And Yes Earth Part

I have a culture, I have a heart,

And, Yes . . . The Earth Did Part

I [jrom me' h no nOI anyChicano" bastard.] And no one can lAke Ilcm Juanita Dominguez, Yo soy

On tlie Splitting of Chicanafo SUbjectivity

2

Lui week, I had been white

· .. we were friends. Yesterday,

I was Spanish

· .. we talked ... once in a while.

Today

IDENTIFYING THE CHICANA SUBJECT{S); POETIC EXCERPTS allowing excerpts, from poems written by Chicanas ofdifferent ages between Ite 19605 and the early 19805, all enlist forms of sdr-representation com. I found within Chicanafo discourse. l

I am a Chicano · .. you do not know me.

Tomorrow, I rise to fighl ·..

and we are enemies. "" Margarita Virginia sanchez, Escape

3

Yo soy Chicano, tengo color Americano pero con hollOT. Cuando me dicen que

my revoIuci6n

DeflCndo mi raz.a con mucha valor.

Yo "O'f Chicana

de las monUfus de Nucvo Mexico My skin is dark.. My hair black.

T engo mi 0rgu.llo, lengo mi re Soy diferente. soy color care

My heart cries for Rds LOpez Tijerina

T engo eullura. Itogo cor.u:6n

~~ ~~ exalted with the triumph of la huelga

Y no me los quira. a mi ni un cabrOn.

Dorinda Moreno, "My

[I am a Chicano, browndinned, 4

an American but with honor. When they tell me the revolution has Itarted, I will defend my people with all my COurage. I have my pride. I have': my faith. I'm different, my skin is brown,

CHICANA date tu propio valor eres III MUJER

til sola

h

Sons, My Daug ten

"

en tus orgasmos en tus partos y en tu muerte i'! en tu palabra? haz 10 que tus hennaliOS CHICANA

HERMANA

MUJER

ahara aClua por TI

[.. CHICANA

give yourself your own value it is you woman yOll alone in your orJ;:a~m~ in your childbirths in your death and in your word? do what your brolhers did CHICANA SISTER

WOMAN

now act for YOURSELFJ

Margarita Cota-Cardenas, "Manifestacion Tardia" (Lale Declaralion) 1£.ln the~r complet~ rendi~ions, these four poems foreground the identity of a se -con~IOUS, .speaking subject, appeal to mimetic modes of represent,llion offer ~he ~t.lc subJcct a c~lIect~ve base and an ethnic identity, evoke cultural ~ride Iliscn e a ~cw semantiC U1l1verse, and reaffirm the partnership between idcnt'ty' ~~~Ura~ld!SCot'Se, and pol~tical. struggle. 'Thus, the revolutionary impulse! of !can"fO cu tural p~ucll~n IS manifest: content as well as form must be 'ffidnsformed, re-created, I~Chlcanafo subjects are to speak with their own aCCents .\0 populate language With their own vernacular.2 ~e ~Iethora of :orms that Chicanas/os have invented to speak themselves in po~tlC dls:ours~ tes~lfies ,10 Ihe,ir creative and successful manipulation oflan a e. 11us mampulatton IS evtdenl III the multiple forms of self-representation ~ ~e

poetic subjects above employ to define themselves and their constituencies. But the excerpts also suggest that, aside from being rich in verbal expression, this sdf-descriptive Chicana language is also the site of violent and contradictOl)' positioning.;, which evoke contrary reactions, communicate a strategic struggle and a relationship to power, enlist competing alliances, and discard identities as well as assuming them. Thus, all these Chicana poems record the passage of an empowered ethnic subject from complacency to action, from social dislocation to political groundedness, and from individual oblivion to collective memory. TIley also illustrate that Chicana identity is something to be discovered rather than passively inherited. Important differences do surf..ce, however, in the manner in which these Chicana poets author themselves into the cultural text. In poem I, "Yo soy Chicano," the speaking subject constructs herself through terms tmditionally used in the Chicano movement, such as color, militancy, ethnic awareness, and cultural pride. In addition, she mark.~ the male gender by equating these features of Chicano identity with manliness. In poem 2, written by a thirteen-year-old from California, self-identification is achieved through the link made between 7thnic self-consciousness and the enunci· atioll oftlw tcrm (.'l,;CI/fIlJ. Wilhin this cnntexl, "Chieano" illcorporatt;s a rejeclion of external definitions, such as "white" or "Spanish," that would idelilify the Chicano as tbe "other." Identity is thus described as a space of self-creation and active struggle against preconceived ethnic modalities that are more acceptable to the dominant culture. Pocm 3 foregrounds cthnicity as a central calegory for Chicana and/or'group identity. However, this excerpt offers a more elaborate construction, following the pattern of Chicano identity set forth by artistic narratives such as HEI Plan Espiritual de Azthin" and "I Am Joaquin," which construct the ethnic subject in relation to race, origin, language, culture, a historical legacy of conquest, a political affiliation with La Causa and the socially dispossessed, and hannony with the land and one's family.' A'l in these examples, the poetic subject distinguishes herself from other ethnic groups: Spanish and Anglo. Yet she breaks with these classical models by identifying herself as both a Chicana and a daughter and by inscribing not only gender and cthnicity but her own female body onto nationalism's largely male-centered narrative.· It is not until poem 4, however, that a new subjectivity is prefigured within the semantic universe of "Chicana," a universe which, the poet explains, narrates the Chicana's self-directed actions, life stages, and existential concerns and her rejec· tion of all forms of ex.ternal subjection. Taken as a whole, these excerpts suggest that Chicana identity is not fixed "once and for all." Instead, they propose that its axis, teffils of discourse, and points of contention change in accordance with the ways in which Chicana subjects arc positioned and, in turn, position themselves within the discourses of history, culture, and society.' In addition, these JXletic voices-some identifying

J\1'1U, 1'1'.::' •.• 11'11'. I'.I\KII'I UlU I'AK!

th~msel\'cs as Chicanas, others as Chicanos-'

.

~df-repreS(:ntalion available '0 Ch" • b" mscnbc Ihe comp<:ling modes of . Icalla su ~cclivit If h' term CIIu:ona itself is a field fio' m 10" I I y. I IS were not enough the " • U P e eu tural c '(j r.' •

Ch lcane community) thai u t i . n qUe! \lnslde and outside the r'dnic. Pocho Mexican Am ~I e SPreVl?USl y conferred identities: Anglo H;.J encan panlSh d eh' , ..... suggests, the story of Chicanas/os an leane. As Norma AJarc6n ot elaborates, evt:n the term o,uom¥Q ":as" turned o~~ to ~ definitive; for, as she cal an~ discursive sInIWe.'~ become a CntICa} Slle ofpolitical, ideologi.

h

.

