Ortiz, Fernando & Millington, Mark.
Reading Ortiz was interesting as it advocated for a liberated, more all encompassing perception on the social, cultural, historical and political aspects of colonisation in Latin America (more specifically Cuba) yet it still exhibits a ethnocentric perception. This slight racism reflected the common thought in anthropology at the time which was sociocultural evolution. As a result of this context, I felt slightly suspicious of Ortiz but not as bad as with Vasconcelos. Ortiz refers to the palaeolithic Indian as having an “inability to adjust himself to the culture brought in by the Spaniards” (99) as well as referring to people as Mongoloids and Negroes and comparing their cultures as less “advanced” in comparison to Indian and European. But other than those contextual semantics, Ortiz was arguing for a more attentive perception! Ortiz vouches for a better, more respectful and aware way to address the convergence and collisions of culture throughout Latin America.
Although in theory and on paper this is a positive thing, as seen in Millington’s article it brings up much criticisms as well. Millington critiques Ortiz by bringing up the point that it is not possible to encompass the intricacies of culture in Latin America and instead it just becomes a generalised term, commonly used but not really understood in its historical, political, social and cultural contexts.