#exponent ii | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

communist-manifesto-daily · 19 days ago

Text

Socialism: Utopian and Scientific - Part 23

[ First | Prev | Table of Contents | Next ]

II - Dialectics

In the meantime, along with and after the French philosophy of the 18th century, had arisen the new German philosophy, culminating in Hegel.

Its greatest merit was the taking up again of dialectics as the highest form of reasoning. The old Greek philosophers were all born natural dialecticians, and Aristotle, the most encyclopaedic of them, had already analyzed the most essential forms of dialectic thought. The newer philosophy, on the other hand, although in it also dialectics had brilliant exponents (e.g. Descartes and Spinoza), had, especially through English influence, become more and more rigidly fixed in the so-called metaphysical mode of reasoning, by which also the French of the 18th century were almost wholly dominated, at all events in their special philosophical work. Outside philosophy in the restricted sense, the French nevertheless produced masterpieces of dialectic. We need only call to mind Diderot's Le Neveu de Rameau, and Rousseau's Discours sur l'origine et les fondements de l'inégalité parmi les hommes. We give here, in brief, the essential character of these two modes of thought.

When we consider and reflect upon Nature at large, or the history of mankind, or our own intellectual activity, at first we see the picture of an endless entanglement of relations and reactions, permutations and combinations, in which nothing remains what, where and as it was, but everything moves, changes, comes into being and passes away. We see, therefore, at first the picture as a whole, with its individual parts still more or less kept in the background; we observe the movements, transitions, connections, rather than the things that move, combine, and are connected. This primitive, naive but intrinsically correct conception of the world is that of ancient Greek philosophy, and was first clearly formulated by Heraclitus: everything is and is not, for everything is fluid, is constantly changing, constantly coming into being and passing away. [A]

But this conception, correctly as it expresses the general character of the picture of appearances as a whole, does not suffice to explain the details of which this picture is made up, and so long as we do not understand these, we have not a clear idea of the whole picture. In order to understand these details, we must detach them from their natural, special causes, effects, etc. This is, primarily, the task of natural science and historical research: branches of science which the Greek of classical times, on very good grounds, relegated to a subordinate position, because they had first of all to collect materials for these sciences to work upon. A certain amount of natural and historical material must be collected before there can be any critical analysis, comparison, and arrangement in classes, orders, and species. The foundations of the exact natural sciences were, therefore, first worked out by the Greeks of the Alexandrian period [B], and later on, in the Middle Ages, by the Arabs. Real natural science dates from the second half of the 15th century, and thence onward it had advanced with constantly increasing rapidity. The analysis of Nature into its individual parts, the grouping of the different natural processes and objects in definite classes, the study of the internal anatomy of organized bodies in their manifold forms — these were the fundamental conditions of the gigantic strides in our knowledge of Nature that have been made during the last 400 years. But this method of work has also left us as legacy the habit of observing natural objects and processes in isolation, apart from their connection with the vast whole; of observing them in repose, not in motion; as constraints, not as essentially variables; in their death, not in their life. And when this way of looking at things was transferred by Bacon and Locke from natural science to philosophy, it begot the narrow, metaphysical mode of thought peculiar to the last century.

[A] Unknown to the Western world until the 20th-century, the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu was a predecessor of or possibly contemporary to Heraclitus. Lao Tzu wrote the renowned Tao Te Ching in which he also espouses the fundamental principles of dialectics.

[B] The Alexandrian period of the development of science comprises the period extending from the 3rd century B.C. to the 17th century A.D. It derives its name from the town of Alexandria in Egypt, which was one of the most important centres of international economic intercourses at that time. In the Alexandrian period, mathematics (Euclid and Archimedes), geography, astronomy, anatomy, physiology, etc., attained considerable development.

China also been began development in natural sciences in the third century B.C.E.

[ First | Prev | Table of Contents | Next ]

#socialism: utopian and scientific #communist manifesto daily #friedrich engels

31 notes · View notes

tucalbito666 · 2 months ago

Text

2. Explorando la Oscuridad Interior (análisis capítulos I-V)

Hola mi gente, hoy les traigo una actualización en la que haré un breve resumen de los primeros cinco capítulos de El túnel. Además, compartiré mis impresiones sobre los personajes, los temas clave y algunos detalles que me parecieron interesantes a lo largo de la lectura.

Capitulo I

En este capítulo se introduce a Juan Pablo Castel, quien, desde el comienzo, revela que ha asesinado a una mujer llamada María Iribarne. Esta confesión inicial otorga un tono sombrío a la historia y deja entrever la personalidad del protagonista.

Al ser un capítulo introductorio, no hay mucho más que resaltar además de la personalidad obsesiva y atormentada del protagonista y la impactante revelación de su crimen, que se desarrolla en detalle más adelante en el libro.

Capitulo II

En este capítulo, Castel nos revela más sobre su forma de pensar y su estado mental, mostrando su incapacidad para conectar con los demás y su visión pesimista del mundo. Expone su lucha por encontrar sentido en su entorno y en sus relaciones, lo que muestra su creciente desesperanza y la distancia emocional que siente respecto a las personas a su alrededor.

Este capítulo y el anterior me han dejado más claro el tono que tendrá la historia del crimen, revelando la personalidad obsesiva de Castel y su visión del mundo, que no comparto. En este punto, empiezo a hacerme algunas preguntas, como qué hizo que Castel tuviera esa visión del mundo o si su crimen es alguna consecuencia de ese pensamiento.

CAPITULO III

En este capítulo Castel narra su encuentro con María, una mujer que parece ser la única capaz de comprender su visión del mundo al ver su obra. La historia se centra en la relación entre ellos y en cómo esta conexión consume cada vez mas a Castel hasta el punto de obsesionarse.

Por fin comienza la historia de cómo María y Castel se conocieron. No esperaba que Castel se obsesionara tanto con María solo por haber visto su obra, al punto de buscarla durante meses cerca del lugar donde vio su obra y dedicarse exclusivamente a hacer obras para que pueda volver a verla.

CAPITULO IV

En este capítulo Castel se encuentra con María en la calle y comienza a describir sus emociones y pensamientos con más profundidad. Castel reflexiona sobre cómo María se ha convertido en una figura central en su vida, y explora sus sentimientos de posesividad y obsesión hacia ella.

Este capítulo revela con mayor claridad la personalidad obsesiva de Castel, ya que nos detalla sus pensamientos y planes acerca de María, además de cómo piensa comportarse al verla. También profundiza en su aversión hacia los grupos sociales (algo con lo que coincido) y en su tendencia a sobrepensar las cosas.

CAPITULO V

En este capítulo Castel sigue explorando sus obsesiones y su creciente paranoia. Su relación con María se vuelve más compleja y problemática, reflejando su desesperación y su incapacidad para encontrar paz al no saber como entablar una conversación con María.

Acá nuevamente se muestra cómo Castel no puede dejar de pensar en María y en imaginar situaciones en las que hablan o se conocen. Esto me deja más preguntas, como qué va a hacer Castel para acercarse a María y por qué termina matándola, pero eso lo responderé cuando acabe el libro (supongo).

Y bueno, ese fue el análisis de los primeros cinco capítulos de El túnel, mientras avance en el libro, iré analizando algunos capítulos y tratando de resolver las dudas que me he planteado en estos capítulos.

#anuel #league of legends #el tunel

3 notes · View notes

scotianostra · 11 months ago

Text

On January 7th 1661, six ‘grave makers’ were paid £18 Scots for ‘raising’ the "mangled torso" of James Graham, Marquess of Montrose.

The Great Montrose, as he was known by his supporters, was renowned for his tactical genius on the battlefield during the civil wars that cost King Charles I both crown and head. Although Montrose would die as a royalist he first entered the lists in the 1630s’ as part of the Covenanters who were resisting Charles I attempts to impose a religious governance on Scotland, which according to legend was kicked of by Edinburgh’s Jenny Geddes in St Giles Cathedral.

Montrose as Covenanter was a moderate and afetr the Bishops War he became a leading exponent of the pro-reconciliation faction, bitterly opposed by the chief of the Campbell clan, who Graham distrusted, and rightly so.

The two became the opposing poles for the ensuing civil war in Scotland, at once a local clan war that would end up involving Ireland and England. Although Montrose, now King Charles’s lieutenant-general in Scotland, could hold his own on the battle fields he cherry picked skilfully using the hills and Glens to his advantage, as other great generals, Wallace and Bruce had centuries before.

Grahams luck came to an end when he was betrayed, taken to Edinburgh and exxecuted for treason in May 1650, while his limbs were distributed for exhibition in Glasgow, Stirling, Perth and Aberdeen. A family member arranged for Montrose’s heart to be removed surreptitiously from his torso after its burial and to be sent – after embalming – to his son in the Netherlands

After the restoration of Charles II in 1660 prompted the king to turn the tables on the Covenanters. In an upsurge of Royalist popular sentiment, Montrose was rehabilitated in a public ceremony in which his mangled corpse was disinterred and reunited with his head, heart and limbs, all of which were recalled from their various locations. In 1661, he was given a splendid funeral and reburied in St. Giles’ Cathedral, where his tomb can be viewed today, and more often than not, you will see a floral tribute to the man, such is the regard he is still held in.

#scotland #scottish #history #edinburgh #soldier

14 notes · View notes

nicklloydnow · 1 year ago

Text

Walker Percy statue in Bogue Falaya Park, Covington, Louisiana

“A Talk with Walker Percy

Zoltán Abádi-Nagy

The Southern Literary Journal, 6 (Fall 1973)

Q: You maintain that perhaps the best way of writing about America in general is to write with authenticity about one particular part of America. By extension this means that, likewise, your attitude and reaction toward philosophical questions of universal human importance— toward the question of the human predicament, to use the term of your philosophy—will be that of an American. Is that correct?

A: I think that is true. My novels have more a European origin than American. They are so-called philosophical novels which is probably a bad word. But you know that the first half of your question is quite true. The greatest exponent of this was Faulkner who concentrated on a small village in Mississippi. It is true that I am interested in philosophical, religious issues and in my novels I use the particular in order to get at the general issues. For example, The Moviegoer is about New Orleans, one part in New Orleans, a young man in New Orleans. The conflict is a hidden ideological conflict involving, on the one hand, what I call Southern stoicism. I have an uncle whose hero was Marcus Aurelius. The other ideology is Christian Catholic. The third: the protagonist is in an existentialist predicament, alienated from both cultures.

Q: What in your view is it in America that makes an existentialist today? What facets of the American intellectual climate, of the American existence in general, are favorable to existentialist thinking?

A: I think in America the revolt is less overtly philosophical. It is a feeling of alienation from American suburban life, the suburb, the country-club, the business community. There is a difference between my protagonists and the so-called counter culture. Many young people revolt in a purely negative way, oppose their parents' culture; whereas the leading characters in my books are much more consciously embarked on some sort of search. I am telling you that because I would not want you to confuse the characters of the counter culture with my characters. One of their beliefs is that the American scene is phony, and their revolt is to seek authenticity in drugs, sex, or in a different kind of communal existence. The characters in my books are embarked on a much more serious search for meaning.

(…)

Q: Your view of life in your literary works is very close to the absurdist view, but the term 'absurd' and the whole Camus terminology hardly ever appears in your philosophical essays. Does this coincide with your preference for Marcel's Catholic version of existentialism as opposed to the post-Christian character of the meaninglessness of Sisyphus' situation?

A: Yes, that is correct. I identity philosophically with people like Gabriel Marcel. And if you want to call me a philosophical Catholic existentialist, I would not object, although the term existentialist is being so abused now that it means very little. But stylistically mainly two French novels affected me: Sartre's La Nausée and Camus' L'etranger. I agree with their novelistic technique but not with their absurdist view.

Q: Is not your third novel, Love in the Ruins, with its Layer I and Layer II—the social self and the inner, individual self—a comic attempt to solve Marcel's dilemma about this separation?

A: You are right. This is a comic device to get at what, ever since Kierkegaard, has been called the modern sickness: the disease of abstraction. I think in the novel Dr. More calls the illness angelism-bestialism. There is nothing new about this. It had been mentioned by many writers in various ways. Pascal said that man is both not quite as high as an angel and not quite as low as a beast. So Dr. More is aware of this schism in consciousness. He talks about the modem mind which, as he sees it, abstracts from the world, from itself, and manages to lose touch with reality.

(…)

Q: Much of it, especially in Love in the Ruins, seems to be a social problem viewed from an existentialist viewpoint of the human predicament. Actually, this is a kind of movement I notice in your works: an increasing awareness of how much the social predicament has to do with the human predicament. If Binx in The Moviegoer was suffocating in an adverse climate of malaise which was a social phenomenon, he was not much aware of its having to do with society; he was not concentrating on things like the social self as later Dr. More is in Love in the Ruins. Was this an intentional change on your part or was the movement towards the concept of malaise as a social product spontaneously developing through the inner logics of these relations?

A: It was a conscious change. Love in the Ruins was intended to take a certain point of view of Dr. More's and from it to see the social and political situation in America. Unlike Binx, whose difficulties were more personal, Dr. More finds himself involved in contemporary issues: the black-white conflict and the problem of science, scientific technology which is treated as a sociological reality today. Both the good and bad of it. I really use this to say what I wanted to say about contemporary issues. About polarization; there are half a dozen of them: black-white, North-South, young-old, affluent-poor, etc. And do not forget that at the end of Love in the Ruins there is a suggestion of a new community, new reconciliation. It has been called a pessimistic novel but I do not think it is. A renewed community is suggested. The suggestion is in the last scene which takes place in a midnight mass between a Christmas Saturday and Sunday. The Catholics, the Jews come to the midnight mass, also the unbelievers in the same community. The great difference between Dr. More and the other heroes is that Dr. More has no philosophical problems. He knows what he believes.

Q: Is it a religious reconciliation then?

A: Yes, that is the case. This was meant for Southerners in particular and for Americans in general.

Q: Binx in The Moviegoer and Barrett in The Last Gentleman do not seem to have the set of positive values needed for absurd creation as conceived by Camus to create their own meaning in meaninglessness. Is this connected with your idea of the aesthetic reversion of alienation, i.e. by communicating their alienation they get rid of it?

A: Yes, there is something there. In the case of Binx it is left open. The ending is ambiguous. It is not made clear whether he returns to his mother's religion or takes on his aunt's stoic values. But he does manage to make a life by going into medicine, helping Kate by marrying her. I suppose Sartre and Camus would look on this as a bourgeois retreat he had made.

Q: How do you look on it?

A: Well, I think he probably . . . as a matter of fact the last two pages of The Moviegoer were meant as a conscious salute to Dostoevski, in particular to the last few pages of The Brothers Karamazov. Very few people notice this.

Q: To me the most striking difference between the European and the American absurdist view is the ability of the American to couple the grim seriousness with hilarious humor, to turn apocalypse into farce. In comparison, Beckett, for all the grim comedy which is there, is a sheer tragic affair. Can you think of some explanation for this?

A: That is a good question and I can only quote Kierkegaard, who said something that astounded me and that I did not understand for a long time. He spoke of the three stages of existence: the aesthetic, the ethical, the religious. When you pass the first two you find yourself in an existentialist predicament which can be open to the religious or the absurd. He equated religion with the absurdity. He called it the leap into the absurd. But what he said and was puzzling to me was that, after the first two, the closest thing to the third stage is humor. I thought about that for a long time. I cannot explain it except I know it is true.

There is another explanation, too, of course. Hemingway once said: all good American novels come from one novel written by a man named Mark Twain. With Huckleberry Finn Mark Twain established the tradition of this very broad and satirical humor. I think the American writer finds it natural to use humor both in his satire and in describing even the worst predicament of his main character. In this country we call it black humor: disproportion between the gravity of the character's predicament and the hilarity of the humor with which it is treated. Vonnegut uses this a good deal.

Q: Richard B. Hauck in A Cheerful Nihilism points out how Franklin, Melville, Twain, Faulkner have shown that the response to the absurd sense can be laughter. At one point Binx becomes aware of the similarity of his predicament to that of the Jews. "I accept my exile," he says. Whether we accept this as his affirmation of life in its absurdity or not, what follows is comedy. Could you agree that this comedy as well as Franklin's, Melville's and the others' could be regarded as the absurd creation of the American Sisyphus as opposed to the serious defiance of Camus' king?

A: I do not know if I would go that far. It may be much simpler. There is an old American saying that the one way to stop crying is to laugh. Binx says, "I feel more homeless than the Jews." Between him and the Camus and Sartrean heroes of the absurd there is a difference. Camus would probably say the hero has to create his own values whether absurd or not, whereas Binx does not accept that the world is absurd; so he embarks on a search. So to him the Jews are a sign. I think he said, "Lately when I see a Jew on a street I am amazed nobody finds it remarkable. But I find it remarkable. But to me it is like seeing Friday's footprint in the beach. " Of course, he is not sure what it is the sign of. Sartre's Roquentin in La Nausée or Camus' Meursault in L'etranger would not find anything remarkable about a Jew, they would not be interested in him.

Q: In your philosophical essay, "The Man on the Train," you stress the speakability of the commuter's alienation and the fact that the commuter rejoices in this speakability. We can probably add: laughability. Incidentally, you do mention in the same article how Kafka and his friends were roaring with laughter when Kafka read his work aloud to them. Again if we had the answer to how alienation can become a laughing-matter, we would have the key to much of what is recently called black humor.

A: I think you are right. In "The Man on the Train" I was talking about the aesthetic reversal: the alienated commuter feeling totally alienated when reading a book about alienation feels better because there is a communication between himself and the writer.

Q: The forms of alienation you are concerned with in your fiction are all results of the objectification, mechanization of the subjective. Does not this view meet somewhere at a point with Bergson's view of the comic as the mechanical manifested in a living human being?

A: It sounds reasonable but I cannot enlarge on that. I am not familiar enough with Bergson. But to your previous question. Let me finish. It is the first time it occurs to me. You brought it up. Maybe, a person like Sartre spent a lot of time writing in a café about alienated people, the lack of communication, etc., and yet, in doing so, he became the least alienated person in France. By writing he performs a superb act of communication for which he has many readers. So you have a complete reversal. He writes about one thing and reverses it through communication. Here we have the American writer locked in his alienation. But I can envision the American writer getting onto it; by seeing the possibility of communication, exhilaration, his alienation becomes speakable. There can be a tremendous release from that. I have never thought of this before. Nobody knows what is going on when you communicate the unspeakable. This all-important step from unspeakability to speakability is such a triumph that in his own exhilaration the American writer finds it natural to use the Mark Twain tradition of the funny, the humorous.

(…)

Q: Religion reminds me of another tendency I notice in your novels from Binx through Dr. Sutter to Dr. More: the scientist Dr. Percy showing in the novels much more than the Catholic. How would you comment on your religious presence in the philosophical essays the—whole idea of the islander opening all those bottles hoping for 'the message'—and on the absence of practical religion from the novels. I know that religion is there as a theme but with no commitment of the writer in any direction.

A: Well, that is very simple. James Joyce said that an artist must be above all things cunning and guileful and must use every trick in the bag to achieve his purpose. In my view the language of religion, the very words themselves, are almost bankrupt. If you are writing a technical article on philosophy you can use the correct word for the correct meaning. But writing a novel is something different. In my view you have to be wary of using words like 'religion,' 'God,' 'sin,' 'salvation,' ‘baptism' because the words are almost worn out. The themes have to be implicit rather than explicit. I think I am conscious of the danger of the novelist trying to draw a moral. What Kierkegaard called 'edifying' would be a fatal step for a novelist. But the novelist cannot help but be informed by his own anthropology, the nature of man. In this respect I use 'anthropology' in the European philosophical sense. Camus, Sartre, Marcel in this sense can all be called anthropologists. In America people think of somebody going out and measuring skulls, digging up ruins when you mention 'an-thropology.' I call mine philosophical anthropology. I am not talking about God. I am not a theologian.

Q: What I meant was not the question of style and technique explicit or implicit but the religious commitment which is there in your philosophical writings but absent from the novels or always left open at best.

A: As it should be left open in the novel.

(…)

Q: None of the main characters in your three books have problems in making a living. Binx is a successful broker, Barrett inherited from his father, Dr. More from his wife. Do you do this to contrast seeming affluence with emptiness under it?

A: I had not thought about it. Maybe so, maybe also to use it as a device to reinforce the rootlessness. After all if these fellows had been day-laborers working very hard they would have had no time for various speculations.

Q: Does that mean that existentialism has no comment on those who are without these economic means and consequently perhaps in a much more serious predicament—because they have no time for speculations?

A: To that Marx would have an answer, Henry Ford would have an answer, Chaplin would have another, etc. Marx invented the term alienation. . .

Q: He reinterpreted an older concept, he discovered a new explanation for alienation.

A: But it is now transferred to a different class of society in Sartre, Camus. These desperately alienated people are members of a rootless bourgeoisie, not the exploited proletariat.

Q: Your novels demonstrate that to many questions affluence is no answer. Danger of life and the saving of lives often figure in your work as in many other black humorists', too. One can think of Barth's The Floating Opera, The End of the Road, Giles Goat-Boy, Vonnegut's The Sirens of Titan, Mother Night, Cat's Cradle and others, Kesey's two novels, Pynchon's V., Heller's Catch-22 and We Bombed in New Haven, etc. Do you think that this or a similar event of great moment in one's life is necessary to awaken the existentialist hero to his absurd situation and that this somehow is needed to shock him into the feeling of necessity for 'intersubjectivity' and shared consciousness as an escape from 'everydayness'?

A: I think that touches on a subject I have been interested in for a long time—a theme I use in all my novels: the recovery of the real through ordeal. It is some traumatic experience—war, Dr. More's attempted suicide—in each case. You have the paradox here that near death you can become aware of what is real. I did not invent this. Prince Andrey lying at the Battle of Borodino and looking at the clouds, makes a discovery: he sees the clouds for the first time in his life. So Binx is the opposite of Prince Andrey: he watches the dung-beetle crawling three inches from his nose.

Q: Correct me if I overinterpret the difference but now that you make this comparison it occurs to me that perhaps there is some irony here in the way it is an opening up of vision for Andrey towards the clouds, the sky, some magnificence suggested by these, and in the way Binx zooms down on an ugly little dung-beetle.

A: Maybe there is a little twist there. But the point is that a little creature as the dung-beetle is just as valuable as a cloud.

(…)

Q: Ordeal is one existentialist solution to escape from the malaise. How effective do you think the others, rotation and repetition, can be? Is it possible that their effect can be more than temporary?

A: To use Kierkegaard's term, they are simply aesthetic relief, therefore temporary.

Q: Friedman says that distortion can be found on the front page of any newspaper in America today. It is not the black humorist who distorts; life is distorted. Does everyday American reality stir you to write with similar directness? I ask this because once in an interview you appreciated the way Dostoevski was stirred to writing by a news item in a daily paper and because once in connection with Faulkner and Eudora Welty you referred to the social involvement of the writer as useful because social likes and dislikes, you said, can be the passion and energy you write from.

A: I see what Friedman means. Right. The danger with newspapers and TV is that it is all trivial. You remember in Camus' The Fall: we spend our lifetime "fornicating and reading the newspapers.” I think the danger is that you can spend your life reading the New York Times and never get below the surface of current events; whereas in Dostoevski's case—The Possessed—the whole was inspired by a news story in a Russian newspaper. I would contrast the inveterate newspaper reader and TV watcher who watches and watches and nothing happens��he is formed by the media. Dostoevski reads one news story, gets angry and this triggers a creative process.

Q: Intersubjectivity is an escape for Binx from everydayness and the other forms of the malaise, he is certainly not formed by the media. But are his aunt's values cars, a nice home, university degree—somehow recreated through intersubjectivity so that he can go back to these formerly rejected values?

A: Yes, sure. The question is, how much? And whether he did not go a good deal beyond intersubjectivity when he regained his mother's religion. Binx says at the end that what he believes is not the reader's business, he cuts the reader loose, refuses to be edifying. This is Kierkegaard going back to Socrates, "I want no disciples."

Q: But in the next paragraph he says, "Further: I am a member of my mother's family after all and so naturally shy away from the subject of religion (a peculiar word this in the first place, religion; it is something to be suspicious of)." This means, it seems to me, that Binx definitely objects to being edifying, especially in a religious way.

A: Yes, if you like.

(…)

Q: I wonder why it is necessary to bring the mental sickness of these characters into such a sharp focus? Is it to perplex the world with the old enigma: are these sick people in a normal world or normal people in a sick world? Or is it the interest of the medical doctor? Or both?

A: It is partly therapeutic, medical interest but also goes deeper than that. The view of Pascal and some others who were interested in the human condition was that there is something wrong with mankind. So it is always undecided in my novels. This is the main question of the novels. Here is a hero who is afflicted, shows malaise, dislocation, and he is surrounded by apparently happy and sane people, particularly Dr. More, who lives in Paradise Estates. So who is crazy, the people apparently happy or those radically dislocated characters?

(…)

Q: Although I know you have been frequently asked about the position of the writer in the South, I would like to ask you to summarize your view on this question for the Hungarian reader for whom this talk is primarily intended and for whom your view of the writer in the South will be a novelty.

A: The position of the Southern writer now, as opposed to thirty years ago when Faulkner was writing, is more and more on a level with other writers' in other parts of the country. In other words the United States is becoming more and more homogenized. America is becoming more alike. Towns in the South lose their distinctive character. And yet, I think, in spite of this, there remains and probably there will remain a unique community in the South between black and white, so that there is much more communication, strangely enough, between middle-class white and black people in the South than there is between intellectual black and white in the North. In the South they have lived in physically intimate terms for 300 years. And whatever might have been the evils of this system, there still exists a strong historical basis of communication. I think it will continue to exist.

