A Country for a Shirt

Or: The Things we Trade

I am surrounded by Mexicans.

Thousands of them. Multiple generations. Old women with tightly wrapped, salty gray buns perched on their heads, simple black skirts down to their ankles; husbands and wives with painted babies in one hand, six-packs of Tecate in the other; teenagers gender segregated, the boys lurking and thick like thieves; trombones and trumpets and pounding drums; wire-frame bulls with spinning horns and tails, propelled by bottle rockets, carried on the shoulders of those in possession of higher levels of risk or machismo or, most likely, both. Many are painted like cartoon skeletons, some are costumed. In front of me, a demon in a grotesque mask has constructed giant bat wings that expand, violently, with the pull of a string; behind me, a man with plastic devil horns protruding from his head, black hair slicked back, his mouth a flame thrower upon the assistance of an aerosol can and cheap lighter. But for wooden stilts, he is entirely dipped in red, a Mexican Achilles.

It is Day of the Dead, and I am in Oaxaca, the beating heart, so to speak, of the Mexico-wide Dia de los Muertos corpus. Few nations are as festive as Mexico, and where death is normally a somber affair, Mexicans – the indigenous populations in particular – consider such melancholia an affront to the departed. Instead, remembering the deceased is a celebration, and celebrate they do. Day of the Dead is a mash up of cultures, the traditional worldview of Aztecs and Toltecs and other pre-Columbian Nahuan people modified by Catholicism imported from Spain, and where the Catholic-American Jesus of my youth looks condescendingly down from his crucifix, shaming me for nothing other than simply being alive, after a week of watching these celebrations I fully expect Catholic-Mexican Jesus to say guero, toss me up a beer.

*****

Mexico is, if I stretch the truth, home turf. My history begins at a crossroads in the San Bernardino Valley of southeastern Arizona, the Sonoran Desert to the west and the Chihuahuan to the east, the dusty American copper town of Douglas to the north of the US-Mexico border and, just to the south of it, Agua Prieta – a town named not for water dirtied by mining refuse, but because the indigenous Ópatas watered their animals there, leaving behind a muddy mess. My Irish-American mother, in the throes of labor, made my Mexican father drive us north across the US border to ensure I was a native-born son, a gratuitous trip given her own American citizenship. Destiny often cloaks bad information.

I lived the first eighteen months of my life in the small Mexican city of Cananea with my mother, older sister, and biological father.[1] The marriage was short, and though ties with the Mexican side of my family were all but severed for most of the next two decades, the gravitational pull has endured.[2] Excepting the 460-ish miles between Juarez and Ciudad Acuña, I’ve eaten in nearly every border town from Tijuana to Matamoros. I’ve absorbed the sun in the seaside beaches of Cabo San Lucas and Zihuatanejo, sipped coffee in the laureled parque principals of Guanajuato and San Miguel, walked the thriving metropolis of Mexico City, and took an astonishingly beautiful but equally ill-advised train trip aboard El Chepe from Chihuahua, over the Sierra Madres, through the Barrancas del Cobre, and ending in the small town of Los Mochis in the northern part of the infamous-then-and-now state of Sinaloa. I harbor an unrealistic belief that invisible Mexican DNA somehow camouflages visible Irish skin, allowing me to blend in as a vacationing Chilango rather than what I am: just another escapist gringo[3] from north of the border. But I never leave Mexico ready to go home, and in some ways, I suppose, I return south in search of what might have been.

This time, I have come to Oaxaca as reset. Mexico is salve to my chronic affliction to better define who I am regardless (it is fifty per cent of me, after all), but more recently, as possible cure to a more acute need to unfuck myself. I am mired. I have found myself unmoored where I thought I was permanently anchored: five years ago I was falsely accused of sexual assault.[4], [5] It was, in the parlance, a Significant Emotional Event, and one that revealed me to be pervious when I thought I was mostly im.[6] In Body Keeps the Score, Bessel van der Kalk argues that trauma changes us fundamentally and physiologically (duh). The essential sentiment here is that trauma persists in all sorts of insidious ways, to include an elemental desire to go “home” in reaction to adversity, even if that “home” is a root cause of the trauma itself, and that understanding it as such can help to change the body back to its pre-traumatic form. Which is how, in some ways, I view Mexico. Though it is not the source of my trauma, and I spent little of my formative life here (and none of it memorable), it is my beginning, and the specter of it is ever-present. It bookends the first eighteen years of my life, marks the beginning of the end of the first important relationship of my adulthood, and now the middle, perhaps, of the second. But in Mexico I’m anonymous, and the country itself remains securely, and seemingly perpetually, in shambles. It is not lost on me that she is also perpetually falsely accused. Surely Mexico can sympathize.

Our vision of travel abroad frequently lacks precision. We can differentiate within our own country and culture – Boston is obviously not Birmingham, Boulder, or Burning Man – but America typically evokes a solo image in those who have not yet been here. The aerial towers of Manhattan perhaps, or the excess of Hollywood or the audacity of Las Vegas or the brittle utopia of Disneyland. But more than likely it is the singular but enduring spirit and optimism of the American West, where all is possible if you’re willing to put your back into it. For those who have grit, who work hard and take risks, who ingest the mantra of the “American Dream”. In America, persistence and confidence trump even stupidity. It may be naïve, but it works because we say so. Perception becomes reality.

Similarly naïve is our vision of Mexico. Though the two nations have much in common – both are vast countries with a diverse population and geography, troubled histories of invasion and subjugation of indigenous peoples, inspirational stories of rebellion and perseverance, heroic tales of the rise, fall, and rise again of national icons – our portrait of Mexico is not one of optimism and confidence, but of conflict and corruption. Perception does become reality, and fairly or not, Mexico is the bogeyman in our North American closet. They bring us our drugs, our cheap labor, our border violence, our tight-skirted jezebels and swarthy cinematic villainy hell-bent on defiling the American dream. But supply feeds demand, and history is not monochromatic, and Mexico fits this image no more than does an infallible America. If your fear relegates your forays south to the pampered and filtered seaside resorts, you deserve the vulgarity of the wet t-shirt contests, fishbowl margaritas, vomitous undergrads, and kowtowing, eminently forgettable waitstaff who await you. Better to buy American; give your money and dignity to a South Florida Johnny Rockets. But if you want better food, and better music, and the best-shittiest beer in the world, and you’re comfortable being just a little uncomfortable, then head south of the border.

My history begins in Mexico, but my history’s history, like many half-Mexicans, begins elsewhere: Spain. Before it was an empire it was an ebb and flow of kingdoms, but by the mid-1400s Spain consisted largely of the Christian crowns of Castile and Aragon and remnants of the Moorish Nasrid Dynasty located near Spain’s southern coast. The two Christian kingdoms united under the marriage of Queen Isabella and King Ferdinand II, and in 1492 – a big year for the western world – the “last sigh of the Moor” was breathed when Boabdil, Abu Abdallah Muhammad XII, Sultan of the Emirate of al-Andulus, the last Muslim King of Spain, relinquished his capital city of Granada.[7] Just a few months later, a persistent, carpet-bagging Ligurian convinced the Spanish royals, after two years of lobbying, to fund his quest to reach Asia not by heading east, but west. Cristòffa Cómbo in his native tongue – Cristoforo Colombo in Italian, Cristóbal Colón in Spanish, and Christopher Columbus[8] to you and me – first approached England, then Portugal (twice), France, Genoa, and Venice before finally securing funding from King Ferdinand and Queen Isabella. The queen, keeper of the Royal Purse, first sent Columbus packing yet again, but Ferdinand, after some discussion, convinced Isabella to take a chance. As legend has it he then personally tracked down Columbus, brooding yet again on the road home, to deliver the good news. On August 3rd, 1492, Columbus finally set sail; he landed in the Bahamas just two months later. In March of 1493, victorious in discovery if not yet in riches, he returned to Spain, leaving behind 40 men on the island of Hispaniola.

If history were a shopping spree, Columbus’s return to Spain would be Black Friday, and those waiting outside Best Buy’s doors at 4am were the young men of the state of Extremadura. Bordering Portugal (home of perhaps history’s greatest sailors), the region was impoverished but seemed to infuse its name – “extremely hard” in English – upon its denizens. The most famous conquistadors were from here: Vasco Núñez de Balboa, Hernando de Soto, Francisco Pizarro, and Hernán Cortés all originated in Extremadura, claimed parts of the New World for Spain as well as themselves, and elevated Spain into an empire while destroying, by cunning, violence, and virus, entire civilizations.

Of all the conquistadors, Hernán Cortés was perhaps the most ruthless. Of lesser nobility but also lesser wealth, Cortés left home at nineteen for Hispaniola to seek his riches in the new world. He spent a few years in Cuba, earning enough money and status to captain an expedition to the mainland of Mexico, arriving in 1519, most likely landing at Chalchihuecan beach in the modern-day city of Heroica Veracruz. He immediately took possession of the land in King Charles’s name, and as consolation gave the surely bewildered locals long-sleeved cotton camisas from Spain. A country for a shirt. Such is the story of all the hemisphere’s indigenous peoples, and the remainder of the Spaniards’ time in Mexico rings familiar: Cortés ignored an order to return to Cuba, burned his own boats in the harbor when he heard whispers of mutiny and retreat, and took on a brilliant and beautiful Nahuan mistress (never mind the likely rape, slavery, and sex-trafficking; for la Malinche’s perceived traitorous role in the defeat of the Aztecs, she remains despised even today). In addition to cotton shirts, Cortés and his men brought horses, and guns, and Jesus – installing crosses and images of “Our Lady” to replace Moctezuma’s idols to Tezcatlipoca and Huichilobos – and shed plenty of Aztec blood in the name of gold, King Charles, and the contemporary version of colonialism. Just two years after his arrival on the Mexican mainland, Cortés conquered the capital city of Tenochtitlán and defeated, for good, the Aztec empire.

