Mexican Revolution

Background Info

• Benito Juarez: the first Mexican leader who did not have a military background, and also the first full-blooded Aboriginal to serve as the President of Mexico and to lead a country in the Western Hemisphere

• Porfirio Diaz: Commonly considered a dictator, he is the President of Mexico for 35 years, with the exception of his temporary resignations. His conservative regime grew unpopular due to repression and political continuity, and he fell from power during the Mexican Revolution
• After his death in 1872, Porfirio Diaz took over as Mexico's leader

The Beginning

After the hostility towards Diaz's rule, Francisco Madero moved into office and became the President of Mexico. Before Election Day, however, Diaz had Madero jailed and then declared a "victory" in the elections.
Madero escaped from jail and spent a short time in San Antonio, Texas. He issued a “letter from jail” following the elections, which he won by a landslide, that called for a revolt. It condemned Diaz for taking office and declared his rule illegal. Madero promised free suffrage and no-reelections. He called for a revolution to begin November 20th, 1910.

The Revolution

Leaders of the 1910 revolt
Madero drew support from many of the citizens, ranging from all over the social hierarchy. After defeating Diaz’s army, Madero took control and began to reform the Mexican government. He welcomed in a democratic government that was semi-controlled by the foreign investors.
The reformation, while starting to make things better for most Mexicans, didn’t go far enough. As a result, one of Madero's supporters broke ranks and formed his own army to demand social reformation for better pay, better working hours and better work conditions. In an unexpected coup d’etat led by the Commander-in-Chief that was appointed by Madero when he took control, the power in Mexico had once again shifted. Madero resigned in 1913 and both he and the vice president were assassinated within a weeks time. Both are remembered as martyrs of the revolution.
There was very little involvement in the Mexican Revolution by the United States.

The End

• Military: the revolution ended with the death of Venustiano Carranza in 1920, and the increasing power of General Alvaro Obregon
• Many believe it ended in 1930, when most of the reformations had happened

Sources:
http://www.mexconnect.com/articles/2824-the-mexican-revolution-1910
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican_Revolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Porfirio_D%C3%ADaz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benito_Ju%C3%A1rez

La Violencia

La Violencia was a period of civil conflict happening within Columbia from roughly 1948 - 1958, which was fought between between the supporters of the Colombian Liberal Party and the Colombian Conservative Party. Some historians disagree on how this conflict began: some agree that it began in 1946 when the Conservative Party reclaimed government position, while others agree that it began with the assassination of Jorge Eliécer Gaitán, one of the most charismatic leaders of the Liberal Party, as well as a leader of the populist movement in Columbia. As the overwhelming chaos built up during the years of La Violencia, and since the lack of security did not help, an estimated million people had abandoned their homes. Media and news station purposely gave incorrect news coverages, in fear of being attacked. During this time, a vast majority of the population were Catholic. Much of the press reported supporting the Church authorities  for the Conservative Party and included unproved accusations against several priests, such as Miguel Ángel Builes, and the Santa Rosa de Cabal Bishop, about openly encouraging the congregation during Mass to murder the political opposition, accusing them of being Masons and Jews and write Pastoral Letters with the same ideas. Most of the armed groups (called bandoleros, a pejorative term) were demobilized when General Gustavo Rojas Pinilla after he took power in 1953. The most prominent bandolero leaders, Guadalupe Salcedo and Juan de la Cruz Varela signed the 1953 agreement (Salcedo was killed in Bogotá years later, in 1957). The last bandolero leaders were killed in combat against the Army. Jacinto Cruz Usma, A.K.A. Sangrenegra (Blackblood), died in April 1964 and Efraín Gonzáles in June 1965.

George Orwell's "Nice Cup of Tea"

The first impressions gained from reading George Orwell’s essay “A Nice Cup of Tea” included Orwell's explanation on the correct ways of enjoying drinking tea. The narrator guides the reader through instructions on how to drink and enjoy tea, but also talks about many of the faults the people are doing when drinking their tea. The title of the essay refers to the essay’s content as well as the idiom which means that something suits someone nicely such as how Orwell describes tea in general. The central meaning within this essay is the methods of creating the "perfect cup of tea". The central meaning is evident within the essay. However, the central meaning can be also presented as a universal meaning that readers can all relate to when reading this particular essay written by George Orwell, which is that people who focus on quality and detail will receive greater results over quantity. Within Orwell’s essay “A Nice Cup of Tea” there are a variety of literary features that help enhance the understanding of the central meaning which are: purpose, tone and mood, structure and syntax, voice and narrative point-of-view, diction, and imagery. 


The purpose, tone and mood of this essay justifies the central meaning within the essay. The overall purpose of the essay is to raise awareness of the beauty of tea, due to the advances of civilizations around the world. The purpose compliments the central idea of creating the perfect cup of tea, due to the fact that if the central meaning of the text was evident, then there would be no purpose to read the essay. The tone Orwell uses within his writing of this essay is a sense of sincerity, seriousness and himself being informative. His tone of sincerity and seriousness within the text is to be able to express his points to the reader with no ambiguities. As well, the tone causes his words to be more descriptive, which leads to the third point to his tone within the essay. Orwell's tone is informative for the reader because he wants the reader to be more interested in tea after he/she reads it and then it eventually leads back to the main purpose of the essay. The mood of the essay shows a sense of being informed, being more appreciative towards the topic of tea and being more aware after reading the essay. As well, the mood also refers back to the purpose.


