One Response to Mexican Urban Adaptation in the Los Angeles Area Author(S): James Diego Vigil Reviewed Work(S): Source: Urban Anthropology, Vol

Home , Chicana Rights Project, Cholo (subculture), Pinto (subculture)

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 Departmentof Anthropology and EthnicStudies Center Universityof SouthernCalifornia

ABSTRACT: Mexican adaptationto urbanareas in the UnitedStates has resulted in the rise of youthstreet groups and gangs. These Chicano groups/gangsare as- sessed withina frameworkwhich examines ecological, economic, cultural,and psychologicalaspects of that adaptation. Since the 1920s, Mexican immigrants and theirchildren have typicallysettled in the poorer,neglected sections of the city, called barrios,and workedin menial,low-paid industries. Changing from traditional was made more these Mexicanpatterns to those of Anglo-America problematicby livingand workingconditions. Moreover, urban social institutions,especially the social control specialists, e.g., schools and law enforcement,often became sources of additionalproblems in the enculturationand socialization process of these immigrants'children. Urban adaptation was exacerbated by these factors, and affectedcultural assimilation and acculturation.Many youths who were unable to findan identityin eitherMexican or Anglo cultureevolved a cholo culturalstyle which aided adaptation to the street. It is this culturaltransitional phenomenon whichaids our understandingof the formationof gangs, forthrough the decades what began as a "boy" gang problemeventually evolved intoa gang subculture. For manycholos the gang subcultureprovides a source of identityand avenues for personal fulfillment.With continuing Mexican immigration,and the existence of a gang subculturewith its own enculturationand socialization patterns,the whole process of Mexican adaptationto urbanlife requires reexamination.

Chicano youthgang activitiesin the barrios(neighborhoods) of Los Angeles and otherurban areas of the southwesternUnited States have for years attractedconsiderable attentionin the public media. Not surpris-

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 46 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

ingly,this attention usually has focused on criminalbehavior attributed to these and othergang youth:gang fights,shootings, and stabbings,rob- beries, burglaries,and illicitdrug traffic(Roderick 1982). Chicano gang members (who oftencall themselves cholos? also frequentlyhave problems on a dailybasis withschool officialsand police,which further contrib- utes to theirreputation as a source of urban disorder.Although gang memberstypically constitute a small minorityof the youngin a barrio,their high visibilityand the relativelack of media coverage of less dramatic barrioactivities has tended both to create a negativeimage of barrioresidents generally,and to obscure the conditionsgiving rise to the gangs themselves.As Oscar Lewis has pointedout in his introductorydiscussion of the "cultureof poverty"in FIVE FAMILIES (1959), such media stereo- typingof poor communitiesis commonplace (see, e.g., Suttles 1968, Mo- rales 1972). The concept "multiplemarginality" can be utilizedto explore and integratethe diverse influenceswhich have shaped the formationand persistence of these gangs, as well as the attitudesand behaviorof the gangs' members. Multiplemarginality incorporates the effectsof barrio life,low socioeconomic status, cultureconflict, and impaireddevelopment of self-esteemwhich arise in a complexof ecological, socioeconomic,cultural,and psychologicalfactors. Employingthe concept in the study of Chicano youthgangs willavoid the problemsassociated withsingle-cause discussions of previousgang studies; Cartwrightet al. (1975:25-45) have provideda general reviewof such studies in the second chapter of their theoreticalstudy of juvenilegangs. The concept of multiplemarginality will permitthe developmentof what Geertz has called a "thickdescription," that is, a descriptionof cumulativeand combinativeinfluences which ac- count forsimilarities and variationswithin and across groups. Marginality, as used here, reflectsthe situationsand conditionsto which Mexicans have been subjected (Dickie-Clark1966) in theiroverall adaptation to Americanurban life. It has been suggested thatthe concept of marginality obscures the crucialimportance of the exploitationof lowerclass workers in low-payingjobs as a factorin a capitalistsystem (Peattie 1974; Perlman 1976). It is certainlythe case that Mexican and Mexican-Americanlabor has been importantin the developmentof southwesternUnited States economic enterprises(farm workers in agribusiness, for instance ). Yet the workersin question have virtuallybeen excluded fromthe mainstreamof urban decision making.Though they have become marginalto the interests of societyat large,they still function as integralmembers of society's economic enterprises.Their perception of this is maintainedby significant structuralfeatures in the environmentto whichthey adapt (Kapferer1978; Lommitz1 977). Local probationand police officialshave estimatedthat as manyas 400 youthgangs currentlyexist in Los Angeles County(Decker 1 983), and at least halfof these are Chicano gangs. There are also, of

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 47

course, many gangs located in communitiesin the counties adjacent to Los Angeles. The gangs range fromthose whichdate fromthe 1940s, for which the existence over time of more than a dozen identifiableage- graded cohorts has been established (Moore et al. 1978), to recently formedgroups. An individualgang's active membershipmight number as highas several hundredor as few as 10 or 12. The newer,smaller gangs are typicallyfound in suburban areas, whilemost of the older,larger gangs 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 model and a stimulusfor gang formationin other areas, and has become a major socializationfactor within and around the barriosoccupied by such gangs. Chicano youthgangs in Los Angeles were initiallyformed by second generationMexican Americans,and the core membershipcontinues to be primarilycomprised of nativeborn youths. The gangs emerged con- temporaneouslywith the subculturaldevelopments which were called pachuctf and gang membersin many ways epitomizedpachuco characteristics.That subculturehas over timeevolved intothe cholo lifestyle,and again, gang membersare the primeparticipants in the dress, speech, behavior,and attitudepatterns which compristfthat label. The cholo life-style (likethe pachuco stylewhich preceded it) representsa syncreticincorpo- rationof elementsfrom Mexican and Americanyouth cultures, as well as values and attitudesshaped by adaptations to the problemsassociated withlife in the barrios.The gang itself,over time,has become partof the barrioenvironment to whichmore recentimmigrants must acculturate.In- creasinglyin recentyears, both immigrantyouths from Mexico and thirdgeneration Mexican Americans have become peripherallyinvolved with streetgangs. The Chicano PintoResearch Project(1979, 1981) has found small numbersof thirdgeneration Chícanos, who are themselvesoffspring of gang members,involved in 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. Ac- culturation,of course, affects virtuallyeveryone to some degree in a multiculturalregion such as the greater Los Angeles metropolitanarea. Members of differentgenerations are affecteddifferently, however, espe- ciallyin immigrantpopulations. Second generationoffspring of Mexican immigrantscomprise a generationwhose acculturationlevel may be regarded as transitional,in that many cannot fullyaccept eithertheir parents' or the majorityculture. This absence of a secure cultural(and personal)identity increases the attractivenessof the gang subculturefor a small, but significant,minority of barrio youths. Age-graded "klikas" (cliques, or cohorts)and (in older gangs) verticallines of organizationlend

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 48 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

some sense of order to their often confused interpersonal interactions (Klein 1971); and the gang's support for criminalbehavior affords avenues for prestige and profitto those who have sharply curtailed chances of ob- taining meaningfuljobs (Moore et al. 1978; Chicano Pinto Research Proj- ect 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-revolu- tionary (1910-1920) period, immigrationhas been the major factor in a twenty-eight-foldgrowth in the Mexican-American population. Their adaptation, and its social and cultural consequences, has taken differentdirec- tions 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 their standard of living. Immigrantsof diverse ethnic backgrounds, especially in the late nine- teenth 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 cur- rent 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

