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
Post a Comment