I too wrote the wrong blog on Sunday… Sorry Jon!

I am definitely beginning to feel as though Jon has purposefully organized the order of the class texts from least to most interesting. I have enjoyed everything we’ve read thus far in class, but every time I think I’ve found my favourite text I end up loving the next one even more.

For me, reading Ruiz de Burton was an absolute treat. I loved the overwhelmingly sarcastic nature of Who Would Have Thought It?. Every point she made was so wonderfully satirical and oozing with contempt for the pretentious upper class New Englanders who bore the brunt of her mockery. Even their names were ridiculous… “Hammerhard”… “Hackwell”… Perhaps the reason she got away with such a harshly critical novel in 1872 was that she made fun of everyone and everything. The literature of Maria Amparo Ruiz de Burton is so heavily laden with cleverly disguised social criticisms that it is possible authorities were oblivious to the true meaning of her literature.

Marti, however, was another story. While I heartily appreciated the beautifully descriptive style employed by this poetic Cubano, I can not honestly say my Spanish is at a level where I can properly appreciate his poetic brilliance. Having to stop every two seconds to look up a word is what robbed me of the authentic Marti experience. Rivera was more my style. I think that if need be, I could sit down and read Rivera without a Spanish-English dictionary and still know what was going on. With Marti? Not a chance. Many of the words I looked up weren’t even listed in any of my dictionaries. The first few stories, however, which I took enormous amounts of time to translate entirely, were extremely beautiful. Jose Marti clearly has almost as great a love for magnificent architectural structures as for intricate language. His ability to make the dingy, overcrowded Brooklyn Bridge dazzle with splendour and the gaudy, corroding Statue of Liberty radiate magnificence is incredible. Jose Marti’s way with words is truly impressive.

What struck me to the core about Tomas Rivera’s writing was his uniquely intricate style and the subtle manner in which he used it to perpetuate the illusion of a collective Chicano voice. The slightly confusing and disjointed manner in which y no se lo trago la tierra is written, if anything, adds to the reader’s understanding of the Chicano situation. This element of confusion layered within the text is metaphorical for the feelings of the young protagonist as he attempts to make sense of the unjust, bewildering world around him. The young boy is caught in a whirlwind of discrimination and spiritual doubt as he struggles with even his own identity during exceedingly difficult years. Although it may take a little getting used to, Rivera’s style is a brilliant addition to his insightful explorations of complex Chicano emotions and issues.

I also thought the movie, Salt of the Earth was crucial to a proper understanding of the full spectrum of issues faced by the Chicano people. While the novels we have read portray the larger, more collectively troubling issues of racial oppression, Salt of the Earth takes it one step further by illuminating an entirely uncharted instance of oppression: the oppression of Chicano women by their own husbands. Many authors have spent so much time dwelling on the racial discrimination of the Chicanos as a whole, the additional gender oppression dealt with by Chicano women has taken a back seat and hidden in the shadow of this more widespread issue. The movie is thus extremely important to a full understanding of the Chicano situation, as it addresses all issues central to their struggle.

I realize this is a little late but the internet has either been unavailable to me or i have been studying for other midterms, but now its time to focus on this class!

Well, these past weeks have flown by! I’ve really enjoyed our class overall. I think that the combination and variety of the readings really made for some diverse discussions. I do think we came back to the same issues a lot of the time, that’s just a reality when you take into consideration the era and group of people we’re reading about. I think a lot of us brought some really interesting points and ideas to the table, and we came up with some great observations all together!

I’m going to say a bit about Marti, as a lot of people have put down his readings. I really enjoyed them overall. Partly perhaps because I read them in English afterward, but also because I really enjoyed, as we know was extremely prevalent, his descriptive style. I loved how he used lists of Spanish words most of us had never heard, but had important meanings. Words which some of the time, only exist in Spanish!

As most have said about “Salt of the Earth”, it was so much fun! I am guilty as I voted for the 80’s movie, but I am quite happy we watched the one we did. I’m suspicious about how realistic it was, as this idealistic version of New Mexico with Anglo’s and latinos living together. Obviously there was some racial tension, but I’m talking about the workers and the lower class. Everyone seemed so happy! It was a refreshing break from the readings, that’s for sure!

