Posted 3 years, 5 months ago at around evening time by oso
Mi primer post bilingüe – My first bilingual post …
Español
Resulta que Georgia – una amiga y la contribuyente del Caribe para Global Voices – ya no me aguanta más. Hasta que haya empezado una revolución de independencia en sus islas chiquitas. (Es broma.) Pero, hablando en serio, tengo el placer de anunciarles que Georgia llegó a ser editora regional de GV. Ahora, tenemos que dividir el área, que antes fue conocida como “Las Américas,” entre dos o tres regiones.
No es una tarea tan fácil ni algo que queremos repetir en el futuro por razones técnicas que tienen que ver con el sistema que utilizamos. Por ejemplo, Georgia y yo acordamos que ella va a cubrir las islas de Cuba, Puerto Rico, y la República Dominicana y que yo la apoyaré con los blogs escritos en español.
Pero si ella cubre las islas Hispanohablantes del Caribe, ¿que hago yo con los “países latinoamericanos” que hablan inglés como Belice y Guyana? Obviamente los dos tienen “la cultura del Caribe” pero están ubicados en Latinoamérica. Adémas, uno puede decir que hay partes de Costa Rica, Panama, Nicaragua, y Honduras que tambien tiene “la misma cultura del Caribe.”
¿Bastante complejo no? Pero esperen porque luego, Boris nos informó que – según Wikipedia y Google – México es parte de América del Norte. Él nos recomendó que dividamos Las Américas entre América del Norte, Centroamérica, América del Sur, y el Caribe. (Supondría que yo cubriría todo salvo el Caribe)
¿Ustedes que piensan? ¿Deberíamos seguir el mismo modelo de Wikipedia con regiones de América del Norte, Centroamérica, América del Sur, y el Caribe? ¿O mejor si simplemente distinguimos entre el Caribe y Latinoamérica? ¿Como clasificamos Belice y Guyana? ¿Incluimos México como parte del Centroamérica, América del Norte, o simplemente del Latinoamérica? Espero sus opiniones.
English
So Georgia says she’s had enough of my nonsense and is pushing for a secession movement to remove the Caribbean isles from my vast empire formerly known as “The Americas.” OK, not really. Actually she’s our newest regional editor at Global Voices … a development which I am very happy about. But now we’re left with the task of dividing the artist formerly known as the Americas between us.
You’d think it’d be easy enough. It’s not. For example, with great diplomacy we arrived at the agreement that she would cover Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and Puerto Rico (OK, so she beat me at thumb wrestling, whatever, she raises her elbows). She had also convinced me to hand over Belize and Guyana … but then I started to question … am I getting taken advantage of here?
Sure, Belize, Guyana, they speak English. They’re part of CARICOM. They have “Caribbean culture,” whatever that means. But if those are our criteria, then shouldn’t Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Dominican Republic be part of Latin America? I mean, they speak Spanish. They are not part of CARICOM. And they share “Latin culture,” whatever the hell that means.
As if things weren’t difficult enough, my dear friend, Boris steps in and does what he is best at: making things more difficult. (I kid hombre, mostly) He tells us: according to Wikipedia and Google, Mexico is part of North America.
So in just a couple days we go from “Latin America and the Caribbean” to “South America, Central America, and the Caribbean” and now to “South America, Central America, North America, and the Caribbean,” where Mexico is part of North America! And to top it all off, Georgia is getting sassy after her big thumb wresting win and now says she can beat me at tennis. ¡Qué boludéz!
So my dear friends, I plead for input. I’m so desperate that I will put out for in put. Should we stick to “Latin America” or divide it further? Where does Mexico go? In an act of Buddha-like non-detachment and generosity, should I offer up Belize and Guyana to the winner of our tennis tournament? I await your wisdom.
I’ve always thought there was a natural division between Central America (I’ve always considered Mexico to be Central America, even though that it is not), the Caribbean Latin countries and South America. However, there could also be further divisions in S.A. with the Andean countries, Mercosur countries + Brasil. I would include Guyana and Belice within the Caribbean culture, for a lack of a better place to place them.
I’ll make my comment bilingual too. – Yo tambien voy a hacer mi comentario bilingüe.
–
There are many ways to divide America… if you are going to keep Mexico as North America then you a have a language problem.
Maybe you should take a look at how many websites your actually going to keep track off. And then decide a way to divide them on an equal amount. Maybe it would be better to divide them by topic, or some other type of division.