QUIlt: a diffcrc:m picture emerges howeY(: h ' d od r. w en ~ step back and read these excerpts from within the still wid cultural-ideological aeslhelic. F=~~is c:: ~s of ~lIltural nationalism's preferred pe . peCIIVC, these excerpts forqtround harmony and continuity 'mod fi. I st r.tgTnelllatlon a d r ' Iween competing idemitics a ,I d n. a ICnatJon. Differences be. IUS er.tse or COIll d d Unlvcrsal Chicilno subiec! whO I . . alOe un er the influencc of a • " , IC I IS entrusted wuh '." SOCIal conditionJI, In this "'on'" , proVlwng an antidote 10 th~ .... LX, a poem such "M''; , propoSC$ a new poetic unive~ fo Ch' as . am estaclOll Tardia," which of [; 'r. r Icanas can be read ' amI ar positions taken in th Ch" as a Simple outgrowth fb '. e leano movement- ' as Just another example o rown. rruhtancy, thi! time a la Chicana But thIS reading prod " " "f" uces tell5101U rather dlan I . I Manifeslaci6n Tardia'" ,. gOSSIng over them ~ally . IS JXlS1l1oned ak>nSS'd ' - r -..... ntJ1/U such as Sor Juana's much-loved "H I be coum~rp~rts: earlier manf!tskJcontemporary mtlniftstlU:imus auth d om res NeClDS (Foolish Men)' or celina Trujillo. who was ins 'red :re h by bol,d.spirited Chic.mas such as Mar. pI y t e MeXican muse and irreverenlly versed:

Your cuhur<: emanates from Raza poslers all yOur walls Chicanismo through osmosis 10

remind

me:

!hal machi-machi-machismo is pan or OUr culture,'

Once allowed to surface the," " ex lad ' enslons comamed' th ' P e, creating discordant notes d red' _ In e nationalist reading self-definition, to be spoken not b a~ b IfCClIng us toward a new fonn of Chicana, La. Mujer (woman)' or a u~ by SOme of us: ttl (you); the generic (SISter), ~>ther types of intervclllion arc inscrihed as wcll by Trujillo'S' unthinkable from the perspec::mj. ere tIl(: ChIcana speaking subject docs the co Uf'Se, She subverts the authon",",'0 ConVentions populo.lOze ' db " y natIOnalist dis_ I I " Ive movement d' h' ~~ tura legacy equally representative of all Ch' ISCOU~, w tch posits a shared l$placement from Chicano cultural _-, . I~anos, Further, she names her Pi UUUCtlon {I,e., La Raz a """"'t )"d "fi f""~~ , I entl les

n:m

;a

htrsdf as a gendered subject (the implicit I), and exposes La Raza cultural production as a "male" domain ("your walls''), Finally, she reminds us, as the Itgcndary poetJose Montoya once did, that "los they are us"-for TrujiUo, "los thry," the oppressors, are you, Chicano male. In lhis way, the Chicana speaking mbjeet positions he~lf in a discursive space once reserved for los p«liJS tk/ ~imlo and laundlcs her own "war ofpositions" on mac1UsmtJ and male privilege "ilhin "alternative" cultural productions, TO SPLIT AZTLAN: WRITING CHICANA SUBJECTIVITY

r

And thus, nOllong after Tomas Rivera published his now classic ... no se fo lrag6 hi~ boy protagonist's greatest fear, that the earth would part,O has materialized under the pens of not one but many Chicana poets. and cultural practitionm. Yes, the earth (here understood as the symbolic rendition of Chicano/a subjectivity, Aztlan) has parted, and it has parted not once but twice-this second time self-consciously along gender lines that deconstruct sexism from within the arena ofChicanajo cultural production itscl( With this parting, singular constructions of idealized, homogeneous subjects. of Chicano political identity have gi~n way to a plurality ofcompeting identities, whose dilTerences are being consciously marked within cultural discou~ in the tradition of many early Mujeres de la ftJ lima,

Raza,IO

This essay examines the ideological formations that led to the splitting of Chicana,'o subjectivity, focusing primarily on cultural productions of the 1970s and soon thereafter, in which Chicanas consciously disassociated themselves from male hegemonic constructions of group identity, This splitting of Chicana/o subjectivity has taken place in two stages. In the first stage, Chicana subjects are either displaced from group characterizations or mediated by systems of differentiation that privileged male forms of identity and subjectivity. II In the second stage, these fonm are either subverted or displaced by alternate definitiora, which foreground Chicanas as individual speaking subjects and in group characterizations; entrust them with their own self-definitiora and subject positiora; and combat male-oriented figurations of Chicanas,l! In the contemporary ~riod, this second type ofself-definition has increasingly given ~ to substitutions for the word C'liumo-namely, ChUll1UU and Chuanos, C1Iicatwja, or ChictJJW/o. 'The markers 0/12, a/o announce the end of the nongendered Mexican American subject of cultural and political identity; they reinscribe the Chicana presence, which had been subsumed under the universal ethnic denomination Chicano, However, there are differences inscribed within these markers, Whereas Chicarw/a consciously reinstates the Chicana subject within the ethnic discourse of Chicano, OticaTUJ/o privileges the female subject within group charac· terizations Ihat mark distinctions, giving the Chicana her own independent trajectory as well as a collective one. Yet both ChicanaJo and Chicano/a are different from earlier forms of sclf-dellnition in Chicano discourse, because those who use these

___________~,..._.~.,~.~,_,_,,~.~.=''' .........., "'"' oq>resslons are deliberately imposin~ their own selcctiVt; proces.'IC$ onto the cultural subject being rt;presented. 11ms, they subvert the silences that have marked nationalism's cloaked splitting of Chicanafo subjectivity under the imagt; of the Chic;l.Ilo malt;-the essential subject for group identity. The splitting of Chicanafo subjectivity along th~ dimensions has an added social function. This configuration purports to emphasize tht; panicular social distinctions that have promoted Chicana int:quality in society, following the same type of logic that Cannen Tafolla enlist5 when asked "Why look at Chicanos St;parately from Anglos, women separately from mOl, and now,to funher complicate it all, at Chicanas as a separate group?" Tafolla's reply: "It is not we who separate people off into groups-our society has already done ihat for us.... If it were not for the different treatment of ethnic and sex groups in our country, there would be no need for one book to be written about the Chicana, or about the Anglo, or about the Black."" For Tafolla as for other contemporary cultural critics, visualizing the distinctions between Chicanas and Chicanos, and Chicanas/os and other groups, allows readers to encounter an oppressive differentiallreatment of Chicana women and to equalize cultural discourse by highlighting the panicularities of the exchldcd element: Chicanas. However, Tafolla's rationale is also important because it responds to the question: Who split the Chicano subject? This question was routinely posed by authoritative discourses that faulted Chicanas for dividing and splitting the Chicano moV(';ment when they sought to foment Chicana-eentertd discourses and practices of resistance. While Tafolla does in fact call for a Chicana rq>rtSt;ntation, thus splitting the Chicana subject away from a purponedly undif· ferentiated fold, her purpose is not to subvert or divide the movement but , rather, to combat exclusion. Ultimately, her aim is to incorporate Chicanas into cultural discounes that mark their distinctions as women as well as their similarities with Chicanas/os at large. However, quite another scenario emerges with the predominant male-centered authoritative discourses, which promised to include Chicanas in the cultural record of the practices of ethnic resistance if they acapted their exclusion as female subjects and dwelled only on their ethnic similarities with Chicano males. Along with nationalism's 5elf-deceptiV('; mirror, which promised Chicana women a transparent reflection of thcJllS(':lves through the imago of others, th~ promises rarely materialized.

