Who is Citizen Rex?

By writing about a universe in which humans and robots coexist, Mario and Gilbert Hernandez’s Citizen Rex opens discussion for larger topics such as discrimination and individual rights. Within the story’s main plot there exists an anti-robot movement, which I have drawn comparisons with other race targeted protests in the United States (Chicano Movement anyone?). One of the more important questions that must be asked is, “What defines an individual?” The robots in Citizen Rex have “consciousness” chips, which presumably gives them the ability to think freely and have creative thought. However, they are denied basic rights and amenities such as “water, electricity and meat” because they were made to be subservient slaves to their human owners. Overall I think Rex serves as a platform for other robots to share their ideas because he has something the others do not; notoriety. This gives him substantial power to send his message to the human citizens.

Using some of Scott McCloud’s vocabulary to analyze the panel on page 122 in Citizen Rex I noticed that all of the panels make use of faith based fragmentation, which is based upon the idea that just because the whole picture is not seen doesn’t mean the rest of it doesn’t exist; our minds fill in the gaps in which parts are missing because we mentally visualize them to be there. In Citizen Rex, Rex himself is not always present in the novel but his story and what he stands for (liberation and justice) certainly is.

 In this panel the Hernandez brothers also use what McCloud describes as abstract symbols, such as letters to form words, which themselves are abstract compared to what they represent. In this case, the letters symbolize a sound that is being made in the background (“HUMMMMM…”). I think this goes along with the idea that many things in Citizen Rex are abstract and not concrete such as his purpose and meaning in the story initially.

Rex’s face is also deteriorating, yet as it’s melting we the readers can still detect traces of what we know in our minds to be human facial features. McCloud explains this as a way people look for human images in everything; even out the most rudimentary shapes and lines.  In the greater scheme of the story I see this as a visual representation of how the material manifestation of an idea can be destroyed but not the idea in which it was molded after. Rex may be dying but everything he has done up till that point will be remembered and carried on because in the words of V from the film V for Vendetta, “Beneath this mask there is more than flesh. Beneath this mask there is an idea…and ideas are bulletproof.”  

I’ve also noticed how distance plays a role in how the different characters are perceived. When a panel is illustrating a scene seen from far away, faces and landscapes become less detailed. Lines, besides acting as shadows, also draw out bigger things in the distance such as mountain ranges and buildings.

Question:

How do you think Citizen Rex relates to the other novels we have read in class about Chicano Literature? And are the robots meant to signify the Chicano minority (or any minority in this case)?

Miss Clairol Multilayered Question

Question 1:
Why do Arlene and Champ go to K-Mart in "Miss Clairol?" What role does Miss Clairol play in Arlene's life? How does their relationship (Arlene and Clairol) reflect Viramontes' commentary on consumerism?


Question 2:
What is Arlene's relationship to Champ in "Miss Clairol?" What kind of message is Arlene sending to Champ by buying so many beauty products? Is Viramontes trying to depict a greater theme of  self acceptance or freedom of self expression with her portrayal of Arlene and her obsession with changing?

When Oppertunity Strikes...

Robert Rodriguez’s’ “Aria” was published in 1982 and is an autobiographical memior of his early childhood as he was raised in a bilingual community while also dealing with his inner struggle to maintain his private cultural identity at the same time as adapting to a new public identity. At the center of these dueling spheres is language; it was something Rodriguez tied strongly with his identity and sense of self. His personal and intimate relationship with Spanish dictated his initial unenthusiastic feelings toward “gringos” and English speakers in general as expressed when he says, “The accent of los gringos was never pleasing nor was it hard to hear. Crowds at Safeway or at a bus stop would be noisy with sound. After I would be forced to edge away from the chirping chatter above me.” The word “aria,” that Rodriguez takes for the title of his story, itself means an air or melody of sounds. This word plays into the theme of his story that his native tongue of Spanish was music to his ears compared to the harsh sounds of the English speakers.

