In the first part of the novel that we read for Tuesday Marcello talks about a brother Manuel who was born years before him and died hours after being born in the mid-80s. He mentions how Manuel was meant to be source of stability for his family. Since neither of his parents had citizenships their son could have been something that rooted their family in the U.S. and may have offered them a better understanding of who they are. Marcello is possibly indirectly talking about the 14th Amendment which has become very controversial over the last couple years. The 14th Amendment talks about Birthright citizenship, which is the principle that every child born on US soil is automatically a native-born citizen, regardless of the immigration status of the parents (vox.com). Under the Trump administration many are making the arguement that this shouldn't apply to children of undocumented immigrants, despite multiple Supreme Court cases recognizing these children as U.S. citizens (vox.com).
Throughout this part of the story he talks about Manuel as something that gave them purpose to be in the U.S.. When he talks about when they would return to Mexico he says that Manuel was the only person in their family who remained in one place (52). Throughout the novel he mentions many times how he had hard forming an identity of who he was because he was undocumented living in a country that he felt like he didn't belong in. He stresses how the border was not only a physical thing on the outside but something that he felt on the inside. I think in a weird way he is kind of jealous of his brother. His brother, if he had lived, would have been able to say he was Mexican-American, he would have an identity that would be accepted and understood by society. I also feel like he may be holding some resentment. If his brother were to live his family would have most likely stayed in the U.S. and could avoid run ins with immigration. I think Marcello tells us this story because he wants to reader to see the conflict he is facing with this identity crisis. Even though Manuel died over 30 years ago he had more of an identity that Marcello did at this time.
Vox Article
1) Why do you think Marcello tells us this story?
2) How does the story about Manuel tie in with what he has been saying about the border throughout the book?
Throughout this part of the story he talks about Manuel as something that gave them purpose to be in the U.S.. When he talks about when they would return to Mexico he says that Manuel was the only person in their family who remained in one place (52). Throughout the novel he mentions many times how he had hard forming an identity of who he was because he was undocumented living in a country that he felt like he didn't belong in. He stresses how the border was not only a physical thing on the outside but something that he felt on the inside. I think in a weird way he is kind of jealous of his brother. His brother, if he had lived, would have been able to say he was Mexican-American, he would have an identity that would be accepted and understood by society. I also feel like he may be holding some resentment. If his brother were to live his family would have most likely stayed in the U.S. and could avoid run ins with immigration. I think Marcello tells us this story because he wants to reader to see the conflict he is facing with this identity crisis. Even though Manuel died over 30 years ago he had more of an identity that Marcello did at this time.
Vox Article
1) Why do you think Marcello tells us this story?
2) How does the story about Manuel tie in with what he has been saying about the border throughout the book?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.