I found the lecture for this week, titled, “The Meeting of Two Worlds”, very enlightening. I’ve known for a long time now that the morality of Christopher Columbus’ journey is been controversial, but I hadn’t known that people were thinking the same thing as early as the sixteenth century. I also learned lots about Columbus’ personality that I hadn’t known before. This week’s lecture provided me with a better insight to what he was really feeling during his trip. For instance, I didn’t know that Columbus had been so insecure and full of anxiety regarding his journey. Up until this point, the narrative that I was told about Columbus is that he was a hero, he made the world we live in today, and that he was always sure of himself. I think that this lecture really humanizes him. Learning that he wasn’t as confident as we thought, or that he had no idea he was discovering anything of value makes him more realistic. I believe that it’s important for the average person to remember that big historical figures aren’t always what they seem to be, and narratives can be deceiving. The reading captured this sentiment by citing Michael-Rolph Trouillot, who says “History is not what happened, but what is said about what happened”.
While doing the reading, I found the contrast of the two cities to be very striking. In the reading, the author talks about the contrast between Polcano (one of the nicest neighbourhoods in Mexico City), and Ecatepac (a very poor neighbourhood just a few miles away) The author describes how easy it is as a tourist, to become out of touch with the world around you when strolling through Polcano. The author then goes on to describe how when living in Ecatepac, it’s easier to just ignore Polcano, and the rest of the world. I noticed that it would be eye-opening to walk through either neighbourhood. I would probably leave both of them, thinking “Wow, I can’t believe people live like this”. I found this passage to be very thought-provoking. It’s so easy to just take life for granted, forgetting that there are millions of people living a very different life.
Overall, this week was very thought provoking, and made me reflect on my living situation, and how other people experience This week’s lecture and reading taught me to be skeptical when learning about historical events, because when we look more in depth, we start to see how a false narrative has been pushed for so long. Now I’m wondering, how many other false narratives have I been subjected to?
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with
I found the lecture for this week, titled, “The Meeting of Two Worlds”, very enlightening. I’ve known for a long time now that the morality of Christopher Columbus’ journey is been controversial, but I hadn’t known that people were thinking the same thing as early as the sixteenth century. I also learned lots about Columbus’ personality that I hadn’t known before. This week’s lecture provided me with a better insight to what he was really feeling during his trip. For instance, I didn’t know that Columbus had been so insecure and full of anxiety regarding his journey. Up until this point, the narrative that I was told about Columbus is that he was a hero, he made the world we live in today, and that he was always sure of himself. I think that this lecture really humanizes him. Learning that he wasn’t as confident as we thought, or that he had no idea he was discovering anything of value makes him more realistic. I believe that it’s important for the average person to remember that big historical figures aren’t always what they seem to be, and narratives can be deceiving. The reading captured this sentiment by citing Michael-Rolph Trouillot, who says “History is not what happened, but what is said about what happened”.
While doing the reading, I found the contrast of the two cities to be very striking. In the reading, the author talks about the contrast between Polcano (one of the nicest neighbourhoods in Mexico City), and Ecatepac (a very poor neighbourhood just a few miles away) The author describes how easy it is as a tourist, to become out of touch with the world around you when strolling through Polcano. The author then goes on to describe how when living in Ecatepac, it’s easier to just ignore Polcano, and the rest of the world. I noticed that it would be eye-opening to walk through either neighbourhood. I would probably leave both of them, thinking “Wow, I can’t believe people live like this”. I found this passage to be very thought-provoking. It’s so easy to just take life for granted, forgetting that there are millions of people living a very different life.
Overall, this week was very thought provoking, and made me reflect on my living situation, and how other people experience This week’s lecture and reading taught me to be skeptical when learning about historical events, because when we look more in depth, we start to see how a false narrative has been pushed for so long. Now I’m wondering, how many other false narratives have I been subjected to?
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with
Having grown up in Europe the image of Columbus presented to us at school was that of the accidental hero who stumbled across America whilst in search of India and returned home with mountains of gold much to the pride and delight of Spain. However, recent socio-political movements regarding the glorification of colonisation in Europe has put Columbus’ heroic status along with other key imperialist figures such as Napoleon and Rhodes into question. And so it is with these two conflicting outlooks that I began this week’s reading and lecture hoping to find a resolute answer to whether Columbus deserves the status of a hero or a villain.
