One Response To In The Los Angeles Area

Transcription

Chicano Gangs: One Response To Mexican Urban Adaptation In The Los Angeles Area
Author(s): James Diego Vigil
Reviewed work(s):
Source: Urban Anthropology, Vol. 12, No. 1 (SPRING 1983), pp. 45-75
Published by: The Institute, Inc.
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/40552988 .
Accessed: 01/02/2013 13:22
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].
.
The Institute, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Urban Anthropology.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Chicano Gangs:
One Response To
Mexican Urban Adaptation
In The Los Angeles Area
James Diego Vigil
DepartmentofAnthropology
and EthnicStudies Center
of SouthernCalifornia
University
ABSTRACT: Mexican adaptationto urbanareas in the UnitedStates has resulted
inthe rise of youthstreetgroups and gangs. These Chicano groups/gangsare assessed withina frameworkwhich examines ecological, economic, cultural,and
psychologicalaspects of that adaptation. Since the 1920s, Mexican immigrants
settledinthe poorer,neglectedsections ofthe city,
and theirchildrenhave typically
called barrios,and workedinmenial,low-paidindustries.Changingfromtraditional
was made moreproblematicby these
Mexicanpatternsto those ofAnglo-America
especially the
livingand workingconditions.Moreover,urban social institutions,
social control specialists, e.g., schools and law enforcement,often became
sources of additionalproblemsin the enculturationand socialization process of
children.Urbanadaptation was exacerbated by these factors,
these immigrants'
and affectedculturalassimilationand acculturation.Manyyouthswho were unable
in eitherMexican or Anglocultureevolved a cholo culturalstyle
to findan identity
whichaided adaptation to the street. It is this culturaltransitionalphenomenon
whichaids our understandingof the formationof gangs, forthroughthe decades
what began as a "boy" gang problemeventuallyevolved intoa gang subculture.
and avenues for
Formanycholos the gang subcultureprovidesa source of identity
and the existence of a
WithcontinuingMexican immigration,
personal fulfillment.
gang subculturewithits own enculturationand socializationpatterns,the whole
process of Mexican adaptationto urbanliferequiresreexamination.
Chicano youthgang activitiesin the barrios(neighborhoods)of Los
Angeles and otherurbanareas ofthe southwesternUnitedStates have for
years attractedconsiderable attentionin the public media. Not surpris45
ISSN 0363-2024, ©1983 The Instituteforthe Studyof Man, Inc.
46
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
ingly,thisattentionusuallyhas focused on criminalbehaviorattributedto
these and othergang youth:gang fights,shootings,and stabbings,robberies, burglaries,and illicitdrug traffic(Roderick 1982). Chicano gang
have probmembers(who oftencall themselves cholos? also frequently
contriblems on a dailybasis withschool officialsand police,whichfurther
utes to theirreputationas a source of urban disorder.Althoughgang
of the youngina barrio,their
constitutea smallminority
memberstypically
and the relativelack of media coverage of less dramatic
high visibility
barrioactivitieshas tended bothto create a negativeimage of barrioresidents generally,and to obscure the conditionsgivingrise to the gangs
discussion
themselves.As Oscar Lewis has pointedout inhis introductory
of the "cultureof poverty"in FIVE FAMILIES (1959), such media stereotypingof poor communitiesis commonplace (see, e.g., Suttles 1968, Mocan be utilizedto explore
rales 1972). The concept "multiplemarginality"
and
and integratethe diverseinfluenceswhichhave shaped the formation
persistenceof these gangs, as well as the attitudesand behaviorof the
incorporatesthe effectsof barrio
gangs' members. Multiplemarginality
life,low socioeconomic status, cultureconflict,and impaireddevelopment
of self-esteemwhicharise in a complexof ecological, socioeconomic,cultural,and psychologicalfactors. Employingthe concept in the study of
Chicano youthgangs willavoid the problemsassociated withsingle-cause
et al. (1975:25-45) have
discussions of previousgang studies; Cartwright
provideda general reviewof such studies in the second chapterof their
will
theoreticalstudyofjuvenilegangs. The concept of multiplemarginality
has
called
a
"thick
of
what
Geertz
the
description,"
development
permit
that is, a descriptionof cumulativeand combinativeinfluenceswhichacand variationswithinand across groups. Marginality,
count forsimilarities
as used here, reflectsthe situationsand conditionsto which Mexicans
have been subjected (Dickie-Clark1966) in theiroverall adaptation to
Americanurbanlife.Ithas been suggested thatthe concept of marginality
obscures the crucialimportanceof the exploitationof lowerclass workers
in low-paying
jobs as a factorina capitalistsystem(Peattie 1974; Perlman
It
labor
is
1976).
certainlythe case that Mexican and Mexican-American
has been importantin the developmentof southwesternUnitedStates
economic enterprises(farmworkersinagribusiness,forinstance). Yet the
been excluded fromthe mainstreamof
workersin question have virtually
urban decision making.Though theyhave become marginalto the interests of societyat large,theystillfunctionas integralmembersof society's
economic enterprises.Theirperceptionof thisis maintainedby significant
to whichtheyadapt (Kapferer1978;
featuresinthe environment
structural
Lommitz1977). Local probationand police officialshave estimatedthatas
exist in Los Angeles County(Decker
manyas 400 youthgangs currently
1983), and at least halfof these are Chicano gangs. There are also, of
Vigil
CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES
47
course, manygangs located in communitiesin the counties adjacent to
Los Angeles. The gangs rangefromthose whichdate fromthe 1940s, for
which the existence over time of more than a dozen identifiableagegraded cohorts has been established (Moore et al. 1978), to recently
formedgroups. An individualgang's active membershipmightnumberas
highas several hundredor as few as 10 or 12. The newer,smallergangs
are typically
foundinsuburbanareas, whilemost of the older,largergangs
are located in long-establishedurban and semi-ruralbarrios. (Many of
these semi-ruralbarrios,and the gangs associated withthem,have been
surroundedin recentdecades by the ever-expandingsuburban developments.) The long-termexistence of older barriogangs has served as a
inotherareas, and has become a
modeland a stimulusforgang formation
within
socialization
factor
and
the barriosoccupied by such
around
major
in
Chicano
Los
formedby secyouthgangs
gangs.
Angeles were initially
ond generationMexican Americans,and the core membershipcontinues
to be primarily
comprisedof nativebornyouths.The gangs emerged contemporaneouslywith the subculturaldevelopments which were called
pachuctf and gang membersin manyways epitomizedpachuco characteristics.That subculturehas over timeevolved intothe cholo lifestyle,
and
in
members
are
the
the
dress,
speech, beprimeparticipants
again, gang
label. The cholo life-style
havior,and attitudepatternswhichcompristfthat
(likethe pachuco stylewhichpreceded it)representsa syncreticincorporationof elementsfromMexican and Americanyouthcultures,as well as
values and attitudesshaped by adaptations to the problemsassociated
withlifein the barrios.The gang itself,over time,has become partof the
barrioenvironment
to whichmore recentimmigrants
mustacculturate.Inin
from
Mexico and thirdrecent
both
creasingly
years,
youths
immigrant
involvedwith
Mexican
Americans
have
become
generation
peripherally
streetgangs. The Chicano PintoResearch Project(1979, 1981) has found
small numbersofthirdgenerationChícanos, who are themselvesoffspring
of gang members,involvedin the core membershipof some youngerage
cohorts.Even those barrioyouth(immigrant
or not)who do not participate
in gang activitiesare keenlyaware of the gang, and must adapt to it.Acculturation,of course, affects virtuallyeveryone to some degree in a
multicultural
regionsuch as the greater Los Angeles metropolitanarea.
Membersof different
however,espegenerationsare affecteddifferently,
in
of Mexican
populations.Second generationoffspring
cially immigrant
a
level
whose
acculturation
comprise generation
may be reimmigrants
in
either
theirparas
that
cannot
transitional,
garded
many
fullyaccept
ents' or the majorityculture. This absence of a secure cultural(and
increases the attractivenessof the gang subculturefora
personal)identity
but
small,
significant,minorityof barrio youths. Age-graded "klikas"
or
(cliques, cohorts)and (inoldergangs) verticallines of organizationlend
48
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
some sense of order to their often confused interpersonal interactions
(Klein 1971); and the gang's support forcriminalbehavior affords avenues
for prestige and profitto those who have sharply curtailed chances of obtaining meaningfuljobs (Moore et al. 1978; Chicano Pinto Research Project 1979, 1981). Mexican-American youth gangs have evolved in the
context of the larger pattern of Mexican adaptation to urban life in the
United States. This adaptation has followed the largest wave of immigration to the United States in the twentieth century. Since the post-revolutionary (1910-1920) period, immigrationhas been the major factor in a
twenty-eight-fold
growth in the Mexican-American population. Their adaptation, and its social and cultural consequences, has taken differentdirections and shapes, depending on the job opportunities, places of residence,
and generally, the standard of living attained by immigrants. The emergence of a gang subculture is a product of and a factor in the continuing
immigrationof Latinos to urban America. Researchers have examined various cultural dimensions of immigrantadjustment to urban life (see, e.g.,
Gamio 1969a, 1969b; Bogardus 1934, Grebler et al. 1970). With the passage of time, many individuals and families made a successful adaptation,
learned American culture, and proceeded to improve theirstandard of living. Immigrantsof diverse ethnic backgrounds, especially in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, underwent a similar pattern. The
record also shows, however, that immigrantsoften faced new and different conditions in the urban setting. Many of the urban social problems of
today, such as inadequate housing, schooling, unemployment, and crime,
attained major significance in connection with early immigration.Although
