{"id":267,"date":"2021-05-05T19:47:07","date_gmt":"2021-05-05T19:47:07","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/23\/?p=267"},"modified":"2023-03-15T11:22:20","modified_gmt":"2023-03-15T11:22:20","slug":"creating-in-between-times-and-identities-expressions-of-contemporary-theatre-in-guatemala","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.critical-stages.org\/23\/creating-in-between-times-and-identities-expressions-of-contemporary-theatre-in-guatemala\/","title":{"rendered":"Creating In-between Times and Identities: Expressions of Contemporary Theatre in Guatemala"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Regina Solis Miranda<\/strong>*<\/a> and Luis Antonio Morales Rodr\u00edguez<\/strong>**<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Abstract<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

Theatricality in contemporary Guatemala has its own poetics shaped by a tense interaction of multiple identities in a context defined by enforced colonial logic. By recognizing Mayan and Ladino\/mestizo theatrical trends, we can explore alternative ways of thinking that shape contemporary artistic production in the country.
Keywords: <\/strong>identity, xajoj, Ladino\/mestizo theatre, decolonialization, Guatemala<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Theatrical Trends in Guatemala<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

To fully understand contemporary theatre in Guatemala, we must first acknowledge the numerous origins and expressions of identity that converge in a small territory, which Guatemalan artists refer to as \u201cthe scenic as consolidation of signs and meanings and their connection with the social events that occurred in Guatemala\u201d[1]<\/sup><\/a> (J.H. Carrillo Padilla 209).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Although Central America gained independence in 1821, the categories created during the colonial era to identify diverse populations are still in use in Guatemala, thus reinforcing a racist interethnic dynamic. According to the latest census of 2018, 42% of the population considers itself Mayan and 56% as Ladino<\/em>, a category that emerged in the seventeenth century to designate mestizo groups (Taracena). The term Ladino<\/em> was later popularized through the state and municipal apparatus with the political aim of creating a homogeneous identity that denied indigenous roots and promoted a model of citizenship which consolidated the nation-state. Two hundred years after independence from Spain, these categories continue to frame the theatrical work in the country, which fluctuates between the recovery of memory and the imposition of a paradigm of modernity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In the 1970s, Hugo Carrillo argued in Origins and Development of Guatemalan Theatre<\/em> that Guatemalan theatre was composed of two simultaneous dramatic trends: the indigenous trend, which Carrillo views as popular theatre, based on its ancient pre-colonial Mayan origin and colonial influence, and the Ladino\/mestizo trend based on European tradition institutionalized by the 1944 Guatemalan Revolution (39). Carrillo characterizes the indigenous theatre as one of resistance, giving it an underground character and relegating it mainly to the rural regions of the western part of the country. To this theatrical trend, ancestral cosmogonic and spiritual elements are attributed. On the other hand, the Ladino\/mestizo theatrical tradition is enacted in the cities and focuses on the daily concerns of Ladinos.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

More recent theatrical analyses, such as that of Jorge Hugo Carrillo Padilla, bypass this binary classification and represent the theatrical tradition in Guatemala as unitary, exclusive to academic and institutional settings in the cities. Although Carrillo recognizes the impact of Guatemalan political history on theatrical work, following the tradition of a colonial state, he tacitly excludes the stage manifestations of the Mayan people.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is important to note that Guatemalan theatrical analysis has been produced mainly by Ladino\/mestizo people, further skewing the interpretation of what transpires on stage. For this reason, voices such as that of the theatre director, actor and cultural manager Reyes Josu\u00e9 Morales are needed to broaden the panorama and enable a reconceptualization of entrenched categories.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reyes Josu\u00e9 Morales defines Guatemalan theatre based on his experience in the west of the country (106), a primarily Mayan region where theatrical production is developed without public policies, budgets or theatre rooms. Morales problematizes the use of the word theatre<\/em> based on what he calls “a historical-aesthetic connotation that in a restricted sense can leave out many important manifestations.” He conceives of a continuous line of theatricalities that stem from the efforts of Departmental Theatre Shows, which began in the 1970s[2]<\/sup><\/a> and continued to flourish through processes of ethnic and political vindication.[3]<\/sup><\/a> Some contemporary groups have successfully reappropriated traditional dances of ancestral origin, or indigenous dance-dramas as he calls them, and erase the borders imposed by hegemonic authorities for the study of the performing arts. Mayan theatre productions in Guatemala are nurtured by the tradition of telling stories through dialogue, movements and music.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Mayan theatre, also called xajoj<\/em>[4]<\/sup><\/a> following the idiomatic tradition of some Mayan communities, is diverse but maintains shared elements such as the representation of social problems, the commitment to collective creation, the influence of Mayan theatricalities and use of training from informal non-scholarly sources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

