Offering love to a young Malaysia lady

Yesterday, Saturday 14 August, I did something rather unprecedented. I offered love to a young Malaysian lady in the presence of my wife. More of this shortly.

Malaysia Hall, London

We spent the afternoon at Malaysia Hall in Bayswater to support a friend at a book signing. Jan’s friend and former library colleague, Nooraini Mydin, decided to mark her 60^th birthday by travelling by train from London to Kuala Lumpur. She recently published (in Malaysia, so not currently available in the UK or USA, excep from the author) Aini’s Railway Odyssey: An exile’s 18,200 km journey home from London to Kuala Lumpur. I collected the money while Nooraini signed books, and her friend Farida charmed diners into buying a copy: well, nine diners at least.

Malaysia Hall is a hall of residence for Malaysian students in London and a place where expatriate or travelling Malaysians meet and enjoy excellent Malaysian cuisine. In addition to the canteen, there is a prayer room and ablution rooms for men and women to wash before praying. We ate early in order to get ready for the book signing. This is where the young Malaysian lady comes into the story. She served us our lunch and Noraini taught me to say “thank you” to her. The Malaysian phrase is tarima kasi (which apparently translates as “I offer you love”, a rather more effusive phrase than the restrained English expression of gratitude). The young lady replied sama sama (“same, same” or “you too”).

Lunch in the canteen

The canteen offers a wide array of dishes: I had a fish curry, Jan spinach, aubergine and rice. There was also a lamb curry, clams a curry sauce, salted eggs (delicious: we tried one), red snapper in a sweet and sour sauce, tiny fried fish. During the afternoon, new dishes emerged from the kitchen to replace those sold out. I asked about a dish of grilled chicken with bright blue rice: the rice is coloured with a flower which adds the blue colour and a distinctive flavour. Puddings are not recommended for those watching their weight or diabetics. They seem to be mostly fritters of various kinds or sweetened with palm sugar. We had a sweet of sago an

Sweets

d coconut, coloured bright purplish-red. Diners eat with a spoon and fork or with their hands.

Over the next four hours or so we watched the dining hall fill with students, family groups, and the odd non-Malay guest (non-Malays are allowed only as guests of a Malaysian citizen). We chatted to Farida, a lawyer by training who coordinates support for people with learning difficulties in a London borough. She also plied us with her home-made brownies, sardine rolls, and a sort of steamed banana and coconut pudding.

The dining hall

Nooraini teaches English to adults in London. One of her colleagues came to the signing, a Malaysian lady who came to London some 40 years ago. She had run a beauty salon in Virginia Water, not far from our home, but now lives somewhere near Winchester. She speaks impeccable British English.

We also met Sarah, a Chinese businesswoman, and student of Nooraini, who had been in London for four weeks to improve her English. We managed to expand her vocabulary, including a few idiomatic phrases which we urged her to use with caution. She and her husband established a trading company in Shanghai two years ago. They sell surfactants produced by German and American manufacturers. Sarah occasionally struggled to understand us, but speaks English with a rather charming British accent.

We also met a Malaysian businessman who was in London at the end of a long business trip (including Latvia and Sweden). He is a Bitcoin agent and also produces an energy drink made with two Malaysian plant-based ingredients. He gave us some samples.

The signing session ended with more food: a light flatbread to dip in a vegetable curry.

As we travelled home (Southwestern had cancelled the train we had expected to catch so our journey was longer than expected), Jan and I chuckled over a notice we had seen (respectively) in the ladies’ and men’s toilets. A notice in Malay and English requesting users not to squat on the toilet seats is accompanied by a diagram depicting the prohibited manoeuvre. We decided that two pensioners are not capable of the contortions required to squat in such a small space: indeed, we doubted that any of the diners that day had the required agility.

Myths, Heroes and Transformations: Churchill, Martin Luther King and AMLO

During the contest to become leader of the Conservative Party, Boris (real name Alexander) Johnson was asked whether he had ever put public service above his own interests. His reply was that he had had to postpone a lucrative book about Shakespeare that the public was desperate to read. A few

Boris Johnson as Churchill

years ago, he published a biography of Winston Churchill. Now, I have not read his book, but there is no shortage of books about Churchill. Rather than a desire to contribute something new to our understanding of our war time leader, I suspect that Johnson’s objective was to associate himself with Churchill. Most Conservative politicians like to portray themselves as a modern Churchill, and preferably as the heir to Margaret Thatcher as well. They tend to gloss over Churchill’s failures in order to conjure up the myth of plucky little Britain left alone to defeat the Nazis and defend the free world. The Soviet Union’s participation in the same war is rarely mentioned. Recently, John McDonnell, the Shadow Chancellor of the Exchequer, was asked to reply in one word whether Churchill was a hero or a villain. His reply, “Villain”, apparently with reference to the suppression of a coal miner’s strike in 1910, brought immediate opprobrium. Whatever one’s evaluation of Churchill, it was not he who brought about a Transformation of the UK that introduced the NHS and Social Insurance, but the post-war Labour Prime Minister Clement Attlee and the Liberal reformer William Beveridge.

