Ear Torture and..."Pinochet Lives!"
Surprisingly little pissed me off about yesterday's LA Times article on the Santiago, Chile music scene, and it got better the more I read.
I've always contended that while beating artists to death and throwing their bodies into the ocean was pretty bad, imported b-sides played in malls, buses, restaurants and 9 out of 10 radio stations in Chile is equally atrocious, insidious - and it's not going to end any time soon. One of those remnants of Pinochet that will live well beyond his ashen bones: a week in Santiago to any tourist who doesn't know better might be enough to convince her that Chileans have the worst musical taste in all of Latin America.
Read the article, because it was written by someone who does know better, interviews some good people, and is pretty damn comprehensive. I would, however, like to correct the lunatic, yet disgustingly common, political assumptions the author, Agustin Gurza, regurgitates. What happened to music in Chile is a telling footprint of the dictatorship. Talk about that. But shut up about politics; you're obviously unqualified.
Today, Chile's artistic rebirth is being fueled partly by an economic boom that's considered a model for Latin American prosperity. (Ironically, some attribute this surge to Pinochet's policies.)
I understand why you inserted that, but honestly, that hack philosophy doesn't even merit repetition. For starters, Pinochanomics continue to be a nightmare for the majority of Chile's population. Chile is very good at selling itself as rich. Yes, a few white folks made out good. But have you talked to a 30 year old woman who lives with her parents and who is only seasonally employed in a sweatshop? I have. She represents Chile's poor - that's Chile.
Secondly, economic upsurge (for the precious few it is affecting) has nothing to do with good music. Violetta Parra was dirt poor. I mean dirt poor. She sang in bars that you wouldn't dare walk into. I wouldn't either. I'm not talking about Liguria, where you met with Los Tres. I saw Enrique sing there last year, it was awesome. What did you drink, anyway? A $9 cocktail? Me too! Bravo!
Miraculously, the absence of targeted killings is doing wonders for Chile's music scene. Now, as opposed to before, if you play music, you won't die or be tortured because of it. Great.
(Actually, I'm told that during Chilean democracy, Alvaro Enrique was electrocuted once, on stage - but only because of a technical problem with the microphone).
But why go on about president Bachelet being a doctor and woman and single mother? Is the country any better off because of it? You beg the question: what is she doing for Chile's artists? Like always, precious little. That's the Chilean tradition. Violetta Parra died in poverty. Ruined. She shot herself in the head. But how easily we're fooled by meaningless symbols of progress when the undercurrent of
artistic neglect is strong as ever in this broke-down excuse for a nation. Chile. In terms of politics, this country is a pirate ship at best.
I've always contended that while beating artists to death and throwing their bodies into the ocean was pretty bad, imported b-sides played in malls, buses, restaurants and 9 out of 10 radio stations in Chile is equally atrocious, insidious - and it's not going to end any time soon. One of those remnants of Pinochet that will live well beyond his ashen bones: a week in Santiago to any tourist who doesn't know better might be enough to convince her that Chileans have the worst musical taste in all of Latin America.
Read the article, because it was written by someone who does know better, interviews some good people, and is pretty damn comprehensive. I would, however, like to correct the lunatic, yet disgustingly common, political assumptions the author, Agustin Gurza, regurgitates. What happened to music in Chile is a telling footprint of the dictatorship. Talk about that. But shut up about politics; you're obviously unqualified.
Today, Chile's artistic rebirth is being fueled partly by an economic boom that's considered a model for Latin American prosperity. (Ironically, some attribute this surge to Pinochet's policies.)
I understand why you inserted that, but honestly, that hack philosophy doesn't even merit repetition. For starters, Pinochanomics continue to be a nightmare for the majority of Chile's population. Chile is very good at selling itself as rich. Yes, a few white folks made out good. But have you talked to a 30 year old woman who lives with her parents and who is only seasonally employed in a sweatshop? I have. She represents Chile's poor - that's Chile.
Secondly, economic upsurge (for the precious few it is affecting) has nothing to do with good music. Violetta Parra was dirt poor. I mean dirt poor. She sang in bars that you wouldn't dare walk into. I wouldn't either. I'm not talking about Liguria, where you met with Los Tres. I saw Enrique sing there last year, it was awesome. What did you drink, anyway? A $9 cocktail? Me too! Bravo!
Miraculously, the absence of targeted killings is doing wonders for Chile's music scene. Now, as opposed to before, if you play music, you won't die or be tortured because of it. Great.
