Mariano Azuela Analysis
AZUELA
• Mariana Azuela, medical Dr aswell as an author … YOU MUST TALKE ABOUT HIM
• He was chief of fiscal affairs in his home town, so a middle class person, a medical DR, a local politician … is this linking us into a certain type of revolutionary? If you wanted to call him one, which type would he have been, diaz? Madero? … he was an intellectual revolutionary, certainly a modero stance … I would think so, why would he not be nesicailary villa, he was a scruffy bandit, later on he becomes more respectiable but I tend to agree with you that he was following modero … he just wanted to reform … so shannas saying as a maoesta he would be a reformoist more than social revultionary and if we wanted to help you out we would back up that MADONISTAS WERE REFORMERS RATHER THAN ANYTHING ELSE, PS, …show more content…
plan san luis port backs that up!!
• Written in 1911, starting early, put to one side chronicing the revoluiton but to write about the rev, and he wrote the first novel by anyone. … published during bad relations
• Published in Texas in 1915, so a foreign audience? For an audience of people that moved away in fear of being fought there, exiles .. but a mixed readership.
• Motive … why write in 1915, whats happening in the revolution at this period? Power struggle between caranza and villa, like any primary source, he must be affected by the enviroment in which hes writing, in 1915 it was a violent period, the split and by 1915 he would have got out, this is where you would have the division between the pair and zapata. What would be in the minds of intellectual? If you could freeze yourself, as a madorista, maderos dead, what would you be thinking in 1915? The revolution continues to go on, maybe they are disspointed they didn't achieve much, because you thought maybe when you got madero in there was end to the reformist revolution, brillitant lets go home and then you get the rise of the coutner revolutionary huerta, must get rid of him, maybe that's the end of it, then you get the fight between … who wold say azelas natural politican of 1915? Who would he have been and leaning towards? Caranza, he is more of a middle class person, I think he was speaking the madoristas langauge, poltician not a bandit, so we got caranza carrying the madorista flag but we got this fight with the popular forces, so if you were an azuela type fo character in 1915 there would be dissapointment. Where do you think the revolution is going? If your saying, we have caranza fighing the corner we are comfrotable in, then who knows, I mean maybe if we get caranza in like we have modero in, who says that's going to be the end of ther evolution, in the case of caranza if we get him in, who knows if that's going to eb the end SO there maybe at this point 1915 there is no real sight at the end, we know whats coming next in hindsight, over in 1917, we don't know that in 1915 so the revoution is just rolling on, I think that's an important aspect when azuela is writing
• His contribution to the revolution itself … so we are getting someone here who is not only theorising about the revolution but he is obviously commited to the revolutionary fighting himself, he wont fight but soething equally as usefuul, act as a phyciain .. he was fighting under the forces of madena, do we know anything about medena? He was part of if you like the broader group in that northern area, linked to villa later on would be the case, we have somebody who would be a natural mdidle class person, who early on helpes the popular forces in the north. Using his skills to do so.
• Have you come across any secondary sources where you may have a funny relation betweent he intellectuals and popular forces? We remember those intellectuals, the city boys … where would azuela have got his education in mexico cuty in university? Teghre is a school of medicience, he is a city boy, being thrusted (in a commitment) into a completely different enviroment, so okay we have got the city and the coutnry side comgin together .. the intellectual and the peasant coing together … in 1815 we are talking about the revolution that is chugging along.
CAN YOU OUTLINE THE STORY
• About a guy called Demitri, a leader of a rebel force under Villa. Something happens his wife, governemnt troops come in and demand food and he goes off, gathers his forces to fight huertas forces.
• Demetrio Macias, leadeer of the popualar forces .. lets rehearse why he and his bunch of men acually pick up arms in the first place? His house gets burnt, the federal soldiers are after him, because he is quite well known and has a reputation, there going in and arimitary violence against his house … are we talking abuot revenge? He had a problem with a government official …
• okay why do you think this is, you have a popular indivdidual vendeta with a local political boss, does this remind you of any part fo the rpe revolutionary period? People who started to fight in 1910, who had already slightly been outlawed because of something they had already done and if you like, what were getting in the role of demetrio macias … its someone who is ebing victimised by and also wanting to take it out on the local representative of the diaz regime. Reminisent of Villa’s sister being raped, exactly that. We have got Azuela picking up on something already in popular culture about why maybe pancho villa first mobilsied, or at elast one of the reasons, but much more to the point he is reflecting on reasons why people in the coutnryside mobilsied …. I think that's an important aspect of it.
