The Spanish conquest over Tenochtitlán represents the clash of opposites. Two cultures with very different ways of understanding the world, at war with each other. The Spanish conquistadors, drastically fewer in number, ultimately conquered the Aztec empire. How did they achieve this? Was it, as Todorov asks, by means of signs? Or is there something else?
The author puts a great emphasis on the "otherness" that both Aztecs and Conquistadors faced, but positions one culture over the other. On one hand, he mentions how the Aztecs, unable to process the differences between themselves and the newcomers, accepted them as gods. (pg. 76) The Aztecs were no longer able to gather sufficient information about the invaders because it was out of the reach of their language. A language that was focused on the past being the same as the future, a search of knowledge to understand "what are we to know?" The Aztec codes represent a constant cycle that allowed them to understand their world, yet made it impossible to improvise. (pg.87) Another important aspect of their language is the veracity that it carried, adding to the lack of ability from the Aztecs to deceit the conquistadors. Todorov connects these linguistic elements with the defeat of the Aztecs. On the other hand, the Spanish first reaction is to perceive the "other" as inferior. This reaction is based on the Western concepts of language, considering the Aztecs as "barbarian" just because they don't share the same language construction. (pg. 76) The conquistadors use the information at their hands to decide "what is to be done?" and act accordingly. (pg. 110) One clear example of this is Cortes's use of Quetzalcoatl's myth (very much in a Machiavellian sense) to trick the Indians into believing he is a god. (pg.116) Todorov describes these and many other linguistic "advantages" from the conquistadors as key to their victory over the natives. Regardless of the evidence presented by Todorov, I do not believe that the Aztec where defeated by means of signs. On the contrary, I find the signs ultimately irrelevant to the outcome of the conquest. Just as the Aztecs had a limited reach due to their cultural formation of language, the Spanish fall victim to a similar problem. The conquistadors also accept omens and lack the vocabulary to describe certain aspects of the Indians. (pg. 108) Some of them even lack the ability to communicate "man to man" as seen in the previous chapter with Columbus. Therefore, the claim by Todorov that Cortes and his companions were superior due to their language leaves out many other variables present in the conquest of Tenochtitlán. Other problem with Todorov's interpretation comes from his viewpoint. He writes from a purely Western perspective. For example, he discards the Mexicans' cultural construction of "La Malinche" as the impossition of European culture over the Indians. On the contrary, he introduces her as a symbol of understanding and assimilation amongst cultures. Despite the altruistic aim of this statement, the reality of the oppression and destruction caused by the Spanish towards the Aztecs takes away the "understanding" part of the statement. (pg. 101) The overall assumption of the author that Aztecs were not able to defeat the Spanish based on their culture, instead of providing a voice to the "Other," continues the Western ideals of European superiority over "natives". The fall of Tenochtitlán, as in any other war, is a sum of multiple factors. Both cultures had to balance new and unprecedented information with their past knowledge. Both the Spanish and the Aztecs suffered defeats and claimed victories during this war. The Spanish, while technically outnumbered, recruited allies within the surrounding chiefdoms. The Aztecs, while supposedly superior in number, lost men at the hands of disease. Based on the number of factors ignored during the chapter, I do not consider the explanation that the Aztecs were defeated only by signs as accurate. Instead, a more in-depth exploration of the fall of Tenochtitlán is necessary to explain the impacts of the "Other."
2 Comments
Vicky
11/14/2018 12:29:18 pm
Hi Alonso, first thank you for such a well-constructed and interesting post! I definitely agree that Todorov's analysis of the signs is somewhat narrow and from a very Western perspective. I'm also interested in how you mention La Malinche, and I think Todorov's interpretation of her role is one that many Latin Americans would disagree with, as it's true that her actions were a betrayal to indigenous values, a submission to European culture and power. At the same time, however, I've read some work by Gloria Anzaldúa, a Mexican feminist, who uses La Malinche as a figure of pride and empowerment because she was the only woman who escaped the confines of the home and allowed herself to speak and become a metaphor for the culture of resistance. There's the idea that La Malinche has not betrayed her people but that her male dominated culture has betrayed her, that she's blamed for the loss of an empire, as if the Aztec empire would not have fallen without her collusion with the colonizers. I'm still trying to figure out what I think of this. Right now, it's an interesting idea and I love Anzaldúa's work, but I'm not sure. What are your thoughts on this interpretation of La Malinche? Thanks again!
Reply
Alonso Pliego
11/18/2018 08:37:28 pm
Hi Vicky! Thank you for reading my post. I had never considered that aspect of La Malinche, and I do have to admit that my reasoning is deeply influenced by 12+ years of the Mexican education system. Yet, I do agree with some parts of Anzaldúa's position. Especially the fact that La Malinche had to make all of her decisions in a heavily male-dominated environment. Just the way she was acquired by the Spanish demonstrates how little opportunity to decide over her life she had. I have to read more about the topic in order to formulate a more un-biased and informed opinion. Also, over the next few days I'm back in Mexico I'll voice this point of view to see how it resonates. Thank you again for your comment!
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AlonsoI'm from Mexico City. I love cooking and eating Mexican food. Archives
December 2018
Categories
All
|