JOSEPH GELFER

[Text below from my 2012 article in the current Fortean Times]

2012 and Indigenous Fantasy

The Mayan Factor

Most people who have heard of the 2012 phenomenon know it is ‘something to do with the Mayan calendar’. There is an element of truth to this, as the date is derived from the closing of the thirteenth b’ak’tun of the Mayan Long Count calendar. However, 2012 speculation begins in earnest when various indigenous ‘prophecies’ are cited that suggest what will actually happen on or around 21 December 2012. Indeed, the use and abuse of allegedly indigenous knowledge is a key 2012 theme, as indicated in the title of one of the first cultural academic critiques by Robert Sitler, The 2012 Phenomenon: New Age Appropriation of an Ancient Mayan Calendar.

Appropriation of indigenous knowledge is a highly contentious issue. In a world where all indigenous cultures have had their land and resources pillaged, maintaining control of identity and traditional knowledge is one of their last remaining indigenous assets. If non-indigenous people come along and misrepresent and profit from that identity and traditional knowledge, a great injustice is often experienced.

Within the context of 2012, this has chiefly happened through the use of Mayan culture and its mobilisation in non-Mayan contexts. The primary example of this was José Argüelles, who adopted a mythical rendering of the Mayan calendar that he called the Dreamspell calendar. Argüelles made much of Mayan culture, but the Dreamspell calendar was largely a product of his imagination inspired by generic Mayan aesthetics, rather than anything genuinely Mayan. Nonetheless, Argüelles constructed a substantial career and movement based around this adoption and adaptation of Mayan indigenous culture. Argüelles was certainly aware of the dangers of this process, and spoke of taking inspiration from the ‘Galactic Maya’ who are of a more cosmological nature rather than the more mundane ‘real Maya’, thus distancing himself from the impure political realities of cultural appropriation.

The Dreamspell calendar is just the first of an almost endless string of 2012 books and products that draw inspiration from allegedly indigenous culture. One of the key outcomes of this process is how 2012 has conflated numerous cultures, suggesting they have a singular message when it comes to 2012. It is common, for example, to see a lot of slippage between Mayan and Aztec artefacts (the Aztec Sun Stone is probably one of the main 2012 images) in 2012 writings. North American indigenous culture is also drawn upon, particularly that of the Hopi, with any number of supposedly initiated individuals passing comment on how Native Americans also have their own 2012 prophecies. It is significant, too, that some 2012 gurus have written for themselves crucial roles in the manifestation of indigenous 2012 prophecies, in effect robbing them of having an indigenous hero.

A Global Context

The use of indigenous culture in 2012 is by no means exclusive to the Americas: the 2012 narrative also extends as far as New Zealand. One example is Drunvalo Melchizedek’s book Serpent of Light: Beyond 2012 in which the author suggests that all the indigenous people of the world are somehow working together in order for a cosmic serpent to settle in the high Andes of Chile within a 2012 context. The book concludes with a grandiose visit to New Zealand. Melchizedek tells us he received an invitation from the Maori Queen before going on to share secret knowledge of the Waitaha people about the next serpentine movement.

It is significant that Melchizedek does not just trade upon Maori identity, but an amplified presentation of indigeneity in New Zealand, for the Waitaha are not ‘regular’ Maori, but largely mythical Maori. In his book, Song of Waitaha: The Histories of a Nation, Barry Brailsford argues that the Waitaha people were not simply an early Maori tribe, but an ancient tribe who settled New Zealand many centuries before recognised settlement, and that their history has been suppressed. Iconic New Zealand historian Michael King dismissed Brailsford’s historical claims, arguing ‘there was not a skerrick of evidence’ that the Waitaha people existed before modern settlement. On his website, Melchizedek went on to sell costly tours with the Waitaha people, acting as a kind of travel agent/knowledge broker.

Melchizedek here combines a number of elements of the 2012 use of indigenous culture in both North America and Australiasia: the singular indigenous worldview; the outsider who rolls up to an indigenous community and shares in their secrets; the glossing over of ‘real’ indigenous cultures by referring to some crypto-historic or non-terrestrial culture; the monetising of indigenous knowledge.

A Balancing Act

While it is clear that indigenous motifs are routinely hijacked in 2012, it is equally clear that this is not necessarily the intention of the hijackers. Many of the individuals who use indigenous themes on their quest for meaning around 2012 would be horrified to be charged with theft or even racism. For many seekers, their mobilisation of indigenous knowledge comes from a deep respect and appreciation for indigenous culture: there is a clear disconnect between intention and effect.

The challenge for these individuals is how to do justice both to their perception of indigenous culture, and how indigenous cultures perceive themselves. This is a difficult task, and one made significantly more complex in the colonised world: non-indigenous residents of North America, Australia and New Zealand, for example, can never really claim to honour indigenous culture without first genuinely owning the fact that they are living on stolen land. Such a realisation requires extraordinary political will and deep soul-searching, and has yet to happen anywhere in the world at a national level.

There are other more modest steps that can be taken that move towards getting the balance right. A good first step is to understand that indigenous cultures—even within a single country—are vastly different, and their true identities lie in their cultural specificities, not some singular pan-indigenous worldview. Equally important is to be more critical of the source of supposedly indigenous knowledge. Information passed on from a weekend shamanic initiation in Peru, for example, is likely to be flaky: genuine indigenous knowledge is guarded fiercely, and must be earned.

Learning about indigenous knowledge in a culturally appropriate context requires actually getting to know indigenous people: this is not as elusive as you might imagine, but does take some time. Once such relationships begin to form, the political realities facing indigenous cultures are likely to surface, personal alliances are likely to emerge, and genuine indigenous knowledge is likely to inspire the rest of the world. And then, just maybe, the 2012 message will finally begin to manifest.