In class, we have spent time analyzing the significance in the fact that Acosta calls himself "the brown buffalo." I was surprised that Acosta addressed the issue so directly in the final paragraphs of the book. It becomes clear that like the buffalo, Acosta is "the animal everyone slaughtered" (198) and "both the cowboys and the Indians are out to get him" (198).
The idea that he uses the buffalo to symbolize predation was not surprising; however, the fact that he indicates both the "cowboys" and "the Indians" are responsible was interesting. In this moment, he addresses the idea that it was not just mainstream white culture that rejected him, but also his Mexican/Indian heritage. Like Mary Jemison and others we have read about, Acosta is somewhere in between two cultures and unfortunately is not able to entirely fit into either one. His identity is "neither a Mexican nor an American...neither a catholic nor a protestant" (199). His ties to both cultures, yet neither one in particular, is ultimately what tears him apart.
It makes me wonder then who he is calling out to when he says that "brown buffalos must ban together" (199). Is he calling only for Mexican-Americans, considering that he seems against labeling himself that way? Or is he calling out to anyone who feels they have been cheated out of their identity?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I think your post is very correct in its insight. I would also add the fact that Acosta belongs to neither group is also indicative of the lack of purpose that pervaded his life up until that point.
That's an interesting question that Virginia brought up at the end. Historically, the brown buffalo would be call for the Mexican-Americans to organize and symbolism this group of individuals without a voice. The Brown Berets and other such militant groups would demand change. But, after getting into Acosta's head and insecurities, the term just can't be that black and white. I think that while the term brown buffalo worked to rally a movement, ultimately it would allow any of those lost on an individal level to adopt an identity.
I believe that Acosta could not have been more clearer in relating the fact that both the Indians and the Cowboys embellished in the death and annihaltion of the Brown Buffalo as an American symbol to the effect upon which both cultures in his life tore him apart literally, and left him without anything to call his own. I completely agree with your statement over the fact Acosta is not clear in whom he is calling out to ban together. Perhaps it is a lost cause.
I don't think he limits the definition of Brown Buffalo to only Mexican-Americans. Even within each of those groups there are numerous differences, so you can be just as lonely and 'killed' by the American culture even if you were an American.
Post a Comment