Last Blog

This weeks blog will be dedicated to the semester as a whole, which I can't believe is already coming to an end. It is crazy to take a step back and think that in a week, my room will be empty and my freshman year of college will be over! It is also really crazy to think I will already be done with my freshman sequence already, it just seems like this year only just started. Look at that, just like high school, time is flying by. I liked our class, and I am glad that I chose this sequence for sure. I really learned something, and frankly, much more than I would have learned in say American Civilization where I would have already known a lot of what the class was focusing on. This class gave me a unique opportunity not only to skip over all of my general education classes, but also gave me the chance to learn something about our American neighbors to the South. I liked the overall layout of the class with prof's Stark and Serrata teaching independently, but i think the papers and discussion questions would have been easier and more effective had the two lectures stayed closer to one another. It seemed like a lot of the time we would be learning about one country, but then talking about a whole different country the next hour, and it lead me to sometimes mix up the countries in general. That said, talking about countries independently allows us to cover more over a shorter time. I also liked the attempts made to make the class interesting, like the trip to Chicago, as well as the dance lessons, I only wish we could have done more things like that, especially back in the first semester. Once again I will say that I loved not having tests in this class, and I did not have to worry about memorizing each country for the test and then forgetting it afterwards. Instead, the papers made me learn and think while writing them. I would however suggest having peer editing all 4 times, because the papers tend to come out better that way. The projects also gave a unique experience to learn, and was especially good for learning to work in groups with your members to make the best documentary possible, and I would suggest continuing this. Overall, this class was unique, and unlike anything I had ever had in a school atmosphere in terms of structure, events, lack of tests, and papers, and I think that overall, it was beneficial to me.

Blog number 11: A little more on Roberto Clemente

In class, Prof. Stark briefly talked about Roberto Clemente, and I thought that a little more could be said about the man, both on and off the field that related to Latin American pride and heritage. Then I found this video, which in 4 minutes said pretty much everything for me...




http://www.biography.com/people/roberto-clemente-9250805/videos/roberto-clemente-mini-biography-35740739713


That quote from the video "If you have a chance to help others a fail to do so, you're wasting your time on this Earth", and that alone, to me, explains why he was such a well-liked and honorable man. Later in the video it says something along the lines of him being to Latino players what Jackie Robinson was to African American ball-players, and he really opened the door of opportunity for Latino players like essentially 3/4 of the current Detroit Tigers team. To be that player, that link between past and future makes Clemente more of a hero than his baseball stats could ever explain. Wikipedia says that the only member of the Pirates organization to not attend his memorial service was the catcher and a great friend of his, who was busy diving in the waters off of Puerto Rico looking for his body. People drove miles to the beach expecting him to "just walk out of the water" and as the man says "it was just devastating, you didn't even have to be a Pirates fan or even a baseball fan". The fact that he died fulfilling his motto of helping others makes him that much more of a hero and an icon for ages to come. Professors Stark and Serrata both seemed to be in agreement that he was the greatest Latino ball player so far, and one does not get that image across Latin America without going beyond the greatness of a player, and into the greatness of a human being. Honestly, before class on Friday I never bothered to find information on Roberto Clemente and to find out all of this about him, really is astonishing to me that I had not heard it all before. Clemente was a Pittsburgh Pirates hero, and a baseball hero, but above all else, a hero of a human being, and he died displaying that personality perfectly.

My Response to Grace's blog number 10

I also wrote my blog about the book, but I stuck to only talking about the Yarur leadership. I felt the same way as you, with the book sounding to me much more like a novel than the other books this year. I felt a lot more connected to this book, and was more interested that I normally am. I felt like the book was like you said, said in a few points, but my main focus was on how the book was actually funny to me. I especially liked the way that the Allende speech at the factory was worded, and the way that he just joked around at first and then "his tone deepened" when he said he will take over the the factory if elected. To me, that was just not regular wording for a historical book, and like you said, was more novel-like than usual. I really liked this book compared to the others.