–
Hay varias maneras de dividir a America… si vas a mantener a Mexico como parte de Norteamerica entonces vas a tener un problema con el idioma.
Quizas lo que deberiasde revisar es el numero de sitios que estarias revisando. Y despues decidir una manera de dividirlos en partes iguales. A lo mejor seria bueno dividirlos por tema o algun otro tipo de division.
Ah, the confusing zone where cultural & geographical boundaries & notions collide & tangle. I’d say keep Mexico in Latin America, on linguistic & cultural grounds; & without hesitation give Guyana & Belize to Georgia–historically, culturally, politically, linguistically, both territories belong to the same group as the current & former British West Indian territories.
While you’re at it, give her Suriname & French Guyana also, since where Guyana goes those two ought to follow.
Primero que nada, aclaro que Mexico no es Centro América, pues es parte de América del Norte. Panamá no es parte de América del Sur, ni mucho menos del norte. Panamá en parte de Centro América. Sinceramente creo que sería mucho más facil si agrupan los paises en: Latinoamérica y el Caribe.
En referencia a Belize, yo la visito todos los años, y cada vez que voy me encuentro con más personas que hablan Español. La populación hispanohablante de Belize tiene sus orígenes en inmigrantes de México, Guatemala y Nicaragua. No creo que tengas problema si deciden incluirla en Latinoamérica.
Abrazos,
Melissa
Oso,
“Latin America” is a linguistic/geographical term. The term was originally coined to group together those parts of the Americas in which Latin (Romance) languages are spoken. Since Spanish, Portuguese, and French are romance languages, all of the countries with those languages spoken are “Latin.”
Of course, this definition can be problematic. Is Quebec a part of Latin America? I would say fine, but most others would say no.
Now to respond more specifically to your post:
1. Puerto Rico, Cuba, and the Dominican Republic are without a doubt a part of Latin America.
2. You wrote: “according to Wikipedia and Google, Mexico is part of North America”
I think we should look at the specific languages. In Spanish Norteamérica and norteamericano differentiate between citizens of the United States (and sometimes Canada) and Latinos. But in English, “North America” seems to be more of a geographical term. In other words, Spanish defines Norteamérica in a cultural/linguistic sense, while English defines it in a geographical sense.
3. This is not related to your questions, but I’ve always liked the terms Iberoamérica and América española. They give more specificity than “Latin America”.
3. In regards to your Global Voices division question: I think “Latin America” and the Caribbean is good. This division leaves out the Falkland Island, but other than that is quite comprehensive.
4. The main problem is that some people define geographies geographically, while others define geographies culturally. Take Central America. Geographically, Panama and Belize are a part of the Isthmus. The “geographicists” say there are seven nations in Central America. But when I lived in Costa Rica and Nicaragua, the ticos and nicas (”culturalists”)… god I sound like Tom Friedman
both said that Central America was comprised of five nations. Belize was not Central American because it was a former British Colony and Panama because it was a part of Colombia.
5. All over the world these problems exist. Take “South Asia”. Is the definition geographic or cultural? Is Afghanistan a part of South Asia? The Mughal and Indian Islamic empires stretched far into Afghanistan. Also, Arunachal Pradesh (Indian state sandwiched between China (Tibet), India, Bhutan, and Myanmar has few cultural affinities with mainland India. But it is geographically a part of the subcontinent – or, at least is on the border of the subcontinent. My point is these things can be tricky.
Anyway, stick with “Latin America and the Caribbean.”
I can understand why you would want to adhere to language barriers and not continental ones. It’s nice to be able to go to a website and click on the US/British flag when you want to read English, but it always troubled me to see the España flag to represent the whole of the Spanish-speaking world. [I'm not partial to the lisp, even though it's read and understood as regular and proper Spanish].
Anyway, Central America is not a continent. And as someone who lives in Texas, I think that Mexico bleeds too well into the US, which is why I would never ever (jamás) call Mexico, “Centro America.” Dividing Las Américas into countries like that seems like you’re giving yourself more work. I would stick with the communal acumen of Wikipedia and divide Las Américas evenly into north and south.
Besides, isn’t most news regional that way anyway?
ps. I would also love to write Spanish as fluidly as that….
