In Nicholas De Genova's Working the Boundaries, he seeks to use his ethnographic work amongst the Mexican immigrant community working in industrial plants in Chicago to explore the production of the ways in which “Mexican migration to the United States and the social status of Mexican/migrant workers are distinguished by an irreducible historical specificity that has been racialized, spatialized, legislated, and enforced. (6) Through an analysis of the way “race, space, and illegality are produced” and an exploration of “Mexican Chicago,” the book begins with an ambitious attempt to tie various literatures together. De Genova conceives “Mexican Chicago” as a “lens” that posits “a critical transnational perspective that can reckon with U.S. nationalism and its imperial conceits by interrogating some of the constructions of race and space that intersect in the imagining and enforcement of the boundaries of the U.S. nation state and politics of citizenship” (96). Using a range of contemporary anthropological theory, historicity, and his own ethnographic work, articulating the factors that shape the production of what he refers to as “Mexican Chicago” appears to be the final aim of the project. As a result, Working the Boundaries must be analyzed not only through the points that are made, but also in how well “Mexican Chicago” is constructed as a lens from which to view particular issues.
De Genova seeks to historicize the idea of the immigrant, using work similar to that of Mae Ngai and partially drawing on the work of Lisa Lowe to “de-fetishize” the immigrant. Historicity is defined “against culture” (25) and De Genova notes that “Anthroplogy's disciplinary preoccupation with “cultural difference” has a defining historical relationship to what Partha Chatterjee has called the “rule of colonial difference” (19). In addition, the traditional paradigm where immigrants are constructed as the other by both the right and left wing is rejected. “Mexican Chicago” will provide a way to look at these issues without being encumbered by traditional baggage such as theories of assimilation or conceptual frameworks that definite immigrants as other.
The backdrop for the ethnography conducted from “May 1993 through December 1995” (6) that shapes the central section of the book are the contentious immigration debates of the mid-1990s. California's Proposition 187, the so-called “Save Our State” ballot measure that sought to bar even legal immigrants from many government services is the best illustration of the political frame that the fieldwork was carried out in. Once again, De Genova exhibits the methodological sensibilities that lead him to reject traditional cultural formulations. For his work as an English as a Second Language teacher, he uses Paulo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed as an inspiration seeking to create an environment where ethnography is “an exercise in learning” (28). To dig deeper into his attempt to pinpoint “Mexican Chicago,” De Genova sought to not be the traditional anthropological observer but a participant, learning from his students and participating in their environment. While his ideas are noble, the results of the ethnography raise questions.
To be sure, De Genova succeeds in providing an excellent theoretical framework, some fine ethnographic insights, and a review of history, the exact contours of “Mexican Chicago” are never fully defined. The historical background produced in the final major chapter is well-written and insightful, however, the observations that De Genova takes from his teaching experiences are often anecdotal and lack the systematic rigor of other sections of the book. A closer look at how successfully he explores the “race, space, and illegality” that shape “Mexican Chicago” shows that the bold pronouncements of his introduction do not come to fruition in his ethnography.
The area of race is exhibited primarily the way De Genova interprets his students' attempts to place themselves within the US ethnoracial taxonomy. The way language influences everyday life is a particular factor of analysis that is illustrated through a description of “relajo,” a concept with varying definitions that “seeks irresponsibility…literally a freedom for nothing. (170) De Genova uses this to describe the ways Mexican immigrants differentiate themselves from African Americans while also distancing themselves from whiteness, which is closely identified with being “American.”
Another area that would benefit from further development is De Genova's exploration of “spatialization.” Much of this is based on the ghettoization of Mexicans into particular neighborhoods such as Chicago's Pilsen district and concentration into certain factories. Many of the factories where De Genova worked were staffed by men and women from the same state and even villages in some cases. Immigrant groups have long been concentrated in particular enclaves, and a more in-depth picture of the separate physical space occupied by Mexicans would have been useful in clarifying De Genova's argument.
Despite using factories as the “sight” of ethnography, few attempts are made to engage studies of labor, and not enough emphasis is given to contemporary employment issues. The same weaknesses evident in De Genova's other ethnographic work reemerge here, in some ways to a greater extent because labor is not addressed to any great extent in the theoretical framework. Portions of De Genova's analysis are similar to works such as Barbara Ehrenreich's Nickled and Dimed: On (Not) Getting By in America (New York, 2001) of several years ago. One instance is De Genova's description of “Rita,” a Puerto Rican Human Resources Manager. After having very congenial relations with the staff, a unionization effort creates a distance. This provides another example in which De Genova's ethnography could have gone beyond description to make Mexican Chicago a framework as clear in practice as it is in his earlier theoretical outline.
In sum, De Genova's book provides a substantial contribution to the literature at a very timely moment in both American academia and society. However, his work offers few original observations, he relies on existing literature for his historical sections, and his ethnography seems rather disjointed and unfinished. “Mexican Chicago” is clearly outlined, but its production remains a shadow. Despite these drawbacks, this important book will hopefully inspire further research in the areas of transnationalism, migration, and approaches that historicize contemporary cultural constructions.
