Finding my primary sources actually turned out to be a
relatively simple task. I think that
there are a few main reasons why this was the case. According to my secondary sources, the genre
of testimonio is fairly new. The piece
that many people agree to be the first testimonio was written in 1966. With this said, there has not been nearly as
many testimonios written in comparison to genres that have been around for
centuries. Furthermore, among the extant
testimonios, I found that there are only a handful that are largely considered
to be representative of the genre.
The three most commonly discussed sources were The Autobiography of a Runaway Slave, Sandino’s
Daughters: Testimonies of Nicaraguan
Women in Struggle, and the most famous testimonio, I, Rigoberta Menchú.
Interestingly, each of these pieces are about experiences in
revolutions. While they take place in
different countries, namely Cuba, Nicaragua, and Guatemala, the authors all
share very similar purposes and statuses.
Each of the authors were from a marginalized group within their country. Their testimonios served as a means of
sharing the hardships that they faced and the actions that they took to
overcome the oppression that they faced.
One interesting discussion point that I came across while
doing my research was an ongoing argument among scholars regarding whether or
not testimonio should have a place in academia.
The argument is essentially based on disagreements over “truth” and
objectivity. Some argue that testimonios
are too biased and full of political agendas to be useful in academia. However, after reading these fundamental
testimonios, I found myself very much on the side of those defending testimonio’s
place in the classroom. They give a
personal touch that really humanizes the groups of people who struggled in
these events in history that we constantly hear and learn about. I think that putting this air of humanness
into political and historical discussion is important. Furthermore, I believe that testimonio has
the ability to inspire those who find themselves even in the direst of
situations to take action to achieve what they know to be right.
I find the time period in which Testimonies emerged as a subgenre really telling. Since the genre seems to correlate with revolutions in different countries, I can see the true purpose of the mixing of languages and the symbolism of realms we can and cannot understand. When reading Gloria Anzaldúa's piece, there is a process of alienation of the reader--whether Spanish or English speaking. This technique, like you said, humanizes the struggling people within the poem, and is incredibly powerful in illustrating the plight of the oppressed. It will be interesting to see with our new President, if more testimonios will be published--especially since Trump overtly targets marginalized people.
ReplyDeleteI find the fact that most of the testimonio's revolve around revolution to be incredibly interesting. Do you believe that there is an innate quality of struggling against a system involved in the creation of such a work. If that is true, do you believe that someone could write a true testimonio about being both in power and within the majority. It is possible that the urgency which requires such a work only comes from a feeling of extreme pressure which someone in power could not feel.
ReplyDeleteYou mention that the testimonio genre is relatively recent, having first emerged in the year 1966. I am curious as to whether anything similar to this genre existed before that year, and as to how the genre emerged in the first place. Are there important historical, social, or political contexts that gave rise to the prominence of this genre? Why do you think it ceased to exist before 1966?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteYou said that you think they could be integrated in academia however do you think the stories are biased? There have been some books written on past experiences where they were either way too embellished or simply did not happen at all. Are you worried that we may learn about events that were manipulated by the author? I understand that we only hear the winners side when it comes to history but do you think that it is still more reliable? What about defamation that would occur so that the author can prove their point?
ReplyDelete