Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-gvh9x Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T07:48:31.237Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Octavio Paz: The Search for Mexican Identity

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2009

Terry Hoy
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The question of national identity has been a central theme in Mexican thought since the Revolution of 1910. The writings of Octavio Paz, one of Mexico's most prominent literary figures, are an important and provocative locus for this question. The contribution of Paz to an analysis of Mexican identity must be seen in the broader context of an intellectual revolution in Mexico. This began in the late 1920's and was directed against the prevailing philosophical romanticism represented by Antonio Caso and Jose Vasconcelos. This was, in part, a protest against the anti-intellectualism inherent in an “aesthetic-intuitive” approach of these writers. But it was also the demand for a philosophical perspective more relevant to an emerging Mexican nationalism already being articulated in literature and art. The writings of the Spanish philosopher Ortega y Gasset were of crucial importance in influencing Mexican philosophy towards realism. The key concept taken from Ortega was that of “historical perspectivism”: the view that reality cannot be grasped independently of the point of view from which it is being observed. Perspectives do not distort reality; they constitute it. Philosophy, then, is changed from something abstract and eternal to something concrete and historical. Ortega's historical perspectivism became the inspiration for Mexican thinkers who wished to develop a national philosophy and a concept of “Mexicanidad.”

Type
Research Article
Information
The Review of Politics , Volume 44 , Issue 3 , July 1982 , pp. 370 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © University of Notre Dame 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For a full discussion of this development see Romanell, Patrick, Making of Modern Mexico (Notre Dame, 1967), pp. 145–85Google Scholar.

2 Ibid., p. 164.

3 Ramos, Samuel, El perfil del hombrey de la cultura en Mexico, 1st ed. (Mexico, 1934Google Scholar; 2nd ed., 1938). For a translation by Peter G. Earle, see Profile of Man and Culture in Mexico (Austin, Texas, 1962)Google Scholar.

4 Weinstein, Michael, The Polarity of Mexican Thought (University Park, Pennsylvania, 1976), pp. 84–85Google Scholar.

5 Paz, Octavio, The Labyrinth of Solitude: Life and Thought in Mexico (New York, 1961), p. 87Google Scholar.

6 Ibid., p. 32.

7 Ibid., p. 33.

8 Ibid., p. 124.

9 Ibid., p. 128.

10 Ibid., p. 132.

11 Ibid., p. 144.

12 Ibid., p. 145.

13 Ibid., pp. 152–55.

14 Ibid., p. 156.

15 Ibid., p. 194.

16 Paz, , The Other Mexico: Critique of the Pyramid (New York, 1972), pp. 24, 25Google Scholar.

17 Ibid., p. 30.

18 This has reference to the extent of U.S. domination of the Mexican economy. According to one survey, foreign capital (not just American) accounts for less than 10 percent of the GNP. But if one looks at key sectors of the economy, the situation is different. In 1970, 70 percent of total manufacturing came from approximately 800 enterprises in which foreign capital was present. In sectors such as the auto industry, capital goods industry, or chemical industry, foreign participation is around 100 percent. (See Johnson, Kenneth, Mexican Democracy: A Critical View [New York, 1978], p. 116Google Scholar.) Ramon Ruiz contends that in the period of the 1960's U.S. business controlled 55 percent of all capital investment in 185 pacesetting industries. (See Ruiz, Roman “The Impact of the Cuban Revolution,” from Struggle Against History, ed. Houghton, N.D. [New York, 1968], p. 161Google Scholar.)

19 Paz, , The Other Mexico, p. 45Google Scholar.

20 See, for example, Kenneth Johnson, Mexican Democracy; Hellman, Judith, Mexico in Crisis (New York, 1978)Google Scholar.

21 Paz, , The Other Mexico, pp. 73, 74Google Scholar.

22 Ibid., p. 77.

23 Ibid., p. 84.

24 Ibid., p. 96.

25 Ibid., p. 98.

26 Ibid., p. 102.

27 See Padgett, Vincent, The Mexican Political System (Boston, 1976), p. 197Google Scholar.

28 Paz, , The Other Mexico, p. 110Google Scholar.

29 Ibid., p. 112.

30 The essence of the ejido is a community or village with communal lands that have been granted it by the government. Ejido lands are worked communally or parcelled out among ejidatarios. This has given rise to the problem of the minifundia: too many ejidatarios concentrated on too little land, along with lack of credit, mechanization, fertilization, insecticides and especially irrigation. For an excellent discussion of the historical development and problems of the ejidos, see Brandenburg, Frank, The Making of Modern Mexico (Englewood Cliffs, 1967), chap. 9Google Scholar.

31 Paz, , The Other Mexico, p. 118Google Scholar.

32 Ibid., p. 137.

33 Ibid., p. 145.

34 Ibid., p. 147.

35 Paz, , Alternating Current (New York, 1967), p. 199Google Scholar.

36 Ibid., p. 200.

37 Ibid., p. 202.

38 Paz, , The Labyrinth of Solitude, p. 29Google Scholar.

39 Lewis, Oscar, The Children of Sanchez (New York, 1961), pp. xi–xxxiGoogle Scholar.

40 Fromm, Erich and Maccoby, Michael, Social Character in a Mexican Village (Englewood Cliffs, 1970), pp. 16–23Google Scholar.

41 See, for example, Lambert, Jacques, Social Structures and Political Institutions (Berkeley, 1967), pp. 113–14Google Scholar; Cumberland, Charles, Mexico: The Struggle for Modernity (New York, 1969), pp. 41–112Google Scholar; Crow, John, The Epic of Latin America (New York, 1971), pp. 153–76; 255–63Google Scholar.