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 49

historicallyrooted dimensionsof any group's adaptation must be considered. Underclass lifeand culturaldistinctiveness among most ethnicmi- noritypopulations have made forthese commonexperiences: schools and otherinstitutional authorities denigrate their culture, first and second-gen- erationsoften come intoconflict with each otherover culturalloyalty, and many individualsundergo interpsychicconflict over theirethnic identity (Feldsteinand Costello 1974). Thus, to understandthe emergence and continuanceof Chicano youthgangs, one must beginwith an examination of Mexican adaptation (or in some cases, maladaptation)as the starting point and trace the varied social and culturalconsequences of theirre- sponse. The gang phenomena revolves around the underclass role in whichMexicans have foundthemselves in the UnitedStates. Though vio- lentstreet gangs are not invariablya partof lifein underclass communities (Whyte1943), theyare frequentlyso and especially when status is com- bined withlong term racial discrimination and cultureconflict (Wolfgang et al. 1972; Bogardus 1943). Many immigrantfamilies in urban areas began with low-skilledand low-payingjobs, which necessitated settlementin substandard housing,usually located 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 workingconditions were accompanied by othersociocultural and sociopyschologicalanxieties and difficultiesfor these immigrants.As inthe cases of otherimmigrant groups (Feldsteinand Costello 1974; Shaw and McKay 1942), schools and law enforcementoften worked to hinderrather than help Mexican culturaladaptation.Mexican culturehistorically has not been positivelyperceived by members of the host culture,and additionallyMexicans have also often been viewed as a differentracial group, resultingin additionalprejudice and discriminationagainst them(Vigil 1980). The ranksof barrioenclaves recentlyhave swelled withnew, recent Mexican and other Latino immigrants. Most of the immigrantsencounter poor workingand livingconditions and undergo adaptation problems much as those in the past did. They have also encountered many Mexican customs, moreover,trans- formedas a resultof the transitionfrom rural to urbanlifeways. For example, the Mexicanpalomilla (age-cohorting) tradition (Rubel 1965), whichis an adolescent life-stage socialization pattern similar to those found throughoutthe world(Cohen 1968), earlyunderwent some alterationsin the urbansetting. The palomillacustom has continuedto provideMexican adolescents withmany pro-social patterns, such as the tendencyfor co- hortmembers to retaincamarada (comrade) relationshipswell intoadult- hood, and even old age (Horowitz 1982). On the other hand, urban conditionsand pressures have generated stress and strainfeatures that markthe transformedpalomilla custom. Youthgroups eventuallyevolved into gangs, with a firmlyrooted gang subculture. This subculture has

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 50 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

evolved its own set of socializationand enculturationpractices whichaf- fectbarrio youth (Torres 1979). Over the last several years,the authorhas participatedin and observed youthsand youth-relatedactivities in numerous barriosthroughout Los Angeles and adjacent counties. He has interviewed Mexican-Americanyouths in each of these, collectingscores of life historiesand hundreds of completed survey questionnairesfrom gang membersand fromyouths not affiliatedwith gangs.3 As a frequentconsul- tant and research contributorto the Chicano Pinto Research Project (C.P.R.P.), a collaborativeteam of academic and community-basedre- searchers,he has been givenready access to theirinterviews with tecatos (habitualdrug users) and pintos(former prison inmates) and theirrelatives, as well as to projectfindings (Moore 1977; Moore et al. 1978; C.P.R.P. 1979, 1981).4 Additionaldata has come fromthe author's participationin several advisoryboards relatedto youthproblems in the Mexican-Ameri- can community.Information from these sources, as wellas fromthe publications cited in the text,form the basis forthe followingdescriptions.

Ecological Aspects

Researchers of the Chicago School of urban sociology have pro- vided 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 of earlyMexican immigrationto Los Angeles show thatthese new residentssettled in neglected and inferiorlocations (Fuller 1920; MonthlyLabor Review 1974; Gamio 1 969A). A series of studies directedby EmoryBogardus (a sociologistat the Universityof SouthernCalifornia who had been trainedat the Univer- sityof Chicago) underscorethe importanceof ecological factorsin shaping the lives of these newcomers. These investigationsnoted that areas which were initiallybypassed in the developmentof urban Los Angeles (the "flats" or lowlands; the areas underneathbridges; and the unde- sirable gulches, ravines,and hollows) subsequentlywere developed with poor street planningand limitedpublic services (Gustafson 1940; Ginn 1947). Many of these "interstices,"as theywere labeled by ecologically orientedresearchers, became marginalareas of the city,in which many social problemsoriginated and grew.While some of these observers' con- clusions, especiallyon crimeand delinquency,are overstated,they seem to reflecta general consensus on the problematicqualities of these neglected interstices,including emergent gangs. Bogardus had earlier warned that "these gangs are not yet of the fixedtype" and the cityhad

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 51

timeyet to "solve its boy gang problemwhile it is stillcomparatively easy to cope withit" (1926:89). But, elsewhere, he too stresses the interaction of social and ecological factorsfor Mexican enclaves in Los Angeles and southern California:"Sometimes fifty,a hundred,or more familiesare foundliving in a segregated section of the cityor small town whichlacks adequate social organization"(1934:19). Similarly,Moore (1978), in sum- marizingthe resultsof interviewswith elderly residents of an area further east than those mentionedabove, foundthat one of the barriosof East Los Angeles, El Hoyo Maravilla,was firstestablished on terrain(hills and gullies) that had been bypassed by urban expansion. "Lots in the tract were very cheap; its most conspicuous featurewas its unsuitabilityfor houses" (p. 56). Barrioenclaves, then,can be traced in part to the fact 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 instance,Mexican immigrants, like other ethnic groups, gravitated to com- munitieswhich reflected their own customs and patterns,for this lessened the effectsof cultureshock and gave thema sense of security.The negative treatmentimmigrants received fromthe host culturalgroup also con- tributedto thistendency. In combination,these influencesled to the spatial and physical separation of immigrantsettlers fromthe surrounding communityand to theiroccupying distinctly older homes and neighborhoods. The commonimplications of the phrase "across the tracks" (or irri- gation canals, highways,river, or freeway)reflect this physicalseparation and visualdifference. In addition,most barriosare characterizedby homes thatare smallerin size, withmore people per household; and are generally lackingin adequate publicservices. Los Angeles has a had a barriosince the nineteenthcentury, located just east of the town center(Griswold del Castillo 1980; Romo 1982). Beforelarge scale immigrationin thiscentury, therewere also colonias or pockets of Mexican-Americanresidents in out- lyingrural districts. Some of them,such as Los Nietos and Cucamonga, date fromearly Mexican ranchdays. By the 1920s and 1930s, these urban and ruralbarrios were filledwith newcomers and new barrios had been established. Most were of the interstitialvariety in the urban area, such as El Hoyo Maravilla.Rural colonias also burgeoned,and were usually situated next to the work place. Railroad section workersand their familiesrooted themselves in Watts, and agriculturalworkers in Cucamon- ga, and so on. Whetherold or new, urbanor rural,all of themshared the qualities noted earlier:spatial separation and visiblyinferior housing. With the expansion and growthof older barriosand the developmentof new ones, concommitantwith the spread of metropolitanLos Angeles,ecological conditionsworsened. Withintwo decades of his warningof a "boy gang problem,"Bogardus (1943) was writingof the urgentneed to recog-

