Identities of the periphery: the construction and the collective prodigy in chicano/a writings

Abstract

It has been generally argued that identity-formation is a complex co-relation of one’s conscious and subconscious intelligences, resulting in the fixity of a set of behavioral traits. From birth people enter numerous contexts, which shape their personalities. In fact, socio-political struggles, cultural practices, religious beliefs and even personal aspirations contribute to the delineation of the self. Hence, the notion of identity is not monolithic or static but subject to change. Self-perception is the outcome of a number of influences from the historical, social, political, ethical, and cultural contexts one enters or from his/her personal preferences resulting from circumstances. Adding to these perplexing issues, we can divide the concept of identity into two broad categories: the individual and the collective expressions of the self. In fact, human beings claim an identity which, more often than not, corresponds to a collective one. And since individuals do not inhabit a void but are active members of worldly socialization, they also form various organized groups of people, both political and apolitical. The corollary is that individual identity is not autonomous; instead, it takes a collectivity’s self-perception as its point of departure or reference. In order to grasp the importance of the “individual vis-a-vis collective” interdependency, we have to consider the importance of a human agency’s continuity throughout time. If we assume that a given collectivity develops a distinct identity over the course of time, then we must acknowledge that the exact same collectivity propagates an indigenous history. And when an individual willingly acknowledges the history of a group of people, then this historicized identity-perception is incorporated into his/her present self representation. In fact, it becomes his/her collective past self to be consolidated into one’s rite of passage into the present and future. Seen in this light, collective consciousness implies a triple relation within a group of people: the avowal of a common ancestry, the identification of self-same present experiences in time and space, and a consensus in the pursuit of their future aspirations. In broad terms, this is the philosophical area where I have sought to approach Mexican-American identity in this dissertation, Identities of the Periphery: The Construction and the Collective Prodigy in Chicano/a Writings. My chief concern is to convey my conviction that Chicanismo is predominantly a collective identity, deeply rooted in the American Southwest (spatial factor) and one which is “the active presence of the whole past of which it is the product” (temporal factor) (Bourdieu 118). Mexican-Americans, in tandem with the rest of hyphenated groupings within the US, and even in the present turbulent global context of the 21st century, strive to conceive and delineate their self-identity. But their self-perception is a rather crooked path since it is the outcome of numerous binarisms: the politics of resistance versus the poetics of cultural identity, Mexican nation versus the US Southwest, individuality versus collectivization, and so on. This dissertation is an attempt to approach the multi-faceted Chicano identity and to present the ways in which the Mexican-American individual construes and builds up his/her self-awareness via the totality of his/her collective experience. It is my sincere hope to succeed in an in-depth understanding of Chicano identity as it appears through its literary expression.