Literal and Metaphorical Explosions

Today a gas station exploded in downtown Viña. As far as I know no one has died, but some people are wounded. I was in Valpo, but my host mom and sister heard the explosion all the way at the house – it must have been pretty powerful. If no one dies it will be a miracle, the station was at a busy intersection.

Today in Gendered History of Latin America (not sure how to shorten this name…our professor is calling it LAW for Latin American Women, but it’s technically gendered history, which is not feminist history?) we discussed an article detailing the categories of barbarism drawn up by Bartolommeo de Las Casas to make the argument of a racial definition of Latin America. This in itself was rather interesting, since Las Casas is usually held up as the exception to the Spanish exploitation and discrimination.  One of his categories, the 2^nd type of ‘barbarian,’ indicated that the people in question had no ‘literal locution’, that is, no Latin, alphabet, or written literature. As the student in charge of leading a discussion, I thought this provoked some interesting questions. I also unintentionally hit a trigger point for our professor. I expressed some disappointment with American history in general because of a lack of written records for much of the continents’ human history; she told me to be careful of negating the value of oral tradition and listed many examples of pictographs and extensive mathematical accomplishments in Mesoamerica. Her points are valid, I certainly don’t want to suggest that indigenous Americans were not complex or intelligent, but I still have questions about this gap between written and other history. Am I simply seeing a gap between oral culture and literate culture (insert Walter J. Ong’s work here) and exhibiting my bias as a literate person? Is it like the gap between the oral culture of the poor and literate culture of the affluent in the US, magnified by a language barrier and lack of cultural similarities?  Or is there an actual difference in specificity and quantity of information between written and oral histories? How does history as modern, scientific, and very literate discipline fit in here?

The Bible might be an example of either of these problems – many of the discrepancies and hazy details are blamed on oral transmission for centuries, but it is because of the strength of these oral accounts that the Bible exists as it is at all. Myth contains truth, oral tradition certainly has value, and archeology can put a lot of pieces together – but from a modern historians’ perspective, written, contemporary texts seem more direct and specific sources, even if their content is mythological. In the Bible’s case, the question of orality (and the large and complex backstory of written codifications to contend with) doesn't particularly bother me because my purpose with the Bible is not to construct a history of the Palestine region and its people ; I am concerned with a completely other form of communication. The Bible also can be used for historical study, but usually in conjunction with other written records and evidence. For a historian trying to construct a comprehensive understanding of a past people, isn’t it easier to study China or Europe, where written records exist alongside oral, mathematical, artistic, and archeological history than to study ancient America, where only the latter forms of evidence exist? The destruction of much of indigenous American culture, people, and language doesn't make this problem any clearer. I am afraid of spouting racist or culturally insensitive views, but so far I can’t come to the conclusion that all other forms of information can entirely make up for a lack of a written language as a source for historical study. To cut to the chase: can I have a preference for written sources with any logical basis, or am I simply upset about not having one type of historical source that is traditionally relied upon in the literate world? If I hold to the former am I agreeing with Las Casas' distinction between a type of 'barbarism' and 'civilization'?  I think I need to read more about Walter J. Ong, SJ. This man might have answers. For now my head and view of history is exploding. If anyone has something to say I'd appreciate some conversation on the topic.