-
AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST
Better to Be Hot than Caught: Excavating the Conflicting
Roles of Migrant Material Culture
Jason De Leon
ABSTRACT Since the mid-1990s, heightened U.S. border security in
unauthorized crossing areas near urban ports
of entry has shifted undocumented migration toward remote
regions such as the Sonoran Desert of Arizona, where
security is more penetrable but crossing conditions are more
difficult. Subsequently, a complex smuggling industry
has developed in Northern Mexico that profits from helping
migrants cross the desert on foot to enter the United
States undetected. Desert crossing is now a well-established
social process whereby items such as dark clothes
and water bottles have been adopted as tools used for subterfuge
and survival by migrants. This article highlights
ethnographic data on the experiences ofmigrants and
archaeological data collected along themigrant trails that
cross
the Arizona desert to illustrate the routinized techniques and
tools associated with the violent process of border
crossing, as well as the dialectical and often oppressive
relationship that exists between migrants and objects.
[material culture, undocumented migration, border crossing,
U.S.Mexico, archaeology of the contemporary]
RESUMEN Desde los 1990s, el augmento de seguridad fronteriza de
EE.UU. en areas cerca de puertos oficiales
de entrada ha desplazado la migracion indocumentada a regiones
remotas como el desierto de Sonora en Arizona
donde la seguridad es mas penetrable, pero las condiciones para
cruzas son mas dificiles. Posteriormente, una
industria para ayudar los migrantes a cruzar la frontera
illegalmente ha desarrollado en el Norte de Mexico. Hoy
cruzando el desierto es un proceso social bien establecido. Los
migrantes utilizan herramientas como ropa negra y
bottelas de agua para eluden la Patrulla Fronteriza y sobrevivir
el desierto. Este artculo presenta datos etnograficos
de las experiencias de migrantes y datos arqueologicos hubo
collectado en los caminos de migrantes en el desierto.
Ha demonstrado que las tecnicas y instrumentos associado con el
proceso violento de cruce son normalizados,
tambien la relacion entre los migrantes y sus objetos son
dialectica y a veces opresivo.
Im watching Victor and Miguel pack.1 We have just re-turned from
a shopping trip where they bought four gal-lons of water, three
cans of beans, 11 cans of tuna, two cansof sardines, half a kilo of
limes, two bags of tortillas, a loafof bread, a bulb of garlic (to
rub on their clothes as a defenseagainst snakes), and a can of
chiles. They are both tryingto cram two gallons of water into their
backpacks that arealready overloaded with food and clothes. Miguel
tells me hehas an extra pair of socks in case his feet get wet or
he starts toget blisters from his uncomfortable knock-off Adidas
sneak-ers. He has also packed a couple of black T-shirts that
hesays will help him avoid la migra [Border Patrol]. It makesit
harder for them to see us at night, he says. I ask about
thediscomfort from the extra heat generated by wearing black
AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST, Vol. 114, No. 3, pp. 477495, ISSN
0002-7294, online ISSN 1548-1433. c 2012 by the American
AnthropologicalAssociation. All rights reserved. DOI:
10.1111/j.1548-1433.2012.01447.x
in the scorching desert, and he says, Its better to be hot
thancaught. Victor then jokes that he should make some roomin his
small pack to take a couple of caguamas [one-quartbottles of beer].
We laugh at the ridiculous idea but deepdown no one is laughing
about the fact that the two gallonsof water they are each carrying
are not even close to whatthey will need to survive a multiday hike
across the desertwhere recent temperatures have been in the low
100s. Theywill have to find water along the way and will likely
endup drinking the green liquid from the bacteria-laden cattletanks
that dot the southern Arizona desert. These men, whoI met several
weeks prior while working in a migrant shelterin Nogales, have
struggled for almost two weeks to comeup with the 30 dollars needed
to buy enough food to last
-
478 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
them both on a multiday crossing. They have attempted thistrip
several times before and will undertake this one withouta paid
guide. There is no point in asking them questionslike why they dont
wear hiking boots or take a compasswith them. Hiking boots are an
unfamiliar and unattainablecommodity to these working-class men. A
compass is tooexpensive and something that Border Patrol would use
toclassify them as smugglers. If they get caught and labeledas
smugglers, they face harsher punishment in the form oflong-term
jail time. I dont ask them if the few meager goodsthey are carrying
are going to be sufficient to get across theborder. I just sit and
imagine the unforeseen perils that noone wants to talk about.
Later, we hop on a bus and silentlyride to the outskirts of Nogales
where they will enter thedesert on foot. Out of nowhere Victor
turns to me and saysA lot of things are going through my head right
now. Imthinking about my family and Im scared that I am going todie
out there. Each time is different; you never know whatis going to
happen. . . . The bajadores [armed border bandits]should be out
partying tonight because its Saturday. Weshould be able to avoid
them. We have food and water andGod willing we will get across. The
three of us get off thebus and walk toward a tunnel that leads out
of town. Wehug and say goodbye, and Victor walks away jokingly
sayinghe brought the beer after all. I watch them disappear into
thedarkness of the tunnel and I wonder to myself how anyonecan
possibly try to prepare for something like this.
INTRODUCTIONThis article is about the materiality and
technologies of un-documented border crossing between Sonora,
Mexico, andSouthern Arizona. It is an analysis of seemingly
ordinaryitems such as clothes, shoes, and water bottles that over
thelast 20 years have been shaped by the institutionalized
borderenforcement practices of the U.S. government, the
humansmuggling industry in Mexico, and by undocumented mi-grants
into a unique set of tools used for subterfuge and sur-vival. For
people like Victor and Miguel, and the thousandsof other women,
men, and children who attempt crossingseach year, these common
items take on new functions andmeaning once brought into the desert
and deposited along themany trails that lead from Mexico into
Arizona. These itemsare the tools of the undocumented, and they are
relied on toavoid detection by Border Patrol and to survive the
SonoranDesert that has claimed the lives of thousands of people
sincethe mid-1990s (Rubio-Goldsmith et al. 2006). Those
whocharacterize the artifacts left behind by migrants as meretrash
(see discussion in Sundberg [2008]) fail to recognizethe
historical, political, and global economic forces that haveshaped
border crossing into a well-structured social process(Singer and
Massey 1998) with a distinct archaeological fin-gerprint.
Migrants like Victor choose to wear dark clothing be-cause they
have been told (and believe) it will help camou-flage them in the
desert. Although many migrants know that
dark clothing raises the bodys core temperature and signalsto
law enforcement that one is a border crosser, this tech-nique
continues to be used by thousands of people each year.In this
article I demonstrate that while migrant technologyand material
culture have become somewhat standardizedover the last 20 years, it
does not necessarily mean that thesetools and techniques are
effective or even safe. I focus myanalysis on three artifact
classes (water bottles, shoes, andclothes) to illustrate that a
dialectical relationship betweenborder crossers and these objects
exists whereby materialculture is adopted and employed to achieve a
social goal(i.e., successful crossing) and that material culture
simul-taneously acts on peoples bodies, shapes their behavior,and
becomes a medium that produces and projects socialdistinctions
(Tilley 2006:61). Material culture is not just areflection of the
social process of border crossing, it activelyconstitutes and
continuously shapes it. I illustrate that theuse of these items is
determined by a complex and culturallyshaped set of processes
influenced by many factors includingeconomic constraints, folk
logic, enforcement practices, mi-grant perceptions of Border
Patrol, and the human smugglingindustry. Moreover, the techniques
used during crossings,both individually and collectively, can often
have unintendednegative consequences. By focusing on the complex
and con-flicting roles of the deceptively simple objects used by
bor-der crossers, I demonstrate how routinized the violent
socialprocess of border crossing and its associated tool kit has
be-come, how people mediate their experiences in the desertthrough
everyday objects, and how objects and technologiescan create
oppressive consequences through both somatictrauma and by marking
people as vulnerable migrants.
I draw on ethnographic and archaeological data fromthe
Undocumented Migration Project (UMP), a long-termstudy of border
crossing along the U.S.Mexico border (seeFigure 1) that I have
directed since 2008. This project wasconceived in an effort to
better understand various elementsof border crossing, deportation,
and the human smugglingindustry in Latin America, as well as
demonstrate the effec-tiveness of using an archaeological approach
to understandan ongoing and clandestine social process.
Archaeologicalsurveys of migrant trails and ad hoc resting areas
known asmigrant stations were conducted in the Arizona deserts
north-west of Nogales during the summers of 2009 and 2010.
Thesesurveys occurred in the Border Patrol jurisdiction known asthe
Tucson Sector, extending from the New Mexico stateline to the Yuma,
Arizona county line. Migrant stations areplaces where people rest,
eat, change clothes, and leave itemsbehind while crossing into the
United States (see Figure 2).To date, the UMP has mapped dozens of
migrant stationsand collected thousands of artifacts, including
water bottles,clothing, and other materials. The ethnographic data
werecollected in the Mexican towns of Nogales and Altar (seeFigure
1) in the summers of 2009 and 2010. Semistructuredand informal
interviews were conducted in Spanish withhundreds of migrants
either before crossing or immediately
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 479
FIGURE 1. Map of study area with major towns and cities
mentioned in text. The light gray rectangular areas designate
national forest and federal
nature reserve lands. The dark shaded circle around the town of
Arivaca represents the approximate boundaries of the archaeological
survey area.
following deportation. In addition, hundreds of hours of
ob-servational data on the day-to-day experiences of deportedpeople
in Nogales were collected. Several migrants werealso given
disposable cameras and asked to photograph theircrossing for
anonymous publication (see Adler et al. [2007]for similar project),
some of which are included here. Al-though migrants attempt to
cross the Sonoran Desert at alltimes of the year, I focus on the
summer months because thisis the period when people face the
highest risk of death fromexposure. Although undocumented migration
has slowedover the last several years (see Table 1), summer
fatalitieshave risen suggesting that desert crossings are more
danger-ous and violent than ever before (McCombs 2011a).
Theinterviews that I collected with migrants during this time
ofyear provide important insight into how people experiencethe
summer desert and the role that material culture playsin surviving
this process.2
Prevention through DeterrenceSince the mid-1990s, heightened
U.S. border security inunauthorized crossing areas near urban ports
of entry hasshifted undocumented migration toward remote
regionssuch as the Sonoran Desert of Arizona, where security ismore
penetrable but crossing conditions (e.g., geographyand environment)
are more difficult. This federal enforce-ment strategy is known as
Prevention through Deterrence (PTD)(Government Accountability
Office [GAO] 1997:6465).PTD along with ever-evolving technologies
of enforcementcontrol have increasingly turned the U.S.Mexico
borderinto a militarized zone where Border Patrol practice a
strat-egy modeled on the Pentagons Low-Intensity Conflict
Doc-trine, a policy first designed to suppress domestic
insurgen-cies in the Third-World (Dunn 1996). The rampant
un-official racial profiling of Latinos, the impenetrable
fencingsurrounding ports of entry, the surveillance
technologies
-
480 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
FIGURE 2. A) Resting at a migrant station. B) Over the course of
repeated
use, migrant stations can develop into sizeable archaeological
sites
(e.g., motion sensors), and the desert itself all contribute toa
hostile and oppressive environment for migrants.
Initially it was thought that the desert would act as anatural
deterrent to migration (Cornelius 2001), but over adecade of
research has shown PTD to be ineffective (e.g.,Cornelius and
Salehayan 2007). This is especially true inArizona, where despite
hundreds of migration-related deathsannually, hundreds of thousands
still attempt to cross the vastdesert on foot each year to enter
the United States withoutauthorization. Rather than deterring, the
strategies and poli-cies associated with PTD have helped shape
border crossinginto a well-organized, dangerous, and violent social
process.In Arizona, the busiest crossing point along the
southernborder, migrants must negotiate a rugged and
inhospitablelandscape characterized by extreme environmental
condi-tions (e.g., summer temperatures exceeding 115 F) andfew
water sources. In the summer, injuries and death arecommon, and
many fail to successfully cross after runningout of water, becoming
dehydrated, or sustaining an injury.Adding to these environmental
factors, migrants must alsocontend with bajadores who assault them
and coyotes [humansmugglers] who may abandon them in the desert. If
migrantsare able to overcome these obstacles, they must still
evade
Border Patrol who employ sophisticated ground and
aerialsurveillance technology to detect and capture people.
It is important to note that the data presented here
werecollected during a moment when major shifts in undocu-mented
migration began to occur. This included a decreasein migration
levels linked to the economic crisis of 2008, in-creased
anti-immigrant sentiment sparked by Arizona StateBill 1070 that
sought to give state police the authority tocheck the legal status
of suspected undocumented people,increased federal spending to
secure the Arizona border,and new deportation strategies that were
initiated to de-ter multiple crossing attempts (De Leon in press;
Slack andWhiteford 2011). Recent apprehension statistics (see
Table1), a notoriously problematic measure of undocumented
mi-gration (Andreas 2009:85112), suggest that border cross-ing is
at its lowest level in decades. Despite this slowing ofmigration
and the fact that the Tucson Sector is now one ofthe most heavily
monitored regions with the highest fatalityrate, Arizona continues
to be the preferred crossing pointfor those who would rather risk
the desert than attempt tocross elsewhere along the border where
drug cartel violencetoward migrants has been escalating (Slack and
Whiteford2011:11). Recent research by Slack and Whiteford
(2011)suggests that increased attacks against migrants, high
deathrates, and anti-immigrant sentiment have done little to
deterthose still desperate enough to undertake an Arizona
crossingin hopes of finding work in a failing and hostile U.S.
econ-omy. Others have shown that deportation programs such asthe
Alien Transfer and Exit Program may be transportingpeople to Sonora
where crossing the desert is the only option(De Leon in press).
This analysis centers on the act of crossing fromNorthern Sonora
into Arizona. It is, however, importantto highlight that
undocumented migration is a complex pro-cess that extends far
beyond the border region. There are keyplanning stages and social
networks involved, which ofteninclude contracting a coyote from a
persons home commu-nity (usu. through kinship networks) and relying
on moneyfrom relatives already in the United States to pay for the
costof transport (Spener 2009:166171). Speners (2009) workon the
relationship between coyotes and migrants in southTexas provides
insight into both the complexities of the hu-man smuggling business
and the strategies that people useto find a reliable guide.
Although Spener and others (e.g.,Parks et al. 2009) have shown that
in many instances coyotesare important resources for undertaking a
safe and successfulcrossing, these analyses have not focused on
Arizona wherethe natural environment and social conditions are more
diffi-cult and increasingly more dangerous (Slack and
Whiteford2011:16). In addition, the relationship between
migrantsand coyotes has been recently complicated by the
increasinginvolvement of drug cartels in human smuggling,
coyoteswho work in cahoots with bajadores, a rise in migrants
fromsome of the poorest parts of Central America and South-ern
Mexico who cannot afford to contract more expensivecommunity-based
coyotes, and systematic attempts by Bor-
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 481
TA
BLE
1.
Sout
hwes
tbor
dera
ppre
hens
ion
statis
tics(
2000
201
0).
Sout
hern
bord
erse
ctor
s20
0020
0120
0220
0320
0420
0520
0620
0720
0820
0920
10
San
Die
go,C
A15
1,68
111
0,07
510
0,68
111
1,51
513
8,60
812
6,90
914
2,12
215
2,45
916
2,39
211
8,71
268
,565
ELC
entr
o,C
A23
8,12
617
2,85
210
8,27
392
,099
74,4
6755
,726
61,4
6955
,881
40,9
6233
,520
32,5
62Y
uma,
AZ
108,
747
78,3
8542
,654
56,6
3898
,060
138,
438
118,
537
37,9
948,
363
6,95
27,
116
Tucs
on,A
Z61
6,34
644
9,67
533
3,64
834
7,26
349
1,77
143
9,09
039
2,10
437
8,32
331
7,70
924
1,66
721
2,20
2EL
Paso
,TX
115,
696
112,
857
94,1
5488
,816
104,
399
122,
689
122,
261
75,4
6430
,310
14,9
9812
,251
Mar
fa,T
X13
,689
12,0
8711
,392
10,3
1910
,530
10,5
367,
517
5,53
75,
390
6,35
75,
288
Del
Rio
,TX
157,
178
104,
875
66,9
8550
.145
53,7
9468
,510
42,6
3422
,919
20,7
6117
,082
14,6
94La
redo
,TX
108,
973
87,0
6882
,095
70,5
2174
,706
75,3
4274
,843
56,7
1543
,659
40,5
7135
,287
Rio
Gra
nde
Val
ley,
TX
133,
243
107,
844
89,9
2777
,749
92,9
4713
4,18
811
0,53
173
,430
75,4
7660
,992
59,7
66T
otal
Sout
hwes
tapp
rehe
nsio
ns1,
643,
679
1,23
5,71
892
9,80
990
5,06
51,
139,
282
1,17
1,42
81,
072,
018
858,
722
705,
022
540,
851
447,
731
Sout
hern
bord
erse
ctor
s20
0020
0120
0220
0320
0420
0520
0620
0720
0820
0920
10
San
Die
go,C
A0.