Creo que esta vez la forma tradicional (norte, centro y sur america) + el caribe seria la mas funcional.
my two centss.
jonathan
If you have to divide, the easiest and most appropriate division has always been: North America (includes Central America and the Caribbean) and South America. Even Aruba, Curaçao, Trinidad etc. in the North America part. Hell, Panama is closer to mainland South America than Trinidad (Panama actually touches it!), so that “closeness” argument won’t cut it.
No sense bringing the axis up or east or diagonal or anything to try to focus it culturally/linguistically/historically. A “Latin America” that speaks Romance languages? Kick out Aruba, Suriname, and purposefully exclude Quebec. And what do you call the Americas that isn’t a part of “Latin America”: Germanic America? I shudder to think.
Eddie,
For me it’s more a usability issue than a political one. A lot of users are probably going to subscribe to the feeds of particular regions. For example, I don’t subscribe the the main GV feed because 20 new posts every time I update my reader is a bit daunting. But when I see 5 in South Asia, 5 in Sub-Saharan Africa, etc., it seems much more manageable. So my question is, would most users want just one Latin America feed or would they want a South American feed and a Central American feed? And either way, if they subscribe to those feeds, would they want Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Dominican Republic to be included?
Moises,
That’s a good point, but one of the main reasons we have regional editors is to give context to local matters for a global audience.
Nicholas,
What is this … Georgia has hired lobbyists! I kid. Yes, Suriname & French Guyana are already banished from the empire. Sadly, in blog terms, that’s not losing much. But here’s my question: if it makes so much sense for countries which are geographically South American, but culturally Caribbean to be included in “the Caribbean,” than why wouldn’t the same be true of Cuba, DR, and PR?
I can’t claim to be an expert here. I’ve only been to three Caribbean islands so far – Cuba, Puerto Rico, and Barbados – but there was a very marked difference between the first two and the latter. In Cuba and Puerto Rico I could have been in any coastal Latin American country. But Barbados was something else entirely even though immigrants from Saint Vincent and Jamaica seemed to fit in very well.
“Cuba and Caribbean Countries Strengthen Cooperation”
Melissa,
Tienes toda la razón. Según “los expertos,” México es parte de América del Norte y Panamá es parte de Centro América. Pero imagina si Panamá todavía fuera un estado de Colombia. ¿Donde marcaríamos la linea? Panamá obtuvo su independencia de Colombia en 1903. Estamos hablando de 100 años y pico. Y, oficialmente, Puerto Rico es un territorio de los EUA!
Vikrum,
You bring up one of our major problems – that I don’t speak Portuguese. It’s something I’d like to take to task, but for now there is a very large and important country which is not getting nearly the coverage it should on GV. BTW, if you know any Portuguese speaking bloggers that are interested in helping out, please get them in touch with me.
The Americas region was the first to get split up, but a few more are to follow and, like you say, the same issues are sure to be brought up. It’s interesting to read the reasons given for dividing up the regions: language, culture, trade pacts, colonial history, political treaties, immigration, geography, etc …
It’s difficult to talk about these things and not sound like Friedman.
Patti,
Most news agencies (ie. BBC) skirt the issue with one big “Americas” section. The Washington Post, however, does have “South America,” “Central America” and “North America.” Mexico and Panama stories always appear in the Central America feed. I agree with you that flags are a dumb way to represent languages.
Jonathan,
¿Pero donde pondrías Cuba, Panama, y México?
Derek,
You really think the people subscribing to the “blog news” coming out of Nicaragua, Costa Rica, and El Salvador are going to also want to read what is happening in Aruba, Trinidad & Tobago, and Jamaica? And vise-versa?
Strictly speaking, Mexico IS part of North America though for your concerns with Global Voices I can see why you wouldn’t want to include it with NA from a cultural standpoint. Speaking of tennis … hell, I shoulda bought my racket when I was out there so I coulda kicked your ass.
BTW … I am, indeed, still using the Ubuntu flavor of Linux founded by Mark Shuttleworth of South Africa but for some reason WordPress is reading it as generic Linux.
The Caribbean has always been about exceptions to rules, so: I take your excellent point about the usability issue, but how about this as a compromise: instead of two feeds, i.e. “Caribbean” & “the rest of the Americas”, however those kingdoms have their boundaries drawn, why not have three: those two, plus an “all Americas” feed that combines them, as the current feed does. That way, readers interested only in Latin/Spanish/South/Central/whatever-American posts could sign up for those alone, readers interested in Anglo/Franco/Hispano/Dutcho-Caribbean posts could sign up for _those_ alone, & readers brave enough to be interested in all of the above could etc. Rather less elegant, but surely in this case more choices are better?
