It was an image of the elections. Not all the pre-voting barbecues, not the landscape littered with posters for parties no one had ever heard of, not José Ramón and fellow PP sorts off for family days out on the "day of reflection", traipsing through the cultural heritage countryside of Mallorca, vice-president "Nipper" Gomez with a man-of-the-people rucksack strapped to his back. Not these. The image was the sofa, the inflatable one belonging to Madrid's mayoral aspirant Esperanza Aguirre. Esperanza - hope, expectation. She went in hope and expectation, blowing up her sofa with a foot pump in the neighbourhoods of the capital. She packed it into a Ryanair hold and transported it to Mallorca. Once more inflated, it was to come to the aid of José Ramón. It didn't. She came, she inflated, he lost. Deflated.
Esperanza will need to try harder. A whole inflatable three-piece with foot rests and coffee table might now be required. She is battling against a new-age Podemos-style sofa, an Ahora Madrid one, not decorated with motifs of Real or Atlético but discreet hammers and sickles (supposedly). You see, the elections may be over but the real election has since begun. The unseemly scramble for coalitions, for retention of or gaining of power - municipal and regional.
Why was Esperanza dragging an inflatable around with her? It was all an attempt to get up close to the people (though in typically Spanish style, the people are rarely referred to; they are the more impersonal "citizens"). Closeness, listening: these were keywords of the elections as much as "stability" was. But things can, if you are not careful, become unstable. If the sofa gets the puncture of electorate rejection, the air is evacuated. Buoyant politics in a PP manner become the sinking feeling of defeat.
The sofa was a late-in-the-day attempt to demonstrate closeness. For years, closeness was of no consequence. But then along came the new lot, with their mantras of participation, their Twitter accounts and online citizen (people) decision-making. Suddenly, the old lot were reminded that there were citizens (people). Blimey, maybe we ought to talk to them. Get up close and personal. Unfortunately, inflatable sofas have been proven not to be the answer, unless the question was -how does a politician make herself appear rather ridiculous? Answer: get an inflatable. What next? Accompanying bouncy castles to keep the kiddies happy while mum and dad are being listened to, close up on the sofa?
But in an act of probably sofa satire, the left have discovered furniture as well. Or they have in Sa Pobla at any rate. Més per Sa Pobla became Sofa per Sa Pobla for a brief time at the weekend. Not that this was an inflatable. Oh no, it was an altogether more rigid affair, an expression of permanence: their hope, their expectation. Where had the sofa come from? Newly acquired from Ikea or maybe hauled out of a nearby skip? Recycled. That will be it. Més are not eco-nationalists for nothing.
The sofa was introduced to the market square on Sunday. As it wasn't right in the market, it probably didn't contravene any licensing regulations regarding market stalls. Not that Més should worry, if they become part of the ruling administration. Everyone will be getting new sofas. The town hall will provide. Perhaps. The sofa's appearance was part of the Més post-election election campaign for government. Improbable though it had seemed, Més wants to ally with PSOE and the Independents and El Pi to form the administration. Anyone but the PP, basically, even if it means an unholy alliance of unlikely bed or rather sofa fellows.
Going to market would mean that the Més message would reach a wide audience - one that includes foreign residents who make habitual trips to the Sa Pobla Sunday market. Not that they matter; they don't vote in any event. No, this was a message for the "poblers". Or might the sofa have been mistaken for an item for sale? Might its occupants have been taken for traders? There, after all, was Antonio Simón Tomás, the Més mayoral candidate, holding up a notice which read 1,141. A bit overpriced, the market visitors would have thought. For a recycled sofa.
This was of course the number of votes that Més had received. "Thank you", the notice also read. 1,141 - 997 fewer than the PP, which received the most votes. 18.7% of the share of the vote - 16.4% lower than the PP's share. How strange it can seem that the system of proportional representation can discount the wishes of 35% of those who bothered to vote. But then, the PP's closeness had only been air - some of it hot. It had been temporary. The Més closeness was more substantial and it was placed in the corner of the people's market.
Showing posts with label Esperanza Aguirre. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Esperanza Aguirre. Show all posts
Wednesday, June 03, 2015
Tuesday, April 22, 2014
Bullfighting Apologies And Apologists
One of the grandest fairs of a Spanish spring is that of San Isidro in Madrid. It is a fair which attracts visitors from across Spain and from overseas. As part of the promotion for this year's fair, the travel agency Nautalia Viajes had offered a package which included hotel accommodation and entrance to one of the main events of this grand fair: the bullfight in the Las Ventas bullring. The agency had offered this package; it now no longer does. Nautalia in fact withdrew this promotion almost two weeks ago. The withdrawal followed an avalanche of criticism from opponents of the bullfight.
Nautalia's explanation for dropping the promotion was posted onto its Facebook page. Its wording was such that it left no one in any doubt that it, Nautalia, recognised that a mistake had been made. "After listening to your petitions (and the informal 'vuestras' was used for 'your') and as a business which values opinions of its community, we have decided to cease selling the package." The explanation went on: "We are conscious of the argument with regard to bullfighting, so for this reason we apologise to people who may have been offended by the sale of this package ... At no time has Nautalia defended the mistreatment of animals."
This was a strong statement of regret. It may have been for PR purposes, but it was PR that was necessary in the face of the onslaught of criticism and of the power of social media. The agency doubtless calculated that it stood to lose more custom by continuing to offer the package than by withdrawing it. Its Twitter account revealed that some supporters of the bullfight said that they would stop being clients.
