I'm hoping someone can help me.
My latest trilogy deals with Spaniards, western Mexican and Californian indians and Hispanics in general. How on earth do I describe their differences from other racial groupings?
I'm certainly NOT trying to be racist.
Anglo/Saxons like me are generally big-boned, have pale skin [many with freckles], blond hair and blue/green eyes. [Again, there are many, many exceptions to this]
Asians have the curilean[sp?] fold and yellowish [bad example] skin, also small of stature.
Africans, of course have dark brown to almost black skin with promintent facial features.
So, what exactly is it that makes Hispanics different?
The Spanish were European and many had blond hair and other Anglo features. However, the generally followed the Mediterranean mold of darker skin, black or brown hair and hazel eyes.
The Aztecs were noted for having large, hooked noses and dark skin browned from the strong sun. The Indians of Sonora/Sinaloa and Baja California had similar coloring but more rounded features. They were NOT redskins as referred to those of the northeastern area of North America.
I spent an hour plus in a Spanish language mass today, probably the only guerro, and tried my best to see what it is that distinguishes Hispanics/Mexicans from others. Their ethnicity was clear but, for the life of me, I can't pin down exactly what that is.
Help!
Ethnicity
Re: Ethnicity
Spaniards at the time of the age of exploration were of mixed ancestry, like all caucasians. Ostrogoth and Visigoth and Slavic peoples migrated to the Iberian peninsula and mixed with the Iberian people early on in antiquity, as Germanic and Slavic tribes did throughout the European mainland. Later, Muslim Moors migrated to the region and added to the mix. In terms of distinctive appearance characteristics, Spaniards are not too distinguishably different from most Southern Europeans due to similar ancestry. In the area of apparel, Spaniards were distinctive. Many of the preeminent fashions of the time originated in the Spanish royal court. The farthingale, notably.
Spanish personality attitudes were quite distinctive, as reflected in their ostentatious fashion sense. Spain was flourishing at the peak of its ascendency circa post 1492, following on the success of the centuries long Reconquista campaign, blessed and chosen by Providence with the discovery of the New World and its riches, mastery of the seas, until the loss of the Great Armada 1588, and rising English freebooter predation on the treasure fleet carrying off American gold and silver.
The Eastern Woodland Native Americans did not have a natural reddish hue. The red skin of legend is a consequence of a dye made from a root, probably madder, known as puccoon, that stained the skin. The red dye was mixed with bear grease and clay cosmetics which functioned as sun blocks and insect blocks and protection from the cold in wintertime. The True People believed red was the color of vigorous health. White the color of death. Perhaps, though not as accepted by scholars, Chinese skin hues in the past might have been a consequence of similar stains from the yellow soils of the Yangtze River drainage basin. Perhaps Middle Eastern and Mediteranean olive skin hues were from a similar cultural cosmetics practice or a consequence of similar widely practiced hygiene customs.
Western American Natives are of a different cultural group than the several Eastern Woodland groups. The three principle Eastern groups based on language divisions being Algic, Siouan, and Iroquian. Uto-Aztecan and Athabaskan predominated in Meso American regions and along Western North American coasts. Some scholars presume each linguistic culture group represents different migrations, from internal or external origination migrations.
Spanish personality attitudes were quite distinctive, as reflected in their ostentatious fashion sense. Spain was flourishing at the peak of its ascendency circa post 1492, following on the success of the centuries long Reconquista campaign, blessed and chosen by Providence with the discovery of the New World and its riches, mastery of the seas, until the loss of the Great Armada 1588, and rising English freebooter predation on the treasure fleet carrying off American gold and silver.
The Eastern Woodland Native Americans did not have a natural reddish hue. The red skin of legend is a consequence of a dye made from a root, probably madder, known as puccoon, that stained the skin. The red dye was mixed with bear grease and clay cosmetics which functioned as sun blocks and insect blocks and protection from the cold in wintertime. The True People believed red was the color of vigorous health. White the color of death. Perhaps, though not as accepted by scholars, Chinese skin hues in the past might have been a consequence of similar stains from the yellow soils of the Yangtze River drainage basin. Perhaps Middle Eastern and Mediteranean olive skin hues were from a similar cultural cosmetics practice or a consequence of similar widely practiced hygiene customs.
