Two nations that have, at one point in their history, had male dominated societies are Brazil and Mexico. The paternalistic influences from the past have been detrimental to family life, as evidenced by the proliferation of Machismo. As one might expect, people do not sit idly by when ruled by an oppressive force. The reaction to Machismo, colloquially known as Familism, is a shared value to both Brazilian and Mexican families. Familism embraces the idea that the family is of greater worth than self. Family members embracing Familism are willing to sacrifice their own happiness or even health for the benefit of those they love. One study has even found that, “[i]n many ways, the Hispanic family helps and supports its members to a degree far beyond that found in individualistically oriented Anglo families” (Ingoldsby 1991).
Through an analysis of La Misma Luna and Dois Filhos de Francisco, this paper will attempt to show that, even in the face of Globalism and Machismo, the influence placed on the importance of family remains strong in Mexican and Brazilian cultures.
One film that beautifully represents the importance of family in Mexican culture is La Misma Luna (Under the Same Moon). In this film, a mother (Rosario) and son (Carlos) have lived in different countries for the last four years – the Rosario in the US, Carlos in Mexico. Even though they have regular interaction, they long to be together; the film documents the son’s perilous journey across the border and eventually to Los Angeles and the arms of his mother. All along the way, the moviegoer witnesses the effect of Familism on the characters’ actions. The first example of this happens early in the film, when the son’s grandmother dies. The audience sees the boy – only 9 years old – taking care of his ailing grandmother by making her breakfast and doing other miscellaneous tasks for her. His actions stand is stark contrast to what would be expected of a young American boy in the same situation. He does not act out of a sense of duty, but rather he acts out of love.
(Carlos bringing his grandmother her medicine and breakfast in bed.)
A second example of Familism is apparent when Rosario considers marriage to legal US resident. She does not love the man, but appears willing to sacrifice the idea of romantic marriage just so that she can give her son the life she thinks he deserves. That is a true sacrifice that demonstrates how much she values her son’s happiness.
Even though the film celebrates the power of a unified family, it does not ignore other forces at play in Mexican family culture. Carlos’ father has been absent his entire life, which could be interpreted in two different ways. One possible interpretation of his absence is that he stands for the evils of the old paternalistic family structure and is best left out of the family. Another reading of the father’s absence could be that globalization has pulled the father away, and the western influences are an evil to be avoided. Perhaps the father is pursing the American Dream at the expense of his child. The film, however, only briefly touches on difficult issues. One reviewer notes that, “[t]he filmmakers know that middlebrow movie audiences prefer their thorny social issues served lite and with a side order of ham” (Catsoulis).
(Carlos waiting for his father, only to be stood up in a restaurant.)
As reflected in the film Dois Filhos de Francisco (Two Sons of Francisco), Brazilian culture still holds strongly to many principles of Familism. Multiple scenes in the film show this and also offer some differences between Brazilian and Mexican Familism. The film covers the life of two boys, Mirosmar and Emival, who develop a love for music that will shape the rest of their lives; they develop this love thanks in-part to the urging of their father. Nurturing this love for music, however, causes many hardships for the family. As one might expect, the boys’ parents are willing to make the necessary personal sacrifices that will allow the boys to have a better future.
One scene that demonstrates the parents’ willingness to sacrifice personal happiness for the happiness of their children occurs when the mother of the boys, Helena, resigns herself to the idea that they must leave home at an early age to be successful. It is not easy for Helena to let go of her own plan for the boys, but she sacrifices time with them and control of their future so they can pursue their dream. This self-sacrifice is alignment with Familism values.
(Helena helping her son pack after conceding her plans to his dreams.)
The family life of the boys in Two Sons of Francisco is very different from that of Carlos in Under the Same Moon. Where Carlos lives separated from his mother and estranged from his father, Mirosmar and Emival come from an unbroken family. One possible reading of this difference is that globalization of western family values has taken hold differently in different Latin American cultures. It is possible that the country of Mexico has been more influenced by the idea of pursuing the American Dream at the expense of family than Brazil has. It is interesting to note that Emival and Mirosmar come from the country in Brazil and are visible shaken when they are forced to move into the city at one point in the movie. Their shock could be interpreted as a Brazilian disinterest in many western ideals that ignore the importance of family.
(Francisco and family gathered together showing the importance of a father’s presence in Brazilian culture.)
The diminishing importance of family is a well-documented result of globalization. Western cultures seems drawn to the idea pursuing wealth and prosperity at the expense of family and love. As western products spread throughout the world, many western ideals are spread as well. Two Latin American films show that, while globalization may be a true threat, family remains an important aspect of their nation’s culture.Works Cited
Catsoulis, Jeannette. “Mother and Son, Divided by Border, United by Phone.” The New York Times. Ingoldsby, B. (1991). "The Latin American Family: Familism vs. Machismo." Journal of Comparative Family Studies 22:57–61.
No comments:
Post a Comment