Brazilian-born Dr Genaro Oliveira works at the New Zealand Centre for Latin American Studies at the University of Auckland.
Few other cities in the world have been depicted through more conflicting lenses than Rio. Is it an earthly paradise where all races coexist, peacefully sipping caipirinha cocktails, or the apocalyptic "City of God", a diabolic experiment testing the limits of human suffering?
It's a place that has always triggered passionate, conflicting opinions and the 2016 Olympic Games coverage has been no different. Just days before the opening, the debate remains starkly divided. Will the Games bring overall positive or negative outcomes? Wealth or deficit to the local economy? More safety or vulnerability to its citizens and tourists? A legacy of public infrastructure that benefits all or only the privileged few?
If we take the word of most Brazilian and foreign press lately, the answers are gloomy. The headlines have all been full of the recent rise of gang and gun violence, corruption scandals, the controversial impeachment of President Rousseff, Zika epidemics, electrical faults at the Olympic village, athletes contaminated by polluted waters and even the risk of jihadist terrorism, something, until now, unheard of in the country. By contrast, the cheerful official supporters of the Games (Brazilian authorities, IOC members and advertisers) proudly claim that "Rio is ready" and blame critics for focusing only on the negative rather than on the fact that most things are working as planned.