Strawberry & Chocolate Final Blog Assignment

Write a brief biography of either David or Diego, the men in the film, Strawberry & Chocolate. What has become of him in the last 10–15 years?

I had to adapt this blog to fit the film I watched and since neither character is a real person, like Eva Peron, I had to be a bit more creative.

Diego Bio (didn't catch his last name)

March 1974: Diego immigrates to Miami.

September 1974: Diego enrolls in the University of Miami to study art history and linquistics.

1977: Singer Anita Bryant launches her Save Our Children campaign in Miami-Dade County, leading to repeal of anti-discrimination measures for gays. (http://www.nndb.com/people/177/000024105/)

May 1978: Diego graduates form the U of Miami with a double major. Goes to work as a custodian in an art museum to earn money to open his own museum displaying Cuban art and literature. Lives in the custodial apartment free of charge in exchange for also leading tours in the museum's Cuban section.

August 1978: Contacts David Cruz, his good friend still living in Cuba who is now a sociology professor at the University of Havana, to set up connections for importing Cuban art.

September 1978: Travels with other gays to California to rally against Anita Bryant's anti-gay appearances and her support of the Briggs Initiative (an initiative on the California State Ballot in 1978 banning gays from teaching in public schools). The initiative was overwhelmingly defeated. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_6_(November_1978)

April 5, 1980: Miami's Cuban Museum of Art and Culture opens a permanent collection of work by Cuban artists. Diego is hired as concierge.

June 1, 1984: Diego is appointed director of traveling exhibits at Miami's Cuban Museum of Art and Culture and begins hosting a number of traveling Cuban exhibitions throughout the year.

Image sources:

http://www.basecine.net/img/documentos/jorgeperugorria1.jpg
http://www.basecine.net/img/documentos/jorgeperugorria1.jpg

Strawberry & Chocolate

A man finds that friendship and understanding can span many boundaries -- age, politics, and gender preference among them -- in this comedy-drama from Cuba. David (Vladimir Cruz) is a student and ardent Communist whose personal life is in something of a slump; his girlfriend recently left him to marry another man after he took her to a hotel in hopes of seducing her, and she announced that she couldn't believe anyone could make love in such an ugly room. One day, David stops by the park and gets some ice cream, where he meets Diego (Jorge Perrugoria); as if his flamboyant manner wasn't announcement enough, David is convinced that Diego must be a homosexual because he's eating strawberry ice cream, even though it's one of the rare days when chocolate is available. David is less than impressed with Diego's open criticism of Castro's regime (especially the government's persecution of gays), but he accepts an invitation to visit Diego's apartment; while David realizes that Diego has seduction on his mind, this is outweighed by the knowledge that Diego's flat houses such forbidden pleasures as Time Magazine, American record albums, and Johnny Walker Red scotch. David's friend Miguel (Francisco Gatorno) is convinced that Diego is a dangerous dissident and urges David to spy on him and pass along his findings to the government. But the more time David spends with Diego, the more he finds that he's intrigued by this very different man, and that he enjoys spending time with him; David also finds he likes Nancy (Mirta Ibarra), Diego's sexy neighbor. Helmed by legendary Cuban director Tomas Gutierrez Alea and based on a story by Senel Paz, Fresa y Chocolate was the first Cuban film to be nominated for an Oscar (Best Foreign Language Film of 1995); it also won honors at the Berlin International Film Festival and the Sundance Film Festival. ~ Mark Deming, All Movie Guide
Text Source: http://movies.msn.com/movies/movie.aspx?m=38336&mp=syn
Image Source: http://www.buy.com/prod/strawberry-and-chocolate/q/loc/322/40054836.html

Evita Blog

I was unable to get a copy of Official Story, so I watched Evita instead. In order to complete my fourth blog assignment, I've adapted Dr. Jones' prompt to fit the movie that I watched. Combining events that actually happened in Argentina during the time of Eva Peron's untimely death and actual events that happened afterwards, I have developed a timeline to attribute to her life. Since she was actually dead when most of this timeline happened, some of the events are ficticious (such as her cancer treatment, although is was are real treatment in 1952 for her type of cancer, the divorce, and the train station events).

