![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
Married in 1919, Miguel and Dolores migrated from Zapotlanejo, Jalisco to Los Angeles, California in 1927, where they raised 10 children: nine boys and one girl. Like Mexican migrant families throughout the US Southwest they experienced leaving Mexico and making a new home, endured the Great Depression, and in many cases, sent their children off to fight in World War II. Throughout this time period, they corresponded with their relatives in Mexico, providing historians with a rare collection of Mexican migrant personal correspondences. By conceptualizing correspondence as a migrant strategy and using these sources as a window into the transnational practices, I make two arguments about the Venegas family. First, I argue that through letter writing the Venegas formed a transnational family. I demonstrate that members of this family replicated their roles despite the distance between them. In the process, they created a transnational space in both Los Angeles and Guadalajara. Second, family members in both Mexico and the United States practiced a form of ‘cultural citizenship’: migrant-defined ideas of belonging and rights that transcend the formal boundaries of both nation-states. The family provided a set of strategies to navigate the Great Depression and World War II. This article contributes to a growing literature on Mexican migration, transnationalism, the ‘Mexican American’ generation, and Mexican migrant letter writing.
Acknowledgements
I thank the participants of the Columbia Latin American History Workshop, Carribean Fragoza, Eric Frith, Fredy González, Adam Goodman, Nara Milanich, Israel Pastrana, Clay Stalls, an anonymous reviewer, and the editors of the special issue for feedback on earlier drafts. Special thanks to María Teresa Venegas and Carlos Venegas for archiving this collection and taking time to talk with me about their family’s history.
Notes
1. Letters cited were translated by the author and are from the Venegas Family Papers, Collection 099, Department of Archives and Special Collections, William H. Hannon Library, Loyola Marymount University. Hereafter cited as VFP. This article also relies on the unpublished book by María Teresa Venegas and personal communication with the Venegas family.
2. Scholars of European migration often grapple with the representative nature of migrant correspondences and reference the lack of research on the founding of collections and archives, but only as it relates to Europeans. For a study on donors of migrant letters in Germany see Helbich and Kamphoefner (Citation2006). There is only one edited collection of Mexican and Central American letters. See Siems (Citation1992).
3. Donna R. Gabaccia notes that immigration historians criticized this paradigm (Gabaccia, Citation1999). Nonetheless, it was the rise of ethnic studies that resulted in the study of Mexican and Asian migrants, particularly the intersections of race, citizenship, nation, and empire. For more on the immigrant paradigm and immigration see also Gabaccia (Citation1998). In a recent article, Adam Goodman proposes that scholars frame United States history around a ‘migration’ instead of ‘immigration’ paradigm, in order to include the histories of non-European groups as well as African-Americans and Native Americans (Goodman, Citation2015).
4. This collection, Ana Rosas’ recent monograph (Citation2014), Vargas’ ethnography (Citation2006), and Miroslava Chávez-García’s current research project ‘Migrant Longing and Letter Writing across the Borderlands’, based on her family’s letters from the 1960s, are a reminder to historians of Mexican migration of the thousands of personal archives stored in homes in Mexico and the United States.
5. While early works on the ‘Mexican American’ generation situate this cohort within the US nation, there is a growing body of work that seeks to place this generation in a transnational content. See José M. Alamillo (Citation2010), Ramón Saldívar (Citation2006), Edward Telles and Vilma Ortiz (Telles & Ortiz, Citation2008), Jessica M. Vasquez (Citation2001). The first wave of scholarship about Mexican migrant families during the 1940s to the 1960s evaluated migrant families by their distance from the Anglo family models. This simple and subjective view of the family, especially the characterization of machismo and patriarchy, was criticized sharply by Chicano/a academics in the following decades. See Ybarra (Citation1983). In his early work on migrant families, Richard Griswold del Castillo traces family relations and patterns, gender roles and labor across the twentieth century, but continued to examine migrant families within a US framework (Griswold del Castillo, Citation1984).
6. This sentiment is expressed in his conversation with José Jauregui, ‘But the idea of killing, no! Organizers, yes …’ (Venegas, Citation2012, p. 13).
7. VFP. Box 6. Miguel Venegas Head Tax.
8. VFP. Box 14. Note made by María Teresa Venegas.
9. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (3 October 1927). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
10. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (25 November 1927). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
11. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (3 October 1927). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
12. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (22 December 1927). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
13. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (22 December 1927). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
14. Moreover, in later years she did help in the store. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (22 December 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
15. VFP. Box 1. Juan (28 January 1932). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
16. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (11 February 1932). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
17. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (12 June 1928). [Letter to Francisco Venegas].
18. VFP. Box 1. Miguel to (12 June 1928). [Letter to Francisco Venegas].
19. Adrián Félix’s work on the ‘political life cycle’ of contemporary Mexican migrants documents the practice of postmortem repatriation (Félix, Citation2011).
20. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (17 July 1929). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
21. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (17 July 1929). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
22. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (31 October 1929). [Letter to Francisco Venegas].
23. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (1 January 1930). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
24. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (11 February 1932). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
25. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (11 February 1932). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
26. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (1 January 1932). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
27. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (22 December 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
28. VFP. Box 2. Anita (3 March 1928). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
29. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (13 April 1930). [Letter to Julia Venegas].
30. These photographs, like the content of the letters, were intended for the entire family. For example, in 1929 Francisco mailed a portrait and addressed it ‘to my beloved brothers and nephews’.
