Myths and legends

Throughout the history, the myths and legends have influenced the Mexican culture, many peoples believes in some urban legends, however a significant number of Mexicans belief that is true the existence of legends, this essay will explore the importance of superstitions in the Mexican’s lives.

An increasing numbers of Mexicans practice some superstitions, they are happy with this practice, one of the most amazing superstition is that many women thinks that if she wants to find a husband, she must buy a stump o a statue of Saint Antony, them if you need boyfriend or husband is truly important to have a candle in front of the Saint and every day, for two weeks you must repeat some words and probably you will find the best men, this superstition is very old, in fact there are many countries which you can see this superstition. Personally I never have practice this superstition, but I met a lot of women who believe in this superstition.

There are other superstitions, if someone accidentally sweeps an unmarried woman; she will never marry; besides if in her married she has pearls, she will cry during her married life because pearls means tears.

Crime in Mexico

The crime in Mexico has high levels, Mexico City, Tijuana, Ciudad de Juarez, Nuevo Laredo, Monterrey, Acapulco and the state of Sinaloa are the most violent cities and it has serious levels of crime.

The crime affects the people’s life style due that because of the high rates presented, nobody can go out of their homes with out the worries of being in danger, and this doesn’t allow the free movement through the city. Parents can’t leave their children alone or send them to school afraid of kidnappings and robberies, which affect their entire normal process of living; they’re intimidated all the time.

Street crime and kidnappings are the most common problems. It is estimated that there are between 2000-3000 crimes committed on the street every day, but only approximately 600 are reported.

There are many important causes, ones of the most important are:

* Poverty
* Income inequality
* Unemployment

In addition, the twentieth century saw a major increase in the Mexico’s crime. It has increased and continues with high levels.

For this same reason, we must look to the cause of the problem, which is simply “education”; it is the Government’s responsibility to find solutions for this problem.

Solutions
* Governments must educate people
* Increase the rate of employment
* Decrease the corruption
* Decrease the rate of poverty

Thus, policies may also be necessary to resolve these problems; similar policies may also be necessary in other so called underdeveloped nations to control.

Although the government takes a lot of measures in order to diminish the crime rate, many people try to take the security of their families in their own hands. Many security companies (some illegal), offer different packages of protection, including security people and surveillance devices. But this kind of luxury can only be afforded by wealthy families, which leaves a major percent of community unprotected.

CRITIQUE ESSAY

Frida and her obsession for self portraits

Frida Kahlo is one of the most famous female artists in Mexico. She did not always aspire to be an artist, many of her works are self-portraits that symbolically express her own pain. Kahlo was married and influenced by the Mexican muralist Diego Rivera and shared his Communist views.

Lots of people have defined Frida Kahlo for her self-portraits (she painted about 1/3 of her works) as a type of therapy to survive an isolation of suffering and physical pain, a kind of repression of the ravaging action inflicted by external events on her body (bus accident, abortions, surgery operations and "weird" medical treatments of her age).

The body definitely was for Frida the centre of any kind of idea, she painted about herself -her body, injured, pierced, distorted by bus and by the medical treatments-and she painted about her external environment such as cultural, political and social aspects of her time and she painted using vibrant colors that was influenced by indigenous cultures of Mexico and European influences that include Realism, Symbolism, and Surrealism. Nevertheless she thought "They thought I was a Surrealist, but I wasn't'', she said."I never painted dreams. I painted my own reality.''

Anyway this representation must not be interpreted as an idolatry of the self. In spite of Frida's love of religious Mexican idols, often represented in her paintings in particular the picture known as “retablos”, which shows Mexican churches, Frida does not idolize her self: she does not show herself as a divine image, there is no trace of mystical tension in her works, neither as exaltation of her personality.

We can formulate the hypothesis that Frida was moved to represent herself and her body by a profoundly perseverant attitude, throughout this interpretation it is possible to understand that Kahlo's thought by the external world and by the disease, Frida has always held a great energy, a surprising dynamism. Maybe this attitude was possible thanks to her internal force.

Nowadays she has long been recognized as an important painter, public awareness of her work has become more widespread since the 1970's. Her "Blue" house in Coyoacán, Mexico City is a popular museum, donated by Diego Rivera after her death in 1954.

Resources:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frida_Kalho
http://www.artchive.com/artchive/K/kahlo.html
http://www.eyeconart.net/history/frida-y-diego.htm

Biography Frida Kahlo

Frida Kahlo was born in Mexico City in 1907, she was the daughter of a Mexican-Indian mother and a German father. Her life was to be a long series of physical traumas, and the first of these came early. At age 6 she was stricken with polio, which caused her right leg to shrivel.

