Talk:Bahia

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

untitled[edit]

(Note: I did on-site research in Salvador da Bahia in 1999 for my doctoral dissertation and have read extensively on the region.)

1) INTRO

Quote: "Bahia is a state in the north-east of Brazil. The name "Bahia" is also sometimes used to refer to the state's capital city, Salvador."

COMMENT: This is a helpful introduction to two of the various shades of meaning in the term "Bahia". One more should be added -- since the article itself falls victim to a confusion of the meanings later on. "Bahia" in popular usage nationally refers above all to the *cultural region* of the capital city Salvador and the outlying Recôncavo area - i.e. just a small subsection of the entire state. (I don't think most Brazilians would think of Juazeiro first when they heard someone say "Bahia"!)

SUGGESTED CHANGE:

"Bahia is a state in the north-east of Brazil. The name "Bahia" is also sometimes used to refer to the state's capital city, Salvador da Bahia - especially by its citizens. In popular usage, "Bahia" refers above all to the African-influenced cultural region comprising the capital Salvador and the area surrounding All Saints' Bay (Baía de Todos os Santos), where a majority of the population are still of African ancestry."

2) BAHIA TODAY

Quote: "As the chief locus of the early Brazilian slave trade, Bahia is considered to possess the greatest and most distinctive African imprint, in terms of culture and customs, in Brazil. These include the Yoruba-derived religious system of Candomblé, the martial art of capoeira, African-derived music such as samba, afoxé, and axé, and a cuisine with strong links to western Africa. Bahia is the birthplace of such noted Brazilian musicians as Dorival Caymmi, João Gilberto, Gilberto Gil, Caetano Veloso and his sister Maria Bethânia, Daniela Mercury, Ivete Sangalo, and Carlinhos Brown, and home to internationally famous groups like Olodum, Ara Ketu, and Ilê Aiyê."

This section falls victim to the confusion I mention above - 95% of it refers only to Salvador, and not the state as a whole. The paragraph could be reworded to more accurately reflect the state/capital distinction.

SUGGESTED CHANGE:

"As the chief locus of the early Brazilian slave trade, Bahia -- especially the greater Salvador area -- is famous for having the greatest and most distinctive African imprint, in terms of culture and customs, in Brazil. These include candomblé (a Yoruba-derived, West-African religious system), capoeira (an African martial art), axé music (a carnival music style derived from candomblé rhythms), and a cuisine with strong links to West Africa. While some famous Bahian musicians such as João Gilberto come from the state's hinterland, the vast majority of Bahia's noted musicians -- Dorival Caymmi, Gilberto Gil, Caetano Veloso and his sister Maria Bethânia, Gal Costa, Daniela Mercury, Ivete Sangalo, and Carlinhos Brown -- come from its capital Salvador, which is also home to internationally famous Afro-Brazilian carnival groups such as FIlhos de Gandhy, Ilê Aiyê, Olodum and Ara Ketu."

(n.b. An afoxé is not a genre of music, but a genre of carnival group. Samba is not particularly unique to Bahia and is not really associated with Salvador, whereas axé music definitely is.)

Alternatively, this paragraph could be reduced substantially and the material added to the entry for Salvador.

How great to find a free on-online encyclopedia writing about Bahia!


You seem like just the person to make the changes. Here on wikipedia, we encourage anyone to be bold with their editing - learn how to edit a page and get started! Reid 07:49, Jul 25, 2004 (UTC)
     The name "Bahia" is also sometimes used to refer to the state's capital city, Salvador.

sorry, i am brazilian and never heard of anyone misusing the term bahia like that. maybe its a tourist thing like calling california a synonim to los angeles.--Alexandre Van de Sande 18:36, 23 Aug 2004 (UTC)

CORRECTION

In fact the information is true, although probably a little bit old fashioned. In the past it was common to refer to Salvador as "a cidade da Bahia" or "the city of Bahia". I was born in Salvador ( naturals are called "soteropolitano" ) and have heard some locals specially from my parents generation refer to the city like that.