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 52 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

nize the problemsgenerated by these settlementpatterns. By then,the federalgovernment had initiatedhousing projects for low-income communitiesin the Los Angeles area. East Los Angeles alone now has fivesuch projects. Manyof these have become barriosin theirown right.Although intended to promote social welfarethe projects were engulfed by the largerbarrio world that existed all around them. Gustafson(1940) recog- nized this problem,in part, at the inceptionof one of these projects: "...The new...residential area thus appears in immediateproximity to an area in process of disorganization.The influencewill be salutaryin tendency, but...rental rates... will limit occupancy to highclass labor,small sala- riedfolk, and minorexecutives. The social distance existingbetween such residentsand the heterogeneousinhabitants further north will be too great forthe maximumcommunity benefit. Furthermore, residents... will be rent- ers, not home owners. As such the communitywill represent a stage of communitydevelopment lacking in community spirit and indicatingthe first stage of sociologicaldecline" (p. 112). Prophetically,the tractis presently the territoryof one of the biggestgangs in the area. Ecological conditions in the barriosof Los Angeles have not gone unchanged,of course, since those neighborhoodswere firstestablished. More recenthousing developments offermore amenitiesthan those builtin the 1940s; and expansion of certainbarrios into adjacent workingclass neighborhoodshas improved the average levelof housing.Over the years,residents, even inthe earliest barrios,have oftenimproved their own housing,and paved roads, gas, water,power, and sewer services have been introduced.These changes notwithstanding,however, older and morerecent urban barrios in the area are contrastivein quality of residentialamenities to most otherareas of the city.In the meantime,new formsof suburban barrioshave also appeared in the greaterLos Angeles area. Some of these have developed in working-class tracthome neighborhoodswhere Chicanos have become second and thirdowners; othersrepresent formerly rural and semi-ruralcolo- nias 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 theirrural isolation. In time,the offspringof formerur- ban barrioresidents in the suburbs formedtheir own gangs in imitationof those existingin their previous neighborhoods and in reactionto the threat of aggressionfrom gangs in nearbycolonias. Manyof the colonias stillex- hibitsigns of underdevelopment,for example an absence of adequate sewer systems,major retailcenters, paved sidewalks, or adequate housing. The secondary suburbanbarrios are betterfitted than this,but being located in the older and less prosperous tractdevelopments, they often show signs of housingand facilitydeterioration. In sum, the firststage of urbanadaptation was characterizedby social and spatial isolation,and re-

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 53

sultantstrains and stress. Such livingconditions tended to disruptsocial networks,and are reflectiveof a largerphenomenon among the minority poor (Bryce-La Porte 1970; Eames and Goode 1973). As neglected, un- derservedsections of the large community,the barriotook on the appear- ance of an underdevelopedbackwash quarter. Suburban developments decades lateradded new barrios,some equallyas underdevelopedas the urban barrios,and others with somewhat better conditions(which still contrasted significantlywith adjacent neighborhoods).Interpersonal violence, robbery,alcohol and druguse became morecommon and crimeand criminalpatterns became an everydayconcern for barrioresidents and non-residentsalike. Althoughmost of the residents are law-abidingciti- zens, theyare undulyexposed to vices and anti-socialactivities, even if onlyas victims.Valentine and Valentine(1970) have noted a similarcourse of developmentin a black ghetto.This is particularlytrue for those thatare concentratedin densely populated,rapidly decaying areas (Clinard1960, 1968; Shaw and McKay 1942). Barrioresidents are aware of these vari- ations among barrios,and of the usuallymore salientdifference between barriosand otherneighborhoods (Achor 1978).

Socioeconomic Aspects

The small percentage of barrioyouth who become affiliatedwith a gang are generallymembers of the underclass. They are affectedby the economic hardshipsof this lifebefore enteringthe streets. Such socioeconomic difficultiesrelate to troubledfamilies, problems with schooling, limitedjob opportunities,and even dress styles.For most of thiscentury, a patternof Mexicans providinga cheap source of laborfor American indus- trieshas continued.Despite continuallabor strugglesto upgrade the status of Mexicanlaborers (Gomez-Quinones 1977; Arroyo1975; McWilliams 1968), manyMexicans have become permanentmembers of the American underclass. The record of Mexican immigrationpatterns clearly docu- ments the difficultiesof adaptation which result fromplacement in un- skilledlow-paying jobs (Gamio 1969a, 1969b; McWilliams1968; Galarza 1964; Moore 1976; Reisler1976). At present,Mexican-Americans still are far behindwhites on most socioeconomic indicators.In California,for example, the average Chicano familyincome is $16,140, compared to $20,175 forwhites. Similarly, only 55 percentof the nation's adult Chicano populationhas finishedhigh school, compared to 83 percent forwhites (Chicago Survey Reports 1979). The same status disparityis apparent in the factthat Chícanos are mostlyof the laboringclass (69 percentoverall, with29.2 percentof them in unskilledoccupations) (Chicano Survey Re- ports 1979). Moreover,these figuresexclude most of the undocumented

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 54 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

Mexican workersand familieswho are even worse off.Family life is often disruptedby the pressures of this unstable economic situation.Even beforelarge scale immigration,studies of Mexicans in Los Angeles noted the social repercussionsof this condition."The railroadCompany imported numerousfamilies of Mexicans withtheir expectations set on highwages. Frequentlythe men have lost theirwork, they cannot secure anotherjob, they cannot speak English,they become discouraged and take to drink- ing. 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 un- derminedsocial controlpractices; and this patterngrew in intensitywith subsequent immigrationto Los Angeles and its environs.Many families, especially those who had wage-earners that could not finda secure job, became confused,disoriented, and problem-ridden.Some parents today have problemsguiding and directingtheir own lives, much less those of theirchildren. As a result,children may go withoutadequate supervision. Lifehistories collected by the authorfrom gang membersreveal frequent accounts of wanderingthrough the neighborhoodalone forhours, as early as age nineor ten. Gang membersalso have a difficulttime in school, often laggingbehind classmates initiallyand theneventually dropping out all together(Haro 1976). Whilethe youths'generalized negative attitudes toward dominantsocial institutionsare in part responsiblefor this failure, it is clear thatour schools have historicallydone a poor job educatingMexi- cans (Carter and Segura 1978). In fact, institutionalizeddiscriminatory practices in the past have, in large part,shaped the youngsters'sceptical attitudes. Bogardus (1926) reportsone young student's response to a teacher's admonitionsabout the importance of education: "Look at Manuel,Miss M. He wentto highschool, and he worksin the brickyardthe same as Pedro, who neverwent to school" (p. 107). Whileteachers might stress the necessityof doing well in school, highschool counselors often systematicallyand explicitlydiscouraged Mexican-Americanstudents from aspiringto a college education. Similareducational practices existed in rural areas (Hill1928). The problemsengendered by familyand school dis- ruptionsare exacerbated by the generallypoor job marketfor minority youth(National Commission for Employment Policy 1982). Withfew sal- able skills,few recreationalopportunities, and no resources, manyof the youngsterssimply "hang-out" on the cornerwith friends who share a similar plight.Much of the timespent withfriends is of the normal,male social discourse and interactionsort, such as talkingabout upcoming social events and discussing personal trialsand tribulations.Large amounts of time,however, create opportunitiesfor the introductionof otheractivities, especially ifan older gang membermakes suggestions and leads them

