科马克·麦卡锡西部小说中的边疆意识形态研究

《科马克·麦卡锡西部小说中的边疆意识形态研究》由会员上传分享，免费在线阅读，更多相关内容在学术论文-天天文库。

ShanghaiInternationalStudiesUniversityRESEARCHONFRONTIERIDEOLOGYINCORMACMCCARTHY’SWESTERNSAThesisSubmittedtotheGraduateSchoolandCollegeofEnglishinPartialFulfillmentoftheRequirementsfortheDegreeofDoctorofPhilosophybyZhangJianranUnderSupervisionofProfessorYuJianhuaJune2014 AcknowledgementsThecompletionofthisdissertationwouldbeimpossiblewithoutsupportandhelpfrommanypeople.Firstandforemost,myheartygratitudegoestomysupervisor,ProfessorYuJianhua.Withouthisthought-provokingguidance,meticulousreadingsofthedraft,andenlighteningsuggestion,thisdissertationwouldnotbepossible.ProfessorYuhasalwaysheldunswervingtrustinmeandignitedmyscholarlypassionforliterarycriticism.Hiswisdomandinsightwillcontinuetoinspiremeinmyfutureacademiclife.MysincerethanksalsogotoProfessorZhangDingquan,ProfessorQiaoGuoqiang,ProfessorLiWeiping,andProfessorShiZhikangfortheirinsightfullecturesfromwhichIhavebenefitedalot.SpecialthanksareduetoProfessorZhouMin,ProfessorLiaoChangyin,AssociateProfessorWangYixuan,andAssociateProfessorChenGuangXingfortheirwarmencouragementandhelpfulsuggestionduringmythree-yearPh.D.studyinSISU.IwouldliketoexpressmyheartfeltthankstoChinaScholarshipCouncil.Withitssupport,IwasabletobeatUniversityofMississippiasavisitingPh.D.candidate.IamverygratefultoProfessorJayWatsonatUniversityofMississippi.HisinsightfullectureshavegivenmeabetterunderstandingofCormacMcCarthy.Asaforeignsupervisor,JayhasdonemuchformeduringmystayinOxford.WheneverIcameacrosspuzzlesintheprocessofwritingthisdissertation,heaidedmewithtimelyhelpandinvaluablesuggestions.MythanksalsogotoProfessorRickWallachforgivingmeimportantmaterialsonCormacMcCarthy.IappreciatehishospitalityduringmyvisittohiminMiamiandhisgenerositytosharewithmeanecdotesaboutCormacMcCarthywhichenabledmetofindmuchinterestandhappinessinthedrudgingprocessofwritingthisdissertation.IalsoownmanythankstomyfellowPh.D.candidates,XiaJin,XuXianjing,LiHongbin,WanXiaolei,YuanYuan,ShiYanlin,ZhangHuaihai,WuChunyingandmanyothers,fortheirhelpandthepleasurabletimeswespenttogether.FinallyIwouldliketothankmyparentsfortheirendlessloveandsupport.i 摘要作为美国当代文坛的重要作家之一，科马克•麦卡锡以其西部小说享誉世界。大部分国内外麦卡锡研究论述了其西部小说中蕴涵的生态意境、西部历史的再现、美国民族神话的消解﹑以及其作品与其它文学作品之间的互文关系，并一致认为其西部小说是反帝国主义书写的文本。这些研究值得肯定，但忽略了其西部小说对边疆意识的再现以及它与麦卡锡反帝国主义书写之间的关系。因此，本论文在现有的麦卡锡研究基础上，将其三部西部小说《血色子午线》（1985）、《骏马》（1992）、《平原上的城市》（1998）解读为社会政治批评文本,并将之放置在美国西部文化﹑社会﹑政治和历史的宏大背景下做考察，通过分析小说中麦卡锡如何运用边疆母题再现、批判和超越边疆意识形态，表达了作家对美国帝国主义的态度经历了一个动态且具有细微差别的过程。论文由五个部分组成。引言包括相关麦卡锡西部小说的研究文献﹑论文基本框架和边疆意识形态的含义。本论文中边疆意识形态具有两方面的含义。从内涵意义来讲，它是一系列将看作地理区域而存在的19世纪美国西部边疆看做美国民族习性诞生之地的信条﹑价值﹑观念的抽象系统。弗雷德里克•杰克逊•特纳的“边疆假说”正是19世纪边疆意识形态的集大成之作。从外延意义上讲，边疆意识形态诉诸于一种边疆修辞，建构美国社会现实的无意识幻象，激发美国人进一步拓展边疆的欲望，并在此践行美国民族习性的理想。无论在内涵还是外延意义上，边疆意识形态遮蔽了美国历史进程上的帝国主义﹑种族主义﹑阶级问题和性别问题。第一章通过分析《血色子午线》，考察麦卡锡对边疆意识形态的再现。本章认为一方面麦卡锡落入了边疆意识形态的窠臼，体现为作家将美墨战争之后美国疯狂地进行边疆扩张的行为理想化。另一方面，麦卡锡质疑了边疆意识形态的合理性，体现在作家对“天定命运”的解构和边疆神话的祛神话。在这两种矛盾的力量中，麦卡锡无意识中屈从于种族主义的“政治无意识”，沿袭了传统西部小说强化美国白人性﹑“强夺复生”和道德重生的叙事模式。因此，麦卡锡对边疆意识形态的重现体现出作家对美国帝国扩张复杂且含混的态度。第二章以《骏马》为例，分析麦卡锡对边疆意识形态的批判，提出边疆意识ii 形态在20世纪40年代的后边疆时代虽不是一种主导意识形态，但成为一种心理残余。主人公在文化、媒介和家庭意识形态国家机器的“召唤”下，将墨西哥想象为能复制牛仔天堂的“新边疆”，挥马南下墨西哥，受到反帝国主义权力的抵抗和殖民文化的反渗透，帝国梦破碎在“新边疆”。