As I began Columbus’ journal I was initially intrigued by his leading strategy, lying to the crew about how far they had sailed presumably in the hope of encouraging them to work harder the next day. He struck me as a respected, competent leader – however this may just be due to his own perception of himself as arguably he cannot have been that competent a leader to lead all his crew in the opposite direction of their destination! He addressed the monarch repeatedly in the journal suggesting that it was not kept solely for Columbus’ own eyes but to be used as an account of the voyage by the King himself demonstrating that Columbus was clearly a trusted servant of the King,
Once Columbus began to write of his actions in America I was horrified by his manipulation of the naïve and innocent indigenous communities; exploiting the fact they were “eager to please” to not only rob them but abuse the information they shared. I was further angered by the offhand manner in which Columbus discussed capturing seven of the Americans to take back to Spain to learn Spanish. However, these feelings were combined with the awe that followed Columbus’ poetic description of the new land he was in as discussed in the lecture. It was clear Columbus was in complete reverence of the place and some of the people. This admiration made me question whether he truly did not feel any emotion towards the Americans and whether he just believed that whatever harm he was causing was for the greater good.
It was Columbus’ clear religious motivation for the voyage; stating that the Americans would make “good Christians”, that made me believe that perhaps Columbus felt his actions were justified in the eyes of God. Through this work I have not found a resolute answer as to whether Columbus deserves the status of a hero or a villain. He may have believed he was acting as God and the King willed and his discoveries and riches did improve the lives of the Spaniards in Europe however I cannot say that it excuses his abuse of the Americans naivety and kindness. What is clear however, no matter whether Columbus is honoured or condemned is the impact he has had on the world even over 500 years later.
Having grown up in Europe the image of Columbus presented to us at school was that of the accidental hero who stumbled across America whilst in search of India and returned home with mountains of gold much to the pride and delight of Spain. However, recent socio-political movements regarding the glorification of colonisation in Europe has put Columbus’ heroic status along with other key imperialist figures such as Napoleon and Rhodes into question. And so it is with these two conflicting outlooks that I began this week’s reading and lecture hoping to find a resolute answer to whether Columbus deserves the status of a hero or a villain.
As I began Columbus’ journal I was initially intrigued by his leading strategy, lying to the crew about how far they had sailed presumably in the hope of encouraging them to work harder the next day. He struck me as a respected, competent leader – however this may just be due to his own perception of himself as arguably he cannot have been that competent a leader to lead all his crew in the opposite direction of their destination! He addressed the monarch repeatedly in the journal suggesting that it was not kept solely for Columbus’ own eyes but to be used as an account of the voyage by the King himself demonstrating that Columbus was clearly a trusted servant of the King,
Once Columbus began to write of his actions in America I was horrified by his manipulation of the naïve and innocent indigenous communities; exploiting the fact they were “eager to please” to not only rob them but abuse the information they shared. I was further angered by the offhand manner in which Columbus discussed capturing seven of the Americans to take back to Spain to learn Spanish. However, these feelings were combined with the awe that followed Columbus’ poetic description of the new land he was in as discussed in the lecture. It was clear Columbus was in complete reverence of the place and some of the people. This admiration made me question whether he truly did not feel any emotion towards the Americans and whether he just believed that whatever harm he was causing was for the greater good.
It was Columbus’ clear religious motivation for the voyage; stating that the Americans would make “good Christians”, that made me believe that perhaps Columbus felt his actions were justified in the eyes of God. Through this work I have not found a resolute answer as to whether Columbus deserves the status of a hero or a villain. He may have believed he was acting as God and the King willed and his discoveries and riches did improve the lives of the Spaniards in Europe however I cannot say that it excuses his abuse of the Americans naivety and kindness. What is clear however, no matter whether Columbus is honoured or condemned is the impact he has had on the world even over 500 years later.
Having grown up in Europe the image of Columbus presented to us at school was that of the accidental hero who stumbled across America whilst in search of India and returned home with mountains of gold much to the pride and delight of Spain. However, recent socio-political movements regarding the glorification of colonisation in Europe has put Columbus’ heroic status along with other key imperialist figures such as Napoleon and Rhodes into question. And so it is with these two conflicting outlooks that I began this week’s reading and lecture hoping to find a resolute answer to whether Columbus deserves the status of a hero or a villain.