2. Write a brief biography of Eva Peron in Evita. Instead of Eva dying at age 33, what else could she have accomplished if she had lived longer?

May 7, 1919: Eva was born.

January 2, 1935: Eva moved to Buenos Aires.

March 1942: Eva began her career in radio.

January 22, 1944: Eva met Juan Peron.

October 22, 1945: Eva and Juan were married.

December 31, 1945: Eva and Juan began the first Presidential campaign. (Juan is elected in 1946)

June 6, 1947: Eva began the "Rainbow Tour".

1947-1948: Eva continued her work for the Foundation.

January 9, 1950: Eva was diagnosed with cancer.

August 31, 1951: Eva declined the Vice-President nomination.

Source for above timeline: http://members.aol.com/EvaPeron/timeline.html

December 31, 1951: Eva and Juan began the second Presidential campaign. (Juan is elected in 1952.)

June 15, 1952: Eva was treated at the Mayo Clinic with a radioactive colloidal gold treatment for endometrial cancer. (Source: Radioactive colloidal gold in the treatment of endometrial cancer: Mayo clinic experience, 1952 http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/abstract/112678663/ABSTRACT?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0)

July 1, 1952: Eva disappeared from public view for 12 months while she was under going cancer treatment. Argentina’s economy rapidly began to decline as did the nation’s confidence in their government. Without Eva’s balcony appearances to keep the Peron administration safe and secure in the eyes of its followers and backers, the majority began to realize that they were suffering instead of prospering.

Increases in wages increased meat consumption resulting in a decline in meat exports. Due to a bad harvest, wheat had to be imported. Nationalist Peronists lost favor with the people due to a new negotiation with Standard Oil (in New Jersey).

April 9, 1953: Eva’s brother and Peron’s private secretary was found dead in the street. The news was withheld from Eva for several months because of the declining condition of her health.

May, 1953: Perón signed a treaty that would lead to an economic union between Argentina and Chile. A similar treaty was signed with Paraguay. Argentina and Great Britain signed a trade agreement. The visit to Argentina by Milton Eisenhower, President Dwight Eisenhower's brother and special representative, was quite significant since it initiated a normalization of relations with the U.S.

August 1, 1953: Eva stood on the infamous balcony, looking as beautiful and healthy as ever, claiming her cancer was in remission and she was ready to resume support of her husband’s causes and would soon begin working with reform projects that would greatly improve Argentina’s economy and her people’s standard of living.

Fall, 1954: Juan and Eva Peron began to clash in their ideas of what steps were needed to improve living conditions for the Argentinean people. During her illness and recuperation, Peron realized how must influence Eva had over his political decisions and he began resenting her involvement, making a vow to his closest staff members that if Eva recovered, she no longer would have the political influence she once had.

December, 1954: Congress passed a divorce bill which created a massive conflict between Church and State that was further exacerbated when on December 30 Perón allowed the reopening of brothels. Peron expelled two Catholic priests from the country and was excommunicated for the Roman Catholic Church.

March 8, 1955: Eva Peron moved into the west wing of the presidential residence. Maria Sanchez, Peron’s new love interest moved into his private quarters.

April 17, 1955: Eva Peron filed for divorce from Juan Peron.

September 16, 1955: A nationalist military group took power in a coup. The military regime accused Peronist leaders of corruption, but no one was prosecuted. Peron sought exile in Paraguay.

(Aside: June 19, 1948: Eva Peron established the Maria Eva Duarte de Peron Foundation, a non-profit organization created to bridge gaps in the national safety net in order to transform the traditional concept of beneficence and redefining it within the Personista idea of social justice.)

Fall, 1955: The military coup dismantled the Eva Peron Foundation.

