The Funny Side of Globalization by Thomas Olesen

IRSH 52(2007),pp.21–34DOI:10.1017/S0020859007003100

# 2007InternationaalInstituutvoorSocialeGeschiedenis

TheFunnySideofGlobalization:Humourand Humanityin Zapatista Framing

ThomasOlesen

Summary: Thisarticlearguesthattheliteratureonsocialmovementsand globalizationhasnotpaidsufficientattentiontothewayinwhichpoliticalactors whoactgloballytrytoovercomethesocial,cultural,andpoliticaldistancesthat separatethem.Itintroducestheconceptofglobalframingtogivefocustothe discursiveprocessescentraltosuch‘‘distancebridging’’.Inparticular,itemphasizes howsymbolsandemotionsarecrucialintheframingofdistance.Empirically,it discusseshowtheconsiderableglobalresonancecreatedbythe Zapatistas inMexico isfacilitatedbyaframingstrategy,carriedoutmainlybythemovement’s spokesman,SubcomandanteMarcos,inwhichhumour,imperfection,andsymbols playadecisiverole.

INTRODUCTION

Bythemid-1990sglobalizationwasawell-establishedtopicinsociology, butnotsointhefieldofpoliticalactivism.Thefirstsystematicsignsoflife dateonlyfromthesecondhalfofthe1990sandittookanevent,the‘‘Battle inSeattle’’in1999,toreallysparkthegrowthofanewagenda.1 Today,the fieldiswelloutofitsinfancy,andempiricaldevelopmentsandasteady paceoftheoreticalrefinementhaveprovidednewcomerswithconsiderableworktobecomeacquaintedwith.2 Alloftheseworksdealimplicitly orexplicitlywiththeissueofdistance.How,inotherwords,do individualsandcollectiveslivingindifferentgeographicallocalesand underdifferentsocial,cultural,andpoliticalconditionssucceedin

1.Forsomeearlyworks,seeJackieSmith etal.(eds), TransnationalSocialMovementsand GlobalPolitics:SolidaritybeyondtheState (Syracuse,NY,1997);MargaretKeckandKathryn Sikkink, ActivistsbeyondBorders (Ithaca,NY,1998);DonatelladellaPorta etal.(eds), Social MovementsinaGlobalizingWorld (NewYork,1999).

2.SeeforexampleSanjeevKhagram,JamesV.Riker,andKathrynSikkink(eds), Restructuring WorldPolitics:TransnationalSocialMovements,Networks,andNorms (Minneapolis,MN, 2002);DonatelladellaPortaandSidneyTarrow(eds), TransnationalProtestandGlobal Activism (Lanham,MD,2005);JoeBandyandJackieSmith(eds), CoalitionsacrossBorders: TransnationalProtestandtheNeoliberalOrder (Lanham,MD,2005).

communicatingandactingwitheachother?How,toputitmoresimply,is thedistancebetweenthemovercome?Thesequestionsareabsolutely centraltoresearchintoactivismandglobalization,butifweagreewith that,thenitissurprisinghowlittleexplicitattentiontheissueofdistance bridginghasreceivedintheliterature.ThisarticleusesMexico’s Zapatistas andthewidespreadglobalresonancetheyhavecreatedtoilluminatethis terrain.3 Inaccordancewiththethemeofthissupplement,Ishallanalyse howthe Zapatistas,andinparticulartheirspokesman,Subcomandante Marcos,haveemployedaframeworkofhumour,humanity,and imperfectiontofacilitateglobalandcross-distancecommunication.

FRAMINGDISTANCE

Globalizationisabstract.Inasociologicalsense,globalizationrefers,to borrowBenedictAnderson’sphrase,tothecreationofimaginedcommunities,4 whicharesocialrelationshipsnotbasedonphysicalco-presence.In amorestraightforwardmanner,itmeansthatwehaverelationshipswith peoplewedonotknow.Suchaviewofglobalizationisacontinuationofa well-wornthemeinthesociologyofmodernity.Theechofrom Durkheim’sanalysisofthetransitionfrommechanicaltoorganic solidarity,fromcommunitiesbasedonphysicalco-presencetomore complexsocialsystemssuchasthecityandthenation,isperhaps especiallyapparenthere.Todaysocialsystemsareacquiringanadditional layertothiscomplexity:thegloballevel.Theideathatglobalization constitutesanewphasein,ratherthanabreakwith,modernityispresent intheworkofsociologistssuchasAnthonyGiddens,UlrichBeck,and RolandRobertson.ForGiddens,globalizationiscentraltowhathecalls thedisembeddingandpost-traditionalizationofsocialrelationships;for Beckitushersinasecondmodernityandaworldrisksocietywithoutany outerlimits;andforRobertsonitmeansthedevelopmentofaglobal consciousness.5

Thisincreasinglyimpersonalandcomplexnatureofsocialrelationships iswhatmakesglobalizationabstract.Foractorswishing,foronereasonor another,tocommunicatewithotheractorsacrosssocial,cultural,political, andgeographicaldistances,itrepresentsahugechallenge.How,inother

3.Theofficialnameofthe Zapatistas istheEZLN(Eje´rcitoZapatistadeLiberacio´nNacional/ ZapatistaArmyofNationalLiberation).

4.BenedictAnderson, ImaginedCommunities:ReflectionsontheOriginandSpreadof Nationalism (London,1983).

5.RolandRobertson, Globalization:SocialTheoryandGlobalCulture (London,1992); AnthonyGiddens,‘‘LivinginaPost-TraditionalSociety’’,inUlrichBeck,AnthonyGiddens, andScottLash, ReflexiveModernization:Politics,Tradition,andAestheticsintheModernSocial Order (Cambridge,1994),pp.56–109;UlrichBeck,‘‘TheCosmopolitanPerspective:Sociology oftheSecondAgeofModernity’’, BritishJournalofSociology,51(2000),pp.79–105.

words,canIsucceedinmakingmydailylifeintelligibleandofconcernto peoplelivingunderconditionswidelydifferentfrommine?Thatisindeed abigquestion,theoreticallyaswellaspractically.Itisonethatcanbe approachedinanumberofways.Onewouldbetoconsiderthestructural conditionsontheworldpoliticalstagethatenablecross-distance communication.Anotherwouldbetolookatglobalmediainfrastructures. Here,inlinewiththethemeofthisvolume,Iwillconsideronlythe discursive challengesincross-distancecommunication,theguidingquestionbeing:whatdiscursivecomponentscanbeexpectedtofacilitate communicationacrossdistance?

Framingtheory,whichhasstimulatedanenormouslywiderangeof studieswithinsocialmovementresearch,offerstheanalystapotentsetof theoreticaltoolsforthinkingaboutdistancebridging,6 althoughsofarit hasbeenappliedmainlytonationalactivism.Whatmakesitsuitablefor thestudyofglobalactivismtooisthatitisconcernedessentiallywith distancebridging.Intheirseminal1986article,Snowandhiscolleagues introducedtheconceptsofframebridging,frameextension,andframe amplification,whichhavesincebecomestaplesofframingresearch.7 These conceptsclearlysuggestthatframingtriestocreateresonanceacrosssocial, cultural,andpoliticaldistance,toforgeaconnectionwithothersinthe publicspace.Framing,tobemoreprecise,isanattemptbyacollectiveto presentagiveninterpretationofrealitytoanaudienceandtoconvincethat audienceoftheaccuracyandlegitimacyofthatinterpretation.The ultimateaimistogeneratesupport,materialandmoral,fortheframer’s claimsand,throughthat,toincreasehischancesofachievinghisaim. Whetherittakesplaceinalocal,national,orglobalcontext,creating frameresonanceishighlycomplex.Framinginaglobalspacefaces additionalproblemsforthesimplereasonthatsocial,cultural,andpolitical distancesanddifferencesaremorepronouncedthere.Asalreadystated, framingtheoryprovidesasolidfoundationforaddressingsuchquestions, butagenuinetheoryof global framingrequiresustobemoretheoretically explicitaboutthespecialproblemsthatconfrontglobalframers.8 WhatI wanttodohereisdrawattentiontotheimportanceofsymbolsand

6.Forreviewsoftheframingperspective,seeJohnA.NoakesandHankJohnston,‘‘Framesof Protest:ARoadMaptoaPerspective’’,in idem (eds), FramesofProtest:SocialMovementsand theFramingPerspective (Lanham,MD,2005),pp.1–29;RobertD.BenfordandDavidA.Snow, ‘‘FramingProcessesandSocialMovements:AnOverviewandAssessment’’, AnnualReviewof Sociology,26(2000),pp.611–639.

7.DavidA.Snow etal.,‘‘FrameAlignmentProcesses,Micromobilization,andMovement Participation’’, AmericanSociologicalReview,51(1986),pp.464–481.Forarecentcollectionof articlesonframingandprotest,seeMichielBaudandRosanneRutten(eds)‘‘Popular IntellectualsandSocialMovements:FramingProtestinAsia,Africa,andLatinAmerica’’, InternationalReviewofSocialHistory,Supplement12(Cambridge,2004).

8.Tellingly,theglobalaspectisalmostcompletelyabsentinarecentvolumeonframesand activism:NoakesandJohnston, FramesofProtest

emotions,whichIcontendcontainuniversalsthatfacilitatecommunicationacrossdistance.Humourcanbethoughtofasbothsymbolicand emotional.Attheendoftheir2000reviewarticle,BenfordandSnownote thatemotionsareconspicuouslyabsentinframingtheory.9 Amongmore culturallyorientedscholars,incontrast,growingattentionhasbeenpaidto emotionsinrecentyears.10 InwhatfollowsIshalldrawonbothpositions tosketchatheoryofglobalframing.

Althoughframingtheorymadeitsentryasasocialconstructionist correctivetothedominanceofresource-mobilizationandpoliticalopportunitytheoryinsocialmovementstudies,ithasretainedthe emphasisofthoseapproachesonrationalandstrategicaction.11 Framing isacalculatedattempttoattractsympathyandsupport.Emotionsare immanentinmanyofthetheory’sarguments,but,aspointedoutinan importantcritiquebyJeffGoodwinandJamesJasper,theytendtobe overshadowedbystrategy.12 WilliamGamson,anotherleadingframing scholar,perhapscomesclosesttogivingemotionsaproperplace.Gamson arguesthatallframescontainaninjusticeframe,hispointbeingthatpeople areessentiallydriventoactivismbyfeelingssuchasangerand frustration.13 CulturalscholarssuchasJeffGoodwin,JamesJasper,and FrancescaPollettagoastepfurther.Fromtheirperspective,activismis creativeandmorallydriven.Importantly,theyareeagertostressthatthere isnocontradictionbetweenemotionsandstrategicthinking.14 Alongthe samelines,elsewhereIhaveusedJasperandPoulsen’sconceptofmoral shockstoexplainthemobilizationoftransnationalcampaigns.15 Moral

9.BenfordandSnow,‘‘FramingProcessesandSocialMovements’’.

