On limits and asymmetries: some notes on whites and their cities for the Karajá
Data from 2000’s Brazilian demographic census drew attention, among other things, to the volume of the indigenous population in "urban residence" situation (38,5%). By the one hand, these numbers respond more to the historical momentum than to a changing situation, for indigenous presence...
Guardado en:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Online |
| Lenguaje: | portugués |
| Publicado: |
Universidade Estadual de Campinas. Instituto de Filosofia e Ciências Humanas
2020
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://econtents.sbu.unicamp.br/inpec/index.php/ruris/article/view/17002 |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| Sumario: | Data from 2000’s Brazilian demographic census drew attention, among other things, to the volume of the indigenous population in "urban residence" situation (38,5%). By the one hand, these numbers respond more to the historical momentum than to a changing situation, for indigenous presence in Brazilian cities and towns are by no means a new phenomenon. By the other hand, thought, they have little to say, for they take for granted what is such thing as "urban residence situation". To put it in non-technical terms, they take for granted what is such thing as a city or a town. What is it, after all? What is a city or a town from the indigenous perspective? Moreover, in what precisely a city or a town differ from an indigenous village and vice versa? This paper addresses to some of these questions. Taking the case of some of the Central Brazilian Karajá’s villages as the analytical focus, I would like to account for this particular indigenous group’s perspective on urban space but also for the way these Indians are confronted by their neighboring non-indigenous practices and understanding. With almost no exception, towns by the Araguaia riverside grew over sites formerly occupied by the Karajá and are therefore thought of by the Indians as standing within their own territory; at the same time, though, they are a limit to them, creating constraints of diverse natures. The living together of Indians and regional people stresses different modes of inhabiting and making places. Beyond accounting for this difference, I would like to point that it is indeed a tension; if there are mutual understandings and agreements, although equivocal, these are still asymmetrical. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2317-1480 |