Or does this suggestion betray my technical ignorance?
“Hired lobbyists”? Nah, dread! Not a ras ah dat! But we small-islanders like to stick together, at least while the rest of the world is watching. We messed up Federation once already, can’t let ourselves be fragmented again.
Pa que te la pelas?
si es por el idioma, MX por parte de centroamerica y ya
Saludos !!!!
Nicholas,
Let me know where we can meet so I can hand over that suitcase of unmarked. . . . Oops, posting in the wrong place again! Dang!
Anonymous Small Islander
Oso,
Though you admit that you’re no expert on these matters, I figure it might be worth pointing out that the English-speaking Caribbean island you’re familiar with – Barbados – also happens to be the least Latin of all the Anglophone islands.
While I agree that that Cuba and PR (and to that list I’d add DR) do feel like coastal Latin America, to me they also feel distinctly Caribbean, in the sense that I can discern almost as many similarities in lifestyle, outlook etc with Latin America as, say, my own country of Trinidad. Belize is a another case altogether. In Belize I felt (and this was way back in 1988) very strongly the presence of native Belizeans, but – and this is perhaps as much due to the incursions of evangelical churches which have replaced Catholicism as it was due to the language – it didn’t seem to me to have much of a Latin feel.
Should also point out that this is by no means a campaign for ownership of the hispanphone islands – in fact, I’m wondering whether it might make more sense for you to keep covering them, in spite of the salutory effect reading Spanish-language blogs is likely to have on my rusty Spanish.
GAP
PS The Georgia of the previous comment wasn’t me, by the way. Clearly I have an impersonator. I don’t even own a suitcase.
GP
Even in “Latin America” there are discrepancies. The way geography is taught in South America is different than how it is taught in Central America, and what belongs where varies depending on location. I would stick with the geographical structure: consider Belize as part of Central America, Guyana, fr. Guyana and Suriname as South America and the islands as the caribbean. It just makes it easier for people to find what they are looking for. Falklands to South America and keep the Argentinos happy. Are there bloggers in the Easter Islands?
Geographically, Cuba (as well as Dominicana and Puerto Rico) is from the Caribbean, undoubtedly. But Geographically you couldn’t talk about Latin American either. To make it short, geographically you talk about South America, Central America, the Caribbean, and North America (which includes most of Mexico). But from a cultural point of view, you talk about North America (incidentally the same, but excluding Mexico), Latin America (mostly countries colonized by Spain and Portugal) and several minor islands in the caribbean, colonies of netherlands, france, UK, etc. Those minor islands I would guess they have a category of their own but I won’t dare to give it a name. I’m not an authority in geographic nomenclature, but that’s my two cents.
What I can asure you is that in weighting “Caribbean” and “Latin America” as the two options while categorizing, you’re in a mistake, because the former is a geographical category, and the latter is a cultural one. Cuba has much more to do with Argentina, Chile and Brasil than it has to do with Cayman Islands or Bahamas, culturally speaking, in spite of the distances.
Sorry but double posting, but I came up with an idea.
I was wondering if you could do the following. The categories in a taxonomy need not to be exclusive. I mean, you can put Cuba (and PR and Dominicana) under Caribbean and under Latin America. Think of categories just like gmail labels, or flickr tags.
Nicholas, Georgia…does the name Abramoff mean anything to you ; )
When’s the tennis match???
Duels about to break out all over the blogosphere over this suddenly contentious issue! I object to Ernesto’s phrase “several minor islands in the caribbean, colonies of netherlands, france, UK, etc.” which is the most unexpected & unwelcome kind of big-island chauvinism. “Minor” is a subjective term which Ernesto will have to explain, but perhaps he merely means “small in land mass”, which is true. But as a citizen of an independent republic I must point out that the “minor” islands to which Ernesto refers are almost all independent nations, British associated states, French overseas departments, & autonomous territories of the Kingdom of the Netherlands. Not colonies any more. Just as Cuba is not a colony any more.
Trying to make your life a little bit more difficult, I add my 50 cents.
Panameños, most Venezolanos, and some colombianos also share the Caribbean culture. Indeed, the only country that still has inhabitants of caribe ethnicity is Venezuela. And if you go for afro-caribbean you have to include us too.