10.SeeforexampleJeffGoodwin etal.(eds), PassionatePolitics:EmotionsandSocial Movements (Chicago,IL,2001).

11.Resourcemobilizationandpoliticalopportunitiesemergedasreactionstoso-called collective-behaviourtheoriesofactivism,whichtendedtoviewactivismasirrationalandasa responsetosocialstrainandbreakdown.Resource-mobilizationtheoristsemphasizetherational andstrategicbehaviourofprotestersandthecrucialroleoforganizationandresourcesinprotest. Political-opportunitytheoristssharetherationalityandstrategycomponent,butdirectattention tothewaythepoliticalsystemshapesactivism.Forsomeofthefoundingtextsofresourcemobilizationandpolitical-opportunitytheoryrespectively,seeJohnD.McCarthyandMayerN. Zald,‘‘ResourceMobilizationandSocialMovements:APartialTheory’’, AmericanJournalof Sociology,82(1977),pp.1212–1241;CharlesTilly, FromMobilizationtoRevolution (Reading, MA,1978).

12.JeffGoodwinandJamesJasper,‘‘CaughtinaWinding,SnarlingVine:TheStructuralBiasof PoliticalProcessTheory’’, SociologicalForum,14(1999),pp.27–54.Foradiscussionofthe reasonsbehindtheabsenceofemotionsinsociologyandpoliticalscience,seeRonAminzadeand DougMcAdam,‘‘EmotionsandContentiousPolitics’’,inRonaldR.Aminzade etal., Silenceand VoiceintheStudyofContentiousPolitics (Cambridge,2001),pp.14–50.

13.WilliamGamson,‘‘ConstructingSocialProtest’’,inHankJohnstonandBertKlandermans (eds), SocialMovementsandCulture (Minneapolis,MN,1995),pp.85–106.

14.JeffGoodwin etal.,‘‘Introduction:WhyEmotionsMatter’’,inGoodwin etal., Passionate Politics,pp.1–24,9.

15.JamesM.JasperandJaneD.Poulsen,‘‘RecruitingStrangersandFriends:MoralShocksand

HumourinZapatistaFraming

shocks,Ihaveargued,helpbridgedistancebecausetheyaddressuniversal conceptionsofhumandignityandsuffering.16 WhatIwanttoaddresshere isnotsomuchtheroleofindignationinglobalframing,butsomething moresubtleandlessaggressive:humour.

Humourisrarelydiscussedbyculturalscholars.Iwouldcontend, however,thathumourneedstobeanalysedinanemotionalframework. Anycommunicationbasedonhumourrequiresanemotionalreadiness andopennessonthepartofallpartiesinvolved.Humourissymbolic, especiallyinapoliticalcontextwhenittriestorelayabroadermessagethat cannotbededuceddirectlyfromthehumorouspointitself.Inthatsense, humourservestocondensemeaning,17 andcondensationofmeaning throughtheuseofsymbolsisawayofmakingframingandcommunicationmoreefficient.Butthatcanbedoneonlybybuildingonmeanings whicharealreadypartofpeople’sstockofculturalandhistorical information.Theefficientsymbol,then,isonethatdrawsonuniversal oralmostuniversalexperienceandvalues.Inthewordsofframing theorists,efficientcommunicationmusthaveculturalresonance.18

Inanearlytreatmentofglobalization,MalcolmWatersarguedthat symbolsareglobalizing.19 Becauseoftheabilitytopackagemeaning efficientlyarounduniversals,symbolsareparticularlyusefulwhenit comestoframingactivitiesthatseektotranscendsocial,cultural,and politicaldistances.Putdifferently,symbolscanhelpovercomewhatwas referredtoatthebeginningofthissectionastheabstractnessof globalization.Ofcourse,theuseofsymbolsinframescantakevarious forms.Humourasasymbolinframingacrossdistancecanbepowerful becauseitoftenevokeshumanfrailtiesandimperfectionsthatare universallyrecognizable.Whenacommunicatoruseshumourinthat wayheopenshimselftotherecipientofhismessagebyimplicitlysaying: ‘‘Iamonlyhumanjustlikeyou’’.Humourcanthereforefunctiontoopen doorstomoreexplicitand‘‘serious’’communicationaboutsocialand

SocialNetworksinAnimalRightsandAnti-NuclearProtests’’, SocialProblems,42(1995),pp. 493–512.

16.ThomasOlesen,‘‘‘IntheCourtofPublicOpinion’:TransnationalProblemConstructionin theHIV/AIDSMedicineAccessCampaign,1998–2001’’, InternationalSociology,21(2006),pp. 5–30.

17.CobbandElderdefineasymbolas‘‘anyobjectusedbyhumanbeingstoindexmeaningsthat arenotinherentin,nordiscerniblefrom,theobjectitself’’.SeeCharlesD.ElderandRogerW. Cobb, ThePoliticalUsesofSymbols (NewYork,1983).

18.SeeforexampleJipingZuoandRobertD.Benford,‘‘MobilizationProcessesandthe1989 ChineseDemocracyMovement’’, SociologicalQuarterly,36(1995),pp.131–156;Sidney Tarrow,‘‘Mentalities,PoliticalCultures,andCollectiveActionFrames:ConstructingMeanings throughAction’’,inAldonD.MorrisandCarolMcClurgMueller(eds), FrontiersinSocial MovementTheory (NewHaven,CT,1992),pp.174–202.

