
DIVERSITY AND INTImATE kNOW±EDgE OF P±ANTS HAS IN OUR TImES DRAWN mODERN
PHARmACEUTICA± gIANTS INTO FORmA± “BIO-PROSPECTINg” CONTRACTS WITH RAIN FOR-
EST TRIBES IN ·ENTRA± µmERICA AND THE µmAzON IN SEARCH OF THE ±ATEST mIRAC±E
DRUgS.
°E ORIgINA± µmERICAN DRUg CORNUCOPIA HAS PASSED THROUgH mANY ACTS AND
PHASES OF SUPPRESSION AND REDISCOVERY BY THE OUTER WOR±D. ´URINg CO±ONIA±
TImES (IN A PREVIEW OF TODAY’S DRUg PROHIBITIONS) ·ATHO±IC ²PANISH AUTHORITIES
PIOUS±Y ExTIRPATED AS PAgAN DEVI± WORSHIP THE mOST HA±±UCINOgENIC OF P±ANTS.
°EY SURVIVED AT jUNg±E OR DESERT mARgINS OR mOVED DEEP±Y UNDERgROUND,
SOmETImES FOR CENTURIES, IN MExICAN ¹NDIAN COmmUNITIES. MExICAN SOURCES
CRYPTICA±±Y SPOkE OF PRE-·ONqUEST tzitzinthlápatl P±ANTS AS A FORm OF INDIgE-
NOUS mYTH OR mADNESS. ³AR±Y IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, PEYOTE SPREAD NORTH
OF THE BORDER, UNTI± THEN COmP±ETE±Y UNkNOWN, AS A RESTORATION CU±T AmONg
¶.². AND ·ANADIAN ½ATIVE µmERICANS, NOW ±EgA±±Y PROTECTED AS RE±IgIOUS
PRACTICES OF THE ½ATIVE µmERICAN ·HURCH. ¹N THE 1940S AND 1950S, ANTHRO-
PO±OgISTS, BOHEmIANS ±IkE µ±±EN GINSBERg, EmINENT ETHNOBOTANISTS ±IkE
ÉARVARD’S ¼ICHARD ³VANS ²CHU±TES, AND OTHER SEEkERS SCOURED MExICO AND
µmAzONIA FOR ±OST DRUg TRACES. ¹N THE mORE CU±TURA±±Y OPEN AND INDIgENOUS-
FRIEND±Y 1960S, SURVIVINg DRUg PRACTICES BEgAN TO COmE OUT IN THE OPEN. ¹N
MExICO, THE MAzATEC SHAmAN MARíA ²ABINA, WHO kNEW A ±OT ABOUT PSI±OCYBIN
mUSHROOmS, BECAmE A kIND OF g±OBA± CE±EBRITY. ÉER REmOTE VI±±AgE IN THE
mOUNTAINS OF SOUTHERN »AxACA STATE, ÉUAUT±A DE JIméNEz, TURNED INTO A kIND
OF HIPPIE TOURIST mECCA. °ESE PSYCHEDE±IC DISCOVERIES CONTRIBUTED IN NO SmA±±
WAY TO SCIENTIfiC STUDY OF SUCH DRUgS AND TO THE flOWERINg OF “DRUg CU±TURES”
AmONg mIDD±E-C±ASS YOUTH IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES AND ³UROPE. »NE ¶·Lµ-
TRAINED ANTHROPO±OgIST, ·AR±OS ·ASTAñEDA, EARNED A SmA±± FORTUNE (AND mUCH
PROFESSIONA± CHAgRIN) WITH HIS NEW-AgEY ´ON JUAN BOOk SERIES, A HOW-TO
VISION qUEST INSPIRED BY HIS ENCOUNTERS WITH A ÓAqUI curandero FROm ²ONORA.
°EY ±IkE±Y SO±D mORE COPIES IN ³Ng±ISH THAN A±± THE GARCíA MáRqUEz NOVE±S
COmBINED, IN FACT, SOmE 28 mI±±ION WOR±DWIDE. ½EW µgERS, ±ED BY gURUS ±IkE
¾ImOTHY LEARY AND ±ATER ¾ERRANCE MCÌENNA, ADmIRED NOT ON±Y THE INTRICATE
CHEmICA± kNOW±EDgE OF ¹NDIANS, BUT THE SUBT±E CRAſt AND VA±UES OF THE gUIDE,
WHO COU±D SAFE±Y mANAgE POWERFU± mIND DRUgS THROUgH TImE-HONORED SOCIA±
psychoactive colonialisÇ
210 • ch a p t er elev en
mENT OF ³UROPEAN POWERS (EVEN THE ´ANES) SEIzED POTENTIA±±Y FERTI±E TOBACCO
AND COffEE IS±ANDS. ÊY 1750, THE ºRENCH RAISED mOST OF THE WOR±D’S COffEE CROP
IN THEIR INFAmOUS±Y BRUTA± AND ±UCRATIVE S±AVE CO±ONY OF ²AINT-´OmINgUE
(ÉAITI). µS HISTORIANS ±OVE TO RECOUNT, COffEE DRINkINg, THE gREAT “SOBERER,”
jO±TED ³UROPE INTO A mODERN BOURgEOIS AgE. °E INSTITUTION OF THE COffEE SHOP
PROVED THE kEY CIVI±IzINg A±TERNATIVE TO THE RAUCOUS ±OW-C±ASS BEER TAVERN.
°OUSANDS DOTTED LONDON AND ¸ARIS BY THE EIgHTEENTH CENTURY. ·OffEE SHOPS
INCU±CATED RISINg “¸ROTESTANT” VA±UES: SOBRIETY, INTE±±ECTUA±ITY AND COmmUNI-
CATION, TO±ERANCE OF FOREIgNERS, THE PUB±IC SPHERE, AND A CAPITA±IST BUSINESS
ETHOS (²CHIVE±BUSCH 1992). ·OffEE SHOPS BIRTHED gAzETTES AND NEWSPAPERS,
AND IN ONE PORT, L±OYDS OF LONDON TRANSFORmED FROm A P±ACE TO TA±k SHIPPINg
NEWS INTO THE PIONEER g±OBA± INSURANCE BROkER. MICHE±ET FAmOUS±Y ATTRIBUTED
THE OUTBREAk OF THE 1789 ºRENCH ¼EVO±UTION TO RATIONA±IST P±OTTERS IN THE CAFéS
OF ¸ARIS, A STUNNINg IRONY, FOR IF TRUE, SUCH REVO±UTIONISTS WERE WI±±FU±±Y
DEPENDENT ON S±AVE-gROWN CAffEINE FROm THE HE±±ISH ºRENCH P±ANTATIONS OF
ÉAITI. °E ¼IgHTS OF MAN SOON A±SO BEqUEATHED THE mONUmENTA± S±AVE REVO±T
kNOWN AS THE ÉAITIAN ¼EVO±UTION, WHOSE FURY AgAINST P±ANTERS, IN ANOTHER
IRONY, fiNA±±Y SHIſtED COffEE’S BONANzA SOUTH TO NINETEENTH-CENTURY ÊRAzI±.
»THER CO±ONIA± STImU±ANTS P±AYED OUT qUITE DIffERENT±Y. MExICAN CACAO, SHED
OF PRIOR MAYAN AND µzTEC COSmO±OgY, BECAmE CREO±IzED BY THE SEVENTEENTH
CENTURY INTO THE WARmED AND SWEETENED-UP ²PANISH ·ATHO±IC CHOCO±ATE BEVER-
AgE. ¹F ANYTHINg, HISTORIANS STRESS ITS ±UxURIANT, ARISTOCRATIC, ANTI-¸ROTESTANT
RO±ES, AT ±EAST UNTI± THE NINETEENTH CENTURY, WHEN STRICT ¸ROTESTANTS IN ÉO±±AND,
³Ng±AND, ²WITzER±AND (AND SOmEWHAT ±ATER, ÉERSHEY, ¸µ) INDUSTRIA±IzED
CHOCO±ATE INTO COCOA POWDER AND A SUgAR-±ADEN SO±ID CANDY FOR THE mASSES.
²PAIN A±SO mINED THE mEDICINA± DRUgS OF THE µmERICAS, SUCH AS CINCHONA OR
¸ERU ÊARk, ANTImA±ARIA± qUININE ±ATER WHISkED OUT BY BOTANICA± SPIES AND
REmADE ON A P±ANTATION SCA±E TO SECURE THE INSA±UBRIOUS TROPICA± REA±mS OF THE
ÊRITISH ³mPIRE. µ VESTIgE OF THIS ÈHITE MAN’S BURDEN IS THE BITTER TONIC WE CA±±
“qUININE WATER.” µ±SO NOTAB±E IS COCA, THE “²ACRED LEAF OF THE ¹NCAS.” ÈITH ITS
SUBVERSIVE±Y A±IVE µNDEAN mEANINgS, ²PAIN COU±D ON±Y TO±ERATE ITS USE AS A SA±VE
TO THE ¹NDIANS FORCED TO HARSH±Y ±ABOR IN THE A±TIP±ANO SI±VER mINES OF ¸OTOSí,
mAkINg COCA INTO PART OF A PAN-µNDEAN COmmODITY CIRCUIT, RATHER THAN AN
ExPORT gOOD, AND INTO A DEgRADINg ¹NDIAN VICE. ÉOWEVER, INDIRECT±Y, THIS
mEANS THAT “COCAINE” (COCA’S mOST NOTORIOUS A±kA±OID) HE±PED STImU±ATE THE
ExPANSION OF THE EAR±Y mODERN ³UROPEAN WOR±D ECONOmY, FUE±ED, AS ANY ECO-
NOmIC HISTORIAN kNOWS, BY THE RICH BOUNTY OF ¸ERUVIAN SI±VER.
212 • ch a p t er elev en
THE 1870S. LESS kNOWN IS THAT µmERICAN ·OCA-·O±A ACTUA±±Y BEgAN ±IFE AS A
FRANk YET DRY ImITATION OF ÍIN MARIANI, CONCOCTED BY THE µT±ANTA PHARmACIST
JOHN ¸EmBERTON IN 1887 AS AN INVIgORATINg AND SExUA±±Y HEA±THY “SOſt” DRINk,
AND WHICH CONCEA±S TO THIS DAY A C±OSE BUT COVERT ±INk BETWEEN µNDEAN COCA
AND µmERICAN mASS CU±TURE (GOOTENBERg 2008). ÊY 1910, HOWEVER, THE BRIEF
AgE OF COCA WAS CUT SHORT BY ExAggERATED ASSOCIATIONS WITH THE NEW DRUg mEN-
ACE, COCAINE. ·OCA-·O±A WENT ON TO BECOmE THE µmERICAN TASTE OF THE TWEN-
TIETH CENTURY, SHORN OF ITS µNDEAN AND ºRENCH ORIgINS. ³NERgY DRINkS REmAIN
AN µmERICAN OBSESSION, INC±UDINg mANY NOW TAPPINg ImPORT ExTRACTS OF
µmAzONIAN gUARANá FRUIT, THE BASIS OF ExCITINg ÊRAzI±IAN NATIONA± BRAND
SODAS ±IkE GUARANá µNTARTICA.
°IS WAS A±SO AN AgE OF REgIONA± IDENTITY AND NATIONA± DRUgS, ExEmP±IfiED
BY TEqUI±A AND YERBA mATE. ¾EqUI±A IS ONE OF DOzENS OF AgE-O±D MExICAN FER-
mENTED AgAVE CACTUS “mESCA±S,” WHOSE JA±ISCAN ROOTS WHITENED AND E±EVATED IT
INTO A NATIONA± INSIgNIA OF MExICANIDAD. µT fiRST A HARD DRUg ASSOCIATED WITH
CHEAP MExICAN DRUNkS, THEN TIPSY POSTWAR TOURISTS, ¾EqUI±A HAS mORPHED
SINCE THE 1980S INTO THE U±TImATE HIgH-END ExPORT, WITH A REgISTERED MExICAN
DOmAIN à ±A ºRENCH CHAmPAgNE AND ARTISANA± $200 BOTT±ES THAT HINT AT A
DRUg±IkE COmmUNE WITH ANCIENT AND EARTHY AgAVE MAYAHUE± SPIRITS. µT THE
OTHER END OF THE µmERICAS IS YERBA mATE, A GUARANí xANTHINE-RICH TEA THAT
JESUITS TRADED FROm CO±ONIA± ¸ARAgUAY ACROSS THE gREATER ¼íO DE ±A ¸±ATA. ÊY
THE ±ATE TWENTIETH CENTURY, THE POPU±AR gAUCHO RITUA± OF mATE FROm SHARED
DRINkINg gOURDS CONSO±IDATED AS THE IDENTIFYINg µRgENTINE NATIONA± HABIT,
AND WITH AN EqUIVA±ENT DEVOTION IN NEIgHBORINg REPUB±ICS. ÉOWEVER, IN
HIgH±Y CIRCUITOUS WAYS, mATE IS ON±Y NOW BECOmINg A WOR±D DRUg. ´RUzE ±AB-
ORERS IN ÊUENOS µIRES CARRIED IT BACk TO THE MIDD±E ³AST, DISPERSINg IT AgAIN
AſtER LEBANON’S mODERN CIVI± WARS. µND A DIASPORA FROm µRgENTINA’S ANTI-
²EmITIC DESPOTS OF THE 1970S, SmA±± ¹SRAE±I-µRgENTINE ENTREPRENEURS, ARE NOW
SPREADINg THEIR SCA±ED-UP mATE DRINkS WOR±DWIDE, POPPINg UP IN HIPSTER
ÊROOk±YN CAFéS AND THE SHE±VES OF ÈHO±E ºOODS.
ÊUT IN CONTRAST TO THESE SUCCESSFU± ±EgITImATED DRUgS, REgIONA± AND ETHNIC
DRUg COmP±ExES WERE EmERgINg THAT AſtER 1900 BECOmE TARgETS OF gROWINg
C±ASS AND RACIA± TABOO. ·HINESE mINORITIES, AS IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES, WERE
DESPISED mOST EVERYWHERE AND BROUgHT THE RESPECTABI±ITY AND ±EgA±ITY OF
OPIUm DOWN WITH THEm. ·ANNABIS, ANOTHER ImPORT TO THE µmERICAS, SUR-
FACED IN A NUmBER OF WAYS ACROSS THE ±ONg NINETEENTH CENTURY. µFRICAN S±AVES
OR SAI±ORS BROUgHT CANNABIS TO ÊRAzI± (maconha) AND TO ·O±OmBIA’S ·ARIBBEAN
COAST (marimba); IN ÊRITISH CO±ONIES ±IkE JAmAICA AND ¾RINIDAD IT ARRIVED AS
214 • ch a p t er elev en
dru¿ wars and dru¿ peaceÕ
216 • ch a p t er elev en
WAS OffSET BY THE mISERY OF DRUg-RE±ATED ARREST, ADDICTION, mADNESS, USER DEg-
RADATION, OR PROHIBITION VIO±ENCE.
ÉOWEVER, THESE C±AImS ARE DUBIOUS IF NOT TRIVIA± COmPARED TO THE UNTO±D
DESTRUCTION AND SCA±E OF HUmAN SUffERINg THIS PERmANENT STATE OF HEmISPHERE
WAR HAS WROUgHT OVER THE PAST FOUR DECADES: THE mI±±IONS OF ·O±OmBIANS
DISP±ACED BY HARD-±INE DRUg ERADICATION STRATEgIES, TENS OF THOUSANDS OF
MExICANS BRUTA±±Y TORTURED AND mURDERED BY CARTE± WARFARE AND mI±ITARY
REPRESSION SINCE 2007 A±ONE, THE THOUSANDS OF DESPERATE ÉONDURAN kIDS flEE-
INg DRUg gANg VIO±ENCE NOW ON OUR DOORSTEP, ENVIRONmENTA± DEgRADATION OF
THE mARVE±OUS±Y BIODIVERSE µNDEAN TROPICS, DESTABI±IzINg INSURgENCIES, mAS-
SIVE CORRUPTION, AND, IN A HOST OF NATIONS, A gRAVE UNDERmININg OF HUmAN
RIgHTS, ±EgITImACY, CITIzEN SECURITY AND TRUST, AND PERHAPS EVEN DEmOCRATIC
FUTURES. ½OT TO mENTION OUR OWN COST±Y POST-1980 PO±ICE-STATE ROUNDUP, IN
THE NAmE OF A “DRUg-FREE µmERICA,” OF mI±±IONS OF mOST±Y POOR DISENFRAN-
CHISED B±ACk AND LATINO YOUTH, mAkINg US DISgRACEFU±±Y, AS MICHE±±E
µ±ExANDER TE±±S US, THE mOST INCARCERATINg DEmOCRACY IN THE HISTORY OF THE
WOR±D.
ÊUT HERE’S THE PARADOx ¹’D ±IkE TO END ON: PERHAPS THE NOTAB±E NEW CONTRI-
BUTION OF LATIN µmERICA TO g±OBA± DRUgS HAS BEEN TO fiNA±±Y BREAk THEIR PO±ITI-
CA± SI±ENCE AND DIVERSIFY THE g±OBA± DEBATE ABOUT DRUgS. ¶NTI± RECENT±Y, LATIN
µmERICAN O±IgARCHS, FEARINg THE UNDERmININg OF VA±UES BY I±±ICIT DRUgS, gENER-
A±±Y FO±±OWED THE HARD-±INE ¶.². DOCTRINES. ¹N FACT, THEY SERVED AS A PI±±AR OF
THE INTER-µmERICAN DRUg WAR WAgED SINCE THE 1970S, THOUgH THESE gUARDIAN
E±ITES qUIET±Y gRIPED THAT THE REA± PROB±Em IS THE VORACIOUS ¶.². DEmAND FOR
DRUgS. ÉOWEVER, IN 2008 A HANDFU± OF EmINENT LATIN µmERICAN ±EADERS IN THE
LATIN µmERICAN ·OmmISSION ON ´RUgS AND ´EmOCRACY (FO±±OWED BY A
DEEPER AND BROADER OffiCIA± 2013 »µ² REPORT) BEgAN TO CA±± ON WOR±D ±EADERS
TO FUNDAmENTA±±Y RETHINk THE WAYS WE CONTRO± DRUgS (»µ² 2013). LEſt AND
RIgHT, LATIN µmERICAN NATIONS HAVE ENTERED THIS DEBATE, ÊO±IVIA, ·O±OmBIA,
¶RUgUAY, ÊRAzI±, ³CUADOR, GUATEmA±A, AmONg THEm. »UR mOST DEVOTED
A±±IES—THE ·O±OmBIAN PO±ITICA± AND mI±ITARY CASTE THAT WAgED A DECADES-±ONg
figHT AgAINST TRAffiCkERS, gUERRI±±AS, AND PEASANTS ON OUR BEHA±F—NOW ±OUD±Y
VOICE CONCERNS FOR SUSTAINAB±E PO±ICIES IN THEIR RECOVERY FROm DRUg WAR.
ºO±±OWINg DEEP-SEATED ±EgA±IST TRADITIONS, ²OUTH µmERICAN SUPREmE COURTS
kEEP DEC±ARINg DRUg POSSESSION ±AWS UN±AWFU± INFRINgEmENTS OF ±IBERTY. ´RUgS
±IkE CANNABIS ARE qUIET±Y DECRImINA±IzED AS A DRAIN ON PO±ICE RESOURCES ACROSS
THE HEmISPHERE OR IN ¶RUgUAY’S CASE, AND SOON JAmAICA, FU±±Y ±EgA±IzED BY THE
DEmOCRATIC PROCESS (AS IN OUR OWN STATES OF ·O±ORADO AND ÈASHINgTON). ´RUg
218 • ch a p t er elev en
ERN g±OBA± PROHIBITIONS) TO THE SAVAgE±Y I±±ICIT, ±EAN AND mEAN COmmODITIES OF
TODAY’S WOR±D ORDER. µS WE INCH OURSE±VES TO DRUg REFORm, WE mIgHT WE±± PON-
DER THE HISTORICA± ERROR OF COmmODIFYINg THE SPECIA± POWERS OF DRUgS. ÈE
mIgHT SEEk CREATIVE SO±UTIONS BEYOND SImP±Y REPACkAgINg CANNABIS AND OTHER
UNTAmED DRUgS ±EgA±±Y A±ONg THE ±INES OF ÊIg ¾OBACCO OR ÊIg ¸HARmA. ÈAYS
THAT TAkE US BACk, HOWEVER ImPERFECT±Y, TO THE PEACEFU± AND ±ESS COmmERCIA±
gARDEN.
·AmPOS, ¹SAAC
2012 Home Grown: Marijuana and the Origins of Mexico’s War on Drugs. ·HAPE±
ÉI±±: ¶NIVERSITY OF ½ORTH ·ARO±INA ¸RESS.
·OURTWRIgHT, ´AVID ¾.
2001 Forces of Habit: Drugs and the Making of the Modern World. ·AmBRIDgE,
Mµ: ÉARVARD ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
´OBkIN DE± ¼IOS, MAR±ENE
2009 °e Psychedelic Journey of Marlene Dobkin del Rios: 45 Ãears with Shamans,
AyahuasQueros, and Ethnobotanists. ¼OCHESTER, ;: ¸ARk ²TREET ¸RESS.
GOOTENBERg, ¸AU±
2008 Andean Cocaine: °e Making of a Global Drug. ·HAPE± ÉI±±: ¶NIVERSITY OF
½ORTH ·ARO±INA ¸RESS.
»RgANIzATION OF µmERICAN ²TATES (»µ²) (²ECRETARY-GENERA± JOSé MIgUE±
¹NSU±zA)
2013 °e Drug Problem in the Americas. ÈASHINgTON, ´·: »µ².
MUSTO, ´AVID
1973 °e American Disease: Origins of Narcotic Control. ½EW ÓORk: »xFORD
¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
½ORTON, MARCY
2008 Sacred Giſts, Profane Pleasures: A History of Tobacco and Chocolate in the
Atlantic World. ¹THACA, ½Ó: ·ORNE±± ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
²CHIVE±BUSCH, ÈO±FgANg
1992 Tastes of Paradise: A Social History of Spices, Stimulants, and Intoxicants.
½EW ÓORk: ÍINTAgE ÊOOkS.
²CHU±TES, ¼ICHARD ³VANS, AND µ±BERT ÉOffmAN
1992 Plants of the Gods: °eir Sacred, Healing, and Hallucinogenic Powers.
¼OCHESTER, ;: ÉEA±INg µRTS ¸RESS.
¾OPIk, ²TEVEN, ·AR±OS MARICHA±, AND ºRANk ËEPHYR, EDS.
2006 From Silver to Cocaine: Latin American Commodity Chains and the Build-
ing of the World Economy, 1500–2000. ´URHAm, ½·: ´UkE ¶NIVERSITY
¸RESS.
notes
220 • ch a p t er elev en
pa r t f ou r
Communities
introduction
222 • pa rt fou r
THE mORE ±OCA±IzED FRAmES OF SOCIA± mOVEmENTS AND FAmI±IES TO THE NATION AS
A WHO±E. ÊENEDICT µNDERSON, AN INflUENTIA± INTERNATIONA± STUDIES SCHO±AR,
DESCRIBED THE NATION AS AN “ImAgINED COmmUNITY” BOUND BY THE “DEEP, HORI-
zONTA± COmRADESHIP” OF ITS mEmBERS, mOST OF WHOm WI±± NEVER mEET THEIR
COmRADES IN PERSON. ¹N A FAR-REACHINg FEW PAgES, »±IVEN OUT±INES HOW
ÊRAzI±IAN E±ITES HAVE ImAgINED THE NATIONA± COmmUNITY AT INflUENTIA±
mOmENTS OVER fiVE CENTURIES—A PROCESS FUNDAmENTA±±Y INFORmED BY qUES-
TIONS AND INTERNATIONA± CONVERSATIONS ABOUT ETHNIC AND RACIA± IDENTITY.
LINkINg ±ONg-TERm HISTORICA± COmmENTARY TO THE CURRENT CENTURY, »±IVEN
DISCUSSES THE RISE OF mI±±IONS INTO ÊRAzI±’S mIDD±E C±ASS AND INITIATIVES FOR
AffiRmATIVE ACTION TO ADDRESS RACIA± DISPARITIES. µS WITH THE CHAPTERS BY ÊABB
AND ÊRENNAN, »±IVEN TE±±S THE STORIES OF POPU±ATIONS THROUgHOUT THE WESTERN
HEmISPHERE THAT ARE PIONEERINg NEW FORmS OF SO±IDARITY ACROSS BORDERS IN THE
SERVICE OF STRUgg±ES FOR RECOgNITION AND EqUITY WITHIN THEm.
¼EADERS WI±± fiND A COHESIVE TONE AND THEmATIC SImI±ARITY IN THE CHAPTERS
ASSEmB±ED IN THIS PART. °REE OF THE AUTHORS ARE TRAINED ANTHROPO±OgISTS
(ÊRENNAN, ÊABB, AND »±IVEN) WHO TE±± STORIES OF PEOP±ES AND CU±TURES AND
SUPPORT THEIR C±AImS WITH A mIx OF fiE±D OBSERVATIONS AND SCHO±AR±Y ±ITERATURE.
LINES FROm ¼ENATO ¼OSA±DO AND ¼IgOBERTA MENCHú COmP±EmENT THE ANTHRO-
PO±OgISTS’ CHAPTERS WITH fiRSTHAND PERSPECTIVES. ¾AkEN TOgETHER, THESE AUTHORS
INVITE US TO THINk ABOUT COmmUNITIES AS THEY WERE, ARE, AND WI±± BE. ºROm
FAmI±IES STRETCHINg THOUSANDS OF mI±ES TO NETWORkS OF g±OBA± ACTIVISTS, INDI-
VIDUA±S FROm LATIN µmERICAN AND THE ·ARIBBEAN CONTINUE TO WRITE NEW
CHAPTERS IN THE g±OBA± HISTORY OF COmmUNITIES.
225
TWO OffiCIA± ´ECADES OF THE ÈOR±D’S ¹NDIgENOUS ¸EOP±ES (1993–2004 AND
2005–14) AND THE ´EC±ARATION ON THE ¼IgHTS OF ¹NDIgENOUS ¸EOP±ES (2007).
°IS mOVEmENT THAT MENCHú HE±PED SPARk NOW REPRESENTS mORE THAN 350
mI±±ION INDIgENOUS PERSONS ACROSS NINETY COUNTRIES AND INCREASINg±Y OVER±APS
WITH OTHER SOCIA± mOVEmENTS ±IkE C±ImATE CHANgE ACTIVISm AND ENVIRONmEN-
TA±ISm mORE BROAD±Y.
¼IgOBERTA MENCHú’S ±EgACY ENDURES THROUgH HER FAmOUS 1984 TESTImONIA±
BOOk AND ONgOINg ±EADERSHIP IN HUmAN RIgHTS CAmPAIgNS. ¼ECOgNIzED BY THE
½OBE± COmmITTEE IN 1992 “FOR HER WORk FOR SOCIA± jUSTICE AND ETHNO-CU±TURA±
RECONCI±IATION BASED ON RESPECT FOR THE RIgHTS OF INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES,” MENCHú
ExEmP±IfiES THE REACH AND ±EADERSHIP OF g±OBA± LATIN µmERICANS.
ÊY µNDREW ÊRITT
Nobel Lecture
Rigoberta Menchú Tum
¹ FEE± A DEEP EmOTION AND PRIDE FOR THE HONOR OF HAVINg BEEN AWARDED THE ½OBE±
¸EACE ¸RIzE FOR 1992. µ DEEP PERSONA± FEE±INg AND PRIDE FOR mY COUNTRY AND ITS
VERY ANCIENT CU±TURE. ºOR THE VA±UES OF THE COmmUNITY AND THE PEOP±E TO WHICH
¹ BE±ONg, FOR THE ±OVE OF mY COUNTRY, OF MOTHER ½ATURE. ÈHOEVER UNDERSTANDS
THIS RESPECTS ±IFE AND ENCOURAgES THE STRUgg±E THAT AImS AT SUCH OBjECTIVES.
¹ CONSIDER THIS ¸RIzE, NOT AS A REWARD TO mE PERSONA±±Y, BUT RATHER AS ONE OF
THE gREATEST CONqUESTS IN THE STRUgg±E FOR PEACE, FOR ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS AND FOR
THE RIgHTS OF THE INDIgENOUS PEOP±E, WHO, FOR 500 YEARS, HAVE BEEN SP±IT, FRAg-
mENTED, AS WE±± AS THE VICTImS OF gENOCIDES, REPRESSION AND DISCRImINATION.
¸±EASE A±±OW mE TO CONVEY TO YOU A±±, WHAT THIS ¸RIzE mEANS TO mE.
¹N mY OPINION, THE ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE CA±±S UPON US TO ACT IN ACCORDANCE
WITH WHAT IT REPRESENTS, AND THE gREAT SIgNIfiCANCE IT HAS WOR±DWIDE. ¹N ADDI-
TION TO BEINg A PRICE±ESS TREASURE, IT IS AN INSTRUmENT WITH WHICH TO figHT FOR
PEACE, FOR jUSTICE, FOR THE RIgHTS OF THOSE WHO SUffER THE ABYSmA± ECONOmICA±,
SOCIA±, CU±TURA± AND PO±ITICA± INEqUA±ITIES, TYPICA± OF THE ORDER OF THE WOR±D IN
WHICH WE ±IVE, AND WHERE THE TRANSFORmATION INTO A NEW WOR±D BASED ON THE
227
VA±UES OF THE HUmAN BEINg, IS THE ExPECTATION OF THE mAjORITY OF THOSE WHO
±IVE ON THIS P±ANET.
°IS ½OBE± ¸RIzE REPRESENTS A STANDARD BEARER THAT ENCOURAgES US TO CON-
TINUE DENOUNCINg THE VIO±ATION OF ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS, COmmITTED AgAINST THE
PEOP±E IN GUATEmA±A, IN µmERICA AND IN THE WOR±D, AND TO PERFORm A POSITIVE
RO±E IN RESPECT OF THE PRESSINg TASk IN mY COUNTRY, WHICH IS TO ACHIEVE PEACE
WITH SOCIA± jUSTICE.
°E ½OBE± ¸RIzE IS A SYmBO± OF PEACE, AND OF THE EffORTS TO BUI±D UP A REA±
DEmOCRACY. ¹T WI±± STImU±ATE THE CIVI± SECTORS SO THAT THROUgH A SO±ID NATIONA±
UNITY, THESE mAY CONTRIBUTE TO THE PROCESS OF NEgOTIATIONS THAT SEEk PEACE,
REflECTINg THE gENERA± FEE±INg—A±THOUgH AT TImES NOT POSSIB±E TO ExPRESS BECAUSE
OF FEAR—OF GUATEmA±AN SOCIETY: TO ESTAB±ISH PO±ITICA± AND ±EgA± gROUNDS THAT
WI±± gIVE IRREVERSIB±E ImPU±SES TO A SO±UTION TO WHAT INITIATED THE INTERNA± ARmED
CONflICT.
°ERE IS NO DOUBT WHATSOEVER THAT IT CONSTITUTES A SIgN OF HOPE IN THE
STRUgg±E OF THE INDIgENOUS PEOP±E IN THE ENTIRE ·ONTINENT.
¹T IS A±SO A TRIBUTE TO THE ·ENTRA± µmERICAN PEOP±E WHO ARE STI±± SEARCHINg
FOR THEIR STABI±ITY, FOR THE STRUCTURINg OF THEIR FUTURE, AND THE PATH FOR THEIR
DEVE±OPmENT AND INTEgRATION, BASED ON CIVI± DEmOCRACY AND mUTUA± RESPECT.
°E ImPORTANCE OF THIS ½OBE± ¸RIzE HAS BEEN DEmONSTRATED BY A±± THE
CONgRATU±ATIONS RECEIVED FROm EVERYWHERE, FROm ÉEADS OF GOVERNmENT—
PRACTICA±±Y A±± THE µmERICAN ¸RESIDENTS—TO THE ORgANIzATIONS OF THE INDIgE-
NOUS PEOP±E AND OF ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS, FROm A±± OVER THE WOR±D. ¹N FACT, WHAT THEY
SEE IN THIS ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE IS NOT ON±Y A REWARD AND A RECOgNITION OF A SINg±E
PERSON, BUT A STARTINg POINT FOR THE HARD STRUgg±E TOWARDS THE ACHIEVEmENT OF
THAT REVINDICATION WHICH IS YET TO BE FU±fi ±±ED.
µS A CONTRAST, AND PARADOxICA±±Y, IT WAS ACTUA±±Y IN mY OWN COUNTRY WHERE
¹ mET, ON THE PART OF SOmE PEOP±E, THE STRONgEST OBjECTIONS, RESERVE AND INDIF-
FERENCE, FOR THE AWARD OF THE ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE TO THIS ëUICHé ¹NDIAN.
¸ERHAPS BECAUSE IN LATIN µmERICA, IT IS PRECISE±Y IN GUATEmA±A WHERE THE
DISCRImINATION TOWARDS THE INDIgENOUS, TOWARDS WOmEN, AND THE REPRESSION
OF THE ±ONgINg FOR jUSTICE AND PEACE, ARE mORE DEEP±Y ROOTED IN CERTAIN SOCIA±
AND PO±ITICA± SECTORS.
¶NDER PRESENT CIRCUmSTANCES, IN THIS DISORDERED AND COmP±Ex WOR±D, THE
DECISION OF THE ½ORWEgIAN ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE ·OmmITTEE TO AWARD THIS HON-
ORAB±E DISTINCTION TO mE, REflECTS THE AWARENESS OF THE FACT THAT, IN THIS WAY,
COURAgE AND STRENgTH IS gIVEN TO THE STRUgg±E OF PEACE, RECONCI±IATION AND
jUSTICE; TO THE STRUgg±E AgAINST RACISm, CU±TURA± DISCRImINATION, AND HENCE
228 • ch a p t er t w elv e
CONTRIBUTES TO THE ACHIEVEmENT OF HARmONIOUS CO-ExISTENCE BETWEEN OUR
PEOP±E.
ÈITH DEEP PAIN, ON ONE SIDE, BUT WITH SATISFACTION ON THE OTHER, ¹ HAVE TO
INFORm YOU THAT THE ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE 1992 WI±± HAVE TO REmAIN TEmPORARI±Y
IN MExICO ·ITY, IN WATCHFU± WAITINg FOR PEACE IN GUATEmA±A. ÊECAUSE THERE
ARE NO PO±ITICA± CONDITIONS IN mY COUNTRY THAT WOU±D INDICATE OR mAkE mE
FORESEE A PROmPT AND jUST SO±UTION. °E SATISFACTION AND gRATITUDE ARE DUE TO
THE FACT THAT MExICO, OUR BROTHER NEIgHBOR COUNTRY, THAT HAS BEEN SO DEDI-
CATED AND INTERESTED, THAT HAS mADE SUCH gREAT EffORTS IN RESPECT OF THE NEgO-
TIATIONS THAT ARE BEINg CONDUCTED TO ACHIEVE PEACE, THAT HAS RECEIVED AND
ADmITTED SO mANY REFUgEES AND ExI±ED GUATEmA±ANS, HAS gIVEN US A P±ACE IN
THE MUSEO DE± ¾EmP±O MAYOR (THE CRAD±E OF THE ANCIENT µzTECS) SO THAT THE
½OBE± ¸RIzE mAY REmAIN THERE, UNTI± PEACEFU± AND SAFE CONDITIONS ARE ESTAB-
±ISHED IN GUATEmA±A TO P±ACE IT HERE, IN THE ±AND OF THE ëUETzA±.
ÈHEN EVA±UATINg THE OVERA±± SIgNIfiCANCE OF THE AWARD OF THE ¸EACE ¸RIzE,
¹ WOU±D ±IkE TO SAY SOmE WORDS ON BEHA±F OF A±± THOSE WHOSE VOICE CANNOT BE
HEARD OR WHO HAVE BEEN REPRESSED FOR HAVINg SPOkEN THEIR OPINIONS, OF A±±
THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN mARgINA±IzED, WHO HAVE BEEN DISCRImINATED, WHO ±IVE
IN POVERTY, IN NEED, OF A±± THOSE WHO ARE THE VICTImS OF REPRESSION AND VIO±A-
TION OF HUmAN RIgHTS. °OSE WHO, NEVERTHE±ESS, HAVE ENDURED THROUgH CENTU-
RIES, WHO HAVE NOT ±OST THEIR CONSCIENCE, DETERmINATION, AND HOPE.
¸±EASE A±±OW mE, ±ADIES AND gENT±EmEN, TO SAY SOmE WORDS ABOUT mY
COUNTRY AND THE CIVI±IzATION OF THE MAYAS. °E MAYA PEOP±E DEVE±OPED AND
SPREAD gEOgRAPHICA±±Y THROUgH SOmE 300,000 SqUARE km; THEY OCCUPIED PARTS
OF THE ²OUTH OF MExICO, ÊE±IzE, GUATEmA±A, AS WE±± AS ÉONDURAS AND ³±
²A±VADOR; THEY DEVE±OPED A VERY RICH CIVI±IzATION IN THE AREA OF PO±ITICA±
ORgANIzATION, AS WE±± AS IN SOCIA± AND ECONOmIC fiE±DS; THEY WERE gREAT SCIEN-
TISTS IN THE fiE±DS OF mATHEmATICS, ASTRONOmY, AgRICU±TURE, ARCHITECTURE AND
ENgINEERINg; THEY WERE gREAT ARTISTS IN THE fiE±DS OF SCU±PTURE, PAINTINg, WEAV-
INg AND CARVINg.
°E MAYAS DISCOVERED THE zERO VA±UE IN mATHEmATICS, AT ABOUT THE SAmE
TImE THAT IT WAS DISCOVERED IN ¹NDIA AND ±ATER PASSED ON TO THE µRABS. °EIR
ASTRONOmIC FORECASTS BASED ON mATHEmATICA± CA±CU±ATIONS AND SCIENTIfiC
OBSERVATIONS WERE AmAzINg, AND STI±± ARE. °EY PREPARED A CA±ENDAR mORE
ACCURATE THAN THE GREgORIAN, AND IN THE fiE±D OF mEDICINE THEY PERFORmED
INTRACRANIA± SURgICA± OPERATIONS.
