Excerpt: A new interdisciplinary field, which I am calling “Oaxacan studies,” has emerged and is offering important conceptual tools for thinking about Latinidad in local, transborder, and hemispheric contexts. While most of the Anglophone scholarship on Oaxaca has been produced by historians and anthropologists who are not native to the pueblos they write about, a generation of scholars that is Indigenous to Oaxaca’s pueblos is now writing about Oaxaca from the vantage point of migrants and children of migrants who were forced to grow up in diaspora. While these scholars have been trained in various disciplines, their work builds on the community-engaged scholarship produced by scholars such as Michael Kearney, one of the leading anthropologists in this field, who is credited with coining the term “Oaxacalifornia” (Kearney, 1995), the transborder political, cultural, and economic space where Indigenous Oaxacans live. When Kearney passed away in 2009, I was a new member of the Indigenous Binational Front (FIOB), a primarily Oaxacan transborder organization, and was asked to take three scholars (Devra Weber, Lynn Stephen, and Laura Velasco) from Los Angeles to Kearney’s house in Riverside County. Once there, we joined his family, FIOB activists, friends, and colleagues to mourn his passing. Those attending recounted how they had met him, the things he had done for Oaxacan migrants, and then we all sang “Canción Mixteca,” a song that expresses the deep sadness and longing of being away from one’s homeland. At the time, I was unaware of Kearney’s contributions to the field of anthropology and the study of transnationalism, but the regard that the Oaxacan paisanos had for him and the stories they shared of when he helped them in their organizing efforts taught me about the importance of establishing long and committed relationships with the community. In a recent publication, Leisy Ábrego (2024) noted that scholars who center the experiences and well-being of the people they conduct research with “aim to be in accompaniment,” meaning that there is an ethical and political responsibility to those people who serve as research subjects. While each individual Oaxacan scholar has their own relationship with their pueblo of origin and the communities they conduct research with, at the core of Oaxacan studies is this ethic of accompaniment that is anchored in the various social organizations created by the Indigenous Oaxacan community: hometown associations, cultural organizations, religious organizations, student organizations, autonomous political organizations, and nonprofit organizations. Building on Kearney’s legacy, this new generation of Oaxacan scholars is shaping the future of Latinx studies by offering not only new conceptual tools for thinking about Indigeneity within a larger conversation about Latinx heterogeneity but also providing a model of accompaniment that is responsive to the individuals they conduct research with, their pueblos, and their descendants, both here and there.




Abstract: This dissertation examines the history of a small colonization reserve to ask how prairie land becomes known and accepted primarily as settler agricultural space even if vaguely understood, at some level, as Indigenous land. The land in question – designated for Mennonite migrants to Manitoba from Imperial Russia in 1875 and often referred to as the ‘West Reserve’ – was one of two block settlements provided to Mennonites in the 1870s. In this micro-historical context, I focus on the interactions between settler history-making, land, and geography, to explore the relationships between material and discursive forms of Indigenous land dispossession, and to consider the roles of water and landscape in the formation of settler identity. As West Reserve settlers became more established, they began to historicize and commemorate their presence there, establishing a corpus of historical understandings of this place that grew stronger and more solidified into the late twentieth century. In many ways this body of knowledge established parameters that defined the region as Mennonite, agricultural, settler space. Yet an analysis of state, settler, archival, and oral history sources reveals that this discursive unmaking of Indigenous space was never totalizing, nor were narratives of agricultural ascendancy the only stories of the region’s environment and geography. Indigenous Peoples continued to utilize, live in, and travel through the region throughout the timeframe of this study (roughly from the time of Mennonite arrival well into the twentieth century). Though the reserve was noted for not having any major water bodies within it, its many small creeks and low areas remained intrinsic, if less-emphasized, features of both the environment and people’s experiences of it.









top posts today

Archives

stats for wordpress