there were differences in the types of urban settings and adaptation strategies utilized by the various immigrantgroups, certain maladaptive patterns of coping emerged in each; and these became sources of national
concern. Mexican Americans in urban settings are the focus of a similar
concern today, particularlyin southern California. Data about urban youth
gangs has been compiled and analyzed for most of this century,charting
the experiences of various ethnic groups (Thrasher 1963; Shaw and
McKay 1942; Yablonsky 1962; Short and Strodtbeck 1967; Keiser 1968).
Although indications of an incipient Mexican gang problem were noted
quite early (Bogardus 1926), there is a paucity of informationon the current status of this phenomenon. While unique in many ways, Chicano
gangs nevertheless share features common to most American gangs. The
comment of Cloward and Ohlin (1960:1) that "gangs, or subcultures... are
typicallyfound among adolescent males in lower-class areas of large urban centers," is true of Chicano gangs in Los Angeles. As Cartwrightand
his associates have noted (1975) gang-related phenomena have been attributed to various causes, and often to a single cause. However, a more
comprehensive approach is warranted because the multiple nature and
Vigil
49
rooteddimensionsof any group's adaptation must be considhistorically
ered. Underclass lifeand culturaldistinctivenessamong most ethnicminoritypopulationshave made forthese commonexperiences:schools and
otherinstitutional
authoritiesdenigratetheirculture,firstand second-generationsoftencome intoconflictwitheach otherover culturalloyalty,
and
many individualsundergo interpsychicconflictover theirethnic identity
(Feldsteinand Costello 1974). Thus, to understandthe emergence and
continuanceof Chicano youthgangs, one mustbeginwithan examination
of Mexican adaptation(or in some cases, maladaptation)as the starting
pointand trace the varied social and culturalconsequences of theirresponse. The gang phenomena revolves around the underclass role in
whichMexicans have foundthemselvesin the UnitedStates. Though violentstreetgangs are not invariably
a partof lifein underclasscommunities
so and especiallywhen status is com(Whyte1943), theyare frequently
binedwithlongtermracialdiscrimination
and cultureconflict(Wolfganget
al. 1972; Bogardus 1943). Many immigrant
familiesin urbanareas began
with low-skilledand low-payingjobs, which necessitated settlementin
substandardhousing,usuallylocated in the oldest, most neglected interstices of the city such as sections of East Los Angeles (Gustafson
1940:25-40; Ginn 1947:18-19). Such livingand workingconditionswere
accompanied by othersocioculturaland sociopyschologicalanxieties and
difficulties
forthese immigrants.
As inthe cases of otherimmigrant
groups
and
Costello
Shaw
and McKay 1942), schools and law
1974;
(Feldstein
enforcementoftenworkedto hinderratherthan help Mexican culturaladhas not been positivelyperceivedby
aptation.Mexicanculturehistorically
membersof the host culture,and additionallyMexicans have also often
been viewed as a different
racial group, resultingin additionalprejudice
them
and discrimination
against
(Vigil1980). The ranksof barrioenclaves
with
have
swelled
new, recent Mexican and other Latino immirecently
Most
of
the
encounterpoor workingand livingcondigrants.
immigrants
tions and undergo adaptation problems much as those in the past did.
They have also encountered many Mexican customs, moreover,transformedas a resultofthe transition
fromruralto urbanlifeways.Forexamthe
Mexican
palomilla(age-cohorting)tradition(Rubel 1965), whichis
ple,
an adolescent life-stage socialization pattern similar to those found
throughoutthe world(Cohen 1968), earlyunderwentsome alterationsin
the urbansetting.The palomillacustom has continuedto provideMexican
adolescents withmanypro-socialpatterns,such as the tendencyforcohortmembersto retaincamarada (comrade) relationshipswell intoadulthood, and even old age (Horowitz 1982). On the other hand, urban
conditionsand pressures have generated stress and strainfeaturesthat
markthe transformed
palomillacustom. Youthgroups eventuallyevolved
rooted gang subculture.This subculture has
into gangs, with a firmly
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
50
VOL. 12(1), 1983
evolved its own set of socializationand enculturationpracticeswhichaffectbarrioyouth(Torres1979). Over the last severalyears,the authorhas
activitiesin numerparticipatedin and observed youthsand youth-related
ous barriosthroughoutLos Angeles and adjacent counties. He has interviewed Mexican-American
youthsineach of these, collectingscores of life
historiesand hundredsof completed survey questionnairesfromgang
withgangs.3As a frequentconsulmembersand fromyouthsnotaffiliated
tant and research contributorto the Chicano Pinto Research Project
(C.P.R.P.), a collaborativeteam of academic and community-basedresearchers,he has been givenreadyaccess to theirinterviewswithtecatos
(habitualdrugusers) and pintos(formerprisoninmates)and theirrelatives,
as well as to projectfindings(Moore 1977; Moore et al. 1978; C.P.R.P.
in
1979, 1981).4 Additionaldata has come fromthe author's participation
several advisoryboards relatedto youthproblemsin the Mexican-Amerifromthese sources, as wellas fromthe publican community.
Information
cations cited inthe text,formthe basis forthe followingdescriptions.
Ecological Aspects
Researchers of the Chicago School of urban sociology have provided a general understandingof the ways in whichurbanism(the structure) and urbanization(the process) work to make certain segments
(ethnicgroup,social class, or residentialarea, singlyor in combination)of
the citymore subject to humandisorganization(Burgess 1925; Thrasher
1963; Shaw and McKay 1942; Wirth1938). Studies ofearlyMexicanimmigrationto Los Angeles show thatthese new residentssettledinneglected
and inferior
locations (Fuller1920; MonthlyLabor Review 1974; Gamio
1969A). A series of studies directedby EmoryBogardus (a sociologistat
the University
of SouthernCaliforniawho had been trainedat the UniversityofChicago) underscorethe importanceofecological factorsinshaping
the lives of these newcomers. These investigationsnoted that areas
which were initially
bypassed in the developmentof urban Los Angeles
(the "flats" or lowlands; the areas underneathbridges; and the undesirable gulches, ravines,and hollows) subsequentlywere developed with
poor street planningand limitedpublic services (Gustafson 1940; Ginn
1947). Manyof these "interstices,"as theywere labeled by ecologically
orientedresearchers,became marginalareas of the city,in whichmany
social problemsoriginatedand grew.Whilesome of these observers' conclusions, especiallyon crimeand delinquency,are overstated,theyseem
to reflecta general consensus on the problematicqualities of these neglected interstices,includingemergent gangs. Bogardus had earlier
warned that "these gangs are not yetof the fixedtype" and the cityhad
Vigil
51
timeyetto "solve its boy gang problemwhileit is stillcomparatively
easy
to cope withit" (1926:89). But,elsewhere,he too stresses the interaction
of social and ecological factorsforMexican enclaves in Los Angeles and
southern California:"Sometimes fifty,
a hundred,or more familiesare
foundlivingin a segregated section of the cityor small town whichlacks
Moore (1978), in sumadequate social organization"(1934:19). Similarly,
with
the
results
of
interviews
residents
of an area further
marizing
elderly
east than those mentionedabove, foundthat one of the barriosof East
Los Angeles, El Hoyo Maravilla,was firstestablished on terrain(hillsand
gullies) that had been bypassed by urban expansion. "Lots in the tract
were verycheap; its most conspicuous featurewas its unsuitability
for
in
the
fact
houses" (p. 56). Barrioenclaves, then,can be traced part to
that immigrants,
who earned littlepay,were forcedto settle in areas that
they could afford.This pattern,however,was also reinforcedby immigrants'preferencesand by the influenceof othersocial groups. In the first
likeotherethnicgroups,gravitatedto cominstance,Mexicanimmigrants,
munitieswhichreflectedtheirown customs and patterns,forthislessened
the effectsof cultureshock and gave thema sense of security.The negative treatmentimmigrants
receivedfromthe host culturalgroup also contributedto thistendency.In combination,these influencesled to the spatial and physicalseparation of immigrant
settlers fromthe surrounding
older homes and neighborcommunityand to theiroccupyingdistinctly
hoods. The commonimplications
ofthe phrase "across the tracks" (or irrigationcanals, highways,river,or freeway)reflectthisphysicalseparation
Inaddition,most barriosare characterizedby homes
and visualdifference.
thatare smallerinsize, withmorepeople per household;and are generally
lackingin adequate publicservices. Los Angeles has a had a barriosince
the nineteenthcentury,located just east of the town center(Griswolddel
inthiscentury,
Castillo 1980; Romo 1982). Beforelarge scale immigration
therewere also colonias or pockets of Mexican-American
residentsinoutlyingruraldistricts.Some of them,such as Los Nietos and Cucamonga,
date fromearlyMexican ranchdays. By the 1920s and 1930s, these urban and ruralbarrioswere filledwithnewcomers and new barrios had
been established. Most were of the interstitial
varietyin the urban area,
such as El Hoyo Maravilla.Ruralcolonias also burgeoned,and were usually situated next to the work place. Railroad section workersand their
familiesrootedthemselvesinWatts,and agricultural
workersinCucamonga, and so on. Whetherold or new, urbanor rural,all of themshared the
qualitiesnoted earlier:spatial separationand visiblyinferior
housing.With
the expansion and growthof older barriosand the developmentof new
withthe spread of metropolitan
Los Angeles,ecologiones, concommitant
cal conditionsworsened. Withintwo decades of his warningof a "boy
of the urgentneed to recoggang problem,"Bogardus (1943) was writing
52
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
nize the problemsgenerated by these settlementpatterns.By then,the
federalgovernmenthad initiatedhousingprojectsforlow-incomecommunitiesin the Los Angeles area. East Los Angeles alone now has fivesuch
projects. Manyof these have become barriosin theirown right.Although
intendedto promote social welfarethe projects were engulfedby the
largerbarrioworldthatexisted all around them.Gustafson(1940) recognized this problem,in part, at the inceptionof one of these projects:
"...The new...residentialarea thus appears in immediateproximity
to an
area inprocess ofdisorganization.The influencewillbe salutaryintendency, but...rentalrates...willlimitoccupancy to highclass labor,small salariedfolk,and minorexecutives.The social distance existingbetweensuch
residentsand the heterogeneousinhabitants
further
northwillbe too great
forthe maximumcommunity
benefit.Furthermore,
residents...willbe renters, not home owners. As such the communitywillrepresenta stage of
developmentlackingincommunity
community
spiritand indicatingthe first
the tractis presently
stage of sociologicaldecline" (p. 112). Prophetically,
the territory
of one of the biggestgangs inthe area. Ecological conditions
in the barriosof Los Angeles have not gone unchanged,of course, since
those neighborhoodswere firstestablished.More recenthousingdevelopmentsoffermore amenitiesthan those builtin the 1940s; and expansion
of certainbarriosintoadjacent workingclass neighborhoodshas improved
the average levelof housing.Over the years,residents,even inthe earliest
barrios,have oftenimprovedtheirown housing,and paved roads, gas,
water,power,and sewer services have been introduced.These changes
however,olderand morerecenturbanbarriosinthe area
notwithstanding,
are contrastiveinqualityof residentialamenitiesto mostotherareas ofthe
city.In the meantime,new formsof suburbanbarrioshave also appeared
in the greaterLos Angeles area. Some of these have developed in working-class tracthome neighborhoodswhere Chicanos have become second and thirdowners; othersrepresentformerly
ruraland semi-rural
colonias whose settlementshave been surroundedby expanded residential
developmentin the suburbs since the end of WorldWar II. Pre-existing
loosely knitgangs in the colonias became more like those of the urban
barriosas theylost theirruralisolation.In time,the offspring
of formerurban barrioresidentsin the suburbs formedtheirown gangs in imitation
of
those existingintheirpreviousneighborhoodsand inreactionto the threat
of aggressionfromgangs in nearbycolonias. Manyof the colonias stillexhibitsigns of underdevelopment,
for example an absence of adequate
sewer systems,majorretailcenters,paved sidewalks,or adequate housing. The secondarysuburbanbarriosare betterfittedthanthis,but being
located in the older and less prosperous tractdevelopments,theyoften
In sum, the firststage of
show signs of housingand facility
deterioration.
urbanadaptationwas characterizedby social and spatial isolation,and re-
Vigil
53
sultantstrainsand stress. Such livingconditionstended to disruptsocial
networks,and are reflectiveof a largerphenomenonamong the minority
poor (Bryce-LaPorte 1970; Eames and Goode 1973). As neglected,unthe barriotook on the appearderservedsections of the largecommunity,
ance of an underdevelopedbackwash quarter.Suburban developments
decades lateradded new barrios,some equallyas underdevelopedas the
urban barrios,and others with somewhat betterconditions(which still
withadjacent neighborhoods).Interpersonalviocontrastedsignificantly
alcoholand druguse became morecommonand crimeand
lence, robbery,
criminalpatternsbecame an everydayconcern for barrioresidents and
non-residentsalike. Althoughmost of the residentsare law-abidingcitizens, theyare undulyexposed to vices and anti-socialactivities,even if
onlyas victims.Valentineand Valentine(1970) have noteda similarcourse
trueforthose thatare
of developmentina black ghetto.This is particularly
concentratedin densely populated,rapidlydecayingareas (Clinard1960,
1968; Shaw and McKay 1942). Barrioresidentsare aware of these variations among barrios,and of the usuallymore salientdifferencebetween
barriosand otherneighborhoods(Achor1978).
Socioeconomic Aspects
witha
The small percentage of barrioyouthwho become affiliated
gang are generallymembersof the underclass. They are affectedby the
economic hardshipsof this lifebefore enteringthe streets. Such socioeconomic difficulties
relate to troubledfamilies,problemswithschooling,
limitedjob opportunities,
and even dress styles.For most ofthiscentury,a
patternof Mexicans providinga cheap source of laborforAmericanindustrieshas continued.Despite continuallabor strugglesto upgrade the status of Mexicanlaborers(Gomez-Quinones1977; Arroyo1975; McWilliams
1968), manyMexicans have become permanentmembersofthe American
underclass. The record of Mexican immigration
patterns clearlydocuments the difficulties
of adaptation which result fromplacement in unskilledlow-payingjobs (Gamio 1969a, 1969b; McWilliams1968; Galarza
stillare
1964; Moore 1976; Reisler1976). At present,Mexican-Americans
farbehindwhiteson most socioeconomic indicators.In California,forexample, the average Chicano familyincome is $16,140, compared to
$20,175 forwhites.Similarly,
only55 percentof the nation'sadultChicano
populationhas finishedhighschool, compared to 83 percentforwhites
(Chicago SurveyReports 1979). The same status disparityis apparent in
the factthatChícanos are mostlyof the laboringclass (69 percentoverall,
with29.2 percentof themin unskilledoccupations) (Chicano Survey Reports 1979). Moreover,these figuresexclude most of the undocumented
54
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
Mexican workersand familieswho are even worse off.Familylifeis often
disruptedby the pressures of this unstableeconomic situation.Even bestudies of Mexicans inLos Angeles notedthe
forelargescale immigration,
social repercussionsof this condition."The railroadCompany imported
numerousfamiliesof Mexicans withtheirexpectationsset on highwages.
Frequentlythe men have lost theirwork,theycannot secure anotherjob,
theycannot speak English,theybecome discouraged and take to drinking. Fightingensues, then perhaps stabbing.They are arrested,sent to
the Police Station, and then to the chain gang, nobody to know the
amountof hardshipthe wifeand motherhave sufferedin silence" (Kienle
1912:32). Earlyobservers noted that livingand workingexperiences unwith
derminedsocial controlpractices; and this patterngrew in intensity
to Los Angeles and its environs.Many families,
subsequent immigration
especiallythose who had wage-earnersthatcould not finda secure job,
Some parents today
became confused,disoriented,and problem-ridden.
have problemsguidingand directingtheirown lives, much less those of
theirchildren.As a result,childrenmay go withoutadequate supervision.
Lifehistoriescollected by the authorfromgang membersreveal frequent
accounts ofwanderingthroughthe neighborhoodalone forhours,as early
timein school, ofas age nineor ten. Gang membersalso have a difficult
ten laggingbehindclassmates initially
and theneventuallydroppingout all
together(Haro 1976). Whilethe youths'generalizednegativeattitudestoare in partresponsibleforthisfailure,it
ward dominantsocial institutions
done a poor job educatingMexiis clear thatour schools have historically
cans (Carter and Segura 1978). In fact, institutionalized
discriminatory
practicesinthe past have, in large part,shaped the youngsters'sceptical
attitudes. Bogardus (1926) reportsone young student's response to a
teacher's admonitionsabout the importanceof education: "Look at
the
Manuel,Miss M. He wentto highschool, and he worksinthe brickyard
same as Pedro,who neverwentto school" (p. 107). Whileteachers might
stress the necessityof doing well in school, highschool counselors often
studentsfrom
and explicitly
discouraged Mexican-American
systematically
educational
to
a
Similar
education.
practicesexisted in ruaspiring
college
ral areas (Hill1928). The problemsengendered by familyand school disruptionsare exacerbated by the generallypoor job marketfor minority
youth(NationalCommissionforEmploymentPolicy 1982). Withfew salable skills,few recreationalopportunities,
and no resources, manyof the
withfriendswho share a simion
the
corner
youngsterssimply"hang-out"
lar plight.Muchof the timespent withfriendsis of the normal,male social
discourse and interactionsort, such as talkingabout upcoming social
events and discussing personal trialsand tribulations.Large amounts of
of otheractivities,
forthe introduction
time,however,create opportunities
if
an
makes
older
member
especially
suggestions and leads them
gang
Vigil
55
intoexcitingalternativesto dailymundaneevents. Gang memberswho secure a good job oftenrefocus and redirecttheirlives intomore conventionalroutes;such a change inorientationis referred
to as "maturingout"
(Matza 1964:22-26). Contemporaryevidence on hard-coreadult, former
gang membersindicatesthattheyhad a poor job historyfromthe beginningof theirwork histories(Moore et al. 1978; C.P.R.P. 1979). Most of
theirjobs were of the secondary level,non-career,withoutfringebenefits,
and seasonal. Such workleaves manydissatisfiedand inconstantsearch
of alternativepaths, too oftenillegalones. On the otherhand, interviews
withotherformergang members (fromthe same age and areas as the
hard-coreadults) showed that they regarded havingfounda stable, prievent.Theircareer involvement
maryoccupationas a life-turning
gradually
drew them away fromthe gang and all of the more personallydysfunctionalactivities.Missingthatinitialjob opportunity,
becomingmoredeeply
involvedwithgang activities,and eventuallyspending time in jails, have
made the hard-corememberseven less preparedforgood jobs. Manyof
themhave become "revolving-door"
violators,in and out of jail forone offense or another(Moore et al. 1978). Social deviance is, of course, found
withinall socioeconomic classes (Tittle,Villemez,and Smith1978), espeless aggressive crimessuch as in "whitecollar" crime,
ciallyinnonviolent,
but the characteristicsand consequences of deviantbehaviorare related
to status. Membersof the lowerstrata who adopt a lifeof crimedo so in
somewhat predictableways and withpredictableconsequences. Theiractivities,especiallyiftheybecome criminals,usuallycause more antipathy
because of the blatant,publicnatureof the incidents,forit is generallyan
unsophisticatedfrontalassault (robbery,burglary,shoplifting,
mugging)
whichinvolvessome riskon theirpart. Because of the risk,particularly
in
an act where the chances forwitnesses are increased, they
committing
are also apprehendedmore easily,sometimes at the scene of the crime.
The fact thattheylack the resources foran adequate defense increases
the probability
of a ready,secure conviction.Even the dress standards of
the gang members(and manybarrioyouthswho are not gang members)
reflectthe relativepovertyamong barriodwellers.The basic styleis fairly
