In the book “El Noche de Tlatelolco” by Elena Poniatowska we see multiple recounts and opinions of the horrific events that took place on October 2nd 1968 in Mexico city. On this day the Mexican Armed forces opened fire on unarmed civilians, one mother, Dolores Verdugo de Solís recounts the event saying “La sangre de mi hija se fue en los zapatos de todos los muchachos que corrían por la plaza,” (Poniatowska) which translates to “the blood of my daughter was on the shoes of all the men that ran through the plaza.”
However, the text itself also covers many perspectives of the Tlatelolco massacre that took place but places the event in context with the student movement and reform that was being demanded. “El Noche de Tlatelolco” shows that there were varying opinions in Mexico at the time in relation to the student movement and the government. One individual named Gonzalo Carranza Rojo who was a garage owner and he said “Yo creo que pase lo que pase, tarde o temprano todos van a dar al PRI. .. Entonces, ¿para qué tanto brinco estando el suelo parejo? (Poniatowska) which translates roughly to “I believe that whatever happens, soon or later everyone will give to the PRI (the president). So why jump so much when the ground is even?” These accounts, though diverse give a rounder view of the massacre. Some are individuals were tainted by propaganda or fear of repercussion of speaking out by the government yet all perspectives are valid. The voices of society that were being covered ranged from individuals themselves who were there, family members of victims, professors, teachers, hippies, reporters, store owners, etc.
The validity in the article lies within the number of perspectives and voices that are taken into account. This book is reliable in that its purpose was to display the horrific events and how they were crimes against humanity, how even in an event such as this there were still some that sided with the government showing the corruption that was occurring and at it’s heart it is making sure this story is told, that his part of history is never forgotten. In its essence it does have an opinion and a motive, however these biases are what is needed to tell this part of history. The biases here were not displayed previously and without this first hand accounts, we have nothing.
This source in regards to its usage in the final video will help to explain and display the different perspectives as well as to show the very opposite recounts of the Tlatelolco massacre. Most articles, original news comments and such have been erased from public eye and this work is one of so few that still has original content from those who experienced what took place that evening. It also will be useful in explaining why the Terror in Latin America was so terrible. It gives substance to the history books. In connection with the first source, there was a desire to find a conflicting point of view that would display elimination of information from that day.
References:
Poniatowska, Elena. La Noche De Tlatelolco. Escolar Y Mayo, 1971.
Interview with Gustavo Inda Rebollar and Ruth Gonzalez Muñoz
The interview with Gustavo Inda Rebollar and Ruth Gonzalez Muñoz in regards to the massacre of Tlatelolco was informative of how the media covered the massacre and how the government dealt with it. In the interview both parties discussed the lack of knowledge of the massacre in regards to being informed by the media or press. In fact they specify that the government prohibited all news about it. They recalled the event as they had been told. The event itself was not published for a long time. The tradition of word of mouth played a huge role in the spreading of what had happened in Mexico City.
Within the discussion, there was a moment when the Olympics were mentioned. The massacre of Tlatelolco occurred 10 days before the opening Olympic games. It was asked to Gustavo and Ruth how they had felt about the Olympics proceeding after the event. They stated that since most of the world had no idea what had just occurred, no one question the Olympics. When they watched the Olympic games as kids, (Gustavo, 9 and Ruth, 6) they remembered certain Olympians who had won and proceeded to protest the massacres and trying to show the world what really happened.
The focus of the conversation was the lack of information there was in the time that the massacre occurred. Yet, even with the government prohibiting the publication of information, word still spread and the student movement proceeded.
In regards to the validity and perspective of this source, it does need to be stated that both parties were quite young when the event happened and were living in a different city. Yet the validity comes with recounting of what they did know, how they found out about what was happening and the relation the massacre had to the Olympics. The purpose of this source was to hear from individuals who had to learn about the massacre in an alternative way since the government was prohibiting the spread of information. It does need to be stated that the individuals were not supporters of Gustavo Díaz Ordaz or the current president either. The politics in Mexico are much more complex and corrupt. There are few who support them therefore there is a bias here. They would not have stated anything in support of the government because of these reasons.
References:
Inda Rebollar, Gustavo, and Ruth Gonzalez Muñoz. “Interview About Tlatelolco Massacre”. Canada, 2020.
Hannah's Blog on LAST100 