090.
090.
110.
120.
120.
110.
130.
180.
230.
220.
15EL
Cen
tro,
CA
0.14
0.14
0.12
0.10
0.07
0.05
0.06
0.07
0.06
0.06
0.07
Yum
a,A
Z0.
070.
060.
050.
060.
090.
120.
110.
040.
010.
010.
02Tu
cson
,AZ
0.37
0.36
0.36
0.38
0.43
0.37
0.37
0.44
0.45
0.45
0.47
ELPa
so,T
X0.
070.
090.
100.
100.
090.
100.
110.
090.
040.
030.
03M
arfa
,TX
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
0.01
Del
Rio
,TX
0.10
0.08
0.07
0.06
0.05
0.06
0.04
0.03
0.03
0.03
0.03
Lare
do,T
X0.
070.
070.
090.
080.
070.
060.
070.
070.
060.
080.
08R
ioG
rand
eV
alle
y,T
X0.
080.
090.
100.
090.
080.
110.
100.
090.
110.
110.
13T
otal
Sout
hwes
tapp
rehe
nsio
ns1.
00l.0
0l.0
01.
00l.0
0l.0
0l.0
0l.0
0l.0
0l.0
0l.0
0
Not
e:D
espi
tean
over
alls
low
ing
ofm
igra
tion,
the
Tuc
son
Sect
orco
ntin
uest
oha
veth
ehi
ghes
tcro
ssin
gra
te.D
ata
from
ww
w.c
bp.g
ov
-
482 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
der Patrol to use lateral deportation to separate migrantsfrom
their previously contracted coyotes. More than everbefore, it is
common to see migrants arrive in Nogales (ei-ther through lateral
deportation or by choice) and contracta local guide who is more
likely to rob or abandon them inthe desert.
Given the rising anti-immigrant sentiment currentlybeing felt
across the United States, it seems unlikely thatcomprehensive
immigration reform will somehow precedeimprovements in the domestic
economy. Moreover, thestrategies of border control that are
currently in place willlikely continue (or escalate) as we approach
an election yearwhen politicians often pander to the recurring
public per-ception held by many that the borders of the United
Statesare out of control (Nevins 2002:6294). This emphasis onborder
security has long been an effective political smokescreen that
diverts attention away from economic and foreignpolicy issues
(Andreas 2009). In 2011, the Obama adminis-tration deported 396,906
people, the most in Immigrationand Customs Enforcement history
(McCombs 2011b). Manyof these deportees were nonviolent offenders,
people withlong histories in the United States, and those brought
to thecountry as children. While visiting Nogales in the summerof
2011, I was struck by the number of people I encounteredwho had
been deported after many years of living in theUnited States and
who were now about to undertake a firstdesert crossing. This rise
in deportations of long-time un-documented residents and young
adults raised in the UnitedStates indicates that immigration
enforcement policies arenow creating a new type of undocumented
migration streamthat is fundamentally different from previous
generations interms of life histories, as well as general awareness
and pre-paredness for a desert crossing. My focus on the
relationshipbetween migrants and the meager tools at their disposal
tosurvive the desert thus has important implications for
un-derstanding the day-to-day experiences of the thousands ofpeople
who, despite the current U.S. economic crisis, arestill attempting
to cross the desert (see Table 1) and howtheir experiences are
linked to and continuously shaped bybroad-scale forms of
immigration enforcement policy. Thehypersuffering that now
characterizes the crossing processis likely to continue even once
the U.S. economy improvesand migration flows increase, suggesting
that for the nextseveral years, hundreds of thousands of people
will continueto enter the desert and experience many of the
difficultiesdescribed in this article.
MIGRANT MATERIAL CULTUREAs the PTD strategy began to shift
undocumented migra-tion toward the deserts of Arizona in the 1990s,
the humansmuggling industry in Northern Mexico grew to deal withthe
influx of migrants to the region. Sleepy agricultural townssuch as
Altar soon became major staging areas for hundredsof thousands of
border crossers who arrived each year. Sub-sequently, coyotes,
vendors, and local manufacturers beganto capitalize on migrants who
needed guide services, tem-
porary housing, food, and equipment. In Altar, smugglinghas
become a major industry, and many outdoor vendorsand convenience
stores now specialize in the goods used bymigrants (see Figure 3).
Crossings are typically chaotic, andpeople often have very little
control over what will happento them. One of the few things they
can control is whatthey choose to carry into the desert. Vendors
exploit mi-grant fears and anxieties by selling them a variety of
goodsat elevated prices under the promise that they are essen-tial
for a safe crossing. In this case, desperation, folk logic,and
predatory entrepreneurism play major roles in shapingconsumer
decisions about what to purchase. I refer to thecomplex of
smugglers, criminals, vendors, and manufactur-ers who profit by
robbing and selling products and servicesto migrants as the Border
Crossing Industry. This industry andits associated goods are
constantly evolving as migrants,smugglers, and vendors attempt to
adjust to changes in en-forcement practices and surveillance
technology.
Over the years, desert crossing has become associatedwith a
material culture that includes a codified set of darklycolored
(sometimes camouflage) clothing (see Figure 3),cheaply made
sneakers and hiking boots, consumables, andother accessories.
Consumables include bottled water, elec-trolyte beverages, and high
salt content foods (e.g., cannedtuna and salted crackers).
Additionally, people equip them-selves with first-aid and
utilitarian items such as gauze, painrelievers, and pocket mirrors
used to signal Border Patrolin case a rescue is needed. These items
are carried in smalldarkly colored or camouflage backpacks that
once filled canweigh upward of 50 pounds. These goods foremost
reflecttechnological attempts to avoid Border Patrol and cope
withthe dangerous conditions in the desert. However, these itemscan
also create physical and social problems for those who usethem. To
illuminate the complex (and often-contradictory)aspects of migrant
goods, I use a theoretical framework thatemphasizes the role of
technology, as well as the dialecticaland somatic relationships
between people and objects. Thisapproach allows for a better
understanding of the forces thathave shaped migrant technology, the
techniques associatedwith different objects, how these objects act
in personaland public domains, and how these items come to be
em-bedded with the traces of human suffering. Below, I
brieflydiscuss each of these components of my approach.
Technology is a fundamental aspect of the human con-dition that
is interwoven into the very fabric of our livesand implicated in
all forms of cultural development (past,present, and future)
(Mackenzie and Wajcman 1999:327).Reductionist views of technology
have tended to focus ei-ther on the tools themselves or their
effectiveness relativeto other technologies (Lemmonier 1986:150).
Some of themost innovative studies of techniques (i.e., technology
ortechnical processes) have shown that material objects arebut one
(and not always necessary [Downing 2007]) ele-ment of complex
technical systems that also include actionand cognition (Lemmonier
1986:147148). To understandhow objects are appropriated and
employed in the context
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 483
FIGURE 3. Vendor in Altar, Sonora, Mexico that specializes in
migrant goods. Photograph by Michael Wells
of border crossing, I draw on technological studies by
AlfredGell (1988) and Bryan Pfaffenberger (1992). Gell points
outthat minimally technology not only consists of the
artefactswhich are employed as tools, but also includes the sum
totalof the kinds of knowledge which make possible the inven-tion,
making, and use of tools (1988:6). Analyses shouldthus neither
focus primarily on an objects characteristics orits effectiveness
at achieving a particular task. Tools cannotbe studied in isolation
because the knowledge needed to ma-terialize them and employ them
in set tasks is fundamentallyconnected to (and shaped by) the
specific social context inwhich they exist (1988:6). This means
that migrant tech-nology may involve commonly found objects such as
shoesand water bottles, but their exact use can only be under-stood
in the context of clandestine crossings. Pfaffenberger(1992:497)
refers to these distinct contexts of technologicalactivity as
sociotechnical systems and argues that they derivefrom the linkage
of techniques (e.g., operational sequences,behavioral patterns,
knowledge) and material culture to thesocial coordination of labor.
In this case, the technologyand social coordination of labor are
directed at helping mi-grants cross the desert undetected. In
addition to contex-tualizing technological activity to understand
how peoplemake decisions about what to use and how to use it, I
alsodraw on theories that focus on techniques of the body
(e.g.,Mauss 1973; Wacquant 1995) and the relationship betweenthe
body and objects (e.g., Bordieu 1977:7295; Downey
2007:215). Pfaffenberger acknowledges that a key aspect ofany
sociotechnical system is human action, but his approachis missing a
more detailed analysis of the physical techniquesinvolved in object
use. My framework gives equal footing tothe context and underlying
factors that create a sociotech-nical system, as well as the bodily
techniques involved inthe technological deployment of objects in
the system. Thisallows not only for a better understanding of how
technolo-gies arise but also the dynamic relationship between
objectsand the human body. I use Border Crossing Sociotechnical
Sys-tem (BCSS) to refer to the nexus of social, economic,
legal,political, and scientific factors that have shaped the BCI
aswell as the subsequent social processes, technologies, andbodily
techniques of desert crossing.
