Towards the beginning of the first chapter, Lovell brings up an idea that we discussed last week in class. He refers to the liberal President Barrios and mentions the liberal vision of modernity to be "a blueprint that would ensure plenty for few and little for many."(6) While some communities enjoyed the safety of secluded environments others were systematically sectioned off and given to large land owners. The Indians were then expected to work the fields for them. This entire concept of land ownership was completely foreign to them. Lovell says, "for them land is air and sunlight, a god-given resource over which no one exercises proprietary rights." (6) Its then extremely difficult to imagine what this sudden and forced change must have felt like to the Indians. As I try to come up with a related idea or metaphor I struggle to do so. The closest I can come is of environmentalism. Today, we are becoming increasingly aware of the planet that we live on and the importance of taking care of that planet. So too did the Indians feel that they were given their land from the ancestors and it was subsequently passed down through generations. The Indians viewed themselves as "not so much owners but caretakers of land."(6) For us that scope has widened greatly as the earth has become "flat". To us the idea that anyone could own the earth is ridiculous, but many people do have a sense of being the caretakers of the earth that we live on. We do our best to be "green" and in that way protect or environment for the future generations to come. In that context, I can much more easily relate to the Indians plight.
On a different note, I wanted to mention the torture that was discussed in such detail in several of the chapters. The graphic torture of Marroquín and so many others seems so unnecessary to me. She could have simply been killed, but instead her body was horribly mutilated. This again incorporates the idea of terror that anthropologist Michael Taussig discusses (125). The body of Marroquín and others was meant to send a gruesome message. The army was competing with strong, human emotions and familial ties. They realized the best way to stifle these emotions into silence was to instill terror. Mutilated bodies was one way that they terrorized communities into silence. In Doña Magdalena's case that silence lasted decades before, "a fear stronger than reprisal began to eat away." (33) I believe this is a good example of how effective terror can be. It can swallow up basic human emotions and leave in its path only silence and a residual, but enormous fear.
Good points. Your point about environmentalism is intriguing (could you explain more what you mean about us not believing we can own land? After all, private land ownership is pretty widespread in the U.S...). But this may have something to do with why environmental organizations are increasingly putting their efforts into defending indigenous land rights (though not all of the time, as explained in publications like this: http://www.ienearth.org/REDD/index.html#8 )
ReplyDelete