»NE OF THE MAYA BOOkS, WHICH ESCAPED DESTRUCTION BY THE CONqUISTADORES,
kNOWN AS °E ·ODEx OF ´RESDEN, CONTAINS THE RESU±TS OF AN INVESTIgATION ON
230 • ch a p t er t w elv e
°E PECU±IARITIES OF THE VISION OF THE ¹NDIAN PEOP±E ARE ExPRESSED ACCORDINg
TO THE WAY IN WHICH THEY ARE RE±ATED TO EACH OTHER. ºIRST, BETWEEN HUmAN
BEINgS, THROUgH COmmUNICATION. ²ECOND, WITH THE EARTH, AS WITH OUR mOTHER,
BECAUSE SHE gIVES US OUR ±IVES AND IS NOT mERE mERCHANDISE. °IRD, WITH
NATURE, BECAUSE WE ARE AN INTEgRA± PART OF IT, AND NOT ITS OWNERS.
¾O US MOTHER ³ARTH IS NOT ON±Y A SOURCE OF ECONOmIC RICHES THAT gIVE US
THE mAIzE, WHICH IS OUR ±IFE, BUT SHE A±SO PROVIDES SO mANY OTHER THINgS THAT
THE PRIVI±EgED ONES OF TODAY STRIVE FOR. °E ³ARTH IS THE ROOT AND THE SOURCE OF
OUR CU±TURE. ²HE kEEPS OUR mEmORIES, SHE RECEIVES OUR ANCESTORS AND SHE,
THEREFORE, DEmANDS THAT WE HONOR HER AND RETURN TO HER, WITH TENDERNESS AND
RESPECT, THOSE gOODS THAT SHE gIVES US. ÈE HAVE TO TAkE CARE OF HER SO THAT OUR
CHI±DREN AND gRANDCHI±DREN mAY CONTINUE TO BENEfiT FROm HER. ¹F THE WOR±D
DOES NOT ±EARN NOW TO SHOW RESPECT TO NATURE, WHAT kIND OF FUTURE WI±± THE
NEW gENERATIONS HAVE?
ºROm THESE BASIC FEATURES DERIVE BEHAVIOR, RIgHTS AND OB±IgATIONS IN THE
µmERICAN ·ONTINENT, FOR THE INDIgENOUS PEOP±E AS WE±± AS FOR THE NON-
INDIgENOUS, WHETHER THEY BE RACIA±±Y mIxED, B±ACkS, WHITES OR µSIAN. °E WHO±E
SOCIETY HAS AN OB±IgATION TO SHOW mUTUA± RESPECT, TO ±EARN FROm EACH OTHER AND
TO SHARE mATERIA± AND SCIENTIfiC ACHIEVEmENTS, IN THE mOST CONVENIENT WAY. °E
INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES NEVER HAD, AND STI±± DO NOT HAVE, THE P±ACE THAT THEY SHOU±D
HAVE OCCUPIED IN THE PROgRESS AND BENEfiTS OF SCIENCE AND TECHNO±OgY, A±THOUgH
THEY REPRESENTED AN ImPORTANT BASIS FOR THIS DEVE±OPmENT.
¹F THE INDIgENOUS CIVI±IzATION AND THE ³UROPEAN CIVI±IzATIONS COU±D HAVE
mADE ExCHANgES IN A PEACEFU± AND HARmONIOUS mANNER, WITHOUT DESTRUCTION,
ExP±OITATION, DISCRImINATION AND POVERTY, THEY COU±D, NO DOUBT, HAVE ACHIEVED
gREATER AND mORE VA±UAB±E CONqUESTS FOR ÉUmANITY.
LET US NOT FORgET THAT WHEN THE ³UROPEANS CAmE TO µmERICA, THERE WERE
flOURISHINg AND STRONg CIVI±IzATIONS THERE. »NE CANNOT TA±k ABOUT A “DISCOVERY
OF µmERICA,” BECAUSE ONE DISCOVERS THAT WHICH ONE DOES NOT kNOW ABOUT, OR
THAT WHICH IS HIDDEN. ÊUT µmERICA AND ITS NATIVE CIVI±IzATIONS HAD DISCOVERED
THEmSE±VES ±ONg BEFORE THE FA±± OF THE ¼OmAN ³mPIRE AND MEDIEVA± ³UROPE.
°E SIgNIfiCANCE OF ITS CU±TURES FORmS PART OF THE HERITAgE OF HUmANITY AND
CONTINUES TO ASTONISH THE ±EARNED.
¹ THINk IT IS NECESSARY THAT THE INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES, OF WHICH ¹ Am A mEm-
BER, SHOU±D CONTRIBUTE THEIR SCIENCE AND kNOW±EDgE TO HUmAN DEVE±OPmENT,
BECAUSE WE HAVE ENORmOUS POTENTIA± AND WE COU±D COmBINE OUR VERY ANCIENT
HERITAgE WITH THE ACHIEVEmENTS OF ³UROPEAN CIVI±IzATION AS WE±± AS WITH CIVI-
±IzATIONS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WOR±D.
232 • ch a p t er t w elv e
ÈE HOPE THAT THE FORmU±ATION OF THE PROjECT IN RESPECT OF THE ´EC±ARATION
ON THE ¼IgHTS OF THE INDIgENOUS ¸EOP±E WI±± ExAmINE AND gO DEEP±Y INTO THE
ExISTINg DIffiCU±TY REA±ITY THAT WE, THE ¹NDO-µmERICANS, ExPERIENCE.
»UR PEOP±E WI±± HAVE A YEAR DEDICATED TO THE PROB±EmS THAT AfflICT THEm
AND, IN THIS RESPECT, ARE NOW gETTINg READY TO CARRY OUT DIffERENT ACTIVITIES
WITH THE PURPOSE OF PRESENTINg PROPOSA±S AND PUTTINg PRESSURE ON ACTION
P±ANS. µ±± THIS WI±± BE CONDUCTED IN THE mOST REASONAB±E WAY AND WITH THE
mOST CONVINCINg AND jUSTIfiED ARgUmENTS FOR THE E±ImINATION OF RACISm,
OPPRESSION, DISCRImINATION AND THE ExP±OITATION OF THOSE WHO HAVE BEEN
DRAggED INTO POVERTY AND OB±IVION. µ±SO FOR “THE CONDEmNED OF THE EARTH,”
THE AWARD OF THE ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE REPRESENTS A RECOgNITION, AN ENCOURAgE-
mENT AND AN OBjECTIVE FOR THE FUTURE.
¹ WISH THAT A CONSCIOUS SENSE OF PEACE AND A FEE±INg OF HUmAN SO±IDARITY
WOU±D DEVE±OP IN A±± PEOP±ES, WHICH WOU±D OPEN NEW RE±ATIONSHIPS OF RESPECT
AND EqUA±ITY FOR THE NExT mI±±ENNIUm, TO BE RU±ED BY FRATERNITY AND NOT BY
CRUE± CONflICTS.
»PINION IS BEINg FORmED EVERYWHERE TODAY, THAT IN SPITE OF WARS AND VIO-
±ENCE, CA±±S UPON THE ENTIRE HUmAN RACE TO PROTECT ITS HISTORICA± VA±UES AND TO
FORm UNITY IN DIVERSITY. µND THIS CA±±S UPON US A±± TO REflECT UPON THE INCOR-
PORATION OF ImPORTANT E±EmENTS OF CHANgE AND TRANSFORmATION IN A±± ASPECTS
OF ±IFE ON EARTH, IN THE SEARCH FOR SPECIfiC AND DEfiNITE SO±UTIONS TO THE DEEP
ETHICA± CRISIS THAT AfflICTS ÉUmANITY.
°IS WI±±, NO DOUBT, HAVE DECISIVE INflUENCE ON THE STRUCTURE OF THE
FUTURE.
°ERE IS A POSSIBI±ITY THAT SOmE CENTERS OF PO±ITICA± AND ECONOmIC POWER,
SOmE STATESmEN AND INTE±±ECTUA±S, HAVE NOT YET mANAgED TO SEE THE ADVANTAgES
OF THE ACTIVE PARTICIPATION OF THE INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES IN A±± THE fiE±DS OF HUmAN
ACTIVITY. ÉOWEVER, THE mOVEmENT INITIATED BY DIffERENT PO±ITICA± AND INTE±-
±ECTUA± “µmERINDIANS” WI±± fiNA±±Y CONVINCE THEm THAT, FROm AN OBjECTIVE
POINT OF VIEW, WE ARE A CONSTITUENT PART OF THE HISTORICA± A±TERNATIVES THAT ARE
BEINg DISCUSSED AT THE INTERNATIONA± ±EVE±.
LADIES AND gENT±EmEN, A±±OW mE TO SAY SOmE CANDID WORDS ABOUT mY
COUNTRY.
°E ATTENTION THAT THIS ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE HAS FOCUSED ON GUATEmA±A,
SHOU±D ImP±Y THAT THE VIO±ATION OF THE HUmAN RIgHTS IS NO ±ONgER IgNORED
INTERNATIONA±±Y. ¹T WI±± A±SO HONOR A±± THOSE WHO DIED IN THE STRUgg±E FOR SOCIA±
EqUA±ITY AND jUSTICE IN mY COUNTRY.
234 • ch a p t er t w elv e
IN THIS ·ITY OF »S±O, BETWEEN THE ·OmISIóN ½ACIONA± DE ¼ECONCI±IACIóN WITH
gOVERNmENT mANDATE AND THE ¶NIDAD ¼EVO±UCIONARIA ½ACIONA± GUATEmA±TECA
(¶¼½G) AS A NECESSARY STEP TO INTRODUCE TO GUATEmA±A THE SPIRIT OF THE
µgREEmENT OF ³SqUIPU±AS.
µS A RESU±T OF THIS µgREEmENT AND CONVERSATIONS BETWEEN THE ¶¼½G AND
DIffERENT SECTORS OF GUATEmA±AN SOCIETY, DIRECT NEgOTIATIONS WERE INITIATED UNDER
THE gOVERNmENT OF ¸RESIDENT ²ERRANO, BETWEEN THE gOVERNmENT AND THE gUERRI±-
±AS, AS A RESU±T OF WHICH THREE AgREEmENTS HAVE A±READY BEEN SIgNED. ÉOWEVER, THE
SUBjECT OF ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS HAS TAkEN A ±ONg TImE, BECAUSE THIS SUBjECT CONSTITUTES
THE CORE OF THE GUATEmA±AN PROB±EmS, AND AROUND THIS CORE ImPORTANT DIffER-
ENCES HAVE ARISEN. ½EVERTHE±ESS, THERE HAS BEEN CONSIDERAB±E PROgRESS.
°E PROCESS OF NEgOTIATIONS AImS AT REACHINg AgREEmENTS IN ORDER TO ESTAB-
±ISH THE BASIS FOR A REA± DEmOCRACY IN GUATEmA±A AND FOR AN END TO THE WAR. µS
FAR AS ¹ UNDERSTAND, WITH THE gOODWI±± OF THE PARTIES CONCERNED AND THE ACTIVE
PARTICIPATION OF THE CIVI± SECTORS, ADAPTINg TO A gREAT NATIONA± UNITY, THE PHASE
OF PURPOSES AND INTENTIONS COU±D BE ±Eſt BEHIND SO THAT GUATEmA±A COU±D BE
PU±±ED OUT OF THE CROSSROADS THAT SEEm TO HAVE BECOmE ETERNA±.
´IA±OgUES AND PO±ITICA± NEgOTIATIONS ARE, NO DOUBT, ADEqUATE mEANS TO SO±VE
THESE PROB±EmS, IN ORDER TO RESPOND IN A SPECIfiC WAY TO THE VITA± AND URgENT
NEEDS FOR ±IFE AND FOR THE ImP±EmENTATION OF DEmOCRACY FOR THE GUATEmA±AN
PEOP±E. ÉOWEVER, ¹ Am CONVINCED THAT IF THE DIVERSE SOCIA± SECTORS WHICH INTE-
gRATE GUATEmA±AN SOCIETY fiND BASES OF UNITY, RESPECTINg THEIR NATURA± DIffER-
ENCES, THEY WOU±D TOgETHER fiND A SO±UTION TO THOSE PROB±EmS AND THEREFORE
RESO±VE THE CAUSES WHICH INITIATED THE WAR WHICH PREVAI±S IN GUATEmA±A.
»THER CIVI± SECTORS AS WE±± AS THE INTERNATIONA± COmmUNITY mUST DEmAND
THAT THE NEgOTIATIONS BETWEEN THE GOVERNmENT AND THE ¶¼½G SURPASS THE
PERIOD IN WHICH THEY ARE fiNDINg THEmSE±VES IN DISCUSSINg ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS AND
mOVE AHEAD AS SOON AS POSSIB±E TO A VERIfiAB±E AgREEmENT WITH THE ¶NITED
½ATIONS. ¹T IS NECESSARY TO POINT OUT, HERE IN »S±O, THAT THE ISSUE OF ÉUmAN
¼IgHTS IN GUATEmA±A CONSTITUTES, AT PRESENT, THE mOST URgENT PROB±Em THAT
HAS TO BE SO±VED. MY STATEmENT IS NEITHER INCIDENTA± NOR UNjUSTIfiED.
µS HAS BEEN ASCERTAINED BY INTERNATIONA± INSTITUTIONS, SUCH AS °E ¶NITED
½ATIONS ·OmmISSION ON ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS, °E ¹NTERAmERICAN ·OmmISSION OF
ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS AND mANY OTHER HUmANITARIAN ORgANIzATIONS, GUATEmA±A IS
ONE OF THE COUNTRIES IN µmERICA WITH THE ±ARgEST NUmBER OF VIO±ATIONS OF THESE
RIgHTS, AND THE ±ARgEST NUmBER OF CASES OF ImPUNITY WHERE SECURITY FORCES ARE
gENERA±±Y INVO±VED. ¹T IS ImPERATIVE THAT THE REPRESSION AND PERSECUTION OF
THE PEOP±E AND THE ¹NDIANS BE STOPPED. °E COmPU±SORY mOBI±IzATION AND
236 • ch a p t er t w elv e
NEW GUATEmA±AN SOCIA± ORDER, OF WHICH, ¹ HUmB±Y BE±IEVE, THE ¹NDIAN WOmEN
A±READY ARE A C±EAR TESTImONY. °IS ½OBE± ¸EACE ¸RIzE IS A RECOgNITION TO THOSE
WHO HAVE BEEN, AND STI±± ARE IN mOST PARTS OF THE WOR±D, THE mOST ExP±OITED OF
THE ExP±OITED; THE mOST DISCRImINATED OF THE DISCRImINATED, THE mOST mARgIN-
A±IzED OF THE mARgINA±IzED, BUT STI±± THOSE WHO PRODUCE ±IFE AND RICHES.
´EmOCRACY, DEVE±OPmENT AND mODERNIzATION OF A COUNTRY ARE ImPOSSIB±E
AND INCONgRUOUS WITHOUT THE SO±UTION OF THESE PROB±EmS.
¹N GUATEmA±A, IT IS jUST AS ImPORTANT TO RECOgNIzE THE ¹DENTITY AND THE
¼IgHTS OF THE ¹NDIgENOUS ¸EOP±ES, THAT HAVE BEEN IgNORED AND DESPISED
NOT ON±Y DURINg THE CO±ONIA± PERIOD, BUT A±SO DURINg THE ¼EPUB±IC. ¹T IS NOT
POSSIB±E TO CONCEIVE A DEmOCRATIC GUATEmA±A, FREE AND INDEPENDENT, WITHOUT
THE INDIgENOUS IDENTITY SHAPINg ITS CHARACTER INTO A±± ASPECTS OF NATIONA±
ExISTENCE.
¹T WI±± UNDOUBTED±Y BE SOmETHINg NEW, A COmP±ETE±Y NEW ExPERIENCE, WITH
FEATURES THAT, AT THE mOmENT, WE CANNOT DESCRIBE. ÊUT IT WI±± AUTHENTICA±±Y
RESPOND TO HISTORY AND THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE REA± GUATEmA±AN NATIONA±ITY.
°E TRUE PROfi±E THAT HAS BEEN DISTORTED FOR SUCH A ±ONg TImE.
°IS URgENCY OF THIS VITA± NEED, ARE THE ISSUES THAT URgE mE, AT THIS mOmENT,
FROm THIS ROSTRUm, TO URgE NATIONA± OPINION AND THE INTERNATIONA± COmmU-
NITY, TO SHOW A mORE ACTIVE INTEREST IN GUATEmA±A.
¾AkINg INTO CONSIDERATION THAT IN CONNECTION WITH mY RO±E AS A ½OBE±
¸RIzE ÈINNER, IN THE PROCESS OF NEgOTIATIONS FOR PEACE IN GUATEmA±A mANY
POSSIBI±ITIES HAVE BEEN HAND±ED, BUT NOW ¹ THINk THAT THIS RO±E IS mORE ±IkE±Y
TO BE THE RO±E OF A PROmOTOR OF PEACE, OF NATIONA± UNITY, FOR THE PROTECTION OF
THE RIgHTS OF THE INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES. ¹N SUCH A WAY, THAT ¹ mAY TAkE INITIATIVES
IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE NEEDS, AND THEREBY PREVENT THE ¸EACE ¸RIzE FROm
BECOmINg A PIECE OF PAPER THAT HAS BEEN PIgEONHO±ED.
¹ CA±± UPON A±± THE SOCIA± AND ETHNIC SECTORS THAT CONSTITUTE THE PEOP±E OF
GUATEmA±A TO PARTICIPATE ACTIVE±Y IN THE EffORTS TO fiND A PEACEFU± SO±UTION TO
THE ARmED CONflICT, TO BUI±D-UP A SOUND UNITY BETWEEN THE “±ADINOS,” THE
B±ACkS AND THE ¹NDIANS, A±± OF WHOm mUST CREATE WITHIN THEIR DIVERSE gROUPS,
A “GUATEmA±ITY.”
µ±ONg THESE SAmE ±INES, ¹ INVITE THE INTERNATIONA± COmmUNITY TO CONTRIB-
UTE WITH SPECIfiC ACTIONS SO THAT THE PARTIES INVO±VED mAY OVERCOmE THE DIffER-
ENCES THAT AT THIS STAgE kEEP NEgOTIATIONS IN A WAIT-AND-SEE STATE, SO THAT THEY
WI±± SUCCEED, fiRST OF A±±, IN SIgNINg AN AgREEmENT ON ÉUmAN ¼IgHTS. µND
THEN, TO RE-INITIATE THE ROUNDS OF NEgOTIATION AND IDENTIFY THOSE ISSUES ON
WHICH TO COmPROmISE, TO A±±OW FOR THE ¸EACE µgREEmENT TO BE SIgNED AND
238 • ch a p t er t w elv e
°ERE IS NO DOUBT THAT THIS PROCESS WI±± BE ±ONg AND COmP±Ex, BUT IT IS NO
¶TOPIA AND WE, THE ¹NDIANS, WE HAVE NEW CONfiDENCE IN ITS ImP±EmENTATION.
°E PEOP±ES OF GUATEmA±A WI±± mOBI±IzE AND WI±± BE AWARE OF THEIR STRENgTH
IN BUI±DINg UP A WORTHY FUTURE. °EY ARE PREPARINg THEmSE±VES TO SOW THE
FUTURE, TO FREE THEmSE±VES FROm ATAVISmS, TO REDISCOVER THEIR HERITAgE. ¾O
BUI±D A COUNTRY WITH A gENUINE NATIONA± IDENTITY. ¾O START A NEW ±IFE.
ÊY COmBININg A±± THE SHADES AND NUANCES OF THE “±ADINOS,” THE “gARíFUNAS”
AND ¹NDIANS IN THE GUATEmA±AN ETHNIC mOSAIC, WE mUST INTER±ACE A NUmBER
OF CO±ORS WITHOUT INTRODUCINg CONTRADICTIONS, WITHOUT BECOmINg gROTESqUE
NOR ANTAgONISTIC, BUT WE mUST gIVE THEm BRIgHTNESS AND A SUPERIOR qUA±ITY,
jUST THE WAY OUR WEAVERS WEAVE A TYPICA± HUIPI± B±OUSE, BRI±±IANT±Y COmPOSED,
A gIſt TO ÉUmANITY.
°ANk YOU VERY mUCH.
°ESE CHEEkY SAYINgS ARE EmB±AzONED ON ¾-SHIRTS, HATS, THONgS, AND OTHER
C±OTHINg UNDER THE ±ABE± ´µ²¸¶. ´µ²¸¶, A SEx WORkER–RUN ÊRAzI±IAN FASH-
ION HOUSE, STANDS FOR “´AS PUTAS” (»F THE WHORES). ¹T A±SO RIff S ON THE ÊRAzI±IAN
±UxURY BRAND ´µ²L¶ (WHICH THREATENED—AND EVENTUA±±Y DROPPED—A ±AW-
SUIT). ·HIC STORES ±IkE ¸ARIS’S GA±ERIES LAFAYETTE HAVE SO±D ´µ²¸¶’S FASHION,
mEDIA FROm AROUND THE WOR±D HAVE COVERED THEIR RUNWAY SHOWS STAgED IN
ÊRAzI±’S STREETS, AND CE±EBRATED ³UROPEAN DESIgNERS HAVE DESIgNED PIECES
FOR THEIR CO±±ECTION. ÊUT ´µ²¸¶ IS NOT jUST A C±OTHINg COmPANY; IT HAS
BEEN IN THE VANgUARD OF A ±ARgER g±OBA± SEx WORkER RIgHTS mOVEmENT THAT
DEmANDS jUSTICE FOR ±OW-WAgE WORkERS, TRANSgENDER PEOP±E, AND COmmUNITIES
OF CO±OR.
¸O±ITICA±±Y ORgANIzED, VOCA±, AND CREATIVE, SEx WORkER RIgHTS ACTIVISTS IN
LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN HAVE FOUgHT FOR—AND WON—gAINS THAT ARE
A mODE± FOR ACTIVISTS (SEx WORkER AND OTHERWISE) WOR±DWIDE. ·O±OmBIA’S
²UPREmE ·OURT RECOgNIzED SEx WORkERS’ AgREEmENTS WITH C±IENTS AS BINDINg
CONTRACTS. µRgENTINE SEx WORkERS SUCCESSFU±±Y ±OBBIED FOR REgU±ARIzINg
THEIR WORk TO RECEIVE BENEfiTS SUCH AS SOCIA± SECURITY. µND IN ÊRAzI± GABRIE±E
LEITE, THE FOUNDER OF ´µ²¸¶ AND THE NONgOVERNmENTA± ORgANIzATION
(½G») ´AVIDA, RAN FOR ·ONgRESS. °ESE PO±ITICA± AND ECONOmIC WINS
STAND OUT AgAINST THE BACkDROP OF DANgERS THAT SEx WORkERS THE WOR±D OVER
FACE DAI±Y: CRImINA±IzATION, VIO±ENCE, RAPE, INCARCERATION, AND DISCRImINATION.
240
²Ex WORkERS IN LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN OF COURSE ARE NO
ExCEPTION.
²Ex WORkERS HAVE FOUgHT BACk. °EY OſtEN ARE ExPERT AND COURAgEOUS ACTIV-
ISTS WHO RISk ARREST, VIO±ENCE, AND STIgmA EVERY TImE THEY SPEAk OUT. “¹SABE±,”
FOR ExAmP±E, WENT INTO HIDINg AſtER TESTIFYINg AgAINST PO±ICE ABUSE IN THE
ÊRAzI±IAN CITY OF ½ITERóI. µſtER HER TESTImONY, SHE WAS kIDNAPPED BY FOUR mEN
WHO CUT HER WITH A RAzOR AND THREATENED HER WITH PICTURES THEY HAD TAkEN OF
HER SON. ÈHI±E SHE WAS IN HIDINg, SHE WAS NOT ON HER OWN. °E SEx WORkER
RIgHTS COmmUNITY IS PARTICU±AR±Y SkI±±FU± AT ±EVERAgINg SOCIA± mEDIA AND RAISED
FUNDS ON HER BEHA±F WHI±E BRINgINg INTERNATIONA± mEDIA ATTENTION TO ONgOINg
PO±ICE BRUTA±ITY IN ÊRAzI±.
ÈITH SOCIA± mEDIA ±INkINg ACTIVISTS ACROSS THE G±OBA± ½ORTH AND ²OUTH,
WORkER ACTIONS IN LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN HAVE AT TImES OUTPACED
AND INSPIRED ACTIONS IN THE ½ORTH. ¹N FACT, SEx WORkER RIgHTS ACTIVISTS IN THE
¶NITED ²TATES CITE ´µ²¸¶ AND GABRIE±A LEITE’S RUN FOR ·ONgRESS AS AmONg
THE g±OBA± SEx WORkER COmmUNITY’S mOST INSPIRINg ExAmP±ES OF WORkER SO±I-
DARITY. ²Ex WORkERS’ DEmANDS AND STRATEgIES fiND COmmON gROUND WITH g±OBA±
figHTS FOR RACIA±, gENDER, SExUA±, mIgRANT, AND POOR PEOP±E’S jUSTICE. µS A RESU±T,
SEx WORkER RIgHTS ACTIVISTS IN LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN HAVE ±ED THE
WAY FOR mOVEmENT BUI±DERS IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WOR±D. °IS CHAPTER SHINES A
±IgHT ON THE WAYS THE REgION’S SEx WORkERS NAVIgATE THE VU±NERABI±ITIES INHER-
ENT IN SExUA± ECONOmIES—SUCH AS PO±ICE VIO±ENCE AND STATES’ AND ½G»S’
ATTEmPTS TO “RESCUE” THEm IN THE NAmE OF ENDINg TRAffiCkINg—WHI±E THEY A±SO
mODE± CUTTINg-EDgE ACTIVISm ON THE g±OBA± STAgE.
²Ex WORk IS NOT I±±EgA± IN mOST LATIN µmERICAN COUNTRIES, BUT A NUmBER OF
RE±ATED ACTIVITIES ARE CRImINA±IzED. ÈORkERS IN THE SEx SECTOR, CONSEqUENT±Y,
±IVE WITH CHRONIC FEAR OF ARREST. ³VERY DAY THEY RISk ±OSINg EVERYTHINg. µS THE
HOST OF mAjOR INTERNATIONA± EVENTS, ÊRAzI± HAS UNDERTAkEN A NUmBER OF HIgH±Y
PUB±ICIzED CAmPAIgNS TO “C±EAN UP” ITS STREETS. »N THE EVE OF THE ¶½¼IO+20
·ONFERENCE IN 2012, A WAVE OF ARRESTS AND SHUTTERINg OF BROTHE±S—INC±UDINg
THE FAmED ·ENTAUROS, A PRICEY BROTHE± THAT JUSTIN ÊIEBER ±ATER VISITED IN
2013—SHOOk SEx WORkERS’ COmmUNITIES. ÈHEN PO±ICE RAIDS AgAIN BEgAN IN
FU±± FORCE BEFORE THE ÈOR±D ·UP, SEx WORkERS WERE READY. »N 16 µPRI± 2014,
HUNDREDS OF SEx WORkERS IN ½ITERóI TOOk TO THE STREETS TO PROTEST THE CHRONIC
ARRESTS OF THEIR CO±±EAgUES WITH SIgNS SAYINg, “¸ROSTITUTION IS NOT A CRImE” AND
“ÈE WANT TO WORk.” µ ±ITT±E mORE THAN A mONTH ±ATER, THE PO±ICE RAIDED AN
APARTmENT BUI±DINg WHERE WOmEN WORkED, BREAkINg DOWN THE DOORS, STEA±INg
THEIR mONEY, AND CONDEmNINg THE APARTmENTS. MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED
SEx WORkERS WERE ARRESTED. ²EVERA± REPORTED BEINg RAPED DURINg THE RAID—
INC±UDINg “¹SABE±.”
²Ex WORkERS ImmEDIATE±Y ORgANIzED. °EY SPOkE OUT AT PUB±IC HEARINgS AND
POSTED PROTEST SIgNS ON THE BUI±DINg. ²PORTINg ´µ²¸¶ ¾-SHIRTS DESIgNED AS
SOCCER jERSEYS FOR THE C±OTHINg ±INE’S 2014 ÈOR±D ·UP CO±±ECTION, THEY P±AYED A
SEmI-NAkED gAmE OF SOCCER—AS PROTEST—OUTSIDE THE STEPS OF ½ITERóI’S mAIN
mUNICIPA± BUI±DINg. °E ¾-SHIRTS READ, “°ERE ÈI±± ÊE ²Ex”—A P±AY ON THE
PROTEST PHRASE “½öO ÍAI ¾ER ·OPA” (°ERE ÈI±± ÊE ½O ÈOR±D ·UP), THUS
CONNECTINg THEIR DEmANDS WITH THOSE OF BROADER mOVEmENTS OF POOR COm-
mUNITIES. °EY A±SO WORE ANOTHER PROTEST ¾-SHIRT, “º¹ºµ ²TANDARD ËONE,”
WHICH BOTH REFERRED TO “PROSTITUTION zONES” (RED-±IgHT DISTRICTS) AND ECHOED
POPU±AR OPPOSITION TO THE $11 BI±±ION THE ÊRAzI±IAN gOVERNmENT SPENT BUI±DINg
ACCORDINg TO º¹ºµ STANDARDS. ¹F STADIUmS WERE TO gOINg TO BE WOR±D C±ASS, WHY
WEREN’T ORDINARY ÊRAzI±IANS’ HOUSINg, HEA±TH C±INICS, AND SCHOO±S UP TO THE
SAmE STANDARDS? ¼EjECTINg THE STRUCTURA± VIO±ENCE AND STATE SURVEI±±ANCE AND
CONTRO± ExPERIENCED BY THE POOR DAI±Y, SEx WORkERS P±ACED THEIR DEmANDS
242 • ch a p t er t h i rt e e n
A±ONgSIDE THOSE OF OTHER mARgINA±IzED CITIzENS. µ mEmBER OF ´AVIDA ExP±AINS
THAT THEIR PROTESTS NOT ON±Y HARNESSED THE OUTRAgE OVER THE COST OF THE ÈOR±D
·UP BUT A±SO AffiRmED THEIR RIgHT TO WORk: “°ERE IS NOTHINg I±±EgA± ABOUT ADU±T
WOmEN WORkINg DURINg THE ÈOR±D ·UP WITH FOREIgN TOURISTS.”
LIkE THEIR ÊRAzI±IAN COUNTERPARTS, SEx WORkERS THROUgHOUT LATIN µmERICA
AND THE ·ARIBBEAN ARE SEASONED CHANgE AgENTS. °EY HAVE FOUgHT FOR THEIR
RIgHTS THROUgH gRASSROOTS ACTIONS AS WE±± AS THROUgH FORmA± PO±ITICA± POWER.
¸ARAgUAYAN SEx WORkERS, FOR ExAmP±E, HAVE ISSUED STATEmENTS TO THE INTERNA-
TIONA± PRESS AgAINST AN ORDINANCE THAT PROHIBITS THEm FROm WORkINg IN THE
STREETS. µRgENTINE SEx WORkERS ±AUNCHED A ÊANkSY-STY±E gRAffiTI PROjECT IN
ÊUENOS µIRES THAT FEATURES PROVOCATIVE±Y DRESSED WOmEN ON ONE WA±± WITH
THEIR HANDS STRETCHINg AROUND THE CORNER TO PUSH A STRO±±ER. °E VISUA±±Y ARREST-
INg CAmPAIgN HAmmERS HOmE THEIR mESSAgE THAT SEx WORkERS ARE NOT CRImI-
NA±S—BUT mOTHERS TRYINg TO PUT FOOD ON THE TAB±E. MEmBERS OF ¸Lµ¸³¼¾²
(¸±ATAFORmA LATINOAmERICANA DE ¸ERSONAS qUE ³jERCEN E± ¾RABAjO ²ExUA±) IN
ëUITO, ³CUADOR, ISSUED A RIgHTS mANIFESTO THAT ENDS WITH THE FO±±OWINg CA±± TO
ARmS: ²Ex ÈORk IS ÈORk! ÈHORES VOTE! ÈE ARE ·ITIzENS WITH ¼IgHTS! ¹N
ÊE±Em, ÊRAzI±, SEx WORkERS C±EVER±Y DRAW mEDIA ATTENTION TO THEIR RIgHTS CAm-
PAIgNS THROUgH A “¸ANTIES ¼ACE” AND AN “»RgASm ÈORkSHOP” ON JUNE 2,
¹NTERNATIONA± ²Ex ÈORkERS ¼IgHTS ´AY. µND GABRIE±A LEITE IS NOT THE ON±Y SEx
WORkER WHO HAS TRIED TO EffECT CHANgE BY RUNNINg FOR PO±ITICA± OffiCE. MARIA
µPARECIDA ÍIEIRA ±OST A BID FOR ·ONgRESS IN ÊRAzI±, WHI±E JAqUE±INE MONTERO
WON A SEAT ON THE CITY COUNCI± IN ÉAINA, ´OmINICAN ¼EPUB±IC.
²Ex WORkER–±ED CAmPAIgNS FOR WORkER jUSTICE ARE A±± THE mORE REmARkAB±E
IN THE mIDST OF gOVERNmENTS’ ImP±EmENTATION OF ANTITRAffiCkINg PROgRAmS,
WHICH mOST OſtEN HAVE TAkEN THE FORm OF ANTI–SEx WORk CRACkDOWNS.
¶NDERSTOOD AS AN ExTREmE FORm OF ±ABOR ExP±OITATION, TRAffiCkINg INTO
FORCED ±ABOR IS NOTHINg NEW. ÊUT SINCE 2000 A±± gOVERNmENTS HAVE HAD
TO CONTEND WITH THE RO±E OF THE ¶NITED ²TATES AS WHAT THE ±EgA± SCHO±AR
JANIE ·HUANg DESCRIBES AS “g±OBA± SHERIff.” °ROUgH ITS ANNUA± REPORT
CARD (THE ¾RAffiCkINg ¹N ¸ERSONS—¾¹¸—¼EPORT) ON COUNTRIES’ EffORTS TO
figHT TRAffiCkINg, THE ¶NITED ²TATES ImPOSES NONHUmANITARIAN ECONOmIC
SANCTIONS ON COUNTRIES THAT RECEIVE A BAD gRADE IN THIS WIDE±Y CRITICIzED REPORT.
µS gOVERNmENTS HAVE SCRAmB±ED TO ImP±EmENT ANTITRAffiCkINg EffORTS,
SEx WORkERS THE WOR±D OVER HAVE BEEN REBRANDED AS TRAffiCkED PERSONS, EVEN
WHI±E THEY INSIST OTHERWISE. µROUND THE SAmE TImE THAT THE ¶NITED ²TATES
±AUNCHED ITS ¾¹¸ ¼EPORT, THE GEORgE È. ÊUSH ADmINISTRATION A±SO BEgAN
REqUIRINg ORgANIzATIONS THAT RECEIVE ¶.². gOVERNmENT FUNDS THROUgH
244 • ch a p t er t h i rt e e n
THE ¶.². ¾¹¸ ¼EPORT, ´OmINICAN WOmEN WHO ExPERIENCED A RANgE OF ExP±OI-
TATION—SOmE OF WHICH DID NOT APPEAR TO mEET THE STANDARD OF TRAffiCkINg—
WERE HASTI±Y SENT BACk TO THE IS±AND AS “TRAffiCkED PERSONS.”
²Ex WORkERS A±SO HAVE BEEN ABUSED AND ARRESTED IN ANTITRAffiCkINg RAIDS
DESIgNED TO “RESCUE” THEm. °OSE WHO CHOOSE WORk IN THE SEx SECTOR mAkE
C±EAR THAT THEIR ±ABOR IS NOT COERCED, BUT THESE ATTEmPTS TO “RESCUE” THEm ARE.
²UCH coercive rescues CAN ±EAD TO PO±ICE VIO±ENCE, RAPE, ExTORTION, INDEfiNITE
DETENTION, AND DEPORTATION. ¹NCREASED SURVEI±±ANCE DRIVES WORkERS TO kEEP A
±OW PROfi±E, THUS COmPROmISINg THEIR ABI±ITY TO VET C±IENTS AHEAD OF TImE AND
TO ACCESS HEA±TH SERVICES.
²Ex WORkERS IN LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN ±ONg HAVE BEEN ORgANIzED.
LOCA± ORgANIzATIONS THROUgHOUT SmA±± TOWNS AND BIg CITIES BRINg SEx WORkERS
TOgETHER. µTTENDINg THE fiRST NATIONA± mEETINg FOR SEx WORkER RIgHTS IN THE
´OmINICAN ¼EPUB±IC IN 1995, FOR ExAmP±E, ¹ WITNESSED WHAT WAS THEN UNFUR±-
INg THROUgHOUT LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN: WOmEN, mEN, AND TRANS-
gENDER PEOP±E IN THE SEx SECTOR WERE BUI±DINg A mOVEmENT. ²Ex WORkER
RIgHTS ACTIVISTS THROUgHOUT THE REgION WERE ExCHANgINg BEST PRACTICES
AND BUI±DINg WORkER POWER THROUgH NATIONA±-±EVE± mEETINgS. ²OON AſtER,
IN 1997, WORkERS jOINED FORCES AS ¼ED¾RA²Ex (¼ED DE MUjERES ¾RABAjADORAS
²ExUA±ES DE LATINOAméRICA Y ³± ·ARIBE) FOR THE fiRST REgIONA± mEETINg.
µN ESPECIA±±Y ACTIVE REgIONA± ORgANIzATION, ¼ED¾RA²Ex HAS mEmBER ORgANI-
zATIONS IN SIxTEEN COUNTRIES, SENDS REPRESENTATIVES TO INTERNATIONA± CONFER-
ENCES, AND WORkS ON A HOST OF CAmPAIgNS TO INCREASE WORkER EmPOWERmENT.