• The people that he is with, the people who are fighitn with him? Why are they fighint, have they got any motives?
o QUOTES? Simialr motives and some are his good friends, if we like, if you want to put this into the terminology that the terminiolgy that the hsitroighghry they are talking about charisma, the charistmatic leaders who they would follow to the ends of the earth … noen fo that are you talking about an ideology, if demetrios doing it, im doing it, so many some sort of idea within this novel that some of the people fighintg are not doing so for ideolofgical reasnos but for a charasmatic leaders
o We have some social injustices here and reasons for if you like the very rotten regime that was there that they were trying to get rid of, this is very different from modero, who saw it as rotten for a political reason, these are social injustices done on the people … the dictat, the three words for the diaz regime, pan y paulo .. what we are seeing in this particualr case/quote – the pan being wackedn,t eh injustice, the brutality.
o One says hes doig it for the cause, eh says it 2 or 3 times, he says he doesn't have to fight but just wants to fight … we seem to have some ideolofical motived peasants/lower middle class. Somewhere within the text, there is somebody saying its just a good laugh, a bit of social mobility .. where else do you get this freedom, get on a horse, roam the coutnryside, freedom of action … in the apst I was told what to do.
o If you like, Azuela in a novel written in 1914/1915 is rehearsing a hole rangte of motives of people joining the revolution
CHARACTERS
LUIS
• if you were to see Azuela in any of the characters it would be luis silvantes … he was a journalist and a medical student, so we are talking the same langauge, what we are doing is ebing the same quialifcations to the table … from a city, I heard something else, the authors ideas are coming through solis, another intellectual
• what type of person he mgiht be that we have read about in a secondary source, obviously he is a city boys … in this case they are villas men rather than zapatas, city and the country side are coming togetehr, if we are saying he is a city boy why would ceventes be going towards the country side, what is motivating him to do so? Ideoologyical, we need to get this revolution going? What do you think he saw his role as being? Whats in a steryoetypical marxist revoltuion, what would their role be, what are we asking them to do … be the brains behind the brawl – providing direction, so if you like, somone like cervantes would come to the coutrnyside to make sense of the revolution for those who cant make sense of it themselevs, we have alrady identified a tremedous about of different individual motives for going to war which some of them as I was saying were doing it for a lauigh and freedom, we need someone to harness them in and give direction, someone like cervantes would going to the coutnryside and doing that,
• now what does he bring to the table, what can he offer them, what was the nature of their first encounter between these people? Between cervates the city and the peasants … they don't trust him, mistrust between the city and the coutnryside, mistrust is hostility … we have got a big tension between different groups within the same forces if you like, maybe between natural madoristas and villistas supporters that were fighitn on the same time, how does that tension manifest itself? How does it start to reduce? What does he offer? Demetrio gets wounded, cervantes comes and what does he observe? Whose looing after demetrio? Native indians, they are using random methods, you have got these traditional healing methods .... so what does he think when he sees all of this going on? Well its certainly not working. So what does he do and what is the reaction of the traditional healers? he gives evidence that scientific advances can help the peasants, we are talking about people who would know that there were germs in the water and you have to boil it, its only inrecent times that mexico city has gotton to this poin. MODERNITY VERSUS TRADTITION .. seeing the benefits of modernity, the fact that it gets healed and the fact that he doesn't get himself killed typically means that he is able to get them on his side to a certain extent, to enjoy their confidence to a certain extent.
• Do you get anuthing else about his reaction to rural reality? Any more examples of it? The government say they are really well equipped and their half naked. There are some ideas here about preconceptions about revolutionaries that are quite the thing or not … I have got a couple of quotes here …cervantes view of the indigenous, peasants, … ‘their naked shnaks and chests polished like ancient bronze’ negative perspective … ancient bronze, we are talking of people with dark skin, meztisos would be lighter, like our colour … naked shanks and chests polished like ancient bronze, its not heoric or derogitory … pride, yknow what I had here, noble savageish, they are still naked ‘shanks and within the same page that ive got … within the same page we have this idea of naked .. he describes demetrios troops as naked, lousy, filithy, creatures, okay so they are still naked but instead of ebing polisehd like bronze they are flithly lousy creatures, maybe their mannerisms. The theory is, they are ideoloised, yeah these are good people, at base level they are good people and we see them in that sort of pre columbian way or atzec soldiers but if you mix with these people, with aztec warrior group dims into the fact that these people are ridden with lice, they don't wash, they smell there is a huge gap between us and them but are supposed to be on the same side, I think there is a lot of that going on.
