Brazilian Regionalism and Patriarchy in the 20th Century Since early on in its colonial history, Brazilian society has been dominated by explicit hierarchical constructs and staunch regionalism. The patriarchal system that is found in Brazil has its roots in the colonial government set up by the Portuguese in the 1500’s. The rugged terrain and dispersion of resources resulted in only certain areas, mostly along the coast, being developed early on, developing a lack of strong centralization leading to the emergence of deep-rooted regionalism. As Brazil advanced into the 19th century it usurped Portugal as the seat of their colonial empire, effectively gaining its independence. During this time Brazil’s institutions of patriarchy and regionalism further cemented themselves into the culture of the country, becoming part of its identity and can still be seen in Brazil to this day. These institutions were so deeply ingrained into Brazilian society as the country moved into the modern era and came under the rule of a military dictatorship, though they still exerted a lot of influence in terms of political and social decision making, patriarchy and regionalism underwent some alterations to adapt to the changes of the times (i.e. the abolition of slavery). In 1930 Getulio Vargas staged a military coup and seized control of Brazil for himself, beginning the dictatorship that would last until the 1980’s, with the exception of the countries brief experimentation with a democratic government. The modernismo movement, in the Brazilian art and literary world, set up Vargas’ rise to power. Much like the futurist movement that fueled Mussolini’s regime in Italy, the backers of this artistic faction sought to escape the woeful past and form a new cultural identity, completely separate of the one born out of the old Portuguese regime. What’s fascinating about this is that the movement that set the stage for the nationalist-populist uprising, was based on cultural change, yet the regime it helped bring in was not one that would shake the deep rooted social foundations of Brazilian society, which were left over from the same Portuguese government whose legacy the modernists were trying to wipe away. Despite the change in government structure, the same patriarchy and regionalism existed. For example, in the early 20th century Brazil had become one of the largest exporters of coffee in the world, most of this was coming from the Brazilian “coffee country” located in the Paraiba Valley region in the state of Sao Paolo. The production of coffee was so integral to the first Brazilian republic that it inspired intense regional superiority in Sao Paulo, giving birth to an oligarchical structure based around the wealthy coffee owners, that irked the general population (specifically the working class), and undermined the legitimacy of the republic in the eyes of the masses. The displeasure of the people with the “coffee aristocracy,” later would grant support and legitimacy to Vargas’ revolution. However, even though the masses were fed up with the patriarchal structure and regional pride that the coffee industry brought about, it could not simply be done away with. For so long coffee helped fuel the Brazilian economy. In her book Caetana Says No, Sandra Graham focuses on a coffee plantation that was owned by Captain Luís Mariano de Tolosa, which was worth about 43,450 US dollars in 1834, which would be nearly one million dollars in today’s economy. A crop worth that much cannot simply be taken out of the economy and despite Vargas’ social reforms, like welfare, the continuation of the coffee trade served to continue the legacy of regionalism. On an international level the coffee trade served to reinforce the patriarchal structure established between Brazil and the Western powers it relied on for trade. Brazil was a massive exporter of “raw materials” to first world countries. However, like many other former colonies, Brazil depended greatly on obtaining “finished goods,” or manufactured items from first world countries. The patriarchal system is all about dependency and, in the early portion of the dictatorship, Brazil could not escape the patriarchal bond it had with the older, more developed European powers. This would later change in the late 60’s with the onset of the Tropicalia movement, when Brazil was exporting a greater amount of finished goods in the form of art and music. Though it kept Brazil dependent on the western powers she had recently gained independence from, the lasting legacy of the patriarchy was not all bad. When examining the nature of Brazilian societal structure it becomes evident that, though there does exist strict social classes, the culture of the nation is flexible. Graham showcases this with the story of the titular character, Caetana, who is forced into a marriage with a man she finds unbearable. She approaches her master, begging him to grant her a separation from her unwanted spouse. Despite the fact that she is a slave and a woman in an arranged marriage, her master eventually “relent[s] and separate[s] the couple.” This is an amazing feat for her considering she lives in a male dominated slaver society. Caetana’s story reveals the silver lining that exists within the Brazilian patriarchy: though it grants power to the dominant males within the society (placing them at the top of the social ladder, whether it be on a domestic, local, or national level), it instills upon them a responsibility