For every day that we have assigned readings or films in the course, students may post a response on our class blog. I will provide several prompts for each of these days to get you started thinking. You may respond to the prompt if you like, but you may also respond to other students’ comments, or to anything else that interests you in the reading or film. Blog posts must be at least 200 words to receive full credit for the day, and they must be posted before class discussion for the day. Blog posts will not receive letter grades, but you will receive credit for the number of comments you post, with 8 posts equaling 100%.
Since I’m asking you to do some readings before we officially have our first meeting on Monday, September 11, you can get started on your blog responses by commenting on those readings. Respond to one of the prompts below or to anything else in the readings that interested you before our first class.
Prompts
- Interpret the poem that begins Chapter 1 of Borderlands/La Frontera.
- What was new to you, what didn’t you know, about the history of the Rio Grande Valley from the Cochise and Aztecs to Spanish Conquest, through the independence of Texas and the Mexican-American War, up to the present, that Anzaldua details in Chapter 1? How did you react to this history?
- Immigration at the Southern border is in the news quite often these days. How does Anzaldua talk about illegal immigration in Chapter 1? What are your views?
- What did you think about the constant switching from English to Spanish and the untranslated passages in Anzaldua’s work? Did you work to read them or skip over them? What effect do you think she’s trying to achieve?
- In Chapter 2, Anzaldua writes that she had to leave home in order to find herself. Do you feel this way sometimes? How do your own experiences of leaving home and family compare to hers?
- How do you think what she says about lesbianism/queerness in Chapter 2 might be different if the article were published today rather than in 1987?
- Comment on/interpret the poem “el sonovabitche.”
Many of the statements that Andalzua makes are timeless and universal, but others— especially ones concerning her own experience— strike me as specific to certain cultures or eras. For example, she states that “humans fear the supernatural, both the undivine… and the divine.” This is a universally true concept; I’ve done research in other English classes on this topic and the concept of humans fearing hybrids or anything “other” is relatable, on a subconscious level at least, to all. Andalzue made a point that was extremely interesting to me: women grow and create new beings inside of them, and to a human-wide culture which fears abnormality and hybridity, woman is made “the stranger, the other.” If this text had been written in a modern era, I believe that her claiims would still hold true in regard to women, queer, people, and essentially any other human who visibly deviates from the norm. She speaks also of economic and political stuggles, along with social: “as working class people our chief activity is to put food in our mouths….” Again, these struggles of the working citizen occur in every generation. Though “La Frontera” was written in the 1980’s, I believe that the basis of her ideas still holds true.
Andalzua, however, also brings up her own specific experiences with her Mexian and indigenous background. She remembers her culture giving “mixed messages:” women should be both “strong” and “submissive” depending on who you ask, or the situation. This is a concept that is true for so much of the world, but I don’t think it completely holds up through time, or through culture. I would think that depending on who you ask (both groups and individuals), some women may feel that their culture told them to be much more submissive, and less strong, or others still may have needed to provide for their family and had time only to be strong, and not as submissive. In some areas for certain Andalzuas experiences are extremely relatable, though I think, hopefully, we are moving away from these strict roles that women must be in. These messages are definitely still communicated by some, even many, but perhaps not as strongly as they had been in another time or place. As far as queerness, I found her experience somewhat unrelatable, I assume more due to time period rather than culture. She recounts an experience of students not knowing what the word “‘lesbian’” meant. In modern-day, even if homophobia is present I would say that the majority of the population (speaking for my culture) knows what the LGBT community is and what struggles they face. As I stated before, Andalzua’s observation that queerness is often shunned because of its hybridity and otherness does hold true. However, I think that we are moving to a place now where it may not be seen as otherness, its truly accepted by some as a natural part of human evolution and individual experience. The base fear that humans have of hybridity will not change, as she says, but we can, in my opinion, reevaluate our strict binaries and prejudices so that these groups are not othered.
By the way this was for the prompt “how might queerness be discussed differently in Chapter 2 if this was published in a different time?”
Great response, Mic. Thanks for getting the conversation rolling!
In her poem “El sonavabitche”, Andaluza recounts stories of trying to find work as a scared immigrant. What I found the most jarring (and frankly, inhuman) was how young these boys were when they had to work long hours in harsh labor, with little reward.