Q: Speaking about America, it occurs to me to ask you at this point if you have ever thought of rotation in historical aspect? Of America as a historical experience in rotation? What the settlers did coming from Europe, or the pioneers did going west was, it seems to me, as exactly zone-crossing as anything in the existentialist meaning of the term—even though the term came much later. If I may go one step further, how can you comment on the effectiveness of this rotation in the light of what you say on the first pages of Love in the Ruins: "our beloved old U.S.A. is in a bad way." And later, "now the blessing or the luck is over, the machinery clanks, the chain catches hold . . .”?

A: I did not think of rotation in an historical aspect. But if rotation is temporary it should run out. That makes it tough. There are more suicides in San Francisco today than in other cities; that is why the rotation has run out, which may or may not be significant. That is what Kierkegaard calls aesthetic damnation—living by rotation.”

#percy #walker percy #existentialism #camus #albert camus #absurdism #marcel #gabriel marcel #pascal #dostoyevski #kierkegaard #soren kierkegaard #faulkner #literature #southern literature #philosophy #bogue falaya #covington #louisiana

18 notes · View notes

mishimamiravenecia · 7 months ago

Text

Nicopeia Icon of San Mark's in Venice

Icono Nicopeia de San Marcos de Venecia

Icona Nicopea di San Marco a Venezia

The icon before the robbery. Missing are strands of pearls that hung from the round hooks on either side under the initials. The precious jewellery, later recovered, is currently on display in the Treasury of Saint Mark's.

El icono antes del robo. Faltan los hilos de perlas que colgaban de los ganchos redondos a ambos lados bajo las iniciales. Las preciosas joyas, recuperadas posteriormente, se exponen actualmente en el Tesoro de San Marcos.

L'icona prima del furto. Mancano i fili di perle che pendevano dai ganci rotondi ai lati sotto le iniziali. I preziosi gioielli, poi recuperati, sono attualmente esposti nel Tesoro di San Marco.

(English / Español / italiano)

It was probably created in the early 12th century, specifically to follow the emperor and the army on campaign. Perhaps it was made for John II himself, who spent most of his reign in the field, fighting the empire's many enemies. This icon traveled with John II and his family throughout his military campaigns. When John returned to Constantinople for a parade celebrating a military victory he gave up his gold, silver and ivory chariot and had the icon placed in a kiot (decorated theca for preserving and displaying icons) that stood in his place. The victory john was celebrating was the recapture from the Muslim Turks of the ancestral castle of the Komnenian family, Kastamon. John believed the Virgin was personally responsible for this important victory.

The icon was taken by bloodied Crusader soldiers in 1204 in hand-to-hand combat with the defenders of the city at the Pantepotes Monastery which was and the last stand of the Byzantines.Taken as spoils of war by the Venetians, the old and blind Doge Dandolo, who died in Constantinople in 1205, would immediately send the icon to Venice as the most important trophy of the destruction of Constantinople. Era il simbolo di come gli equilibri di potere si fossero appena spostati da Bisanzio sul Corno d'Oro alle lagune di Venezia, Dio aveva ora trasferito la Sua benedizione da Costantinopoli a Venezia con la forza delle armi.

In February 1438 a large delegation from Constantinople arrived in Venice headed for for a great church council negotiating the union of the churches that was held in Italy. The ancient Patriarch Joseph II along with a group of clerics and nobles visited Saint Mark's and saw the treasures that had been looted in 1204. Here is an account of the visit:

... We also looked at the divine icons from what is called the holy templon... These objects were brought here according to the law of booty right after the conquest of our city by the Latins, and were reunited in the form of a very large icon on top of the principal altar of the main choir... Among the people who contemplate this icon of icons, those who own it feel pride, pleasure, and delectation, while those from whom it was taken — if they happen to be present, as in our case—see it as an object of sadness, sorrow, and dejection. We were told that these icons came from the templon of the most holy Great Church. However, we knew for sure, through the inscriptions and the images of the Komnenoi, that they came from the Pantokrator Monastery.

***

Probablemente se creó a principios del siglo XII específicamente para seguir al emperador oriental y a su ejército en las campañas bélicas. Tal vez se hizo para el propio Juan II Comneno, que pasó gran parte de su reinado en el campo de batalla, luchando contra los numerosos enemigos del imperio; este icono viajó con Juan II y su familia durante sus campañas militares. Cuando Juan regresó a Constantinopla para un desfile en celebración de una victoria militar, renunció a su carro de oro, plata y marfil e hizo colocar el icono en un kiot (teca decorad para conservar y exponer iconos) que había en su lugar. La victoria que Juan celebraba era la reconquista del castillo ancestral de la familia Comnena, Kastamon, a los turcos musulmanes. Juan creía que la Virgen era personalmente responsable de esta importante victoria.

En la Cuarta Cruzada, en 1204, el icono fue tomado por los soldados cruzados tras un combate cuerpo a cuerpo con los defensores de la ciudad de Constantinopla, cerca del monasterio de Pantepotes, que constituía la última resistencia de los bizantinos. Tomado como botín de guerra por los venecianos, el anciano y ciego dux Dandolo, que murió en Constantinopla en 1205, enviaría inmediatamente el icono a Venecia como el trofeo más importante de la destrucción de Constantinopla. Era un símbolo de cómo el equilibrio de poder acababa de pasar de Bizancio en el Cuerno de Oro a las lagunas de Venecia, Dios había transferido ahora su bendición de Constantinopla a Venecia por la fuerza de las armas.

En febrero de 1438, una gran delegación de Constantinopla llegó a Venecia de camino a un gran concilio eclesiástico celebrado en Italia para negociar la unión de las iglesias. El antiguo Patriarca de la Iglesia bizantina José II, junto con un grupo de clérigos y nobles, visitó San Marcos y vio los tesoros que habían sido saqueados en 1204. He aquí un relato de la visita:

.... También hemos contemplado los iconos divinos de lo que se llama el sagrado templon...Estos objetos fueron traídos aquí según la ley del botín inmediatamente después de la conquista de nuestra ciudad por los latinos, y fueron reunidos en forma de un icono muy grande en lo alto del altar mayor del coro principal.... Entre las personas que contemplan este icono de iconos, los que lo poseen sienten orgullo, placer y deleite, mientras que los que se lo han llevado -si están presentes, como en nuestro caso- lo ven como objeto de tristeza, pena y abatimiento. Nos dijeron que estos iconos procedían del templón de la Santísima Gran Iglesia. Pero nosotros sabíamos, por las inscripciones y las imágenes de los comnenes, que procedían del monasterio del Pantocrátor.

***

Probabilmente fu creata all'inizio del XII secolo appositamente per seguire l'imperatore d'Oriente e l'esercito in campagna bellica. Forse è stato realizzato per lo stesso Giovanni II Comneno, che trascorse gran parte del suo regno sul campo, combattendo i numerosi nemici dell'impero; questa icona viaggiò con Giovanni II e la sua famiglia durante le sue campagne militari. Quando Giovanni tornò a Costantinopoli per una parata che celebrava una vittoria militare, rinunciò al suo carro d'oro, argento e avorio e fece collocare l'icona in un kiot (teca decorata per conservare ed esporre icone) che stava al suo posto. La vittoria che Giovanni celebrava era la riconquista del castello ancestrale della famiglia Comnena, Kastamon, da parte dei turchi musulmani. Giovanni credeva che la Vergine fosse personalmente responsabile di questa importante vittoria.

Nella quarta crociata, nel 1204, l'icona fu presa dai soldati crociati dopo un combattimento corpo a corpo con i difensori della città di Costantinopoli, presso il Monastero di Pantepotes che fu l'ultima resistenza dei Bizantini. Presa come bottino di guerra dai veneziani, il doge Dandolo, vecchio e cieco, che morì a Costantinopoli nel 1205, avrebbe subito spedito l'icona a Venezia come il trofeo più importante della distruzione di Costantinopoli. Era il simbolo di come gli equilibri di potere si fossero appena spostati da Bisanzio sul Corno d'Oro alle lagune di Venezia, Dio aveva ora trasferito la Sua benedizione da Costantinopoli a Venezia con la forza delle armi.

Nel febbraio 1438 una numerosa delegazione da Costantinopoli arrivò a Venezia diretta a un grande concilio ecclesiastico che si tenne in Italia per negoziare l'unione delle chiese. L'antico Patriarca della Chiesa Bizantina Giuseppe II, insieme ad un gruppo di chierici e nobili, visitò San Marco e vide i tesori che erano stati saccheggiati nel 1204. Ecco un resoconto della visita:

.... Abbiamo anche guardato le icone divine da quello che viene chiamato il sacro templon...Questi oggetti furono portati qui secondo la legge del bottino subito dopo la conquista della nostra città da parte dei Latini, e furono riuniti sotto forma di una grandissima icona in cima all'altare maggiore del coro principale.... Tra le persone che contemplano questa icona delle icone, chi la possiede prova orgoglio, piacere e diletto, mentre a chi l'ha prelevata – se è presente, come nel nostro caso – la vede come un oggetto di tristezza, tristezza e sconforto. Ci è stato detto che queste icone provenivano dal templon della santissima Grande Chiesa. Ma dalle iscrizioni e dalle immagini dei Comneni sapevamo con certezza che provenivano dal monastero del Pantocratore.

Source text extracted from: pallasweb.com

photos: pallasweb.com

#venice #venezia #venecia #san marco #icons #arte bizantino #byzantine art

4 notes · View notes

justforbooks · 11 months ago

Text

A farce, for heaven’s sake! Everyone knows farce is dead.” When a character says these lines on page eight of Janice Hallett’s latest whodunnit, The Christmas Appeal, we can practically see the author tipping us an outsized wink. Hallett, after all, is one of today’s foremost exponents of cerebral, knowing crime. A swift 180 pages later, Hallett has slain another victim and shown that farce was never really dead in the first place. Literary murder – especially the cosy sort – has always been comic. The real mystery is: why is it so popular now?

Richard Osman’s Thursday Murder Club series, in which laughs, foibles and irony figure far more prominently than bloody murder, has topped the charts for four years running. The Crime Writers’ Association has just launched a new Whodunnit Dagger to honour the year’s best cosy, classic or quirky mystery. This Christmas, production company Mammoth Screen will bring us its latest Agatha Christie for BBC One, a reworking of Murder Is Easy that, like its predecessor Why Didn’t They Ask Evans?, plays up the love and laughs – moving away from the grittier cynicism of its earlier adaptations.

But then, this is the production company that made Blandings – based on the PG Wodehouse Blandings Castle stories – and Agatha Raisin. The latter, an affectionate rendering of MC Beaton’s none-more-cosy crime capers, is a reminder that the genre has always been popular. Trace it back from SJ Bennett, whose sleuth of choice is Queen Elizabeth II, and Hallett, through Beaton and Simon Brett, with his wisecracking Charles Paris mysteries, and you find an unbroken link to the golden age of comic crime.

Christie herself wrote laughs aplenty, especially when it came to Poirot; her contemporary and fellow queen of crime, Ngaio Marsh, excelled at badinage. GK Chesterton’s Father Brown stories, written in the early 20th century, have a profound and gentle humour – or not so gentle in the barbed parody The Absence of Mr Glass, which pokes fun at Sherlock Holmes. Arthur Conan Doyle also made space for jokes amid the pea-soupers and arch villainy, not just in surreal escapades such as The Red-Headed League, but in the everyday interactions of Holmes and Watson. And there are links between the generations: as a producer on Radio 4’s classic adaptation of Dorothy L Sayers’s Lord Peter Wimsey series, Brett revisited the pinnacle of comic crime from the 1920s and 30s.

In Evelyn Waugh’s 1945 novel Brideshead Revisited, the aristocratic Catholic family at its centre turns in times of crisis, not to sermons, but to Father Brown stories. Read aloud by the matriarch, the scene is at once absurd, touching and completely understandable. Part of the solace stems from the benign humour of the tales, and that explains why comic crime is resurgent today – amid planetary and economic crises, that promise of escapism is more beguiling than ever. Especially at this time of year. From Hercule Poirot’s Christmas to PD James’s Mistletoe Murders, authors as well as readers have been drawn to fatal festivities.

We’re all familiar with gallows humour, the need to find laughter in the grimmest places. Yet the appeal of truly comic crime is less about professional detectives doing a grisly job than dilettantes playing a game. Literature has few laughing policemen, but an awful lot of quipping amateurs. Even Marsh gave her best one-liners not to handsome Inspector Alleyn but to her Watson figure, the journalist Nigel Bathgate.

Games, puzzles and mysteries are by definition playful. And it’s not just the sleuths who are playing. Reader is always pitted against author in a test of wits – can we solve the crime before the detective? Like every game, there are clear rules: detective author Ronald Knox set out his not entirely serious 10 commandments of fair play in 1929. This is what makes these stories such perfect escapism today: readers can lose themselves in the contest. Every true whodunnit is a work of metafiction, as the reader flits in and out of the story, constantly trying to estimate the author’s intelligence or honesty in setting trails and leaving clues.

