In reading the Popol Vuh, something I found myself thinking about over and over again was the connections in certain events between the Mayan stories and modern Christian stories. As the Popol Vuh has a complex and lengthy history with translation, especially with that of a Roman Catholic friar involved in one of the main translations, there is the question of whether or not all the tales were properly understood in the translation. I am not Christian or Catholic myself, and thus have only a basic understanding of the Catholic religious texts, but both the flood to destroy the people made of wood and the tale of Lady Blood and her want of forbidden fruit connect back to stories I have heard before in Catholic settings.
There are, obviously, important distinctions, like that of Lady Blood being the daughter of a lord from Xibalba rather than the creation of God, and the flood leading to the creation of monkeys. Still, the connection is undeniable. This asks the question of how well the Popol Vuh acts as a voice of Indigenous myth. The friar, Francisco Ximénez, was accredited with both transcription and translation of the Popol Vuh, as him and his parishoners worked together. This implies, of course, that the Mayan parishoners would have been deeply entrenched in Catholic and Christian narratives, and this also could play a role in the inclusion of Catholic themes within these stories. Of course, the Ximénez translation works off of an original manuscript, one no longer accessible. Something mentioned in class is how many cultures in Latin America believe in the idea of reviving the spirit of ancestors by speaking their words. If a friar speaks for “those who cannot speak themselves” is it the act of a saviour, or the act of a colonizer? Especially when the words spoken are related to religion and creation myths.
As far as other things I found interesting in the Popol Vuh, I think the twins Hunahpu and Xbalanque are a very interesting look into what is deemed important in one’s character—the boys tend to work from a duality of taking justice into their own hands while working with the higher powers at the same time. It does quite a good job at establishing how important singular identity and judgement is away from the influence of god-like figures, and I think that could contribute to the culture of identity in Latin America. It is also a lesson to not always trust authority figures, like the grandmother who kicks them out. This proves to me, at the very least, that there is a semblance of the original Indigenous voice through the possible-colonial editing job.
I also agree that there seem to be very similar themes connecting to Catholic creation imagery, particularly for the portrayal of Xibalba as a place where all the bad things seem to be, although that could just be common for most creation myths. It does bring into question whether the agenda of Ximenez was the most honest translation possible or maybe entertainment that could be enjoyed by Catholic audiences. Unfortunately, he is not very well documented so we will probably never know. It’s still something to keep in mind as we read, I look forward to how the portrayal of Hunahpu and Xbalanque develops with that in mind.
Yes, these are good questions… and perhaps ultimately unanswerable. I certainly noticed the flood, for instance, and at another point there was a deity that was three in one, much like the Christian Trinity.
I guess that one of the things I take from this is that there’s inevitably suspicion that what we think or hope might be the “Indigenous voice” ends up “contaminated” (as it were) with a colonial overlay. This will be all the more obvious in some of the other texts we read in the coming weeks.
Yeah, I also noticed a lot of mirroring of Christian religious texts. Last semester I took a class on beowulf, and, again, as we only have one surviving manuscript, it is impossible to tell what is original and what has been added afterwards. We came to the conclusion that it is perhaps more beneficial to view these more as adaptations rather than translations. While certainly frustrating as an audience member who wants to get to the core of the text, however, it does illuminate the vested interest Ximenez had, and the semantic tools employed to align the religious views of the Quiche with those of the Spanish crown