for the past two weeks i have been taking a class on curanderismo, or mexican folk healing i have wasted 600 dollars on tuition and 2 weeks of my summer break here is the final essay i wrote for the class summing up what i felt about the class (note: if i seem like i'm coming off rather hard on the hocus pocus stuff, well it's because i am, but anyone who has spoken with me can tell you that i am sympathetic to the idea of magic, i just chose to leave out my criticism of curanderismo in terms of magical works and focus on the rational side of the equation):
name changed to protect the guilty
**********@unm.edu
7/30/09
Anthropology 340
Traditional medicine without borders
I think what I will take away from this class is a much clearer sense of what it means to be a practitioner of traditional medicine within a modern setting. It seems to be an uphill struggle against the perceptions of the modern medical field. Modern medicine seems to cast dispersions on the practice of traditional methodology’s for healing. So not only does the healer have to work within the context of being perceived as a second class healer in terms of technique, they have to suffer what I imagine often amounts to ridicule when they discuss their profession in a non interpersonal context or with other health professionals. Modern western medicine, or allopathic medicine as it was referred to in the class, is not known to use the techniques of traditional medicines such as the curanderismo techniques displayed in class. The practitioners of the traditional techniques point out that western medicine is lacking in certain fundamental things that are present in the techniques used by the curandero. This they say is what differentiates the two styles in terms of effectiveness. The traditional medicine looks at the patient in terms of a holistic approach whereas the allopathic medicine only looks at the patient in terms of the specific symptoms of the disease they may be suffering, and fails to take the entirety of the patient and their needs into account.
The word allopathic was first used by Samuel Hahnemann the founder of homeopathy, it was intended to be a term of derision for “modern medicine”. I think it rather telling that this was the term that was chosen to be used by the vast majority of the presenters during the class in that allopathic is not a term that most medical doctors use to describe what they practice. In fact there seemed to be a distinct sense of distaste for western medicine by a good portion of the presenters. While during the first few days of the class there were overtures of attempts to integrate the fields of modern medicine (the term I will choose to use out of respect) with traditional methodology. While I can respect the attempt there was never any discussion as to how this was approached. What were the specific techniques utilized within the context of the integration? Furthermore from what I saw, what techniques could be utilized? I find it hard to figure out what the difference is between a platica and a normal therapy session save for the presence of a red head band, overtones of spirituality, and perhaps the lack of certification to perform therapy in the state of New Mexico. That was the only instance where I saw a clear area where the two techniques could me “merged” though they differ little in application.
When discussing the efficacy of the techniques it was often said that one need faith for the rituals to truly work. Perhaps this is a personal bias but when discussing things that are of a scientific nature, as medicine is, or at least should be, faith is the absolute last thing that I wish to hear. After Judith Ann Pancho Claver’s presentation where she depicted doctors as nothing more than pill pushing monsters I have to admit I had lost any interest in what she had to say. I’m not trying to decry the usefulness of faith in terms of healing but faith alone has it’s limits. Let me give a small thought experiment for the interested reader; if a curandero were to be transplanted from central Mexico the heart of Africa and was asked to heal someone in a village there, how effective would the techniques utilized by the curandero be? Now assume exactly the same situation but switch the curandero with a medical doctor of the western tradition. Given that the western doctor has the tools available to him to practice, he will be just as effective in Africa as he would be in Mexico as has been proven out by history. I would wager that the curandero would find his “cures” not nearly as effective in Africa on someone who doesn’t have the context to “believe” in what the curandero is doing. For me, the extent to which I will trust someone with my health is the extent to which their methods are proven to work. Only western medicine can provide reasons for why things work, and why they don’t and back those reasons up with facts. This is a level of thoroughness that was not offered by the curandero’s in their presentations. It seemed as though the majority of the presenters cited “diseases” that were in fact issues that would either work themselves out in time or could just as easily be handled in a more rational manner. The near constant claim that western medicine made no attempts to heal many of the “diseases” listed by the presenters was ridiculous. The vast majority of the “diseases” that were described would not be things that an MD would deal with, they are issues for a therapist or a psychologist. Which should have been obvious to the various presenters who were, or are themselves in at least some capacity performing the functions of providing therapy in a professional context . It was this blindness to the obvious and the purposeful double think that struck me most about the majority of the presenters. They would in the same sentence speak of integration then speak poorly of western medicine. The frequency of this behavior increased as the 2 weeks progressed.
In terms of the presenters chosen I only have three very strong reactions. The first being the one I mentioned concerning Judith Ann Pancho Claver, the second was the strange inclusion of the brother sister energy healing team who had very little to say about traditional curanderismo. The third was the most distasteful to me. Elena Avila is perhaps the most egotistical human being I have yet been in the presence of. She opened her talk by saying, and this is only mildly paraphrased; “when I started training in curandersimo it was an almost extinct practice.” I find that impossible to believe given the overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Furthermore she was the only person to receive an entire day to herself. In addition to having her book be a required reading material for the class and having her book be for sale in the “woman’s resource center” as mentioned in the syllabus, the woman’s resource center of course being run by one of her disciples. Humility is said to be a virtue of a curandero, Elena is most certainly not in possession of this virtue.
In summary what I learned from this class is that curanderismo is nothing more than a few methods for performing the ill defined act of “healing” “diseases” that are not truly diseases but more psychological issues. It does this through ritual and symbolic magic (i.e.: the egg for the limpia). Where it has gotten out of hand is in people who believe they truly have the ability to cure the ailments that fall outside the bounds of curanderismo’s curative limits. I was once told, to be wary of people who have something to sell you. Everyone who presented had something to sell me, a product, a service, a group, a store, or a belief.
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
baronsamdei's journal
