In 5 pages this paper discusses the autobiography of Rigoberta Menchu in terms of the controversy which surrounds it in a slave narrative, political polemic, and experiential statistical analysis. Two sources are cited in the bibliography.
Name of Research Paper File: JL5_JLrigo.rtf
Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
doubt which has been cast on the veracity of the account, but the function of the narrative itself. In other words, is the most important aspect of the whole issue
the possibility that Rigoberta was perpetrating a Communist-inspired hoax, as has been asserted by critics such as Horowitz (2002) or the fact that her story illustrates a deeper and more
important aspect of the relationship between indigenous peoples and their colonisers.
The autobiography could certainly be seen as falling into the classic pattern of the slave narrative, an account written to alert whites to the realities of the institution of slavery
as well as the innate humanity of black people, as those who were equally deserving of civil rights and humane treatment by other sectors of the population. Slave narratives were,
at the time, often dismissed as anti-slavery propaganda and it is probably fair to say that the terms in which they were couched left no doubt that no aspect of
the institution could be seen as positive. Similarly, it would be reasonable to suppose that any account of the ill-treatment or cultural exploitation of Guatemalans would not focus on any
benefits which had been gained from the experience, since this would be counter-productive in terms of the effect on the reader.
From this standpoint, the question arises as to whether the truthfulness of Rigobertas account of her life is the central issue,
or the facts that events similar to those she describes did in fact occur. In other words, if Horowitz is correct in saying that Rigoberta is telling an outright lie