Friday, March 10, 2006
Dissociation
have you notice that you can't appreciate a painting if you don't take some distance to look at it?, some perspective? well, home countries are like paintings for the ones who start the non-stop wondering aroung the world. My Chile, my painting.
Last night I was at the house of a friend from Ecuador, and some of the girls showed us a short documentary about the situation with the zapatista army in Mexico. the short film started with a mexican boy, son of a politic prisioner, telling a "nice poem called: This is enough!".- a little young boy, telling a story full of rage trying to look cute, I thought. the whole escene was disturbing me at some extent, why? I started thinking in all the political revolutions of South America, all the people saying pretty "left-wing" discourses, and I realized that always have made me feel uncomfortable about being southamerican, (I mean, wait a minute, I'm left wing, I'm a liberal, but just the idea of holding a pale on my hands in a revolutionary fashion just doesn't fit, it doesn't feel ok, why?...) and then i noticed the enourmous dissociation of my country. we have a bloody political history, there is a wound in our nation that hasn't been healed, justices hasn't been made and we have been raised trained in the arts of "living as if nothing happened", trained in the arts of becomming blind, or amnesic. but the truth is that is my history, that is on my blood; it is on my "to do" list to do something for justice be made, for wounds to be healed, for tellin an alternative story
 |
Monday, January 23, 2006
Here is a thought
It is clear that the "official lanes of power", that of the government and corporations are corrupted and collided in order to prevail their own interests leaving hopeless to the 90% of the world population. Thus, terrorism and phenomena like human trafficking and other crimes rise as a consequence and expression of a desperate intent to survive.
In other words, from the perspective of homeostasis, is the "Official lane" who is injecting too much pression into the world system, then the social anomie rises as a natural response to this pression. At the same time this social anomie keeps the Official lane in the power and justify its existence, since there is no official and validated (and uncorrupted) way to control and keep track on the policies and decisions of the official institutions; therefore, terrorism and other vicious practices are part of the same system and are useful to these institution in order to keep their power.
In other words, from the perspective of homeostasis, is the "Official lane" who is injecting too much pression into the world system, then the social anomie rises as a natural response to this pression. At the same time this social anomie keeps the Official lane in the power and justify its existence, since there is no official and validated (and uncorrupted) way to control and keep track on the policies and decisions of the official institutions; therefore, terrorism and other vicious practices are part of the same system and are useful to these institution in order to keep their power.
Wednesday, January 18, 2006
Valparaiso
Wednesday, December 14, 2005
About Marraquetas, Cuchuflís (Chilean stuff) & Starbucks
Today I'm going to Chile, but certainly I am going Home from Home... Thanks guys!
Steven "Potorke!"
Lauren...
Gideon...
Rebekha...
Marcelo...
Dulcy...
Sarah y Tamarak
Maria y Leonard
Y "el Jason", jajaWednesday, November 23, 2005
,
",". COMA, a state of mind, a period of latency, you know what has been said, but you don't know what is coming next. Every second is a moment of coma, the real question is how do you embrase that coma; is it anxiety in front of ambiguity or is it an invitation with a "yes" for an answer?
Friday, November 18, 2005
About Rockstars, Priests, Intellectual Yuppies and Cable TV
Saturday, June 04, 2005
It is frightening (Or beautiful? Honestly, I don’t know.) to see the result of someone’s passions, especially if that someone has good ideas and a good amount of charisma.
