LITR 5731: Seminar in
American Minority Literature
Student Research Project
Jennifer Branch
7-Dec-04
Mexican-American Women as a Double Minority
In reading literature by women of different ethnic backgrounds, I wondered about their status as a double minority. It was clear to me that black women would fit more easily into this category because of the oppression that has faced both women and African Americans for so many years. However, I wasn’t sure how a woman of Hispanic heritage would fit into this genre. If Hispanic people are considered an ambivalent minority, where do they belong? What is it about their minority status that makes them ambivalent? Is it as difficult for a woman of Hispanic heritage to get her book published, her voice heard as it is for a black woman? Better yet, is it as easy for this Hispanic woman to get her book published as it is for a white woman? A white man? I went in search for the answers to these questions in order to establish some sort of thesis.
In the first section of this research journal, I use articles by Christine Granados and Benjamin Marquez to establish whether or not Latin Americans are considered, in general, as a minority. The article by Christine Granados confronts the ongoing debate that tries to determine whether the term Latino or Hispanic is the preferred label for the culture. The second review by Benjamin Marquez attacks the research done by Peter Skerry that suggests that Mexican Americans are an ambivalent minority. The third article by Maria Newman touches briefly on the difficulty that Mexican Americans face in being of a different culture in the publishing industry.
The second section deals with establishing whether or not females are seen as a minority both in society and in literary circles. The article by Michelle Sugiyama asserts that woman is discriminated against, and uses the example of high-heeled shoes in relation to foot-binding in order to prove this theory. Jeff Thomson deals with identity in the characters of Woman Hollering Creek as a reflection of modern-day women and the way they handle their minority status.
The research for the third and final section proposes that women of a Hispanic background can serve as a double minority. This subject is dealt with by Jennifer Jue, who notes that women of color who write are finding a silenced voice and breaking ground for other women. It is confronted indirectly by Ilan Stavans and Edward Stanton, who, in writing of the ‘Latino Literary Tradition’ have noticeably left out all of the female Latino writers. Their absence in these articles perhaps speaks louder than their presence would.
Section 1: Latin Americans as a Minority
In this section, I needed to find
material that confirmed whether or not a Latin-minority issue existed.
I found a substantial amount of evidence that confirmed the existence of
the Latin-American as a Minority issue, however; the three sources that
follow seemed to be the most overwhelming and cohesive examples.
Christine
Granados: Hispanic VS Latino
In order to establish the existence of a minority issue, I sought reason in this article by Christine Granados, who explains the ongoing battle for the label most preferred by the culture. Granados suggests that the finality in choosing the term most suited for an individual insinuates a standpoint, not on the preference of label alone, but rather a statement on political, social and generational stance.
Granados claims that the term ‘Hispanic’ is often the preferred term among the younger people of the culture because they tend to be more conservative, generally second or third generation citizens, and are therefore more assimilated. She goes on to speculate that the term ‘Latino’ is typically chosen among the older generation which tends to be liberal and more radical. Though the voices that tend to be heard are the ones who are more resistant to the term ‘Hispanic’, the results of the poll proved that over 65% of those questioned preferred the term ‘Hispanic’ over ‘Latino’.
Several Hispanic people are interviewed in an effort to understand the reasoning behind the preferred terms. Sandra Cisneros does not choose to be called Hispanic because “it is a very colonistic term, a disrespectful term, a term imposed on [them] without asking what [they] wanted to be called.” Cisneros finds the term insidiously destructive because of the readiness with which the younger generation accepts the word. She feels that in this acceptance, the origin of the label is not being properly considered; that the dominant culture imposed the lab le as a way of erasing the identity of a people and their past.
Another interviewee, a professor of sociology also objects to the term Hispanic, and likens it to being called African-American, colored or Negro. He claims that in these cases, the issue is not necessarily in the term itself, but rather who is imposing the term. He further suggests that the term Hispanic was not developed by the Hispanic culture, but rather the dominant culture. As time progresses and people become more assimilated, he insists that the term ‘Hispanic’ is integrated more and more into the daily language.