Blog number 10: The Yarur Legacy

This week I want to talk specifically about the Peter Winn book we are reading for prof. Stark's discussion questions. I have been doing my questions lately, and I am liking this book significantly more than the others this year so far, so I would like to talk about why that is for this week's blog. I am going to talk specifically about the 3 Yarur leaders that the book describes; Jorge, Juan, and Amador and their leadership. I personally found their systems and the shifts between them to be comical. The father Juan was the man who set up the company, and he did so during pretty bad times, with a lot of outside support. He set up a very loose system where he was seen as a father figure, walking among his men, and being friendly with not only the employees, but their families as well. He took advantage of his incredible skill in business as well as his charismatic character. The people liked him, and were happy to work for the successful company during hard times. But then he died, and his most successful son took over the reigns for the company. This shift to me was the funny one, as he took everything his father had put together, and threw it out the window. The Taylor system was implied in the factory, half the workers laid off, while production doubled. Jorge focused completely on productivity and efficiency of the factory, and the factory benefited in exchanged for unhappy workers. He created a gap between the workers and leaders of the factory, where his father had worked hard to prevent that very thing. This is one of those scenarios where one could imagine the father rolling in his grave with what his son was doing. But at the same time, he was a businessman, so perhaps not so much, it is just difficult to tell whether this was a move that would have been supported or not. It is also difficult to choose whether the boost in production was worth the decrease in worker happiness. I for one think so, but then again, ultimately the workers take over, so who knows. But then Amador takes over from his brother, and he tried to essentially return to his father's ways while retaining the productivity. He tried to return to the paternal image, but he lacks the charisma of his father, and the workers hated him. He kept the productivity high through further worsening the working conditions, to the point where a 3 minute bathroom break got the worker yelled at. The people increased their dislike for management, and eventually take the factory.


In a single generation, the Yarur leaders lost all the support of the workers, and completely revamped the system of the workers. It is just funny and strange to me that brothers had such different ideas from one anther and their father as well.

Mt Response to Grace's Blog 9: Dreams, Reality, and Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows

I found Dahlmann's story to be very difficult to grasp because like you said it was very abstract and makes the reader read the story with a funny influence on thoughts. I agree completely with you in regards to Harry's state of being in The Deathly Hallows, which I read twice, and saw the movie twice and still struggle to understand what is really going on. Part of me wants to believe he is asleep, the other wants to say he is dead an saved only by the presence of Voldemort's horcrux inside him. So does that make his conversation real? Can somewhere he's never been, talking with someone who is dead possibly be real? The same question comes up for Dahlmann; can someone who is strapped to the operating table, dying really be visiting the south in his head and have it be real enough to believe? The question isn't really between real and fake, but whatever the reader perceives to be real and fake, and how much they are willing to believe and play along with. I dream at night, but that doesn't make unicorns and dragons real in the world we live in now does it?


I also found it very difficult to try and wrap my mind around all of the ideas being thrown out; like he really went, he dreamt he went, he did not go but it was his choice to go, he did go but it was not his choice, he did not go because fate did not allow it, and he went because fate did allow it. Writing that out and then reading it over it makes no sense to even me, so I don't expect it to make sense to anyone else, but my point is, there are so many interpretations of such an abstract situation and idea that it is nearly impossible to get a grasp on the group conversation.