Today I saw "Luther,” the history of Martin Luther (directed by Eric Till, 2003, with the participation of Joseph Fiennes and Alfred Molina, among others). Luther was a passionate man. He was driven by guilt as well as by the search for truth. A doctor of theology (I don’t want to lecture a class, but only to introduce the subject), he rescues the biblical scriptures, which contrasted sharply with the authoritarian, guilt-filled, abusive and unfounded doctrines of the Roman Catholic Church of the sixteenth century. As an evangelist Luther began to preach in a passionate way about the merciful God found in the Bible and he became popular—yes, he was a hit in Maguncia; he was a Rockstar. There are elements in the preaching of Luther that could explain his success: Luther placed God himself on the side of the blamed and abused habitants of Maguncia (blamed by the Catholic doctrine and abused by the purchase of their salvation; money that was used for the building of St. Peter’s Cathedral). Besides, Luther did something huge: he helped to build the ethos of a nation. He allowed the German people to create their own version of the manifestations of their religious beliefs. The Lutheran Church, as well as the Anglican, Calvinist, etcetera, are born from the free practice of a community that exerts sovereignty over itself. The action of Luther derived in a revolution that was like a religious update: “No more Romans, but Germans. No more Romans, but British.” It was something like the prevaling of the republic over the monarchy, an expression of the culture that escapes from heteronomy. The Bible was translated into the local language, local songs, created by them, and they were allowed free interpretation and to ask questions. God was among the people.
Jesus did something similar in relation to the Pharisees. He freed the conscience from eternal condemnation and destroyed all the rules. He killed the “religion”—in the sense of power structures—and preached salvation to all who believed in Him. That was the only requirement: to believe. Dead repetitions or dead rituals were not required—only believing in and relating with him in a spiritual way. Both characters brought freedom of conscience.
However, what we see today inside the church is, on some occasions, pitiful and unacceptable. There still exist the rules, guilt, structures of power, and the struggle to reach the top of those structures. There are doctrines and more doctrines, translations of the Bible that are too literal or too liberal. Ladies and Gentlemen, every time we attend a Church with legal personification, we are in front of the institutionalization of Christianity. Why is that a problem? Because it creates a conflict between our expectations, the discourses and the practices.
The expectations: “The church is a place of sweet communion with God and with fellow man, a place of reunion where everyone can find shelter and spiritual consolation, where the poor will be sustained and sooner than later, we will reach a spiritual utopia where God finally will reign.”
The discourse: “God is a God of love; His salvation is for everyone; there is freedom in God; and there is no larger or smaller sin, because we are all sinners and God has saved us. Let be all welcome!”
The practices: “We, the ones leading the church, are here because we are better than all of you poor souls with no consolation that cannot reach the place we are standing on, except through a process of being totally obedient to our commands. Anyone who responds any other way will be considered the enemy, and therefore must be ripped away or destroyed.”
This practice is recurrent in every social institution, not only in churches. Let us take a look at economy: Adam Smith “preached” about a free economy, where everyone would have equal access to information and equal access to the accumulation of capital to invest it and make sure that everyone had a comfortable and happy survival. Is that what happened when capitalism reached the consolidation of its practice? Clearly, no. He who holds the information holds the power, and not everyone has equal access to that information. Therefore, not everyone has the same opportunities, and it is evident that not everyone can insure a comfortable and happy survival.
What I want to stress here is the gap between the idea and the massive practice of that idea, between the statement of principles and their practice by society and the eventual institutionalization of those principles; The gap between the freedom in God preached by Jesus and Luther and the dogmatic rigidity of the Church. It seems proper to raise the question: Is the people’s religious sensibility what determines its social order in economic, moral and everyday terms or is this order what determines the way we practice our beliefs?
World-trotters
Monday, June 20, 2005
It is interesting to observe how people talk about their trips. They can spend hours talking about the different places they have visited, the things they have seen. They even talk in terms of the smell that those places have, the colors, and the experience of “being abroad.”
It seems that for most people, the “world-trotter” is seen as more cultured and interesting than those who never left their homeland. It makes me think about the nomadic origins of our civilization. What is so attractive about knowing? What is so attractive about filling our eyes with the greatest possible number of things, about crossing borders, expanding, conquering, appropriating a place, apprehending it and making it our own?
This appropriation can be esthetic (tourism), political (empire), economic (globalization to create a virtual empire) or emotional (free interpretation), but it seems that the main issue is about appropriation.
At this very moment I am on a plane from Chile to Argentina, and I can see all that our beloved smog does not let us see. (I live in Santiago, Chile, which ranks first for air pollution.) Of course it is beautiful. It is always sunny above the clouds, and there is so much to see, so much to explore. I think that this is the reason why we are fascinated with the idea of an infinite Universe—believing that our passion for knowledge will never be completely satisfied.