constant (a good, warm shirt,durable pants, hardyshoes) and thus the
demands fora wide, assorted wardrobeare avoided. Khakipants, forexample, became fashionableaftertens of thousands of Chicano WorldWar
II and Koreanvets or theiryoungerrelativesbegan to wear these armyisin a later period, the "county" jeans acquired free of
sues. Similarly,
those
incarceratedevolved into the most fashionable in the
charge by
barriodress code. Ineach ofthese instances,functionality
was the cornerstone to dress and the styleeventuallybecame the uniform.
(This is not to
say thatthe cholo is a poor dresser,as most of themtake great pridein
wearingbrightwhitetee-shirtsand inpersonallystarchingand ironingtheir
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
56
VOL. 12(1), 1983
own khakipants. The oftenheard phrase, "I was all choloed out" signifies
one was dressed to the teeth.)The derivationof the pants stylefromgovand penal) is but one instanceof how dominant
ernmentsources (military
the
influences
barrio,even indress habits.
society
Sociocultural Aspects
toiledwithas a resultof livingin marThe pressures thatimmigrants
at
and
areas
working marginaljobs broughtsevere social and cultural
ginal
strains.The urbanAmericancultureto whichtheyhad to adapt was fragmentedand devoidof a sense of community.
manyof the imRemarkably,
to sustain a
in
barrios
their
instill
to
were
able
gemeinshaft many
migrants
in
cases
such
even
semblance of social stability,
manyMexican
although
customs and habits would stillundergoabruptand oftendestabilizingalterations.Most MexicanAmericanshave been able to make the transition,
albeitwithuneven progress. For those thatare able to assimilate,it is often a matterof exchangingone set of social and culturalbehaviorsforanother;manyhave done this.On the otherhand,thereare manymorewho
surviveby mixingelements of Mexican and Americanculturesintotheir
communitymust be
adaptation strategies.Thus, the Mexican-American
a cohesive cultural
is
A
subculture
subculture.
of
level
in
of
terms
seen
subcultural
a
broad
and
culture
national
within
a
system
larger
system
dividedintosmallersubcultures.In thisinstance,the
may itselfbe further
subcultureof Mexicans generallyincludesthatof the transitional
generation (cholos) and finallythe subcultureof gangs is contained withinthe
cholo subculture.Cultureconflictbegins on the firstlevel vis-a-visAnglo
and Mexican culture,affectingalmost everyonefromthe minority
group.
On the transitional
adapting,
level,forthose Mexicans who have difficulty
The culminationof the firsttwo levels is
the conflictincreases in intensity.
which
a gang subculture,
developed in partfromsome second generation
withand develop strongatto clearlyidentify
unable
Chícanos who were
A streetculturethus slowly
culture.
or
Mexican
tachmentsto eitherAnglo
the subculture
the
from
removed
twice
evolved: a subculture
largerentity,
intense
the
most
reflects
which
It
subculture
this
of Mexicans. is
multiple
conflictsof the Mexican-American
people. Cultureconflictand its effects
on socioculturaladaptationare frequentaspects of immigrant/host
society
contact and occur all over the world.Manytypes of syncreticinnovations
have arisen in the process, especially in regard to linguisticblendings
(Hymes 1971; Penalosa 1980). The mentalanguish that resultsfromadculturalcodes, however,is welldocjustmentto competingand conflicting
umented (Shermerhorn1970; Mangin 1970; Frazier 1957; Vigil 1980;
is impeded,makingindividuals
Poggie 1973). Wherethe culturaltransition
Vigil
57
even more marginalto the dominantculture,an alternativeis generated
wherebysecond generationyouthsbegin to develop theirown lifestyle.
The culturalconflictwhichsecond generationMexican Americansof the
1930s and 1940s were undergoingled to the creation of their own
subculturalstyle (Bogardus 1929, 1943). One variantof that style (borrowed fromthe flamboyantblack innovationpopularized by entertainer
Cab Calloway,the originalor at least well publicizedzoot-suiter)became
known as pachuco. Pachucos fashioned a way of dress (finelytapered
pegger pants,long,largeshoulderedcoats tapered at the bottom,a watch
chain,double-soledshoes, and broad-brimmed
fedora)thatmarkedthem
as urban "cool" (Bogardus 1943; McWilliams1968; Tuck 1956). They
even concocted theirlanguage, sometimes referred
to as "Spanglish" because itmixedSpanish and Englishpatterns;in most cases itwas a continuationof calo, a colloquialspeech styleor pidginization
of the Spanish
language begun earlier(Barker 1972; Hinojas 1975). In subsequent decades, the process of culturalinnovationhas continuedwithnew generations of youth. By the 1960s and early 1970s, the style that evolved
became knownas cholo. The presentday cholo has insome ways continin the use of calo speech patterns
ued the pachuco tradition,primarily
(Serrano 1980), and has changed the dress style to khaki pants, plaid,
pendletonshirt,deck shoes, and a watch cap or bandana. Local law enforcementofficialshave tended to view each of these innovativecultural
styles as indicatingsocial deviance, and local media have propagated
withexaggerated descriptionsintendedto
these impressions,frequently
ridiculethe dress and speech styles. Thus, althoughmost "pachucos"
and most "cholos" (i.e., most of those whose dress and speech patterns
markedthemas membersof a culturally
transitional
generation)were not
involvedin destructiveanti-socialactivities,the general public has been
ofcriminalgang
encouraged to viewtheirculturalstylesas a manifestation
behavior(Tuck 1956; McWilliams1968; Miller1975; Miller1977; Baker
1979; Johnston1979). Culture conflictdid of course create an acute
sense of marginality
formany.A culturally
marginalperson is "the product
of a groupor groups whichhas defineda certainlifesituationin a manner
fromthat of the group judginghis conduct. A normalresponse
different
fromthe person's pointofview becomes abnormalinthe eyes of the latter
group" (Sellin 1938:43). Yinger's use of contraculture,especially in the
Chicano case, also appropriately
definesthe gang subculture;otherwriters have used other terms, such as oppositionalculture,in discussing
similarpoints (Willis1977). "In a contraculture...
the conflictelement is
central;manyof the values, indeed, are specificallycontradictionsof the
values of the dominantculture" (Yinger 1960:629; emphasis added).
Derbyshire(1968:101) has noted this tendencyamong Mexican Americans; and the same trendhas also been noted innon-barrio,
workingclass
58
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
suburbanareas (Vigil1979; Burielet al. 1982). Two social institutions
have
and inthe conplayeda pivotalroleinthe lifeof the childrenof immigrants
flictwhichhas generatedthe marginalstatus of so manyof them.One is
the schools, whichearlyresearchersnoted as a problemforthe second
generationof MexicanAmericans:schools generallyhave failedto accommodate the culturally
different
(Bogardus 1929; Sanchez 1967). The other
is law enforcement.
Teachers and police officers,
as school and streetspecialists supervisingchildren'sdaytimearenas of activity,
are society's primaryagents of social control.Whatchildrendo notlearninthe classroom,
theylearnon the streets.For many,itappears thatthe streetshave taken
the lead in this regard. Law enforcementpersonnelhave become street
"teachers" of sorts, but (as in the classroom) many Chícanos have not
been or become good street"pupils." In fact,law enforcementand barrio
relationshipsare oftenantagonistic,as is generallytrue of other low-income communities.Each holds low opinionsof one anotherthat usually
lead to frictional
social interaction,
thus undermining
the dynamicsof adstems fromthe historical
aptationalstrategies.In large part,this hostility
relationsthatstarted and has persistedon a
legacy of police/community
confrontational
route(Acuna 1981; Vigil1980). Over the years,thissituation has bred an over-policingbarriopattern,oftenleading to the "labeling" of even law abidingresidentsas anti-socialand criminal.Livinginthe
barriotends to draw more police attention,regardlessof whetheran individual is a deviantor not (Morales 1972; UnitedStates Commissionon
CivilRights1970). As a result,manywho appear to be cholo are inaccuratelyperceivedas gang members,and anyyoungsterlivinginthe barriois
apt to be considered a gang member.Youthactivitiesin the schools and
on the streets,of course, revolvearounda broaderbackdropof socioeconomic status. Underclass status often affects what is learned in the
schools and on the streets,especially given the marginaltreatmentand
situationof Mexican Americans.Merton(1949), in addressing the social
and culturalstrainsof an underclass lifeand how this conditioncontributes to the formationof a subculture,has underscoredthe way in which
Americansociety expects the populationto aspire to certaingoals, but
maintains social class inequalities and consequent differencesin the
means forattainment.This means/goalsdiscrepancyhas been enlarged
upon by,forinstance,Cloward and Ohlins(1960); and Moore (1978) has
Chícanos in East Los Angeles.
applied the constructto researchinvolving
Alienatedyouthswhose education and occupational prospects seem to
precludethemfromwhat Choen has called "the respectable status system" face severe problemsinestablishingforthemselvesa social identity.
"The delinquentsubculturedeals withthese problemsby providingcriteria
of status whichthese childrencan meet" (Cohen 1955: °1). The Chicano
gang subculturehas an integrallogicof itsown and a sense of community
Vigil
59
whichattractsand socializes manyyouths;and "once established,such a
subculturalsystemmay persist,but not by sheer inertia.It may achieve a
lifewhichoutlasts thatof the individualswho participatedin its creation,
but onlyso long as itcontinuesto serve the needs of those who succeed
its creators" (Cohen 1955:65). An importantaspect of male adolescent
status attainment,
of course, is the process whicha cultureor subculture
providesfor"becominga man," and thisis especiallyproblematicforcul(1958), usingexamples from
turallymarginalyouths.Bloch and Neideroffer
various societies, have emphasized the role of urban gangs in this process. Burtonand Whiting(1961:94), discussing the cross-culturalassociation between adolescent initiationrites for males and conditions
conducive to cross-sex identification
problems, have added that it is
with a functionsimilarto that of
"clear that the gang is an institution
..inthose societies withconflictin sex identity."Ecological presinitiation.