ROLLING STONE./DIRECTIONLESS/LEADERLESS
• What do we think about the way the revolution goes? In the revolution they are mobilsing they are fighting, as the revolution conitinues do you get an idea of them having an end goal? Do they have any political understanding of whats going on? At first they arnt joined, they are in tehir own little groups and they werent joined with alrger forces and then cervantes pursuades them to join, and then later on they tell them what to do … that's extactly what im after, what is that portraying? If azuelas tryig to portray are certain characteristic oof the revolution, whats going on, bring it back again to the time its being written? Any thoughts? Able to show they are fighting for the sake of fighting … so if its going nowhere they is no direction to it, there is no ideology … the divisons between three mainleaders, so noone knows who to fight for, there is a piont in the novel they question who they are fighitn for,a nd say okay lets carry on … tis true, its directionless, and lack of strong leadership is coming through. How about pancho villa shouldn't he be a leader for them? When they meet up they tell stories, about how they look up to villa? Fightin for pancho villa is a thing to keep them going …
• There is something that demetrio says towards the end, basically I think its his wife who ass, wy do you keep on fighting … when he trhows the stone, why do you keep on fighting … stone rolls, gathers pace, has its own momentum, that might be if you like the way the revolution might be seen, it starts here but once you start it has a momentum of its own, we don't even know that its going to finish in 1917 it might go on for 10 years. There is an inevitablity, lack of direction, incontrolabelt nature … important to grasp. An aspect of ther evolution he is protraying.
MYTH AND LEGEND
• s there anything said about pancho villas men? Do we have anything on this? Do we know anything? Where do they get any information? It was all just myth and legend, there is a bit where they go on about him for ages and then goes at the end I realise that noone has actually met him.
• Its like all these myths and hugely exagerated story … I think this is getting to part of the popualr following, it was built on images, not fact but on the way people thought certain epople acted and in that northern division, there is a tremendous amount of positive and negative images being pushed about.
• I don't think we touched upon it as part of the actually seminar on pacnho villa .. did I mention corridos? You might want to remember it, and look at it … CORRIDOS … they are the songs and posters … you smakc it onto a tree trunk and oh yes, pancho villa, I want to tell you abuot this great battle and he rode into battle and about 10 foot tall, he fought 4 men at the same time and at the end I am proud to call myself a supporter of pancho villa .. the corrido .. thse were versus so often than not it could be a ballad about the revoolution about famous people, now that might well have been where those people who don't read well got their ideas. You must remember these epope were largwely illiterate.
• Dorrados do we know who they were? Villas body guard … part of the division del norte, the origional men of confidence, this is his inner group if you like that he could call upon at ny time, they had a tremesdous amount of street cred, people would want to ride with the dorrados, all vecasue of the corridos, they are supposed to be unbelievable. We have this idea of biggin up images and fighting for something that isnt the actual reality.
