Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rcrh6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T01:57:29.310Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modernizing Message, Mystical Messenger: The Teatro Petul in the Chiapas Highlands, 1954-1974

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2015

Stephen E. Lewis
Stephen E. Lewis*
Affiliation:
California State University, Chico, Chico, California
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The Mexican government's National Indigenist Institute (Instituto Nacional Indigenista, or INI) was at a crossroads in early 1954. Three years after opening its pilot Indigenist Coordinating Center (Centro Coordinador Indigenista, or CCI) in San Cristóbal de Las Casas, Chiapas, the INI had managed to launch several development projects in the highlands despite the hostility of local ladinos (non-Indians) and the indifference and distrust of most Tzeltal and Tzotzil Maya communities. The INI operated nearly fifty bilingual schools, called Literacy Centers, but attendance figures were low, especially for girls. It had built four medical clinics, but most highland Maya still turned to shamans when they fell ill. Although water-borne and flea-borne diseases ravaged the indigenous population on a seasonal basis, most Tzeltals and Tzotzils resisted the INI's vaccination and hygiene campaigns and refused to permit the encasement of their sacred springs. The INI also had trouble selling its consumer cooperatives. In short, it had established a foothold in a complicated region, but most Tzeltals and Tzotzils were reluctant to embrace its development programs.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Americas , Volume 67 , Issue 3 , January 2011 , pp. 375 - 397
Copyright
Copyright © Academy of American Franciscan History 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

I wish to thank the David W. Lantis University Professorship at California State University, Chico for supporting this project. In Mexico City, I was inspired and guided by Ángel Baltazar Caballero and Margarita Sosa Suárez, both employees of the Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas (formerly INI). A 2007 panel on puppets at the Rocky Mountain Conference on Latin American Studies—and the lively discussion that followed—provided insights that improved this article, as did the comments of the anonymous reviewer for The Americas. Last of all, thanks to Bill Bcezley for coordinating this special issue.

1. After about 1960, once the INI had established several other Coordinating Centers, monthly reports become increasingly bureaucratic and acritical.

2. “Los materiales audiovisuales,” Acción Indigenista, no. 13 (July 1954).

3. Sánchez claims that there were five original puppeteers: two mestizas, a Zinacanteca, a Zinacanteco, and himself (from Ixtapa). See Teodoro, Sánchez S., Alma del teatro Guiñol Petal. Autobiografìa de Teodoro Sánchez S. (Tuxtla Gutiérrez: Talleres Gráficos del Estado, 1993), p. 48.Google Scholar

4. Archivo Histórico del Centro Coordinador Indígena Tzeltal-Tzotzil (hereafter AHCCITT), Sección Educación, Ser: Dirección, See: Educación, 14-1953/1, “Lingüística;” and Cario Antonio Castro Α., “Làs metas del Teatro Petul,” in Educación, Lingüística y Ayudas Visuales del Centro Coordinador Tzeltal Tzotzil Serie Mimeográfica No. 11, cds. Fidencio Montes Sánchez, Onofre Montes R., y Andres Santiago M. (México: INI, 1955), p. 2.

5. Sánchez, , Alma del teatro Guiñol Petul, pp. 57–58.Google Scholar

6. Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas, Centro de Documentación “Juan Rulfo” (CDICDJR), Informes del Centro Coordinador Indigenista Tzeltal-Tzotzil (hereafter ICCITT), 1954, “Informe de la actividades desarrolladas durante el mes de septiembre de 1954,” by Andrés Santiago Montes, Sept. 20, 1954, p. 400. Note: aH annual reports (“Informes”) are housed in the CDICDJR and will appear hereafter as “ICCITT,” followed by the year.

7. ICCITT, 1954, “Informe de noviembre de 1954,” by Director de Educación Profesor Fidencio Montes Sánchez, p. 539.

8. ICCITT, 1954, “Informe de los trabajos efectuados durante el mes de noviembre por el grupo de Teatro Guignol bajo la dirección de Marco Antonio Montero, en el CCITT del INI,” dated Dec. 6, 1954. Montero had the INI print the verses of the round and distribute them to various promoters.

