One of my reads on our last visit to Mexico trip was Ramón
del Valle-Inclán’s Tirano Banderas: novela de Tierra Caliente.
Valle-Inclán (1866-1936) was a Spanish poet, novelist, playwright, essayist and
journalist. When I was a student, it was his poetic works, especially his sonatas,
Primavera, Estío, Otoño and Invierno (Spring,
Summer, Autumn and Winter) rather than this novel that were in the curriculum.
However, he visited Mexico twice, in 1892-1893 during the
dictatorship of Porfirio Díaz, and in 1921 when the revolutionaries who had
deposed Díaz had finally triumphed. He met Francisco I. Madero, the leader of
the 2010 Revolution and the first revolutionary president. This must have been
in 1892-1893, before Madero became an important opposition political figure,
since he was assassinated in 1913. One of the characters of Tirano Banderas,
don Roque Cepeda, a mystic and idealist, is clearly based on Madero. Various
other figures clearly had Mexican originals, such as Doctor Atle, a reference
to the artist and writer Gerardo Murillo, whose pseudonym was Dr. Atl (atl
being the Nahuatl for water). Tirano
Banderas, the dictator of Santa Fe, is advised by científicos (followers
of European knowledge and the philosophy of Auguste Comte) as was Porfirio Díaz.
Valle-Inclán also became a friend of Álvaro Obregón, one of the most important
revolutionary generals, and himself president of Mexico from 1920-1924.
The novel reflects aspects of the Mexico that Valle-Inclán
knew, but the imagined country in which it is set, Santa Fe de Tierra Firme, is
clearly not one hundred percent Mexico. The capital is a fetid port, a tropical
hothouse, while Mexico City is set in a high, temperate mountain valley. The
dictator chews coca, an addiction of the high Andes of South America, not
Mexico.
Valle-Inclán was one of the Generation of ’98, a literary
group that sought ways to respond to the shock of the Spanish-American war of
1898. In Tirano Banderas he sought a unity of Spain’s lost empire by
creating a literary language that reflected the many kinds of Spanish spoken
throughout the Hispanic world, of which Castilian was (and still is) a
minority. My edition includes a 16-page glossary of non-Castilian vocabulary,
including many Mexicanisms and Nahuatl terms, but also the Spanish of
Argentina, Chile, words from the speech of gypsies and so on. This vocabulary does
not make for an easy read.
In Mexico, people assume from my looks that, like most
visitors from overseas (the majority being from the USA) I speak little or no
Spanish and almost always with a heavy English accent. When I respond in
Spanish they often try to guess where I am from, always without success. They
are puzzled, because a lot of what I say sounds like them, but they can see
that I most certainly am not Mexican.
My first education in how to speak Mexican was in the summer
of 1972 at the daily tertulia (afternoon coffee gathering) of my
landlady Consuelo Cevallos and a group of her neighbours. It took time to
attune my ear to the chat, but once I could follow the conversation, I joined
in. Although I was admitted to the tertulia, the ladies asked me “Why do you
speak like that? Why don’t you speak like us?” Over that long summer, I
discovered that life was much easier and more enjoyable if I spoke to the
Mexicans I met in their own variety of Spanish. My spoken Spanish was further
polished by many nights in the bar of the Camino Real hotel and at the
subsequent poker games with a group of young students who befriended me. From
them I learned a Mexican Spanish that was far less polite than that of
Consuelo’s ladies.
Language, of course, is not just a mechanical means of
communication, but a window into culture. For example, Mexicans tend to be more
elaborately courteous than Spaniards. If you read early colonial Spanish
documents, there is an elaborate emphasis on status and formal politeness. And
the Indigenous societies that Spain now ruled were very hierarchical and
emphasized courtesy and self-deprecation in their rhetoric. It is hardly
surprising that Spanish and Indigenous forms should result in a Mexican emphasis
on politesse and deference. For example, in Castilian, if I do not quite
understand what somebody has said to me, I might respond “¿Qué me dijo?” (What did you say?) but in Mexico the phrase is
“¿Mande usted?” (literally What are your
orders?). I was once told in Valencia, when I used just that phrase, that I
should not be so servile. Similarly, the Mexican “A sus órdenes” (At your
orders) is rarely if ever heard in Spain.
Then there are the words that come from Nahuatl and other
native languages. Chocolate (chocolatl) has passed to Mexican, Castilian
and English speakers. Tomate and tomato are similarly of Nahuatl origin,
but Mexicans retain jitomate, a word closer to the Nahuatl xitomatl;
tomate means that green fruit with a thin brown husk that Americans call tomatillo.
Nahuatl terms for everyday objects similarly passed into Mexican Spanish: huipil
(Nahuatl huipilli) is a woman’s blouse. A petate (petatl)rather
than an estera) is a mat, and a popote (not a pajita) is a
drinking straw. . A young child might be referred to affectionately by a
Mexican as an escuincle or escuintle. Similarly, a man might
refer to a male friend as guëy (pronounced like weigh) from the Nahuatl huey
(man). The Aztec emperor was known as the huey tlatoani (the man who
speaks). Tlatoani passed into Mexican Spanish to denote an Indigenous
chieftain. Terms also moved the other way. The Spanish mandón (bossy
boots) in colonial Mexico meant a minor official, not a jumped-up bossy
character.
