Bonsoir,

I think I have to rethink this new photography assignment quite a bit. I might be getting in a little over my head. In class today, Barry brought up some good points that a) putting eggs on myself is wasteful and expensive, and b) I still don’t have an extremely clear idea of where I’m going with this. He suggested that I look at movie monsters for inspiration, but the only problem is that I don’t want the figure in this photography series to seem dangerous. I want the figure to appear inhuman and unapproachable, but not exactly life-threatening. It is hard to explain exactly what I want right now…Since I don’t have an art reference to compare this to, I think the closest “character” to what I’m trying to create is Gollum from Lord of the Rings. Don’t worry, I won’t be eating raw fish heads, and I will still have all my hair. But I do want the figure to lose its “civilized” qualities, therefore isolating the character, and creating an intense distance between this person and the viewers.

So how do I accomplish this? REALLY?! Barry asked me to look up my favorite movie monsters, so I took the humanish/ humanoid-type monsters…And I posted them. WARNING: IF YOU DO NOT LIKE HORROR MOVIES, OR IF YOU ARE EASILY MADE SQUEAMISH, DO NOT LOOK BELOW.

Hahahaha! Sorry, that might have been pointless. I am trying to actually brainstorm here. This might be a little more helpful–Bonnie told me about a female artist, Ana Mendieta, who worked a lot with the female form and the landscape. I looked at her work, and I loved it. Some of it gets really dark, which is exactly what I’m going for. Take a look!

Cool. Thanks, Bonnie! I will brainstorm more, and report back later! Goodnight!

Hugs and Kisses,

Zoe

¨

Pasaron las elecciones legislativas y entramos en “cuarentana vacacional” durante todo el mes de julio de 2009, una suerte de suspensión general de la actividad laboral, estudiantil y recreativa como consecuencia de la Pandemia de gripe porcina  (alerta 6, la máxima, ver el enlace a la wikipedia).

Estalló en marzo y a fines de abril la OMS la declaró pandemia y durante mayo y junio se extendió y se convirtió en 85.000 casos en el mundo con 434 muertes “constatables”…América y Oceanía son los continentes más afectados de los 124 países atacados por la Gripe A.

Estados Unidos (30.000 casos/ 178 muertes) y México (9.000 casos/119 muertes) son los más afectados y “nosotros los argentinos” completamos el podio del dolor con ” 1624 casos y 57 muertes” con Canadá y Chile en los cinco primeros lugares, sumando entre los cinco…400 de las 434 muertes.

En América Latina, la Argentina tiene más del 75% de las muertes con 57 casos, Chile 16, Colombia 2, Brasil-Uruguay y Paraguay 1 y no registran muertes, Perú-Bolivia-Ecuador y Venezuela (los 10 países registran casos de afectados siendo Chile con 7.376 el más afectado).

Esta es la cruda estadística, con datos en aumento minuto a minuto, a partir de aquí, el análisis…obviamente que nadie quiere la gripe y menos que avance, lo primero es lo primero.

El dato, es lo segundo, y se llama inoperancia, descuido, falta de reflejos, irresponsabilidad, falta de política y de prevención…lo que pasó es que el árbol de las elecciones, impidió ver el bosque de la enfermedad, no se actuó en tiempo y forma y eso es una reponsabilidad política del Estado Nacional, cuyo gobierno se despertó el 29 de junio, derrotado en las urnas y con la gripe en las calles y entonces, sólo entonces, el tema se instaló en el medio de la escena nacional…como decía mi mamá…“después que el chico está muerto, María tapa el pozo”.

Y empezó la psicosis, huyo la ministro de Salud ( a no cargar sobre ella la responsabilidad total, basta de chivos expiatorios), cada provincia, cada municipio, cada institución educativa entró en un “salvesé quién pueda” con total descordinación, sin conducción, en estado de pánico como frente a un Tsunamí y se declaró la cuarentena y al mes de Julio de 2009 como de vacaciones generales, se destapó la olla que estaba contenida a presión y aparecieron los barbijos, la voligoma, el gel de alcohol y algunos hasta instalaron la preocupación sobre si la final Velez- Huracán debe jugarse con o sin público…demencial !!!

Qué te pasa Argentina, estás nerviosa Argentina ???, la consigna es ALERTA , no pánico (que no cunda), estamos fuera de las elecciones ya no se va a perder ni un voto, ahora hay que pisar la pelota y ser responsables, hay 57 muertes que lo reclaman, no es momento de sacar partido frente a la enfermedad, es momento de conducir al pueblo hacia la salud, sin medidas efectistas como la de “Aprender en casa” que hoy lanza la presidenta(!!!), basta de ombliguismos, dar respuestas sanitarias y llevar tranquilidad, es lo que la gente espera de nuestros gobernantes, ¿es mucho pedir que quién gobierna no pierda la calma y deje de mirar para otro lado?

Un párrafo final…a veces en esta ocasiones de descontrol aparecen los oportunistas que buscan sacar partido de la situación, por ejemplo, los comerciantes que han lanzado a la venta a 5 pesos un barbijo con los colores de Vélez para ir a la cancha el próximo domingo…

Posdata: Qué lo parió, Mendieta !!!

I haven’t posted for quite some time, so a brief update:
- I’ve been working on my film paper and have found the comments shared on this blog very helpful. So thanks for all the suggestions.
- Two things people should check out: Michael Burns’ blog has recently featured an enlightening discussion of Logics of Worlds and academic bullying (though the two are not related…); and Adam Kotsko is on a mission to problematise popular religious positions on homosexuality and abortion. I’m not sure I agree with everything he says, but his exchange with his commentators is quite provoking.

Last week I had the good fortune of attending a daylong conference at Birkbeck entitled ‘The Latin American Turn: On the Unfinished Project of Decolonisation.’ The following is a summary of the papers and my thoughts regarding the themes that were addressed.

The papers focused on current Latin American political theories and praxis and their relations to European thought. The speakers challenged the current nature of this relationship on two fronts: (1) European thought (even post-colonial theory) tends to operate in European categories perpetuating a Eurocentrism that subordinates non-European thought to the canon of European theory; (2) Latin American thought must be receptive to European thought, but must resist being determined by it. This latter point was excellently summed up by Enrique Dussel when he said, ‘We need Badiou, but not Badiou.’ I’ll summarise each of the papers and then end with my thoughts about the themes of the day. Two preliminary notes: I’ve reproduced the majority of my notes in all their scattered and fragmentary glory in hopes that they will be helpful to as many people as possible; I missed the last paper because the conference was running 45-50 minutes behind schedule and I didn’t want to miss my hus home.

Enrique Dussel

Dussel started the day off by giving a keynote consisting mainly of themes from his Twenty Theses on Politics. He sought to theorise the transition from a revolutionary politics (often restricted by its negative posture) and leftist political praxis. Latin America is intriguing in this regard as the Argentinean and Bolivian governments offer potential examples of such a praxis (Dussel and everyone else speaking seemed to Bolivia seems much more promising). He formulated this transition in the form of the question ‘how do we exercise power rather than just criticize it?’ Power is often reduced to domination. This characterises the work of Hobbes, Locke, Weber, Habermas, and Foucault. Indeed for Weber, power is defined as legitimised domination.

Dussel argues that rethinking power is to strike at the being of politics. He defines politics as a field relating to other fields (social, economic, cultural, etc.). His paper thus focused on understanding the relationship between politics and power.

Power is first characterised by force (a will), but this will is not the will to power, but a will to life. This understanding of political power is characterised by three determinations:

(1) A will to life (a vitalist position): The first determination of the ontology of politics, it is material in content, but not material in the sense of physical. This will is a general will; that is, it is the will of a community, not of individuals.
(2) The capacity for union: unity is a moment of practical reason. There is a consensus that attaches a united (general) will to a goal.
(3) Feasibility: contra the Frankfurt school, instrumental reason is crucial to politics.

Dussel offers this ontology of politics as a positive conception which might perpetuate revolutionary ideas without succumbing to a purely negative position. Here he sited the Zapatista’s reluctance to formulate or participate in political institutions. This reluctance forces them to only offer negative critiques without offer a positive political vision capable of advancing a/ the community. If one thus remains negative, the movement is a social movement, not political.

Communities are potentia (taken from Spinoza). They are power in itself, without determination. Through political praxis the power of the community becomes an institution. This institution must be characterised by obediential power (connected this to the speeches of Eva Morales). In short, the community holds sovereignty and authority. Institutions do not hold power, but exercise it on behalf of the community. When institutions become convinced that they hold power, they are fetishising power. In this moment, authority believes its own will becomes foundational for the exercising of power and politics becomes domination. This moment is constitutive for modern understandings of power, from Hobbes to Lenin. The people become obedient to power rather than vice versa.

From Carl Schmitt to Machiavelli to Laclau, theorists have focused on praxis to the exclusion of institutions. Contra Foucault and Freud, institutions are not inherently oppressive. Similarly discipline does not equal oppression. There are moments when institutions meet the needs of the people.

Dussel divides political institutions into three types:

(1) Material: economics, technology, security, ecology. They must organise the reproduction of the community.
(2) Legitimising: democratic means of validating institutions, enabling the community to exercise its will to live.
(3) Institutions of feasibility: I was a little unclear on this last one

Politics is thus divided into three levels:

(1) Praxis
(2) Institutions
(3) Political principles

Dussel notes that there is resistance in contemporary theory to political principles. He argues that this level should include at least three positions:

(1) Material affirmation of life
(2) Validity principle (not sure about what he meant here)
(3) Feasibility principle

From here Dussel shifted to a discussion of law drawing especially on the Christian theological tradition. Agamben demonstrates, in his commentary on Romans, how law becomes a metaphor for order. Dussel argues that the law is not the basis for action. The law can by unjust. The justification for action is faith, not the law (connected to St. Paul).

He then discussed the plebes as a future people, creating a populace of the future. The problem of liberation is not the order, but developing a critical consensus against the order. This future populace will also develop a law, but in the meantime the justification for action is faith.

He ended by arguing that the end of the state is a logical postulate, a regulative idea, but impossible. During Q&A, he argued that in order to sustain the moment of liberation it is necessary to grow the people’s consciousness of their ability to be an actor in history.

Ramón Grosfoguel

Grosfoguel sought to address differences between post-colonial studies (PCS) and coloniality/modernity (C/M) studies. I spent most of the paper wondering what the hell coloniality was. Maldonado-Torres later defined the preliminary difference as this: post-colonial studies focuses on the consequences of a period of history termed colonialism; coloniality focuses on the networks of power that defined that period and continue to operate even though the historical period of traditional colonialism has ended. Grosfoguel made it clear that he did not see the two camps as diametrically opposed, but equally stressed that there are important differences that need to be highlighted. The differences are:

(1) Genealogical: PCS tends to start its discussion of colonialism in the 18th and 19th centuries. C/M starts 300 years earlier in 1492. This year marks the formulation of global capitalism and modernity. This 300 year period is sometime marginalised in PCS and impacts the understanding of the relationship between modernity and colonisation. C/M strives to understand the Renaissance as part of modernity. For this position, modernity is inherently colonial. C/M’s focus on this relationship between modernity and coloniality allows it to push for the de-colonisation of knowledge and being. In this sense, C/M is transmodern (a term adopted from Dussel) rather than post-modern. The latter, with its modern determinations remains colonial.

(2) Epistemological: C/M argues that Occidentalism is the condition for Orientalism. In addition to the ethnic hierarchy and global division of labour that came with colonialism, there is an epistemological hierarchy which produces an epistemic racism that undergirds the racism that is constitutive for productive exploitation. This epistemic racism is entangled with epistemic sexism, forming a complex global class division often ignored by classical Marxism. This ignoring is symptomatic of Eurocentric fundamentalism. Other fundamentalism are varieties of this originating fundamentalism. From Christian fundamentalism to Islamic fundamentalisms to nationalistic fundamentalisms, they all arise from the binaries established by Eurocentric fundamentalism. C/M’s transmodernity thus seeks to complete the work of de-colonisation by de-colonising knowledge, but how can we go about this task if we only read Lacan, Foucault, and Derrida? C/M calls for an expanded cartography of power. The figures of European theory are not ignored, but viewed from the perspective of a new geography. We must de-colonise political economy.

[The next two papers were given by Carolina Sanin and Marcia Martins de Rosa. Sanin’s paper was interesting, but focused less on theory and more on literary embodiments of theory. De Rosa spoke about her various experience, but, to be honest, I found it difficult to follow.]

Nelson Maldonado-Torres

Maldonado-Torres stated two goals: 1) a tentative genealogy of de-coloniality; 2) exploring the basic problems that de-coloniality seeks to address.

His genealogy consisted of three moments:

(1) First wave (late 18th, first half of the 19th century in the forming United States and Latin America): this moment in the US was ultra-racist in that it was characterised by ethnic divisions amongst white Europeans. There were discussion about whether the Spanish or Italians were less white than the French or British. In Latin America, the diversity of indigenous peoples made for a more racially mixed context. In light of this racial situation, the often overlooked Hatian revolution is especially significant. The Hatians had to critically develop a new understanding that overthrew European understandings of humanity. Hatian intellectuals developed these theories in the 19th century. The first wave thus refers to this period of questioning European categories of being. This dating denies neither the existence of colonial projects nor anti-colonial movements prior to this period. Indeed de-colonisation began at the first moment of colonisation. Rather this dating indicates that this resistance did not become formal until the 19th century.

(2) Second wave: this period comes after the Pan-African Conference, the end of World War II, and the decolonisation of India. It is marked by a period of fascism in Europe. Fascism is domestic colonialism. No longer is it possible to view European colonisers as bringers of civilisation. The paradigm of progress and Enlightenment has begun to colonise itself, rendering European intentions much more suspicious. This amounts to the demystification of Europe. Thus, while the first wave is marked by the affirmation of Europe (an affirmation varying in intensity), the second wave becomes more radical in its disenchantment with European Enlightenement.

(3) Post-coloniality?: Maldonado-Torres sought to indicate the tenuous nature of this characterisation by including the question mark. This period is marked by the global mobilisation of indigenous movements. From this indigenous perspective, however, coloniality still exists. It is post-coloniality only from the perspective of colonial powers who argue their colonial operations have ceased. Coloniality studies argues that there is no post-colonialism.

As time was running out, Maldonado-Torres was only able to provide a brief outline of the basic problems of coloniality studies:

(1) Philosophical anthropology
(2) Ethics and politics (and their relation)
(3) Epistemology

While all three are interrelated, the third must be the condition for the thinking of the other two.

Oscar Guardiola-Rivera

The organiser of the conference, Guardiola-Rivera gave an intriguing paper, though for some reason I only took minimal notes. He noted that contemporary discussion is marked by the fact that the US is the next Latin American country and the collapse of global-capitalism’s self-healing capacities, if not global capitalism itself. He argued that liberation has little to do with affect; it is an objective, essential praxis. He also stated that we have reached the end of vanguard theory. I found his contrasting of Kantian predicative with messianic time especially interesting. He argued that a liberating political praxis is not restorative, but messianic. In doing so, he drew on Che Guevara as embodying messianic praxis.

Eduardo Mendieta

Mendieta argued that the project of de-colonisation is also a project of de-secularisation. The latter occurs in the form of dispersing the modern myth of secularity. Mendieta calls this the theological enlightenment of the Enlightenment (a tendency he finds in Marx’s political theology).

Modernity sought to secularise politics, but in doing so theologised the market. In order to do this work, what Mendieta calls secularisation as a project (I was a little unclear on this point), the economy must re-politicised. The economy is always a consequence of political decision. Dussel’s re-founding of politics similarly calls for the de-fetishisation of the market.

Ernst Bloch and Walter Benjamin represent a negative or critical political theology, rejecting the founding of the political in a positive way.

Mendieta calls for a critical political theology that is both political and theological. It is political in its referencing of the political economy of theology especially in popular religiosity. It is the formulation of a critical political economy through theological discourse.

Religion is not a black box but a creative means of a community formulating a way of life.

Lewis R. Gordon

Gordon argued that the colonised find themselves in an unreasonable relation to reason. Reason dictates that the opposition to reason’s policing of experiences is unreasonable. Gordon terms this epistemic dependency: a state of receiving the theories by which we interpret out experiences. Communities are blocked from being the source of their onw theories of their own experiences.

The challenging of this state follows three thematics:

(1) Philosophical anthropology
(2) Freedom and theories of transformation
(3) Metacritique of reason

Gordon offered two specifications to these thematics: reason is a broader category than rationality; liberty and freedom are not the same thing.

He drew on Fanon to argue that racism creates a category below the self/other dialectic. From this perspective, one is fighting just to be regarded as an other.

He then shifted to argue that the market is governed by the tradition of doxa more than episteme. He also stated that we downplay the role of human agency in the market. We discuss the ‘market’ going up or down rather than the human actions that cause economic changes.

He concluded by discussing how the intellectual has become colonised by the market, becoming a commodity. When this happens, the methodological becomes confused with the ontological.

Question and Answer

Guardiola-Rivera re-emphasised the distinction between prediction (Kant) and anticipation (Che).

Mendieta discussed the selling of commodities as selling little nuggets of time, which amounts to a domestication of time. The market thus becomes an ontologisation of the future anterior. He also stated that neo-liberalism and Protestantism go and in hand. He concluded by defining theology as a critical reflection on praxis nurtured by popular religiosity.

Concluding Thoughts

All in all, I thought the conference was a strong showing of interesting thought that is easily missed by PhD students wading through their volumes of Derrida, Deleuze, or Lacan. I did think it was interesting that more than half of the people attending a conference highlighting the elision of Latin American thought in European theory seemed to be Latin American. There were a few points that I thought that slipped through the discussion.

(1) A lack of any interaction with what is often termed analytic philosophy: there was some discussion of coloniality operating in epistemological categories, but these remarks were generally still focussed on continental philosophy. This missed opportunity is particularly regrettable, in my opinion, because I suspect aspects of Latin American thought would challenge the analytic/continental divide, both resonating with and provoking current European efforts to deconstruct this all too often rigid border.

(2) While Dussel acknowledged the difficulty of addressing the will of the people, he didn’t address how the difficulty might be overcome. If a community’s will is united in the oppression of another community, how do we invalidate that will? The recent events in California surrounding Proposition 8 seem like a timely example. Badiou’s theory of the subject seems to offer one possible solution to this dilemma, but I’m not sure if I find it satisfactory.

(3) I’m always left confused about what I’m supposed to do regarding coloniality theory. I can’t adopt the perspective of oppressed or indigenous people without reducing their experiences through my imitation. If I allow Latin American theory to challenge my European or North Atlantic perspective, I still evaluate these experiences from that same perspective. I find the problem of addressing the European hegemony of theory an interesting one, I’m just not sure of the goal. I assume it’s not Latin American domination of theory (or the domination of any other group). So the end goal must be a democratic exchange of ideas. I’m still left wondering from what position one evaluates this exchange.

Sorry this post is so long, but I hope those interested in this field find the summaries papers helpful.

A transferência do jogador de futebol Cristiano Ronaldo do Manchester United  para o Real Madrid por 80 milhões de libras, é a mais cara da história do futebol. Cristiano Ronaldo concretiza assim o seu sonho de infância de jogar no Real Madrid e o Manchester United enche os cofres

Estes são os dez passes mais caros da história

1. Cristiano Ronaldo (POR), do Manchester para o Real Madrid (2009): 93 milhões de euros

2. Zinedine Zidane (FRA), da Juventus para o Real Madrid (2001): 75 milhões de euros

3. Kaká (BRA), do Milan para o Real Madrid (2009): 65 milhões de euros

4. Luis Figo (POR), do Barcelona para o Real Madrid (2000): 61 milhões de euros

5. Hernán Crespo (ARG), do Parma para a Lazio Roma (2000): 56 milhões de euros

6. Gaizka Mendieta (ESP), do Valência para a Lazio Roma (2001): 48 milhões de euros

7. Rio Ferdinand (ING), do Leeds para o Manchester United (2002): 47 milhões de euros

8. Andrei Shevchenko (UCR), do Milan para o Chelsea (2006): 46 milhões de euros

9. Juan Sebastián Verón (ARG), da Lazio para o Manchester U. (2001): 46 milhões de euros

10. Ronaldo (BRA), da Inter de Milão para o Real Madrid (2002): 45 milhões de euros.

Galeria com fotos e vídeos do Cr7

One of my fondest memories as a Madridista: The Champions League final (2000) in Paris against Valencia. It was the first time two teams from the same country had met in the final.

The line-ups that day:

Real Madrid: Casillas, Helguera, Karanka, Ivan Campo, Salgado, Roberto Carlos, Redondo (C), Mcmanaman, Raul, Anelka, Morientes

Valencia: Canizares, Djukic, Pellegrino, Angloma, Gerardo, Farinos, Mendieta, Kily Gonzalez, Gerard, Angulo, Lopez.

Enjoy.

Non so perchè….probabilmente tutto questo è dovuto all’aver indossato una maglia della Lazio durante una partita di calcetto, la maglia era quella di Claudio “el piojo” Lopez, un mito.

Eh si, perchè da “bambino” (nel 2000 avevo 12 anni) ero tifoso della Lazio, perchè era una squadra veramente micidiale, o forse è solo una mia convinzione mia…

In questi giorni sono andato a prendere la formazione di quegli anni, dal 1997 al 2002, il periodo in quei tifavo la formazione biancoceleste e ho avuto proprio bei ricordi….i giocatori simbolo (quelli che mi hanno segnato l’adolescenza) sono questi:

Portieri:

Marchegiani

Luca Marchegiani

Difensori:

Paolo Negro
Alessandro Nesta
Giuseppe Favalli
Guerino Gottardi
Giuseppe Pancaro
Sinisa Mihajlovic
Fernando Couto

Centrocampisti:

Nedved

Lombardo

Giuseppe Venturin
Diego Fuser
Pavel Nedved
Roberto Baronio
Matias Almeyda
Sergio Conceiçao
Dejan Stankovic
Attillio Lombardo
Ivan de la Penà
Diego Simeone
Juan Sebastian Veron
Karel Poborsky
Dino Baggio
Stefano Fiore
Gaizka Mendieta

Vieri

Attaccanti:

S. Inzaghi

Pierluigi Casiraghi

Alen Boksic
Roberto Mancini
Marcelo Salas
Christian Vieri
Simone Inzaghi
Claudio Lopez
Hernan Crespo

Allenatore:

Sven Goran Eriksson

Il migliore di tutti: Claudio Lopez

Volevo chiedervi un favore: se avete la maglia originale di Claudio Lopez mi potete contattare, perchè sarei disposto a comprarla (se il prezzo è ragionevole)…

]]> http://elsimposio.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/gigapan-y-barak-obama/ Thu, 02 Apr 2009 10:16:44 +0000 kurro http://elsimposio.wordpress.com/2009/04/02/gigapan-y-barak-obama/ http://debico.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/as-10-maiores-vendas-da-historia/ Tue, 03 Mar 2009 21:46:14 +0000 debico http://debico.wordpress.com/2009/03/03/as-10-maiores-vendas-da-historia/

Alguns posts abaixo, Nóia falou dos atuais tempos de crise. Pois bem, este post reviverá os tempos de vacas gordas do futebol mundial. Afinal de contas, a fantástica revista Four-Four-Two trouxe uma relação das 10 maiores vendas da história do futebol e fiquei afim de analisá-las.

Vamos nessa?

1) Zidane (Juventus -> Real Madrid): R$223 milhões
Sem dúvidas, valeu cada centavo. O meia francês estourou em Madri, fez um baita sucesso e é certamente um dos maiores jogadores de futebol de todos os tempos.

2) Figo (Barcelona -> Real Madrid): R$183 milhões
Olha o Real de novo aí, gente! Em uma transferência pra lá de polêmica, os Merengues levaram Luis Figo para o Santiago Bernabéu e o português também deu certo no rival do Barça. Mais um ponto pro Real.

3) Crespo (Parma -> Lazio): R$168 milhões
Essa é discutível. Hernan Crespo foi muito bem no Parma, mas não repetiu o mesmo sucesso na Lazio. No entanto, fez alguns gols e até taça levantou. No meu modo de ver, fez menos do que deveria, mas valeu.

4) Buffon (Parma -> Juventus): R$154 milhões
Essa é indiscutível: o titular da seleção italiana foi uma belíssima compra e ainda se tornou símbolo da Vecchia Signora. É capitão e adorado pela torcida.

5) Mendieta (Valencia -> Lazio): R$147 milhões
Bola murcha da Lazio. Com sua canhotinha infernal, Gaizka Mendieta encantou os italianos, que pagaram bem, mas que viram pouco. Ele alternou bons e maus jogos. Não valeu o investimento.

6) Schevchenko (Milan -> Chelsea): R$140 milhões
Fracasso total. Após brilhar muito em Milão, Schevgol nada fez em Stamford Bridge. Tanto que está de volta ao Milan, por empréstimo.

7) Rio Ferdinand (Leeds -> Manchester United): R$140 milhões
Basta dizer que o zagueirão é o atual capitão (junto com Van der Sar) dos Red Devils e que levantou mais uma taça no último domingo. Bola dentro do Sir Alex Fergunson!

8 ) Ronaldo (Inter -> Real Madrid): R$137 milhões
Mais uma compra do Real, mais um acerto. Enquanto esteve inteiro, Ronaldo balançou as redes européias diversas vezes. Depois, baleado, acabou saindo pelos fundos.

9) Vieri (Lazio -> Inter): R$137 milhões
A Lazio compra mal, mas vende bem. Cristian Vieri fez muitos gols pela Internazionale e, por um bom tempo, foi sinônimo de bola na rede tanto em Milão quanto na Azurra.

10) Robinho (Real Madrid -> Manchester City): R$132 milhões
Até agora está sendo um dos piores negócios da história. Mas como o rapaz ainda joga lá e tem talento, esperemos mais um pouco.

Después de unas cuantas semanas en las que hemos dejado el tema un poco apartado, vuelve el repaso a las carátulas del Fifa, ese juego que todos adoramos en nuestra niñez.

2001 fue el año de Mendieta, uno de los pilares principales del Valencia de Cúper que llegó a la final de la Liga de Campeones contra el Real Madrid y de la selección española en la Eurocopa de Holanda-Bélgica. Esa temporada el vasco volvería a jugar a un gran nivel, consiguiendo llevar de nuevo al club ché a una final continental, esa que se perdió trágicamente en los penaltis. A pesar de los éxitos, el verano siguiente pondría pies en polvorosa, hacia tierras más fértiles, que resultaron movedizas y terminarían por hundirle. Pero esa ya es otra historia.

La portada británica la ocupó Paul Scholes, uno de los iconos de ese gran Manchester United de los Gigs, Beckham o Neville, que monopolizó casi todos los títulos de las Islas en la década de los 90 y principios de la siguiente.

El año anterior un jovencito francés había maravillado al mundo del fútbol, y sus internadas por la banda izquierda de Highbury, para posteriormente cruzar la pelota al palo contrario, no pasaron inadvertidas a los directivos de EA Sports, que le colocaron en el frontal de la edición francesa. Ese chico, obviamente, era Thierry Henry.

Los alemanes tuvieron a uno de sus mitos en portada y, Lothar Matthäus, a quien a modo de homenaje, se le dedicó el espacio, ya que se había retirado poco tiempo antes de la salida del juego.

En los Países Bajos, Edgar Davis, el chico que jugaba con gafas, lo que, junto a su larga cola, lo confirmó como uno de los jugadores más carismáticos del fútbol de los últimos años.

Pippo Inzaghi apuraba su última temporada en la Vecchia Signora antes de que el Milán abonara la nada despreciable cantidad de 40 milloncejos de euros por su fichaje, y mientras tanto protagonizaba la edición italiana. Su llegada al club de San Siro provocó que Leonardo, saliera de la entidad milanista, pero éste también pudo ocupar la cabecera del juego en Brasil.

Para terminar, las 2 últimas portadas. La imagen israelí traía a Shimon Gershon, una de las jóvenes promesas judías de la época y que después se convertiría en capitán del Hapoel, su equipo de toda la vida, hasta que, en 2006, el dinero fuera más importante que el sentimiento y se marchara al Beitar Jerusalén. Sus antiguos aficionados no se lo han perdonado y ahora le llaman Boged (traidor). Por cierto, ese mismo año el Hapoel alcanzaría los cuartos de la UEFA, eliminando al Chelsea y el Parma. La carátula estadounidense mostraba a Ben Olsen, que ese año emigró a Inglaterra para jugar con el Nottingham.

Además de éstas que podéis ver también hubo portadas en Portugal, con Sá Pinto -aquel que jugó en la Real Sociedad y que estuvo sancionado un año sin jugar- y Ko Jong-Su de Corea del Sur. Una vez más, si alguien encuentra alguna imagen que yo no haya mostrado, agradecería que me lo comentara.

Es un tipo inteligente éste Xavi. Inteligente. Fuera del campo habla con la prensa y siempre deja chicha, porque no es un robot, porque es inteligente, y la inteligencia fuera, se nota en el campo. Otros, muy buenos sobre el terreno, son instintivos. Maradona era instintivo y llevaba la física al extremo. Como Mágico. Pero no eran inteligentes. Con instinto puedes ser un gran central, o un delantero de talento. Pero la inteligencia se cocina en la Masía.

Pep es otro tipo inteligente. Cruyff le llamó un sábado a una discoteca. Estaba a punto de pedirle bailar a una chica, y el flaco le requirió en la primera convocatoria. Como era un esmirriao de dieciocho años, le soldó al eje de la zaga. Con Koeman. Y la gente se echó las manos a la cabeza. Pioneros. Luego a Frank de Boer se lo hicieron en el Ajax campeón de Europa. Otro inteligente, Johan. Pep, fajándose con grandes delanteros se hizo un hombre, subió a la posición de cuatro, dió clases particulares y se retiró por la puerta de atrás, como todos los inteligentes. Se le llamó maricón y cobarde. Como a todos los inteligentes. En la recta final coincidió en entrenos con Xavi, y avisó “hay un chaval de la cantera que será mejor que yo”.

Y entre medias otro inteligente más romántico, De la Peña. Construyó el mito de Ronaldo y sucumbió a los cantos de sirena italiana. Quedó varado en la misma costa que Mendieta, Cláudio López, Farinós, Ayala, Roberto Carlos, Anglomá, Laudrup, Paul Ince, y tantos otros… Y no volvió a levantar cabeza. Demasiado NBA. Un jugador 2.0, algo demagógico, poco dosificador. Pero Xavi es el hermano mayor que, sabiéndose la lección de mañana,  baja a la calle a vacilar a los niños con la pelota. Y ahora es cuando más luce. Pero no cuando más me gusta. Igual que Elvis en las Vegas, Xavi en un equipo desmotivado o sin calidad, es mi favorito. Porque él está igual. Cuando el Barça no estuvo de moda, y se plagó de jubilados borrachos copando espacio en el terreno, él siguió marcando goles, buscando pases, paredes, huecos. Pero nadie le acompañó y la afición, que no reconoce la inteligencia, sólo la demagogia, le olvidó. Y ahora vuelve.

Campeón de todo (del mundo sub-20, de la reciente Eurocopa, liga, Europa…) trotando con su pesada mochila (escuadra, cartabón, transportador de ángulos…) por todos los campos, con la idea de la belleza como himno generacional. Hace lo que ves y lo que no. Ayer la Sexta le señaló como el que más velocidad media empleó frente al Madrid. Y toca, y protege la pelota, y la acompaña, con esa figura tan característica, de jugador pequeñito que se salvaguarda con los codos y cose el cuero la diestra, por dentro o por fuera, como una extensión del pie, mientras el cerebro le manda información y bombea juego. 

Pero cuando el equipo andaba mal, y los compañeros se convertían en rivales, mantener la pose y la elegancia, atacar como si pensaras que puedes hacer gol, salir del terreno con la cabeza alta, morir con la estética por bandera, significa convencer de que el fútbol es algo tan complejo como simple.

En un país en el que los mediocentros con talento quedan en la sombra -Mazinho, Urrutia, Milla…-, y sólo ocupan el titular después de un millón de buenos partidos -Mauro Silva, Senna, Pirlo-  lo de Xavi es un reconocimiento a los caídos por la pura clase, a los abatidos en combate frente a los advenedizos que ponen el acento en el músculo y los cojones. España se estrelló con los cojones. Siempre. La selección que maravilló con Camacho -la del 9-0 a Austria- tenía a Pep en la manija. La que palmó en el mundial, a Albelda. Y palmamos con Hierros y Nadales. Hasta que Luis no rindió pleitesía a la clase en el centro, no hubo copa. Camacho, por más que grites no hay jugada con más cojones, que un golazo por la escuadra. El resto es pura impotencia.

Y nunca le pidió nada a nadie. La inteligencia seduce.

I have discovered online a very interesting classic journal article about Aztec autosacrifice by the esteemed Dr. Zelia Nuttall. Written in 1904, it lacks the benefits of recent scholarship, but it still remains a keystone work in understanding the specific form of autosacrifice that is bloodletting from the ears. Dr. Nuttall provides detailed description and discussion of the various specific forms of ear sacrifice, accompanied by extensive translation from numerous codices and photographs of pictorial depictions of this type of penance. If you are interested in learning more about how the Aztecs traditionally performed ear sacrifice, I strongly recommend following the link to read the article. Even better, as it is in the public domain, the full text is available to download as a PDF through Google Books!

Click here to go read “A Penitential Rite of the Ancient Mexicans” by Dr. Zelia Nuttall!

Some highlights of this article are discussions of the close association of ear autosacrifice with the gods Tezcatlipoca, Mixcoatl, Huitzilopochtli, and Quetzalcoatl. Of particular interest during this veintana of Quecholli is the description of a special type of autosacrifice attributed to Mixcoatl, the God of the Hunt. The article includes several forms of ear sacrifice linked to specific veintanas, including Quecholli and Panquetzaliztli. Additionally, it describes a sacrifice offered on the day Nahui Ollin, the daysign of the current Sun, the Sun Four Movement.

Also interesting is Dr. Nuttall’s analysis of the jaguar/ocelot imagery surrounding Tezcatlipoca and his connection to the constellation Citlal-Xonecuilli, which is known today as either Ursa Major or Minor (a little help on which one, Shock?).  [Edit -- It's Ursa Major.  Thanks, Shock!]  Instead of a bear, the Aztecs saw the constellation as a jaguar and a symbol of Tezcatlipoca. It reminded them of the time when Tezcatlipoca, acting as the First Sun, was chased from the sky by Quetzalcoatl and descended to Earth in the form of a great jaguar to devour the giants, the first people. That is why the constellation seems to swoop from its peak in the sky down to the horizon, reenacting this myth every day in the night sky.

My only irritation with this article is a few points where the good doctor strays from proper anthropological neutrality to make disparaging comments about the practice of autosacrifice, and to congratulate the Spaniards on stamping it out. I’ll admit it, I do derive a certain sly pleasure in using this article to help modern Aztec Reconstructionist pagans in reviving this religious practice!

Jaguar Vessel

The artists that concentrate on nature add a more mystical element to the subject of breath. Here the focus is the relation of man to nature and how the two are united by means of breath. Almost as ephemeral as breath itself, these works don’t strive for immortality; they get carried away by the wind, destroyed by the passage of time. However, by evoking deeply hidden instincts or distant memories they manage to carve their impression deep into our minds…

Giuseppe Penone, “Breath Leaves” (1979-1991)

The artist laid down on heaps of leaves, breathing into them and leaving the outline of his body…

Ana Mendieta, Silhouettes

The artist used to leave the trace of her body in the environment, using every possible means: earth, water, fire and in the last picture, just air…

Thanks to Drew Wright for suggesting this classic game. I’m not sure that any commentary I write can do any better than the BBC’s clockwatch report of the time, so with acknowledgements to the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/euro2000/800493.stm) I’m going to reproduce theirs.

Wednesday, 21 June, 2000

31 mins: Ljubinko Drulovic breaks clear down the left as he has already on several occasions. He whips in a fine cross and hot-shot striker Savo Milosevic is on hand to head Yugoslavia in front.
Spain 0-1 Yugoslavia

39 mins: Raul’s neat movement on the edge of the box earns him a yard of space. The ball finds its way through to Alfonso who sweeps it home with his left foot.
Spain 1-1 Yugoslavia

51 mins: Substitute Dejan Govedarica picks up a pass from Drulovic and smashes the ball home from the edge of the area. Another fine assist for Drulovic, another fine finish and it’s Yugoslavia who move ahead again.
Spain 1-2 Yugoslavia

52 mins: They aren’t in front for long. Etxeberria sets up fellow substitute Pedro Munitis, who curls in a beautful strike off the post and an instant equaliser for Spain. What a superb game this is turning out to be.
Spain 2-2 Yugoslavia

75 mins: Another Mihajlovic delivery causes pandemonium in the Spain box and Slobodan Komljenovic eventually stabs past Canizares at the far post. Ten-man Yugoslavia go ahead for the third time in a cracking match. Spain need something fast or they will be out of Euro 2000.
Spain 2-3 Yugoslavia

90 mins: A lifeline for Jose Antonio Camacho’s side as the referee points to the spot for a challenge on Abelardo. Mendieta steps up to coolly slot home – and Spain are still alive… just.
Spain 3-3 Yugoslavia

94 mins: Unbelievable scenes as the ball gets pumped into a crowded Yugoslav area and Alfonso shows great poise and skill to guide a difficult volley into the corner. Who would have thought it? Spain are back from the brink.
Spain 4-3 Yugoslavia

95 mins: The final whistle blows and Spain have done it. Those two late goals have got them into the quarter-finals after the most thrilling game of the tournament so far.
Final score: Spain 4-3 Yugoslavia

A reminder:

Thanks to Drew Wright for suggesting this classic game. I’m not sure that any commentary I write can do any better than the BBC’s clockwatch report of the time, so with acknowledgements to the BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/euro2000/800493.stm) I’m going to reproduce theirs.

Wednesday, 21 June, 2000

31 mins: Ljubinko Drulovic breaks clear down the left as he has already on several occasions. He whips in a fine cross and hot-shot striker Savo Milosevic is on hand to head Yugoslavia in front.
Spain 0-1 Yugoslavia

39 mins: Raul’s neat movement on the edge of the box earns him a yard of space. The ball finds its way through to Alfonso who sweeps it home with his left foot.
Spain 1-1 Yugoslavia

51 mins: Substitute Dejan Govedarica picks up a pass from Drulovic and smashes the ball home from the edge of the area. Another fine assist for Drulovic, another fine finish and it’s Yugoslavia who move ahead again.
Spain 1-2 Yugoslavia

52 mins: They aren’t in front for long. Etxeberria sets up fellow substitute Pedro Munitis, who curls in a beautful strike off the post and an instant equaliser for Spain. What a superb game this is turning out to be.
Spain 2-2 Yugoslavia

75 mins: Another Mihajlovic delivery causes pandemonium in the Spain box and Slobodan Komljenovic eventually stabs past Canizares at the far post. Ten-man Yugoslavia go ahead for the third time in a cracking match. Spain need something fast or they will be out of Euro 2000.
Spain 2-3 Yugoslavia

90 mins: A lifeline for Jose Antonio Camacho’s side as the referee points to the spot for a challenge on Abelardo. Mendieta steps up to coolly slot home – and Spain are still alive… just.
Spain 3-3 Yugoslavia

94 mins: Unbelievable scenes as the ball gets pumped into a crowded Yugoslav area and Alfonso shows great poise and skill to guide a difficult volley into the corner. Who would have thought it? Spain are back from the brink.
Spain 4-3 Yugoslavia

95 mins: The final whistle blows and Spain have done it. Those two late goals have got them into the quarter-finals after the most thrilling game of the tournament so far.
Final score: Spain 4-3 Yugoslavia

A reminder:

Nada será igual en las comunicaciones, antes y después del lanzamiento mundial del Iphone 3G y las sucesivas actualizaciones y copias de otras empresas, nace una nueva manera de comunicarnos y por ende “globalizarnos”, hablar por teléfono, mandar mails y sms, navegar por internet, escuchar música y sacar fotos, consultar el tiempo, ubicarnos en cualquier lugar con el GPS, calculadora, la bolsa del mundo, tomar notas, armar la agenda personal y laboral…“Eh…Mendieta…no será mucho”…como diría El Quijote…“Sancho, cosas vederes que non crederes”

Estar comunicados, tener información al instante, planificar y organizar…todo sostenido por una mano y operado por la otra, es fascinante, por que modifica nuestra cotidianeidad y nos acerca a nuestro mundo infantil de hace 50 años cuando en en la historieta Dick Tracy, el protagonista se comunicaba con su reloj pulsera y eso nos parecía algo mágico e inalcanzable, bueno ya no lo es, las cosas cambian por el ingenio humano aplicado a la tecnología.

La política como actividad humana no puede quedar ajena a estas realidades que modifican la vida de relación, de hecho en las recientes elecciones primariasen Estados Unidos, la tecnología vía internet, videos, mails…se convirtió en una herramienta que en la campaña de Barack Obama, fue la estrella del accionar proselitista del morocho.

En la Argentina, todavía hay una cierta reticencia a la utilización de las nuevas tecnologías, en la política…el conflicto que vivimos entre el gobierno y el campo, marco una bisagra con la masividad de los mails utilizados por el sector agropecuario para sus convocatorias y proselitismos y esta tendencia irá en aumento y en las elecciones legislativas del 2009, será imprescindible su utilización como herramienta de comunicación.

Lo mediático y lo virtual, son realidades que ayudan a la formación de opiniones e identidades en el seno del conjunto social, el Iphone 3G, viene a incidir en esta dirección…“aunque usted, no lo crea”, remedando a Ripley…

Por estas horas y de cara a la batalla del Senado, las comunicaciones, están al rojo vivo, para consolidar intenciones de votos o para cambiar decisiones ya tomadas…mails, sms, llamadas…son la artillería que el gobierno utiliza para lograr los dos votos que le están faltando para ser mayoría y del lado de la oposición, lo mismo vale, para los siete que le están faltando para frenar al oficialismo…

Vienen nuevos y excitantes tiempos en la comunicación y en la política…nace la Comunicación Política de la revolución Iphone 3G.

Posdata: Linda semanita se nos viene !!!

” Todo pasa y todo queda, pero lo nuestro es pasar, pasar haciendo caminos, caminos sobre la mar. Nunca perseguí la gloria, ni dejar en la memoria de los hombres mi canción” , dice Antonio Machado en su poema Cantares.

El mandato y la vida de un gobernante pasa, sus acciones de gobierno quedan y deciden si en su camino, sobre la mar, encontró o no la gloria, de por cierto siempre perseguida, para que su mandato-cantar quede en la memoria de los hombres.

Los primeros 100 días de la presidenta, son la primera estrofa de sus Cantares de gobierno, es el arranque de su hacer camino, permiten delinear “su estilo”, sus aciertos y errores iniciales y vislumbrar el rumbo elegido para gobernar durante cuatro años…

Es un dato que los primeros 100, transcurrieron mayoritariamente en las vacaciones, de lo que hemos llamado “La Argentina Escolar” (marzo-noviembre) por lo cuál el ritmo de gobierno y los días en Casa de Gobierno, apenas si rozaron la mitad del tiempo, los 2 discursos (asunción e inauguración de sesiones del Congreso), brillantes en su alocución pero similares en el contenido están marcando “intenciones y deseos” pero no realidades, el gran dato de la economía está dado por los 50.000 millones de dólares de reserva en el Banco Central, una especie de fondo antisísmico ante los avatares de la economía mundial, un fondo en aumento debido al dólar alto y las retenciones al campo y la producción, acá hay una crisis, virulenta por estas horas, donde el diálogo es de sordos, lo que marca un estilo no dialoguístico y si imperativo.

La CGT a través de Hugo Moyano trata de cerrar acuerdos salariales alrededor del 19.5 %, obviamente que van a ser devorados por una inflación en permanente ascenso desde principios de año, de esto “el discurso oficial” no habla, y los índices poco claros están generando, más inflación…Con Moyano se pasó de la tensión inicial a un cierto idilio que el crimen por encargo del tesorero de los camionesros rosarinos, está poniendo en jaque a esta principal apoyatura del gobierno nacional.

No hay inversiones importantes, por que no se terminan de cerrar aspectos de la deuda externa y ningún político de fuste de las principales economías del mundo se acerca a la Argentina, y sin inversiones el crecimiento se paraliza, aún cuando aumente la recaudación, Condoleeza Rice y Angela Merkel, no incluyeron a Buenos Aires en su periplo.

La política Internacional, arrancó con un reto a Tabaré por Botnia, otro reto al presidente de Guinea, un viaje a Venezuela, la pelea con EEUU por la “operación basura” y Antonini y una “tímida” reconciliación en las relaciones, un traspié en la entrega de los rehenes de las Farc, el no placet a Iribarne para su embajada en el Vaticano, una buena actuación discursiva en Santo Domingo y un próximo viaje a Londres y a París, en lo interno se complicó con la venta de autos diplomáticos en la cancillería y la renuncia del vice canciller.

La oposición más fuerte fue una frase el expresidente Eduardo Duhalde….”Cristina no está preparada para gobernar”, enarbolando la teoría del “doble comando” entre Cristina Kirchner y Néstor, devenido en candidato a Presidente del Partido Justicialista, para que nadie del justicialismo “saque los pies del plato” , el acuerdo con Roberto Lavagna es el botón de muestra.

A los temas que en los primeros 100, “no se les pudo poner cascabel al gato” son la crisis energética, la inflación y la ascendente inseguridad.

Aun cuando las encuestas, señalan altos índices de popularidad de la presidenta, menores que los de Néstor Kirchner en sus primeros 100 días de gobierno, un balance de las luces y sombras, coloca a estos primeros 100, con más tendencia hacia la sombra que hacia la luz…por supuesto que Machado opinaría…“Caminante no hay camino, se hace camino al andar” pero…“Golpe a golpe” y “verso a verso”…va a estar jodido, Mendieta.

So its that time of year again. If your Fantasy Football team (like my own) is floating aimlessly with players you were SURE would come good….still yet to come good its time to get some transfers in! Below is my squad from hell, the players who you may well have thrown in your side as the season began, then regretted it as your players regularly topped the “Transfers Out (Gameweek)” column! Whatever transfers you make, avoid this unlucky 11.

1. Paul Robinson – While his “goals conceded” tally may only be eighteen,(albeit the 3rd worst in the league) his “matches thrown away with untimely errors” must be much greater.
2. Luke Young – The fact that Young sat on the bench for England in Russia despite gaining his team a fantastic ten fantasy points in 630 minutes of football says a lot for Steve McClaren.
3. Pascal Chimbonda – Covering at left back for my side purely because Spurs have conceded 21 goals with him on the pitch this season, more than all the rest of the Spurs squad (and all but 2 of Derby’s!)
4. Tal Ben Haim – He was said to be one an Abramovich signing, proof if proof were needed just how little the Russian knows about football
5. Phil Jageilka - Priced at the start of the season at 5.5m, you can now pick him up for 5.0 (dont)
6. Lassana Diarra – Wenger’s £2m summer purchase has played 19 minutes, don’t be fooled into following his lead.
7. Steve Sidwell - What did he expect. Seven Chelsea midfielders have played more minutes than Sidwell this season. That’s everyone except Ballack!
8. Kevin Boateng – When Tainio, Jenas, Zokora, Stalteri and even Gardner play more than your signing you know its time to sell.
9. David Nugent - Harry’s £6m signing has been outshone by Benjani, Kanu and Utaka, who are all far better buys.
10. Andriy Shevchenko – If you were buying him in the hope that he would come good eventually he hasn’t!
11. Morten Gamst Pederson - Follow the lead of the other 2297 people on fantasy.premierleague.com and sell the Norwegian winger, especially since he’s being outscored and outshone by David Dunn!

Notable mentions should also go to Eduardo, Bywater, Mendieta and Earnshaw!

Como siempre que algún referente de la cultura o de lo que sea se muere, alguien manda por mail “las mejores frases de…”, la mayoría de las veces se trata de un compendio atropellado de palabritas que no dicen nada… Pero en este caso alguien me mandó “Las mejores frases de Inodoro Pereyra” en honor al Negro Fontanarrosa (grande de grandes) y la verdá es que no tiene desperdicio, ¡Disfruten!

-”Endijpué de tantos años, si tengo que elegir otra vez, la elijo a la
Eulogia con los ojos cerrados. Porque si los abro elijo a otra”.

- Dígame don Inodoro ¿usté está con la Eulogia por alguna promesa?
- Mendieta, uno se deslumbra con la mujer linda, se asombra con la
inteligente… y se queda con la que le da pelota.

- Vago no soy, quizá algo tímido para el esjuerzo.

- Estoy comprometido con mi tierra, casado con sus problemas y divorciado de sus riquezas.

- ¿Y usted cómo se gana la vida?
- ¿Ganar? ¡De casualidá estoy sacando un empate!

- ¿No andará mal de la vista, don Inodoro?
- Puede ser. Hace como tres meses que no veo un peso.

- ¿Por qué esta agresión gratuita?
- ¡Si quiere se la cobro!

- El pingüino es monógamo.
- ¿Y por qué cree que le dicen Pájaro Bobo?

- Con la verdá no ofendo ni temo. Con la mentira zafo y sobrevivo, Mendieta.

- La historia lo juzgará. Pero tiene el mejor de los abogados: el olvido.

- Eso de “hasta que la muerte los separe” es una incitación al asesinato.

- Acepto que la Eulogia es fulera, pero es de las que demuestran la beyeza por el absurdo.

- Usté no está gorda, Eulogia. Es un bastión contra la anorexia apátrida.

- ¿Puede una persona disaparecer de a pedazos? Porque a la Eulogia le
desapareció la cintura.

- Pereyra, míreme a la cara.
-¿Por qué este castigo, Eulogia? ¿Por qué tanta crueldá?

- La Eulogia es, lejos, la mejor prienda que conocí en mi vida. Bien lejos… 20, 30 kilómetros. De cerca es así, jodida…

- La Eulogia es una santa. No como mi cuñada que sufre el Síndrome de la Abeja Reina. Se cree una reina y es un bicho.

- A veces la picardía crioya es sólo desesperación, Mendieta.

- Ahura hay fertilización asistida. Vea el caso de la señora del viejo
Aredes. Quedó embarazada. En el pueblo se comenta que al viejo lo ayudaron.

- ¡Mire esta vaca, Serafín! Musa inspiradora de miles de composiciones escolares… ¡Y ahora es acusada de traficante de colesterol por el naturismo apátrida! Nos da su leche, su carne, su cuero. ¡Lo quiero ver a usté haciéndose una campera de zapayitos!

- La muerte nivela a güenos y malos, don Inodoro. Lo malo es que nivela pa’ bajo.

- No tenemos que copiar las cosas malas de ajuera, Lloriqueo. ¡Nosotros tenemos que crear nuestras propias cosas malas!

- Estuvo divertido el pesebre viviente este año, Mendieta.
- Bien la vaca. Algo sobreactuado el burro.

- Soy crítico meteorológico, señor. La tormenta de anoche. “Floja
iluminación de los relámpagos, yuvia repetida, escenografía pobre y pésimo sonido de los truenos en otro fiasco de esta puesta en escena de Tata Dios. Una típica propuesta de verano, liviana, pasatista, para un público poco exigente”.

- ¡No me diga que va a barrer, Pereyra! ¡La última tarea doméstica que hizo jué doblar una serviyeta!

- Yo no quiero ser irrespetuoso, Eulogia, pero lo que ha hecho Tata Dios con usté es abuso de autoridá.

-Inodoro – Digo yo, Mendieta… Pa’ conseguir la famosa leche cultivada… ¿habrá que sembrar la vaca?

Mendieta – ¿Y el caldo de cultivo, don Inodoro?

Inodoro- ¡Las veces que tiré sopa en el surco y no brotó ni un fidéu dedalito!