I think you are the second person who reacts in my new blog "Rebetiko (in English)" and I thank you for that! Instead of answering with an email I thought it would be better to write a new post since your questions are interesting even for other people.
Your comment was: How would you define the male manga person and the female, if there is such a difference? Or do you think of it as a male personality? Does this have to do with masculinity to you? To me it sounds like human dignity, but I might not understand...
I was glad to see that you mentioned the female version of the word mangas (mangissa). It is one of my beloved topics and I have written quite a lot about the sensible differences in the use of nouns in my dictionary of rebetiko which is going to be published during the autumn 2008.
My purpose with the post "The same old story - WHAT MEANS MANGAS?" was not to start discussions about this very word. I´m terribly bored when I see people arguing and rearguing about the same things on rebetiko forums. My purpose was to give some comments and start using the words "mangas" and "mangia", knowing that I have already explained what I have in mind. I don´t want to define, I only want to describe. I am not a methodologist, an intellectual researcher who cut rebetiko into pieces, wearing white gloves and examines it with a magnifying glass. I am aware that I use a "different" language in approaching it. My language is the one of heart and thorax. I let my heart speak, filtrating my experiences from the last people of rebetiko. I even use my mind instead of not allowing myself get into fanatism and enroll this music in a mythological veil. I am aware too of the continuous struggle between "ego" and "it"...
Now, I will answer your questions.
Is there such a difference between male and female mangas?
Yes, if you agree that a man and a woman are completely different. Women´s attitudes have always been different and cannot be changed within some seconds, as we(they) need to believe. Women, according to my opinion, do not need to drive big trucks, even for the simple reason that transport by trucks must be forbidden... And, women do not need to be mine-workers, even for the simple reason that we have to find alternative energy sources. Women are stronger organisms than men and they have not needed to be tough, in the same way as men. When they were forced to, they have showed that they can be much tougher than us. When the German police was hunting Baader- Meinhof the orders coming from the Police Department were clear: "Shoot the female members first".
Though I have glorified the character of the real mangas, I know that there is something self-destructive in his identity. Women, if you allow me to generalize, are not self-destructive as men. They are not programmed to. In case they fall into such an attitude,it usually last too long.
I believe in women who behold their sensuality, even when they are getting involved into men´s world. I believe that one of the most stupid things a woman can do is, to imitate male behaviours instead of being accepted by them. Mangisses, according to my opinion, were, Roza Eskenazy, Rita Abadzi, Angelitsa Papazoglou, Sofia Karivali, Daisy Stavropoulou, Poly Panou. The idol Sotiria Bellou was something else.
Is the attribute of being a mangas a proof for masculinity?
No, not at all. It is big mistake to mix up attitudes from older times with modern points of view. A big missunderstanding, with reasonable explanations, among young people of today is that mangia considers to be a proof of masculinity. According to common sense, if one feels sure of what he/she is does not need to emphasize it...
I suppose I have answered your interesting questions.
Your comment was: How would you define the male manga person and the female, if there is such a difference? Or do you think of it as a male personality? Does this have to do with masculinity to you? To me it sounds like human dignity, but I might not understand...
I was glad to see that you mentioned the female version of the word mangas (mangissa). It is one of my beloved topics and I have written quite a lot about the sensible differences in the use of nouns in my dictionary of rebetiko which is going to be published during the autumn 2008.
My purpose with the post "The same old story - WHAT MEANS MANGAS?" was not to start discussions about this very word. I´m terribly bored when I see people arguing and rearguing about the same things on rebetiko forums. My purpose was to give some comments and start using the words "mangas" and "mangia", knowing that I have already explained what I have in mind. I don´t want to define, I only want to describe. I am not a methodologist, an intellectual researcher who cut rebetiko into pieces, wearing white gloves and examines it with a magnifying glass. I am aware that I use a "different" language in approaching it. My language is the one of heart and thorax. I let my heart speak, filtrating my experiences from the last people of rebetiko. I even use my mind instead of not allowing myself get into fanatism and enroll this music in a mythological veil. I am aware too of the continuous struggle between "ego" and "it"...
Now, I will answer your questions.
Is there such a difference between male and female mangas?
Yes, if you agree that a man and a woman are completely different. Women´s attitudes have always been different and cannot be changed within some seconds, as we(they) need to believe. Women, according to my opinion, do not need to drive big trucks, even for the simple reason that transport by trucks must be forbidden... And, women do not need to be mine-workers, even for the simple reason that we have to find alternative energy sources. Women are stronger organisms than men and they have not needed to be tough, in the same way as men. When they were forced to, they have showed that they can be much tougher than us. When the German police was hunting Baader- Meinhof the orders coming from the Police Department were clear: "Shoot the female members first".
Though I have glorified the character of the real mangas, I know that there is something self-destructive in his identity. Women, if you allow me to generalize, are not self-destructive as men. They are not programmed to. In case they fall into such an attitude,it usually last too long.
I believe in women who behold their sensuality, even when they are getting involved into men´s world. I believe that one of the most stupid things a woman can do is, to imitate male behaviours instead of being accepted by them. Mangisses, according to my opinion, were, Roza Eskenazy, Rita Abadzi, Angelitsa Papazoglou, Sofia Karivali, Daisy Stavropoulou, Poly Panou. The idol Sotiria Bellou was something else.
Is the attribute of being a mangas a proof for masculinity?
No, not at all. It is big mistake to mix up attitudes from older times with modern points of view. A big missunderstanding, with reasonable explanations, among young people of today is that mangia considers to be a proof of masculinity. According to common sense, if one feels sure of what he/she is does not need to emphasize it...
I suppose I have answered your interesting questions.
3 comments:
Thankyou for your interesting answer! And of course I agree, man and woman are different from each other, thank God.
I also wonder about something else you talk about. You say that mangas don´t want to harm anybody and hold a low profile. Self-respect, self-control. And then you talk about the self-wounding as an magnificent attitude (not so normal among the women). I understand we are talking about a historical type of personality here, but the admiration of this concept may still be a reality. To me self-wounding is hurting your next, it is an act of violence that hurts the other, even though he himself is not beaten. How does this go together? Is it some sort of stoic thinking in the bottom? Or does it have to do with pride and desperation? Within the mangas culture it seems to be an accepted way of resolving conflicts and contradictions with the outside and the inside.
Hi again!
Total missunderstanding...
By saying self-wounding I mean that a person hurts himself instead of hurting somebody who offended him. That is why I call it mabnificent. It declares dignity and refusal till violence. On the other hand it shows a certain incapability to controll the black waters of anger coming within. I don't believe that it includes a certain exhibition. Women do not use such an attitudes. They do not belong their traditions. Am I clear now?
I'm correcting:
refusal to violence...
magnificent (not mabnificent)
Post a Comment