¹N AN INTERVIEW WITH THE ¹NTERNATIONA± »RgANIzATION FOR MIgRATION, ³±ENA
¼EYNAgA, ¼ED¾RA²Ex’S ExECUTIVE SECRETARY, COUNTERED THOSE WHO TRY TO SPEAk
FOR THEm: “²Ex WORkERS ARE NOT PART OF THE PROB±Em, WE ARE PART OF THE
SO±UTION.”
ÈITH SCARCE FUNDINg, ±OW ±ITERACY RATES, AND CORRUPT—AND OſtEN ABUSIVE—
±OCA± PO±ICE, LATIN µmERICAN AND ·ARIBBEAN SEx WORkERS HAVE HAD TO fiND A
WAY TO kEEP THEIR CO±±EAgUES SAFE AND kNOW±EDgEAB±E ABOUT THEIR RIgHTS.
·ONSEqUENT±Y, SINCE THE EAR±Y 1990S, SEx WORkER ORgANIzATIONS HAVE BEEN PER-
FECTINg ±OW-COST AND EffECTIVE PEER-TO-PEER OUTREACH TO “HARD TO REACH” POPU-
±ATIONS. ²Ex WORkERS IN LATIN µmERICA WERE AmONg SOmE OF THE fiRST PEER
246 • ch a p t er t h i rt e e n
navi¿atin¿ seôual econoÇies:
perforÇance as labor
ÈHI±E SEx WORkER COmmUNITIES figHT FOR THEIR RIgHTS, THEY A±SO ARE TRYINg TO
EARN A ±IVINg. ÈORkERS mAY SEEk TO DEVE±OP RE±ATIONSHIPS THAT ARE ±ONg TERm
A±ONgSIDE ONE-TImE PAID ENCOUNTERS. °ESE ±ONg-TERm RE±ATIONSHIPS CAN BRINg
A±± kINDS OF mATERIA± gOODS AND CASH INTO THE HOUSEHO±D. MANY SEx WORkERS
TRY TO DEVE±OP AT ±EAST ONE ONgOINg ±OCA± TRANSACTIONA± RE±ATIONSHIP SINCE THESE
C±IENTS/±OVERS CAN HE±P PAY THE RENT OR CHI±DREN’S SCHOO± FEES WHEN mONEY IS
TIgHT.
½OT A±± C±IENTS ARE ±OCA±. ¸ARTS OF LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN HAVE
BECOmE DESTINATIONS FOR INTERNATIONA± TOURISTS SEEkINg PAID SExUA± ENCOUN-
TERS. ´IVERSIFYINg C±IENTE±E AmONg ±OCA±S AND FOREIgN TOURISTS CAN SECURE
AgAINST ECONOmIC CRISES THAT CUT INTO ±OCA± C±IENTS’ PURCHASINg POWER OR THE
VAgARIES OF ±OW TOURIST SEASONS. ½OT qUITE ±OVERS, NOT qUITE C±IENTS, THE FOREIgN-
ERS INVO±VED IN THESE RE±ATIONSHIPS ARE NOT EASI±Y PIgEONHO±ED. °E TERm “SEx
TOURIST,” FOR ExAmP±E, ImP±IES SOmE kIND OF fixED CATEgORY THAT INVO±VES P±AN-
NINg AND INTENTIONA±ITY. µND THE TERm “SEx TOURISm” FAI±S TO CAPTURE THE WIDE
RANgE OF CONTExTS IN WHICH TRAVE±ERS ENgAgE IN TRANSACTIONA± SExUA± ENCOUN-
TERS. “²Ex TOURISm” CAN BE P±ANNED (AND EVEN PREPAID) BUT A±SO AN ON-THE-flY
DECISION. ³COTOURISm, ROOTS TOURISm, AND “gAY TOURISm” A±SO BRINg FOREIgN
TOURISTS TO LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN. ¾OURISTS IN THESE kINDS OF
ExCHANgES mAY ImAgINE A SHARED “SO±IDARITY” THROUgH RACIA±/ETHNIC OR SExUA±
IDENTITY. °US (ASSUmED) SAmENESS—OR DIffERENCE—CAN BE WHAT TOURISTS SEEk
AND ±OCA±S PERFORm. °E SEx SECTOR INVO±VES A RANgE OF TRANSACTIONS BETWEEN A
RANgE OF ACTORS WHOSE gENDER, SExUA±, RACIA±, ETHNIC, AND C±ASS IDENTITIES—AND
NATIONA±ITY AND ACCESS TO VISAS TO TRAVE±—SHAPE DESIRE, POWER, AND CONTRO±. ¹T
CAN BE WI±D±Y ±UCRATIVE, OR BARE±Y A±±OW WORkERS TO gET BY. ´IffERENT SETTINgS
AffORD DIffERENT DEgREES OF WORkER CONTRO±. »NE COmmONA±ITY ACROSS THIS
BROAD ±ABOR SECTOR, HOWEVER, IS THE RO±E OF PERFORmANCE.
µ±± kINDS OF ASSUmPTIONS ARE IN P±AY WHEN INDIVIDUA±S TRAVE± TO PAY FOR
SExUA± ENCOUNTERS—WHEN THEY COU±D jUST AS WE±± PURCHASE SExUA± ExPERIENCES
AT HOmE. ÈITH A HOST OF WEBSITES PERPETUATINg STEREOTYPES OF LATIN µmERICAN
AND ·ARIBBEAN SEx WORkERS AS “HOT” AND “fiERY,” FOREIgN TOURISTS mAY ImAgINE
P±ACES IN LATIN µmERICA AS OffERINg HYPERSExUA± AND, OſtEN, RACIA±IzED BODIES.
¹T IS NOT UNCOmmON FOR FOREIgN TOURISTS TO ASSOCIATE gREATER SExUA± PROfiCIENCY
WITH A PERSON’S SkIN CO±OR AS WE±± AS WITH TROPICA± C±ImATES. »NE WHITE GERmAN
TOURIST WHO HAD BEEN PAYINg FOR SEx EVERY NIgHT OF HIS VACATION TO±D mE
248 • ch a p t er t h i rt e e n
BE mEASURED. µCTIONS, HOWEVER, CAN REVEA± DEgREES OF COmmITmENT. ²Ex WORk-
ERS COACH ONE ANOTHER ON TECHNIqUES TO ±ImIT TImE—AND ±ABOR—WITH C±IENTS.
°OSE WHO CAN AffORD TO DEC±INE C±IENTS REFUSE TO WORk WITH ANYONE WHO mAY
BE DRUNk, RUDE, OR DIRTY OR WHO DO NOT AgREE TO THEIR TERmS (FEE, CONDOm USE,
AND P±ACE FOR THE ENCOUNTER). µND C±IENTS, OF COURSE, CAN STOP RETURNINg—AND
SENDINg gIſtS AND mONEY—AT ANY TImE.
´ESPITE C±IENTS’ CONTRO± OVER PAYmENT AND gIſt gIVINg, SEx WORkERS work AT
BUI±DINg THEm INTO THEIR SExUA± AND AffECTIVE NETWORkS. ÈITH A THIN OR NON-
ExISTENT SOCIA± SAFETY NET IN mOST OF LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN, THESE
RE±ATIONSHIPS CAN SUPP±Y FORmS OF SECURITY THAT THE STATE DOES NOT. ¹N HIS
RESEARCH WITH mA±E SEx WORkERS IN ÊRAzI±, THE ANTHROPO±OgIST GREgORY
MITCHE±± mET FOREIgN mA±E ±OVERS/C±IENTS WHO WERE TA±kED ABOUT AS “UNC±ES”
AND “gODFATHERS.” ÓOUNg mA±E ÊRAzI±IAN SEx WORkERS (SOmE OF WHOm WERE
mARRIED TO WOmEN AND DID NOT IDENTIFY AS gAY) BUI±T THESE NEW qUEER kIN
NETWORkS BY DRAWINg ON TRADITIONA± NOTIONS OF ÊRAzI±IAN kINSHIP. µS “gODFA-
THER gRINgOS” ATTEND BAPTISmS AND OTHER FAmI±Y-ORIENTED EVENTS, TRANSACTIONA±
SExUA± RE±ATIONSHIPS THAT OſtEN REmAIN OffSTAgE BECOmE VISIBI±IzED. ëUEER SEx
TOURISm AND THE TRANSNATIONA± kIN IT PRODUCES A±±OW NEW NOTIONS OF FAmI±Y TO
BE VERY mUCH ON STAgE AND IN SO DOINg RECONfigURES AND SUBVERTS TRADITIONA±
UNDERSTANDINgS OF mASCU±INITY, gENDER RO±ES, AND FAmI±Y STRUCTURE.
°IS TWIST ON TRADITIONA± kINSHIP HAS CONSEqUENCES NOT ON±Y FOR SEx WORk-
ERS BUT A±SO FOR C±IENTS. °EY TOO PUT work INTO BUI±DINg AND mAINTAININg
THESE RE±ATIONSHIPS. °EY WI±±INg±Y ENTER TERRITORY FAR FROm THE BEDROOm; AſtER
A±±, THEY COU±D PAY FOR SEx AT HOmE. ³VEN THOUgH IT CAN BE WORk TO mAINTAIN
THESE ±ONg-DISTANCE RE±ATIONSHIPS, THE PAYOff mAY ExTEND BEYOND ImmEDIATE
P±EASURES. ºOR THE FOREIgN ±OVERS, THERE mAY BE THE BENEfiTS OF A SENSE OF
BE±ONgINg THAT COmES WITH FEE±INg A PART OF TWO SPACES—AND TWO FAmI±IES.
ÈHI±E LATIN µmERICAN AND ·ARIBBEAN PARTNERS ARE NOT INCORPORATED IN THEIR
FOREIgN ±OVERS’ ±IVES BACk HOmE, THE FOREIgN PARTNERS CAN ENjOY A±± THE AffECTIVE
jOYS THAT ACCOmPANY “BEINg FAmI±Y.”
ÉOWEVER ±ONg C±IENTS’ gENEROSITY ±ASTS IS UP TO THEm. °EY CAN—AND DO—
TURN Off THE SPIgOT ON A WHIm. ºOR THIS REASON, AgINg SEx WORkERS TRY TO SECURE
INVESTmENTS—IN jEWE±RY, THEIR HOmES, AND THEIR CHI±DREN’S EDUCATION.
»B±IgATINg A C±IENT BY ASkINg HIm TO BE A gODFATHER IS ONE mORE WAY TO SECURE
A STREAm OF mONEY FOR ONE’S CHI±D. ²Ex WORkERS, THUS, mIgHT BUI±D ±ONg-TERm
SAFETY NETS OUT OF A COmBINATION OF ±OCA± AND FOREIgN C±IENTS WITH WHOm THEIR
RE±ATIONSHIPS mAY INVO±VE EmOTION AND CARE.
³VERY DAY SEx WORkERS IN LATIN µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN UNDERTAkE CREATIVE
STRATEgIES TO STAY SAFE, mAkE A ±IVINg, AND POSSIB±Y CRAſt ±ONg-TERm mOBI±ITY
STRATEgIES. °EY DO SO WHI±E A±SO DEmANDINg THEIR RIgHTS AND A SEAT AT PO±ICY-
SETTINg TAB±ES. °EY HAVE CA±±ED FOR PO±ICIES THAT DECRImINA±IzE SEx WORk AND
DISENTANg±E SEx WORk FROm TRAffiCkINg. °EIR ACTIVISm AND kNOW±EDgE—
WHETHER ON THE RUNWAY, IN THE STREETS, OR AT INTERNATIONA± CONFERENCES—HAVE
±AUNCHED PIONEERINg HARm-REDUCTION PROgRAmS, REDUCED É¹Í INFECTIONS, AND
INSPIRED OTHER mOVEmENT BUI±DERS AROUND THE WOR±D. °EY OſtEN PAY DEAR±Y FOR
SPEAkINg OUT. ¹N THE fi±m A Kiss for Gabriela GABRIE±A LEITE ExP±AINS WHY SUCH
RISkS ARE WORTH IT: “ÓOU DON’T mAkE ANY mOVEmENT HIDINg UNDER THE TAB±E.”
250 • ch a p t er t h i rt e e n
Family Adjustments
Renato Rosaldo
* °ESE PAPERS HAVE NOTHINg IN THEm. ¹N ²PANISH A SHEET OF PAPER IS A papel, BUT A NEWSPAPER
IS A periódico.
252
Ajustes Familiares
Renato Rosaldo
253
ABOUT HIS gRANDmOTHER. MY mOTHER SAYS
HE’S SAID THAT SINCE CO±±EgE.
254
MI mADRE DICE qUE HA DICHO ESO
DESDE qUE ASISTIó A ±A UNIVERSIDAD.
255
f ou r t e e n
256
fi¿ure 14.1. ¹TEmS FOR SA±E IN A ÉAVANA TOURIST mARkET. ¸HOTO BY º±ORENCE ³. ÊABB.
°ESE ARE ACCOmPANIED BY TRAVE± NARRATIVES, AND IF THE TRAVE±ER HAS BEEN DAR-
INg ENOUgH TO ±EAVE THE FO±D OF OTHER TOURISTS AND mAkE mORE mEANINgFU±
CONNECTIONS WITH THOSE ±OCA±S ENCOUNTERED, THIS mAY PROVE PARTICU±AR±Y RICH
mATERIA± FOR BRAggINg RIgHTS. µmONg A CERTAIN kIND OF TRAVE±ERS, SUCH BRUSHES
WITH ±OCA± CU±TURE mAY INC±UDE INTImATE AND AmOROUS RE±ATIONS OR DARINg
ENTANg±EmENTS WITH ADVENTUROUS INDIVIDUA±S ONE WOU±D NOT mEET BACk HOmE.
»F COURSE, mANY OTHERS mIgHT RETURN FROm A PERIOD OF TRAVE± WITH A NEW
UNDERSTANDINg OF THE P±ACE VISITED, A BETTER APPRECIATION FOR ITS PEOP±ES AND
CU±TURES, AND A SENSE OF THE VA±UE OF FOREIgN ExPERIENCE IN BRINgINg TOgETHER
HUmANITY FROm DISTANT SHORES. µT ITS BEST, TRAVE± mAY CONTRIBUTE TO OUR g±OBA±
CONSCIOUSNESS AND OPENNESS TO ±EARNINg OTHER WAYS OF BEINg IN THE WOR±D. ¹F ¹
EmPHASIzE IN THIS CHAPTER THE FREqUENT mISUNDERSTANDINgS THAT TRAVE±ERS TAkE
AWAY FROm THEIR ExPERIENCES IN LATIN µmERICA, IT IS TO mAkE A CASE FOR RECOg-
NIzINg AND OVERCOmINg OUR OWN mISPERCEPTIONS, WHICH ARE COmmON±Y BASED
ON THE WIDE±Y HE±D ASSUmPTIONS WE HAVE ABOUT LATIN µmERICA AND THE
·ARIBBEAN.
µS WE CONSIDER WHAT TRAVE±ERS TO LATIN µmERICA PAST AND PRESENT ANTICIPATE
AND DESIRE IN HEADINg ²OUTH, WE WI±± SEE THAT THEIR ASSUmPTIONS mAY ±EAD TO
SOmEWHAT PROB±EmATIC TRAVE± ACCOUNTS AND A ±IkE±IHOOD OF REINFORCINg STERE-
OTYPED NOTIONS OF DIffERENCE BETWEEN “US” AND “THEm,” ½ORTH AND ²OUTH.
Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n à r av el • 257
²UCH mISPERCEPTIONS CAN REINFORCE THE DURAB±E INEqUA±ITIES BETWEEN OUR
REgIONS IN THE HEmISPHERE. ÊEFORE CONC±UDINg, ¹ COmmENT ON SOmE AUSPICIOUS
SIgNS THAT PEOP±E-TO-PEOP±E TOURISm CAN SERVE TO CHA±±ENgE THE DUSTY NOTIONS
OF CU±TURA± DIffERENCE AND THE “NATURA±” ORDER OF THINgS. ²OmE OF WHAT ¹ OffER
HERE WOU±D fiND PARA±±E±S IN TRAVE± TO OTHER WOR±D REgIONS, BUT ¹ HIgH±IgHT THE
SPECIfiC SORTS OF ExPERIENCES THAT EmERgE FROm TOURISm IN LATIN µmERICA AND
THE ·ARIBBEAN, ESPECIA±±Y AmONg TRAVE±ERS FROm THE ¶NITED ²TATES.
Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n à r av el • 259
fi¿ure 14.2. ´ANCER PERFORmINg AT THE
¾ROPICANA NIgHTC±UB IN ÉAVANA. ¸HOTO
BY º±ORENCE ³. ÊABB.
ÉEmINgWAY BARS, WHERE THE WRITER CONSUmED HIS FAmED DAIqUIRIS AND mOjI-
TOS DURINg THE 1940S AND 1950S. µ±± OF THIS CONSPIRES TO TRANSPORT THE TRAVE±ER
TO ANOTHER TImE, EVEN IF ÉAVANA’S PRESENT IS VERY mUCH A PRODUCT OF ITS PAST
AND NOT SImP±Y A RESIDUE OF IT. ·UBA’S POST-²OVIET ECONOmIC CRISIS OF THE 1990S
HAS mARkED THE PRESENT PERIOD jUST AS mUCH AS THE PREREVO±UTIONARY ±ICEN-
TIOUSNESS OF THE ¾ROPICANA NIgHTC±UB, THOUgH IT IS THE ±ATTER THAT mORE TOURISTS
WISH TO DISCOVER ON A TRIP TO ÉAVANA.
µ VERY DIffERENT C±ASS OF TRAVE±ERS OPTS FOR WHAT HAS BEEN CA±±ED ExPERIENTIA±
TOURISm IN THE HIgH µNDEAN COmmUNITIES ±IkE ÍICOS, ¸ERU, YET THEY TOO ARE
ATTRACTED BY THE NOTION THAT THEY WI±± gET TO kNOW A P±ACE THAT “TImE FORgOT”
AND THAT IS UNmARRED BY mODERN CU±TURA± AND ECONOmIC DEVE±OPmENT. °AT
AgRICU±TURA± COmmUNITY, WHICH HAS BEEN OF kEEN INTEREST TO SOCIA± SCIENTISTS
SINCE THE TImE WHEN IT WAS A HACIENDA, HAS RECENT±Y ±AUNCHED A SmA±± TOURISm
PROjECT TO DRAW VISITORS, mANY OF THEm YOUNg AND IDEA±ISTIC, WHO WANT TO
ExPERIENCE THE “AUTHENTICITY” OF µNDEAN TRADITIONA± ±IFE C±OSE UP OVER THE
COURSE OF SEVERA± DAYS. µRRIVINg IN SmA±± gROUPS, THEY ARE SHOWN THE COm-
mUNITY’S ·ASA DE ±OS µBUE±OS (±ITERA±±Y, “gRANDPARENTS’ HOUSE”), A ONE-ROOm
HISTORY mUSEUm OF PHOTOgRAPHS AND OTHER DOCUmENTS OF SEVERA± CENTURIES OF
ÍICOS’S PAST, HIgH±IgHTINg THE PERIOD FROm THE 1950S WHEN ·ORNE±± ¶NIVERSITY
±AUNCHED A DECADE-±ONg PROjECT IN APP±IED ANTHROPO±OgY.
¾ODAY’S RESIDENTS HAVE CONTINUED TO SEEk “PROgRESS” FOR THE COmmUNITY, IN
PART BY RE-CREATINg THE PAST FOR ITS VISITORS. GUESTS STAY IN ±ODgES BUI±T NExT
DOOR TO THEIR HOSTS AND ARE INVITED TO jOIN THE FAmI±IES IN PREPARINg AND EATINg
mEA±S, WORkINg ON THE ±AND, AND PARTICIPATINg IN OTHER ACTIVITIES, SUCH AS A
BAPTISm OR A WEDDINg (AS ¹ DID DURINg A RECENT VISIT THERE). ÉOSTS mAkE A POINT
OF TA±kINg TO THEIR gUESTS ABOUT THE ENDURINg TRADITIONS THAT gIVE mEANINg TO
THEIR ±IVES, PERFORmINg RITUA±S WITH COCA ±EAVES OR SPEAkINg REVERENT±Y ABOUT
THE mOUNTAIN gODS. ¹F THEIR OWN mODEST HOUSES NOW HAVE E±ECTRICITY A±±OWINg
THEm TO ENjOY ¾ÍS, RADIOS, AND OTHER mODERN CONVENIENCES, THIS IS NOT mEN-
TIONED IN THEIR NARRATIVES OF TRADITIONA± ±IFEWAYS. ¹NDEED, A PROmOTIONA± BRO-
CHURE FOR ExPERIENTIA± TOURISm IN ÍICOS STATES THAT “TO gET ACqUAINTED WITH
P±ACES WHERE PEOP±E ONCE ±IVED IN ANCIENT CIVI±IzATIONS AND TO SHARE A FEW DAYS
OF THEIR DAI±Y ±IVES, A±± THIS WI±± HE±P YOU UNDERSTAND THIS PART OF THE WOR±D’S
RICHNESS, WHICH ONE NEVER ImAgINED ExISTED FAR AWAY FROm THE CITIES” (ÊABB
2011: 87). ¹T IS NO WONDER THEN IF TRAVE±ERS COmE AWAY WITH A SENSE THAT THEY
HAVE PARTICIPATED IN CU±TURES THAT HAVE BEEN PRESERVED IN TImE.
ÈE mIgHT ASk WHICH CAmE fiRST, TOURISTS’ ExPECTATIONS OF fiNDINg ±ANDS
±OCkED IN TImE OR THEIR HOSTS’ DESIRE TO OffER SOmE CONfiRmATION THAT THIS IS IN
FACT WHAT THEY HAVE TO OffER. °E COmmODIfiCATION OF CU±TURA± DIffERENCE AND
Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n à r av el • 261
EVEN CU±TURA± IDENTITY—IT IS OſtEN ICONIC PEASANTS OR mARkET WOmEN IN CO±OR-
FU± SETTINgS WHO SERVE TO SE±± A DESTINATION—IS A PHENOmENON THAT IS WIDE-
SPREAD TODAY. °ERE IS IN FACT A mUTUA± COmP±ICITY IN SUCH PERFORmANCES AND
CONSUmPTION OF AgE-O±D TRADITION IN P±ACES THAT mAY ACTUA±±Y BE VERY mUCH
ON THE mOVE AS ±OCA± RESIDENTS STRIVE TO BETTER THEIR ±IVES WITH THE AmENITIES
THEY SEE AROUND THEm IN THE WIDER SOCIETY, IN THE mEDIA, AND SO ON. ¹F ±OCA±
HOSTS P±AY TO THE ROmANTIC DESIRES OF THEIR VISITORS FOR “AUTHENTIC ExPERIENCE,”
IT mAY BE OUT OF CU±TURA± PRIDE or OUT OF A NEED TO EARN A ±IVE±IHOOD IN ORDER TO
SEND THEIR CHI±DREN TO SCHOO± SO THAT THEY mAY BE PREPARED FOR EmP±OYmENT
OUTSIDE THE COmmUNITY (AND SOmETImES BOTH).
ÈHAT FUE±S THIS ROUTE TO ECONOmIC DEVE±OPmENT, HOWEVER, mAY WE±± BE THE
SORT OF “ImPERIA±IST NOSTA±gIA” THAT THE ANTHROPO±OgIST ¼ENATO ¼OSA±DO fi NDS
IN THE ENCOUNTERS OF NORTHERNERS WITH THEIR CU±TURA± COUNTERPARTS IN THE
G±OBA± ²OUTH. °ERE IS OſtEN A fiNE ±INE BETWEEN THE RESPECT FOR TRADITION THAT
VISITORS mAY SHARE WITH THEIR HOSTS AND A kIND OF THINkINg THAT CAN SERVE TO
CONSO±IDATE AND ±EgITImIzE DIffERENCES OF POWER. °US THE DANgER OF TOURISTS
TAkINg HOmE A SENSE THAT THEY HAVE TRU±Y COmE TO kNOW A mORE “PRImITIVE” OR
“SImP±ER” WAY OF ±IFE THAT THEY mAY INDU±gE IN FOR THE DURATION OF THEIR VISIT
AND THEN HAPPI±Y RETURN TO THEIR mORE STATE-OF-THE-ART, ¹NTERNET- AND CE±±
PHONE–DEPENDENT ±IVES.
Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n à r av el • 263
“Latin Americans are Äiendly and easygoing,
but they lack the drive for development”
¼E±ATED TO THE VIEW THAT LATIN µmERICAN NATIONS ARE INHERENT±Y UNSTAB±E IS
THE VIEW THAT LATIN µmERICANS THEmSE±VES ARE A FRIEND±Y AND AgREEAB±E PEOP±E
BUT NOT DRIVEN TOWARD THE mEASURES OF DEVE±OPmENT THAT ARE OſtEN TAkEN FOR
gRANTED IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES OR ³UROPE. °IS VIEW mAY STEm FROm THE HISTORY
OF CO±ONIA±ISm IN THE REgION AND THE UNFORTUNATE CONC±USION THAT IF LATIN
µmERICA REmAINED UNDERDEVE±OPED SO ±ONg IT WAS OWINg TO THE FAI±INgS OF THE
REgION’S OWN PEOP±ES. ·ONSIDER THE FAmI±IAR CARICATURE OF LATIN µmERICANS’
EASYgOINg ATTITUDES, SOmETImES NEgATIVE±Y REPRESENTED BY µmERICANS’ USE OF
THE TERm mañana. °E NOTION IS THAT LATIN µmERICANS ARE IN NO HURRY,
WHETHER TO RACE THROUgH A mEA± OR TO CARRY OUT A BUSINESS PROPOSITION. ÈHI±E
TOURISTS mIgHT ENjOY A S±OWED PACE DURINg A HO±IDAY, THEY BRIST±E AT THE
THOUgHT OF A PEOP±E WHO ARE NOT INTENT ON EmBRACINg “PROgRESS” AND BECOm-
INg mORE “DEVE±OPED”—THAT IS, BECOmINg THE WAY THOSE IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES
PRIDE THEmSE±VES ON BEINg.
°US, TOURISTS COmE TO ExPECT FRIEND±Y SERVICE WHEN THEY TRAVE± TO LATIN
µmERICA AND THE ·ARIBBEAN, BUT IF THE HOSPITA±ITY FA±±S SHORT IN THEIR ESTImA-
TION, THEY mAY SUggEST THAT A VENUE IS NOT UP TO THE ExPECTED STANDARDS OF
ACCOmmODATINg TOURISTS’ NEEDS. ¹N ·UBA, FOR ExAmP±E, WHI±E SERVICE IS gENER-
A±±Y FRIEND±Y, ¹ HAVE SEEN TOURISTS COmP±AIN THAT THE SOCIA±IST-ORIENTED ECON-
OmY HAS NOT TAUgHT WORkERS TO BE EffiCIENT AND TO AIm TO P±EASE. »F COURSE,
NOW THAT A±± ARE WAITINg FOR THE flOODgATES TO OPEN FOR ¶.². TRAVE± TO ·UBA, WE
mAY fiND THAT THERE WI±± SOON BE A NOSTA±gIA FOR THE DAYS BEFORE mASS TOURISm
mADE A TRIP TO THE IS±AND NATION INDISTINgUISHAB±E FROm TRAVE± E±SEWHERE IN
THE REgION. ¹N THE ·ARIBBEAN gENERA±±Y, TOURISm SCHO±ARS HAVE DISCUSSED WHAT
IS “BEHIND THE SmI±E” THAT IS ExPECTED OF A±± SERVICE PROVIDERS. ÈHI±E TOURISTS
mAY BE±IEVE THAT A gENUINE DESIRE TO SATISFY THE NEEDS OF THEIR VISITORS IS BEHIND
THE SmI±E, THE STORY IS A±WAYS mORE COmP±Ex. ·±EAR±Y, THE ECONOmIC mOTIVATION
TO HO±D ON TO NEEDED EmP±OYmENT IS A STRONg FORCE IN PRESENTINg A FRIEND±Y
TONE AT TOURIST VENUES, YET INTERVIEWS WITH WORkERS REVEA± gREATER AmBIVA±ENCE
ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE WORk REqUIRED AND THE BEHAVIORS OF SOmE TOURISTS
WHOSE ExPECTATIONS ABOUT ±OCA± SERVICE PROVIDERS mAY REST ON STEREOTYPED
IDEAS ABOUT THEm.
°E µNTIgUAN-BORN WRITER JAmAICA ÌINCAID, IN HER ExTENDED ESSAY TIT±ED A
Small Place, DISSECTS THE TOURISm ENCOUNTER FROm THE VANTAgE POINT OF A ±OCA±
OBSERVER. ²HE IS mOST TRENCHANT IN HER VIEW OF THE IgNORANT TRAVE±ER WHO SEES
Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n à r av el • 265
“Sensual pleasure is on prominent display in Latin America”
¹F TOURISTS jUDgE LATIN µmERICA WANTINg IN AmBITION OR ENTREPRENEURIA± SPIRIT,
THEY OſtEN fiND THE REgION TO HAVE AN ExCESS OF SENSUA±ITY AND SEDUCTION. °IS
HAS NOT ESCAPED THE ATTENTION OF TOURISm SCHO±ARS, WHOSE BOOk TIT±ES SO FRE-
qUENT±Y INVOkE THIS qUA±ITY, EVEN IF IRONICA±±Y: Negotiating Paradise, Peddling
Paradise, Pleasure Island, Caribbean Pleasure Industry, AND Take Me to My
Paradise ARE A FEW OF THESE TIT±ES.× ·ERTAIN±Y THE ·ARIBBEAN HAS RECEIVED A
gREAT DEA± OF SUCH ATTENTION, THOUgH ÊRAzI± AND PARTS OF ·ENTRA± µmERICA HAVE
A±SO CAPTURED A SHARE OF BOTH THE SCHO±AR±Y AND POPU±AR ImAgINATION. ÈHY
WOU±D THIS BE? ²URE±Y TROPICA± C±ImATE AND RICH NATURA± ENVIRONmENT ARE A
PART OF IT, A±ONg WITH AN UNDERSTANDAB±Y ±ANgUID PACE AS THE B±AzINg SUN BEATS
DOWN. ÊUT RECENT DECADES HAVE A±SO BROUgHT SEx TOURISm TO THE REgION, AS
TRAVE±ERS HAVE mADE THEIR WAY TO DESTINATIONS WHERE COmmERCIA±IzED SEx HAS
BECOmE A mEANS OF ±IVE±IHOOD FOR mANY WHO ±ACk A±TERNATIVES OR fiND THEm SO
POOR±Y PAID THAT THEY CANNOT SUPPORT THE NEEDS OF THEIR FAmI±IES.
¸REREVO±UTIONARY ÉAVANA WAS kNOWN AS A P±AYgROUND FOR THE ¶.². mI±ITARY
AND THE MAfiA, WITH gAmB±INg AND PROSTITUTION AP±ENTY. LARgE±Y E±ImINATED
BY THE REVO±UTIONARY gOVERNmENT AſtER 1959, SEx WORk RETURNED IN THE 1990S
WHEN ·UBA’S ECONOmY P±UmmETED AND THE NATION’S PEOP±E ±OOkED TO B±ACk
mARkET ACTIVITY ( jineterismo) OF ONE kIND AND ANOTHER. ¹N ½ICARAgUA AND
·UBA DURINg THE ±AST COUP±E OF DECADES mANY WOmEN AND SOmE mEN HAVE
BEEN SE±±INg SExUA± FAVORS TO BOTH NATIONA±S AND TOURISTS, SOmE OF WHOm COmE
ExP±ICIT±Y FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO fiND SEx AND SOmETImES ROmANCE ON THE
mARkET. ÊOTH SHORT- AND ±ONgER-TERm RE±ATIONSHIPS HAVE FORmED BETWEEN
TOURISTS AND ±OCA±S IN THIS WAY, AND WHETHER mONEY OR OTHER gIſtS ARE OffERED,
THERE IS OſtEN THE APPEARANCE IF NOT THE REA±ITY OF AffECTION BETWEEN THE PAR-
TIES. ¹N DIVERSE WAYS WE SEE INTImATE A±±IANCES THROUgHOUT THE ·ARIBBEAN AND
LATIN µmERICA, mANY INVO±VINg mA±E TOURISTS AND FEmA±E ±OCA±S, OTHERS INVO±V-
INg gAY mA±E TOURISTS AND ±OCA± mEN WHO AT ±EAST perform AS gAY SEx WORkERS,
AND STI±± OTHER CASES IN WHICH WOmEN TOURISTS COmE FOR AmOROUS ADVENTURES
WITH mEN, OffERINg THEm CASH OR OTHER gIſtS AND ENTERTAINmENT THEY COU±D NOT
OTHERWISE AffORD.
ÈHI±E LATIN µmERICAN NATIONS HAVE mADE EffORTS TO CURTAI± SEx TOURISm,
ESPECIA±±Y WHEN IT INVO±VES mINORS, THEY HAVE SOmETImES A±SO TURNED A B±IND
EYE TO THE PRACTICE, WHICH DOES AſtER A±± BRINg REVENUES. ºOR THE TOURISTS THEm-
SE±VES, THERE IS AT ±EAST SHORT-TERm gRATIfiCATION AND THE SENSE THAT THE REgION
OffERS mORE OPEN-mINDED ACCEPTANCE OF SExUA± INDU±gENCE. »R, IN THE CASE OF
Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n à r av el • 267
TOURISTS AND THEIR PARTNERS FREqUENT±Y COmE TOgETHER WITH VERY DIffERENT STAkES
AND THAT POWER DIffERENCES DEfiNE THE TERmS OF THESE INTImATE RE±ATIONS.
If you go. . .
¹N JANUARY 2015, THE New Ãork Times ¾RAVE± ²ECTION ISSUED ITS “52 ¸±ACES TO
GO IN 2015” (½EW ÓORk ¾ImES 2015). ¹N THE ±INEUP, THE LATIN µmERICAN AND
·ARIBBEAN REgION WAS WE±± REPRESENTED, WITH NINE SITES OffERED. °E ±ISTINg OF
RECOmmENDED DESTINATIONS AND THE BANNERS EAgER±Y DESCRIBINg WHY TO gO
THERE WERE REVEA±INg:
°IS SAmP±INg SUggESTS THAT LATIN µmERICA mAY HAVE SOmETHINg FOR EVERYONE,
WHETHER HISTORY BUffS, ±AID-BACk ±EISURE TOURISTS, NATURE ±OVERS, OR THOSE
SEEkINg TO BE THE fiRST TO gET TO P±ACES RECENT±Y Off-±ImITS TO TOURISm. ¸±ACES
ARE BRANDED AS THE NEW AND THE DIffERENT, THE jUST-RESTORED, THE Off-THE-
BEATEN-TRACk, OR THE ENVIRONmENTA±±Y CONSCIOUS, AND TRAVE±ERS fiND THEIR NICHE
AmONg AN INCREASINg±Y WIDE ARRAY OF OffERINgS.
ÊABB, º±ORENCE ³.
2011 °e Tourism Encounter: Fashioning Latin American Nations and Histories.
²TANFORD, ·µ: ²TANFORD ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
ÊERgER, ´INA, AND µNDREW GRANT ÈOOD
2010 Holiday in Mexico: Critical Reflections on Tourism and Tourist Encounters.
´URHAm, ½·: ´UkE ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
ÊOWmAN, ÌIRk ².
2013 Peddling Paradise: °e Politics of Tourism in Latin America. ÊOU±DER, ·»:
LYNNE ¼IENNER.
·OCkS, ·ATHERINE
2013 Tropical Whites: °e Rise of the Tourist South in the Americas. ¸HI±ADE±PHIA:
¶NIVERSITY OF ¸ENNSY±VANIA ¸RESS.
·OHEN, ·O±±EEN ÊA±±ERINO
2010 Take Me to My Paradise: Tourism and Nationalism in the British Æirgin
Islands. ½EW ÊRUNSWICk: ¼UTgERS ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
ÌINCAID, JAmAICA
1988 A Small Place. ½EW ÓORk: ºARRAR, ²TRAUS AND GIROUx.
LITT±E, ÈA±TER ³.
2004 Mayas in the Marketplace: Tourism, Globalization, and Cultural Identity.
µUSTIN: ¶NIVERSITY OF ¾ExAS ¸RESS.
MERRI±±, ´ENNIS
2009 Negotiating Paradise: U.S. Tourism and Empire in Twentieth-Century Latin
America. ·HAPE± ÉI±±: ¶NIVERSITY OF ½ORTH ·ARO±INA ¸RESS.
½EW ÓORk ¾ImES
2015 “52 ¸±ACES TO GO IN 2015.” New Ãork Times, JANUARY 11.
¸ADI±±A, MARk
2007 Caribbean Pleasure Industry: Tourism, Sexuality, and AIDS in the Domini-
can Republic. ·HICAgO: ¶NIVERSITY OF ·HICAgO ¸RESS.
²CHWARTz, ¼OSA±IE
1997 Pleasure Island: Tourism and Temptation in Cuba. LINCO±N: ¶NIVERSITY OF
½EBRASkA ¸RESS.
Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n à r av el • 269
note
¸ORTUgUESE AND ²PANISH ExP±ORATION AT THE END OF THE fiſtEENTH CENTURY ±ED TO
THE BUI±DINg OF THE WOR±D’S TWO ±ARgEST EmPIRES. ÈHI±E THE CONTEmPORARY
WORD globalization mIgHT NOT BE APPROPRIATE FOR THAT HISTORICA± mOmENT, EAR±Y
³UROPEAN ExPANSION PRODUCED AN UNDENIAB±Y g±OBA± ECONOmY OF PEOP±E,
gOODS, AND CU±TURE. ³UROPEANS BOUgHT S±AVES IN µFRICA, TOOk THEm TO THE
µmERICAS, AND BROUgHT mINERA±S AND AgRICU±TURA± COmmODITIES BACk TO
³UROPE IN A CYC±E THAT REVO±VED THROUgH AND AROUND THE µT±ANTIC. ÊRAzI± POS-
SESSED PRECIOUS STONES AND gO±D AND PRODUCED SUgAR AND OTHER AgRICU±TURA±
COmmODITIES THAT CIRC±ED THROUgHOUT THE WOR±D SYSTEm, OſtEN RETURNINg TO
ÊRAzI± IN A CHANgED FORm. ºOR THE PAST fiVE HUNDRED YEARS ÊRAzI±’S ECONOmY,
POPU±ATION, RACIA± COmPOSITION, AND CU±TURE HAVE BEEN CONSTANT±Y INTERACTINg
WITH THE REST OF THE g±OBE.
ºROm A REgION SPARSE±Y POPU±ATED BY NATIVES, ÊRAzI± HAS BECOmE HOmE TO
VAST CONTINgENTS OF PEOP±E FROm DIffERENT CONTINENTS AND A CENTRA± P±AYER IN
g±OBA± LATIN µmERICA. ¹N 1500, THE ¸ORTUgUESE ARRIVED IN A ±AND WITH BETWEEN
FOUR mI±±ION AND fiVE mI±±ION NATIVES. ·ONTACT WITH ³UROPEANS mEANT THE
NEAR-ExTERmINATION OF THIS POPU±ATION TO A POINT THAT IN THE 1950S SEVERA±
ANTHROPO±OgISTS FEARED IT WOU±D DISAPPEAR. °IS TREND HAS CHANgED, gRADUA±±Y,
AND INDIgENOUS POPU±ATIONS ARE gROWINg AS THEY REgAIN THEIR TRADITIONA±
±ANDS. ²INCE IT WAS CO±ONIzED, ÊRAzI± WAS SHAPED BY THE CONTRIBUTION OF PEOP±E
OF DIffERENT ORIgINS WHO HAD ARRIVED FROm AROUND THE g±OBE. ²±AVES WERE
BROUgHT FROm µFRICA. ¹mmIgRANTS CAmE FROm ³UROPE AND µSIA AND INC±UDED,
AmONg OTHERS, ¸ORTUgUESE, ²PANIARDS, GERmANS, ¹TA±IANS, ¶kRAINIANS,
LEBANESE, ³UROPEAN AND MIDD±E ³ASTERN JEWS, AND JAPANESE. ¾ODAY mANY
271
fi¿ure 15.1. ¸OSITIVIST TEmP±E IN ¸ORTO µ±EgRE, ÊRAzI±. ²OURCE: ÈIkImEDIA ·OmmONS.
°IS fi±E IS ±ICENSED UNDER THE ·REATIVE ·OmmONS µTTRIBUTION 2.0 GENERIC ±ICENSE. HTTPS://
COmmONS.WIkImEDIA.ORg/WIkI/ºI±E.¾EmP±O_POSITIVISTA.jPg.
272 • ch a p t er f i f t een
POSITIVISm WAS AN IDEO±OgY THAT FORESHADOWED mODERNITY AND jUSTIfiED
AUTHORITARIAN mEANS OF ATTAININg IT. °E POSITIVIST SO±DIER ºIE±D MARSHA±
·æNDIDO ¼ONDON, FOR ExAmP±E, DEDICATED HIS ±IFE TO THE INDIgENOUS CAUSE AND
URgED THAT INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES BE RESPECTED AND NOT E±ImINATED, EVEN THOUgH
EVENTUA±±Y THEY NEEDED, IN HIS VIEW, TO BE INTEgRATED INTO WHAT HE DEfi NED AS
“CIVI±IzATION.” ¸OSITIVISm THUS BECAmE A WAY FOR ÊRAzI± TO mODERNIzE ITSE±F IN
RE±ATION TO ³UROPE AND FOR ¹NDIANS TO “CIVI±IzE” THEmSE±VES IN RE±ATION TO
ÊRAzI±. ¼ONDON HAD A DEEP ImPACT ON g±OBA± IDEAS ABOUT NATURE AND INDIgE-
NOUS PEOP±E, ESPECIA±±Y AſtER °EODORE ¼OOSEVE±T jOINED HIm IN THE ExP±ORA-
TION OF THE µmAzON REgION OF THE “¼IVER OF ´OUBT” IN 1913 AND 1914. ¹NDEED,
¼OOSEVE±T FREqUENT±Y CIRCU±ATED ¼ONDON’S IDEAS IN SPEECHES BEFORE SUCH INTER-
NATIONA±±Y ImPORTANT ORgANIzATIONS AS THE ½ATIONA± GEOgRAPHIC ²OCIETY IN
ÈASHINgTON, ´·, AND THE ¼OYA± GEOgRAPHICA± ²OCIETY IN LONDON.
µNOTHER ImPORTANT NINETEENTH-CENTURY ºRENCH BE±IEF THAT CIRCU±ATED TO
AND FROm ÊRAzI± WAS SPIRITISm, WHICH PRESENTS ITSE±F AT ONCE AS A SCIENCE, A
PHI±OSOPHY, AND A RE±IgION. µCCORDINg TO ITS FOUNDER, µ±±AN ÌARDEC, SPIRITISm
WAS BASED ON THE RE±ATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE mATERIA± WOR±D AND THE INVISIB±E
WOR±D, THE ±ATTER BEINg INHABITED BY SPIRITS. LIkE POSITIVISm, SPIRITISm HAS AN
EVO±UTIONARY APPROACH WHERE SPIRITS PROgRESS AND TRAVE± TO HIgHER SPHERES, AND
IT TOO WAS mORE INflUENTIA± IN ÊRAzI± THAN IN ºRANCE. ²PIRITIST CENTERS CAN BE
FOUND IN mOST ÊRAzI±IAN CITIES, AND SEVERA± HAVE HOSPITA±S FOUNDED BY PHYSI-
CIANS COmmITTED TO THE IDEO±OgY. ¹NDEED, mANY mIDD±E-C±ASS INTE±±ECTUA±S AND
PO±ITICIANS ARE SPIRITISTS. ÓET SPIRITISm DID NOT HAVE A ONE-WAY TRAjECTORY.
¼ATHER, ÊRAzI±IANS HAVE mIgRATED TO ºRANCE TO OPEN CENTERS AS THE DOCTRINE
TRAVE±ED FROm ³UROPE TO LATIN µmERICA AND THEN BACk TO THE »±D ·ONTINENT.
²PIRITUA± AND SOCIA± EVO±UTION, mODERNITY AND PROgRESS, THESE HAVE A±± BEEN
CONCERNS OF ÊRAzI±IAN INTE±±ECTUA±S AS THEY HAVE mOVED AROUND THE WOR±D AND
ASkED A SERIES OF qUESTIONS: ·AN ÊRAzI± BECOmE A mODERN AND DEVE±OPED COUN-
TRY? ·AN CIVI±IzATION BE BUI±T IN THE TROPICS? µRE THE ÊRAzI±IAN PEOP±E READY
FOR THE COUNTRY’S CHA±±ENgES? ²HOU±D ÊRAzI± DEVE±OP ITS OWN CU±TURE OR TRY TO
EmU±ATE THAT OF mORE ADVANCED NATIONS? °ESE qUERIES HAVE A±WAYS BEEN
PRESENT IN ÊRAzI±IAN INTE±±ECTUA± ±IFE SINCE A±± DEA± WITH THE RO±E OF E±ITES AND
PO±ITICIANS, THE RE±ATION BETWEEN POPU±AR AND ERUDITE CU±TURE, AND THE P±ACE
OF µFRICA, µSIA, THE MIDD±E ³AST, AND ³UROPE IN ÊRAzI±.
·ONTEmP±ATINg ÊRAzI± AND DISCUSSINg THE VIABI±ITY OF A CIVI±IzATION IN THE
TROPICS ORIgINATED WHEN ÊRAzI± BECAmE A REPUB±IC IN 1889. µT THIS CRUCIA±
mOmENT, INTE±±ECTUA±S PERCEIVED TWO OBSTAC±ES TO THEIR CIVI±IzINg PROjECT—
274 • ch a p t er f i f t een
fi¿ure 15.2. ÊRAzI±IAN µmERICAN ·O±ONIzATION ²OCIETY ADVER-
TISEmENT PUB±ISHED IN Crisis (MARCH 1921). ·OURTESY OF THE ·ARTER
ÈOODSON ¸APERS, MANUSCRIPT, µRCHIVES, AND ¼ARE ÊOOkS LIBRARY,
³mORY ¶NIVERSITY.
reflections on race
MANY ÊRAzI±IANS BE±IEVE THAT CERTAIN IDEAS AND CU±TURA± PRACTICES APPROPRI-
ATED FROm ABROAD ARE “OUT OF P±ACE,” PARTICU±AR±Y IN REgARD TO PO±ITICA± PHI±OSO-
PHIES. ºOR INSTANCE, A±THOUgH THE ÊRAzI±IAN ECONOmY WAS BASED ON THE
WIDESPREAD ExP±OITATION OF S±AVE ±ABOR FOR THREE CENTURIES, PART OF THE ImPERIA±
PO±ITICA± E±ITE FOR mOST OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY ADHERED TO THE ±IBERA±
IDEAS CREATED IN AND APP±IED TO ³UROPE. °E ÊRAzI±IAN INTE±±ECTUA± ¼OBERTO
276 • ch a p t er f i f t een
ENCOURAgED THE mOST±Y SINg±E mA±E CO±ONISTS TO mIx WITH NATIVE AND µFRICAN
WOmEN. »VER CENTURIES, SUCH RE±ATIONSHIPS PRODUCED A mIxED POPU±ATION AND
A SOCIETY WITH FEWER qUA±mS ABOUT INTERRACIA± INTERCOURSE THAN THE OTHER
DOmINANT S±AVE SOCIETY OF THE µmERICAS, THE ¶NITED ²TATES. µS EUgENICS CAmE
TO THE FORE IN THE ±ATE NINETEENTH CENTURY, ³UROPEANS AND ½ORTH µmERICANS
±ED THE WAY IN CRITICIzINg RACIA± mIxTURE AND CODIFYINg RACIA± HIERARCHIES.
²OmE ÊRAzI±IAN INTE±±ECTUA±S RESPONDED TO THESE IDEAS BY ATTEmPTINg TO
“WHITEN” THE NATIONA± POPU±ATION THROUgH ImmIgRATION FROm ³UROPE. ÓET AT
THE HEIgHT OF SCIENTIfiC RACISm IN THE 1930S, THE SOCIO±OgIST GI±BERTO ºREYRE
PROPOSED A NEW RACIA± VISION THAT PROmOTED ÊRAzI± AS A TROPICA± CIVI±IzATION
WITH UNIqUE CHARACTERISTICS, SUCH AS mestiçagem (RACIA± mIxTURE) AND “RACIA±
DEmOCRACY.” ºREYRE WAS STRONg±Y INflUENCED BY ºRANz ÊOAS, THE FOUNDINg
FATHER OF µmERICAN ANTHROPO±OgY, UNDER WHOm HE DID HIS gRADUATE STUDIES AT
·O±UmBIA ¶NIVERSITY. ÊOAS HE±PED TO DEBUNk THE THEN-PREVAI±INg ImPORTANCE
OF RACE AS AN ExP±ANATION FOR DIffERENCES BETWEEN SOCIETIES. ¹NSTEAD, HE EmPHA-
SIzED CU±TURE AS THE mAIN ExP±ANATORY FACTOR.
¹N ºREYRE’S VISION, ÊRAzI±’S RACIA± mIxTURE WAS NOT A PROB±Em TO BE “WHIT-
ENED” BUT AN ADVANTAgE IN RE±ATION TO OTHER NATIONS. ÉE PRAISED THE WISDOm
OF THE ¸ORTUgUESE, WHO HAD BUI±T WHAT HE CA±±ED A “TROPICA± CIVI±IzATION” IN
ÊRAzI±. ºREYRE ARgUED THAT RACIA± mIxTURE WAS PERFECT±Y ADAPTED TO ÊRAzI±’S
ENVIRONmENT, mAkINg IT DIffiCU±T TO DEfiNE RACE IN THE BINARY WAY (WHITE/
B±ACk) THAT IT WAS IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ºREYRE THUS BECAmE THE FOUNDER OF
WHAT IS kNOWN AS “THE mYTH OF ÊRAzI±IAN RACIA± DEmOCRACY,” WHICH BECAmE AN
OffiCIA± IDEO±OgY OF THE COUNTRY FOR DECADES. °IS mID-TWENTIETH-CENTURY IDE-
O±OgY PERmEATES NOT ON±Y ASPECTS OF SOCIO±OgICA± THINkINg BUT A±SO ÊRAzI±IAN
POPU±AR THOUgHT. ¹NDEED, NUmEROUS ImPORTANT ½ORTH µmERICAN AND
³UROPEAN SOCIA± SCIENTISTS ARgUED THAT ÊRAzI±IAN RACIA± DEmOCRACY SHOU±D BE
ExPORTED TO THE REST OF THE WOR±D, A±THOUgH TODAY “RACIA± DEmOCRACY” IS SEEN
AS A mYTH, NOT A REA±ITY.
278 • ch a p t er f i f t een
RECEIVINg NEWCOmERS, OſtEN FROm POORER COUNTRIES ±IkE ÉAITI, ÊO±IVIA, ²ENEgA±,
AND GHANA, AmONg OTHERS.
³mIgRANTS CARRY THEIR CU±TURE WITH THEm. ÊRAzI±IANS THUS NOT ON±Y PRESERVE
WHAT THEY BE±IEVE IS TYPICA±±Y ÊRAzI±IAN, BUT THEY A±SO TEND TO DEVE±OP AND
mARkET “ÊRAzI±IAN CU±TURE” FOR THE REST OF THE POPU±ATION. °IS CAN BE SEEN IN
ÊRAzI±IAN RESTAURANTS AND mUSICA± SHOWS AROUND THE WOR±D AND IN HUgE
·ARNIVA± PARADES IN P±ACES ±IkE LONDON AND ²AN ºRANCISCO. ¹N mANY ½ORTH
µmERICAN AND ³UROPEAN CITIES CAPOEIRA, INITIA±±Y CREATED BY ÊRAzI±IAN S±AVES AS
A DANCE, HAS BECOmE VERY POPU±AR AND IS TAUgHT BY ÊRAzI±IAN mASTERS. ¹NDEED
CAPOEIRA AND “ÊRAzI±IAN jUjITSU” HAVE BECOmE WIDESPREAD IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES
AND ARE TODAY HIPSTER HOBBIES IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES, ³UROPE, AND JAPAN.
¹N THE PAST ÊRAzI± WAS OſtEN SEEN AS CONSTANT±Y ADOPTINg IDEAS AND mODES
OF ExPRESSION FROm THE NORTHERN HEmISPHERE AND OF COURSE CONTINUES TO
RECEIVE OUTSIDE INflUENCES IN THE SPHERE OF CINEmA AND mUSIC. µmONg THESE
ARE TE±EVISION AND mUSICA± PRODUCTS mANUFACTURED BY mU±TINATIONA± CORPORA-
TIONS AND ÉO±±YWOOD CINEmA WITH ITS POSITION OF WOR±D HEgEmONY. ÓET FOR
SOmE TImE ÊRAzI± HAS A±SO BEEN AN ExPORTER OF CU±TURA± AND SPIRITUA± gOODS.
ºOR ExAmP±E, ÊRAzI±IAN mUSIC HAS HAD A g±OBA± PRESENCE SINCE THE 1920S AND
1930S WHEN SAmBA SINgERS TOURED ºRANCE AND WHEN ·ARmEN MIRANDA WAS
ÉO±±YWOOD’S BEST-PAID FEmA±E SINgER AND ACTRESS. ÊOSSA NOVA, WHICH INTER-
ACTED STRONg±Y WITH µmERICAN mUSIC, WAS FROm ITS OUTSET IN THE 1960S A mUSIC
gENRE THAT HAD WOR±DWIDE FANS. ÓET WHEN ÊRAzI± STARTED TO PRODUCE ITS OWN
ROCk AND RO±± IN THE 1970S mANY CRITICS ATTACkED IT AS NOT BEINg “ÊRAzI±IAN
mUSIC.” ¾ODAY, HOWEVER, THERE ARE ÊRAzI±IAN ROCk BANDS THAT COmPOSE SONgS
IN ³Ng±ISH AND ARE SUCCESSFU± IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES AND ³UROPE. ÈHEN THE
mEmBERS OF THE ÊRAzI±IAN mETA± BAND ²EPU±TURA WENT TO A XAVANTE INDIgENOUS
VI±±AgE IN MATO GROSSO IN SEARCH OF THEIR CU±TURA± ORIgINS, THE RESU±TINg DISC
Roots BECAmE ONE OF THE BIggEST-SE±±INg A±BUmS IN ³UROPE IN jUST fiſtEEN DAYS,
SURPASSINg MICHAE± JACkSON AND MADONNA IN ÊRITAIN, AND SE±±INg mORE THAN
500,000 COPIES IN ON±Y TWO mONTHS. »N THE ONE HAND, THE “ROOTS” WERE NATIVE
TO ÊRAzI±, BUT ON THE OTHER, ³Ng±ISH WAS THE ±INgUA FRANCA USED IN ORDER TO
COmPETE IN A g±OBA±IzED mARkET.
´EfiNINg ÊRAzI±IAN CU±TURA± ExPRESSIONS HAS BECOmE mUCH mORE COmP±I-
CATED THAN IT USED TO BE. ´URINg THE POPU±IST PHASE OF ÊRAzI±’S HISTORY (1945–
64), WHAT CAmE FROm OUTSIDE WAS OſtEN SEEN AS FOREIgN AND THEREFORE ImPURE
AND DANgEROUS. °US, ·OCA-·O±A AND ÉO±±YWOOD fi±mS WERE USUA±±Y CITED AS
ExAmP±ES OF ½ORTH µmERICAN CU±TURA± ImPERIA±ISm, WHI±E SAmBA AND ·INEmA
½OVO (½EW ·INEmA), OF WHICH THE fi±mS DIRECTED BY G±AUBER ¼OCHA ARE THE
280 • ch a p t er f i f t een
µRgENTINA, COUNTRIES THAT gENERA±±Y SEE THEmSE±VES AS “³UROPEAN,” SECU±AR,
AND WITH ±ITT±E µFRICAN INflUENCE.
¸ENTECOSTA±ISm HAS gROWN AT AN ImPRESSIVE SPEED AND IS NOW THE SECOND-
±ARgEST RE±IgION IN ÊRAzI±. ¹T IS NOT ON±Y A RE±IgIOUS ENTERPRISE BUT A±SO A PO±ITI-
CA± AND ECONOmIC ONE. MANY PASTORS HAVE BEEN E±ECTED TO ·ONgRESS, WHERE
THEY FORm A gROUP THAT VOTES TOgETHER WHENEVER A RE±IgIOUS ISSUE IS AT STAkE
(ABORTION, RE±IgIOUS EDUCATION, ETC.). °E ¶NIVERSA± ·HURCH OF THE ÌINgDOm
OF GOD, ESTAB±ISHED IN ÊRAzI± IN 1977, HAS CHURCHES IN 116 OTHER COUNTRIES,
INC±UDINg IN ½ORTH µmERICA AND THE ³UROPEAN ¶NION, mOBI±IzINg mI±±IONS
OF FAITHFU± FO±±OWERS AND ±ARgE SUmS OF mONEY. ¹TS FOUNDER IS THE OWNER OF
¼EDE ¼ECORD, ÊRAzI±’S SECOND-±ARgEST TE±EVISION NETWORk.
µ±THOUgH ÊRAzI± DID NOT CREATE SOCCER, IT HAS mANAgED TO ESTAB±ISH ITSE±F AS
A COUNTRY WE±± kNOWN FOR THE PRACTICE OF THAT SPORT, WINNINg THE ÈOR±D ·UP
fiVE TImES. ÊRAzI± IS SUPPOSED TO HAVE A SPECIA± STY±E OF P±AYINg SOCCER, FAmOUS
FOR ITS ImPROVISATION AND A±mOST CHOREOgRAPHIC PERFORmANCES. ºOR YEARS
ÊRAzI± HAS BEEN AN ExPORTER OF SOCCER P±AYERS WHO P±AY mAIN±Y FOR ³UROPEAN
TEAmS. ÊRAzI± HOSTED THE SOCCER ÈOR±D ·UP IN 2014 AND WI±± HOST THE ²UmmER
»±YmPICS IN ¼IO DE JANEIRO IN 2016. ÉAVINg THESE TWO mAjOR INTERNATIONA±
SPORTS EVENTS IN ÊRAzI± mEANS TENS OF THOUSANDS OF VISITORS AND PROVIDES EVI-
DENCE THAT ÊRAzI± IS CAPAB±E OF ORgANIzINg mEgA EVENTS THAT ENTAI± INTERNA-
TIONA± TOURISm, AN AREA WHERE ÊRAzI± OſtEN FA±±S SHORT.
¹N FOREIgN RE±ATIONS ÊRAzI± HAS BEEN INVO±VED IN THE ¶NITED ½ATIONS mIS-
SION IN ÉAITI, IN TRAININg ½AmIBIA’S NAVY, AND IN OTHER ACTIVITIES ±IkE THE
CONflICT OVER ¹RANIAN NUC±EAR ARmS. ¼ECENT±Y, A ÊRAzI±IAN DIP±OmAT WAS E±ECTED
CHAIR OF THE ÈOR±D ¾RADE »RgANIzATION, A FORUm IN WHICH ÊRAzI± HAS BEEN
ACTINg TO ENSURE THAT THERE IS FAIR COmPETITION AS REgARDS ITS ExPORTS. ºOR YEARS,
ÊRAzI± HAS BEEN TRYINg TO OBTAIN A PERmANENT SEAT AT THE ¶NITED ½ATIONS
²ECURITY ·OUNCI± IN AN EffORT TO ESTAB±ISH ITSE±F AS A DIP±OmATIC ACTOR THAT IS
RECOgNIzED ACCORDINg TO ITS ECONOmIC AND PO±ITICA± ImPORTANCE.
new Çiddles
¹N ORDER TO BE A g±OBA± P±AYER, ÊRAzI± STI±± HAS TO FACE mANY CHA±±ENgES, INC±UD-
INg THE ISSUE OF SOCIA± jUSTICE. ÉISTORICA±±Y, ÊRAzI± HAS ±AggED BEHIND mOST
COUNTRIES IN TERmS OF INCOmE DISTRIBUTION. ¹N 1989, ITS GINI INDEx—WHICH
mEASURES A COUNTRY’S DEgREE OF INEqUA±ITY IN TERmS OF INCOmE (RANgINg FROm
0 TO 1, WITH 1 INDICATINg HIgH INEqUA±ITY)—WAS ONE OF THE WOR±D’S HIgHEST AT
282 • ch a p t er f i f t een
CHIEflY IN DURAB±E gOODS (APP±IANCES, E±ECTRONICS, AND FURNITURE), WHICH HAS
gROWN TWICE AS FAST AS THE OVERA±± mARkET AT 30 PERCENT PER YEAR SINCE 2005.
°E NEW mEmBERS OF ·±ASS · ARE COPIOUS±Y BUYINg FURNITURE AND APP±IANCES,
SUggESTINg THAT A CONSIDERAB±E SECTOR OF THE POPU±ATION NOW HAS ACCESS TO
gOODS THAT WERE PREVIOUS±Y RESTRICTED TO THE mIDD±E C±ASS. °E gOVERNmENT
PREDICTS THAT IN THE FUTURE ÊRAzI± WI±± BE mAIN±Y A mIDD±E-C±ASS COUNTRY.
paths of inclusion
284 • ch a p t er f i f t een
AROSE AS A mOVEmENT AgAINST BUS FARE INCREASES BUT RAPID±Y EVO±VED INTO DEmAND
FOR BETTER HEA±TH, BETTER EDUCATION, AND AN END TO CORRUPTION. °E mOVEmENT
SUggESTS THAT A PORTION OF THE POPU±ATION REPRESENTED BY YOUNg PEOP±E—
mEmBERS OF A gROUP WITH ACCESS TO mORE CONSUmER gOODS THAN THEIR PARENTS
HAD—NOW WANT SOmETHINg mORE. °ESE YOUNg PEOP±E DO NOT TRUST THE FORmA±
ORgANIzATIONS OF A REPRESENTATIVE DEmOCRACY: gOVERNmENT, PO±ITICA± PARTIES,
AND mAINSTREAm mEDIA. °ERE IS OF COURSE A ±INk BETWEEN THOSE PROTESTS AND
THE »CCUPY mOVEmENT AND µRAB ²PRINg THAT HAD OCCURRED IN OTHER COUNTRIES,
AND ±IkE THEm, THE ÊRAzI±IAN PROTESTS BECAmE INSPIRATIONA± IN OTHER PARTS OF THE
WOR±D. ÈITH THE INSTANT COmmUNICATION PROVIDED BY SOCIA± mEDIA THERE IS A
RECIPROCA± INflUENCE OF WHAT IS HAPPENINg IN DIffERENT P±ACES OF THE g±OBE.
ÊRAzI± HAS BECOmE HIgH±Y DIVERSIfiED, WITH THE INCREASINg EmERgENCE OF
FRESH SOCIA± P±AYERS WHO BUI±D NEW IDENTITIES AND DEmAND RECOgNITION AND
SPECIfiC RIgHTS. µS ÊRAzI± BECOmES ±ESS UNEqUA± AND mORE EDUCATED, mYRIAD
YOUNg PEOP±E ARE mAkINg C±AImS AND VOICINg THEIR DEmANDS. ¹F ÊRAzI± IS TO
BECOmE EVEN mORE g±OBA±, ITS ±EADERS AND CITIzENS HAVE TO mAkE IT WIDE±Y
INC±USIVE, NOT A NATION WHERE g±OBA± IDEAS OF RIgHTS OR EmP±OYmENT ARE ON±Y
FOR THOSE IN THE DOmINANT C±ASSES.
ºRY, ¸ETER
2000 “¸O±ITICS, ½ATIONA±ITY, AND THE MEANINgS OF ‘¼ACE’ IN ÊRAzI±.” Daedalus
129.2: 83–118.
LESSER, JEffREY
1999 Negotiating National Identity: Immigrants, Minorities, and the Struggle for
Ethnicity in Brazil. ´URHAm, ½·: ´UkE ¶NIVERSITY ¸RESS.
»±IVEN, ¼UBEN GEORgE, AND ¼OSANA ¸INHEIRO-MACHADO
2012 “ºROm ‘·OUNTRY OF THE ºUTURE’ TO ³mERgENT ·OUNTRY: ¸OPU±AR ·ONSUmP-
TION IN ÊRAzI±.” ¹N Consumer Culture in Latin America, ED. JOHN ²INC±AIR
AND µNNA ·RISTINA ¸ERTIERRA, 53–65. LONDON: ¸A±gRAVE MACmI±±AN.
²CHWARCz, LI±IA MORITz
1999 °e Spectacle of the Races: Scientists, Institutions and the Race Éuestion in
Brazil, 1870–1930. ½EW ÓORk: ÉI±± AND ÈANg.
²CHWARz, ¼OBERTO
1977 Ao vencedor as batatas. ²öO ¸AU±O: ´UAS ·IDADES.
Ïntroduction
288 • pa rt f i v e
SImP±IfiCATION AND ExP±OITATION, ON THE OTHER, CAN BE mURkY DESPITE EVEN THE
BEST INTENTIONS.
¹N THE SECOND DECADE OF THE TWENTY-fiRST CENTURY, mANY TAkE g±OBA± CON-
NECTIVITY FOR gRANTED, AND SOmE ARE ASkINg WHETHER EVER DENSER AND SPEEDIER
CONNECTIONS ARE THE PANACEA ONCE PROmISED. µRTISTS WITHIN THE CIRCUITS OF
g±OBA± LATIN µmERICAN ARE, NOT SURPRISINg±Y, WEIgHINg IN ON SUCH qUESTIONS.
»NE BEST-SE±±INg ExAmP±E IS THE E±ECTRIC AmBIVA±ENCE ABOUT THE “REflECTIVE AgE”
THAT ANImATES ·ANADA-BASED µRCADE ºIRE’S A±BUm Reflektor (2013). °E A±BUm
DRAWS HEAVI±Y ON RHYTHmIC STY±ES AND SPIRITUA± SYmBO±S FROm THE ·ARIBBEAN,
ESPECIA±±Y ÉAITI (THE NATIVE COUNTRY OF ONE OF THE BAND mEmBER’S PARENTS),
AND THE mUSIC VIDEO FOR THE SONg “µſtER±IFE” mASHES TOgETHER SCENES FROm
Black Orpheus (1959), A fi±m SET IN ¼IO DE JANEIRO’S ·ARNAVA± AND mADE BY THE
ºRENCH DIRECTOR MARCE± ·AmUS. ÈHETHER BORN IN THE REgION OR NOT, ARTISTS
±IkE µRCADE ºIRE CONTINUE TO SHAPE g±OBA± LATIN µmERICA THROUgH THE BUR-
gEONINg mARkETP±ACE FOR CREATIVE ImAgES, WORDS, AND SOUNDS THAT CAST g±OBA±
REflECTIONS.
Al fin me encuentro
con mi destino sudamericano.
—èor¿e luis bor¿es, “¸OEmA CONjETURA±” (1943)
291
STRESSINg INDIgENOUS mYTHS. ÈHAT THEY UNDERSTOOD BY “INDIgENOUS” WAS,
OBVIOUS±Y, OPEN TO DEBATE. ¹N µRgENTINA, THE COUNTRY’S IDENTITY COA±ESCED
AROUND gAUCHO ±ORE, WITH THE mEN ON HORSEBACk PROmINENT±Y REPRESENTED BY
THE ±ITERATURE OF ÉI±ARIO µSCASUBI, ÊENITO LYNCH, ÉI±ARIO DE± ·AmPO, ¼ICARDO
GþIRA±DES, AND, ESPECIA±±Y, JOSé ÉERNáNDEz’S EPIC POEm °e Gaucho Martín
Fierro (1872). ¹N THE COUNTRY, THEN AS NOW, THERE IS A DEBATE ON THE DIffERENCE
BETWEEN gaucho AND gauchesco ±ITERATURE. °E FORmER IS A BY-PRODUCT OF THE
gAUCHOS THEmSE±VES, RURA± COWBOYS WITH AN IDIOSYNCRATIC VIEWPOINT, WHEREAS
THE ±ATTER IS AN APPROPRIATION BY CITY DWE±±ERS OF THE gAUCHO STY±E. ÉERNáNDEz’S
POEm, IN SPITE OF ITS NATIONA± STATUS, IS gAUCHESCO IN THAT HE WAS NOT A gAUCHO
HImSE±F, mEANINg HIS CE±EBRATION OF THE BUCO±IC ±IFE OF gAUCHOS IS DERIVATIVE,
AN ImITATION AND NOT AN AUTHENTIC DEPICTION.
²ImI±AR±Y, IN MExICO, NATIONA± IDENTITY WAS BUI±T AROUND THE IDEA±IzED VIEW OF
THE mESTIzO, AS SHOWCASED IN THE WORkS OF JOSé ¼OSAS MORENO, ¹gNACIO MANUE±
µ±TAmIRANO, AND, PROmINENT±Y, JOSé JOAqUíN ºERNáNDEz DE LIzARDI’S NOVE± °e
Itching Parrot (1816). °E mESTIzO IS A HA±F-BREED, PART ABORIgINA± AND PART
³UROPEAN. °E WAR OF INDEPENDENCE PUSHED A±ONg THE CONCEPT THAT MExICO’S
IDENTITY WAS DEfiNED BY THIS HA±F-BREED, AND BY THE BEgINNINg OF THE TWENTIETH
CENTURY, JOSé ÍASCONCE±OS WAS AB±E TO BUI±D THE ESSENTIA±IST PHI±OSOPHY—IN HIS
BOOk °e Cosmic Race (1925)—THAT mestizaje WOU±D U±TImATE±Y DEfiNE NOT ON±Y
MExICAN CIVI±IzATION, BUT THE ENTIRE WOR±D POPU±ATION.
°ESE EffORTS WERE, FOR THE mOST PART, ±OCA±. ÈHAT WAS mANUFACTURED AT HOmE
STAYED AT HOmE BECAUSE LATIN µmERICA DID NOT REgISTER AS AN ENgINE OF CU±TURA±
ExPORTS. ¹NDEED, UP UNTI± ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹, THE REgION’S ±ITERATURE WAS mADE FOR INTER-
NA± CONSUmPTION. GIVEN THE ENORmOUS gEOgRAPHIC SPREAD AND THE ±ImITED mEANS
OF BOOk PRODUCTION, ±ITERARY DISTRIBUTION WAS PENURIOUS ACROSS THE CONTINENT,
WHICH mEANT THAT NATIONA± ±ITERATURES WERE DEfiNED BY THE ±OCA± AND A±mOST
ENTIRE±Y SE±F-CONTAINED. °E gENERATION OF WRITERS WHO BROkE THIS PATTERN, THE
fiRST TO BE READ OUTSIDE THE CONfiNES OF THEIR OWN COUNTRIES, WERE THE modernistas.
ÊETWEEN 1885 AND 1915, THIS CADRE OF AUTHORS FROm VARIOUS COUNTRIES BUI±T A DIS-
TINCT REgIONA± ±ITERATURE WITH ITS OWN ETHOS. ¼UBéN ´ARíO AND JOSé MARTí WERE
READ, IN NEWSPAPERS AND mAgAzINES AND TO A ±ESSER DEgREE IN BOOkS, NOT ON±Y AS
½ICARAgUAN OR ·UBAN BUT A±SO, SURPRISINg±Y, AS LATIN µmERICANS.
°EIR EffECT REACHED ON±Y SO FAR, THOUgH. µ CONTINENTA± AUDIENCE COA±ESCED
AROUND THE modernistas, AND, TO A ±ESSER ExTENT, THEY WERE EmBRACED IN ²PAIN
AſtER BEINg CE±EBRATED BY INTE±±ECTUA±S SUCH AS MIgUE± DE ¶NAmUNO AND JUAN
¼AmóN JIméNEz, WHO APP±AUDED THE FACT THAT VOICES FROm THE FORmER CO±ONIES
WERE fiNA±±Y fiNDINg THEIR P±ACE. ÓET, THAT A±mOST NO REACTION TOOk P±ACE E±SE-
292 • ch a p t er si ô t een
WHERE IN ³UROPE AND IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES—IN SPITE OF MARTí’S ExI±E IN º±ORIDA
AND ½EW ÓORk—EmPHASIzES THEIR ±ImITED SCOPE. °IS gENERATION WAS NOT READY
FOR g±OBA± STARDOm. ¹T WOU±D TAkE TImE FOR THEm TO BE SEEN EVEN AS PRECURSORS.
°E mISSINg TOO± THAT kEPT THEm AT BAY WAS TRANS±ATION. ÈHI±E THEY STRUg-
g±ED AgAINST TRITE ²PANISH mODE±S DATINg BACk TO THE ·OUNTER-¼EFORmATION AND
THE SA±VOS OF THE ²PANISH ³mPIRE AS IT ±OST CONTRO± OF THE µmERICAS THROUgHOUT
THE NINETEENTH CENTURY, THE modernistas WERE INFATUATED WITH ºRENCH AND
µmERICAN ±ITERATURES. °EY TRANS±ATED THEIR FAVORITE AUTHORS INTO ²PANISH THEm-
SE±VES, OR AT ±EAST ACTIVE±Y REflECTED ON THEIR SENSIBI±ITY AND OVERA±± ImPACT: ´ARíO
CHAmPIONED THE WORk OF THE ºRENCH WRITERS ¸AU± ÍER±AINE AND ÍICTOR ÉUgO,
JOSé MARíA ÉEREDIA TRANS±ATED ÈI±±IAm ·U±±EN ÊRYANT, AND MARTí PRAISED
ÈHITmAN. ÓET THE modernistas THEmSE±VES WOU±D NOT REACH OTHER ±ANgUAgES
(ºRENCH, ³Ng±ISH, GERmAN, ¹TA±IAN), AT ±EAST NOT CONSISTENT±Y, FOR DECADES.
ÊY THE 1940S, LATIN µmERICAN POP CU±TURE REVO±VED AROUND ranchera mOV-
IES mADE IN MExICO, WITH STARS ±IkE JORgE ½EgRETE, ´O±ORES DE± ¼íO, ¸EDRO
¹NFANTE, AND MARíA ºé±Ix. °EIR AUDIENCE REACHED THE ENTIRE ²PANISH-SPEAkINg
WOR±D, FROm ÊUENOS µIRES TO LOS µNgE±ES, AS WE±± AS THE ¹BERIAN ¸ENINSU±A.
²ImU±TANEOUS±Y, RADIO SERIA±S AND INCIPIENT telenovelas, PRODUCED IN MExICO,
¸ERU, AND µRgENTINA, BECAmE PROmOTERS OF A TRANSCONTINENTA± IDENTITY. °ESE
±OWBROW WORkS WERE FERVENT±Y CONSUmED BY A±± SOCIA± C±ASSES. °E BRIDgE WAS
THE ²PANISH ±ANgUAgE AND A SHARED SENSE OF HISTORY.