19.MalcolmWaters, Globalization (London,1995).

politicalissues,butusedinpoliticalcross-distanceframingitseldom standsalone,usuallyformingpartofabroaderschemeofcommunication.

METHODOLOGYANDSTRUCTURE

IwouldemphasizefromtheoutsetwhatIdonotintendtodointhis analysisofhumourinthe Zapatistas’cross-distanceframing.Byfocusing onhumour,humanity,andimperfectionIdonotimplythattheyarewhat explain theglobalresonanceofthe Zapatistas.Myanalysisismainly descriptiveandexploratoryinilluminatingonecomponentinthecomplex Zapatista frame. 20 Inthat,itissuggestivetoooffuturedirectionsfor analysisofthe Zapatistas,aswellasofglobalizationgenerally.21

Thedatasourceforthisanalysisis Zapatista documents.The Zapatistas havebeenveryproductiveindisseminatinginformationandpolitical analyses,whichreflectsthe Zapatista self-conceptionasanarmyofwords ratherthanweapons.22 Thedocumentshavevariousauthors,butingeneral thecommunicativeandframingworkofthemovementhasbeeninthe handsofSubcomandanteMarcos.Marcosisusuallyreferredtoasa spokesman,butisineffectakeyleaderofthemovement.InthefollowingI drawmainlyonMarcos’swritings,whereprimarilyweencounter humour.Ihavechosentoquoteatsomelengthintheanalysis.That,I believe,isnecessaryinananalysisofframingwhereacentralaimisto conveytothereaderasenseofhowtheactorinquestioncommunicates andframeshismessages.

AsIhavesaid,the Zapatistas havebeenprolificintheircommunicative production,sotheanalysisbelowcandonomorethandipintothebodyof theirtextstoextractafewselectedexamples.Ihavechosenthreethatin theirdifferentwaysilluminatehowMarcos’sframeshaveusedhumour andsymbols.Theexamples,whichformthestructureofthefollowing discussion,concernfirst,theoriginsofthe Zapatista movementinthe early1980s,secondtherelationshipbetweenthe Zapatistas andglobal solidarityactivism,andthenthemostrecentmajor Zapatista initiative,the ‘‘OtherCampaign’’.Iwillbeginmyanalysis,however,withabrief introductiontotheframingusedbythe Zapatistas.

20.ForamorecomprehensiveanalysisofwhatIcalltransnationalframinginrelationtothe Zapatistas,seeThomasOlesen, InternationalZapatismo:TheConstructionofSolidarityinthe AgeofGlobalization (London,2005).

21.Iambynomeansthefirsttostresstheroleofhumourandhumanityin Zapatista framing; seeforexampleNicholasHiggins,‘‘TheZapatistaUprisingandthePoeticsofCultural Resistance’’, Alternatives,25(2000),pp.359–374.

22.ThemostextensivecollectionofEnglishtranslationsofMarcos’swritingsisthusaptlytitled OurWordIsOurWeapon:JuanaPoncedeLeo´n(ed.), OurWordisOurWeapon:Selected Writings,SubcomandanteMarcos (London,2001).

HUMOURANDHUMANITYINZAPATISTAFRAMING

Asalientfeatureofthe Zapatistas hasbeentheirabilitytogenerate resonancegloballysincetheiruprisingin1994.23 AsIhaveanalysedmore extensivelyelsewhere,24 thatresonanceistheresultofasuccessfulframing strategy,whichcontainsnumerousdimensions.Butthereisonefeature thatseemstobepresentinallvariationsoftheirframing:itshumanity.In almosteveryinterventionthe Zapatistas stresstheirownimperfections andmistakesandportraytheirprotestasanopenquestion,aprocessrather thansomethingwithaclearstrategyandfinalgoal.Humourplaysacentral partintheirimperfectionframe.

Inhiscommunique´s,SubcomandanteMarcosusestwolayersof framing:thereisa‘‘serious’’levelwhichisaboutpoliticalanalysisand strategy,butitisconstantlyaccompaniedbymeta-reflectionsaboutthe Zapatistas’thoughtprocesses,theirdoubts,theireverydayexperiences. Thissecondlayerissaturatedwithhumourandgivesaveryhuman impression,somethingalmostentirelyabsentinthemoreself-important andpompousrevolutionarymovementsofthe1960s,1970s,and1980s;a traditionfromwhichthe Zapatistas considerthemselvestohavedeparted inmanyimportantrespects.25 Theirhumanisticself-portrayallacedwith humourhasthereforefacilitatedtheglobalresonanceofthe Zapatistas’ framingactivities.Bypresentingthemselvesasordinaryflawedand troubledhumanbeingswithnopredeterminedanswerstoeveryquestion, theyareabletospeaktoamuchbroaderaudiencethanwouldotherwise havebeenpreparedtolisten.The‘‘openness’’ofthemovement,inother words,allowsawidevarietyofpeopleandgroupstofindpointsof resonanceinthe Zapatista frame.