Blog number 9: Cuba after Castro

This week I want to discuss Cuba, and more specifically what do you think Cuba will be like once the Castros are no longer in power. We discussed in class that Castro was not a bad guy at the beginning of his rule, and was supported by almost 95 percent of the population in taking over for Batista. That said, something clearly changed, and we saw it in his methods, and the way he essentially trapped everyone on the island. When Fidel gave up power to Raul many people may have thought things would change at that point, and to a certain extent, they have. People are allowed to have cell phones and computers now, a technology that has been around for as long as I personally can remember. I for one would have a tough time without a cell phone and a computer, so i can only imagine what it must be like down there. That said, things under Raul have only changed so much, and are probably not going to be too ground-breaking considering Fidel is still alive and I would assume is watching over him like a hawk.So then my question becomes what happens in 2018? What happens when Fidel and Raul die? Perhaps most importantly, what happens when the current generation of political leaders also step down or die? I realize that the man slated to take the presidency next is just a "yes-man" but I cannot help but think what if he changes things up, and maybe reestablishes relationships with the U.S., could it once again become legal to visit Cuba? Will we stop hating Cuba because their ideas conflict with the U.S.? It is impassible to tell because like prof. Stark said; Miguel Diaz-Canel is a fairly unknown politician and was a surprise to many as the man Raul would support in 2018. The wikipedia page on him does not even have much useful information! So what do you guys think? Will Cuba change much, or will Fidel's ghost continue to run the island country through the body of Diaz-Canel?

My Response to Alexis's Blog 8

I was also fascinated by Borges life, and most specifically the young age when he began. To be completely honest, I remember when I was in about first or second grade I asked my mom why we had a thermos in our cabinet that had Harry Potter on it and who that was. She answered "Oh that's a really big book, you'll see one day". If I couldn't read Harry Potter by that age, I find it truly incredible that this little boy was reading the classic stories he was, and writing as well, which I used to hate doing at that age. I recently watched Matilda while babysitting, and this makes me think of her, and how she was reading Moby Dick in first grade, and was incredibly smart for her age. I also found it interesting not only that the head injury from "The South" actually happened to him, and did indeed have very negative effects. To me, being blind is on of my worst fears, and so to imagine loving reading like Borges did really makes me think of how much he lost when he lost his vision. It really was a true love of his to continue writing and have others read to him, but it could not have been anything like what he used to have in reading. Like you, I found Borges to be an interesting individual, especially at a young age.

Blog number 8: Donkey Kong and his bananas

For this week's blog I have chosen to discuss the banana that has played a very significant role in much of the development of Latin America. I actually found a YouTube video on video game speculation in which the creator discusses the ways that the old game Donkey Kong Country could portray what he calls the Latin American banana wars. It is about a video game and is just his belief so I won't post it, but I will discuss what he says in the video and explain why I think many of his descriptions and theories are impressive and accurate. For those of you unfamiliar with Donkey Kong, he is a gorilla known for his love of bananas and his struggle to regain them after they were stolen by an enemy crocodile named King K. Rool. His arguments are as follows:


King K. Rool is a carnivorous crocodile, and during the game he actually states that he hates banana's, so why then is he so bent on stealing them from Donkey Kong? He then goes on explaining how King K. Rool only wants the bananas to remove Donkey Kong so that he can "occupy" his home and how this goes along with the theme of the U.S. at this time of occupying Latin American countries for their own gain. K. Rool is known for this appearance shown below, which he then compares to a political cartoon that depicts Teddy Roosevelt as a King also shown below. This connection would explain the way that K. Rool (as Roosevelt) wants to use the banana's to take over Latin America. He also goes on to explain that the final battle with K. Rool takes place on a pirate ship. which both relates to the arsenal of ships under the United Fruit Companies command, and the immoral message behind those ships, as if they were pirates, stealing from the people.


                                  


The creator then moves on to discuss the subject of railways and transportation within the game world. The game world has multiple levels in which Donkey Kong must traverse destroyed rail ways left there by K. Rool and his army. He states that this implies the connection between the UFC's monopoly on transportation and the control that was exerted upon the rail roads of Central America. We learned in class that the UFC chose not to build a railroad for Guatemala because it would diversify transportation away from the UFC's control. Along many of these railway levels, the player experiences smaller crocodiles wearing full U.S. army clothing blocking the way for Donkey Kong to continue on his mission. Meanwhile, no other character in the game wheres much in terms of clothing, but yet these crocodiles are wearing full army gear. Once again, we see the control placed by UFC and the U.S. upon Latin American railways represented in a  video game.


