The character Caliban first
appears in William Shakespeare's play The Tempest. In this play,
Caliban's island is invaded, his ancestors are killed, he is enslaved and
he is taught his oppressors' language. Shakespeare uses Caliban as an anagram
for the word cannibal, a bestial type of man. From a colonizer's perspective,
Caliban needs the civilized to come and develop him and his country. Just
as "Caliban" is derived from the word "cannibal," the word "cannibal" comes
from "Carib." Retamar explains that the Carib Indians were the valiant
and warlike inhabitants of Cuba; however, the Spanish (and Columbus) sometimes
considered them to be an unnecessary part of the land. Using the many characterizations
of the fictional Caliban, Retamar writes about how the Latino can be seen
as a "true life" Caliban. He does this by recording conflicting views of
this figure in literature; more specifically, he responds to Jose Marti's
"Our America" and Argentina's Domingo Sarmiento's On colonization,
both of which discuss the mestizo, and mixing of Spanish and Indigenous
cultures.
One major issue in Retamar's essay is the conflicting representations of Caliban in Latin American and European literature. Looking at Caliban's enslavement, writers such as Rodo and Groussac believe that Caliban represents North America. These Latin American writers contend that North America, not the island, has endured exploitation. Rodo and Groussac also assert that Latin America is symbolized by Ariel, the intelligent character in The Tempest. This contrasts with the idea that association of Caliban with the island. As mentioned, the word Caliban is taken from cannibal--something evil--and this becomes a negative association for Latinos. The indigenous people of Latin America are seen in travel accounts as bestial and simple minded, so this is what supposedly gives the Europeans the right to take over the land and the people. The Europeans enforce their language and culture on the people of the island and this causes people to think that Caliban/the Latino is only a copy of the European. This compels people to believe that we have no true culture and that we are inferior.
Most importantly, Retamar uses two contrasting ideas from writer-statesmen Jose Marti and Domingo Sarmiento to discuss whether Caliban should have been conquered. Both Marti and Sarmiento believe that the indigenous people are represented by Caliban; however, their differences in opinion are striking. Marti believes in creating our own culture from the mestizos by embracing the positive characteristics of Caliban. By embracing the positive culture of the mestizo, a strong community can be formed by the people who understand the history, land and customs. Marti believes that only someone who is from the land can fully understand how to govern the land for and by the people. Marti believes that the Europeans were wrong in what they did to the people of the land, and with their exploitation came nothing but economic hardships, along with the depopulation of the land. The Europeans knew little about the land and the culture. So, then, how did they come expecting to make things better? The Europeans came to improve but left the people of the land with a social stigma, a feeling of being inferior. By means of contrast, Sarmiento believes the tactics used by the Europeans were exactly what it took to develop a prospering country. Sarmiento looked towards the United States as the ideal civilization. Sarmiento thinks that America would have been incapable of progress had it not been for the extermination of most of the indigenous people. The Tempest's Prospero is the hero according to Sarmiento, because he is the colonizer-- just like that of North America. According to Sarmiento, whites are "the most perfect, the most intelligent, the most beautiful and most progressive of those that people the earth" (24).
To some extent, both authors make valid points. If you have a strong foundation of culture along with strong people, a strong community will arise. If the mestizo culture had never been influenced by the European culture, would it have flourished? All cultures at one time or another start out as being indigenous and develop into civilizations (for the most part). Of course, there is always the possibility that if the Europeans had gone about teaching their culture in a different way, mestizos would have had a chance to use it to their advantage. Instead, the Europeans forced their culture, for example their language, and made the mestizo resent anything that would have benefited his civilization.
The writers Retamar discusses in "Caliban" all voice multiple truths of history. Who is to say which writer is right in his interpretation of Caliban? Like many other issues in history, there is more than one interpretation. In fact, part of the problem with history is that multiple truths are not presented; this leaves us with a one sided view on things.
Furthermore, how many people are there who were taught about the exploitation that went along with colonization across the world? Another problem with writing history is that too often the author only writes what is appealing to society at that particular time. Is what is appealing at the time a good representation of actual history, or is literary recognition a historian's top priority? We are sure that during the time period of colonization, most Europeans believed that the indigenous were too simple minded to build a prosperous community. Given this ideology, there would not be too much objection to the exploitation that occurred. Now, the interest falls with those who have been done wrong. Is history only supposed to be strictly facts, or do opinions count as valid contributions?
Overall Roberto Retamar does an outstanding job of explaining how the indigenous people have been viewed literarily and historically in the character of Caliban. Retamar also allows his reader to see not just one interpretation of history, but several. "Caliban" leads readers to pick and choose what is valid to them. The symbolism of Caliban is very important in explaining the experiences of the indigenous people, and by invoking authors like Jose Marti and Domingo Sarmiento, Retamar shows contrasting views. These conflicting discourses help us to understand why people think the way that they do about Spanish Colonialism. The Latino culture is sometimes thought of as being a culture brought about by the Europeans, but in reality it is the combination of indigenous exploitation and the Latino's instinct to survive that have created our own distinct culture of today.
Return to Syllabus