Despite the slow start and dragged out chapters, I ended up taking a liking to “Who would have thought it”. I think that Ruiz de Burton does an excellent job of portraying this mass transition over time of a New England family during the civil war. Her detailed chapters and stories within the novel show us the importance of class, race and gender obviously. But also taking into consideration her being a Chicana, I think it’s interesting reading knowing the thoughts in the novel are coming from her mind. Funny how her name wasn’t on the book to begin with…

I’ll stop there, and say that I’m so exited for the next few books that are coming! You’re all in for a treat with Julia Alvarez, let me tell you! I think as we now slide to somewhat more contemporary literature, primarily in English I believe, we’ll all be able to relate much better, and form some interesting discussions.

I was in a film studies course prior to this class and I remembered one of the required reading was Michael Cieutat’s account on Mexican iconography. “On the one hand, there was a Mexican Catholic, subject to a harsh social hierarchy (from hidalgo to peon, crushed by tradition… on the other, the American Protestant on racial purity, rejecting miscegenation, unlike the Mexican who accepts the mestizo.”

Religion seems to be poignant issue regardless of the period in which the novel is set. Ruiz de Burton uses Catholicism to distinguish Spanish Catholics and Irish Catholics through Lola’s refusal to sleep beside Mrs. Norval’s Irish maid. The boy in Rivera’s novel seems to have a problematic relationship towards religion. Rivera juxtaposes images and ideas.

The novels also better informed me of Chicano history. The theory of Manifest destiny was reflected in Who Would Have Thought It? and migration seemed to be the pressing concern in …y no se lo trago la tierra before it was published in the 1970s.

I have enjoyed the books we read so far. They constantly questioned the concept of borders and its fluidity. In my introduction, I had restricted myself in defining North American literature and in a way confined myself within a personal border. By reading Ruiz de Burton, Marti and Rivera, I now have a better understanding of North America in its entirety.

I wrote the wrong blog on Sunday……

I’ve enjoyed most the various styles of writing employed by the writers. I’m a bit of a sucker for Barton’s eloquence and her coy narratives in her book, which are reminiscent of a hipster music critic reviewing 19th century white society. As well, her characters are so poignantly created they linger in your mind for days after reading it, whether it be Hackwell idiosyncrasies and conniving speeches or Mrs. Norval’s silly points of view. There are elements of humour which are strewn throughout it, so once you get over the fact that it’s not an easy read you can enjoy the richness that bleeds over the pages.

Marti’s observational stylings are quite sensational, though for someone whose Spanish skills need some crimping I couldn’t grasp every one of his descriptions. He does open our eyes to the experience of New York as the bustling, almost supernatural metropolis that it remains as today. Having seen New York City it was interesting to read someone who shared the same awe as I did after visiting the city. It was also enjoyable that his views of America were taken from an objective way, and didn’t let many of his own opinions barge in.

Rivera was a good read as well, though more emotional then it was eloquent, it certainly captures all the pains of the labouring Mexican-Americans in a surreal way in many ways incomparable to anything I’ve ever read.

All in all, it’s interesting exploring different methods these authors comment on society and how it’s experienced by Mexican-Americans, and I look forward to delving in further.

it’s about that time of the year…. midterms, papers, (blogs…wikis), not to mention all of the readings that go along with these academic endeavors. So far this term we’ve covered such a variety of readings and i think that i have enjoyed tomas rivera’s work the best (convenient since he is also my wiki-subject…. but a coincidence none the less). i think i enjoyed this the most because of its abiguities – it’s structured chaos within the very format of the novel. i enjoyed that there were no characters and that you had to jump from one ‘chapter’ to the next without very much warning.
going back to the beginning with “who would have thought it”; i didn’t not enjoy this book, but obviously (and with, from what i can tell from class/blogs) with a class consensus, the books ending was somewhat ________. Despite this blank ending, the characters were vivid and, in my opinion, probably quite accurate with how people in the time and area would have reacted to such scandal.
marti’s readings were, on the other hand, difficult and at the same time, rewarding. i struggled to no end with these readings but what i did comprehend from them, i enjoyed very much. marti is a poetic writer with a beautiful fluidity in his writing. he can take something like the brooklyn bridge and turn it into this living creation of the people. i loved that he took the time to describe the people alongside the bridge (even if it was difficult to read…) and how they impacted each other.
finally, i wanted to mention once again, that i enjoyed the movie very much, despite it’s dated, and cheesey appearance. i can only imagine what it would have been like at that time to go through what the characters did and the rough, black and white images really enforced what we had read up to that point.

