In Chilton's essay she talks about the problems Mexico is currently having with the drug cartels and how the Mexican government goes unmentioned and unappreciated for the great lengths they're taking to regain their country (by jailing drug lords, jailing them in the U.S, and decriminalizing small amounts of drugs). From what I've read an watched on the news I do agree 100% with Chilton's argument. You always see on the news all these horrible things happening in Mexico because of the drug cartels Murders, abductions, carjackings, riots. But the news never really says anything about the Mexican government and what they're trying to do to stop the ongoing drug war.
The cartoon illustrated by Nate Beeler would be very hard to interpret in any other way than stated by Chilton. You have the muscle man with the bat (labeled Drug cartel) hitting the small pinata (labeled Mexico) whose stomach splits open releasing thousands of skulls (with a halo glowing around them all to depict innocence). What else can you get from that other than the drug cartels are bashing Mexico and killing innocent people. Let me contradict myself in saying other readers might get something different from the background aspect of the cartoon (the dead tree and barren wasteland). I see it as meaning no hope, in a sense that if you're wandering in the desert you have little to no chance in finding a pond, or lake of any sort to drink from. And the tree dead and lifeless, the pinata tied to the tree, the tree being kind of like a crutch but as you can see not a very good one as its dying it leaves the pinata defenseless.
Your second paragraph is great. You are "reading" the cartoon with a critical eye. Perhaps there is no hope, you say, because the government has no power to fix the problem. Perhaps that was the cartoonist's main idea. In fact, he didn't draw a symbol for the government. Why not? They are nowhere to be seen. Rhetoric is both what is shown and what is left out. Great!
ReplyDeleteGood work. Keep it up.
SM