Volume XI of the Caribbean Conference Series published from papers read at the annual University of Florida sessions is directed at a broad survey of Central America for the first time. The reports are divided into the six categories of Nature and Man, History and Government, The Economy, the Culture, International Relations, and Reference and Bibliography. Also for the first time, the articles are largely home grown, as all but five writers come from the University of Florida. The results are not appreciably different from those visible in previous volumes. Some writers combined personal observations with old material while others more seriously did some research.
It is customary in reviewing books of this sort to say that the articles are uneven. (I will be no revisionist.) A paper by Murdo J. MacLeod makes a contribution in every sense. While it is hard to agree with him that Colonial Central America was exciting, his theme is fresh and his efforts should be applauded. It may be that he is correct.
Personally most useful is the bibliographical article by Irene Zimmerman. She explains clearly what she does not propose to do— within these restrictions it is a craftsman’s job of organization. The emphasis is on the period since 1821; Panama is included—although not historically Central American, it is now a part of most statistical studies.
Naturally enough the volume contains some errors, minor and otherwise. The Central American constitution of 1824 was not unicameral. Bolívar’s dream of a united America hardly came true at Panama in 1826. Manifest destiny did not emerge from “several interpretations (of the Monroe Doctrine) of the past.” Woodrow Wilson was not President of the United States in 1911. Several writers pay lip service to the diversity of Central America but adopt a collective concept in order to simplify their conclusions.
The five non-Gainesville contributors are well-known Central Americans. José Figueres, quoted today as often as Bolívar (Toynbee rates well in this volume), plays his usual role of friendly critic of the United States. Jorge García Granados treats of the slow assimilation of the Guatemalan Indian. Carlos Arosomena Arias acquits Theodore Roosevelt of assault on Panama. Jorge Fidel Durón stresses Honduras in Central America’s international relations. Alejandro Baca-Muñoz surveys the present and future of Central American economic integration, a wholesome topic.
Editor Wilgus wrote the introduction, largely an account of the two Inter-American agricultural schools at Turrialba and Zamorano.
On the whole the book is for the general reader. Too little material is examined intensively or from new viewpoints to intrigue the specialist. It could prove useful to the Central American historian, as an example, who needs a handy survey of music or anthropology. (It was disappointing nonetheless to find a summary of one genre for five nations reduced to the works of one man.)
The book points two warning signs to us. One is frivolous: We are in danger of creating clichés now about Central America as bad as those of the “inscrutable Orient.” We are all guilty of such expressions as “backward, ” “ independence by default, ” “ the bridge of the Americas,” “crossroads of the world.” Let’s stop.
The other warning is that we not only cannot agree on what is United States intervention, but worse, we do not know how to separate the evil from the good.