Finally, he talks about the overall layout of the game itself, where there are 6 worlds, and the final battle on the pirate ship. 4 of these levels take place in nature, the names are: Kongo Jungle, Monkey Mines, Vine Valley, Gorilla Glacier, Chimp Caverns, and Kremcrok Industries Incorporated. The final name clearly stands out, a level within the world is called Polluted Pond, and the picture shows a building spewing pollution into the air. It is very clear that the only level directly associated with the invaders is portrayed very very negatively. And the country that would have been associated with Industry like this for the time period is the U.S. The clear message being sent here, and he says this as well, is that the U.S. and it's overpowering industry has come in and tried to destroy something natural in Latin America. The U.S. interest also included oil, which is a very main part of the final world as well.


The creator sums up the entire video excellently: "We have a war over bananas, lead by an imperialistic president, featuring an industrialized enemy, with an armed fleet that owns and destroys railroads, who uses a well equipped army, to secure fruit an oil for the good of Kremland(U.S.A.)".
pretty strong message for a video game in my opinion, and an accurate one in my eyes, what do you guys think?

My response to Leah's blog numero siete

This is a very interesting blog to me, because like you, I did not know much if anything about Henequen plants when Stark mentioned them. I also did not have those pictures in my head of what the plant would look like, because in my head a cactus is one of those typical big cactus' with the two arms branching off and upward. It is really nice to see what it actually is, and even more so, to see it being made and processed. Isn't it strange to think of all the things that can be used to make very similar objects? You managed to make the process of twine-making more interesting than it ever was to me before hand, and so good job to you!

Blog number 7, I'll make a man out of you

I am going back to the Disney theme again this week for my inspiration in this weeks blog. I knew since Monday when prof. Stark told us about women who disguised themselves as men in order to fight in the Mexican Revolution that I wanted to take the time to talk about that. Stark gave us the specific example of Petra Herrera, who disguised herself as a man not only to fight in the war, but to be treated with the respect and opportunity of a man at war. We then learned that she moved up the ranks to colonel for the leadership she displayed and effort she put in. She then revealed herself to actually be a woman, and was treated with the respect that she deserved afterward as a result of her efforts and not her gender. Hua Mulan is a legendary Chinese heroine portrayed in the Disney movie Mulan known for doing the same thing in the war against the Huns that Herrera did in the Mexican revolution. Mulan, fearing for her fathers life, and irritated by the inability of women to join the army signed up as a man, and is shown in the movie struggling to keep up at first. But then she concentrated and really put her mind to it, and ends up being better than even her leader in the training camp. Everyone respects her now for what she has shown on the battlefield. She is found out to be a woman and is at first shunned for this, but then she then kills the leader of the Huns and is given the highest award possible in the military by the emperor himself. Regardless of her gender, she has shown her worth on the battlefield and is given a reward like any man in the same position would have received. In both situations, the woman disguised herself to fight for what she believed in, proved her worth, and was rewarded despite their gender. I find this very interesting because it happened so similarly, yet so far away in distance and time, but still shows almost the exact same moral of no matter who you are, you deserve a chance, and if you succeed, you will be rewarded like any other person in the same position. In fact, this apparently occurs often enough in history to have a wikipedia page titled: List of wartime cross-dressers. It is pretty clear that women could handle the fighting expected, and wanted to help with the war-efforts all throughout history.

My Response to Elena's blog number 6

I liked your blog this week because it is a good continuation of what we did with propaganda in class this past week. I feel like the picture you found is very similar to the one we saw in class with Uncle Sam reaching over towards Cuba and the Caribbean from the U.S. The eagle, much like Uncle Sam is a very well known symbol for the US, and the way that it is preying upon Latin America with the same kind of greed, and negative atmosphere that is shown is very similar to the picture with Uncle Sam. I don't really know if there is significance behind the bird standing in Africa versus the US or Latin America, but the general symbolism is very similar. I think there may also be a connection between the eyes, and the way that Uncle Sam looks greedy versus the eagle looking borderline evil with the read, squinting, evil eyes. Both images show the US intervention in a negative light and I just felt like connecting the two images, and that's all I really have to say about that.