 

William Beveridge

We Brits are not alone in loving our myths. A few years ago, I visited the National Civil Rights

The National Civil Rights Museum, Memphis, TN

Museum in Memphis, Tennessee. The museum is attached to the motel where Dr Martin Luther King was assassinated: one can visit the balcony on which he stood and, rather creepily, the exact position of the gunman in a building across the street. The museum shows a splendid film, which documents King’s campaign for Civil Rights, but also his absolute opposition to the Vietnam War and his unflinching support for workers’ rights, including a garbage worker’s strike in Memphis. One image in the film shows a striking African American man carrying a cardboard sign that reads “I too am a man”. There can be few contemporary politicians who would not associate themselves with Dr

LBJ and Dr King at the signing of the Civil Rights Bill

King  as a champion of Civil Rights, but most prefer the one-dimensional hero of civil rights, and conveniently omit his other campaigns. Nevertheless, The Civil Rights Bill, advocated by Dr King and implemented by President Johnson was certainly a Transformation.

The current president, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO), relies on Mexicans’ love for their heroes when he refers to his Cuarta Transformación (“Fourth Transformation”). The other transformations to which he refers are the struggle for independence from Spain (1810-1821), the Liberal Reform of the 1860s, and the Mexican Revolution of 1910-1920. All three are replete with heroes — and villains — who give the Fourth Transformation all the right resonances.

Independence began with the Grito de Dolores (“the shout – or call to action – of Dolores”), father Miguel Hidalgo y Costilla’s declaration of Independence from the steps of his church in the small town of Dolores. Hidalgo led an assault on the nearby Guanajuato, important for its silver mining.

El Pípila

Another hero gave the rebels victory: a young boy, known as Pípila, who worked in the mines, died laying an explosive charge at the doors of the granary where the Spanish troops had taken shelter. The Spaniards were massacred and their heads displayed on the walls of the building. Hidalgo died in March 1811. Another priest, José María Morelos y Pavón succeeded as the heroic leader of the struggle. Morelos convened the first Mexican congress in 1813, before dying for the struggle like Hidalgo.

Now, it is hard to argue that independence was a bad thing, but the results of the First Transformation were not entirely positive. For four decades opposing factions (crudely Centralists with a monarchist and pro-church bent, versus Federalists opposed to monarchy and the church) battled for power. Pronunciamientos (rebel proclamations) and the toppling of presidents were frequent. Upon independence, the indigenous peoples of Mexico were declared to be equal citizens with rights and obligations identical to those of non-indigenous citizens. Who could complain? But there were catches, which the newly equal Indians did not like at all. Firstly, they lost the special protections that they and their communities had been granted by the Spanish Crown. Independence eroded their self-government and, in many cases, villages’ communal lands. Individual liberty obliged the he Indians to pay new and very unpopular taxes.

The standard history includes a good number of 19^th century villains. Agustín de Iturbide, independent Mexico’s first ruler (as Emperor Agustín I) gets a bad press, as do the Catholic bishops. Antonio López de Santa Anna gets the blame for numerous pronunciamientos, the loss of Texas, and much of the responsibility for the later loss of California, Arizona and New Mexico. The arch-villain is Emperor Maximilian, the Austrian prince installed by Napoleon III and the Mexican monarchists, in 1862. This was when the Second Transformation occurred. The President at the time was a Liberal, Benito Juárez, an Indian from Oaxaca. Juárez packed the Mexican government into his carriage and wandered around northern Mexico to keep independent government alive and to escape capture. Juárez is AMLO’s ultimate national hero, triumphing in adversity. Eventually, Napoleon, tiring of the enterprise, withdrew his troops. Defeat at Querétaro cost Emperor Maximilian his life in 1867.

 

Juárez in a mural by José Clemente Orozco, National Museum of History, Mexico City

The Liberals were now free to implement their Laws of Reform. One of the most important results of the Reform was the expropriation of all church property. The church owned vast amounts of agricultural land, as well as churches, monasteries and convents. The law prohibited the right of any corporate body to own property. This included indigenous communities, many of which cultivated communal land to meet their expenses. Thus, the Reform laws were a direct attack on one of the fundamental elements of indigenous society. Curiously enough, that villain of history, Maximilian, had proposed laws to protect community land.

Porfirio Díaz

Despite their victory over Napoleon and Maximilian, Juárez’s Liberals. In 1876 they were replaced by a Liberal general, Porfirio Díaz (also an Indian from Oaxaca). Díaz remained in office as a dictator until 1911. His policy of pan y palo (bread and stick), suppressing rebellions and strikes and keeping opponents under his thumb. He also invited foreign capital to build railways and invest in agriculture, mining and petroleum. Landowners were given a free hand to expropriate community land, legally or illegally.

