article on Aztecs II

[Richard Haly]

Ouch.

There is an issue here that troubles me. Having taught Chicano Studies I am
quite aware of the forces of Cultural Nationalism and "lo indio" what I see
here troubles me in thusly: say you were going to write a book about the
French Revolution. To do any kind of decent job - even only archival and not
actually interviewing people re liberte egalite fraternite - one would have
to learn French. Duh. How is it people think they can write about a culture
when they don't know the language. And why is it usually indigenous
languages (ie. non european ones) where this happens. The spelling of
Moteuczomah as Moktekuzoma is (as J. Richard Andrews can teach us) a flag
that this person doesn't know Nahuatl.  This kind of PC appropriation
(Chicano of Nahua) is one of the things that I (Ph.D in hand) hate about
academia. First the reconquista and now the reteconquista.

There are serious ethical issues of representation that such a book brings
up. I, who have done over 25 years of "fieldwork" with Nahuas and speak it
passably (understand it better) will only claim in my writings that what I
write is
a product of my _interaction_ with Nahua speakers. I am NOT PostModern
enough to admit such readings of the sources as Vento apparently feels
entitled to.

ye ixquich.

Richard Haly

----------
>From: Mel Sanchez <melesan at pacbell.net>
>To: Multiple recipients of list <nahuat-l at server.umt.edu>
>Subject: Re: article on Aztecs II
>Date: Sun, Aug 08, 1999, 21:07
>

> Take a look at this from amazon.com:
>
> http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ts/book-contents/0761809201/qid=934166
> 480/sr=1-17/002-5080852-7218268