Latin American indigenous peoples have contested state assimilationist policies, won new international norms and made their contemporary relevance clear through their political activism. But, as Joanna Crow reveals in The Mapuche in Modern Chile, the story is not simply one of indigenous peoples' resistance to state and societal oppression, but a complex relationship in which state policies and actors, and indigenous intellectuals, politicians and cultural figures, mutually influence and modify discourses and practices. Crow emphasises the diversity of Mapuche responses to state policies and the contradictions within state institutions and policies in Chile. She reveals how the tensions within state discourses and practices have offered opportunities for Mapuche actors to shape those discourses to their own purposes.

Using a variety of primary and secondary sources, Crow provides nuanced portraits of key Mapuche politicians and cultural notables, showing the breadth and complexity of accommodation and challenge to state modernising and civilising projects. Crow analyses the diverse ways in which ethnic identity is constructed by Chileans and Mapuche and examines the contrasting meanings attributed to ethnic identity, showing how social relations and political struggle construct diverse interpretations of what it means to be Mapuche or Chilean.

Although other scholars have noted the range of Mapuche political and partisan alliances, Crow's detailed portraits of Manuel Manquilef, Manuel Aburto Panguilef and Venancio Coñuepán paint these men as complex, human individuals. Similarly, Crow's depictions of Mapuche cultural notables such as an opera singer, Rayén Quitral, and a poet, David Aniñir, show the variety of ways in which Mapuche express their ethnic identity and challenge static notions of indigeneity, while her discussion of the Chilean poets Pablo Neruda and Gabriela Mistral, and singers Violeta Parra and Víctor Jara, reveals the counter-hegemonic embrace of indigenous roots as part of Chilean society rather than as anachronistic or atavistic elements, as indigenous peoples are so often conceived in dominant discourses.

In her discussion of Manuel Manquilef, Crow shows the complexity of ethnic identity and political response to state policies. Manquilef was an affluent, educated descendant of Mapuche chiefs who defended the state's liberalising agenda. A member of the Liberal Democratic Party, elected to Congress in 1926, Manquilef believed that individual ownership and liberal, capitalist markets would ensure the progress of Chile as a whole and the Mapuche in particular, in agreement with much elite ideology of the early twentieth century. At the same time, however, Manquilef denounced state indifference and negligence with regards to the fraudulent land sales, usurpation and violence affecting many Mapuche.

Manuel Aburto Panguilef, a contemporary of Manquilef, presents a contrary political and social position. Panguilef showed political and tactical flexibility, initially supporting political alliances with leftist parties in the common demands for social justice, then distancing himself from the Left as he called for a Mapuche republic. Panguilef's proposal for an autonomous republic for the Mapuche people outpaced the Left's theoretical and tactical approaches to the situation of the Mapuche, and he did not hesitate in advocating what he saw as Mapuche ethnic interests over class.

A third key Mapuche politician of the mid-twentieth century, Venancio Coñuepán, was elected to Congress as a member of the Conservative Party, served as minister of lands and colonisation in the anti-party government of General Carlos Ibáñez del Campo, and was director of the Dirección de Asuntos Indígenas (Directorate of Indigenous Affairs, DASIN). As congressman and minister, he staunchly defended Mapuche lands from threats of usurpation, and advocated assistance to Mapuche in education and credit. For Coñuepán, aid to Mapuche peasants was not against the interests of Chileans or the state project of modernisation. In Crow's reading of my own analysis of Coñuepán and the Corporación Araucana, however, Crow misinterprets my argument that Coñuepán did not seek to change the fundamental relationship between the Mapuche and the state, maintaining that he did. I argue that he did not challenge the unitary state or make demands for collective political and territorial rights, both of which have become elements of the proposals of contemporary Mapuche political activists and intellectuals.

In her analysis of contemporary Chile, Crow offers a detailed discussion of Mapuche activists' efforts to use the Lagos administration's Comisión de Verdad Histórica y Nuevo Trato (Commission of Historical Truth and New Deal) as a way to criticise state policies and propose a new type of relationship with the Mapuche people that would enshrine recognition of collective rights. Similarly, Crow's analysis of how Mapuche history and culture have been portrayed in public museums or referenced in centennial celebrations traces the changes in state discourse and the influence of Mapuche professionals working in state agencies and in these museums to modify dominant and static notions of Mapuche culture.

Crow's book is rich in details and in examples of contesting definitions of ethnic and national identity. Beyond what I have covered in this review, Crow provides vivid examples of a range of Mapuche and Chilean individuals who challenged static and negative views of Mapuche and indigenous peoples in dominant discourses. Yet her effort to show the diversity and contradictions within state discourse and practice tends to overshadow the continuities in state policy and national ideology regarding indigenous peoples and, in particular, the Mapuche. At times, Crow almost creates a picture of a state harbouring conflicting ideologies and policies, rather than one characterised by unequal power relations within state agencies that sustain dominant notions of national identity and prioritise certain discourses and policies. Crow herself points to power as a key underlying factor in the creation of official discourse in her introduction. She acknowledges in her conclusion that, while official rhetoric now includes multiculturalism, power relations remain highly centralised. Overall Crow offers a nuanced and insightful analysis of the myriad ways in which Mapuche have responded to state notions of ethnic and national identity.