EFFECT OF CONSTANT BATTLE
• We are talking about the revolution has been going on for 5 years, from the time he is writing, he is like how long is this revolution going on for? So in his mind is the idea that the revolution isnt coming to any end soon, whats it doing to the people who are fighitng? The exposure to violence …
o Cervantes and solis .. the intellectuals, the ideological driven revolutionaries – what happens to them? They chat, they met before. So if you are exposed to the reality of the revoltuion, it was supposed to be this, yet solis is like give it a few years and you will be cynical, in the case of cervates you can give hima few more eyars, what happens him in the end … he goes to the united states, stops fighting and sneds a letter we should set up a business, a mexican restraunt … so whats happening with this then? Whats being portrayed here then, 1915, we are having here a situation where this idealistic revoltuion goes to into the coutnryside to give direction, in the end ditches the revoltuion, ditches his country and icthes the idea about doing anything for his country …
o There is something here that's worth saying, lets say in 1910, who is a loyal mexican patriot and who is a revolutionary in 1910 … in 1910 whos I loyal to the country, DIAZ, who is a revoltuionary, ZAPATA, VILLA, MODER0 … 1911-13, whos loyal to the coutnry MODERO, whose the revoluionaries, ZAPATA. 1914, whos loyal to the country, HEURTA, whos against the country, VILLA, ZAPATA, CARRNZA. Late 1914-17, whos loyal? CARANZA IS JUST ONE OF THE GANGS IN TOWN, the point im trying to make is if you are trying to be a loyal mexican, riding your horse, were do you have to go? You have got to bounce from one to another to another, you have contantly stiwtching your alliegence, if you wanted to be loyal to the countrya nd recognised gov you boucning from diaz to modero to hueta whose killed madoer, and from heuta to one of these groups so all of the time you are having to switch sides in order to keep loyal. There is a particular bloke called pascal didn't last long, he failed to switch sides and he got himself killed as being a traitor, so you would have had to known what was goin on if your idea of the revolution was built upon myths of what pancho villa is like … so im not sure where we were with that but the point was that you had to sort of switch.
o How about moral valures that demetrio and men might have and change during the revolution? the example when Demitire thinks he is the most enfantic, that they ambus, there is one part when he about to kill people and he has a flash back of his house, he lets people free, hes symathetic, he doesn't to become that eprson, there is a morale highground they take but it is undermind by their brutality and banditry and constant struggle, where does it go in the end??
o If you are a band of men, and this is an area you are operating in and these are all sort of towns and villages, whats your relationship with these people? You cant carry much with you as you are constantly on the run … what relationship do you want? You want food, hiding, shelter, INFORMATION? What do you do? You must be In tune to what they want? There is a certain amount of empathy, you mustnt attack them, keep them on your side, so whats happening later on in this model with regards to that relationship … but with the amount of expoosure to violence, it falls apart, they pilage, and burn and as a result what do these people know, they don't trust them, like the examples of wrong information … the trust or bond between tehm gets cut, they are no better than federal forces, no better or worse than bandits, when you ehard these people were coming you hide your horses so they don't nick thema nd in my phd research when I was looking at rural communities, it wasn't idoeligies that was their robels, there problems were arbiturary violence or theft by ‘revolutioanryies’ tey called themslves this to legitimise criminal behavours …. Azuella is portraying the way the revoltuion, even if it started with diolgical direction we discover that he probs didn't, even it if started that way it later turned bad.
• The books shows that any sign of weakness if laughed at, this is something I wanting to discuss chested’ I think there is a bit of savergery here, the effects of violence and expures to violence and how its effects the way the people ract is important,
WOMAN – around last 10 minutes
THE NOVEL, ANY GOOD?
• Is it any relevence to historicans, is it a story?
• Its cultural, written at the time, gives us a perspective of what he thinks, but as a novel in a periodical, it might be for people to be entertained. In one way or another it's a primary source, you are starting to give me ideas to ask
• Whos writing it, whats their perspective, what is there validity of their perspective, do they know anything about what their writing, the motives … why might he have written it, entertainment, military reasons, fincnial reasnos … not primiarly but elemetns of them, otherwise it would be a diary ro memoir, you have to write it to be asseccable … it might not be any more biased than any other primary sources, like the crealman interview, there is always exageration because of the context of whatthe source is, interviews or diarys are the same as long as you look as context
• If you are lookling for an altereaer motive ..
who come sout worst, who does he treat most badly, which character or group is he most harsh? Some of the men following Demitire, blonide because of his violence, his ruthlessness there and in actualy fact could tag closely pancho villas dorados, someone who was just mental, would kill people ruthlessly. Who else, or which group? The federals, we only get it decriped through demitiri, but to a ceftain extent you get that, they were alwys the enemy … any group within the revolution? this is what mexico is like, cervantes, his life … they had the odeology, they had the drive and revolutionary direction and then they dithced the revoltuiona dn elft it high and dry, abandoned the revoltuion, he should hav eben giving direction, at a time were he should, he leave for america and encourages people to come, what happened the ideals they once had? The ciritiism of the revolutionw as that the middlecalss bourgeouis failed the revoltuioon and didn't give it direction, from 1914-17 it was almost directionless and that when people in the revolution got killed, at this time the stone was rolling down the hill and your cant challenge
it.