Zapata (centre left) and Villa (centre right)

By 1910, when he was due to be “re-elected” again, Díaz was opposed by political enemies, by a growing and ambitious middle class, and by oppressed peasants and rural workers. The Third Transformation was about to burst on the scene. This was the Mexican Revolution, a ten-year civil war littered with heroes and villains. Hero number one was “the Apostle of Democracy”, Francisco Indalecio Madero, a wealthy landowner and spiritualist from the northern state of Coahuila. His revolutionary slogan was Sufragio efectivo y no reelección (“A free vote and no re-election”). In the north Pancho Villa, a teetotaller and ardent lover of numerous women, led cowboys and other rural workers in revolt. In the southern state of Morelos Emiliano Zapata (played by Marlon Brando in the film Viva Zapata, screenplay by John Steinbeck) led rural villages in revolt under the banner of Tierra y Libertad (“Land and Liberty”) and the Virgin of Guadalupe. Madero, Villa and Zapata are heroes in Mexican school textbooks. The victorious Madero was elected, but turned out not to be a wily enough politician for his enemies in the army. The arch villain General Victoriano de la Huerta deposed and murdered Madero and his Vice President. De la Huerta was in turn deposed by revolutionary armies assailing him from north and south.

 

Pino Suárez (left) and Madero (right) lie dead outside Lecumberri prison

The victorious Constitutionalists led by President Venustiano Carranza and General Álvaro Obregón, a chickpea magnate by trade, wrote the current Mexican Constitution in 1917.  The Constitution set out the basic tenets of the political regime that ruled Mexico rarely challenged until the beginnings of this century: restitution of communal land to the villages, distribution of land from large estates to landless peasants, a degree of workers’ rights, and no re-election to any office in the nation. The

Zapata assassinated

heroes all came to a sticky end. Zapata was ambushed by a colonel in the federal army in 1919. Pancho Villa was given a large estate by the government and retired there but was ambushed in his car in 1923. Carranza died at the hands of federal troops while fleeing the capital and Obregón was assassinated by a fervent Catholic as he ate lunch.

To a degree the regime of managed democracy established by the Revolution brought benefits to peasants and workers, and stimulated industry and tourism. On the other hand, revolutionary leaders enriched themselves and their supporters and those who protested or opposed them could be dealt with very harshly. By the time the rule of the PRI (Institutional Revolutionary Party) came to an end in 2000, the system was groaning under the weight of corruption, waste and a young population unable to find employment. The violence created by drug cartels, with whom politicians were complicit, had reached alarming levels. Unfortunately, the new democratically elected governments failed to address profound social inequality, corruption, unemployment and violence. AMLO has promised that his Fourth Transformation will solve these enormous problems.

 

Jeremy Corbyn and AMLO in Tabasco

The United Kingdom is itself in the throes of a process that AMLO might well define as a Transformation: the ineluctable Brexit, in which myths and heroes are very much to the fore. One candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party, Esther McVey launched her campaign with a framed photo of Margaret Thatcher by her side, much as any devout Mexican might display an

The winning run out in the World Cup

image of the Virgin of Guadalupe. The England cricket team recently won the cricket World Championship in an exceedingly close and tense final match against New Zealand. A fervent Brexiteer, Jacob Rees Mogg, MP, declared that this was proof that we do not need the EU. Rees Mogg’s subtext was the myth of plucky Britain standing alone without the support of the cowardly Europeans who capitulated to the Nazis. We were not bowed by the Blitz and we can take whatever hardships might result from leaving  the EU. Let’s hope that in the case of both the Mexican and British Transformations good judgement and sense prevail over myth.

Roma: a hit movie and life in 1970s Mexico City

Roma was perhaps the most surprising international hit film of 2018. The dialogue is all in Spanish or in Mixtec, an indigenous language of the southern state of Oaxaca. Its star is Yalitza Aparicio, a young woman from Oaxaca who had not acted in a film before, and who learned Mixtec for her role. Roma is Alfonso Cuarón’s loving portrait of the Mexico City neighbourhood in which he grew up. As it happens, I was living in the neighbouring district of Condesa, so the sights and sounds of the film were familiar to me.

 

Mopping the driveway: Roma

I first arrived in Mexico in 1972 as part of an exchange programme between the Mexican and British governments, with two other young students: Alan Knight, now professor emeritus of Latin American History at Oxford, and Guy Thompson, emeritus of the University of Warwick. Two employees of CONACYT, the government agency that funds academic activities in Mexico, collected us at the airport to drive us to our lodgings. I decided to get out at the second stop and was greeted by my landlady, the recent widow of a businessman. When I returned to Mexico to research my PhD, she had remarried and moved to the USA, so I lodged with her daughter’s family in the same home.

Mexico City is divided into colonias, each with its own history and character. The original core of the city includes the vast main square or zócalo, the cathedral and the Palacio Nacional, the president’s official office. Many colonial buildings that have withstood Mexico’s violent past and numerous earthquakes give the centre recall the three centuries of Spanish rule. As the city grew, it colonized (hence colonias) pieces of land. For example, the victorian district where the British embassy now stands is Colonia Cuauhtémoc, known for its spacious homes of government ministers of the late 19^th and early 20^th-centuries.