Blog number 6: Communism or Robin Hood-ism

Once more I shall make a reference to a Disney movie in Robin Hood commonly known for the saying; "steal from the rich and give to the poor". The movie Viva Zapata also represents these ideals in the way that Zapata and his followers intend to steal the land from the rich men and return to the valleys that they grew up in. Although there is a difference here between the two movies in the fact that the lands once belonged to Zapata and his men, the same idea is present in both movies where society is better when everyone has the same, and no one is left behind anyone else. Big John in the Disney movie is the very rich King who has much more than all of his subjects, and he represents the opposite of communism where one person has a lot more than anyone else, and it is not fair at all. On the other hand, Robin hood represents the lower classes and their desires to be better off than they are. In Viva Zapata the president and the rich men represent the desires of the rich to be better than others versus Zapata who represents the communistic view of everyone sharing the land equally.


During the red scare, everyone seemed to think that Zapata and his men did indeed represent communistic views, and the reputation of the director took a direct hit as a result of this connection to communism. Now that being said, is it really communistic to think that Zapata wants the land was unfairly taken from his men to be returned to them? Is this really communism in the movie? Or is it like this glorified "Robin hood-ism"? If you ask many people, they would say that Robin Hood is the hero of his movie, and is loved by the vast majority of viewers. Finding someone who dislikes the character Robin Hood is a difficult task. That being said, Robin Hood represents more communistic views than Zapata in that what he is taking and giving never belonged to those recieving the benefits. The fact is that Robin Hood is a communist, but a heroic one who is not only not disliked, but actually loved for his actions by the viewers of Robin Hood.


And so my question becomes: is Zapata communist (meaning he would be looked down upon in our society), or are his actions deserving of the glorified treatment that Robin Hood recieves (Robin hood-ism)? I for one feel that both Robin Hood and Zapata's actions are beneficial to everyone, and that perhaps both deserve to be seen in a better light than communistic, such as Robin hood-istic.

My response to Jacqueline's blog number 5

In my opinion, the simple answer to your question is no, this raceless nation remains even today to be idealistic and improbable. I agree completely on your comment about applications asking for race, I think it is wrong, and goes against that idea of equality that we have been striving for for years. But it goes beyond that, last year I was looking through my school's collection of scholarship applications and it is more than just asking for race, but there are applications that are only open to people of a specific race, and that is the way it is going to be. Even if we get to the point where we can remove race from applications and that sort of thing there is still the issue of stereotypes like you said, which in my opinion have an even smaller likelihood of ever going away. The first thing many people do upon meeting a new person is create this idea of who they are, despite knowing they should not do that, it happens anyway, and what is the most outward appearance to make that initial judgement off if not race? I simply feel that it is simply to far ingrained in our society at this point to ever realistically think that we can have a raceless nation. One can look at the leaders like Mandela, Gandhi, and King all one wants, but how can you take their movements as improvements to society when the other side of the spectrum is represented simultaneously by the leadership of Castro, Hitler, Jong-un, Stalin, and Putin? For each man who fights for that equal, ideal, raceless nation, there is a man pushing from the other side for the segregated and unequal life, and the media and modern technology makes sure we all know about it.


 'Raceless' to me goes beyond equality, and beyond stereotypes, I think that raceless is just to ideal of an image where not only are we all equal, but we are all one in the same. The day that someone can meet a new person and not see race, the day that one can sit at a table with everyone else and have no negative or positive thoughts based on appearance is the day that a raceless nation has arrived. However good luck with that when stereotypes and media are flushing your mind with all those thoughts that you are not supposed to have about other people. The only chance for a raceless nation is one in which there literally - not figuratively or theoretically - is no difference in race among humans.