• Mariana Azuela, medical Dr aswell as an author … YOU MUST TALKE ABOUT HIM
• He was chief of fiscal affairs in his home town, so a middle class person, a medical DR, a local politician … is this linking us into a certain type of revolutionary? If you wanted to call him one, which type would he have been, diaz? Madero? … he was an intellectual revolutionary, certainly a modero stance … I would think so, why would he not be nesicailary villa, he was a scruffy bandit, later on he becomes more respectiable but I tend to agree with you that he was following modero … he just wanted to reform … so shannas saying as a maoesta he would be a reformoist more than social revultionary and if we wanted to help you out we would back up that MADONISTAS WERE REFORMERS RATHER THAN ANYTHING ELSE, PS, …show more content…
plan san luis port backs that up!!
• Written in 1911, starting early, put to one side chronicing the revoluiton but to write about the rev, and he wrote the first novel by anyone. … published during bad relations
• Published in Texas in 1915, so a foreign audience? For an audience of people that moved away in fear of being fought there, exiles .. but a mixed readership.
• Motive … why write in 1915, whats happening in the revolution at this period? Power struggle between caranza and villa, like any primary source, he must be affected by the enviroment in which hes writing, in 1915 it was a violent period, the split and by 1915 he would have got out, this is where you would have the division between the pair and zapata. What would be in the minds of intellectual? If you could freeze yourself, as a madorista, maderos dead, what would you be thinking in 1915? The revolution continues to go on, maybe they are disspointed they didn't achieve much, because you thought maybe when you got madero in there was end to the reformist revolution, brillitant lets go home and then you get the rise of the coutner revolutionary huerta, must get rid of him, maybe that's the end of it, then you get the fight between … who wold say azelas natural politican of 1915? Who would he have been and leaning towards? Caranza, he is more of a middle class person, I think he was speaking the madoristas langauge, poltician not a bandit, so we got caranza carrying the madorista flag but we got this fight with the popular forces, so if you were an azuela type fo character in 1915 there would be dissapointment. Where do you think the revolution is going? If your saying, we have caranza fighing the corner we are comfrotable in, then who knows, I mean maybe if we get caranza in like we have modero in, who says that's going to be the end of ther evolution, in the case of caranza if we get him in, who knows if that's going to eb the end SO there maybe at this point 1915 there is no real sight at the end, we know whats coming next in hindsight, over in 1917, we don't know that in 1915 so the revoution is just rolling on, I think that's an important aspect when azuela is writing
• His contribution to the revolution itself … so we are getting someone here who is not only theorising about the revolution but he is obviously commited to the revolutionary fighting himself, he wont fight but soething equally as usefuul, act as a phyciain .. he was fighting under the forces of madena, do we know anything about medena? He was part of if you like the broader group in that northern area, linked to villa later on would be the case, we have somebody who would be a natural mdidle class person, who early on helpes the popular forces in the north. Using his skills to do so.
• Have you come across any secondary sources where you may have a funny relation betweent he intellectuals and popular forces? We remember those intellectuals, the city boys … where would azuela have got his education in mexico cuty in university? Teghre is a school of medicience, he is a city boy, being thrusted (in a commitment) into a completely different enviroment, so okay we have got the city and the coutnry side comgin together .. the intellectual and the peasant coing together … in 1815 we are talking about the revolution that is chugging along.
CAN YOU OUTLINE THE STORY
• About a guy called Demitri, a leader of a rebel force under Villa. Something happens his wife, governemnt troops come in and demand food and he goes off, gathers his forces to fight huertas forces.
• Demetrio Macias, leadeer of the popualar forces .. lets rehearse why he and his bunch of men acually pick up arms in the first place? His house gets burnt, the federal soldiers are after him, because he is quite well known and has a reputation, there going in and arimitary violence against his house … are we talking abuot revenge? He had a problem with a government official …
• okay why do you think this is, you have a popular indivdidual vendeta with a local political boss, does this remind you of any part fo the rpe revolutionary period? People who started to fight in 1910, who had already slightly been outlawed because of something they had already done and if you like, what were getting in the role of demetrio macias … its someone who is ebing victimised by and also wanting to take it out on the local representative of the diaz regime. Reminisent of Villa’s sister being raped, exactly that. We have got Azuela picking up on something already in popular culture about why maybe pancho villa first mobilsied, or at elast one of the reasons, but much more to the point he is reflecting on reasons why people in the coutnryside mobilsied …. I think that's an important aspect of it.