ºINA±±Y, SOmETHINg DRAmATIC TOOk P±ACE ON THE g±OBA± STAgE IN THE 1950S,
A±±OWINg WRITERS FROm VARIOUS PARTS OF LATIN µmERICA TO BE SEEN AS SPOkESPER-
SONS OF THEIR WOR±DS. ÊY BECOmINg COmmODITIES, THEY TRANSFORmED THEmSE±VES
INTO INTERNATIONA± CE±EBRITIES. µſtER ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹¹, THE ³UROPEAN NOVE±, ARgUA-
B±Y THE mOST POPU±AR OF A±± ±ITERARY gENRES AT THE TImE, APPEARED TO HAVE REACHED
A DEAD END. °E ATROCITIES COmmITTED ON ³UROPEAN BATT±EfiE±DS mADE THE CON-
TINENT SEEm ExHAUSTED, SE±F-POSSESSED, AND UNImAgINATIVE. ºIgURES ±IkE MARCE±
¸ROUST, ºRANz ÌAÿA, AND JAmES JOYCE PUB±ISHED WORkS THAT FE±T SUffOCATINg. µ±±
OF A SUDDEN, fiCTION NO ±ONgER SEEmED TO INVITE THE PUB±IC TO ESCAPE, TO DREAm
A±TERNATIVE UNIVERSES, BUT TO FEE± ENTRAPPED. ¹T WAS THEN THAT THE SO-CA±±ED °IRD
ÈOR±D EmERgED AS A FERTI±E ±ANDSCAPE. ºROm µFRICA TO THE ·ARIBBEAN, FROm µSIA
TO LATIN µmERICA, NEW kINDS OF NOVE±S OffERED VISTAS TO A±TERNATIVE REA±ITIES.
°IS IS THE VORTEx FROm WHICH ³± ÊOOm EmERgED. ¹T CANNOT TRU±Y BE
DESCRIBED AS A gENERATION, FOR ITS mEmBERS WERE BORN IN THE SPAN OF mORE THAN
TWO DECADES, BETWEEN 1914 AND 1936. ¾O SOmE ExTENT, IT SHOU±D NOT BE
DESCRIBED AS AN ExC±USIVE±Y AUTOCHTHONOUS PHENOmENON BECAUSE IT WAS IN
ÊARCE±ONA, IN THE OffiCES OF THE ±ITERARY AgENT ·ARmEN ÊA±CE±±S, WHERE THE
Ãh e Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n Åov el • 293
CONCERTED ENTERPRISE TOOk SHAPE. µſtER A±±, IT WAS ÊA±CE±±S WHO, SHREWD±Y REC-
OgNIzINg THE ARTISTIC TA±ENT OF ABOUT HA±F A DOzEN WRITERS, ORCHESTRATED THE
RE±EASE OF THEIR BOOkS THROUgH ²PANISH PUB±ISHERS EAgER TO fiND NEW AUDIENCES
ACROSS THE µT±ANTIC.
¹N mORE WAYS THAN ONE, ³± ÊOOm WAS AS mUCH AN OUTBURST OF TA±ENT AS IT
WAS AN EDITORIA± PHENOmENON. ¹NDEED, THE NAmE ITSE±F IS AN ³Ng±ISH-±ANgUAgE
±OANWORD THAT ±OOSE±Y EmU±ATES THE TRANSNATIONA± BONANzA OF COmPANIES ±IkE
³xxON AND ¶NITED ºRUIT THAT HAD mADE A FORTUNE IN LATIN µmERICA IN THE
fiRST HA±F OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY. ½EVER HAVINg FOUND mARkETS THAT WOU±D
mAkE BOOk DISTRIBUTION VIAB±E IN LATIN µmERICA COUNTRIES, ²PAIN fiNA±±Y REA±-
IzED A WAY TO mAkE THE BOOkS OF los boomistas AVAI±AB±E TO A mIDD±E C±ASS EAgER
TO DEfiNE ITSE±F WITHIN, AND BEYOND, NATIONA± BORDERS.
ÊA±CE±±S IS A PROVOCATIVE FOCA± POINT FOR REflECTINg ON A qUESTION ³± ÊOOm
POSED, A±BEIT INDIRECT±Y: ÈHAT ARE THE CONfiNES OF LATIN µmERICA? MIgHT
THERE TRU±Y BE SUCH A THINg AS A TRANSCONTINENTA± IDENTITY, THE E±USIVE DREAm OF
²ImóN ÊO±íVAR IN THE NINETEENTH CENTURY? °IS mA±±EAB±E, OſtEN ABUSED TERm
“LATIN µmERICA” IS USED TO REFER TO ANY NATION THAT DOESN’T ±IVE IN ³Ng±ISH (THE
¶NITED ²TATES, ·ANADA, ETC.), AND, DEPENDINg ON THE CIRCUmSTANCE, IT mIgHT
INC±UDE ÊRAzI± AS WE±± AS THE ºRANCOPHONE ·ARIBBEAN. ÓET ³± ÊOOm A±mOST
ExC±USIVE±Y CAmE FROm THE ²PANISH-SPEAkINg WOR±D. ³VEN JORgE µmADO, THE
ÊRAzI±IAN AUTHOR OF Dona Flor and Her Two Husbands (1976), SAID HE DIDN’T
qUITE fiT IN IT. ¹N FACT, ON±Y WHEN ³± ÊOOm BECAmE A mARkETINg TOO± ABROAD
DID HE AND OTHER ÊRAzI±IAN figURES SUCH AS JOöO GUImARöES ¼OSA, JOöO ¶BA±DO
¼IBEIRO, AND ½E±IDA ¸IñON BECOmE INC±UDED IN THE ±IST. °EIR BOOkS WERE A±SO
SAID TO HAVE ExOTIC E±EmENTS THAT mADE THEm PART OF THE SAmE AESTHETIC. ÊUT
THIS APPROACH CAmE AS AN AſtERTHOUgHT.
°E WRITERS OF ³± ÊOOm, mOST OF THEm COmINg FROm AN URBAN mIDD±E- AND
UPPER-mIDD±E C±ASS, WERE ±Eſt-±EANINg IN THEIR PO±ITICS. µ gENERATION BEFORE,
THE LATIN µmERICAN INTE±±IgENTSIA HAD BEEN PUSHED TO DEfiNE ITS VIEWS IN REAC-
TION TO THE ²PANISH-µmERICAN ÈAR OF 1898 AND THE EmERgENCE OF THE ¶NITED
²TATES AS A g±OBA± POWER. ºIgURES ±IkE ´ARíO AND MARTí OPEN±Y ExPRESSED THEm-
SE±VES AgAINST EmPIRE, fiRST TARgETINg ²PAIN, THEN THE ¶NITED ²TATES. ¾O A ±ARgE
ExTENT, THEIR SUCCESSORS TOOk THE SAmE mANT±E. °EY FOUgHT FOR SE±F-DETERmI-
NATION AND AgAINST FOREIgN INTERVENTION. °OSE VIEWS BECAmE A STAP±E OF THEIR
TImES THROUgH mANIFESTOS, INTERVIEWS, AND mEDIA APPEARANCES.
°E PO±ITICS OF ³± ÊOOm WERE THE OUTgROWTH OF FREE-mARkET PO±ICIES
BETWEEN ³UROPE AND LATIN µmERICA, PUT IN P±ACE IN THE 1960S IN ORDER TO
ExPAND mARkETS, INC±UDINg IN THE CU±TURA± REA±m. MANY COUNTRIES IN THE
294 • ch a p t er si ô t een
REgION AT THE TImE WERE UNDER DICTATORIA± REgImES, A mODE± THAT WOU±D REmAIN
IN P±ACE, mORE OR ±ESS CONSISTENT±Y, UNTI± THE 1980S. °ESE REgImES OſtEN
EmBRACED CENSORSHIP, FORBIDDINg THE PUB±ICATION OF A BOOk CONSIDERED TO BE
TESTY. ²TI±±, CENSORSHIP WAS A±SO A PUB±ICITY mECHANISm: THAT WHICH WAS FORBID-
DEN BECAmE INSTANT±Y A±±URINg. ¹T IS CRUCIA± TO kEEP IN mIND THAT IN THE 1960S,
mASS mEDIA BEgAN TO DEfiNE A±± ASPECTS OF CU±TURE. ²EPARATINg THE NATIONA±
FROm THE INTERNATIONA± BECAmE INCREASINg±Y DIffiCU±T. µ BOOk APP±AUDED IN
ONE COUNTRY BECAmE A qUICk COmmODITY IN THE REST OF LATIN µmERICA BECAUSE
OF THE INCREASINg±Y EASY flOW OF INFORmATION.
³VEN IF ³± ÊOOm WAS A COmmERCIA±, AESTHETIC, AND IDEO±OgICA± PHENOmE-
NON, IT TOOk TImE FOR ITS EffECTS TO BE FE±T g±OBA±±Y. ¹N RETROSPECT, IT WAS NOT
UNTI± THE 1980S, WHEN A SERIES OF NEO±IBERA± PO±ICIES A±±OWED FOR A FREE flOW OF
mERCHANDISE AND WHEN THE REgION WAS INVO±VED IN CREATINg A UNIfiED IDENTITY
FROm SPORTS TO mUSIC THAT WAS EASY TO ExPORT, THAT THE BRUNT OF ³± ÊOOm WAS
TRU±Y FE±T. ÊY THEN ITS mEmBERS, mIDD±E-AgED, WERE TURNED INTO CE±EBRITIES.
°EIR VIEWS, OſtEN THE fiRST TO BE HEARD ABROAD, CARRIED ENORmOUS WEIgHT.
µ NUmBER OF boomistas FOUND THEmSE±VES IN ¸ARIS IN THE 1950S. µT THE
TImE, THE mETROPO±IS WAS SEEN AS A mEETINg P±ACE FOR INTE±±ECTUA±S. °ERE, IN
²PAIN, AND THROUgH TRAVE± TO DIffERENT POINTS OF LATIN µmERICA, THEY BECAmE
ACqUAINTED WITH EACH OTHER AND DE±IBERATE±Y EmBARkED, AESTHETICA±±Y AS WE±±
AS IDEO±OgICA±±Y, ON A COmmON mISSION TO RENEW THE REgION’S ±ITERATURE. °E
fiRST NOVE± TO BECOmE A g±OBA± PHENOmENON WAS ·ORTázAR’S Hopscotch (1963),
WHICH DEA±T WITH AN ExI±E, ÉORACIO »±IVEIRA, STRANDED IN ¸ARIS. µN ExPERI-
mENTA± WORk INSPIRED BY ³ASTERN RE±IgIONS THAT ASkS THE READER TO TAkE AN
ACTIVE RO±E IN SHAPINg THE NARRATIVE ARC OF THE STORY, IT CAmE ABOUT jUST AS THE
BEATNIkS WERE gAININg ATTENTION IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES. »RIgINA±±Y PUB±ISHED
IN ÊUENOS µIRES, IT WAS qUICk±Y EmBRACED BY A YOUNg gENERATION OF READERS.
µT THE TImE ·ORTázAR WAS A DI±ETTANTE WITH A±mOST NO INTEREST IN PO±ITICS. ÓET
HIS NOVE± WAS SEEN AS A REjECTION OF THE POPU±IST PO±ITICS OF ¸ERONISm IN
µRgENTINA, WHICH OſtEN RIDICU±ED ³UROPEANIzED IDEAS. ¹N SPITE OF ITS HEſtY
SIzE, Hopscotch SO±D THOUSANDS OF COPIES WITHIN WEEkS OF ITS RE±EASE.
¹N qUICk SUCCESSION, A SERIES OF gROUNDBREAkINg WORkS BY ·AR±OS ºUENTES,
MARIO ÍARgAS L±OSA, µUgUSTO ¼OA ÊASTOS, GUI±±ERmO ·ABRERA ¹NFANTE, JOSé
´ONOSO, AND OTHERS APPEARED IN BOOkSTORES. °EY RECEIVED PRIzES AND ACCO-
±ADES. ÉOWEVER, IN TERmS OF ExP±OSIVE SUCCESS Hopscotch WAS FO±±OWED BY—
AND, IN TERmS OF SA±ES, SUPERSEDED BY—GABRIE± GARCíA MáRqUEz’S One
Hundred Ãears of Solitude (1967), A gENERATIONA± TA±E WITH BIB±ICA± UNDERTONES
ABOUT A ·O±OmBIAN COASTA± TOWN. °E NOVE± COVERS THE ±IFE OF THE ÊUENDíAS,
Ãh e Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n Åov el • 295
AN OUTSIzED, IDIOSYNCRATIC FAmI±Y WITH A PENCHANT FOR ExCESS AND FOR WHOm
mEmORY IS SImU±TANEOUS±Y A RESERVOIR OF WEA±TH AND A FACTORY OF NIgHTmARES.
GARCíA MáRqUEz WAS A RE±ATIVE±Y UNkNOWN jOURNA±IST IN ExI±E IN ³UROPE
BECAUSE OF HIS CONFRONTATION WITH ·O±OmBIA’S DICTATORIA± REgImE. ÉIS BOOk,
A±SO PUB±ISHED IN ÊUENOS µIRES, BECAmE AN INSTANT BEST SE±±ER, THE AUTHOR’S
PROfi±E FEATURED ON THE COVERS OF mAgAzINES ACROSS THE CONTINENT.
¹T IS ImPORTANT TO REmEmBER THAT WHI±E fiCTION—AND THE NOVE± AS A gENRE—
WAS ENORmOUS±Y POPU±AR, LATIN µmERICA A±SO ExPRESSED ITSE±F TO THE WOR±D
THROUgH POETRY. °E INTERNATIONA±IzATION OF THE REgION IS PERHAPS DUE TO A
SINg±E POET, ¸AB±O ½ERUDA, WHOSE APPEA± NEVER APPEARS TO BE DImINISHED.
³VEN BEFORE HE TURNED TWENTY, ½EſtA±í ¼EYES, AS HE WAS CA±±ED BEFORE HE OPTED
FOR HIS PEN NAmE, WROTE A TYPE OF POETRY THAT THE mASSES qUICk±Y EmBRACED.
µmONg HIS fiRST BOOkS WAS Twenty Love Poems and a Song of Despair (1924).
¹T CONTAINS VERSES AS FAmOUS AS THOSE OF ·ATU±±US, ´ANTE, AND ÍER±AINE. µS HE
EVO±VED, ½ERUDA BECAmE IDEO±OgICA±±Y ENgAgED, USINg POETRY AS A CONDUIT FOR
CHANgE. ÉE SOUgHT TO gIVE VOICE TO THE VOICE±ESS: THE SAI±OR, THE HOUSEWIFE, THE
POSTmAN. µND HE FOUgHT TO gIVE LATIN µmERICA A g±OBA± IDENTITY AS A CONTI-
NENT IN TOUCH WITH ITS ROOTS.
»THER POETS HAVE P±AYED A SImI±AR RO±E, A±THOUgH NONE HAS ACHIEVED
½ERUDA’S DEgREE OF ACCEPTANCE. °ESE INC±UDE ·éSAR ÍA±±EjO FROm ¸ERU, A±SO A
·OmmUNIST SYmPATHIzER, AND »CTAVIO ¸Az FROm MExICO, AN hombre de letras
WHOSE PRESENCE ENAB±ED A DIA±OgUE BETWEEN THE REgION AND CU±TURES FROm
AROUND THE g±OBE. ÍA±±EjO DIED IN ¸ARIS WHI±E THE ²PANISH ·IVI± ÈAR WAS TAk-
INg P±ACE. ¸Az ±IVED INTO HIS EIgHTIES, RECEIVINg THE ½OBE± ¸RIzE IN 1990.
½EITHER OF THEm BE±ONgED TO ³± ÊOOm, YET THEIR WORk REDEfiNED LATIN
µmERICA, mAkINg IT ±ESS PAROCHIA±.
°E TERm “mAgICA± REA±ISm” IS A mISTRANS±ATION OF µ±EjO ·ARPENETIER’S lo
real maravilloso, WHICH IS HOW HE DESCRIBED, IN THE PRO±OgUE TO °e Kingdom
of °is World (1949), WHAT HE SAW DURINg A VISIT TO ÉAITI, WHERE THIS NOVE± IS
SET. µT THE TImE, SURREA±ISm WAS THE FASHION IN ºRENCH CIRC±ES. ¹N ·ARPENTIER’S
VIEW, ÉAITIAN ±IFE WAS mORE PRImA± THAN SURREA±ISm IN ITS COmBINATION OF THE
ROUgH, UNAffECTED BY CIVI±IzATION, AND ITS UNCONSCIOUS ±ANgUAgE. °E RESU±T
WAS AN UNADU±TERATED DIA±OgUE BETWEEN DREAmS AND AWARENESS, BETWEEN REA±-
ITY AND mAgIC. ¶PON THE SUCCESS OF One Hundred Ãears of Solitude THAT COm-
BINATION BECAmE, IN THE OPINION OF CRITICS IN ³UROPE AND THE ¶NITED ²TATES,
THE SINE qUA NON OF LATIN µmERICAN CU±TURE.
°ERE IS A FORERUNNER TO ³± ÊOOm WHOSE OEUVRE OPENED THE ROAD TO g±OBA±I-
zATION: JORgE LUIS ÊORgES. ÊORN AT THE END OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY, ÊORgES
296 • ch a p t er si ô t een
WAS INVO±VED IN SEVERA± ARTISTIC mOVEmENTS THAT PUSHED LATIN µmERICAN ±ITERA-
TURE BEYOND ITS BORDERS, AmONg THEm Ultraísmo. ¶P UNTI± THE ±ATE 1950S,
ÊORgES WAS THE PROPERTY OF A SmA±± gROUP OF DEVOTED READERS. ÉIS POEmS, STO-
RIES, AND ESSAYS HAD BEgUN TO BE TRANS±ATED, mOST±Y INTO ºRENCH. ÓET HE WAS STI±±
A ±OCA± AUTHOR. ²EVERA± boomistas DISCOVERED HIm IN THE PAgES OF THE mAgAzINE
Sur, BUT IN 1961, ÊORgES WAS THE RECIPIENT OF THE ¹NTERNATIONA± ¸UB±ISHER’S
¸RIzE, TOgETHER WITH ²AmUE± ÊECkETT, WHICH RESU±TED IN THE ImmEDIATE RENDER-
INg OF HIS WORk INTO VARIOUS ³UROPEAN ±ANgUAgES. ¹T IS PRECISE±Y AT THAT mOmENT,
jUST AS ³± ÊOOm WAS ABOUT TO BE ±AUNCHED, THAT ÊORgE’S Ficciones (1944) STARTED
TO BECOmE UBIqUITOUS IN ÈESTERN ·IVI±IzATION, A CANONICA± VOICE DEfiNINg NOT
ON±Y LATIN µmERICAN ±ITERATURE BUT POSTmODERN ±ETTERS IN gENERA±.
µ±mOST BY OSmOSIS, THE TERm “mAgICA± REA±ISm” BECAmE ATTACHED TO ÊORgES,
WHOSE ImPACT HAS BEEN mANIFO±D. ¹N SPITE OF HIS B±INDNESS, HE REPRESENTS TIRE-
±ESS READINg. ÉE A±SO PERSONIfiES THE DRIVE TOWARD REmEmBERINg EVERYTHINg,
TOWARD FOSTERINg A mEmORY WITHOUT BOUNDARIES. »NE OF HIS qUINTESSENTIA±
STORIES IS “ºUNES, THE MEmORIOUS,” ABOUT A ¶RUgUAYAN WHOSE CAPACITY OF TOTA±
RECA±± TURNS HIm INTO A mONSTER. µNOTHER CRUCIA± PIECE IS “°E µ±EPH,” ±UCID±Y
DESCRIBINg A mAgICA± OBjECT, FOUND IN A ÊUENOS µIRES BASEmENT, CAPAB±E OF
CONTAININg THE ENTIRE UNIVERSE A±± AT ONCE. °E ImP±ICATION IS THAT µRgENTINA,
AND NO ±ONgER ³UROPE, IS WHERE ART IS TO BE FOUND. µmONg ÊORgES’S mOST CE±-
EBRATED TA±ES IS “¸IERRE MENARD, µUTHOR OF THE Éuixote,” IN WHICH HE CONjURES
A ºRENCH SYmBO±IST AUTHOR COmmITTED TO A SINg±E mISSION: REWRITINg—THOUgH
NOT COPYINg—PORTIONS OF ·ERVANTES’S Don Éuixote. ¹T IS ExTRAORDINARI±Y
INflUENTIA± IN THAT IT SUggESTS, AmONg OTHER THINgS, THAT READINg AND NOT WRIT-
INg IS WHAT ±ITERATURE IS ABOUT, AND THAT ORIgINA±ITY IS NOT ABOUT NEWNESS.
²UCH IS ÊORgES’S ImPACT THAT IT IS ImPOSSIB±E TO CONCEIVE OF WRITERS ±IkE JOHN
ÊARTH, ¹TA±O ·A±VINO, AND ´ANI±O ÌIš WITHOUT HIm. ÓET HE WAS NOT THE ON±Y
PRECURSOR TO ³± ÊOOm. µNOTHER ImPORTANT VOICE WHOSE INflUENCE REACHES
BEYOND LATIN µmERICA IS JUAN ¼U±FO, AUTHOR OF °e Plain in Flames (1953).
¶N±IkE ÊORgES, WHO WAS A COSmOPO±ITAN, ¼U±FO CAmE FROm A POOR FAmI±Y IN
THE MExICAN STATE OF JA±ISCO, WHICH WAS DEVASTATED BY THE ¼EVO±UTION OF 1910.
ÉIS STORIES ARE ABOUT DEPRIVATION, ABOUT THE PRIDE OF PEOP±E WITHOUT THE BASIC
NECESSITIES IN ±IFE. °ROUgH HIS fiCTION (¼U±FO A±SO WROTE THE NOVE± Pedro
Páramo [1955]), HE REACHED ·HINESE, ÊRAzI±IAN, AND µFRICAN READERS, SHOWCAS-
INg AN ASPECT OF LATIN µmERICA—ITS RURA± ±IFE, BARED TO THE BONE IN TERmS OF
POSSESSIONS—THAT A±±OWED FOR ANOTHER FORm OF UNIVERSA±ISm: SUffERINg.
ºOR ³± ÊOOm AND ITS PRECURSORS TO HAVE A g±OBA± REACH, ONE CHIEF FACTOR
NEEDS TO BE UNDERSTOOD: TRANS±ATION. GARCíA MáRqUEz OſtEN SAID THAT FOR A
Ãh e Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n Åov el • 297
·O±OmBIAN WRITER TO BE APP±AUDED IN ÊOgOTá, HE fiRST NEEDED TO BE READ IN
½EW ÓORk. ¹NDEED, IT WAS THANkS TO TRANS±ATION THAT, AS »CTAVIO ¸Az ONCE PUT
IT, “LATIN µmERICANS WERE INVITED TO THE BANqUET OF ÈESTERN CIVI±IzATION.”
°E TORCHBEARER AmONg TRANS±ATORS INTO ³Ng±ISH, ONE WHOSE WORk DEfi NED THE
fiE±D, WAS GREgORY ¼ABASSA, AN µmERICAN OF ¸ORTUgUESE DESCENT.* ²OON AſtER
IT APPEARED IN ÊUENOS µIRES, ÉARPER & ¼OW OffERED HIm One Hundred Ãears
of Solitude. ÈORkINg C±OSE±Y WITH GARCíA MáRqUEz, HIS RENDITION OF THE NOVE±
WAS ENTHUSIASTICA±±Y RECEIVED BY µmERICAN READERS. °E AUTHOR HImSE±F EVEN
SAID THE TRANS±ATION WAS SUPERIOR TO THE ORIgINA±. ¼ABASSA A±SO TRANS±ATED
·ORTázAR’S Hopscotch, AmONg OTHER WORkS FROm ³± ÊOOm.
µmERICAN PUB±ISHERS, EAgER TO SEE THESE NOVE±S BECOmE COmmERCIA±±Y SUC-
CESSFU±, PUT ¼ABASSA AND OTHERS TO WORk ON OTHER LATIN µmERICAN WORkS.
¶N±IkE THE TRANS±ATORS OF ·ERVANTES’S Don Éuixote, WHO UNTI± THE 1950S WERE
ÊRITISH, A±± THOSE INVO±VED IN WORkINg WITH THE FASHIONAB±E LATIN µmERICAN
WRITERS WERE FROm THE ¶NITED ²TATES, INC±UDINg ³DITH GROSSmAN, ²UzANNE JI±±
LEVINE, AND µ±FRED MAC µDAm, AmONg OTHERS. ¹N SOmE CASES, IT WAS THEY WHO
BROUgHT THE NOVE±S TO THE ATTENTION OF PUB±ISHERS. ¹N ANY CASE, THANkS TO THESE
RENDITIONS, ³± ÊOOm BECAmE A g±OBA± gOOD. °E WRITERS WERE FREqUENT±Y
INVITED TO ±ECTURE AT UNIVERSITIES AND TO WRITE OP-ED PIECES FOR NEWSPAPERS ±IkE
THE New Ãork Times. °E fi±m RIgHTS OF THEIR NOVE±S WERE ACqUIRED BY
ÉO±±YWOOD AND OTHER mEDIA INSTITUTIONS, AND ·ORTázAR’S SHORT STORY “ʱOW
¶P” WAS TURNED INTO AN EPOCH-mAkINg mOVIE (1966) BY THE ¹TA±IAN DIRECTOR
MICHE±ANgE±O µNTONIONI. LIkEWISE, ÍARgAS L±OSA’S NOVE± Aunt Julia and the
Scriptwriter WAS ADAPTED FOR fi±m (1990), SET IN ½EW »R±EANS WITH ¸ETER ºA±k.
µNTHONY ëUINN AND ºRANCIS ºORD ·OPPO±A TRIED WITHOUT SUCCESS TO ACqUIRE
THE RIgHTS FOR One Hundred Ãears of Solitude. ¹N THE END, GARCíA MáRqUEz DID
SE±± Love in the Time of Cholera (1985), WHICH WAS fi±mED WITH THE ²PANISH
ACTOR JAVIER ÊARDEm.
°E ImPACT OF TRANS±ATION mUST BE SEEN UNDER ANOTHER ±ENS. ÈHEN AN
AUTHOR kNOWS HIS WORk WI±± AUTOmATICA±±Y BE TRANS±ATED INTO OTHER
±ANgUAgES—AND, ON OCCASION, IT WI±± APPEAR IN ONE OF THOSE OTHER ±ANgUAgES
BEFORE IT DOES IN THE ²PANISH ORIgINA±—SUDDEN±Y HIS TARgET READER IS PART OF A
* ¼ABASSA IS A ·ATA±AN SURNAmE. ¼ABASSA’S PATERNA± gRANDPARENTS WERE ·ATA±AN AND ·UBAN
(A±SO OF ·ATA±AN DESCENT), AND HIS FATHER gREW UP IN ·UBA. ÉIS mATERNA± gRANDPARENTS WERE
FROm THE ¶NITED ²TATES (SURNAmE MACFAR±AND) AND ³Ng±AND, AND HIS mOTHER gREW UP IN ½EW
ÓORk ·ITY. ¼ABASSA ±EARNED ¸ORTUgUESE (AND mOST OF HIS ²PANISH) IN HIgH SCHOO±. ²EE ¼ABASSA’S
mEmOIRS, If °is Be Treason: Translation and Its Dyscontents (½EW ÓORk: ½EW ´IRECTIONS,
2005), 29, 33.
298 • ch a p t er si ô t een
±ARgER COmmUNITY OF NATIONS. ¹N OTHER WORDS, TRANS±ATION PUSHED AUTHORS TO
THINk OF THEmSE±VES IN ±ESS PAROCHIA±, mORE AmBITIOUS TERmS, AS CITIzENS OF THE
ENTIRE WOR±D. °IS mEANS THAT ±ITERATURE NO ±ONgER SITS EASI±Y IN NATIONA± ±ITER-
ARY TRADITIONS BUT, INSTEAD, IS AN ITEm FOR ±ARgE-SCA±E SUPP±Y.
¹N ANA±YzINg THE CAREER OF boomistas ±IkE GARCíA MáRqUEz AND ÍARgAS
L±OSA, IT IS POSSIB±E TO STATE, WITH PRECISION, THE mOmENT THEY WENT g±OBA±. ¹N
THE CASE OF THE FORmER, THIS TRANSITION TOOk P±ACE IN 1982, FO±±OWINg THE PUB-
±ICATION OF Chronicle of a Death Foretold. ºROm THAT mOmENT ON, GARCíA
MáRqUEz’S WORk NO ±ONgER SEEmED DESTINED ExC±USIVE±Y FOR A ²PANISH-±ANgUAgE
PUB±IC. ¹N THE CASE OF THE ±ATTER, IT HAPPENED WITH °e War of the End of the
World (1981), WHEN ÍARgAS L±OSA WENT BEYOND ¸ERU TO fiND HIS SUBjECT mATTER
IN NINETEENTH-CENTURY ÊRAzI±, IN THE UPRISINg OF A gROUP OF FANATICS THAT TESTS
THE qUESTION OF ÊRAzI±IANNESS. °ESE STRATAgEmS mADE THE LATIN µmERICAN
NOVE± INTERNATIONA± mERCHANDISE.
ºOR A WHI±E THERE WAS A gROUP OF LATIN µmERICAN WOmEN AUTHORS WHOSE
STY±E DEPENDED ON REFASHIONINg THE AESTHETICS OF ³± ÊOOm. °EY INC±UDE
¹SABE± µ±±ENDE, AUTHOR OF °e House of the Spirits (1982), A FAmI±Y SAgA THAT
RESEmB±ES THAT OF THE ÊUENDíAS, AND LAURA ³SqUIVE±, WHOSE NOVE± Like Water
for Chocolate (1989) USED A kITCHEN ON THE ¶.².-MExICO BORDER TO mIx INgRE-
DIENTS AS STEAmY AS SEx AND mAgIC. ÈHY WOmEN jOINED THE FRAY RATHER ±ATE IS
THE RESU±T OF A VARIETY OF FACTORS, INC±UDINg THE RISE AND CONSO±IDATION OF FEmI-
NISm IN mETROPO±ITAN CENTERS ±IkE ÊUENOS µIRES, MExICO ·ITY, ²ANTIAgO, AND
ÊOgOTá IN THE 1970S, AS WE±± AS THE READINESS OF THE ±ITERARY mARkETS TO SATISFY
AN INTERNATIONA± HUNgER FOR A mORE NUANCED, mU±TIFACETED DEPICTION OF gEN-
DER RE±ATIONS IN THE REgION. °ERE WERE A±SO ±ATE ADDITIONS, SUCH AS MANUE±
¸UIg, THE µRgENTINE AUTHOR OF Kiss of the Spider Woman (1976), AND, FROm
¸UERTO ¼ICO, ¼OSARIO ºERRé, WHO ±ATER IN ±IFE WOU±D SWITCH FROm ²PANISH TO
³Ng±ISH IN NOVE±S ±IkE °e House on the Lagoon (1995), THUS INSERTINg HERSE±F
IN ANOTHER IDENTITY PARAmETER: LATINOS IN THE ¶NITED ²TATES. µ±± OF THESE
WORkS ENCOURAgE AN UNDERSTANDINg OF 1960S ±ITERARY WORkS THROUgH THE PRISm
OF gENDER. ÈHI±E A±mOST A±± OF THE mEmBERS OF ³± ÊOOm WERE mEN, WE mUST
REmEmBER THAT WOmEN DID NOT ENTER THE ±ABOR POO± IN FU±± FORCE IN LATIN
µmERICA, EVEN IN THE CU±TURA± REA±m, UNTI± THE 1970S.
µ YOUNgER CROP OF AUTHORS HAS EmERgED IN LATIN µmERICA, ONE WHOSE PRO-
fi±E IS HEAVI±Y DEfiNED BY ³± ÊOOm. MEmBERS OF THE NExT gENERATION—ÉORACIO
·ASTE±±ANOS MOYA, µNDRéS ½EUmAN, ¹gNACIO ¸ADI±±A, ³DmUNDO ¸Az ²O±áN,
JUAN ÍI±±ORO, AND JORgE ÍO±PI, AmONg OTHERS—HAVE STRUgg±ED TO DISTANCE
THEmSE±VES FROm A TYPE OF ±ITERATURE THAT, IN THEIR VIEW, SImP±IfiES THE REgION
Ãh e Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n Åov el • 299
RATHER THAN mAkINg IT COmP±Ex. ¹N A REFUTATION OF mAgICA± REA±ISm, THEY HAVE
BUI±T THEIR OEUVRE AS HYPERREA±IST, EmPHASIzINg DRUgS, mUSIC, VIDEO gAmES,
AND ExCESS IN THE URBAN mI±IEU WHERE THEIR NOVE±S ARE SET. MANY HAVE SET THEIR
P±OTS AS FAR FROm LATIN µmERICA AS POSSIB±E, SAY, ³UROPE DURINg ÈOR±D ÈAR
¹¹, AS IN ÍO±PI’S In Search of Klingsor (1999).
µRgUAB±Y THE mOST INTERESTINg—AS WE±± AS THE mOST PO±EmICA±—POST-
ÊOOm AUTHOR WHOSE WORk HAS REDEfiNED LATIN µmERICAN ±ITERATURE IS ¼OBERTO
ÊO±AñO, WHO DIED IN 2003, AT THE AgE OF fiſtY. µ±THOUgH HE WAS BORN IN ·HI±E,
HE ±IVED IN MExICO AND ²PAIN AND DIgESTED µRgENTINE ±ITERATURE TO SUCH A
DEgREE THAT HIS OEUVRE IS TRU±Y INTERNATIONA±, NOT ON±Y FROm A mARkETINg PER-
SPECTIVE, BUT A±SO IN ITS CONTENT. ÉE IS BEST kNOWN FOR THE NOVE± °e Savage
Detectives (1996), WHICH IS SET IN MExICO AND USES A MExICAN ²PANISH THAT IS
UTTER±Y AUTHENTIC. ¹N FACT, THE BOOk mIgHT BE DESCRIBED AS THE BEST MExICAN
NOVE± OF THE END OF THE TWENTIETH CENTURY, A BIzARRE CHANgE OF gEARS IN THAT IT
ANNOUNCED THAT THE ±OCA± NO ±ONgER BE±ONgS TO THE ±OCA±S.
ÊO±AñO WROTE STORIES ±IkE “°E ¹NSUffERAB±E GAUCHO” (2003) THAT DO THE
SAmE WITH µRgENTINE ±ITERATURE, OffERINg AN UTTER±Y ORIgINA± REREADINg OF
ÊORgES AND ·ORTázAR. µND IN HIS NOVE±±A By Night in Chile (2000), HE UPSETS
·HI±EAN ±ETTERS BY SUggESTINg THAT THE ¸INOCHET E±ITE CREATED AN AESTHETICS
THAT EVEN THE LEſt WHO±EHEARTED±Y EmBRACED. °ESE AND OTHER STRATEgIES mADE
ÊO±AñO AN ENFANT TERRIB±E. °EY A±SO TURNED HIm INTO AN INSTANT SUCCESS IN
³UROPE AND THE ¶NITED ²TATES, WHERE HIS BOOkS, IN TRANS±ATION, BECAmE THE
SUBjECT OF FESTIVA±S AND THE STAP±E OF CREATIVE WRITINg PROgRAmS. °ROUgHOUT
HIS OEUVRE, ÊO±AñO, IN ExP±ICIT AND SUBT±E WAYS, mAkES A CRITIqUE OF ³± ÊOOm:
HE ACCUSES THE mOVEmENT OF TURNINg LATIN µmERICA INTO A FACTORY OF kITSCH,
COmP±ETE WITH C±AIRVOYANT PROSTITUTES, FORgOTTEN CO±ONE±S, AND EPIDEmICS OF
INSOmNIA. ÉIS ARgUmENT IS THAT IN SEEkINg INTERNATIONA±IzATION THE mEmBERS
OF THAT gENERATION SO±D THEIR SOU± TO THE DEVI±. ÓET ÊO±AñO ±OVES THE DEVI±: HE
WOU±D HAVE DONE THE SAmE.
ÈHEN GARCíA MáRqUEz WAS AWARDED THE ½OBE± ¸RIzE IN 1982, IT SEEmED ³±
ÊOOm WAS AT THE CENTER OF INTERNATIONA± CU±TURA± AffAIRS. °EN, WHEN HIS
ONETImE-FRIEND ÍARgAS L±OSA A±SO WAS AWARDED IT IN 2010, THE ImPRESSION WAS
THAT THIS gENERATION HAD REDEfiNED THE WOR±D IN INCISIVE WAYS, mAkINg LATIN
µmERICA FASHIONAB±E. ÊUT SUCCESS HAS ITS DISADVANTAgES. ¹N THE TWENTY-fiRST
CENTURY, THE REgION IS NO ±ONgER SEEN AS AWkWARD AND UNDERDEVE±OPED.
¹NSTEAD, LATIN µmERICA IS PERCEIVED AS fiNDINg A DE±ICATE BA±ANCE BETWEEN ITS
mU±TIP±E, AT TImES DISPARATE qUA±ITIES. ¹N THE DRIVE TO BECOmE INTERNATIONA±,
THE FEE±INg PERSISTS THAT IT IS IN THE PROCESS OF ±OSINg ITS INTEgRITY AND THAT IT IS
300 • ch a p t er si ô t een
BECOmINg ±IkE THE REST OF THE WOR±D AS IT STRESSES ITS UNIqUENESS AS A TOURIST
ATTRACTION. °AT IS THE DRAWBACk OF INTERNATIONA±IzATION.
̺Y ¿µ¶º¾
²TAVANS, ¹±AN
2010 A Critic’s Journey. µNN µRBOR: ¶NIVERSITY OF MICHIgAN ¸RESS.
2010 Gabriel García MárQuez: °e Early Ãears. ½EW ÓORk: ¸A±gRAVE.
²TAVANS, ¹±AN, ED.
1997 °e Oxford Book of Latin American Essays. ½EW ÓORk: »xFORD ¶NIVERSITY
¸RESS.
2012 °e FSG Book of Twentieth-Century Latin American Poetry. ½EW ÓORk:
ºARRAR, ²TRAUS AND GIROUx.
