¿Madre bondadosa o cruel madrastra? Imagen nacional y caricaturas en la cultura visual de Cuba (1868-1878)

Barra lateral del artículo

PDF

ISSN online: 1989-9289

Prefijo Doi: 10.14201

Contenido principal del artículo

Ainhoa Gilarranz
Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
España
Vol. 9 (2018), Estudios, Páginas 231-255
DOI: https://doi.org/10.14201/fdp.24945
Derechos de autor Cómo citar

Resumen

A lo largo del siglo XIX, las mejoras técnicas en el mundo de la imprenta permitieron introducir asiduamente grabados, ilustraciones y caricaturas entre sus publicaciones. Los dibujantes satíricos se hacían eco de los acontecimientos que se debatían entre la sociedad y los representaban mediante su código humorístico en las páginas de prensa. La personificación de las naciones en alegorías, principalmente femeninas, se popularizó entre los caricaturistas proyectando imaginarios nacionales con unas características muy concretas. En los momentos de mayor conflicto social y político estas representaciones nacionales brotaban difundiendo ideales, opiniones y corrientes de pensamiento que llegaban a la población. Uno de esos acontecimientos fue la Guerra de los diez años (1868-1878) entre Cuba y España, el primero de los conflictos por la independencia que enfrentó a la colonia con la metrópolis. Mediante el estudio de fuentes iconográficas, principalmente las ilustraciones de Víctor Patricio de Landaluze en la publicación españolista Juan Palomo, se profundiza en la construcción del imaginario nacional tanto de España como de Cuba durante el conflicto, en el papel de la otredad en la fabricación de estas representaciones y su consolidación en otros productos: literatura y objetos cotidianos, con la intención de analizar la contienda desde su dimensión cultural.

Palabras clave:

Estudios culturales, nación, imaginario, caricatura

Descargas

La descarga de datos todavía no está disponible.

Detalles del artículo

Crossref
Scopus
Google Scholar
Europe PMC

Citas

Abbott, E., Corbin, L., & Neibergall, J. (2000). Computer adoption levels of Iowa dailies and weeklies. Newspaper Research Journal, 21(2), 84-94.

Andrade, S., Lachat, C., Ochoa-Aviles, A., Verstraeten, R., Huybregts, L., Roberfroid, D., & Cardon, G. (2014). A school-based intervention improves physical fitness in Ecuadorian adolescents: A cluster-randomized controlled trial. International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, 11(1), 153-170.

Arroyave, J. (2006, June). The emergence of diffusion theory in Latin America: A critical analysis. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Communication Association. Dresden, Germany: International Communication Association.

Beltrán, S. (1976). Investigación en comunicación en Latinoamérica: Indagación con anteojeras]. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Scientific Conference on Mass Communication and Social Consciousness in a Changing World. Leipzig, Germany.

Bordenave, J. D. (1976). Communication of agricultural innovations in Latin America: The need for new models. Communication Research, 3(2), 135-154.

Brossard, D., Lewenstein, B., & Bonney, R. (2005). Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The impact of a citizen science project. International Journal of Science Education, 27(9), 1099-1121.

Brossard, D., & Scheufele, D. A. (2013). Science, new media, and the public. Science, 339(6115), 40-41.

Bowater, L., & Yeoman, K. (2013). Science communication: A practical guide for scientists. London, UK: Wiley & Blackwell.

Bubela, T., Nisbet, M. C., Borchelt, R., Brunger, F., Critchley, C., Einsiedel, E., ... & Jandciu, E. W. (2009). Science communication reconsidered. Nature Biotechnology, 27(6), 514-518.

Bucchi, M. (2008). Of deficits, deviations, and dialogues: Theories of public communication of science. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 57-76). New York, NY: Routledge.

Bucchi, M., & Trench, B. (Eds.). (2008). Handbook of public communication of science and technology. New York, NY: Routledge.

Collins, K., Shiffman, D., & Rock, J. (2016). How are scientists using social media in the workplace? PloS One, 11(10), e0162680.

Cooper, C. (2016). Citizen science: How ordinary people are changing the face of discovery. London, UK: Gerald Duckworth & Co.

Chapin, M., & Threlkeld, B. (2001). Indigenous landscapes. A Study in Ethnocartography. Arlington, VA: Center for the Support of Native Lands.

Chevalier, J. M., & Buckles, D. J. (2013). Participatory action research: Theory and methods for engaged inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA: Routledge.

Crawford, C. B., & Strohkirch, C. S. (2002). Leadership education for knowledge organizations: A primer. Journal of Leadership Education, 1(2), 18-33.

Da Cruz, C. G. (2018). Community-engaged scholarship: Toward a shared understanding of practice. The Review of Higher Education, 41(2), 147-167.

Dupagne, M. (1999). Exploring the characteristics of potential high-definition television adopters. Journal of Media Economics, 12(1), 35-50.

Dunwoody, S. (2014). Science journalism: Prospects in the digital age. In M. Bucchi & B. Trench (Eds.), Handbook of public communication of science and technology (pp. 43-55). New York, NY: Routledge.

Dutton, W. H., Rogers, E. M., & Jun, S. H. (1987). Diffusion and social impacts of personal computers. Communication Research, 14(2), 219-250.