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 55

intoexciting alternatives to dailymundane events. Gang memberswho secure a good job oftenrefocus and redirecttheir lives into more conven- tionalroutes; such a change in orientationis referredto as "maturingout" (Matza 1964:22-26). Contemporaryevidence on hard-coreadult, former gang membersindicates that theyhad a poor job historyfrom the beginning of theirwork histories(Moore et al. 1978; C.P.R.P. 1979). Most of theirjobs were of the secondary level,non-career, without fringe benefits, and seasonal. Such workleaves manydissatisfied and in constantsearch of alternativepaths, too oftenillegal ones. On the other hand, interviews withother former gang members (fromthe same age and areas as the hard-coreadults) showed that they regarded havingfound a stable, pri- maryoccupation as a life-turningevent. Theircareer involvementgradually drew them away fromthe gang and all of the more personallydysfunc- tionalactivities. Missing that initial job opportunity,becoming more deeply involvedwith gang activities,and eventuallyspending time in jails, have made the hard-coremembers even less preparedfor good jobs. Many of themhave become "revolving-door"violators, in and out of jail forone of- fense or another(Moore et al. 1978). Social deviance is, of course, found withinall socioeconomic classes (Tittle,Villemez, and Smith1978), espe- ciallyin nonviolent,less aggressive crimessuch as in "whitecollar" crime, but the characteristicsand consequences of deviantbehavior are related to status. Membersof the lowerstrata who adopt a lifeof crimedo so in somewhat predictableways and withpredictable consequences. Theirac- tivities,especially if they become criminals,usually cause more antipathy because of the blatant,public nature of the incidents,for it is generallyan unsophisticatedfrontal assault (robbery,burglary, shoplifting, mugging) whichinvolves some riskon theirpart. Because of the risk,particularly in committingan act where the chances forwitnesses are increased, they are also apprehended more easily,sometimes at the scene of the crime. The fact that theylack the resources foran adequate defense increases the probabilityof a ready,secure conviction.Even the dress standards of the gang members(and manybarrio youths who are not gang members) reflectthe relativepoverty among barriodwellers. The basic styleis fairly constant (a good, warm shirt,durable pants, hardyshoes) and thus the demands fora wide, assorted wardrobeare avoided. Khakipants, forex- ample, became fashionableafter tens of thousands of Chicano WorldWar II and Korean vets or theiryounger relatives began to wear these armyis- sues. Similarly,in a later period, the "county" jeans acquired free of charge by those incarceratedevolved into the most fashionable in the barriodress code. In each of these instances,functionality was the corner- stone to dress and the styleeventually became the uniform.(This is not to say that the cholo is a poor dresser, as most of themtake great pride in wearingbright white tee-shirts and in personallystarching and ironingtheir

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 56 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY 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 stylefrom gov- ernmentsources (militaryand penal) is but one instanceof how dominant society influencesthe barrio,even in dress habits.

Sociocultural Aspects

The pressures thatimmigrants toiled with as a resultof livingin marginalareas and workingat marginaljobs broughtsevere social and cultural strains.The urbanAmerican culture to whichthey had to adapt was frag- mentedand devoidof a sense of community.Remarkably, many of the im- migrantswere able to instilltheir gemeinshaft in manybarrios to sustain a semblance of social stability,although even in such cases many Mexican customs and habits would stillundergo abrupt and oftendestabilizing al- terations.Most MexicanAmericans have been able to make the transition, albeitwith uneven progress. For those thatare able to assimilate,it is often a matterof exchangingone set of social and culturalbehaviors for another;many have done this.On the otherhand, thereare manymore who surviveby mixingelements of Mexican and Americancultures into their adaptation strategies. Thus, the Mexican-Americancommunity must be seen in terms of level of subculture.A subcultureis a cohesive cultural system withina larger nationalculture and a broad subculturalsystem may itselfbe furtherdivided into smaller subcultures. In thisinstance, the subcultureof Mexicans generallyincludes thatof the transitionalgenera- tion (cholos) and finallythe subcultureof gangs is contained withinthe cholo subculture.Culture conflict begins on the firstlevel vis-a-visAnglo and Mexican culture,affecting almost everyonefrom the minoritygroup. On the transitionallevel, for those Mexicans who have difficultyadapting, the conflictincreases in intensity.The culminationof the firsttwo levels is a gang subculture,which developed in partfrom some second generation Chícanos who were unable to clearlyidentify with and develop strongat- tachmentsto eitherAnglo or Mexican culture.A streetculture thus slowly evolved: a subculturetwice removedfrom the largerentity, the subculture of Mexicans. It is this subculturewhich most reflectsthe intensemultiple conflictsof the Mexican-Americanpeople. Cultureconflict and its effects on socioculturaladaptation are frequentaspects of immigrant/hostsociety contact and occur all over the world.Many types of syncreticinnovations have arisen in the process, especially in regard to linguisticblendings (Hymes 1971; Penalosa 1980). The mentalanguish that resultsfrom ad- justmentto competingand conflictingcultural codes, however,is welldoc- umented (Shermerhorn1970; Mangin 1970; Frazier 1957; Vigil 1980; Poggie 1973). Wherethe culturaltransition is impeded,making individuals

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 57

even more marginalto the dominantculture, an alternativeis generated wherebysecond generationyouths begin to develop theirown lifestyle. The culturalconflict which second generationMexican Americansof the 1930s and 1940s were undergoingled to the creation of their own subculturalstyle (Bogardus 1929, 1943). One variantof that style (bor- rowed 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, large shouldered coats tapered at the bottom,a watch chain,double-soled shoes, and broad-brimmedfedora) that markedthem as urban "cool" (Bogardus 1943; McWilliams1968; Tuck 1956). They even concocted theirlanguage, sometimes referredto as "Spanglish" because it mixedSpanish and Englishpatterns; in most cases it was a con- tinuationof calo, a colloquial speech styleor pidginizationof the Spanish language begun earlier(Barker 1972; Hinojas 1975). In subsequent decades, the process of culturalinnovation has continuedwith new generations of youth. By the 1960s and early 1970s, the style that evolved became knownas cholo. The presentday cholo has in some ways continued the pachuco tradition,primarily in the use of calo speech patterns (Serrano 1980), and has changed the dress style to khaki pants, plaid, pendletonshirt, deck shoes, and a watch cap or bandana. Local law en- forcementofficials have tended to view each of these innovativecultural styles as indicatingsocial deviance, and local media have propagated these impressions,frequently with exaggerated descriptionsintended to ridiculethe dress and speech styles. Thus, although most "pachucos" and most "cholos" (i.e., most of those whose dress and speech patterns markedthem as membersof a culturallytransitional generation) were not involvedin destructiveanti-social activities, the general public has been encouraged to view theircultural styles as a manifestationof criminalgang behavior(Tuck 1956; McWilliams1968; Miller1975; Miller1977; Baker 1979; Johnston1979). Culture conflictdid of course create an acute sense of marginalityfor many. A culturallymarginal person is "the product of a groupor groups whichhas defineda certainlife situation in a manner differentfrom that of the group judging his conduct. A normalresponse fromthe person's pointof view becomes abnormalin the eyes of the latter group" (Sellin 1938:43). Yinger's use of contraculture,especially in the Chicano case, also appropriatelydefines the gang subculture;other writ- ers have used other terms, such as oppositional culture,in discussing similarpoints (Willis1977). "In a contraculture...the conflictelement is central;many of the values, indeed, are specificallycontradictions of the values of the dominant culture" (Yinger 1960:629; emphasis added). Derbyshire(1968:101) has noted this tendency among Mexican Ameri- cans; and the same trendhas also been noted in non-barrio,working class