Hotel La Casona, a former Roma mansion

On the other side of the east-west Avenida de la Reforma, and either side of the north-south Avenida de los Insurgentes, is Colonia Roma. One of the glories of Roma is its domestic architecture, notably Art Deco but also a variety of European-influenced styles popular in the late 19^th and early 20^th-centuries.

 

Colonia Roma domestic architecture

Colonias have their own distinctive street naming system. The streets of Roma are named after Mexican cities and states, as are the streets of Colonia Condesa, my colonia, so named because it was built on land owned by a countess. I lived on Mexicali street. This was a modern concrete and glass building, with a small indoor garden, a large sitting room/dining room, a perpetually busy  kitchen, and three large bedrooms. At the back was a concrete yard and another very plain concrete building which housed the laundry and the maids’ apartment, reached by an external stair.

 

Calle Mexicali: number 14 is centre left behind the small tree

Condesa was a solidly middle class neighbourhood, occupied by families for whom the post-revolutionary regime that dominated Mexico from 1930-2000 had been a source of good incomes. Mexicali had a mix of modern houses, small apartment blocks and some European-style and Art Deco homes that dated to the 1920s or 1930s. At either end of the street were wide avenues whose lanes of traffic were divided by trees. Avenida Insurgentes is a short walk east. There I would catch my bus to the archives and libraries where I researched. On my way home, I could stop at Sanborn’s café for a cool drink, and, if I felt extravagant, a bowl of strawberries.

My landlady was fairly typical of Condesa’s population. Her deceased husband was a prosperous businessman. She was an emotional, adorable lady of fiery temperament. She made a mean margarita, a mixture of only tequila and Cointreau, omitting the non-intoxicating lime juice. She had a collection of saints in her wardrobe, although as I recall she did not attend church. Every afternoon, a group of local ladies came to the house for the afternoon tertulia (social gathering) of coffee, chat and good manners. It was these ladies who persuaded me to abandon the Castilian I had learned for eight years, in favour of wonderfully expressive Mexican Spanish. I learned my earthier vocabulary over Friday night poker sessions with younger friends. My landlady’s daughter had worked as a flight attendant and spoke good English. She married an economist who graduated from the national university. He was active in the student protests of 1968 and, after the Tlatelolco massacre and government repression, had gone into hiding for a time. When I met him and lodged with his family, he was working for the Ministry of Public Works.

A Mixtec quinceañera and her "chamberlains"

Just as in Roma, the family had two maids. Silvia, a Mixtec speaker with an accent when speaking Spanish, and dark skin. Both marked her out as an Indian. She reached her 15^th birthday during my stay. In Mexico the celebration of a girl’s 15^th birthday is an important occasion for a mass and a party. I doubt that Silvia’s family could afford a very grand party, but her employers bought her an elegant white dress and sent her to her home village for the celebrations. And, just as in Roma, another of the maids became pregnant out of wedlock. The maids worked six days per week, did the laundry, swept and mopped floors indoors and out, cooked and served breakfast, lunch and dinner daily, and breakfast on Sunday, but not after 10am when their day off started.

Serving breakfast in Roma

A Condesa nevería

Condesa was a calm and agreeable place to live. Its iced cream shops were legendary and there was a good selection of taquerías for an excellent snack, or small restaurants serving a hearty comida corrida (fixed price lunch) for 12 pesos (the equivalent of a US dollar). There were street sellers also. I recall vividly the sound that announced the arrival of the itinerant seller of baked sweet potatoes, a low, throaty steam whistle.

Life for the residents of Condesa was immeasurably more comfortable and cossetted than for residents of Mexico City’s poorer neighbourhoods, such as Tepito, a central district notorious  as a den of criminals. The home on Mexicali was spacious, well-lit and comfortably furnished. The Ministry of Public Works ran a subsidized store where employees could buy food and clothing. The butcher was a cross-eyed gentleman. It was terrifying to see him wield a sharp cleaver with abandon. Items not available there could be bought at the Puerto de Liverpool or Palacio de Hierro department stores.

 

El Palacio de Hierro department store

Those who had achieved a still more prosperous lifestyle than the residents of Condesa, might live in the swish modern neighbourhood of Polanco. Polanco housed the best hotel in the city, the Camino

Deportivo Chapultepec

Real (the Queen stayed there while I was in Mexico City). Across the road from the Camino Real was the Deportivo Chapultepec, a combination sports and social club with the best facilities in the city. I was often invited there by a group of young men, which included one of Mexico’s best tennis players and two brothers who played for the national badminton team. The gentleman members who were a little too old for strenuous sports might gamble away a sociable afternoon playing chuti mul, a form of dominos, in a room in which the continuous clack of dominos slapped on to the table drowned out most conversation.

