Earlier today, in an effort to better understand Guaman Poma and his The First New Chronicle and Good Government, I decided to read a little bit of the text’s introduction. Upon getting further acquainted with Poma’s status as a noble, as well as his ability to speak multiple languages, I was reminded of something we had earlier discussed in class. Namely, that the concept of Indigenous writing kind of contradicted the idea of being Indigenous in the first place. This was the case because systems of writing were brought on by colonizers. It got me thinking of whether Poma, who had the ability to read, write, and speak Spanish, was the ideal person to represent all Indigenous people to the Spanish king. Although he undoubtedly meant well, his privileged societal position ensured that, perhaps, his experience was not the same as that of most Indigenous people. I always seem to be coming back to the question of the “real,” and now I’m wondering if one must be part of the “average” of a group in order to be considered a “real” member of the group at all.
Although I don’t remember all of the details, I remember another book I once read that dealt with a similar question. In Primo Levi’s The Drowned and the Saved, Levi notes that he is not the one who is more apt to tell of what happened in the Holocaust, because he survived. If he survived, that means that he automatically didn’t have the worst of it and could not possibly know how to tell of what happened accurately. Poma not only had a decent grasp of Spanish and writing, unlike other Indigenous people; he was also a Christian. His Christianity likely not only impacted his own ideas of right and wrong, but also made it so that he would be viewed more equitably by Spaniards in Peru as a whole. If Poma’s overall treatment under the Spaniards wasn’t as bad as it may have been for others, who is he in being able to make demands or tell a story?
After dwelling upon all this, I continued reading the book’s introduction. This only led me to find out that Poma did not consider himself an “Indian” either. He himself recognized his differences and held himself to a status above that of the “Indians,” which he considers to be entirely commoners. It seems as if Poma holds himself to a status in between that of the Indigenous and the Spaniards, without being mestizo. This is yet another reason why Poma’s voice as a representation for the Indigenous can be contested, regardless of how much Indigenous matters matter to him. Who should get to speak, and does being able to speak contradict the very notion of being one who deserves to speak at all?
4 replies on “Should Guaman Poma Get to Speak?”
“I always seem to be coming back to the question of the “real,” and now I’m wondering if one must be part of the “average” of a group in order to be considered a “real” member of the group at all.” You’re not the only one… that question comes back again and again when we’re faced with Spivak’s question. And in the case of Latin American literature, it is directly linked to a narrative genre that became paradigmatic in the 20th century, the “testimonio.” We tend to think that expression can occur directly, without mediation. That is why authors who problematize the “intermediate” are so stimulating. Let’s continue as a group to think about these issues (we may not reach a definitive conclusion, and that’s okay!)
I think it is a good question about who gets to speak and represent a group. I would argue that there is never a perfect person for it because there is so much variation in groups. But there are better picks than others. Guaman Poma might not be a good choice because of his different status and beliefs but he would probably have a better chance of being listen to because of his higher status.
Hi Yasmin my love! Thank you for your insightful comments on the question of representation of a group. I think the “average” of a group doesn’t really exist, especially as a metric for lived experience. As we’ve discussed numerous times in this class there usually isn’t a perfect voice for the subaltern. However, potentially having many voices that are part of a marginalized group to an extent might be a way to gather a representation for certain groups.
I love the title of this blog and I loved reading your thoughts! It’s really interesting seeing how Guaman Poma views his positionality as maybe some sort of a ‘bridge’… Also on your sentence “I always seem to be coming back to the question of the “real…” I felt this being the case for me during all our time too!