These two streams, Ladino\/mestizo theatre and Mayan theatre, differ primarily in their intentionality and scope. For Luis Carlos Pineda (Teatro<\/em> 5), the diversity of context, social classes and cultural groups increases the impact of theatre in the country, not because it appeals to mass audiences but because it recognizes theatricalities that, in other circumstances, might not be considered theatre. However, the means of outreach and dissemination are determined in part by requirements of staging. For example, xajoj<\/em> theatre has a high community outreach, and commercial theatre can sustain long blockbuster seasons, while independent and experimental theatre still lacks recognition from the general public, yet offers a unique perspective that contributes significantly to Guatemalan theater in general.<\/p>\n\n\n

\n
\"\"
\u201cXajoj Tun\/Rabinal Ach\u00ed.\u201d Photo: Guatemalan Ministry of Culture and Sports<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n
Xajoj<\/em><\/strong><\/em>: An Approach to Mayan Theatrical Poetics<\/strong><\/h5>\n\n\n\n

In the territory known today as Guatemala, dramatic expressions were common prior to the Spanish invasion and subsequent trauma. Hugo Carrillo  points out, as indigenous populations have claimed for centuries, that Mayan forms of drama were persecuted by the settlers and their Eurocentric logic, which led to the imposition of their understanding of drama (41). Carrillo posits a discontinuity between the ancestral Mayan and contemporary expressions of Mayan art, and while he recognizes the complexity, antiquity and profundity of Mayan dramatic manifestations, he resorts to categorizing them simplistically as \u201cGuatemalan popular theatre.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Reyes Josu\u00e9 Morales calls xajoj<\/em> a \u201ctheatre of indigenous or Mayan matrix\u201d and describes it as a manifestation of a \u201ccomplex network of cultural, ritual, scenic, bodily practices, aesthetic conceptions, material registers of thought, philosophical concepts, etc., from which scenic works with different characteristics have emerged\u201d (106). He lists some historical processes that have deeply impacted these Mayan scenic practices, for example, the demonization of the indigenous by Spanish invaders, the imposition of Christianity, the folklorization of their artistic proposals and the threat of NGO-ization. Morales sees indigenous matrix theatre as a living animal that walks between various times; hence, to fully understand it, the viewer must recognize and reflect on the continuity of Mayan culture in a globalized context.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Luis Carlos Pineda (\u201cTeatro Plural\u201d 196\u201398) creates three categories to describe the different streams within the Mayan theatre. These are the ancestral xajoj<\/em>, described as an ancient tradition prior to colonial invasion with an unaltered cosmogonic and ritual sense, the syncretic xajoj<\/em>, which hides elements of Mayan tradition, due to conflicts with the Spanish, in theatrical performances of European style, and the new xajoj<\/em>, associated with the Oxlajuj B’aqtun<\/em>[5]<\/sup><\/a> and the \u201cnew era.\u201d Although theatre in Guatemala finds institutional niches as a result of the 1944 Revolution, these were of benefit primarily to mestizo theatre, due to the folklorist and exoticist perspective on Mayan art. It is important to note that the documentation and analysis of theatrical productions in the country have precluded performances by Xinka and Afro communities, populations made invisible in the State\u2019s official narrative.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The recognition of xajoj<\/em> and its construction as dance-theatre (that is, theatre performed through dance and music which creates its own scenic system) was prioritized by the artist and educator Lisandro Guarcax, founding member of the Sotz’il Jay cultural centre, who was brutally murdered in 2010. Grupo Sotz’il<\/em><\/a> was created in 2000 with the aim of \u201crecovering cultural roots through research and the promotion of pre-Hispanic Mayan music and dance\u201d (Grupo Sotz’il). The reflections on Mayan art promoted by Sotz\u2019il have been projected into other spaces, where such art forms have materialized as collective community creations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

In response to Guarcax’s assassination, several groups of artists reacted through their creative work; their collective spirit led to the creation of the Movimiento de Artistas Mayas Ruk\u2019ux<\/em><\/a>, a group of artists devoted to the discussion and conceptualization of Mayan art, particularly the theatre. This platform gave way to the emergence of Mayan theatre groups such as Mujeres Ajchowen<\/em><\/a>; these pioneering artists, by boldly claiming the theatricality of Mayan women, broke away from mainstream paradigms of the performing arts in an openly racist and sexist country. Thus, new generations of young Mayans who are increasingly linked to the arts have become fertile receptors of the seed of theatre as a means to develop their political awareness, ethnolinguistic identity and organizational savvy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

\n