A home in Lomas de Chapultepec

More prosperous still were the neighbourhoods where the truly rich had their homes. One such was Lomas de Chapultepec, close to Chapultepec park at the far end of Avenida de la Reforma. A friend who lives there once introduced me to a neighbour who was chief of staff to president Carlos Salinas de Gortari. To the south of the city, San Ángel was a wealthy district of cobbled streets with homes and gardens concealed behind high walls covered in gloriously colourful but very thorny bougainvillea.

 

Homes in San Ángel

Certain things were beyond the reach of any but the very rich. For example, when Mexicans referred to vino (wine) they invariably meant not wine but rum, tequila or some other nationally produced spirit. Wine came from Europe, and European goods were prohibitively expensive. On a road trip with my Deportivo friends I visited the federal territory of Quintana Roo. This area, now an international tourist destination, was then so remote from central Mexico, and transport of goods so prohibitive, that it was a tax free zone. Goods from overseas were imported by. I bought a small supply of Cadbury’s chocolate and English tea (unaffordable in the capital) and smuggled them past the customs officers on the territory’s border as a treat for my host family.

I recall only one alarming event. I was sitting at home one Sunday reading calmly when I heard six gunshots. I did not go out that day, but learned later that in the apartment building across the street, the doorman had been pestering a pretty young girl. Her brother borrowed a gun from a friend to persuade the doorman to leave his sister alone. The doorman argued the point and received six bullets for his trouble.

A sweet potato seller

I can testify that Cuarón’s film captures beautifully the lifestyle, the sights and smells of 1970s Colonia Roma. During one scene, I heard in the background the whistle of the sweet potato seller and was transported to Colonia Condesa for a moment. If you are tempted to visit Condesa, my old neighbourhood has become one of the chic colonias, full of expensive restaurants, late night clubs and lively gay bars (Mexico City is a remarkably tolerant place for gay men and women). Except for those brought down by 2017’s earthquake, the buildings are mostly the same, but the ladies of the Condesa tertulia where I learned to speak like a Mexican have long gone.

Mexican cuisine and meeting a dinosaur

I recently spent part of a week cooking Mexican takeaway dinners for some of our neighbours to raise funds for the charity where our eldest son Chris works in Mexico. One of the glories of Mexico is its cuisine, which varies considerably by region. Cooking for my neighbours made me think about the ingredients I was using and the origins of the dishes I served. I recall a friend who is an historian of Indian art remarking that Indian food originally relied on spices for its flavours. The chiles that make some Indian dishes so hot cannot have been used in India until after the contact between Spain and Mexico in 1519, since only ancient Mexicans had the pleasure of eating chiles until that date. In fact, the relevant date was probably 1565 when a friar by the name of Andrés de Urdaneta succeeded in finding a route from Acapulco in Mexico to Manila in the Philippines and back. Andrés’ feat of navigation launched the annual Manila Galleon, through which Mexico traded with all of Asia for 250 years. Foods travelled from Mexico to Asia and from Asia to Mexico and shaped the cuisines of both continents.

Acapulco Bay in 1852

When I was a graduate student in Mexico I spent a few weeks in Chilpancingo, independent Mexico’s first capital, but by the 1970s an unprepossessing provincial town (it had two cinemas, one “with rats”, the other “without rats”) and seat of the government of the state of Guerrero. I was researching the career of a family of revolutionaries from Guerrero by the name of Figueroa. One of their descendants was the state governor and I had been trying to track him down. I followed him to Acapulco, from where the galleons used to leave for Manila, but he was fishing with the Shah of Iran and seemed not to have time to see me. So, I left the luxurious resort city for Chilpancingo to consult the state archives and try again to meet governor Rubén Figueroa Figueroa.

Acapulco bay. In the foreground is the Fort of San Diego, built to deter pirates

My first move was to visit the rector of the Autonomous University of Guerrero (UAG), who kindly allowed me to use the student canteen and assigned a senior member of staff to make sure I was looked after. This gentleman invited me to the dining event of the week in Chilpancingo. This was a restaurant that opened only for Thursday lunch and served only one dish, pozole verde. Pozole is a stew of pork and hominy seasoned with various ingredients according to its colour (white, red, green), and served with accompaniments such as oregano, onion and radishes. I could get the white version any day at a pozolería (pozole restaurant) near my hotel, but the green pozole was special and anybody who was anybody in Chilpancingo set aside Thursday lunch for it. As we got started with a few glasses of mezcal (a spirit made from agave cactus) we noticed the general in charge of the military district, Enrique Cervantes Aguirre, at the next table. His troops had been busy lately, rescuing governor Figueroa from the guerrilla band led by a local schoolteacher, Lucio Cabañas. They had also, recent scholarship has discovered, murdered and tortured their way through the mountains in the search for the governor. Let’s return to that black page of Guerrero’s history later.

