Con ton y son

The internet radio station Pandora has several pre-made genre stations to choose from.  A couple weeks ago I discovered the Cuban music station... and my life was forever changed.  Latin American music is AWESOME.

I think that non-Latin musicians like doing Latin music every now and then - it just grooves better than lots of other genres do.  For example, take the song Save the Last Dance for Me performed by the Drifters:

You can hear a very straight rhythm, especially coming from the drum set.  Now consider Michael Bublé's cover of the song:

It's obviously Latin music from the beginning - salsa, to be exact.  The clave rhythm (on claves) starts in the second verse, and you can hear the tumbao (on the conga) later on:

Even the inflection and rhythm of his singing is more syncopated, giving it a nice Latin groove.

What about Wonderful Tonight by Eric Clapton?

Just your good ol' fashioned rock ballad.  But Michael Bublé strikes again!  Here's his cover of this song:

He's turned it into a slow Brazilian bossa nova, even singing a verse or two in Portuguese.  The basic bossa nova rhythm is easily felt throughout:

For a final example, let's listen to the original version of Stand by Me by Ben E. King:

There's a little bit of a Latin vibe going on in there, but Prince Royce takes it to a whole new level:

The song is now a full-blown bachata, a style of music that originated in the Dominican Republic.  The characteristic bongos and güira are prominently heard.  A good portion of the lyrics have also been translated into Spanish.

But there aren't just Latin covers of non-Latin songs; artists cover songs that were Latin in the first place, as well as writing their own original music in different Latin styles.  Latin American music has subtly crept into the tastes of Anglo-America.  You can't help but tap your foot or bounce your head or move some part of your body while listening to it (at least I can't).  Is Latin music prevalent because of our proximity to its birthplace, or is it just great stuff?  Honestly I don't care - I'm just glad it's here.

Mary Candelary

María Candelaria (Emilio Fernández, director; 1943)

So I was going to compare this movie to Disney's The Hunchback of Notre Dame, but then I remembered that it's a Disney movie, and those are frowned upon in this class.  (Except for Pocahontas.)

Instead, I'll discuss Jonathan Livingston Seagull, a novella published by Richard Bach in 1970.  Hall Barlett directed a film adaptation which came out in 1973.  (While the book was moderately successful (top of the NYTimes Bestseller List for 38 weeks), the movie was less so - the author sued the film company, and it's one of the few films that Roger Ebert has walked out of.)

I never read the book, but I saw the movie on my mission.  (My mission president loves this movie - he had it on DVD and showed it to us.)  It's a very spiritual/transcendental/metaphysical story about a seagull who savors the joys of flying instead of conforming to the trash-eating lifestyle of his flock.  His flock eventually banishes him and treats him as an outcast because of his "radical" ideas.  Similarly, María Candelaria is an outcast in her community.  Unlike María Candelaria, however, Jonathan Livingston Seagull doesn't die.  He sticks it to the man (who in this case happens to be a council of seagull "elders") by teaching the young seagulls how to overcome the mundane conformity of garbage-scavenging.

Through the symbolism in each story, it's pretty obvious that María and Jonathan are Christ figures.  (Okay, so maybe María represents the Virgin Mary... In order to make the symbolism fit with the gender of the characters, La Virgen is the next best thing.)  Just to make sure you get the connection, the dedication at the beginning of the film reads "To the real Jonathan Livingston Seagull, who lives within us all."  From my point of view, María represents the 'redemptive' power of the Atonement; she suffered and died because of the sins of the people.  Jonathan reflects the 'exalting' power of the Atonement, because he helps others reach their full potential and become like him.

yes, Neil Diamond did the music for this movie

Another interesting connection between the two is the symbolism of their names.  Candelaria is Spanish for Candlemas, a Christian holiday celebrating the presentation of Jesus at the temple, and during which candles are blessed.  (Candles... light... Light of the World... Christ.)  As for Jonathan Livingston Seagull, is not the Savior referred to as a living stone (1 Peter 2:4-6)?  His name in the Spanish translation is less discrete:  'Juan Salvador Gaviota.'  For whatever reasons, artists have been employing Christ figure symbolism for centuries.  What other examples can you think of?

If walls could talk...

