chicana/o or latina/o?

Since some of the authors in our reading list are not Mexican-American but are Dominican-American or descendant from parents born in other Latin American countries, they are not all Chicanos…but are they all Latinos?

Se puede decir que cada mexicano-estadounidense es un “chicano”? Creo que no…me parece que “Chicano/a” es una identidad que uno/a elige para si mismo. Del mismo sentido, se puede decir que todos los Chicanos tambien son Latinos? Que es la diferencia entre Chicano y Latino? Me acuerda de una clase de geografia aqui en ubc donde aprendimos que “chicano/a” es una identidad que tiene mas sentido politico que “latina/o” Tambien Chicano refiere solamente a gente que han nacido en los EEUU, no a los mexicanos que nacieron en mexico y viven/han vividos en los EEUU.

So, Jose Marti is not a Chicano, right? By the definitions that are commonly accepted (and according to wikipedia) Marti would not be Chicano because he was born in Cuba to Spanish parents. However, would he be considered Latino? More likely, I think. But, since he did spend some time living in Mexico and in the U.S. could he identify himself as a Chicano if he believed in the politics? Quien sabe?

Y Maria Amparo Ruiz de Burton? Was she a Chicana? Maybe because of the political and feminist nature of her writings. But, if you were to base the decision solely on geography and not of politics or philosophy she would not be, since technically she was born in Mexico and moved to the U.S. … but she moved to a part of the U.S. that used to be Mexico…so now this is confusing, one of those instances where the border moved, not el pueblo.

But since Chicano/a identity is both very political and personal, ultimately it is up to the individual to define their own identity. Either way, all of the authors that we are reading in this class have a similar experience in that they have Latin American ancestry (or were born in a Latin American country) and have lived in the U.S., both of these aspects of their individual identities have a definite influence over their writing.

Okay, now I’m rambling. I have enjoyed these books…Rivera has been my favourite so far, and I look forward to reading the books to come.

re cap…

i really enjoyed reading the three very differently stylized chicano books. My favourite one by far would have to be “y no se lo trago la tierra” just because of the style its written in, the point of view of a narrator who is a young child, and the highly controversial themes that arise throughout the book.

I hope though, that in the novels to come, we touch on issues like chicana feminism and the problems that arise in their lives, in contemprorary USA. i was surpised not to have found a single book or at least an article by Gloria Anzaldua, who is one of the most influential chicana women writers out there. For anyone who is interested in this literature i highly recommend reading her work. She is highly inspirational and has a very unqiue and magnificent style of writing.

Another theme that i feel we haven’t touched on as much, and perhaps its because we’ve been reading about mexico/USA in the 1950’s and earlier on, but the idea of space i find is really important when talking about chicanos. Where does one belong when he/she does not belong to either place or belongs to both. Gloria Anzaldua talks about this state called “nepantla”, which is like an in between state…kind of like limbo. I think its a really big issues that many chicanos deal with while trying to build their identity…obviously being chicano is a socially constructed identity that gives people from mexico living in the states, some identity. However, the idea of not wanting to fully assimilate to the american way of life and also trying to stay away from the traditional mexican norms (for women, for example) puts chicanos in a place where perhaps neither here nor there is good..which leaves them in this states of nepantla.

I hope the coming up books deals with feminism and space because for our class, these are important grounds to cover. and if we can throw a little Anzaldua in the way,,,that would be fabulous!!! happy thanksgiving!!!

My thoughts so far…

So I know that we are just supposed to do a blog entry on our thoughts so far in the course, but I’ve already started reading the next book, and I have to say I’m really excited to start talking about it after our exam next friday. So far, I’ve enjoyed this course: the spanish debates throw me off sometimes when I cant express my thoughts properly, but I’m really gaining insight on the experiences of the chicanos in America. The books we’ve read, although I havent enjoyed them all, do complement each other really well on the topics and issues we are discussing. The movie was just the cherry on top I’d have to say. Sometimes it’s hard to sit down for a proper amount of time to give the attention a book deserves in order to fully grasp the story. This was different with the movie however, as we were forced to sit there and watch it all in 2 sittings, and that just made all the difference. Im not the kind of person that can read a book in so many fragments, but with the hectic life of university I’m finding I dont have the time to sit for 3 hours to read a book, and am instead reading it in chunks when im on the bus or have a break from classes. This doesnt impact me the way that its meant to, so I appreciate taking the time in class to discuss the more pertinent topics in the novels.