As he became more skilled and proficient in speaking English, he thought it harder to find enjoyment and an intimate connection in speaking his family’s Spanish. He, for lack of a better word, starts to forget his language because he is being discouraged from speaking Spanish, while being encouraged to speak only English within his private home sphere. The disconnect he experienced from his family that transpired from his situation gave him a sense of alienation within his own home and resonated feelings of guilt and shame. “As I grew fluent in English, I no longer could speak Spanish with Confidence,” and “I was cursed with guilt. Each time I’d hear myself addressed in Spanish, I would be unable to respond with any success,” demonstrate Rodriguez’s frustration and embarrassment he felt when trying to communicate. As a child, it must have been a confusing time in his life to be cut off completely from something that came naturally from him. Much of this guilt stems mostly from his extended family whom express shame in him for losing the ability to speak “flowing Spanish,” and nicknamed him hurtful names such as “pocho” which means colorless or bland.

I link the dishonor and embarrassment felt by Rodriguez as a child to the young school boy in Tomas Rivera’s short story “It’s That It Hurts,” from his greater novel of “The Earth Did Not Devour Him.” The “it” referred to by the title is the discrimination and shame felt by the main character towards the other children in his school. The unnamed boy knows that the school is aware that he is the son of Mexican immigrants and can use that fact as easy validation to expel him from school after getting in a fight. Unlike the young boy in Rivera’s story, Rodriguez receives encouragement from public figures (teachers) to assimilate into American Society and welcome him as he does, while receiving negative and discouraging feedback from his Mexican relatives. The contradiction between these two stories and what drew me to draw parallels between them were the similarities of parenting technique contrasted with the willingness of the child. The parents in “Aria” were always portrayed as very encouraging to the young Rodriguez while the parents in “It’s That It Hurts” are eluded to also wanting their child to stay in school to better his education in order to compete for better jobs. Both boys however, have different stances on what they want to do; Rodriguez assimilates while the young boy in Rivera’s novel would rather be in the fields with his parents. One must take in to account the different time periods that these memoirs come from, but I find it interesting to note that although they come from different periods, both sets of parents act in similar ways wanting their children to ultimately succeed. What is most interesting to me though is the source of the discrimination in the two stories.

My Question:

Is it general human nature to want our children to do better than us, or do you think there will ever be a generation of parents that act towards their children as they did toward their parents?

Woman Hollering Creek

“Cleofilas thought her life would have to be like that, like a telenovela, only now the episodes got sadder and sadder. And there were no commercials in between for comic relief. And no happy ending in sight. She thought this when she sat with the baby out by the creek behind the house. Cleofilas de…? But somehow she would have ti change her name to Topazio, or Yesenia, Cristal, Adriana, Stefania, Andrea, something more poetic than Cleofilas. Everything happened to women with names like jewels. But what happen to Cleofilas? Nothing. But a crack in the face.”

This selected passage from “Woman Hollering Creek” lends itself as an example of one of the overall themes of this story which illustrates the naïve and innocent impressions about romance and marriage. At this point in the plot, the story’s main protagonist, Cleofilas, has developed an idealistic but artificial way about thinking of these concepts due to media outlets such as her telenovelas which romanticizes everyday life and relationships.

In the first sentence, the omniscient narrator depicts Cleofilas as a dynamic character, that is, one capable of change. However, it becomes obvious that she will only achieve change when the right catalyst is added to her dire situation. In this case, it was the on-going conflict between herself and her husband, Juan Pedro, which made her realize that her life would never be like those of the glamorous woman in the telenovelas. The sentence, “And there were no commercials in between for comic relief,” portrays the state of emotional exhaustion she goes through with her everyday life. This section of the paragraph personifies a tone of despair and complete helplessness especially when the narrator says “And no happy ending in sight.” It’s as if the narrator pities Cleofilas for setting herself up so perfectly to fail to achieve an unattainable image. Cleofilas is stuck.

“But what happen to Cleofilas? Nothing. But a crack in the face.” These short clipped coupled sentences offer much to the characterization breakdown of Cleofilas. The narrator leads the reader to believe that nothing will come of Cleofilas’ fantasizing notions. Nothing, that is, except a “crack in the face.” I find the imagery of the word “crack” to be more shocking than the word scratch or bruise would be because it is an unusual way for the narrator to describe someone as if they were a statue. Maybe this was the narrator’s objective; to draw parallels between Cleofilas and a statue. In a way they are both stuck as they are with no means of escape unless helped from an outside source. I also see this “crack” as a type of chip on her shoulder. It’s location on her face represents the place her husband lashes at on her. She received this “chip” from admiring the passionate but unrealistic telenovelas  and now that she has had a dose of hard hitting reality, her entire outlook has been transformed which in turn lends itself to her character development and changing depth. The telenovelas play a huge role as a motif in this passage by symbolizing the works underlying theme of Cleofilas’ naïve views of life, yet how they also later act as a foil to her greater epiphany and change in outlook on life.