For his successes Cortés was bestowed the title of Marquis of the Valley of Oaxaca, despite never setting foot in the state. If he had headed to Oaxaca, he might have taken the path I did from Mexico City: east to Puebla and beyond, then south towards Tehuacán, avoiding the Trans-Mexican volcanic belt – the Sierra Madre Occidental – and continuing on to Oaxaca, approaching the valley from the northwest, the city center at the north end, the small artist’s barrio of Xochimilco to the north of that, where I find an apartment for about $300 a month, the only as-yet-unrevealed downsides being the cockroach or two I kill daily and what sounds like an active silver mine on the other side of my bedroom wall. There is a church nearby, and a graveyard, with all its affiliated Dias de los Muertos noises, and cobblestone streets providing foundation for an urban minefield of unattended dog shit and the whoosh click whoosh click of handlooms and bread vendors on foot and moped, announcing their locale with a mellifluous cadenza of ellll PANNNN, and cafés with beans sourced from just over the mountains and, though I initially came here to be alone, my 23 year-old nephew is on his way to join me.

*****

History is malleable. Memories change, and what we witness is not even always truth. The strongest memories occur when an event, or the perception of it, coincides with emotion; physiologically speaking, neurons interact with other neurons in a synapse and release a neurotransmitter. Whether those synapses have a particularly strong connection – when an event and the perception of it meet with violence – helps determine the strength of the memory, its resonance dependent upon how often those neurons are reactivated, or how often that violent interaction is reenacted.

For example: In August of 1995 I was a twenty-four year old soldier stationed in South Korea and at the tail end of an exhausting one-year tour. As self-reward, a friend and I took a 10-day holiday to Thailand, where I grew an extraordinarily lame soul patch,[9] drank too much, and delighted in, courtesy of a London grammar school teacher, my first experience with the inscrutable self-deprecation that is British humor. In the early morning hours of August 3rd in Phuket, Thailand, I learned that my first siskid[10] was born in Nevada, but because we are centers of our own universe, my oldest nephew’s history begins not with him, but with me. Thailand plus first exposure to British humor plus birth of eldest siskid is, apparently, a particularly strong synapse (the violent collision of event and emotion), and that I get to tell my nephew exactly where I was and what I was doing when he was born means those particular neurons, from that place and time, are reactivated, at a minimum, every year on the second of August. I take great pleasure in re-sharing, annually, the details of this gift with him, and the best indicator of my pending dementia will be not when it appears I believe I’m telling him his origin story for the first time – I treat it no other way – but when I forget to tell him at all.

It is difficult to view him as anything other than a small object to hurl into the air, to regale with Army stories, or, in a most peaceful of memories, as one end of a game of long-toss, me in the middle, his younger brother the antipode. Yet now here he sits, wispy blonde sandlot of a beard, young mannish, across from me on the top floor of a Oaxacan cinder block house, barking dogs and fireworks and pre-Dias de los Muertos trombone-laden parades interlacing his nascent riff on the brilliance of Camus. An hour earlier he disembarked the ADO bus from Mexico City late but with a look of subdued pleasure typically reserved for lottery wins and first kisses. He is, in many ways, exactly the young man you would have predicted he would become. His sensitivity and conscientiousness as a kid has found traction as a young adult, and he not only emotionally shoulders the responsibility for the world’s ills and injustices, but has apparently determined that a personal sartorial style of “hobo grandpa” might somehow offer personal penance, weathered moccasin slippers and a heavy wool, roll neck Native American print cardigan a modern-day hair shirt. He refuses to buy anything new and has a shameful reluctance to bargain, yet still shows up with three travel bags, two of them surely lifted, under concealment of darkness and the neurocognitive effects of marijuana, from a Goodwill donations drop-off. I chalk his laissez-faire attitude towards planning, packing, and efficiency up to millennialism rather than conscious intention, and, in short, am ecstatic to see him here. Solitude is cool, but traveling with a nephew less than half your age is cooler.

He is a recent college graduate and current irresolute. Though he has professional goals, they are months down the road, and he is now more like a beach bum without beach; snow bum with neither snow nor mountain. Which is a good place to be. But where my nephew came for adventure and protraction, I came to Oaxaca as latest attempt at the aforementioned life reassessment. Over the last several years, I have learned a few things – both about myself and about others – that I thought I knew but really didn’t. Like chemistry, I understood the equations (sort of), but couldn’t quite internalize the process. Adversity was a world I thought I knew, but in truth had been more of an outside observer. And much like traveling, you never really know a place until you live there for a while. Now I’ve lived there for a while, and though the happiness line on my life’s bar graph has generally trended up, the TJ-promised Pursuit of Happiness has proven more elusive[11]: In the previous several months I have quit a job, quit a professional partnership and changed a personal one, and intentionally dislocated from any permanent address. The intent was to strip myself of all distractions and accouterments in order to better focus on the jing in my qi,[12] but an ex-girlfriend – part-time muse and full-time confidant – has offered up the alternative explanation that I actually like being sad. This is not ridiculous. Humans certainly introspect, but rarely do we take time when we’re kicking ass to revel in it. We’re far more likely to wallow in our sadness, and to do so solitarily.[13] Cortés traded a country for a shirt; here I am trading adversity for seclusion.  

However difficult it may be to refind purpose and happiness, negotiating a foreign country has always been easy, and is quite often when I feel in my element. Comfortable being uncomfortable. But learning Spanish is a different story, and it is a task at which I am resoundingly successful in failing. I wasted two years of lessons in high school, and could easily blame the Nevada public school system,[14] or the social Petri dish that is high school in general, but the fact is that failure was due purely to an insecurity in how really bad I was at learning what might have been my native tongue. No one likes to be perceived as dumb when apathetic seems so much nobler. With maturity and confidence comes the acknowledgement that both can be true; I am here in Oaxaca regardless, and I swear to dedicate myself anew.

I start my mornings at the A.M. café, a local coffee shop favored by tourists and language teachers, where I swap greetings with Ricardo the barista, my Spanish never improving but our handshake gradually more elaborate. I take my coffee to go, and walk the several blocks to the Instituto Cultural for my Spanish lessons, passing navy and white-uniformed kids walking to school; smoke-belching city busses; sidewalk-driving motorcycles; and lurid, exceptional graffiti of all genres, influenced by politics and irony and indigenous art and, surely, Banksy. The language school is on the sprawling compound of an old colonial estate, and though I see students of all ages and ethnicities, five of my eight classmates are older women, all from the Seattle area and unknown to one another. They bring cookies to class, take copious notes, and make no attempt at mimicking a Mexican accent. They all have innocuous enough sounding reasons for being here, and though they profess to be living their best lives, traveling the world with or without husbands or partners, I find their stories too convenient, and imagine them instead as drug mules, their “I’m retired!” exhortations savvy cover for what they are: carriers of Mexican black tar heroin[15] headed for the Pacific Northwest, where they will make the notoriously sedate Emerald City downright comatose. I create backstories for each, individual specialties and nicknames reflective of their preferred methods of violence, la aguja de tejer and la masa de pastel and la pellizcadora, all founding members of the upstart Pelos Azules gang and third only to the Sinaloa and Jalisco Nueva Generación cartels as most feared and with a wider reach.[16]

After class I walk the streets of Oaxaca City, a grid of cobblestones and parks and wide streets with narrow alleys and high walls and sprawling churches, quiet interiors in direct contrast to the boisterous exteriors of tourists, and street vendors, and indigenous buskers, the men often sleeping off hangovers while dirty children rotely squeeze and expand accordions behind an empty cup ready to collect loose pesos. There are weddings and comparsas[17] seemingly daily, and occasionally it is difficult to determine if they are one or the other, both loud and festive and musical, a riot of colors. I see one wedding – I think – led by giant-headed, 15-foot tall papier mâché bride and groom, closely followed by a coterie of dancing Mexican women in differently colored pastel dresses, all conservative but one, her with smile ignited and shimmying hips and a leg slit so high the mesmerized bystanders[18] focus on her and not the actual newlyweds, and if Oaxacan brides toss their bouquets, my money is on this girl in lime green. I am always perplexed at the sensuality of Mexico, home of the second most Catholics in the world, and Oaxaca does nothing to reduce my curiosity. Though it is famous for its festivals, food, and mezcal, I think “City of Necking Teenagers” must surely be the city’s slogan.[19] Parts of Oaxaca’s streets are connected by narrow arteries that open up into small squares, then disappear again on the other side, and counting the young couples, wearing matching school uniforms and so intertwined I cannot tell where boy stops and girl begins, becomes pastime.