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 58 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

suburbanareas (Vigil1979; Burielet al. 1982). Two social institutionshave playeda pivotalrole in the lifeof the childrenof immigrantsand in the con- flictwhich has generated the marginalstatus of so manyof them.One is the schools, whichearly researchers noted as a problemfor the second generationof MexicanAmericans: schools generallyhave failedto accom- modate the culturallydifferent (Bogardus 1929; Sanchez 1967). The other is law enforcement.Teachers and police officers,as school and streetspe- cialists supervisingchildren's daytime arenas of activity,are society's pri- maryagents of social control.What children do not learnin the classroom, theylearn on the streets. For many,it appears thatthe streets have taken the lead in this regard. Law enforcementpersonnel have 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 frictionalsocial interaction,thus underminingthe dynamicsof ad- aptationalstrategies. In large part,this hostilitystems fromthe historical legacy of police/communityrelations that started and has persistedon a confrontationalroute (Acuna 1981; Vigil1980). Over the years, this situation has bred an over-policingbarrio pattern, often leading to the "label- ing" of even law abidingresidents as anti-socialand criminal.Living in the barriotends to draw more police attention,regardless of whetheran indi- vidual is a deviantor not (Morales 1972; UnitedStates Commissionon CivilRights 1970). As a result,many who appear to be cholo are inaccu- ratelyperceived as gang members,and any youngsterliving in the barriois apt to be considered a gang member.Youth activitiesin the schools and on the streets,of course, revolvearound a broaderbackdrop of socioeconomic status. Underclass status often affects what is learned in the schools and on the streets, especially given the marginaltreatment and situationof Mexican Americans.Merton (1949), in addressing the social and culturalstrains of an underclass lifeand how this conditioncontrib- utes 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/goals discrepancyhas been enlarged upon by,for instance, Cloward and Ohlins(1960); and Moore (1978) has applied the constructto research involvingChícanos in East Los Angeles. Alienatedyouths whose education and occupational prospects seem to preclude themfrom what Choen has called "the respectable status system" face severe problemsin establishing for themselves a social identity. "The delinquentsubculture deals withthese problemsby providingcriteria of status whichthese childrencan meet" (Cohen 1955: °1). The Chicano gang subculturehas an integrallogic of its own and a sense of community

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 59

whichattracts and socializes manyyouths; and "once established,such a subculturalsystem may persist,but not by sheer inertia.It may achieve a lifewhich outlasts that of the individualswho participatedin its creation, but onlyso long as itcontinues to 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 "becoming a man," and thisis especiallyproblematic for culturallymarginal youths. Bloch and Neideroffer(1958), usingexamples from various societies, have emphasized the role of urban gangs in this process. Burtonand Whiting(1961:94), discussing the cross-culturalassoci- ation between adolescent initiationrites for males and conditions conducive to cross-sex identificationproblems, have added that it is "clear that the gang is an institutionwith a functionsimilar to that of initiation...in those societies withconflict in sex identity."Ecological pressures and underclass status, in combinationwith the effectsof culture conflict,as noted earlier,have generated reduced parentalcontrol and en- hanced the attractionof streetactivities for many barrio adolescents. The adult male's parentalrole in the household has particularlybeen attenu- ated; infact, father-absent households are relativelycommon, and dispro- portionatelyso forthe familiesof gang members.Boys in such situations are keenlyaware of the absence of appropriatemale models withwhich to identify.One twenty-year-oldgang member,in recountinghis lifehistory in an interviewwith the author,put it thisway: "Not too manyof myfriends had a father.When anyone did, we would go over to theirplace and hope he (the father)would take us someplace." Anotherinformant, a fifteen- year-oldfrom East Los Angeles, specificallyrecalled his dramatizationof the shiftfrom maternal control to peer associations withthe gang: "When I wentto grammarschool, mymother used to comb myhair and parted it down the middle.When I wentto juniorhigh I took the comb fromher and combed myhair straight back and was cholo likethe rest." Where the father is present,and involvedin the youth's socialization,he is in many cases a productof the gang subculturehimself. That subculturein part is a reforgedcombination of the traditionalMexican palomillacustom of adolescent age cohorts and the complex of culture values known as machismo.There are as manypositive machismo traits (strong work ethic, responsibilityfor family and friends,and patientcourage against seemingly insurmountableobstacles) but street lifehas especially nurturedan emphasis on masculine aggressiveness, dominance,and boastfulassertion of individualand group pride.In combinationwith the limitedopportunities forself-expression that pervade the barrio(physical, social, cultural,intel- lectual,and otherwise)this emphasis all too oftenresults in behaviorthat is destructiveboth to self and others. Whileaggressive, violentbehavior, for example, is socially sanctioned on the footballfield, it is not on the

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 60 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

streets; but manystreet-wise youth have difficultystaying in school, much less joiningorganized sports. Streetfighting has sometimes been an ave- nue to success forbarrio youngsters (as well as otherurban populations) who have parlayedthat skill into a prize fightingcareer. More often,of course, it results simplyin injury,even deaths, and involvementwith the criminaljustice system. The underlyingvalues, however,are pervasive in the cholo subculture,and especially in the gangs. Youngermembers ob- tain them fromolder membersfunctioning as father-surrogates,or even fromtheir own 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 told me to go back out and not come back untilI fought back and stopped actinglike a sissy. I feltfunny inside because I thought he would comfortme withwords like- 'What's the matter,hijo?'" In sum- mary,the Chicano gang subcultureshares withthose of otherethnic immigrantgroups an originin underclass economics and marginalecological conditions;and likethe gang subculturesof othergroups, it providesindi- viduals withmeans for facing such factors as cultureconflict, unstable familysituation, urban pressures, and adolescent identitycrisis (Yablonsky 1962; Short and Strodtbeck 1967; Kendis and Kendis 1976). Chicano gangs are distinct,however, in experiencing,continuing waves of Mexican immigrationin this century.Mexican immigrantsin Americanurban areas are thus subjected to socialization and enculturationprocesses of a deeply rootedsubculture. Adaptations strategiesare stronglyaffected by these factors,and have especiallyaltered the process of culturalacquisi- tionand retentionfor the new immigrants.This resultsin new generations of cholos, withsome individualsin each groupgravitating toward gang so- lutionsto streetlife. Enculturation and socializationinto a gang culturehas become an aspect of culturalconflict for immigrant's children. The gang subculture has thus persisted and grown, reaching beyond the urban barriosof its originto the suburbs; whilethe cholo subcultureof whichit is a part has spread even further,to such bordertowns as Mexicaliand Ti- juana on the Mexican side.