Entman, R. M. (1993). Framing: Toward clarification of a fractured paradigm. Journal of Communication, 43(4), 51-58.

Flyvbjerg, B. (2001). Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Friedman, S. M., Dunwoody, S., & Rogers, C. L. (1999). Communicating uncertainty: Media coverage of new and controversial science. New York, NY: Routledge.

Gamson, W. (1992). Talking politics. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Glaser, B. G., & Strauss, A. L. (1967). The discovery of grounded theory: Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL: Aldire.

Gregory, J., & Miller, S. (1998). Science in public: Communication, culture, and credibility. Cambridge, MA: Plenum.

Grier, S., & Bryant, C. A. (2005). Social marketing in public health. Annual Review of Public Health, 26, 319-339.

Guzzetti, B. J., & Gamboa, M. (2004). Zines for social justice: Adolescent girls writing on their own. Reading Research Quarterly, 39(4), 408-436.

Herriott, R. E., & Firestone, W. A. (1983). Multisite qualitative policy research: Optimizing description and generalizability. Educational Researcher, 12(2), 14-19.

Holliman, R., Collins, T., Jensen, E., & Taylor, P. (2009). ISOTOPE: Informing science outreach and public engagement. Final report of the NESTA-funded ISOTOPE project. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University.

Jensen, E., & Holliman, R. (2009). Investigating science communication to inform science outreach and public engagement (pp. 55-71). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Katz, E. (1957). The two-step flow of communication: An up-to-date report on an hypothesis. Public Opinion Quarterly, 21(1), 61-78

Kesby, M. (2000). Participatory diagramming: Deploying qualitative methods through an action research epistemology. Area, 32(4), 423-435.

Leach, J., Yates, S., & Scanlon, E. (2008). Models of science communication. In Holliman, R., Whitelegg, E., Scanlon, E., Smidt, S., & Thomas, J. (Eds.), Investigating science communication in the information age (pp. 128-146). London, UK: Oxford University Press.

Liang, X., Su, L. Y.F., Yeo, S. K., Scheufele, D. A., Brossard, D., Xenos, M., & Corley, E. A. (2014). Building buzz: Scientists communicating science in new media environments. Journalism & Mass Communication Quarterly, 91(4), 772-791.

Listerman, T. (2010). Framing of science issues in opinion-leading news: International comparison of biotechnology issue coverage. Public Understanding of Science, 19(1), 5-15.

Lin, C. A. (1998). Exploring personal computer adoption dynamics. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 42(1), 95-112.

Massarani, L., Reynoso-Haynes, E., Murriello, S., & Castillo, A. (2016). Posgrado en comunicación de la Ciencia en América Latina: Un mapa y algunas reflexiones. [Science Communication Postgraduate Studies in Latin America: A map and some food for thought]. JCOM, 15(05), A03.

Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2014). Designing qualitative research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Martín-Barbero, J (1993). Communication, culture, and hegemony: From the media to mediations. London, UK: Sage.

McNiff, J. (2014). Writing and doing action research. London, UK: Sage.

Meyrowitz, J. (2009). Medium theory. In D. Crowley & D. Mitchell (Eds.), Communication theory today (pp. 50-77). Redwood City, CA: Stanford University Press.

Pearce, W., Brown, B., Nerlich, B., & Koteyko, N. (2015). Communicating climate change: Conduits, content, and consensus. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Climate Change, 6(6), 613-626.

Peters, H. P. (2013). Gap between science and media revisited: Scientists as public communicators. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 110 (Suppl. 3), 14102-14109.

Rocha, M., Massarani, L., & Pedersoli, C. (2017). La divulgación de la ciencia en América Latina: Términos, definiciones y campo académico. En L. Massarani, M. Rocha, C. Pedersoli, C. Almeida, L. Amorim, M. Cambre, A.C. Nepote, N. Rocha, J. Aguirre, J.C. Goncalvez, L. Cordioli & F. Ferreira (Eds.), Aproximaciones a la investigación en divulgación de la ciencia en América Latina a partir de sus artículos académicos (pp. 39-58). Rio de Janeiro, Brasil: Fiocruz-COC.

Rogers, E. M. (2010). Diffusion of innovations. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

Selin, C., Rawlings, K. C., de Ridder-Vignone, K., Sadowski, J., Altamirano Allende, C., Gano, G., & Guston, D. H. (2017). Experiments in engagement: Designing public engagement with science and technology

Stilgoe, J., Lock, S. J., & Wilsdon, J. (2014). Why should we promote public engagement with science? Public Understanding of Science, 23(1), 4-15.

Weigold, M. F. (2001). Communicating science: A review of the literature. Science communication, 23(2), 164-193.

White, J. M. (2013). Translating science, health and technology: Reporters as knowledge transfer intermediaries. Online Journal of Communication and Media Technologies, 3(2), 227.

Wynne, B. (1995). Public understanding of science. In S. Jasanoff, G. E. Markle, J. C. Peterson, & T. Pinch (Eds.), Handbook of science and technology studies (pp. 361-388). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Wong, N. T., Zimmerman, M. A., & Parker, E. A. (2010). A typology of youth participation and empowerment for child and adolescent health promotion. American Journal of Community Psychology, 46(1-2), 100-114.

Yin, R. K. (2017). Case study research and applications: Design and methods. (6th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.