Response to Perez-Wendt

I found all the poems for this week to be an enjoyable read, but my favorite one by far is Perez-Wendt’s, “We Are Not the Crime We Are the Evidence.” In this poem the speaker is creating identity by using the words “they” and “us”. Because the speaker uses these words we can tell that there is a separation between two different types of people who are against each other. Although it is not clear what type of people we get that feeling because the words “they” and “us” make it seem like one group is better than the other.

From my understanding/reading of the poem I came to the conclusion that it is a piece about colonization. The reason I think it is poem about colonization is because the speaker of the poem uses words and sentences that can be interpreted as an act of colonialism. For instance, the speaker states, “ They’ve dusted us,” “Their fingerprints/ All over us.” For me that read as an act of colonialism because the speaker is not saying this in a positive light, instead he or she is presenting it negatively. The fact that the speaker says “they’ve dusted us” shows that he or she feels as if he or she is being swept away and forced to disappear. Also, the speaker may speaker feel as if he or she is being cleansed from his or her “savagery.” One can infer that this is a form of colonialism given that the elements of colonization are to cleanse and correct the ways of the other that are not like colonizer. Also, the fact that the speaker says they have fingerprints all over them shows that he or she feels as if his or her people are marked with the colonizers fingerprints.

In addition, the poem is filled with strong verbs such as “Chastened,” “Acquitted,” “Dismantled,” “Ignored,” and “Consigned.” When reading these verbs the first thing that came to mind was the act of colonization. These words can be used a description to show how the colonized subject has been torn apart by the colonizer. The colonized has been confined in “chastened cell” meaning he or she being restrained from what he or she wants to do or is being forced to do something. They have also been “dismantled” and “ignored” which for me means they have taken apart and put aside. This process of being taken apart and tossed to the side is very similar to act of colonization in terms of the colonizer changing the ways of the colonized to “correct” way of living.

So in this poem the poet is creating identity through the perspective of a colonized subject. The poet is challenging the generic term of identity because the speaker is identifying is his or herself as a colonized subject in contrast to identifying his or herself by his or her ethnicity. I like the fact that the speaker does not identify his or her ethnicity because anyone can relate to this piece, particularly if someone or a group of people has been colonized him or her. Does that make sense?

-Lizzie Chaidez