Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
If a testimonial is questioned for its presumed inaccuracies, then the contesting work of such testimonial must meet the criteria of impartiality, reliability, and validity for the counter-data it presents. This article probes Stoll's response to Menchu's work in terms of the quality of data it offers and the arguments it weaves through the analysis. His work is found to provide weak use of alternative interview and documentary sources, to engage in selective use of evidence, and to leave out important contextual aspects of life in civil-war and contemporary Guatemala. Hence, it is asserted that Stoll's book, far from constituting an attempt to carefully reconstruct the experience and trajectory of Menchu in unprejudiced terms, affords him the opportunity to diminish the importance and rightfulness of revolutionary action in Guatemala and the role of individuals in building a collective memory.
Nelly P. Stromquist (Wed,) studied this question.