由此，麦卡锡对催生美国人向往浪漫化的边疆生活欲望的意识形态信条进行釜底抽薪，质疑了美国民族“情感结构”的不合理因素。第三章讨论麦卡锡在《平原上的城市》对边疆意识形态的超越，厘清边疆意识形态是边疆怀旧的动因，引发牛仔病态地向往过式的边疆生活，实践伪牛仔准则，并构成边疆意识形态持续作用的物质存在基础。在边疆意识形态的强力作用下，主人公并非从其在《骏马》中的经历汲取教训，却仰仗美国资本的优越性，发起购买“象征边疆”——墨西哥女性——的商谈。麦卡锡并未让主人公的商业磋商和交易顺利进行，却使之遭受挫折，从而讽刺了美国的新帝国主义。与此同时，麦卡锡通过展望美国帝国逻辑运作的失调，呼吁美国民众再认同边疆的杂糅性，合理面对美国西部尤其是美墨边境的文化异质性和多样性，才能走出美国在其境内外进行帝国扩张的恶性循环，从而消解了边疆意识形态的同质话语。通过上述分析，本文得出结论：麦卡锡利用传统西部小说中的边疆母题，旨在再现﹑批判和超越以“天定命运”和民族主义之名为美国帝国主义辩护的边疆意识形态。这种意识形态在美国社会的持久存在是家庭﹑文化和媒介等意识行态国家机器高效作用的结果，并“召唤”美国人与浪漫化的边疆生活现实形成一种想象关系，却无意识地激发他们帝国欲望。麦卡锡在不同小说中呈现的边疆意识形态体现了作家对美国帝国主义的态度具有动态且细微的变化，经历了一个含混﹑批判和超越的过程。通过分析麦卡锡西部小说的边疆意识形态，本文试图将其从传统西部小说中脱颖而出，上升为社会政治批评文本，这一上升在一定程度上显示了当代美国西部小说的文学活力性和实用性。关键词：科马克•麦卡锡；西部小说；边疆；边疆意识形态；帝国主义iii AbstractAsoneofthemostimportantwritersincontemporaryAmericanliterature,CormacMcCarthyisknownforhisWesternsathomeandabroad.MostChineseandforeignMcCarthystudieshaveanalyzedhisrepresentationofthehistoryoftheAmericanWest,hisecologicalvision,hisdemythologizingofAmericannationalmyths,andhisworks’intertextualrelationshipwithotherliteraryworks.ScholarshavereachedatacitagreementthatMcCarthy’sWesternsengagewithanti-imperialistwriting.Whileinsightful,thesestudieshavelargelyignoredtherepresentationoffrontierideologyanditsrelationtoMcCarthy’santi-imperialistwritingapproach.Thus,repositioningMcCarthy’sWesternsassociopoliticalcommentarieswithinabroadercontextofAmericanWesternculture,society,politicsandhistory,thisdissertation,basedonthepreviousachievementsinMcCarthystudies,continuestodisclosefrontierideologyinhisthreerepresentativeWesternsBloodMeridian(1985),AllthePrettyHorses(1992)andCitiesofthePlain(1998)andanalyzehowMcCarthydrawsonthefrontiermotiftoreplay,criticizeandtranscendfrontierideologytoexpresshisdynamicyetnuancedauthorialattitudetowardAmericanimperialism.Thisdissertationconsistsoffiveparts.Itbeginswithanintroductionthatpresentsaworkingdefinitionoffrontierideology,aliteraturereviewofMcCarthy’sWesternsandalayoutofthisdissertation.Frontierideologydiscussedinthisdissertationincludestwoaspects.Connotatively,frontierideologyreferstoanabstractionofthesystemofbeliefs,valuesandconceptsthatdeemedtheAmericanWesternfrontierofthenineteenthcenturyasthegeographicalareawheretheAmericannationalcharacterwasformed.FrederickJacksonTurner’sFrontierThesiswasthecomprehensiveculminationoffrontierideologyinthenineteenthcentury.Denotatively,frontierideology,resortingtothefrontierrhetoric,consistsoftheunconsciousfantasythatconstructsAmericansocialrealityandinstructsAmericanstodesireforafurtherfrontierwheretheycanliveuptotheidealsoftheAmericannationalcharacter.Frontierideologyatdenotativeandconnotativelevelcoversupiv Americanimperialism,racism,sexismandclassisminitshistoricalprocess.ChapterOnefocusesonMcCarthy’sreplayingoffrontierideologybyexaminingBloodMeridian.ItarguesthatMcCarthy,ontheonehand,fallsintotheshackleoffrontierideologyinhisidealizationofAmericanfrontierexpansionthatranamokinandaftertheMexican-AmericanWar,andhe,ontheotherhand,interrogatestherationaleoffrontierideologyinhisdeconstructionofManifestDestinyandhisdemythologizationofthefrontiermyth.Withinthetwoconflictingforces,McCarthyunwittinglysuccumbstothe“politicalunconscious”ofracismduetohisreinforcementofAmericanwhitenessandglorificationofthenarrativetropeof“regenerationthroughviolence”andmoralrebirthinherentinthetraditionalWesterngenre.Hence,McCarthy’sreplayingoffrontierideologyreflectsacomplexandambivalentattitudetowardAmericanimperialexpansion.ChapterTwoexaminesMcCarthy’scriticismoffrontierideologywithacasestudyonAllthePrettyHorses.Itarguesthatfrontierideology,thoughnotappearingasthedominantideologyinthepost-frontier1940s,becomesakindofpsychicresidueharboringinAmericansociety.Theprotagonist,underthe“interpellation”ofthecultural,family,andcommunicationsIdeologicalStateApparatus(ISA),self-arrogantlyimaginesMexicoashis“NewFrontier”torecreatethecowboyparadisethere.Heridessouthward,onlytoencounterfierceanti-imperialistresistanceinhisself-conceived“NewFrontier.”McCarthydismantleshisprotagonist’simperialdreambymakinghimreverselypenetratedbythecultureofthecolonized.Indoingso,McCarthycriticizestheassumptionsoffrontierideologythatcontinuestobegetAmericans’desireforaromanticizedvisionofthefrontierlife,andquestionstheunreasonableaspectsofAmericannation’s“structuresoffeeling.”ChapterThreediscusseshowMcCarthytranscendsfrontierideologyinCitiesofthePlain.Thischapterbasesitsargumentontheideathatfrontierideologyistherootcauseoffrontiernostalgiainthepost-frontier1950sasembodiedbycowboys’pathologicalfascinationwiththeobsoletefrontierlifeandtheirpracticesofquasi-cowboycodeswhichprovidematerialexistenceforthecontinuedoperationoffrontierideology.Undertheeffectiveinfluenceoffrontierideology,theprotagonist,v insteadofdrawinglessonfromhisexperienceinAllthePrettyHorses,imagineshispossiblepossessionofthe“symbolicfrontier”representedbyaMexicanwoman.BytakingadvantageofAmericancapital,theprotagonistinitiatescommercialnegotiationonbuyinghis“symbolicfrontier.”Byhighlightingfailedcommercialnegotiationandexchange,McCarthymakesironyontheconceptofAmerica’snewimperialism.Meanwhile,McCarthy,byenvisioningthedysfunctionofAmericanimperiallogic,urgesAmericanstore-identifywiththehybridizedfrontier,soastoproperlyfacetheculturalheterogeneityanddiversityintheAmericanWest,particularlyintheMexican-Americanborderlands.Indoingso,AmericanscandismantlethehomogenousdiscourseoffrontierideologyandstepouttheviciouscircleofAmericanimperialdominationwithinandbeyondAmericanterritory.TheconcludingpartsummarizesthemainpointsdiscussedinthisdissertationandconcludesthatMcCarthy’sappropriationofthefrontiermotifinherentinthetraditionalWesterngenreaimsatreplaying,criticizingandtranscendingfrontierideologywhich，inthenameofManifestDestinyandnationalism,hasjustifiedAmericanimperialism.ItalsoreachestheconclusionthatthepersistenceoffrontierideologyinAmericansocietyisduetotheefficientandeffectivefunctionofthefamily,culturalandcommunicationsISAwhichjointly“interpellate”Americanstoformanimaginaryrelationshiptotherealconditionoftheexistenceoftheidealizedfrontierlife.ButfrontierideologyunconsciouslyspursmanyAmericans’imperialdesire.Furthermore，McCarthy’srepresentationsoffrontierideologyinhisdifferentWesternsenableustoseethathisattitudetowardAmericanimperialismexperiencesadynamicyetnuancedprocessinwhichhisinitialambivalencegiveswaytocriticismandtranscendence.TheanalysisoffrontierideologyinMcCarthy’sWesternsattemptstodisengagethemfromthetraditionalWesterngenreandspeakstotheviabilityandutilityofcontemporaryAmericanWesternasaparadigmofsociopoliticalcommentary.KeyWords:CormacMcCarthy,theWestern,Frontier,FrontierIdeology,Imperialismvi ContentsAcknowledgements……………………………………………………………………i摘要………………………………………………………………………………iiAbstract…...