sures and underclass status, in combinationwiththe effectsof culture
as noted earlier,have generatedreduced parentalcontroland enconflict,
hanced the attractionof streetactivitiesformanybarrioadolescents. The
adult male's parentalrole in the household has particularly
been attenuhouseholds are relatively
ated; infact,father-absent
common,and disproso forthe familiesof gang members.Boys in such situations
portionately
are keenlyaware of the absence of appropriatemale models withwhichto
One twenty-year-old
identify.
gang member,in recountinghis lifehistoryin
withthe author,put itthisway: "Not too manyof myfriends
an interview
had a father.When anyonedid, we would go over to theirplace and hope
he (the father)would take us someplace." Anotherinformant,
a fifteenfrom
recalled
East
Los
his
dramatization
of
year-old
Angeles, specifically
the shiftfrommaternalcontrolto peer associations withthe gang: "When
I wentto grammarschool, mymotherused to comb myhairand parted it
down the middle.When I wentto juniorhighI took the comb fromher and
combed myhairstraightback and was cholo likethe rest." Wherethe father is present,and involvedin the youth's socialization,he is in many
cases a productof the gang subculturehimself.That subculturein part is
Mexicanpalomillacustom of adoa reforgedcombinationofthe traditional
lescent age cohorts and the complex of culture values known as
machismo.Thereare as manypositivemachismotraits(strongworkethic,
forfamily
and friends,and patientcourage against seemingly
responsibility
insurmountable
obstacles) but street lifehas especially nurturedan emon
masculine
phasis
aggressiveness, dominance,and boastfulassertion
of individual
and grouppride.In combinationwiththe limitedopportunities
forself-expressionthatpervade the barrio(physical,social, cultural,intellectual,and otherwise)thisemphasis all too oftenresultsin behaviorthat
is destructiveboth to self and others. Whileaggressive, violentbehavior,
for example, is sociallysanctioned on the footballfield,it is not on the
60
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
streets;but manystreet-wiseyouthhave difficulty
stayinginschool, much
less joiningorganizedsports. Streetfighting
has sometimesbeen an avenue to success forbarrioyoungsters(as well as otherurbanpopulations)
who have parlayedthat skillinto a prize fighting
career. More often,of
it
in
results
even
and
withthe
involvement
course,
deaths,
simply injury,
criminaljustice system. The underlying
are
values, however,
pervasive in
the cholo subculture,and especiallyin the gangs. Youngermembersobtain themfromolder membersfunctioning
as father-surrogates,
or even
fromtheirown fatherswho were raised in the same barrioenvironment.
One formergang member,interviewed
by C.P.R.P. researchers,illustrated
this: "When I got beat up one timeas a kid,I came home crying.When I
saw myfather,he toldme to go back out and notcome back untilI fought
back and stopped actinglikea sissy. I feltfunnyinsidebecause I thought
he wouldcomfortme withwords like- 'What's the matter,hijo?'" In summary,the Chicano gang subcultureshares withthose ofotherethnicimmigrantgroups an originin underclass economics and marginalecological
conditions;and likethe gang subculturesof othergroups,itprovidesindividuals withmeans forfacingsuch factorsas cultureconflict,unstable
crisis(Yablonsky
familysituation,urbanpressures,and adolescent identity
1962; Short and Strodtbeck 1967; Kendis and Kendis 1976). Chicano
gangs are distinct,however,inexperiencing,continuingwaves of Mexican
in thiscentury.Mexican immigrants
in Americanurban areas
immigration
are thus subjected to socialization and enculturationprocesses of a
deeply rootedsubculture.Adaptations strategiesare stronglyaffectedby
these factors,and have especiallyalteredthe process of culturalacquisitionand retentionforthe new immigrants.
This resultsin new generations
of cholos, withsome individualsineach groupgravitating
towardgang solutionsto streetlife.Enculturation
and socializationintoa gang culturehas
become an aspect of culturalconflictforimmigrant'schildren.The gang
subculture has thus persisted and grown, reaching beyond the urban
barriosof itsoriginto the suburbs;whilethe cholo subcultureof whichitis
a part has spread even further,
to such bordertowns as Mexicaliand Tijuana on the Mexicanside.
Sociopsychological Aspects
The factors outlined above created the conditions for the gang
subculture.The resultantpersonal pressures, anxieties,and frustrations
have founda vehicleforexpressionin thissocial unitand an outletforanger and hostility
among youngmales. The gang lifestylehas functionedto
routinizeand stabilizea marginalexistenceforsome cholos. A complexof
norms,beliefs,and procedureshave evolvedand now operate to socialize
Vigil
61
barrioyouthintoa gang. Externalfactorssuch as underclass and racial
the subculture,and these factors
contributedto initiating
discrimination
stillplay a major role in maintaining
it, but the gang youth's internalized
barrio patterns now also support the maintenance of the gangs. The
barrioteenagerwho becomes involvedin destructiveand self-destructive
the life around him. As Plant (1937:18) has
behavior is only mirroring
"if
it
that
the
is
true
noted,
triumphsand tragedies of the streetflowinto
and become a part of the child,then all programsof personalitychange
must manage somehow to change the street." Individualswho are multiplymarginalto Americanurban society also oftenprobablyexperience a
(e.g., concerningwhere they live,
multiple,complex sense of inferiority
and
what they do, who they are,
why and how they got there). Such
poorlyintegrated,conflictualself-images,quite oftennegative,collectively
produce a grouppatternwhichhelps to alleviatestress and develop channels foraffectiveexpression.As an example, a common sense of frustration sometimes becomes so generalized in a group that it erupts into
action (riots, strikes, demonstrations)directed against the perceived
object of theirdiscontent.A case in pointis the Casa Blanca barrioriotof
1975. Casa Blanca barriois in the cityof Riverside,an area about sixty
miles southeast of Los Angeles. The riotby youngand old, male and female residentswas against the police. Participantsreportedthat the acand anger at
tion,whichlasted forseveral days, was based on frustration
theirshared miseries,includingunderclasstreatmentand especiallypolice
is the outcome of a cumulaharassment.This multiplesense of inferiority
tiveprocess. For some, itmay beginwithbirthin a barrio.Whilea barrio's
socioculturalmilieuprovidesmanywiththe acquisitionof a positiveselfconcept, thereare also numerouscases where practicallyevery imaginable thingworks to assure a poor self-image(e.g., poor home, low
income,disruptedfamilylife,and culturaldissolution).Such backgrounds
often generate the types of gang members who are fearless "locos"
(crazies). The accumulationof parental physical or emotional neglect,
abuse fromolder streetchildren,punitiveeducational incidents,and poor
models to emulate has builtup in theman innerrage, leading to an early
"social death." The childfeels he is worthlessbecause of his experience,
and consequentlysees littlevalue in followingsociety's norms.Otherexperiencesalso helpto engendera self-imageconflict.The social avoidance
thatdominantgroupmemberspracticeis oftencontributory
(Reckless and
Dinitz1967), especiallyin social contacts withpublicauthorities(such as
in schools). Whileadolescence is a marginalsituationforall youth,a type
of betwixtand between role ambivalence,it is additionallyproblematicfor
barrioyouthwho bringto thisgrowthprocess otherinternalizedsources
in thisstage
Peer group pressure is unusuallyinstrumental
of marginality.
of lifeformost modernwestern people. The peer group, especially ifa
62
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
rootedsubculturaltradition,
is an integralpartof it,oftenbecomes the stawith
whichto allyand identify
oneself,as ifa sum of troubled,
bilizingforce
personally segmented individualsfind security in numbers (Horowitz
1974:246). Many patternedactivitiesof the gang subcultureprovidepersonal avenues forfulfillment,
(2)
including:(1) Recruitmentand initiation;
goals and roles; (3) strivingsfor rank; and (4) positive self-concept
et al. 1975). These featuresare embedded in group psycho(Cartwright
logicalprocesses whichfunctionto provideprotection,security,and affection;positivepersonalties; shared ¡deals and interests;climateof equality
and justice; symbolicgroup ceremonialsand activities;and common enemies outsideof the group(Scheidlinger1952). The patternof recruitment
and initiationis a relativelysimple matter. Generally,eligibilityfor
recruitment
is based on whetherone was raised in the barrio.There are
also instanceswherean individualwould grow up in several barrios,since
some familieschange residences quite often;however,the barriosocializationexperienceremainsessentiallythe same. Most youthsare able to
avoid or refuse induction.Others get involvedonly in a peripheralway,
such as at partiesor less demandinggang affairs.For those barrioyoungsters thatspend a good partoftimeinthe street,however,thereis a natural social settingwhich encourages intimacywithneighborsat an early
age. Spontaneous and usuallyharmless,mischiefoftenbecomes the first
in a long bondingsequence where mutualtrustamong youngchildrenis
established. By the age of eightor nine,manyyoungstersalready know
thattheybelong to a barrio,even becomingknowledgeableabout territorialboundaries(Moore,Vigil,and Garcia 1983). The exposure to gang lore
may even begin much earlier:one older gang member,duringa Chicano
PintoResearch Project interview,
playfully
suggested thatthe interviewer
ask his five-year-old
son what barriohe was from.The child puffedhis
chest and responded, "I'm fromWhite Fence." There are many other
"pre-gang" learninginstances of thisnature.Positivepersonal ties which
allow forfeelingsof affectionand securityagainst common enemies outside of the barrio(or group)become established.Gang initiation
is the first
ritual
to
It
affirm
and
occurs
personalallegiance
group
identity.
just priorto
or duringa child's years in juniorhighschool, although(especially with
non-residentsof the barrio)it may occur much later (Moore, Vigil,and
Garcia 1983). Initiation
involvesacceptance of a physicalbeating,
typically
with
one
audience
to witness his individualbraveryand
a
providing
group
Some
refer
to
the
initiation
courage.
