Reaction To Popular Culture As Mass Culture

It seems pertinent to first address the fact that Bellos is equating Brazil’s defeat by Uruguay in 1950 to Hiroshima. In my personal opinion, it seems that these two “national tragedies” might not be at the same level, seeing as no one’s life was lost as a result of the football game. Still, it does say something about Brazil’s culture, and the importance of football to Brazilians. That there were would be such a strong reaction to this event is representative of something that has become more than just a game—becoming almost like a national religion. This is made evident from the multiple books that were published about this game.

The loss definitely permeated through the nation, and became part of the national consciousness. In a way it is the greatest unifier for the nation, and brings a source of national pride; it ties the country together and allows people to show their patriotism. Another sign of football’s omnipresence was how Bellos writes that the Brazilians were called “survivors”. Survival implies a traumatic experience, and it seems that the football game was considered a source of trauma for the nation since the game produced “survivors”.

A different type of culture can be seen through the telenovela, which also seems to be less dividing and unifying than football. There are not huge crowds of people who gather to cheer telenovelas, but it still remains a relevant and important part of the media representation of life and society. Telenovelas can be seen as a reaction to the time, a confrontation of life that discusses (and critiques?) different aspects of society. The genre has expanded, and has become a way to look to the future and a sign of modernity. 

Telenovelas are interesting because they seem to be successful in some regions. Telenovelas have become symbolic of Latin American culture, and seem to be good methods through which to enter the different and complex cultures of Latin America. Both telenovelas and football seem to be part of the “popular”, but I wonder how they can be sites of tension and resistance. In other words, are both exclusively part of the mainstream? And if they are, could that detract from their cultural significance?

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Response To: The End of Popular Culture?

Response to Pop Culture as Folk Culture

The People