Segunda parte Comentarios Reales

Segundo parte

Creo que esta parte representa la realidad Inca despues de la conquista, en contraste con la primera parte que representa el Imperio inca precolombino. Garcilaso incluye a los espanoles en esta segunda parte del libro como parte fudamental y protagonista en America. Me parecio interesante que el autor discutiera diferentes aspectos de la economia tanto espanola como americana que cambiaron con la conquista. Los autores anteriores no habian discutido el impacto de las expediciones espanolas en el nuevo mundo en la vida cotidiana. Garcilasco parece preocupado por la inflacion en espana y los crecientes precios de la tierra y la comida en America. Creo tambien que Garcilasco haya interesante la velocidad con que los conquistadores espanoles se reparten el territorio Americano y la proporcionalidad de este suceso con querellas entre los criollos y la corona. A medida que los espanoles descubrian mas y mas recursos se hacia mas dificil la administracion de la tierra y la armonia en America.
Garcilasco da varios ejemplos de las guerras civiles por la administracion del imperio Inca. Algunos de ellos son la muerte de Francisco Pizarro, la muerte de Vela Nunes y las guerras de Francisco Hernandez Giron. Por un lado de la Vega trata de mostrar la exclusion de los valores Incas en la nueva sociedad y por otro la maldad existente entre los espanoles. Aunque el autor no culpa a los europeos por sus actos sino que culpa el demonio por poner horrendas deciciones en el comportamiento espanol (112). El final del libro es muy dramatico: la ejecuccion de un principe Inca. Creo que en su descripcion logra transmitir su preocupacion por la suerte de lo que un dia fue el imperio Inca asi como la tiranidad aun vigente de los espanoles en el Peru. Al mismo tiempo creo que de la Vega es un poco sarcastico al crear tal final porque esta mostrando una injusticia que ha permanecido por mas de 100 anos con la llegada de Cristobal Colon a la espanola y que todavia facilmente puede ser evidenciada a pesar de todo lo que se ha escricto sobre los indigenas y sus derechos naturales y civiles (118).

The Christian Religion in “Y no se lo tragó la tierra”

Wow, I’m still reeling with all kinds of thoughts and emotions after finishing this book. (sorry I’m posting this so late again!!) Rivera’s portrayal of the protagonists’ life is so painfully raw, and his method of narration, through the eyes of the child, is powerful. The reader is able to see the reality, stripped bare of adult-like pretences and reservations, of the boys’ struggle with religion, poverty, racism, and lack of acceptance and self worth; all of which are under the umbrella of his (slowly decreasing) child-like naivety.

A lot of the everyday battles faced by the protagonist are reflected in today’s society. For example his own frustration and anger in asking why, if God existed, he would let bad things happen to good people. He feels that God simply does not care, and maybe even does not exist. There is a sense of hopelessness here; a sense of refusal to accept his mother’s belief that God does exist and that he allows things to happen for reasons which may not be understood but on the other hand, that he has a special plan in the afterlife for impoverished people such as themselves.

At the end of the novel, we read that the boy comes to grips with his own reality…one that does not include God. He decides that he is able to figure everything out on his own and that he doesn’t need to hide in the naivety of his “darkness” anymore. With the boy having grown up with an understanding of the Christian religion that was very oppressive, it is understandable that he desires to be free from it. This, however, is frustrating because even though throughout this book there are people who have changed and manipulated the message of hope and grace that Christianity is said to offer, one can suggest that the foundation of this religion reveals a pure faith that there is a God who loves and saves and who does not condemn those that belong to him. The portrayal of Christianity in this book, which is so jaded, twists grace into condemnation which in turn, understandably, forces the boy to push away from his childhood beliefs as well as the hope that has been offered to him.

… y no se lo tragó la tierra

I was looking at the cover for quite awhile, trying to find the words to describe the book entirely. I started thinking that what appeared to be a dragon might actually be “el Diablo”. But I thought the devil did not come despite the boy calling him.

The book uses dialogue to portray events in the boy’s life. Dialogue with the unseen such as the devil, the ramble in the boy’s head and the conversations in the truck all seem to have a communicative effect that reaches beyond the conventional narrative. While I was reading “Cuando lleguemos”, I felt like I could almost hear the voices of the people in the truck. They resemble streams of consciousness. Their inner thoughts are so diverse yet limited to that of the adults only. The readers do not know what the children are thinking. The book has been told from the perspective of a young boy trying to understand the adult world. Like most things in this book, the dialogue seems to be confined within the minds of the adults. And through Rivera’s writing, their voice is heard.

Salt of the Earth

I though this moving was great. It not only provides us with a criticism on American culture and prejudices against Mexican Americans in the 50s but also a criticism on the role of women in American society, whether they be of mexican decent or not. The migrant workers are treated as such, workers that come and go with the seasons, but mining does not require a season to work unlike fruit-picking. These families were not necessarily immigrants, on the contrary, they were born and raised on the tierra they worked. This is how the protagonist Esperanza Quintero introduces the small, mining town, as a town before and after the arrival of the Anglos. All along the Mexico-USA border, in California, Arizona, New Mexico and Texas there have been disputes about where the border should lie and who belongs on which side. This film criticizes important racial issues the time; rights for chicano workers (or equal rights to anglo workers), discrimination against American-born people of Mexican decent, and finally gender issues as well. 
This film was released in 1954 by Anglo director, Herbert J. Biberman.  Biberman was one of the original “Hollywood Ten”, a group of ten directors who released a short film in which they all condemned McCarthyism and Hollywood Blacklisting. All ten were briefly jailed in 1950. When Salt of the Earth was released in 1954, it was banned from being viewed by the American public. This says even more about the state and depth of racism and the government. Even more so because this film was based on a strike that actually occurred in New Mexico. I think that the film was banned for a number of reasons besides the fact that Biberman was blacklisted by the US government such as the the critique of Anglos’ racism towards American-born Mexicans, the Marxist movement of the workers revolting and staying strong by fighting together against their employer, lack of rights for chicanos and non-existent support from the American government, early feminist movements…the list goes on. Regardless, the fact that this film was banned is important and interesting and worth discussion. (thanks wikipedia!)
I thought this movie was extremely relevant to our class and chicano culture. Good pick Jon.