“Flacos con caras de viejos aunque la mita’ eran jóvenes” The translation of these lines filled my mind with terrible images, not unlike the infamous photos of child factory workers from the early 20th century. Except, this is a more modern story, no longer the 1910’s, and child labor laws are in place. But the sonavabitche is able to hold their illegal status over them like a cruel employee at an animal shelter holds treats out to strays before capturing them, and he treats them like slaves, using the word “migra” like a whip to discipline them into harsh labor. El sonavabitche can manipulate his words and force them into submission even when they haven’t broken any laws. Tyrannical actions solicit fear into mexicanos from an early age, a learned fear in order to survive. Uses and abuses their fear and vulnerability for personal gain, such as cheap labor. El sonavabitche is, to me, a conquistador, a slave owner, and tyrant. He has zero regard for humanity, simply because he can get away with it. Now that we are here, in Trujillo, I look at the statue in La Plaza Mayor, mainly the inscription on it – “Conquistador del Peru”, and I think about sonavabitche, and if Francisco Pizarro was one, or acted like one. I think about the Icncan people who were killed by diseases and forced to give away their home, their community, their lives. I think about what they would say to the statue, what they would say about Pizarro.
In Chapter 2, Anzaldua writes that she had to leave home in order to find herself. Do you feel this way sometimes? How do your own experiences of leaving home and family compare to hers?
In chapter two of Anzaldua, the notion of leaving home and finding oneself is more prevalent than ever. Her journey from leaving home to creating a sense of self is accompanied by extreme forms of conflict and life-changing decisions. I sense this conflict, to a certain extent, in my own travels as well. Upon arrival I felt a wave of wariness. Did I make the right decision leaving behind everything I know? Will I be happy in such a foreign environment speaking a language that is not my own? Entering such a new way of life with no familiarity was quite jarring. But, I soon came to realize none of those things matter, nor should they have a negative effect on my experience while traveling. When Anzaluda writes, “But I didn’t leave all the parts of me: I kept the ground of my own being,” I took it as a moment of self-reflection in this time of uncertainty. When I travel, when I carry parts of myself to places I have yet to call home, I feel a sort of shift. I realized that there are these pieces of myself that are there to comfort me in all places at all times. I can always count on myself to continue to grow and accept changes as they come to me. And most importantly, I allow myself to feel these emotions and sit with my thoughts in an attempt to find a place of acceptance. I definitely resonate with the fact that travel equates to finding myself. And that I find it necessary to leave the comfort of my home to continue on this path of self discovery. The act of travel has always been a multidimensional form of movement. I feel as if Anzaldua portrays this sense of multidimensionality extremely well and her accounts of personal journeys and experiences only help to strengthen her narrative. In addition, her inclusivity of emotions and cultural expectations only enhance the sense of self she is actively finding.
What did you think about the constant switching from English to Spanish and the untranslated passages in Anzaldua’s work? Did you work to read them or skip over them? What effect do you think she’s trying to achieve?
The constant switching between English and Spanish in Anzaldua’s work represents the two cultures she exists in. I think she is trying to achieve the effect of what it is like to be a bilingual immigrant. Even in the few days in Trujillo, I have noticed the difficulty of switching back and forth from Spanish to English. She is representing the constant back and forth that she faces, and the ties she still has to her home. This ties into the notion of her leaving home as well- you can leave home but you will always carry a part of yourself with you wherever you go.
I personally skipped over the Spanish portions, however in hindsight, working to read over them will not only help improve my spanish, but be more effective in deepening the meaning of the story, and the struggles Anzaldua faced. The phrases that are said in Spanish show what is important to her and her culture, and are often phrases that depict things she or other immigrants had to go through.
In Chapter 1 Anzaluda talks about immigration with an emphasis on the historical precedent of migration. She shared how the history of ancestral belonging and connections the Cochise culture had with the land and how the intermingling of Indian/Indigenous peoples and Spanish created the hybrid race leading to contemporary Mexican-Americans. I thought the depiction of Pedro illegally being deported was very insightful of the violently militant ways immigration has proven to be apathetic. There was no attempt to hear or see Pedro as a US citizen let alone to humanize the predicament ICE put him in. The lack of awareness of the bias these agents hold is often overlooked in the media. I resonate with Anzaldua’s perspective of illegal immigration because it provides context and humanity relaying the pains of the process. I appreciated that she touched on the topic of women and migration towards the end of the chapter. Last fall I took a “Women, Globalization, and Migration” course where we learned heavily about the risks Mexican women face. Not only are they pillaged by the men who choose to exploit them both in Mexico and the US but they are also at large neglected by both governments oftentimes having no truly safe place for refuge. However, these women time and time again still make a way for themselves and their families often sharing what little bit of resources they do gain amongst other women migrants or their families on either side of the border. This is why I get frustrated with uneducated stances against migrants in the media and elsewhere because, for the most part, they receive nothing from us but are vilified as if they are violent or lazy when in fact it is US Americans typically exploiting and endangering the migrants.