While reading “From a Native Daughter” I was curious if the spiritual aspect of culture gets lost in written history. I had this question after reading the bottom of page 125, where Trask recounts their grandmother’s description of the land’s response to annexation. While historians learning the language should mean they interpret history more accurately, would they be able to grasp the feeling of being connected to the land and culture through language alone?
When I read “Arts of the Contact Zone”, I wondered if Guaman Poma’s education led him to linking Andean history with Christian history. If he had not been literate, would he have made those same connections?
Good evening Kaila,
I found your questions and thoughts to be very intriguing towards both readings you also made me question those same thoughts, especially with the different outcome if Guaman Poma wasn’t so literate and how would the outcome be presented differently.
Kaila,
Good questions.
I think there is a difference between learning a language and being immersed in a culture, to understand a group of people. Some things don’t translate well to other languages and some things won’t make sense if one doesn’t understand the why. Historians didn’t understand the connection Hawaiians have to their land because land is seen as a commodity. The spiritual aspect is lost in written history.