Granados then delves into the etymology of each term and attempts to decipher why each is important. Hispanic is derived from España, and this country led the conquest of the New World. Their language dominated Latin America. Latino traces its roots back to Rome and seems to be more inclusive, “encompassing Latin American countries such as Cuba, Puerto Rico, the Dominican Republic, Mexico and others”.
The younger generation that tends towards the label Hispanic seems to feel that it is more politically correct, and that it is a term everybody understands, but when asked, Granados discovers that most people would not pick either label, but rather one that came closer to identifying their exact origin: Mexican American, Cuban American, etc.
She gives an example of the assimilation factor of the minority group in a marginal segment when interviewing Maria Martin, who said that she first believed the term Hispanic was ‘the dominant cultures attempt to homogenize Latinos’, but has in fact, now accepted the term because ‘it has become more a part of [their] reality…’
In trying to decipher whether the terms are imposed or chosen, and whether they are naturally accepted or accepted through assimilation, Granados has proven the minority element of the culture, and laid out the difference in assimilation between generations.
Benjamin Marquez on
Peter Skerry: Mexican Americans: The Ambivalent Minority
Marquez comments briefly on the
two theses introduced in Peter Skerry’s book: that Mexican Americans are not a
minority group because they share so much in common with white ethnics, and that
“contemporary Mexican-American politics is fuelled by forces that belie the
underlying process of incorporation”. He
does not feel, however, that Skerry is correct in his assumptions because while
Skerry contends that conflict within the Mexican American community can be
attributed to misguided government policy and “elite manipulation”, Marquez
asserts that Skerry has not taken into account the “complex role that race
plays in Mexican –American policy”. (375)
Marquez explains that in Skerry’s writing, stereotypes drive much of
the narrative, rather than actual facts. While
these types of stereotypes would make Mexican-Americans ambivalent minorities,
Marquez feels that the racism Mexican-Americans receive and is not explained
thoroughly enough in Skerry’s book make them a minority and not an ambivalent
minority.
Maria Newman:
Sandra Cisneros, Her New Book, Her New Look
While this article deals
primarily with the release of Cisneros’ most recent book Caramelo, it touches marginally on the incidence of Hispanic
publishing. Newman asserts that the
publishing world has changed exceptionally since the first publication of House
on Mango Street in 1984, when the Houston-based Arte Publico
Press distributed the novel. Arte Publico
Press is the largest publisher of Latino literature in he United States and
since their beginning, several of the more mainstream houses are printing Latino
literature. This trend is
attributed to the growing Latino population.
As the numbers increase, it is felt that more and more books are desired
by the culture. Before this, Julia
Alvarez says ‘you had to go in search of this kind of literature’ not
because it wasn’t being written, but because the larger houses weren’t
printing the material because they did not feel the minority of people wanting
this type of literature warranted the press costs.
The article continues on to comment that The
House on Mango Street remains one of Vintage Books’ best sellers for many
years.
Section 2: Women as a Minority
In this section, I needed to establish whether or not a contemporary issue with women as a minority in both literary circles and society existed. Again, I found overwhelming confirmation that though numerically, women have surpassed men, they are still treated as a minority in that they are discriminated against. The two articles that follow deal with identity of women in a patriarchal society.
Michelle Sugiyama:
Of Woman Bondage: The Eroticism of Feet in the House
on Mango Street
This article by Michelle Sugiyama deals with the link between female sexuality and high-heeled shoes in Sandra Cisneros’ novel The House on Mango Street. She also discusses the attraction of men towards women both with high-heeled shoes and bound feet, and suggests that these are similar.
She begins the article with a quote by Rick Overton from Comic Strip Live: “High Heels must have been a man’s idea—their asses will look good and they’ll be crippled.” Sugiyama suggests that the foot/shoe motif of Cisneros’s work sheds light on ‘male manipulation of female sexuality and thus on the design and operations of the human mind’. In The House on Mango Street, high heels are used as a tool. They accentuate the feminine, they elongate the legs, they cause the hips to sway, they are also, like feet that have been bound, painful to walk in. The beauty that they accentuate, claims the author, is a form of power that they hold over men.
