what is popular culture in latinoamerica?

Latin American culture is very heterogeneous and varies a lot depending on the region, still there are some similarities, that's why the text uses three big areas on its attempt to describe it, the Andean region, Brazil and Mexico. Ever since the Conquest, Latin America has been changing, but even with all the changes it has had, there are still some rituals and traditions, from our native American ancestors, that are kept, but there are also some bad things, like due to globalization some of the same ancestors are taken aside and exploited or capitalists have taken away their lands. Also the development and social trends of the different areas may vary due to the country that conquer them and to urbanization and industrialization. Another area of Latin American culture that was very affected by the conquest was religion, after they invade America they imposed their religion and tried to change the rituals that were already used, but Europeans had an advantage, that they used written documents, as Indians usually had more a vocal heritage (narrative). Part of the traditions that are kept by some of the Indians are music and poetry, and there still are people that write in their native language, and also they keep native instruments. Another tradition that is trying to be kept is all the artesanias, which have a lot of different meanings, and they were related to religion sometimes, in a bad or a good way, but also, beside their meaning they have become in some cases an income for families. It is really hard to describe a region so vast like Latin America, but I think the authors here gave us very good idea of what in general concepts is Latin America.

what is the people?

I will like to start this post quoting one of the most outstanding lines of the paper: " Fanaticism is the only force that God gave the heart to win its battles". I feel like the first is very political and how that environment affects people, and she established a difference between the people and the liars, and how they are move just by envy, and also how this people would never be the leaders of the people, because in order to do that they should be fanatics of the people. Also the author feels disappointed and mad about how all people are liars, and she knew about lies, because she was married to a president, but not necessarily because he was a liar, but because of the environment she was involved. She also feels like a responsibility to tell the world about these lies. Even though she felt like she lived in a world of lies, she always admire and respect her husband, and would follow him where ever he would go. Because of the life she was living, she was always surrounded by people that would lie to take advantage of some situations, and because of that her will was been washed away, so that she wont believe in some people anymore. She believes in the people, or what she called the people, because they are truthful, they have heart and ideals. She always stood for the people, and that people is Latin America, being oppressed and exploited by the Imperialist, mainly USA. She wanted que la voz del pueblo fuera escuchada en todo el mundo, dando un grito de lucha por la justicia y libertad! For Peron, people's happiness comes first, because if people are not happy, then a country can't be great. I also feel that they use a lot the principle of democratics, the voice of the people, and how the government should really reflect that and be a government of the people, for the people and by the people. Even if it has a valid argument, I feel that after a while the text becomes monotonous and redundant, going over and over again on the same idea: How the people must fight, must not become sell outs, must want to be listened so they wont be opressed and mistreated by "the others". I don't really get the second one, it was kind of confusing and couldn't get the main idea, but I feel that the idea of the people is like any random person, any average joe, the country people, just living an ordinary life, but the characters of the story didn't seem that ordinary, but still they were not part of the oligarchy.

Culture...

In the first article the author establishes something from the very beginning and is that culture is ordinary, and he also relates culture to society, how they are made of common meanings and directions. He also seems disappointed about the path that society is taking, how it is getting worse and worse everyday. Culture is always changing, and those changes are the things that mold it into what is becoming, and the way people adapt to those changes is the only way to survive in this world. This has a lot to do with how people were raised, so that they can accept these changes and get use to them and take the best of them also. He makes a really clear and strong statement saying that culture is expanding and all the elements on it are too, because as time changes, people changes which means culture is changing, our culture is not the same as 50 years ago, due to a lot of things, for example technology and education. Culture is a reflect of people, and people are a reflect of their education, so culture is a reflect of education and changes with it. On the second text, culture is seen like the consequence of the past, a mix of the old and new, there they use the word collage or coral reefs, because culture comes from a lot of different things and places that have "deposit", and in most of the nations of the modern world that were conquered is a mixture of appropriations, resistance and accommodations, as the text says.
The term culture has also been misused and twisted in a wrong way, since now is applied to ways of life and as a thing, that can be steal, manipulated or sell. There has been a lot of moments in history that have changed the way culture is developed, also not every culture is the same, since there are ones that believe in magic and others that do not believe in magic or things related to it. Some things such as dances, typical dresses, that people think defines their culture, sometimes is not more than heritages from the colonial processes and are not really part of their true roots. Culture is the consequence of many things and the recompilation of a lot of history and events that occurred, but sometimes those things that made us really proud of our culture, are not what we really think, and sometimes what we think and referred as culture is not really it.

Me

Hi
My name is Rommel Fernandez, I'm from Costa Rica this is my 2 term here in UBC, I've been here since august and I'm a Science student.

testing

testing