In the following discussion, I demonstrate that the deci-sions
to adopt particular techniques and objects result fromthe influence
and logic of the BCSS. For migrants, it is of-ten the perceived
efficacy (i.e., folk logic) that drives theselection of certain
types of goods, which can sometimes beineffective or detrimental.
However, my point is not thatmigrant technology is illogical. As
Pfaffenberger points out:
That a sociotechnical system develops does not imply that it is
alogical system, or the only possible system, that could have
devel-oped under the circumstances; social choice, tactics,
alternativetechniques, and the social redefinition of needs and
aspirations allplay a role in the rise of sociotechnical systems.
[1992:499]
-
484 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
Instead, my focus on technology and its impacts onmigrants
allows for a better understanding of the socialdimensions of how
this particular set of techniques is used inthe context of crossing
and how these techniques are assessedby migrants. Similar to
Wacquants (1995:85) finding thatthe boxing universe has its own
internal logic that may appearirrational to outsiders, the migrant
techniques presentedhere can neither be judged or subject to
critical evaluationthat blames individuals for using what often
appear to becontradictory or somatically damaging practices.
AlthoughI am interested in how material culture (mis)functions
atthe individual level of use and how collectively these goodshave
the unintended (or at least unwanted) consequence ofserving as
markers of illegality, my intent is to highlight thedialectical
relationship between people and objects and toexamine the blurry
line between the two (Keane 2006b).
Two decades of research on material culture has demon-strated
that objects have social lives (e.g., Appadurai 1986),agency (e.g.,
Hoskins 2006), and can oppress users (e.g.,Latour 1992). My
analysis draws on the concept of objecti-fication (Tilley 1996),
which posits a dialectical relationshipbetween people and material
culture whereby we create ob-jects to improve our capacity as
humans and these objects candevelop their own autonomy, which may
eventually come tooppress us (Miller 2010:59). Whether it is the
high fencingand cameras at urban ports of entry that shift migrant
streamstoward more remote border regions, the motion sensors
andunmanned aerial drone planes that detect migrants, or theharsh
desert that is used as a geographic deterrent, the bulkof the
surveillance and deterrent technologies used alongthe U.S.Mexico
boundary are inherently oppressive to theflow of undocumented
people. Like the panopticon, thesespecific technologies require
very little human input to dotheir jobs effectively. However, it is
not just law enforce-ment technologies that oppress migrants. The
seeminglyordinary objects that have been co-opted for crossings
havealso come to negatively impact migrants but in more sub-tle,
less obvious manners. This objectification is visible inthe ways
that migrants try to use objects to improve theirpersonal capacity
to avoid detection and survive the desertwhile simultaneously
adopting a uniform set of goods thatincreases stress on their
bodies and publicly marks them asvulnerable and illegal to
others.
An analysis of the personal and public qualities of
migrantmaterial culture allows us to understand both how
peopleconceptualize border surveillance technology and how
theiradoption of certain goods makes possible or inhibits
newpractices, habits, and intentions (Keane 2006a:193).
Thisframework provides insight into why material culture (e.g.,dark
clothing) that has negative impacts on peoples bodiesand social
interactions continues to be used by migrants overtime. Karen
Hansen notes:
The subjective and social experiences of dress are not
alwaysmutually supportive but contradict one another or collide.
Thecontingent dynamic between these two experiences of dress
givesrise to considerable ambiguity, ambivalence, and, therefore,
un-
certainty and debate over dress. Dress becomes a flash point
ofconflicting values, fueling contests in historical encounters, in
in-teractions across class, between genders and generations, and
inrecent global cultural and economic exchanges. [2004:372].
Focusing on the conflicting role of migrant material cul-ture is
fertile ground for improving our knowledge about thesocial process
of border crossing, as well as the embodiedexperiences of migrants.
As part of this analysis, I argue thatmigrant-specific habitus
(Spener 2009:226229) in the formof routinized physical suffering
can be gleaned from detailedstudies of migrant artifact classes and
how they were usedor modified. In particular, I employ the
archaeological con-cept of use-wear (i.e., modifications made to
objects asa result of usage) to provide a more intimate
understand-ing of the somatic relationship between people and
objects.Studies of artifact use-wear and discard show how the
re-peated patterning of empty water bottles, worn out shoes,and
sweat-drenched clothes reflect years of individual andcollective
suffering in the desert. Migrant habitus is not onlyrepresented in
the traces of human activity embedded inindividual artifacts but
also in the long-term systematic useof particular objects
associated with the alleviation of suffer-ing that derives from
exposure to the desert environment(e.g., pain medication, gauze).
In the following sections,I describe three classes of commonly used
artifacts (waterbottles, shoes, and clothes), highlight the
technique and logicbehind their use, and document the somatic and
social effectsthese goods have on people.
WATER BOTTLESBy far the most ubiquitous artifact type found at
migrantstations is the water bottle. This is no surprise given
thatthe leading cause of migration-related injuries and death
arenow linked to hyperthermia (failed thermoregulation causedby
exposure to excessive temperature) (GAO 2006:15).Outside of
avoiding heat and exposure to the sun (often animpossibility in the
desert), the only way to combat thisproblem is through the
continued consumption of water andother hydrating liquids. In no
uncertain terms, bottled wateris what keeps people alive.
Most of the water purchased by migrants is bottled lo-cally in
one of the many plants in Northern Mexico thatcater primarily to
this transitory population. In Altar alone(population approx.
9,000) there are at least six water bot-tling plants, all of which
produce the typical plastic onegallon rounded jug that is commonly
used by migrants(see Figure 4a). Migrants favor this style because
its largehandle and thick walls make it durable and easier to
carryon long walks. This vessel style is not typically used by
U.S.water companies, making it easy to distinguish country
ofmanufacture based on bottle shape alone. Prior to 2009, allof the
one gallon Mexican bottles were manufactured usingeither clear or
white opaque plastic. For many years migrantseither painted these
bottles black or fashioned covers out ofplastic, burlap, or cloth
(see Figure 4b-c) in an attemptto camouflage the object from Border
Patrol. A common
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 485
FIGURE 4. A) One gallon white bottle. B) Bottle with plastic
cover. C) Bottle that was once painted black with shoe polish. D)
Black plastic bottle
assumption is that white bottles are a disadvantage. As
oneperson stated: We got caught on the first night of our
tripbecause Border Patrol saw the light reflecting off of a wa-ter
bottle. Toward the end of 2009, companies began toproduce one
gallon bottles out of black plastic (see Figure4d), a sign that
technological changes at the factory levelwere the direct result of
migrant preferences. However,agents working on the ground primarily
rely on sign cutting(i.e., foot tracking), ground sensors, infrared
cameras, andsound to locate people, suggesting that it is unlikely
thatdarkly colored bottles provide a strong tactical advantage.The
insistence by migrants (and border vendors) that cam-ouflaged
bottles help you avoid detection probably reflects acombination of
peoples lack of understanding about currentsurveillance technology,
as well as entrepreneurial attemptsto capitalize on migrant folk
logic. In addition to specializedcolor and shape, many company
brand names overtly targetmigrant consumers and their religious
beliefs. For example,one company in Altar is called Santo Nino de
Atocha andtheir label features a drawing of the Latino version of
theChrist child believed to assist pilgrims on dangerous
journeys(Thompson 1994; see Figure 5). To an observer familiar
withthe BCI (incl. Border Patrol), the shape, color, and labelson
these bottles are easily recognized as both being manu-factured in
Northern Mexico and linked to undocumentedmigration.
Technique and LogicAlthough human water needs range widely
depending onmetabolism, climate, diet, clothing, and activity level
(Sawkaet al. 2005:3133), estimates of the average U.S.
AdequateIntake (AI) (i.e., the level of daily water consumption
neededto prevent the deleterious effects of dehydration) are
ap-proximately 3.7 liters and 2.7 liters for middle-age menand
women, respectively (Institute of Medicine 2004:73).3
However, this AI is likely insufficient for desert environ-ments
where studies have shown male soldiers losing anaverage of 4.9
liters of water a day from sweating alone
(2004:411). Some postulate that active adults in warmclimates
have a daily water need of six liters (Sawka et.al 2005:32), a
conservative estimate for those doing in-tense desert hiking. If we
use six liters as a minimum AIfor adults walking several miles a
day during hot summermonths, a person would need to consume
approximately1.6 gallons a day to prevent dehydration. If someone
walksfor three days, which is the approximate time it takes toget
from the border to one of the common rendezvouslocations in
southern Arizona (e.g., Three Points) (seeFigure 2), they minimally
need to carry 4.8 gallons. A gallonof water weighs 8.35 pounds,
which means that someonecarrying four gallons starts their trip
with 33.4lbs of liquid.This weight would be augmented by food,
extra clothes, andother supplies. Based on my observations and
interviews, themaximum amount of water an adult can carry is four
gal-lons, with many opting to bring between one and two (seeFigure
6a).