31. VFP. Box 10.
32. VFP. Box 1. Dolores (22 December 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
33. VFP. Box 10.
34. VFP. Box 10.
35. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (February 1937. Day not specified). [Letter to Dolores].
36. VFP. Box 2. Francisco (29 August 1939). [Letter to Miguel].
37. VFP. Box 2. José Miguel (26 January 1928). [Letter to Julia Venegas].
38. VFP. Box 2. Francisco (4 June 1931). [Letter to José Miguel].
39. VFP. Miguel (6 March 1930). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
40. VFP. Miguel (29 January 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
41. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (14 March 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
42. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (17 February 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
43. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (10 April 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
44. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (24 June 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
45. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (21 September 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
46. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (11 February 1932). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
47. Scholars working on more contemporary migrant families emphasize the agency of migrant children and youth. Marjorie Faulstich Orellana, for example, examines their role as linguistic and cultural brokers (Orellana, Citation2009).
48. VFP. Box 2. José Miguel (23 March 1931). [Letter to Ignacio Venegas].
49. VFP. Box 2. José Miguel (23 March 1931). [Letter to Ignacio Venegas].
50. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (22 April 1932). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
51. VFP. Box 2. Francisco (29 August 1939). [Letter to Miguel].
52. VFP. Box 16. María Teresa (4 October 1940). [Letter to Ricardo Venegas].
53. VFP. Box 2. Juan (4 October 1940). [Letter to Guillermo Venegas].
54. For example, in a letter to his father, Miguel wrote about a prank they played on Guillermo. After they told Guillermo they were going to send him to Mexico, he got dressed and packed his bags, only to be disappointed when his parents informed him it was not true. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (1 January 1930). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
55. VFP. Box 1. Miguel (10 April 1931). [Letter to Juan Venegas].
56. VFP. Box 2. José Miguel (24 March 1931). [Letter to Francisco Venegas].
57. VFP. Box 2. José Miguel (1 August 1931). [Letter to Guadalupe Venegas].
58. See Alamillo (Citation2010).
59. VFP. Box 1. José Miguel (22 September 1938). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
60. VFP. Box 1. José Miguel (4 November 1938). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
61. VFP. Box 1. José Miguel (17 August 1938). [Letter to Miguel Venegas]. As we might expect, the letters between José Miguel and his siblings and parents were filled with request for photographs: José Miguel wanted to see his siblings, especially the younger ones, and of course his relatives in Mexico wanted to see all of the Venegas children. The photographs and content of the letters were likely shared with all of the Venegas children.
62. VFP. Box 2. Francisco (2 June 1943). [Letter to Miguel Venegas]; VFP. Box 2. Lupe (17 September 1943). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
63. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (17 September 1943). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
64. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (16 December 1943). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
65. VFP. Box 2. Francisco (2 June 1943 and 12 July 1943). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
66. VFP. Box 2. Francisco (12 July 1943). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
67. VFP. Box 2. Francisco (12 July 1943). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
68. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (17 September 1943). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
69. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (16 December 1943). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
70. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (16 December 1943). [Letter to Dolores].
71. For a discussion on the challenge of tabulating the participation of Latinas and Latinos in World War II see Rivas-Rodriguez and Olguín (Citation2014).
72. Enlistment record for José Miguel and Ricardo’s petition for naturalization, retrieved 10 February 2015, from Ancestry.com. Original documents from Records of the National Archives and Records Administration Record Group 84, World War II Army Enlistment Records and Florida, Naturalization Records, 1847–1995.
73. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (17 September 1943). [Letter to Dolores].
74. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (3 January 1944). [Letter to Dolores].
75. VFP. Box 2. Ricardo (9 December 1943). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
76. This could be read as an effort by María Teresa Venegas to place the agency on her uncle and aunt. However, this statement reflects sentiments expressed by Francisco and Lupe.
77. In a letter to Dolores, Lupe notes Miguel and Alicia’s return to Los Angeles. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (11 May 1944). [Letter to Dolores].
78. Border crossing card, retrieved 10 February 2015, from Ancestry.com.
79. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (16 January 1948). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
80. VFP. Box 2. Efrain and Josefina (4 May 1948). [Letter to Miguel Venegas and Dolores]; VFP. Box 2. Francisco (11 February 1948). [Letter to Miguel].
81. VFP. Box 2. Juan (August 1949). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
82. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (29 March 1950). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
83. VFP. Box 2. Lupe (29 March 1950). [Letter to Dolores Venegas].
84. VFP. Box 2. Eduardo (11 August 1949). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
85. VFP. Box 2. Eduardo (6 February 1950). [Letter to Miguel Venegas].
86. The Voces Oral History Project, founded in 1999 at the University of Texas, Austin (originally titled ‘U.S. Latino & Latina World War II Oral History Project’), has stimulated the production of approximately 1000 oral histories with veterans and four edited volumes. Luis Alvarez’s contribution in the most recent volume demonstrates the richness of this growing field. Focusing on Latina/os fight for first class citizenship during the war Alvarez argues that ‘Latino soldiering encompassed a range of multiracial and transnational experiences that foreshadowed the diverse theories of Latinidad in more recent decades’ (Alvarez, Citation2014, p. 76).
87. Based on the birth of his sixth child in Los Angeles, he likely returned in 1954 or 1955.
88. In 1987 Eduardo and Maria filed naturalization papers, likely in response to the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. Retrieved 10 February 2015, from Ancestry.com. See California, Naturalization Records, 1940 to 1991, Petition Number 00681230, 31 March 1987.