Criticism of religion in “y no se lo trago la tierra”

Unquestionably, Tomas Rivera is criticizing the role that religion plays in the lives of the migrant workers. Since religion is an inherent part of the lives of the characters, it is inevitably a part of almost every story. And Rivera seems to think that religion is one of the oppressive factors keeping the migrant workers in the vicious cycle of a troublesome life full of exploitation and suffering. He criticizes the Church on a moral level: the chapter in which the protagonist sees the nun and the priest making love in the sastreria puts emphasis on its hypocrisy. The young man is trying to find out who he is, his place in society, and religion is a huge obstacle to this. Taught that sex is a sin, something dirty and base, he is told to deny himself and one of the core elements of his identity. He criticizes religion at a grassroots level – where priests find it more important to take donations for the parish fund than to address problems in the community, the problems that Rivera is describing for us.
Rivera takes a very existentialist view on life: the protagonist must make his own live, take control of his own destiny, and break away from the vicious migrant cycle which is partly imposed by religion.
The protagonist questions good and evil…he asks: what is good? what is evil? He curses God and calls out for the Devil, and sees that life is arbitrary, that religion doesn’t have control of his life. He questions his mother’s belief that there is really a God out there who will grant your wishes if you are good and punish you if you are bad. What kind of God is that, he asks?
In the very end, when he climbs out from under the house, he is free from this oppression…he smiles because he realizes that he is free, he is in control, it is his life to live and no one else’s…that he hasn’t lost anything, and that everything is related….therefore that everything is in his control.

on migrants

So, I’m back from the movie at the VIFF, “La Frontera Infinita” created in Mexico. It was, well, astounding.I highly recommend it to you all, but I believe I caught the last, and only showing. The documentary follows Mexicans, Salvadorians, Hondurans, and other Central Americans through their journeys and quests from their origins to their destinations (including shelters being built by those whose limbs had been severed by the trek on trains). However, there was no conclusive ending to the documentary, as there was no conclusive ending to Rivera’s novel. And the documentary was at times scattered and scrambled as well, following different people and groups and different times. Perhaps it is because these problems are not clear or resolved, nor will they ever be.

Like one of the men said in the beginning of the movie (this isn’t a direct quote, just what I remember…”there are a thousand mishaps in going north, and one hope. It is that one hope that keeps us going”.

I feel bad for the poor man sitting next to me, because every once and awhile somebody would say something in the film, and I would think “Shit! I-should-write -that-down-so-I-don’t-forget-so-I-can-write-that-in-my-blog”, so I would scramble in my purse to find a pen and paper, substituted with eyeliner and Safeway receipts.

One of the things I scratched onto the receipt was something an middle-aged woman attempting to migrate again to the north said. It was something to the extent of “arm yourself with sticks and stones, because they will try to get you in the north.” Personally, this made me upset and brought up the passage in Rivera’s book in the first half of the novel about the boy being harassed by the gringos. It just made me agree with what another man said in “La Frontera Infinita”…

“Who are the migrants? Who are NOT the migrants?”

That is a question to think about.

Rivera, I’m Liking Your Style

As I read further and further towards the heart of …y no se lo tragó la tierra, the feelings of pity and disgust that the novel has evoked within me seem only to intensify. The heart-wrenching story told by a young immigrant boy appears to worsen consistently with no hope of eventual improvement in sight. The injustice experienced by the young boy and the Chicano migrant workers around him is infuriating. The fact that he is condemned for defending himself when physically attacked in the bathroom is beyond maddening. Although I am often angered by the injustice brought forth in the novel, I am thoroughly enjoying Rivera’s writing. The disjointed style that seems to have confused and frustrated so many classmates is in fact what I am enjoying most. Throughout the novel, Rivera continually jumps around from one narrative voice to the next, expressing at various intervals the perspectives of intolerant young bullies, heartbroken mothers, indignant young victims of racial discrimination, and so on. The multitude of voices Rivera brings to the page via his fragmented vignette style of writing give the Chicano struggle a universal quality. If the story were told in one fluid motion from beginning to end, through the perspective of the young boy, the reader would sympathize with his plight and receive a limited concept of what life was like for the Chicano immigrant. Rivera’s style, however, is much more conducive to a proper concept of the hardships, the discrimination, the displacement experienced in Chicano life. The manner in which Rivera interjects at sporadic intervals with the disembodied voices of unexpected, unintroduced Chicanos is therefore crucial to the reader’s understanding of the widespread nature of this oppression. I love that Rivera has not only found a purpose significant enough to write about, but a style that enables him to multiply exponentially the impact he achieves over his readers.