The book “A boy like that, a political story sung by the king”written by Abel Gilbert and Pablo Alabarcesexplains the emergence of the figure of Palito Ortega from the coincidence in space and time of a series of quite complex reasons, such as post-Peronism, the arrival of the “little black heads” in the big city, the heyday of the idea of meritocracy and the presumed authenticity of the poor boy who sang happy songs, “a peculiar case that requires quite detailed explanations”, the authors explain.
In the text published by the Gourmet Music Publisher, the researchers make it clear that there is no recipe for generating a popular idol. Alabarces points out that a good part of the phenomenon of Palito Ortega is interesting because an attempt was made to explain it through a recipe and the singer himself, with self-sufficiency and a certain boastfulness, ironized: “I have tried to make more idols but the one who succeeded was me.”
The authors do not doubt that there is a manufacturing process and that certain criteria are applied for that manufacturing, but they do not fail to see that it was the beginning of the 60s, when the first moment of marketing took place, applied without much scientificity in the creation by Palito Ortega. However, in the case of the singer from Tucuman, they see it as a fairly artisanal and intuitive work, which leads to the conclusion that “There is no recipe that will inevitably condemn you to success”.
The composer and writer born in 1960, Abel Gilbert, and the doctor in Sociology born in 1961, Pablo Alabarces, discover new facets that they reproduce in their work, in which Palito Ortega appears as a reader of César Vallejo, a follower of Luchino Visconti’s cinema and art collector. In addition, they state that the musician took classes with Carlos Alonso, one of the greatest Argentine painters. The authors did not want to use the label “autodidact from Tucuman” in the text because it was always used in a pejorative way. However, they agree that the composer and actor is also a great representative of the self-taught tradition in Argentina.
Throughout his career, the singer decides with some prudence not to exhibit his knowledge: on the contrary, he shows his life trajectory by saying “Don’t forget that I was a shoeshine boy in the province of Tucumán, I was a poor person who had no formal education”. This biographical condition is essential for the “mask” in the theatrical sense, which installs Palito as a figure who reaches the top by coming from far below. The book also shows that unknown aspect, and above all, the fact that Palito Ortega wanted to film Leopoldo Marechal’s “Adán Buenosayres”, back in 1975. “That could show a contradiction or a crack in his mask,” says Alabarces.
– Télam: Can it be said that Palito Ortega is a popular idol that breaks the mold of the Argentine tragic idol?
– Pablo Alabarces: Nor is there a rule that speaks of the tragic idol. In my experience I can see that tragic and non-tragic idols coexist. The fact that Maradona, for example, has died at the age of sixty, I don’t know if he transforms him into a tragic idol. The case of Gardel and that of Eva Perón without a doubt. The now forgotten case of Julio Sosa, which we tell about in the book, also without a doubt; it is about death of young people, accidental or due to disease, but I don’t know if there is a strict rule. Yes, it is the case of Gilda and, however, it is not necessarily the case of Rodrigo. We could continue thinking about dead young singers and that this has not transformed them into idols. I don’t know if that tragic condition is a fundamental component or part of the mold.
– T.: In some way, is Palito Ortega also considered the one who stopped the fall of another idol, Charly García?
– PA: No. Palito did not stop Charly García’s fall, but simply saved his life. The specific story is that at the time that Palito intervenes in Charly’s hospitalization, he was in court, he depended on a judge, not on a medical diagnosis, and the judge had decided to send him to a recovery farm. Charly said “this is killing me” At that moment Palito intervenes offering his space. The story is more complex because he had entrances and exits, but the truth is that he did not stop his fall.
On the other hand, those who have seen him play Charly García after his recovery, and especially those who have seen him sing, have not been very satisfied with the results of “that recovery”. That is why it can be said that it is true that he saved her life. And the type of response that he sustained in the cultural and spectacular sphere in Argentina was undoubtedly very positive. One of the central arguments of the book is that this gesture with the other singer is one of the three redemptions of Palito Ortega: the first is to beat Antonio Domingo Bussi in Tucumán, the second is to save Charly García and the third is to impose himself as founding father of Argentine rock.
– T.: How can one read the success and permanence of the singer during the dictatorship? Can there be more than one look at this fact?
– PA: A central argument of the book is that it takes more than a glance. That is: it would be necessary to take a much more complex look at culture and entertainment during the dictatorship, to perceive that Palito Ortega’s plot is not exceptional, but absolutely normal. During the dictatorship discs continued to be recorded, books continued to be printed, there continued to be theater, there continued to be cinema, television continued to function without any type of interruption: it did not even need to make major changes with respect to what was happening shortly before the dictatorship, in the last cycle of the presidency of Isabel Perón, which was harshly repressive and persecutory. So yes, a broader view is needed to explain why the whole show “turns to the right” (in quotes) and becomes relatively complicit. We had to wait until 1981 for certain dissident voices to appear with some effectiveness and force (the clear case of Teatro Abierto) After Teatro Abierto, I’m going to say it in a very practical way, no one can play dumb.
– T.: How did the idea of an analysis of this figure come about?
– PA: There is a moment in the book in which we say that Palito Ortega is a kind of metaphor for the desired Argentina. We do not say at any time that it is a reflection, because this idea would be far from our theoretical convictions: there is nothing in culture that reflects society. Yes, there are, of course, ways of representing the social and ways in which societies try to read themselves. Stick is one of them. It is a metaphor of what Argentine society would have loved Argentine society to be, that is, a happy society, without major problems, in which the popular sectors occupied subordinate, disciplined and obedient spaces…
The idea for the book came about because we always thought that the strange thing was that no one had thought of it before. Palito is an exceptional phenomenon. He is a figure who for sixty years occupies the center, or part of the periphery of popular music, and not only this, because his films were also extremely successful, both those in which he acted and those he directed. We think how such a figure had not been the object of a look, a figure that goes through sixty years of history in such an intense way with its relations with democratic governments, as with dictatorships. I insist, the surprising thing is that no one has thought of it before.
– T.: Did the view of society with popular artists change from the 60s to this moment?
– PA: Of course it changed. The ways of relating to all societies with their popular music changed, the way of linking with the circulation and consumption with cultural goods. At that time records were bought and sold, not today. The centrality of the carnival dance in the 1960s has completely disappeared. And the centrality of entertainment magazines, which today have become gossip magazines. The functioning of social networks has changed not so much the look, but the relationship between any society and its popular artists.
– T.: Does Palito Ortega fit into the idea of Argentine identity?
– PA: It is a difficult question. It would be necessary to discuss a lot what we understand by argentinidad, how the idea of argentinidad works. It is an idea that represents a very forced homogeneity, an idea of being Argentine that actually contradicts all sociological or anthropological evidence in Argentina, which is nothing more than an enormous field of difference and inequalities.
Now, if someone wanted to propose the image of Palito Ortega as a kind of representation of Argentine identity, of course they would give the idea of great homogeneity, and great discipline and acquiescence with the system, with the way in which the society, with respect for the hierarchy. This idea is totally contradictory to the Argentinity represented by a Maradona who, on the contrary, rebels against the idea of hierarchical pigeonholing.