Round Ont: RnuMn's Maniful Chicano The best example of th~ types of male-centered discourses of exclusion can be ~ound in Arm~do Rendon's Chicano Manifuto, published in 1971. In his description of the Chlcanafo revolt, Rendon polarizes the forces of contention into the mutually exclusive categories of nwlti.rmo (male) and malinehismD (female). Whe~as, for RendOn, the former is synonymous with revolutionary struggle, commitment, and progress, the latter is synonymous with retrocession, betrayal,

i l\"I':'~'- - - -

and conflUC'lI. By his pl.:n, (Chicana) female malindlts arc in errl:ct h;Ulishecl from the political movement itself, cast over to the other side with the heinous Tio Tacos (Chicano Uncle Toms) and Anglo oppressors. But female belrayal is much worse than the male ve~ion, since ml1/indld betray not only a political principle but male dignity and manhood as well. to Ultimately, for Rendon, (Chicanas) maliflf:hts obstnlct social pro~, collective identity, and reconciliation with oneself, the f:-tmily, and thc nation. Rendon's objectification of political forces in the categories of rr"unismo and mohllchismo at no point escapes its gOldered focus. As he hiJllS(':lf confessed after describing the Chicano revolt: "It may seem that when reference is made to Chicano activism, the emphasis is on the masculine alone. That tendency is mainly attributable to my being macho (male) and naturally viewing the Chicano revolt as a male-dominated phenomenon."" Since madtb is not only male but a specific Chicano male (Rendon), it follows that mahncht is also a panicular Chicana female, who remains gcneric in his essay. Rendon also associates Chicano male with macho and the purponedly generic Chicano. And he implies that if Chicanas (mQlindw) want to be Chicano (the generic term) and light oppression, they have 10 embrace Chicano manhood as a political and personal objective. He explains: "The essence of machismo, of being macho, is as much a symbolic principle for the Chicano revolt as it is a guideline for family life. ... Macho, in other words, can no longer relate merel}' to manhood but must relate to nationhood as well. ... The word Chicano in many ways embodies the revolt itself."'1 Following Foucault's logic. it could Ix: said that Rend6n SC:t5 into motion a system of gender differentiation designed !O maintain a fonn of (male) powerpatriarchy, which "subjugates" the Chicana by "imposing a law of lnuh" upon her (machirmo) and by making her subject to $Omeont; else (Chicano males) "by control and/or dependence."11 Thus, Chicana subjectivity, as elaborated in RendOn's Chicano Manifuto, is equivalent to subjection: Chicano. 'I Howevc:r, even with his devastating ponrait of Chicanas and Malintzin Tencpal (Cones's mistress), Rendon could not alter the onslaught of Chicana activism. As he admitted upon paying lip servia to the contradictions in his text and to the vinues of some Chicanas, Chicanas weren't ready to take a back scat to anyone. And many of them didn't: they contested their negative figuration in stories of madw liberation and manifest Chicanos by creating their own productions of cultural and political stnlggle.

Round Two: RtdQiming the Chuana Subjut Given Ihe ideological constraints that Chicanas faced, reclaiming a subject position meant parting with male-ce.ntered ethnic qualifiers that inscribed Chicana subjection; relocating Chicanas within Azt1:in, the political struggle, and nationalist discourse; transforming Malinche into Malintzin;" rejecting the unequal and

"NU,

divisive practices of st;xism in the struggle against domination; textualizing Chicana militancy; visualizing the experiences of Chicana women in mainstream Anglo-Saxon and alternative feminist discourses; contesting Chicano male dominance at home and at work; and providing Chicana perspectives as a means of evoking cultural pride among all people-particularly Chicanas. In brief, intervening into ChicanaJo subjectivity within the context of the prevailing discourses of exclusion necessarily meant reconnecting Chicanas to themselves, to each other, and to others. Many Chicanas boldly accepted this challenge,20 changing the word CilKcmO to OKana in order to define themselves, assuming the most progressive elements of Chiul1llJ, and giving Chicana/o subjectivity a female body and condition. But these Chicanas not only changed the word; they literally changed the subject, populating culture with Chicanas, often replacing the discourses of tamalismo and compadres (brotherhood and brothers) with the discourses of feminismo and ctmlodru (sisterhood and sisters), and problematizing the domain offeminism itself. I' Most important, they alter«l the subject position of Chicanas in cullural productions, taking them from subjection to subjectivity, from entrapment to liberation, and from distortion and/or censurt: to self·awareness and defrnition. rz In order to do all this, they enlisted more complex modes of representation, which could better accommodate multiple subjects, competing discourses, and contrary self-images. While it would be a mistake to attribute this type of oppositional stance to all Chicanas or Chicana cultural productions, these features were commonly found in the works of many Chicana cultural practitioners from the early 19705 onward. Chicanas such as Yolanda L6pcz, Ana Nieto-Gomez, Dorinda Moreno, and Bernice Zamora-whose work will be examined in the following sections-altered Chicano cultural production by interrogating, modifying, and displacing images of Chicana subjects from within different practices of resistance and ideological and cultural fonnations." IMAGING THE SPLIT CHICANA SUBJECT; LOPEZ'S (FALLEN) GUADALUPE

To date, one of the best and most controversial Chicana artists is Yolanda Upez. The foree of LOpcz's artistic production arises from her successful and repeated modification of traditional ponraits of Chicanas/Mexicanas. Her most renowned work is contained in the $em Guadalupe (Guadalupe series).lt As could be expected, the target here is the stoic Christian Guadalupe, who in LOpez's practice is frequently displaced by moclern-day Chicanas in motion: militant Chicanas, fun-loving Chicanas dressed in shoru for summer, hard-working Chicana mothers breast-feeding their babes, and warm Chicana daughters and grandmothers openly expressing their aJfeetion for one another in joyful embraces. b Unlike the original Guadalupe, who first images henelftoJuan Diego and the church, LOpez reimages Guadalupe for contemporary Chicanas/Mexicanas seeking liberation

n:s ... TH1=: 1=:ARTH DID PART

from oppressive male-oriented images ofC~icana women and from the debilitating influences of social institutions and beliefs. . .. . Perhaps the best example ofUpez's splitting ofChl.c~na/o subjectiVity can be found in a work depicting a fallen portrait of the tradi~o~al Guadalu~ ~gure 3.1).1'5 As normally occurs in the work of LOpez, the ~~uc border (thIS time ~n indigenous rim that serves as the internal frame) enclfchng ~~adalupe remalOS intact. However, the privileged space reserved for the tradiuonal Guadalupe image is intentionally subverted, virtually left blank in the ce~ter of ~he page, where the eyes of the well-trained Chicano/Latino p~blic.fix their ~e m confirmation of the image of the Christian Virgin. Attention IS drawn Instead to the right, to a contemporary Chicana who jogs away toward the :orner of ~he external frame, and to the left, to a moclern-day Guadalupe .feedin~ he~ child, located halfway outside of the Guadalupe border. And as a Sign of Its dISplacement the traditional image of Guadalupe appears at the bottom of the external

•

frame. . 'I1ms, LOpez's artistic text is literally.split between. twO ?hlcana doubles: one sct consisting of the young Chicana and her duplicate ~mage; ~e other set oonsistingofdisparate Guadalupes-theuniversally recognizable Vtrge~ a~d the lifelike modem Guadalupe, dressed partly in the robe of ~he Blessed Vugm and partly in street dothes. The contrasting vertic~1 and hon~ntal ~ovements associated with these artistic subjects militate agamst the stauc quahty and closure of the traditional Guadalupe portrait, and they chart new passages away ~ro~ the immortal, supernatural past and toward the Chicana'.s.worldly ~resent. SI~larly, the multiplication of Chicana subjects by ~o~bles mlht~tes agau~t the e~l~tence of a singular univenal woman, imaged Wlthin the Chlcano/Launo "?"dl.non of North America as the rrwtka Christian mother. LOpez also contests thIS s~ngular woman by deliberately counterposing the eternal Virgin with twO very different types of ChicanasfMexicanas: a mother and a young Chicana, both of who~ are consciously embodied. That is, their physical attrihutes art: foregrounded ~n .the text not hidden as the cloaked Virgin's are. And L6pez draws important disbn~. tion~ between these Chicana subjects, not only in their embodiment but ~so m their divergent activities and social attitudes. Thus, while one of these Chl~ana subjects assumes the role of motherh~, ~d h~r ~iation ~~ the samtly Guadalupe is marked by her posture, limlted IOseruon mto the pnVlleged Guadalupe space, and support by the familiar roses, the other runs away from ~he Guadalupe portrait, divested of traditional imagery, unfettert:d by robe. or .child, physical or emotional stagnation, or artifieial roses, perhaps toward a third Image of the Chicana, yet to be constructed within another te~tual border: . By relegating the notably artificial, statuesq~e portral~ ~f the Chlca~a/Mexl­ cana Virgen to the bottom of the page, LOpez d,~a~ thiS Image as a ~able one for contemporary Chicanas/Mexicanas, and she Invlles.the.refo~ulanon and/or displacement of this rt:ified female icon by new images, msplrtd III everyday ,:o~k and play. Liberation from further subjection is inscribed in many forms W1thm

al.V' Co

.... n"' .. "''''''

....

ur"";'l~ r. ...:>r.:>11\1'1

r

~,

.•.