For my money, today’s greatest exponent of playful detective fiction is Alex Pavesi, whose Eight Detectives is a gloriously original, intricate and often very funny series of practical jokes played on the reader. Dann McDorman’s new novel, West Heart Kill, as tricksy as they come, uses a jigsaw puzzle as cover art, while the cover of my own Helle & Death tips its hat to Cluedo. This playfulness puts us in the right mood, but the classic whodunnit has other weapons, many of which it shares with farce: plots like clockwork, exquisite choreography and perfect timing. Sayers’s Peter Wimsey has been called “Bertie Wooster with Jeeves’s brain”.

The most important comic quality of both murder mystery and farce, however, is the meticulous arranging of cause, effect and misunderstanding. The detection of a murderer involves paying minute attention to what people say and do. The reader is given privileged access into the lives of others, replete with dramatic irony and a degree of omniscience. And what could possibly be funnier than the everyday idiosyncrasies of human beings?

The Christmas Appeal is packed with hypocrites and exhibitionists. Mrs Ruddle, in Sayers’s Busman’s Honeymoon, is a world-class gossip. As for the sleuths themselves, from Holmes, to Poirot, to Torben Helle, the more seriously they take themselves, the sillier they become. Snoop on anyone for long enough, and their habits, sayings, priorities start to become hilarious.

Daily inspiration. Discover more photos at Just for Books…?

#just for books #cosy crime #book review

5 notes · View notes

braveclementine · 6 months ago

Text

Warnings: None.

Chapter Note: Even though Y/N will be turning twelve, I wrote her a little mentally younger. Every time there is a son or daughter of Stark, they're always brilliant. So I wanted to make her a little handicapped instead. She is brilliant, but she acts a little younger and is treated a little younger than other kids her age.

Y/N ran home in excitement, backpack still swinging on her back. She waved at the gardener that was digging in the flower beds next to the tower, "Hello Mr. Gates!"

The middle aged man looked up at her and smiled, waving back, "Hello Ms Stark. How was school today?"

"It was great! We're learning about World War II in History, so I'm going to ask Mr. Rogers if he can help me study." Y/N said, bouncing on the balls of her feet. "And my birthday is tomorrow and daddy said I could skip school if I wanted to, but I don't think I will. I like school."

"Well that's good." Mr. Gates said, leaning on his shovel. His slightly graying black hair was combed back and his amber eyes twinkled in kindness. "Don't ever drop out kid, school is a gift."

"Of course not mister." Y/N said, getting ready to head back to the Compound.

"How old are you turning?" He asked kindly.

"Twelve!" Y/N said with excitement. "I have to go though, daddy always gets worried if I'm not in by three forty-five."

"Of course. Have a blessed day young lady." Mr. Gates said and then went back to digging. Y/N skipped the rest of the way to the Avengers Compound.

She headed over to her daddy's work area first, F.R.I.D.A.Y. letting her in. "Hi daddy! I'm home."

"Hey ladybug." Tony said, spinning around in his chair. He set aside the Iron Man helmet that he was working on and opened his arms, letting Y/N run into them. He kissed the top of her head. "How as school today?"

"It was great! We learned how to calculate the distance between planets and stars in scence, we're learning about World War II in history, and we've moved onto exponents and fractions in math." Y/N said excitedly. "But I hope we kind've speed up on the planets because our next topic is animals!"

Tony chuckled, "You gonna ask Capsicle about helping you with your history homework?"

"Daddy, it's not nice to call other people names." Y/N said solemnly, as she always did whenever Tony called someone something other than their names.

"It's a fun name." Tony said, kissing the tip of her nose, "Like how I call you ladybug. Or do you not want to be many ladybug anymore?" He feigned a hurt look.

She squealed, wrapping her arms around his neck, "No! I do ! I do!"

Tony laughed, picking her up and carrying her out of his lab. "Okay ladybug. Now run along. Steve and Natasha are upstairs in the kitchen. I'll make sure to eat dinner with you."

"Okay. Bye daddy." Y/N said and ran up the stairs instead of taking the elevator.

"Welcome home Y/N." Natasha said, already putting out the saltine crackers with peanut butter on them, along with a glass of milk on the table as Y/N skipped into the room.

"Hi Auntie Nat. Hi Mr. Rogers." Y/N greeted the two people in the room excitedly, sliding her backpack off the her shoulder and plopping it into the chair next to her. She also saw Loki and grew excited running over to him. "Hi Mr. Loki."

Loki smiled affectionately at her. "Hey little Stark. How was Midgardian little people jail?"

Y/N pouted, which Loki thought was adorable. "It's not jail! It's fun! Jail is for bad people!"

Loki chuckled. "I take it you had a good day?"

"Yes!" She said and then suddenly grew shy and said, "I have to interview someone that I look up to and I was hoping to interview either you or Teddy."

Loki smiled. Bless her little heart, wanting to interview the two people that were hated the most on the planet. "Well, how about you as Bucky, okay? I think he'd like that."

"Yeah, he would." Steve said, smiling over his newspaper.

"Where is Teddy?" Y/N asked, looking around for Bucky. She had started calling him Teddy from a really young age when she'd heard Steve call him 'Bucky Bear'. And he did have some of the best hugs so she called him Teddy, short for 'Teddy bear'.

"Him and Uncle Sam are out on a run." Nat said, tapping the plate, "Now eat your snack and drink your milk before you start on your homework."

Y/N quickly climbed into her seat next to Mr. Rogers and ate her peanut butter crackers and milk. She pulled out her history homework first and asked, "Mr. Rogers, will you help me? It's on World War II."

"Of course pumpkin." Steve said softly, putting his newspaper to the side. The two of them worked on her homework, going through it quickly, before she moved onto math by herself and then science.

She looked up in worry as she pulled out her English assignment, "Teddy isn't back yet."

"He'll be home soon." Nat said with a smile, texting on the phone to Clint who was on a mission with Wanda and Rhodey. "Him and Uncle Sam are bringing pizzas home for dinner."

"Is Dr. Bruce, Uncle Thor, and daddy going to join?" Y/N asked.

"Thor is staying on Asgard tonight." Loki said, looking up from his book. "But he'll be down tomorrow for your birthday. And Uncle Strange is going to show up too!"

Y/N beamed.

"Hey, do you know what you want for your birthday?" Natasha asked. "Your dad keeps saying you'd want a pony."

Y/N giggled. "We can't get a pony! Daddy's being silly. But. . ." She looked up thoughtfully. "A puppy would be fun."

"Yeah?" Nat asked excitedly. She couldn't have her own kids, so Y/N was the closest she could get. And she loved her like her own. Really, they all did, even Loki. "Do you know what kind?"

"Um. . . one that's good with kids." Y/N said matter of factly. "Like a dalmatian. Or. . ."

"A golden retriever?" Steve asked.

Y/N nodded excitedly. "Yeah!"

Steve and Nat shared a secret smile and then Bucky and Sam came in with the pizzas, followed by Bruce, Tony, and Pietro.

"Hey hoghead." Bucky teased, wrapping Y/N up in a huge hug.

"Teddy!" Y/N squealed in excitement. "You're home!"

"Yep." Bucky said, kissing the top of her head, looking over her shoulder at the homework. "What are the weirdo teachers making you do now?"

"They're not weird." Y/N pouted adorably. "And this is an essay. I have to interview someone that I look up to. And I was going to ask you and Loki. Loki said to ask you since he was here first. Can I interview you? Please?"

Bucky was touched that she looked up to him. "Yeah, of course you can Honey bear."

Y/N beamed again.

"But you gotta eat first." Sam said with a grin, putting the pizzas down on the counter. Steve got up to help him with the plates.

"Did you get all of the homework except the essay done?" Tony asked, kissing the side of his daughters head.

She nodded and said, "But I would like Dr. Bruce to look over my science homework please."

"Of course I will." Bruce answered, "And you know that you can just call me Bruce, kiddo."

"I know!" Y/N answered, putting her homework back in her backpack. "But I want to be resp- respectable."

"Here Angel." Sam said, handing her a plate with two pizza slices on it.

"Thank you!"

"So what did you say earlier when I told you Tony wanted to get you a pony?" Nat asked, throwing Tony a teasing smile.

Y/N giggled, lighting up the moods of every person in the room, "He's silly! We don't have room for a pony!"

"Sure we do." Tony protested. "We have plenty of space inside!"

Y/N shook her head and continued to giggle. "Let's get a puppy instead! Or a bunny! Or me and Teddy could get a baby bear!"

"I like that idea!" Bucky perked up and he held out his fist gently so she could bump it as hard as she could.

Steve shook his head in amusement.

They finished dinner quickly. Bucky, Sam, and Y/N ran around the living room, chasing each other with pillows while Bruce looked over Y/N's science homework and the others chatted casually.

Y/N squealed as Bucky picked her up and flew her over his head. "I'm flying!"

"Yes you are angel." Sam grinned. "Flying straight-" He leapt up and grabbed her out of Bucky's arms "-into my arms."

"No!" Y/N giggled, trying to get away. "Daddy! Daddy the monster got me!"

Tony chuckled and 'rescued' her from Sam's grasp. "Ah! Now daddy's the hero isn't he!"

Bucky 'gently' kicked Tony in the balls. Tony groaned, lowering Y/N to the ground to cover his private parts. Y/N didn't notice, as Steve held his arms out, getting down on one knee and said, ""The princess needs to come home to the castle now."

"My prince!" Y/N squealed, throwing herself into Steve's arms and laughing as he picked her up and then carried her off to bed.

"Ow, what was that for?" Tony complained, now that Y/N was out of earshot.

Bucky chuckled, "I think you should be more worried about your daughter calling Steve her prince."

Tony snorted, "No, I think I should be more worried about giving her siblings in the future."

The others roared with laughter.

"Read me a bedtime story?" Y/N asked Steve happily.

Steve smiled, going over to her bookcase and pulling out a huge book that contained every fairy tale in the world. It was heavy and thick, with old parchment and old hand drawn illustrations. They were also the original fairy tales too, so not the new ones that had been re-written.

"Which one do you want to hear tonight?" Steve asked, flipping open the book carefully. Him, Sam, Clint, and Rhodey had taken turns reading every single story in here to her.

"Um, the one about Little Red Riding Hood!" She said happily, wrapping her arms around a teddy bear that Wanda had given her for Christmas.

"Okay." Steve said softly, opened up the page, and read until she fell asleep.

6 notes · View notes

lalacastillo2011 · 1 year ago

Text

literatura precolombina y conquista

youtube

POPOL VUH

El Popol Vuh es un relato teológico de origen maya Quiché que trata sobre la historia de la creación de las cosas. Es equivalente para la cultura precolombina a la Biblia para los cristianos y el Corán para los musulmanes.

En el inicio de la historia, el tema principal es la reunión y una conversación entre dos dioses (Tepeu y Gucumatz), planea entre ellos la creación de algo para que habitara en el mundo y se decidieron por crear primero la luz. Llevaron de esta manera una secuencia lógica para conseguir que el mundo fuera un buen lugar para habitar; crearon el aire, una relación entre la Tierra y el agua y también les dieron la movilidad a los animales.

Al final de todo este proceso de creación, vino el inicio del hombre, quien estaba hecho de maíz. Ciertos personajes de Xibalbá (Sangre, Ictericia, Cráneo e Infortunio) deseaban a toda costa el hecho de eliminar a los hombres para que así ellos fueran los poseedores de la Tierra, pero sus ideas no les dieron resultado. Una campesina llamada Ixquic recibió una noticia de ser la madre de los hijos de la voz que le estaba hablando, ésta obedeció a lo que se le había propuesto y fue a la casa de la abuela.

La abuela, al recibir a Ixquic no le creyó lo que ella estaba diciendo y le propuso unos retos para ver si verdaderamente ella estaba diciendo la verdad; para la sorpresa de la abuela, todo lo que se le propuso fue cumplido, sin embargo tenía que acceder a cuidar a sus nietos (Hunahpú e Ixbalanqué).

Los señores de Xibalbá invitaron a jugar a Hunahpú e Ixbalanqué con los señores del inframundo o mundo subterráneo y dejaron como símbolo a su madre y abuela una caña. En el mundo subterráneo, Hunahpú e Ixbalanqué fueron partícipes de juegos muy peligrosos y por uno de ellos, no tan juego sino que una orden de echarse al fuego, murieron. Pero al día siguiente volvieron a nacer y con ayuda de las aves mensajeras les hicieron creer a los señores Xilbabá que eran magos y resucitaban a las personas, éstos dejándose llevar pidieron que hicieran la magia y Hunahpú e Ixbalanqué los mataron y no los resucitaron.

En conclusión podemos decir, que el Popol Vuh es la más grande muestra literaria de la cultura precolombina, por sus influencias, el relato de sus formas de vida y entre ellas sus costumbres y tradiciones tanto religiosas como vivencias de su quehacer cotidiano.

