Sunday, October 5, 2008

“antes destruida que conocida”

Comentarios reales is turning out to be an interesting read and there were a variety of themes that caught my interest. Last class it was mentioned how the “discovery” of the Americas profoundly affected the European worldview. In the first chapter Garcilaso de la Vega gives us a glimpse into what were supremely important philosophical, scientific and religious debates at the time. For example, Garcilaso de la Vega shows that “en contra de lo que de esta Tórrida Zona los filósofos dijeron, que no imaginaron jamás que en ella pudiese haber nieve,” there is in fact snow in the Andean countries, and the hot regions of the torrid zone are not uninhabitable as commonly believed. In trying to revise what is known about the New World, Garcilaso de la Vega appeals to both the scientist (with direct observation: “yo nací en la Tórrida Zona … y me crecí en ella hasta los veinte años”) and the theologian (using Bible-based logic: “no es de imaginar, cuanto más creer, que partes tan grandes del mundo las hiciese Dios inútiles”).

At many times throughout the text Garcilaso de la Vega laments that many Spaniards reporting back from the Americas have got it all wrong for not knowing indigenous languages and not thoroughly understanding their culture(s); this continent and its people were “antes destruida que conocida.” Garcilaso de la Vega must be one of the first to raise the issue of who is to write authoritative account of the indigenous people. Who has legitimacy? According to Garcilaso de la Vega: “será mejor que se sepa por las propias palabras que los Incas lo cuentan, que no por la de otros autores extraños”. He repeats how he, due to being born and raised in Peru, is the legitimate one to tell these stories, and in many cases he collected information from Incan communities themselves. This is a stage further in the transition between Europeans writing about Latin America for other Europeans, to Latin Americans recording their experiences for their own literary creation and historical records. The perspectives of someone who was more of an “insider” of Latin American culture are very interesting, such as his appraisal of the Incan government, which indirectly compares this “benevolent imperialism” with the violent and exploitative Spanish one.

5 comments:

Robert Boettcher said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Robert Boettcher said...

Creo que es muy interesante que hablas, Serena, del lenguaje. Me parece que de la Vega piensa que los espanoles no cuentan verdaderamente la historia de las Americas por no hablar/entender las varias idiomas indigenas. Como de la Vega esta escribiendo del punto de vista indigena y comentando un poco sobre los espanoles, podriamos decir lo mismo, que los indigenas no entiendieron bien los espanoles por falta de hablar espanol?

FERNEY said...

Efectivamente de la Vega se nos muestra aqui como esa persona que va a mostrar al viejo mundo lo que se puede pensar del nuevo mundo desde la perspectiva de un individuo originario del nuevo territorio con voz y autoridad para declarar lo que se puede aceptar como cierto.

JennieG said...

Hey Serena,

I really like your idea that Garcilaso is both a scientist and theologian. Really interesting. Also, what you say about who is really legitimate enough to write the summary is really thought-provoking. I think he is pretty close to being the best because he is a little bit Incan and a bit European but I'm not sure if his views are skewed yet or not...

Daye said...

Aunque estoy de acuerdo que la Vega puede ser parte de un grupo etnica "diferente" q lo de los conquistadores y asi puede escribir desde un perspectivo aparte de ellos ... no se si el sera lo *mejor* ni the "legitamite" one to tell these stories ... por todo lo que le ha pasado y como se crecia, algo que me parece que en aquella epoca les definia en grande parte a "los indios" era el sufrimiento que les pasaba -- y no se si eso es algo con que la Vega se podia relacionar bastante.