Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Remember The Alamo, Sure, As Long As We Remember It For What It Really Is: Something Sinister
San Francisco Chronicle (via San Antonio Lightning) ^ | 4/15/04 | Oscar Villalon, Chronicle Book Editor

Posted on 04/15/2004 6:46:23 AM PDT by laotzu

(Editor's note; What follows here is a copy of a story that appeared in the Hearst Corporation's San Francisco Chronicle on April 12, 2004. It is reprinted here in its entirety without permission or apology.)

As the guy who wrote on the billboard at 24th and Valencia sometime in the night last week phrased it, before what he wrote in orange spray paint was papered over with a new canvas, "F -- 'The Alamo.' "

To many Mexican Americans, there's no more succinct, if impolite, wording to get across how repulsed one of the biggest minority groups in the country - - and certainly the largest in California and Texas -- is by that dilapidated mission-turned-fortress-turned-tourist-attraction in San Antonio, Texas. What's intriguing, though, given the release Friday of the big-budget movie "The Alamo," is how many people apparently don't get this. (Aside to the studio's marketing department: Have you lost your minds? Putting up an advertisement for "The Alamo" the size of a boxing ring in the Mission District?)

Any discussion about the movie so far, whether in reviews or articles about its making, has been about how it's a new-and-improved version of past depictions of that battle. This time we see that there were Tejanos fighting with the Texans at the Alamo. We see that Travis and Bowie had slaves with them during the siege. We see that more likely than not, Davy Crockett didn't go down swinging. And we see that not all the troops in Gen. Santa Ana's army were craven cowards. Things were ... complex.

As important as those tweaks are to the story, and as correct as it is to discuss them, the concern at this point in our history shouldn't be so much how the actual events at the Alamo are (or have been) presented on the screen. Dress up a bunch of baby chimps in period costumes, give them spark-shooting plastic ray guns and include them in the fall of the Alamo, too, for all that verisimilitude matters.

No, the problem is that the Alamo, like the Confederate flag, is a symbol of something much greater, much more sinister than itself. It has come to stand for what's happened long after the events of March 6, 1836. It's why the words "Remember the Alamo!" can make certain barrooms go quiet and a mouth go dry before it has the chance to spit.

Despite the facts, past movie adaptations of the Alamo -- and so many other historic events involving white America and the Other -- have been little more than propaganda for the myth of "white man good, brown man bad," problematic at best because it's what a majority of our country wanted to believe for a variety of cultural and political reasons. So, that you would have John Wayne turning himself into an Aryan Roman candle in "The Alamo" (1960) isn't surprising. In the end, that battle has -- and perhaps can only -- come to be a glorification of (white) Texan sacrifice, no matter how many allowances any film, including this new one, makes for the truth. The Alamo remains a fiery cascade of bullets, blades and cannonballs that casts into shadow the struggle Mexican Americans would go through to exist with dignity in the United States -- a struggle that continues today.

With that in mind, and going on the assumption that most Americans get their history lessons from two-hour-plus prestige films, let's revisit the date of the battle, which is a key scene from "The Alamo,'' and see how we can get the point across another way. Imagine we could stop the picture mid-action, the actors stuck in time as if they were all tagged in a giant game of freeze tag. Then a pleasant-looking woman comes into the frame, hands clasped before her, and delivers a public service announcement, saying something like:

"Hi. Sorry to interrupt the movie. But the producers of 'The Alamo' have asked me, in the spirit of good faith, to sorta explain a little more of what you're seeing here.

"So, OK. Behind me you see these Tejanos getting ready to give up their lives for the cause of Texas independence. But you should probably know a couple of things. As soon as Texas gets its independence in 1836 and joins the United States nine years later, all the relatives and the descendants of those poor guys back there will become second-class citizens. Many Tejanos will literally be terrorized by their fellow Texans in the years to come -- over land, over opposing slavery.

"And Mexican Americans in general throughout the Southwest, in Texas and in California in particular, will also experience oppression. Segregation, for example, and of every stripe: segregated movie houses, segregated schools, segregated swimming pools. You name it. If you've ever seen 'Giant,' you know what I'm talking about. In fact, a lot of people don't know this, but the first successful case for desegregation in schools wasn't Brown vs. Board of Education, but Roberto Alvarez vs. the Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District. This happened down in San Diego in 1931. True story.

"OK. I see some arms starting to shake here, what with the muskets being heavy and authentic and all, so let's get back to the movie. You good people enjoy."

If only. But that's not going to happen, and it's doubtful the other side of the story will be addressed in the commentary on the DVD. What's most likely, frankly, is that outside the Mexican American community, nobody is likely to notice the head-shaking frustration these Americans have with the Alamo.

They're not likely to spot the long trickle of blood that leads from there to the Texas Rangers cruising through the streets of border towns with the bodies of Mexicans and Mexican Americans strapped to the hood and trunk of cars as though they were trophy deer. (Between 1914 and 1919, the Rangers killed about 5,000 "Hispanics"; a figure so gruesome that in 1919 legislation was passed in Texas, at the urging of Rep. Jose T. Canales, to reform the organization.)

When they see "The Alamo," audiences are unlikely to understand that through the gates of a ruined mission comes a legacy of "white" America asserting cultural superiority over the "losers" from Texas' war of independence. Or that the Alamo is in many ways like Kosovo: the site of a battle where the eventual victor took a serious defeat, a losing engagement that's been fetishized to justify treating another people as a historic threat, not to be fully trusted.

They won't see how in our ever-evolving country, there's little place for reverence toward a symbol that says more about our shortcomings than our virtues.

Like the other thing the guy who spray-painted "The Alamo" billboard wrote, "Forget 'The Alamo.'


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: alamo; professionalvictim; sanantonio; texas; waaaaaa; waaaaaah
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last
Oh, puke.
1 posted on 04/15/2004 6:46:24 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: laotzu
"So, OK. Behind me you see these Tejanos getting ready to give up their lives for the cause of Texas independence. But you should probably know a couple of things. As soon as Texas gets its independence in 1836 and joins the United States nine years later, all the relatives and the descendants of those poor guys back there will become second-class citizens. Many Tejanos will literally be terrorized by their fellow Texans in the years to come -- over land, over opposing slavery.

"And Mexican Americans in general throughout the Southwest, in Texas and in California in particular, will also experience oppression. Segregation, for example, and of every stripe: segregated movie houses, segregated schools, segregated swimming pools. You name it. If you've ever seen 'Giant,' you know what I'm talking about. In fact, a lot of people don't know this, but the first successful case for desegregation in schools wasn't Brown vs. Board of Education, but Roberto Alvarez vs. the Board of Trustees of the Lemon Grove School District. This happened down in San Diego in 1931. True story.

You think that is bad? - do some history on life in Mexico from the Alamo to now for the average Jose...

2 posted on 04/15/2004 6:49:56 AM PDT by 2banana (They want to die for Islam and we want to kill them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
John Wayne really had something against Hispanics, didn't he? He was married to two: his first wife was Mexican, the second Peruvian and his children are all Hispanic. Also, if this clown had watched Wayne's version of the Alamo, he would have noticed that many of the best characters in the movie were Hispanic, some of the worst, Anglo. But then again, that would confuse his dim mind with the facts.
3 posted on 04/15/2004 6:57:07 AM PDT by laconic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 2banana
If it so terrible for Mexicans in America, why do so many millions of them cross the border?
4 posted on 04/15/2004 7:00:17 AM PDT by John Thornton
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: laconic
Also, if this clown had watched Wayne's version of the Alamo, he would have noticed that many of the best characters in the movie were Hispanic, some of the worst, Anglo. But then again, that would confuse his dim mind with the facts.

The idiot also does not realize that not all the Texans fighting for independence were white. For example, the town of Mexia is named for a Mexican general who fought for Texas independence. Texas has families with Spanish surnames who have lived here for hundreds of years, fought for independence, and don't buy that race-baiting crap.

Pretty hard to sell people on the notion that they are excluded from the club when they are the founding members.

5 posted on 04/15/2004 7:06:05 AM PDT by hopespringseternal (People should be banned for sophistry.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
Bottom line - if Texas is so bad, and Mexico so good - why aren't folks sneaking across the Texas border at night to get into Mexico?
6 posted on 04/15/2004 7:16:14 AM PDT by Mr Rogers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Thornton
"If it so terrible for Mexicans in America, why do so many millions of them cross the border?"

It's because life is so wuuuuuunderful in Mexico that they are coming over to the United States to share their wuuuuunderful vision of life. You see, in Mexico, there's no discrimination, no poverty, no upper or lower class. Jobs are plentiful, health care is available to all, they all have clean water, good schools and really really caring politicians and police who only want the best for the people.

7 posted on 04/15/2004 7:20:13 AM PDT by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
Santa Ana was in and near San Antonio during Mexico's War Of Independence, ca. 1820; he was a lt. fighting for Spanish Colonial rule. Learned to decapitate fighters opposing Spain. When coming to San Antonio to crush the rebels in 1836 he had just finished up 'the rape of Zacatecas', no details needed.

Local Hispanic people suffered under Spanish colonial rule, Mexican corrupt rule, they suffered under intense attacks from Comanche and Apache raiders and slavers, and then undeniably suffered under Anglo land-grabbers when Texas Republic was established. The vile coward Mustang Gray and his murder of the Benavides family comes to mind.

This idjit doesn't care about real history. Posturing, sneering narcissist.
8 posted on 04/15/2004 7:21:44 AM PDT by squarebarb ("You gotta learn to street-fight with these vermin." --- Michael Savage)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hopespringseternal
Heck, we named a whole state after Mexico.

I think this guy was at that protest two weeks ago in San Francisco holding up that sign "Support the insurgents"
9 posted on 04/15/2004 7:26:59 AM PDT by Flightdeck (Death is only a horizon)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
They kicked the corrupt Mexican officials south of the Rio Grand in the pants for claiming land they never really had the strength to occupy and had not occupied because the Indians kept killing their behinds every time they stepped north of the Rio.

Mexico waited for Americans to clean out the indians, then wanted to take the cake with taxes added. Given our squandering of their sacrifice today, I would have advised them not to bother.
10 posted on 04/15/2004 7:33:44 AM PDT by MissAmericanPie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
No, the problem is that the Alamo, like the Confederate flag, is a symbol of something much greater, much more sinister than itself.

Well let's just call for a ban on all things American so that we can be more inviting to all the illegals in our country. For cryin' out loud ... what a moron!


11 posted on 04/15/2004 7:37:45 AM PDT by al_c
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
Guacamole barf alert!


12 posted on 04/15/2004 7:38:53 AM PDT by RightWingAtheist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
little more than propaganda for the myth of "white man good, brown man bad,"

Until you recognize and accept the fact that Santa Anna was every bit as bad as he's been portrayed in the "myth", you'll never get to the truth.

The tragedy of the Texas Revolution is that none of the other States in Mexico succeeded in rebelling against Santa Anna's coup.

13 posted on 04/15/2004 7:43:42 AM PDT by jdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
Dress up a bunch of baby chimps in period costumes, give them spark-shooting plastic ray guns and include them in the fall of the Alamo, too, for all that verisimilitude matters.
Here, inadvertently, is liberalism and post-modern relativism in a nutshell. "Not all truth is True. Heck! The Truth may not be true, but so what? We're about The Truth, not things that are true or whatever did happen or whatever is happening now. The Truth is what's important."
14 posted on 04/15/2004 7:49:13 AM PDT by VadeRetro (Faster than a speeding building! Able to leap tall bullets in a single bound!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: John Thornton; 2banana
<< If it so terrible for Mexicans in America, why do so many millions of them cross the border? >>

Bastards are either all bloody stupid -- or have been conscripted into the Criminal Alien Invasion Army.

Or both.
15 posted on 04/15/2004 8:08:35 AM PDT by Brian Allen (Intact - Male - American - Republican - Pro-Bush - PRO-ISRAEL - Pro-War - Pro-Gun - Pro-Life! Next?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: laotzu
Near present-day Houston, Tex., Santa Anna, was wearing a DRESS, when caught trying to slink away...
hehehe...they HATE it when I remind 'em of THAT one!
16 posted on 04/15/2004 8:58:45 AM PDT by 7MMmag (just where ARE the harlem globetrotters when 'ya need 'em? those guys could beat anybody!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro; Perlstein; LS; William McKinley; Lazamataz; Dog Gone; Texaggie79
"Remembering your heritage oppresses me," the poor liberal whines..."So you must reject and forget your own cultural heritage, lest it offend or oppress me, the epitome of America's new class of professional victims and whiners."

There, I just summarized his entire rant of an article.

17 posted on 04/15/2004 9:17:15 AM PDT by Southack (Media Bias means that Castro won't be punished for Cuban war crimes against Black Angolans in Africa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Van Jenerette
...for later reading.
18 posted on 04/15/2004 9:36:56 AM PDT by Van Jenerette (US Army Infantry(1967-1991))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: laconic
Oscar is a typical example of a brown bigot. His allegiance is to Mexico, not to the United States. Oscar should pack up his duds and go back to the country he worships: Mexico.
19 posted on 04/15/2004 9:44:23 AM PDT by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: VadeRetro
Here, inadvertently, is liberalism and post-modern relativism in a nutshell. "Not all truth is True. Heck! The Truth may not be true, but so what? We're about The Truth, not things that are true or whatever did happen or whatever is happening now. The Truth is what's important."

You and I have disagreed on much, VR, and probably will again in the future, but I couldn't agree more with your above statement!

20 posted on 04/15/2004 10:34:11 AM PDT by Ignatz (Scribe of the Unwritten Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-43 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson