Download We Don`t Do Art for Art`s Sake 1 We Don`t Do Art for Art`s Sake

WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
ChelseaHackett
PerformanceandActivism
Dr.DianaTaylor
May16th,2016
1
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
2
Ixkik
ImagineforamomentyouareinacornfieldinthehighlandsofGuatemala.
YoufollowyourfriendNorma,aMayaGuatemalanwomanwhorunsamentorship
programforgirls,throughthetallstalks.“Thegirlsaresellingwhistles,because
manyofthemareattackedhere.”Inthecorn,shemeans.Itseemstogrowtaller
aroundyou.Theyellowandgreenthatsurroundsyouisthebloodofthecountry,
thetasteofanyextendedstayhere.ThePopolVuh,theoriginmythofmodernMaya
culture,tellsofhowManwascreatedfromamixofcornandwood.Thatsamecorn
nowaccountsfor50-70%oftheMayadietinGuatemala(OrganizaciónTips,n.d.).
ThecontentsofthisfieldarethesourceofthepeopleofSololá,thecommunity
positedonahillsideoverlookingLakeAtitlán.Thesoilyouwalkonhere,inthe
Kachiquelregionofthecountry,wasthesamepassageofSpanishtraderoutesafter
theconquestsofthe16thcentury(McKinnon,2016,p.17).Thetraderoutesthat
broughtaninfluxofSpanishcultureandstompedorburnedoutanythingthatthey
perceivedassignificanttotheMaya,includingthepeoplethemselves1.Thedensity
clears,torevealtwobuildings:acommunitycenter,paintedwithMayasymbols,and
anamphitheater.
Theperformancetakesplaceinthecommunitycenter.Youentertoseea
familiararrangement:asetofstoolsfacingthefrontoftheroom.Burningcandles
serveasfootlightsfortheprosceniumstage.Therestoftheaudience,local
1TheAutodeFe,overseenbyFrayDiegodeLandainManíin1562,wasanorganizedburningof27
Mayancodicesandover5000images.Anaccountoftheseeventshasbeentheatricalizedinaplayas
ahistorywrittenbyindigenousplaywrightCarlosArmandoDzulEk(DzulEk,1992).
2Arecentdiscoveryofanabandonedgovernmentwarehousefoundastockpileofover200,000ID
cardsofthosedisappearedorknowntohavebeenkilledduringtheCivilWar.Theseartifactsarestill
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
3
grandmothersandchildren,readtheplaybill-styleprogramsannouncingthetitleof
theshow:Ixkik(Ajchowen,2013).TheylikelyknowIxkikfromthePopulVuh.There,
sheisagirl,impregnatedbyHunHunahpu.Shefleestotheunderworldtodeliver
hersons:theMayaHeroTwins.However,thisIxkikisdifferent.Thebonesofthe
storyarethere,butthecontenthasshifted.
Nolongeragirl,thisnewIxkikisagrownwomanandacommunityleader.
Theplaybeginswithsteadydrummingandatunefromafluteplayedbytwo
womenagainstthewall.Beforewords,thereismovement.Twowomenonstage
sweeptheirarmsacrosstheirbodiesandlandinposes,holdingforasecondbefore
theybeginagaininrapidsuccession.Theygroundintothefloor,weightingintotheir
feetinawaythatallowsyoutorelaxintoobserving.Nothingisfearfulaboutthe
undulations.Suddenlythedrummerstandsandyoubecomeawarethatshehas
transformedintoIxkik.SheentersthebathhouseofIxmukané,agrandmotherand
wisewomaninhercommunity.
Here,theprosceniumstageseemstodisappearandyoubecomelesslikean
audiencememberandmorelikeachildpeeringthroughacrackeddoor.Thereisa
senseofwitnessing,ratherthanwatching.Somethingthatissecretorprivateis
beingrevealed.Somethingritualisticisbeingperformed.Theheatedstonesbeneath
thecotonwhichIxkiklaysproducerealsteamwhenIxmukanépourscoldwater
ontothem.Ixkikhasavision,andlosesherselfintotheheatbeneathher.Wereturn
totheperformancespaceastwocharacterswhohavesatinthewingsenterto
revealthevision.Amaskeddemoninamodernbusinesssuitbeginstofightwitha
girlwhowearsthesameclothesasIxkik.Ixkikwrithesonthecot,supportedby
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
4
Ixmukané.Whenshecalms,Ixmukanéexplainsthatademonfromtheunderworld
isthreateningherdaughter.
Astheplaycontinues,Ixkikispresentedwitharealitythatbringsyoubackto
thecornfield:inordertosaveherdaughter,Ixkikmustventuretotheunderworldto
battlethedemonasheattempttopreventherdaughterfrominheritingher
leadership.Shemusttakeherdaughtertoanotherwombwhereshewillbesafe.She
knowsthatthedemonwantstopreventherandherdaughterfromcontinuingtheir
missionofsocialchange.Ixkikchoosesthebattle.Shedancesbackandforthwith
thedemon,choreographedchaos.Astheyfinish,itisclearthatheisdefeated,but
therealitylingers:Ixkikhasgivenupherownlifeinordertosaveherdaughter’s.
Youseethegirlssellingthewhistles;yourememberwhytheyneedto.
TheworkofGrupoSotz’il(hereonreferredtoasSotz’il),describedhere
throughtheperformanceofIxkikbytheirall-femaletroupeAjchowen,playsavital
roleinthesustenanceofMayacultureinSololá,Guatemala.Inthispaper,Iwill
arguethattheirperformancesareamechanismofculturalresilience.Inhiswork
withFirstNationstribesinCanada,ChristopherLalondedefinesculturalresilience
as“theprocessofcreatingandmaintainingastrongsenseofcollectivecultural
identity”(Lalonde,n.d.,p.9).Hearguesthatculturalresilienceisabifurcated
concept,operatingasamechanismonboththebroaderculturallevel,aswellasthe
individuallevel.Heexplains,“whencommunitiessucceedinpromotingtheir
culturalheritageandinsecuringcontroloftheirowncollectivefuture—inclaiming
ownershipovertheirpastandfuture—thepositiveeffectsreverberateacrossmany
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
5
measuresofyouthhealthandwell-being”(Lalonde,n.d.,p.23).Itisbeyondthe
scopeofthispapertoaddresstheimmediateimpactofthesecondmechanismof
resilience,inrelationtoindividualswithintheSololáregion.However,inthe
followingIwillexplorehowtheperformancesofSotz’ilfunctionasaformof
resistanceandculturalresilience,ananti-colonialvisualizationofMayasurvivance
inthe21stcentury.
ResilienceintheFaceOf…
Resiliencecannotoperatewithoutrisk,adversityorthreat.AnnMasten
definesresilienceas“thecapacityofadynamicsystemtoadaptsuccessfullyto
disturbancesthatthreatensystemfunction,viability,ordevelopment”(Masten,
2014,p.6).TheMayaculturehasfacedsignificantriskoferasure.JesusaRodríguez
describesthisstrugglewhenspeakingofvariousindigenousgroupsinLatin
America“for500yearswe’vehadasystemthat’striedtomakethemdisappear—
notjusttoexcludethem,buttoerasethemfromthefaceofthisearthandtakeover
theirlands”(Rodriguez,2010).The500-yearmarkersignifiesthearrivalofthe
Spaniardsin1523.Theimpactofcolonialismiswelldocumentedandtheattemptto
systemicallyerasetheMayapeoplebycolonistshasbeenmarkedthroughhistorical
events,aswellastheexclusionofMayaculturalheritagefromhistorical
perspectivesonthetimeperiod.
Theseactsoferasuredonotliveintheveiledandfoggyspaceofthedistant
past.Theyhavecontinuedactivelyintothe20thand21stcenturies.From1960-1996,
GuatemalawasengagedinwhattheGuatemalangovernmentcalledaCivilWar,
knownlocallyas“LaViolencia”ortheviolence.Ofthe200,000casualtiesofthat
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
6
war,83%wereMaya(TheCenterforJusticeandAccountability,2016).Ironically
theviolenteffortstodestroytheMayapeoplehavebeendiligentlydocumented2,
leadingtofurthersupportintryingformermilitarymembersforcrimesagainst
humanity.
TheGuarcaxfamilycreatedSotz’ilasanefforttorespondtothesethreatsof
destruction.Theirfoundingleader,LisandroGuarcaxdescribedtheirworkby
saying,“wedon’tdoartforart’ssake;wedoittorecoverthedignityofourpeople”
(AggabaoThelen,2010).Createdin2000,Sotz’ilwasstartedonthehealsoftheend
ofmilitarysupportedviolenceinGuatemala.Inthemanualthattheyhavecreated
outliningthedancestheyuseintheirproductions,Sotz’ildescribestheir
relationshipwitherasure:
Theysaidthatourcommunitydidn’texist,thatitdiedhundredsof
yearsagowiththeendofthegreatcivilization,thatourremainswere
discoveredbytheSpanishintheirinvasionofourlands.Theysaid
thatwewereforgotten.
Butwesaidthatwewereherenow,inthepresent,inthisplace,inthe
hills,thelakes,theanimalsthetreesinthewordsofourmothers,our
fathers,intheenergiesthatdancedinthefires,inourblood,thereis
thewisdom,theknowledgelinkingustothecosmos(GrupoSotz’il,
2015,p.8).
2Arecentdiscoveryofanabandonedgovernmentwarehousefoundastockpileofover200,000ID
cardsofthosedisappearedorknowntohavebeenkilledduringtheCivilWar.Theseartifactsarestill
beinguncoveredandcatalogued(Weld,2014).
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
7
Sotz’ilhasnamedtheirintentionsandeffortstosustaintheirculturedespitethreats:
theirresilience.However,ittakesfurtherexplorationtounderstandhowthis
operatesasamechanismofculturalresilience.
Whenconceptualizinghowaculturesurvivesinthefaceofrisk,PeterElsass
describestheconceptofdevelopingamatrix.Hearguesthatinordertoovercome
threats,aculturemustdevelopamatrix,or“afundofknowledgecharacterizingan
organization;itisastructurethatcanbetalkedaboutthatthathasnotonlyan
emotionalcontent,butculturalandideologicalcontentaswell”(Elsass,1992,p.
176).Thematrixisvitaltothecontinuationoftheculturalpracticesinthefaceof
adversitybecauseitcreatesacircumstanceinwhichthegroupmayactcohesively
withasharedsetofunderstandings.Elsasselaborates,“thebasisforamatrixof
survivalistheshareddevelopmentofabodyofknowledge,whichgivesaformof
solidarityandinertiatothegroup”(Elsass,1992,p.176).Theconstructionofa
matrixisapracticeofself-determinationandsubjectivity,asitpresentsa“pathto
gainingthepossibilityofdecidingoneselfwhatsubstancetoputintotherhetorical
phrasesoncollectiveconsciousness”(Elasass,1992,pp.102-104).
ForthetheoristPauloFreire,thisactofnamingtheworldisanactof
resistancetooppression.Inhistext,PedagogyoftheOppressed,Elsass’smatrix
mightbeidentifiedintheconceptofdialogue.Hestates,“dialogueistheencounter
betweenmen,mediatedbytheworld,inordertonametheworld”(Freire,1993,p.
61).Thenamingoftheworldisakintotheformationofthematrix.Thedenialof
dialoguebyoppressiveforces(thecolonizersandtheUS-backedGuatemalan
militaryinthiscase),istheunderpinningactionofdehumanization.Freire
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
8
continues,“ifitisinspeakingtheirwordthatpeople,bynamingtheworld,
transformit,dialogueimposesitselfasthewaybywhichtheyachievesignificance
ashumanbeings”(Freire,1993,p.69).Creatingamatrix,istheactofnamingthe
world.Thedenialofthisactionistheenforcementofpredeterminedmatriceson
culturalgroups,opperationallyknownascolonialism.
ThematrixthatSotz’ilhasdevelopedcomesfromtheirdeliberaterecoveryof
buriedMayahistories.Beforetheybegancreatingart,theybeganbuildingthe
matrixfromwhichtheywouldcreate.Theyexplainintheirmanual,“sincewe
startedourjourneyasmusicaldancers,wehavebeensearching.Searchinginthe
Mayacodices,searchinginiconography,inbooks,lookingforourownlanguagefor
dance,formusic,fromourrace”(GrupoSotz’il,p.8,2015).HeidiMckinnonexplains,
“WhenSotz’ilfirstbeganin2000,thebrothersandcousinsspentyearsstudying
classicMayatexts:thePopolWuj,TheAnnalsoftheCakchiquels,ChilamBalam,the
MemorialofSololá,theDresdenandMadridCodices,andtheRabinalAchí.They
visitedarchaeologicalsitessuchasnearbyIximche’,aswellasTikal,andCopánin
Honduras.TheymeticulouslystudiedthemuralsofBonampakandotherclassical
Mayaartandhieroglyphics”(McKinnon,2016,p.16).Theirconstructionofamatrix
wasasystemicrecoveryofwhatcolonistsandtheGuatemalangovernmenttook
fromtheircultureforcenturies.
Whatisvitalinunderstandinghowthismatrixoperatesisthatitisnota
stagnantrecreationofthepast.Rather,bothSotz’ilandElasasspointtothematrix
asanadaptiveandlivingentity,respondingandrelatingtotheworldarounditand
operatingasaframethroughwhichtheworldcanbecritiquedandrenamed.Freire
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
9
wouldpointtothedialogicalnatureofthematrix.Elsassdescribes,“itisnotthe
matrixassuchthatinsuressurvival.Ratheritisthewayinwhichtheculturescreate
aninterplaybetweenthematrixandthesurroundingsociety”(1992,p.177).To
understandthewayinwhichthisinterplayworks,Iwillcomparetheworkof
Sotz’il’sIxkikwithotherproductions,deemed“folkloric.”
FolkloreinContext
InherexplorationofLatinAmericantheatreinTheatreofCrisis(1991),
DianaTaylorcritiquestheargumentmadebyFirstWorldtheoriststhatLatin
Americantheatreisfolkloricorawatereddowncopyofoutsidetheatreforms.
Instead,sheposestheideathattheatreofLatinAmericaoperatesasaformof
transculturation.Shepositsthatelementsofvarioustheatreformsarepresentin
LatinAmericanotthroughabsorption,butratherthroughanactiveandselective
process(Taylor,1991,pp.15-16).TaylorpointstoCarenKaplan’ssummationofUlf
Hannerz’sassertionthat“marginalsocietiesarenotthepassiverecipientsofready
madeimagesandconsumergoods.Ratherthesearecomplex,sophisticatedcultures
whichfilterandmediatefirstworldimports,recreatinglocalmeanings,producing
hybridculturalartifactsandsubjects”(Kaplan,2001,p.190).Thisconceptofactive
anddeliberatetransculturationispresentintheworkofSotz’ilandisakintothe
subjectiveandself-determinedconstructionofamatrix.
Ajchowen’sperformanceofIxkikcontainedmanyelementsthatwould
recognizabletoFirstWorld,Western,orGloballyNortherntheatreaudiencesas
markersofatheatricalperformance.Theyarrangethestageinaprosceniumform.
Thefootlights(whilecandles,whichwouldnotbeallowedinmostUStheatres
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
10
becauseoffirecodes),wereeasilyidentifiableasdemarkingtheplayingareafrom
theaudience.Theprogrampresentedtherolesandtheactors,aswellasgivinga
briefsynopsisoftheplayitself.Thedirector,Barillas,trainedasatheatre
professionalattheUniversidaddeGuatemala,wherehetookcoursesthatwould
appearfamiliartomosttheatreBFAstudentsatUSinstitutions.Envisioningtheir
selectionoftheseelementsasaccidentalorunavoidabledeniesSotz’il’sagencyin
buildingtheirownculturalmatrix.Whilesomeoftheformsareborrowed,the
contentandmessagesoftheirperformancesoperatewithinauniquecontext,
deliberatelycreatedbyLisandroandotherGuarcaxfamilymemberstopresentthe
worldoftheMayacosmovision.