As I began Columbus’ journal I was initially intrigued by his leading strategy, lying to the crew about how far they had sailed presumably in the hope of encouraging them to work harder the next day. He struck me as a respected, competent leader – however this may just be due to his own perception of himself as arguably he cannot have been that competent a leader to lead all his crew in the opposite direction of their destination! He addressed the monarch repeatedly in the journal suggesting that it was not kept solely for Columbus’ own eyes but to be used as an account of the voyage by the King himself demonstrating that Columbus was clearly a trusted servant of the King,
Once Columbus began to write of his actions in America I was horrified by his manipulation of the naïve and innocent indigenous communities; exploiting the fact they were “eager to please” to not only rob them but abuse the information they shared. I was further angered by the offhand manner in which Columbus discussed capturing seven of the Americans to take back to Spain to learn Spanish. However, these feelings were combined with the awe that followed Columbus’ poetic description of the new land he was in as discussed in the lecture. It was clear Columbus was in complete reverence of the place and some of the people. This admiration made me question whether he truly did not feel any emotion towards the Americans and whether he just believed that whatever harm he was causing was for the greater good.
It was Columbus’ clear religious motivation for the voyage; stating that the Americans would make “good Christians”, that made me believe that perhaps Columbus felt his actions were justified in the eyes of God. Through this work I have not found a resolute answer as to whether Columbus deserves the status of a hero or a villain. He may have believed he was acting as God and the King willed and his discoveries and riches did improve the lives of the Spaniards in Europe however I cannot say that it excuses his abuse of the Americans naivety and kindness. What is clear however, no matter whether Columbus is honoured or condemned is the impact he has had on the world even over 500 years later.
Though I have never formally learnt about Christopher Columbus in school, in my mind he had always been portrayed as heroic – possibly I assumed this because of the countries and provinces which are named after him, possibly also because of the fact that he must have been an intelligent individual and highly skilled navigator. Since moving to Canada and learning about American history I am aware of the devastating impact of cultural myopia and colonialism, though I still never held Columbus personally accountable. Reading Columbus’s personal memoir was very strange for me; I found it shocking how brief some of his daily accounts were. Many people who experience historical events of huge difficulty and significance seem to have written detailed thoughtful accounts of their life and plans, for example Anne Frank, Adolf Hitler and Nelson Mandela, whereas this text struck me as more of a report – the prologue implies it was presumably a report to the monarchy of Spain. I had assumed that he wrote to process his thoughts and emotions, but it seems this is not the case. It makes me question – did Columbus have so much faith that he would eventually make it back to Spain to hand over the account? Did he leave instructions for what was to happen to it after his death, or make more than one copy?
Despite the structural style, Columbus described many of his surroundings and experiences in a lyrical, poetic way – as mentioned in the lecture this week. Hauntingly, I found a certain purity in his words – despite the insensitive language sometimes used to describe people he encounters, he is undoubtedly in awe of what he finds, “no man could look at [the fish] without amazement and delight, the colours are so beautiful”. The villain character he is so often made out to be does not line up with the naivety of his words when discovering this new land – and from his perspective just doing his job. He wrote, “They captured [the Native American] but told him they meant him no harm”.
The other assigned reading shows a similar history from a vastly different perspective. I found it uncomfortable to read, though it is more like what I was expecting when learning about colonialism in a class on Latin American studies. It is difficult to consider this piece alongside Columbus’s account. After mentioning how the Inca believed the newcomer to be a “lord in his kingdom” one phrase which stuck out to me was “…the soldiers began to kill Indians like ants”. This notion is supported by the assigned student video “The Meeting of the Two Worlds II” – which discusses the horrific abuse of the native people, and also the after effects of their invasion; 90% of Native Americans were killed from contact with Europeans – largely through disease. I’d like to learn more about how far there was miscommunication between the indigenous people and the explorers, and how far, perhaps, Columbus’s account is untruthful or unreliable?
Posted in Blogs, Week 2 | Tagged with colonialism, Columbus, Inca, indigenous
Though I have never formally learnt about Christopher Columbus in school, in my mind he had always been portrayed as heroic – possibly I assumed this because of the countries and provinces which are named after him, possibly also because of the fact that he must have been an intelligent individual and highly skilled navigator. Since moving to Canada and learning about American history I am aware of the devastating impact of cultural myopia and colonialism, though I still never held Columbus personally accountable. Reading Columbus’s personal memoir was very strange for me; I found it shocking how brief some of his daily accounts were. Many people who experience historical events of huge difficulty and significance seem to have written detailed thoughtful accounts of their life and plans, for example Anne Frank, Adolf Hitler and Nelson Mandela, whereas this text struck me as more of a report – the prologue implies it was presumably a report to the monarchy of Spain. I had assumed that he wrote to process his thoughts and emotions, but it seems this is not the case. It makes me question – did Columbus have so much faith that he would eventually make it back to Spain to hand over the account? Did he leave instructions for what was to happen to it after his death, or make more than one copy?