9. Acción Indigenista: Boletín Mensual del Instituto Nacional Indigenista, no. 24 (June 1955).

10. The INI’s Health division used literally tons of soap with 10% DDT in its campaigns.

11. Acción Indigenista, no. 24 (2–3), June 1955. The original in Spanish reads as follows: “Somos la Brigada/ de la Sanidad/Mueran los microbios/y la suciedad./Si quieres curarte/de la comezón/Tienes que bañarte/con agua y jabón./Deberás peinarte /tu pelo lavar/Siempre preocuparte/por dedetizar./Ύ así con limpieza/feliz vivirás/Pues ya tu cabeza/nunca rascarás.“

12. The INI’s clash with the Pedrero alcohol monopoly is told in Stephen E. Lewis, “La guerra del posh, 195154: un conflicto decisivo entre el Instituto Nacional Indigenista, el monopolio del alcohol y el gobierno del estado de Chiapas“, Mesoamérica 46 (Jan.-Dec, 2004), pp. 111–134. Julio de la Fuente, the CCI’s director in 1952, led an exhaustive study of alcoholism and the alcohol monopoly in Chiapas in 1954–55; see Monopolio de aguardiente y alcoholismo en Chiapas: Un estudio “incómodo” de Julio de la Fuente eds. Stephen, Lewis, E. and Margarita, Sosa Suárez (Mexico, D.F.: Comisión Nacional para el Desarrollo de los Pueblos Indígenas, 2009).Google Scholar For a more contemporary discussion of alcohol in the Chiapas highlands, see Eber, Christine, Women and Alcohol in a Highland Town (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1995).Google Scholar

13. ICCITT, 1954, “Informe de los trabajos efectuados durante el mes de noviembre por el grupo de teatro guig-nol bajo la dirección de Marco Antonio Montero, en el Centro Coordinador Tzeltal-Tzotzü del I.N.I.,” p. 552.

14. Ibid., pp. 552–553.

15. Ibid.

16. Acción Indigenista, no. 24 (June 1955), p. 1.

17. Rus, Jan, “Whose Caste War? Indians, Ladinos, and the Chiapas ‘Caste War’ of 1869,” in Spaniards and Indians in Southeastern Mesoamerica: Essays on the History of Ethnic Relations eds. MacLeod, Murdo J. and Wasser-strom, Robert (Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1983), pp. 144–45.Google Scholar

18. AHCCITT, 1954, Ser: Dirección, Sec: Educación, 1954, Exp. 19–1954/2, “Las prioridades del Teatro Petul.”

19. Fidcncio, Montes S., “Apertura educativa en los Altos de Chiapas” in El indigenismo en acción: XXV aniversario del Centro Coordinador Indigenista Tzeltal-Tzoîzil, Chiapas eds. Aguirre Beltrán, Gonzalo, Villa Rojas, Alfonso, Romano, Agustín et. al. (México: INI and SEP, 1976), p. 88.Google Scholar It is worth noting that a hand-puppet troupe in San Juan Chamula today calls itself the “Petul Xun” theatre.

20. Castellanos, Rosario and Montero, Marco Antonio, with illustrations by Mexiac, Adolfo, Teatro Petul Vol. 1 (México: INI, 1958), p. 4.Google Scholar

21. Montero, Marco Antonio, “Petul visita el INI,” in Castellanos, and Montero, , 9–23.Google Scholar On Grajales’s campaign against the Catholic Church and religion in general, see Stephen, E.Lewis, The Ambivalent Revolution: Forging State and Nation in Chiapas, 1910–1945 (Albuquerque: University of New Mexico Press, 2005), pp. 67–80;Google Scholar and Ríos Figueroa, Julio, Siglo XX: muerte y resurrección de la Iglesia Católica en Chiapas (México: UNAM/PROIMMSE, 2002), pp. 73–109.Google Scholar

22. ICCITT, 1956, “Informe de labores correspondiente al mes de noviembre de 1956,” by César Tejeda Fon-seca, dated from SCLC, Dec. 10, 1956.

