77
4 People, Bodies and Power
In the Guaycurú tales about the ‘time of origins’, references are made to beings who
own culture and who have a social life similar to that of the Guaycurú themselves,
but are called by the names that designate various animal species today. Thus
Qaqare (carancho, Caracara plancus), Pobé (turkey vulture, Cathartes aura),
Mañic (rhea, Rhea americana) and many others, are central characters in many
stories. Their physical appearance is sometimes described in anthropomorphic
terms, and in other cases in relation to current animal species. In any case, the
change from one shape to another is usually quite fluid. Some of the most important
tales describe radical changes in the life of these beings, often after a great cataclysm (such as a flood or a gigantic fire, among others). Upon such events, some of
these beings adopted an anthropomorphic appearance and became the ancestors of
the current Guaycurú. Others, with an animal or—less frequently—vegetable
appearance, are the origin of the present fauna and flora. According to the classic
interpretation, these tales speak of the ‘transformation’ of certain animals into
‘human beings’ due to cataclysms. In the mythical past, these are thought to have
been ‘talking animals’ like those in Aesop’s fables, and later became ‘true humans’
permanently.
These readings do not fully comply with the Moqoit and other Guaycurú accounts
on the corporeality of many powerful beings still present in the world, which can
assume a great diversity of shapes, ranging from vegetables or animals to humans,
and even meteorological and astronomical phenomena (such as rainbows, storms,
lightning, and meteorites) (Giménez Benítez, López, & Granada, 2002). Some
humans, such as the pi’xonaq or male shamans and pi’xonaxa or feminine shamans,
also have the ability to manifest in animal or meteorological shapes. Certainly, there
are also humans, animals, and plants that can only assume one shape, but even they
can take on other appearances in a particularly powerful realm: dreams.
In recent years, studies on corporality, personhood, and the classification of living beings have flourished in Chaco (Medrano, 2013; Medrano, Maidana, & Gómez,
2011; Rosso, 2010; Suárez, 2012; Tola, 2005, 2009, 2010). Through them, we have
learnt a lot about the fluidity and porosity of body limits, the relevance of fluid
exchange and the way in which it carries intentions. We have also learnt that multiple intentional agents can coexist in the same body and multiple bodily regimes
can be available for the same intentional agent. Beyond their rich ethnographies and
interesting analyses, several of these works have adopted a view strongly influenced
by perspectivism and animism, both proposed as models of ‘Amerindian thought’
by specialists in Amazonian groups such as Viveiros de Castro (2002) and Descola
(2012). We believe the models built based on Amazonic ethnographies are limited
when trying to apply them to the chaqueño groups.
6
As we have pointed for the
6 The dialogue with Amazonic studies is fruitful and can provide interesting elements and suggestions, but, as general interpretative models, perspectivism and animism are insufficient to account
for what Chaco ethnographies show.
Signs, Not Phenomena: Moqoit Cosmo-politics and Alternative Experiences…
4 People, Bodies and Power
In the Guaycurú tales about the ‘time of origins’, references are made to beings who
own culture and who have a social life similar to that of the Guaycurú themselves,
but are called by the names that designate various animal species today. Thus
Qaqare (carancho, Caracara plancus), Pobé (turkey vulture, Cathartes aura),
Mañic (rhea, Rhea americana) and many others, are central characters in many
stories. Their physical appearance is sometimes described in anthropomorphic
terms, and in other cases in relation to current animal species. In any case, the
change from one shape to another is usually quite fluid. Some of the most important
tales describe radical changes in the life of these beings, often after a great cataclysm (such as a flood or a gigantic fire, among others). Upon such events, some of
these beings adopted an anthropomorphic appearance and became the ancestors of
the current Guaycurú. Others, with an animal or—less frequently—vegetable
appearance, are the origin of the present fauna and flora. According to the classic
interpretation, these tales speak of the ‘transformation’ of certain animals into
‘human beings’ due to cataclysms. In the mythical past, these are thought to have
been ‘talking animals’ like those in Aesop’s fables, and later became ‘true humans’
permanently.
These readings do not fully comply with the Moqoit and other Guaycurú accounts
on the corporeality of many powerful beings still present in the world, which can
assume a great diversity of shapes, ranging from vegetables or animals to humans,
and even meteorological and astronomical phenomena (such as rainbows, storms,
lightning, and meteorites) (Giménez Benítez, López, & Granada, 2002). Some
humans, such as the pi’xonaq or male shamans and pi’xonaxa or feminine shamans,
also have the ability to manifest in animal or meteorological shapes. Certainly, there
are also humans, animals, and plants that can only assume one shape, but even they
can take on other appearances in a particularly powerful realm: dreams.
In recent years, studies on corporality, personhood, and the classification of living beings have flourished in Chaco (Medrano, 2013; Medrano, Maidana, & Gómez,
2011; Rosso, 2010; Suárez, 2012; Tola, 2005, 2009, 2010). Through them, we have
learnt a lot about the fluidity and porosity of body limits, the relevance of fluid
exchange and the way in which it carries intentions. We have also learnt that multiple intentional agents can coexist in the same body and multiple bodily regimes
can be available for the same intentional agent. Beyond their rich ethnographies and
interesting analyses, several of these works have adopted a view strongly influenced
by perspectivism and animism, both proposed as models of ‘Amerindian thought’
by specialists in Amazonian groups such as Viveiros de Castro (2002) and Descola
(2012). We believe the models built based on Amazonic ethnographies are limited
when trying to apply them to the chaqueño groups.
6
As we have pointed for the
6 The dialogue with Amazonic studies is fruitful and can provide interesting elements and suggestions, but, as general interpretative models, perspectivism and animism are insufficient to account
for what Chaco ethnographies show.
Signs, Not Phenomena: Moqoit Cosmo-politics and Alternative Experiences…