Tofullyunderstandhowthisisdistinctanddeliberate,itisusefultocompare
theirperformancestocompaniesthatSotz’ilhascritiquedasbeingfolkloric.Sotz’il
describestheirownperformancepracticesas“integratedexpressionand
experiencethroughmusic,dance,song,theater,cosmovision,andspiritualitybased
inthetheatricalproductionsofourancestorswheretheexpressionofartisholistic.
Culturalprinciplesandvaluesinformatotallyoriginaltheatricallanguage,
technique,andplatforminGuatemalaandMesoamerica”(Mckinnon,2010,p.18).In
contrast,DanielGuarcaxcritiquedothertheatrecompaniesthatheperceivedas
servingdifferentendsinGuatemala.Hesaid,“therearegroupsthatonlyperformfor
entertainment.InGuatemala,theyarecalledfolklorists,andtheyperformshows[of
Mayaarts]forpurelycommercialmeans,oftenpromotedbythestate”(Mckinnon,
2010,p.18).ThedismissalofLatinAmericantheatreasfolkloricisequally
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
11
damagingwhenitcomesfromSotz’ilmembersaswhenitcomesfromFirstWorld
critics.However,thecriticismstillneedstobeunpacked.
WhenGuarcaxcritiquedthepiecescreatedingovernmentsupported,forprofittheatresasfolkloric,hewasperhapspointingtoadifferenceinmatrices.The
mostobviousdifferencebetweenthetheatrecompanieshecommentedonand
Sotz’ilaretheaudienceandtheaimofthework.Asgovernmentsponsoredentities,
thoseperformancesmightbeperformedforMayapeople,butmorelikely,they
wouldbepresentedtotheLadrinopopulationorforeignersasafor-profitentity.In
contrast,Sotz’ilcreatestheirworkprimarilywiththeSololácommunityinmind.
Whiletheirperformancestour,Sotz’il’sproductionsarenotintendedorcreated
primarilytomakeaprofit,ratherthemaintenanceoftheMayacosmovisionisseen
asoneoftheultimateaims.Inthisway,the“folkloric”piecesareoperatingwithina
differentmatrix,arguablythematrixofneo-liberalism,wheretheultimateformof
utilityisprofitability.
Anotherwaytoseethedifferencesinthematricesisinhowtheyusestories
drawnfromtheMayacodices.ThematrixthatSotz’ilhascreatediscomprisedofthe
researchonMayatexts,imagesandstories.However,theirperformancesdonot
functionasastaticrepresentationofextanttexts.Rather,theyhaveusedthese
storiestocreateamatrixofunderstandingthroughwhichthecurrentconditionsof
theMayapeopleareconsideredandcritiqued.Thisisevidentinthewaythat
AjchowenenvisionedIxkik.Shewasrecognizable,butherstorywasnotaretelling
ofthePopulVuh.AjchowenintegratedIxkik’sstoryintoanewmatrix,buildinga
worldviewinwhichsheasaMayawomanisthesubject.Ixkikisnolongeragirl,but
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
12
insteadawomanandpowerfulpoliticalactivist.Shereactstotheviolenceofthe21st
century,whicharriveswearingasuit.Shebirthsadaughter,ratherthantwoHero
SonTwins.Sheherselfbattlesthedemonoftheunderworld,andhersacrificebrings
tolightthesacrificesthatMayawomenmakeeverydayforthewellbeingof
themselvesandtheirdaughters.ThematrixthatSotzilhascreatedhasananticolonialvisuality.