(Actually, I'm told that during Chilean democracy, Alvaro Enrique was electrocuted once, on stage - but only because of a technical problem with the microphone).
But why go on about president Bachelet being a doctor and woman and single mother? Is the country any better off because of it? You beg the question: what is she doing for Chile's artists? Like always, precious little. That's the Chilean tradition. Violetta Parra died in poverty. Ruined. She shot herself in the head. But how easily we're fooled by meaningless symbols of progress when the undercurrent of
artistic neglect is strong as ever in this broke-down excuse for a nation. Chile. In terms of politics, this country is a pirate ship at best.
posted by Chileno @ 10:56 AM
Share on Facebook
Search This Blog:
6 Comments:
Why would they interview a 30-year-old Gen-EXer who in a sense, between a limbo state of adolescence and adulthood? To powers that be likes to Chile portray itself perfectly to the outside. They can't afford to have bad PR like this. You know most gringos never see those shantytowns in Santiago. They like to stay in the "whitelandia" part of town.
>>>30-year-old Gen-EXer
Not sure who you're referring to.
>>>They can't afford to have bad PR like this.
I'm waiting for some hush money ;-)
The poblaciones are very interesting but depressing as hell.
You know what I'm referring to. :)Why would the Chilean media/goverment expose those kind of "fracasos" to the outside? That goes against all the "progress and modernism" Chile has made since the Pinochet's regime. They don't want the foreigners to see those people because it's not the picture Chile wants to paint to the outside world. And that is the most important thing in Chile is to appear perfectly 'coiffed" to the international community.
"Pinochanomics continue to be a nightmare for the majority of Chile's population..."
I know it's more fun on the Bash-Pinochet-Bandwaggon, and undoubtedly he deserves most of it, but I'd like to point out that the recent economic growth and inflation around 4% (attributable to Pinochet's free market policies), sure beats the disaster of an administration that was Allende with his %600 inflation. Give the man the criticism he deserves, but you have to recognize the good with the bad or you can't learn from history.
Joel, the consumer price index just rose 0.9 percent in June. In about a year, the price of a quart of milk has jumped from 450 pesos to 650.
Inflation is all over the news, it's a knife twisting into the side of the poor because their wages DON'T increase.
Chile's economy sucks. Sure, it's great for the 1% of companies that do 96% of the exporting (in an export-based economy) and employ 10% of Chile. Sure it's fine if you're earning 18 million pesos a month as a TV executive...but what about the reporter who earns 500,000 pesos a month (roughly $1,000). And, relatively, that's a LOT! Chilean economist Marcel Claude estimates that 80% of Chileans are struggling month-to-month even DAY-to-DAY to get by.
Pinochet did nothing to improve Chile's economy for the poor. Yes, he helped Chile continue in its great tradition of whoring out its natural resources to foreign investment, benefiting an elite few.
Ever wondered why Chile is still one of the most unequal countries in the world according to the World Bank?
There's nothing "good" about Pinochet to recognize at all.
The economy tanked under Allende largely because of U.S. design. The CIA funded truck-driver strikes that resulted in food shortages, while fascist groups such as Patria y Libertad organized violent street demonstrations to create the impression of chaos. So yeah, high inflation under Allende - but you have to consider external factors - such as involvement of the world's LARGEST SUPERPOWER - which are conveniently avoided by those who apishly repeat the "broke a few eggs for the omelette" nonsense that you are parroting.
Joel, why don't you try telling that shit to a poor woman who lives in a rat-infested house in Santiago with three generations of family members, who's cousin was shot dead by the military in Arica on New Year's, 1989, while painting a leftist mural. Tell her, "yeah, you know, Pinochet did some bad, but you gotta separate the good from the bad, look what he did for your economy!"
So okay, you might have a case if you were to say that the poor people who were tortured or had family members killed - if these poor people were somehow lifted up out of poverty because of this military repression. That is, if you believe that life and loss of dignity/sanity can be ameliorated with money.
But even then you obviously can't make that case because the poor have stayed poor. (And don't even try to say poverty is going down in Chile, it's not).
Anyway, if you look closely at your argument, Joel, and the reality of Chile, you're saying that it's okay to kill poor people in order to make rich people richer. You make me sick.
Violetta Parra shot herself in the head. In Washington state Cobain blows his brains out with a legally purchased shotgun. One was dirt poor, the other was afflicted with a mental disease and an addiction to Baltimore Love while having all the money in the world.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home