~

"

~

.•.•

,,~

n.

. LOpez\ fallen Guadalupe: in the rejection of images that promote submission of Chicanas to existing power relations through the diffusion of universal "female" tmths; in the lifelike images of Chicanas; and, finally, in the empty spaces, which provide an opening for future constructions of Chicanas that can assist in their self-knowledge. While LOpez successfully redefines one of the most traditional images of the ChicanafMexicana, thus redefining ChicanasfMexicanas themselves, she does not IMe sight of the tensions that frame Chicana subjectivity in real life. In fact, she invites these competing images into her text at the same time that she invites her Chicana spectators outside, to contemplate their own self-images and the degree lowhich her reformulation of the Guadalupe image approaches theirs. LOpez also involves her viewing public in a series of intertextual dialogues wilh other traditional variants of Guadalupe in Chicano cullUral productions-variants such as "1..;1 Familia de la Raza" (the Chicano Holy Family), "L"lJefita," "I AmJoaquin," or RIm Me, Ultima, all of which reify Chicana subjects, extolling the virtues associated with motherhood. Z1 With this dialogue, LOpez underscores the limited anistic images available to Chicana subjecl~, and she extends her cultural critique to a wider range of cultural productions, interfacing as well with other Chicana texts that offer alternative visions ofChieana subjeel~. Thus, L6pez's new Chicana subjects exist tensely on the border between tradition and modernity. CHANGING THE SUBJECT(S): THE COUNTER DISCOURSES OF CHICANA FEMINIST WRITINGS

Figure 3.1. Yolanda

LO~z,

from &rU Guadalupe, 1978.

The dialogical quality featured in LOpez's work is not unique to her particular brand of cultural production. It is commonly found in the works ofother Chicana cultural practitioners, whose entrance into textual representation is marked by the appeardnce of a wide range of counter discourses. At their best, these counter discourses populate language with the interests and vernacular of Chicanas, subordinated within the cultural conversations of race, class, and gender oppression. The bold-spirited nature of this revisionist movement is best illustrated by the Chicana feminist writings of the early 1970s, which denounced the contradictions of the Chicano political movement and sang the virtues of La Mujer and the heroines of La ColUsa. Unlike early Chicano movement discourses, which privileged issues of general interest to the group, these Chicana feminist discourses reinscribed the condjlion ofChicanas onto the political text.'lII Ana Nieto-Gamez's "La Chicana," a political article written at a time when strenuous efforts were being made to integrate Chicanas into the curriculum, provides an illustration of these early Chicana feminist counter discourses. 2lI In this essay, Nieto-Gomez proposes that Chicana feminism "is the recognition that women are oppressed as a group and are exploited as pari ofla raza people" under the imperatives of a racist capitalist system. While foregrounding her discussion of the particular nature of Chicana oppression within the parameters

""u.

of the group, she :uso emphasizes that proponents orreminism should identify and act upon the needs of Chicana women-needs such as "child care reproduction. economic stability, welfare rights, forced sterilization and prostitution." Nonethe. less, she qualifies this statement by adding that "all interests must be eradicated," including female interests. Thus, she draws a clear distinction between her brand ofChicana feminism and mainstream variants, which would be content to substi. tute male oppressors with female ones. With her particular construction of Chic,uL1. feminism, Nieto-G6me-L deliberately and successfully contairn the male-centercd discourse on Chicano oppmsion, formulated in response to an unwarranted fear of Chicana activism. As previously suggested, these types of discourses onen accuscd Chicanas of dividing the Chicano movement and of aligning themselves with mairntream feminists, who allegedly planed to rt:instate even mort: oppressive regimes. In tum, NietoGomez's counter discoune challenb'eS each ofthesc assumptions and provid" a more equitable representation of male and female interests. And she avoids the closure of Chicano movement discourse, soliciting feedback from a mixed public and calling for a more integrated approach, which addresses the very colllradictions that have separated Chicana women from Chicano males. Finally, like many of her contemporaries, she argues that this approach, ifit is to be successful, must aim toward transforming the entire f.1.bric of social relationships. Nieto-G6mez's refonnulation of Chicano movement narratives shares man)' affinities with LOpe-L's Guadalupe. The fallen Guadalupe images new interpreta. tions of Chicana subjects; "La Mujer" offers Chicanu new subject positions within political discourse and practice. The fallen Guadalupe invites more com. plex forms of artistic representation of Chicana subjects; "La Mujer" invites a more complex undemanding of the nature of Chicana,lo oppression. The fallen Guadalupe counters competing male and female narralives of Guadalupe; Nieto. Gomez's lext counters the narratives of Chicano nationalism with those of Chicana feminism. I-inally, the Guadalupe portrait inviles its spectators to reflect critically on the unsuitability of the traditional Christian Guadalupe for represent. ing contemporary Chicana subjects, while the essay "La Mluer" challenges its readers to reflect on the limitations of early Chicano movement discounes for representing the interests of Chicanas in the political arena. Together, these Chicana texts successfully countered the male-centerecl nationalist text, which frequently laced its exclusion of active Chicana subjects with idealized archetypes that were of little value in the political struggle for self-affirmation. Yet liberating Chicanas from their subjection entailed much more than refig. uring their images and condition within contemporary cultural and political discourse. A step had to be taken toward Chicana activism. That is, discourses of liberation had to be formulated-discoufSCs that championed Chicana militancy, consciousness, and sc.lf-empowennent. Clear distinctions had to be made between these discounes of liberation and the authoritative discourses of Ihe Chicano

,.·•., ... ' n " r,/'Klll

lJlLlI"I\KI

movement, which favored male models of resistance (Che, Villa, and Zapata, for instance) and were often contextualized by the exploitation of Chicanas at home and at work.'" Once again, poetry furnished a useful medium for imagining a new type of Mujer de la Raza, a Mujer who could lead her people into liberation, lextualize the passa~ to militancy through a new artistic sc.nsibility, and raise awareness about her unique burden through her own counter discour5Cs of Chicana,lo liberation. LIBERATING THE SUBJECT: SHOUT OUT, MUJER DE LA RAZA