It is interesting to observe how people talk about their trips. They can spend hours talking about the different places they have visited, the things they have seen. They even talk in terms of the smell that those places have, the colors, and the experience of “being abroad.”
It seems that for most people, the “world-trotter” is seen as more cultured and interesting than those who never left their homeland. It makes me think about the nomadic origins of our civilization. What is so attractive about knowing? What is so attractive about filling our eyes with the greatest possible number of things, about crossing borders, expanding, conquering, appropriating a place, apprehending it and making it our own?
This appropriation can be esthetic (tourism), political (empire), economic (globalization to create a virtual empire) or emotional (free interpretation), but it seems that the main issue is about appropriation.
At this very moment I am on a plane from Chile to Argentina, and I can see all that our beloved smog does not let us see. (I live in Santiago, Chile, which ranks first for air pollution.) Of course it is beautiful. It is always sunny above the clouds, and there is so much to see, so much to explore. I think that this is the reason why we are fascinated with the idea of an infinite Universe—believing that our passion for knowledge will never be completely satisfied.
Women, Wolfs & Masculine Castration: The revenge of the non-fact
Wednesday, May 18, 2005
I started reading "Mujeres Que Corren Con Lobos" by Clarissa Piconla Estés. It talks about the intuitive woman, the sexual, cyclic one, and the ages of women, their wisdom and creative fire. I know that feeling; I know what she is talking about—at the end of the day, I am a woman, am I not? However, I think that this kind of ultra-feminist literature creates more stereotypes than we need.
Let us do an exercise and think about the intuitive man, the sexual and cyclic one, his ages, wisdom and creative fire. I must confess that this idea provokes in me a conflict between these characteristics and my stereotyped beliefs about them. Men hide this intuitive, sexual and cyclic depth behind a stereotype they did not ask for. What happens to men on Pincola’s wolfs race? Are these the evil beings that have profaned the earth, destroying it? Where does the archetype come from? Do not Hitler and Mary Tudor dance on the same dancing floor? Or, do not Ghandi, Shamans and Pablo Neruda embrace Frida Kahlo, Barbara Wood and Mother Teresa? Where is the institutional order of gender these days?
The large impact caused by this book through workshops and the confirmation of a whole dogmatic doctrine about women makes me think about the relation between Hysteria and Feminism. They have in common the grief because of castration, the longing to recover something that has been taken away. On the other hand, the psyche derives from certain zeitgeist... Again: where is the institutionalism of Gender?
I started reading "Mujeres Que Corren Con Lobos" by Clarissa Piconla Estés. It talks about the intuitive woman, the sexual, cyclic one, and the ages of women, their wisdom and creative fire. I know that feeling; I know what she is talking about—at the end of the day, I am a woman, am I not? However, I think that this kind of ultra-feminist literature creates more stereotypes than we need.
Let us do an exercise and think about the intuitive man, the sexual and cyclic one, his ages, wisdom and creative fire. I must confess that this idea provokes in me a conflict between these characteristics and my stereotyped beliefs about them. Men hide this intuitive, sexual and cyclic depth behind a stereotype they did not ask for. What happens to men on Pincola’s wolfs race? Are these the evil beings that have profaned the earth, destroying it? Where does the archetype come from? Do not Hitler and Mary Tudor dance on the same dancing floor? Or, do not Ghandi, Shamans and Pablo Neruda embrace Frida Kahlo, Barbara Wood and Mother Teresa? Where is the institutional order of gender these days?
The large impact caused by this book through workshops and the confirmation of a whole dogmatic doctrine about women makes me think about the relation between Hysteria and Feminism. They have in common the grief because of castration, the longing to recover something that has been taken away. On the other hand, the psyche derives from certain zeitgeist... Again: where is the institutionalism of Gender?
