But What About the Chicken!?!?!? Did He Get to the Other Side!?!?!

Cidade de Deus (City of God) is a 2002 film, directed by Fernando Meirelles, which follows the life of Rocket, as he grows from a boy into a man (and then photographer) in the favela, City of God, in the 1960s and the 1970s.  Although it is fictional, it is based on actual events (and a novel of the same name), and it can be called a “testimonio” which are apparently common in literature that originates from the favelas of Brazil. (Hart 205)  The Hart article discusses what the film got right, while the Oliveira article discusses an important issue that the film only hints at:  race and class in the favela.

What the film addresses in relation to actual events, according to Hart, is showing how “the lives of the subaltern classes are manipulated by the mediatic, governmental, and law-enforcing powers within society.” (206)  The film especially shows the way they are controlled by the media and police.  We first see the media’s hand when we see the newspaper photographer taking multiple shots of Shaggy’s dead body, more than likely to be used to keep any would-be hoods too scared to commit any crimes.  Later we see the media’s influence by the newspaper using Rocket’s connection to Li’l Ze to get pictures of him and his gang.

The police’s manipulation is seen clearly enough when it is revealed at the end of the movie that they were the ones selling the guns to the two rival gangs all along.  But this is the only action the police take throughout the gang war until the end, when we see “Li'l Ze's refusal to pay for his guns that the police decide to act, because they have been providing him with the guns in the first place.”  (206)  By this time most of the members of each gang are dead, so the police’s sudden involvement makes little difference.

Two important subjects that the film does not explore are race and class.  That is not surprising since, according to Oliveira, “In Brazilian scholarship, race (if not disregarded entirely) tends to be explained as a result of class conflict.”  (72)  While film is hardly scholarship, Oliveira’s assertion holds true.  It may also be because there is a “relative lack of racial segregation in the favelas of Rio de Janeiro.”  It was also interesting that the film did not even hint at the political struggle of the favela citizens.  Especially in the terms of landownership:

 Landownership has become a critical part of the favelados'     political agenda, for through ownership residents guarantee their right to settlement and ensure the favela's continued existence.  80

It is interesting that they would want the favelas to continue to exist instead of building up new accommodations for themselves.  They do have to own the land first of course.  That is probably one of the reasons why they associate race with class conflict in Brazil.

Comrade Judging Dog is back. And he judges your actions on Spring Break: Guilty!

"Like Oceans 11 with better cigars." I guess I can see that...

Che, Part 1: The Argentine is a 2008 film, directed by Steven Soderbergh, which covers the entire Cuban Revolution while focusing on the exploits of Ernesto “Che” Guevara.  The film showed Che complete his transformation from asthmatic physician to the most recognizable revolutionary of the 20^th century.  The film sets Che up as a Christ-like savior of the poor, with lofty ideas on how to free the poor workers of the world.  However, his ideas of bringing that about did not really work with his view of revolution and the use of guerilla warfare to complete a successful revolution.

Che believed that the most important thing for the people was to rebel against what he viewed were the imperialist powers of the world, the chief among them being the United States.  The Cuban Revolution was meant to be the beginning of a larger offensive that would free all of Latin America, and eventually the world.  In his “Message to the Tricontinental”, Che likens the struggle in Vietnam to gladiators in ancient Rome.

 The solidarity of all progressive forces of the world towards the people of Vietnam today is similar to the bitter irony of the plebeians coaxing on the gladiators in the Roman arena. It is not a matter of wishing success to the victim of aggression, but of sharing his fate; one must accompany him to his death or to

victory.

He says this yet he still insists that the revolution must be global, and even though he is trying to push the UN into action, he has the audacity to call it a “harmless organization”.  He also mentions South Africa and its black majority’s need to revolt, to “rise up to rescue their right to a decent life from the hands of the ruling oligarchies.”  He ends his message by reemphasizing the Revolutions ultimate goal: “Our every action is a battle cry against imperialism, and a battle hymn for the people's unity against the great enemy of mankind: the United States of America.”

Che believed that only a global revolution could destroy imperialism, yet he was a champion of guerrilla warfare.  He even wrote on the subject, including the essay “Guerrilla Warfare: A Method.”  In it he outlines some steps for guerrilla warfare and specific instances where it would be necessary to use it.  He ended the essay with:

The outcome of today's struggles does not matter. It does not matter in the final count that one or two movements were temporarily defeated, because what is definite is the decision to struggle which matures every day, the consciousness of the need for revolutionary change, and the certainty that it is possible. This is a prediction. We make it with the conviction that history will prove us right.

Sadly for Che this did not turn out to be the case, as his failed revolution in Bolivia proves.  If only he had followed most of the steps he had laid out for guerrilla warfare.

Comrade Judging Dog is on Spring Break.  Will judge you next week.

From Asmatico to El Che and How The Mighty One Got Him There

The Motorcycle Diaries is a 2004 for film that is based off of the diary that Ernesto (Che) Guevara kept while traveling through South America, with his friend Alberto Granado, in 1952.  Throughout his travels across South America, Guevara forms a love for its people, and a wish to see them treated fairly by the governments of the continent. 

The film’s purpose is to show how Guevara had his “political awakening as he was pulled away from his familiar life in Argentina and exposed to a continent of brutal extremes”, and how this formed him into the revolutionary that he later became. (Elena 21)  The film excellently shows his restlessness, as discussed by the Eduardo Elena reading.  It also shows his lack of knowledge of the countries he visits and his not taking the time to research those countries.  Doing so could have saved him a lot of trouble later on as a revolutionary trying to start a guerilla action in Bolivia, as Ann Zulawski discusses in her essay.

Guevara was not alone in his travels in the 1950s.  He “came of age in a time marked by the regular movement of people across Argentina, from rural residents relocating to urban areas to short-term leisure travel.” (Elena 22)  His entire generation seemed to have that restless need to travel, but not everyone was able to the way he did.  Guevara was able to freely break social and spatial boundaries during his travels due to his “position as a male in 1950s Argentine society.” (26)  However he made the effort to separate himself form normal tourists by avoiding large cities and trying to connect to more “rural folk.” (28, 31)  Meeting these people did not seem to end his views of them as stereotypes.  The film does appear accurate that he “went farther than his peers to seek out people from different social worlds,” but also glosses over the “social landscape of the 1950s.” (32, 33)  This could be seen as important in shaping Guevara’s future, so it seems to be a strange omission.  It is also interesting that Guevara largely ignored the politics of his native Argentina when he was younger.  He did not become involved in politics until after his travels, and then not even in his home country.

Even though his journeys greatly influenced him, they:

reflected the increasing rigidity of his view of political action, coupled with a deepening inability to perceive the full complexity of social conditions… contributed to his final failure in Bolivia, as the guerilla-traveler attempted to lead a revolution among a largely indigenous population about whom he knew almost nothing.  (48)

This meshes with what Zulawski discusses in her essay; mainly the fact that Guevara spent very little time in the country of Bolivia. (181)  His diary lacked the same level of description that he gave to other countries. (183)  He ultimately failed to see that the proletariats of Bolivia had a strong hand in the government and would have started change themselves.  Especially since few even knew he was in the country in 1967. (204)

STILL GUILTY!

It seems the mighty Che forgot that knowledge is power.