I really enjoyed … y no se lo trago la tierra. The anecdotes are well written individually, with their tales of maturation from childhood and the ironic and heartbreaking situations the characters find themselves in, but the way that Rivera weaves them all together is masterfully done. It took me awhile to appreciate the structure of the book because at first all I could see was a collection of unrelated fragments. At first the protagonist feels that he had lost a year, and he feels unsettled and disoriented, but at the end he is at peace because “se dio cuenta de que en realidad no había perdido nada.” The book is a process through which Rivera draws upon the experiences of many fictional characters to describe the authentic Chicano experience. This series of random events, when seen together at a distance, form a portrait of a people.

Given the importance of this narrative technique, can we even say that the boy is the central character? We do not even know his name. But we do know the names of Ramon and Juanita, the quarreling lovers, the children of the unfortunate Garcia family, Chuy who died at war. We also hear their voices – the book is largely composed of criss-crossing conversations, fragments of dialogue by unknown speakers, stories related second-hand by gossiping neighbors. The events in the book are the collective life of el pueblo and they are narrated through its many voices. There are many identities and attitudes within this collective, this much is clear from the penultimate chapter when we overhear the private thoughts of the stranded migrants. Some angrily curse their situation and others let their thoughts wander peacefully – you can see both resignation and rebellion, but always hope of something better. I’ve never read a book where you could say that an entire group was the protagonist instead of a single character. Could anyone give me any other examples of books written this way?