Western American Natives are of a different cultural group than the several Eastern Woodland groups. The three principle Eastern groups based on language divisions being Algic, Siouan, and Iroquian. Uto-Aztecan and Athabaskan predominated in Meso American regions and along Western North American coasts. Some scholars presume each linguistic culture group represents different migrations, from internal or external origination migrations.
Last edited by polymath on January 31st, 2011, 12:59 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Spread the love of written word.
-
longknife
Re: Ethnicity
Thanks!!! Great response. The thing about the grease and stuff to protect against the sun causing the reddish color is something I've never read or heard of.
I knew the stuff on western Indians as I've done a lot of research in the area. I know that western Mexican cultures matched those in what is now the southwestern USA. At the same time, it appears California, both Baja and north, were generally of a different cultural tree/line. Of course, the Paiute living on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevadas were of Shoshone lineage.
I guess I'm going at something I really don't need to worry about.
A fact that caught me by surprise were the number of settlers in early Spanish Californias who were of African descent, to include many of mixed Indians blood. In fact, Los Angeles and San Jose both were settled by a wide mixture of ethnic groups.
I knew the stuff on western Indians as I've done a lot of research in the area. I know that western Mexican cultures matched those in what is now the southwestern USA. At the same time, it appears California, both Baja and north, were generally of a different cultural tree/line. Of course, the Paiute living on the eastern side of the Sierra Nevadas were of Shoshone lineage.
I guess I'm going at something I really don't need to worry about.
A fact that caught me by surprise were the number of settlers in early Spanish Californias who were of African descent, to include many of mixed Indians blood. In fact, Los Angeles and San Jose both were settled by a wide mixture of ethnic groups.
Re: Ethnicity
You're welcome, lvcabbie.
As a general rule of thumb principle, readers will imagine physical appearances based on their cultural experiences. A timely, influential appearance characteristic here and there is sufficient to give readers something to go on. Influential characteristics are best noticed by a viewpoint character taking personal notice and expressing commentary relevant to the dramatic action.
Speech patterns and syntax are another way to distinguish clashing cultures in contact. Spanish syntax, for example, retains the formality of Latin's rigid gender and status distinctions, while Native American syntax favors animacy from individual standpoints.
Spaniards at the time of Conquista were convinced of their racial supremacy. Though the native peoples were no less certain of their racial superiority. African migrants were a commodity of Spanish settlement, as they were throughout the assorted Colonial Age colonies and empires and cultures. Racial intermixing occurred throughout. Though like with English cultures, African peoples were considered off limits (and tempting forbidden fruit) in the Spanish colonies. However, racial purity was an ideal of all the colonial cultures. So much so that a racial stratification nomenclature developed. Mestizo and mulatto, for instance.
One more significant point, Spanish cultures placed great importance on family values, as well as God, country, and king. Again, like English and other cultures. With the diminishment of family values in the modern West, how much importance past cultures placed on a sense of belonging isn't as familiar today as it was in the not so recent past. Spanish-American cultures preserve family values more than most other present-day ethnicities.
As a general rule of thumb principle, readers will imagine physical appearances based on their cultural experiences. A timely, influential appearance characteristic here and there is sufficient to give readers something to go on. Influential characteristics are best noticed by a viewpoint character taking personal notice and expressing commentary relevant to the dramatic action.
Speech patterns and syntax are another way to distinguish clashing cultures in contact. Spanish syntax, for example, retains the formality of Latin's rigid gender and status distinctions, while Native American syntax favors animacy from individual standpoints.
Spaniards at the time of Conquista were convinced of their racial supremacy. Though the native peoples were no less certain of their racial superiority. African migrants were a commodity of Spanish settlement, as they were throughout the assorted Colonial Age colonies and empires and cultures. Racial intermixing occurred throughout. Though like with English cultures, African peoples were considered off limits (and tempting forbidden fruit) in the Spanish colonies. However, racial purity was an ideal of all the colonial cultures. So much so that a racial stratification nomenclature developed. Mestizo and mulatto, for instance.
One more significant point, Spanish cultures placed great importance on family values, as well as God, country, and king. Again, like English and other cultures. With the diminishment of family values in the modern West, how much importance past cultures placed on a sense of belonging isn't as familiar today as it was in the not so recent past. Spanish-American cultures preserve family values more than most other present-day ethnicities.