December 9, 1955: Determined to continue her fight for social justice and reform, Eva found a new balcony to stand on at the train station in Buenos Aires. For four days, eight hours a day, Eva spoke (shouted) to “the people” from her new podium. The military force ignored her until the fifth day, when so many supports showed up, shouting “Evita, Evita, Evita” that the train station was unable to operate its normal schedule.

December 13, 1955: Evita was arrested but it was impossible for the military police to take her to jail because of the throng of supporters on the train station lawn. Thousands continued to shout, “Free Our Evita. Free Our Evita.” After being apprehended for only 30 minutes, Eva reappeared on the train station balcony.

Eva’s popularity was so extraordinary, that the new military presence decided to keep a close eye on her, but let her do her work for fear that her unprecedented political influence might hinder their work. Eva, in return, keep as distant from the military as possible while intent on not allowing it to become an obstacle in her reform work. Eva gained new wealthy supports from those who had opposed her husband’s political interests and work, but in the background were actually moral supporters of Eva’s. Now that Eva and Juan Peron were no longer associated, these wealthy supports publicly came forward as benefactors for her causes.

March 14, 1955: The Maria Eva Duarte de Peron Foundation was renamed The Maria Eva Durante Foundation and was officially reestablished for operation with the following goals (and accomplishments):

*Assist elderly, children, and women with the basic needs of housing, food, and medicine.
*Obtain pensions to people over 60.
*Set up a plan to construct 1000 schools throughout Argentina as well as nursery schools and daycare centers.
*The Amanda Allen Children’s City created shelter to children from two to seven years old who were orphans or whose parents were unable to care for them.

*The Students’ City was a residence for students who came to Buenos Aries to study but had no place to stay.
*The Children’s Tourism Plan enabled children to vacation.
*The Children’s Competitions supported many sports and enabled the Foundation to provide medical checkups to over 300,000 children.
*The Children’s Hospital and Epidemiology Center and the Children’s Recuperation Clinic helped improve children’s health care.

July 26, 1959: Eva Peron died. “Her work had become a part of the thousands of men, women, and children who mourned her. [In only forty years] Evita had found the reason for her life and had left to others, as she herself once said when she inaugurated a polyclinic, the easiest task: that of changing the names of the works she had built.”

(http://www.evitaperon.org/part3.htm).

The following Internet resources were heavily relied upon:

http://www.answers.com/Juan%20Peron

http://www.studybuddy.nl/english/start.html

http://www.evitaperon.org/part3.htm

http://www.tripadvisor.com/Tourism-g312741-Buenos_Aires_Capital_Federal_District-Vacations.html

Evita: Her Story is Better Than Her Movie

The most significant Hollywood musical in 15 years (virtually the only Hollywood musical in 15 years) turns on the dubious political integrity of one Eva Duarte, 1930s actress, working-class heroine, and consort of Argentina's fascist leader Col Juan Perón. Born into poverty, Eva worked her way up a ladder of men, then hitched her star to the military dictator to become the self-appointed 'spiritual leader of the nation'. Her socialist rhetoric may have been at odds with her glamorous lifestyle, but her death in 1952 caused an outpouring of grief. Is the musical still a credible genre in these cynical times? On the basis of this film, the answer's a qualified yes. Parker has no embarrassment when it comes to putting over a song, and he's assembled a strong cast in Madonna, Pryce (Perón) and a fiercely brow-beating Banderas as the ubiquitous narrator. Unfortunately, for all its popularity on stage, the Andrew Lloyd Webber/Tim Rice show makes an unlikely movie. Parker does his best to disguise the fact with extensive cross-cutting and plentiful crowd scenes, but there's no real dynamic to the story, no sense of movement. The film cries out for the liberation of choreography to supplement the thin, repetitive score. An unholy cocktail of Emiliano Zapata, Eva Braun, and Princess Di, Evita's politics are intriguing; presumably that's what attracted Parker and co-screenwriter Oliver Stone to the material, but the movie's so seriously weighty, the bombast rather tips the balance against Evita charisma. Despite Madonna's impressive performance, we're never remotely tempted to cry for her - and, in the end, that must make the film a failure. Movie review from: http://www.timeout.com/film/newyork/reviews/64088/Evita.html