Sociopsychological Aspects

The factors outlined above created the conditions for the gang subculture.The resultantpersonal pressures, anxieties,and frustrations have founda vehiclefor expression in thissocial unitand an outletfor anger and hostilityamong youngmales. The gang lifestyle has functionedto routinizeand stabilizea marginalexistence forsome cholos. A complexof norms,beliefs, and procedureshave evolvedand now operate to socialize

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 61

barrioyouth into a gang. Externalfactors such as underclass and racial discriminationcontributed to initiatingthe subculture,and these factors stillplay a major role in maintainingit, but the gang youth's internalized barrio patterns now also support the maintenance of the gangs. The barrioteenager who becomes involvedin destructiveand self-destructive behavior is only mirroringthe life around him. As Plant (1937:18) has noted, "ifit is truethat the triumphsand tragedies of the streetflow into and become a part of the child,then all programsof personalitychange must manage somehow to change the street." Individualswho are multi- ply marginalto Americanurban society also oftenprobably experience a multiple,complex sense of inferiority(e.g., concerningwhere they live, what they do, who they are, and why and how they got there). Such poorlyintegrated, conflictual self-images, quite oftennegative, collectively produce a group patternwhich helps to alleviatestress and develop chan- nels foraffective expression. As an example, a common sense of frustra- tion 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 barrioriot of 1975. Casa Blanca barriois in the cityof Riverside,an area about sixty miles southeast of Los Angeles. The riotby young and old, male and fe- male residentswas against the police. Participantsreported that the action,which lasted forseveral days, was based on frustrationand anger at theirshared miseries,including underclass treatmentand especiallypolice harassment.This multiplesense of inferiorityis the outcome of a cumula- tive process. For some, itmay begin withbirth in a barrio.While a barrio's socioculturalmilieu provides many withthe acquisitionof a positiveself- concept, there are also numerous cases where practicallyevery imagin- able thing works to assure a poor self-image(e.g., poor home, low income,disrupted family life, and culturaldissolution). Such backgrounds often generate the types of gang members who are fearless "locos" (crazies). The accumulation of parental physical or emotional neglect, abuse fromolder streetchildren, punitive educational incidents,and poor models to emulate has builtup in them an innerrage, leading to an early "social death." The childfeels he is worthlessbecause of his experience, and consequentlysees littlevalue in followingsociety's norms. Otherex- periencesalso helpto engendera self-imageconflict. The social avoidance thatdominant group members practice is oftencontributory (Reckless and Dinitz1967), especially in social contacts withpublic authorities(such as in schools). Whileadolescence is a marginalsituation for all youth,a type of betwixtand between role ambivalence,it is additionallyproblematic for barrioyouth who bringto this growthprocess otherinternalized sources of marginality.Peer group pressure is unusuallyinstrumental in thisstage of lifefor most modern western people. The peer group, especially if a

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 62 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

rootedsubcultural tradition, is an integralpart of it,often becomes the sta- bilizingforce with which to allyand identifyoneself, as ifa sum of troubled, personally segmented individualsfind security in numbers (Horowitz 1974:246). Many patternedactivities of the gang subcultureprovide personal avenues forfulfillment, including: (1) Recruitmentand initiation;(2) goals and roles; (3) strivingsfor rank; and (4) positive self-concept (Cartwrightet al. 1975). These featuresare embedded in group psycho- logicalprocesses whichfunction to provideprotection, security, and affec- tion;positive personal ties; shared ¡deals and interests;climate of equality and justice; symbolicgroup ceremonialsand activities;and common enemies outside of the group(Scheidlinger 1952). The patternof recruitment and initiationis a relativelysimple matter. Generally,eligibility for recruitmentis based on whetherone was raised in the barrio.There are also instanceswhere an individualwould grow up in several barrios,since some familieschange residences quite often;however, the barriosocial- izationexperience remainsessentially the same. Most youthsare able to avoid or refuse induction.Others get involvedonly in a peripheralway, such as at partiesor less demandinggang affairs.For those barrioyoung- sters thatspend a good partof timein the street,however, there is a natu- ral social settingwhich encourages intimacywith neighbors at an early age. Spontaneous and usuallyharmless, mischief often becomes the first in a long bondingsequence where mutualtrust among youngchildren is established. By the age of eightor nine,many youngsters already know that theybelong to a barrio,even becomingknowledgeable about territo- rialboundaries (Moore, Vigil,and Garcia 1983). The exposure to gang lore may even begin much earlier:one older gang member,during a Chicano Pinto Research Project interview,playfully suggested that the interviewer ask his five-year-oldson what barriohe was from.The child puffedhis chest and responded, "I'm fromWhite Fence." There are many other "pre-gang" learninginstances of thisnature. Positive personal ties which allow forfeelings of affectionand securityagainst common enemies outside of the barrio(or group)become established. Gang initiationis the first group ritualto affirmpersonal allegiance and identity.It occurs just priorto or duringa child's years in juniorhigh school, although(especially with non-residentsof the barrio)it may occur much later (Moore, Vigil,and Garcia 1983). Initiationtypically involves acceptance of a physicalbeating, providingone witha group audience to witness his individualbravery and courage. Some gangs referto the initiationceremony as "jumpingin," for several gang membersparticipate in it.(In previousyears, the custom was to beat up someone ifthey wanted to leave the gang. Today,it is bothfor entrance and exit.) Initiationsvary in stylefrom one barrioto another,or withinklikas (cliques, age-cohorts)of a barrio,but the rationaleis essen- tiallythe same. Because conflictwith other barrios is so common,there is

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 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 theirfuture gang loyalty and dedication by taking the punishment unflinchingly.Several members have told this author that "jumping in" was a way of demon- strating 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 it was 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 hospi- tal, 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 abbre- viated 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 affect gang 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,for example), 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 partially reflects 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

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 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 responsi- bilityof making sure the younger cohorts are properly socialized. This fic- tive 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 initiated youth 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 as- sumed 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 living up to the rules, group sanctions are invoked, usually subjecting the violator to name-calling reflecting his in- fraction. 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 their life,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 brighterindi- viduals. Helping one's homeboys with advice and emotional support dur-