Spread the love of written word.
-
Matt Phillips
- Posts: 16
- Joined: July 14th, 2010, 2:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: Ethnicity
Polymath - That was an interesting take. Could you elaborate on what you meant by, "Native American syntax favors animacy from individual standpoints." Can you give some examples and discuss what that means for writing dialogue for Native American characters (in English, but the characters are speaking their native language in the story)?
Dialogue, of course, does not have to evoke a different culture, but verisimiltude is important in historical fiction. How do you achieve verisimilitude in dialogue without lapsing into caricature through the use of phonetic spellings, etc.? Reading translated texts to pick up on syntax and diction is one way, but primary sources for some native cultures are sparse.
Thanks!
Dialogue, of course, does not have to evoke a different culture, but verisimiltude is important in historical fiction. How do you achieve verisimilitude in dialogue without lapsing into caricature through the use of phonetic spellings, etc.? Reading translated texts to pick up on syntax and diction is one way, but primary sources for some native cultures are sparse.
Thanks!
Re: Ethnicity
Native North American languages tended to acknowledge individual pecking order. That's what I mean by animacy, a person speaking to a superior might name the superior first or promote self's importance over another person or thing. Pecking order: deities, spirits, ancestors, headmothers or headmen, depending on whether in town or abroad, older kin, self, less important personages, animals generally, inanimate things, and so on. Nouns and personal pronouns first regardless of whether sentence subject or object, then the verb and the predicate compliment.
"I, John Smith, you tell, English ships, when come again?" Headman Wahunsonacaugh said.
John Smith, tell me when English ships come again. Modern English syntax.
The people's cultures didn't recognize passive voice as a rhetorical vice, though literal translations into English might be cast in passive voice. Actually, passive voice constructions were fairly common as most of the people were subservient to others in some relationship or other.
Great Horned Serpent I blessed by. (Dragon equivalent sky spirit, self-reference subject, verb, preposition. Passive voice.)
The Great Horned Serpent blessed me. (English active voice.) Passive voice modern English syntax, I am blessed by the Great Horned Serpent. "I" object of the action, "am blessed" to be auxilliary verb and main verb, and preposition "by," and subject actor of the bless action "Great Horned Serpent" in object position.
I know the syntax of animacy as a fourth grammatical person, again, recognizing pecking order. Fourth person has mostly faded from modern languages, though there are a few legacies surviving, i.e., for formal direct addresses. For instance, Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, Madame Majority Leader, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, Citizens, I come before you . . .
Literally translating a foreign language phrase into English, like Spanish, demonstrates how different the syntaxes are.
No tomes me pelo. [No you (familiar) pull my hair.] English equivalent idiom: Don't pull my leg.
Some cultures consider formal diction and syntax insulting, while others consider inappropriate familiarity insulting.
"I, John Smith, you tell, English ships, when come again?" Headman Wahunsonacaugh said.
John Smith, tell me when English ships come again. Modern English syntax.
The people's cultures didn't recognize passive voice as a rhetorical vice, though literal translations into English might be cast in passive voice. Actually, passive voice constructions were fairly common as most of the people were subservient to others in some relationship or other.
Great Horned Serpent I blessed by. (Dragon equivalent sky spirit, self-reference subject, verb, preposition. Passive voice.)
The Great Horned Serpent blessed me. (English active voice.) Passive voice modern English syntax, I am blessed by the Great Horned Serpent. "I" object of the action, "am blessed" to be auxilliary verb and main verb, and preposition "by," and subject actor of the bless action "Great Horned Serpent" in object position.
I know the syntax of animacy as a fourth grammatical person, again, recognizing pecking order. Fourth person has mostly faded from modern languages, though there are a few legacies surviving, i.e., for formal direct addresses. For instance, Mr. President, Mr. Vice President, Madame Majority Leader, Ladies and Gentlemen of the Senate, Citizens, I come before you . . .
Literally translating a foreign language phrase into English, like Spanish, demonstrates how different the syntaxes are.
No tomes me pelo. [No you (familiar) pull my hair.] English equivalent idiom: Don't pull my leg.
