Category Archives: review

Review of course reading

Analysis of 100 Years of Dominican Feminism

Thursday, April 26th author of Black behind the ears, Ginetta Candelario, lectured a presentation titled 100 Years of Dominican Feminism. Candelario’s main point was to elaborate on the specific cases of Dominican feminists. The talk was featured as a part of the University of Scranton’s week-long campaign to confront sexual violence on campus. In the spirit of the campaign designed to empower women, this presentation focused on historical women of the Dominican that were involved in social activism within their country.

Ginetta Candelario’s lecture consisted of an illustrated PowerPoint presentation in which she thoroughly elaborated on specific slides. Following the lecture, Candelario accepted questions from the audience. Beginning with a few positive remarks, I immediately noticed Candelario’s excellent public speaking skills. It was obvious that she knew her presentation well and merely used her PowerPoint to facilitate the lecture and not dominate it. Candelario also consistently made eye contact with the audience which I felt was important throughout her presentation. Finally, I enjoyed Candelario’s personal stories relating to her research into Dominican feminism. The story of thumbing through stacks of articles in the library searching for a specific letter and/or newspaper clipping clearly demonstrated the depth and concentration of her research. Her other story about the town square in the capital where women shaved their head in public as an activist demonstration was empowering.

There were a few things that I did not like about the lecture. I felt that Candelario spent too much time on the finer details. I understand that the who, what, where, and how are important questions to consider whenever addressing historical figures but for a short lecture I felt that Candelario weakened her presentation by including too much context information. For example, I did not think it was worth including extraneous personal information on character’s spouses or significant others just to arrive at the origin of the word feminism in the Dominican Republic. Another critique, as insignificant as it is, was the length of the lecture. As a presenter, you need to be aware of the time remaining and not run late. Although it was mostly due to the audience’s questions, Candelario’s lecture ran over the expected time. Nevertheless, I thoroughly enjoyed Candelario’s presentation and look forward to finishing reading her book Black behind the ears.

Lastly, our most recent theme in Race in Latin America was race and nation in the Dominican Republic. First, Candelario’s book is an excellent parallel to the course unit because it addresses that race and nationality can be dynamic despite being grouped together. One can be both light and dark skinned and be Dominican but both reject African descent. Her lecture, on the other hand, offers examples of women who find Dominican nationality through feminism giving a different picture to the theme of race and nation.

Ginetta Calendario – Review

Ginetta Candelario is a Dominican-American sociologist who has studied the foundations of feminism in the Dominican Republic for the past seventeen years. The main point that she emphasized was the difference between North American and Dominican feminists. Dominican women were more concerned with autonomy; having rights to divorce, to own property, and to govern their own bodies. Women in the United States were chiefly concerned with suffrage, but this did not matter to the Dominican feministas whose government “elections” consisted of militia-led coup d’états where a vote would not be of much use. North American women would not reach this level of feminism, which is considered Second Wave feminism, until the 1950’s.

After her presentation, we had a question and answer session about both her presentation and her book, Black Behind the Ears (There is more to the name). This book followed transnational Dominican migrants at three key cities and studied their racial self-identification. Those in Washington D.C. more readily identified with their African ancestry, and accepted their blackness. Those in New York held on to anti-black ideologies, in an attempt to separate themselves from African-Americans and how they were treated in America. Those in Santo Domingo also held on to anti-black, but more specifically, anti-Haitian, ideologies due to years of schooling and customs that supported this philosophy. This relates to class in that we studied the roots of anti-blackness/anti-Haitian ideas. We found them to originally be a way to distance the Dominican Republic from the free and black country of Haiti so that international trade would not be deterred.

Concerning the presentation and dinner, Dr. Candelario was eloquent, knowledgeable, and enthusiastic about her work. Her work has already begun to change my perspective and appreciation of my background and identity. However, during the presentation she seemed to be disorganized in how she would flip back-and-forth between slides. Also, she would provide exorbitant amounts of information to answer questions. Besides that, I identify strongly with Dr. Candelario as a Dominican-American woman who is white passing. As a child, I would fill out my race as black and my ethnicity as Hispanic/Latino on standardized tests. As I grew to understand race and ethnicity, I realized I could not identify as black simply because I did not identify as white. Her work has re-opened my own internal conversation of my identity, and I am grateful.