Burnt-outlightbulbs

The Zapatista organizationwasformedintheearly1980sbyagroupof urbanintellectualsfromMexicoCity.Astheybegantocomeintocontact withtheindigenouscommunitiesofChiapas,theyweregraduallyforced toreconsidertheideologicalandtheoreticalbaggageoftheMarxismand revolutiontheyhadbroughtwiththem.This‘‘clash’’betweenthe indigenouswayofthinkingandtheurbanintellectualsisacentraltheme in Zapatista self-mythology.26 Theirformativestoryhasbeentoldon manyoccasionsbyMarcosasawayofelucidatingthepoliticalideasofthe Zapatistas basedondialogueanddemocracy,thecentralityofwhichis

23.Olesen, InternationalZapatismo

24. Ibid.

25.SeeforexampletheinterviewwithMarcosinGabrielGarciaMa´rquezandRobertoPombo, ‘‘HablaMarcos’’, RevistaCambio,28March2001.

26.Olesen, InternationalZapatismo,pp.113–116.

28 ThomasOlesen

ascribedtotheinfluenceofthoseindigenouscommunitiesandtheir century-longexperienceofsocialandpoliticalprotestandorganization. Below,Ishalldiscusshowthisself-conceptionislinkedtotheir experiencesfollowingtheuprisingin1994,whenthe Zapatistas entered intodialoguewithcivilsociety.

UsingironyandhumourMarcosrecentlydescribedthefoundersofthe Zapatistas as:

[ ]agroupof‘‘illuminati’’whocamefromthecityinorderto‘‘liberate’’the exploitedandwholooked,whenconfrontedwiththerealityoftheindigenous communities,morelikeburntoutlightbulbsthan‘‘illuminati’’.Howlongdidit takeustorealizethatwehadtolearntolisten,and,afterwards,tospeak?I’mnot sure,notafewmoonshavepassednow,butIcalculatesometwoyearsatleast. Meaningthatwhathadbeenaclassicrevolutionaryguerrillawarin1984(armed uprisingofthemasses,thetakingofpower,theestablishmentofsocialismfrom above,manystatuesandnamesofheroesandmartyrseverywhere,purges, etcetera,insum,aperfectworld),by1986wasalreadyanarmedgroup, overwhelminglyindigenous,listeningattentivelyandbarelybabblingitsfirst wordswithanewteacher:theIndianpeoples.27

Theintentionwithstoriessuchasthatistoportraythe Zapatistas as imperfect,or,putdifferently,ashuman,anotherthemeIshalltouchon later.Humanbeings,intheirideas,constantlystumbleandtakewrong turns.Frailtyandimperfectionareoftenthebasisforhumour,soalmost bynecessityhumourcomestoplayacentralpartinthe Zapatistas’selfunderstanding.Theessenceoflifeistolearnfromexperience,alearning whichtakesplaceessentiallythroughdialoguewithothersandiswell capturedinthe Zapatista catchphrase,‘‘askingwewalk’’( preguntando caminamos).

Socialandpoliticalchange,then,isnotjustaboutsomedistantgoal,but justasmuchaboutthemethodandthewaytogetthere.Understanding thatsetsthe Zapatistas apartfromthemoretraditionalrevolutionary groupsofLatinAmericainbothpastandpresent,whichhaveoften proceededfromaready-madetheoryofwheretogoandhowtogetthere. Speakingabouttheirownexperienceandaimsinhumorousandhuman termsservestocreateapointofreferenceforpeopleallovertheworld. Everyoneisfamiliarwiththetypesofmistakesanddoubtsthatthe Zapatistas havealwaysfaced.Weallknow,fromourdailylives,that existencecannotbe‘‘planned’’andthatthebestresultsareoftenachieved bycooperationanddiscussionwithothers.Thedialogicalelementalso includes,invitingpeopletoparticipateinsocialandpoliticalprotest with the Zapatistas,ratherthanfollowingapredefinedpathcarvedoutbya revolutionaryavant-garde.

27.SubcomandanteMarcos,‘‘Chiapas,theThirteenthStele:PartTwo,ADeath’’,25July2003, availableatwww.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID¼3957(lastaccessed29May2007).

Apinkstilettoheel,size612,withoutitsmate

Ina2001interviewwithCarlosMonsivaı´sandHermannBellinghausen, Marcosstatedthatthe Zapatistas werepreparedfor1January1994,when theystagedtheiruprisinginChiapas,butnotfor2January.28 Whathe meantwasthatthereactionstotheuprisingwerequiteunexpected.The Zapatistas weremetbywhatMarcoslaterreferredtoasa Zapatismo civil. 29 Itisacentralthemeinthe Zapatistas’self-mythology,howitwas thattheirarmeduprisinggeneratedahugeresonancefromcivilsociety withinandoutsideMexico,andthatitendedupshapingtheorganization anditsstrategiesinimportantways.Indeed,inthestoryoftheoriginsof theorganizationdiscussedabove,theemphasisinthemeetingbetweenthe Zapatistas and Zapatismocivil isondialogue,listening,andlearning.The interestofexternalactorsintheuprisingprovidedthe Zapatistas witha muchneededspotlightonasituationinwhichtheMexicangovernment andarmywereconsideringwhethertooptforamilitary‘‘solution’’orto negotiate.AftertwoweeksoffightinginearlyJanuarytheparties eventuallystartedadialogue.SincethatearlyJanuarynoshotshavebeen fired,althoughChiapasremainsheavilymilitarizedandthe Zapatistas still beararmsthere.

The Zapatistas havebenefitedgreatlyfromthisexternalattention. Solidarityhascomeinmanyshapes:forexample,NGOdevelopment projects,money,materials,andvolunteerslivingaspeacemonitorsin Zapatista communities.Butsolidarityactiviststoohavebenefitedbecause formanythe Zapatista uprisinganditspoliticaltheoryactedasamotivator andinspirationatatimewhentheLeftwastryingtoredefineitselfinthe wakeoftheendoftheColdWar.Inphysicalterms,solidarityactivists could‘‘meet’’the Zapatistas intheso-called Aguascalientes in Zapatista territory.The Aguascalientes wasthesceneofseverallargeencounters betweenthe Zapatistas andMexicanandglobalsolidarityactivistsduring the1990s.In2003,inasurprisingmove,the Zapatistas announcedthe dismantlingofthe Aguascalientes and,withit,anattempttoredefinethe relationshipbetween Zapatista communitiesandsolidarityactivists.

Inacommunique´from2003Marcosacknowledgesthehugeimportance ofsolidarityforthe Zapatistas,buthelamentsthefactthattherelationship isoftenbasednotonmutualrespectbutonpityandcharity.Quotingfrom aletterhewrotein1994,Marcosillustratesthepoint:

Fromwhatourpeoplereceivedinbenefit[:::]Isavedanexampleof ‘‘humanitarianaid’’forthechiapanecoindigenous,whicharrivedafewweeks ago:apinkstilettoheel,imported,size61 2 [:::]withoutitsmate.Ialwayscarryit inmybackpackinordertoremindmyself,inthemidstofinterviews,photo

28.CarlosMonsivaı´sandHermannBellinghausen,‘‘MarcosaFox:Queremosgarantı´as;nonos tragamosesodequetodocambio´’’, LaJornada,8January2001.

29.YvonLeBot, Elsuen ˜ ozapatista (Barcelona,1997),p.306.

reportsandattractivesexualpropositions,whatwearetothecountryafterthe firstofJanuary:aCinderella.[:::]Thesegoodpeoplewho,sincerely,sendusa pinkstilettoheel,size612,imported,withoutitsmate[:::]thinkingthat,pooras weare,we’llacceptanything,charityandalms.Howcanwetellallthosegood peoplethatno,wenolongerwanttocontinuelivingMexico’sshame.Inthatpart thathastobeprettiedupsoitdoesn’tmaketherestlookugly.No,wedon’twant togoonlivinglikethat.30

Marcosthengoesontoassesshowthingshavedevelopedsincethen:

ThatwasinAprilof1994.Thenwethoughtitwasaquestionoftime,thatthe peopleweregoingtounderstandthatthezapatistaindigenousweredignified,and theyweren’tlookingforalms,butforrespect.Theotherpinkheelneverarrived, andthepairremainedincomplete,andpilingupinthe‘‘Aguascalientes’’were uselesscomputers,expiredmedicines,extravagant(forus)clothes,whichcouldn’t evenbeusedforplays[:::]and,yes,shoeswithouttheirmate.Andthingslikethat continuetoarrive,asifthosepeopleweresaying‘‘poorlittlethings,they’revery needy.I’msureanythingwoulddoforthem,andthisisinmyway’’.

Andthat’snotall.Thereisamoresophisticatedcharity.It’stheonethatafew NGOsandinternationalagenciespractice.Itconsists,broadlyspeaking,intheir decidingwhatthecommunitiesneed,and,withoutevenconsultingthem, imposingnotjustspecificprojects,butalsothetimesandmeansoftheir implementation.Imaginethedesperationofacommunitythatneedsdrinkable waterandthey’resaddledwithalibrary.Theonethatrequiresaschoolforthe children,andtheygivethemacourseonherbs.31

Marcosistacklingaverydelicatesubjectherethroughtheuseof humourandsymbols.Thebalanceneedingtobestruckistodefinethe Zapatista conceptionofsolidaritywithoutalienatingandoffending solidarityactivists.Thelonepinkstilettoheelisapowerfulandhumorous symbolofthedarksideofsolidarity.Ashoewithoutitsmateisasymbol thatcanbewidelyunderstood.Andsendingastilettoheeltoaplacewhere therearefewpavementsfurtherunderlinesthewell-intentionedabsurdity ofthisactofsolidarity.Thestilettoheelbecomesasymbolofakindof solidaritywherethesenderdoesnotthinktoasktherecipientwhathe reallyneeds.Forthe Zapatistas,thatisnotsolidaritybutpityandcharity,a signofalackofrespectandunderstandingonthepartofthegiver.

Thestilettoheelsetsthestageforamoreseriousanddamningcritiqueof solidarityactivitiesthatarenottheresultofatruedialoguewith Zapatista communities.Theparableworkswellbecauseitallowsthesolidarity activistreaderofthemessagetoexempthimselfeasilyfromthecritique. Whointheirrightmind,thereadergiggles,wouldsendalonestilettoheel toChiapas?ButwhenMarcoschangesgearandspeaksaboutuseless materialsandmisguideddevelopmentprojectsitislikelythatthe

30.Marcos,‘‘Chiapas,theThirteenthStele’’.

31. Ibid

HumourinZapatistaFraming

solidarityactivistwillatleasthaveencounteredsimilarexperiences,either throughobservationorthroughhisownefforts.Thestiletto-heelparable, inotherwords,‘‘lures’’thereaderintoacceptingMarcos’sbroaderand moreseriouspoint.

