9. General and capoeiristic perceptions of aggression and violence in Salvador

Differences in perceptions of aggression and violence are even more heterogeneous and inconsistent than scientific definitions of both phenomena. In discussions with patients, therapists, capoeiristas and people from my neighbourhood it became clear that both notions are perceived as connected but not equal. Most of them argued that an aggressive person is not necessarily violent and vice versa. Capoeiristas for example frequently speak about capoeira violenta (violent capoeira), violençia dentro da capoéira (violence in capoeira) and about jogo agressivo(aggressive play). The first term refers to history of capoeira when institution was violent representing revolt against slavery and marginalisation. Some masters were also using term capoeira violenta describing capoeira style practiced by some groups from São Paolo and Rio de Janeiro. Other two expressions are used to describe different types of play. Most capoeiristas would differentiate between violençia (violence) and agressão (aggression). One of them described occurrences at capoeira events as follows:

Ontem fui na roda. Puxa, jogo era tao agressivo, mas não desenvolveu em violénçia. Eu nao gosto esa violénçia dentro da capoéira (Yesterday I participated in roda.  The play was aggressive, yet it didn’t evolve into violence. I really dislike violence in capoeira; author's translation). 

Even if the upper statement indicates that there is a perceived difference between aggression and violence within capoeira, it does not provide a good explanation what that difference is. To gain more information about perceived differences between both aggression and violence I had to use the technique of indirect questioning about violence and aggression during in-depth interviews. For example: What about aggression, what does it mean for you? What do you thing about violence in capoeira? How would you describe aggressive play? How would you describe violent play?

One of the masters commented aggression and violence as following:

I can say that there is always a certain level of aggression present in any martial art. The question is how you are able to conceal it. That is why the notion of malandragem developed in capoeira. A good and skilled capoeira player would never disclose his real intentions, he would mask his emotions, and he would accumulate the aroused aggression and use it in his favour in appropriate moment. His attack would come from nowhere, by surprise, like the cat he will let himself push into the corner and than use all his power and smoothness to defeat his opponent. Such attack is violent in the real life situation, and will cause damage to the other, but during the practice and in the rodas we endeavour ourselves to avoid any kind of violence. That is why every master would emphasize that capoeira is o jogo (play) and not a luta (fight). In my rodas I permit aggressive play that will coerce the players to face and control their aggression, but I will stop the play as soon as I notice that the play might be turned into a fight. That is why I always want to be present on rodas performed in my academy even if I already have trained instructors, which carryes out the lessons. However they are still not skilled enough in malandragem to perceive possible danger of violence before the damage is already done.

Many younger capoeiristas would equal aggression and violence, but some would speak about aggression referring to dynamic play with more physical contact and employment of strength. According to them it is useful to practice this kind of play, as it gives you a notion of how to react in real situations of danger on the streets. In such situations you have to be ready to defend yours or somebody else’s life. Same capoeiristas would use the term violence in the context of "dirty play”[10] and employment of weapons within capoeira. Many would argue that capoeira was violent in the past, when the economic and socio-political situation pushed capoeiristas into violence. Santos Silva (2002, p. 147) writes that in the 19th century many capoeiristas were involved in street violence as mercenaries of political parties. Violence represented a means of economic survival for the marginalised and excluded part of the Brazilian population. The abolition of slavery brought freedom for Afro-Brazilians, however, they have continued to be marginalized, unable to get a job or participate in capital distribution. My interlocutors claim that today's role of capoeira is different, which is why all capoeira practitioners have to help change the art's reputation. Many disapprove of violence and clearly differentiate between aggressive play and violent behaviour. They use the term violence to depict a violent player (capoeirista violento) or a violent group (grupo violento). Also the last phrase is sometimes used when they refer to capoeira in Rio de Janeiro or São Paolo. Capoeira in these two cities is believed to be more violent in order to compete or to devaluate Salvadorian capoeira. In general grupos violentos employ violence like fights in rodas da rua or even at capoeira events to achieve economic or promotional success. Capoeiristas agree that not only Rio de Janeiro and São Paolo are familiar with violent capoeira. In Salvador there exist schools and masters with aggressive tendencies, while in Rio de Janeiro aggressive play and employment of violence are part of the philosophy for entire groups. Violence in context of capoeira is expressed outwardly with the employment of physical power, yet I have previously argued that there also exist latent forms of violence, forms that do not contain aggression, but are still harmful.