The Farming of Bones: A Review

Edwidge Danticat

Edwidge Danticat is the author of a historical fiction novel, The Farming of Bones, that follows Amabelle Desir, a Haitian-born woman and main protagonist, through her intense transformation and struggle to survive through the Haitian Massacre. The story begins and symbolically ends in the fictional town Alegría, and the story moves between border towns near the Haitian and the Dominican border. This novel was published in 1998 by Soho Press and has received many rewards and recognition since its publication, namely the American Book Award in 1999.

The Farming of Bones relates well to the challenges that many living in Hispaniola (referring to the Dominican Republic and Haiti) faced in our current unit “Race & Nation in the Dominican Republic” during the height of the Haitian Massacre. Even with clear and distinct differences in the social hierarchy among characters, Danticat skillfully crafts a narrative that demonstrates the relationships that exist among the Dominicans, Haitians, and those of mixed race and backgrounds. The past few readings relate very well to the novel as they demonstrate that although there are clear class differences, race or nationality weren’t the main impetus for the slaughter. After the Generalissimo, Rafael Trujillo, begins a slaughter of Haitians, one might be tempted to assume or wonder if the tension was always there. Why all this hardship? Why all this dislike for the other? These are just a few of the questions that our unit seeks to address so that the memory of the lives lost, the farming of bones, may one day be remembered in hopes that these injustices come to an end.

While I personally would’ve loved to have discovered the fate of a few characters, I believe that the fact that we, as readers, do not know is in itself a literary tool. It allows us to immerse ourselves into the harsh reality that we probably would not have known the fate of many who were killed, captured and even survived the massacre. Many artistic liberties taken in Danticat’s development of this book. She clearly states this early in her prologue and is intentional about this in order to produce a moving book that includes a wide array of the realities that those who lived in border towns in the Dominican Republic and Haiti experienced. Danticat draws upon historical evidence and personal interviews and is ultimately able to create a presentation and narrative that is succinct and moving, while maintaining the essence of the Haitian Massacre.

In what ways do you believe that the narrative fails or falls short of telling the story of one who were involved and experienced the Haitian Massacre? Any appraisals it deserves?

How can novels like these help us move beyond the genocides and tragedies that seem all too common throughout history and even this day in age?

 

Danticat, E. (1998). The Farming of Bones. New York: Soho Press.

A World Destroyed, A Nation Imposed

Image result for haitian machete

Richard Lee Turits is a professor of Latin American Studies at William and Mary College in Virginia. His research focuses on Caribbean history, specifically Hispanic history in the Dominican Republic and Haiti[1]. Turits’ article “A World Destroyed, A Nation Imposed:  The 1937 Haitian Massacre in the Dominican Republic” (2002) is a historical essay arguing that the Haitian massacre is both genocide and an all-out assault on a bicultural and transnational community[2]. Although Turits’ essay includes testimonies of Haitians and Dominicans before and after the massacre, this article is a secondary source because Turits makes a thesis about a historical time and supports it throughout the article.

Our new unit in Race and Latin American History is Race and Nation in the Dominican Republic. Turits’ article, as well as the genocide itself heavily, relates to our current unit. As the essay explains, the distinction between Haitian and Dominican was incredibly vague. For one the two countries especially near the border intermarried and mixed for generations[3] discrediting the argument that skin color actually played a critical role in determining who and who was not Haitian during the massacre. What seemed to play more of a role in the massacre was cultural identity and stereotypes[4] and nationalist ideology stemming from the Trujillo Regime[5]. The genocide of 1937 allows us to question what nationality means and how race is involved in that type of identity.

Turits’ essay on the Haitian massacre is well written an informative. It doesn’t surprise me that the article won an award1 and was translated into Haitian Kreyòl[6]. Turits’ highlights background information such as the border region between Haiti and the Dominican prior to the massacre which gives the reader a strong understanding of the relationship between the two countries. The testimonies supplemented throughout the essay also provide firsthand accounts of the massacre which allows the reader to feel this tragedy. This essay flows well and is clearly divided into sub-topics breaking down the before and after of the massacre extremely well. My only complaint was that it was not longer.