AccordingtoDylanA.T.Miner,“unlikevision,whichpresupposesan
apoliticalandcommonmodeofseeing,visualityrecognizesthecomplexitiesand
differentwaysoflooking”(Miner,2009,pp.177).Whenconceptualizingtheideaof
ananti-colonialvisuality,Minerexplainsthat“colonialvisionalwaysplacesthe
aboriginalwithinthegazeofthesettler.TheIndigenoussubjectfunctionsmerelyas
theobjectofvision,almostexclusivelybelongingtothesettlers.Tofullycombatthis
legacyofoppression,onemustinvertthisprocessandreinserttheNativeas
visionaryandsubjectwiththeabilitytopartakeinvisualpower”(Miner,2009,
pp.177-178).WhilethetermsAboriginalandIndigenousareultimatelytiedinwith
colonialism(andoffertheirownopportunitiesforcritique),thecontrastbetweena
colonialvisualityandananti-colonialvisualityisausefulwayofunderstandingthe
differencesbetweenSotz’il’sworkandthatofmorefolklorictheatrepresentations.
Sotz’il’svisualitystandsincontrasttothestatesponsored“folkloric”Maya
theatricalpresentations,whichreproducepre-colonialtextsasmummifiedforms.
Thesepresentations,whilemasqueradingasarepresentationofMayaculture,reify
thestatusquoofthegovernment.Theypresenttheworldthroughthematrixof
neoliberalism,functioningasprofitableenterprisesfortheperformers,andreifying
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
13
thenotionsupportedbythestatethattheMayapeopleareofthepast,somethingto
belookedbackuponfromamodernvantagepoint.Thisis,ineffectaneoliberalor
neocolonialvisuality,perpetuatingtheconceptofMayapeopleasobjects.
Survivance
Itisvitaltonotethattheaforementionedevaluationoffolklorictheatreisnot
asimplenotionofgoodandbad,rightandwrong.GeraldVizenor’sconceptof
survivance,whichspeakstotheresilienceandresistanceofIndigenouspeoplein
thefaceofchangesandthreats,allowsroomtounderstandhowboththose
performinginthefolkloricpiecesandthoseperformingwithSotz’ilareengagedina
formofresilientpractice.Survivance,isatermusedtodescribethewaysinwhich
Indigenousgroupspersist,despitepersecution.MaryLouisePrattsummarizes
Vizenor’sconceptofsurvivanceas“aresilient,resistantcommitmentto(one’s)own
vital,creativeunfoldingovertimeandinplace(Pratt,2016).Inthisway,boththe
workofGrupoSotz’ilandanyMayaperformersinvolvedinthefolkloric
performancessponsoredbythestateserveasameansofvitalandcreative
unfolding.Performersinbothgroupsmustprovidefood,clothes,andshelterfor
themselvesandtheirfamilies.Thosewhoworkwiththestatemaybeoperating
withinadifferentmatrix,buttheirabilitytoprofitandsustainthemselvesandtheir
familiesthroughthismatrixandtheretellingofMayastoriesdemonstrates
survivance.Sotz’il’sworkisalsoaformofsurvivance,astheyworktomaintainthe
cultureasawhole.Theybothcomewiththeirownbenefits,andasSotz’ilknows
intimately,theirowncosts.
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
14
AliciaSen,theactresswhoportrayedIxkikintheproductionbyAjchowen,is
deeplyawareoftheresistancethathercompanyispracticingandthethreattotheir
ownsurvival(andsurvivance).InAugustof2010,Alicia’shusbandandthefounder
ofGrupoSotz’il,LisandroGuarcax,waskidnapped,torturedandmurdered,along
withthreeofhisfamilymembers.Themessagedeliveredbythesemurderswas
clear:theconstructionandrepresentationofaMayamatrixisnotaneutralact,and
ispowerfulenoughtoposeathreattothosewhohopetomaintainthecolonial
matrix.Whilethedirectperpetratorsofthisviolencehavebeenprosecuted,those
responsibleforhiringthemarestillatlarge.
