Sarmiento's first chapter confused me. As I was reading it,
I kept trying to find a piece of evidence that he wasn't entirely biased or
that his use of the words savages and barbarians were to make a point
concerning the misconceptions of that time period when examining the
indigenous. I finally realized that he was actually very much biased against
the natives and in favor of a European way of life. His idea of progress was
modeled after the United States and
European nations. He believed that one must own land to see progress, that they
must trade with foreign countries, and utilize the environment. Sarmiento saw
the influence of the indigenous peoples to be “suffocating” the idea of
progress and the life of settlers to be “primitive” and “unchanging.” My
question is thus; Why then did Sarmiento
acknowledge that barbarianism “is not without its attractions” in the last
paragraph of his first chapter? Doesn’t this counteract his earlier arguments?
In my view, he destroys his earlier argument in this last
paragraph because he almost speaks of the gaucho way of life with type of
reverence or respect. Sarmiento often
refers to the lazy life that the gauchos lead through the earlier portion of
his argument though. The only explanation that I have been able to come up with
is that he is acknowledging the functionality of the gaucho way of life so that
he can later demonstrate how they may be reformed so that progress may occur. Perhaps
he is attempting to say that with some encouragement from the elites, the
wayward settlers may be Europeanized. This is the only explanation I have been
able to come up with and am eager to hear how you all interpreted this section.
I thought Sarmiento talked about the gauchos with "reverence or respect" because, even though they were barbaric, they weren't indigenous. The gauchos were of European or African descent; it was more acceptable for them to act and live in a "savage" way because they were naturally more civilized due to their heritage. The gauchos also contributed to Sarmiento and the other settlers, so their barbarism was "not without its attractions." They raised cattle and horses, while the indigenous didn't benefit them at all. It's almost like when your friend tells you a joke and you think it's really funny, but, when somebody you don't like tells the same joke, it's not funny anymore.
ReplyDelete