The passage to Chicana militancy is best captured in Dorinda Moreno's "Mujer de 1.1. Raza."" Here Moreno urges the Mujercs de la Raza to "shout out" the an~r in their souls as wdl as lheir newly found freedoms, and she predicts that today the Mujer de 1.1. Raza will "nullify her past subserviency," "activate her convictions," and "organize her liberation," "forging the direction for tomorrow." Yet her affinnation of collective liberation is but the culmina· tion of a poetic reflection that documents the many facets of Raza women's pas5.1.ge to militancy: recognition of their oppression; denunciation of the pain and wrongs endured; faith in the transformative potential and leadership of Raza women; protest against oppression through political discourse and con· sciousness raising; and, finally, a call to action and involvement in the business of transforming the future. The unyielding power of the Chicana's consciousness enables her to pass from one state of being, where she is "caged" in society's "concretejungles," to another state, whcre she is outside its grip. According to the poetic subject, this consciousness kindles not only militancy (the renunciation of wrongs endured and the rejection of unfulfUled promises) but also a contagious appreciation for liberation ofall subje<:ts. Economic and social oppression, mental and urban ghettos-aIl of which have bttn nourished by the larger social order-are not, however, the only evils to be countered with this newly discovcred Raza women's consciousness. This consciousness is also to be enlisted against the "false pride" of Raza men, who "wrongfully" believe that the place of Raza women is "only in the home." The antidote to the Raza women's triple oppression is thus to be found in their "spectacular awareness" and "perceptive insights." TIle power of their consciousness is so great that it can alter all aspects oftheir existence and can influence those who are exposed to it, regardless of ~nde.r or place of origin. By likening Raza wornen's consciousness to a tropical stonn, Moreno captures its explosive. potential: Our ideas lik.e thunder ovenake our lives

like lightllillg across the skies ~achillg

minds opclling t:yr:s."

Because this political consciousness can transfonn the consciousness ofothcrs Moreno concludes that Raza women and men will prevail in their united struggl~ against the multiple forms of Chicana subjection. In retrospect, Moreno's formulas for liberation may !Ccm extremcly naive, particularly to contemporary Mujeres de la Raza, who have militated in the presence of less than sympathetic Chicano cohorts. Nonetheless, Moreno is aware that much groundwork must bt laid for building the consciousness of ~ Mujer. For MOn':no, this type of dJOo demands not only militancy but the purposeful cn':ation of a liberating discourse; thus, "rdlective change" can come about only ifRaza women "SHOlfr OUT" the deep-seated rcsemment in their souls about the conditions that have subordinated them and depleted their energies. Such a political discourse, once framed in the cxperiences of Raza women, will, according to Moreno, then provide the base necessary for "activating" their conviction and "organizing" their liberation through strategic ventures that will enable them to meet the challenge of the day and forge the din:ction of tomorrow. Although Moreno's poem ends by appealing to the collective nature of her tnterpnse-that is, the participation of Raza men-it is clear that dlt primary struggle of eonsciousntss building and organization of Chicllllas lies in the hands of the Mujer de la Raza herself; for it is she who must confront the anger and hostility that have ensued from h(~r exploitation, just as she must savor the heart~throbbing euphoria evoked by her own self-styled amiD Y 1.,"10 de libmuwn (song and cry of libcrlltion)_"" And it is she who must extend her testimony and message of social refonn to Ihose who surround her. Finally, it is the Chicana subj«t who, in Moreno's poem, brtaks OUI ofthe jail cdls ofcconomic, racial, and gender oppression, a.\Sisted by the "brolherly" SU!)!Xlrt Ihat i., optimistic.'llly en. listed in such an endeavor. It goes without -S..'lying that Mureno's all-inclusivc brand of Raza women's feminism is om attempt to involve Chicano males in the unique struggles of Chicanas-a st"l\eb'Y no doubt enlisted as a deterrent [0 the continued suhjugation of Chicanas in the household, the factories, thc fields, and the. Chicano movement. Yet (h~ tensions cOluinue to surf.'lce in the poem, which, afler all, foregrounds Chic.'l1lO1 women's strugglc:s and experiences and does not mention the Chicano male sulJjC1:t until the final V(:no, where a courst: of action for the futun: is oudined.

facets of oppression (Figure 3.2).M Unlike the poetic version of this narrative of Chicana liberation, tht flf'St scene of the triptych captures the subordination of the ~'Iujer de la Rna in society by focusing on her entrapment in lhe concn:tc jungles ofurban life, where she is accompanied by husband and daughter." In this scene, she is a victim of her eircumstance, a spectator who caresses the bars of her cell and assumes the posture and appearance of a passive woman. As a sign of her complacency, her lips arc sealed, and she hides behind her man and her daughter, who are also subjected to society's concrete jungles. Scene two, which marks a dramatic change in the composure and the physical appearance of the Mujtr de la Rna, iUu.~trates the crucial passage to Chicana consciousncu. It is significant that in this scene the Mujer de la Raz.a is presented alone, her figure magnified to fill the enlin': artistic space of th~ center of the triptych, from where she shouts the anger in her soul, the resentment at her condition. Here she has shcd the braids and th~ maidenly bun of the Spanish scnorila, and her mouth is open wide, her hair free. This Mujer is dcarly reminis~ cent of the "Militant Chicana," who was widely featured in movement publications that dther captured her alone or placed her in front of ~dy Liberty. "Ibt now fragmented urban structure, which fonnerly had caged her and her family in dilapidated housing projects, is cast offinto the background: it no longtr towers over the family's portrait but is lodg~d in her wild tresses, confined to her memory. In marked contrast stands the artistic rendition of a spectacular Chicana militancy, guaranteed (as Mor~no had predicted) "to reach minds and open eyes." Thc power of its rage is channeled through the fil,"I.lre of a Chicana who assumes the features of an enraged animal and will not be deterred in her quest for freedom. In scelle Ihree, Ihe Mujerde la Raza begins her escapt: from the prison ccllihat continues to ~Ilgulf her husband, now reinstated in the background, behind the

Re-imaging llil Fnnak Gn'lo (SeTlam) lhrough Art

These tellSions arc also roregrounded from another perspective in an iIIuslration acc~mpallying Moreno's poem. In this anonymous black-and-white sketch, the ~uJtr de la Raza's passage to Iiberalion is depicted in three scenes that progresSIvely document her n':lease from a jail cell containing the multiple a~nts and

Figu~

3.2.

I~ne

del Rosario,

M'!i" de ItJ ibl..{a, c.

1975.

..... , ......

ban, aJonWiide her enlarged face. Here an end to entn.pment is preftgUred: the head ofthe Mujer de Ia Rau, who has shouted out, aJready protrudes outside the ban, aJthough her body is still tn.pped imide. The full and successful liberation of the Mujer de Ia Raza is reflected in the figure of the other Mujer de la Raza, perhaps the daughter, who appears in miniature at the bottom right of the scene. With her mouth opened in protest, and fist clenched in defiance, she leads the other Mujer (perhaps her mother) out of incarceration. The male remaim in the background, not at the side of the Mujer, as Moreno had initially proposed. He neither obslnlct5 nor aids the process ofliberation, while the Chicana figure. who is prominently displayed in the center of the portrait, provides the impetus and the support for this transition from oppression to liberation. Her opened mouth, which is duplicated in the face of the Mujer de la Raza in scene two and in the face of the Mujer who has escaped incarceration, provides the necessary discourse for consciousness raising. Her long, disheveled hair, which envelops scenes one and thrtt, sustains the human figure! in these scenes, providing the bridge from subjugation to liberation. It is significant that the Chicana who has made her way out of the cell, marking me p~age to liberation, continues to display the f."1rmworker's eagle on her chest; thus, In her person, the struggle against economic, racial, and gender oppression is fused at the symbolic level in the female body. Even with this fusion, the artist of this tripytch appears to suggest that escape from incarceration is an arduous process requiring a painful struggle with multiple antagonists as well as a supportive network. Perhaps that is why the artist chose 10 privilege the process leading up to liberation (as represented by the figures who are still partially entrapped in the cell) rather than its end product: the young Chicana who has escaped bondage. B~ p~vileging the process by which the Chicana is liberated (her militancy and reJe<:tlon of social and domestic oppression) with an expansive spatial representation, the artist echoes Moreno's message that liberation will require various stages of political consciousness and activism on many fronts. However, here as well the seeds of liberation are to be found in the Chicana's own analytical and verbal capabilities. She must "SHOUT OUT" her condition if liberation is to be achieved, fusing the symbolism of her struggle Wilh that of her people. CDmhoting &xUm: Rtj"mnng ''Nota.ftum a Chicana Cool" In contnUt 10 "Mujel"(:s de la Raza," which textuaJizC5 the passage to Chicana militancy through consciousneu raising ...ilhout giving much attention to the internal contradictions of the Chicano movement's ideology, "Notes from a Chicana Coed" by Bernice Zamora foregrounds these contradictions, drawing attention to movement discourses that were preoccupied with issues of racial oppression." Through the demystifying critique of a bold-spirited Chicana coed, Zamora deconstruct! these largely nationalist analyses, which targeted the gahtulw