Despite the structural style, Columbus described many of his surroundings and experiences in a lyrical, poetic way – as mentioned in the lecture this week. Hauntingly, I found a certain purity in his words – despite the insensitive language sometimes used to describe people he encounters, he is undoubtedly in awe of what he finds, “no man could look at [the fish] without amazement and delight, the colours are so beautiful”. The villain character he is so often made out to be does not line up with the naivety of his words when discovering this new land – and from his perspective just doing his job. He wrote, “They captured [the Native American] but told him they meant him no harm”.
The other assigned reading shows a similar history from a vastly different perspective. I found it uncomfortable to read, though it is more like what I was expecting when learning about colonialism in a class on Latin American studies. It is difficult to consider this piece alongside Columbus’s account. After mentioning how the Inca believed the newcomer to be a “lord in his kingdom” one phrase which stuck out to me was “…the soldiers began to kill Indians like ants”. This notion is supported by the assigned student video “The Meeting of the Two Worlds II” – which discusses the horrific abuse of the native people, and also the after effects of their invasion; 90% of Native Americans were killed from contact with Europeans – largely through disease. I’d like to learn more about how far there was miscommunication between the indigenous people and the explorers, and how far, perhaps, Columbus’s account is untruthful or unreliable?
Posted in Blogs, Week 2 | Tagged with colonialism, Columbus, Inca, indigenous
For a large part of my life, Christopher Columbus was depicted as an “accidental hero” and the man who in some way “started it all.” I remember many teachers would describe how he set out on a voyage to the Silk Road in Asia, took the wrong route and ended up in the Americas. I […]
Posted in Blogs | Tagged with #twoworlds, Colombus, colonialism, weektwo
(Heads up: this is my unedited chain of thoughts) “The Meeting of Two Worlds” What an interesting take on the…
Posted in Blogs, Week 2 | Tagged with Christopher Columbus, hero or villain, Meeting of Two Worlds, Oct 12 1942
After watching “Power to the People” my first impression was how familiar the content looked to me at first glance. This student video displayed black and white clips of political meetings, marches and speeches which -displayed as they were, without colour and audio- could easily have represented almost any European or American country in the mid 20th century. Before beginning this course I was aware that I had an incorrect perception of Latin America as an exotic, idealistic paradise, but this video struck me particularly because I learnt it is not at all as far-removed from my own culture as I had thought. This video was on populism in Brazil, and the political, historical narrative surrounding it. Additionally, the background music of “Power to the People” made it seem extremely professionally produced. The video “Brazilian Slavery and Abolition” had a similar impression on me, in the way that the actions and series of events in that section of history are not unfamiliar to my understanding.
Watching “Independence Narratives, Past and Present” helped me gain a brief understanding of one of the reasons possibly why these countries are grouped together as Latin America – they share a common history. From what I gathered, they were fighting for freedom from colonial bonds at roughly the same time as each other. This reminded me of learning about how European countries all rebelled against feudalism at around the same time in the 1700s because each revolution triggered another. Further research showed me that tomorrow is Mexican independence day!
Finally, watching “A Revolutionary Process: The Cuban Revolution in the 1960s” was very entertaining and also really interesting to see a subject of more modern history. At school I had briefly learnt about Cuba’s involvement in the Cold War, but I had never connected that history to the concept of Latin America in my mind, as I had learnt from a Western perspective -not talking much about the Cuban people themselves at all. Interestingly, when the student stated “…the United States viewed Cuba as a back door…” It made me think of the things I have read about their modern views of Mexico, and the alleged dangers brought by Mexican immigrants and connections to drug cartels.
Overall, I really enjoyed watching the student videos. Even though not all of the content was about things I am specifically interested in, it was great to see brief introductions to some of the course content and I was surprised by how much I learnt from them.
Posted in Blogs, Student Videos | Tagged with independence, populism in Brazil, revolution, week1