Ãh e Ü at i n Á Ç er ic a n Åov el • 301
seventeen
¾RAVE±INg ME±ODRAmA
¶º²º¸³Êº²µ¾ and eôportin¿ southern
Çoralities; or, how can soÇethin¿ so bad
still be so ¿oodÕ
O. Hugo Benavides
Ãhe èoKe that traversed THE µRAB WOR±D FOR A WHI±E IN THE ±ATE 1990S
WENT SOmETHINg ±IkE THIS: °E mAN RETURNS HOmE AſtER A ±ONg DAY AT WORk. °E
WIFE RESPONDS TO HIm IN C±ASSICA± µRABIC, TO WHICH HE SAYS, WHAT, YOU ARE
SPEAkINg MExICAN NOW? °IS jOkE REFERRED TO THE FACT THAT MExICAN telen-
ovelas HAD BECOmE THE RAgE IN ³gYPT AND THROUgHOUT THE µRAB WOR±D. ºOR THE
PRODUCERS, THE DISTRIBUTION TO EACH µRAB COUNTRY PRESENTED A ±INgUISTIC NIgHT-
mARE THAT THEY SO±VED qUITE EffiCIENT±Y. µ±± THE telenovelas (INC±UDINg NON-
MExICAN ONES) WERE DUBBED IN C±ASSICA± µRABIC. ° IS ImmEDIATE±Y BROUgHT A
WHO±E RANgE OF ISSUES TO THE FOREFRONT, WHICH HIgH±IgHTS LATIN µmERICA’S CON-
TRIBUTION TO g±OBA±IzATION. °EY A±SO A±±OW US TO RETHINk THE RO±E OF mEDIA IN
DIffERENT PARTS OF THE WOR±D, ±IkE THAT OF THE µRAB-SPEAkINg WOR±D, AND THE
mANNER IN WHICH CU±TURE AND COmmODIfiCATION ARE INTRICATE±Y INTERTWINED IN
THE CONTEmPORARY PRODUCTION OF g±OBA± mARkETS, AND VICE VERSA. ¹N THEIR g±O-
BA± TRAjECTORY telenovelas HAVE A±SO, A±BEIT UNCONSCIOUS±Y AND UNWITTINg±Y,
SUCCESSFU±±Y CONNECTED mYRIAD g±OBA± (²OUTH) COmmUNITIES THAT, A±THOUgH
gEOgRAPHICA±±Y DISPERSED AND ±INgUISTICA±±Y DIVERSE, IDENTIFY WITH THE SImP±IS-
TIC REA±ITIES ExPRESSED THROUgH THE LATIN µmERICAN mE±ODRAmA.
LATIN µmERICAN telenovelas ARE VERY DIffERENT FROm ½ORTH µmERICAN ONES,
PARTICU±AR±Y BECAUSE THEY HAVE SHORTER PRODUCTION RUNS (NORmA±±Y BETWEEN SIx
AND EIgHT mONTHS) AND THE BEST ONES AIR DURINg PRImE TImE. ¸ERHAPS IT IS THESE
CHARACTERISTICS THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THEm BECOmINg A g±OBA± COmmODITY OVER
THE PAST FOUR DECADES. °E TE±ENOVE±AS DISCUSSED HERE, Los ricos tambien lloran
(°E ¼ICH µ±SO ·RY), Ão soy Betty, la fea (±ITERA±±Y, “¹ µm ÊETTY, THE ¶g±Y”)
AND Íica (XICA), AmONg mANY OTHERS, HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFU±±Y ExPORTED
THROUgHOUT THE WOR±D, BECOmINg INDISCRImINATE AmBASSADORS OF LATIN
302
µmERICAN CU±TURE. °ESE RAgS-TO-RICHES SOAP OPERAS HAVE, NOT SURPRISINg±Y,
FURTHER CONTRIBUTED TO ENHANCE LATIN mE±ODRAmATIC E±EmENTS OF ROmANCE
AND SEx, DRUg CU±TURE, AND COmP±Ex FAmI±Y DYNAmICS THE WOR±D OVER. °EY
HAVE g±OBA±IzED, AND g±AmORIzED, LATIN µmERICAN NOTIONS OF WHAT IT mEANS
TO ±OVE, SUCCEED, AND BE POWERFU±.
Telenovelas HAVE A VERY RECENT HISTORY IN THE µmERICAS, YET FROm THEIR
ImPACT IT WOU±D SEEm THAT THEY HAVE BEEN A±WAYS PART OF LATIN µmERICAN
CU±TURE. °EY DID NOT mAkE THEIR APPEARANCE IN ²OUTH µmERICA UNTI± THE EAR±Y
1960S, WHEN TE±EVISION ENTERED THE LATIN µmERICAN mARkET. °IS mARkET
ExP±OSION, HOWEVER, WAS PREfigURED IN radio-novelas (RADIO SOAP OPERAS) AND
folletines (PAmPH±ET±IkE NOVE±S) FROm SEVERA± DECADES BEFORE, THE ±ATTER COmINg
INTO ExISTENCE AS EAR±Y AS THE TURN OF THE CENTURY IN THE 1900S. °US telenovelas
INHERITED THE STRUCTURE OF THE mE±ODRAmA FROm BOTH OF THESE VISUA± AND AURA±
mEDIA AND FUSED THEm INTO ONE INCREDIB±Y POWERFU± mEDIUm OF LATIN
µmERICAN POPU±AR CU±TURA± REPRESENTATION. ²INCE THE 1960S telenovelas HAVE
HAD AN ImPORTANT ImPACT ON PEOP±E’S DAI±Y ±IFE, AS THEY DRAmATICA±±Y PORTRAY
SUCH CONTROVERSIA± ISSUES AS I±±EgITImATE CHI±DREN, mISP±ACED IDENTITY, THE BUR-
DEN OF SOCIA± CONVENTIONS, AmOROUS REjECTION, AND THE EVER PRODUCTIVE NOTION
OF FORBIDDEN DESIRES, SExUA± AND OTHERWISE.
¹T IS A TESTAmENT TO THE telenovela’S SUCCESS THAT mANY OF THE P±OT ±INES ARE
REUSED OR THAT A TE±ENOVE±A WI±± BE REBROADCAST IN DIffERENT COUNTRIES AſtER BEINg
ADAPTED TO ±OCA± DIA±ECTS AND CU±TURES. °IS TRANSNATIONA± E±EmENT IS ON±Y
HEIgHTENED BY THE INCREDIB±E ExPORT SUCCESS OF TE±ENOVE±AS THROUgHOUT THE
µmERICAS (INC±UDINg THE ¶NITED ²TATES) AND THE WOR±D. µND SUCH g±OBA± INTERAC-
TION HAS ±ED SOmE TO ARgUE THAT mE±ODRAmA mIgHT BE THE mOST SUCCESSFU±, POPU-
±AR, AND CU±TURA±±Y AUTHENTIC REVO±UTION AffECTINg THE CONTINENT SINCE THE 1960S.
»F COURSE, IT IS THIS PRODUCTIVE TENSION BETWEEN THE ±OCA± CONTExT AND tel-
enovelas THAT mARkS THE DIffERENCE BETWEEN ±OCA±/NATIONA± CONTExTS AND THE
g±OBA±/TRANSNATIONA± PROCESSES. ¹N THE mEANWHI±E THESE ±OCA±-g±OBA± TENSIONS
A±SO HE±P EmPHASIzE A CONNECTION BETWEEN °IRD ÈOR±D NATIONS THAT CONTIN-
UES TO fiND FORmS OF ExPRESSION IN THESE LATIN µmERICAN mE±ODRAmATIC PRO-
DUCTIONS. °EREFORE THE TRANSNATIONA± SUCCESS OF THESE NATIONA± VENTURES
PUSHES US TO ASk: ÈHAT ARE THE ±OCA± AND g±OBA± CU±TURA± ExPRESSIONS THAT
A±±OW THESE OVER-THE-TOP mE±ODRAmAS TO BE READI±Y UNDERSTOOD IN SUCH CON-
TRASTINg NATIONA± CONTExTS? ÉOW DO THESE TRAVE±INg mE±ODRAmAS REASSERT THEIR
IDENTITY AS LATIN µmERICAN PRODUCTIONS WHI±E STI±± HAVINg A DRAmATIC ImPACT
ON THEIR NEWFOUND AUDIENCES? »R PERHAPS EVEN mORE SUCCINCT±Y, HOW CAN
SOmETHINg SO BAD BE SO gOOD?
µ TE±±INg E±EmENT IN THE telenovela’S SUCCESS IS THE RO±E THAT gUI±TY P±EASURE
P±AYS IN THE mE±ODRAmA’S POWERFU± REPRESENTATION. ºOR STARTERS, telenovelas ARE
STEREOTYPICA±±Y REPRESENTED AS REflECTINg ON±Y PART OF THE ±OCA± AUDIENCE’S
SOCIA± mAkEUP: WOmEN AND POOR AND WORkINg-C±ASS PEOP±E. ÉOWEVER, FROm
THE VERY BEgINNINg THE ACTUA± ECONOmIC SUCCESSES OF THE telenovelas AS WE±± AS
THE ±ASTINg CU±TURA± ImPACT OF mANY OF THEm REflECT qUITE A CONTRARY SOCIA±
PICTURE.
°ERE ARE NO DOUBTS THAT EVERYBODY, mEN AND WOmEN, AS WE±± AS THE POOR
AND RICH, ARE WI±±INg CONSUmERS OF telenovelas AND POSITIVE±Y RESPOND TO THE
SEDUCTIVE ImAgES PRESENTED TO THEm ON THE SCREEN. °E FACT THAT telenovelas
ARE REPRESENTED AS ±OW-C±ASS ENTERTAINmENT WITH ±ITT±E CU±TURA± CONTENT ON±Y
HEIgHTENS THE VIEWER’S gUI±TY P±EASURE OF FEE±INg THEY ARE ENjOYINg SOmETHINg
THEY SHOU±D NOT BE, AND IN THAT mANNER CROSSINg I±±ICIT±Y INTO SOCIA± mORES
THAT HAVE BEEN HISTORICA±±Y DENIED TO THEm.
Telenovelas, IN THIS mANNER, A±±OW VIEWERS TO INHABIT THE C±OSED SOCIA±
±ANDSCAPE OF WEA±TH, POWER, AND STATUS THAT HAS BEEN SYSTEmATICA±±Y OUTSIDE OF
THE mAjORITY OF THE POPU±ATIONS’ REACH. ÓET THE SEDUCTIVE mANNER IN WHICH
THESE STRUgg±ES ARE REPRESENTED ON±Y REIFY THESE C±OSED CIRCUITS OF STATUS AND
HIERARCHY THAT ARE ExACT±Y WHAT BOTH INCITE AND REPE± THE mAjORITY OF VIEWERS
AND C±INCH THE telenovelas’ POPU±AR SUCCESS. °IS IS A±SO WHY ±ARgE HISTORICA±
EVENTS HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFU±±Y REPRESENTED THROUgH telenovelas (INC±UDINg THE
MExICAN ¼EVO±UTION, POST–WOR±D WAR ³UROPEAN mIgRATION TO THE µmERICAS,
ETC.). ¹N mANY REgARDS mANY OF THESE EPIC PRODUCTIONS HAVE A±±OWED EACH
NATION IN THE µmERICAS TO USE IT TO REflECT UPON THEIR OWN HISTORICA±, SOCIA±,
AND CU±TURA± FORmATION.
¾O THIS EffECT, DESIRE, SExUA± ATTRACTION, AND AN OBSESSIVE ATTACHmENT TO
THE »THER ARE PART OF telenovelas’ CENTRA± OBjECT OR THEmE. LOVE, PARTICU±AR±Y
A kIND OF FORBIDDEN, TRANSgRESSIVE ±OVE, WI±± A±WAYS BE AT THE HEART OF THE
µNOTHER ExAmP±E OF THIS g±OBA± ImPACT OF telenovelas IS THE SUCCESS THAT Los
ricos también lloran (°E ¼ICH µ±SO ·RY) gARNERED A±± OVER THE WOR±D. °IS
MExICAN telenovela ORIgINA±±Y AIRED IN POST-PERESTROIkA ¼USSIA IN 1992. Bogaty
Toszche Plachut (THE TIT±E IN ¼USSIAN) WAS AN INCREDIB±E SUCCESS AND A HIT FOR
THE NATION’S ·OmmONWEA±TH ·HANNE±. ¹T WAS A PARTICU±AR SUCCESS FOR THE
¼USSIAN PRODUCER »STANkINO, WHICH gAmB±ED ON BUYINg THE RIgHTS OF THIS
1979 PRODUCTION. ÉIS HOPES HAD BEEN THAT THE UPWARD±Y mOBI±E STORY OF A
POOR WOmAN mARRYINg INTO WEA±TH WOU±D TRANS±ATE TO THE CHANgINg ±AND-
SCAPE OF THE CO±±APSINg ²OVIET ¶NION AND RE±ATE TO THE EmERgENCE OF THE NEW
¼USSIAN NATIONA± IDENTITY AND mARkETP±ACE (ÉE±gUERA 2008). °E PRODUCER’S
HOPE WAS CONfiRmED BEYOND ExPECTATIONS. °E TRANS±ATED telenovela BROkE A±±
¼USSIAN TE±EVISION VIEWINg RECORDS, WITH OVER 200 mI±±ION HOUSEHO±DS g±UED
°E 1976 ÊRAzI±IAN SOAP OPERA Escrava Isaura (¹SAURA, THE ²±AVE) IS ARgUAB±Y
ONE OF THE EAR±IEST telenovelas TO HAVE mET WITH WOR±DWIDE SUCCESS. ¹T WAS AIRED
IN OVER EIgHTY COUNTRIES, THE fiRST telenovela TO BE BROADCAST IN THE THEN–
²OVIET ¶NION AND THE ON±Y ONE TO EVER BE SHOWN ON ÊRITISH TE±EVISION. °E
mE±ODRAmATIC STORY ABOUT A ±IgHT-SkINNED RUNAWAY S±AVE WHO IS AB±E TO PASS
AS A WHITE WOmAN WAS mET WITH THUNDEROUS SUPPORT FROm DIffERENT INTERNA-
TIONA± AUDIENCES. °E mAIN ACTRESS, LUCé±IA ²ANTOS, WAS INVITED BY ±EADINg
mA±E PO±ITICA± ±EADERS FROm A±± OVER THE WOR±D, INC±UDINg ºIDE± ·ASTRO HImSE±F,
TO VISIT THEIR COUNTRIES. °E RACIA± UNDERTONES OF THE telenovela A±SO OPENED
THE CONTENT OF mE±ODRAmAS TO A gREATER NUmBER OF SOCIA± AND PO±ITICA± THEmES.
°IS IS WHAT A ÊRAzI±IAN jOURNA±IST REA±IzED WHI±E VISITINg ¾IBET WHEN HIS
DRIVER WAS CONSTANT±Y REFERRED TO AS µNDRéS BECAUSE HIS RE±ATIVE±Y DARkER SkIN
REmINDED HIS FE±±OW COUNTRYmEN OF THE µNDRéS CHARACTER IN Escrava Isaura,
WHICH WAS A HUgE SUCCESS THERE.
°IS WOR±DWIDE ImPACT PERHAPS HAS ON±Y BEEN SURPASSED BY THE 1999
·O±OmBIAN TE±ENOVE±A, Ão soy Betty, la fea (¹ µm ¶g±Y ÊETTY), WHICH WAS
SUCCESSFU± BEYOND THE ·O±OmBIAN PRODUCERS’ INITIA± P±AN TO SUCH A DEgREE THAT
JUST AS A±± telenovelas HAVE FORBIDDEN ±OVE AS THEIR mE±ODRAmATIC THEmE, THEIR
P±OTS ARE ABOUT THE BA±ANCE OF POWER, ENAB±INg STAR-STRUCk ±OVERS TO ACHIEVE
POSITIONS OF POWER THAT HAD BEEN ORIgINA±±Y DENIED TO THEm. ¹T DOESN’T mATTER,
IN THIS REgARD, THAT ONE OF THE PROTAgONISTS (NORmA±±Y A mA±E) mIgHT BE E±ITE;
IT ON±Y CONfiRmS THAT HE IS STI±± PART OF AN O±D CORRUPT SYSTEm. ÉIS POWER
COmES FROm A FA±SE SENSE OF SECURITY, FROm THE O±D mARkET SYSTEm THAT P±ACES
VA±UE ON APPEARANCE AND SUPERfiCIA± REA±ITIES. °EN, THROUgH THE TRUE ±OVE OF
ANOTHER (AND ONESE±F), FOR SOmEONE SOCIA±±Y INFERIOR, SOmEONE WHO COmES
FROm A P±ACE “DIffERENT” FROm HIS OWN, HE IS AB±E TO REC±AIm A TRUE SENSE OF
POWER, OF SE±F AND »THER, AND RECONNECT TO THE NATIONA± COmmUNITY. ÊOTH Los
ricos tambien lloran AND Ão soy Betty, la fea, gRAPP±E WITH THIS CENTRA± ISSUE. ¹N
BOTH INSTANCES THE mAIN FEmA±E CHARACTER mANAgES TO TURN THE TAB±ES ON THE
UPPER C±ASS AND WHAT IS COmmON±Y DEEmED CIVI±IzED SOCIETY. ÈHAT HAPPENS
BY THE END OF BOTH telenovelas IS THAT THESE SUPPOSED±Y WORTH±ESS CHARACTERS
ARE TRANSFORmED INTO THE mOST VA±UAB±E PEOP±E ON THE SHOWS. °IS IS DONE NOT
BY mEANS OF CHARACTERS gOINg THROUgH DRAmATIC CONVERSIONS; IT IS THOSE
AROUND THEm WHO CHANgE. ¹T IS THE HEART±ESS AND SUPERfiCIA± E±ITE WHO ARE
S±OW±Y AWAkENED TO THE TRUE VA±UE OF ±IFE AND U±TImATE±Y REDEfiNE THE NOTION
OF SOCIA± AND EmOTIONA± POWER FROm THE INSIDE OUT.
°IS POWER PARADIgm IS mOST ExP±ICIT IN Íica, THE 1996 ÊRAzI±IAN telenovela
SET ON ¸ORTUgUESE S±AVE P±ANTATIONS OF ²OUTH µmERICA IN THE 1700S, ONE THAT
READI±Y DE±VED INTO THE CORE qUESTION OF THE VA±UE OF A HUmAN BEINg. °E ISSUE
WAS POSED NOT ON±Y IN TERmS OF THE ACTUA± COmmODIfiED fiNANCIA± AND SExUA±-
IzED VA±UE OF ENS±AVED µFRICAN BODIES, BUT OF WHITE BODIES THAT WERE WI±±INg
TO TRAffiC HUmAN BEINgS IN ORDER TO REINSTATE THEIR (SUPPOSED) RACIA±IzED SUPE-
RIORITY. ¹T IS PART±Y THE APT ADAPTATION OF THESE qUESTIONS IN A “SExY” ÊRAzI±IAN
mE±ODRAmATIC FORm THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE HUgE SUCCESS OF THIS telenovela THE
WOR±D OVER. °E mAIN ACTORS, ¾AíS µRAújO AND ÍICTOR ÈAgNER, WERE HAI±ED AS
NATIONA± HEROES WHEN THEY VISITED ½EW ÓORk ·ITY. ¹T WAS A±SO THE DEEP IDEO-
±OgICA± qUESTIONINg AND SExY THEmE THAT mADE THE mAINSTREAm ½ORTH
µmERICAN mAgAzINE Æanity Fair IN 2000 REFER TO Íica AS “HA±F ‘¼OOTS,’ HA±F
SOſt PORN.”
°IS CENTRA± qUESTION OF POWER IS OBVIOUS±Y mORE ExP±ICIT IN A S±AVE SETTINg,
WHERE, IT WOU±D SEEm, THE P±ANTATION OWNER IS THE ON±Y ONE IN CONTRO±. ÊUT IN
Íica WE S±OW±Y ±EARN IT IS THE WHITE P±ANTATION OWNERS WHO ARE HORRIB±Y COR-
RUPTED BY THEIR mONSTROUS DESIRES TO CONTRO± AND DOmINATE THE µFRICAN
»THER. ¹N THIS ExP±OITATIVE ACT WHITE PEOP±E ±OSE A±± ABI±ITY AND POWER TO CON-
TRO± THEmSE±VES. °IS WHITE ANxIETY AND ±ACk OF CONTRO± IS mADE EVEN mORE
POIgNANT BY THE FACT THAT IT IS XICA, THE µFRICAN S±AVE, WHO IS AB±E TO SEDUCE
THE ·OmENDADOR, THE RICHEST WHITE PO±ITICA± OffiCER OF THE REgION. ²HE NOT
ON±Y gAINS HER FREEDOm BUT A±SO ENDS UP BEINg THE OWNER OF THE RICHEST DIA-
mOND mINES IN THE REgION. ¾O THIS DAY, SOmE ÊRAzI±IAN TOWNS IN THE REgION
ARE NAmED ´IAmANTINA (²mA±± ´IAmOND) AND »URO ¸RêTO (ʱACk GO±D).
¶±TImATE±Y, XICA NAVIgATES FROm ±IVINg AS A S±AVE/NONHUmAN UNAB±E TO EVEN
WA±k INSIDE A CHURCH TO BECOmINg THE mOTHER OF A PRIEST IN THAT SAmE CHURCH
THAT ONCE DENIED HER SE±F-WORTH AND HUmANITY.
°AT XICA DA ²I±VA IS AN ACTUA± HISTORICA± SUBjECT AND THAT THE TE±ENOVE±A
mORE OR ±ESS FO±±OWS THIS FORmER S±AVE’S ROAD TO FREEDOm ON±Y HEIgHTENS THE
mE±ODRAmATIC TENSIONS OF POWER. ¹T IS NOT SURPRISINg THAT SUCH A SEDUCTIVE
SUBjECT AS XICA WOU±D BE ENTICINg TO DEVE±OPED PARTS OF THE WOR±D THAT ARE
gRUDgINg±Y COmINg TO TERmS WITH THEIR PART IN THE CO±ONIA± HISTORIES OF THE
µmERICAS, µFRICA, AND µSIA—AND A±SO AS PART OF A g±OBA±IzATION PROCESS THAT
CONTINUES TO BE INVESTED IN NEW FORmS OF CAPITA±ISm THAT NOW mUST INCORPO-
RATE, REPRODUCE, AND ENgAgE DIffERENCE RATHER THAN DENY IT.
ÈHAT IS IT ABOUT THIS mE±ODRAmATIC FORm THAT HAS BEEN AB±E TO ExCITE PEOP±E’S
ImAgINATION THE WOR±D OVER? ÈHAT ARE telenovelas AB±E TO OffER IN THE mOST
PRAgmATIC FASHION THAT DID NOT ExIST BEFORE OR THAT COmmUNITIES DIDN’T HAVE
ON THEIR OWN? ¸ERHAPS IT IS EqUA±±Y ImPORTANT TO CONSIDER HOW THESE mE±ODRA-
mATIC VENTURES HAVE BEEN AB±E TO flY UNDER THE CENSORSHIP AND RADAR OF INTE±-
±ECTUA±S AND CU±TURA± E±ITES AND IN THIS mANNER RECONNECT SUPPOSED±Y UNEDU-
CATED COmmUNITIES THROUgHOUT THE WOR±D.
Telenovelas HAVE mANAgED TO ADDRESS FAU±T ±INES CREATED BY CENTURIES OF
CO±ONIA±ISm. ¹T IS qUITE A CONTRAST, mAYBE EVEN A SURPRISE, THAT WHAT ONCE
WERE THE DESTINATIONS FOR S±AVES AND THE SOURCES OF RAW mATERIA±S ARE NOW
AB±E TO REPRESENT THEmSE±VES IN SUCH A mANNER FOR g±OBA± CONSUmPTION. µſtER
fiVE CENTURIES OF ExP±OITATIVE CONDITIONS telenovelas PRESENT THEmSE±VES AS A
WONDERFU± VEHIC±E FOR BOTH THE REPRESENTATION AND THE RE±EASE OF THE NATIVE
»THER.
»N ONE SIDE THEY gIVE VOICE (A±BEIT IN A DISgUISED FASHION) TO THE “NATIVES”
THAT SUPPOSED±Y HAVE NONE. »N THE OTHER THEY TEmPER THE ANxIETIES OF ImPE-
RIA± »THERS WHO WONDER IF THE E±ITES WENT TOO FAR—WITHOUT EVER ADmITTINg TO
THEmSE±VES THAT THEY kNOW THEY DID. ¾O THIS DEgREE telenovelas ExEmP±IFY ONE
OF JAmES ÊA±DWIN’S PROPHETIC ±INES, WRITTEN ±ONg AgO, IN THE mID-1900S: “°E
WOR±D IS NO ±ONgER WHITE, AND IT WI±± NEVER BE WHITE AgAIN.” Telenovelas ARE
±IVINg EVIDENCE OF THIS INSIgHT AND OF THE WHITE WOR±D’S ANxIETY TO WANT TO
±AUgH ABOUT OR AT ±EAST PRETEND TO ENjOY THE CHANgINg ±ANDSCAPE OF DIffERENCE.
MEANWHI±E, THE WOR±D IS BEINg TRANSfigURED, ONE telenovela AT A TImE, IN THE
PROCESS CREATINg NEW gROUPS OF G±OBA± ²OUTH COmmUNITIES WHO YEARN TO
ExPRESS NEW FORmS OF SE±F-REPRESENTATION, HISTORICA± RE±EASE, AND DOmINATION.
ÊA±DWIN, JAmES
1950 Notes of a Native Son. ÊOSTON: ÊEACON ¸RESS.
ÉA±±, ²TUART
1997 “°E LOCA± AND THE G±OBA±: G±OBA±IzATION AND ³THNICITY.” ¹N Culture, Glo-
balization and the System: Contemporary Conditions for the Representation
of Identity, ED. µ. ÌINg, 19–39. MINNEAPO±IS: ¶NIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA
¸RESS.
314
LOS ¹NVISIB±ES
Renato Rosaldo
315
ei¿hteen
Fabiano Maisonnave
316
èapan-braZil
Ãh e Ði r l froÇ Ñh i n è u K u • 317
RE±OCATED TO ²öO ¸AU±O AND OTHER CITIES. JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IANS BECAmE SmA±±-
BUSINESS OWNERS, OPENINg ±AUNDROmATS AND BODEgAS, A±± THE WHI±E gAININg FAmE
FOR THEIR RATES OF SAVINg AND INVESTmENT IN EDUCATION.
»NO WAS NOT ONE OF THESE mYTHICA± JAPANESE ImmIgRANTS. ÊREAkINg FROm
HIS COmPATRIOTS, HE OPENED A C±UB IN THE CENTER OF ²öO ¸AU±O, BRINgINg
ÊRAzI±IAN mUSICIANS—FAmOUS AND ±ESS SO—TO HIS STAgE. »NE OF HIS mOST
ImPORTANT CONTACTS WAS WITH THE gUITARIST ÊADEN ¸OWE±±, A WE±±-kNOWN PRO-
PONENT OF BOSSA NOVA AND COAUTHOR OF mANY SONgS WITH ÍINICIUS DE MORAES,
WHO WROTE THE ±YRICS TO “°E GIR± FROm ¹PANEmA” AND COUNT±ESS OTHER C±ASSICS.
¾OSHIRO »NO WORkED WITH ¸OWE±± IN 1970, WHI±E THE ARTIST WAS IN JAPAN
RECORDINg A ±IVE A±BUm. °E ENVIRONmENT IN WHICH LISA »NO WOU±D flOURISH
WAS IN THE mAkINg.
braZil-u.s.a.-èapan
ÊOSSA NOVA REACHED JAPAN THANkS TO ITS HUgE SP±ASH ON THE µmERICAN mUSIC
SCENE. ¹TS SONgS TE±±INg OF A “±OVE-SEA-flOWER” TRI±OgY SPREAD THROUgHOUT THE
1960S, ATTRACTINg AN AUDIENCE AND ARTISTS FROm ºRANk ²INATRA TO ³±VIS ¸RES±EY.
°E SO-CA±±ED BOSSA NOVA INVASION CAmE TO ½EW ÓORk ·ITY’S ·ARNEgIE ÉA±± ON
21 ½OVEmBER 1962, WHEN YOUNg ARTISTS INC±UDINg ²éRgIO MENDES, JOöO
GI±BERTO, AND ¾Om JOBIN A±± PERFORmED. ²UDDEN±Y PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN
ÊRAzI±IANS AND µmERICANS BECAmE THE ARTISTIC AND COmmERCIA± RAgE. ¹N 1963
A VERSION OF “°E GIR± FROm ¹PANEmA” RECORDED BY JOöO GI±BERTO, SAxOPHONIST
²TAN GETz, AND BUDDINg SINgER µSTRUD GI±BERTO SO±D TWO mI±±ION COPIES. °E
±IST OF µmERICAN ARTISTS WHO ExPERImENTED WITH BOSSA NOVA INC±UDED jUST
ABOUT EVERY BIg NAmE OF THE “C±ASSIC ERA” OF µmERICAN jAzz: ½AT “ÌINg” ·O±E,
JOHNNY MATHIS, ³±±A ºITzgERA±D, ²ARAH ÍAUgHAN, »SCAR ¸ETERSON, µ± JARREAU,
AND ME± ¾ORmé. ³±VIS ¸RES±EY RECORDED “ÊOSSA ½OVA ÊABY” IN 1963, DESPITE
THE SONg’S FAST PACE AND mARIACHI-C±AD mUSICIANS HAVINg ±ITT±E TO DO WITH JOöO
GI±BERTO’S RHYTHm. ³VEN SO, THE gENRE SPREAD ±IkE WI±DfiRE. “JUST ABOUT EVERY-
ONE ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH, BARRINg MOTHER °ERESA OF ·A±CUTTA, SEEmS TO
HAVE RECORDED ÊOSSA ½OVA AT ±EAST ONCE,” WRITES THE ÊRAzI±IAN jOURNA±IST ¼UY
·ASTRO. °E µmERICAN-ÊRAzI±IAN mUSICA± A±±IANCE REACHED ITS HEIgHT IN 1966,
WHEN ºRANk ²INATRA INVITED ¾Om JOBIm TO RECORD WITH HIm. °E RESU±T,
Francis Albert Sinatra & Antonio Carlos Jobim, WAS NOmINATED FOR µ±BUm OF
THE ÓEAR, ±OSINg THE GRAmmY TO THE ÊEAT±ES’ Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club
Band.
Ãh e Ði r l froÇ Ñh i n è u K u • 319
STY±E. ¼ATHER, IN 1989 »NO RECORDED HER DEBUT Catupiry IN A STUDIO IN ¼IO DE
JANEIRO. °E A±BUm, WHOSE NAmE IS A REFERENCE TO A BE±OVED TYPE OF ÊRAzI±IAN
CHEESE, FEATURED NINE SONgS IN ¸ORTUgUESE AND THREE mORE IN ³Ng±ISH. ÉER
SOſt VOICE WAS WE±± SUITED TO BOSSA NOVA AND HER ÊRAzI±IANNESS AND C±OSE RE±A-
TIONSHIPS WITH ÊRAzI±IAN mUSICIANS WORkED IN »NO’S FAVOR. ²TARTINg IN 1990
SHE RE±EASED ONE RECORDINg EVERY YEAR, VARYINg HER CO±±ABORATIONS WITH
ÊRAzI±IANS IN RECORDINg AND PRODUCTION, AS WE±± AS IN THE STUDIO.
¹N 1994, »NO CAUgHT HER BIg BREAk WHEN SHE RECORDED “³STRADA ÊRANCA” WITH
¾Om JOBIm IN ¼IO DE JANEIRO. “¹T WAS WONDERFU±. ÈE REHEARSED AT HIS HOUSE, ON
HIS ÓAmAHA ACOUSTIC PIANO. ¹T WAS ±IkE THE SOUND OF BIRDS,” »NO RECA±±ED IN A
2010 INTERVIEW. ºIVE YEARS ±ATER, »NO RECORDED HER BIggEST COmmERCIA± SUCCESS,
Dream, RE±EASED IN JAPAN BUT A±SO IN THE ·HINESE mARkETS OF ÉONg ÌONg AND
¾AIWAN. ¸RODUCED BY THE ÊRAzI±IAN »SCAR ·ASTRO-½EVES, Dream WAS THE BEgIN-
NINg OF WHAT »NO CA±±S HER “mUSICA± jOURNEY.” ºOR THE fiRST TImE, THE SONgS WERE
BOSSA NOVA VERSIONS OF ³Ng±ISH-±ANgUAgE C±ASSICS ±IkE “¾EA FOR ¾WO” (WITH SOmE
VERSES IN ¸ORTUgUESE) AND “MOON±IgHT ²ERENADE.” ¹N THE YEARS THAT FO±±OWED,
»NO’S CAREER gREW mORE AND mORE INTERNATIONA±±Y FOCUSED. ²HE RE±EASED A±BUmS
WITH g±OBA± INflUENCE FROm ÉAWAII (Bossa Hula Nova, 2001) AND ¹TA±Y (Éuesta
Bossa Mia, 2002) TO ²PAIN (Romance Latino, VO±S. 1–3).
LISA »NO NEVER FORgOT ÊRAzI±, EVEN AS SHE BROUgHT BOSSA NOVA TO THE WOR±D.
¹N 2007 SHE HEAD±INED A mAjOR OPEN-AIR SHOW IN ¾OkYO IN HONOR OF ¾Om
JOBIm AND ACCOmPANIED BY JOBIm’S SON AND gRANDSON, ¸AU±O AND ´ANIE±
JOBIm. ²HE SPEARHEADED A PHENOmENON THAT mAY NOT HAVE TOPPED THE
JAPANESE CHARTS RIgHT AWAY BUT SO±IDIfiED BOSSA NOVA AS ONE OF THE COUNTRY’S
PROmINENT mUSICA± NICHES WITH ITS OWN AUDIENCE, ARTISTS, AND INDUSTRY.
èapan-china
µſtER ITS BIRTH IN ÊRAzI± AND EmIgRATION TO THE ¶NITED ²TATES, BOSSA NOVA
FOUND ITS HEART IN JAPAN. ÊY 1990 JAPAN WAS THE mAIN mARkET FOR ESTAB±ISHED
ÊRAzI±IAN ARTISTS ±IkE ¼OBERTO MENESCA±, ½ARA LEöO, LEI±A ¸INHEIRO, AND
JOYCE. ³VERY ÊRAzI±IAN BOSSA NOVA ARTIST TRAVE±ED TO JAPAN; mOST OF THEm mADE
THE TRIP mORE THAN ONCE. ³VEN THE REC±USIVE JOöO GI±BERTO mADE THE ±ONg TRIP
TO µSIA TO PERFORm IN 2003.
ÊOSSA NOVA’S mOmENTUm IN JAPAN PRO±IFERATED. ½O OTHER COUNTRY HAS A
mORE ExTENSIVE CATA±Og OF RE±EASES AND RERE±EASES. »±D AND RARE A±BUmS IN
ÊRAzI±, SUCH AS THE mUSIC OF ·HICO ºEITOSA AND THE ¾AmBA ¾RIO, CAN BE FOUND
Ãh e Ði r l froÇ Ñh i n è u K u • 321
±ATTER kNOWN FOR THE CATCHY AND INTERNATIONA±±Y SUCCESSFU± “µI, ²E EU TE PEgO”
(»H, ¹F ¹ ·ATCH ÓOU)—P±AYED HUgE SHOWS TO ÊRAzI±IAN AUDIENCES IN JAPAN.
MEANWHI±E BOSSA NOVA mUSICIANS ±IkE ³DU LOBO AND »SCAR ·ASTRO-½EVES
ATTRACT JAPANESE CROWDS, YET HARD±Y mAkE A RIPP±E AmONg ÊRAzI±IAN FANS.
ÈHY DON’T JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IANS, WHO OſtEN REAffiRm THEIR IDENTITIES BY
ImPORTINg ÊRAzI±IAN PRODUCTS AND mUSIC TO JAPAN, EmBRACE THE EVER-PRESENT
BOSSA NOVA? °E JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IAN CU±TURA± ACTIVIST ÍA±éRIA »HTSUkI THINkS
THAT “THE mAjORITY OF dekasseguis HAVE ±ITT±E INTEREST IN BOSSA NOVA BECAUSE, AT
THE TImE WHEN THESE ÊRAzI±IANS WERE EmIgRATINg TO JAPAN, THE gENRE WAS A±±
BUT FORgOTTEN IN ÊRAzI±.” ÊUT THERE mAY BE OTHER ExP±ANATIONS. °E ¾OkYO-
BASED JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IAN jOURNA±IST ³WERTHON ¾OBACE, FOR ExAmP±E, SEES THREE
REASONS THAT dekassegui DISTANCE THEmSE±VES FROm ÊOSSA ½OVA. ºIRST, THE
ImmIgRANTS COmE FROm THE ±OWER-mIDD±E C±ASS AND AS AN “ ‘OTHER’ ENDS UP
BEINg DISCRImINATED AgAINST. ¹T’S ±IkE BEINg A FAN OF BOSSA NOVA AND ±IVINg IN
THE gHETTO. ÓOU CAN ±ISTEN TO IT IN YOUR HOUSE, BUT IN THE STREETS IT’S gOTTA BE
[ÊRAzI±IAN] FUNk.” ²ECOND, ¾OBACE ASSERTS, ExPATS FROm ÊRAzI± BECOmE mORE
“PATRIOTIC” IN JAPAN, OſtEN EmBRACINg mUSIC SEEN AS mORE TRADITIONA±±Y
ÊRAzI±IAN, ±IkE COUNTRY mUSIC, Axé, AND SAmBA. ºINA±±Y, “FOR THE NEW gENERA-
TIONS IN ÊRAzI±, BOSSA NOVA IS AN ANTIqUATED STY±E OF mUSIC THAT FAI±ED TO EVO±VE
WITH TImE. °E ±YRICS ARE THE SAmE, THE THEmES AND THE RHYTHm DON’T CHANgE.”
ÊRAzI±IANS EVEN gRIPE, ACCORDINg TO ¾OBACE, THAT THERE IS TOO mUCH BOSSA NOVA
IN JAPAN’S PUB±IC ARENA. “¹’VE HEARD ±OTS OF PEOP±E COmP±AIN THAT ÊOSSA ½OVA
IS OVERP±AYED IN JAPAN. ºROm E±EVATORS TO CAFES, SUPERmARkETS, RESTAURANTS,
EVEN mEDICA± C±INICS AND HEA±TH SPAS.”