gangs
ceremonyas "jumpingin," for
several gang membersparticipateinit.(In previousyears,the custom was
to beat up someone iftheywanted to leave the gang. Today,itis bothfor
entranceand exit.) Initiationsvaryin stylefromone barrioto another,or
withinklikas(cliques, age-cohorts)of a barrio,but the rationaleis essentiallythe same. Because conflictwithotherbarriosis so common,thereis
Vigil
63
a need for self-defense, and the initiationis a screening process to test
one's physical and mental durability.On the other hand, it affords members a chance to judge a person's abilityto add strength (like building an
arsenal) to the gang. On the other hand, a person proves theirfuturegang
loyalty and dedication by taking the punishment unflinchingly.Several
members have told this author that "jumping in" was a way of demonstrating that you would not "snitch" under pressure. The event can be
very formal or informaldepending on the barrio tradition, and there are
some gangs who avoid the custom completely or practice it irregularly.
Typically,this adolescent passage ritualfollows an extended acquaintance
and association with one or more gang members, during which the recruit's "loco" behavior is evaluated to determine whether an initiationis
required and ifit should be a stern one. Usually it is a spontaneous affair,
often when members are under the influence of alcohol or drugs, or both.
From four to seven youngsters surround the initiate and pummel him to
the ground. He always loses. The test is in his effortsto keep fromfalling
to the ground, even though he gets beaten up. One man told a C.P.R.P.
interviewerthat itwas drugs which caused him to want to beat up, or initiate, someone. He said, "It made me feel like the Hulk." Another, in the
same interviewsession, pointed out: "He (the recruit)may go to the hospital, but it's in his mente (mind). He wants to join and it shows all over his
body." The bruises serve as an imprimateurthat the person now belongs.
On the other hand, another well-likedfellow was legitimated in this abbreviated manner: "That vatos (guy) cool, man. Just give him a couple of
chingazos (blows), and ya estuvo (it's over)." A second feature of the gang
system, the establishment of role boundaries and group goals, solidifies
one's attachment and commitment to the group. Even before a formal
gang induction,barrio youngsters begin to affectgang members' personal
characteristics, such as in dress or language style. Identification with
these group habits serves as an important source of identityformation,
especially since early maturityis prized in the streets. One other practice is
giving members nicknames, and in some cases certain individuals have
acquired one earlier in their street life. Quite often the sobriquet defines
the salient role quality of the person (Loco or Killer,forexample), but more
regularlyit pokes fun at a physical resemblance or personal characteristic:
Oso (bear), Conejo (rabbit), Viejo (old man), or Slick. At any rate, the person now has a personal name with which to tattoo his body (along with
the barrio name) and write his placa (personal graffitisignature) on walls
and buildings. The latter activity partiallyreflects the need to declare, or
broadcast, one's personal identityto the general public. In addition, the
group now acts as a surrogate family,providing help and protection
against outsiders, directions on appropriate etiquette ways to think and
act to gain recognition,counsel and guidance froman older person, and a
64
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
feeling of group unity and pride. Casual barrio acquaintances become
carnales (brothers), camaradas, and homeboys (fromthe same barrio) by
virtue of gang membership. Old personal ties are tightened and new ones
initiated. Veteranos (older, veteran gang members) take on the responsibilityof making sure the younger cohorts are properlysocialized. This fictive parental attention is taken seriously, as many veteranos go out of their
way to give counsel, recognition, and protection. The veterano is often a
positive role model and a source of money and other resources in times of
need. However, it may also happen that the model is one who spent much
time in jail, glorifyingthe experience, and is a habitual drug user. Also important is that a climate of fear may be engendered by the older locos,
keeping initiatedyouth from entertaining personal sentiments of an independent nature. Fear, of course, largelyexplains why a young person joins
the gang; and it is fear that keeps many there. The gang fosters a clear
egalitarian attitude towards material possessions, which is demonstrated
time and again. It provides opportunities forgang members to gain stature
by submerging personal wishes and desires to that of the group. In fact,
there is a strong emotionally charged atmosphere that pervades most
gang social situations, and most youngsters attempt to approximate the
group mean. Money, resources, a car are shared with others with assumed indifference.Some gang members take this responsibilityseriously
and consciously strive to operate from unselfish motives. In these and
other such matters, furtherrespect is gained by keeping your palabra
(word). This is especially true when a member is confronted or challenged
by an outsider, foran injuryto one is an injuryto all. Laying down one's life
for the barrio is common, as verified by the gang retaliations that occur
throughout southern California. (The law enforcement records show over
300 gang-related deaths in Los Angeles county alone in 1980 [Roderick
1982].) If one fails or falters in livingup to the rules, group sanctions are
invoked, usually subjecting the violator to name-calling reflectinghis infraction. Sometimes a leva (social avoidance) sanction is used for blatant
or recurringdeviations fromgroup norms. A state of mind that surrenders
itself to the group is the end result. Ego and status enhancement are attained through group norms, which in the gang promote strivingfor rank
and provide peer approval (and older males' approval) to enhance one's
positive self-concept. Because of the social voids in theirlife,many barrio
youngsters acquire a status reputation through gang activity
(Stumphauzer, Aiken, and Veloz 1978). The ego ideal now becomes the
barrio,the new group ideal. Body tattoos indeliblybrand that group feeling
onto the individualand he constantly reaffirmsits truthby writinghis placa
(ego and barrio name) on walls and fences. Attaining status within the
gang structure is extremely important,especially among the brighterindividuals. Helping one's homeboys with advice and emotional support dur-
Vigil
65
ingstressfulmoments,and doingitwithapparentunselfishdedication,is a
way of gainingrecognitionand shapinga reputation.Italso giventheman
to develop and demonstratetheirleadershipabilitiesinprecaropportunity
ious or dangerous situationswhere decisiveness and intelligenceare valued. Often,however,thishas led to destructiveand debilitativebehavior.
forinstance,and the highlyprized vato
Locura (quasi-controlledinsanity),
that many aim for,similarto the almost
loco (crazy dude, guy) life-style
classic "desperado" behaviorof westernfrontier
tradition,are attractive
to youthswhose lives have been filledwithtrauma (C.P.R.P. 1979:116117). Quiteoften,such individualsbecome the "loco" standardforothers,
so forthe youngermembers. While locura gives one the liparticularly
cense to act out personal motives,italso providesthe group,as minority
and underclass members of society,generalized outlets for aggressive
sentiments.The need forrecognitionand expression (status and leader(e.g., drugs) and destrucship) thus is oftenmanifestedin selfdebilitation
tive behavior(e.g., gang slayings).It is always clear that prestigeawaits
one who amasses a reputationforlocura, even ifit is based on fear. No
one (friendor foe) knows what to expect froma loco, and thiselementof
surprisegives one an edge inmost social situations.Despite the incidence
of locura,however,thereare manymore positiveways to acquire status:
the youngman who diplomatically
negotiatesthe gang out of troublein a
rivalarea, or the one who is especially skilledat effectingliaisons with
the car owner who gladlytakes memyoungladies at parties,and finally,
bers on low-riding,
"cruising"sojourns. Itmustbe underscoredthatonlya
small numberbecome deeply involvedindestructivebehavior,despite the
multiplepressuresof barriolife.Those who do so usuallyhave undergone
distressingexperiences, or have experienced a turningpoint
particularly
whichlockedthemintothe pattern(e.g., one minorinfraction
leadingto an
of
barrio
The
vast
conviction
and
arrest,
young
incarceration).
majority
people duringadolescence select more sociallyapproved routes forego
and experiment
and status expression,althougheven theysometimesflirt
the
customs
subculture
withcertaincholo and gang
way. It is a life
along
can be easily
that
sometimes
in
American
society,
style, like so many
once it has
discarded
as
and
as
the
need
easily
requires,
just
adopted,
its
outlived purpose.
Conclusion
An East Los Angeles gang memberonce toldthisauthorthathis life
had been a succession ofchanges: he changed residences quite often,his
parentsfinancialsituationwas precariousand in additiontheywere coninterminstantlyundergoingfamilybreakups and separations,he regularly
66
URBAN
ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL 12(1),1983
gled good and bad behavior and performance at school, and when he was
a teenager he decided to be a cholo, dress and act the part; but when the
occasion warranted it, he changed roles and took on a differentcharacter.
Much of the cholo, and especially gang life,reflectthis recurringpattern of
instability,uncertainty,and fluctuation. Octavio Paz offered this observation on the pachuco variant of the cholo situation back in the 1940s: 'The
pachucos are youths...who formgangs in Southern (California) cities; they
can be identifiedby theirlanguage and behavior as well as by the clothing
they affect...Their attitude reveals an obstinate, almost fanatical will-to-be,
but this will affirmsnothing specific except their determination- it is an
ambiguous one, as we will see - not to be like those around them. The
pachuco does not want to become a Mexican again; at the same time he
does not want to blend into the lifeof North America. His whole being is
sheer negative impulse, a tangle of contradictions, an enigma. Even his