My question is to what point do you think fantasizing about something idealistic goes past the point of healthy day dreaming to something that is an unhealthy obsession such as Cleofilas with the telenovelas? Is it when you start adding yourself to the equation and give yourself false hope? Or is this false hope a good thing in which Cleofilas can hold on to in order to keep her family together? In other words, is it worth it?

I am Joaquin Reflection

I am Joaquin by Rodolfo Corky Gonzales is an homage, to what I believe to be, the various Mexicans and Mexican-Americans that have struggled to embrace and re-claim their cultural and personal identity when having to face the American (United States to be more specific) assimilation machine. There are two types of cultures; one that embraces other cultures (aka a melting pot) and one in which demands outsiders to conform to their standards and way of life (aka Assimilationists). It is my opinion that most people would like to regard America as a melting pot, but know and admit that a hint of superiority exists with those of natural citizenship. The speaker of this poem seems to be caught in between two worlds and two moral dilemmas. As discussed on the first page, he can assimilate and survive while having to live with the shame of turning his back on his heritage or he can fully embrace his culture and become spiritually sound at the expense of his “hunger” and possible livelihood gains. The speaker’s use of the word “sterilization” depicts and accurate representation of what he believes he has to accomplish in order for him to become a full member of society in the eyes of the American culture.

            Throughout this poem, many of the themes that resonated with me were that of unification, liberation, freedom, endurance, survival and determination. The speaker was able to illicit all of these by constantly emphasizing and repeating the phrase “I am…” By doing this he is repeatedly confirming his identity (whether to himself or to the audience, I’d be interested to find this out) by acknowledging that he, among all the people, saints and revolutionaries he mentioned, are one in the same; they are a people united for the same cause. At the same time, I feel and sense a bit of reluctance in his tone as if he wants to take action but doesn’t or can’t because he is just a “campesino” or farmer/peasant and just a puppet of the current political system with no real powers. The author also takes the tone of resentment. I feel his struggle to give up and play along and to rebel and fight for his beliefs. How far will he go and how much will he sacrifice before he gives up entirely?

            What I gather from reading this is that culture and heritage is not something that he will easily surrender in light of what he believes his ancestors and countrymen fought and died for as this seems to be a prevalent theme throughout the poem. This makes me think: What would any of us do to protect what we believe in or who we are? Is it acceptable to sacrifice a bit of yourself or sell yourself to guarantee self preservation? What is most important is that Joaquin, like many of us, want recognition of hard work and that him, you, me and we, are all people deserving and wanting to be treated like humans and not as second class citizens to be manipulated and taken advantage of by the system. The key message to take away from this poem from how I’ve interpreted it, is to constantly endure and survive, but not at the cost of sacrificing one’s identity. Identity, as it were, begins with an “I” and in a poem of a man constantly trying and attempting to reclaim his identity by embracing his culture and the people who defended it against a giant machine; it’s the most concrete thing he has to hold on to.

            When I read this poem and think of America today, I see extreme patriotism everywhere whether it be Mexican-American, African-American, European, Asian etc. Back to my point at the beginning as to whether or not the United States specifically has truly embraced its melting pot status, still puzzles me. Historically, there seem to have always been people seen as inferior by fellow Americans whether due to race, religion, sexual preference etc during certain time periods, such as the treatment of African-Americans during the Revolutionary war into the Civil Rights Movement, Japanese-Americans during World War II and even certain European-American working class people in the industrial age during the early 1900’s. All, if not the majority, have found their place in American society today. Is it because of this melting pot factor or was it by process of gradual assimilation that they were able to grow roots peacefully somewhere? I find this a very interesting and fascinating question because I know that everyone’s take on it will be different. Hoping to play devil’s advocate, I’d be really interested in hearing everyone’s thoughts on the matter and hopefully my thought process makes sense to anyone reading this.

Eng 202

Just testing to see whether this works or not