µNOTHER ÊRAzI±IAN jOURNA±IST FROm ¾OkYO, ¼OBERTO MAxWE±±, BE±IEVES THAT
THIS DISTANCINg IS S±OW±Y CHANgINg. µCCORDINg TO MAxWE±±:
»VER TImE, ESPECIA±±Y AſtER THE 1990S, JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IANS BEgAN SE±F-IDENTIFY-
INg AS ÊRAzI±IANS, SETTINg THEmSE±VES APART FROm “NATIVE” JAPANESE. µND IN THE
EAR±Y 2000S, THEY BEgAN gETTINg INTO ÊRAzI±IAN mUSIC, OſtEN AS STUDENTS EITHER
OF NON-JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IANS, WHO HAD COmE TO JAPAN AS mUSICIANS, OR OF SkI±±ED
JAPANESE ARTISTS. µ±± OF THIS WAS A mEANS OF fiNDINg THEIR P±ACE WITHIN JAPANESE
SOCIETY, NOT, AS mANY HAD HOPED AT THE BEgINNINg OF THE mIgRATORY PROCESS, AS
THE CHI±DREN OF JAPANESE PARENTS (AND THEREFORE THEmSE±VES JAPANESE), BUT AS
ÊRAzI±IANS INSTEAD. ¹ WOU±D EVEN VENTURE TO SAY THAT JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IANS ARE
ON±Y INTO SAmBA mUSIC AND BOSSA NOVA HERE IN JAPAN. (³-mAI± CORRESPONDENCE,
10 MAY 2014)
ÈHI±E BOSSA NOVA WAS DEVE±OPINg ITS OWN DYNAmIC IN JAPAN, LISA »NO WAS
gAININg OTHER AUDIENCES, PRImARI±Y IN ·HINA. ´ESPITE ·HINA’S STRINgENT RU±ES
Ãh e Ði r l froÇ Ñh i n è u K u • 323
fi¿ure 18.1. JAPANESE ÊRAzI±IAN SINgER LISA »NO DURINg A 2011 mUSIC FESTIVA± IN ÊEIjINg.
¸HOTO BY ºABIANO MAISONNAVE.
SOUND OF THE STREET BE±ONgS TO LISA »NO,” HE WROTE. ·´ HAWkERS ON THE CITY’S
TEEmINg STREET CORNERS HAVE TURNED »NO’S VOICE INTO gREAT PROfiTS. ÊUT CON-
NECTINg »NO TO ÊRAzI± IS A DIffERENT STORY. µS THE FORmER CONSU± ExP±AINED:
´URINg THE ÈOR±D ³xPO IN 2010, THE CONSU±ATE WORkED TO PROmOTE BOSSA
NOVA’S IDENTIfiCATION AS A ÊRAzI±IAN mUSIC gENRE BY SPONSORINg CONCERTS BY THE
gROUP ÊOSSA ½EgRA. °E qUINTET/qUARTET UNITES ÊRAzI±IAN AND µSIAN mUSI-
CIANS, RECORDINg BOSSA NOVA TUNES IN BOTH ³Ng±ISH AND MANDARIN. °E FO±±OW-
INg YEAR, IT WAS THE ·HINESE SINgER JASmINE ·HEN’S TURN. ·HEN, WHO HAS
RECORDED ÊRAzI±IAN C±ASSICS IN MANDARIN SINCE 2008, CAmE TO SHARE THE STAgE
·ASTRO, ¼UY
2003 Bossa Nova: the Story of the Brazilian Music °at Seduced the World. ·HI-
CAgO: ·HICAgO ¼EVIEW ¸RESS.
Ãh e Ði r l froÇ Ñh i n è u K u • 325
nineteen
Alma Guillermoprieto
326
REgARDINg E± GIgANTE DE± ½ORTE. °E AUDIENCE FOR HOmEgROWN mOVIES mE±TED
AWAY, MExICAN NATIONA± STUDIOS SHUT DOWN, AND BETWEEN 1950 AND 1990 ON±Y
A SCATTERINg OF mOVIES WERE mADE IN MExICO IN ANY gIVEN YEAR. »THER THAN A
FEW ±ABORIOUS ART-HOUSE EffORTS, THOSE THAT WERE PRODUCED WERE HARD±Y OF NOTE.
MExICAN CINEmA CAmE TO INTERNATIONA± ATTENTION AgAIN IN THE 1990S, REIN-
CARNATED AS ART fi±m WITH BOx-OffiCE POWER. ¼EmARkAB±E DIRECTORS, CINEmATOg-
RAPHERS, SET DESIgNERS, AND ACTORS CAmE UP THROUgH THE RANkS. °ANkS TO THE
ARRIVA± OF BIg-BUDgET ADVERTISINg CAmPAIgNS AND THE AgE OF THE CREATIVE DIREC-
TOR, mANY ASPIRINg cineastas SURVIVED AS fi±mmAkERS BY DIRECTINg TE±EVISION
ADVERTISEmENTS. »F THE gENERATION OF PERFORmERS WHO CAmE OF AgE IN THE
1990S, NONE HAS BECOmE SO IDENTIfiED WITH THE ½EW LATIN µmERICAN ·INEmA
AS GAE± GARCíA ÊERNA±, WHO, OUT OF THE SENSE OF FAmI±IARITY HIS SCREEN PERSONA
gENERATES WOR±DWIDE, IS OſtEN REFERRED TO BY HIS fiRST NAmE ON±Y.
GAE± HAS, CERTAIN±Y, THE mOST DISTINgUISHED fi±mOgRAPHY OF THE CURRENT
CROP OF LATIN µmERICAN ACTORS. µT AgE EIgHTEEN, HE STARRED IN AN ENCHANTINg
TEN-mINUTE SHORT CA±±ED De tripas corazón, DIRECTED BY µNTONIO ¶RRUTIA: THE
SHY, HUNgRY, SExUA± CURIOSITY GAE± PROjECTED CONTRIBUTED gREAT±Y TO THE fi±m’S
»SCAR NOmINATION. µ YEAR ±ATER HE WAS THE UNFORgETTAB±E FACE IN THE mU±TICAST
Amores perros, WHICH BROUgHT HIm STARDOm AND gAVE THE BRASH YOUNg DIREC-
TOR, µ±EjANDRO GONzá±Ez ¹ñáRRITU, HIS OWN PARTINg-OF-THE-SEAS mOmENT. °EN
CAmE µ±FONSO ·UARóN’S Ã tu mamá también, A±SO AN INTERNATIONA± HIT, AND AN
»SCAR NOmINEE. °e Crime of Father Amaro, °e Motorcycle Diaries, AND Bad
Education, THE ±AST DIRECTED BY ¸EDRO µ±mODóVAR, SOON FO±±OWED. ÈITH THESE
fi±mS CAmE A S±EW OF AWARDS AND »SCAR NOmINATIONS.
ÉE HAS APPEARED OR STARRED IN THIRTY-FOUR ADDITIONA± fi±mS AND SUNg IN A
FEW OF THEm. ÉE EVEN HAS A mOCk-mUSIC VIDEO ON ÓOU¾UBE, INITIA±±Y mADE FOR
THE MExICAN BOx-OffiCE HIT Rudo y Cursi. ¾OgETHER WITH ´IEgO LUNA, HIS
CHI±DHOOD FRIEND AND COSTAR IN Ã tu mamá también AND Rudo y Cursi, HE
STARTED THE PRODUCTION COmPANY ·ANANA, WHICH HAS PRODUCED, AmONg OTH-
ERS, THE RIgOROUS±Y UNSENTImENTA± BEAUTY-qUEEN THRI±±ER Miss Bala (MISS
ÊU±±ET) AND ·ARY ºUkUNAgA’S DEBUT FEATURE fi±m, Sin nombre, ABOUT A PAIR OF
ÉONDURAN mIgRANTS TRAVE±INg NORTH THROUgH MExICO, WHICH gARNERED mANY
INTERNATIONA± AWARDS AND NOmINATIONS.
GARCíA ÊERNA± ±IkES TO PRETEND THAT NONE OF THIS IS ExCEPTIONA±. ¹T’S HIS WAY
OF PROTECTINg HImSE±F FROm THE BURDENS OF STARDOm, A±THOUgH IT’S NOT C±EAR IF
THE TRICk ACTUA±±Y WORkS. ÈHEN ¹ mET WITH HIm ONE ±ATE mORNINg IN THE
·ANANA HEADqUARTERS IN MExICO ·ITY’S HIPSTER-ISH ·O±ONIA ¼OmA, HE WAS
HIDINg BEHIND EYEg±ASSES AND WEARINg TORN jEANS AND A ¾-SHIRT. ¶NSHAVEN AND
ii
iii
ºOR A±± THE g±AmOR AND jUmPINg AROUND THE WOR±D IT INVO±VES, GAE±’S PRIVATE
±IFE IS DOmESTIC AND qUIET. ÉE ±IVES IN ÊUENOS µIRES WITH THE µRgENTINE-BORN
339
and Sex Tourism in the Dominican Republic. ²HE IS CURRENT±Y WRITINg Love and
Heartache across Borders ABOUT FAmI±IES SEPARATED BY ±EgA± STATUS. ²HE IS AN ADVISER TO
THE ÊEST ¸RACTICES ¸O±ICY ¸ROjECT AND HAS BEEN A BOARD mEmBER OF ´IffERENT µVENUES
AND ɹ¸²—ORgANIzATIONS THAT ADVOCATE FOR SEx WORkER RIgHTS. ²HE A±SO FOUNDED THE
²URVIVOR LEADERSHIP ¾RAININg ºUND FOR TRAffiCkINg SURVIVOR-ADVOCATES.
Ándrew Òritt IS A ¸H.´. CANDIDATE IN LATIN µmERICAN HISTORY AT ³mORY
¶NIVERSITY FOCUSINg ON SPATIA± HISTORY, RACE/ETHNICITY, ÊRAzI± IN g±OBA± CONTExT, AND
CU±TURA± HISTORIES OF PRODUCTION. ÉIS DISSERTATION ExP±ORES THE mAkINg OF SPACES AND
RACIA± AND ETHNIC IDENTIfiCATION IN THREE NEIgHBORHOODS IN THE CITY OF ²öO ¸AU±O. °E
PROjECT IS SUPPORTED BY A ²OCIA± ²CIENCE ¼ESEARCH ·OUNCI± ME±±ON ¹NTERNATIONA±
´ISSERTATION ¼ESEARCH ºE±±OWSHIP AND THE ºU±BRIgHT-ÉAYS ´OCTORA± ´ISSERTATION
¼ESEARCH µBROAD PROgRAm.
Òrenda Ælsey IS µSSOCIATE ¸ROFESSOR OF ÉISTORY AT ÉOFSTRA ¶NIVERSITY. ²HE IS THE
AUTHOR OF Citizens and Sportsmen: Fútbol and Politics in Twentieth-Century Chile.
ÉER WORk HAS APPEARED IN THE Journal of Social History, THE International Journal of
the History of Sport, AND Radical History Review. ²HE HAS WRITTEN ON SPORTS AND PO±I-
TICS FOR mAINSTREAm PUB±ICATIONS, INC±UDINg THE New Republic AND Sports Illustrated.
ÉER CURRENT BOOk, COAUTHORED WITH JOSHUA ½ADE±, ExAmINES THE HISTORY OF WOmEN’S
SPORT, gENDER, AND SExUA±ITY IN LATIN µmERICA.
Àeter Ævans IS ¸ROFESSOR ³mERITUS IN THE ´EPARTmENT OF ²OCIO±OgY, ¶NIVERSITY OF
·A±IFORNIA, ÊERkE±EY, AND ²ENIOR ºE±±OW IN ¹NTERNATIONA± ²TUDIES AT THE ÈATSON
¹NSTITUTE FOR ¹NTERNATIONA± ²TUDIES, ÊROWN ¶NIVERSITY. ÉE IS BEST kNOWN FOR HIS WORk
ON THE PO±ITICA± ECONOmY OF NATIONA± DEVE±OPmENT, ExEmP±IfiED BY HIS 1995 BOOk,
Embedded Autonomy: States and Industrial Transformation, WHICH SETS THE RO±E OF
THE ÊRAzI±IAN STATE IN COmPARATIVE PERSPECTIVE. ¹N RECENT ARTIC±ES HE HAS ExAmINED
CHANgINg STATE-SOCIETY RE±ATIONS AND THE RO±E OF ±ABOR.
Àaèa Ôaudree IS µSSOCIATE ¸ROFESSOR OF µNTHROPO±OgY AT ÊROWN ¶NIVERSITY. ²HE
IS THE AUTHOR OF Singing for the Dead: °e Politics of Indigenous Revival in Mexico,
WHICH WON THE 2014 ÊOOk ¸RIzE FROm THE ²OCIETY FOR LATIN µmERICAN AND ·ARIBBEAN
µNTHROPO±OgY (µmERICAN µNTHROPO±OgICA± µSSOCIATION). ²HE IS A±SO A PUB±ISHED
POET AND P±AYWRIgHT.
Àaul Ðootenber¿, ²¶½Ó ´ISTINgUISHED ¸ROFESSOR OF ÉISTORY AND ²OCIO±OgY
AT ²TONY ÊROOk ¶NIVERSITY, IS A ±EADINg SCHO±AR OF THE HISTORY OF DRUgS IN THE
µmERICAS. ÉE STUDIED LATIN µmERICAN HISTORY AT ²T. µNTONY’S ·O±±EgE, »xFORD, AND
THE ¶NIVERSITY OF ·HICAgO, BEFORE TURNINg TO g±OBA± DRUg HISTORY WITH WORkS SUCH AS
Cocaine: Global Histories (¼OUT±EDgE, 1999) AND Andean Cocaine: °e Making of a
Global Drug (¶NIVERSITY OF ½ORTH ·ARO±INA ¸RESS, 2008). ÉE IS ACTIVE IN INTERDISCI-
P±INARY INITIATIVES FOR NEW PERSPECTIVES ON DRUg STUDIES AND DRUg REFORm SUCH AS THE
´RUgS, ²ECURITY, AND ´EmOCRACY (´²´) PROgRAm OF THE ²OCIA± ²CIENCE ¼ESEARCH
·OUNCI± AND THE »PEN ²OCIETY ºOUNDATIONS.
Ðre¿ Ðrandin IS ¸ROFESSOR OF ÉISTORY AT ½EW ÓORk ¶NIVERSITY AND A mEmBER OF
THE µmERICAN µCADEmY OF µRTS AND ²CIENCES. ÉE IS THE AUTHOR OF A NUmBER OF BOOkS,
345
ÊO±IVIA (continued) ÊRAzI±IAN ·OOPERATION µgENCY (µÊ·),
mUSIC, 114, 116–18, 121, 124–25; 189–90, 191, 193fig.
TOURISm, 268; ¶.². PO±ITICS, 64 ʼ¹·² COUNTRIES (ÊRAzI±, ¼USSIA, ¹NDIA,
ÊO±SA ºAmí±IA, 188, 282–3 ·HINA, ²OUTH µFRICA), 22, 187, 265
BORDERS, 15, 17, 155, 163–64, 223, 288; DRUg ÊUSH, GEORgE È., 23, 63, 80, 243, 244
CU±TURE, 207, 209, 214, 216; FOOD AND
CUISINE, 152, 155; ±INgUISTIC, 98, 113; ·ANDOmB±é, 104
±ITERATURE, 294, 297; mUSIC, 119; SOCCER, CANNABIS, 11, 210, 213–15, 217, 219
131, 135, 140; “SOUTH OF THE BORDER,” 10, ·APE ÍERDE, 110, 188
93, 214; TRAVERSINg NATIONA±, 107, 113, CAPITA±ISm, 15, 17, 85, 160, 311, 330; CRITIqUE
194, 294, 326, 335; ¶.².-MExICO, 9, OF BY JAmAICA ÌINkAID, 265; AND DRUg-
66–71, 110, 119, 207, 209, 299 FOODS, 210; ÉUgO ·HAVEz ON, 83;
ÊORgES, JORgE LUIS: ³± ÊOOm, 287, 291, NEO±IBERA±, 72
296–97, 300; “°E LIBRARY OF ÊABE±,” ·ARDOSO, ºERNANDO ÉENRIqUE, 22, 141
97; VARIETY OF ²PANISH, 106, 108, 112 ·ARIBBEAN: THE µFRICAN DIASPORA, 104,
BOSSA NOVA, 13, 107, 279, 288, 316–325 120–21; µFRO-DESCENDANT POPU±ATIONS,
ÊRAzI±, 20, 22, 25, 222–23; µFRO-ÊRAzI±IANS, 47, 103–4; ·ATHO±ICISm, 47; C±ImATE
31, 104, 114–15, 132–33, 138–39, 274, CHANgE, 33; FOOD AND CUISINE, 150; ±ABOR,
276–77, 280–81, 283–84; AgRICU±TURE, 47, 149, 222, 240–41, 243, 244, 245;
11, 164, 167–86, 187–203; ÊRAzI±-µFRICA ±ANgUAgE, 102, 103–4, 110, 112; mUSIC,
CONNECTIONS AND COmPARISONS, 104, 139, 123, 289; P±ANT-DRUgS, 210–11, 213–14;
189, 194–95, 197–98, 201–2; P±ACE WITHIN LATIN µmERICA, 294; SEx
DEVE±OPmENT INITIATIVES, 164, 167–86, TOURISm, 247–49; SOCCER, 131; SOCIA±
187–203; DICTATORSHIP, 40–41, 43, 48, mOVEmENTS, 82, 240–41, 243, 244, 245;
52, 141, 190, 198, 319; ENVIRONmENTA± TOURISm, 258, 264, 265, 266, 268
PO±ICIES, 33; FAVE±AS IN, 42, 47, 48, 53, 54, ·ASTRO, ºIDE±, 31, 124, 330; BASEBA±±, 138;
216, 280; fi±m, 276, 279–80; FOOD AND AND ¶.². PO±ITICS, 9,16–17, 58–65; Ão soy
CUISINE, 147–48; ON g±OBA± PO±ITICA± Betty, la fea (¹ µm ¶g±Y ÊETTY), 307
STAgE, 4–5, 33, 187–88, 265; INDIgENOUS ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH AND ·ATHO±ICISm, 9, 16,
POPU±ATIONS, 104, 132–33, 271, 273, 279; 37–57, 98–99, 280–81; AND µFRO-
±ANgUAgE, 10, 32, 112; ±IBERATION ÊRAzI±IAN RE±IgIONS, 274, 280–81;
THEO±OgY, 38, 40–42, 48, 52, 53, 54; ·ATHO±ICISms, 47–8; DICTATORSHIP, 40,
±ITERATURE, 291, 294, 297, 299; mIgRATION 44–45, 49–51; gENDER, 40–42, 52–55;
TO AND FROm, 108, 110, 212, 271–72, 276, ±ANgUAgE, 100, 106–7; P±ANT-DRUgS, 209,
277–79, 288, 317–18, 321, 322; mUSIC, 211, 215, 216, 218; ²ECOND ÍATICAN
121, 316–25; PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg, 9, ·OUNCI±, 38, 39fig., 41. See also
29, 74–75; ¸ARTIDO DOS ¾RABA±HADORES, ±IBERATION THEO±OgY
29, 74, 282; P±ANT-DRUgS, 210, 211, 212, ·ENTRA± µmERICA, 101, 228; THE ·ATHO±IC
213, 216, 217; POSITIVISm AND SPIRITISm, ·HURCH AND ·ATHO±ICISm IN, 38, 43, 47;
272–73; PUB±IC HEA±TH, 5; RACE AND LAND±ESS ÈORkERS MOVEmENT
ETHNICITY IN, 31, 223, 271, 274–77, PARTNERSHIPS IN, 81; mIgRANTS FROm,
283–84; RE±IgION, 46, 47, 48, 54; RURA± 11–12, 336; mI±ITARY DICTATORSHIP AND
mOBI±IzATION, 80–82; SEx WORkERS IN, CIVI± WAR IN, 38; P±ANT-DRUgS AND DRUg
240–44, 246, 249; THE S±AVE TRADE AND CU±TURE, 209, 212, 218; SOCCER, 209;
S±AVERY, 115, 212, 275–77, 279, 307, TOURISm, 266
310–12; SOCCER, 131–33, 135, 136, 137–45; ·ENTRA± ¹NTE±±IgENCE µgENCY (·¹µ), 1, 40,
telenovelas, 307, 310–12; TOURISm, 266, 52, 59, 60–61, 118
274, 281 ·HáVEz, ÉUgO, 4–5, 29, 64, 75, 83
346 • i n de ô
·HICAgO ÊOYS, 21, 36N6 GUATEmA±A, 234, 237; INDIgENOUS
·HI±E, 32, 36N11, 108, 291; 1973 mI±ITARY gROUPS, 3, 230, 237; JAmAICA ÌINCAID’S
COUP, 8, 118, 140–41, 330; A±±-FEmA±E CRITIqUE OF, 264–65; ±ANgUAgE, 97,
SOCCER TEAm ¾A±CA IN, 134fig.; ·HICAgO 98–101; LATIN µmERICAN mUSIC IN
ÊOYS, 21, 36N6; DICTATORSHIP, 79–80, ºRENCH CO±ONIA± µFRICA, 123; LUSOPHONE
118, 330; ECONOmIC PO±ICIES, 21–22; µFRICA, 194, 196, 198; mIgRATION, 103,
MAPUCHE PEOP±E, 103; mUSIC, 118–19, 108; IN ½ORTH µmERICA, 32; AND ½ORTH-
122; ¸AB±O ½ERUDA, 9, 296; ¼ICARDO ²OUTH DEVE±OPmENT, 187; P±ANT-DRUgS,
LAgOS, 8, 16, 20–36; ¼OBERTO ÊO±AñO, 209–14, 218–19; ROOTS OF SA±SA mUSIC IN,
300; SOCCER, 133–34, 138, 140–41; 120–1; S±AVERY, 103, 104–5; telenovelas,
STUDENT mOVEmENT, 28; TRANSITION TO 309, 312; TRADE, 103, 148–49, 210–11
DEmOCRACY, 23–26, 36N9, 36N12, 119, 330 ·O±UmBIAN ³xCHANgE, 147
·HINA, 23, 277–78, 280, 297, 330; BOSSA ·O±UmBUS, ·HRISTOPHER, 3–4, 68, 99, 225,
NOVA IN, 13, 288, 316, 320–25; ʼ¹·², 232
22, 187, 265; ·HINESE ImmIgRANTS IN COmmUNISm, 38, 58–65, 138, 296
¶.²., 213; FOOD, 11, 105, 149, 152, 156; CONSUmPTION, 94; Cannibalist Manifesto,
SOCCER, 142; TRADE WITH AND INVESTmENT 274; OF ±ITERATURE ON INTERNATIONA±
IN LATIN µmERICA, 5, 11, 124, 171, 174, mARkET, 292; OF mEAT IN ·HINA, 176;
175–76, 184, 278; ¶.². PO±ITICS, 60 ¸ACIfiC FUSION CUISINE, 146–162; OF
·HRISTIAN ÊASE ·OmmUNITY, 38–40, 43, PERFORmANCES OF TRADITION, 262; OF
44, 50 telenovelas, 304–5, 308, 312; AND
City of God, 280, 288 UPWARD SOCIA± mOBI±ITY, 282–83
CIVI± WAR, 38, 212, 274; IN GUATEmA±A, 221, conversos, 210
225, 234–35; IN LEBANON, 213; IN CORPORATIONS: ACqUISITION OF ±AND IN
MOzAmBIqUE, 196, 198–99; IN ¸ERU, 151; MOzAmBIqUE BY, 188, 196–97; ÊRAzI±IAN
IN ²PAIN, 26, 36N7, 296 SYmBO±IC gOODS, 279–80; CORPORATE
C±ImATE CHANgE, 16, 163, 165, 199, 226; CAPITA±ISm, 72, 85; ENVIRONmENTA±
DEFORESTATION, 33, 171, 177–181, 183–185; ACTIVISm AND, 84; FOOD PRODUCTION, 82;
³VO MORA±ES, 82–84; LATIN µmERICA’S ¸E±é’S TIES TO, 138; PHARmACEUTICA±, 5,
RO±E IN ADDRESSINg, 5, 32–34, 73, 82–84, 209, 219
86 ·ORTázAR, JU±IO, 291, 295, 298, 300, 301
COCOA, 211 CREO±IzATION, 93; FOOD AND CUISINE, 159, 211;
COffEE, 1, 102, 105, 210–12, 216, 278 ±ANgUAgE, 104, 110
·O±D ÈAR, 238; THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH, 38, ·UARóN, µ±FONSO, 327–29, 331–33
46; AND CONflICT IN GUATEmA±A, 221, ·UBA: BASEBA±±, 138; ÊUENA ÍISTA ²OCIA±
234, 238; AND ·UBA, 58–64, 65N1, 138; ·±UB, 94, 115; ·HE GUEVARA, 1, 30–31,
DRUg PO±ICIES AND, 215, 218; ±ANgUAgE, 62, 63–64; ·HINESE-·UBAN FOOD, 105;
109; SOCCER, 138 fi±m, 330; GABRIE± GARCíA MáRqUEz’S
·O±OmBIA, 82; COffEE, 212; ·O±OmBIAN fi±m SCHOO± IN, 329, 332; ExI±ES FROm IN
¼AI±WAY ·OmPANY, 132; DANCE, 124; ¶.²., 59, 61, 62, 63, 64; ±ITERATURE, 292;
mUSIC, 105, 120, 122; ¸±AN ·O±OmBIA, mEDICA± PROFESSIONA±S FROm IN ÈEST
216; P±ANT-DRUgS, 207, 208, 213, 214, µFRICA, 104; mIgRATION TO AND FROm,
215–17; ²ERgIO ·ABRERA, 332, 333; SEx 109; mUSIC, 115, 120, 123–24; ¸OPE
WORkER ACTIVISm, 240; TOURISm, 268; ºRANCIS, 46, 52; RUmBA, 115; S±AVERY AND
TRUTH COmmISSIONS, 79; Ão soy Betty, la ABO±ITION IN, 276; SOCCER, 131; TOURISm,
fea (¹ Am ¶g±Y ÊETTY), 307–9 256, 260, 262–63, 264–66, 268, 336;
CO±ONIA±ISm, 3, 8, 10, 12, 72; THE ·ATHO±IC TRANSCU±TURATION, 148; AND ¶.².
·HURCH, 39, 40, 52, 100; FOOD, 102; PO±ITICS, 9, 16–17, 46, 52, 58–65, 120
i n de ô • 347
·UBAN ¼EVO±UTION, 1, 31, 58–59, 115, 330 DISAPPEARED, THE, 77; IN µRgENTINA, 43,
·U±INARY ¹NSTITUTE OF µmERICA, 151, 152, 153, 44–45, 50–52, 77–80; THE ·ATHO±IC
160 ·HURCH, 43, 44–45, 50–52; IN
GUATEmA±A, 230, 234; MARCE±±A
´AkAR, 94, 123, 309 µ±THAUS-¼EID ON, 40; ½ATIONA±
DANCE, 10, 93, 107, 114–26, 326; µFRO- ·OmmISSION ON THE ´ISAPPEARANCE OF
·O±OmBIAN, 124; µFRO-·UBAN, 124; ¸ERSONS (·HI±E), 35N3; ¼ICARDO LAgOS
CAPOEIRA, 279; ·ARmEN MIRANDA, 13, ON, 24
114–15; cueca IN JAPAN, 119–20; DISEASE, 5; CO±ONIzATION AND CONqUEST, 3–4;
±AmBADA, 121; LU±A’S COmmENTS ON, 194; DANCE USED TO TREAT ¸ARkINSON’S, 120;
RE-µFRICANIzATION, 123; SOCCER, 137; DRUg-CU±TURE, 215; ³BO±A, 104; FOOT AND
TOURISm, 260fig. See also SA±SA; SAmBA; mOUTH, 176; “mAD COW,” 176; SEx WORk,
TANgO 244–46, 250; STUDENT DISSENT DESCRIBED
´ARíO, ¼UBéN, 292 AS, 60. See also ɹÍ/µ¹´²
DE± ¾ORO, GUI±±ERmO, 331, 332, 333 ´OmINICAN ¼EPUB±IC, 74, 243, 245
DEmOCRACY, 23–30, 80, 84–87, 228, 285; ´ONOSO, JOSé, 291, 295
DRUg PO±ICY, 217–18, 309; FOOD AND ´RUg ³NFORCEmENT µgENCY (´³µ), 207, 218
CUISINE, 148, 155; IN GUATEmA±A, 234–
37; IN MOzAmBIqUE, 196; PARTICIPATORY, ECONOmIC PO±ICY, 20–21, 73, 82, 85; IN
5, 9, 16, 74–77; “RACIA± DEmOCRACY,” ÊRAzI±, 281; IN ·HI±E, 20–21;
276–77, 283; ²A±VADOR µ±±ENDE’S PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg, 74–77; SOCCER
E±ECTION, 8, 118, 140; SOCCER, 141; AND NEO±IBERA±ISm, 140; ¶.².
TRANSITIONS TO, 16, 20, 21, 23–30, MI±±ENNIUm ·HA±±ENgE ·ORPORATION,
49, 77–80, 119, 141; IN THE ¶.²., 197; ÈASHINgTON ·ONSENSUS, 20–21,
59; ¶.². ·UBAN ´EmOCRACY µCT, 35N4, 36. See also ¹NTERNATIONA±
62–63 MONETARY ºUND; ÈOR±D ÊANk
DEVE±OPmENT, 72, 74, 163–5; ÊRAzI±IAN ³CUADOR, 108, 208, 217, 218, 243
SOYBEAN AgRICU±TURE, 173–177, 178; ³± ÊOOm, 291, 294–301
º¹ºµ AND, 139; IN GUATEmA±A, 228, 231, ³± ²A±VADOR, 238; FOOD AND CUISINE, 152; THE
236, 237; NEO±IBERA±ISm, 35N4; MAYA, 229; mIgRANTS FROm, 110, 147;
PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg, 74; PROjECTS IN çSCAR ¼OmERO, 40, 47, 52, 106
MOzAmBIqUE, 11, 187–202; AND SEx ³mPRESA ÊRASI±EIRA DE ¸ESqUISA
WORkERS IN ÊRAzI±, 244; SUSTAINAB±E, 81; µgROPECUáRIA (³mBRAPA), 173–74,
TOURISm AND, 260, 262, 264–65 188–194, 198, 200
DICTATORSHIP, 16; IN µRgENTINA, 20, 24, 35N3, ENCOUNTER: CO±ONIA± ExPANSION AND
36N8, 77–80; IN ÊRAzI±, 40–41, 43, 48, CONqUEST, 4–5, 97–103, 225; CU±INARY,
52, 141, 190, 198, 319; IN ·HI±E, 8, 21, 147, 154; ±ANgUAgE, 97–103; P±ANT-DRUgS
24–25, 26–27, 36N9, 36N12, 79–80, 118, AND DRUg CU±TURE, 209; TOURISm, 222,
140, 330; DEVE±OPmENT PROjECTS DURINg 247, 249, 256–269
PERIODS OF, 190, 198; IN GUATEmA±A, 234; ³Ng±AND, 278; ABO±ITION OF S±AVERY, 276;
±ITERATURE, 294–95, 296; IN MExICO, 335; FOOT AND mOUTH DISEASE IN, 176; GABRIE±
¸OPE ºRANCIS AND, 42–45, 48–51; GARCíA MáRqUEz’S ±ETTER TO THE ¼OYA±
¸ORTUgA±, 195; PROTEST mUSIC, 116, 118; »BSERVATORY OF, 34; GAE± GARCíA
SOCCER AND, 135, 138, 140–41, 143; IN ÊERNA±, 328, 337; INVASION OF THE
²PAIN, 24, 26; TRANSITIONS FROm, 16, 20, MA±VINAS, OR ºA±k±AND, ¹S±ANDS BY,
21, 23–30, 77–80, 141; TRUTH 36N8; LATIN µmERICAN DANCE IN, 120,
COmmISSIONS, 5, 24–25, 77–80, 86. See 122; P±ANT-DRUgS, 211; SOCCER, 10, 131, 132,
also DISAPPEARED, THE 142; telenovelas, 288
348 • i n de ô
³SqUIVE±, LAURA, 299 FOREIgN INVESTmENT, 132, 140, 143, 188–90,
ETHNIC ENC±AVES, 146–47, 154, 160 191–202
ExOTICISm, 93, 164, 287; mUSIC, 10, 116, 118, ºRANCE: Black Orpheus, 289; DE GAU±±E’S
125–26; FOOD, 150–51, 155, 161; CRITICISm OF ¶.². FOREIgN PO±ICY, 59–60;
±ITERATURE, 291, 294; ¸ACIfiC FUSION ExI±E OF ¹VONE GEBARA TO, 42; FOOD AND
CUISINE, 148; PERCEPTIONS OF MExICA CUISINE, 148, 149, 150, 153, 159, 211,
(µzTEC) AND MAYA PEOP±ES, 150–51, 208; 212–13; THE ºRENCH ·ARIBBEAN, 104–
TOURISm, 222, 247–48, 256, 258–59 105, 211; ºRENCH ¼EVO±UTION, 211; GROUP
ExPORTS, 34; AgRICU±TURE, 158, 170–71, OF 7, 22; ±ANgUAgE, 98; ±ITERATURE, 293,
174–78, 184, 188, 191–92, 201, 211, 278; 296, 297; mIgRATION TO, 108, 136, 138,
FOOD, 149, 159–61, 213; kNOW±EDgE, 164, 139; mUSIC, 120, 121, 123; ¸OPE ºRANCIS
188; ±ANgUAgE, 103; OF LATIN µmERICAN AND DISAPPEARANCE OF NUNS FROm, 44,
DEmOCRACY AND SOCIA± CHANgE, 8, 29, 50; POSITIVISm AND SPIRITISm IN ÊRAzI±,
84–87; ±ITERATURE, 287, 292, 295; P±ANT- 272–73; SOCCER, 136, 139, 141
DRUgS, 211, 216, 220N3; SOCCER, 131, ºRE±ImO (ºRENTE DE LIBERTAüöO DE
142–45; telenovelas, 302–312 MOüAmBIqUE), 196
ºREYRE, GI±BERTO, 277
FAVE±AS: AND THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH, 39, 41, ºRIEDmAN, °OmAS, 6
47, 48, 53, 54; DRUg CU±TURE, 216; AND ºUENTES, ·AR±OS, 13, 19, 31–32, 35N2, 291, 295
REPRESENTATIONS OF ÊRAzI±, 280; REPRO-
DUCTIVE RIgHTS FOR mOTHERS IN, 42, 47, 54 GA±EANO, ³DUARDO, 4
ºERRé, ¼OSARIO, 299 GARCíA ÊERNA±, GAE±, 2, 13–14, 36N10,
fi±m AND TE±EVISION: A Huey P. Newton Story 287–88, 326–337
IN ÊRAzI±, 276; ÊRAzI±IAN CINEmA, 279– GARCíA MáRqUEz, GABRIE±, 13, 34–35, 209;
80, 288–89, 330; ·ARmEN MIRANDA, 13, AND ³± ÊOOm, 287, 291, 295–96, 297–
114–15, 118, 279, 287; DEPICTION OF LATIN 301; fi±m SCHOO± IN ·UBA, 329, 332;
µmERICANS AND LATINOS IN ¶.²., 13, 111, ½OBE± ¸RIzE, 300, 301; One Hundred
114–15; DRUg CU±TURE, 119, 216, 288; FOOD Ãears of Solitude, 17, 298, 301
AND CUISINE, 94, 150, 152, 153, 155; GABRIE± gAUCHO, 213, 292, 300
GARCíA MáRqUEz’S fi±m SCHOO± IN ·UBA, gENDER: AND THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH, 40–42,
329, 332; GAE± GARCíA ÊERNA±, 1–2, 326– 52–55; ±ITERATURE, 299, 304–5; SEx
37; G±OBO mEDIA CONg±OmERATE, 280; WORkER ACTIVISm AND ±ABOR, 222, 240–
±ANgUAgE, 109; mASS mEDIA AND PO±ITICS, 50; SOCCER, 10, 133–35, 145; telenovelas,
26–27; MExICAN CINEmA, 327–29, 330– 288, 308–9, 310–11; TOURISm, 267
32; No, 36N10, 330; RIgHTS TO ³± ÊOOm gENTRIfiCATION, 146, 148, 157, 160
NOVE±S, 298; SOCCER, 140, 141. See also gEOgRAPHY, 31–32, 167–175, 177–185, 195–
telenovelas 197, 221; DEfiNITION OF LATIN µmERICA,
FOOD, 93–94, 163, 165; AgRICU±TURE, 167– 98, 101, 294
174, 181–85, 188–192, 200–1; “DRUg- GI±BERTO, JOöO, 317, 318, 320
FOODS,” 210; ±ANgUAgE, 102, 103, 105, G±OBA± ½ORTH, 72–73, 84–85, 86; C±ImATE
107; mEAT CONSUmPTION, 176; ¸ACIfiC CHANgE, 82–83; DEVE±OPmENT PROjECTS,
FUSION CUISINE, 146–62; SECURITY AND 187, 195; FOOD AND CUISINE, 150;
INSECURITY, 80–81, 163, 165, 177, 188, 191, HIERARCHY WITH G±OBA± ²OUTH, 124, 165,
192, 199, 201; SOCIA± mOBI±ITY, 176, 282; 309; PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg, 75, 77;
SOVEREIgNTY, 80–81, 82, 265; TRUCkS, 10, RURA± mOBI±IzATION, 81; SA±SA, 123–124;
146, 147fig., 152–161 SEx WORkER ACTIVISm, 222, 241; SOCCER,
FOOTBA±± ( fútbol, futebol). see SOCCER 94, 131; TOURISm, 256, 257, 262; TRUTH
FOREIgN AID, 58, 62, 192, 197, 199 AND RECONCI±IATION, 79–80
i n de ô • 349
G±OBA± ²OUTH: APPROPRIATION OF CU±TURA± ICON, 17, 31, 89–92, 133, 262
FORmS FROm, 116, 124; CIRCU±ATION OF LATIN ImmIgRANTS AND ImmIgRATION: IN
µmERICAN DEmOCRACY AND SOCIA± CHANgE µRgENTINA, 108; ASSImI±ATION, 155; TO
WITHIN, 8, 24, 73, 79, 81; C±ImATE CHANgE, AND FROm ÊRAzI±, 108,110, 212, 271–72,
82–84; DEVE±OPmENT PROjECTS, 11, 187–88, 277, 278, 288, 317–18, 321, 322; FOOD AND
189, 192, 195, 200–1; DRUg CU±TURE, 207; CUISINE, 94, 146–48, 152–53, 155, 160;
fiRST POPE FROm, 9, 45, 46; SEx WORkER ±ANgUAgE, 108–12; mUSIC, 116, 122, 123;
ACTIVISm AND ±ABOR, 222, 241; SOCCER, 139; SOCCER, 132, 133; TO THE ¶.²., 63, 108–12,
telenovelas, 288, 302, 312; TOURISm, 262 129, 152–53, 155, 160, 336; ¶.².