The structure and syntax used in Orwell’s essay helps the reader understand the central meaning. Within “A Nice Cup of Tea”, each paragraph portrays a certain idea within Orwell’s argument. The first paragraph consists of a hook, the following paragraph explains how important tea is, and then another paragraph expresses (or states) his argument. The following paragraphs explain the “eleven...points” about making a perfect cup of tea as well as the comments about the current similarities and examples of how people mistreat their tea. Orwell eventually ends with a conclusion that suggests that other uses of tea which gives the reader more information based on the topic. Overall, the structure and paragraphing flows nicely, which helps the reader follow and understand the central meaning of the essay. The effective use of syntax enables the smooth flow of ideas to come across to the reader about the use of capitalization and conjunctions. Within the essay, the capitalization of “WITHOUT SUGAR” (Orwell, 2) gives emphasis towards the reader. The impact that capitalization can cause is massive, because the reader can see that the phrase is larger than the rest of the words which shows that drinking tea without sugar is important. As well, the conjunctions that help start the list of creating the perfect cup of tea such as “firstly”, “secondly”, “thirdly”, “fourthly”, “fifthly” etc. help emphasize the transitions between Orwell’s ideas.


The voice and narrative point-of-view of the essay help the reader gain a better understanding of the central idea. The voice of the essay is probably the author himself, George Orwell and the narrative point-of-view is written in first person. The voice and narrative point-of-view shares a similar role in engaging the reader (emotionally) because the essay is personal and opinion based. The situation within this essay seems that Orwell is trying to talk to the reader, due to that fact he refers to the reader in second person as if Orwell was talking to the reader.


Diction within the essay was used to help portray the method of making the perfect cup of tea. Orwell uses connotation-based words to help describe the incorrect ways of tea practicing such as “tea out of an urn is always tasteless, while army tea, made in a cauldron tastes of grease and whitewash”. The connotations of tasteless, grease and whitewash all convey a sense of the tea turning out distasteful and unpleasant which affects the reader to avoid using those containers to pour tea from. Orwell also uses the diction within the essay “A Nice Cup of Tea” to be precise, such as drinking tea using a “cylindrical type of cup”.  

The imagery used by Orwell in the essay includes images painted from descriptive instructions, such as “six heaped teaspoons”. As well, the description of not using strainers or other items to “imprison the tea” causes the reader to picture tea leaves trapped within a cell-like prison. This specific image was interesting, due to the fact that the image shows one section of the eleven points of creating the perfect cup of tea. As well imagery is used when Orwell states that “tea is meant to be bitter” and then he compares it to beer which also is “meant to be bitter”. Another example of comparison is when he expresses his disliking towards adding sugar to tea by saying that it is“equally reasonable to put in pepper or salt”.

Shooting an Elephant Commentary

My first impression on George Orwell's "Shooting An Elephant" begins with a Western European man out casted by the surrounding population of Moulmein, Burma. This eventually leads to the incapacitation of an elephant, which "was not, of course, a wild elephant, but a tame one which had gone “must”", and some happy Burmese poeple: "I heard the devilish roar of glee that went up from the crowd." However, in the end of the essay, the narrator reflects on his actions and "wondered whether any of the others grasped that I had done it solely to avoid looking [like] a fool". The central meaning of George Orwell's "Shooting an Elephant" is that the social pressure on a person leads to foolish actions in order to feel that sense of acceptance. Orwell uses literary features to help enhance the central meaning though the plot and setting, characterization, tone and mood, and voice.


The plot of the essay is briefly explained through each paragraph, that there is a Western European man who was out casted by the Burmese people within the setting of "Moulmein, in lower Burma". He expressed his feelings of frustration because he was on their side against the British imperialism; however, after he knew that the Burmese hated him, he was unsure.The Burmese were very excited towards the narrator, due to the fact that he had a gun, which caused them to portray him as the elephant killer. The narrator realizes the situation and then decides whether or not he should kill elephant. The elephant was eventually incapacitated, and "took him half an hour to die." At the end of the essay, he begins to reflect on why he killed the elephant, and come to the conclusion that he killed the large animal  "solely to avoid looking [like] a fool".


The characterization of the essay helps enhance the central meaning of the essay. Orwell characterizes two main people in the essay: one being the narrator himself and the other being the people of Moulmein. Orwell portrays the narrator through his thoughts and actions. A quote to help justify this statement would be when the narrator say "solely to avoid looking [like] a fool." This quotation shows that the narrator is self-conscious and kills a large animal in order to gain that sense of acceptance. 


The tone of the essay is a sense of reflection, regret and pity. Due to the fact that he is able to show some kind of reflection, I began to understand what he was experiencing, as well as, a sense of pity and regret towards the narrator. The mood that I received, as a reader, was a sense of anger and resentment towards the actions that narrator had done in his achievement of, yet again, the sense of acceptance from amongst the civilians.


The voice of the essay, from what I understood, is probably the Western European man (the narrator). But it could also be the voice of the author. This brings up the sense of ambiguity (to be able to be interpreted in more then one way) of whether or not the voice of the essay is the author's. However, the narrative point-of-view of the essay allows the content to help the reader understand what the character is going through as the essay progresses.