The Modernization of Indigenous Populations
I found the discussion of indigenismo in our lecture today to be very interesting. We were presented with an intriguing quote by Guillermo Bonfil Batalla: "redeeming the Indian by making him disappear." This quote suggests that the only way to make better the "faults" or "bad aspects" of the indigenous people is to completely get rid of them all together - whether Batalla meant through killing them or just by eradicating their culture, I don't know. Both are terrible outcomes, and it is also a terrible way to think about indigenous people and their culture.
There are many aspects of this class where it is especially difficult to take myself out of my 21st century perspective on life - and this is one of them. It's just hard for me to think about disrespecting a group of people and a culture like the indigenous people have always been disrespected and disregarded. Just because they are not as "modern" (whatever the definition of that may be) as the rest of society, does not mean that their culture and lifestyle is any less valid than that of the rest of society. The people of Mexico and many other Latin American countries viewed the indigenous people as obstacles to modernization. They thought that Mexico wouldn't reach modernity without getting rid of indigenous culture. I understand that the indigenous people weren't exactly up to the "status of modernization" that the Mexican people wanted, but why does that matter? Could Mexico not modernize itself without getting rid of indigenous culture? One could argue that a diversification of culture makes a nation more modern, but that's all based on the definition of modern. Perhaps not in the case of Mexico because they wanted to create a Mexican identity. But why couldn't this include indigenous culture?
The point was also made that the indigenous are always changing, and I thought that this was really interesting because it's true. Indigenous people are definitely getting more modern in some aspects, but are still retaining their culture. I think this is something that's really cool, because they're taking what they need from the modernization of Mexico, yet still staying true to themselves. It is an interesting concept however, the re-invention of a group of people as society progresses. I wonder if this applies to other groups of people as society changes. For example, is this applicable to the changing views of gender? It's an intriguing thing to think about.
There are many aspects of this class where it is especially difficult to take myself out of my 21st century perspective on life - and this is one of them. It's just hard for me to think about disrespecting a group of people and a culture like the indigenous people have always been disrespected and disregarded. Just because they are not as "modern" (whatever the definition of that may be) as the rest of society, does not mean that their culture and lifestyle is any less valid than that of the rest of society. The people of Mexico and many other Latin American countries viewed the indigenous people as obstacles to modernization. They thought that Mexico wouldn't reach modernity without getting rid of indigenous culture. I understand that the indigenous people weren't exactly up to the "status of modernization" that the Mexican people wanted, but why does that matter? Could Mexico not modernize itself without getting rid of indigenous culture? One could argue that a diversification of culture makes a nation more modern, but that's all based on the definition of modern. Perhaps not in the case of Mexico because they wanted to create a Mexican identity. But why couldn't this include indigenous culture?
The point was also made that the indigenous are always changing, and I thought that this was really interesting because it's true. Indigenous people are definitely getting more modern in some aspects, but are still retaining their culture. I think this is something that's really cool, because they're taking what they need from the modernization of Mexico, yet still staying true to themselves. It is an interesting concept however, the re-invention of a group of people as society progresses. I wonder if this applies to other groups of people as society changes. For example, is this applicable to the changing views of gender? It's an intriguing thing to think about.
I found the point that Gardino made about the Indians always changing to be very fascinating as well. He asked us, “What did the indigenous people hang onto? And are they still indigenous?” His answer was no because what it meant to be indigenous was constantly changing. This really made me think because what other culture isn’t changing with the times? What it means to be an American or really any other culture is constantly changing too. Our generation is significantly different than the ones before us. Our technology has changed and shaped us significantly, the way we cook and prepare food has also changed (actually we just eat tons of fast food), the way we dress, our music, the values we find most important, etc. I guess I just think it could be argued that all cultures are constantly changing and this change does not determine whether they continue to exist or not. If that were true, then each of our generations could call themselves something other than Americans, or the Native Americans in our country would no longer exist either. Their culture has changed significantly since the Europeans invaded their lands, yet they continue to maintain their identity as Native American.
ReplyDelete