Muddy English[edit]

"There are some discussions about brazilian indepence, because for almost the "baianos", it really came to happen in Bahia, with the battles, not in september 7, when the imperator declared independency."

That just doesn't make sense. Smells like Google translate or something. Anyone who knows what was trying to be said, change? Karlusss 00:32, 12 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The whole article could use some work to clean up the English, actually. "XIX century", improper capitalization, bad spelling...
On the other hand, whoever helped write the article writes much better English than I do Portugese, so this isn't meant as an insult by any means. ekedolphin 08:14, 15 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yes! Please clean up the English. The rambling, run-on sentences are painful to read. Some make little sense. I speak/read a little Portuguese and understand that ideas are conveyed in a slightly different manner than in English. It's the same kind of thing with Spanish where writers try to bamboozle their audience with complexity. English prefers clarity. 37.133.234.35 (talk) 01:52, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Attention to history and ongoing debate[edit]

This page is generally good and helpful, but I did find the history to be somewhat misleading, even if well written. Perhaps it was almost too convincing at first and I am glad that I have since found competing information on wikipedia, but also at the library and elsewhere on the internet.

Currently a paragraph under the sub-header "History" reads: "...After several battles, mostly in Pirajá, the province was finally able to expel the Portuguese on July 2nd 1823, known as Bahia Independence Day, a great popular celebration. In the state there is an ongoing discussion about the exact moment of Brazilian independence, because for almost all "baianos," it really happened in Bahia with the battles, and not on September 7, when the Emperor, Pedro I, declared independence."

I am not sure how the first sentence is supported and makes itself evident, other than by simple statement or seemingly popular belief. The second paragrhaph seems to allude to some questions and pursue a more veracious standpoint, but perhaps it is not nearly as forthecoming as it should be. And that is the real point. In other words, this paragraph is probably way too simple in its details to discuss the wheight and truth of the matter that is Brazilian constitutional history and national formation.

I suggest either editing the paragraph and/ or cross-referencing another wikipedia page (topic) for clarity and intellectual justice. And I strongly suggest that all readers take note of the discussions on this page and others. It seems more relevant than some wikipedia topics we read that are not as seemingly complex. Therefore...

See Wikipedia topic "Empire of Brazil" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empire_of_Brazil

See Wikipedia topic "Brazilian War of Independence" at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazilian_War_of_Independence

READ THE DISCUSSIONS and also NOTE that the "The neutrality of this article is disputed" on the second topic in the above.


I also suggest reading Brazil: The Forging of a Nation, 1798-1852 by Roderick J. Barman (Stanford University Press, 1988)

I may be able to point out other issues, but this is the most glaring right now.


I appreciate the participation by everyone. Thanks.

DjZ 08:00, 4 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

what does it produce

Worth Mentioning the Disney filem Los Tres Caballeros/ The Three Caballeros song?[edit]

There is a song in The Three Caballeros that is about Bahia. Is it worth mentioning on this page?Mrobinson587 06:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No. 209.29.86.3 (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 22:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Climate?[edit]

Anybody want to add a section for climate/weather? 64.81.167.175 (talk) 09:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Bahía means bay in Spanish[edit]

It is not archaic Portuguese but Spanish.--83.35.181.1 (talk) 22:09, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is the pre-1943 spelling reform spelling in Brazil.2804:14D:5C70:9981:4156:ED4A:B873:B8A0 (talk) 16:10, 16 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

northeastern?[edit]

The lead paragraph says that Bahia is "located in the northeastern part of the country", and the infobox includes this map. Why is that called "northeastern" Brazil? "Eastern" it certainly is, but how "north"? It looks to me like it's roughly equidistant from the northern and southern boundaries of the country, but there's a lot more area to the north than to the south. Simply "eastern" seems much more appropriate to me. If "northeastern" reflects how Brazilians think of Bahia because of the way the population is distributed in the country, rather than because of its geographic location, then the article needs to note that. To call that "northeastern" Brazil is simply an error in the purely geographic and most universally understood meaning of the word.