OLLANTAY

Toda la historia va alrededor del amor que sienten Ollantay y Cusi-Cuillur, pero no es posible su unión debido a que ella es la hija preferida del Inca y no se puede casar con él ya que no es noble.

En la Escena primera Ollantay se encuentra hablando con Piqui-Chaqui sobre Cusi-Cuillur, el paje le aconseja a Ollantay dejar de pensar en ella ya que podría enojar al rey.

Willca Uma se enuentra con Ollantay, y éste le pregunta porque ha venido, ya que su venida suele significar que alguna desgracia se acerca, le expone simbólicamente el riesgo de su amor con Cusi-Cuillur, luego se despide; el paje tiene una pesadilla sobre un ahorcamiento de un zorro y luego se dirigen a casa de Cusi-Cuillur.

En la escena II, la Reina Madre le pregunta a Cusi-Cuillur que es lo que la está haciendo sufrir, ella ella responde que ha sido abandonada por Ollantay, luego entra Pachacutic y consuela a su hija, un criado le avisa al rey sobre la llegada de unos vasallos que entran a bailar y cantar, el rey se marcha, y Cusi-Cuillur pide a todos que se vayan pero un Yaravi se queda para cantarle una historia romántica con final triste.

En la escena III, Pachacutic, Ollantay y Rumiñachui están planeando estrategias militares, teniendo todo listo para una guerra, luego de la reunión Ollantay pide hablar a solas con el rey, Ollantay le expone todo lo que el rey ha hecho por él y como Ollantay es su fiel sirviente, luego de implora que le conceda a su hija, pero el rey lo rechaza firmemente.

Durante la escena IV, Ollantay dice un monólogo sobre como la desgracias que atormentan su vida y de cómo se vengará del rey y del Cuzco para poder ser el nuevo rey.

Ollantay manda a su paje en búsqueda de Cusi-Cuillur pero no hay señales de ella ni de su madre, Ollantay se entera que un grupo de hombres del rey lo están buscando.

Piqui-Chaqui teme lo peor, Ollantay planea huir para sublevarse contra el rey.

El rey y Rumiñahui hablan sobre la huida de Ollantay y sobre su búsqueda, reciben un quipo informando que los andícolas han recibido con euforia a Ollantay, lo que desató la cólera del rey.

El jefe montañés explica al pueblo sobre como Ollantay los guiará en la batalla, Ollantay es nombra rey y Hanco Huaillo le entrega su anillo al nuevo jefe de los Andres (el jefe Montañes).

Escena VII, Monólogo de Rumiñahui, habla de cómo se ha metido en problemas por intentar buscar a Ollantay, lo duro que será la lucha con él, se empieza a poner nervioso.

Escena VIII, Pitu Salla aconseja a Ima qué tiene ventajas como recibir mimos, favores de los príncipes pero a Ima Suma le parece insoportable, con las Vírgenes escogidas.

Una noche que estaba en el jardín escuchó unos gemidos y preguntó quién era, parecían expresiones de dolor poco claras en su mensaje, cosa que no olvidará.

Escena IX, Willca Uma se encuentra con Piqui-Chaqui y le pregunta sobre Ollantay, le cuenta de cómo Cuzco sufre por la pérdida de Pachacutic.

Escena X, el rey Yupanqui se reúne en la corte con Willca Uma, Rumiñahui reconoce su falta y pide una segunda oportunidad, Willca Uma predice un gran futuro para él en los Andes.

Escena XI, Rumañiahui se encuentra mal herido y un Indio le informa al rey, Ollantay reconoce a su amigo y se entera de que Yupanqui en sus delirios ha causado esto.

Escena XII, Ima Suma le pregunta a Pitu Salla qué secreto le está ocultando, ella accede a revelárselo, le muestra en la noche, cuando la madres están durmiendo, una puerta de piedra en el jardín

Escena XIII, Ima Suma y Pitu Salla entran en la cueva en donde está Cusi-Cuillur, le cuenta porque está en esas condiciones, le confiesa que es su madre e Ima Suma le pide que aguante hasta que averigüe la manera de liberarla.

Escena XIV, El rey pregunta a Willca Uma noticias sobre la misión, reciben un quipo que informa qué Ollantay fue capturado y la Provincia de los Andres tomada; el plan era qué en las festividades todos estuvieran ebrios para atacarlos, planean ahorcarlos, luego Rumiñahui pide al rey redención, Antes del ahorcamiento el rey perdona a Ollantay, su paje y al jefe montañés y les asigna cargos importantes, así mismo de comprometen a buscar a Cusi-Cuillar.

Escena XV, Ollantay, El rey y Willca Uma parten a ver a Cusi-Cuillar, la encuentran gracias a Ima Suma y Mamacaca, Cusi-Cuillar se encuentra con Pitu Salla, el rey Yupanqui la reconoce como su hermana y Ollantay como su amada y el rey les ofrece una nueva oportunidad y permiten su amor, y viven una nueva vida todos juntos.

RABINAL ACHÍ

La obra comprende dos actos, el primer acto se divide en tres cuadros y el segundo acto en un cuadro. El Varón de los Queche, con sus tropas, destruyó cuatro poblaciones Rabinaleb' y obligó a sus habitantes a pagar tributos. Después de batallar días enteros, el Varón de los Queche es capturado y llevado al palacio de Jefe Cinco Lluvia, para ser juzgado.

En el primer acto, primer cuadro, comienza con la captura del Varón de los Queche por el Varón de Rabinal y llevado ante el padre de este, el Jefe Cinco Lluvia. El Varón de los Queche había invadido y destruido varios de los pueblos del valle, territorios rabinales, comienza un una larga serie de acusaciones en su contra con un interrogatorio por parte del Varón de Rabinal. En el segundo cuadro, se refiere a la conversación entre el Varón de Rabinal y el Jefe Cinco Llluvia sobre los acontecimientos ocurridos que el Varón de los Queche aniquiló a niños y que secuestró al Jefe Cinco Lluvia, y este expone condiciones para recibir a cautivo. En el tercer cuadro, el Varón de Rabinal le expone al Varón de los Queche las condiciones del Jefe Cinco Lluvia que son que sea su vasallo, sea humilde, que no escandalice, que se incline y que doble rodilla, pero el Varón de los Queche le contesta amenazante y se resiste a aceptar las condiciones que le ofrecen.

En el segundo acto y final, llega el Varón de los Queche ante el Jefe Cinco Lluvia, el cautivo se presta a una parodia de conciliación, protocolo de la ceremonia sacrificial. Durante la cual rechaza obstinadamente los ofrecimientos que se le hacen, reivindicando. Águilas y jaguares lo sacrificaron abriéndole el pecho con los mazos, mientras que todos los presentes bailan en ronda. Finaliza con la orquesta de un coro general que da patetismo al drama.

LOS LIBROS DE CHILAM BALAM

Los Chilam Balam son textos escritos en tiempos coloniales que poseen un gran valor cultural de la península de Yucatán. Chilam (o chilan) se les decía a los sacerdotes que interpretaban los libros y la voluntad de los dioses. Balam, al parecer fue un famoso Chilam que predijo la llegada de extranjeros a Yucatán.

En el libro nos dice que en los diccionarios mayas encontramos que Balam significa "tigre" o "jaguar", mientras que Chilam quiere decir "profeta o intérprete"; pero también Chilan (con n) ese mismo significado, además del de "acostado".

Para los mayas, los dioses escribían en el cosmos la historia y el porvenir del mundo, y gracias a su capacidad sensible lograron descifrar este lenguaje que usaban los dioses. Así, conocieron el poder de la palabra y la seducción de las texturas, y dejaron también su testimonio en la Tierra; a través de una escritura que es profunda, mística, y está poblada de imágenes de fuerte carga simbólica.

La literatura estaba al servicio de la religión, pues la relación con la divinidad fue para los mayas prehispánicos el eje de la vida comunitaria. Así, al igual que la ciencia y otras disciplinas, el arte se concebía más como una expresión de lo sagrado que como una forma de creación personal o colectiva. La escritura misma era sagrada, y sólo la conocían unos cuantos hombres, por lo general sacerdotes, a quienes les eran revelados los designios de los dioses y las leyes divinas que mantenían el orden cósmico.

Así, los libros fueron objeto de veneración. En aquel entonces, los textos sagrados se leían en los rituales y ceremonias litúrgicas para que la comunidad fuera consciente del sentido de su existencia, tal como hoy sucede con los libros de otras religiones, como la judía o la católica. Además, eran anónimos. A nadie se le habría ocurrido firmar su obra, pues los autores no eran vistos como tales, sino como meros transmisores de la voluntad divina y de la herencia espiritual de su pueblo.

Los mayas crearon una escritura pictográfica de alto colorido y sumamente compleja, acaso la más desarrollada de la América precolombina, y la plasmaron principalmente en códices (libros de papel amate doblados en forma de biombo) a los que los mayas yucatecos llamaban anahte. De éstos, sólo sobreviven tres: el Dresdensis, el Peresianus y el Tro-Cortesianus, conocidos también como códices de Dresde, París y Madrid, respectivamente, por ser las ciudades donde actualmente se encuentran; estos códices contienen, básicamente, información sobre los primeros conocimientos astronómicos y la invención del calendario. En cambio, hasta la fecha existen cientos de textos en piedra y en estuco, muchos de ellos sin descifrar.

Los Libros de Chilam Balam son:

Chilam Balam de Tusik

Chilam Balam de Tizimín

Chilam Balam de Maní

Chilam Balam de Chumayel

MEMORIAL DE SOLOLÁ

Memorial de Sololá es un libro que narra las historias de los indios que habitaban en Guatemala, sus luchas, sus triunfos, sus sufrimientos, y su esclavitud y miseria cuando sopló sobre ellos el vendaval de la conquista extranjera; escrito a finales del siglo XVI por indios instruidos en la escritura moderna.

Fueron los dos abuelos Gagavitz y Zactecauh los que llegaron a Tulán y engendraron a los Xahilá. De cuatro lugares llegaron personas a Tulán, donde llegaron a engendrar hijos. Fue entonces creada la Piedra de Obsidiana por Xibalbay, fue hecho el hombre por el Creador y el Formador, y rindió culto a la Piedra de Obsidiana. Cuando se hizo al hombre lo fabricaron de la tierra y lo alimentaron con árboles y hojas. Pero el hombre no hablaba, ni caminaba, no tenía sangre ni carne; su carne se hizo de la masa del maíz. Se crearon 13 varones y 14 mujeres. Inmediatamente anduvieron, tenían sangre y carne; se casaron y se multiplicaron. Tras esto, los Xahilá narran las historias de sus padres y abuelos, sus victorias y sus conquistas antes de que éstos decidieran engendrar hijos. Posteriormente en el libro se describen diversos sucesos históricos relacionados con las tribus y sus familiares, así como las descendencias, parentescos y tribus resultantes.

SIMILITUDES Y DIFERENCIAS ENTRE OBRAS

SIMILITUDES

DIFERENCIAS

Ollantay

Todo el texto está basado en la época prehispánica y tiene un especial enfoque en la pirámide social de nuestros antepasados (Nótese la diferencia entre un noble y un soldado). Al tener un lenguaje poético sirve como base a algunas características del lenguaje quechua (Elocuencia y concisión).

Es un drama escrito en lengua Quechua y trata sobre el amorío imposible entre Ollantay y Cusi-Cuillur, dada la diferencia de estrato social. Su cronología abarca un período de 10 años, para algunos estudiosos entre 1461 y 1471, establecida en el período inca imperial.

Popol Vuh

Es un texto literario de origen teológico (En su inicio narra el diálogo entre dos dioses: Tepeu y Gucumatz). El mito se fundamenta con la historia y se remiten los gestos y palabras de la divinidad de los dioses, parte fundamental de la cultura precolombina. De esta manera se hace presente la realidad para las personas que influyeron en su escritura.

Fue concebido como una obra “fingida” (de ficción) y no como una obra de literatura ni mucho menos de entretenimiento. Es el equivalente a la Biblia para los cristianos, sólo que aplicado en la cultura maya quiché; es un texto sagrado y le da mucha importancia a la Palabra, pues se cree que la historia es tal y como la menciona este libro.

Rabinal Achí

Tiene un valor histórico muy grande porque afirma y demuestra que la comunicación y la rivalidad para el hombre siempre ha sido muy importante, esto se ve reflejado en las guerras e intentos de conquista a los Rabinaleb desde el punto de vista de ser enemigos entre pueblos; pero, a su vez el teatro representa un sistema de comunicación fácilmente distinguible y que goza de herencia y tradición.

Es un drama dinástico del siglo XV, y muestra algunas de las costumbres culturales prehispánicas. Relata mitos del origen de algunos pueblos y ciertas relaciones socio-políticas de la época, expresadas por medio de música y danza. Es conocida también como Danza del Tun y se considera que sus orígenes se remontan hasta el siglo XIII siendo representada por un grupo quiché (Los Rabinaleb).