Questions:

  1. How did Trujillo come to power who influenced his nationalist campaign?
  2. According to Turits, how are native Haitians and native Dominicans determined? And what do the differences between Haitians and Dominicans say about race and nationality?

[1] William and Mary College, History Faculty. Richard Lee Turits. Web

[2] Richard Lee Turits. Hispanic American Historical Review: A World Destroyed, A Nation Imposed, (2002)

[3] Richard Lee Turits. Hispanic American Historical Review: A World Destroyed, A Nation Imposed, (2002) 596.

[4] Richard Lee Turits. Hispanic American Historical Review: A World Destroyed, A Nation Imposed, (2002) 597-599.

[5] Richard Lee Turits. Hispanic American Historical Review: A World Destroyed, A Nation Imposed, (2002) 630-633.

[6] The Conference of Latin American History. The James Alexander Robertson Memorial Prize. Web.

Black Intellectuals: From Elitist to Activist

Terms of Inclusion: Black Intellectuals in 20th Century Brazil is a secondary source written by Paulina L. Alberto. It was published in 2011. Her intended audience is those in academia, to provide more insight to research that came before her and will come after her. This source can be classified as an intellectual history.

In summary, these two chapters cover the emergence of afro-Brazilian papers as activist instead of elitist. Chapter three focuses on the nuances concerned with the Mae Preta statue; white Brazilians saw the black wet-nurse as the obedient slave who suffered in silence, accompanied by a sense of nostalgia for a time when black voices were more easily silenced. Afro-Brazilians saw the white child suckling the black wet-nurse as an analogy to the debt owed to afro-Brazilians. The reparations owed to these wet-nurses for feeding and sustaining the white population at the expense of their own black children. Chapter four talks about racial tensions after Vargas lead a bloodless coup and installed a nationalist government. He promoted Brasilidade (Brazilianess), which was a mix of patriotism, nationalism, and integration of black culture into the mainstream. White Brazilians preferred a melting pot approach, where the remnants of African culture would disintegrate and mesh with the dominant European-based culture in Brazil. Afro-Brazilians preferred a multicultural/salad bowl approach, where pure African customs should remain untouched and celebrated, such as Candomble. Schisms occurred within the black community concerning the following items: socialism vs. fascism, anti- vs. pro-immigrant, westernization vs. pan-Africanism.

A critique I have is in her periodization. She simultaneously flips through time and space: the events are not chronological, and so it gets confusing as to the order in which the events occurred, and at the same time she is changing between Salvador, Rio, and Sao Paulo.
I enjoyed her sources. She used black, immigrant, and white Brazilian newspapers as sources. This truly gives a three-dimensional look into how racial discrimination/inclusivity was viewed amongst these groups.

Questions:
How would you interpret the Mae Preta?
How do you think the schism within the black community concerning methods of integration affected their eventual integration into mainstream society?

Blacks and Whites in Sao Paulo, Brazil

Blacks and Whites in Sao Paulo, Brazil, was written by Gorge Reid Andrews in 1991. This book provides a history of Brazilian racial inequality from the abolition of slavery in 1888 up to the late 1980s, showing how economic, social and political changes in Brazil during the last 100 years have shaped race relations. Andrews uses secondary source to gather information from various sources such as government policies, newspaper, employment data and much more.

The focus of this blog will be chapter six and seven. In these two particular chapters, Andrews traces the discrimination against Afro-Brazilians and the inequality leading to the black movement. He focuses on the racial competition between the Afro-Brazilians and white Brazilians. For instance, the advancement of Afro-Brazilians was always seen as a threat because the whites “insist that harmony is best preserved by black people remaining in “their place” and not creating “disagreeable situations” of competition and challenge.” This finally lead to the black movement because black mobilization finally reminded Brazilians that their country is not the racial democracy that it claims to be and if there were no problems then it would not lead to that movement.