Blog number 5, when to help

During professor Stark's part of the class we talked a lot this week about U.S. intervention into foreign affairs and things like when if ever is it okay for the U.S. to butt into another countries business, with or without their asking for it. I look at this subject in a strange way, in fact sometimes I can't even convince myself which side of the argument I want to be on in this situation. However, I am generally for U.S. involvement in foreign affairs, so long as the situation calls for the intervention.


With regards to countries like Cuba, I think that the U.S. was correct in joining the conflict for a few reasons. First off, I see Cuba both as a potential friend, and a potential enemy of the U.S., and frankly, I feel as though our leaving Cuba is what lead to the conditions there are today. I feel like had we stayed there and fixed things up and protected our economic investments, then perhaps Cuba is our friend today, or maybe even a state. I also feel that the proximity to the U.S. and the potential of a threat to the U.S. in Cuba also justifies intervention, because if we are there to stop communism in the first place, then we do not have to worry about it decades later and into the present. Had it been an issue of invading Peru or Afghanistan like today then maybe I would not be so in favor of joining, but the proximity of a nation in danger leads me to believe invading was in our best interest.


For the Dominican Republic, I also felt as though invading for a short period of time was a smart decision there as well. Although professor Serrata and the Dominican people may disagree, I once again feel as though the proximity to the U.S., and the threat of Haiti spreading to the other half of the island was just cause to invade for a short period of time. Once again, it is an issue of closeness to the U.S., and the threat of an enemy developing that leads me to believe that invading in the Caribbean was the correct move for short periods of time.


The issue of a humanitarian crisis to me is of less importance than is threat to the U.S.. I simply feel as though governing bodies like the United Nations were created to stop that type of thing, so why is it automatically the U.S.'s duty to send in our own men to fight for the cause? It should be the duty of the whole world to come together and share the burden if the humanitarian crisis needs to be stopped. If the U.S. deems it a humanitarian crisis and goes to fight then whats stopping us from invading China, or North Korea, or Cuba, or even Russia? Just because humans are not treated with the same respect as they are here is not justification to fight a war, unless the U.S. feels threatened.


For me, foreign intervention all comes down to feeling threatened, not feeling obligated.

My Response to Lauren's blog number 4

I saw the terms half breeds and mystical creatures and instantly thought of Harry Potter. Then I read the rest of your blog and realized that I would actually be able to make a connection to Harry Potter. Like you said, Cecilia herself is a mulatto, but yet she refers to her mulatto friends as half bloods in a demeaning manner. Now lets think of the Half-Blood Prince, Severus Snape, who himself is a half blood like Cecilia. Now as many of us probably know, Snape is a good guy in the end, but for the majority of the series that is not known, and Snape allies himself with the Death eaters who despise and hunt those who lack pure wizard blood. Although Snape is half-blood, we see him ally himself with those of a higher status than himself. We see Cecilia do a similar thing, where she is clearly "half-blood" herself in her mulatto nature, but sees herself as white, as a higher standing than her own friends who have a darker skin than herself, which would put her also as higher standing.

Blog number 4: Party Time

While reading and talking about Cecilia this week in class, especially the later chapters that revolve around a party, I couldn't help but think of all the other parties I have read about in literature through high school. This majestic party atmosphere is a setting fairly common in literature, regardless of where the novel came from. What I mean by that is that while reading I was thinking about the connections between Cecilia and here party, and other novels or plays where a party takes center stage. American writer Fitzgerald and The Great Gatsby is an excellent example of a party being the center. Shakespeare liked to do this as well, whether it was the Taming of the Shrew, Hamlet, or Romeo and Juliet, the party always gives the story a good, public location for events to happen. George Bernard Shaw's Pygmalion also utilizes a party as the coming out for Elisa after her transformation to a classy woman. My point in saying all of this, and listing a bunch of classic novels and poems is in saying that this concept of a party offering a location for events to occur is an idea that is very common to literature. The party offers a public location like I said before, but it also creates an immediate public reaction, so when events occur, they immediately offer consequences as a direct result. So, what we see here is that no matter where the author comes from, no matter their background, parties still offer a great place for the plot of a story to unfold or become relevant.