However, for practical purposes I recommend you to draw the line between CARICOM and Latinos (former Spain, Portugal, and France colonies). Neederland Antilles are so connected to Venezuela that they will go with us too. I’m not sure what to do with Suriname. Could you ask them?
Well, at least one consensus does seem to be forming: that I am blowing all of this out of proportion. I think another thing is clear; no matter how we divide things up, it’s going to be along arbitrary lines that not everyone is going to be happy about.
Ernesto and Nicholas came up with the best idea – for us to simply include some countries in both regions. (hell, Puerto Rico could be considered part of the Caribbean, Central America, and North America). Unfortunately, the way we have things set up (with hierarchical categories) each country needs to be in just one region.
Regardless, it’s been an interesting conversation which has shown that there are obviously no “rules” to geography, only precedents to follow or change.
Good Luck with this one…
Doesn’t seem to be an easy fix.
My apologies to Nicholas, and I regret the way I referred to the smaller islands in the Antilles. My native language is not English, and though I speak it and write it well, I didn’t had “minor” as a pejorative term. I am sure though, that there are correct terms to refer to the big and small islands separately, but I can’t recall them right now. Could any one help me on this one? In Spanish we call them (without being chauvinistic at all) “Antillas menores” and “Antillas mayores”. I certainly agree that having more land mass is not an advantage or makes us better countries. We’re still small countries in the average. Hope you accept my sincere apologies and thanks for clearing me out the political status of most of those islands, which I had mistaken.
On the other hand, if you have to stick to the strictly tree-like hierarchical taxonomy, I would suggest to keep “North America” and “Latin America and the Caribbean” with two editors for the last one if the workload is considerable. If you still need to split the Americas in three (which I deeply object), I’d go the Iria way: “North America”, “Caricom” and “Latin America”, including Mexico in Latin America, and not in north America, and the Latin Caribbean countries (like Cuba, PR and dominicana) in Latin America too. Belize should be in Caricom, not in L.A. As well as Guyana, Suriname and the third one I can recall right now.
This is certainly not an easy matter, as most of us have pointed out. Puerto Rico has more to do politically with the US, but culturally is more like a Latin American country, due to its heritage from the Spanish rule.
Ernesto, no apologies necessary–my tongue was lodged firmly in cheek–& furthermore your bilinguality puts me to shame, since I can barely manage to make myself understood in English, much less Spanish or anything else. “Antillas menores” and “Antillas mayores” would be Lesser and Greater Antilles in English.
Oso, no, you’re not blowing anything out of proportion–the question is fascinating, puzzling & far from academic, as there are many practical instances where it does make a difference whether a territory is considered “Caribbean” or not. GV turns out to be one of them. In the absence of Divine Arbitration i.e. bolts of lightning drawing boundaries across the earth’s surface or some such, ad hoc divisions will always have to be made by bumbling humans. And whatever gets decided in this particular instance, however we get split up, all of us Carilatihispanglomeribeans can rest assured that we’ll have a superstar editor looking out for us, whether it’s you or Georgia. (Swelling chords.)
I’m back…it was just a few days of temporary madness.
And I love your blog….it’s going on Sangroncito’s World’s blog list right now (or as soon as I find a pen to jot down the address….).
Congratulations on the bilingual post. Me gusta mucho.
From an Dominican (Republic)-American Blogger:
Hola, soy de Puerto Rico y, aunque no soy ningún experto, creo que puedo aclarar algo. Contrario a lo que digan la mayoría de los mapas del mundo, y contrario a lo que crean la mayoría de los puertorriqueños, oficialmente, según la interpretación del Tribunal Supremo de EEUU, Puerto Rico NO es un territorio americano. La situación colonial de Puerto Rico convierte a su territorio en una posesión de los Estados Unidos, pero no parte de esa nación.
Es un tanto complejo, y por eso se presta para confusiones (De hecho, pueden preguntarle a cualquier puertorriqueño, y muy posiblemente que dirá con toda seguridad que esto no es cierto).
Vamos a ver si me sale en ingles…
Hi, I am from Puerto Rico, and, although I am not an expert, I think I can clarify something. Officially, according to the Supreme Court of the US, Puerto Rico isn’t an American territory, but an American possession. That means Puerto Rico is not part of the US. Puerto Rico belongs to the UUSS.