(the Anglo) as the sole agent of Chicano/a oppression. In her scathing and ironic critique of the movement's reductionism, she juxtaposes the nationalistic discourse ofa eamaJ (male) with that of his Chicana mate, who is beginning to display a feminist consciousness. Whereas his discourse is marked by abstract expressions of national oppression, hers is marked by her own female testimonial of concrete, lived experiences of gender oppression. However, her/story prevails as the dominant one. She questions his boisterous yet rhetorical commitment to their "collective" liberation from a "foreign" enemy; and she repudiates the universal truths U'aIWTlilled through authoritative movement discourses, which proposed that as Chicanos we "al"(: oppressed first because ... our skin is dark," and "we al"(: exploited as workers by a system which feeds like a vulture off the work of our people, "" without attending to gender. By naming her ,amtJfs (brother's) privilege-his three gahadla guisas (white girlfriends), use of his wife's free intellectual labor, and failure to provide for his family-Zamora foregrounds Chicanas' issues within movement discourses in much the same way that her contemporaries, such as Enriqueta Vasquez, did in the face of denial, censure, and opposition on the part of many Sl::gments of the Chicano community. As Vasquez explflined: "When she [the Chicana] tries ~o speak of Machismo, she is immediately put down and told 'We know about It. .. .' She receives nothing but censorship again. She tries hard to say, 'Yes, there is much on Machismo, but can't you Machos lock at the women and children who are the victims of your Machismo?' She tries so much to speak up and instead finds herself speaking to deaf cars and a completely dosed mind."" Zamora I"(:enacts this type of discursive encounter with a "dosed-minded male" in order to make him see "the victims of his machismo." Shc also reminds her readers, as Vasquez did e,lrlier, that "When we talk of equality in the Mexican-American movement, we better be talking about TOTAL equality, beginning right where it all starts, At Home. lIft 11ms, tlle Chicana subject obliges her ctmUJi to see himSl::lf as an agent of oppression. More important, her active participation in this discourse serves as testimony to the fact that Chicanas themselves must lead the way toward educating others about their condition as it is represented in the politicallif~ of the community and at home. "Notes from a Chicana Coed" in fact exemplifies this type of consciousness raising as its speaking subject instructs the Chicano male about the theoretical and practical contradictions of"Chicano heavies," who promoted exploitation ofwomen in the household while enjoying Sl::xuaJ privileges and leadership positions outside the home. The political lesson encapsulated within these notes is scathing. The CQ1JlQfs repetitive assertion that "the gabacho is oppressing us" is countered with the young poet's sarcastic assertion: Dye carnal, you may as well

teU me thaI the mOOtl water

. cura constipation that penguin soup prevents crudas or that the Arctic Ocean is menudo. to Thill ddianl answt:r, which c10res the poem, undencort:s the fact that there is no turning back to racial utopias which polarize the forces of opprcssion along ethnic lines and create fictitious narratives of domestic bliss wilh the concept of a male-centered familialism. The spt:aking subject also invites the very real possi. bility that other young Chicana coeds will refuse to be brdinwashcd or intimidatt:d into believing rhcwrical statemenu that run counter to their own interesl$ and have no concrete expression in their daily lives. The poem ends in a stalemate between nationalist and feminist discourses, with no inkling ofthe male's response to this second alternative discourse on Chicana/o oppression. Yet, like the other cultural texts examined in this essay, "Notes frvm a Chicana Coed" skillfully weaves together the competing tensions that It:d to Chicana-centered cultural productions. Like these tt:xts, "Notes" marks a definitive break with the Chicano discourses of exclusion, which would deprive Chicanas of a place in the political movement for self-determination and a voice in the struggle for equality.

RENAMING THE CHICANA AUTHOR(S): 80RDERS, BRIDGES, AND TRAVELING THROUGH THE 1990S Bemice Zamora, Margarita Cota-Cardenas, Dorinda Moreno, Volanda LOpez, Ana Nieto-G6mez, Carmen Tafolla, Enriqueta Vasquez, Marcdina TrujiUo, Martha Cotera. Tht: contributions of these and other Chicana cultural practition. ers who are nOt named in this essay are best summarized by the title ofa collection of poems, Puentes.J fionm-as (Bridges and Borders). Chicana cultural producers of the 1970s and early 19805 crossed the seemingly impenetrable borden of Chicano subjectivity. They transformed the language of self-representation, visualized new ethnic configurations and subject positions, and paved the way for contemporary Chicana.~ to explore other dimensions ofthe Chicana experience. Had it not been for tht: pionet:ring drofts of early Chicana cultural practition~rs, who were oft~n unjustly divorced by their own Rna, th~ developments would have bttn hampered. And of course new roads need to be travcl~d in tht: 1990s if the constantly changing panorama of an ever·growing Chicana population is to gain entrance into cultural discourse in a manner that dignifies this population and privileges iu own sdf-eonslructions and the rhythms and intentiOn! of its own vt:macular. Thanks to the efforts of Mujeres cit: la Raza, who had the conge (anger/courage) and political foresight to say "Va soy" and mean "Chican.a," this joumey toward new Chicana subjcctivitit:s in the year 2000 is facilitated.· 1

~

..,

-

.