Spain.info is the website for the national tourism agency Turespaña. Under a heading, "Bullfights: the magic of Spain's 'national fiesta' ", the website talks about the "excitement" of this fiesta and says that "to discover Spain is to discover bullfighting culture". It refers to the San Isidro event as indeed it does to others. It makes one crucial mistake, though. It includes reference to the bullfight in Barcelona. There no longer is a bullfight in Barcelona. Catalonia has banned bullfighting.
The effusive description that Spain.info offers is probably to be expected. Even if there are those at Turespaña who are wary of being involved with the argument in the way that Nautalia has been, the agency could hardly not mention bullfighting or be critical of it. One could argue, however, that it goes over the top in seeking to convey the "excitement".
But Turespaña is of course a government agency, and the national government of the Partido Popular has made clear its commitment to and support of bullfighting. And there are others from the PP who are clear in this support. The party's president in Madrid, Esperanza Aguirre, is one of them.
On Sunday at Seville's April fair (where there is a bullfight), Sra. Aguirre issued her own strong statement as part of the oration for the bullfight, one that was very different to that which Nautalia had felt compelled to make. She spoke of how bullfighting was part of her family's tradition and had been since her great-grandfather's days. She placed her love of bulls alongside her Christianity and her love of country. She accused critics of bullfighting of being anti-Spanish and said that their arguments were of a much lower intellectual level than had been inherent to criticisms expressed a century ago. In other words, one has to conclude that opponents, in addition to being anti-Spanish, are little more than an unintelligent rabble.
Invoking being anti-Spanish and so also its opposite, being pro-Spanish, can be seen within the context of the Catalonian argument. The bullfighting ban, where many within the PP are concerned, was purely political. But this ignores the fact that the ban was the result of popular legislation through petition. Not all the thousands upon thousands who signed the petition could surely have been motivated solely by Catalonian nationalist sentiments and a desire to attack a potent symbol of Spanishness, i.e. the bullfight.
Spanish nationalism is quite clearly threatened by Catalonia's quest for independence, and this is a threat felt by those on both the right and the left politically (PSOE isn't in favour). But there is a crucial difference when it comes to the nationalist narrative. Elements within the PP are in tune with Sra. Aguirre's back-to-the-future model of nationalism. The Spanish people may still be Christian but they aren't necessarily staunch Catholics, as has been demonstrated, for example, by opposition to abortion reform. And nor are they necessarily defenders of the bullfight. None of this opposition makes them anti-Spanish.
If Sra. Aguirre and the PP were a travel agency, they might feel obliged to issue a retraction.
Nautalia's explanation for dropping the promotion was posted onto its Facebook page. Its wording was such that it left no one in any doubt that it, Nautalia, recognised that a mistake had been made. "After listening to your petitions (and the informal 'vuestras' was used for 'your') and as a business which values opinions of its community, we have decided to cease selling the package." The explanation went on: "We are conscious of the argument with regard to bullfighting, so for this reason we apologise to people who may have been offended by the sale of this package ... At no time has Nautalia defended the mistreatment of animals."
This was a strong statement of regret. It may have been for PR purposes, but it was PR that was necessary in the face of the onslaught of criticism and of the power of social media. The agency doubtless calculated that it stood to lose more custom by continuing to offer the package than by withdrawing it. Its Twitter account revealed that some supporters of the bullfight said that they would stop being clients.
Spain.info is the website for the national tourism agency Turespaña. Under a heading, "Bullfights: the magic of Spain's 'national fiesta' ", the website talks about the "excitement" of this fiesta and says that "to discover Spain is to discover bullfighting culture". It refers to the San Isidro event as indeed it does to others. It makes one crucial mistake, though. It includes reference to the bullfight in Barcelona. There no longer is a bullfight in Barcelona. Catalonia has banned bullfighting.
The effusive description that Spain.info offers is probably to be expected. Even if there are those at Turespaña who are wary of being involved with the argument in the way that Nautalia has been, the agency could hardly not mention bullfighting or be critical of it. One could argue, however, that it goes over the top in seeking to convey the "excitement".
But Turespaña is of course a government agency, and the national government of the Partido Popular has made clear its commitment to and support of bullfighting. And there are others from the PP who are clear in this support. The party's president in Madrid, Esperanza Aguirre, is one of them.
On Sunday at Seville's April fair (where there is a bullfight), Sra. Aguirre issued her own strong statement as part of the oration for the bullfight, one that was very different to that which Nautalia had felt compelled to make. She spoke of how bullfighting was part of her family's tradition and had been since her great-grandfather's days. She placed her love of bulls alongside her Christianity and her love of country. She accused critics of bullfighting of being anti-Spanish and said that their arguments were of a much lower intellectual level than had been inherent to criticisms expressed a century ago. In other words, one has to conclude that opponents, in addition to being anti-Spanish, are little more than an unintelligent rabble.
Invoking being anti-Spanish and so also its opposite, being pro-Spanish, can be seen within the context of the Catalonian argument. The bullfighting ban, where many within the PP are concerned, was purely political. But this ignores the fact that the ban was the result of popular legislation through petition. Not all the thousands upon thousands who signed the petition could surely have been motivated solely by Catalonian nationalist sentiments and a desire to attack a potent symbol of Spanishness, i.e. the bullfight.
Spanish nationalism is quite clearly threatened by Catalonia's quest for independence, and this is a threat felt by those on both the right and the left politically (PSOE isn't in favour). But there is a crucial difference when it comes to the nationalist narrative. Elements within the PP are in tune with Sra. Aguirre's back-to-the-future model of nationalism. The Spanish people may still be Christian but they aren't necessarily staunch Catholics, as has been demonstrated, for example, by opposition to abortion reform. And nor are they necessarily defenders of the bullfight. None of this opposition makes them anti-Spanish.
If Sra. Aguirre and the PP were a travel agency, they might feel obliged to issue a retraction.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
