Advertisement
YOU ARE HERE: LAT HomeCollectionsStatues

Culture : Mexico Confronts Cortes--Again : * It's time to quit vilifying the Spanish 'Father of Mexico' and give him his due, two famous authors argue.

March 31, 1992|MARJORIE MILLER | TIMES STAFF WRITER

MEXICO CITY — If the father of your country were best known for cutting down an Aztec emperor rather than a cherry tree, would you honor him with a monument?

While American textbooks illuminate the most honorable qualities of George Washington, official Mexican lore has vilified the father of modern Mexico, Spanish conqueror Hernando Cortes.

To many Mexicans, Cortes is a symbol of rape and plunder. He tore down Tenochtitlan, capital of the Aztec Empire, and imposed Spanish rule over Indian civilization. With the concubine Malinche, he produced a new mixed-blood or mestizo race. Ultimately, he hanged the brave and honorable Aztec warrior Cuauhtemoc.

Such notoriety explains the irritation that novelist Carlos Fuentes provoked last month when, amid preparations for the 500th anniversary of Spain's arrival in the New World, the author suggested that Mexico erect a statue of Cortes.

Not just any statue. A full-bodied Cortes on horseback. Prominently displayed in a plaza of Mexico City, the capital built on the ruins of Tenochtitlan. Five centuries after the fact, Fuentes argues, it's high time Mexico comes to terms with its colonial past.

"We have not overcome the trauma of the Conquest," Fuentes explained in an interview. "We behave like a colonized country. We were born of a crime of extreme cruelty, but we were able to build ourselves and have created a culture that is Spanish, Catholic, mestizo. Our father was Hernan Cortes whether we like it or not."

As surprising as the proposal was the fact that Fuentes and Nobel laureate Octavio Paz finally found an issue on which they agree. Paz pooh-poohed the statue but heartily seconded the need for a more balanced view of Cortes.

"It is time that Cortes took his rightful place as a historic figure," Paz said in an interview. "He is a figure who has a dark side and a bright side. He is neither an angel nor a devil. He was a great military tactician. He was not a barbarian."

During a speech in Spain last December, Paz said: "To idealize the vanquished is no less fallacious than to idolize the victors."

The reproach from Mexico's two leading authors drew a giant harrumph from the rest of the intelligentsia. Proceso magazine reporter Gerardo Ochoa Sandy wrote that Fuentes had addressed only one side of the problem, "the supposed Mexican complex over the figure of Cortes, and not the Spanish attitude toward Cuauhtemoc . . . and Indians in general."

"Why only a statue of Cortes?" wrote El Financiero newspaper columnist Jaime Aviles. Referring to tyrants of Mexico's past, he added, "Why not also a monument to Santa Anna, a Maximilian, a (Porfirio) Diaz? In the end, what this is about is not building altars, but admitting freely and without prejudice, with absolute objectivity, the complex trauma of our history."

Carlos Monsivais, a leading essayist on Mexican culture, doubts one can be objective about one's own violent history.

"My grandparents spoke Nahuatl, so I know where I stand--with the majority," said Monsivais, who insists that, ethnically, Mexico is still an Indian country.

The 1990 census counts 6.4 million Indians--speakers of an indigenous language and their children. The government's National Indigenous Institute estimates 8 million to 10 million Indians, including some who have lost their language but still live in Indian communities or lead traditional lives.

"Look at the people," responds Monsivais. "Culturally Mexico is mestizo , but ethnically it is still an Indian country."

Monsivais believes that Mexico has come to terms with the Conquest, and opposition to a statue of Cortes is an example of just that.

"Cortes was a terrible historical inevitability. He is not a person with whom I sympathize, but I also am not going to fight with his ghost. At this point, a statue of him doesn't mean reconciliation, it means homage to colonization and it is an affront to Indian groups," Monsivais said.

It is Paz who once described the Mexican character as entwined with its colonization. Mexicans are hermetic, suspicious of foreigners and defensive, he wrote 40 years ago in "The Labyrinth of Solitude." They venerate a bleeding Christ beaten by soldiers and condemned by judges, because they see in him the image of a dethroned and murdered Cuauhtemoc.

Malinche, a translator for Cortes before procreating with him, is the symbol of a violated mother embodying openness and betrayal, Paz wrote. Those who favored opening Mexico's economy to outsiders were called malinchistas .

Today, President Carlos Salinas de Gortari is opening Mexico to foreign investment and influence with little popular backlash. Isn't this a sign that Mexico is assimilating the Conquest?

"To a large degree, we have overcome this resistance to foreigners," said Jose Luis Martinez, Mexico's foremost scholar of Cortes, who nonetheless believes the country has a long way to go.

Advertisement
Los Angeles Times Articles
|
|
|