Su Rho (Kevin) Yoo

ISP Section 8
Due: 1/24/2018

By using bullfighting as a metaphor in relation to Portugal, the author aims (or appears)

to highlight some characteristics existent in Portugal by noting (1) the strategy used by the

bullfighters; the Portuguese attitudes towards gatherings such as family and church, which

exhibit teamwork and unity, (2) the Portuguese actions in art and business which demonstrate

their strive for perfection, and, (3) the celebrations in Portuguese bullfighting which include the

values and traditions of joy and bravery. Unfortunately, it is difficult to take the words of the text

seriously as it seems to have problems in both factuality and arguments that it tries to reach for

out of thin air. The characteristics listed above may indeed qualify as ‘interesting points’ but a

straightaway decision by the reader to take them as facts is dangerous without an analysis of how

the author came to those conclusions (or pulled them out of thin air.)

From the beginning of the text, the author’s choice to use bullfighting as a metaphor to

exemplify Portugal seems flawed. The author writes, “Comparing Portugal and Spain on the

indices… yields many more similarities than differences,” then ironically begins to list the

differences in economic power, population, and language. In addition to the great exaggeration

of Portugal’s financial standing in Western Europe which Spain is only a few spots above, the

author also introduces Vasco da Gama as if to suggest his existence was the cure-all for

corruption. The comparisons, between the Spanish and Portuguese ‘versions’ of bullfighting,

which details the Spanish bullfighting’s emphasis on tragedy (&death) vs. Portuguese

bullfighting’s emphasis on emotionalism (& love of life, heroism), looks to be a potentially valid

set of assumptions to form an argument but his mention of [studying the two types of bullfights

helping to sensitize subtle cultural differences that are overlooked, such as assuming that all
Asian nations have the same culture] questions whether if the author recently discovered that

assuming similarities of Asian nations is not a correct approach, and in turn with the high and

euphoria he achieved from this discovery decided to go on a journey to understand global

cultures, ironically using stereotyping metaphors based on proximity of regions. When the author

tries to conclude the reasoning for his metaphor by writing the differences in the treatment of

Spanish vs Portuguese colonies he seems to commend the Portuguese for the concubinage of

slaves which is contradictory to the high concentration of Catholics in Portugal later detailed in

the book. With such obvious flaws in the early stages of the text, I do not see how this is not a

book full of paradoxes.

When a reader realizes the true nature of the text, one realizes that fluffs of descriptions

and paradoxes are littered throughout the text. Statements that entail the actual object or a set of

rules are the only statements that hold any factual value.