My Reaction to Grace's blog 3

I love your blogs because they are interesting and relate to things that I like. Plus they have videos so that is a plus for sure. I just read your blog and immediately thought of when Prof. Serrata said that a gaucho could know where a blade of grass was from by chewing it, which made me laugh in class. so when I read the name of the video: Sherlock Holmes doesn't need a map I thought you related it very well to the gauchos and the different kinds of gauchos. I agree too that Sherlock Holmes would make a good cowboy, based on skills and his social standing.

Blog number 3

This week I thought it would be a good idea to talk about something that I still don't understand from Stark's part of the class. That is, I still do not understand why Chile cared that Peru and Bolivia united. Lucas asked in class, but I did not understand Stark's reference to Indiana and Ohio, and I don't think that Mitch's example about Toledo and the upper peninsula relates to the issue. To me the issue is that Chile was jealous that a struggling nation was trying to help itself by joining up with another nation. The Toledo issue is that Ohio wanted Toledo from Michigan, which directly affected Michigan, so that doesn't really apply here. Meanwhile, the Indiana example just doesn't seem like it would matter to me. It simply appears to me to be one nation being upset that another nation is trying to save itself and bring itself out of debt. Why is Chile set on holding down Peru?

My Reaction to Emily's Blog number 2: Lost

I really like the analogy that you used Emily, and i think that you hit on the time period very well with the characters. I agree that their following blindly is very similar to the elites of Latin America at the time following the European systems without questioning whether they will work for them or not. I also like that you made an interesting connection to an outside show, and a reference that a lot of people can understand even if you have not seen the show simply on a little description of the show. It makes answering other people's blogs more fun when they connect them to interesting and fun topics.

Blog number 2

Hello everyone, as I am sure was expected, I'm going to use this blog to talk quickly about my reference to the Jungle Book in class. At first I thought it was a somewhat limited reference, but now that I have looked over it, and watched it another three or four times I see a lot of things that make the analogy as very good to me. First off, it is sung by King Loui, who expresses his desire as an elite to expand to something more than a monkey, or a savage. This matches up with the Latin American elites of the time also wanting to evolve, and become more like Europeans. The fire that King Loui searches for stands for the progress that Latin American elites are also looking for. Finally, King Loui spends some of the song chasing around a lower class monkey and thumping him with a leaf, which in turn stands for the elite's pushing aside of the lower classes to better himself. King Loui expresses his desire to walk among men, to progress, and his willingness to push aside those below him, much like the elites of Latin America were while building their nations in the 1800's.

Blog #1: Introduction

Hello everyone, this is Matt Sinclair. I am a biology major but currently do not know what to do with a biology major. I really enjoy our class on Latin America, and chose to take it as my sequence for a couple of reasons. First of all, I have been to Latin America, and to Tulum and absolutely loved being there. That experience alone was enough to make me want to learn more about there people, such as how they built these structures, how they lived, and where they went. This of course adds to the fact that I have never visited Asia or Europe or some of the other options we had, so Latin America seemed to be the more interesting topic to me. Second of all, was my three years of Spanish in high school, which I did well in and for the most part enjoyed. I especially liked the days where we would focus on culture, and so learning more about the modern culture of Latin America seemed like an easy choice in that regard. Lastly, I chose Latin America due to its closeness to myself. I have always felt that it would make more sense to learn the ways of the countries who neighbor us, not so much the ones across an ocean. Overall, between Asian, European, American, and Latin American civilization, I choose the one that, in my opinion, was most relevant to me, and most interesting, but still had this feel of newness to it of something I had never studied in depth before. I am happy with my decision and glad to be in class with all of you.