Pozole verde

The ingredient that makes pozole green is what Mexicans call tomates and Americans tomatillos. In fact, these are not tomatoes at all, but they are delicious and one of many foods that have come to us from ancient Mexico and its cuisine. The tomato proper also comes from Mexico, where in the Náhuatl tongue it was called a xitomatl, which the Spanish could not pronounce, so they called it a jitomate in Mexico and a tomate in Spain. Another all-Mexican food whose name in English comes from the Náhuatl is chocolate (xocolatl). Before 1519, cacao beans had two functions. One variety was used as coinage (there was no metal or paper currency), but above all cacao was used to make a luxury drink that could be afforded only by the aristocracy, who drank it out of colourfully painted gourd cups. The āhuacatl (Spanish aguacate, our avocado) also originated in Mexico. The staples of the diet of ancient Mexicans were maize, first cultivated by a lake in the northern part of the state of Guerrero around 7,000 B.C., and beans.

A modern painted gourd cup similar to those used by ancient Mexican lords

Other ingredients arrived in Mexico with the Spanish. The Mexicans had no large domesticated animals (the turkey was the largest) but the Spanish introduced cows, sheep, pigs and goats. A decade or two after the defeat of the Aztecs in 1521 great herds of these animals wandered over Mexico’s plains and valleys, no doubt to the initial amazement of the locals. So, beef and pork arrived, and chickens (for a time an expensive luxury). Sugar cane was introduced very quickly (before 1521 honey was the main sweetener). The Spaniards also imported wheat, orange and lemon trees, and brought wine and vinegar from Europe in barrels. The wine came in handy if water supplies ran out during the sea voyage.

Foodstuffs also arrived from Asia by a long and dangerous sea voyage of several months. Rice was soon growing on the Pacific coast, along with coconut palms. The mango, found in profusion in Mexican markets, came from the Philippines as did cinnamon and other spices. And in return Mexico sent to Manila tropical fruits and vegetables that are now favourites in the Philippines.

As in Spain, lunch is the big meal of the day. It usually starts with two “soups”: a sopa aguada, literally “watery soup”, and a sopa seca, or “dry soup”. Last year the daughter of my former landlady in Mexico City made us a splendid tortilla soup, made with stale maize tortillas, tomato, chile, chicken stock and epazote, a native Mexican herb also known as Jesuit’s tea. A dry soup might be a small plate of tomato-flavoured rice or pasta. Next might be a quickly fried or grilled steak with a sauce of tomato, onion and chile, turkey in a sauce of mole poblano (featuring sesame, chile and chocolate) or a green pepper stuffed with cheese. Lunch will finish with some fruit or a small sweet dish. Our favourite last year in Michoacán was jericalla, an egg custard flavoured with cinnamon.

A short time after my lunch of pozole verde I succeeded in meeting governor Figueroa. His cousin Arturo introduced me to him at a meet-the-public session. I was taken to the front of the queue, where I found the governor flanked by two elderly men, all three wearing guayaberas, an elegant loose-fitting shirt that originated in the Philippines. Governor Figueroa introduced his two companions as Guerrero’s greatest living poets. Given the governor’s reputation as a gun-toting politician, it struck me as curious that he felt the need to be accompanied by literary men. We discussed his rescue from the band of Lucio Cabañas and he invited me to attend a seminar of the treasurers of the state’s largest municipalities the next day. I recall the governor saying that some municipalities were so poor that they could barely afford pencils and paper for the mayor’s office. The truth of this statement was vividly illustrated when I visited the mayor (presidente municipal) of Buenavista de Cuéllar. I found the presidente sitting alone in the modest town hall in an office with a desk, two chairs and a filing cabinet. His desk was bare. He seemed to have nothing to do except wait for an occasional visitor. The fact that his (only?) visitor that day was a young student from Cambridge did not seem to surprise him.

 

Governor Figueroa with two of his captors

I was reminded recently of my lunch of pozole verde, and of governor Figueroa when reading a PhD thesis about Lucio Cabañas’ group. Figueroa had tried to persuade the guerrillas to abandon their struggle in return for cash and a guarantee of political office. Instead, the band held him for ransom. Figueroa escaped twice only to be recaptured. Eventually the army tracked down the fighters who were guarding him and in the ensuing gun battle Figueroa walked to the army’s side unharmed. He demanded that the soldiers give him a gun so that he could shoot at his captors. Mexicans came to refer to their traditional politicians who tried to block democratic reforms as dinosaurs. Governor Figueroa was, without doubt, one of the fiercest of the Mexican dinosaurs – perhaps a tyrannosaurus.

Lucio Cabañas during his guerrilla campaign and (right) soldiers posing with his body

Aldeburgh Festival and a Mexican General with Four Left Legs

Jan and I have just paid a brief visit to Aldeburgh during the annual festival. We were there to see a choral group, the East Suffolk Skylarks, of which my sister Tricia is a member, give their first public performance. The notable thing about this group is that all the members are people with Parkinson’s or their friends and family members. I had associated Parkinson’s only with trembling limbs, but I discovered that we should understand that it affects muscle control in many ways, including the voice and breathing control. Parkinson’s does not make singing easy.

