Week 10 : I, Rigoberta Menchú
by kenwardt
This week’s reading was a bit tougher to digest, not only because it was a longer read than I am used to, but also because of the content involved. Rigoberta Menchú highlights key interactions that Indigenous communities face across the globe, through accounts occurring in her “own” life.
After watching the lecture, I would like to focus on the idea of secrets. What perfect timing to read this testimonio, right after reading “The Hour of the Star” by Clarice Lispector. Through watching Lispector’s eery, yet captivating interview, I can gather similar ideas of “secrets” and how crucial it was for the reader to remain captivated and hooked for the rest of the story. There was something so captivating about Lispector that I can’t fully put my head around it. Maybe it was just how free she spoke her mind, and didn’t care what anyone thought of her. Secrets are important in captivating the audience, and Menchú’s accounts of secrets did leave me wanting more, but I respected the fact that to her, some things are better kept as secrets and that we all need something for ourselves, or for our community of people that no one can take away. However, certain secrets are better told to the public if it can break the silences of injustice that may be occurring. Menchú incorporates these ideas and breaks the silence of the indigenous people in Guatemala. This is beneficial in order to promote change in the world. I do have to say that sometimes the line between whether or not it is worth sharing with the world or keeping it as a secret can be quite blurry, and it can be difficult to draw the line and set up boundaries.
I found Menchús stories to be very touching and even though some of her stories may not have been true ( her brother passing away) I still found it valuable in getting her point across, as this does happen in indigenous communities she is involved in. I did enjoy how Jon described Menchú as using literary games to draw us all in, and through her captivating storytelling, we were all intrigued in hearing her opinions on the silenced indigenous communities. These gruesome and violent scenes painted a picture of what is really going on in our indigenous communities around the world.
My question to you all this week is: Do you think Menchú was in the wrong when she told her “own” stories of the indigenous communities facing oppression and being silenced?
“There was something so captivating about Lispector that I can’t fully put my head around it. Maybe it was just how free she spoke her mind, and didn’t care what anyone thought of her.”
Yes, for sure, and I like this comparison. Though Menchú’s situation is a little different… she is deliberating trying to get our attention, to make us see something that we might otherwise prefer to ignore.
“even though some of her stories may not have been true ( her brother passing away)”
Just to be clear on this… there is no doubt that the army *did* kill Menchú’s brother (and her mother; there’s some slight controversy about responsibility for her father’s death). It’s just that it probably didn’t happen exactly as she tells it and she was almost certainly not the direct witness that she says she was in the book. So why might she make these (relatively small) changes?
The effect created by the contiguity of two works as different as that of Lispector and this testimony is very interesting. How to tell an “existence” is already in The Hour of the Star a reason for reflection on the limits of literary creation. There is a doubling between Rodrigo and Macabea, as there is one between Menchú and Burgos, but the question would be to know how they correspond to each other.
Hi Kenwrad,
Thank you for a well-written and thoughtful post.
Like Jon and Daniel said, I also found your comparison of Lispector and this testimony captivating.
Besides, I definitely agree with you that while there may be some misrepresentation in these stories, Menchú did get her point across which in some sense, is more important when dealing with such topics.