To begin, I realized I got ahead of myself a post back because I read the Anzaldúa selections, but after re-reading this piece alongside the other pieces this week, there’s an overall focus on Mexican culture. With insights into the history and evolution of the culture, there’s a lot to discuss in terms of how place ties into identity.
I was immediately fascinated by the descriptions of the US-Mexican border in Gloria Anzaldúa’s Borderlands: La Frontera: “es una herida abierta where the Third World grates against the first and bleeds” (Anzaldúa 25). Similar to our discussion of race and ethnicity as constructs, borders are also constructions. Anzaldúa’s descriptions show how these divides further divide people. I lived in El Paso, Texas, and could see Mexico from my house. If anyone remembers when Gov. Palin said, “I know about foreign politics because I can see Russia from my house,” well, middle school liberal-leaning me made fun of this by saying I knew a lot about foriegn politics because I could see Mexico― Juarez to be exact. My memories of the border fall in-line with Anzaldúa’s description. Juarez was known for being the most dangerous city on the planet; whereas, El Paso was one of the safest large cities in the country (large by population). I remember this reiteration; however, the border patrol didn’t seem that visible. The border was a measly fence and the Rio Grande was nothing more than a creek, which leads me to think a border is ultimately pointless. Whenever we drove by, I never (in accordance with my memory) saw people outside of their homes, which were piled and lumped together so closely― overcrowded. A lot of my classmates had relatives on the other side and visited every-so-often. Even though I was told the city was dangerous and that gangs were prominent, it didn’t look like it (but I never was over there, so I can’t say I know―these are just mere 8-years-old observations). Overall, I think Anzaldúa makes a strong point on how borders are detrimental, especially the US-Mexican border because it’s a clear mark of colonialism.
In Baca’s selections, the border discourse is like a passing of the baton from Anzaldúa’s work. The discourse is furthered by discussing the rise of Mestiz@ culture due to the spectrum of indigenous identity because while identity is complex, we have to keep in mind that they are not interchangeable. There’s a timeline that is discussed in both works that detail when cultural crossovers happened to create seemingly new cultures. This is important to acknowledge and recognize because cultures are affected by fusions and colonialism; thus, these influences can be seen through objects, society, and values tied into these cultures. “Xicano Indigeneity” claims that indigenous ties are erased by colonial narratives, which means that currently, there are social movements happening to prevent this erasure. This piece helped bring all of the readings full circle by talking about how state violence carries on the colonial tradition, which furthered my questioning on the necessity of borders that are mere constructs.
Comments