It is a litter complex (If you ask any Puerto Rican, possibly he would answer that it is not thru, and if you see any map, possibly will say “us territory” nest to Puerto Rico), but it is the official interpretation of the Supreme Court. I don’t remember the name of the case that establish this interpretation, but it can be verified.
Saludos a todos.
Speaking as a Latin American person that lives in the Caribbean, I’d say it’s better to go with the politically correct denomination instead of arousing controversy over the fact that that you enlisted, let’s say, the Dominican Republic in the South American division (we are certainly not a part of South America, by the way).
Being Latin American is all a question of perception. If we go by the linguistic way, Quebec should be considered part of Latin America, yet I really don’t think Quebecois consider themselves as Latin Americans. Furthermore, a Dutch-speaking citizen of Bonaire or Curacao may consider himself to be Latin American, while we know that Dutch is not part of the romance languages.
If we go by cultures, America has so many diverse and different cultures that I don’t think there will be an acceptable way to establish our nationalities by it.
See my point?
I personally get mad whenever I want to register at a site and find that I have to do it under the “South America” or “Central America” denominations. I’d rather register under “American” (the Dominican Republic is, after all, part if the American Continent), and even so I end up not being very happy about it.
So, after all that has been said, my recommendation is that you divide America geographically, that is, North America (this includes Mexico), Central America, South America and the Caribbean.
Hablando como una persona Latinoamericana que vive en el Caribe, yo diría que es mejor irse con la denominación políticamente correcta en vez de levantar controversia sobre el hecho de que enlistes, vamos a decir, a la República Dominicana en la división de Sur América (nosotros ciertamente no somos parte de América del Sur, de paso).
Ser Latino Americano es toda una cuestión de percepción. Si nos vamos por la vía lingüística, Québec debería ser parte de América Latina, pero de verdad no pienso que los Quebequés se consideren como Latinoamericanos. Más aún, un ciudadano holandés parlante de Donaire o Curazao puede considerarse a sí mismo como Latinoamericano, mientras sabemos que el Holandés no es parte de las lenguas romances.
Si vamos por cultura, América tiene tantas culturas diversas y diferentes que yo creo que no habría una forma aceptable de establecer nuestra nacionalidad de esa forma.
¿Ves mi punto?
Yo personalmente me enfurezco cuando quiero registrarme en un sitio y me encuentro con que tengo que hacerlo bajo las denominaciones de “Sur América” o “Centro América”. Preferiría registrarme bajo “América” (la República Dominicana es, luego de todo, parte del Continente Americano), y aún así no termino muy contenta con eso.
Así que, luego de todo lo dicho, mi recomendación es que dividas a América geográficamente, es decir, América del Norte (esto incluye a México), América Central, América del Sur y El Caribe.
[...] 9 January, 2006: Global Voices recognises the Caribbean as a separate region to the rest of the Americas, and appoints its first Caribbean editor, Georgia Popplewell. Over at Americas editor David Sasaki’s blog, a discussion starts up about how to define the Caribbean geographically. Caribbean bloggers leap into the fray…. [...]
[...] “In this CSME time. In this time of dancehall self-righteousness versus soca wutlessness. In this time when Trinis don’t want to hear about “small islanders” reaching to the Billboard charts with soca music. In this time when Haitians still call out for our help and we still studiously ignore them. . . . . It is now more than ever that we need to consider what it means to this generation,” writes Attillah Springer in the latest entry in the “Caribbeanness” debate which was set in motion by a post at Global Voices Americas’ editor David Sasaki’s blog. [...]
I only just recently made a comment on my blog about whether even BARBADOS (where I’m from) was part of the Caribbean. Sounds absurd? Yes I would think so considering it is part of CARICOM and it is one of the English speaking islands (and I see some ppl are using language to distinguish between Caribbean and Latin America and therefore putting Cuba in the LAtin America Category).
The case that some people use against Barbados being in the Caribbean rests on it not being in the Caribbean Sea – Barbados is totally surrounded by the Atlantic Ocean.
So maybe the Caribbean sea is what should define the islands in the Caribbean. But the question comes “Does the Caribbean Sea define the islands of the Caribbean or do the islands of the Caribbean define the Caribbean Sea”.
