week6—one more thing off the to-do list—
reading blog #11 – Mark Rice’s Making Machu Picchu
“The historian Alberto Flores Galindo once observed that Peruvians are often “in search of an Inca” to forge symbols of a new Peru.15 Perhaps it is time we lent attention to the influence of tourists also in search of an Inca in the making of Machu Picchu and Peruvian national identity.” (5)
Mark Rice’s text on Machu Picchu was extremely fascinating. It was a very informative and mostly straightforward reading, while at the same time, it handled the many complexities and contradictions of the symbolism of Machu Picchu very well—in my opinion. Transnationalism and transculturation are two things very prominent in the ‘making’ of Machu Picchu. I think the formation of identities and what goes into making and unmaking these identities is very interesting.
“The story of tourism in Cusco illustrates how the formation of regional identity is not just a local process but also a transnational one.” (7)
I had never much knew about Machu Picchu before coming into this program. Even then, I didn’t know much in all honesty. I knew it was a beautiful place and also a world wonder. Other than that, there was nothing in my head about Machu Picchu. Knowing this, I tried to go into my experiences at Machu Picchu without much or any expectations. This was difficult. Machu Picchu is a thing/place that brings a lot of emotion to the table, whether that be negative or positive emotion usually depends on the person. I’ve heard the conversation surrounding Machu Picchu often start with a big, Peruvian sigh.
I found it especially interesting that Machu Picchu stood for different things in different eras of its formation—this standing, was determined and dependent on whose intentions was brought forth most strongly.
“In its first era, tourism promotion in Cusco emphasized the modernity of the region and its indigenismo folklore movement. The narratives created for tourism consumption helped define an indigenismo amenable to Cusco, and later, to national elites. In the following decades, the site reflected efforts to bolster feelings of Pan-Americanism. Machu Picchu was elevated, by both the United States and leftist figures, in calls for hemispheric unity. Later, starting in the 1960s and 1970s, Machu Picchu represented an antimodern, static imagination of the past that was increasingly appealing to travelers, many of them from the global north. While countercultural celebration of a mystic vision of Machu Picchu was viewed warily by many in Cusco, the region’s youth welcomed the new social connections. By the end of the twentieth century, the shift to adventure travel, ecotourism, and luxury tourism continued to pro- mote the Andes and indigenous culture as unchanged, naturalist, and purist links to an Inca past.” (159)
All in all, super interesting read. Added a lot to my understandings and experiences of Machu Picchu.