There are several markets in or near the main square. One is dedicated largely to textiles of bedspreads and pillow cases and intricately embroidered shirts and dresses; one to touristy arts and crafts of hammocks, cheap lucha libre masks, and alebrijes, the fantastical and colorful Mexican folk art animals; another seemingly to the local delicacies of fried grasshoppers, piled into great wooden bowls, and stacks of dried maguey worms dangling on threads like fish on a stringer; they move and spin in the breeze, a mobile for baby ogres. But the largest market – Central de Abastos – is on the outskirts of town, and Sundays brings Oaxacans from all over the state selling anything that isn’t permanently affixed to the earth. Like many markets in third-world countries, the U.S. State Department advises I watch out for pickpockets, but it’s unnecessary caution: I intend to fill my bags, not empty them. Mexican markets are flame to my moth and, similarly, I go to them simply because the light is on. Central de Abastos serves as headquarters for furniture factory, fish market, florist, shoemaker, saddler, dressmaker, butcher, baker, produce, pawnshop, potter, mendicant and medicant. I walk the market without goal, directionless, moving more quickly only through the butcher’s aisles, where stinking meat and smoke and flies discourage loitering. By the end, I walk away with a dozen eggs, a pound of skirt steak, tortillas, a pint of honey, a pineapple, a knot of quesillo,[20] and six small avocados, all for less than $6.

The market is ringed with dilapidated and dusty maroon and white taxis, colectivos that make shared runs between Central de Abastos and the towns near Oaxaca; they announce their destinations with elaborately lettered village names scrolled across the top of the windshield. A row of food stalls align the pereferico road outside the market, small trailers with bar seating for four or five, stacks of meat on a vertical spit, slowly rotating around a natural gas flame; the cook expertly shaves off thin slices into a small flour tortilla and adds pineapple squares he slashes from atop of the rotisserie, catching them into the tortilla like a bartender trick from a campy chain restaurant. The gringas, topped with salsa and quesillo, are tacos dopamine, and my nephew and I eat them until we’re too tired to chew with our mouths closed. At night we walk the streets, intermixing with the comparsas and other tourists, watching young kids dancing on tall stilts and listening to trumpets blaring; they are the happiest of instruments, I think, because it must be impossible to play them quietly. We sip artisanal mezcal – a redundancy in Oaxaca if there ever was one – and yes, the hipsters are here. Mezcal is elementally local, and the best is harvested, by hand, either illegally or under restricted permits, from the mountains around Oaxaca, but hipsters have rolled in and made it bougie. The indigenous owner of a local distillery outside the city tells us he drinks about five shots a day, the first as soon as he rolls out of bed, while the bartender at Mezcaleria Los Amantes in the tourist district pours delicately with accompanying grandiloquent narration and tells us that one must drink mezcal “like you kiss.”[21] Regardless, and unlike Colombia’s aguardiente – literally, “fire water” – this shit is tasty.

My nephew leaves after a week, off to Mexico City where he will lose his wallet and identification, and then to Bogota and Cartagena, where in the surrounding jungle he will touch a bird or a cat or a wild pig and contract the local version of salmonella or jungle fever, completing a long thru-hike despite delirium and explosive diarrhea, returning to town on the back of a donkey, triumphant. I am left to deal with the unfucking.

I switch my Spanish lessons from the group setting with the Pelos Azules to one-on-one courses – again, the seclusion – with Manuel, a bespectacled twenty-something Zapotec who rides the bus well over an hour each way in order to attempt to teach me Spanish in a Oaxacan coffee shop. He is bright and motivated, and in between flashcards and oversugared coffee, we talk about the prospects of work other than language instruction that perhaps pays more, or even of living somewhere other than Oaxaca. Manuel is, in any conventional American wisdom, broke. He is married with a child, has no car, no savings, and lives on a small farm with his parents. He survives, in the most literal sense, day by day, and espouses happiness. Though I am not surprised, I press him. Studies have shown that though there is happiness in poverty – as there is in wealth – there is a threshold that corresponds with simple survival. What and when we eat; our labor as it relates to our physical and mental health; whether we’re able to provide for our families; or even to be able to identify a future – preferably bright – all contribute to our ability to be “happy”, whatever that means. I have my own experience with this level of poverty, and believe that not being able to plan for anything beyond the next paycheck alters us physiologically and, most often, detrimentally. But there is a higher limit as well, and the rich certainly experience inadequacies, and unfulfillment, and sadness, and cheating spouses and cancer and shitty children and a lack of purpose. What they don’t experience is a fear of losing a roof over their heads or an uncertainty as to where their next meal is coming from, or whether they should use their last dollars for gas money to get to work or breakfast for their children.

Manuel is undeterred. Money pays for things, he admits, and can buy security, but under no circumstance can it buy happiness. We worship that which we choose; some choose money or fame or time or reputation. Manuel chooses the present. “Purpose and happiness is where I find it.”

*****

The exterior wall between my apartment and the silver mine next to me serves as ad hoc soccer goal, three or four kids kicking a raggedy ball, piles of dog shit no doubt serving as impromptu defenders. An overweight boy is one of the few kids I observe wearing shorts in the temperate Oaxacan weather; he is the only one without a shirt. I think he must fancy himself the last real man in Oaxaca. He also unknowingly teaches me Spanish – gol!, yells a child; no es!, answers the fat kid – and that I can recognize present tense warms me. The past and future are simply simulations in your mind, I think, and the only real thing is the now. The future is pure speculation, and history is rarely true – or at least not the whole truth. For example, I was born in America not as a result of my mother’s heroic attempt to ensure my American citizenship, but simply because the hospitals were better there. She was not thinking of my future, but rather my (at the time) present, and the idea that my immediate vitality might be at risk if I were to be born in a subpar hospital. This is, I think, a good lesson. Perception might be reality, but it doesn’t have to be, and we can’t trade seclusion for clarity, any more than we can trade a country for a shirt. The trades we make are constructions of our own imagination, as are the things we choose to worship.

I choose to worship the present.


[1] Such a clinical way to describe one’s begatter, but what in lieu of? Natural father? Paterfamilias? Perhaps, given my ongoing attempts to learn Spanish and in a nod to Vice President Pence’s glorious display of mailing-it-in code-switching, my padre biológico.

[2] Even in dreams: Though most of mine are Daliesque – a few of the more memorable include switch-hitting dinosaurs fungoing rocks in my direction while I rowed a boat across Lake Shasta; crocodiles swimming backwards while swallowing my friend Ted; and a Bolivian marching band drum-and-fifing Jesus and his entourage up a Greek hillside switchback – some of my dreams are of such lucidity they effect real life. As in: I once dreamed I won the single sculls silver medal for Mexico at the 2004 Summer Olympics. I knew not whether to salute the flag or hold my hand over my heart; regardless, it inspired me to take up the real thing, and yes, you are reading a first-person travel narrative typed by the calloused hands of the Novice Division Champion, single sculls, 2007 Head of the Occoquan.

[3] Where are you from, gringo? Like the ferengis of Ethiopia or the muzungus of Uganda, gringo in Mexico is a ubiquitous term for just about any foreigner, and is not reserved for their neighbors to north. The term is Spanish in origin, and was intended for Greeks (griego); the Spaniards brought it with them to New Spain, where it eventually morphed to ‘gringo.’ Not to worry; much like “Canuck,” it’s not necessarily an insult. But have no doubt – you’ll know when it is.

[4] Such a vicious pairing of words, sexual and assault. No room or time in today’s world for clarification or elaboration, let alone consideration of evidence (or a lack thereof) or truthfulness of an accuser, or even an accused’s answer of “no, I didn’t.” As contrast, note that assault alone has become downright banal: Mayor Pete Buttigieg described President Trump’s draft-avoiding fake injury an “assault on the honor of this country.” Writer Mark Shea called Trump an “assault on common human decency.” The New York Times cited his “assault on climate science.” The watchdog group Common Cause has an entire website based on Trump’s “physical assault of the press.” The Washington Post cites his “assault on democracy,” and Rainforest Rescue blasts his “assault on US National Monuments.” Former CIA Director Mike Hayden wrote an entire book on it, and specifically Trump’s apparent “assault on intelligence.”

[5] No, I didn’t.

[6] Why are we only impervious? Can we not be pervious? Can we not be whelmed? Or plussed, gruntled, or combobulated? When I show mercy, am I not with ruth? Is my full torso not my riff? If I’ve dismembered a limb, can I not remember it? If I work for myself, am I jugated? Can I not be ept with my writing? And don’t get me started on ‘regardless’. Regardless, I love words, and remain fully gusted with the English language.

[7] In what is surely enshrined in the Pantheon of the Most Tiger Momish Things ever Uttered, Abu Abdallah’s mother, seeing him burst into tears upon one last look at his former kingdom, said “you do well, my son, to cry like a woman for what you couldn’t defend like a man.”

[8] Of Italians, Ligurians, and Genoans: Contemporary language refers to Columbus as Italian, but like his “discovery” of America, the truth evolves. Columbus was ostensibly born in Genoa, spoke Ligurian (though wrote almost exclusively in Spanish), and surely referred to himself as Genoese, yet even that is scrutinized – there are theories he was Catalan, Iberian-Jewish, Greek, Portuguese, Polish, Sardinian, Corsican, Norwegian, and – because why not – Scottish.

[9] “Who do we blame for the soul patch?” asks Vox. Indeed, whom do we blame? Despite the unlikely event one’s soul might escape from a leaky chin, a soul patch does not, in fact, patch anything. It’s just a shitty goatee abbreviated, and we’re all to blame.