Then to make matters more confusing there is a Caribbean Plate on which all of this rests. Should this Caribbean Plate define what should be considered as the Caribbean. I am not sure where the boundaries of the Plate are located. My geography is not quite so advanced.
Then we can even introduce “West Indies” to make the argument even more confusing (and for some a bit volatile since West Indies has a number of colonial connotations)
Anyway, I guess ultimately history, tradition and convention distinguish the CAribbean from the rest of The Americas.
Neil, you bring up some interesting points. I did know that Barbados is surrounded by the Atlantic (although, you have to admit that the waters around Bridgetown feel much more Caribbean than the East Coast), but not that it rests on a separate plate. You’re not the only one who makes a case for geography playing a role in defining what is Caribbean. I spent a couple hours last night digging through the archives of the of the Caribbean Review of Books where I found a review by Nicholas of Denis William’s Prehistoric Guiana:
Geographic features obviously have their impact on cultural ones, but where do we “draw the line.” Is Tierra del Fuego part of Antartica? Does the half of Istanbul to the west of the Bosphorus river count as European while the rest of the city is Middle Eastern?
The only answer that has come to me so far is that there is no answer.
Well, I waited this one out. Here’s my input – not that it matters:
The Caribbean as an entity really doesn’t exist. This is because people in the Caribbean do not necessarily identify themselves with the ‘Caribbean’ – there are pretty strong national identities. I used to hate it when people heard I was from Trinidad and tried and screwed up a Jamaican accent. Idiotas. But the point there is that a Jamaican and a Trinbagonian will get along just fine, but they don’t look at each other as ‘one’. There are enough problems within the countries themselves that any island will identify strongly with what they consider to be the ‘real’ .
‘Caribbean’ is a word for people from the outside that are basically saying, ‘those islands over there that we don’t know the names of’. The problem is geography, and there’s a Pope to thank for it with his magic pen that split the region between Spain and Portugal.
Now, as far as the problem with weblog categories, the solution seems to be simple… language. If you identify the English speaking countries, you’ll find that 2 countries in South America speak English: Belize and Guyana. The English speaking Caribbean is pretty clearcut. By land mass and population, the English speaking people are a minority in the region. MINORITY. You could just call this the Caribbean, or Anglophone Caribbean.
By land mass and population, Spanish is the first language of the Caribbean. So you have Cuba, Puerto Rico and the D.R. which speak Spanish. Spanish is also the dominant language in South and Central America. That would be called – Latin America.
French are next by land mass and population – the islands of Martinique, Guadeloupe, and countries where French kweyol (creole; patois) are spoken – not to mention French Guyana. That would be the French Caribbean.
After English is Dutch. The Netherlands and Suriname. Dutch Caribbean.
Dependence and arguments on geography seem out of place when it comes to weblogs. Language is the key. Go with language. It may be messier, but it’s more accurate.
The particular stubborn horse that started this thread–how to divide the Americas between two GV editors–is dead and long past the point where flogging might induce resurrection. David and Georgia one way or the other have come to terms–their own private Treaty of Tordesillas–so I won’t go into all that again.
But: “The Caribbean as an entity really doesn’t exist…. ‘Caribbean’ is a word for people from the outside that are basically saying, ‘those islands over there that we don’t know the names of’”–this I dispute with some personal consternation, as someone who identifies himself, depending on context, as Trinidadian, West Indian, and Caribbean, and who spends much of his professional life trying to understand and define what those categories do, can, and could mean.
I know the Caribbean as a non-geographical, historical, political, cultural entity does exist because I know I belong to it, and because I know many people–Trinidadian, Guyanese, Barbadian, Jamaican, St. Lucian, Vincentian, Cuban, Haitian, Bahamian, etc etc etc–who make the same claim. “Caribbean”, true, does not and cannot entirely circumscribe our identities because, well, identity isn’t so simple: it is a fluid, overlapping concept covering innumerable traits, preferences, choices, behaviours, beliefs, and hopes.
Ask me who I am and I’ll reply, depending on the circumstances: male; young; not so young; Trinidadian; quarter Guyanese; a reader; a writer; an editor; French creole; white; red; Irish; from Diego Martin; from Port of Spain; a St. Mary’s old boy; a UWI alumnus; English-speaking; a fox; a hedgehog; short-sighted; short; skinny; right-handed; lefty; liberal; neo-Tapia; a blogger; an optimist; a romantic; a jointpop fan; Antillean; West Indian; and, yes, Caribbean.