When she was 18, she was involved in a serious bus accident which left her with damaged very severely. A metal rod had made a very deep abdominal wound, and her third and fourth lumbar vertebrae were fractured. Frida was forced to stay in bed, while Frida was confined to her bed, her mother brought her a small lap easel, and Frida started to paint. She had studied art before, at the National Preparatory School, where she had met Diego Rivera when he was painting the Creation mural, but Frida had never worked on paintings before. Over her bed, Frida had a mirror so she could see herself, and this was the beginning of her focus on self portraits.

Frida was friend of Tina Modotti, who modelled for Diego Rivera, and through her Frida and Diego met again, and fell in love. They married on August 21st, 1929.

In the fall of 1930 Frida traveled with Diego to San Francisco, where Diego worked on murals at the Pacific Stock Exchange and the California School of Fine Arts, and in the summer of 1931 they went to New York where Diego had a major exhibition of his work. Then, in the spring of 1932, they moved to Detroit, where Diego worked on a series of murals at the Detroit Institute of Arts. At this time Frida had become pregnant, however, after the bus accident in 1925 she could not have children, and complications arose. Frida's trauma in the Henry Ford Hospital in Detroit is illustrated in her paintings.

In 1939 Diego and Frida divorced, and Frida felt very sad and distraught by this. She produced many fine paintings in this period, but being devastated by the divorce, she consumed a lot of liquor, and her health deteriorated rapidly. She had circulatory and other problems associated with the incidents she had had before.

In 1940, Kahlo, threatened by gangrene, had her right leg amputated below the knee. It was a tremendous blow to someone who had invested so much in the elaboration of her own self image. She learned to walk again with an artificial limb, and even (briefly and with the help of pain-killing drugs) danced at celebrations with friends. But the end was close.

In July 1954, she made her last public appearance, when she participated in a Communist demonstration against the overthrow of the left-wing Guatemalan president Jacobo Arbenz. Soon afterwards, she died in her sleep, apparently as the result of an embolism, though there was a suspicion among those close to her that she had found a way to commit suicide. Her last diary entry read: "I hope the end is joyful - and I hope never to come back" - Frida

A Response to Samuelson's "Importing Poverty" article

Robert Samuelson wrote an article in the Washington Post titled "Importing Poverty" in text the author shows how the immigration is one of the most important causes of the poverty in Mexico. I agree that the poverty rate is higher because of immigration; in particular I think Samuelson shows that very well. The main purpose was to explain how the poverty is associated with immigration has been causing a higher poverty line; as a result, while more poor Hispanics enter in the US, poverty goes up.

In this moment people are obligated to escape from their countries due to the economical situation. When they arrive to a new country they have to adjust to a different type of life and jobs. In Mexico is common to see many people run to the USA and live in the poverty because of their illegal status.

In particular, I read about that. The article shows statistics about this situation; the official poverty line has increased last year, the poverty rate was 12.3 percent, though in 2005 was 12.6 percent, nevertheless it was also higher than the 11.8 percent average in 1970s, furthermore in 2006 there were 36.5 million people poverty, in 1990, the population was smaller and there were 33.6 million people in poverty, the rate of poverty among non immigrants has increased, it situation has caused many problems, nonetheless immigration is not the only cause of poverty, other problems exist, in which the first and immediate cause of poverty in Mexico is the individual condition. This cause refers to the circumstances and characteristics of poor people. For example, the amount of education, skill, intelligence, health, and prejudice all have an influence on poverty.

I think, USA should be more interested in all these people and maybe show them how they really live there, because in Mexico and Latin American countries people have the idea that in USA they will find all the solutions for their problems, and it is not true. The government should do campaigns showing statistics of how has the poverty increased and the social and economic problems in their cities.

On the other hand the lack of education is one of the most significant factors that contribute to poverty. There is no access to jobs for non-educated people. But for the author, there are implications of the governments.

It is paradox to think that Mexican people will be more important in a foreign country, because they think that the new jobs are the same works in their own countries but with better incomes, and this is not true. They have to forget their culture, their families and their jobs, spending more money in another country and to living worst than in Mexico.

But in my opinion the main purpose of the article is to show what the government hasn’t shown. The rate of poverty among non immigrants has been declining. Also the poverty rate among immigrants has declined. So why is there a slightly large poverty rate? By immigrants, and their direct next generation descendants being a larger percentage of the population. If the group with a larger poverty rate increases as a percentage of the population that poverty rates can go up even if the rate is declining for every group, and if the majority of individuals are doing better. Immigration isn't on the net making people poor or keeping them in poverty, it actually helps raise many of the immigrants from poverty, but it’s still bringing in new poor people.