Migrants typically never carry enough water to sustainthemselves
on a multiday crossing, and this is influencedby several factors.
First, many crossers are unfamiliar withdesert environments and
greatly underestimate how muchwater they will need to consume to
avoid hyperthermia ordehydration. This is often exacerbated by
conflicting infor-mation they may be told by their coyote (who
almost alwaysunderestimates the actual distance that will be
walked), sto-ries they have been told by other migrants who crossed
withlittle water, or a persons inability to purchase water.
Theamount of water a person carries is also influenced by
theirphysical (in)ability to carry multiple gallons, the size of
theirbackpack, and how much other gear they are carrying (seeFigure
6b). In an excerpt from a typical interview with aperson preparing
to cross, they talk about the difficulty ofcarrying water:
Im bringing one gallon of water. I know it is not enough,
butwater is really heavy. I cant carry more than one gallon. Look
atmy bag [points to a small duffel bag] . . . I dont want to drink
toomuch water before I leave . . . I dont want to get a cramp . . .
I
-
486 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
FIGURE 5. A) Santo Nino de Atocha is a Latino version of the
Christ child who is thought to assist travelers on journeys. B) A
bottle from the Santo Nino
de Atocha factory in Altar, Sonora, Mexico
just take little sips of my bottle and hope that I find more
wateralong the way if I run out.
Those who find gallon bottles too heavy or expensivewill opt for
smaller sizes (ranging from 500 milliliters to 1.5liters). It is
common to see people traveling with less thanone gallon of water in
their packs, and the high density ofsmall bottles found at migrant
stations suggests that this is awidespread trend.
Somatic ImpactsHaving insufficient water for a crossing
inevitably createsphysiological stress, and the majority of people
I interviewedwho spent more than a day in the desert described
sufferingfrom various effects of hyperthermia:
I thought I was going to die out there . . . I couldnt take it.
Myheart was pounding and I started to see things. I was delirious.I
was hallucinating. I was looking at the trees but I was
seeinghouses and cities all around me . . . I would stop and take a
smalldrink of water but five minutes later I would see things again
. . . Ionly brought a gallon of water with me. [Raul, 36 years
old]
Additional water sources for those who run out arelimited in the
desert. Although some humanitarian groupsmaintain permanent water
tanks and water drop locationsfor migrants, these sites are few and
far between. Those whorun out of water often rely on stagnant ponds
or bacteria-laden water tanks used for livestock, if they are
luckyenough to encounter one (see Figure 7a). This practice
isarchaeologically visible via use-wear on refilled bottles
(seeFigure 7b). Moreover, many commented that drinking thiswater
causes intestinal illness and increased dehydration:
We crossed with another man who was 62 years old. He
couldnthandle it. He drank some water from a cattle tank that made
himsick. Well, we all drank it but he got an infection. The water
hadlittle animals swimming in it but we were so thirsty. . . . He
startedvomiting and had diarrhea so we took him back into
Mexico.
Even if you have enough water to stay hydrated, itmay heat to a
temperature that renders it virtually undrink-able. During the
summer of 2010, as part of the UMP field
school, University of Washington undergraduate studentSteven
Ritchey conducted an experiment to test the tem-perature
differential between white and black bottles. Hefilled both types
with water and exposed them to direct sun-light over the course of
a typical summer day. Measurementsof the internal temperature of
the water in each bottle weretaken at one hour intervals, along
with the correspondingexternal air temperature (see Figure 8). The
results showedthat within the first hour, the black bottles
temperatureeclipsed both ambient temperature and the white bottle.
By12:30 p.m., the temperature differential between bottlesreached
15 degrees (black bottle= 121.8 F, white bottle=106.8 F). The black
bottle would eventually heat to 126.3F, 6.3 degrees higher than the
recommended temperaturesetting for a domestic water heater.
Drinking hot water raisesa persons core temperature forcing the
body to expend ad-ditional energy to cool the hot liquid. This can
increaseexhaustion levels even if the liquid is consumed while
rest-ing. Additionally, gulping hot water in the desert is not
onlyunpleasant but also sometimes physically difficult.
SHOESBecause of their close connection to the body and their
abil-ity to maintain shape even when the wearer is absent, shoesare
an artifact class whose physical properties are stronglytied to
those who once wore them. For example, in mu-seum contexts they are
often used as stand-ins for thosewho cannot be physically present.
However, making shoesmetonyms for people or their embodied
experiences canbe ethically questionable (Jones 2001) and
theoretically re-ductionistic. I argue that the hundreds of shoes
recoveredby the UMP that belonged to women, children, and menare an
important artifact class. However, instead of func-tioning as
metonyms for migrants, these objects providephenomenological
insight (via use-wear) into the dialecticalrelationship between
people (in this case their feet) and thedesert.
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 487
FIGURE 6. A) Shopping for water. B) Packing a backpack
The shoes most commonly worn by migrants are inex-pensive
Chinese- or Mexican-made sneakers, usually replicasof higher priced
U.S. models (see Figure 9). These shoes areoften ill-fitting,
poorly constructed, and generally not well-suited for rugged desert
hiking (see Figure 10). They offerlittle ankle support, have hard
rubber bottoms that easily
FIGURE 7. A) Filling up bottles at a cattle tank. B) Recovered
bottle filled with green cattle tank water
wear through, and have soles that frequently detach fromtheir
leather or plastic uppers. It is common for people tocarry an extra
pair of shoes (in case their first pair breaks)and super glue for
ad hoc repairs. Sneakers are common,but those who cannot afford
them or who choose to wearsomething more familiar will attempt to
cross the desertin styles including cowboy boots, dress shoes,
cheap hikingboots, and traditional sandals.
Technique and LogicMost migrants cannot afford high-end hiking
boots, but theirpreference for sneakers is not a simple economic
issue. In-dividuals may be familiar with hiking boots, but opt
forsneakers because they have never worn hiking boots, theybelieve
that sneakers are more appropriate for the desert, orthey choose to
wear the shoe style they think will both getthem through the desert
and stylistically help them blendin once in the United States. It
is not uncommon to seeMexican and Central Americans crossing the
desert withfresh haircuts and new sneakers. Many undocumented
mi-grants assume that the best way to avoid detection is to notlook
poor, a strategy that can backfire. I once observed aMexican
immigration official board a bus in Chiapas and sin-gle out and
remove a group of Central American migrantswhose new wardrobes,
fresh haircuts, and shiny sneakerscaused them to stand out against
the rest of the passengerswho appeared to be working-class,
underdressed Mexicans.Although sneakers may be the most accessible
and culturallypreferred type of footwear for migrants, their use in
thedesert has harmful impacts on peoples feet.
Somatic ImpactFriction blisters are subdermal pockets of fluid
caused byforceful rubbing. After hyperthermia-related injuries,
blis-ters on feet are the most common physical trauma expe-rienced
by migrants (see Figure 11). During normal long-distance hiking
these injuries can be caused by poorly condi-tioned feet,
ill-fitting shoes and socks, improper footwear,heat, and moisture,
all of which are typical conditions forborder crossers. Migrant
blister problems are exacerbatedby cheaply made shoes (esp. if they
are not broken in), a
-
488 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
FIGURE 8. Results from an experiment comparing the water
temperature in white and black plastic bottles (Courtesy of Steven
Ritchey)
persons failure to recognize and adequately treat the
earlystages of a blister, and unhygienic desert conditions that
canlead to infection. Migrants who employ a guide are often atthe
mercy of their coyote who typically dictates if and whenthe group
can stop and rest. Additionally, Border Patrolsrelentless pursuit
of migrants by air and land, combinedwith a persons desperation to
cross the border, may leadpeople to ignore foot and other injuries
until they can nolonger walk. By the time people get a chance to
change theirshoes, socks, or apply first-aid, their blisters may
have be-come severe. Indirect evidence of this foot trauma is
visiblearchaeologically in the bloody socks, gauze, and worn
outshoes (see Figure 12) that are often recovered at
migrantstations located several days walk from the border. Thosewho
develop severe blisters sometimes only stop walkingonce they are
captured by Border Patrol or when their feetliterally give out.