Memorial de Sololá

Pieza literaria que habla de forma muy clara sobre la creación del hombre (el material del que estaba hecho, o sea de la tierra y su alimentación de hojas y árboles). También relata otros factores relevantes como la creación de la Piedra de Obsidiana por Xibalbay. Después se describen sucesos históricos relacionados con las tribus y sus familiares.

Es un libro que narra las historias de los indios que habitaban en Guatemala, sus luchas, sus triunfos, sus sufrimientos, y su esclavitud y miseria cuando sopló sobre ellos el vendaval de la conquista extranjera; escrito a finales del siglo XVI por indios instruidos en la escritura moderna.

Los Libros de Chilam Balam

Chilam Balam es un conjunto de libros relacionados a actividades históricas de la cultura maya precolombina. Proviene de una rica herencia transmitida de generación en generación de forma oral tomando en cuenta a la vez antiguos libros jeroglíficos. Balam es un nombre de familia y su interpretación es tribal. Libro sagrado y profético con temas astrológicos y de cronología

En comparación con las demás obras estudiadas, su período de creación posiblemente abarque los siglos XVI y XVII, lo que la hace una literatura más reciente siendo redactada después de la conquista española. Su fonología y escritura tiene rasgos europeos; también relata muchos temas de la vida maya, por lo tanto no está completamente centrada en la teología y sus ramas.

En Conclusión

Entre las similitudes que todas estas obras compartes podemos concretar las siguientes: época, contexto sociocultural, corriente literaria (literatura precolombina), religión politeísta (factor implícito), los autores (aunque el autor/autores de cada libro no sean los mismos, todos forman parte de las civilizaciones precolombinas latinoamericanas)

Todos los libros narran historias muy diferentes: Ollantay es una historia de amor, el Popol Vuh explica el origen del mundo y es considerado una especie de “Biblia”, Rabinal Achí relata mitos de pueblos, el Memorial de Sololá narra la creación del hombre (de maíz) y las aventuras del árbol genealógico de la tribu Xahilá y sus parentescos, y Los Libros de Chilam Balam tienen una escencia precolombina mezclada con europea, estos libros cuentan historias del pueblo maya, culturas y tradiciones.

CONCLUSIÓN

En cuanto a los libros se ha podido ver en ocasiones, textos teológicos (cuanto se narra que hay comunicación entre algunos dioses), vemos como los antepasados han intentado o nos narran historias de ellos de aquel entonces, entre esas encontraríamos temas de guerras, luchas ganadas así como perdidas, sufrimientos, esclavitud; donde podríamos decir que aún se encuentran esos distintos temas en la sociedad actual; podemos decir que estas civilizaciones “antiguas” han dejado una gran huella y en muchas ocasiones dejan muchas preguntas a las civilizaciones modernas.

youtube

#precolombina #Youtube

5 notes · View notes

beautiful-basque-country · 2 years ago

Note

Kaixo! A question about Donostia! Is there a specific reason the culinary scene there developed the way it did? What drew so many chefs there in the first place?

Kaixo!

Eskerrik asko for the question, this is a topic that wasn't discussed on the blog after all these years and it's quite interesting!

The so called New Basque Cuisine is a culinary trend started in 1976 inspired by some of the principles of the French Nouvelle Cuisine, that aimed for a renewal of traditional Basque cuisine based on three principles: the recovery of traditional recipes and lost dishes; the recovery of the authenticity of ingredients (meaning local producers and seasonal products); and the expansion of the traditional recipes through creativity and innovation.

It started in 1976, when the Gourmets Group organized in Madrid the "Round Table on Gastronomy", in which Rafael Anson, Néstor Luján, Juan Mari Arzak, Pedro Subijana, Raymond Oliver and Paul Bocuse, among others, took part as speakers. The presence of Bocuse and Oliver - two of the greatest exponents of French cuisine - allowed the Basque chefs to learn the details of the transformation that had originated the French Nouvelle Cuisine. On the occasion of the conference, they became friends with Bocuse, who invited them to visit his restaurant in Lyon to learn more.

In December of that same year - after spending 15 days learning in Lyon - a first meeting was held at the Jaizubia restaurant and the young attendees and eventually future fathers of the New Basque Cuisine were:

Juan Mari Arzak, Arzak restaurant (Donostia) Pedro Subijana, Akelarre restaurant (Donostia) Tatus Fombellida, Panier Fleuri restaurant (Errenteria) Ramón Roteta, Roteta restaurant (Hondarribia) Patxi Quintana, Patxiku Quintana restaurant (Donostia) Ricardo Idiáquez, Chomin restaurant (Donostia) Pedro Gómez, Romantxo restaurant (Irun) Manolo Iza and Jesús Mangas, Jaizubia restaurant (Irun) José Juan Castillo, Casa Nicolasa restaurant (Donostia) Ramón Zugasti, Arantzabi restaurant (Amasa- Villabona) Xabier Zapirain, Gurutze Berri restaurant (Oiartzun) Luis Irizar, Irizar restaurant (Madrid) Karlos Arguiñano, Arguiñano restaurant (Zarautz)

They were already friends - many of them have studied together - and colleagues, so it makes sense that since the ones who were learning about the French cooking revolution were from Donostia, they showed their knowledge to their friends of the same area.

That first meeting was followed by others, and in March 1977 they proposed to organize periodic dinners by the group as a whole, which would be held each time in a different restaurant, and which would be attended by some 40 or 50 people chosen by the members to taste the new dishes presented and give their opinion on them.

These dinners - which took place over a couple of years - worked as a laboratory and a place to exchange and discuss ideas. They also eventually led to the "II Round Table on Gastronomy", which took place in Donostia and was dedicated to regional cuisines.

New Basque Cuisine is generally regarded as the starting point for a renewal of the whole Spanish gastronomy that, over time, has positioned itself as one of the world's benchmarks.

#euskadi #euskal herria #basque country #pais vasco #pays basque #food #new basque cuisine #history #basque chefs #basque food #culture #donostia #gipuzkoa

16 notes · View notes

heathersdesk · 2 years ago

Text

https://exponentii.org/blog/the-hypocrisy-of-our-missionary-work-and-how-to-fix-it/

As a convert from a poor family full of mental illness and addiction, I say with my entire chest that the Church and its members are an essential part of why I didn't end up being a statistic of poverty, addiction, abuse, and incarceration.

I left my hometown on the East Coast (and by extension, my family) to go to school in Utah and later ended up moving to Idaho. I've spent more of my adult life away from my family than I've spent near them.

Let me poke a giant hole in the assertions that the Church is somehow solely responsible for destroying my relationships with my family. Because when two family members who desire to maintain contact across physical distance, they will do so. If they don't, there are other reasons for that which membership in the Church doesn't create.

Baptism and temple marriage weren't the reasons my relationships with my family were strained. All my church membership did was reveal the preexisting fractures that were already there, and would've existed regardless of whether I'd ever been baptized or not. I would've still moved away. I would've maintained the same separations from family members with whom I'm zero contact at this point. All the Church did was give me the options and resources to build that life for myself. The Church gave me what I needed to start over in a totally new place without family support. Which is great, because there was absolutely no reality in which my relationship with my family was ever going to be any different.

There was no version of my life with a happy extended family OP is describing, with enough mutual respect and restraint to have that kind of closeness. For that kind of closeness to exist, people on both ends of a relationship have to be willing to put in that work. If they wanted to, they would. If they didn't, it's because they didn't want to. And I can tell y'all from personal experience: if it's been decades and a family hasn't moved on from you're in a cult/you have a coffee pot, the fractures go deeper than that, no matter what anybody says.

I don't have children who can misinterpret and blame my personal and religious choices on missionaries. It wouldn't matter if I did because my branch didn't have missionaries. I joined the Church with the support of church members who found me, taught me the discussions, and baptized me because it was what I wanted and they were the only ones available. The idea that missionaries walk around bumping into walls and causing generational trauma? That's attributing way too much of what a family's dynamic already is on innocent bystanders who don't have the power or support necessary to force anyone to do anything.

AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD—no, not God. Women. For the love of women and their bodily autonomy, can we stop advocating for the Church to get involved in the US's broken healthcare system by forming their own hospitals and medical clinics? Any unmarried woman who has had BYU's insurance and health care can tell you why that's a bad idea. Enough women already have their access to medication and treatment curtailed in the name of "religious freedom." The doctors at BYU's student health center already don't bother diagnosing or treating conditions like PCOS because hormone therapy (i.e. birth control) is part of the treatment for it. Nobody needs more of the same, which is exactly what would happen if they took church-sponsored health care on the road.

#mormon #lds #mormonism #tumblrstake #religion #faith #the church of jesus christ of latter day saints

9 notes · View notes

viviendopraga · 1 year ago

Text

Praga – Hoy, 28 de septiembre, la Rep. Checa recuerda a su patrón nacional: ¡San Wenceslao ruega por nosotros!. El príncipe Wenceslao I, Premislita, muerto en la ciudad de Stará Boleslav (cercana a Praga), en donde se realiza la “Procesión Nacional de San Wencesleao”, que llega hasta la Iglesia, donde se expone el cráneo del santo patrono checo. Moneda de 20 Coronas Checas. Foto: TodaPraga. San Wenceslao es también la imagen de la identidad estatal checa, su más importante estatua está en la parte alta de la Av. Wenceslao en la capital checa y la moneda de 20 coronas tiene su imagen con el pedido: ¡San Wenceslao, No nos dejes perecer, ni a los por venir! Dos años para la muerte: 935 y 921 San Wenceslao fue asesinado un 28 de septiembre de 935, dice una versión. La historia se refiere a él como alguien muy educado, leía y escribía en latín, algo que en su época hacían muy pocos. Cultivaba el vino y la leyenda afirma que hacía muchas cosas buenas. Lo educa su abuela, Ludmila (quien será otra de las patronas del Pueblo Checo). Asesinada por su yerna, Drahomíra, la madre de San Wenceslao. Los historiadores dicen que mientras Ludmila favorecía a Wenceslao para que fuera rey checo, por ser el primer hijo de Vratislav. Quien, en ese momento, era príncipe y no había obtenido aún la bula papal que le consagraba el derecho a ser Rey y con título hereditario. Boleslav, el hermano mayor de Wenceslao nació después de la bula. Su mamá estimaba que él tenía más derechos a ser el soberano de las tierras checas. Vratislav muere en 921, según la otra versión, y es Drahomíra quien asume el mando por que sus dos hijos son aún menores de edad. Es cuando arrecia el pulso entre ella y su suegra. Ludmila deja el Castillo de Praga y se refugia en el Castillo de Tetín. Hasta a donde la manda a matar. La ahorcan con su propio velo. Václav ordenará, cuatro años después, traer los restos de su abuela y colocarlos en el Claustro de Jorge. Desde entonces empezará el Culto a Santa Ludmila. ¡San Wenceslao, ruega por nosotros! Boleslav II inicia el culto y Carlos IV lo extiende por Europa La mañana del 28 de septiembre del 929, Wenceslao va a la Iglesia, en Stará Boleslav, es interceptado y atacado por su hermano, Boleslav y tras una pelea, lo matan quienes lo acompañaban. Moría un príncipe, cristiano, bueno y empezaría la leyenda, que cobró más fuerza en el Siglo X. El sobrino del patrono, Boleslav II aportó mucho por que se le realizara culto. Por cierto, San Wenceslao está enterrado junto a su sobrino, en la Capilla de San Wenceslao. Hasta el emperador del Sacro Imperio Románico Germánico, Carlos IV honraba a San Wenceslao. Fue él quien mandó a construir la famosa Corona Imperial de San Wenceslao, la más antigua y más importante pieza de las Joyas de la Coronación de los Reyes Checos. Desde el año 2000, el 28 de septiembre se declara un día de feriado y recordación nacionales. Foto: Copia de la corona de San Wenceslao en el castillo de Karlstejn.Foto: Dominio Público CC0 1.0 ¡San Wenceslao, ruega por nosotros! https://www.viviendopraga.com/faltan-creyentes-asi-que-regalan-119-iglesias

2 notes · View notes

marbetxsarq · 1 year ago

Text

Parcial III Frauenkirche.

La Frauenkirche de Dresde (Iglesia de Nuestra Señora):

La Iglesia de Nuestra Señora, construida entre 1726 y 1743, contiene una de las bóvedas más grandes hechas de piedra. Se convirtió en un emblema para el barroco de Dresde.

El punto que me toco fue hablar sobre el arquitecto de esta obra.

George Bähr.

15 de marzo de 1666 – 16 de marzo de 1738.

Fue un arquitecto alemán nacido en el seno de una familia pobre. No obstante, el sacerdote de la aldea ayudó a pagar su educación, con lo que el joven Bähr pudo entrar como aprendiz de carpintero en Lauenstein, Sajonia. En 1690, Bähr se trasladó a Dresde para comenzar a trabajar como carpintero. Su sueño era ir a Italia y admirar los edificios famosos que allí se encontraban, así que en su tiempo libre estudió mecánica.