g±OBA±IzATION: ANTI-g±OBA±IzATION, 81; ¹mmIgRATION AND ·USTOmS
ÊRAzI±, 278; DIffUSION OF PARTICIPATORY ³NFORCEmENT (¹·³), 129
BUDgETINg, 74; º±AT ÈOR±D THEORY, 6; ImPORTS: AgRICU±TURE, 164, 170, 173–74,
FOOD AND CUISINE, 151; ±ANgUAgE, 113; 176, 177, 184, 198; FOOD AND CUISINE,
±ITERATURE, 296; ORIgIN OF TERm, 15; 149, 336; OF IDEO±OgIES FROm THE G±OBA±
SOCCER, 142, 144fig.; SOYBEANS, 175–77; ½ORTH, 72, 272–73; ±ANgUAgE, 102;
telenovelas, 302–3, 304, 311 mANUFACTURED gOODS, 278, 322; P±ANT-
GUATEmA±A: 1954 COUP, 59, 234; CIVI± WAR DRUgS, 213, 336; SOCCER, 142; THE
IN, 221, 234; DRUg PO±ICY, 217; HUmAN TRANSAT±ANTIC S±AVE TRADE, 276
RIgHTS IN, 234–36; ±IBERATION THEO±OgY ¹ñáRRITU, µ±EjANDRO GONzá±Ez, 327–333
IN, 40; MAYA IN, 101, 105, 229–30; INDIgENOUS ±ANgUAgES, 10, 97–98, 99–103,
MENNONITES IN, 105; mIgRANTS FROm, 105–7, 111, 113
110, 236; ¼IgOBERTA MENCHú’S ½OBE± INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES: µRAUCANIANS, 118; IN
ACCEPTANCE SPEECH, 225–39 ÊO±IVIA, 82, 84, 125; IN ÊRAzI±, 271, 273,
gUERRI±±A WAR: THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH, 51; 279; ·ATHO±ICISm, 47, 53; EAR±Y CO±ONIA±
·HE GUEVARA, 2, 10; ´I±mA ¼OUSSEff, ExPANSION AND CONqUEST, 3–4;
25; DRUg PO±ICY IN ·O±OmBIA, 217; IN ENVIRONmENT AND C±ImATE CHANgE, 183,
GUATEmA±A, 235; Amores perros, 331 227, 231, 236; FOOD, 150–51, 156;
GUEVARA, ³RNESTO “·HE,” 1–3, 4, 30–31, 34, “ImAgINED µNDEAN INDIgENISm,” 94,
102; AS ICON, 1–3, 4, 17, 30, 89–93; IN 121; ¹NCA, 98, 100, 114, 118–19, 156, 211,
mANgA, 10, 17, 89–93; ¶.². PO±ITICS, 62, 212; indigenismo, 117, 291–92; ±ANgUAgE,
63–64 10, 11, 97–98, 99–107, 111, 113; MAYA,
99, 100, 101, 105, 107, 151, 208, 211,
ÉAITI (²AINT-´OmINgUE), 238, 281, 289; 229–230, 268; mestizaje, 31–32, 147,
µ±EjO ·ARPENETIER’S NOVE± °e Kingdom 292; MExICA (µzTECS), 17, 68, 69, 98,
of the °is World, 296; LAND±ESS 100, 151, 208, 211, 229; mUSIC, 118–19,
ÈORkERS MOVEmENT IN, 81; mIgRANTS 279; »±mEC, 208; P±ANT-DRUgS, 5, 165,
FROm, 109, 278; ¼EVO±UTION, 4, 211; 208–211; ¼OBERTA MENCHú, 12, 221,
S±AVERY, 211 225–239; SOCCER, 135–36; ËAPATISTA
ÉAITIAN ÌREYò±, 98, 104 UPRISINg, 262, 330, 335
ÉAVANA: MIAmI’S “LITT±E ÉAVANA,” 64; ¹NTERNATIONA± MONETARY ºUND, 21, 23, 36N5
mUSIC, 94, 115, 123; TOBACCO, 210; INTERNATIONA±IzATION: OF ÊRAzI±IAN SYmBO±IC
TOURISm, 257fig., 259–60, 266; ¶.². gOODS, 280; fi±m, 326, 333; ±ANgUAgE, 113;
PO±ITICS, 59, 60, 62, 64, 65N1 ±ITERATURE, 13, 287, 293, 296, 300–1;
ÉERNáNDEz, JOSé, 292 SOCCER, 142–45
ɹÍ/µ¹´², 5, 244, 246, 250 INTERNET AND SOCIA± mEDIA, 330, 333; AND
ÉONDURAS, 217, 229, 327 º±AT ÈOR±D THEORY, 6; FOOD TRUCkS, 152,
HUmAN TRAffiCkINg, 45, 222, 241, 243–45, 154, 154, 155; mIgRATION AND
250, 310 TRANSNATIONA±ISm, 11; PROTEST, 285;
350 • i n de ô
ëUINTO ¸ODER, 29; SEx WORk ACTIVISm, COmPARED TO ³Ng±ISH, 335; USE BY ¸OPE
241, 246; TOURISm AS ESCAPE FROm, 262; ºRANCIS, 46, 106–7
ÓOU¾UBE, 26, 125, 327, 336 LATIN µmERICA, DEfiNITION OF, 98, 101, 294
LATINO ¸OPU±ATION IN THE ¶.².: ·UBANS, 59,
JAmAICA, 104, 123, 213, 214, 217 61, 62, 63, 64; DANCE, 120; FOOD AND
JAPAN: BOSSA NOVA IN, 13, 288, 316–325; CUISINE, 146, 153, 160; fi±m, 115, 280, 333,
DEVE±OPmENT INITIATIVES, 190, 191–93, 336–37; INCARCERATION AND ¶.². DRUg
195, 199, 200; FOOD AND CUISINE, 146, PO±ICY, 217; ±ANgUAgE, 11–12, 108–13;
149, 150, 152, 156, 157–58, 159–60; ±ITERATURE, 299; mIgRANT TRAI± TO ¶.².,
GROUP OF 20, 4; mIgRATION TO AND FROm 336; mUSIC, 119, 120, 122; ½EW ÓORk
ÊRAzI±, 212, 271, 278, 279, 288, 317–18, ¸UERTO ¼ICANS, 120
321–22; ±ANgUAgE, 99, 108; mANgA, 10; LGʾë: AND THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH, 37–38,
mIgRATION FROm LATIN µmERICAN TO, 46, 49, 51; mARRIAgE, 46, 49; qUEER kIN
108, 278, 321–22; mUSIC, 93, 94, NETWORkS, 249; RIgHTS mOVEmENT, 330;
114, 116–18, 119–20, 121, 124; SOCCER, SOCCER, 134; TOURISm, 247, 266;
144 TRANSgENDER SEx WORkERS, 240, 245, 248
JAPANESE ¹NTERNATIONA± ·OOPERATION ±IBERATION THEO±OgY, 16, 38–44, 52–55,
µgENCY (J¹·µ), 191–93 57N4, 106; ´Om Éé±DER ·æmARA, 40,
JOBIm, µNTûNIO ·AR±OS, 316, 317, 318, 320, 41, 52; ¹VONE GEBARA, 40–41, 42, 52, 54;
321 MARCE±±A µ±THAUS-¼EID, 40; çSCAR
¼OmERO, 40, 52, 106
ÌINCAID, JAmAICA, 264–265 L±OSA, MARIO ÍARgAS, 13, 19, 35N2, 291, 295,
ÌOREA: ExPANSION OF mIDD±E C±ASS IN, 6; 298–301
FOOD TRUCk mOVEmENT, 10, 93, 146–47, ±OCA±, THE: AgRICU±TURE, 182, 184, 189;
152–55, 160; mIgRANTS FROm, 152, 153; DEmOCRATIC PARTICIPATION AND
mUSIC, 323 ENgAgEmENT, 16, 29, 74, 75; FOOD AND
CUISINE, 147–48, 149, 154; ±ANgUAgE, 11,
LA ÍíA ·AmPESINA, 80–81 101, 109, 110, 300, 303; LATIN µmERICAN
±ABOR, 205; COmPARISONS BETWEEN ÊRAzI± ROOTS OF TRANSNATIONA± jUSTICE AND
AND MOzAmBIqUE, 189, 197–98, 201–2; HUmAN RIgHTS, 78, 79; ±ITERATURE, 287,
FOOD AND CUISINE, 148–50, 153, 155, 156, 292, 297, 300; mIgRANTS PARTICIPATINg IN
159, 160; INDIgENOUS PEOP±ES, 211, 215; FROm AFAR, 12; P±ANT-DRUgS, 216, 218;
mIgRATION, 104–5, 137, 155–56, 196, 213, RECEPTIONS OF ¸OPE ºRANCIS, 48; IN
244, 321; SEx WORkER ACTIVISm, 12, RE±ATION TO THE g±OBA±, 3, 6, 8, 78, 86, 93,
240–50; SOCCER, 132, 133, 137, 138, 142– 319, 325, 336; RESISTANCE TO DEVE±OPmENT
43; WOmEN IN WRITINg WORkFORCE, 299. PROjECTS, 200; SEx WORkER ACTIVISm,
See also S±AVERY 245–49; SYmBO±S OF IDENTITY, 101, 149;
LAND±ESS ÈORkERS MOVEmENT (M²¾), telenovelas, 303, 304; TOURISm, 222,
80–82, 86 256–57, 262–68
±ANgUAgE: CONqUEST AND CO±ONIzATION, 3, 10, LOS µNgE±ES, 293; FOOD AND CUISINE, 10, 93,
99–100; LATIN µmERICANS IN THE ¶.²., 146–48, 150, 152–59; ±ANgUAgE, 99, 111
108–113; ±ITERATURE AND TRANS±ATION, 293, ±USOTROPOCIA±ISm, 194, 277
298–99; ±OANWORDS, 100, 102–3, 104,
294; mIgRATION, 11, 103–5, 108–113; MACHU ¸ICCHU, 259, 261fig.
mUSIC, 13, 319–20, 323, 326; NATIONA± MADURO, ½ICO±áS, 29
VARIETIES OF ²PANISH AND ¸ORTUgUESE, 32, mAgICA± REA±ISm, 34, 291, 296–97, 300
102; RE±IgION, 105–7; SEx WORkERS USE OF, MA±AWI, 191, 193fig.
248; Spanglish, 94, 112–13; ²PANISH MAPUTO, 191
i n de ô • 351
MARTI, JOSé, 292–94 CU±TURE, 209, 210; fi±m, 334; FOOD AND
MATO GROSSO STATE (ÊRAzI±), 167–185, 191, CUISINE, 152–56, 164, 176; ±ITERATURE,
279 294; SOCCER, 132; STUDENT mOVEmENT IN
MAYA, 229–230; DRUg CU±TURE, 208–9, 211; ·HI±E, 28; TOURISm, 258
±ANgUAgE, 99, 100, 101, 103, 105, 107; mIgRATION, 2, 4, 32, 304; ACROSS ÊERINg
TOURISm, 151, 268 ²TRAIT, 32; µSIAN mIgRATION TO LATIN
mEmORY: OF DICTATORSHIP, 26, 45, 51; µmERICA, 133, 149, 212, 317–18; TO AND
¼IgOBERTA MENCHú COmmENTS ON, 231; FROm ÊRAzI±, 271–74, 276, 278–79,
One Hundred Ãears of Solitude, 297; 280–81, 288, 317–18, 321–22; DANCE,
SOCCER, 138; TOURISm, 259–65 122; FOOD AND CUISINE, 149, 152–53,
MENCHú, ¼IgOBERTA, 12, 221, 223, 225–239 155–56; ¹NTERNATIONA± »RgANIzATION FOR
MENDES, ²éRgIO, 318–19 MIgRATION, 245; ±ABOR, 104–5, 137,
MENEm, ·AR±OS, 4, 20 155–56, 160, 196, 213, 244, 321;
mestizaje (mestiçagem), 6, 31–32, 147, 277, ±ANgUAgE, 103–5, 108–113; LATIN
292 µmERICANS IN THE ¶.²., 108–12; LOS
MExICA (µzTEC), 17; CA±ENDAR, 68, 69; DRUg µNgE±ES AS HUB OF g±OBA±, 147; mUSIC,
CU±TURE, 208–9, 211; FOOD AND CUISINE, 116, 119, 122, 123; SOCCER, 132–33, 137,
151, 211; MUSEO DE± ¾EmP±O MAYOR, 229; 142; TO THE ¶.²., 11–12, 108–112, 327,
½AHAT± ±ANgUAgE, 100 336; TO URBAN AREAS, 201, 317–18
MExICAN ¼EVO±UTION, 119, 214, 262, 304 MI±±ENNIUm ´EVE±OPmENT GOA±S, 199
MExICO, 1; THE ·ATHO±IC ·HURCH, 47, 53; MINISTRY OF µgRICU±TURE, LIVESTOCk AND
“COSmIC RACE,” 8, 292; DRUg CU±TURE, ºOOD ²UPP±Y (Mµ¸µ), 171fig., 173
207–9, 211, 213, 214, 215, 217, 218; MINTz, ²IDNEY, 159, 210
ECONOmIC gROWTH, 265; ECONOmIC MIRANDA, ·ARmEN, 13, 114–15, 118, 279, 287
PO±ICY, 35N5; ³NRIqUE ¸EñA ½IETO, MISTRA±, GABRIE±A, 9
28–29; ExI±E OF ¼IgOBERTA MENCHú TO, mODERNISm, 232, 274
225, 229; fi±m AND TE±EVISION, 293, 302, modernistas, 292–93
305–7, 309, 326–27, 328–333, 335–337; mODERNITY, 73, 135, 140, 159, 273
FOOD AND CUISINE, 10, 19, 146, 147, 149, mODERNIzATION, 176, 190, 237
150–51, 152–53, 159; GROUP OF 20, 4, 23; MORAES, ÍINICIUS DE, 317–18
gROWTH OF mIDD±E C±ASS IN, 6; ±ANgUAgE, MORA±ES, ³VO, 64, 82–83, 84, 218
101–3, 105, 107, 109, 108–13, 300, 302; MOzAmBICAN ¹NSTITUTE FOR µgRICU±TURA±
±ITERATURE, 291, 292, 296, 297, 299, 300; ¼ESEARCH (¹¹µM), 192
mestizaje, 292; mIgRATION TO AND FROm, MOzAmBIqUE, 11, 139, 164, 187–203
66–69, 105, 110–13, 129, 336; mUSIC, 119; mU±TINATIONA± PO±ITICA± ORgANIzATIONS:
¸ARTIDO ¼EVO±UCIONARIO ¹NSTITUCIONA± ʼ¹·² COUNTRIES (ÊRAzI±, ¼USSIA, ¹NDIA,
(¸¼¹), 335; SOCCER, 131; TOURISm, 256, 258, ·HINA, ²OUTH µFRICA), 22, 187, 265;
259, 262, 263, 268 GROUP OF 7, 22; GROUP OF 8, xV, 23;
MExICO ·ITY, 17; AS CENTER OF FEmINISm IN GROUP OF 14, 22; GROUP OF 20, xV, 4,
1970S, 299; FOOD AND CUISINE, 151; GAE± 22–23; GROUP OF 77, 83, 84;
GARCíA ÊERNA± AND, 328, 336; »RgANIzATION OF µmERICAN ²TATES, 216,
ImmIgRATION FROm, 66; ¹NTERNATIONA± 217. See also ¶½
µ¹´² ·ONFERENCE IN, 246; ±ANgUAgE, MUSEO DE± ¾EmP±O MAYOR, 229
113; ¼IOBERTA MENCHú IN, 225, 229 mUSIC: “ImAgINED µNDEAN INDIgENISm,” 94,
mIDD±E C±ASS: gROWTH OF IN THE DEVE±OPINg 121; LA±O GUERRERO, 214; ±ANgUAgE, 107;
WOR±D, 6, 8, 27–28, 223, 281–83; LISA »NO, 13, 288, 316–325; Mozart in
ADOPTION OF SPIRITUA± FORmS BY, 273, the Jungle, 334; PROTEST mUSIC, 118–19.
274; ÊRAzI±IANS IN JAPAN, 322; DRUg See also REggAETóN; SA±SA; SAmBA; TANgO
352 • i n de ô
½ACA±A ·ORRIDOR, 191–94, 199 ¸ERONISm, 295
Narcos, 216, 288 ¸ERU: ECONOmIC gROWTH, 265; FOOD AND
NEO±IBERA±ISm, 35N4, 36N6, 72, 140, 160, CUISINE, 10, 19, 105, 151; GUSTAVO
295 GUTIéRREz, 38, 52; ±ANgUAgE, 105–6, 107;
½ERUDA, ¸AB±O, 9, 296 mestizaje, 31; mIgRATION TO AND FROm,
½EW ÈAVE CINEmA (·INEmA ½OVO), 330 108, 133; mUSIC, 114, 117, 118, 121, 125;
½ICARAgUA, 238; ¼UBéN ´ARíO, 292; P±ANT-DRUgS AND DRUg PO±ICY, 207, 211,
±IBERATION THEO±OgY IN, 40; ²ANDINISTAS, 215, 218; PO±ITICA± PARTICIPATION, 28, 74;
57N4, 62, 262; TOURISm, 256, 259, 266 ¼ICARDO ËáRATE, 146–149, 155–61; La
½OBE± ¸RIzE: FOR ±ITERATURE, 9, 17, 35N1, 296, teta asustada (°E MI±k OF ²ORROW),
300, 301; FOR PEACE, 12, 225–26, 227–39 332; TOURISm, 259, 260, 263, 267fig., 268
NONgOVERNmENTA± ORgANIzATIONS, 12, 45, 77, PEYOTE, 208–9
78, 232, 240–241 ¸INOCHET, µUgUSTO: 1973 mI±ITARY COUP, 8,
½ORTH-²OUTH RE±ATIONS, 86, 165, 288, 309; 118; ARREST OF, 79; DICTATORSHIP, 24,
DEVE±OPmENT PARTNERSHIPS, 187, 192, 36N6, 118, 122, 140, 300; P±EBISCITE, 24,
195; LAND±ESS ÈORkERS MOVEmENT, 81; 36N9, 330; ¼ICARDO LAgOS AND, 26,
TOURISm, 257; SEx WORkER ACTIVISm, 222, 27fig., 36N12
241. See also G±OBA± ½ORTH; G±OBA± PO±ITICA± PARTIES, 234, 285; ÊRAzI±IAN
²OUTH ·OmmUNIST ¸ARTY, 138; ºRE±ImO
(MOzAmBIqUE), 196; LIBERA±S AND
»ffiCIA± ´EVE±OPmENT µSSISTANCE (»´µ), ·ONSERVATIVES, 262; ¸ARTIDO
192 ¼EVO±UCIONARIO ¹NSTITUCIONA± (¸¼¹),
»PERATION ·ONDOR, 215 335; ¸ARTIDO DOS ¾RABA±HADORES (ÊRAzI±),
»RgANIzATION OF µmERICAN ²TATES (»µ²), 29, 74, 282; SOCCER, 140
216, 217 ¸OPE ºRANCIS (JORgE MARIO ÊERgOg±IO), 9,
»RTIz, ºERNANDO, 148–49 16, 37–57, 106–7, 108, 112; RE±ATIONSHIP
TO mI±ITARY DICTATORSHIP IN µRgENTINA,
¸ANAmA, 99, 122–23, 238 42–45, 48–51
¸ARAgUAY: CO±ONIA± TRADE IN, 213; GUARANí ¸ORTUgA±: ÊRAzI±IAN INDEPENDENCE FROm,
AS OffiCIA± ±ANgUAgE OF, 100; MENNONITES 195, 272; CO±ONIA± ExPANSION AND
IN, 105; SEx WORkERS, 243; SOCCER, 132, CONqUEST, 3, 10 99–100, 271–72;
140; SOCIA± mOVEmENTS, 82 DICTATORSHIP IN, 79, 195; ±ANgUAgE, 32,
¸ARIS: COffEE SHOPS, 211; ´µ²¸¶ FASHION, 98–99, 102–4, 106, 110, 112, 113;
240; ³± ÊOOm AUTHORS IN, 295, 296; LUSOPHONE µFRICA, 187, 189, 194–95;
LATIN µmERICAN mUSIC IN, 117, 120; ±USOTROPOCIA±ISm, 194, 277; mERCHANTS
MESOAmERICAN CODICES IN, 101; TRAININg FROm, 148–49; mIgRATION TO AND FROm,
OF GASTóN µCURIO, 151 108, 110, 277; THE S±AVE TRADE AND
PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg, 29, 73, 74–77, 85, S±AVERY, 115, 310
86 POSITIVISm, 272–3
¸ARTIDO DOS ¾RABA±HADORES (ÊRAzI±), 29, 74, POVERTY: ±IBERATION THEO±OgY CRITIqUE OF,
282 40, 41, 42, 52; IN MOzAmBIqUE, 197;
¸ARTIDO ¼EVO±UCIONARIO ¹NSTITUCIONA± PERSPECTIVE ON BY º±AT ÈOR±DERS, 6;
(¸¼¹), 335 ¸OPE ºRANCIS AND, 54; ¼IgOBERTA
¸Az, »CTAVIO, 9, 296, 298, 301 MENCHú COmmENTS ON, 229, 230, 231,
¸EñA ½IETO, ³NRIqUE, 29 233, 236, 238; SOCCER, 133, 139. See also
¸ERóN, ³VITA, 25 ANTIPOVERTY PROgRAmS
¸ERóN, ¹SABE±ITA, 25 ¸RO·ERRADO, 189–90
¸ERóN, JUAN, 25, 49 ¸RO²µÍµ½µ, 189–201
i n de ô • 353
¸UERTO ¼ICO, 61, 276, 299 OF JUAN ¼U±FO, 297; IN MOzAmBIqUE,
¸UIg, MANUE±, 299 187, 192, 195–96, 197–98; TOURISm, 259.
See also RURA± mOBI±IzATION
RACE AND ETHNICITY, 8–9, 10, 12, 231; IN RURA± mOBI±IzATION, 16, 73, 75, 80–82
ÊRAzI±, 31, 223, 271, 274–77, 283–84; ¼USSIA, 277; AgRICU±TURE, 175–75; ʼ¹·²,
“COSmIC RACE,” 8–9, 292; B±ACkNESS, 187, 265; SA±SA IN, 124; telenovelas, 288,
123–24; FOOD AND CUISINE, 146–47, 148, 305–7
153, 155, 160; IN GUATEmA±A, 236, 237,
239; “RACE ACTOR,” 337; AND SEx TOURISm, ²ACHS, JEffREY, 199
247–48, 267; SOCCER, 132–33, 135–38, ²A±AzAR, µNTONIO DE »±IVEIRA, 195
139, 145; telenovelas, 305, 307, 310–11; SA±SA, 94, 116, 118, 120–124, 157
TOURISm, 258; ¶½³²·» STUDY IN ²ANTERíA, 104
ÊRAzI±, 276 SAmBA, 274, 279; ·ARmEN MIRANDA, 114–15,
“RACIA± DEmOCRACY,” 276–77, 283 279; AND THE CITY OF ²öO ¸AU±O, 317; AND
RACISm: IN ÊRAzI±, 277, 283, 284; DRUg DIffUSION OF ¸ORTUgUESE ±ANgUAgE, 107;
CU±TURE AND PO±ICY, 213, 214, 215, 218; IN JAPAN, 319, 322, 323; SOCCER, 137
FOOD AND CUISINE, 158; ±INgUISTIC, 106; ²öO ¸AU±O (CITY), 132, 167, 212, 288, 317–18,
AND ImmIgRANT ENTREPRENEURSHIP, 160; 319
¼IgOBERTA MENCHú’S COmmENTS ON, 12, SCA±E, 15, 86; AgRICU±TURE, 167, 177, 183,
225, 228, 233, 236, 238; SOCCER, 141 188–91, 196–98, 200, 211; fi±m, 332;
RE-AFRICANIzATION, 123, 126 ±ITERATURE, 299; P±ANT-DRUgS, 211, 213;
¼ECIFE, 40–41, 52 SOCCER AND DECO±ONIzATION, 139; TImE,
¼ED¾RA²Ex (¼ED DE MUjERES ¾RABAjADORAS 173. See also INTERNATIONA±IzATION; ±OCA±,
²ExUA±ES DE LATINOAméRICA Y ³± THE; TRANSNATIONA±, THE
·ARIBE), 245 ²I±VA, LUIz ¹NáCIO LU±A DA (“LU±A”), 25, 29,
REggAETóN, 94, 115, 122–23 311fig.; COmmENTS ON ÊRAzI± AND µFRICA,
¼ENAmO (¼ESISTêNCIA ½ACIONA± 194; DEVE±OPmENT AND FOREIgN
MOüAmBICANA), 196 ASSISTANCE PROgRAmS,187–88, 199;
REVO±UTION: ·HE GUEVARA, 1, 31; DIgITA±, ±IBERATION THEO±OgY AND E±ECTION, 57N4;
221–22; DRUg CU±TURE, 210; FOOD AND RO±E IN ADDRESSINg g±OBA± PROB±EmS, 4
CUISINE, 150; ºRENCH ¼EVO±UTION, 211; S±AVE TRADE (TRANSAT±ANTIC), 4, 103–5, 115,
ÉAITIAN ¼EVO±UTION, 4, 211; ±IBERATION 149, 271
THEO±OgY AS FORm OF, 38–39; ½ICARAgUA, S±AVERY, 4, 10, 15, 32, 103, 126; AgRICU±TURE,
57N4, 262; mE±ODRAmA IN telenovelas AS 211, 212, 213, 271; IN ÊRAzI±, 115, 212, 213,
FORm OF, 303; TOURISm, 262–63. See also 275–77, 279, 310–12; ÊRAzI±-µFRICA,
·UBAN ¼EVO±UTION; MExICAN ¼EVO±UTION 194–95, 271; candome, 136; IN THE
¼IO DE JANEIRO (CITY), 280; 1992 ³ARTH ·ARIBBEAN, 47, 103–4, 211; FESTIVA±
²UmmIT IN, 82; 2016 »±YmPIC gAmES IN, ½OSSA ²ENHORA DA ÊOA MORTE, 274;
281; CONSTRUCTION OF º±UmINENSE’S FOOD AND CUISINE, 147, 149, 211; ÉAITIAN
STADIUm, 142; fi±mIC REPRESENTATIONS OF, ¼EVO±UTION, 4, 211; ±ANgUAgE, 104;
280, 288, 289; ±ANgUAgE, 113; mUSIC, 317, SOCCER, 136; telenovelas, 305, 307, 310–
320; POSITIVIST ARCHITECTURE IN, 272; SEx 12. See also µFRO-DESCENDANT
WORkERS IN ½ITERóI, 240–43; µmERICANS
¶mBANDA’S CREATION IN, 274; ÈOR±D SOCCER (fútbol, futebol), 131–145, 242, 274,
ÓOUTH ´AY 2013, 46 280, 281, 308
¼OUSSEff, ´I±mA, 25, 48 SOCIA± mOVEmENTS, 10, 12, 73, 86, 221–23,
RURA± AREAS: IN ÊRAzI±, 54, 167–86, 278; DRUg 226; AffiRmATIVE ACTION PO±ICIES IN
CU±TURE, 214, 216; gAUCHO, 292; ±ITERATURE ÊRAzI±, 283–84; ±IBERATION THEO±OgY AS
354 • i n de ô
FORm OF, 38, 41; PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg DICTATORSHIP, 8; SOCCER fiE±DS USED
AND, 75; RURA± mOBI±IzATION, 81–84 FOR, 140
²OUTH µFRICA: ʼ¹·², 187; FARmERS FROm TOURISm, 12, 232, 256–70, 281, 300–1; TO
IN MOzAmBIqUE, 198; TRUTH ÊRAzI±, 281; DRUg CU±TURE, 209; “ExP-
COmmISSIONS, 5, 24, 79; ¼IgOBERTA ERIENTIA± TOURISm,” 222; FOOD AND CUISINE,
MENCHú ON, 238; SOCCER, 139; SOCIA± 148, 151, 156, 159, 160; TO MAYAN COmmU-
mOVEmENTS, 81 NITIES, 101; SEx WORk, 243, 246, 247–50
²OUTH-²OUTH. See G±OBA± ²OUTH TRADE, 163, 165; BETWEEN LATIN µmERICA AND
²PAIN: ARREST OF ¸INOCHET, 79; CIVI± WAR IN, ·HINA, 5, 11, 176, 323; BETWEEN LATIN
24, 26, 36N7, 295; CO±ONIA± ExPANSION µmERICA AND THE ¶.²., 5, 323; ÊRAzI±-
AND CONqUEST, 3, 10, 32, 98–104, 106, JAPAN-MOzAmBIqUE, 200; CO±ONIA±, 149,
118, 148–49, 209, 271; fi±m, 331, 333, 337; 210, 213; ·UBAN EmBARgO, 58, 59, 63,
FOOD AND CUISINE, 149, 150; ±ANgUAgE, 120; DRUg, 11, 210, 212, 213, 215, 216, 309;
10, 32, 98–104, 112; ±ITERATURE, 292–94, FOOD SOVEREIgNTY, 81; FREE, 81, 335;
295, 296, 300; mestizaje, 31–32; NEO±IBERA±ISm, 35N4; ÈOR±D ¾RADE
mIgRATION FROm AND TO, 108, 133; mUSIC, »RgANIzATION, 281
115; P±ANT-DRUgS, 209, 210, 211, 212, 214; TRADITION, 93, 268; IN THE µNDES, 260–62;
¼OYA± ²PANISH µCADEmY, 95, 102, 106; ·ATHO±ICISm, 47; DRUg CU±TURE, 218;
SOCCER, 136–38, 144fig. fi±m, 326; FOOD AND CUISINE, 142, 146,
²PANg±ISH, 94, 112–113 150, 154, 155, 157; AND gENDER RO±ES, 135,
SPIRITISm, 273–74 248; AND kINSHIP, 249; ±AND, 196, 271;
STEREOTYPES, 16; IN fi±m AND TE±EVISION, 13, ±EgA±IST, 217; ±ITERATURE, 291, 299; mUSIC,
115, 118; FOOD AND CUISINE, 158; OF 119, 124, 323; TE±ENOVE±A’S CRITIqUE OF,
INDIgENOUS PEOP±E, 125; ±ANgUAgE, 108; 308; SOCCER, 143; WRITINg, 101
TOURISm, 247–8, 257–69 TRANS±ATION, 68–69, 288, 334; CU±INARY, 150;
STUDENTS: AffiRmATIVE ACTION PO±ICIES IN FOREIgN mUSICIANS IN ·HINA, 323;
ÊRAzI±, 283–84; ANTI-ÍIETNAm ÈAR PRO- ±ITERATURE, 291, 293, 296–99, 300; FROm
TESTORS IN ¶.²., 60; fi±m, 331–32; mUSIC, ¸ORTUgUESE INTO “ÊRAzI±IAN,” 32;
120, 123, 322; PERSECUTION IN µRgENTINA, RE±IgIOUS INSTITUTIONS, 105–7; telenovelas,
42–43, 45; PERSECUTION IN GUATEmA±A, 305–6, 308, 309; UNTRANS±ATED ²PANISH
234; IN COURSES ON LATIN µmERICAN USED IN ³Ng±ISH, 111
PO±ITICA± THEORY, 82; mOVEmENT IN ·HI±E, TRANSNATIONA±, THE: ³± ÊOOm, 294; FOOD
28–29; SOCCER, 132; TOURISm, 258–59 AND CUISINE, 146–48; mANgA, 10; mUSIC,
SYNCRETISm, 95, 104, 105, 274 94, 123; SEEmINg NOVE±TY OF
CONTEmPORARY TRANSNATIONA±ISm, 15;
telenovelas, 13, 107, 288, 302–13, 333; DRUg AND SEx WORk RE±ATIONSHIPS, 222, 248,
CU±TURE, 216; GAE± GARCíA ÊERNA±, 329; IN 249; SOCCER, 133, 145; telenovelas, 303,
POST-DICTATORSHIP ·HI±E, 26; PROmOTINg 309; TRANSNATIONA±IzATION, 280
TRANSCONTINENTA± IDENTITY, 293 TRUTH AND RECONCI±IATION COmmISSIONS, 5,
TE±EVISION. See fi±m AND TE±EVISION 24–25, 77–80
TEqUI±A, 103, 151, 158, 213
¾OkYO: µNDEAN mUSIC AND DANCE IN, 116–17, ¶mBANDA, 274
119–20; BOSSA NOVA IN, 316, 319, 320, 325; ¶½: 1992 ³ARTH ²UmmIT IN ¼IO DE JANEIRO,
dekasseguis IN, 322; LISA »NO, 316, 323 82; ÊRAzI±’S RO±E WITHIN, 188, 281;
TORTURE: IN µRgENTINA, 42–43, 44, 77–79; IN HUmAN RIgHTS, 235, 238; INDIgENOUS
ÊRAzI±, 48; IN ·HI±E, 24–25, 79–80; IN ³± PEOP±ES, 225, 232; ¼IgOBERTA MENCHú,
²A±VADOR, 52; ¼ICARDO LAgOS’ 218; ¶½³²·» STUDY IN ÊRAzI±, 276;
DENUNCIATION OF UNDER ¸INOCHET ¶½¼IO+20 ·ONFERENCE, 241
i n de ô • 355
¶NIöO ½ACIONA± DE ·AmPONESES (¶½µ·), ÍASCONCE±OS, JOSé, 8, 292
200 ÍENEzUE±A: mIgRANTS FROm, 108; ORIgINS OF
¶NITED ²TATES, 4, 6, 8; C±ImATE CHANgE, 33–34, SA±SA, 120; PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg IN,
82–83; CO±ONIA± SETT±EmENT PATTERNS IN 74, 75–77; PO±ITICA± SYSTEm, 28, 29;
½ORTH µmERICA, 32; ·UBA, 46, 52, 58–65, RO±E IN ADDRESSINg g±OBA± PROB±EmS, 4;
120; FOOD AND CUISINE, 11, 146, 150, 151, SOCIA± mOVEmENTS, 82; AND ¶.².
159, 160; g±OBA± ±EADERSHIP, 23, 72, 243; PO±ITICS, 64
ÉO±±YWOOD, 115, 118, 279, 280, 326,
332–33, 337; INTERNATIONA± DEVE±OPmENT ÈATANABE, ²ADAO, 319
PROjECTS, 190–91, 195; ±ITERATURE, 298, 299; WORkINg C±ASS: IN ·HI±E, 28; FOOD AND
±ANgUAgE, 108–13; mIgRATION TO AND FROm, CUISINE, 146, 148, 150–51, 160;
278, 336; mUSIC, 119, 120, 122, 123, 137, 317, ImmIgRANTS IN LONDON, 122; SOCCER, 133,
319, 320; PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg, 75–77; 138–39; telenovelas, 304
P±ANT-DRUgS AND DRUg PO±ICY, 213, 215, 218; ÈOR±D ÊANk; ·HI±E ²O±IDARIO, 21, 22;
PRESIDENTIA± PO±ITICS, 25; RACE RE±ATIONS IN, PARTICIPATORY BUDgETINg, 73, 74, 75;
276, 284; SEx WORkER ACTIVISTS IN, 241; THE SUPPORT FOR ²OUTH-²OUTH DEVE±OPmENT,
S±AVE TRADE AND S±AVERY, 276–77; SOCCER, 187, 190, 192, 194, 199
139; SOYBEANS, 171, 173, 175; ²PANISH ÈOR±D ·UP, 136–41, 143, 241–43, 246,
µmERICAN ÈAR OF 1898, 294; TORTURE 281
PROSECUTIONS, 79–80; TOURISm FROm ¶.². ÈOR±D ¾RADE »RgANIzATION, 281
TO LATIN µmERICA, 256–70; TRADE WITH ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹, 292
LATIN µmERICA, 5, 323. See also LATINO ÈOR±D ÈAR ¹¹, 38, 115, 120, 276, 293,
¸OPU±ATION IN THE ¶.². 300
¶RUgUAY: µFRO-ÊRAzI±IAN RE±IgIONS IN, 280;
ÊORgE’S STORY “ºUNES, THE MEmORIOUS,” ÓOU¾UBE, 26, 125, 327, 336
297; DRUg PO±ICY, 217; ³DUARDO
GA±EANO, 4; ±ANgUAgE, 109; SOCCER, ËAmBIA, 191
135–37, 140 ËAPATISTA REBE±±ION, 262, 330, 335
¶²µ¹´, 188, 190, 191, 194, 199, 244 ËImBABWE, 198
356 • i n de ô