This extreme walking behavior is logicalif one considers that many
who undertake crossings are es-caping some of the most impoverished
communities in LatinAmerica (and beyond) or trying to return home
to theirfamilies in the United States at any cost, even death.
Ivewitnessed this desperation when I have encountered peoplein the
desert who were suffering from extreme dehydra-
tion, excruciating blisters, and life-threatening injuries
buthad to be thoroughly convinced to go to the hospital to
avoidimpending death.
CLOTHINGRecent anthropological studies of clothing have focused
onthe dialectical relationship between people and the objectswith
which they adorn their bodies (Miller 2010:1241).Moving beyond
previous semiotic studies of clothing thattended to emphasize the
ways in which these items repre-sented differences (e.g., class),
these new analyses highlightthe active and substantial role that
dress plays in creating andshaping peoples experiences and
determining what consti-tutes the self (e.g., Banerjee and Miller
2003). For example,in her study of sarongs in Eastern Indonesia,
Catherine Aller-ton (2007:2537) found that they are intimately tied
to thewearers body and bodily substances while also
projectingmessages that are interpreted by the outside world. Here
Idemonstrate a similar pattern whereby the clothing adoptedby
migrants for clandestine crossings impacts their bodiesand
simultaneously sends messages to others about theirsocial and
juridical status.
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 489
FIGURE 9. New pairs of men and women sneakers typically worn
by
migrants
Migrants typically wear darkly colored clothes, usu-ally black
T-shirts, dark denim jeans, and dark sweatshirts(see Figure 13b).
These items either come from a personswardrobe or are bought from
border vendors. Unlike spe-cialty hiking clothes that are designed
with lightweight fabricfor optimal ventilation and quick drying,
most migrants wearclothes constructed with thick cotton, synthetic
fibers, or
FIGURE 10. Climbing over rocky terrain in sneakers
denim. These clothes are heavy, absorb heat and moisture,and are
not well-suited for desert environments or hiking.This apparel is
usually supplemented with dark socks andshoes, as well as black,
blue, or camouflage backpacks (seeFigure 13a).
Technique and LogicSimilar to black bottles, dark clothing is
thought to be aneffective form of camouflage, especially when
walking atnight or when resting in shaded areas during the day.
How-ever, as previously noted, most of the methods Border Pa-trol
uses to detect migrants rely on remote sensing, sign-cutting, and
infrared. A description of the infrared thermalimaging used by
Border Patrol suggests that dark clothingis useless against (and
may actually assist) this surveillancetechnology:
All objects that are not at absolute zero temperature emit
varioustypes of electromagnetic radiation including infrared. The
hotteran object gets, the more infrared radiation is emitted. . . .
Blackercolors and duller surfaces usually have a higher emissivity
andradiate infrared energy more effectively. . . . Due to their
ownlevels of infrared heat energy, people are easily seen 24 hours
aday. [Mesenbrink 2001]
Somatic ImpactsDark clothes absorb more heat, which can raise a
personscore temperature and increase the rate of dehydration
andheat-related exhaustion. Compounding the issue of heat
ab-sorption is the added weight of thick insulated clothes and
aheavy backpack along with the low moisture permeability ofmaterial
such as denim. Together, these factors contributeto increased
physiological strain in the form of more wettedskin, higher skin
temperatures, and greater general discom-fort. This stress is often
seen in the recovered clothes andbackpacks that emit intense
perspiration odor and displaylarge, crystalline sweat stains.
-
490 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
FIGURE 11. A woman having her blisters bandaged after a failed
desert crossing
The physical stress caused by wearing dark clothes im-pacts
people individually, but for migrants as a group theseclothes
create the unwanted signal that a person is a bor-der crosser.
Border Patrol agents I have spoken with com-mented that when using
remote cameras or visual spottingtechniques they can easily
distinguish among hikers, narco-traffickers, and migrants based on
a combination of pheno-type, clothing style, backpacks, water
bottles, and behavior.In essence, walking through the desert
wearing dark cloth-ing arouses suspicion. My personal tendency to
wear darkclothes and a large backpack while conducting
archaeologi-cal surveys has repeatedly caused me to be dusted by
BorderPatrol helicopters and stopped and questioned by agents onthe
ground.4 It is not just agents who read signals from mi-grant
clothing. Both the bajadores who assault migrants inthe desert and
the criminals who prey on recently deportedpeople at ports of entry
use clothing as an indentifying char-acteristic when selecting
their victims (De Leon in press).
DISCUSSIONDespite repeated use over many years, the migrant
tech-niques and goods described here are at best minimally
ef-fective at helping someone avoid detection and at
worstsomatically and socially injurious. In essence, the paradox
ofobjectification (Miller 2010:59) is visible in the
contradic-tions created by the reliance on particular types of
water bot-tles, shoes, and clothing that often do more harm than
good:the black water bottles that marginally help someone
avoidbeing seen while simultaneously heating up its
life-savingcontents to an almost undrinkable temperature; the
cheapsneakers that migrants assume will be suitable for hiking
buteventually rip apart while traversing a rocky and thorny
ter-
rain, but not before causing excruciating blisters; the
darkclothing that is supposed to provide camouflage but is use-less
against Border Patrols sophisticated technologies andinstead raises
the bodys core temperature and helps speedup the dehydration
process. Close inspection of these objectsshows how each betrays
their user in different ways. Whenexamined collectively as an
archaeological assemblage thatgoes back as far as the 1990s, a
pattern of use-wear emergesthat is indicative of routinized and
intense human sufferingresultant from millions of systematic
attempts to overcomeinstitutionalized enforcement practices. If we
look at mi-grant material culture from the perspective of those
whoencounter border crossers and read the messages encoded intheir
quasi-uniforms, we see that the clothes, water bottles,and cheap
sneakers further betray people by broadcastingtheir vulnerability
to those seeking to either apprehend orassault them.
In their seminal paper on border crossing, Singer andMassey
argued that border crossing is a well-defined socialprocess whereby
migrants draw upon various sources of hu-man and social capital to
overcome barriers erected by U.S.authorities (1998:562). People
accrue migration-specific cap-ital (i.e., the human and social
capital gained from the cross-ing experience such as where, when,
and how to cross)during each attempt, and as this capital increases
so doesones likelihood of success (1998:569). Others have
sinceconfirmed these findings (e.g., Spener 2009). The questionthen
arises: If migrants accumulate knowledge during eachcrossing
attempt, why do the seemingly negative or ineffec-tive techniques
described here continue to be replicated? Theanswer to this
question is not straightforward and requires adissection of the
many factors that shape the BCSS.
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 491
FIGURE 12. Shoes with use-wear. A-B) A childs cowboy boot with
hole
worn through the sole. C-D) A womans sneaker with detached
soles. A red
bra strap was used to refasten the two parts. E-F) Shoe with
detached sole
that the user has attempted to re-connect with a sock and
binding from a
t-shirt.
Border crossers, even first-timers, are often aware ofthe
general obstacles involved in the process. Still, this phe-nomenon
is chaotic and rife with physical and emotionaldifficulties that
can make focusing on the minutia of mate-rial culture quite
challenging. The tendency to downplay orignore material culture in
this setting relates to what Millercalls the humility of
things:
Objects are important, not because they are evident and
physicallyconstrain or enable, but quite the opposite. It is often
preciselybecause we do not see them. The less we are aware of them,
themore powerfully they can determine our expectations, by
settingthe scene and ensuring our appropriate behavior, without
beingopen to challenge. They determine what takes place to the
extentthat we are unconscious of their capacity to do so.
[2010:50].
FIGURE 13 A) and B) Migrants wearing dark clothes
Among those facing injury and death, the failure torecognize the
negative impact of black water bottles or cheapsneakers is not only
excusable but also expected.
Additionally, the ineffectiveness of different types
oftechniques can be subtle and difficult to disentangle fromthe
general chaos, violence, and suffering of border cross-ing.
Migrants already expect the process to be miserable,and the fact
that one technique might add additional dis-comfort can be easily
overlooked. Moreover, the ephemeralnature of border crossing
communities and the diversity ofindividuals involved in the process
(e.g., migrants from dif-ferent ethnic and economic backgrounds)
means that thereis often little regulation of folk knowledge and a
great deal ofmythology about what the process is like. One only
needs tospend an hour talking with a group of recently deported
mi-grants to hear a wide range of crossing techniques that
rangefrom rational (e.g., drinking a lot of water) to preposter-ous
(e.g., a person once told me he almost evaded BorderPatrol in the
dark by walking on all fours and pretending
-
492 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
FIGURE 14. Victor and his backpack. Photograph by Michael
Wells
to be a wild animal). Migrants often lack the means to
crit-ically evaluate and test different techniques in the
desert,and many will often accept that certain technologies are
ef-fective (even if they are not) because they see others
usingthem. The BCSS has its own internal logic that is difficult
tocritique from within the system. Furthermore, the BCSS isnot
strongly regulated, and misinformation can both easilybe
incorporated into and perpetuated by the system. A mi-grants
crossing success is strongly determined by tenacityand luck
(Cornelius et al. 2008), which means many havebeen able to cross
despite their use of seemingly harmfultechniques.