very name is enigmatic: pachuco, a word of uncertain derivation, saying
nothing and saying everything.It is a strange word with no definitemeaning; or, to be more exact, it is charged like all popular creations with a diversityof meanings" (1961 :13-14). Paz did not address the other sources
which created this pachuco lifestyle, forhe emphasized only the transitory
nature of the cultural experience. It is clear, however, that the culture conflictand transitional generation phenomenon is set in a number of areas
which together revolve around the larger issue of Mexican adaptation to
American society. Beginning with where Mexicans settled and lived and
the types of jobs they held, it appeared that theirintegrationinto the urban
social order was to be on the fringes. As with many other ethnic groups,
the strains and pressures of adjustment to urban environs often resulted
in social and cultural features which engendered major problems for some
participants. Likewise, the problems of these ethnic groups became magnified in the lives of their children. Normal youth cohorting became problematic and soon after officials and authorities began to refer to youth
groups as gangs. With most immigrantcommunities, discriminationfrom
the larger society tended to diminish after a while, but racial prejudice
against Mexican-Americans has abated much more slowly. In part because of this, most of the Mexican settlements have remained barrios,
with many families long term residents. The conditions for subsequent
generations have been similarenough for them to repeat earlier patterns.
In fact, it is the persistence of these patterns which have operated to establish a gang subculture in many barrios. Moreover, the barrios have retained their Mexican flavor with continuing Mexican and Latino
immigration in recent years. Thus, a gang subculture and large scale
Mexican/Latino immigration are two factors which make this Chicano
experience distinct, as compared to other ethnic groups. Because of this
relativelylong historyin urban Los Angeles and southern California, there
Vigil
67
are presently
firstgenerationMexicangangs inLos Angeles,and the cholo
lifestylehas even diffusedto towns along the Mexican side of the border
(Castro 1981), and in a northernMexican state (Villela and Gastelum
and theirchildren,of course, underwentother
1980). Mexicanimmigrants
of
in
cultural
the urban setting.Traditionalsocial control
conflicts
types
for
were
transformedbecause of the new living
mechanisms,
instance,
and workingconditions,and immigrantshad to relymore and more for
these matterson urban social institutions,
such as teachers and police.
Teachers and police,however,as oftenhindered,ratherthanaided, incorporationof and allegiance to Americanstandards. It was in the schools
wherethe most acute cultureconflictexperiences transpired.Teacher-pupil clashes over primarylanguage use and othercontrastingculturalbewithstudent knowledge and skillacquisition.
liefsappeared to interfere
Mexican-Americansalso experienced more contacts with law enforcement,and the interactionsgenerallywere hostileand negative.As noted,
gang members experienced learningproblems which caused them to
leave school early.Even thoughsocioeconomic patternsare paramount
conditionforunderstanding
Chicano gangs. There
theyare nota sufficient
is also the matterof culturaladaptation to Americanlifewaysand language. AllMexican Americanshave undergonethe process of acculturation,withmost (especiallythe second generation)experiencingdifficulty
and theirchilduringthe transitional
phase. Duringthisphase, immigrants
dren acquire an Angloculturalrepertoirewhilestillretainingan identification and association withMexican lifeways.The fact that many Mexican
Americanshave been able to maintaina bilingual/bicultural
persona attests to the often positive outcome of this adaptation (Vigiland Long
root them1981). Nevertheless,thereare otherswho are unable to firmly
selves in either one of the two cultures, or much less to become
Thus theyfashionothersolutions.This is especiallythe
bilingual/bicultural.
case forthose who remaininthe cholo phase, and fora varietyof reasons,
spend moretimeon the streets,becomingenculturatedand socialized to
the normsand standards of gang members.Street life,as we have seen,
has transformeda number of Mexican traditions,such as palomilla
cohorting,adding urbandimensionsto an adolescent lifestage passage.
The gang subculturereflectsthis syncreticpatternof mixingdonor and
host patternsintosomethingnew and different.
Such a subcultureis very
attractiveto youngChícanos who objectivelyreflecta dual heritage,but,
ironically,
subjectivelyreject both,and thus adopt the streetcultureas a
source of stability.Even in non-barriosuburban neighborhoods,where
there is sociocultural ambiguityamong second and thirdgeneration
Chícanos, we findthe tendencyforinvolvementin a type of streetgang,
althoughnot as negativelycharged as the older gangs in colonias and urban barrios.As summarizedhere,the gang subcultureemerged as a type
68
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
of adaptationto the marginality
stemmingfromthe contrastand conflict
between Mexicanand Angloculture.Mexicans were usuallynot whollyintegratedintoAmericansociety.In short,theywere forcedto live on the
marginsof available space, to workin menial,secondaryjobs, and to affectand expect a minimalresponse and concernfrommajorsocial institutions.WhilemanymoreMexicans thanthose who became gang members
underwentthisseries of marginalsituations,withmost makinga type of
"constructivemarginality"
out of it(Arvizu1974), it is the gang members
who dynamicallyexhibitthe cumulativeeffectsof these multiplestatus
"crises." Where they live,what resources they and theirfamilieshave,
how theyfashiona socioculturalniche,and whytheyneed an identity
are
all issues that pervade the lives of regulargang members. Viewingthe
of how and why
gang subculturein this broader way aids interpretation
the subculturearose, and outlineswhen and where youngstersgravitate
to it as a solutionto urban adaptation.The multiplemarginality
concept
aids integration
of the several competingtheorieson gang deadditionally
linquency,deviancy,and crime.Whilesocial class, as noted, is the predominantfocus inmost of these theories,itis nota sufficient
conditionfor
the gang subculture.The multiplemarginality
construct,on
understanding
the otherhand, lends itselfto a holisticinterpretation
preciselybecause
social behavioris multi-layered,
and formanyChicanos, it is the cumulative workingsof these marginalsituationswhichaccounts fortheirgang
membership.
NOTES
1 Cholo is a term used in some
parts of Latin America to describe those who are intermediate culturally,between the metropolitan and indigenous Indian cultures.
2 Pachuco is a 1940s term
perhaps derived from the Mexican town of Pachuca, but most
certainly traced culturally to El Paso, Texas, where the Mexican version of the zoot-suit
gained prominence.
3 This research was aided
by an N.I.M.H. fellowship #F 32 HMO7952-01 in 1979-1980, and
an independent study, Ford Foundation grant, 1979-1980. The author wishes to acknowledge the valuable criticisms of the paper offered by John M. Long and Joan Moore.
4 The 1979
study was funded by a National Institute of Drug Abuse grant #1 RO1 DAO
1849-01, and by the U.S. Department of Labor grant #21-06-78-18; the 1981 study was
funded by an National Institute of Mental Health grant #1-RO1 MN 33104-01 .
REFERENCES
Achor, S.
1978
CITED
Mexican Americans in a Dallas Barrio. Tucson:
Press.
University of Arizona
Vigil
Acuna, R.
1981
69
Occupied America:A Historyof Chícanos (2nd ed.).New York: Harper
and Row, PublishingCo.
Arroyo,L. and Nelson-Cisneros,V. (eds.)
1975
Special Issue on Labor Historyand the Chicano. Aztlan-lnternational
Journalof Chicano Studies Research 6:(2). Los Angeles: University
of
California,Chicano Studies Center.
Arvizu,S.
1974
Baker,B.
1979
Barker,G. C.
1972
IN The CulturalDrama, W. Dillon
EducationforConstructiveMarginality.
Press, 122-135.
(ed.). Washington,D.C.: SmithsonianInstitution
Gang Murders,Spreading Across County,Reach Record Rate. Los Angeles Times, November14.
Social Functions of Language in a Mexican-AmericanCommunity.
of ArizonaPress.
Tucson: The University
A.
Bloch, H. A. and Niederhoffer,
1958
The Gang: A Study in Adolescent Behavior. New York: Philosophical
Library.
Bogardus, E. S.
1926
1929
1934
1943
Burgess, E. W.
1925
The CityBoy and His Problems.Los Angeles: House of Ralston,Rotary
Club of Los Angeles.
Second GenerationMexicans. Sociology and Social Research 13:276283.
of SouthernCaliforniaSoThe Mexican in the UnitedStates. University
of SouthernCalifornia
cial Science Series, No. 8. Los Angeles: University
Press.
Gangs of Mexican American Youth. Sociology and Social Research
28:55-66.
The Growthof the City:An Introduction
to a Research Project. IN The
City,R. E. Park,E. W. Burgess, and R. D. McKenzie. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 47-62.
Buriel,Raymond,SilverioCalzada and RichardVasquez
1982
The Relationshipof TraditionalMexicanAmericanCultureto Adjustment
and DelinquencyAmongThree Generationsof Mexican AmericanMale
Adolescents. HispanicJournalof BehavioralSciences 4(1):41-55.
J. W.
Burton,R. V.andWhiting,
1961
The AbsentFatherand Cross-Sex Identity.
Merrill-Palmer
Quarterly7:8595.
Bryce-LaPorte,Roy Simon
1970
UrbanRelocationand FamilyAdaptationin PuertoRico: A Case Studyin
Urban Ethnography.IN Peasants in Cities, W. Mangin (ed.). Boston:
Co., 85-97.
HoughtonMifflin
Carter,T. P. and R. D. Segura
1978
MexicanAmericansin School: A Decade of Change. New York:The College Board.
D. S., B. Tomson and H. Schwartz
Cartwright,
1975
Gang Delinquency.Monterey,California:Brooks/Cole.
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
70
Castro, G. L.
1981
VOL. 12(1), 1983
El Cholo: Origen y Desarrollo. Mexicain, B. C: Universidad Autonoma De
Baja California.
Chicano Pinto Research Project
A Model for Chicano Drug Use and for Effective Utilization of Employ1979
ment and Training Resources by Barrio Addicts and Ex-Offenders. Los
Angeles, California (Final Report for the Department of Labor and National Institute of Drug Abuse).
Barrio impact of High Incarceration Rates, (by Joan W. Moore and John
1981
Long.) Los Angeles: Final Report for National Institute of Mental Health.
Chicano Survey Reports
1979
Labor Force Experiences. Report No. 1. Chicano Projects, Universityof
Michigan.
Clinard, M.