NOTES I.Juanit:t Dominguez, "Yo soy Chicano," in Armando RendOn, 71It ai/altO MtIJf~ (New York; Collier, 1971), p. 182; Margarita Virginia Sanchez, "Escape," in IV~ A" Chitanar, ed. Phillip Ortego (New York; Washington Square Press, 1973), p. 208; Dorenda Moreno, "My Son, My Daughten," in fA Mwpt.J /JJ iUrrojLa tinra tin vida (Berkeley, Calir.: Ca5a Editorial, 1975), n. 1'.; Margarita Cota-Cardemu, "M:mifesuoon Tamia" (Late Declaration), fA PRla/na 2, no. 2 (Fall 1980); 37. }{alt: In these poems, five spaced dou indicate omissions from the original text. 2. FoUowing Michel Foucault, 1 view subjectivity as an elfttt, as something produced by the power of di5cou~ and social relations. Foucault's projttt of exami~ngsubjtttivity thrm.gh "the h;~tory of the mode, by which, in ollr cuhure, human bemgs are made subjccts" is also useful here, because it allows for undentanding t~e ~nte~elatedn~ss ~f different forms of ethnic subjeetivities as they are construCted from WIthin different h,stonc:aJ p~riods. For a more complete discussion of this project, see his "The Subject and . Power," Cri/itallnquiry 8, no. 4 (Summer 1982); 777. 3. The "Plan F..spiritual de Azdan (Spiritual Manifesto of Aztl!m) is a dedarahon put forth :\1 the Dcll\'t:r Conference, MaN;h 1969. 'Inis dcclaratK)O identif)CS Aztlin as the platt of the ChicanolmlJ/i.t:" nation, prof!l0tes (ama/iJma (brotherhood) as a coDectivc ",:,"lue, stipulates that lhe "calling of our blood" is the b:l~is for Chicano po....er, and est:\bh~!lc~ a link bet~en the nations of the "bronze continelll"; North, South, and Central Amenta. '" AmJoaquin" (1967) purported to be an "epic ofthe Chicano people." The poem foll~ lhe spiritual joumey of a Chicano male protagonist who alleviates his penonal and SOCIal alicnation by reaffirming his ties with Mexican culture, history, and identity. 111e poem also prdigura the coming of a Chicano revolution, tr..ca a racial ethnic ancestry, and militates against assimilation, passivity, and cultural genocide. "Fl Plan" and "Yo soy Joaquin" appeared in the popular anthology 1.il~alura Chi,,,1IfJ,' TlXla J '~~It:dQ, ed. JOS:Ph Sommers, Antonia Castaneda Schular, and Tomas Ybarra Frausto (Englewood CIiJTs, NJ.: Prentice-HaD, 1972), pp. 93-94, 89-90. 4. Afterdescribing herdark skin and her black hair, the poetic \'Oitt brings them together in the phrase "My nippb are dark brown" (Moreno, "My Son, My Daughten," p. 6). 5. I ha~ adopted Stuart Hall's notion of "identity as positionality" as a way of establishing connections between different forms ofChicanalo identity and subjectivity. In describing identity as po~itionality, Hall notes; "Identities are lhe names we give to the different ways we are positKlIled by, and position ourselves within, the nalTativcs of the past." Sec his "Culturallcrg, Cary Nelson, and Paula Treichler (New York; Routledge, 1992). 6. Nanna A1aroon, "In the Tracks of the Native Woman," CullJual SlutJits 4, no. 3 (1990):

''''.7. SorJuana Ints de la Cruz was a famous Mcxican poet. She is known for her poem "Hombres Nccios," wriuen in the late seventeenth century and considered by many to be a precursor of feminist thought because: of its scathing ~xposition and critique of the paradoxes of male arrogance toward women.

.... _, 8. Marcelina Trujillo, hMachismo Is Part ofOurCultun:," in TM Tltull 1V0IMIl: Milll'Jril]

W_ IVI'itm '.! IN lhtiurJ St4rn, ed. Dexter F"tsher (Bos.ton: Houghton Mifflin, 1980), pp. iOl-402_ 9.... And tIu &rt!I Did NfJi Pa,t (Berkeley, Calir.: (hiinto Sol, 1971). 10. "'Vomen of the Race," a tenn commonly used ill alternative productiolls to refer to Chicanas. II. I am n:ferring to lhe systems of signifICation within nationalist discourse: which dfe<:ted the displacement of Chicana subje<:tivity. In language, for example, the univuul ethnic subject olien was treated as masculine (Chicano) instead offeminin<: (Chicana) ~-en when fully embodied Chicanas wen: represented. A case in point is the volume IVt A,t Chiamos (sec note 1 above), which greets the n:ader with the image of a young Chicana representing lhe passage to "modem Chicano expression." Chicana subjcctivity is tbus ovt:rridden at the linguistic level by a gender referenlthat centen a Chicano masculinity and dellies tbe Chicana all independent subjc:t;tivity as well as a separ.l.Ie literary trajectory. Phillip Onego (lhe editor of IV, ATt Otua1WS) was not alone in this portrayal; similar eJGlffiplc:s abound in early Chicano productions. 12. The splitting of Chicana/o subjectivity could abo be examined from the outsKk, through a critique ofthe dominant culture's figurations ofChtcana/o identity and subjectiviry or a critique of alternative feminist n:pn:sentations of Chic:mas. I have elected to examine the spliuing of Chicana/o subjectivity from imide the Chicana's own cultural production, in order to foreground the tensions between maxulinist and feminist construetiOI1$. Alternate definitions that fon:ground Chicanas as (individual) speaking subjects include: those lhat fol.low the pattern found in excerpt 3, which begins "Yo soy Chicana." Gl'(MJ.p charaClerizations include those that appeal din:t:t1y 10 1I collective female identiry ....; thout individual distinction, such as "Mujer" or "Chicana.." E.xample' include excerpt 4 and the poem "Mujer de I" R:ua," analyzed later in this essay. For an analysis of the~e forms of Chicana identity, sce my essay "I Throw Punches for My Race, but I Don't Want to Be a Man," in CullulIIl Slud~J, pp. 81-95. 13. Cannen Tafolla, Ttl Split II Hutrlllll (San Antonio: Mexic-dIl America.n Cultural Center, 1985), p. I. 11. M RendOlI notes: "We ChicallOS have our sh....n: ofnuilinches, which is what we call traitors to la ral.a who are of la rna, after the example of an Aztec woman of that name who became Cortel.' concuuinc under the name of Dona Marina, and scrvt..d him also as an interpreter and infonner ·against her own people. The malinches are worse characten and more dangerous Ihan the Tio Tacos, lhe Chicanismo cuphemism for an UncJ.c: Tom. 11le Tio Taco may stand in the way of progress only out of fear or misplacal. selfimportance. In lhe se....-itt oflhe gringo, malinchc:s attack [theirJ own brothen, betray our dignity and manhood, cause jealousies and misundentandings among us, and actually seek to n:taro the advance ofthe Chicanos, ifit benefits themselves-while the gringo watchcs"

(PI'. 96-97). 15. Ibid., p. 183. 16. Ibid., p. 105. 17. Foucault, "The Subject and Power," p. 781. 18. Unarguably, RendOn's (AiavM MtuliftJItI i, an extreme illustration; OIher cultural practitioners were leu offensive when splitting Chicana/o subjectivity under the pl.e of

.~"

~

~

"

~

""'"