This contributes to our unit’s theme because these chapters show us that even after slavery was abolished the racial inequality in Brazil was still highly present. It was either in forms of employment, clubs or education for Afro-Brazilian. Their appearance was also taken as a factor for the discrimination they faced. It has to be taken into factor that even though Andrews tells us about the racial inequality upon Afro-Brazilians, he does not however, touch upon the subject of the racial inequality against the immigrants by Afro-Brazilians. Nonetheless, Andrews does an excellent job at showing us the racial inequality present in Sao Paulo, Brazil and the effects of Afro-Brazilians taking a stance for themselves.

Florestan Fernandes – The Negro in Brazilian Society

 

 

 

 

 

The sociologist Florestan Fernandes addresses the legacy of a white society in relation to a crippled and impoverished Afro-Brazilian population living within the state of Sao Paulo. Fernandes refutes the accepted belief that equality exists among races and argues that the Afro-Brazilian was never prepared to compete equally in a free-labor society. Fernandes claims that this allowed white Brazilians and white Europeans to continually surpass them in the social and economic stage. The Negro in Brazilian Society is an empirical essay published in 1969. It looks specifically at the state of Sao Paulo, Brazil because, as Fernandes points out Sao Paulo is the ideal setting for racial relation studies. For the purpose of our own studies, The Negro in Brazilian Society is a primary source because describes results of a sociological study. This essay was intended to show that Brazil was not the beacon of racial equality that it claims to be but on the contrary, is a system that discriminates against the Afro-Brazilians in various ways.

 

The second unit of our Race in Latin America studies is Blackness in Brazil. Fernandes essay The Negro in Brazilian Society strongly contributes to the unit because of its thesis and conclusion. Abolition occurred about 80 years before this essay was published which declared constitutional equality for all races yet, there is still strong discrimination and inequality for the Afro-Brazilian. This essay takes an in-depth look at the social and economic factors affecting the Afro-Brazilian which in turn affects how the Afro-Brazilian as a race and as an individual is viewed.

 

It should be addressed that although Fernandes supported his claim of inequality between whites and Afro-Brazilians with data from multiple Sao Paulo censuses, a few of his tables were somewhat ambiguous such as Table 4 – Births, Deaths, and Stillborns. These ambiguities cloud his credibility. Nonetheless, Fernandes is a social justice warrior. He criticizes a vast majority of Brazilians claiming that they hold a “prejudice of having no prejudice” allowing them to be oblivious to the severe inequality among them. He offers rational arguments about how immigrants out-competed Afro-Brazilians in the free-labor market and how the legacy of slavery affected job opportunities for the Afro-Brazilians as well.

 

DQ’s

 

A common phrase today with regard to racism in the United States is “I am colorblind, therefore I don’t see race.” Is that phrase similar to Fernandes’ claim that white Brazilians have a prejudice of having no prejudice?

 

What are the major factors that led to white immigrants out-competing Afro-Brazilians in the labor market?

Fernandes, Florestan. The Negro in Brazilian Society. New York: Columbia University Press, 1969.

Freyre – Masters and Slaves

The Masters and the Slaves, was written by Gilberto de Mello Freyre, which was first published in 1933. It is a secondary source because it incorporates and explains in detail the different types of resources. He wrote this reading to explain that the strength of Brazil lies in its racial diversity.

Freyre elaborates on the living conditions of Portuguese settlers, the indigenous peoples of Brazil, and African slaves. In this particular chapter, he focused mostly on African cultural anthropology and its social history rather than the physical anthropology. Freyre believes that the anthropology-culture and historical social aspects of African life indicate that Brazil benefited from a better type of colonists from the “dark continent”, than did the countries of the Americas.

He traces numerous separate lines from African civilization to Brazil, noting in considerable detail the importance of the vastly varying African populations, religions, languages, and cultures that were brought. He emphasizes that the negative qualities considered characteristic of African slaves in Brazil were in fact produced by slavery, not by African heritage. There was a deeper analysis of food, clothing, religious rituals and dance, which was linked from the African slaves to the Brazil’s culture that is seen today.

Sexuality was a prevalent theme in this reading, he talks about the odor of certain kinds of bodies, the “lushness” of women’s diets, sexual diseases, the heat and the importance of Big House in Brazilian culture. There is a focus on the prayers, child marriage, taunting rhymes and lullabies. He also mentions the Mohammedan Negroes that were brought to Brazil from the African area which had been most deeply penetrated by Islamism. They were culturally superior not only to the natives, but to the great majority of the white colonists.

