Pony Party… capoeira

.

Capoeira

I don’t know what made this jump into my head this morning (^.^)

I first heard this neat song in a movie my son was watching about capoeira. I loved the song immediately (it’s kinda catchy, isn’t it?) And so I looked into the capoeira thing. My son described it as ‘kinda like break-dancing and karate rolled into one, the slaves in Brazil made it up for defense,  but it’s really a game now.’

Huh!

With just a bit of digging we found:

There is contention as to whether the game arrived with enslaved Africans or whether Africans refined a preexisting Brazilian game. One catalyst for capoeira was the homogenization of African people under the oppression of slavery. Capoeira emerged as a way to resist oppression, secretly practice art, transmit culture, and lift spirits.

Ah! A dance of subversion…. of Revolution!!

The wiki definition says:

Capoeira (ka.pu.?ej.??) is an Afro-Brazilian blend of martial art, game, and culture created by enslaved Africans in Brazil during the 16th Century. Participants form a roda (circle) and take turns playing instruments, singing, and sparring in pairs in the center of the circle. The game is marked by fluid acrobatic play, feints, subterfuge, and extensive use of groundwork, as well as sweeps, kicks, and headbutts. Throughout the game, a player must avoid a sweep, trip, kick, or head butt that may knock him or her on the floor. Less frequently-used techniques include elbow-strikes, slaps, punches, and body-throws. Capoeira has evolved from one main form, known as “Capoeira Angola”, into two other forms known as “Capoeira Regional”, and the ever-evolving “Capoeira Contemporânea”.  

Wiki has a good overview of capoeira & a list of books. We got Ring of Liberation by J. Lowell Lewis when my son was interested. As I recall it was a very interesting book.

Here’s what capoeira looks like:

A game between masters:

So what paths did you go down, that you never would have investigated on your own… that only your association with or love for someone else led you to look further?


Thanks for stopping in….

Hang out and chit chat for awhile… and when you’re done

check out some of the excellent offerings on our recent and rec’d list.

O & Please don’t rec the pony party, another will trot up in a few hours.

(^.^)

11 comments

Skip to comment form

    • RiaD on January 18, 2008 at 00:11

    please stop in and say hello…

    • nocatz on January 18, 2008 at 00:22

    is Pavlovian by now

  1. This is absolutely hilarious!  I think I’m the only person who’s noticed this so far.

    DailyKos diarist ShipJack’s diary, from about midnight last night, titled, Obama Supports John Edwards’ [sic] in Surprise Interview got CBS in a quick spot of trouble.

    ShipJack, in his diary, reworded Obama’s now-famous interview in which he discussed Reagan.  ShipJack reworded it in order to bring out what he thought was the underlying logic of Obama’s claims.

    Obama Supports John Edwards’ in Surprise Interview

    by Shipjack [Subscribe]

    Thu Jan 17, 2008 at 12:06:50 AM EST

    Obama, using his strong intellect, revealed something deeply interesting.

    Let’s all hold Obama to his own logic.

    http://tpmelectioncentral.com/

    If you listen to the interview, Obama is RIGHT. He didn’t say the following… but the the logic behind what he says is thus,

    THE LOGIC

    “When the country was so sick of a blue state president, Carter, Reagan was able to tap into it by being 100% red-state. Reagan knew the electorate was so sick of a blue-state president and blue-state policies, they we’re willing to go 100% red. Reagan didn’t mince words. He ran on a 100% red-state message. When Reagan won with a 100% red state message, Reagan had a 100% red-state mandate. Reagan knew transformation was all about mandate. Reagan ran a clear red-issue campaign. He never reached out to blue. Reagan was able to bowl over any resistance in Congress because he had a clear 100% red-state mandate. When you have a 100% red-state mandate, no one is surprised by what you do. Reagan, therefore, was able to get all the changes he wanted. Reagan was for those reasons…transformational.”

    It’s important to emphasize: Obama did not say that, that is ShipJack’s rewording of what Obama said.

    On January 17 at 1:30 PM, that is, 13 and 1/2 hours later, CBS reporter Aaron Lewis posted an entry on John Edwards giving a criticism of Obama’s praise for Reagan.  This appeared on the CBS campaign blog From the Road.  

    The reporter used the Obama non-quote from ShipJack’s diary —  word for word — in order to show what Edwards was responding to.

    The CBS post in question is here but the quote has been fixed.

    However, the CBS blog post was picked up at MYdd by Jerome Armstrong here, including both the original mistaken quote, lifted from ShipJack, and the corrected quote.

    Big Tent Democrat picked up from Armstrong, before the quote was fixed, and puzzled over the fact that CBS has posted an Obama quote that Obama never actually said, here.

    All in all, a truly hilarious adventure for ShipJack’s diary.

  2. Miss you,  miss you, miss you!!! Be back later for witr — turning off the internet … going, going, gone!  

Comments have been disabled.