We watched the group warm up and rehearse at one of the studios at Snape Maltings, a few miles inland from Alderbugh, where the high-profile concerts featuring world-class musicians take place. After a session of warm-up exercises, the Skylarks ran through their programme of sea shanties. Their enthusiasm, commitment to one another, and joyous sound was truly inspiring. There is a family connection with Snape. The maltings were a regular destination for our maternal grandfather, Harry Lucas, captain of a saling barge. Harry must have experienced many a North Sea day of strong wind and rain like the day of the performance. Since some of the Skylarks are quite frail, the organizers were concerned about the weather, and proposed the possibility of performing in the warmth of the maltings instead. But the Skylarks had come to perform in public for the first time and were determined that weather would not stop them.

To reach the bandstand, the performers had to negotiate the steps over the concrete sea wall, walk along a plastic ‘red carpet’ to the stand, and then up more steps. Some of the 23 performers were able to stand to perform, others remained seated. The keyboard player held her sheet music down with the aid of plentiful clothes pegs and a festival volunteer’s hands to prevent the music blowing along the beach. Then an audience of some hundred people heard the glorious sound of jolly sea shanties over the raging wind. The performance was a triumph and the Skylarks’ smiles showed that they knew it.

 The bandstand on the beach at Aldeburgh

Those of you who know my enthusiasm for Mexican history, will doubt that one can link sea shanties performed on a North Sea beach to Mexico. However, one of the songs performed was a shanty variously known as Santianna, Santy Anna, Santayana and so on. The rather improbable subject of this song is General Antonio de Padua María Severino López de Santa Anna y Pérez de Lebrón, known as Santa Anna for brevity. Santa Anna was the prototypical 19^th-century Mexican caudillo (military leader), who led several pronunciamientos (coups d’état). He was president of Mexico several times. Americans know him best as the Mexican general who in 1838 besieged Anglo-secessionists in the Alamo in San Antonio, Texas, where Davy Crockett died. Shortly afterwards Santa Anna was defeated by Sam Houston at the battle of San Jacinto, and Texas became an independent republic, before joining the USA in 1845.

Santa Anna was rather good at losing Mexican territory. He was president at the time of the campaign that Americans know as the Mexican-American War, and Mexicans as the Unjust North American Invasion (1846-1848). Mexican defeat resulted in the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo (1848), which ceded to the USA present-day California, Arizona and New Mexico. Santa Anna’s career was definitively ended by the Revolution of Ayutla of 1854-1855.

Curiously enough, Santa Anna, had about as many left legs as he had presidential terms. He first lost his left leg to French cannon fire in the Pastry War of 1838, prompted by a complaint from a French Pastry chef who claimed compensation for damage to his shop in Mexico City. Santa Anna had his leg buried with full military honours in a tomb in Mexico City. His next leg was made of cork, was captured by American troops during the Unjust North American Invasion, and is now on display in the Illinois State Military Museum. His next leg is now in the home of former Illinois governor Richard J Oglesby. It was captured in the same war. Thus, Santa Anna required a fourth leg. His original leg had already come to a tumultuous end when he was deposed from the presidency in 1844. Rebellious Mexicans raided the leg’s tomb and dragged it through the streets.

The original author of the sea shanty knew enough about Mexico to glorify Santa Anna’s military exploits, but, unfortunately, the song is dramatically a-historical. The lyrics inform us that:

He gain’d the day at Molly-del-Rey

Away Santianna

An’ General Taylor ran away

All across the plains of Mexico

Alas for Mexico, far from winning the day Mexican forces were soundly defeated at Molino del Rey, to the south of Mexico City, and Santa Anna never had the pleasure of chasing General Zachary Taylor across any plains. Rather, Taylor led the invasion and defeated the Mexican army repeatedly. Still, it is a very jolly song. And, when performed with gusto by the Skylarks, one quite forgot the North Sea wind.

Trump and Mexico

At the moment I am reading Yannis Varoufakis’ book Adults in the Room, his account of his negotiations with the EU concerning Greek debt. Varoufakis is a self-promoter, but a moment in the book when he tells the EU negotiators that he was elected by the Greek people to do what they want, not to be subservient to the EU’s troika, came to my mind when I read about Mr Trump’s latest threat directed at Mexico.

By way of background Mexicans (documented and undocumented) and Americans (ditto) have been crossing the border daily ever since the USA seized the Mexican territory that is now Texas, New Mexico, Arizona and California at the barrel of a gun a century and a half ago. In 1942, Mexico solved a critical labour shortage in the USA by signing the Mexican Farm Labor agreement which provided workers for jobs that Americans were not available to do or did not want to do, until the US abolished it in 1964. This did not stop the flow of Mexican across the border. The numbers entering the USA increase when the Mexican economy is not strong or when the US economy is booming, and decrease when times are good in Mexico or bad in the USA.

Some years ago, a university friend was the Mexican consul in San Francisco. He told me that he had two essential duties. One was to visit Mexican citizens who had been arrested to ensure that their rights were not violated. The other was to run a mobile service that toured the fields issuing a credential that certified that undocumented workers were Mexican citizens, which enabled them to open bank accounts and apply for a driver’s licence. My friend told me that the US authorities liked the credential because it reassured them that the Mexican workers were not Muslims (and thus not a terrorist threat). In other words, both governments benefited. The Mexican government credential enabled their citizens to live relatively normal lives, and the US was reassured to some degree that undocumented workers were not a risk to public safety.

