In Ak’abal’s collection of poems, the section entitled “500 años” or “500 years” offers readers a complete storyline through a number of poems. Ak’abal introduces us to this story with the poem titled the same as the section, “500 years”. This poem gives us a context for the section, one critical of the treatment and status of Indigenous peoples. “500 years”, “pain”, and “holes” work together to paint a picture of the injustice (p 155, line 5), misery (p 157, line 1), and poverty (p 162, line 4) experienced by Indigenous people, and by Ak’abal. The poem titled “paradise” enlightens us to the cause of this mistreatment of Indigenous people, colonization. This particular poem begins with a description of a world of paradise, without sin, but soon transitions to a world of violence where the powerful enforce their will on others (page 159).
These poems give us the beginning and the middle of a story of colonization and oppression. However, the final poem of the section “the lamb” leaves me thinking there is hope for this story. This final poem speaks of a lamb and a shepherdess, as the shepherdess licks the lambs wound (page 163). As Ak’abal ended this section with this poem, I am left thinking that the lamb represents the oppressed Indigenous people, and the shepherdess represents a more abstract idea of hope, or freedom, or justice. His choice of finishing this section that is filled with a depiction of the creation and perpetuation of the minority status of Indigenous people with a poem of healing and comfort reveals an intent to rewrite the end of a story of oppression and change it into one of hope.
Hi Julia, thank you for sharing! I find your reading really interesting, mainly because it’s nearly the opposite of how I first read it. For me, the lamb poem seems tragic – I saw the licking of the wound as grotesque, and the lamb’s crying as a sign of its terror and pain. What I took away from the poem, was that the shepherdess was an imperial and paternalistic figure which thought it knew what was best for the lamb, and the lamb was Guatemala. The poem seemed, to me, to represent the false aid that Guatemala might receive from these powers. However, after hearing your interpretation, I’m surprised to see that I read it the way that I did! I think that what persuades me towards your reading is the simple fact that it’s a shepherdess and not a shepherd – this detail seems purposeful, and I feel like the more typical shepherd would have been chosen if the goal was to make some connection with Christianity and imperialism. I think that connection with Christianity is still there, but that it’s subverted through the gender swap. I’m not sure though, and would be happy to hear others thoughts!
Adding on to what both Benjamin and Julia have written, I think The Lamb has some interesting commentary on the state of affairs of Indigenous people at the time Ak’abal wrote said poem. Like Benjamin said in the previous comment, the image of a shepherdess and a lamb immediately evokes Christianity, but that’s as far as the connection goes, in my opinion. This poem really does seem to be its own thing, and like Julia says, I find that there’s at least some tone of hopefulness or understanding to it. However, I think the meaning of the poem goes a bit further than that. To me, it seems like this poem is situating us back to “500 years”, back to the present. The story about the lamb that’s been hurt seems to represent the Indigenous people of Guatemala at the time Ak’abal wrote the poem. I think it’s trying to say that the pain is still there, it is still felt 500 years since everything began. It acknowledges the sharp pain and sadness that comes with this reality. While 500 Years explores the weight of the past 500 Years on the Indigenous community, The Lamb explores the pain during modern times, the sharpness and unavoidability of it. When it comes to the shepherdess, I think Julia’s reading of it is pretty accurate, she does seem to represent some sort of powerful theme (which currently escapes me). However, I believe the main thing to takeaway from the poem is its commentary on the current state of affairs at the time.
The final poem in the section did not strike me as hopeful at first but I do agree that it has a sense of catharsis, the lamb is being held by someone who wants to help it and it is finally allowed to cry. I don’t know if it is exactly hopeful but I do see it as being able to move on from the past while still understanding the impacts that it has had on the people, in this case the lamb. The shepherdess licking the wound does not heal it, it is just the beginning of the healing process.
Hello Julia, while you have quite a few good points, I would like to disagree with you on the ending of The Lamb. I personally think that it is not a hopeful ending but a tragic one. For instance, It is odd that Ak’abal decides to add the detail of the little shepherdess, but I think the shepherdess is used to represent a young “lady liberty” or a youthful America. Furthermore, idiomatically, to “lick your wound” means to withdraw temporarily while recovering from a defeat. Therefore, I think the lamb, the stand-in for the Indigenous, was trying to withdraw temporarily from America, but it ended up being forever because America was the one to “lick” its wounds. What do you think?