Some cultures consider formal diction and syntax insulting, while others consider inappropriate familiarity insulting.
Spread the love of written word.
-
Matt Phillips
- Posts: 16
- Joined: July 14th, 2010, 2:02 pm
- Contact:
Re: Ethnicity
That's helpful, Polymath, thank you.
Since we obviously can't use directly translated syntax like your "I, John Smith, you tell .." example, but also want to achieve some measure of verisimilitude, maybe a good middle ground would always be to observe the hierarchy you mentioned in writing Native American dialogue? Like:
"My mother entered the longhouse, and I spoke to her," rather than, "I spoke to my mother when she entered the longhouse."
and "The sachem was who I and my little brother sought," rather than, "My little brother and I sought the sachem."
The second one is more awkward. I suppose it's better to sacrifice verisimiltude if it can't be achieved without awkwardness, but I hope there's a way to do both.
Since we obviously can't use directly translated syntax like your "I, John Smith, you tell .." example, but also want to achieve some measure of verisimilitude, maybe a good middle ground would always be to observe the hierarchy you mentioned in writing Native American dialogue? Like:
"My mother entered the longhouse, and I spoke to her," rather than, "I spoke to my mother when she entered the longhouse."
and "The sachem was who I and my little brother sought," rather than, "My little brother and I sought the sachem."
The second one is more awkward. I suppose it's better to sacrifice verisimiltude if it can't be achieved without awkwardness, but I hope there's a way to do both.
Re: Ethnicity
The much maligned passive voice is one way to do both.
//My mother I spoke to when she entered the longhouse.//
//The Sachem my brother and me sought.//
Though neither at first glance appear passive, they are revealed so by recasting, separating the sentence objects in subject position from the subjects by the verbs, somewhat closer to modern English syntax.
//My mother was spoken to by me when she entered the longhouse.//
//The Sachem was sought by my brother and me.//
They might feel a little clumsy, but they're voice aesthetics that if used timely and judiciously for dialogue or thoughts could be effective characterization.
//My mother I spoke to when she entered the longhouse.//
//The Sachem my brother and me sought.//
Though neither at first glance appear passive, they are revealed so by recasting, separating the sentence objects in subject position from the subjects by the verbs, somewhat closer to modern English syntax.
//My mother was spoken to by me when she entered the longhouse.//
//The Sachem was sought by my brother and me.//
They might feel a little clumsy, but they're voice aesthetics that if used timely and judiciously for dialogue or thoughts could be effective characterization.
Spread the love of written word.
-
longknife
Re: Ethnicity
Wow! What great stuff!
I got away with using commonly understood stuff in the part where my MC is aboard ship. "Tain't da way da C'apn wants it." And so on.
I've also tried to ensure NOT using contractions, something Spanish does not use.
But, you've raised my curiosity. How would disciples/acolytes speak to the friars/fathers? When one refers to one to another of equal rank, I tried using el Padre or something similar.
I think I may just be making a big thing out of nothing. My audience is modern day people and my best goal might just to give them hints of things without going into boring details.
I got away with using commonly understood stuff in the part where my MC is aboard ship. "Tain't da way da C'apn wants it." And so on.
I've also tried to ensure NOT using contractions, something Spanish does not use.
But, you've raised my curiosity. How would disciples/acolytes speak to the friars/fathers? When one refers to one to another of equal rank, I tried using el Padre or something similar.
I think I may just be making a big thing out of nothing. My audience is modern day people and my best goal might just to give them hints of things without going into boring details.
Re: Ethnicity
Spanish clergy were as class conscious as any other subcultural group. Familiarity between superiors and subordinates was largely frowned upon. However, whether formal or familiar would go toward characterizing the characters' interpersonal relationships and the characters. Familiarity with close friends, formal with all others out of esteem or respect, even if coerced by force majeure.
Generally, honorifics are used when addressing a superior cleric. Your holiness, your eminence, your reverence, and so on. Padre by itself for familiarity. See honorific (linguistics) for a general survey of honorific speech. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorifics_(linguistics)
Addresses to subordinates were also formal register; however, they tended to implicate lower esteem and respect.