ApenguinintheLacandonForest

Inthesummerof2005,afteraprolongedperiodwithoutmuchoutward activity,the Zapatistas relaunchedthemselveswiththeso-calledSixth DeclarationoftheLacandonForest.Inthatdocument,theorganization presentedwide-rangingnewinitiatives,inparticularthe‘‘OtherCampaign’’.TheOtherCampaign,whichsaw Zapatista delegatestourMexico forseveralmonths,wasintendedtobeanalternativeandparallelcampaign totheMexicanpresidentialracein2006,ananti-neoliberalcampaign,as the Zapatistas sawit,forthemostmarginalizedandimpoverishedsectors oftheMexicanpopulation.Thedeclarationgaverisetoavarietyofcritical responsesandcomments.Laterthatsummer,SubcomandanteMarcos respondedatlengthtothecritiquesdirectedagainsttheSixthDeclaration, whichhadclearlynotbeenwrittenbySubcomandanteMarcoshimselfbut wassignedsimplyby‘‘the Zapatista militaryleadership’’.

ThedocumentstartswithMarcosnotingthatthereisapenguininthe Zapatistaheadquarters.Withoutgoingfurtherintothisratherstrange observation,promisingonlytoreturntothepenguinlaterinthedocument, hebeginsaseriesofsharp-edgedrefutationsandcommentariesregarding theSixthDeclarationanditscritics.Inthefinalsection,keepinghis promise,Marcoschangestoneandexplainsthestoryofthepenguin.He recountshow,intheprocessofdismantlingacampintheLacandonForest, thesoldierswereeatingthechickensthathadbeenraisedinthecamp,but:

Whenonlyoneremained,ontheprecisedayofdeparture,whathappened happened.[ ].Thelastchickenbeganwalkingupright,perhapstryingtobe mistakenforoneofusandtopassunnoticedwiththatposture.Idon’tknow muchaboutzoology,butitdoesnotappearthattheanatomicalmakeupof chickensismadeforwalkingupright,so,withtheswayingproducedbythe effortofkeepingitselfupright,thechickenwasteeteringbackandforth,without beingabletocomeupwithaprecisecourse.Itwasthenthatsomeonesaid‘‘it lookslikeapenguin’’.Theincidentprovokedlaughterwhichresultedin sympathy.Thechickendid,it’strue,looklikeapenguin,itwasonlymissingthe whitebib.Thefactisthatthejokesendeduppreventingthe‘‘penguin’’from meetingthesamefateasitscompan ˜ erosfromthefarm.32

Thepenguin,savedbylaughterandsympathy,returnedwiththe soldiers,includingMarcoshimself,tothe Zapatistas’ headquarters.Here,

32.SubcomandanteMarcos,‘‘APenguinintheSelvaLacandona’’,28July2005,availableat www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID¼8398(lastaccessed29May2007).

hesays,itquicklyadaptedtotheroutinesoftheinsurgents’lifeinthe forest.Infact,itsoonbecameclearthatitwasconsideringitselfoneof them:

Wehadn’trealizedhowfarithadgoneuntiloneafternoonwhenitrefusedtoeat inthecornerithadbeenassigned,anditwentovertothewoodentable.Penguin madearacket,morechicken-likethanpenguin-like,untilweunderstoodthatit wantedtoeatwithus.[ ]Theinsurgentcaptaininchargehadtoldmethatthe chicken,Imeanpenguin,didnotliketobealoneatnight,perhapsbecauseit fearedthatthepossumsmightconfuseitwithachicken,anditprotesteduntil someonetookittotheirtarp.

Then,afterthecomicalaccountofthepenguin’stransformation,Marcos revealsthestory’spoint:

Doyouknowwhat?ItoccurstomenowthatwearelikePenguin,tryingvery hardtobeerectandtomakeourselvesaplaceinMexico,inLatinAmerica,inthe World.Justasthetripweareabouttotakeisnotinouranatomy,weshall certainlygoaboutswaying,unsteadyandstupidly,provokinglaughterand jokes.Althoughperhaps,alsolikePenguin,wemightprovokesomesympathy, andsomeonemight,generously,protectusandhelpus,walkingwithus,todo whateveryman,womanorpenguinshoulddo,thatis,toalwaystrytobebetter intheonlywaypossible,bystruggling.33

Thestoryofthepenguin,asthisparagraphshows,isastoryaboutthe heroicsof trying,despiteunfavourableodds,imperfection,andinsecurity. Thepenguintriedtoadapttochangingcircumstancesbydoingsomething thatisnotnaturaltoit,butitsucceededoutofdesperationandnecessity. That,asMarcosindicates,istheessenceofstruggling.Strugglinginthis perspectiveisaboutmorethansecuringashareoftheresources,about morethanplacingthingsontheagenda.Itisratherawayoflife,achoice driven,astheculturalscholarsintroducedabovewouldhaveit,bymoral andemotions.34 Usinghumour,asMarcosdoesinthepenguinstory, servestoplacethepointpreciselyinanemotionalandmoraluniverse.The penguinisaneffectivesymboltoaccomplishthatgoal.Weallknowwhata chickenandapenguinlooklikeanditdoesnottakemuchimaginationto visualizethesceneandthecomicaldifficultythechickenwouldencounter intryingtostandupright.

