Borderlands Identity

            For my Latin American and Caribbean studies capstone class with Professor Barnett, we just finished reading Borderlands by Gloria Anzaldúa.  In this book, she identifies the existence of a “borderlands” identity held by those who live between the binary identities created by the rigid border – geographically, culturally, linguistically – between United States and Mexico.  Anzaldúa addresses the relationships between those who fit distinctly into these binary identities and those who occupy a “borderlands” identity, in that the “borderlands” identities hold strong ties to both side while simultaneously existing entirely separately and uniquely.  They simultaneously identify multiple homelands and a complete lack of homeland.  In many cases, these individuals live in ambiguity in terms of language, homeland, and identification when surrounded by those who live entirely within an in-group; these individuals may frequently feel othered by those who share their same heritage from one side of the border or the other, resulting in a situation like that of Cuban exiles in which their homeland no longer wants them.  As a result, they form a new identity with strong ties to the past but entirely unique experiences.

            While Anzaldúa wrote primarily about the Chicanx experience, I could not help myself but to compare to the O’odham experience.  In her book, Anzaldúa references those who have experienced a changing identity with the movement of the border, in which they lost their homeland identification when the border crossed them.  While these situations do not echo or even mirror the experiences of the O’odham, they call attention to some of the same struggles created by the existence of the border and the relationships the hold with the United States and Mexico.  Geographically, the O’odham occupy a “borderlands” identity that exists separately and uniquely from either side of the border, and they hold strong ties to the land on either side of the border in terms of identification of homeland; however, that is where the “borderlands” identity that Anzaldúa writes about ends for the O’odham.  They hold no ties to the nations that created the border that crossed them.  They do not exist as a result of the fusion of lives.  They have existed longer than the borderlands, and thus, the identification of their lives as such would have to be an adoption of the label on their part.

            In her article, “Who’s the Indian in Aztlán? Re-Writing Mestizaje, Indianism, and Chicanismo from the Lacandón,” Josefina Saldaña-Portillo responds to Anzaldúa by identifying her failure to identify that Mexico and the Southwest themselves are a borderland through the fusion of indigenous past and colonial past, through the interception of indigenous, Spanish, African, and Anglo roots.  This borderlands relationship may be more applicable to the O’odham, through pure American Indian roots and/or the American Indian interception with the Spanish and Anglo experience to create the modern O’odham experience.

            Anzaldúa’s work gave voice to many Chincanxs across the United States through the creation of a bilingual, bicultural group with two distinct homelands that no longer feel like home.  Saldaña’s point is fair in identifying the limitations and the shortcomings of her work, as this work does not represent the entire borderlands experience, even if it was never intended to do so.  Saldaña wants to ensure that the conversation regarding the indigenous and American Indian experiences in relation to colonization and the modern negotiation of border relations – in terms of modernity as well as history – continues openly and inclusively.