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 65 ingstressful moments, and doingit with apparent unselfish dedication, is a way of gainingrecognition and shaping a reputation.It also giventhem an opportunityto develop and demonstratetheir leadership abilities in precar- ious or dangerous situationswhere decisiveness and intelligenceare val- ued. Often,however, this has led to destructiveand debilitativebehavior. Locura (quasi-controlledinsanity), for instance, and the highlyprized vato loco (crazy dude, guy) life-stylethat many aim for,similar to the almost classic "desperado" behaviorof westernfrontier tradition, are attractive to youthswhose lives have been filledwith trauma (C.P.R.P. 1979:116- 117). Quite often,such individualsbecome the "loco" standardfor others, particularlyso for the youngermembers. While locura gives one the li- cense to act out personal motives,it also providesthe group,as minority and underclass members of society, generalized outlets for aggressive sentiments.The need forrecognition and expression (status and leadership) thus is oftenmanifested in self debilitation(e.g., drugs) and destructive behavior(e.g., gang slayings).It is always clear that prestigeawaits one who amasses a reputationfor locura, even ifit is based on fear. No one (friendor foe) knows what to expect froma loco, and thiselement of surprisegives one an edge in most social situations.Despite the incidence of locura,however, there are manymore positiveways to acquire status: the youngman who diplomaticallynegotiates the gang out of troublein a rivalarea, or the one who is especially skilled at effectingliaisons with youngladies at parties,and finally,the car owner who gladlytakes members on low-riding,"cruising" sojourns. Itmust be underscoredthat only a small numberbecome deeply involvedin destructivebehavior, despite the multiplepressures of barriolife. Those who do so usuallyhave undergone particularlydistressing experiences, or have experienced a turningpoint whichlocked theminto the pattern(e.g., one minorinfraction leading to an arrest, convictionand incarceration).The vast majorityof barrio young people duringadolescence select more sociallyapproved routes forego and status expression,although even theysometimes flirt and experiment withcertain cholo and gang subculturecustoms along the way. It is a life style, like so many in Americansociety, that sometimes can be easily adopted, as the need requires,and just as easily discarded once it has outlivedits purpose.

Conclusion

An East Los Angeles gang memberonce told thisauthor that his life had been a succession of changes: he changed residences quite often,his parentsfinancial situation was precariousand in additionthey were con- stantlyundergoing family breakups and separations,he regularlyintermin-

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 66 URBANANTHROPOLOGY 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,reflect this recurringpattern of instability,uncertainty, and fluctuation. Octavio Paz offered this observa- tion 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 life of 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 definitemean- ing; or, to be more exact, it is charged like all popular creations with a di- versityof 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 con- flictand 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 theirintegration into 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 mag- nified in the lives of their children. Normal youth cohorting became prob- lematic 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 similar enough for them to repeat earlier patterns. In fact, it is the persistence of these patterns which have operated to es- tablish a gang subculture in many barrios. Moreover, the barrios have re- tained 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

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 67

are presentlyfirst generation Mexican gangs in Los Angeles,and the cholo lifestyle has even diffusedto towns along the Mexican side of the border (Castro 1981), and in a northernMexican state (Villela and Gastelum 1980). Mexican immigrantsand theirchildren, of course, underwentother types of culturalconflicts in the urban setting.Traditional social control mechanisms,for instance, were transformedbecause of the new living 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, rather than aided, incor- porationof and allegiance to Americanstandards. It was in the schools where the most acute cultureconflict experiences transpired.Teacher-pu- pil clashes over primarylanguage use and other contrastingcultural beliefs appeared to interferewith student knowledge and skillacquisition. Mexican-Americansalso experienced more contacts with law enforcement,and the interactionsgenerally were hostileand negative.As noted, gang members experienced learningproblems which caused them to leave school early.Even though socioeconomic patternsare paramount theyare nota sufficientcondition for understanding Chicano gangs. There is also the matterof culturaladaptation to Americanlifeways and language. All Mexican Americanshave undergonethe process of acculturation, withmost (especially the second generation)experiencing difficulty duringthe transitionalphase. Duringthis phase, immigrantsand theirchildren acquire an Anglocultural repertoire while still retaining an identification and association withMexican lifeways.The fact that many Mexican Americanshave been able to maintaina bilingual/biculturalpersona at- tests to the often positive outcome of this adaptation (Vigiland Long 1981). Nevertheless,there are otherswho are unable to firmlyroot themselves in either one of the two cultures, or much less to become bilingual/bicultural.Thus theyfashion other solutions. This is especiallythe case forthose who remainin the cholo phase, and fora varietyof reasons, spend more timeon the streets,becoming enculturated and 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 urbandimensions to an adolescent lifestage passage. The gang subculturereflects this syncreticpattern of mixingdonor and host patternsinto something new and different.Such a subcultureis very attractiveto youngChícanos who objectivelyreflect a dual heritage,but, ironically,subjectively reject both, and thus adopt the street cultureas a source of stability.Even in non-barriosuburban neighborhoods,where there is sociocultural ambiguityamong second and third generation Chícanos, we findthe tendencyfor involvement in a type of street gang, althoughnot as negativelycharged as the older gangs in colonias and urban barrios.As summarizedhere, the gang subcultureemerged as a type

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 68 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

of adaptationto the marginalitystemming from the contrastand conflict between Mexican and Angloculture. Mexicans were usuallynot whollyin- tegrated intoAmerican society. In short,they were forcedto live on the marginsof available space, to work in menial,secondary jobs, and to af- fectand expect a minimalresponse and concernfrom major social institutions. Whilemany more Mexicans thanthose who became gang members underwentthis series of marginalsituations, with most makinga type of "constructivemarginality" out of it (Arvizu1974), it is the gang members who dynamicallyexhibit the cumulativeeffects of these multiplestatus "crises." Where they live, what resources they and theirfamilies have, how theyfashion a socioculturalniche, and whythey need an identityare all issues that pervade the lives of regulargang members. Viewingthe gang subculturein this broader way aids interpretationof how and why the subculturearose, and outlineswhen and where youngstersgravitate to it as a solutionto urban adaptation. The multiplemarginality concept additionallyaids integrationof the several competingtheories on gang delinquency,deviancy, and crime. While social class, as noted, is the pre- dominantfocus in most of these theories,it is not a sufficientcondition for understandingthe gang subculture.The multiplemarginality construct, on the other hand, lends itselfto a holisticinterpretation precisely because social behavioris multi-layered,and formany Chicanos, it is the cumula- tive workingsof these marginalsituations which accounts fortheir gang membership.

NOTES

1 Cholo is a term used in some parts of Latin America to describe those who are intermedi- ate 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 acknowl- edge 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 CITED

Achor, S. 1978 Mexican Americans in a Dallas Barrio. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 69

