Content deleted Content added
→Analysis: Marcos Pérez Jimenez's regime wasn't anti-capitalist at all Tags: Reverted Visual edit |
Undid revision 1053559654 by 45.187.93.28 (talk) cool, but an expert who is named and cited said this, don’t change their words, eh |
||
Line 31:
==Analysis==
[[File:Jim visits Plaza Cubierta in Assignment Venezuela.png|thumb|Still frame of "Jim" visiting the [[Modernism|Modernist]] [[University City of Caracas|Plaza Cubierta]] at [[Central University of Venezuela]]]]
The film was produced in the context of the [[History of Venezuela (1948–1958)|Marcos Pérez Jiménez military dictatorship]], with scholar Lisa Blackmore describing the propaganda and national image of that time as having distinct dual purposes: for Venezuelans, the Venezuelan leaders wanted to show an independent
Scholar [[Miguel Tinker Salas]] wrote that the film was part of a practice intended to make the American employees more sympathetic to the Venezuelan locals upon arrival, and to not be too brash; he also believes it was unsuccessful in this aim. He states this is because it was only shown to employees of petroleum corporations, not their families, and was paired with extensive classes in [[Venezuelan culture]] that generally perturbed the employees — enough for stories of expatriates calling the practice "indoctrination" to arise. Tinker also suggests that anything learnt from the lessons and film were quickly forgotten, with American oil workers still retaining their opinion of cultural dominance.<ref name=tinker>{{cite book|last1=Tinker Salas|first1=Miguel|last2=Joseph|first2=Gilbert M.|last3=Rosenberg|first3=Emily S.|title=The Enduring Legacy: Oil, Culture, and Society in Venezuela|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_R5JkihMrXAC&pg=PA148|publisher=Duke University Press|year=2009|isbn=9780822392231}}</ref><sup>:147–148</sup>
| |||