• The people that he is with, the people who are fighitn with him? Why are they fighint, have they got any motives?
o QUOTES? Simialr motives and some are his good friends, if we like, if you want to put this into the terminology that the terminiolgy that the hsitroighghry they are talking about charisma, the charistmatic leaders who they would follow to the ends of the earth … noen fo that are you talking about an ideology, if demetrios doing it, im doing it, so many some sort of idea within this novel that some of the people fighintg are not doing so for ideolofgical reasnos but for a charasmatic leaders
o We have some social injustices here and reasons for if you like the very rotten regime that was there that they were trying to get rid of, this is very different from modero, who saw it as rotten for a political reason, these are social injustices done on the people … the dictat, the three words for the diaz regime, pan y paulo .. what we are seeing in this particualr case/quote – the pan being wackedn,t eh injustice, the brutality.
o One says hes doig it for the cause, eh says it 2 or 3 times, he says he doesn't have to fight but just wants to fight … we seem to have some ideolofical motived peasants/lower middle class. Somewhere within the text, there is somebody saying its just a good laugh, a bit of social mobility .. where else do you get this freedom, get on a horse, roam the coutnryside, freedom of action … in the apst I was told what to do.
o If you like, Azuela in a novel written in 1914/1915 is rehearsing a hole rangte of motives of people joining the revolution
CHARACTERS
LUIS
• if you were to see Azuela in any of the characters it would be luis silvantes … he was a journalist and a medical student, so we are talking the same langauge, what we are doing is ebing the same quialifcations to the table … from a city, I heard something else, the authors ideas are coming through solis, another intellectual
• what type of person he mgiht be that we have read about in a secondary source, obviously he is a city boys … in this case they are villas men rather than zapatas, city and the country side are coming togetehr, if we are saying he is a city boy why would ceventes be going towards the country side, what is motivating him to do so? Ideoologyical, we need to get this revolution going? What do you think he saw his role as being? Whats in a steryoetypical marxist revoltuion, what would their role be, what are we asking them to do … be the brains behind the brawl – providing direction, so if you like, somone like cervantes would come to the coutrnyside to make sense of the revolution for those who cant make sense of it themselevs, we have alrady identified a tremedous about of different individual motives for going to war which some of them as I was saying were doing it for a lauigh and freedom, we need someone to harness them in and give direction, someone like cervantes would going to the coutnryside and doing that,
• now what does he bring to the table, what can he offer them, what was the nature of their first encounter between these people? Between cervates the city and the peasants … they don't trust him, mistrust between the city and the coutnryside, mistrust is hostility … we have got a big tension between different groups within the same forces if you like, maybe between natural madoristas and villistas supporters that were fighitn on the same time, how does that tension manifest itself? How does it start to reduce? What does he offer? Demetrio gets wounded, cervantes comes and what does he observe? Whose looing after demetrio? Native indians, they are using random methods, you have got these traditional healing methods .... so what does he think when he sees all of this going on? Well its certainly not working. So what does he do and what is the reaction of the traditional healers? he gives evidence that scientific advances can help the peasants, we are talking about people who would know that there were germs in the water and you have to boil it, its only inrecent times that mexico city has gotton to this poin. MODERNITY VERSUS TRADTITION .. seeing the benefits of modernity, the fact that it gets healed and the fact that he doesn't get himself killed typically means that he is able to get them on his side to a certain extent, to enjoy their confidence to a certain extent.
• Do you get anuthing else about his reaction to rural reality? Any more examples of it? The government say they are really well equipped and their half naked. There are some ideas here about preconceptions about revolutionaries that are quite the thing or not … I have got a couple of quotes here …cervantes view of the indigenous, peasants, … ‘their naked shnaks and chests polished like ancient bronze’ negative perspective … ancient bronze, we are talking of people with dark skin, meztisos would be lighter, like our colour … naked shanks and chests polished like ancient bronze, its not heoric or derogitory … pride, yknow what I had here, noble savageish, they are still naked ‘shanks and within the same page that ive got … within the same page we have this idea of naked .. he describes demetrios troops as naked, lousy, filithy, creatures, okay so they are still naked but instead of ebing polisehd like bronze they are flithly lousy creatures, maybe their mannerisms. The theory is, they are ideoloised, yeah these are good people, at base level they are good people and we see them in that sort of pre columbian way or atzec soldiers but if you mix with these people, with aztec warrior group dims into the fact that these people are ridden with lice, they don't wash, they smell there is a huge gap between us and them but are supposed to be on the same side, I think there is a lot of that going on.