It’s not unreasonable to affirm that there is something negative about bringing in new poor people. The main counter argument to that point is that people could immigrate for government benefits. That's why I'm much more partial to arguments about not making illegal immigrants eligible for welfare than I am to thoughts about trying to stop illegal immigration (which I don't think can be done) or mass deportation.

Another possible negative is that immigration from Mexico reduces the incentive for government reforms, and reduction in the level of socialism in Mexico (both by removing the discontented people, and by the remittances which go back to Mexico and might make some people who stay more content), and also might represent a drain of more intelligent or motivated individuals from Mexico, and as a result will help keep Mexico poor.

To conclude, I want to add that even if the American statistics show that the Latin immigrants are below the poverty line, they may be partially wrong. A person that earns only 20000 dollars per year, an American will consider as poor, but for this person this is a great amount of money that would be impossible to make in his or her own country. Americans have managed to standardize a way of life that they consider as normal or over poverty, but immigrants don’t care about this type of life, they only care about the extra money they will make through any kind of job. I do not agree entirely with the author because his point of view is too focused on America, in only a small group of people and not the larger view, and that is that even if they believe Hispanics are living as poor in their country, they definitely aren’t, and most of them don’t care about their small or creepy jobs because they are helping their families back in their native countries, and that is the greatest way to end poverty in the continent.

Even if it represents a problem for the USA itself, let’s not forget that in the case of Mexico, USA signed a free trade agreement that broke a lot of industries which caused the lost of a lot of jobs for many people. So in one way, it is responsibility of the country to manage that immigrants have a better way of life, better incomes, and better jobs.

Exessives in Mexico

In Mexico there are a particular celebration, every year they celebrate the day of their deads it is one of the oldest traditions 0f Mexico:

• It is not the Mexican version of Halloween. Mexicans have celebrated the Day of the Dead since the year 1800 B.C.


• It is not scary or morbid. There are no images of dead people, ghosts, witches, or the devil.


• It is not a cult. This ritual has nothing to do with cults. It is a Catholic Christian ritual mixed with folk culture. Going to mass is an essential aspect of this celebration.


• It doesn’t honor death, but they have the opportunity to reflect upon our lives, our heritage, our ancestors and the meaning and purpose of their own existence.


• Altars or ofrendas are not for worshiping but for offering our love and remembering our departed family members.


• It is not a sad ritual. It’s a day of happiness because we will be remembering our loved ones. Although when in the graveyard, people assume an introspective attitude.


• It is about Love not Fear.


• It is not a “strange” ritual. It is very similar to going to a grave and leaving flowers or stuffed animals, lighting a candle to remember the deceased.


• It is not a careless or fearless confrontation of death. It is a moment to reflect upon one’s life and the cycle of life and death.

On the other hand in Colombia this day is some different, the tradition of the day of the dead is a bit forgotten, in this country this time is taken to pay honor the dead and bring flowers to the cemetery, in addition there are no major rituals or celebrations, but is time to remember our dead, also it is used to clean and decorated the graves. On November 1 people offers gratitude for the favors granted by the Saints.
Also, people go to the churches to pray for the dead and pray for the health and happiness of the living. In Colombia the day of dead is celebrated on November 1st.

Resources: http://www.inside-mexico.com/

Differences and similes

Mexico and Colombia have a lot of differences and similes, both have amazing cities, important tourists places, in fact both countries have an old magical culture, although, nowadays those countries have problems such as corruption, poverty and unemployment.

The Mexican economy is considerer like a mixture of modern and outmoded industry and agriculture, both of which are increasingly dominated by the private sector. Mexico has a free market economy and recent administrations have improve infrastructure and opened competition in seaports, railroads, telecommunications, electricity generation, natural gas distribution and airports. In addition oil is Mexico’s largest source of foreign income.

On the other hand the Mexico’s government is based on a congressional system, where the president is the head of the state and the head of the government; similarly the federal government represents the United Mexican States and is divided in three branches: executive, legislative and judicial and it is established by the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States.

Additionally, the politics of Mexico are dominated by three political parties: National Action Party (PAN), the Party of Democratic Revolution (PRD) and the Institutional Revolutionary Party (PRI).

Compare to with Colombia’s government takes place in a framework of a presidential representative, where the president is the head of the state and the government; cconsequently, there is a multi-party system: executive power, legislative power, as a result Colombia and Mexico have similes in the government but there are many differences particularly in the political parties because en Colombia there are at least ten parties.

Resources:

www.ikipedia.org/wik/