Back

Home

Animals as Philosophical and Ethical Subjects


Animals as Reflexive Thinkers


Domestication and Predation


Animals as Entertainment and Spectacle

Animals as Companions


Animals as Symbols


Animals in Science, Education and Therapy


Animals in History


Animals as Food


Animals in Literature and Ecocriticism


Animals in Feminism and Ecofeminism


Animals in Religion, Myth, and Folktales


Conservation and Animal/Human Conflict


Miscellaneous

Contact
LKalof@msu.edu

Linda Kalof,
Seven Bryant,
Amy Fitzgerald
Department of Sociology, Michigan State University,
East Lansing, MI 48824

‘Europe', ‘Spain', and the Bulls
Carrie B. Douglass
Journal of Mediterranean Studies 1992, v. 2, pg. 69-79

“Europe” and “Spain” are cultural constructions with multiple meanings. “The bulls” are also a cultural construction, which have come to be the center of this cultural identity debate. Those who are for “the bulls” represent those who are on the traditional side of the fence and who wish to keep “Spain” separate from “Europe”. On the other hand, to be against the bulls is to be pro-modernization and European. This article addresses the cultural categories of “Spain” and “Europe” as represented since the 18 th century. The author focuses on the role of the bullfight in this cultural debate of identity and seeks to understand how the public view of the bullfight is changing.

The author opens with a brief history of Spain and how the current stereotype of Spain came to be. Spanish isolation from Europe began in the 16 th century when Catholic Spain rejected “Europe” with the Spanish stance against Erasmusian religion. By the 17 th century, Spain had lost control of the trade with American colonies and power shifted to northern European countries. During the Romance period in the early part of the 19 th century, romantic writers and artists came to Spain to recreate the vision of “primitive” Spain. Images of gypsies and bandits, flamenco dancers, Carmen, and the bullfighter remain steadfast today. By 1898, Spain had lost the last of its American Colonies. Many people wanted to solve Spain's economic and social problems by making it more “European”. These people were known as “Europeanizers”. Gradually Spain became more economically similar to Europe by becoming more industrialized. In 1985, Spain was recognized into the European common market.

The history of bullfighting began as a status symbol. Only royals could participate. Then at the beginning of the 18 th century, it became a common man's sport. Since the Enlightenment, many have argued that the bullfight was “barbaric”. Those who opposed the bulls (known as antitaurines) wanted to make Spain more “European” by eliminating the bullfights. They view bulls as unrational while “Europe” remains a symbol of rationality.

Douglass suggests that there are two types of people in Spain. Those who are “for” the bulls, and those who are “against” the bulls. Each of these groups are cultural identities. To be “for” the bulls means that you are traditional and you reject the idea of bringing Spain into the modern culture of “Europe”. To be “against” the bulls is to make the statement that you are supportive of the modernization and Europeanization of Spain. The antitaurines argue that the bullfights are a “barbarous, non-European, thirdworldish, primitive anachronism” (pg. ). Many feel it is cruel and inhumane. Before Spain became a member of the EEC, one member of British parliament propsed to ban's Spain entry until the sport was prohibited. Douglass suggests that this was an attack on Spain cultural independence. This reinstates the idea that “Europe” does not view the bulls as having a part in modern Europe.

Douglass goes on to suggest that there is also a third position in this cultural debate. This category would change the cultural meaning of the word “Spain”. She interviewed several people who admitted to being for the bulls but also to agreeing that it is barbaric and cruel. These people desire to embellish the effects of a modern economy, democracy, and society. However, this would mean they risk loosing their cultural heritage and the values and qualities of “Spanish life.” It is viewed that the “European” model of society is “rational” but the “Spanish” model of society “concentrates on a better quality of life” (pg. 75). Being “for” the bulls then reaffirms the cultural significance of “Spain” by suspending rationality and concentrating on the irrational value of the bulls.

So the symbolic significance of the bullfight can be understood by understanding how it is connected to questions of cultural identity as expressed in the cultural definitions of “Spain” and “Europe”. Douglass has shown how they were once antitheses of one another but have become more closely connected. “Spain” is a part of the larger “Europe” in that it takes on economic and political attributes of the larger culture but maintains the irrational social traditions through the bullfight as its symbol.

 

Back