ROLLING STONE./DIRECTIONLESS/LEADERLESS
• What do we think about the way the revolution goes? In the revolution they are mobilsing they are fighting, as the revolution conitinues do you get an idea of them having an end goal? Do they have any political understanding of whats going on? At first they arnt joined, they are in tehir own little groups and they werent joined with alrger forces and then cervantes pursuades them to join, and then later on they tell them what to do … that's extactly what im after, what is that portraying? If azuelas tryig to portray are certain characteristic oof the revolution, whats going on, bring it back again to the time its being written? Any thoughts? Able to show they are fighting for the sake of fighting … so if its going nowhere they is no direction to it, there is no ideology … the divisons between three mainleaders, so noone knows who to fight for, there is a piont in the novel they question who they are fighitn for,a nd say okay lets carry on … tis true, its directionless, and lack of strong leadership is coming through. How about pancho villa shouldn't he be a leader for them? When they meet up they tell stories, about how they look up to villa? Fightin for pancho villa is a thing to keep them going …
• There is something that demetrio says towards the end, basically I think its his wife who ass, wy do you keep on fighting … when he trhows the stone, why do you keep on fighting … stone rolls, gathers pace, has its own momentum, that might be if you like the way the revolution might be seen, it starts here but once you start it has a momentum of its own, we don't even know that its going to finish in 1917 it might go on for 10 years. There is an inevitablity, lack of direction, incontrolabelt nature … important to grasp. An aspect of ther evolution he is protraying.
MYTH AND LEGEND
• s there anything said about pancho villas men? Do we have anything on this? Do we know anything? Where do they get any information? It was all just myth and legend, there is a bit where they go on about him for ages and then goes at the end I realise that noone has actually met him.
• Its like all these myths and hugely exagerated story … I think this is getting to part of the popualr following, it was built on images, not fact but on the way people thought certain epople acted and in that northern division, there is a tremendous amount of positive and negative images being pushed about.
• I don't think we touched upon it as part of the actually seminar on pacnho villa .. did I mention corridos? You might want to remember it, and look at it … CORRIDOS … they are the songs and posters … you smakc it onto a tree trunk and oh yes, pancho villa, I want to tell you abuot this great battle and he rode into battle and about 10 foot tall, he fought 4 men at the same time and at the end I am proud to call myself a supporter of pancho villa .. the corrido .. thse were versus so often than not it could be a ballad about the revoolution about famous people, now that might well have been where those people who don't read well got their ideas. You must remember these epope were largwely illiterate.
• Dorrados do we know who they were? Villas body guard … part of the division del norte, the origional men of confidence, this is his inner group if you like that he could call upon at ny time, they had a tremesdous amount of street cred, people would want to ride with the dorrados, all vecasue of the corridos, they are supposed to be unbelievable. We have this idea of biggin up images and fighting for something that isnt the actual reality.