Sugiyama contends that it is this power that actually weakens women under the weight of the patriarchal society. Because they are beautiful, because they are desirable, because they have this power, men tend to keep them away from the rest of the world, as is the case in House. Sugiyama cites instances of beautiful women being held captive in their own homes by the men who were initially attracted to their power.
The author cites instances of this bound feet persona, from stories like Cinderella to Miss A-pao, a Chinese tale of a woman who is beautiful but whose feet aren’t bound, and so is the subject of criticism. “Part of the appeal of bound feet is that their length is dramatically decreased…high heels too, cause the foot to appear smaller”.
The article goes into the appeal
of the appearance of small feet, of the gentle sway that it induces because they
growth is literally retarded. She
comments that ‘a crippled woman is easier to control than a woman with healthy
limbs’. The beauty associated
with these women is akin to the ease with which they are discriminated against.
This is proven in Cisneros with which the men of Mango Street
‘vehemently guard their woman’. These women long for their own houses, a household that they
can rule over instead of the patriarchal prison in which they remain captives, a
reflection of modern-day woman.
Jeff Thomson:
‘What is called Heaven” : Identity in Sandra Cisneros’s Woman Hollering
Creek
This article discusses the struggles and characterization of women in Sandra Cisneros’ work as a reflection of the discrimination contemporary women face. Thomson begins by invoking the characters in Woman Hollering Creek. Ines, Thomson feels, personifies the strong woman in society that takes the deepest pain inside her self and through that claims her own identity. He claims that the union of gender and gender-based ideologies and is essential to the strong female persona.
Thomson then talks about the importance of the story Eleven, in that the girl is establishing ‘aspects of an archetypal Chicana female identity’. In Barbie-Q, Cisneros attacks the artificial feminine stereotypes that are epitomized in the doll, and furthers the idea by insisting that it is this stereotype that women argue about having to live up to, while simultaneously purchasing the dolls for their daughters, perpetuating the cycle of discrimination and keeping the woman “confined in a partial identity”.
The author notes briefly that the theme of these short stories reflect the vulnerability of females, that their own stories are dictated to them and the ones who seem to be stronger in society are women who have assimilated both masculine and feminine characteristics.
There is then discussion of the women who have maintained a kind of autonomy, who have remained strong but without anyone. Thomson comments that these women “understand how their power rises from a misuse of sexuality and is a dangerous result of women recapitulating the mistakes of men”. He confronts the issues of gender identity by relating the story of Flavio and Lupe. When Flavio agrees to model for Lupe’s painting of the Prince and the Princess, the tragic love story. Thomson asserts that through the short story, Flavio is grounded while Lupe is searching: ‘she has no identity that isn’t purchased’. Through this article, I found that the discrimination of women and women as a minority is an issue that is studied through literature and the characters reflected in that literature.
Section 3: Mexican Woman as a Double Minority
In this section, I sought articles that would either prove or disprove
the status of Mexican-American women as a double minority.
I found that the evidence supporting their status as such was prevalent.
I also found that the absence of women in articles regarding Latino
literature was extremely telling.
Jennifer Jue:
Breaking the Silence: Women of Color and Issues of Voice and Cultural
Identity
This article discusses women of color and their biographical writings in terms of their expressions of cultural identity and voice. She invokes Cisneros, Maxine Kingston and Alice Walker. Though she discusses three different ethnicities, I will only discuss the portions of the article that deal with the Latin American woman.
Jue suggests that language, for women of color, is extremely important and plays a large role in defining their cultural identity. This identity encompasses their ethnicity, gender and socioeconomic class. It is this identity that is expressed when their stories are told in their own voice.
“Women of color have always struggled to voice their experiences within a society that has historically silenced them”. Jue claims that as women of color begin voicing their experience, not only are they opening the gate for other women to tell their stories, but they are simultaneously being resisted by society as the woman who is loud and out of place. In the face of this, the author claims that these women are not allowing other people to write their own histories, but are instead writing their own representation of the culture in which they were born to, and the cultures and gender-groups that oppose them.
