Week Seven

"Hadn't he even let his wife go off and leave him? The day when he learned his wife had left him, the idea of going out in search of her didn't even cross his mind. He let her go without trying to find out at all who she went with or where, so he wouldn't have to go down to the village. He let her go as he'd let everything else go, without putting up a fight." (Tell Them Not to Kill Me!, Juan Rulfo, 286)

Juvencio, the "he" that is being referred to in this passage, is not an ideal, moral person. He is a murderer and a coward. Even worse, though, Juvencio is apathetic.

Apathy, that debilitating attitude that prevents positive change, that makes people feel weak and powerless. Even though there is a big push for those of the rising generation to act and to be a useful part of society, we are still infected with apathy. But I think there's more to it than simply "not caring" about the world around us. Dave Meslin addresses this issue in his brief Ted Talk.

I don't know if I completely agree with all of his points, but I do agree that there are barriers holding some seemingly apathetic people back from doing what they know is right. As young adults, it's easy to overlook the needs of the community or, on a smaller scale, those around you, on a daily basis. We get caught up in homework, tests, social activities, church responsibilities, family responsibilities, and various other obligations. But how often do we take the time to reach out and change the world around us? We tell ourselves it's too hard or that we are inadequate for such a task. These, I believe, are the barriers that Dave Meslin is referring to. 

So, how do we fix this apathy problem? 

 

   To me, it really is as simple as doing. 

But what do you think? Are you going to be apathetic to this blog post or are you actually going to act and respond? It's up to you. 

Week Five

Andrés de Santa Maria, The Harvesters, 1895

This is one of my favorite scenes in art. Before I saw the title or even started to contemplate this painting, something else came to mind:

Jean-François Millet, The Gleaners, 1957

Millet's painting came almost 40 years earlier than de Santa Maria. It's likely that de Santa Maria was familiar with Millet's work and he likely wanted to recreate it.

Though de Santa Maria's version is quite similar to Millet's painting, there are some obvious differences. de Santa Maria chooses to have one woman actually bending over and picking while the other two women stand, but in Millet's painting, two women are bending over while the third is just about to be reach for the plants as well. So the depiction of these harvesters or gleaners is slightly different.

That's a very small difference, and I almost suggest it with tongue in cheek. But the differences that really matter are two things.

1. The backgrounds. In Millet's painting, we see a lovely pastoral scene, typical of European paintings of that time.  But in de Santa Maria's painting, we see mountains and a vast expanse of land. The landscape is so different in Latin America than it is in Europe. This difference helps to emphasize the essential Latin American and European feelings we get from these paintings.

2. The clothing. I don't know much about clothing styles in 19th century Europe and Latin America, but I can tell you that they differ quite a bit. Millet's gleaners look European and de Santa Maria's gleaners look Latin American. 

These differences are all on the surface. The similarities- and one in particular- are what really impresses me.

We all have to glean.

We are all different, that can't be denied. But at the same time, we have this unbreakable connection with every other person alive or dead: Humanity. We are all human. And, call me crazy, but I think that's more important than any difference