Our Word Is Our Weapon, Week Two

The “Beneath the Mask” section of Our Word is Our Weapon raised more questions about the identity of Subcommandante Marcos. It’s interesting- not necessarily bad or good, just interesting- to add a section to this book that shows him interacting with the children in the camp, then later adding a section of confessions, it all seems very personal, even if the confessions are largely political. Compared to the more elusive image of Marcos that we saw in the first half of our discussion, this is vulnerable, intimate. I particularly enjoyed the section where he responds to the list of accusations- there’s a lot of personality here but there is also a deep awareness of how he is perceived, criticized, received… and he accepts it all. It’s hard not to feel at least a little bit endeared to this person/character/”hologram.” Is that strategic? Is it genuine? Both? I can’t say for sure.

The next section, wherein Marcos interacts with Durito, is much more metaphorical than the previous parts we have read. Durito, who claims to be 10 years old and a beetle, becomes part of the Zapatista movement of his own accord. Throughout Marcos’ stories, ages are sometimes exaggerated or tied to specific dates. This makes me wonder about Durito’s actual age- though, in some of his interactions with Marcos, it does seem like he is a child, while in others he is wise and politically aware beyond his years. This section also has an incident where Marcos, along with Durito, are almost caught by the military. When Marcos fears for Durito’s safety, Durito says that Marcos is actually the most at risk, which Marcos realizes is true. This takes me back to the previous section. Is Marcos including this to make a point about the dangers that children are facing under this government? Durito comes to the camp willingly, seeks it out even, yet I wonder what sort of childhood you have to have to do such a thing. (As an aside, I tried looking Durito up and all I can find is a specific type of snack, so if this is a nom de guerre, it is not one that is widely remembered.)

Of course, there is also a large part of this dedicated to discussing the Popol Vuh. Since we have already spoken about this so much (and no doubt will speak about it more tomorrow), I will try to keep my thoughts here concise. I think that, much like in IRM, including the Popol Vuh speaks largely to a shared identity. It makes sense that Marcos identifies with it, connects with it, and shares it here. Even though his own identity is called into question (or problematized), using the Popol Vuh is undoubtedly a way for him to connect with the people he is speaking, fighting, dying, for. It seems that there are also a lot of parallels (intentional or unintentional) between the story he is telling about the Zapatistas and the story of the Popol Vuh.