The article claims that in finally finding their own voice, by breaking the silence that they have been forced to endure, they are creating their own language: one that actively resists sexism, racism, and other forms of oppression.
Jennifer Jue describes Sandra Cisneros’ work can be described as an
endeavor in the ‘development of bicultural, bilingual identity’ and uses the
example of a Esperanza in The House On
Mango Street’s perception of a woman who won’t leave her house. The woman knows very little English, and Esperanza believes
that this is the reason she is so shy in her neighborhood. Not only is the woman held captive by gender boundaries, she
is also held captive by cultural boundaries.
In her conclusion, Jue asserts that it is these women of color that help
other females find their voice; that their battle against the double minority is
fought and helps women of all cultures in the long run.
Ilan Stavans: The
Quest for a Latino Literary Tradition
This article delves into Latino-American literature and the efforts to define the literary tradition. Stavans begins his article by pointing out the driving force behind anthologies: merchandising. He suggests that anthologies are nothing more than “an eclipsed portion of the population” (such as women, minorities, etc), that are better represented in anthologies than in other forms of literature. He comments on the aggravation that New York publishing companies had neglected Latino literature for such a long time. In search of creating this tradition, the Nortan Anthology approached Gary Keller and Nicolas Kanellos to piece together work that would comprise this anthology. In the sea of authors they list, the neglect to list any female Latino authors. Their absence in this article proves that not only are they a minority because they are Hispanic, but are also a minority because they are women, and the men are holding the pens.
Edward Stanton:
Hispanic Writers and American Literature
Stanton presents in this article a series of articles by Spanish-speaking authors and their views on American literature. He discusses the views of several Latino males on readings of American work, the views of Spanish work and its function in America, but all of the males in question are just that – male Latino writers. No work of Sandra Cisneros, Julie Alvarez, Pat Mora is discussed. Perhaps a more insidious threat to being cast-aside is the fact that they are completely and totally ignored and disregarded in this article. To be cast-aside means that there was at least a consideration involved. By reading this article and only this article, one would assume that the Hispanic writers of American literature are only Hispanic males. This further implies the Latina writers status as a double minority: she is part of a underrepresented culture and a grossly underrepresented gender.
Conclusion
As it seems natural that an African-American woman could easily fit into a double minority category, it did not seem at first that a Latino woman would slide so easily into the category. The Mexican-Americans’ perceived label as an ambivalent minority gave way initially to difficulty in establishing a case for true discrimination; however, all of the research I have done has proven to me that Latino women are part of this label. They are under the bonds of both a patriarchal and discriminatory society. Some are voiceless, but the writers who are stepping up today prove that not all are voiceless, and the number of choiceless is growing smaller and smaller as years progress.
Bibliography
Granados, Christine. “Hispanic vs Latino.” Hispanic
Trends. 13.12 (2000) 40-42
Jue, Jennifer. “Breaking the Silence: Women of Color and
Issues of Voice and Cultural Identity.” Religious
Education. 88.3 (1993) 451-462
Marquez, Benjamin. “Ambivalent Minority.” The
American Book Review. New York: the Free Press. 1993.
Newman, Maria. “Sandra Cisneros: Her New Book, Her New
Look.” Hispanic. 15.9 (2002) 44-47
Sugiyama, Michelle. “Of Woman Bondage: The Eroticism of
Feet in the House on Mango Street”. Midwest Quarterly. 41.1 (1999) 9-20
Thomson, Jeff. “What is Called Heaven: Identity in
Sandra Cisneros’s Woman Hollering Creek.” Studies in Short Fiction.
31.3 (1994) 415-425
Stanton, Edward. “Hispanic Writers and American
Literature.” ANQ. 10.2 (1997) 3-7
Stavans, Iian. “The Quest for a Latino Literary Tradition.” Chronicles of Higher Education. 47.14 (2000) 13-15