I took a city tour through Cusco yesterday, mostly because I was too lazy to walk to half the historical sites 15 minutes out of town. There are probably 100 travel agencies that offer these type of tours, so I found one that looked interesting, and what follows are the fruits of that experience. Although the tour, (como se dice?)"sucked ass," I was thoroughly entertained by two different characters: Wilbur, the English-speaking guide, and the fat Australian lady with swollen ankles (she gets her own section at a later date).
Wilbur talked in hushed tones and was so melodramatic it was laughable. For some reason, Indian words can only be pronounced with wide-open eyes and a breathy voice. The amusement with his style quickly turned to annoyance: His voice was overpowered by other guides in the area, while his competency was overshadowed by the interesting things they had to say. Wilbur`s was a Sesame Street lesson of Indian vs Spanish words ("Sand... is ´tio´!" ) compared to other guides` National Geographic and History Channel education.
Wilbur often gave misinformation, left out accepted alternative explanations, or downright lied about history, officially qualifying him to teach it in all of America`s 50 state school systems. When pressed on his contradictions or confusing legend with reality by those of use who had other information, he replied (3 different occasions in 3 hours) "Well...this history is difficult". I was happy I had visited two different historical museums that morning, both with a personal guided tour, which had at least taught me that the legend of the first two Inkas emerging from Lake Titicaca, walking on water, and finally arriving at Cusco was not exactly historically accurate.
Wilber went to great lengths to explain methods employed by the Spaniards in changing Inka society. While he skipped over the most obvious way, slaughtering a shit-load of people, he spent significant time explaining how Spaniards tried to convert Inkas to Christianity. He was particularly insensed that Spanish churches were built upon Inka churches and that Spaniards triangulated, to steal a political term, elements of Inka religion like the sun and moon and weaved them into their explanations to the natives. And lastly, at the end of his sermon to us, we learned that the Spanish used the cross symbol in the churches because the Inkas worshiped the cross also (the southern cross constellation), not because it was also the primary symbol of the Christian religion.
His best quote about conquest... "The Spainards did it....(4 second pause)...to chaaaannnge...(4 second pause)..their MIND!" It immediately reminded me of Joe Protester`s catch-phrase, "Think about it...Fucking THINK about it!"
I didnt want to embarass him, but someone seriously needs to explain how religious conquest works to this guy! Maybe also explain why Christmas is when it is, why Easter is when it is, and why we have christmas trees. And to top it off, maybe ask what religions and cultures the Inkas wiped out on their way to empire?
Wilbur talked in hushed tones and was so melodramatic it was laughable. For some reason, Indian words can only be pronounced with wide-open eyes and a breathy voice. The amusement with his style quickly turned to annoyance: His voice was overpowered by other guides in the area, while his competency was overshadowed by the interesting things they had to say. Wilbur`s was a Sesame Street lesson of Indian vs Spanish words ("Sand... is ´tio´!" ) compared to other guides` National Geographic and History Channel education.
Wilbur often gave misinformation, left out accepted alternative explanations, or downright lied about history, officially qualifying him to teach it in all of America`s 50 state school systems. When pressed on his contradictions or confusing legend with reality by those of use who had other information, he replied (3 different occasions in 3 hours) "Well...this history is difficult". I was happy I had visited two different historical museums that morning, both with a personal guided tour, which had at least taught me that the legend of the first two Inkas emerging from Lake Titicaca, walking on water, and finally arriving at Cusco was not exactly historically accurate.
Wilber went to great lengths to explain methods employed by the Spaniards in changing Inka society. While he skipped over the most obvious way, slaughtering a shit-load of people, he spent significant time explaining how Spaniards tried to convert Inkas to Christianity. He was particularly insensed that Spanish churches were built upon Inka churches and that Spaniards triangulated, to steal a political term, elements of Inka religion like the sun and moon and weaved them into their explanations to the natives. And lastly, at the end of his sermon to us, we learned that the Spanish used the cross symbol in the churches because the Inkas worshiped the cross also (the southern cross constellation), not because it was also the primary symbol of the Christian religion.
His best quote about conquest... "The Spainards did it....(4 second pause)...to chaaaannnge...(4 second pause)..their MIND!" It immediately reminded me of Joe Protester`s catch-phrase, "Think about it...Fucking THINK about it!"
I didnt want to embarass him, but someone seriously needs to explain how religious conquest works to this guy! Maybe also explain why Christmas is when it is, why Easter is when it is, and why we have christmas trees. And to top it off, maybe ask what religions and cultures the Inkas wiped out on their way to empire?
Wilbur`s insistence on legend while completely ignoring historical explanation, his fetish for explaining simple objects in the Indian language, and his total failure to explain any facts of historical interest about the ultra-famous archeological sites we were seeing reminds me of some stereotypical PhD in multi-cultural studies who knows nothing of real history nor is really interested in different cultures, but is an expert on Kwanza, an afficionado on the exploitation of Columbus, offended by the stars and stripes, and whose thesis was "The History of Snaps: How white oppressors inspired self-ego-abuse in the afro-american comunity."
Wilbur also had bad breath.
Although he had some legitimate reasons to be upset with Spaniards (of 500 years ago), Wilbur seemed to have misdirected anger towards them: He really should be pissed at Anglo-Saxons just for the existence of his ridiculous name, and at Hollywood-types for popularizing it with Mr. Ed; It was probably his parents` favorite show & playing while they concieved him, thus inspiring his name (and Wilber`s about the right age)
Of course, Spaniards have done plenty of bad things in South America, not least of which is their legacy of flan offered in every dessert menu on the continent.
So.... Saludos a Wilbur!!!
Wilbur also had bad breath.
Although he had some legitimate reasons to be upset with Spaniards (of 500 years ago), Wilbur seemed to have misdirected anger towards them: He really should be pissed at Anglo-Saxons just for the existence of his ridiculous name, and at Hollywood-types for popularizing it with Mr. Ed; It was probably his parents` favorite show & playing while they concieved him, thus inspiring his name (and Wilber`s about the right age)
Of course, Spaniards have done plenty of bad things in South America, not least of which is their legacy of flan offered in every dessert menu on the continent.
So.... Saludos a Wilbur!!!
