ween cultures, and thus, a catharsis. Silko shows that the burning of the libraries was a radical action the Europeans took to preserve a certain reality. The American Government’s placement of Indians into American boarding schools also shows the suppression of cultural identity to preserve “homogeneity.” It seems that having power doesn’t make a culture confident because it will go to extremes to preserve one thought, thus killing any opportunity for open communication. Thus, it is the imperialists that are the antagonists of the catharsis theory by maintaining the intercultural gap.Both authors stress that, through literacy, the subjugated can voice their opinion in retaliation of the dominant power of a culture. The minorities are vulnerable to the majority group because they have no free and open communication with the major power to express their thoughts and points of view. Thus, their interpretations of reality is often lost, forgotten, or suppressed. Yet, what Silko and Pratt are stressing is that everyone has the ability and right to use the power of language despite status. Poma parodied Spanish history by “changing and [adapting] it along Andean lines to express Andean interests and aspirations.” Similarly, Helen Sekaquaptwea wrote a book on her perspective of the boarding schools. Seemingly, the point of Silko and Pratt’s emphasis on literacy as a tool to rebel, is to show that knowledge is power, especially the knowledge that the word will portray the thoughts of even the most “savage” people. Both authors state that literacy takes many uses other than the conventional meaning of the term. Literacy, for the powerful is used, not only to communicate, but also to influence, learn, protect, and destroy. The inferior culture, however, uses literacy to gain power over dominant points of view by voicing their opinions via writing. Yet, just like water is insoluble in oil, n...