And, of course, Spain was very remote from Mexico, so that
the two varieties of Spanish developed differently over time, especially after
independence in 1821. In essence, Mexican Spanish became a variant of 16th/17th-century
Castilian. I once had to pacify a director of the Alhambra, who had been
annoyed by the editing of his text. As soon as he heard my Spanish he commented
“Oiga, habla usted el español de Cervantes” (“You speak the Spanish of
Cervantes”). His irritation disappeared and we became friends.
A mannerism that is much more frequently used in Mexican
Spanish than in Castilian is the frequent (even prolific) use of the
diminutive. A Mexican would often ask for “un cafecito”, a Spaniard for “un
café”; in Mexico “unas tortillitas”, in Spain “unas tortillas”, or please (“por
favor”) might become “por favorcito” The overall effect in Mexican speech is to
convey great pleasure and self-deprecation.
Some phrases tell you much about cultural differences
between Mexico and Spain. In my experience, it is quite rare for a Spaniard to
invite you to her/his home, preferring instead to host a meal in a restaurant.
Mexicans, on the other hand, are proud to invite one to their home, especially
a foreigner or a person of high status. The guest is welcomed with the phrase
“Está usted en su casa”, “Aquí tiene su casa” (literally This is your home”) or
something similar that expresses pride and pleasure in your visit.
The formal usted form of verbs has been almost
completely abandoned in Spain; but in Mexico it is still regularly heard, even
if I now hear some shocking uses of the informal tú. However, it will
take a long time for Mexicans to abandon the prolific use of titles to address
one: licenciado (a person with a first degree); arquitecto, ingeniero,
or more simply jefe (boss).
Then there are the words that just mean something different.
If you are told that a camión will take you to Oaxaca to visit that
beautiful city you should expect a bus (autobús for a Spaniard for whom
a camión is a lorry) and you should board it at the central camionera
not the estación de autobuses. I recall once landing unexpectedly at JFK
airport in New York because my plane had a fault that required a long runway
(and waiting fire engines). A Puerto Rican employee of Eastern Airlines
addressed us in an English which was almost entirely incomprehensible. A group
of elegantly dressed Mexican businessmen asked her if “¿Nos
van a llevar en camión?” (Will we be taken by bus?), to which the airline
employee replied in appalling Spanish as if addressing peasants: “¿Un camión? Un camión es una trocka!”
The verb chingar (never to be used in polite
company), and its derivatives, is so rich a vein of Mexican slang that the
Noble prize-winning poet Octavio Paz devoted a small essay to it in his book El
Laberinto de la Soledad (The Labyrinth of Solitude). My Spanish
dictionary cites five definitions:
rather demurely, to annoy; more frankly, to copulate; to steal, as in
“me chingaron el dinero” (they stole my money); to kill, in my experience
usually figuratively (“ya se me chingó el carro”: my car is done for); to
finish something, as in “se chingaron todo el pastel” (they scoffed the whole
cake). One could add several meanings and derivatives. A boastful Mexican might
claim to be “el más chingón” (the very best; more politely he might be “el mero
mero”, the bees knees). Another derivative, una chingadera means “a
lot” or “ a ton of” (as in “gané una chingadera de dinero jugando poker”: I won
a ton of money playing poker).
A word that trips up many Castilian speakers is the verb coger,
for which my dictionary gives many meanings, of which the most common usage is
to take, hold or catch: as in take an apple from the tree or money from a
purse; hold a package; catch a bus; and so on. But in Mexico its meaning is
invariably just one: the expletive equivalent of the English F word. The usual
Mexican alternative is agarrar (defined as “to take or seize strongly,
especially with the hand”); i.e. to grab. I was once severely chided for my use
of agarrar instead of coger by a client in Barcelona, whose
company distributed my reference books, and who moved in high social circles
(he sailed with King Juan Carlos). He was greatly amused by the way I speak
Spanish, but when, at the end of our lunch, I asked “Dónde puedo agarrar un
taxi” (Where can I get a taxi?), he reprimanded me sternly: “Aquí no se agarran
sino que se cogen” (Here we don’t grab them, we catch them”).
Finally, there are considerable differences of pronunciation
and tone. The lisped Spanish ‘c’ before the vowels ‘e’ and ‘I’ and ‘z’ before
all vowels, is always an ‘s’ in Mexico (consequently, Mexicans frequently
misspell words: e.g. cocer (to cook) and coser (to sew) are
commonly both spelled coser. In place names an ‘x’ is either a ‘sh’ or a
guttural ‘ha’ (like the Spanish ‘j’): Xochimilco (Shochimilco) or Oaxaca
(Wahaca). And the charming girl’s name Xochi (Nahuatl for flower) is Shochi. Vowels
tend to be pronounced rather longer in Mexico than in Spain.
In tone, Mexican Spanish is much lighter, more musical on
the tongue, and much less guttural than Castilian. To my ear, at least, Mexican
speech has a musicality that Castilian lacks. And social interactions in Mexico
are more formal (a Spaniard might say deferential) and elaborate. A speaker in
a shop or restaurant in Spain who is more familiar with Mexican social norms
may find Spaniards much more direct and forthright/brusque: the overall
impression is that one is engaged in a business transaction which is to be briskly
conducted; in Mexico, the interaction will be longer and more formally polite.
Lest my Castilian-speaking friends consider me unduly
prejudiced against Iberian Spanish and Spanish society, we recently resumed our
visits to Spain: a few days in Valencia and a delightful stay at the Voramar
hotel on the beach in Benicassim lulled to sleep by the sound of waves of the
Mediterranean are a great pleasure. But Mexico and its language has a special
appeal which endures.