"The Mexican muralists produced the greatest public revolutionary art of this century, and their influence throughout Latin America - most recently in the wall paintings in Nicaragua - has been far-reaching and continuous.  There was a time, during the 1930s, when it was also felt in Britain, and in the USA, but since then they have rarely entered artistic discourse."
(Dawn Ades, Art in Latin America, 151)

Man, Controller of the Universe by Diego Rivera

Murals are cool.  They make places more interesting.  People have been painting on walls for a long time.  Some murals are considered great works of art.  Sometimes they serve political purposes; sometimes they’re just to look pretty.  I’d guess that most times they are commissioned works of art.  Mexican murals turned out to be a big hit – they served a distinct purpose at a time of political and social change.  The purposes murals serve are highly varied, and I’d argue that there’s always an underlying motive for creating them.

downtown Provo

You don’t have to go to Mexico to see murals – we’ve got some here in Provo, even on campus.  I think that relief sculptures can also count as a type of mural (carved, rather than painted).  There are plenty of those around too.

relief sculpture on the LDS Mesa Arizona Temple (source)

Murals are a unique form of visual art because they’re stationary.  I think this adds to the artistic experience - in order to see a mural in person, one must travel to its location.  This forces the observer to also experience the sounds, smells, and general ambiance of the mural’s location.  But I think in most cases, people don’t travel to a place specifically to view its murals; the murals add to the general ambiance of the place.

(source)

What about painted walls that aren't commissioned works of art?  Most people call it graffiti.  It often serves the same purpose – to send a message to the masses in a public place.  I didn't think much about graffiti until I heard about Banksy, an anonymous street artist from England.  If you haven’t heard of him, you should definitely read up on him – he’s a super-interesting figure.  He definitely has a political/social agenda, but I think he does much of his work for his own enjoyment (and to make places more interesting).  Reading through one of his books completely changed my attitude toward graffiti.  What do you think – is graffiti a legitimate form of art?  See what he has to say about it:

“Graffiti is not the lowest form of art.  Despite having to creep about at night and lie to your mum it’s actually the most honest artform available.  There is no elitism or hype, it exhibits on some of the best walls a town has to offer, and nobody is put off by the price of admission…

They say graffiti frightens people and is symbolic of the decline in society...

The people who truly deface our neighbourhoods are the companies that scrawl their giant slogans across buildings and buses trying to make us feel inadequate unless we but their stuff.  They expect to be able to shout their message in your face from every available surface but you’re never allowed to answer back.  Well, they started this fight and the wall is the weapon of choice to hit them back.

Some people become cops because they want to make the world a better place.  Some people become vandals because they want to make the world a better looking place.”

(Banksy, Wall and Piece, 8)

(source)

Science

"The life and death of hypotheses.  From the equation - me as part of the Cosmos - to the axiom - the Cosmos as part of me.  Subsistence.  Knowledge.  Anthropophagy."
(Anthropophagite Manifesto, Revista de Antropofagia, (São Paulo), no. 1, May 1928)

I didn't know what to make of this manifesto when I read it.  I still don't.  But the quote above immediately reminded me of the following:

That dialogue was taken from an interview of Neil deGrasse Tyson, perhaps the most well-known astrophysicist of this generation.  (He even came and spoke at a forum at BYU a few years back.)  The interviewer asks him to share the most astounding fact about the universe.  Tyson responds by explaining how our bodies are made up of atoms that were formed from the supernovae of stars, and then says:

“…when I look up at the night sky… I know that yes, we are part of this universe, we are in this universe, but perhaps more important than both of those facts is that the universe is in us.  When I reflect on that fact… I feel big, because my atoms came from those stars.  There’s a level of connectivity… You want to feel relevant; you want to feel like you’re a participant in the goings-on of activities and events around you.  That’s precisely what we are just by being alive.”

What a humanities quote from a scientist, right?!?!  I'm a science major, but I still think that humanities are important and that the two fields of study have much to learn from each other.  The manifesto talks about “the Cosmos as part of me,” which is literally true.  The tone of this video clip may not match the tone of the manifesto, but I think anthropophagy relates to both.  We consume subsistence, knowledge, and the world around us.  We take in the universe because we want to be a part of it and we want it to be a part of us.  There’s something very natural and very human about being curious about the world around us; we explore and do experiments to learn more about it.  From a certain point of view, in this process the universe is trying to understand itself.

The works of God continue,

And worlds and lives abound;

Improvement and progression

Have one eternal round.

There is no end to matter;

There is no end to space;

There is no end to spirit;

There is no end to race.

-W.W. Phelps