Anyway, the pecking order hierarchy of Spanish Catholic clergy, cardinal, bishop, priest, friar, deacon, brother or monk, and novice or novitiate, with subset hierarchies within each rank. There were also administrative titles, abbot for example, who managed the temporal needs of a monastery--abbey. Abbess for convents. Rector, manager of a rectory. Administrators weren't necessarily ordained ministers.
Some letters from the era may be of interest, in both the original Spanish and English translations;
These deal with ill-fated attempts to establish a Spanish mission at Ajacan, a precursor to the Anglo Jamestown, Virginia settlement.
"Letter of Luis de Quirós and Juan Baptista de Segura," 1570.
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/ja ... e?id=J1037
"Letter of Juan Rogel to Francis Borgia," 1572.
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/ja ... e?id=J1038
Generally, honorifics are used when addressing a superior cleric. Your holiness, your eminence, your reverence, and so on. Padre by itself for familiarity. See honorific (linguistics) for a general survey of honorific speech. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honorifics_(linguistics)
Addresses to subordinates were also formal register; however, they tended to implicate lower esteem and respect.
Anyway, the pecking order hierarchy of Spanish Catholic clergy, cardinal, bishop, priest, friar, deacon, brother or monk, and novice or novitiate, with subset hierarchies within each rank. There were also administrative titles, abbot for example, who managed the temporal needs of a monastery--abbey. Abbess for convents. Rector, manager of a rectory. Administrators weren't necessarily ordained ministers.
Some letters from the era may be of interest, in both the original Spanish and English translations;
These deal with ill-fated attempts to establish a Spanish mission at Ajacan, a precursor to the Anglo Jamestown, Virginia settlement.
"Letter of Luis de Quirós and Juan Baptista de Segura," 1570.
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/ja ... e?id=J1037
"Letter of Juan Rogel to Francis Borgia," 1572.
http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/etcbin/ja ... e?id=J1038
Last edited by polymath on February 3rd, 2011, 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.
Spread the love of written word.
-
longknife
Re: Ethnicity
Polymath - thanks loads for the input.
You must have a background for history or linguistics. In any case, you've given me a lot of grist for the mill.
I already understood the heirarchal[sp?] status of the Catholic clergy. While I always wrote Father Serra, the friars were always addressed by one another as Brother. And the disciples/acolytes addressed all friars as Padre - except for el Padre Presidente.
I also did my best to show the clergy's belief that all Indians, mulatos, mestizos etc were child-like and needed their parental guidance.
You must have a background for history or linguistics. In any case, you've given me a lot of grist for the mill.
I already understood the heirarchal[sp?] status of the Catholic clergy. While I always wrote Father Serra, the friars were always addressed by one another as Brother. And the disciples/acolytes addressed all friars as Padre - except for el Padre Presidente.
I also did my best to show the clergy's belief that all Indians, mulatos, mestizos etc were child-like and needed their parental guidance.
Re: Ethnicity
You're welcome, lvcabbie.
History and linguistics are passionate areas of interest for me. Also, working as an editor, fact checking is one of my chores. I study linguistics for its contribution to my writing growth. Stylistics, semiotics, poetics, narratology, and rhetoric too. I'm not so much interested in an artful turn of a phrase as communicating meaning as effectively as humanly possible. I've learned the hard way if I mean one thing readers are likely to take the most obtuse meaning imaginable. Not because they're peevish, because I tend to see things differently than some presupposed social norm. Which should be an advantage for novel writing, but is one of my stumbling blocks.
Hierarchy is one of my spelling demons. If I don't stop and think about it, I reverse the I-E hierarchy. I before E . . . Dessert and desert are another.
History and linguistics are passionate areas of interest for me. Also, working as an editor, fact checking is one of my chores. I study linguistics for its contribution to my writing growth. Stylistics, semiotics, poetics, narratology, and rhetoric too. I'm not so much interested in an artful turn of a phrase as communicating meaning as effectively as humanly possible. I've learned the hard way if I mean one thing readers are likely to take the most obtuse meaning imaginable. Not because they're peevish, because I tend to see things differently than some presupposed social norm. Which should be an advantage for novel writing, but is one of my stumbling blocks.
Hierarchy is one of my spelling demons. If I don't stop and think about it, I reverse the I-E hierarchy. I before E . . . Dessert and desert are another.
Spread the love of written word.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 20 guests