23. Interview, Agustín Romano Delgado, Mexico City, 16 January, 1995.

24. ICCITT, 1962, Teodoro Sánchez Sánchez, “Informe,” cited in “Informe de labores realizadas en el Depto. de Ayudas Visuales durante el mes de febrero de 1962,” by Marcelino Jiménez, Jefe del Depto. de Ayudas Visuales, p. 222.

25. Castellanos, Rosario, “Petul, promotor sanitario,” in Rosario Castellanos, Teatro Petul, V. 3 (México: INI, 1963), pp. 5–14.Google Scholar

26. Favre, Henri, Cambio y continuidad entre los Mayas de Mexico (México: INI, 1984[1971]), p. 363;Google Scholar see also Holland, William, Medicina maya en los altos. Un estudio de cambio sociocultttral (México: INI, 1963 [1962]).Google Scholar

27. ICCITT, 1959, “Informe anual, 1959,” Vol. 2, p. 54.

28. Castellanos, Rosario, “Petul en la campaña antialcóhlica,” in Castellanos, , Teatro Petul, Vol. 3 (México: INI, 1962), pp. 17–28.Google Scholar

29. Castellanos, Rosario, “Petul y el diablo extranjero,” in Castellanos, Rosario, with illustrations by Mexiac, Adolfo, Teatro Petul, vol. 2 (México: INI, 1961).Google Scholar

30. ICCITT, 1956, from Prof. Onofre Montes Ríos, dated Oct. 5, 1956.

31. Castellanos and Montero, Teatro Petal, p. 8.

32. ICCITT, 1962, enero-febrero, “Informe,” by Teodoro Sánchez Sánchez, cited in “Informe de labores realizadas en el Depto. de Ayudas Visuales durante el mes de febrero de 1962,” by Marcelino Jiménez, Jefe del Depto. de Ayudas Visuales, Las Casas, Chis., p. 223.

33. ICCITT, 1962, p. 224.

34. ICCITT, I960: 2, “Informe del mes de mayo” from Teodoro Sánchez Sánchez, June 17, 1960, pp. 69–70.

35. Castellanos and Montero, Teatro Petul, p. 3.

36. “Sección audiovisual en el Papaloapan,” Acción Indigenista, no. 69 (March 1959).

37. ICCITT, 1963: 3, “Informe correspondiente al mes de junio de 1963,” from Dir. of Depto. de Ayudas Visuales Marcelino Jiménez, quoting at length from Teodoro Sánchez Sánchez, head of the Tzeltal group.

38. AHCCITT, I960, Ser. Dirección, Sección Ayudas Visuales, 1960, 1–1960/1.

39. AHCCITT, Serie Dirección, Sección Ayudas Visuales, 1–1970/1, “Informes originales, 1962–70,” from Pedro Pérez Pérez to Dir. of Depto. of Ayudas Visuales, Nov. 4, 1965.

40. Ibid., from Pedro Pérez Pérez to Marcelino Jiménez Uribe, Jefe del Depto. de Ayudas Visuales, dated from Las Casas, July 4, 1966.

41. Ibid., from Pérez to Marcelino Jiménez, dated April 18, 1967, and May 11, 1967.

42. AHCCITT, Serie Dirección, Sección Dirección, 1010–1973/6.

43. AHCCITT, Serie Dir., Sección Dir., 1974, 81–1974/4, from Antrop. Raúl Rodríguez Ramos to Agustín Romano, Dec. 23, 1974

44. Cato, Susana, “La historia del teatro guiñol de Chiapas de Marco Antonio Montero y Rosario Castellanos,” Proceso 905 (7 March 1994), 62.Google Scholar

45. The most emphatic critique is a collection of essays by Warman, Arturo, Bonfil, Guillermo, Nolasco, Margarita, Olivera, Mercedes and Valencia, Enrique entitled De eso que llaman antropología mexicana (México: Editorial Nuestro Tiempo, 1970);Google Scholar see also La quiebra politica en ¡a antropología social en México II. La polarización (1971–1976) eds. Carlos García Mora and Andrés Medina (México: UNAM, 1986).

46. Navarrete Cáceres, Carlos, Rosario Castellanos: su presencia en la antropología mexicana (México, DF: UNAM/PROIMMSE, 2007), p. 19.Google Scholar