[10] Why no gender-neutral English word for the child of a sibling? Why be forced to write “my oldest niece or nephew” when sobrino, or neveux, or the delicious but unwieldy geschwisterkinder will do? I propose siskid (or, if you must, brokid. Or sibkid. Or cuzkid).

[11] Important to note that Mr. Jefferson most likely cribbed this sentiment from Epicurus, a Roman philosopher who believed in the importance of living the good life. Despite dying from dysentery and a urinary tract infection (perhaps he led a life just a little too good) Epicurus was Epicurean to the end: “I have written this letter to you on a happy day to me, which is also the last day of my life. For I have been attacked by a painful inability to urinate, and also dysentery, so violent that nothing can be added to the violence of my sufferings. But the cheerfulness of my mind, which comes from the recollection of all my philosophical contemplation, counterbalances all these afflictions.”

[12] The New World Encyclopedia has a more straightforward fix: move about 20 minutes a day, feed my body correctly, practice yoga or meditation, and to do something I “really enjoy every day!” Seems easy.

[13] Original sin isn’t disobedience but loneliness, and God is patient zero: Adam and Eve left his company for the forbidden fruit of knowledge, and he’s been punishing humanity like a petulant child ever since.

[14] College Media Network ranks Nevada’s public school system 46th out of the 50 states; Forbes, 47th; World Atlas, 47th; US News, 45th; and USA Today, dead last at 50. Fortunately, none of these sites ranked the states by percentile, as I don’t totally understand how that works. Because I went to a Nevada public school.

[15] Translated, the Mexican slang for their exported heroin is Mad Libs in reverse: little bomb, pitch, white, pretty, horse, bald, load, meat, tar, scrap, bubble gum, brown, cat, the correct, goat, powder, bark, tiger, white tiger, north tiger, glass, oaf, and “fan of coco”, and if taking heroin makes me feel like I feel when I’m watching the film Coco, I might consider it.

[16] Perhaps the real reason I fail to learn Spanish is a lack of focus.

[17] Essentially, a parade endemic to a specific neighborhood or extended family, with local musicians and honoring the neighborhood or family dead.

[18] It may have been just me.

[19] Distant seconds: City of Low Awnings, City of Dog-shitted Streets, City Where the Early Bus Avoids the Protests.

[20] Oaxacan cheese, or quesillo, tastes like Monterey Jack, looks like mozzarella, handles like string cheese, and was concocted either by the devil or a harried but genius babysitter. See it made: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q3nG0ef2xYc

[21] My nephew slams his before the bartender is finished with her instruction.

Havana: Life in the Open

The cry of a baby, the gunfire rattle of a metal whisk stirring in a metal bowl, the repeated gargly “ur ur urrr!” of a street rooster, the skilled pull of a bow across the strings of a violin, a vendor’s cry of aguacate, aguacate, AAGWAAACAATAAAY: This is a moment in time in la Habana, a life lived in the open, unsanitized, raw, smelly, loud, and beautiful.  Maybe.

There are two Havanas – the one the tourists see, with five-star hotels and personalized, top-down city tours in beautiful pink and green and candy apple red Buicks, Chevys and Fords; thirty-dollar meals in swanky hotel restaurants (cheap to the Westerners who patronize them, more than a month’s wages to those who work at them) teed up with live Afro-Cuban music at your feet; a good night’s sleep in a room with the luxury of glass windows.

San Miguel Street, Havana
San Miguel Street, Havana

And there is the other Havana, the city of two million people densely packed into every available space, building codes non-existent (or ignored, or simply unenforced); where clothes seem to exist only on bodies and balcony clotheslines; where the throaty rumbles of sixty-year-old American cars, held together with the Cuban equivalent of baling wire and duct tape, ply the streets in a non-stop parade of ingenuity and the failings of communism; where everyone is poor but no one starves, plentifully fed on not-again black beans and rice.  The inhabitants of this five-hundred-year-old city live life in the streets and without windows, the life private impossible, nixed by a condescending, paranoid government and a collapsing infrastructure that keeps the vibrant life outside rather than in, the discussion of whether this is a good thing or not moot, as that is a debate for the wealthy, people rich in resources or time or options.

Havana is unlike anywhere else, a city that was once among the most affluent in the world, first as a stopover for the riches of the plundered goldfields of South America on their way to Spain; then as an international commercial port connecting the Old World and the New; then as a strategic pawn in the United States’ quest for superpowerdom; and now the second-to-last vestige of a system that simply doesn’t work (congratulations North Korea, you win).  The tourist neighborhood of la Habana Vieja still exudes magnetism, but the remainder of the once-grand city invokes not the Fall of Rome, but Angkor Wat in the early days, every block littered with the viscera of colonial and baroque architectural treasures, many breathtaking both for their former grandeur as well as for their current distress.  Some sprout decades-old trees literally growing from their walls and roofs, yet all but the most decrepit still provide housing for the city’s residents.

To be a Habanero is to be communal, to have limited choices, to be resourceful, and to be really, really patient, because in Havana you wait.  You wait at a government exchange center to convert money (but not in line – a spoken “quien es el ultimo” to any gaggle and you instantly find your place in the queue); outside upscale restaurants for a wireless signal; for the hardware store to stock the part you need to fix your shower (mas tarde – “later” – always mas tarde); and, inexplicably, for ice cream, on the sidewalk with hundreds of others at the corner of L and 23rd.  The ice cream at Coppelia might be good, but the reality is that, like many other things in Cuba, it is good simply because it is the only thing Cubans know –  the nearly sixty years of isolation, despite being just a one-hour flight to Miami and with many Cubans having relatives in the U.S., has taken a heavy toll.

It has only been a year since President Obama eased the economic embargo and restored diplomatic ties with Cuba, and just over seven since Fidel (“the bearded one,” or, if you’d rather not say the name, a simple stroking of the chin will suffice) handed over power to his brother Raúl, and the Cuban government still keeps a tight control on the reins. But things are changing, albeit slowly. Twenty years ago Cubans could not rent out rooms in their homes to tourists; today casa particulares are the best and most common places to stay in Havana.  Eight years ago locals could not patronize the very hotels that employed them, today they can.  Four years ago Cubans could not buy and sell property, but today they go for outrageous sums that only ex-patriots can afford.  Six months ago, the town of Viñales, the third-most visited place in Cuba, did not have access to the internet; today the citizens wait in line at the government communications store to buy two-dollar an hour scratch cards they can use only in the wifi-zone of the village square.  And this in a country where the average monthly salary is just fifteen dollars, the equivalent of an American paying $490 for an hour of internet access.  The rest of the economy here is just as illogical: seventy per cent of the work force is employed by the government; cab drivers make as much money in a day as do doctors in a month; men surreptitiously sell coveted potatoes with a no-eye contact, whispered papas like they’re slinging crack on a street corner.  State-owned stores have limited selection, are poorly stocked even in those few things they are ostensibly supposed to have (get your bread at the state-owned bread store; your expensive powdered milk at the powdered milk and cheese store; your booze at the booze store), and have remarkably, though understandably, poor customer service.

Liquor Store
Liquor Store

At a liquor store I ask the clerk seated behind the counter if the sodas are cold.  She has options to inform her response, and could a) stand up and open the cooler door to touch the cans of soda; b) keep one butt cheek on her stool and stretch her arm the approximately two feet to open the cooler door to touch the cans of soda; or c) yell out for someone else in the back room, whose job is apparently to check for cold cans of soda.  She predictably chooses option “c”, though she does take my money and put it in the cash register.  At a convenience store (the irony), there are no five- or ten-peso pieces to give me my full change.  The clerk gives me a handful of coins and, after I point out that I am shorted, an indifferent shoulder-shrug.  Oh well.  Such is life in Havana.

If it sounds like I’m down on Havana, it is because I am.  Perhaps my opinion is unfairly shaped by my experiences:

A brief deviation, or, “That Time I was Detained by the Cuban Secret Police.  Twice.”

On a Sunday in the park across the street from the Santa Rita de Casia church in the residential Miramar neighborhood of Havana, Berta Soler and her Damas de Blancas sit idly on concrete benches waiting for mass to release.  They are dressed all in white, some two-dozen women, some holding small Cuban flags or umbrellas for sunshade; most carrying black or red purses and cradling a stem of flowers; each with a satin scarf of blue and white draped over their shoulders like priestly vestments.  In 2003, seventy-five journalists, artists, community organizers and the husbands of these women were arrested and jailed for anti-government activities; in 2009 sixty-four were released on condition that they immediately leave the country.  The remaining eleven refused to abandon Cuba, and though they too were eventually set free, Berta and her damas continue their protest.  They meet here every Sunday – have met here for the last thirty-three Sundays – where many of the women, hustling from mass services across the street, join Berta and the others in their circuit: up Quinta Avenida, east towards Havana to the clock tower at Calle 10 and then back again, where they sing a few songs and give a few speeches and then walk the three blocks towards the beach and into the waiting crowd of what they say are government employees ordered to confront and beat them.

I sit on the steps of the rotunda here, in Parque Miramar, as two men sitting next to me methodically fold and shred some papers into Chiclet-sized pieces and then toss them to the wet ground; a young boy plays with yards of Mylar tape discarded from an old VHS cassette, pausing only to take a piss on the steps next to me, the two of us making brief eye contact over a short wall that saves me from being splashed by his urine.  I wander the square searching for someone who looks like they might speak English, and find Antonio and Eduardo, who tell me the story of the damas.  I take a few pictures of the women, and then make my own way towards the beach, past a few parked busses and through two intersections hosting an abnormally large group of men and women sitting in lawn chairs, leaning up against fences, or standing around, as if in wait for something or someone.  At the corner of Calle 26 and Avenida 1a I wait, camera in hand, for a gap in the traffic to cross when a white Soviet-made Lada comes to an abrupt halt next to me, blocking my way only slightly but clearly indicating it is here with a purpose.  Two men casually dressed step from the car and walk, aggressively, towards me; one significantly larger than the other has his wallet cupped in one hand, thumbing out just enough of a cheap, laminated identification card that I can read the letters: DSE.  Departamento de Seguiridad del Estado – the Department of State Security, or the Cuban secret police.  He asks in Spanish for identification; I give it and tell him my far and away most commonly repeated Spanish sentence: lo siento, mi Español es muy malo.  He says reporter?, I say no; he looks at my Virginia driver’s license and says American? and I say yes.  I am a tourist and have I done something wrong?

I once read that when someone responds to official questioning with “have I done something wrong” you can be assured that he probably has, and probably knows it, and here I am now: I want to make fun of his trinkety government ID and his shitty car, but I know exactly why I was stopped, know exactly who he is calling on that ridiculous, dated push-button cell phone, and the fact is that I am significantly nervous.  A night or two in a Cuban jail would have no doubt been, in hindsight, a story of which I would regularly brag, but in foresight a night or two in a Cuban jail sounds less than appealing.  He tells me to wait, and then a similar white Lada pulls up, an immagracíon sticker on the door, and the big undercover DSE guy points at me melodramatically, as if there is a possibility that there is a second shooter, some unidentified man on the grassy knoll who got away, but here!, this guy!, the one in the blue t-shirt and blue suede Pumas, we almost lost him but for the shoes, that pair of analog LoJacks on his feet, here is your guy.  The immigration officer, who speaks decent English, takes my ID card and then we begin a brief Q&A:

What’s your name?

Jay Morse.

You are a journalist?

No.

What are you doing here in Cuba?

I’m just traveling.

Can I see your passport?

I don’t have it, I only have a picture of it on my phone.

You are staying at a hotel?

No.

Where are you staying?

With a friend.  Actually, a friend of a friend.  Actually, a family friend.

What is the address?

I don’t know it.

What is the phone number?

I don’t know it.

Do you have a business card?

No.

Do you have a visa?

No.

What is the address?

I told you, I don’t know it.  I only know it when I see it.

Where is it?

The intersection of 60 and 19.

Let me see your passport.

Again, I only have a picture of it, but here it is.  Can you tell me why you stopped me?

The question seems to have tested the limit of his English, because here is where we revert to purely the Español and where I have also regained my confidence, because he doesn’t understand the address, writes down my passport number incorrectly, and doesn’t seem to care where I am staying or who I am.  My increased agitation is met with bored, blank stares, and with the two undercover agents having driven away and this man’s partner back in the car, waiting, we have reached an awkward impasse.  The Cuban government accounts for about 70 per cent of employment here, and Cubans generally get paid very little; in exchange, they work very little (a Cuban friend told me of a saying: “they pretend to pay us and we pretend to work”) and even breaking contact with me seems to be too much of a chore.

But the interaction has done its job.  I don’t dare wait around to see if there is a violent confrontation with the damas (I find out later there is one), and I curse my stupidity in taking too many pictures, in talking to one of the organizers, in wearing blue suede shoes, in sweating so profusely even in the cool Cuban December weather that I could be tailed simply by following the water spots dripping from the back of my neck.  I am hyper-vigilant, and I take a long way home, stopping every few blocks to look around to see if I’m being followed.  I walk beyond where I’m staying and around the block again, just to be sure, wondering the entire time how this must compare to living here every day, because I start looking at everyone with suspicion, the young men across the street from my house who don’t seem to do anything but sit; the old woman on her second-floor balcony I pass by on my way to the third floor gym; the shirtless guy at the liquor store who, it seems, I now see every other time I leave my house.  Perhaps this is part of it, keeping the ignorant masses ignorant and the apathetic masses apathetic, this notion that you can never be sure who you can trust, or be confident to whom you can safely vent, even in just a moment of weakness, about some frustrating aspect of the system under which you live.

Two weeks later I am again detained, this time at the airport when I am trying to leave, and spend forty-five minutes in a dimly-lit back room with one man who asks me a series of stupid questions, prepared in ink, and then records my stupid answers also in ink.  He too asks if I am a reporter, this time I tell him “no” but that Cuba is making me want to be one.  Later, another man lazily goes through all of my belongings while five others, and a dog, look on; I ask one agent, who speaks English, why I am being detained.  “It is normal procedure,” he says, “just a random inspection.”

“Bullshit,” I answer, “I have watched an hour’s worth of people walk through customs without incident.  I’ve been to a lot of countries and I’ve never been treated like this.  So why am I being detained?” And now he is resigned, and beleaguered, and seems almost apologetic.  “You’re right,” he says, “it’s not random.  But I have no idea why.  Where did you go while you were here?  Did you talk to anyone? See anyone unusual?”

**********************

Everyone in Havana I speak to, or at least those with whom I feel comfortable asking pointed questions about life in Cuba, tells me to just not talk about the government.  Don’t ask questions, and don’t criticize.  I tell one man about my interactions with the DSE near the park, he tells me “it’s no big deal.  It happens to everyone.” But it seems to me to be a really big deal, because even with my view of Havana tainted by a giant undercover agent snatching from my face any rose-colored glasses I may have worn and stomping them into the eroding sidewalk at my feet, the city just seems sad, a façade of what once was.  Havana’s storied almendrones (because they are shaped, apparently, like almonds), the legions of vintage American cars Cubans use as taxis, are spectacular at first blush, but in reality they are the exoskeletons of ghosts, a conflation of American bodies supplemented by Bondo and spray paint and powered by French and Russian diesel engines, running on Chinese tires and controlled by German steering wheels with street-fabricated parts and accessories holding it all together.  They are appropriately tank-like, because but for a few of the major thoroughfares, Havana’s city streets are comprehensively pot-holed, an urban floor-is-lava playing field: touch intact asphalt to stay alive.  Giant grey dumpsters occupy some street-corners, though they are in the middle of the road more than they are not; where there is no dumpster, people just drop their trash.  On one street corner both the road and much of the sidewalk are simply missing, the telltale mark of a backhoe that simply scooped up a pile of accumulated garbage, sidewalk, road, and all.  They pretend to pay us, we pretend to work.

I experience little of the stereotypical, though often validated, joy and vibrancy or love of life that one finds in other Latin American or even West African countries.  And where a traveler may often experience internal conflict in wanting a country to remain the same – the absence of technology and brazen consumerism is refreshing, but a rickshaw is charming only for the man in the back – I find myself wishing Cuba would change.  Quickly.

The Other Cubans

The Artist:  The century-old brick and plaster house is both drunk with her art and testimonial to her resourcefulness; old keys for branches and buttons for windows and screws and stamps and hasps and beans and a surfboard tip for a mountain and driftwood machetes and the metal handles from black binder clips depicting what is unmistakably Mary cradling baby Jesus. Her canvas is never canvas – too hard to come by – and she instead uses wood and cardboard and old skateboard decks and the reverse of old posters, anything that will hold paint and ink and glue.  The ArtistI watch as she quickly cranks out three cityscapes, each with a brightly colored Cuban flag, buildings in varying stages of disrepair, and a more subtly drawn slogan, propaganda either for or against, the choice in the eye of the beholder.  She wants everyone to know that the beautiful buildings in Old Havana – her inspiration – are falling down, but she feels stagnated by the times, and everything looks today like it did yesterday like it did fifty years ago.  “Nothing is new,” she says.  “I think the muse is on vacation.”

Las Damas de BlancasThe Marcher: In 2003 seventy-five artists, journalists, community organizers and husbands were arrested and jailed for their anti-government activities; sixty-four were released in 2009 on condition that they immediately leave the country. The eleven remaining refused to abandon Cuba, and though they too were eventually released, their struggle continues.  For the last thirty-three Sundays, Berta Soler and her Damas de Blancas have met here, outside the Santa Rita de Casia church, where they protest their husband’s imprisonment by making one circuit up la Quinta Avenida to 16th Street and back again, then walk the three blocks to the beach where they are met, violently, by what they say are government employees ordered to confront and beat them.  And next Sunday? “We do it again.”

The Musician: The Malecón is a ten kilometer stretch of seaside road from Castillo de San Salvador de la Punta west to the Rio Almendares; dilapidated and ever-deteriorating buildings to the south and black coral rock breakers and a concrete wall to the north, Tromboniststorms above the Straits of Florida occasionally bringing waves so violent they smash against the seawall, flood the road, and drench the buildings beyond it.  Upon the wall sits a lonely, solitary figure with not a tourist in sight; a Miami Heat hat on his head and a trombone pressed so tightly against his lips his knuckles turn white.  Armando is a professional, he says, but lost several of his teeth to disease – he shows me his dentures – and now is practicing just to get back to where he used to be.  He plays three songs, All of Me, Memories, and the last, as I’m walking away, Yesterday, the significance of the last amplified by the supporting band of crashing waves, old cars, and history.


el CombatienteEl Combatiente
:
 On December 2, 1956, a twenty-nine year old Fidel Castro and eighty-one other men crash-landed the yacht Granma at Playa las Coloradas and changed Cuba forever. Francisco was eventually there too, a young man tired of Ferdinand Batista’s thuggery and wanting change.  Of the twenty-four men in his small unit, twenty are still alive today, on the 59th Anniversary of Castro’s landing.  Now Francisco sits on the sidewalk outside his house in the Miramar neighborhood of Havana, where he meticulously scrawls out orders for his wife’s pan con perro, pan con mayonesa, and pan con croquetas and unsuccessfully cajoles her, twenty-five years his junior, into posing for a photograph.  ¡Vive Cuba!

The Boxer: In Barcelona in 1992 Héctor Vinent Cháron won an Olympic gold medal in the light welterweight division; he did it again in Atlanta in 1996. He boxed at the same Olympics as Oscar De La Hoya (reported net worth of more than $700 million), Gimnasio de BoxeoFloyd Mayweather ($500 million), Antonio Tarver ($10 million), David Reid, and Eric Griffin; and beat Sugar Shane Mosley ($10 million), David Diaz ($15 million) Stevie Johnston, and Fernando Vargas. Ring Magazine lists Héctor as the fifth best Olympic boxer of all time; today he sits on crumbling steps in an empty doorway across the street from the Rafael Trejo gym in old Havana, a stopwatch and whistle hanging around his neck.  He trains a few locals, his son, and the occasional drop-in tourist, and keeps ready a dog-eared folder full of pictures – him with Sugar Shane Mosley, him carrying Teófilo Stevenson’s casket, him fighting in Biloxi, Mississippi – and old computer printouts showing the brackets from his Olympic and World Championships.  He shows me a picture of his dresser at his mom’s house, stacked with trophies surrounded by medals; in one corner, an Olympic gold.

Frank, Playa Setente IIThe SurferThe surf along Playa Setenta is frequent and breaks both ways, but one man is selective.  He catches waves half as often as everyone around him but rides them twice as long.  He’s a dolphin trainer, tall-building painter, window-washer, rock climber, skate-boarder, champion BMXer, and part-time model, but the waves are what he lives for.  He is, surely, the best body-boarder, stand-up paddler, and surfer on the island, and though his uniform of board shorts, flip-flops, tank top and knock-off Wayfarers would place him anonymously on any surf spot in the world, Cuba is where he will stay.  For now.

The Campesino: All seventy-eight years of Angel’s life have been on this small plot of land adjacent to the Valle de Viñales National Park, where the campesino grows sweet potatoes, zucchini, avocados, corn, and coffee Angel the Campesinoplanted so sparsely and randomly intermixed with the lush, natural vegetation that he has to hold the plants in his hands before I can see them.  An “hola” and a smile turns into a forty-five minute discussion on family, farming, hurricanes, coffee (Brazilian is the best but he’s willing to change his mind), tourists, sons and pants – the former of which he has three; the latter, one. “Farming is hard and I wish I had more money.  But I have this view every day.”

Coming of Age in Pablo’s Kingdom

I spent the most important summers of my youth almost exclusively outdoors, in the days before the internet and cell phones and when video games existed largely as upright, quarter-gobbling monoliths. This, along with the bucolic pace of my rural town, ensured that I counted the days and hours with friends, playing baseball in the streets or endless games of basketball at the elementary school hoops, with their seven-foot tall rims and chain-link nets, the temperature and aridity of the high desert air causing our finger tips to crack and split with every dribble of a dirt-covered basketball; calling out Marco/Polo at the municipal swimming pool; or playing tennis with girlfriends at the weedy, faded-green tennis courts, trading kisses and serves equally errant. Few of us were rich by even the most generous definitions; almost all of us had working mothers and more than a few had absent dads and it seems to me, in hindsight, that we spent a lot of time unknowingly teaching each other how to negotiate life as young men.

Later, in high school and with the responsibilities of a job and a rusted-floor truck, carefree life in small-town Nevada diminished but never really ceased. On summer nights our doors remained not only unlocked but wide open to allow through the cool desert air. I had no curfew to speak of, and my life in rewind, were one to look for those moments where I could have strayed down a road less paved, could be safely boiled down to lying to Mr. Crow about the ownership of a mechanical pencil, playing cards while smoking Swisher Sweets, and one regrettable night with a bottle of Southern Comfort.

I was a freshman in high school in 1985; that year Medellin, Colombia, was well on its way to earning, and deserving, a reputation as the most dangerous city in the world, a title it wouldn´t relinquish until the nineties were well over. By comparison, today’s murder capital is San Pedro Sula, Honduras, with a rate of 171 homicides per 100,000 people – Medellin in 1991 had a murder rate more than double that. And it was essentially the work of one man, Pablo Escobar.

It is hard to tell the story of Medellin without mentioning Escobar, but Hernán Echevarria, who also grew up in the 1980’s, refuses to say his name, and calls him only “the famous criminal.” As a child, Hernán lived in Campo Valdez, a poor-but-not-the-poorest barrio of Medellin where his father moved as a young man, uneducated but dedicated, working twelve hours a day, seven days a week at a juice cart, showing Hernán by deed and word that hard work and education was the only true way out of Campo Valdez and into better worlds. “It was safe when I was a kid,” said Hernán, but the neighborhood grew worse as he grew older. Hernán had a bomb go off near him one day when walking to high school, and the driver of the motorcycle responsible for assassinating Luis Carlos Galán, a presidential candidate in 1989, was a childhood friend. “It was a poor area, and there were few opportunities to work, so being part of the narco culture was attractive.” It was ostensibly easy money, though mysteriously gained, and some started calling these kids “los magicos” because they could make money appear. For Hernán, a man who clearly loves his city, the change in ethic was palpable, and he fears that it still exists, albeit manifested in a slightly different way. “Have you seen the mannequins?”, Hernán asks me (I have; there is no way to not see the mannequins, they are cartoonishly and anti-gravitationally well endowed and lined up outside storefronts beckoning you in). “You can sit in the café and watch the street and play the game of ‘real or not’ as the women walk by.” Hernán is adamant that this is not a show of wealth and prosperity, but something more insidious. “It is the descendant of the narco culture, about a perception of what it means to be beautiful and glamorous, and it’s not just for the women. It used to be okay that men could be ugly,” he continued. “We have a saying that means ‘men are like bears, the uglier the tastier,’ but I don’t think this is true anymore.”

Regardless of whether it is narco culture or just newly found materialism, being Colombian, and in particular a Paisa – someone from Medellin and the surrounding area – means interminably and frustratingly answering for the Escobar years, something they see as akin to asking a German to explain Hitler or a Russian to explain Stalin, as if it is their fault for producing such a monster and their duty to explain why and how it happened. For Diego (last name withheld), the questions are a bit more difficult to answer. The second youngest of thirteen children, he was close to his younger sister but a small child when his older brothers were in their late teens and early twenties; when Diego was playing a version of freeze tag in the streets, his brothers – at least one and as many as four – were forming the gang that would become Pablo Escobar’s most feared and prolific assassins. Diego’s last name is Italian and unusual in Colombia, and when the police started referring to the gang simply by his last name, life became, to say the least, difficult.

“My last year of high school was awful,” Diego says. “When a teacher would call out my last name, the entire room would go quiet. When grades were posted, my name would always be circled or underlined with some comment written next to it.” Diego was regularly followed (he believes it was usually the police), and one day, tired of seeing the same car tailing him for weeks, he dropped his books in the street and, crying uncontrollably, faced the car with his arms spread wide. “Kill me now!” he shouted. “If you’re going to kill me, do it now! I am just a student so leave me alone!”

The tailings stopped, but not the violence. Diego heard explosions around the city seemingly daily, and came home from school one day to see the windows of nearly every house on his block shattered, the effects of the bombing of a business near the family home. He saw a young man murdered literally in front of his eyes, and believes he lost at least ten friends to the violence, some of them personally involved and some of them not. “The police were powerless,” Diego says, “either from corruption or out of fear. Escobar put a price on every police officer’s head. At stop signs, other cars would stop a hundred feet away from the cops in case a bomb went off or if the gangs started shooting at them.”

The misery, of course, was particularly personal to Diego. One brother was murdered in Bogota in the late 80’s; another died in 1991, along with sixteen other people, in the bombing of the Macarena bullfighting stadium in Medellin. A third brother committed suicide, and two others were killed, probably by police, in targeted raids on the same day in different parts of the city. “My father died of a heart attack,” he says, “but I am convinced my mother died of a broken heart.” After the death of a husband and five sons, Diego says his mother essentially shut-down. “My best memories of my mother are of her singing and cooking. Her voice was my alarm clock, and she never let any of us, no matter how early, leave the house without making breakfast.” But she quit cooking, then quit singing, then seeing – Diego says she closed her eyes one day and refused to open them – and then, finally, quit talking. The last words Diego heard his mother say was in response to his asking why she couldn’t, or wouldn’t, open her eyes: I don’t want to see the world.

I asked Diego if he, or his parents, knew what his brothers were doing. “I knew when I was older, and was able to read and understand more, and I think my parents knew. We just never talked about it.” Sometimes we don’t ask the questions to which we don’t want to hear the answers.

But for as much as Diego and Medellin would like to leave all that nonsense behind, those who came of age in Pablo’s kingdom are generationally intertwined with cartels, cocaine, political terrorism, murderers, and, perhaps most importantly, helping the rest of the world to see Medellin’s citizenry for who they are – generous, optimistic, and kind, with an acknowledged but well-intentioned self-importance and sense of pride in belonging to something bigger than themselves. Which are all things not Pablo.

Perhaps. To a small extent, I can sympathize with Hernán’s plight. Being a Nevadan means having to regularly explain that the state is more than just Las Vegas, more than just gambling and legal prostitution (we have more mountain ranges than any other state save Alaska, damn it). Humans are naturally inclined to embrace the good while deflecting the bad when pride is at stake, but this seems a bit disingenuous. Maybe we do have to account for where we’re from. Because for all the demurring of narco culture and Pablo Escobar, Hernán also shares a telling Colombian proverb, one he says everyone knows and labels the “eleventh and twelfth commandments”: The first (or eleventh) is that “when someone offers papaya, take it.” Easy to mistake this sentiment as something similar to “never look a gift horse in the mouth” or the more pedestrian “don’t pass up an opportunity,” until you hear the twelfth amendment: Never offer papaya. Essentially, don’t present me with an opportunity – even one at your expense – because if you do, I’m going to pounce on it. This might be the culture of industriousness and optimism, but it also contributes to a culture of conflict and a history of violence that has played out, ironically, almost entirely within Colombia’s own borders.

Hernán tells another story, his recollection of an uninformed childhood discussion over the reasoning behind Escobar’s declared war against the government. Escobar was angry at Colombia’s extradition policy with the United States, which aimed to prosecute the drug cartel’s leadership in the U.S. judicial system. Escobar said “a grave in Colombia is better than prison in the U.S.,” and one of Hernán’s friends said that his father supported Pablo, likening the extradition policy to a bad kid getting disciplined not by his own father, but by his neighbor’s. “I can understand this,” says Hernán. “But I don’t think we were very good fathers.” And here is an element both Hernán and Diego raise, the importance of not forgetting. Both say the current generation, who embrace narco culture but do not fully understand the havoc Escobar and his cronies wreaked upon lives in this city, run the risk of living through the same hell through which Diego and Hernán lived.

Escaleras

So how do you do this? How do you simultaneously ask the rest of the world to stop picking at the scab that is cocaine and Pablo Escobar and see instead the beauty that is Colombia and Medellin? How do you convince people to move on, but to not forget? This is the same message the city is trying to share through social urbanism or, as Hernán calls it, “democratic architecture.” Medellin installed a grand public library, a beautiful cubist building, on the top of the hill in a dangerous neighborhood, and outdoor escalators grace the steep hillside in the depressingly named “District 13” where, before the escalators, residents had to walk up and down more than 300 steps to get to the city center and home again. The idea is not only to make life easier for the city’s most destitute, but to let them know that the government cares about them and that they should care about themselves as well. Whether the projects have improved the quality of life of the residents isn’t clear – we saw the escalators used only by a jubilant dog and a smiling little girl taking out the trash – but that the residents take pride in their community is: both neighborhoods are clean and active and colorful, District 13 particularly so. Locally-painted murals grace the walls of the homes that press in around the stairs, and house plants are in abundance.

Mural

Medellin is also mall-crazy, and has a smoothly running metro system that is the pride of the city. There is not a piece of garbage or stain of graffiti to be found in any station or on any train. The city turned the dirtiest, druggiest, prostitutiest area of downtown into a public library with a neighboring bamboo garden and monumental park of towering lights; there is free Wi-Fi in every public space; and favorite son Fernando Botero donated a new sculpture of his peace dove to sit next to – but not replace (move on but don’t forget) – the original Pajaro de Paz that was blown up in 1995. This is not reinvention necessarily, but reinforcing pride and focusing the positive. And maybe it works. Medellin, once the murder capital of the world, was named 2015’s “City of Innovation.”

Diego today is single and lives with two of his sisters in Laureles, an upscale area of Medellin. For a living he teaches Spanish and English to businesses around the city, and a few days a week he volunteers in the Ocho de Marzo barrio, where he gives free Portuguese lessons to children who live in one of the most dangerous neighborhoods in Medellin, one where you can be killed for wandering across the “invisible frontier” and into the territory of the la Sierra barrio. People ask Diego why Portuguese, why not English, but for him it doesn’t matter what he teaches. “It’s the message that is important,” he says. “I’m telling them they don’t have to be what other people expect them to be. They can be something different and better. They can be someone.

A Picture May be “Worth a Thousand Words”, but it’s Rarely Clear in the Fog of War

Please see the original posted at Small Wars Journal, October 13, 2015; by Jay Morse and Prof. Geoff Corn.

It is a tragic inevitability of war that innocent civilians often pay a price for the chaos of battle, and the unfortunate loss of life resulting from Saturday’s destruction of a hospital in Kunduz should sadden us all.  There may have been a time in history when massive civilian casualties were considered a tolerable consequence of armed conflict, but international law today demands a respect for human life that is fundamentally incompatible with any concept of “total war.”  We should be neither surprised nor dismayed that the international response to this tragedy has been so intense.  However, we should also be careful not to confuse sympathy for the victims of this incident with an assumption that the attack was in violation of international law.  Human error and the proverbial “fog of war” will always create a risk of unintended consequences, and the law that regulates war also recognizes that no military force can ever guarantee error-free warfare.

Our military is without question the most professional and well-equipped force in the world. However, while both our weapons systems and our laws have progressed, the reality is that even the very best amongst the profession of arms can only hope to mitigate the risk of civilian casualties on today’s battlefield.  It is unrealistic to expect a force to guarantee attack execution perfection, and the unfortunate casualties resulting from the destruction of the hospital in Afghanistan serves as powerful reminder of this certainty.

It is important to pause and mourn the loss of life, as it is important to conduct a thorough investigation in an effort to prevent similar events from happening in the future.  But it is just as important to ensure that American pilots are not automatically branded as “war criminals” without understanding the law and how it applies.  Some of the international reaction to Kunduz symbolizes the risk that emotion will adversely affect proper legal critique of military operations.  Assessing compliance with the requirements of the international laws of war, or humanitarian law, is distorted by the tendency to engage in “consequence based” analysis: civilians died, therefore, as Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF) President Meinie Nicolai asserts, the attack constitutes a “grave violation of international humanitarian law.”  Her statement is both premature and legally misleading.  Tragic images of civilian suffering naturally paints a legally troubling picture, but a force’s compliance with international law must be judged upon an accurate understanding of the law, focused on the pre-attack situation – not on post-attack effects.

There should be no debate as to what law applied to regulate the Kunduz attack decisions.  While international humanitarian law was developed primarily to regulate war between states, there are core rules that regulate all conflicts, including those against non-state organized armed groups, such as the ongoing conflict in Afghanistan.  Forces engaged in these hybrid conflicts are bound by certain fundamental international legal obligations: to limit deliberate attacks only to “military objectives” (a legitimate military target); to take all feasible precautions to mitigate the risk to civilians resulting from those attacks; and to forego any attack on a lawful military target when the anticipated civilian casualties would significantly outweigh the anticipated military advantage to be gained from the attack (the so-called “proportionality” rule).  In addition to these general obligations, one rule seems particularly relevant to the bombing in Kunduz: the extensive protection afforded to hospitals.

Though no object in the battle-space enjoys more legal protection, a hospital is not completely immune from being lawfully attacked, despite an MSF spokesperson’s assertion that “bombing a fully functioning hospital can never be justified.”  International law prohibits attacking hospitals so long as they are not being used by the enemy in a manner inconsistent with their exclusive medical and humanitarian function. Even when a commander has intelligence indicating misuse, humanitarian law requires that the commander, normally through an intermediary like the International Committee of the Red Cross, issue a demand to the enemy that he terminate his misuse of the hospital before any attack may be lawfully conducted. The only exception to this requirement is when friendly forces are actually under fire from a hospital and have no alternative other than to respond with force.

Any attack on a hospital will automatically trigger intense scrutiny by U.S. commanders, but it is invalid to immediately draw a conclusion that the law must have been violated simply because a hospital was hit. Too many variables need to be assessed.  If the hospital was intentionally targeted, an investigation must determine whether notice of the hospital’s status was conveyed to U.S. forces; if the notice was properly integrated into the planning process; if there were indications that the hospital was being used improperly; if a warning was issued by U.S. forces; and whether the hospital was the actual intended target or was rather the result of an attack on another target nearby.  If the attack was directed against a nearby target, then an investigation should determine if U.S. forces took feasible precautions to mitigate the risk to the hospital.  The commander should have assessed whether attacking a nearby target would risk damaging the hospital; what was the anticipated level of damage; and how it compared to the anticipated benefit of the attack.  Finally, and probably most likely in the bombing at Kunduz, an investigation should determine whether the attack on the hospital was the result of human or technical error, and if so, whether that error was reasonable under the circumstances.

Answering these complex questions requires a thorough investigation that recreates the situation that confronted the U.S. commanders and pilots who executed this mission.  Nonetheless, President Meinie Nicolai almost immediately condemned the attack as a “grave violation” of international humanitarian law.  Her reaction – that because a hospital was attacked, it must be a violation of international law – is an unfortunate outgrowth of the incorrect assumption that modern professional militaries are capable of executing error-free operations.  This assumption is completely at odds with the reality of warfare, no matter how “precision” our weapons. Furthermore, even President Nicolai’s assertion that the U.S. committed a “grave violation” – the most serious category of war crimes – is legally impossible, as a grave breach may occur only during an international armed conflict – a conflict between states. Whether President Nicolai is misinformed or simply misspoke, her statements illuminate the gross misunderstanding the public has of the laws as they apply to armed conflict.

Nations have attempted to set rules for war for surely as long as there has been warfare itself, and continuing efforts to both improve and implement the law are essential to advancing the aspirations that always motivated these rules: to strike a balance between the need to allow states to wage war while limiting, as much as possible, the inevitable human suffering produced by conflict. Condemnation of attacks based purely on results not only distorts this balance, but applies the law erroneously and sets a dangerous precedence.  Of course, none of this means mean that U.S. military personnel operate with impunity, and President Obama’s order to conduct a thorough investigation is correct (though certainly redundant).  There is a robust and clear body of law that proscribes actions while simultaneously giving military personnel a structure to determine not only what is a legitimate target, but also, just as importantly, when and how you can attack that target. If an investigation concludes that the law was violated, accountability for that violation is essential.  And not to assuage international public opinion, but to reinforce the essential link between complying with international humanitarian law and legitimately claiming status as a professional armed force.  The reality is that armed forces of the United States are regularly trained on whom and what constitutes a legitimate target.  The personnel involved in the targeting process not only understand the law, but also the strategic and political implications of attacking a typically civilian facility such as a hospital.  Only a comprehensive investigation will reveal whether the attack was the result of human or technical error, or perhaps even (though highly unlikely) malicious intent; only this determination will indicate whether there was in fact a violation of the law.

The bombing of the hospital in Kunduz certainly aggravates the tragedies of more than a decade of war in Afghanistan, and will only make US efforts to stem ISIS and a resurgent Taliban that much more difficult.  But the fact remains that war today is, as it has always been, a brutal endeavor, and no matter how precise our weapons or thorough our analysis, human error will lead to tragedy.  This doesn’t make it a war crime.

Jay Morse is retired US Army lieutenant colonel and is a partner in the law firm of Corn, Jensen & Morse.  He can be reached at jaymorse.org or jay.morse@cornjensenmorse.com.

Geoffrey Corn is a retired US Army lieutenant colonel and is a Professor of Law at South Texas College of Law in Houston, Texas.  He can be reached at gcorn@stcl.edu.

 

 

Guest Post: How Trump and Jesus Got Crossways with Refugees

A guest post from Mark Moore, my spiritual advisor and a truly great person.  Also check out his non-profit at http://mananutrition.org/.
Originally posted: Updated:
BLASPHEMY LAW
With more refugees on the move on our globe than anytime since WWII, it’s getting harder to ignore them. We all know what Donald Trump would do. Send them back! Build a wall. He’s made that pretty clear. Slovakia’s interior ministry spokesman Ivan Netik partly agrees with Trump, but is a little more lenient, “We’ll take Christians,” he told CNN recently. Adding, that there were no mosques in Slovakia, so they preferred Christians only.

It’s interesting that the Slovakians, like Trump and many in America, would invoke the nomenclature, “Christian Nation” and use it as an excuse not to help “outsiders.” Just as Donald could not come up with a favorite Bible verse, perhaps they also are unaware of or forgetting what their first leader, Jesus, had to say on the subject? I’m not trying to get all religious on you, but some historical context is in order if we want to examine how Trump and Jesus are not exactly running mates on this issue.

In the Bible in Matthew Chapter 25 Jesus sits down with his disciples and preaches what amounts to be his final sermon. He says, “When the son of man comes in his glory, he will sit on his glorious throne. He will gather the nations before him and he will separate the sheep and the goats.” For those not familiar with the story today, the short version is that Jesus is boiling down religious efforts to their most important and critical points. In essence he says to a bunch of uber-religious guys, “Here is what is going to be on the all important final exam!” Pretty handy stuff to know if you are overly concerned with things like judgement day.

The original followers got the picture he was painting for them: It’s the end of times, and the God they seek to serve will come back for “judgement” and will be seeing who passed and who failed in this great test called life. On the one side will be the failures, in the story he called them the “goats”. On the other side would be those who passed the test, those he referred to as “sheep”. Donald Trump ought to love this story, it haslosers and winners built right in!

What is interesting about the scene he paints, is that in both instances…both the goat-failures and the sheep-star pupils… both sides are surprised at their place in the story. The sheep say, “Hey wait? I am a sheep? How did I get to be a sheep?” And at the very next minute the goats say, “Me? Really? I am a goat? What makes me a goat?” They say this in response to Jesus upside-down grading scale revelation which says, “I was secretly hiding all the time, acting like a human in need and whatever you did to me determined your passing (or failing) grade.” Most people of the Christian faith know this story and have read it many times. In the end it seems that it is unremembered acts of kindness that create a pass/ fail grade in this course called life.

If we think of life as if it were a pass/fail college course, it’s interesting to reflect how awful it would be to have a professor who graded like this. Imagine a college professor who looked out over her class and said, “Listen up. Put down your pencils, because in the end everyone who thinks they are going to pass this course is actually going to fail and everyone thinks they are going to fail is actually going to pass.” If a professor said this, all the students would say, “We’ll what’s the point of studying?” It’s not an encouraging or very fair sounding grading scale.

Christians today fall into two basic camps regarding this story. A more liberal reading of this section says this: Fundamentalists beware! Heaven and Hell, in and out, end times fears and judgments …are all based on random acts of human kindness. Jesus hits them all here as he talks about the basics of human need: clothing, food, hospitality, serving the downtrodden … those are the things that really matter. Indeed, liberals would not call it a “liberal” reading…they would call it a literal reading. To be sure it’s pretty hard to read it any other way.

This more liberal reading of this text often evokes the classic liberal response to organized religion, which is: “Well then I am not going to study. Sounds like its all about being nice and a good humanitarian, so to heck with all this religion stuff. Jesus just wants us to be nice to people.” If goats and sheep are not delineated based on adherence to faith tenants, then to heck with the faith and church and scripture memorizing and morality and religion stuff! I’ll just be extra nice when I can.

The more conservative reading favored by Evangelicals says that while these great humanitarian acts are certainly important, the real point of that story is the over-all message of what they like to call “the cross”. This cross-language for evangelicals is very important stuff. They rightly point out that the answer to every one of Jesus, “when did I see you” questions can be answered by the cross. Surely the disciples who saw him imprisoned and crucified must have later reflected on this story after the fact: When did I see you naked? When did I see you in prison? When did I see you thirsty? When did I see you lonely? All of those can literally be answered with the simple answer, “On the cross”. There’s your message. Go preach it!

What we know from the end of the Biblical account is that the original disciples initially scattered and quit, but then after just a few days they rallied and became so sold out for the cause that everyone last one of them would go to their death in defense of their faith. This happened, according the the New Testament, only after he chased them down and super-naturally appeared to them. A few thousand years later, with an inquisition and plenty of foibles behind them, a few billion of these followers are still hanging around and now reside in what some like to call “Christian Nations”. Personally,I can’t help but think that such a term would give Jesus the willies.

The Sheep and the goats story indeed covers the great scope of human need. The very issues mentioned by Jesus in this story are the same ones that form the primary list of concerns we see both in short term relief efforts to help refugees and in longer term efforts to build sustainable and scalable “development” solutions. These issues drive todays World Bank, they make up the “three legs of the stool” for USAID’s development criteria, they compose much of the Millennium Development Goals. Thoughtful, post-Christian or non-Christian, secular people who seek to make the world a better place realize that there is nothing really new in the world of “international development” as they call it. Development programs and policies are about feeding the hungry, giving justice to the forgotten, drilling wells for the thirsty, empowering and educating the estranged and disadvantaged. The very same issues Jesus pegged centuries ago in this sheep and goats story. Non-religious humans do these things, these acts of kindness, because they are good and right and true.

But those like Donald Trump who like to evoke terms like “Christian Nation,” should have an extra, added motivation and mandate that supersedes any noble humanitarian notions within them. They have, or should have, Jesus speaking to them once again the old familiar sheep and the goats story, and both camps, the right-wingers and the left-wingers should feel some uneasiness in their midst. The right-wingers, poised to use the cross as a way to crucify and condemn their enemies, better re-read the story and note who the losers were. Left-ish Christians, should note the original disciples response to that question, “Lord when did we see you hungry?” The original disciples did not go out and start hospitals and schools at first, instead they preached the cross. But in doing so they did not simply speak about the cross and use it as a whipping post for non-Christians, they lived the cross. They lived self-sacrificial lives. They pooled resources. They fed the hungry, the gave water to the thirsty, not because they wanted to be do-gooder humanitarians, but because they wanted a genuine, cross-like response in the coming judgement.

So for Mr Trump and any self-described Christians concerned with making America great again, perhaps we would do well to study up on Jesus’s definition of greatness. Then check CNN and see if we can find Jesus thinly disguised, huddled along various European boarders dressed as a Muslim, Syrian refugee.

Mark Moore is a contributor to Huffington Post and Author of Nourish: A God who Loves to Feed Us.