ideal male figures or female figures imaged wilh male eyes. Yet his essay pr0vidc3 us with a perfect exampk: of the contradictions of Chicano movement discou.-,es and practices. While he castigates _1i",1ra for dividing the movement, and opposes the subjc:clion of ethnic groups to immutable Anglo truths (stereotype:! such as the Frito Bandito, for instance), he nonetheless activates system' of diffen:ntiation that duplicate rather than contest the subjection of ChicanaS/os within the dominant social fonnation. 19. This n:naming was conscious, and it n:prc:sented anolher intcrpretation of lhe hiSlorical figure Malinnin Tenq>al, who was said to be horn around the year 1505 and ....ho was dubbed a trailOr because ofher n:lationship wilh Cones. The tenn MaJiJlcNis now synonymous with traitor, and Chicanas wish to n:cIaim Malintzin as a historical prc:cunor of Chicanas and a victim of male chauvinist attitudes, wltich often culminated in holding her almosl single-handedly responsible for the conquest of Mexico. Chicanas generally orrer positive depictions of Malint:dn. For all example, see Adelaida del Ca~tillo's "Malintl.in Tenq,al: A Pn:liminary Look into a New Penpectivt:," in EsU!]s till l.JJ M'9n. ed. Rosaura Sanchez alld Rosa Martinez Cnu (los Angeles: Chtcano Studies Research Center, 1977), pp. 12-4-149. 20. For a bibliographical sampling of some of their lexts, see FJizabc:th OrdOiicz, "Sexual Politics and the Theme of Sexuality in Chicana Poetry," in Womm in Hispanic L;/nll/lfft: Icons and Fallen IrJoI.r. ed. Ue~h Miller (Berkeley: Univt:nity of California Press, 1983), PI'. 316-337. 21. See Martha Cotera, "Feminism: The Chicana and the Anglo Vcmolls," in Twiu III MinorilJ: Mt:cium Anrtrittul Womm. ed. Margarita Melville (St. Louis: Mosby, 1980), pp. 217-234. 22. There wen: many Chicanas who of COU~ mimickt:d malc:-oriented vemons of female subjects in their cultural productions. These types of female-authored productions IOb';cally IJc:long to the fint stage of the splitting of Chicana/o subjtttivity. 23. These Chicanas have been selected because of their convergence wilh One or more of the features listed above, and in order to give a sampling of Chicana cultuml production in different domains. 24. Yolanda LOpc-t, StrV e-Jalwpt (Guadalupe serics), Mai.t.t I, no. 4 (Spring 1978): 55 59 and front and back coven. 25. Tbcx obsoerv:ations are applicable to COntemporary Mexicanas as well. 26. I refer to this image as lhe fallen Guadalupe, but this portrait is not distinguished in GUlldalupt, p. 55. 27. "La Jo'arnilia de hl Ra~.a" is the name of an illuslmtion done by the mumlist Walter Bab. Significantly, lJJ Ftmlilia tit la R4<.a was also lhe name of a publication that stn:sscd the principle of unity through the family as well as nationalist renditions of Chicano idcntiry. The illustration lhat I am referring to recalls represc.ntatiolt! of"the holy family." Bab's illustration centers a male protagonist and a child, who en~ the spectator's guc: din:etIy through frontal portraits. 11le veiled woman, who is reminiscent of lhe Virgin, is capturcd by herprofilc:, which prevents this type ofdefinition and engagement. In addition, her body becomes an extension of the male's, M his ann extend~ around her, once ag-din n:centering his representation and role as "prote<:tor." For an example of this portrait, see Dc CoImts 1,110. 2 (Spring 1974): 65. BItu Mt, Ultima is the title of a novel by Rudolfo Anaya (Berkeley, Calif.: Quinto Sol, 1974). 11le novel is replete with traditional reprc:scntation' of WOmc:ll. 1bc:sc TepTCKntalions come together in the char.tcter of Ultima, the most

sme

ANGlE CHABRAM DERNERSESIAN

56

~ . finc db hcrrdationship 10 Antonio. "LaJeftta" wa5 imporUl11 female character, who 15 dc: £1 Ye- ' (D_ "_1"'" Calif.: Quinto Sol, 1972), p. . _ _I.....,cnutkd =fHJtl uo;TMO_,. _~..l published in a scmffi anu~,. hi [J'K)(hcr who works all day ........ 233. "LaJdita" is intended 10 be a lnh~te to a C ~na 'h nd "ooly
29. Ana Nieto-GOme%, ".... c.a~a,. Soma ~L "The Role of the: ChKana 30. For an account of these contradieuons, sec. '6~29 .. ' Es.uz.1J 011 fA M¥ pp. . within the ~tlldent Movc~cnt: In , lUza" in La ~ll1jtr a /JJ IWa, p. 27. 31. Donnda Moreno, MUJcr d e a , 32. Ibid. .' .' /Q . mi IiIHrIlCi&t (New York Doubk· 33. 1 am paraphrasmg Ricardo san~hci/; s Can :J ~ 77u UbtrtJJWn of II Chicano Mil/d. day, 1971). This title signiflCanlly earned t~ ~u~ea ~~ Rosario ofVaUejo, C;ilifomia, 34. This illustration, which I bclieve to " y rene 'M ' "M uJ'er de la Rau p.27. accompanIes oreno s . . '. . ' Ix: a thing of the past, at least • h' typeOfVlClimuatlOlilSSCC n . 35,. In Mol"Coo 5 poem, t IS r..' ment toward self-deu::mUnatlOll. . . h unts her sOCCeM".... move for the poetlC subject, w 0 reco Ch' Coed" ea,o,ol3 (1977); 19. 36. Bemice Zamora, "NoteS from a lCillla ,

FOUR

Speaking from the Margin Uninvited Discourse on Sexuality and Power Emma Pbu. Don't fmlOin wiJIIin l!u PJ7d-noJ.lh€ ,1oJII,t. T W

/I

I«Jk. I1rnr ClII drnmgh.

ntLtNI: CIXOUI, "TilE UlUCH O' TlIE 1Ul)UI,\"

'0

37. Rend6l1, (;hictJM M(Ulifu~, p. 15~'Th W man of La Rau," in A~tl4n: All ArztJwlogy 38. Enriqueta Lo~gauex y Vasq~e~, Id . e dOSUUl Steiner (New York: Vintage Books, of Mtric4ll-AIfIl7'icmI: LiJoalllft, ed. Luis Va ez an 1972), p. 277. .. V.:....,uc::z "Woman of La Raza, p. 278. 39 . -... , . Coed" 19 40. Zamora, "Notes fro~ a ~Il\c~n~ :_~~' p~_ S~n Diego por d gran cjemplo que ..._.... traba>n a SylVIa .......... aga m ; ' p 41. l.e '-K'UICO este ~. •. aslul.a de Iluestra cullura. or . .._ d I do y convenldo en cnllea " I nos dlO al haucr5C oc ora ble por 'as"Iml" aclO...',._ ., nue habrin aqui. Tamblen L~ .. .,_e supueslO, me ,,,,go respon~ I da. nue me proporcionb en 1a preparaclOn u<: ilgrad<::.:CO a Zarc DcnleTSdlan a gran "yu " este en!i3.YO.

My socialist-reminist position has pushed me toward a psychoanalytic end, ir only momemarily. When I was a budding graduate studem in ChicanaJo history and women's history, I tried stubbornly to show that a class-based movement subsumed gender. l While Chicano scholars argue that race must be integrated into a cJass..based revolution, many Chicana scholars defend the premise that the secondary status given to women's issues in a race- and class-based revolution cheats the revolution.! 'I11e "unhappy marriage" between Marxism and reminism, howevt:r, remains the chosen marriage, because the alternative for feminists is capitalism-a deadly, destructive husband. s As socialist feminists, we opt ror the man who, as our mothers point out, "si toma hiji., pero no te golpea" (yes, he drinks, but he doesn't bauer you). He is far from perrect, but we tenaciously hitch ourselves to the man ~ are desperate to change in order to improve the marriage. TIlls "husband" has potential irhe abandons the ego-driven anxiety that defines his world on his terms. With him, at least, there is a potential for equality and freedom.· With the capitalist, we are banered, raped, and lert to die in factories, fields, bedrooms, and boardrooms. The Marxist tclh us that "womcn are oppreSS«l," as he gathers with his male cohorts, then yells to you, "Oye coraz6n, are you finisbed typing my manuscript?" Lip selVice is worth something, whether it's in the boardroom or the bedroom, but it is not a revolution. 3 I want to take us beyond the antiquated Marxist-feminist debate, assuming we agree that class struggle is unavoidable and that race/gender analysis and sexual autonomy must be the vanguard of a victorious revolution.' The qua57