Yetevenifthestoryishumorous,ithasadeeplyseriousandevenrather poignantundercurrent.Thechicken’sattempttostanduprightand transformitselfintosomethingwhichitisnotis,infact,donetodefend itselfagainstotherwiseinevitablemortaldanger.Again,itishardnotto feelsympathyandpity.Toseesomeonehumiliateortransformhimselfin ordertoavoidanimminentthreatisaheart-wrenchingsightforall

33. Ibid

34.Thisviewisalsoexpressedinthe Zapatistas’widespreaduseoftheconceptofdignity;seefor exampleOlesen, InternationalZapatismo,pp.119–120.

humans.Atthesametimesuchactsalsocallforthouradmiration. Strugglingagainsttheoddsistypicallyseenasheroic.Byfusingthepitiful andtheheroicinasymbolicandhumorousparableMarcosattemptsto provokesympathyandsupportfromexternalactors.Prefacingthestoryof thepenguin,Marcosspeculatesaboutthepossibleviolencethatthe Zapatistas willencounterwhentheysetoutontheirtourofMexico.The Zapatistas,inotherwords,willneedthesupportandunderstandingof peopleandgroupsinMexicoandabroadastheyembarkontheOther Campaign.

CONCLUSION

Thisarticlehaszoomedinonhumourandsymbolsin Zapatista framing, arguingthattheuseofhumourandsymbolsfacilitatedtheglobal resonancethatthe Zapatista uprisinghasgeneratedsince1994.Ithas donesoonthebasisoftheoriesaboutframing,emotions,andglobalization andthroughthreeshort‘‘stories’’toldbySubcomandanteMarcos.Inthe firststory,Marcosrecountshowthe Zapatistas wereformedintheearly 1980sasaresultofameetingbetweenagroupofurbanintellectualsand theindigenouscommunitiesinChiapas.Thestoryservesasademocratic invitationtoactiviststoparticipate with the Zapatistas,ratherthansimply followtheirlead.Inthesecondstory,Marcosspeaksaboutthenatureof globalsolidaritywiththe Zapatistas.Whilerecognizingthebenefitsofit, hecriticizessomeofitfornotbeingbasedonmutualityandrespectforthe Zapatistas.Inthethirdstory,Marcostriestoevokethesympathyand supportofexternalactivistsfortheimpendingOtherCampaign.Fearing violentrepressionasthe Zapatistas plantoembarkonapoliticaltourof Mexico,heusedtheparableofachickenthattransformsitselftowalk uprightlikeapenguininanattempttoavoidbeingslaughtered.The Zapatistas,saysMarcos,arelikethis penguinintheLacandonForest, tryingtostanduprightinadifficultsituationandneedingsupportand sympathytosurvive.

InthisarticleIhaveportrayedalargelypositiveandsuccessfulcaseof globalframing.Inconclusion,however,Ithinkitisimportanttoasksome moresearchingquestionsabouttherealpotentialandreachofglobal framing.

Firstofall,framingisessentiallyarelationbetweenanauthorandan audience,andtheauthorhasaspecificaudienceinmind.Communication canhardlybeeffectiveandmeaningfulunlessitisformulatedwitha recipientinmind.Butbytailoringhiscommunicationtheframe’sauthor excludesothers.Seenlikethat,globalframingisindeedoftenarather exclusiveaffair.Inthecaseofthe Zapatistas itisclearthatwhenMarcos speaksheaddressesawell-educatedurbanmiddleclassinEuropeandthe US,wherehisextensiveuseofaliterarystyleandhumorousparables

seemstogodownparticularlywell.Theupshotofcourseisthattheframe risks‘‘missing’’workers,forexample,orimmigrants,peopleonsocial security;people,inotherwords,whoareprobably‘‘closer’’tothe Zapatistas intermsoftheirsocialandpoliticalprecariousness.

Butinthesecondplace,thisimageofexclusioncanbereversedtoo.To continuewhathasjustbeensaid,itisimportanttostressthatthosewho ‘‘listen’’togroupslikethe Zapatistas tendtocomefromthewell-educated middleclassesinwell-offpartsoftheworld.Giventhestiffcompetition forattentionintheglobalpublicsphere,thereisariskthatthosewhofind anearinEuropeandtheUSAarethosewhoinonewayoranothercan ‘‘speakthelanguage’’ofthoseaudiences,whichcancreateakindof hierarchybetweenthe‘‘well-educatedoppressed’’andthe‘‘poorly educatedoppressed’’fromwhichsomevoiceswillinevitablybeexcluded.

Third,itisevidentthatwhenspeakingofcompetition,thathasincreased since9/11.Messagesissuedbyterroristgroups,andparticularlyal-Qaeda, generateroutineattentionfrommedia,politicians,andthepublic.The politicsoffearthatsuchgroupsstandforandthriveonisthemirror oppositeofthehumourandhumanityinthe Zapatista frame.Terrorist framesareabsolutelydevoidofhumourandinsteadspeakalanguageof threatandviolence.Sadlyitseemsthatthepoliticsoffearandviolence automaticallycreateamuchlargeraudiencethanthoseofhumourand humanity.

Wearelefttowonderwhetherthe Zapatista frameofhumourand humanity‘‘only’’reflectedandderiveditsresonancefromthemore cosmopolitan,optimistic,andpost-ColdWar1990s,andwhether9/11has returnedustothesecurityimperativecharacteristicoftheColdWar period.Itiscertainlynocheerfulconclusiontodraw,butasoberlookat theworldoftodaydoessuggestthatthevoicesofwarandviolence, belongingequallytotheterroristsandthoseengagedinthe‘‘waron terror’’,areoccupyingthecentreoftheglobalpublicsphere,pushingthe voicesofhumourandhumanitytotheperiphery.Thosevoicesneedtobe heardnowmorethanever.We,asacademics,haveaspecialobligationto trytogivethemaplaceinpublicdebate.