Show
Sunday, May 29, 2005
Today I was driving over Costanera Avenue, an avenue on an upper class neighborhood in Santiago, Chile. In Santiago, “red-stop-light shows” are quite common. While a stop light is red, children start doing a juggling show—some are more skilled than others—and after the short show ends, the children ask for money from the audience in the other cars at the stop light. I don’t know if it is necessary to clarify that the children who perform these shows belong to low-income families and neighborhoods.
Today the show consisted of the following: a kid juggled with three little balls while standing on the back of a bent down woman who was in her fifties. Sadly, I don’t have pictures, but this woman was bent forward while the child stood on her back. At the end of the brief show, the child descended from the woman’s back and she simply stood up with no expression on her face while she moved to the side of the street to let the children look for their pennies in the wealthy cars.
This Show is remarkable, because it actually shows. I can’t help but be perturbed by the explicit character of the resignation of this woman, by the years over her shoulders, by how accustomed she had grown to frustration, to being an instrumental object, by her implicit acceptance of serving, and her acceptance that “nothing new will come.” I surely do not want to get into the hysteric discourse about “the woman who suffers,” but this woman reminded me of another one, who I met seven years ago, who I was able to chat with after she asked me for money to buy medicine for her children. We stayed outside the pharmacy talking (With time, one becomes particularly skeptical and would rather buy the food or medication than just give money away), and she told me about her inability to work because she could not trust anyone to take care of her children. She made disparaging comments about her neighbors who left their kids locked inside the house while they went to work, and exposed their children to being raped by their own fathers or stepfathers.
I left this conversation with the feeling of being locked, the feeling that one way or another that woman was going to end up losing something: “I do not have any money because I cannot work, and I do not work because if I do, my children will die as victims of a fire, or rape, or drug overdose.” It is not necessary to use statistics to know that this is the reality of most of the women with no income and that is why I applaud this shocking and explicit show—because of the drama of its secondary actress, its realism, its capacity to communicate and for its montage: to be in the right place and at the right time, just in front of our eyes.
Today I was driving over Costanera Avenue, an avenue on an upper class neighborhood in Santiago, Chile. In Santiago, “red-stop-light shows” are quite common. While a stop light is red, children start doing a juggling show—some are more skilled than others—and after the short show ends, the children ask for money from the audience in the other cars at the stop light. I don’t know if it is necessary to clarify that the children who perform these shows belong to low-income families and neighborhoods.
Today the show consisted of the following: a kid juggled with three little balls while standing on the back of a bent down woman who was in her fifties. Sadly, I don’t have pictures, but this woman was bent forward while the child stood on her back. At the end of the brief show, the child descended from the woman’s back and she simply stood up with no expression on her face while she moved to the side of the street to let the children look for their pennies in the wealthy cars.
This Show is remarkable, because it actually shows. I can’t help but be perturbed by the explicit character of the resignation of this woman, by the years over her shoulders, by how accustomed she had grown to frustration, to being an instrumental object, by her implicit acceptance of serving, and her acceptance that “nothing new will come.” I surely do not want to get into the hysteric discourse about “the woman who suffers,” but this woman reminded me of another one, who I met seven years ago, who I was able to chat with after she asked me for money to buy medicine for her children. We stayed outside the pharmacy talking (With time, one becomes particularly skeptical and would rather buy the food or medication than just give money away), and she told me about her inability to work because she could not trust anyone to take care of her children. She made disparaging comments about her neighbors who left their kids locked inside the house while they went to work, and exposed their children to being raped by their own fathers or stepfathers.
I left this conversation with the feeling of being locked, the feeling that one way or another that woman was going to end up losing something: “I do not have any money because I cannot work, and I do not work because if I do, my children will die as victims of a fire, or rape, or drug overdose.” It is not necessary to use statistics to know that this is the reality of most of the women with no income and that is why I applaud this shocking and explicit show—because of the drama of its secondary actress, its realism, its capacity to communicate and for its montage: to be in the right place and at the right time, just in front of our eyes.
Friday, October 28, 2005
It is amazing how your heart is the filter of your eyes... now I look at the same faces and places and they seem different to me
Powered for Blogger by Blogger Templates