This is a sufficiently glaring error that I'm going to change the text to say "eastern", and if calling it "northeastern" is important enough for the change to upset anyone, maybe they will explain why here before they revert it.—Jim10701 (talk) 18:50, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Olá, eu sou brasileiro e irei escrever em português, pois não sou suficientemente fluente em inglês para assim escrever (Peço desculpas adiantadas por isso). O seu questionamento é compreensível, porém não há sentido em mudar um termo aceito no Brazil e mundialmente, como o termo nordeste o é. A resposta para a sua duvida é simples: Como você pode notar o Brazil é menos uniforme geograficamente do que os Estados Unidos e, portanto sua divisão regional não é totalmente relacionável ao que é feito com o mapa dos Estados Unidos ou noutros países anglófonos ou do mundo todo. Outro exemplo que eu posso lhe citar é o fato de parte do nosso "Norte" estar mais para um noroeste e seguindo sua lógica, a única divisão correta seria a de "Sul" e "Centro-Oeste" ou o Brazil deveria ser dividido em apenas duas regiões (Norte-Sul, Leste-Oeste ou Oriente-Ocidente). Obs: Essa resposta não foi apenas dirigida ao usuário "Jim10701", mas a todos que tiverem essa duvida. Agradeço a atenção. 189.36.234.145 (talk) 17:15, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 2013 was a while ago, and so was 2017. So I am going to rely on my imperfect Portuguese, which means I could misunderstand something. However, there are at least two common systems for dividing Brazil into regions. The one I am most familiar with says that Bahia is part of the Northeast of Brazil (although it is sometimes described as the Northeast coast). However, (skipping Sergipe and Alagoas which were split off from Bahia and Pernambuco) at times when the NE coast is talked about it is more Pernambuco and North (Ceara etc.) There are geographical/climatological/historical reasons why much of Bahia is not part of the Northeast. Further, Bahia was for a while the Colonial Capital of Brazil. Which made it a dividing point. So it is mostly a convention and not a geographical thing.P2dwight (talk) 03:35, 7 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Brazilian chiming in! I know this topic is old, but I feel I should give an explanation to why is Bahia on the Northeast region: the current regionalization of Brazil is being observed since 1970, before that specific arrangement, Bahia (and Sergipe) were usually grouped with Minas Gerais, Espírito Santo and Rio de Janeiro, the regions group the states according to physical and socioeconomic aspects. Bastewasket (talk) 02:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:36, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:42, 23 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Section heading locations[edit]

The section headings History and Universo Paralello are on the right. Can anything be done so that they're on the left like the others? Mcljlm (talk) 16:12, 19 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Mcljlm can you give us some more details about your set-up (ex. mobile or desktop, browser, etc.)? They all appear on the left for me. --Nsophiay (talk) 14:57, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm looking at the page on my desktop. Now I see Universo Paralello on the left but History isn't. Mcljlm (talk) 15:56, 20 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm also on desktop and I don't see that in any browser (unless you're talking about the fact that an image is blocking the heading from being entirely on the left?). Otherwise you might want to try clearing your cache and reloading. --Nsophiay (talk) 00:28, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The image blocking the heading from being entirely on the left is exactly what I'm referring to Nsophiay. Looking at some of the previous versions it appears that at one time Economy wasn't on the left but it is now. Mcljlm (talk) 18:22, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Should be fixed now (I put some of the images into a gallery). --Nsophiay (talk) 02:27, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, much better. Mcljlm (talk) 10:23, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Page formatting with images[edit]

@Moxy I added the gallery of images yesterday to clean up the page a bit because it's so overloaded with images and that's affecting how headings and paragraphs are displayed (see above discussion). The images that are now in the gallery used to all be on the right-side of the Regions section, which resulted in the Koppen climate map being pushed down to History. Hence why I grouped them together and moved them to the bottom of the Geography section. I also moved the pie chart to the left because otherwise there's an unseemly gap between the Largest cities subheading and the list of cities.

I am still a fairly new Wikipedian, so maybe this was not the best solution. Do you have any suggestions (especially on the Largest cities gap issue)? Just remove some images? --Nsophiay (talk) 16:24, 24 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]