En 1705, a la edad de 39 años, fue nombrado Maestro Carpintero de la ciudad de Dresde, aunque carecía del certificado de maestro. Una de sus principales metas era modernizar las iglesias de la ciudad. Pensaba que los edificios existentes no hacían justicia alguna a los servicios de la Iglesia Protestante.

Otras obras:

Su primer edificio sería una parroquia en el área de Loschwitz, en Dresde, un edificio en forma de octágono alargado, que se terminaría en 1708.

La iglesia del orfanato de Dresde fue construida alrededor de 1710, seguida por la Dreifaltigkeitskirche (iglesia de la Trinidad) en Schmiedeberg, 1713-1716.

Entre 1719 y 1726 se construyó la iglesia de Forchheim , así como las de Königstein, Hohnstein y Kesselsdorf (todas en Sajonia) y una cantidad considerable de viviendas en Dresde. Pero la fama de Bähr le llegaría con el diseño de la famosa Frauenkirche o Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de Dresde. Le encomendaron la tarea en 1722; en 1726 se aprobaría el diseño, comenzando las tareas de construcción. En 1730, Bähr se convirtiría en el primer alemán en adquirir el título de “arquitecto”.

Experiencia:

Fue bastante bueno este parcial, yo estaba con muchísimas cosas en la cabeza y cansada por la entrega de expresión II que tenia ese mismo día. Pero mi grupo y yo logramos exponer muy bien sobre esta obra.

Con lo que me quedo de esta obra es su interior, ame los colores pasteles y en como la luz natural ilumina la nave gracias a las ventanas de vidrio, la cúpula a pesar de ser realizada de piedra arenisca se puede observar ligereza, tranquilidad y espiritualidad.

~Historia II

~Profesora: Arq. Rebeca Tineo @lonuevodenuevo

#tqmbarroco #historiarq

2 notes · View notes

iagoglez · 1 year ago

Text

Músculos, caos y notas en los márgenes

El cacao era intragable para los europeos hasta que le añadieron azúcar. Eso, convertido en máxima, es lo que Netflix parece aplicar a buena parte de sus series documentales: hay una gran base, pero suavizada para que llegue a todos los públicos.

Hace unas semanas estrenaron “Músculos y caos: Una versión no autorizada de 'Gladiadores americanos'”. La serie, en su esencia, responde a esa necesidad tan pesada de una generación, la X, que parece llevar años reclamando su derecho a generar espacios de nostalgia. Sucedía en “The Toys That Made Us”, “The Films That Made Us” o en “High Score”: paseos por iconografía que encuentra su máxima expresión en los 80. Sin embargo, en todas estas series acontece algo peculiar: todas son, como mínimo, interesantes. Doblegarse a generar contenidos basados en la mitificación del pasado no es sencillo, y menos si no quieres abrir (demasiadas) heridas. “Músculos & Caos” expone de manera directa en el resumen de sus cinco episodios todas sus cartas: Una idea loca para producir un programa (1) consigue evolucionar con éxito y desmadre asociado al rumor del consumo de drogas (2), pero estos problemas se superan y se termina convirtiendo en un fenómeno mundial más lucrativo para una parte que para otra (3), lo que no impide que se cree una gran familia capaz de propiciar una evolución del formato que termina agotando a las protagonistas (4), y que deriva en un final acelerado por las malas decisiones de la productora (5).

Por desgracia, y con esto no quiero decir que no merezca la pena verla, cada vez que la serie va a tocar un tema espinoso pega un viraje de timón y consigue escaquearse. No la vi por la cosa esta de la nostalgia, sino por mi convencimiento acerca de todo lo que queda por rascar de una década fascinante. En serio, siempre lo diré: los 80 son más que synthpop, hamburguesas, superproducciones y la imposición definitiva de la cultura estadounidense. Los 80 es esa década que podría definir la primera aparición de John Rambo: dramón de tonos fríos y crítico con su sociedad neoliberal, que pasaría a ser todo lo contrario en su segundo capítulo. Acorralado (First Blood, 1980) se mantiene en el imaginario colectivo como el detonante del cine de action héroes: o sea, películas de mamporreros hipermusculados simplificando la existencia humana. Lo gracioso es que Stallone en esta primera interpretación del personaje no lucía tal rotundidad física. No digo que no estuviera en una excelente forma física, claro, pero es en Rambo (en realidad Rambo: First Blood Part II, lo de “Rambo II” no existe) cuando la historia arranca presentando, literalmente, un desfile de músculos.

Pero el accidente en la recepción de Acorralado como una película (solo) de acción ya había derivado en el éxito de los dos Conan en los años 82 y 84, y en el año 85 comienza el mejor momento de la WWF, esta pantuflada de señores hiperhormonados. Los 80 ya eran los años de los músculos y del fitness, y toda esa burricie consiguió algo tan complicado como que el carrerón de Jane Fonda quedar opacado por sus vídeos de aerobic.

Gladiadores Americanos surge de todo esto a finales de la década, estrenándose su primera temporada ya en el 89, el mismo año en que ve la luz el proyecto más personal de David Hasselhoff, Los Vigilantes de la Playa. Pero esa es otra historia y debe ser contada en otra ocasión El resumen de los capítulos en realidad ya sirve para saber qué se va a ver, pero lo interesante creo que se encuentra en aquello que no se cuenta. El primer punto sería que Gladiadores Americanos llega a la cultura norteamericana cuando la percepción de los héroes de masas iba a cambiar de manera peculiar: en el año 93 el propio Schwarzenegger se pegará una monumental hostia con El Último Gran Héroe (grandioso guion, por otro lado), el mismo año que triunfan el culo ridículo de Michael Douglas en Instinto Básico y, sobre todo, Parque Jurásico. Sí, las bolsas de músculos parecían no tener ya ese calado. Un segundo punto: ¿Por qué triunfa entonces Gladiadores Americanos? En la propia serie lo dejan claro: por la gente que concursaba, igual de musculada en su primera temporada, pero “más humana” a partir de la segunda. Ignoro si los responsables que hablan en el documental eran conscientes de lo que esto implicaba, pero en el fondo lo que hicieron, de manera muy inteligente, fue dar cabida en un escenario de fantasía a personas más o menos convencionales. Gente con excepcionales capacidades físicas, pero normal, no infraseres de gimnasio. Gladiadores Americanos coincide en el tiempo y el espacio con algo tan peculiar como el mandato de George Bush. Peculiar por único, boicoteado desde sus propias filas pese a tener elementos favorables, a ojos estadounidenses, como para asegurar una reelección. En España nos sigue sorprendiendo que El Hormiguero, Iker Jiménez o Ana Rosa puedan marcar corrientes de opinión relevantes, pero en EEUU la política siempre supo contaminar la cultura popular de la manera que más beneficiara al poder, y es en ese contexto en el que la apuesta por un espectáculo anabolizado de este calibre podría parecer segura. Pero no. El tercer punto ni se menciona en su plenitud: lo Gay. Porque, sí, Gladiadores Americanos tiene una estética marcadamente gay. El colorido, los trajes, las poses presentando a los y las gladiadores… Al contrario del wrestling y su aspiracional estética destinada a evocar los efluvios de un calzón sudado, Gladiadores Americanos trabajó el formato para reforzar un ambiente de brillibrilli de cardados pétreos y pulcra agresividad cordial: el afecto en el choque afectivo de dos cuerpos hipermusculados tras un asalto tenía tanto o más valor que la propia batalla. Curiosamente, en la serie no tienen reparos en desvelar un porcentaje considerable de lesbianas al tiempo que no se menciona la existencia de ningún luchador gay, algo probablemente imposible ya solo en términos porcentuales.

El cuarto, y último, punto, y el más relevante, es netamente político, algo que en realidad no se esconde en la serie (es una de las claves) pero que jamás se llega a mencionar de manera directa: la necesidad de la defensa sindical. El contexto es importante: empiezan bajo mínimos en la primera temporada para intentar sacar adelante el proyecto y se someten a un ritmo descomunal durante las dos siguientes al tiempo que el programa se convierte en un éxito. Es en ese momento, cuando está claro que la productora está consiguiendo grandes ingresos cuando llega el gran y ridículo giro del guion: varios de sus protagonistas exigen una subida salarial, pero el productor, Samueld Goldwyn Jr, se niega, los despide sin pensárselo, y provoca con una serie de reemplazos que marcan el principio del fin del programa. En un escenario de fantasía puedes tener muchos elementos relevantes: edificaciones, luces, colores… Hasta personas. Los Gladiadores Americanos eran parte de ese escenario que se había convertido en el gran éxito del formato: ese espacio al que gente de a pie podía acceder para sentirse en un mundo diferente al suyo. Esa situación a la que accedían muy pocas personas, pero que permitía a millones proyectar sus deseos de tener esa inmensa fortuna. Ni siquiera importaba lo que pagaran a las personas concursantes, algo de lo que a veces solo eran conscientes al terminar: el premio era estar. La proyección tal vez sea la gran emoción de las personas que habitamos el planeta a partir de los años 50. De una transmisión cultural que primera era oral se pasa a la escrita, y, muchos siglos después, a la cinematografía, una nueva gramática capaz de representar aquello solo se había podido imaginar. Pero es en realidad a partir del auge de la televisión cuando la necesidad de rellenar espacios banaliza y desvirtúa la intencionalidad del relato, algo que termina de desmadrarse con el vídeo, y, finalmente, los contenidos de internet. Esa proyección de la emoción deja de responder a un orden: ya no se puede controlar a partir de los deseos de guionistas, el público la desarrolla como le viene en gana. En el caso de Gladiadores Americanos, ese público establece una conexión con el equipo original, capaz de transmitir a través de las pantallas una familiaridad y un compadreo que queda excelentemente retratado en el cuarto capítulo de la serie, en el que narran su gira por el país con un espectáculo en directo que les obliga a pasar innumerables junt@s haciendo… Bueno, pues esas cosas que se hacen cuando se pasa mucho tiempo junt@s. A “Músculos y Caos” le falta el arrojo de exponer una conclusión evidente: el programa muere por la avaricia de una productora que no quiere reconocer ni los méritos ni los derechos de quienes le dieron la gloria. A “Músculos y Caos” le falta el arrojo de exponer otra conclusión evidente: en los EEUU a día de hoy se ha normalizado el ocultamiento de la importancia de la lucha por los derechos de las personas trabajadoras, y solo por eso fueron capaces de hacer un documental de cinto episodios en el que no reflejan claramente este hecho. A pesar de todo, “Músculos y Caos” es una serie que merece la pena ver, porque este mensaje, en el fondo, queda perfectamente claro, aunque no lo digan, de la misma manera en que son capaces de recrear un fascinante ambiente de libertad extremo, ese que solo se puede dar en una familia disfuncional que se enorgullece de serlo. Conseguir que sientas cariño y respeto por sacos de músculos no parecía sencillo. Bola extra: John McTiernan dirigió a Schwarzenegger en 1987 en Depredador, pero al año siguiente hizo La Jungla de Cristal, y fue uno de los responsables de la elección de Bruce Willis como protagonista para poder reírse del arquetipo de héroe de acción. Cuando en 1993 estrenó ese gran fracaso de Schwarzenegger, El Último Gran Heroe, McTiernan jugó con una historia que se desarrollaba a partir de una idea muy concreta: el poder de los espectadores para ser felices al proyectarse sobre historias ajenas. Bueno, en este caso de manera literal, pero es que era una película.

4 notes · View notes

scotianostra · 2 years ago

Text

On May 21st 1650, James Graham, Earl of Montrose, was hanged in Edinburgh.

The tragic “Great Montrose” was renowned for his tactical genius on the battlefield during the civil wars that cost King Charles I both crown and head. Although Montrose would die as a royalist he first entered the lists in the 1630s’ Bishops’ War as part of the Covenanter army resisting the king’s bid to impose top-down religious governance on Scotland.

But Montrose was the moderate and post-Bishops War found himself a leading exponent of the pro-reconciliation faction, bitterly opposed by the chief of the Campbell clan, the Marquess of Argyll.

These two became the opposing poles for the ensuing civil war in Scotland, at once a local clan war and the vortex of a border-hopping conflict that sucked in Ireland and England too. Although Montrose, now King Charles’s lieutenant-general in Scotland, could kick tail in battle his faction was divided and ultimately outnumbered by the Covenanters. Montrose had to flee Scotland for exile in 1646.

The execution of Charles I opened the door for Montrose’s own untimely end, in one of those classic affairs of double-dealing. The exiled Charles II, having now inherited the claim, named Montrose his lieutenant in Scotland and dispatched his family’s longtime paladin back to native soil to try to raise an army. But even as he did so, he was negotiating with Argyll’s Covenanters, who saw a chance to make good their political and religious objectives by playing kingmaker with their former enemy. So when Montrose landed in 1650, he found little support and was overwhelmed at the Battle of Carbisdale. After several days’ wandering he sought refuge with a former friend who he did not realize was now also on the government’s side, and was promptly arrested and given over to his enemies for execution and for posthumous indignities: his head was mounted on a pike atop Edinburgh’s Tolbooth, and his four limbs nailed to the gates of Stirling, Glasgow, Perth and Aberdeen.

