Theses and Dissertations
This collection includes both ASU Theses and Dissertations, submitted by graduate students, and the Barrett, Honors College theses submitted by undergraduate students.
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by
Description
This dissertation examines how contemporary ideologies of race and “colorblind” discourse are reproduced, deployed, and reimagined in Mexican American literature. It demonstrates that the selected narratives foreground inconsistencies in colorblind ideologies and problematize the instability and perennial reformulation of race definitions in the United States. This study also contributes to the discussion of racial formation in Mexican American literary studies from 1970 to 2010. Chapter One provides the critical and literary context of Mexican American literature from 1970 to 2010. Chapter Two details the process of racial formation in the United States according to Michael Omi and Howard Winant. Simultaneously, this chapter describes the theoretical framework and concepts of experience and epistemic privilege, mestizaje, and intercultural relations as offered respectively by Paula M. L. Moya, Rafael Pérez-Torres, and Marta E. Sánchez. Chapter Three offers an analysis of racial discourse and assimilation via two autobiographical texts: Oscar Acosta’s The Autobiography of a Brown Buffalo (1972) and Richard Rodriguez’s Hunger of Memory: The Education of Richard Rodriguez (1982). Chapter Four examines the colorblind racial ideology in two texts by Mexican American women authors: Erlinda Gonzales-Berry’s Paletitas de guayaba (1991) and Mona Ruiz’s Two Badges: The Lives of Mona Ruiz (1998). Chapter Five explores the rearticulation of colorblind racial discourse in the “postracial” United States. In this chapter, we examine three works of speculative fiction: The Rag Doll Plagues (1992) by Alejandro Morales, Texas 2077: A Futuristic Novel (1998) by Carlos Miralejos, and Lunar Braceros 2125-2148 (2009) by Rosaura Sánchez and Beatrice Pita. By combining theories from Chicana/o Studies, Critical Race and Gender Studies, and Cultural Studies in my textual analysis, my dissertation challenges notions of contemporary colorblind or postracial ideologies that regard present day discussions of race as counterproductive to U.S. race relations.
[Text in Spanish]
[Text in Spanish]
ContributorsFlores, José Roberto (Author) / Rosales, Jesus (Thesis advisor) / Foster, David W (Committee member) / Gil-Osle, Juan P (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2017
Description
ABSTRACT
In the 19th and 20th centuries, many Latin American intellectuals began to question why their countries had failed to modernize and produce the type of economic prosperity and democratic societies that they desired. Influenced by the scientific theories of their time, many of the explanations offered by these intellectuals centered on a single issue—race. Yet scientific and historical definitions regarding “race” have varied greatly ranging from a conceptualization of race as a cultural to a biological construct. This same time period also saw the emergence of two new literary genres which addressed “racial” conflict in their own right—indigenismo and neo-indigenismo. In the last thirty years, postmodernist and postcolonialist readings of these texts have tended to articulate these interethnic conflicts in highly racialized terms which diminish the importance of any cultural differentiation that may exist (i.e. attitudes, aptitudes, norms, religions, expectations) while simultaneously augmenting perceived racial discord between groups—even where racial difference barely exists.
This dissertation is an analysis of Pueblo enfermo (1909) and Raza de bronce (1919) by Alcides Arguedas, as well as Sociología guatemalteca: el problema social del indio (1923) and Hombres de maíz (1949) by Miguel Ángel Asturias. By taking an interdisciplinary approach and drawing on texts from history, anthropology, economics and literature I challenge many of the commonly held notions regarding the issues of race in these texts. I argue that, despite tinges of what social scientists have termed “scientific racism” that these works should be interpreted as criticisms of what the authors understood as cultural problems and deficiencies within their societies. Additionally, I argue that this highly politicized cultural criticism of their countries by Arguedas and Asturias was meant to challenge the mestizo and Ladino hegemony of their times as a means of making their countries more democratic, and that the strident postmodernist and would-be postcolonial readings reveal actually hidden anachronistic and ahistorical bias of their authors.
In the 19th and 20th centuries, many Latin American intellectuals began to question why their countries had failed to modernize and produce the type of economic prosperity and democratic societies that they desired. Influenced by the scientific theories of their time, many of the explanations offered by these intellectuals centered on a single issue—race. Yet scientific and historical definitions regarding “race” have varied greatly ranging from a conceptualization of race as a cultural to a biological construct. This same time period also saw the emergence of two new literary genres which addressed “racial” conflict in their own right—indigenismo and neo-indigenismo. In the last thirty years, postmodernist and postcolonialist readings of these texts have tended to articulate these interethnic conflicts in highly racialized terms which diminish the importance of any cultural differentiation that may exist (i.e. attitudes, aptitudes, norms, religions, expectations) while simultaneously augmenting perceived racial discord between groups—even where racial difference barely exists.
This dissertation is an analysis of Pueblo enfermo (1909) and Raza de bronce (1919) by Alcides Arguedas, as well as Sociología guatemalteca: el problema social del indio (1923) and Hombres de maíz (1949) by Miguel Ángel Asturias. By taking an interdisciplinary approach and drawing on texts from history, anthropology, economics and literature I challenge many of the commonly held notions regarding the issues of race in these texts. I argue that, despite tinges of what social scientists have termed “scientific racism” that these works should be interpreted as criticisms of what the authors understood as cultural problems and deficiencies within their societies. Additionally, I argue that this highly politicized cultural criticism of their countries by Arguedas and Asturias was meant to challenge the mestizo and Ladino hegemony of their times as a means of making their countries more democratic, and that the strident postmodernist and would-be postcolonial readings reveal actually hidden anachronistic and ahistorical bias of their authors.
ContributorsEngelbrecht, Jexson Ashley (Author) / Volek, Emil (Thesis advisor) / García Fernández, Carlos J (Committee member) / Hernández Gutiérrez, Manuel J (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2018