1960
1968
Cross-Cultural Replication of the Relation of Urbanism to Criminal Behavior. American Sociological Review 25:253-57.
Sociology of Deviant Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
Cloward, R. A. and L. B. Olin
1960
Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. New York:
The Free Press.
Cohen, A. K.
1955
Delinquent Boys: The Culture of the Gang. Glencoe, Illinois: Free Press.
Cohen, Y.
1968
The Transition from Childhood to Adolescence.
Decker, Cathleen
1983
Derbyshire, R. L.
1968
Chicago: Aldine.
Gang-Related Murders Fall by 38% in Los Angeles. Los Angeles Times.
January 7.
Adolescent IdentityCrisis in Urban Mexican Americans in East Los Angeles. IN MinorityGroup Adolescents in the United States, E.B. Brody (ed.).
Baltimore: The Williams and Wilken Company, 73-110.
Dickie-Clark, H. F.
1966
The Marginal Situation, London: Routledge, Kegan Paul.
Eames, E. and J. Goode
1973
Urban Poverty in a Cross-Cultural Context. New York: The Press.
Feldstein, S. and L. Costello (eds.)
1974
The Ordeal of Assimilation: A Documentary History of the White Working
Class. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
Frazier, E. F.
1957
Fuller, E.
1974
Race and Culture Contact in the Modern World. New York: Knopf.
The Mexican Housing Problem in Los Angeles (1 920). Reprinted monograph series. IN Perspectives on Mexican American Life, C.E. Cortez
(ed). New York: Arno Press, 1-123.
Galarza, E.
1964
Merchants of Labor. Santa Barbara: McNally and Loftin,Publishers.
Gamio, M.
1969a
1969b
Mexican Immigrationto the United States. New York: Arno Press.
The Mexican Immigrant. New York: Arno Press.
Vigil
Ginn, M. C.
1947
Gomez-Quinones,
1 977
CHICANO
GANGS IN LOS ANGELES
71
Social Implications of the Living Conditions of a Selected Number of
Families Participating in the Cleland House Program. Unpublished
M.A.Thesis, Universityof Southern California, Department of Sociology.
J.
The Origin and Development of the Mexican Working Class in the United
States: Laborers and Artisans North of the Rio Bravo, 1600-1900. Prepared for the V International Congress of Mexican Studies, Patzcuaro,
Michoacan, Mexico, October 12-16.
Grebler, L., J. W. Moore and R. Guzman
1970
The Mexican American People. New York: The Free Press.
Griswold del Castillo, R.
1980
The Los Angeles Barrio, 1 850-1 890. Los Angeles: Universityof California
Press.
Gustafson, C. V.
1940
An Ecological Analysis of the Hollenbeck Area of Los Angeles.
Unpublished M.A.Thesis, Universityof Southern California, Department
of Sociology.
Haro, Carlos Manuel
An Ethnographic Study of Truant and Low Achieving Chicano Barrio
1976
Youth in the High School Setting. Ph.D. dissertation, Universityof California, Los Angeles.
Hill, M. E.
1968
Hinojas, F. G.
1975
Horowitz, Ruth
1982
An Americanization Program for the Ontario Schools, 1 928. IN California
Controversies, L. Pitt's (ed.). Glenview, Illinois: Scott, Foresmen and
Company, pp. 250-254.
Notes on the Pachuco: Stereotypes, History, and Dialect. Atisbos: Journal of Chicano Research (Summer):53-65 Stanford: Chicano Studies
Center.
Adult Delinquent Gangs in a Chicano Community. Urban Life: A Journal
of Ethnographic Research 11(1):3-26.
Horowitz, R. and G. Schwartz
1974
Honor, Normative Ambiguity and Gang Violence. American Sociological
Review 39:238-51 .
Hymes, D. (ed.)
1971
Johnson, T. J.
1979
Keiser, R. L.
1968
Pidginization and Creolization of Languages.
sity Press.
London: Cambridge Univer-
La Vida Loca. New West, January 29.
The Vice Lords: Warriors of the Street. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Kendis, K. O. and R. J. Kendis
1976
The Street Boy Identity: An Alternative Strategy of Boston's
Americans. Urban Anthropology 5:1-17.
Chinese-
72
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
Kienle,J. E.
1912
Klein,M. W.
1971
Lewis, Oscar
1959
VOL. 12(1), 1983
Housing Conditions Among the Mexican Population of Los Angeles.
of SouthernCalifornia,Department
UnpublishedM.A.Thesis, University
of Sociology.
Street Gangs and Street Workers. Englewood Cliffs,New Jersey:
Inc.
Prentice-Hall,
Five Families:MexicanCase Studies inthe Cultureof Poverty.New York:
Basic Books.
Lomnitz,Larissa A.
Networksand Marginality:Life in a Mexican Shantytown.New York:
1977
Academic Press.
Mangin,W. (ed.)
1970
Matza, D.
1964
Merton,R. K.
1949
Miller,W. B.
1975
Miller,W. P.
1977
of Urbanization.BosPeasants in Cities: Readings in the Anthropology
Co.
ton: HoughtonMifflin
Delinquencyand Drift.New York:JohnWiley& Sons, Inc.
Social Structure and Anomie. Social Theory and Social Structure.
Glencoe: The Free Press.
Violenceby YouthGangs and YouthGroups as a CrimeProblemin Major
AmericanCities. WashingtonD.C.: U.S. Departmentof Justice.
The RumbleThis Time. PsychologyToday,10, May.
MonthlyLabor Review
1974
Conditions of Mexicans in California.IN Readings on La Raza: The
TwentiethCentury,M.S. Meir,and F. Rivera (eds.). New York: Hilland
Wang. 178-201.
Moore, J. W.
1976
1977
Mexican Americans(2nd ed.) Englewood Cliffs,New Jersey: Prentice
Hall.
The Chicano Pinto Research Project: A Case Study in Collaboration.
Journalof Social Issues 33:144-58.
Moore, J. W. et al.
1978
Homeboys: Gangs, Drugs, and Prison in the Barrios of Los Angeles.
Press.
Philadelphia:Temple University
Moore, J. W., J. D. Vigiland R. Garcia
in Gangs. Journalof Social Problems31(2):
1983
Residence and Territorially
182-194.
Morales,A.
1972
McWilliams,C.
1968
Ando Sangrando. (I am Bleeding). La Puente. California:Perspectiva
Publications.
NorthfromMexico-TheSpanish-SpeakingPeople of the UnitedStates.
New York:Greenwood Press.
CHICANO
Vigil
GANGS IN LOS ANGELES
73
National Commission for Employment Policy
1982
Hispanics and Jobs: Barriers to Progress. Washington, D.C.: National
Commission on Employment Policy.
Paz, O.
1961
Peattie, L. R.
1974
The Labyrinthof Solitude. New York: Grove Press, Inc.
The Concept of Marginality as Applied to Squatter Settlements. Latin
American Urban Research 4:101-109.
Perlman, J.
1976
The Myth of Marginality.Berkeley: Universityof California Press.
Penalosa, F.
1980
Chicano Bilingualism. Rowley, Massachusetts:
Plant, J. S.
1937
Personality and the Cultural Pattern. New York: Commonwealth Fund.
Poggie, J. J.
1973
Newbury House.
Between Two Cultures: The Life of an American Mexican. Tucson: The
Universityof Arizona Press.
Reckless, W. C. and S. Dinitz
1967
Pioneering with Self-Concept as a Vulnerability Factor in Delinquency.
Journal of Criminal Law, Criminology and Police Science 58:515-23.
Reisler, M.
1976
Roderick, K.
1982
By the Sweat of Their Brow. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press,
Inc.
Killings Drop but Unorthodox Gang Project Fights for Life. L.A. Times,
August 30.
Romo, R.
1982
East Los Angeles: History of a Barrio. Austin: Universityof Texas Press.
Rubel, A. J.
1965
The Mexican American Palomilla. Anthropological Linguistics 4:92-97.
Sanchez, G. S.
1967
Scheidlinger, S.
1952
Forgotten People: A Study of New Mexicans. Albuquerque, New Mexico:
Calvin Pub. Inc.
Psychoanalysis and Group Behavior. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, Inc.
Schermerhorn, R. A.
1970
Comparative Ethnic Relations. A Framework for Theory and Research.
New York: Random House.
Sellin, T.
1938
Culture Conflict and Crime. New York: Social Science Research Council.
Serrano, R.
1980
Barrio Dictionary. Bakersfield: California State University.
Shaw, C. and R. McKay
1942
Juvenile Delinquency and Urban Areas. Chicago: Universityof Chicago
Press.
74
URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY
VOL. 12(1), 1983
Short, J. F., Jr. and F. L. Strodtbeck
1967
Group Process and Gang Delinquency. Chicago: Universityof Chicago
Press.
Suttles, Gerald D.
1968
The Social Order of the Slum. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.
Stumphauzer, J. S., T. W. Aiken and E. Veloz
Behavioral Ecology of Chicano Gang Violence. Unpublished paper.
1978
Thrasher, F. M.
1963
The Gang. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.
Tittle, C. R., W. J. Villemez and D. A. Smith
1978
The Myth of Social Class and Criminality:An Empirical Assessment
the Empirical Evidence. American Sociological Review 43:643-56.
Torres, D. M.
1979
Tuck, R.
1956
of
Chicano Gangs in the East Los Angeles Barrio. California Youth AuthorityQuarterly 32(3):5-1 3.
Not With the Fist, Mexican-Americans in a Southwest City. New York:
Harcourt, Brace.
United States Commission on Civil Rights
Mexican Americans and the Administration of Justice in the Southwest.
1970
Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government PrintingOffice.
Valentine, C. A.and B. L. Valentine.
1970
Making the Scene, Digging the Action, and Telling It Like It Is: Anthropologists at Work in a Dark Ghetto. IN Afro-American Anthropology:
Contemporary Perspectives, N. E. Whitten and J. F. Szwed (eds.) New
York: The Free Press, 403-418.
Vigil, D.
1979
1980
Adaptation Strategies and Cultural Life Styles of Mexican American Adolescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 1 :375-92.
From Indians to Chícanos: A Sociocultural History. St.Louis, Mo.: C. V.
Mosby Co.[Reprinted and reissued as From Indians to Chícanos: The
Dynamics of Mexican Americani Culture. Porspect Heights, IL: Waveland
Press, Inc. 1984.]
Vigil, J. D. and J. Long
1981
Unidirectional or Nativist Acculturation? - Chicano
Achievement. Human Organization 40(3): 273-77.
Paths
to School
Villela, S. and S. Gastelum
1980
Los Cholos: Los "Cholos" De Culiacan: Transculturacion Chicana en
Bandas Juveniles de Sinaloa. Culiacan: Universidad Autonoma de
Sinaloa.
Whyte, William F.
1943
Street Corner Society. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.
Willis, P. E.
1977
Learning to Labour. England: Saxon House.
Wirth, L.
1938
Urbanism As a Way of Life. American Journal of Sociology 44:3-24.
Wolfgang, M., R. M. Figlio, and T. Sellin
1972
Delinquency in a Birth Cohort. Chicago: Universityof Chicago Press.
Vigil
Yablonsky,L.
1962
Yinger,J. M.
1960
75
The ViolentGang. New York:MacMillanCompany.
Contracultureand Subculture. AmericanSociological Review 25:625635.

One Response To In The Los Angeles Area

Transcription

Similar documents

Prison Gangs and Disruptive Groups

Sureño Norteño - Pioneer Trails

Kightlinger, Jeff 092214

MEERKAT

An expression of gratitude for all our moments.

28th - San Jose State University

Gangs in San Jose Powerpoint

arts district

April Newsletter - Colorado Springs School District 11

Los Angeles Times - David Kordansky Gallery