A Tutsi Survior is Left to Tell

Immaculée Ilibagiza was born in Rwanda and studied Electronic and Mechanical Engineering at the National University of Rwanda. Her life transformed dramatically in 1994 during the Rwanda genocide when she and seven other women huddled silently together in a cramped bathroom of a local pastor’s house for 91 days! During this horrific ordeal, Immaculée lost most of her family, but she survived to share the story and her miraculous transition into forgiveness and a profound relationship with God.

To really know Immaculée, listen to how others describe her: “In all of my countless hours with her, in a multitude of private and public settings, this transcendentally spiritual woman always—and I mean always—shines a light that captures everyone within its boundaries,” says internationally renowned author and speaker Dr. Wayne W. Dyer. “The very first moment we met, I knew in an absolute flash of insight that I was in the presence of a uniquely Divine woman.
To me, Immaculée was not only left to tell this mind-blowing story, but more than that, she’s a living example of what we can all accomplish when we go within and choose to truly live in perfect harmony with our originating Spirit.”

“Immaculée is a stunningly beautiful woman who emanates peace and light,” adds women’s wellness pioneer and best-selling author Dr. Christiane Northrup. “Her story is one that confirms the existence of power of a Divine Source. When I read her book, I came to understand and trust at a whole new level that true communion with God is possible for every one of us.”

Four years after the Rwandan tragedy, Immaculée immigrated to the United States and began working for the United Nations in New York City. She has since established the Left to Tell Charitable Fund to help others heal from the long-term effects of genocide and war.

There’s another interesting story about how Immaculée called upon God in a different chapter of her life. This time, she asked God to bring her the man of her dreams. She sat down with a piece of paper and sketched the face of the person she wanted to marry, listing his height, a strong character, and other endearing characteristics. Three months later, she met her husband, Bryan Black, who came to Rwanda to set up the UN court that would prosecute those responsible for planning the genocide. Immaculée says that he was “sent by God, courtesy of the UN, all the way from America!”

Left to Tell has sold more than 250,000 copies worldwide, been made into a documentary, and through her Left to Tell Charitable Fund has raised over $150,000 for the orphans of Rwanda. Ms. Ilibagiza has been invited to speak to a range of audiences including dignitaries of the world, multinational corporations, churches, and local school children. The importance of her story has been recognized and honored with numerous humanitarian awards, including an honorary doctoral degree from the prestigious University of Notre Dame; the Mahatma Gandhi International Award for Reconciliation and Peace 2007; a finalist as one of Beliefnet.com’s “Most Inspiring People of the Year 2006;” and a Christopher Award, “affirming the highest values of human spirit.” Left to Tell has been chosen as Outreach Magazine’s selection for “Best Outreach Testimony/Biography Resource of 2007, and for the 2007-2008 One Book program at Villanova University making it a mandatory read for 6,000 students.

Immaculée lives in Manhattan with her husband and their two children. Left to Tell is Immaculée’s first book. http://www.lefttotell.com/about/index.php

Rwanda Blog

Write and post a brief review (500–1000 words) of the book We Wish to Inform You That Tomorrow We Will be Killed With Our Families: Stories from Rwanda by Philip Gourevitch. Focus in particular on your reaction to the reading and on any changes you might make to the film Hotel Rwanda based on your reading of the book.

I'm not sure I would have ever watched Hotel Rwanda if I hadn't seen a Tutsi survivor on UNC-TV one night about a year ago. While watching a fund raising segment featuring Dr. Wayne Dyer, one of his guests was Immaculee Ilibagiza. The pictures on the right depict her and her family. She was the only survivor. The top photo shows Immaculee in 1994 after her ordeal ended and the bottom photo shows her husband and children, whom she now lives with in New York City.