EFFECT OF CONSTANT BATTLE
• We are talking about the revolution has been going on for 5 years, from the time he is writing, he is like how long is this revolution going on for? So in his mind is the idea that the revolution isnt coming to any end soon, whats it doing to the people who are fighitng? The exposure to violence …
o Cervantes and solis .. the intellectuals, the ideological driven revolutionaries – what happens to them? They chat, they met before. So if you are exposed to the reality of the revoltuion, it was supposed to be this, yet solis is like give it a few years and you will be cynical, in the case of cervates you can give hima few more eyars, what happens him in the end … he goes to the united states, stops fighting and sneds a letter we should set up a business, a mexican restraunt … so whats happening with this then? Whats being portrayed here then, 1915, we are having here a situation where this idealistic revoltuion goes to into the coutnryside to give direction, in the end ditches the revoltuion, ditches his country and icthes the idea about doing anything for his country …
o There is something here that's worth saying, lets say in 1910, who is a loyal mexican patriot and who is a revolutionary in 1910 … in 1910 whos I loyal to the country, DIAZ, who is a revoltuionary, ZAPATA, VILLA, MODER0 … 1911-13, whos loyal to the coutnry MODERO, whose the revoluionaries, ZAPATA. 1914, whos loyal to the country, HEURTA, whos against the country, VILLA, ZAPATA, CARRNZA. Late 1914-17, whos loyal? CARANZA IS JUST ONE OF THE GANGS IN TOWN, the point im trying to make is if you are trying to be a loyal mexican, riding your horse, were do you have to go? You have got to bounce from one to another to another, you have contantly stiwtching your alliegence, if you wanted to be loyal to the countrya nd recognised gov you boucning from diaz to modero to hueta whose killed madoer, and from heuta to one of these groups so all of the time you are having to switch sides in order to keep loyal. There is a particular bloke called pascal didn't last long, he failed to switch sides and he got himself killed as being a traitor, so you would have had to known what was goin on if your idea of the revolution was built upon myths of what pancho villa is like … so im not sure where we were with that but the point was that you had to sort of switch.
o How about moral valures that demetrio and men might have and change during the revolution? the example when Demitire thinks he is the most enfantic, that they ambus, there is one part when he about to kill people and he has a flash back of his house, he lets people free, hes symathetic, he doesn't to become that eprson, there is a morale highground they take but it is undermind by their brutality and banditry and constant struggle, where does it go in the end??
o If you are a band of men, and this is an area you are operating in and these are all sort of towns and villages, whats your relationship with these people? You cant carry much with you as you are constantly on the run … what relationship do you want? You want food, hiding, shelter, INFORMATION? What do you do? You must be In tune to what they want? There is a certain amount of empathy, you mustnt attack them, keep them on your side, so whats happening later on in this model with regards to that relationship … but with the amount of expoosure to violence, it falls apart, they pilage, and burn and as a result what do these people know, they don't trust them, like the examples of wrong information … the trust or bond between tehm gets cut, they are no better than federal forces, no better or worse than bandits, when you ehard these people were coming you hide your horses so they don't nick thema nd in my phd research when I was looking at rural communities, it wasn't idoeligies that was their robels, there problems were arbiturary violence or theft by ‘revolutioanryies’ tey called themslves this to legitimise criminal behavours …. Azuella is portraying the way the revoltuion, even if it started with diolgical direction we discover that he probs didn't, even it if started that way it later turned bad.
• The books shows that any sign of weakness if laughed at, this is something I wanting to discuss chested’ I think there is a bit of savergery here, the effects of violence and expures to violence and how its effects the way the people ract is important,
WOMAN – around last 10 minutes
THE NOVEL, ANY GOOD?
• Is it any relevence to historicans, is it a story?
• Its cultural, written at the time, gives us a perspective of what he thinks, but as a novel in a periodical, it might be for people to be entertained. In one way or another it's a primary source, you are starting to give me ideas to ask
• Whos writing it, whats their perspective, what is there validity of their perspective, do they know anything about what their writing, the motives … why might he have written it, entertainment, military reasons, fincnial reasnos … not primiarly but elemetns of them, otherwise it would be a diary ro memoir, you have to write it to be asseccable … it might not be any more biased than any other primary sources, like the crealman interview, there is always exageration because of the context of whatthe source is, interviews or diarys are the same as long as you look as context
• If you are lookling for an altereaer motive ..
who come sout worst, who does he treat most badly, which character or group is he most harsh? Some of the men following Demitire, blonide because of his violence, his ruthlessness there and in actualy fact could tag closely pancho villas dorados, someone who was just mental, would kill people ruthlessly. Who else, or which group? The federals, we only get it decriped through demitiri, but to a ceftain extent you get that, they were alwys the enemy … any group within the revolution? this is what mexico is like, cervantes, his life … they had the odeology, they had the drive and revolutionary direction and then they dithced the revoltuiona dn elft it high and dry, abandoned the revoltuion, he should hav eben giving direction, at a time were he should, he leave for america and encourages people to come, what happened the ideals they once had? The ciritiism of the revolutionw as that the middlecalss bourgeouis failed the revoltuioon and didn't give it direction, from 1914-17 it was almost directionless and that when people in the revolution got killed, at this time the stone was rolling down the hill and your cant challenge
it.