Hasta ahora tengo que decir que la mejor cosa que hemos leido ha sido lo de Jose Marti. Simplemente porque es la lectura que me hizo sentir algo mas profundo que las otras. Cuando escribi mi blog de Jose Marti, estaba llena de sentimientos, pasiones, ideas que corrian por mi cabeza. Las imagenes que pintaba Marti eran las mas bellas, las mas reales, las mas humanas, y el las describia con su profundo talento literario y filosofico. Y aunque el era cubano, ni Chicano o imigrante a los Estados Unidos, el entendia realmente, perfectamente, lo que era America y lo que sigue siendo hoy….vio el pasado de America, el presente, y tambien el futuro que vendria. A veces la vista del exterior es mejor que la interior; Marti entendia mas claramente el espiritu de America que los Americanos que observaba.
Asi que releyendolo no me cuesta demasiado.

Sorry if it is a little late but there was so much to do over the thanksgiving weekend that I had no time to blog.

Anyways,  so far my favorite read has been Who Would Have Thought It? I came to appreciate how everything was in flux in this novel.  Every single character changes for better or for worse.  The personalities of each character do not change, they seem to be the only thing that is truly constant in this novel.  Even though certain characters travelled upwards in their social assent their personal qualities remained in tact.  I thought this was quite funny because each person who ascended in the social hierarchy of the time only did so because of the money from a woman who mostly all of them shunned.  As much as I enjoy comedies of error, I was happy with Y no se lo tragó la tierra.  Even thought the book was depressing at times I was mostly entertained by it.

I enjoy the content and the atmosphere of the class. The Spanish readings have been challenging for me but they have helped my Spanish immensely. Even though for me it can be intimidating to speak Spanish I think I’ll live.  Anyways, I’m looking forward to the second half of the semester.

So, I apologize that I’m a few days late. It seems that going home for Thanksgiving and being in the middle of nowhere at Grandma’s house means no internet.

I’ve thoroughly enjoyed this course so far. I feel it is one of the courses I have taken so far at the university level that is really engaging, and where I have to actually think, not just memorize.

Although I didn’t initially enjoy the first three works we analyzed, looking back in retrospect, I find that these works were like a shot of vodka — a bad taste at first, but with lingering taste later that makes you feel good.

A theme I connected with that was strung throughout Ruiz de Burton, Rivera, and Marti, along with “The Salt of the Earth” was the concept of “American”. Of who is, and who is not. Being born and raised in the states, it is a concept that has been present my entire life. I feel as if in both private and public primary education in the US, we learn about how great our country is because it is “a melting pot of all cultures”. But once you step outside to recess, you see all the Filipino kids playing together, all the African-American kids playing together, and all of the Caucasian kids playing together. And somehow the image of “American” is one that is primarily white.

To me, it seems like this…You can be an American if you parents were immigrants. You can be an American if your grandparents were immigrants. But only if your parents or grandparents (etc) immigrated from Europe. A family could have immigrated from China 150 years ago, and this family would somehow be viewed by the American public as “less American” than a family that immigrated from Germany 25 years ago. There is so much discrimination in the States. I can feel it from living in a liberal area of Washington State, and I can’t even begin to talk about the almost bi-polarization of races in other parts of the US I have visited–southern California, North Carolina, South Dakota. It seems as if the US wants to call itself a “melting pot” or a “racial quilt” but wants to be able to pick what ingredients go into the pot or what fabric is used in the quilt.

Why is that?

This has been an interesting class for me so far, having never read Chicano literature. Progressing through the texts we have come across similar themes, but what is most interesting is how the representation of each theme contributes to the greater message about Chicano identity in each text. For example, we talked last class about the differences between …y no se lo tragó la tierra and The Salt of the Earth, and how the former found the root of Chicano exploitation in racism and the latter found it in class. Who Would Have Thought It?, …y no se lo tragó la tierra, and the pieces by Jose Marti posed questions without solutions: is the true home of mixed-raced people in Mexico or the U.S., how can the incessant toiling of campesinos be ended, or can Latin Americans be content in the “soulless” culture of the U.S.? The film, on the other hand, established that while racial tensions exist, class is at the root of exploitation, and that liberation lies in unionization. In the second half of the course we can be sure that different questions about Chicano history/identity/destiny will surface. I am particularly looking forward to the subject of Chicana subjectivity that will come out in Woman Hollering Creek.