Antonia Castañeda has utilized scholarship from women’s studies and Mexican-American history to examine nineteenth-century literary portrayals of Mexican women. As Castañeda notes, scholars of women’s history observe that in the United States, male novelists of the period—during which, according to these scholars, women’s traditional economic role in home-based agriculture was threatened by the transition to a factory-based industrial economy—define women solely in their domestic roles of wife and mother. Castañeda finds that during the same period that saw non-Hispanic women being economically displaced by industrialization, Hispanic law in territorial California protected the economic position of “Californianas” (the Mexican women of the territory) by ensuring them property rights and inheritance rights equal to those of males.
For Castañeda, the laws explain a stereotypical plot created primarily by male, non-Hispanic novelists: the story of an ambitious non-Hispanic merchant or trader desirous of marrying an elite Californiana. These novels’ favorable portrayal of such women is noteworthy, since Mexican-American historians have concluded that unflattering literary depictions of Mexicans were vital in rallying the United States public’s support for the Mexican-American War (1846–1848). The importance of economic alliances forged through marriages with Californianas explains this apparent contradiction. Because of their real-life economic significance, the Californianas were portrayed more favorably than were others of the same nationality.
The “apparent contradiction” mentioned in the highlighted text refers to the discrepancy between the
legal status of Mexican women in territorial California and their status in the United States
unflattering depiction of Mexicans in novels and the actual public sentiment about the Mexican-American War
existence of many marriages between Californianas and non-Hispanic merchants and the strictures against them expressed in novels
literary depiction of elite Californianas and the literary depiction of other Mexican individuals
novelistic portrayals of elite Californianas’ privileged lives and the actual circumstances of those lives
此讲解的内容由AI生成,还未经人工审阅,仅供参考。
正确答案是 B。
该文提到,在1846-1848的墨西哥美战争中,不好的文学描绘对动员美国公众支持起到了重要作用。但同时,Castaeda 发现,19世纪小说中对加利福尼亚女士(Californianas)的描述要比其他同国人的描述褒义得多。这种表面上的矛盾,也就是“highlighted text”中指的矛盾,指的是小说中对墨西哥人的不好描绘与实际公众的情绪之间的差异。选项B正确地指出了这种矛盾。
The United States Census Bureau uses the ethnonyms "Hispanic or Latino" to refer to "a person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin regardless of race" and states that Hispanics or Latinos can be of any race, any ancestry, any ethnicity.
这篇阅读难在对美国的历史不了解。。。跟那篇印第安飞地差不多
这篇文章看了两三遍才明白过来:就是说一个普遍的现象是女人在19世纪的美国情况都不是很好,但是很奇怪,拉美裔Carliforniana的女人似乎社会地位还不错,有法律保障她们和男人有同等的经济上的权利。
第二段,作者就开始讲这些Carliforniana具体是什么情况。然后发现在小说里面,她们在婚姻上很抢手;但是呢,同期的美西战争,黑西哥(拉美裔)是必须要unflaterry的。考虑到Carliforniana也是黑西文哥裔的人啊,所以这里就出现矛盾了。(这里是这个题)。接下来作者解释了这个问题,就是因为这些Carliforniana有钱!
第二段第一句:want to marry an elite Californiana; 第二段第二句:unflattering literary depictions of Mexicans.
所以这里的contradiction是这两组Hispanics‘受到不同待遇’的对比。D。
这题很难,要着重理解
These novels’ favorable portrayal of such women is noteworthy, since Mexican-American historians have concluded that unflattering literary depictions of Mexicans were vital in rallying the United States public’s support for the Mexican-American War (1846–1848).
而且还要想清楚至少两层逻辑。mark。
看到都说难我就放心了。。。
书读百遍其义自见。。。虽然4分钟看懂+做题没戏。
首先交代背景:AC评估19世纪墨女。
AC的两个发现:1.19世纪美国女性都居家。2.19世纪美国非西班牙女性走向工业化,加州的西班牙法律保护加州的墨女。(根据逻辑理解,19世纪美国的非西班牙女不被保护财富,同时代的加州西班牙女被立法保护其财富。)
AC的观点:此立法解释了为啥19世纪美国非西班牙男小说家喜欢撰写非西班牙男商人渴望娶Californiana女(墨女)。男小说家把墨女往好的写值得注意,因为这个时期墨西哥和美国的战争需要把墨西哥人往坏的写,才能调动美国人参战。所以为啥?因为娶墨女可以富有丫,解释了矛盾(要把墨西哥人往unflattering坏处写,但是却讴歌墨女!),所以男小说家愿意讴歌墨女比起墨西哥的男人来说。
通过与加州拉美裔妇女的婚姻而建立的经济联盟的重要性,解释了这一明显的矛盾【这个矛盾就是考题了,也是刚才分析的,一部分往好了写,一部分人不讨好的写。为什呢?因为那些妹子有钱,大家都想娶她们,这个就是经济联盟重要性解释的地方】。由于他们在现实生活中的经济意义,加州拉美裔妹子被描绘得相同国籍的人更为美好。
因为墨西哥裔美国历史学家认为,对拉美裔人的不讨好的文学描写是美国公众对美墨战争(1846-1848)的支持至关重要的。【也就是说,有一些描写是不讨好拉美裔人的,跟上问赞美讨好地描写男的都要找加州拉美裔的妹子是不一致的。就是说,一部分描写在描写加州拉美裔妹子的时候是赞美的,大家都要娶她们啊,因为她们有经济地位的;但同时为了获得公众对于对墨战争的支持,有一些描写必然不会把拉美人往好了写。因为美国人要和他们打仗啊,肯定把敌人往差了写,稍微有点良心的也得中立的写,肯定不会赞美的写。】
这些小说对这些女性的良好刻画是值得注意的。【这里要理解到,要转折了,上面那个情节是好的,是一种赞美性的描写,大家都想要跟加州拉美裔妹子结婚。但是这种赞美是值得注意,为什么呢?下面肯定要讲一些不同了】。
看了一遍又一遍,看了三个问题和选项。有关第二段的拙见:
法律【上文提到的:在加州的拉美裔法律保护了“加州人”(墨西哥妇女)的经济地位,确保他们的财产权和继承权利与男性的权利平等。】解释了一种典型的情节。这种情节主要是由男性、非拉美裔小说家创造的。这个典型的情节是:一个雄心勃勃的非拉美裔商人或交易想要和加州人(墨西哥妇女)精英结合。【这要理解到,因为这些妹子具有钱,具有经济定位,所以大家都想跟他们结合。】
全文逻辑链:
1.AC研究19世纪女性文学形象
2.USA文学中的女性经济地位不保;Hispanic law中有一条保护Ca女性经济地位的法令
3.由此解释非Hispanic文学的典型情节的出现原因
文章不长,要短时间读懂有难度
居然此题没有人提问,要整个第二段整体理解才能理解此题,好难啊~~~
我也完全不能理解。这文章真的好难。。。
登录 或 注册 后可以参加讨论