CONCLUSIONThis article provides insight into the complexities
and con-flicts of the material culture and techniques that
hundredsof thousands of undocumented migrants rely on each
yearduring dangerous border crossings. This material culturehas
been shaped by 20 years of institutionalized enforcementpractices
that have funneled people toward the SonoranDesert, by the human
smuggling industry that profits byresponding to and overcoming
changes in border securitystrategies, and by the migrants who for
many years onlyneeded to evade Border Patrol and survive the lethal
desertgauntlet before being welcomed through the literal and
fig-urative backdoors of low-wage labor markets in the
UnitedStates. The recent rise in deportations and state-based
anti-immigration laws directed at policing the undocumentedlabor
force suggest that things are going to get worse formigrants before
they get better, and it remains to be seen
whether the rate of border crossings will rise if and when
theU.S. economy improves. Although apprehensions are at anall-time
low, there are still thousands of both impoverishedmigrants and
recently deported long-time undocumentedresidents who are entering
the desert. This dynamic nexusof suffering, politics, economics,
and contradictions contin-ues to shape the BCSS today.
My analysis has focused on the dialectical relationshipbetween
migrants and their material culture to highlightthat these objects
and technology: (1) are fundamentallyconnected to (and shaped by)
the BCSS, (2) are formal-ized and have a clear technological
purpose, (3) are logicalwithin the context of the BCSS but often
have conflictingsomatic impacts, and (4) emit social messages at
every stageof the crossing process. I have shown that peoples
percep-tions about the functionality and efficacy of particular
goodsare often in direct conflict with the social and somatic
im-pacts associated with the use of those of objects. In
manyinstances, migrant material culture is profoundly oppressiveand
often runs counter to the goals of avoiding detectionand surviving
the desert. However, migrants have limitedeconomic means to
purchase equipment that would maketheir trip more bearable. People
make conscious decisions topurchase and use certain goods because
they are relatively af-fordable, they are rational based on the
collective knowledgeassociated with the crossing process
(influenced by vendors,coyotes, and previous migrants), and the
sometimes dys-functional nature of different techniques is
camouflaged bya host of factors that make the crossing experience a
chaoticsetting where no one particular object or behavior will
en-sure success. Many have either been caught or lost their
livesbecause of ineffective or harmful techniques, but millions
ofothers have successfully crossed with little water and
cheapsneakers.
I have focused on the techniques, as well as the op-pressiveness
of migrant material culture. My intent has notbeen to provide
evidence that all undocumented migrantsare easily identifiable
based on what they wear and carrybut, rather, that in the Sonoran
Desert, one can expect tofind a relatively uniform collection of
material culture thatreflects a specific groups set of techniques
used to overcomeborder enforcement. To declare that migrants can
somehowbe identified solely on shoes or clothes foolishly ignores
thecomplex and dominant role that racial profiling plays in bor-der
enforcement. Simply put, the primary measure BorderPatrol uses to
identify suspected undocumented migrantsis phenotype. You only need
to ask documented Latinoswho live in southern Arizona what arouses
suspicion at im-migration checkpoints to understand that ones skin
color,last name, and accent supersede clothing or shoes. The
studypresented here should also not be seen as an attempt to of-fer
insight into how to avoid detection. No technology thatis readily
accessible to impoverished border crossers couldever hope to match
the level of sophisticated machinery thatis used to detect and
capture people. The best that any mi-grant technique can hope to
accomplish is assuage some of the
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 493
suffering experienced in the desert and possibly help some-one
avoid an untimely death. Although I have highlightedsome of the
conflicts associated with migrant techniques,future research will
need to address the contradictions ofBorder Patrol surveillance
technologies that are relativelyineffective in deterring people
from migrating but highlysuccessful in making the crossing process
more miserableand dangerous.
Intensified border enforcement, increases in violenceassociated
with border crossing, and more punitive measuresdirected at
apprehended migrants have all made it moredifficult for
undocumented Latinos to work in the UnitedStates on a temporary or
seasonal basis over the last twodecades. As a result, the
undocumented Latino work force isnow more permanently settled
(Massey et al. 2002) and lesslikely to voluntarily return to Mexico
periodically. Todaythose who successfully cross the desert are well
aware ofthe magnitude of this accomplishment. Two months afterI
watched him and Miguel walk into a dark tunnel on theoutskirts of
Nogales, I caught up with Victor and asked himhow he finally
entered the United States (see Figure 14):
We walked for five days. . . . We ran out of food and spent
thelast two days without anything to eat. . . . I got very sick
fromwalking so far. My blood pressure dropped very low while I
wastrying to climb out of a wash. . . . We ran out of water but
wereable to find a cattle tank. . . . The water was very dirty but
wedrank it anyways. . . . We ended up throwing away our
backpacksand our extra clothes on the fourth day. We put all our
waterinto one backpack and took turns carrying it for a few hours
at atime. . . . In the end I think we walked more than 60 miles.
Thiswas my fifth time trying to cross the desert and I finally
madeit. . . . I keep this backpack as a memento of that last
trip.
Jason De Leon Department of Anthropology, University of
Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 481091107; [email protected]
NOTESAcknowledgments. Parts of this research were funded by
theNational Science Foundation (Award # 0939554), the University
ofWashingtons Royalty Research Fund, and the University of
Michi-gan. I wish to thank Bob Kee, Michael Wells, Jackson
Hathorn,Aaron and Madeline Naumann, Ran Boytner and the Institute
forField Research, Consuelo Crow, Robyn Dennis and the Center
forAdvanced Spatial Technology at the University of Arkansas, and
allof the students who participated in the 2010 field school.
Specialthanks to Steven Ritchey whose data on water bottle
temperatureswere used in the article and Michael Wells for Figures
3 and 14. Inaddition, Hannah DeRose-Wilson, Emma Duross, Anna
Forringer,Sarah Rybak, and Joia Sanders assisted with the
laboratory analysisand photography of artifacts. Mara Inclan
proofread the Spanish ab-stract. The archaeological field work
could not have been carriedout without the help and support of the
many residents of Arivacaincluding Fern Robinson, Penny and Steve
Shepard, Maggie and RichMilinovitch, Shaun Quintero, Ronnie, Uncle
Jojo, and everyone atthe La Gitana Cantina. The ethnographic
fieldwork could not have
been carried out without the support of Dona Hilda and Don
PacoLoureido at the Albergue Juan Bosco migrant shelter in Nogales.
I amindebted to my friends Chapo, Chava, Eric, Polo, Netchy,
Fernando,and Panchito who introduced me to La Linea and whose
stories areinterwoven into this narrative. This article has greatly
benefited fromfeedback from several people. First, I am indebted to
my wonderfulwife, Abigail Bigham, who read many drafts of this
article from startto finish. Kirk French, Mara Elena Garca, Anthony
Graesch, andJose Antonio Lucero provided comments on an early draft
of this ar-ticle. University of Michigan graduate students and
faculty providedfeedback on this article through the Anthro-History
Programs writ-ing workshop. I wish to thank the four anonymous
reviewers whoseinsightful comments and critiques significantly
improved the qualityand coherence of this piece. I also want to
thank Tom Boellstorff atAmerican Anthropologist for all of the
editorial comments and assistancein translating the reviewer
comments into major themes that madethe revising process immensely
easier. Any mistakes or omissions inthe final product are my own.
Finally, this work would not have beenpossible without the help and
trust of the many people I have metalong the border who have
graciously shared their powerful storieswith me. Although I cannot
name them here, I have tried to repaytheir generosity by doing my
best to accurately document what theyexperience on a daily basis.
Gracias.
1. All names are pseudonyms.2. Conditions during other seasons
such as winter can also be ex-
treme and many people have died from exposure to
freezingtemperatures. Compared to the summer, the experiences
ofthose crossing during the winter are less known and
warrantfurther research.
3. One liter equals 0.26 gallons.4. Dusting is a tactical
maneuver whereby helicopters descend on
migrants in the desert and attempt to blind and disorient themby
kicking up dust with their propeller blades.