Inspiteofthispersonaltrauma,AliciaformedtheallfemalebranchofSotz’il,
Ajchowenasalivingtestamenttoherlatehusband.AsIwatchedherperform,
movingthroughthedancesofIxkik,Ithoughtofthesecondmechanismofcultural
resilience.Aliciaisamodelofresilienceinthefaceofpainandrisk,anditisdifficult
toimaginethatherparticipationinSotz’ildidnotcontributetoherindividualability
tocontinuemovingforward,despitegreatloss.However,thatsecondmechanismof
resilienceagainisbeyondthereachofthispapertodetermine.
Conclusion
TheworkofGrupoSotz’ilservesavitalroleintheSololácommunityand
presentsamodelforhowindigenoustheatreforms,whenactivelyconstructed
throughtheprocessesoftransculturationandmatrixproduction,mayoperateas
mechanismsofculturalresilience.Sotz’ilisamodelofMayasurvivance,utilizingan
anti-colonialvisualitytoensurethattheMayaculturecontinuestobevisibleand
vitalthroughthe21stcentury.
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
15
Bibliography
AggabaoThelen,C.(2010,September1).ThesignificanceandbrillianceofSotz’il:
EmbodyingMayaLiberation.
Ajchowen.(2013,June).Ixkik.Performance,Sotz’ilJay.
DzulEk,C.A.(1992).Elautodefeochoquededosculturas.Tramoya,33,57–62.
Elsass,P.(1992).Strategiesforsurvival:thepsychologyofculturalresilienceinethnic
minorities.NewYork:NewYorkUniversityPress.
Freire,P.(1993).Pedagogyoftheoppressed(Newrev.20th-Anniversaryed).New
York:Continuum.
GrupoSotz’il.(2015).Ati’tXajoj:DanzandoconlaAbuela.(ChelseaHackett,Trans.).
GrupoSotz’il.
Kaplan,C.(2001).Deterritorializations.InS.L.Roberson(Ed.),Definingtravel:
diversevisions(pp.190–199).Jackson:UniversityPressofMississippi.
Lalonde,C.(n.d.).DRAFT:IdentityFormationandCulturalResilienceinAboriginal
Communities.Uvic.ca.
Masten,A.S.(2014).GlobalPerspectivesonResilienceinChildrenandYouth.Child
Development,85(1),6–20.http://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12205
McKinnon,H.(2016,Spring).Dancingwithfire:Themajecsticanddangerouswork
ofGrupoSotz’il.FirstAmericanArt:ArtofIndigenousPeoplesoftheAmericas
Magazine,6,16–24.
WeDon’tDoArtforArt’sSake
16
Miner,D.A.T.(2009).Whentheyawaken:indigeneity,miscegenation,and
anticolonialvisuality.InD.Baca&V.Villanueva(Eds.),Rhetoricsofthe
Americas(pp.169–195).PalgraveMacmillan.Retrievedfrom
http://www.myilibrary.com?id=276517
OrganizacionTips.(n.d.).CornandtheMaya.RetrievedMay14,2015,from
http://www.mayadiscovery.com/Ing/history/corn.htm
Pratt,M.L.(2016).Mobilityandthepoliticsofbelonging:Indigenousexperimentsin
creativecitizenship.InResistancestrategies.Scalar.Retrievedfrom
http://scalar.usc.edu/works/resistant-strategies/mobility-and-the-politicsof-belonging-indigenous-experiments-in-creative-citizenship
Rodriguez,J.(2010).500YearsofResistance.(M.Ramirez-Cancio&D.Rogers
Valenzuela,Trans.).
Taylor,D.(1991).Theatreofcrisis:dramaandpoliticsinLatinAmerica.Lexington,
Ky:UniversityPressofKentucky.
TheCenterforJusticeandAccountability.(n.d.).SilentHolocaust:theMaya
genocide.RetrievedMay16,2016,fromhttp://cja.org/where-wework/guatemala/
Weld,K.(2014).PapercadaversthearchivesofdictatorshipinGuatemala.Retrieved
from
http://ezproxy.usherbrooke.ca/login?url=http://lib.myilibrary.com?ID=580
682