THE CARTA DEL PAISAJE DE LAS AMÉRICAS: A RESPONSIVE UNDERSTANDING

Abstract

Introduction: The present work results from a dialogical and critical understading of the recently published Carta del Paisaje de las Américas where there is an attempt to find out the singularities of this paper compared to others once written in the Americas. This text, as a whole, addresses at which extent such document is an instrument, and by doing so, its existence as an instrument that grants the right to happiness as Americas’ collective asset .Purpose: The present work aims at claiming the Carta as an instrument that will grant the right to happiness as a collective asset of the Americas. Methods (Optional): To achieve the purpose, it was read all Cartas ever produced, whether regionally or nationally, in the Americas, in order to understand their discursive genre -  supported by the diological language conception developed by Mikhail Bakhtin and his circle – whose document referred in this article belongs to. After elucidating the genre of the document's discourse, the case of “happiness as a asset” was taken as an object of reflection, since it is exposed in the Carta as the maximum principle to be granted through the landscape and as a collective asset of the Americas. We also focused on the identification of characteristics of both national and regional Cartas already written in the American scope which would unveil their methodologies. For this reason, when understanding the process of creating the Cartas, it is taken into account how committed they are to the representation of singularities and particularities; how committed they are to alterity and to the different ways of conceiving and relating to the landscape. Results: The choice of the discursive genre does not guarantee the longing for serving as an instrument and there is a lack of conceptual precision that opens up the possibility of manipulating specifications and ideological principles found on the document. The right to happiness as a collective asset in the Americas is a transcendental longing, detached from the concrete reality that, therefore, is not legitimate. Conclusión: This document represents an advance regarding the way we think about our landscapes collectively. But at the same time, it also shows us the difficulty of operationalizing a collective project as well as the trouble constructing methodologies collectively that enable to represent the otherness present in the countries and regions made up by the Americas. The principles stated are much more transcendental expression of some intellectuals’ wish, than an immanent and really concrete expression. Attention is drawn, in particular, to the need to overcome this transcendentalism that highlighted the Construction of our National, Regional Cartas and, consequently, of our Continental Landscape Carta; to the need to open ourselves up to other individuals. The realities of the Americas, which are diverse, plural, singular, contradictory when brought out by the instruments developed based on the universal principles of the Carta, will certainly be uncharacterized by principles detached from their reality. Therefore, the choice of the discursive genre did not grant the longing to being used as an instrument that will enable the achievement of the right to happiness as a collective asset in the Americas.