I'm curious whether the toxicity the contributor wishes to communicate would come through better if the image was juxtaposed with another image, perhaps one that more explicitly depicts the work and violence of bus driving. Without the caption, it is difficult to understand what sort of toxicity the author is attempting to convey.
I'd like the author to more explicitly address toxicity in the caption. While the reader/viewer is led to read violence as toxicity in the image captions, it would be interesting for the author to elaborate why the lens of toxicity is appropriate for theorizing violence.
The image allows visualizing a deep problem in society related to alcohol abuse as a toxic that devastate all the spectrum of society, as mentioned by the author. The visualization allows easying to understand the toxic impacts of alcohol and how it is connected with the worst masculinity expressions, including violence.
The presented image has a flashy original design. Although it is not created by the ethnographer, it is part of the story told by both, the designer and the ethnographer. The image presents a three squares perspective, such as in a comic, showing the evolution of the character, generating a direct interest in the background story.
The visualization tells us about how toxic behaviors are linked to toxic's ingestion, in this case talking about toxic masculinities related to alcohol abuse, reflecting the detriment of society along the time.
This visualization is a layered, in-your-face, critique of alcoholism and masculinity in Guatemala. The artist transforms the El Borracho Loteria card into this triptych of a dick-head that suggests alcoholism is prevalent across socio-economic status. Mohamed situates this image within a discussion of toxic masculinity in Guatemala. . His interpretation contextualizes this image as social-critique showing its multifaceted connections to art and male culture.
Bien a verga is translated by google as "shit-faced." There is obviously a commentary in this triptych about sexual potency and alcoholism, but I'm also strangely curious about the critical distinction between shit-faced and dick-head in this artist's critique of masculinity. I'm curious about the reception of this triptych by other viewers. Who is it aimed to? How is it distributed? Does it speak to (some) women's experience, and in what ways.
This is an existing art work and cultural commentary that the ethnographer has found and situated with a larger cultural context. It is an image referencing El Borracho but transforming the original drunken character into a grotesque image of three "dick-heads". The artist has simplified the visual elements however the stance and environment (seemingly against a wall outside a bar with a bottle of alcohol) remain consistent with the original image. As A. Mohammed notes, the changing clothing marks these images as suggesting that alcohol abuse is endemic across social class.
The image is grotesque and funny. I don't know how to enrich it further. I would be curious to see the image in its context as a piece of public or gallery art, to see it seen by other viewers. But as presented I think it is an image rich in ethnographic import.
This visualization is positioned within an discusson of toxic male culture in Guatemala. It speaks to the specificity of toxic masculinity in an ethnographic context. The author writes that the image shows the negative impact of alcohol abuse on society, but I'm not sure that this visualization addresses that aspect. There is an interesting dynamic at play between alcoholism, sexual potency and toxic masculinity. In the image I think toxics is linked to limpness as part of a progression.
