Review: Heart of Aztlan

I just finished reading Heart of Aztlan by Rudolfo Anaya. It sucks. But before you think I have some kind of bias let me tell you why.

I've read two other books by Rudolfo Anaya: Bless Me, Ultima and Alburquerque. I read the first one because I'd always heard it was good so I checked it out. And I read the other for a paper I did in college. I thought they were both good. Bless Me, Ultima, especially, has a very dreamy, poetic feel to it. It is a basic "boy grows up" novel told from a Chicano perspective. On the other hand, Alburquerque is more contemporary in setting and tone. It is a pretty straightforward novel with a protagonist who is a writer in Albuquerque, NM.

Both those novels have something to recommend them. So I have nothing against Rudolfo Anaya. But Heart of Aztlan has some big problems. I found myself constantly wishing it would end.

Quick plot summary: the story is about a Hispanic family who move from the rural areas into the barrio in Albuquerque. The time is the 1950s or early 60s. The main character is a young boy learning how to live life on the streets in the barrios and his dad is also a major character who becomes emasculated, so to speak, by his new environment.

First problem: the characters engage in dialogue which is unrealistic. If Anaya had written a masque or an epic he might've been able to get away with the really cheesy, stiff language some of his characters speak. It seems to me, the author had a socio-political agenda in writing this novel. Consequently, he makes the characters oftentimes speak set-pieces, not realistic dialogue. It's fine to have any kind of agenda you'd like but a novel or short story require verisimilitude. This is one of the major flaws in the novel.

Also, I had a problem with the cheesy "mythological" passages. Throughout the novel Anaya refers to an ersatz, Aztec-like mythology which is supposed to give some of the characters spiritual depth. For one thing, I think it would've made more sense to have them inspired by Catholic dogma and ritual. Considering the time, place, and culture it would make more sense to have people in the barrio seeking spiritual answers in the church, or even curandera-like superstitions, if you're going to write a realistic novel. But also, I just find that whole "Aztlan" mythology/ideology espoused by many in the Chicano movement very silly. But that could just be my own personal taste.

I felt like Anaya was trying to get some political/social/cultural ideas across in this novel. I say, write an essay. It is hard to incorporate political ideas in a work of fiction without immediately sounding foolish. But there are good writers out there who have done it: George Orwell (of course!), Jonathan Swift, etc. Anaya doesn't seem to be the kind of writer who can successfully incorporate political ideas into his fiction. He is trying too hard to make us think about political issues and not trying hard enough to get us involved in his story.

Now I think I'll have to go back and read the other two books of his I've read to see if I was in error in thinking them any good.