COLLOQUY

THE QUESTION

RESPONSES

BACKGROUND

The very fact that Menchú's book has been ghettoized by being classified as part of the so-called "multicultural canon" is indicative of the politicized agenda of its critics. Of course it should be taught! -- if not as "objective" history, then as autobiography; as "witness" or "testimony" in the tradition of writers as diverse as Anne Frank and Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (who aren't, by the way, usually relegated to the "multicultural" ghetto) -- to say nothing of the prophets in most of the world's great religions.

We don't know whether every incident contained in these accounts happened exactly as it was reported; when historians do discover discrepancies, these are (and should be) noted, and we incorporate them into our understanding, analysis, and critique of the works, as well as the history they represent.

In other words, it isn't a matter of "either"/"or", "true"/"false", "valid"/"invalid". Rigoberta's account, like those I mentioned above, may be approached --and debated-- from diverse perspectives. We learn from this! Last time I looked, that's what intellectual inquiry was supposed to be about.

-- David G. Whiteis, Indiana-Purdue University, Ft. Wayne (posted 1/14, 12:45 p.m., E.S.T.)

previous response

next response

STEP 1: Your contact information (required)

Your name:

Your title & institution:

Your phone:

Your e-mail address:

STEP 2: Your comments (required)

STEP 3: Submit!

Check this box if you would like this submission to be considered for publication as a letter to the editor in the printed Chronicle.