The older I get, the better I understand myself, the more I see of the territories strung through and around this body of water, the more I realise that (and how) I am a Caribbean person; and the complicated and very real divisions of ethnicity, language, class, island, and nation (whatever “nation” means!) that run through these territories do not and cannot fundamentally threaten that notion of “Caribbeanness” that I share with millions of people who I have no trouble conceiving of as compatriots.
It may be–must be?–true that the average individual living in this messy little pocket of the world, eyes firmly on the basic, mundane goals of survival and happiness, thinks of himself or herself foremost as Jamaican, Kittitian, St Lucian (or in even more socially minute terms as black urban female JLP-voting Methodist Jamaican etc). But enough of us accept and believe in a bigger, genuinely and distinctively Caribbean identity for the word–the definition–the aspiration–to carry the weight of validity and the charge of possibility.
Or, to paraphrase Ian McDonald: I am part Guyanese by ancestry, Trinidadian by birth, West Indian by inheritance, and Caribbean by conviction.
Or, to quote Derek Walcott: “either I’m nobody, or I’m a nation”.
First, I didn’t know that the treaty existed, and if it does exist, well, that’s that. I didn’t expect my input to be taken; I said so in my post.
As far as the rest – Nicholas, the first thing that I will ask you to do is, without prompting answers, go to a part of the Caribbean where you know not one person and ask them to describe themselves. You may get ‘West Indian’, but you will very rarely find ‘Caribbean’. Certainly, you may speak for yourself – but when a word is used more outside of a region than inside of a region, it’s apparent that the region doesn’t ‘own’ the word. If you don’t believe me, scroll through this tripe: http://www.technorati.com/tag/Caribbean
There are too many borders to make sense of things. But on the web, language is the key border at this time – and some of us are working toward minimizing that border as well.
As far as personal consternation, well… I do not like this world, but I must deal with it as it is. I sympathize with you, perhaps even empathize with you, but I have looked long and deep into that well of consternation myself through CARDICIS and other endeavours. I see the world in five ways – as it was, as it is, as it will be, as I believe it should be, and as others see it. Negotiating between those 5 points and giving my own opinion the least weight lent itself to the conclusion that caused personal consternation on your part.
My answer? If you don’t like it, change it. That’s what I try to do all the time. But to change it, first we must recognize it for what it is.
If you’re in the Caribbean and you know it show your tag!
If you’re in the Caribbean and you know it show your tag!
If you’re in the Caribbean and you know it and you really want to show it, show your tag!
Man, if you guys could see the sparring going on over Turkey and Sudan … no neat drawers in this world.
I don’t know David, and I don’t pretend to – I don’t live there. I live in the Caribbean.
Where do you live?
Taran,
Such aggression. I highly recommend going for a run. I went for a run this morning and I tell you, I couldn’t feel better and more relaxed. It’s like a post-orgasmic cigarette lasting all afternoon.
Anyway, the comment wasn’t for you specifically, hence the “you guys.”
I live in San Diego. It’s lovely. Very tranquil setting – I highly recommend that you make a pass through one of these days.
Aggression? David, you amuse me in the most amusing sense of the term.
As you say, you live in San Diego. Therefore, I will say this without aggression – having hoped you would have come to this conclusion – that your perspective on any other region is derived from where you live.
I wouldn’t tell you about where you live. Why do you think you can tell us about where we live? You can’t… and that’s been the point. The Caribbean defines itself, just as San Diego defines itself.
Most people would respond defensively while being accused of aggression, but perhaps I have gained further insight into your manner of dealing with perspectives other than your own. Or – am I reading that wrong?
Such aggression indeed – your response was aggressive. Mine was to make the case that I just made – without aggression. My point is made, though you may not see it as such. This isn’t a competition. I simply tried to point out what your Caribbean contributors already tried to point out.
Now I see why they stopped.
l8r, d00d.
I appreciate your graciousness Taran. And I appreciate you.
CREO QUE TODA LATINO AMERICA ES UNA SOLA COSA SOLO QUE CON DIFERENTES MATIZES,Mexico tiene lo suyo,El salvador lo suyo Chile lo suyo por igual el resto de paises tienen lo suyo,a demas paises como .belize.brasil,guyana.que hablan diferente se identifican con nuestros paises.devemos aseptarlos como nuestros hermanos paises .o.k.