Arturo Arias’ “Guatemala 1954: Funeral for a Bird” examines a devastated mid-coup Guatemala through the perspective of Maximo Sanchez. Maximo, not yet five, lives in a world full of violence and despair, but also full of colour, freedom, and new discoveries. As we follow him we see that in his eyes, the dead bodies and puddles of blood lining the streets are only obstacles in the way of his next adventure.
Throughout the story, the focus is never on the death surrounding Maximo, or the atrocities that he is implied to have experienced, but rather on the simpler things that are within his understanding. His desire to learn the proper name for everything, his simultaneous revulsion and curiosity towards the worm-filled corpses, and his eagerness to participate in a burial of a dead bird all take the forefront of this narrative. Maximo’s attitude towards the human corpses is particularly jarring in contrast with his behaviour towards the death of the bird; his fervency to see this bird up close causes him to trip over a rotting corpse, and his only response is to kick the body in frustration, yet he treats the bird with utmost care during its burial.
It is not that Maximo is entirely blind to the events that are occurring around him—he realizes that the bombs may have to do with his father’s disappearance, and becomes frightened at the thought of them returning—but he cannot grasp reality the way a more mature person, such as the old man, could. At first glance this may seem to limit the narrative, but I believe it does the opposite: in confronting something already shocking through the eyes of an unknowing child, our own eyes are opened to the inescapable horrors that Guatemalans became accustomed to during this time.
I agree with most of the points here; however, I’d like to expand on Maximo’s attitude towards the rotting human corpses compared to bird corpses. Maximo has become desensitized by all the human corpses because they are everyday, mundane, and an annoyance. In turn, that causes Maximo to treat them like a pebble on the road or a stick in a forest. Compare that to a just recently dead bird’s corpse, Maximo performs a burial/funeral. Could this be because the bird is untainted unlike the rotting human corpses? Or is it because Maximo treats human corpses differently? Just a thought to ponder.
Hi Izabella! I really enjoyed your comparison of the human corpses with the bird in the story, and the reasons as to why Maximo reacted differently to them. I also really liked James’ expansion on these thoughts, and I particularly resonated with the desensitization aspect. It made me think of how death is portrayed in movies, and how I react to it differently depending on who is dying. For example, if I’m watching a war movie, I don’t necessarily react to human death in any specific way because it’s one of the many, much like in “Funeral for a Bird”. However, if you bring an animal into the story and it’s killed, even if it’s a horse that was being ridden into battle or a dog, I have very strong opinions about it. It makes me really sad and empathetic towards this animal (which obviously wasn’t harmed) but who had no decision or way to protect themselves with the human-caused conflict that is taking place. It would be interesting to see the psychology behind this and why it is that it affects us, as well as Maximo, so much.
Firstly, I’d like to commemorate you on your title for this post. I found it very suitable for the themes you discussed and the weight you were able to convey about the situation. I also like the attention you put towards the differences in Maximo’s attitudes, however, I was hoping for some more development as to why. Could it be that it’s a desensitization to the human bodies, that he doesn’t realize these bodies were real people with lives before dying and weren’t always lying on the street, or that the bird represents something more important than the dead people? Another interesting idea to develop could be I personally think the bird represents the purity of thought. A bird has no concept of good and evil and can therefore not be either. It’s like a child in that way, innocent.