for those who fall under their jurisdiction. This caveat would carry over to the dictatorship as well. Unlike the totalitarian regimes that dominated many parts of the world at the time (i.e. the USSR and Italy), the new Brazilian government would be classified as a soft dictatorship because, though Vargas would rule with complete authoritarian control, he still kept in mind that he had to look out for the best interests of the people he ruled. Much like Caetana’s owner, Vargas sought to help appease his people’s worries by implementing many celebrated social reforms, like the creation of a welfare system. By catering to some of the needs of the masses, the leader is able to stay in power, without having to worry about large amounts of dissent amongst his citizens. It is still important to remember though on a social level, there were still two sides to the coin. Brazil struggled to escape the pitfalls of uneven development created by regionalism and patriarchy. Graham displays this inequality by showing that women in Brazilian society, including social elites like Inácia Delfina Werneck, were not allowed to learn to read. As most slaves had to rely on their masters for any sort of literary insight, so too did most women in the male dominated society. Chris Dunn briefly discuss’ the issue of illiteracy in Brazil in the 1970, stating only about forty percent of Bahians were literate, while over seventy-five percent of the population of Sao Paulo could read and write. This continuing trend in gaps of literacy are quite alarming and adequately show the pit falls that Brazil experienced due to the longevity of regionalism and the patriarchy. Following Vargas’ reign Brazil underwent another, brief experimentation with democracy until another military cue in 1964 reestablished the military dictatorship. In the midst of this political turmoil, a new counter culture began to spring forth, inspired by tropical areas in Bahia called Tropicalia. Much like the Flower Power movement happening at the same time in the US, Tropicalia sought to express the feelings of an unheard minority through literature, music, and art. However, unlike the hippies, the tropicalists sought to also form a national identity, building upon previous artistic movements, as well as taking advantage of the regionalism and patriarchy that was ingrained into the society. The tropicalists stood behind the idea that “art [has] a transforming function in society,” meaning that they believed in order to bring change the culture of Brazil, these new young artists could circumvent the bureaucracy that came with patriarchy and bring change to their country by expressing their visions through the arts. Musicians like Gilberto Gil used their music to open up a new cultural dialog about modern Brazil, in order to “enlighten the people.” The Tropicalia movement, since it largely tried to circumvent the patriarchy/government in its attempt to redefine Brazilian culture, was a true counter culture, and as alluded to earlier, help establish a Brazilian identity in the international community with the export the music and art produced during this time. However, the tropicalist movement was not a complete breakaway from the cultural norm in Brazil. The foundations, sounds, and ideas of the movement are all rooted in regionalism, albeit a slightly different variation. The tropicalists sought to capture what they saw as the real spirit of the country. The relied heavily on the sounds and atmosphere of the northern jungles for inspiration, as well as the popular culture of the working class. This movement continued the trend in Brazilian history of Afro-Brazilian cultural being established in Bahia, like copiaera, samba, and Candoblé. But despite its roots in working class areas and undeveloped jungles, Tropicalia, much like the new government, could not escape the grasps of patriarchy completely. The movement was very interested in the life of the working class, yet all its followers did not necessarily fit the role of the songs they were singing. For example, while doing a televised concert, Nara Leão took a moment to state her new found “commitment to public performance as way to confront the regime.” A voice from the crowd then questions the sincerity of her claim, pointing out that she herself is part of the bourgeoisie. Though her performance would go on to greatly please the crowd and redeem her, the institution of patriarchy clearly snaked its way into Brazil’s counter culture. Despite a massive amount of relatively sudden change over a span of about thirty years, Brazil could still not shake the regionalism and patriarchy that had dominated the country since the Portuguese colonized it. Though theses social constructs experienced some changes following the abolishment of slavery and the onset of Brazilian independence, they still held a huge influence in society, at times even dictating the way the dictatorship would take itself, in one way or another. The fact that these ideas were even able to find a way to fit into the burgeoning counter culture of the 1960’s speaks volumes to both institutions level of immersion into Brazilian society.

Work Cited:
Dunn, Christopher Brutality Garden: Tropicália and the Emergence of a Brazilian Counterculture, (The University of North Carolina Press, 2001), Kindle Edition

Graham, Sandra, Caetana Says No: Women’s Stories from a Brazilian Slave Society, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002),