Her story of surviving 91 days in the tiny bathroom of her pastor's house along with seven other women was as amazing as it was horrific. In these cramped quarters, they had almost nothing to eat, had to remain silent, and were forced to endure the sounds of death and dying surrounding their small place of refuge. How were normal bodily functions coped with and carried out among seven women? What kept just one of them from going mad thus revealing their presence to the militia that repeatedly searched the house in rigorous attempts to find them.

Immaculee wrote a book about her experience, Left to Tell, in which she shows "us how to embrace the power of prayer, forge a profound and lasting relationship with God, and discover the importance of forgiveness and the meaning of truly unconditional love and understanding—through our darkest hours." (http://www.lefttotell.com/book/index.php)

It was Immaculee's TV appearance that prompted my interest in the movie, Hotel Rwanda. I was glad to have opportunity, in this course, to view it again.

While I found Gourevitch's book a little bit difficult to follow, I think it is extremely well written. However, I don't think I could have followed the characters and the actions as well if I had not seen the movie first. Gourevitch does a brilliant job of not taking sides. He tells this story of genocide from both the side of the killers and those who are killed. I applaud his efforts to track down all the people he interviewed in order to write this book. The writer makes us chillingly aware that death (murder) is inevitable (doctors killed their patients, teachers killed their students, and neighbors killed their neighbors) On page 43 the question is asked, "What is a human being?" To which to answer is, "They had no understanding."

Gourevitch defines "they" by writing, "when Paul, a Hutu, set out to defy the killers, he did so by appealing to their passion for power: 'they' were the ones who had chosen to take life away and he grasped that that meant they (my emphasis) could also choose to extend the gift of retaining it" (129). I'm glad Gourevitch didn't focus extensively on Paul because we get a much broader perspective of what happened and didn't happen by seeing it through the eyes of so many. On the other hand, since the movie's focus is on Paul, I'm grateful that the book's author painted the picture of Paul in the same light as the movie.

One of the most compelling lines in the book is when Paul told Gourevitch, “During the genocide…I thought so many people did as I did, because I know if they’d wanted they could have done so” (141). Gourevitch makes it clear that the whole world, the Security Council, Washington, and the international community are "theys" as well. "Nkurunziza told me that in 1991 he had visited Washington. 'They didn't know there was a war in Rwanda...they didn't know of Rwanda.' I said, 'It's a little country next to Zaire.' They said, 'Where is Zaire?' Now, how can they say they know what happened in my country last year?" (263, all italics, my emphasis).

They: the murderers.

They: the ignorers.

They: the saviors.

Which "they" are we?

I would not change anything about the movie. It leaves us with a feeling of hope...the hope that finally an end to the awfulness is near.

Paradise Now Blog

Blog: Do you agree more with the petition to have the film removed as an award nominee or with the counter-petition? What are you reasons for favoring one side over the other?

“Paradise Now” is a film that deserves to be shown to the world regardless of people’s political views. " (From the counter petition to support the film as an artistic work worthy to be seen and lauded.)

I never understood how suicide bombers get their jobs. Not only were these two choosen, it was their choice to do this deed. I don't in any way support the idea of one life being used as the medium by which other innocent lives are sacrificed. However, I loved the idea about what is "right" in the opening scene. When the 2 men are arguing over the crooked bumper, I was struck when the question was asked, "Which side is crooked?" The answer was, "The right side."

My thought is that this is exactly the problem...that which represents itself as "right" in the world, a certain religion, a certain belief, a certain group of people...many times that which is "right" is really very "crooked." To me, this became a guiding point for the film. What is right? Is suicide bombing right? Is it based on crooked thinking? Is it right to expect a human being to die in order to kill others in order to make a political statement? Is it right to make the bombers believe that two angels will pick them up on the other side? I don't have the answers, but I support the film's opportunity to be shown and to receive award recognition.