Testimonio: On The Politics Of Truth

by John Beverley

These four germinal essays by John Beverley sparked the widespread discussion and debate surrounding testimonio--the socially and politically charged Latin American narrative of witnessing--that culminated, with David Stoll's highly publicized attack on Rigoberta Menchu's celebrated testimonial text. Challenging Hardt and Negri's "Empire, Beverley's extensive new introduction examines the broader historical, political, and ethical issues that this literature raises, tracing the development of testimonio from its emergence in the Cold War era to the rise of a globalized economy and of U.S. political hegemony. Informed by postcolonial studies and the current debate over multiculturalism and identity politics, "Testimonio reaches across disciplinary boundaries to show how this particular literature at once represents and enacts new forms of agency on the part of previously repressed social subjects, as well as its potential as a new form of "alliance politics" between those subjects and artists, scientists, teachers, and intellectuals in a variety of local, national, and international contexts.

144 pages, Paperback

First published June 14, 2004

Reviews

[Norma · Rating 5 out of 5]

"the argument between Menchu and Stoll is not so much about what really happened as it is about who has the authority to narrate. What seems to bother Stoll...is that Menchu has an agenda. He wants her to be a "native informant," who will lend herself to his purposes" (p. 81, Beverley).

--Should people giving testimony be mediated by intellectual representation?

In the book, Beverly makes those differences pretty clear. He thinks Stoll is wrong for assuming that Menchu (an indigenous Guatemalan) needs interpretation by the intellectual. I can see that Stoll would want to use subalterns as raw material for his own interpretations, given his political inclinations and his issue concerning "truth." Beverley and Spivak don't just want to use the subaltern as "raw material"--by endorsing Testimonio or organic intellectuals, they are trying to find some middle ground between the subaltern and the intellectual. Stoll is not doing that? All theorists advance their own agendas. The question is How they advance their agendas. In addition, there is the issue of subtext and without the subaltern's input there goes any hope in catching errors in the writings. I don't believe that without the input of the subaltern--the hegemonic would end up reading faulty information. Thus, some middle ground must be found, and this is what, to some degree, Beverly is trying to do.

[Lauren · Rating 5 out of 5]

An extremely important, foundational text for anyone interested in Latin American testimonios. Useful for students of Latin American literature, Anthropology, and/or Oral History. Highly recommended.