Freyre does an excellent job in explaining the impact the African culture had in Brazil. He uses variety of resources to give an insight of the living conditions of “Negro” slaves. Although some of the resources might not be credible because they were travelers’ accounts or family stories, it gives the reader the unpleasant truth about slavery and its mark in Brazil.

 

Do you agree with certain points in this reading? If so, what are they?

Do you believe this reading is similar to Jose Vasconcelos and his idea of a “cosmic race”?

Cosmic Race – Jose Vasconcelos

Jose Vasconcelos wrote this reading, which can be classified as a thought-piece, in 1925. It is possible that he wrote this in an attempt to persuade the literate masses in Mexico about the superiority of the “fifth race”, inciting a nationalistic fervor, and rallying supporters for his 1928 presidential campaign.

This essay elaborates on how to gain access to the fifth and superior race. Forced marriages and dominance must be left behind, and we must open up to love and choice in order to create a more beautiful, educated and liberal race. The Americas are the new “promised lands,” and we must accept each other in order to be worthy of such gifts. Advancements in technology have debunked the notion that their must be one, superior and dominant race. There are three levels to society: militaristic, which would be won by the Anglos; rational, which would be won by the “Malays”; and aestheticism, which is the best way to live, and would be dominated by the mestizos.

Vasconcelos contradicts himself. He preaches loving thy neighbor and accepting the positive characteristics of other races, but proceeds to denigrate the poor, the uneducated, and the physically unappealing people. He claims the fifth race will be superior because all of these “negative traits” will die out, because these people would not be able to procreate. He is blaming genes for poverty and illiteracy when these are institutional failings.

Do you think these stereotypical positive and negative characteristics of different races are reliable?

Do you believe peace could be attained through this cosmic race?

Does this race sound more like the “whitening” of already existing cultures?

From Mestizophilia to Biotypology

A review by Luis Melgar

Biotypologist Examining an Indigenous Person

Between the 1920s and the 1960s, Mexico underwent many changes in power and governance and in its struggle to find unity and cohesion sought to establish a racialized system that would create a Mexican identity which would serve as a model for the world. This seemed to be more viable and less abhorrent at the time with the use of biotypology, a form of classifying human characteristics, instead of castes with the aim of simplifying Mexico. Ultimately, this system and many before it would fail in its attempts and would only further complicate the turbulent mapping of a 20th century Mexico.

This reading is a secondary source because it was published in 2003 and cites time periods and theories from the early to mid-20th century. This source was created as an attempt to follow and find the path that Mexico took in its attempt to find its identity.

Mestizophilia to Biotypology is a reading that contributes to “Indigeneity in Mexico” very well because it reviews key time periods that shaped how Indigeneity is perceived and categorized throughout 4 main time periods: the Porfiriato (1876-1910), the Mexican Revolution (1910-1920), the postrevolutionary movement (1920-1940) and the Partido Revolucionario Institucional era (1940-60s) p.188

The reading was well researched and incorporates various schools of thoughts and theories that were emphasized during each of the time periods mentioned. The introduction was confusing initially, but after having completed the reading, I was able to read and understand the introduction in a new light. It tells a compelling story that follows mexico’s complex racial timeline. The examples cited are relevant and effective. It does require that the reader have a background in Mexican history to make sense of the references used, but thankfully we have had that in our course thus far.

I also feel that a diagram or chart that gives a clear and visual timeline that I could follow easily would add to this chapter and illustrate the racialization shifts in Mexico well. This may be difficult due to the constantly changing Mexican racial landscape. The author mentions this early on in the reading and reiterates this in the conclusion once again. Nonetheless, the reading was easy to follow.

It is clear that much time and effort was put into the eugenic and biotypological “research”. It has certain elements and influences from other factors such as Comte’s Positivism, Lamarck’s Theory, Mendelism from the 1940s.

Why do you think that there was so much emphasis and stress on identifying a people or group of people?

What do you think occurred after biotypology and where does that leave Mexico, in particular, today?