Though the two readings this week talked about different aspects of development and culture, their underlying message was very similar. The idea of transculturation was one that was new to me especially in the context of modern day Guatemala, but it makes perfect sense. Whether it be over religious ideals or community development overall, the Mayans are at a point in their history where acceptance of Ladino and Western influences seem almost inevitable if they wish to survive. The preservation of Mayan culture is a very noble and worthy goal, but it seems as though this will be hard if the people cannot even agree on what this culture is. More importantly though, as both articles point out, this preservation is more of a hybrid of many cultural ideals that the people/founders titled so that it would seem as though only Mayan traditions are a part of it when in fact other influences have obviously seeped through. But how is it possible for these influences not to? After hundreds of years of infiltration and Spanish values being forced upon them it seems nearly impossible that the Mayans would escape without even some acceptance of these ideas. At the same time, the countries hardships in terms of development would suggest that maybe it is not such a terrible idea to try another way that includes Western capitalist ideas – although CDRO is quick to renounce them.
I think the most important idea from the reading was the difficulty in finding the right balance between preserving the Mayan culture and accepting their Spanish influence and need to develop. I cannot say where this balance lies or if it will ever be perfectly attained, but what I do think is that the Mayans will continue to be impoverished and taken advantage of as long as they cannot figure out their identity in today’s Guatemala. Some examples from the reading follow. The CDRO was established with the premises that it would help “address ethnic development needs and interests” by promoting “total community participation, mutual support, and horizontality” (141, 143). All these factors were claimed to be traditional Mayan organizational methods. The projects that resulted from efforts of the CDRO however, turned out to be a little different: “On the one hand, CDRO’s projects were community-based and culturally appropriate…on the other hand, they were privately funded, locally managed, and complementary with market incorporation” (144). When you analyze the projects with this in mind, it seems as though traditional Mayan methods are only half of the efforts, with more modern, developmental methods making up the other half. This is a perfect example of the transculturation Cook and Offit discuss in their article.
The issue over religion also represents what seems to be a sense of confusion in what is “Mayan”. While the Costumbres identify themselves as traditional, the article maintains that they were more accurately a “blend of Christian and Maya religion” (47). Maybe this is the only way to preserve Mayan culture however. By combining it with village religions like Christianity and Protestantism, the Mayan traditions are at least in some way guaranteed to continue to exist. Like we have talked about before (especially with Javier’s situation – as well as Manuel’s) the Mayans are at a very challenging “crossroad” where it seems as though some aspects of society have already chosen to take the path of combined preservation. What it best or correct is a question that is left to be answered.
In regards to Grace's last paragraph, I thought the same thing about the Costumbre. To me it would make sense that the syncretic approach would have better results. I thought that blending aspects of bothreligions would draw in more people. But what I took from the article was that the anti-syncretic approach of Maya Spirtuality was actually doing better than Costumbre. What I realized as I read further was that Maya Spirituality, although it did not blend religions, did incorporate some very Western ideas. For example, women had a larger role in the religion. The increasing success of Maya Spirituality further reinforces the fact that transculturation was occuring in both religions. However, the more successful blended modern aspects of society into an old religion while Costumbre attempted to incorporate aspects of two different religions. These findings reflect the feelings and perception of the new generation, a generation that has developed modern values.
ReplyDeleteInteresting post. 2 questions:
ReplyDelete1) What do you mean by "if they wish to survive" in your first paragraph? In what way is survival dependent on accepting western/ladino ideology?
2) Arguing that CDRO counts as transculturation is a provocative and insightful point. How do you think Monica DeHart (who wrote the article) and CDRO's Mayan critics in San Pedro would respond to that, though?