Acuna, R. 1981 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: Universityof California,Chicano Studies Center. Arvizu,S. 1974 Educationfor Constructive Marginality. IN The CulturalDrama, W. Dillon (ed.). Washington,D.C.: SmithsonianInstitution Press, 122-135. Baker, B. 1979 Gang Murders,Spreading Across County,Reach Record Rate. Los An- geles Times, November14. Barker,G. C. 1972 Social Functions of Language in a Mexican-AmericanCommunity. Tucson: The Universityof ArizonaPress. Bloch, H. A. and Niederhoffer,A. 1958 The Gang: A Study in Adolescent Behavior. New York: Philosophical Library. Bogardus, E. S. 1926 The CityBoy and His Problems.Los Angeles: House of Ralston, Rotary Club of Los Angeles. 1929 Second GenerationMexicans. Sociology and Social Research 13:276- 283. 1934 The Mexican in the UnitedStates. Universityof SouthernCalifornia So- cial Science Series, No. 8. Los Angeles: Universityof SouthernCalifornia Press. 1943 Gangs of Mexican American Youth. Sociology and Social Research 28:55-66. Burgess, E. W. 1925 The Growthof the City:An Introductionto 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, Silverio Calzada and RichardVasquez 1982 The Relationshipof TraditionalMexican AmericanCulture to Adjustment and DelinquencyAmong Three Generationsof Mexican AmericanMale Adolescents. HispanicJournal of BehavioralSciences 4(1):41-55. Burton,R. V.and Whiting,J. W. 1961 The AbsentFather and Cross-Sex Identity.Merrill-Palmer Quarterly 7:85- 95. Bryce-LaPorte, Roy Simon 1970 UrbanRelocation and FamilyAdaptation in Puerto Rico: A Case Study in Urban Ethnography.IN Peasants in Cities, W. Mangin (ed.). Boston: HoughtonMifflin Co., 85-97. Carter,T. P. and R. D. Segura 1978 Mexican Americansin School: A Decade of Change. New York:The Col- lege Board. Cartwright,D. S., B. Tomson and H. Schwartz 1975 Gang Delinquency.Monterey, California: Brooks/Cole.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 70 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

Castro, G. L. 1981 El Cholo: Origen y Desarrollo. Mexicain, B. C: Universidad Autonoma De Baja California.

Chicano Pinto Research Project 1979 A Model for Chicano Drug Use and for Effective Utilization of Employ- ment and Training Resources by Barrio Addicts and Ex-Offenders. Los Angeles, California (Final Report for the Department of Labor and Na- tional Institute of Drug Abuse). 1981 Barrio impact of High Incarceration Rates, (by Joan W. Moore and John 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 Cross-Cultural Replication of the Relation of Urbanism to Criminal Be- havior. American Sociological Review 25:253-57. 1968 Sociology of Deviant Behavior. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Cloward, R. A. and L. B. Olin 1 960 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. Chicago: Aldine. Decker, Cathleen 1983 Gang-Related Murders Fall by 38% in Los Angeles. Los Angeles Times. January 7.

Derbyshire, R. L. 1 968 Adolescent IdentityCrisis in Urban Mexican Americans in East Los Ange- les. 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.) 1 974 The Ordeal of Assimilation: A Documentary History of the White Working Class. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday. Frazier, E. F. 1957 Race and Culture Contact in the Modern World. New York: Knopf. Fuller, E. 1 974 The Mexican Housing Problem in Los Angeles (1 920). Reprinted mono- graph 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 Mexican Immigrationto the United States. New York: Arno Press. 1969b The Mexican Immigrant. New York: Arno Press.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 71

Ginn, M. C. 1947 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. Gomez-Quinones, J. 1 977 The Origin and Development of the Mexican Working Class in the United States: Laborers and Artisans North of the Rio Bravo, 1600-1900. Pre- pared 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. 1 980 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 1976 An Ethnographic Study of Truant and Low Achieving Chicano Barrio Youth in the High School Setting. Ph.D. dissertation, Universityof Cali- fornia, Los Angeles. Hill, M. E. 1 968 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.

Hinojas, F. G. 1975 Notes on the Pachuco: Stereotypes, History, and Dialect. Atisbos: Jour- nal of Chicano Research (Summer):53-65 Stanford: Chicano Studies Center.

Horowitz, Ruth 1982 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 Pidginization and Creolization of Languages. London: Cambridge Univer- sity Press. Johnson, T. J. 1979 La Vida Loca. New West, January 29. Keiser, R. L. 1968 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 Chinese- Americans. Urban Anthropology 5:1-17.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 72 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

Kienle,J. E. 1912 Housing Conditions Among the Mexican Population of Los Angeles. UnpublishedM.A.Thesis, Universityof Southern California,Department of Sociology. Klein,M. W. 1971 Street Gangs and Street Workers. Englewood Cliffs,New Jersey: Prentice-Hall,Inc. Lewis, Oscar 1959 Five Families:Mexican Case Studies inthe Cultureof Poverty.New York: Basic Books. Lomnitz,Larissa A. 1977 Networksand Marginality:Life in a Mexican Shantytown.New York: Academic Press. Mangin,W. (ed.) 1970 Peasants in Cities: Readings in the Anthropologyof Urbanization.Bos- ton: HoughtonMifflin Co. Matza, D. 1964 Delinquencyand Drift.New York:John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Merton,R. K. 1949 Social Structure and Anomie. Social Theory and Social Structure. Glencoe: The Free Press. Miller,W. B. 1975 Violenceby YouthGangs and YouthGroups as a CrimeProblem in Major AmericanCities. WashingtonD.C.: U.S. Departmentof Justice. Miller,W. P. 1977 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 Mexican Americans(2nd ed.) Englewood Cliffs,New Jersey: Prentice Hall. 1977 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. Philadelphia:Temple UniversityPress. Moore, J. W., J. D. Vigiland R. Garcia 1983 Residence and Territoriallyin Gangs. Journalof Social Problems31(2): 182-194. Morales, A. 1972 Ando Sangrando. (I am Bleeding). La Puente. California:Perspectiva Publications. McWilliams,C. 1968 Northfrom Mexico-The Spanish-Speaking People of the UnitedStates. New York:Greenwood Press.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO 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 The Labyrinth of Solitude. New York: Grove Press, Inc. Peattie, L. R. 1974 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: Newbury House. Plant, J. S. 1937 Personality and the Cultural Pattern. New York: Commonwealth Fund.

Poggie, J. J. 1973 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 By the Sweat of Their Brow. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, Inc.

Roderick, K. 1982 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 Forgotten People: A Study of New Mexicans. Albuquerque, New Mexico: Calvin Pub. Inc.

Scheidlinger, S. 1952 Psychoanalysis and Group Behavior. New York: W. W. Norton & Compa- ny, 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: University of Chicago Press.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions 74 URBAN ANTHROPOLOGY VOL. 12(1), 1983

Short, J. F., Jr. and F. L. Strodtbeck 1967 Group Process and Gang Delinquency. Chicago: University of 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 1978 Behavioral Ecology of Chicano Gang Violence. Unpublished paper. 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 of the Empirical Evidence. American Sociological Review 43:643-56. Torres, D. M. 1979 Chicano Gangs in the East Los Angeles Barrio. California Youth Author- ity Quarterly 32(3):5-1 3. Tuck, R. 1956 Not With the Fist, Mexican-Americans in a Southwest City. New York: Harcourt, Brace.

United States Commission on Civil Rights 1970 Mexican Americans and the Administration of Justice in the Southwest. 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: Anthro- pologists 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. 1 979 Adaptation Strategies and Cultural Life Styles of Mexican American Ado- lescents. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 1 :375-92. 1980 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 Paths to School Achievement. Human Organization 40(3): 273-77. 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.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Vigil CHICANO GANGS IN LOS ANGELES 75

Yablonsky,L. 1962 The ViolentGang. New York:MacMillan Company. Yinger,J. M. 1960 Contracultureand Subculture. American Sociological Review 25:625- 635.

This content downloaded on Fri, 1 Feb 2013 13:22:09 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions