I took a lot away from this class as both a student and Mexican-Canadian woman. I loved starting the class with the Popol Vuh and discussing seeing the human need to understand our origins stemming from the engaging text. Where we come from appears to be a question that has baffled humans across the globe. From this I was also drawn to Guaman Poma’s writings. He offers suggestions for improving governance and promoting social justice within the colonial context. In this way, he is reclaiming the agency of indigenous people, not grounded within a eurocentric ethnic framework but instead on a notion of what can arguably be considered universal human rights albeit through the lens of Christianity. I also appreciated I,Rigoberta not just because of the powerful text but the controversy behind it. It is here that I was glad we discussed how Rigoberta may not be as innocent as she seems. With that I was also captivated by the conflicting interests and alternative perspectives as presented by David Stoll. From there I was grateful to learn from the Zapatista movement around the importance of orality and how words play a powerful role in preserving identity. Lastly, viewing notions of nature from an indigenous shaman in The Falling Sky was also very interesting to me as it showed how certain indigenous groups view human’s connection to nature. 

The class itself was useful to further dissect these texts. I appreciate how we all had varying opinions on matters such as who can speak on behalf of indigenous peoples or to what extent should indigenous have to conform to their oppressive systems in order to advocate for their interests. I also appreciated our conversations that, despite straying away from the course’s main focus, were important conversations to have nonetheless. This includes the topic of when it is okay to be uncomfortable within a classroom. I think this is a very important subject especially in a course such as this one because it forces us to certain extent to go beyond our comfort zones and question what we normalize and what we reject. By challenging our frameworks of perception, we can open ourselves up to other ways of thinking, particularly to indigenous thought and knowledge. 

While this course is made to expand our knowledge on indigeneity within Latin America, I can say that I am leaving this class with more questions than answers. I don’t mean that I took away anything but more so that this course has challenged me to truly question what I normalize including “inclusive rhetoric” as seen with UBC Arts’ statement on decolonizing the university. I’d always heard about this idea but I am appreciative of how this course actually asked the basic question of “what does this mean?” In addition, I still don’t know what we consider indigenous. It is an elusive term that is difficult to define. To what extent can we consider Guaman Poma indigenous versus Rigoberta? Who truly has a representative voice of the indigenous experience or can we claim anybody of having such? Nevertheless, if there is one thing I am taking away from this class is to never stop engaging in listening and learning. While I can’t necessarily say I will ever be an expert on the indigenous experience, I can always meaningfully engage with people who do to truly expand my horizons. Thank you Latin American Studies!