In “Tropicalizations: Transcultural Representations of Latinidad,” a work edited by Aparicio and Chávez-Silverman, the authors discuss the variety of geo-cultural influences that have permeated Latin America and part of the United States. The work examines the concept of Tropicalization and the ways in which two cultures in an unequal relationship can interact and influence each other. I think it is interesting to consider the ways in which colonial nations have constructed their understanding of other nations. Wildly differing perceptions of other cultures and traditions were created, with significantly varying levels of power given to the subject of discussion.
As noted by the work, the Latin America region and its variety of cultures have, to some degree, engaged in a mutual exchange of culture and incorporated themselves into the U.S. in certain “contact zones.” This means that the members of these cultural groups have had more opportunities to make their voices heard or to succeed in the colonial environment. Other areas and cultures, with the example given in the book being Arabs, were given significantly less autonomy and representation, being largely framed within the constraints of a bigger culture’s outlook and agenda.
While the discrepancy between cultures given and denied exposure is easily evident, I think that the difference between the two can be misleading to the real-life effects of colonialism on people. Something I feel should be noted is that the relative ability of Latin peoples and cultures to engage and shape the discourse around themselves has detriments as well. Its existence has decreased their perceived “status” as a culture suppressed by another. By having a voice of its own, however small, the culture possesses exposure and power. Latin America can be seen as both more empowered than other cultures in similar circumstances while also presenting with less visible levels of suppression to the public eye.