REFERENCES CITEDAdler, Rudy, Victoria Criado, and Breet
Hunneycutt
2007 Border Film Project: Photos by Migrants & Minutemen
onthe U.S.-Mexico Border. New York: Abrams.
Allerton, Catherine2007 The Secret Life of Sarongs: Manggarai
Textiles as Super-
Skins. Journal of Material Culture 12(22):2246.Andreas,
Peter
2009 Border Games: Policing the U.S.-Mexico Divide. NewYork:
Cornell University Press.
Appadurai, Arjun, ed.1986 The Social Life of Things: Commodities
in Cultural Per-
spective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Banerjee,
Mukulika, and Daniel Miller
2003 The Sari. Oxford: Berg Publishers.Bourdieu, Pierre
1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge:
CambridgeUniversity Press.
Cornelius, Wayne2001 Death at the Border: Efficacy and
Unintended Consequences
-
494 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012
of US Immigration Control Policy. Population and Develop-ment
Review 27(4):661685.
Cornelius, Wayne, Scott Borger, Adam Sawyer, David Keyes,
ClareAppleby, Kristen Parks, Gabriel Lozada, and Jonathan
Hicken
2008 Controlling Unauthorized Immigration from Mexico:
TheFailure of Prevention through Deterrence and the Need
forComprehensive Reform. Technical report. La Jolla: Immigra-tion
Policy Center.
Cornelius, Wayne, and I. Salehyan2007 Does Border Enforcement
Deter Unauthorized Immigra-
tion? The Case of Mexican Migration to the U.S. of
America.Regulation & Governance 1:139153.
De Leon, JasonIn press The Alien Transfer and Exit Program:
Migrant Perspec-
tives from Nogales, Sonora, Mexico. International
Migration.Downey, Greg
2007 Producing Pain: Techniques and Technologies in
No-Holds-Barred Fighting. Social Studies of Science
37(2):201226.
Dunn, Timothy1996 The Militarization of the U.S.-Mexico Border.
19781992:
Low-Intensity Conflict Doctrine Comes Home. Austin: Uni-versity
of Texas Press.
Gell, Alfred1988 Technology and Magic. Anthropology Today
4(2):69.
Government Accountability Office1997 Report to the Committee on
the Judiciary, U.S. Senate
and the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Represen-tatives,
Illegal Immigration: Southwest Border Strategy Re-sults
Inconclusive; More Evaluation Needed.
http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/gg98021.pdf, accessed March
1st,2011.
2006 Report to U.S. Senate; Illegal Immigration: Border
Cross-ing Deaths Have Doubled Since 1995; Border Patrols Ef-forts
Have Not Been Fully Evaluated.
http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06770.pdf, accessed March 1st,
2011.
Hansen, Karen2004 The World in Dress: Anthropological
Perspectives on Cloth-
ing, Fashion, and Culture. Annual Review of
Anthropology33:369392.
Hoksins, Janet2006 Agency, Objects and Biography. In Handbook of
Material
Culture. C. Tilley, W. Keane, S. Kuchler, M. Rowlands, andP.
Spyer, eds. Pp. 7485. London: Sage
Institute of Medicine2004 Dietary Reference Intakes for Water,
Potassium, Sodium,
Chloride, and Sulfate. Washington, D.C.: National
AcademiesPress.
Jones, Ellen Carol2001 Empty Shoes. In Footnotes on Shoes. S.
Benstock and S. Fer-
riss, eds. Pp. 197232. New Brunswick: Rutgers
UniversityPress.
Keane, Webb2006a Signs Are Not the Garb of Meaning: On the
Social Anal-
ysis of Material Things. In Social Analysis of Material
Things.Daniel. Miller, eds. Pp. 182205. Durham: Duke
UniversityPress.
2006b Subjects and Objects. In Handbook of Material Culture.C.
Tilley, W. Keane, S. Kuchler, M. Rowlands, and P. Spyer,eds. Pp.
197202. London: Sage.
Latour, Bruno1992 Where Are the Missing Masses?: The Sociology
of a Few
Mundane Artifacts. In Shaping Technology/Building
Society:Studies in Sociotechnical Change. W. Bijker and J. Law,
eds.Pp. 225258. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Lemonnier, Pierre1986 The Study of Material Culture Today:
Toward an Anthro-
pology of Technical Systems. Journal of Anthropological
Ar-chaeology 5:147186.
MacKenzie, Donald and Judy Wajcman (eds)1999 The Social Shaping
of Technology. Buckingham: Open Uni-
versity Press.Mauss, Marcel
1973 [1934] Techniques of the Body. Economy and Society
2:7087.
Massey, Douglas, Jorge Durand, and Nolan Malone2002 Beyond Smoke
and Mirrors: Mexican Immigration in an Era
of Economic Integration. New York: Russell Sage
Foundation.McCombs, Brady
2011a Border-Crosser Deaths Reach a Low, But Still 182
PeopleDied. Arizona Daily Star, October 12.
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_97e908b45cb954a9-a03e-49341f85dcb6.html,
accessed November 30, 2011.
2011b US Deportations Set Record Even as Those from Arizonafall.
Arizona Daily Star, October 19.
http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/us-deportations-set-record-even-as-those-from-arizona-fall/article_bee8c9d0-cdfa-5890-b8fe-7a033d482c4d.html,
accessed November 30, 2011.
Mesenbrink, Johh2001 Protecting Borders with Thermal
Imaging.
http://www.securitymagazine.com/articles/protecting-borders-with-thermal-imaging-1,
accessed July 25, 2011.
Miller, Daniel2010 Stuff. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Nevins, Joseph2002 Operation Gatekeeper: The Rise of the Illegal
Alien and the
Making of the U.S.-Mexico Boundary. New York:
RoutledgePress.
OLeary, Anna2009 The ABCs of Migration Costs: Assembling,
Bajadores, and
Coyotes. Migration Letters 6(1):2735.Parks, K., G. Lozada, M.
Mendoza, and L. Garca Santos
2009 Strategies for Success: Border Crossing in an Era of
Height-ened Security. In Migration from the Mexican Mixteca:
ATransnational Community in Oaxaca and California. W. Cor-nelius,
D. Fitzgerald, J. Hernandez-Daz, and S. Borger, eds.Pp. 3161. San
Diego: Center for Comparative ImmigrationStudies.
Pfaffenberger, Bryan1992 Social Anthropology of Technology.
Annual Review of An-
thropology 21:491516.Rubio-Goldmsith, Raquel, Melissa McCormick,
Daniel Martinez,
and Inez Duarte
-
De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 495
2006 The Funnel Effect and Recovered Bodies of
UnauthorizedMigrants Processed by the Pima County Office of the
Med-ical Examiner 19902005.
http://immigration.server263.com/indexphp?content=B070201, accessed
October 10,2010.
Sawka, M., S. Cheuvront, and R. Carter III2005 Human Water
Needs. Nutrition Reviews 63(6):3039.
Singer, Audrey and Douglas Massey1998 The Social Process of
Undocumented Border Crossing
Among Mexican Migrants. International Migration
Review32(3):561592.
Slack, Jeremy and Scott Whiteford2011 Violence and Migration on
the Arizona-Sonora Border.
Human Organization 70(1):1121.Spener, David
2009 Clandestine Crossings: Migrants and Coyotes on the
Texas-Mexico Border. Ithaca: Corne ll University Press.
Sundberg, Juanita2008 Trash-Talk and the Production of Quotidian
Geopolitical
Boundaries in the USA-Mexico Borderlands. Social &
CulturalGeography 9(8):871890.
Thompson, John1994 Santo Nino de Atocha. Journal of the
Southwest 36(1):
118.
Tilley, Christopher2006 Objectification. In Handbook of Material
Culture. C. Tilley,
W. Keane, S. Kuchler. M. Rowlands, and P. Spyer, eds. Pp.6073.
London: Sage.
Wacquant, Loc1995 Pugs at Work: Bodily Capital and Bodily Labour
among
Professional Boxers. Body & Society 1:6593.
FOR FURTHER READING(These selections were made by the American
Anthropologist editorialinterns as examples of research related in
some way to this article. They donot necessarily reflect the views
of the author.)
Dorsey, Margaret E2010 Miguel Diaz-Barriga Beyond Surveillance
and Moonscapes:
An Alternative Imaginary of the U.S.Mexico Border Wall.Visual
Anthropology Review 26(2):(128135)
Sandell, David P.2010 Where Mourning Takes Them: Migrants,
Borders, and an
Alternative Reality. Ethos 38(2):179204Susan, Bibler Coutin
2003 Legalizing Moves: Salvadoran Immigrants Struggle forU.S.
Residency. pp. 228 Ann Arbor: University of MichiganPress.