You will recall that the latest threat is not the first that Mr Trump has issued against his southern neighbour. During his election campaign he promised to build a big, beautiful wall on the southern border and that “the Mexicans will pay for it”. Why the Mexicans should agree to pay was never clear, and, of course, they politely declined to do so. Once in office, he threatened both the Mexican and Canadian governments with tariffs, which violated his government’s treaty with both nations, known in the USA as NAFTA ,and in Mexico as TLCAN. The treaty was renegotiated on the Mexican side by President Peña Nieto, the predecessor of the present incumbent, Andrés Manuel López Obrador (AMLO). AMLO honoured his predecessor’s agreement and submitted it to the Mexican legislature for approval. On the very day that AMLO submitted the agreement, Mr Trump threatened tariffs, starting at 5% and rising to 25%, on all Mexican imports to the USA unless the Mexican government took unspecified steps to reduce undocumented immigration into the USA. This was a direct violation of the agreement that the Mexicans were in the process of ratifying. As you may have read, the Mexicans reacted calmly, sent their foreign minister to Washington and reached an agreement with the US administration. Some press reports suggest that, in the main, the Mexicans simply agreed to things they were about to negotiate with the US in any case. I do not know if this is true.

This incident raises a few questions. First, the increase in the numbers of people reaching and crossing the southern US border does not consist solely of Mexicans, but principally of citizens of Guatemala, El Salvador, Honduras, Nicaragua – in short countries to the south of Mexico. These countries have a long history of US interference to support particularly vicious and generally military or quasi-military regimes. Google Roberto D’Aubuisson in El Salvador or Oliver North and the Contras in Nicaragua and you will see what I mean. These also happen to be countries whose development aid from the USA has been severely reduced by Mr Trump. The current immigrants do not want to stay in Mexico but to enter the USA and, in many cases, to claim asylum. This raises two questions. Why is it the Mexican government’s sole responsibility to prevent people travelling to the USA? If the USA cannot stop these people crossing the border, how does it think the Mexicans, with far fewer resources, can do so? Much of the southern border of Mexico is remote and barely under government control. And if the US government finds it difficult to provide adequate shelter for those who cross the border, how can Mexico pay for even larger numbers stuck on the border because the US refuses to admit them? Should Mexico now threaten its southern neighbours in similar fashion and what would this achieve?

It is true that much of the vile people trafficking that transports across the US border is carried out by Mexican drug cartels, which have expanded into other illegal businesses, and into legal activities funded by drug profits. It is also true that corruption, from local police officer to senior military men and politicians, in Mexico protects the drug cartels, and therefore the people traffickers. However, it is equally true that demand for drugs in the USA fuels the drug trade. Moreover, high-powered weapons that are legal in the USA are illegal in Mexico, but nevertheless are sold into Mexico, on one occasion at least with the connivance of the US government.

AMLO was elected on the promise of improving the lot of the poor, ending corruption (a very tall order in six years), and reducing violence (ditto). He has taken steps, some symbolic and some real to deliver on his promises. He has increased pensions for many Mexicans, but has scrapped the pensions received by former Mexican presidents. He has reduced his own salary and that of senior government employees. He sold the recently-purchased presidential plane and flies on low-cost carriers. He refuses to live in the official presidential residence, Los Pinos, which he has turned into a museum and cultural centre. He has also made some dubious decisions and his achievements may not be equal to his profuse rhetoric.  However, Mr Trump’s tariffs (which still threaten if Mexico fails to achieve goals that he refuses to define) would have caused huge damage to the Mexican economy and would have driven Mexicans north with the Guatemalans, El Salvadorans etc. In short, they would have made matters worse.

One must also ask whether Mr Trump’s remedies will have any beneficial effects. A wall or a blockade at the border will probably stop quite a lot of people crossing. Those who do cross will do so at greater peril to their lives. But those whom the US most wants to keep out, drug smugglers, people traffickers and other criminal elements, have the resources and know-how to get themselves or their goods across the border or to circumvent barriers. Those people need to be targeted with intelligence, and preferably with the cooperation and good will of the Mexican government. Mr Trump’s insistence on loudly proclaimed initiatives to keep everybody out will exclude those who could live and work to the benefit of the USA and will stop very few criminals.

But the key point really is why does Mr Trump think the president of Mexico’s top priority should be to do his bidding every time his whim or temper causes him to issue a threat? That was the point Mr Varoufakis made about the Greek government and the EU, and the same is true for Mexico.

One comment I read by a Mexcan writer compared Mr Trump’s threats to the behaviour of  an armed robber holding up a family in a car with a gun pointed at a child’s head. The driver could refuse in a dignified manner to hand over his money, or he could persuade the robber to take what he can offer and leave. AMLO seems to have followed the latter course with modest success for now.