Division vs. Unity/Perspective

To begin, I think it is important to note the perspective from which these accounts are given. Throughout reading the Paradise in Ashes, I tried to keep in mind Beatriz Manz's background and how this may have influenced her delivery of the accounts encountered. I thought it was interesting to note that Manz may have had similar experiences in her home country of Chile to what she encountered in Guatemala although she admits that the situation in Guatemala were more severe. Perhaps this could make her more understanding of the situations that she reports. To play devil's advocate, this could possibly make her overly sympathetic to the situations that she reports. Depending on one's position, this may be of value or serve as a disadvantage to the reader. Nonetheless, I thought it was important to keep in mind how her unique perspective may have been shaped by her past.

Furthermore, I thought many of my peers made some interesting comments below me, many of which coincided with some of the points that I noticed throughout my reading. I thought that Natalie made an interesting point when she discusses the reunification section, and how it was surprising to her that many of the peasants disagreed on issues concerning war and insurgency. I think this brings up an important issue concerning the divisions in Guatemala that can be easily overlooked. So often in our class discussions, we discuss ladinos versus Mayans, and this helps develop the sense of a dichotomous system of classes or groups that exist within Guatemala; however, as we discovered here, it is much more complex than that. We so often talk about the differences between the ladinos and the indigenous people, that it can be easy to overlook the many differences within the indigenous groups that separates one unique culture from the next one. In the Carol reading and even much earlier in the semester when Miguel spoke to the class during his first visit, we were able to get a glimpse of the pride that different indigenous people have for their respective groups. I think that if we consider the different Mayan groups individuality in their unique cultures more carefully, it will be easier to understand why such differences exist in their opinions concerning such issues are war and insurgency.

Ironically, as we discuss the differences among different indigenous groups, we encounter similarities between ladinos and Mayas, once again offering a different perspective to what I normally consider, as Katie points out in her comment. Because the Mayan people are so often considered the victimized group, it is easy to overlook some of the difficulties that some of the ladinos suffer. Instead I often lump them in with the idea of ladinos being the "superior" group and oppressors of the "inferior" Maya people. As we found within the reading, economic status can bring different groups of people together no matter what ethnic group they belong to. It forces them to experience similar situations in a country where they are expected to be on opposing sides of the spectrum. Once again, this is another way in which my tendency to imagine the dichotomous system of ladinos and Mayans has been disrupted.

Finally, I think it is very appropriate to end with a question that Nikhila and Katie raise, which I think is the recurring central question in all of our readings and class discussions when we consider Guatemala's history. How can a country overcome difficulties caused by a system that was forced upon them and that has continued for so long up until this point? I think this is the question that many developing countries struggle with, and until they are able to find solutions to this very complex issue in addition to correcting what has been considered "right" in their country since colonization, I don't know if it will be possible to solve their issues.