Ask a Mexican | Al Pacino Obsession & Mexican-American War Agreement 

Pin It
Favorite
click to enlarge art6907widea.jpg

Dear Mexican: Many times, as I cross the border into the United States, I see bald cholos buying images (posters, blankets, baby bibs) of Al Pacino in Scarface. Where does such an obsession for this ugly Cuban come from? Is Tony Montana replacing la Virgencita de Guadalupe in cholos’ living rooms across America? —Proud to be an Illegal Alien

n n

Dear Wab: Author Ken Tucker recently published Scarface Nation: The Ultimate Gangster Movie and How It Changed America, but save some money and refry this: Tony Montana’s popularity is for the same as why Bonnie & Clyde became folk heroes during the Great Depression, la misma razón porque Dubya was re-elected in 2004 and George Armstrong Custer was so popular—America loves its up-from-stupidity outlaws. Cholos, on the other hand, love Montana for the obvious reason: por pendejos. I get the socioeconomic rationale for Montana’s deification in thug culture—his rise from poverty through riches via machismo, guile and the white chica—but Mexicans who worship him insult our culture for falling under the spell of a coño. Whatever happened to the days when the killers Mexicans lionized—Emiliano Zapata, Pancho Villa, Gregorio Cortez—slaughtered for the ’hood that was la raza? Not only that, but the celebration of drug kingpins in Mexico? (Answer redacted by the Mexican’s editor because he doesn’t want his prize wab to turn up in a ditch!)

n n

I was talking to my uncle a few weeks ago, and he mentioned something to the effect that, as part of the original postwar agreement between the United States and Mexico after their 1848 war, Mexican citizens were originally supposed to be able to go back and forth as they pleased. I know that the original draft was changed. Unfortunately, I don’t have the time to do further research. If it’s true, I guess them Mexican illegals aren’t illegal—they’re simply exercising the terms of the postwar agreement. —El Niño Héroe

n n

Dear Heroic Child: Your uncle was partially right. Article IX of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo originally stated that “the relations and communication between the Catholics living in the territories [conquered by the United States during the Mexican-American War], and their respective ecclesiastical authorities, shall be open, free and exempt from all hindrance whatever, even although such authorities should reside within the limits of the Mexican Republic, as defined by this treaty; and this freedom shall continue, so long as a new demarcation of ecclesiastical districts shall not have been made, conformably with the laws of the Roman Catholic Church.” In other words, Mexican Catholics could cross between the two countries for religious purposes and no one else. However, American authorities removed this provision from Article IX before signing the treaty and altogether struck Article X, which guaranteed that the American government would respect the property rights of their new wards. Don’t believe the Chicano Studies urban myth that said the treaty guaranteed bilingual rights for Mexicans, or that such a provision would even apply to the Mexicans who now live in the American Southwest, almost all who have no historical ties to the conquered Mexicans (who by and large didn’t consider themselves Mexican, but that’s another story). Better yet, let’s all just get over the fact that the southwest United States once belonged to Mexico—as I’ve written before, Mexico ruled those territories from 1812 until 1848, a chronological fart between the much-longer reigns of the Spaniards (212 years), gabachos (158 years), and the Native Americans (eternal).

n n

Ask the Mexican at TheMexican@askamexican.net, MySpace.com/ocwab, or write to him via snail mail at: Gustavo Arellano, P.O. Box 1433, Anaheim, CA 92815-1433!

Pin It
Favorite

Tags:

More by Gustavo Arellano

  • Uptight Gringo Ladies

    Also: Why the bedsheet dresses?
    • Nov 7, 2011
  • B to the W to the S-Words

    The three anti-Mexi slurs you used are so 1950s—the only people who use those words nowadays are old gabachos and Alabamans.
    • Nov 1, 2011
  • Conquests & 9/11

    Also: Is 'Mexican' Offensive?
    • Oct 24, 2011
  • More »
  • Ask a Mexican | Crime of Being Undocumented & Clamato Juice

    Dear Mexican: I can’t tell you how disappointed I’ve been these past few days, as a U.S. citizen and ciudadano Mexicano, how I’ve been seeing more and more stories about los narcos and how the Mexican government keeps getting screwed over in newspapers. I think that you should dedicate a whole article in your column telling your gringo readers what their pot and crack consuming h...
    • Feb 4, 2009
  • The Straight Dope | A Lion Shame

    My friend says Christians weren’t actually thrown to the lions in ancient Rome, but when I was at the Colosseum, I saw a big cross there in honor of all the Christians martyred at that spot. He insists this was just made up by the church to perpetuate their religion. What gives? —vbunny nThe story has its suspicious aspects, I guess. According to the historian Tacitus, Christians durin...
    • Feb 4, 2009
  • News Quirks | School Daze

    Curses, Foiled AgainnPolice in Council Bluffs, Iowa, reported that a man who threatened a store clerk with a gun took cash and then pulled out a can of pepper spray and tried to spray the clerk. Instead, he accidentally sprayed himself in the face and ran away. n• A shoplifter who made off with $1,200 worth of designer purses from a store in Cape Coral, Fla., was run over twice by her getaway...
    • Feb 4, 2009
  • More »

Comments

Subscribe to this thread:

Add a comment

© 2016 Salt Lake City Weekly

Website powered by Foundation