Rosario_rodriguez_18_dec

DE MESTIZAJES, INDIGENISMOS, NEOINDIGENISMOS Y OTROS:
LA TERCERA ORILLA
(SOBRE LA LITERATURA ESCRITA EN CASTELLANO EN BOLIVIA)

by

Rosario Rodríguez Márquez
Licenciatura en Literatura. Universidad Mayor de San Andrés, La Paz-Bolivia 1982
Master of Arts, University of Pittsburgh, 1992

Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of
Arts and Sciences in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for thedegree of
PhD in Hispanic Languages and Literatures

University of Pittsburgh
2008

UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
ARTS AND SCIENCES

This dissertation was presented
By
Rosario Rodríguez Márquez
It was defended on
Novermber, 18
and approved by
John Beverley, PhD,
Professor of Spanish and Latin American Literature and Cultural Studies
Hermann Herlinghaus, PhD,
Professor of Latin American Literature andCultural Studies
Aníbal Pérez, PhD,
Associate Professor of Political Science
Elizabeth Monasterios, PhD,
Associate Professor of Latin American Literature and Chair of the Department

ii

De mestizajes, indigenismos, neoindigenismos y otros: la tercera orilla
(sobre la literatura escrita en castellano en Bolivia)
Rosario Rodríguez Márquez, PhD
University of Pittsburgh, 2008

The dissertation arisesfrom the hypothesis that the perspective of indigenism is
indispensable as a guiding thread in the reading of a variety of Bolivian literary expressions, now
impacted by formulas of literature written in Spanish as well as by modern and postmodern
urban culture. There are two main strands that are woven into this reading: one that works to
weave in detail each of the works chosen; the other thatsearches to intertwine the connections
that unite those different works, holding in perspective, in both strands, a place of contact
between basically the two cultures: Andean indigenous and Westernized.
It affirms that both the canonical indigenous positions as well as the proposals of mestizaje
that operate by omission of the indigenous make themselves apparent in two of the most
importantnovels of the Bolivian literary historiography: Juan de la Rosa (1885) and Raza de bronce
(1919). The first operates through omission of the indigenous by erasing the Indian from the
novelistic epic; the second, by superimposing on the Indian vision a series of mediations that end
up blurring that vision in front of the reader, allowing only the narrator’s view. Therefore, both
function around anauthoritarian narrator and operate in a similar fashion both discursively and
ideologically regarding the Indian. Instead, Yanakuna (1952), which is considered in general as
part of orthodox indigenism and a mere repetition of its principles and denunciations, denotes

iii

important breaks in relation to the two aforementioned works and to other novels of orthodox
indigenism. In it, theinterweaving of literature and politics marks an enrichment of the discourse.
Counter-representational or de-representational postures and strategies of reversion are
achieved through actively discordant textualities in relation to earlier classical indigenist
propositions in the four other narratives under study: Manchay Puytu, el amor que quiso ocultar dios
(1977); Manuel y Fortunato: una picaresca andina(1997); Chojcho con audio de rock p’sshado (1993) and
Cuando Sara Chura despierte (2003). These works offer an “other” way of looking that makes
possible the “translation” of diversity.

iv

TABLA DE CONTENIDOS

1.0

2.0

INTRODUCCIÓN ………………………………………………………………….. 1
1.1

CONVITE …………………………………………………………………… 1

1.2

REPENSANDO EL INDIGENISMO ………………………………………. 7
1.2.1

Indigenismo y mestizaje………………………………………………. 7

1.2.2

Un poco de historia ……………………………………………………9

1.2.3

Monoculturalismo, pluricultural e interculturalidad ……………………17

1.2.4

En torno al neoindigenismo ………………………………………….. 19

1.2.5

Lo real maravilloso latinoamericano ………………………………….. 24

LAS NARRATIVAS DE EXCLUSIÓN ……………………………………………...30
2.1

Raza de bronce: EL NARRADOR PROBLEMÁTICO …………………………31
2.1.1

Antecedentes: la lectura...