After the end of Cromwell‘s Protectorate, and the actual restoration of Charles II, these scattered remains were gathered up and interred with reverence at St. Giles Cathedral. The present-day Dukes of Montrose are his direct descendants. James Graham, Earl of Montrose and his execution have the still more considerable honour of a wee tribute by legendary dreadful poet William McGonagall. (Montrose himself was known to try his hand at poetry, too.) I say wee, but it is quite long, the other poem by W E Aytoun is equally as long, but McGonagall, in my opinion has the shout here!

THE EXECUTION OF JAMES GRAHAM, MARQUIS OF MONTROSE A HISTORICAL POEM

‘Twas in the year of 1650, and on the twenty-first of May, The city of Edinburgh was put into a state of dismay By the noise of drums and trumpets, which on the air arose, That the great sound attracted the notice of Montrose.

Who enquired at the Captain of the guard the cause of it, Then the officer told him, as he thought most fit, That the Parliament dreading an attempt might be made to rescue him, The soldiers were called out to arms, and that had made the din.

Do I, said Montrose, continue such a terror still? Now when these good men are about my blood to spill, But let them look to themselves, for after I am dead, Their wicked consciences will be in continual dread.

After partaking of a hearty breakfast, he commenced his toilet, Which, in his greatest trouble, he seldom did forget. And while in the act of combing his hair, He was visited by the Clerk Register, who made him stare,

When he told him he shouldn’t be so particular with his head, For in a few hours he would be dead; But Montrose replied, While my head is my own I’ll dress it at my ease, And to-morrow, when it becomes yours, treat it as you please.

He was waited upon by the Magistrates of the city, But, alas! for him they had no pity. He was habited in a superb cloak, ornamented with gold and silver lace; And before the hour of execution an immense assemblage of people were round the place.

From the prison, bareheaded, in a cart, they conveyed him along the Watergate To the place of execution on the High Street, where about thirty thousand people did wait, Some crying and sighing, a most pitiful sight to see, All waiting patiently to see the executioner hang Montrose, a man of high degree.

Around the place of execution, all of them were deeply affected, But Montrose, the noble hero, seemed not the least dejected; And when on the scaffold he had, says his biographer Wishart, Such a grand air and majesty, which made the people start.

As the fatal hour was approaching when he had to bid the world adieu, He told the executioner to make haste and get quickly through, But the executioner smiled grimly, but spoke not a word, Then he tied the Book of Montrose’s Wars round his neck with a cord.

Then he told the executioner his foes would remember him hereafter, And he was as well pleased as if his Majesty had made him Knight of the Garter; Then he asked to be allowed to cover his head, But he was denied permission, yet he felt no dread.

He then asked leave to keep on his cloak, But was also denied, which was a most grievous stroke; Then he told the Magistrates, if they could invent any more tortures for him, He would endure them all for the cause he suffered, and think it no sin.

On arriving at the top of the ladder with great firmness, His heroic appearance greatly did the bystanders impress, Then Montrose asked the executioner how long his body would be suspended, Three hours was the answer, but Montrose was not the least offended.

Then he presented the executioner with three or four pieces of gold, Whom he freely forgave, to his honour be it told, And told him to throw him off as soon as he uplifted his hands, While the executioner watched the fatal signal, and in amazement stands.

And on the noble patriot raising his hands, the executioner began to cry, Then quickly he pulled the rope down from the gibbet on high, And around Montrose’s neck he fixed the rope very gently, And in an instant the great Montrose was launched into eternity.

Then the spectators expressed their disapprobation by general groan, And they all dispersed quietly, and wended their way home And his bitterest enemies that saw his death that day, Their hearts were filled with sorrow and dismay.

Thus died, at the age of thirty-eight, James Graham, Marquis of Montrose, Who was brought to a premature grave by his bitter foes; A commander who had acquired great military glory In a short space of time, which cannot be equalled in story.

#scotland #scottish #soldier #nobility #civil war #the stuarts #history

5 notes · View notes

poemassemanales · 2 years ago

Text

CAPITULO IX: FELIPE ACEDO COLUNGA

En el verano de 1939 fue sometido a un Consejo de Guerra el que había sido Catedrático de Ética de la Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Ministro y Presidente del Congreso de los Diputados, Julián Besteiro. El fiscal, antiguo alumno suyo, reconoció que Besteiro era un hombre honesto y que no había cometido crimen alguno, pero solicitó la pena de muerte por ser un socialista moderado algo “mucho más peligroso”, según el ponente, que el socialismo revolucionario. Besteiro fue condenado a cadena perpetua y un año después murió en la cárcel de Carmona. El fiscal de ese Consejo de Guerra es nuestro friki de hoy, uno de los máximos responsables de darle “cobertura legal” al golpe de estado de Julio de 1936: FELIPE ACEDO COLUNGA.

Felipe Acedo (Palma de Mallorca, 1896 – Madrid, 1965) creció compartiendo la milicia y el derecho. Participó en la guerra de África y pronto mostró sus planteamientos ultra conservadores. Conspiró en el golpe de estado de Sanjurjo en Agosto de 1932 y se reintegró a la milicia en 1934 como fiscal en los consejos de guerra tras los sucesos de Octubre de ese año en Asturias. En Julio de 1936 se posicionó rápidamente junto a los sublevados y se puso al frente de la Fiscalía en las sucesivas localidades que los rebeldes iban conquistando. Tuvo cargos de responsabilidad política como Gobernador Civil de Barcelona entre 1951 y 1960 así como Delegado del Gobierno en la Compañía Telefónica.

Acedo se empleó a fondo como fiscal en la represión franquista pero más a fondo se empleó como ideólogo para lograr una justificación legal del golpe de estado. Fue el verdadero arquitecto de la represión franquista desde la justicia.

Acedo Colunga es un personaje bastante desconocido, representa la frialdad y la crueldad de la violencia institucionalizada del nuevo régimen, una violencia de “traje y corbata” y emanada de supuestos textos legales. El afán permanente de Acedo fue demostrar la ilegalidad del régimen de la II República, especialmente del Gobierno del Frente Popular y al mismo tiempo dotar al nuevo régimen de una apariencia de legalidad frente al “ilegítimo” gobierno republicano. Así lo definen los historiadores Francisco Espinosa, Guillermo Portilla y Ángel Viñas en su reciente obra Castigar a los rojos. Acedo Colunga, el gran arquitecto de la represión franquista.

Como curiosidad su periplo como gobernador civil de Barcelona nos dejó una actuación que desmiente todo cuanto los independentistas y seguidores barcelonistas acusaron al franquismo de enemigo de Cataluña y del Fútbol Club Barcelona (algún día espero que sepamos algo más del colaboracionismo entre la burguesía catalana y el franquismo). Acedo se empeñó personalmente en desalojar y expulsar por la fuerza a los arrendatarios de los terrenos para que el Barcelona pudiera construir su nuevo estadio. El propio club lo dejó claro: “Conviene decir que no todos los terrenos adquiridos están totalmente libres y a nuestra disposición, puesto que se está desalojando a los arrendatarios y meros ocupantes allí establecidos. A tal efecto hay que hacer constar nuestro más profundo agradecimiento al excelentísimo Gobernador Civil, don Felipe Acedo Colunga, que, siempre ha atendido todo cuanto redunda en la grandeza del Barcelona, se ha percatado perfectamente desde el primer momento de la monumentalidad de nuestros proyectos y les ha prestado siempre el más cariñoso y entusiasta apoyo”.

Pero volvamos a su obra represora. En 2019 el historiador Francisco Espinosa encontró en el Archivo del Tribunal Militar Territorial Segundo de Sevilla un documento básico para conocer a este personaje; se trataba de la Memoria del Fiscal del Ejército de Ocupación (ya el nombre lo dice todo) redactada hacia el final de la guerra. Acedo expone claramente que el derecho militar está por encima del derecho civil:

“Demostrar al mundo de forma incontrovertible y documentada nuestra tesis acusatoria contra los sedicentes poderes legítimos, a saber, que los órganos y las personas que el 18 de julio de 1936 detentaban el poder adolecían de tales vicios de ilegitimidad en sus títulos y en el ejercicio del mismo, que, al alzarse contra ellos el Ejército y el pueblo, no realizaron ningún acto de rebelión contra la Autoridad ni contra la Ley”.

En una de sus primeras actuaciones como fiscal en Huelva tras el inicio de la guerra es diáfano en su exposición, que asume la sentencia de muerte:

“Que declarado el Estado de Guerra consecuencia de la anarquía en que se encontraba el país, el único Gobierno legítimo de la Nación es el que impone la disciplina del Ejército restauradora de la tradición histórica”.

En la propia Memoria se dice que el primer objetivo es reprimir y el segundo justificar. Acedo (junto a Serrano Suñer) tenía claro que el entramado judicial en que se estaba envolviendo el gobierno rebelde necesitaba de una justificación “legal” para poder seguir desarrollando la represión cara al futuro. Las leyes de la República otorgaban al Gobierno constitucional y solo al gobierno la posibilidad de declarar el estado de guerra. Por lo tanto, la declaración por parte de los militares de ese estado de guerra el 18 de Julio fue ilegal. Acedo se empeñó en desmontar esa legalidad a base de difundir ampliamente en la sociedad española, en los medios afines y en el extranjero, que el poder constituido el 18 de Julio de 1936 era ilegal porque las elecciones de Febrero de ese año habían sido falseadas (todavía hay quien, en el revisionismo histórico de moda, defiende esta tesis). A todos los que defendieron la legalidad del Gobierno republicano se les acusó además con efectos retroactivos de ¡rebelión militar! Era lo que algunos juristas han denominado la “justicia invertida”.

Para completar la estrategia ideológica y legal se elaboró el Dictamen sobre la ilegitimidad de los poderes actuantes el 18 de julio de 1936, de Serrano Suñer, que completaba las bases en que se movió el régimen golpista:

a) la Segunda República fue ilegítima en origen;

b) la guerra civil la inició la izquierda en octubre de 1934;

c) el triunfo del Frente Popular en las elecciones de 1936 fue fruto de un fraude;

d) el «Alzamiento» fue consecuencia del vacío legal y de poder creado tras las elecciones; e) los responsables del desastre fueron la República y los partidos que integraban el Frente Popular, que eran los que querían la guerra;

f) en la zona republicana reinó el terror, al contrario que en la «nacional», en que primó la justicia y las garantías procesales.

Este cuerpo de mensajes repetidos ad infinitum durante décadas caló en la sociedad española; no se puso interés en desmontarlo tras la muerte del dictador salvo en textos de historia de difusión limitada y desgraciadamente, hoy día, aparecen revisionistas históricos que pretenden lanzar de nuevo y masivamente estas falsedades.

La Memoria del fiscal Acedo Colunga se encontró en 2019 pero los historiadores se preguntan si realmente estaba perdida o se hizo muy poco para encontrarla, posiblemente no se quiso encontrar no ya por conocer la trayectoria de este personaje sino por no conocer de primera voz cual era la dotación moral y legal del nuevo régimen.

Para Acedo, sus jefes y sus secuaces no existían como dice Viñas “los principios humanitarios, la división de poderes, la independencia judicial, la igualdad ante la ley, el concepto de persona jurídica, las garantías procesales, conceptos clásicos establecidos del derecho romano y por encima de todo el Estado de derecho, simples antiguallas que debían desaparecer”.

No tenemos imágenes grabadas de las actuaciones profesionales del temido fiscal, pero quienes lo vieron y oyeron lo comparan con el famoso juez nazi Roland Freisler que en los juicios insultaba a los acusados. He dejado para el final dos muestras de su extravagante, aunque temible ideología:

"Cuando nuestro Caudillo asumió el mando militar del Alzamiento, recogió los atributos morales e históricos del Poder Público Español. Ante la historia, ante la moral y ante el derecho el único Gobierno legítimo de España desde el día 18 de julio de 1936 era el que se ejercía militarmente, en supremo esfuerzo de sublimización espiritual y redención humana. De aquí que, desde el primer instante, toda oposición a este Poder único legítimo cayera dentro de la órbita del Código de Justicia Militar y concretamente de su artículo 237 que define el delito de Rebelión de Militar".

La última es la perla más cruel y abyecta:

“Hay que desinfectar previamente el solar patrio. Y he aquí la obra —pesadumbre y gloria— encomendada por azar del destino a la justicia militar (...) Hoy al terminarse en julio del 36 el proceso de nuestra decadencia histórica con esta inmensa hoguera donde se está eliminando tanta escoria, aparecen problemas de una magnitud extraordinaria que exceden y superan todo límite”.

10/1/2023

#FelipeAcedo

3 notes · View notes