………………………………………………………………………….ivIntroduction…………..………………………………………………………………1ChapterOneBloodMeridian:ReplayingFrontierIdeology………………..……28A.FrontierExpansionduringandaftertheMexican-AmericanWar…………...31B.TheAlliancebetweenFrontierViolenceandImperialistPower……………..51C.Anti-ImperialistPowerandAmbivalenceof(Anti)-Imperialism………...….69ChapterTwoAllthePrettyHorses:CriticizingFrontierIdeology.........................89A.TheImperialistImaginingofthe“NewFrontier”…………………………..92B.TheEncounterbetweenImperialistandAnti-ImperialistPowerinthe“NewFrontier………………………………………………………………….…115C.TheDisillusionmentoftheImperialDreaminthe“NewFrontier”………140ChapterThreeCitiesofthePlain:TranscendingFrontierIdeology……………157A.TheFrontierasaFinishProjectandFrontierNostalgia…………….……158B.TheFailedAgentofNewImperialismforthe“SymbolicFrontier”……...180C.Re-integrationintotheHybridizedFrontier...………………………….….200Conclusion….............................................................................................................217WorksCited…………………………………………………………………..……223vii IntroductionThisdissertationstudiesCormacMcCarthy’smajorWesternswithafocusonhisrepresentationoffrontierideologyanditsrelationtoAmericanimperialism.ThereasonstochooseMcCarthyasthesubjectofthisdissertationaremorethanabundant:heisa“worthydisciplebothofMelvilleandofFaulkner”(Bloom,“Introduction”v);“thereisnogreaterworkbyalivingAmerican”thatcanmatchhis(Bloom,How7);hisstyle“sublimate[s]Melville,theBible,andErnestHemingway”(Hage3).Besides,McCarthypulleddownnumerousawardsandprizes,includingWilliamFaulknerFoundationAward(1966),NationalBookAward(1992),NationalBookCriticsCircleAward(1992)andPulitzerPrize(2007).AlltheseawardsandhonorsprovetheaestheticvaluesofMcCarthy’sworks.McCarthyuseshisastonishingfacilitywithSpanish,Americancowboyslang,SouthernslangandcolloquialphrasestopainttheparticularsoftheSouthernandWesternlandscapeandpeopleintheseregions.ThemostinfluentialworksinMcCarthy’swritingcareerarehisWesterns,whichhaveinspiredagreatdealofcriticalandpopularresponses.CriticshavedeemedhisWesterns,particularlyBloodMeridian(1985),asmasterpieces“nottobesurpassed”(Bloom,“Introduction”1).McCarthyonceassertedthathehasalwaysbeen“interestedintheSouthwest”and“[t]hereisn’taplaceintheworldyoucangowheretheydon’tknowaboutcowboysandIndiansandthemythoftheWest”(qtd.inWoodward32).TheSouthwest,asthehistoricalfrontier,becomesthemostimportantfictionallocaleofhisWesterns.RichardSlotkinsuggeststhattheresilienceofthefrontiermotifhasbecomeincreasinglyapparentwhenitcontinuallyfindsexpressioninvaryingarenasofculturalandpoliticalactivities,rangingfromtheAmericanmilitaryaggressionandtheforcedexportationofAmericanforeignpolicytotheurban1vigilantemoviesproducedbyHollywoodinthe1980s.Itisthroughsuchactsof1InGunfighterNation:theMythofFrontierinTwentiethCentury(1992),RichardSlotkinpointsoutthatthefrontiermythhasaccomplishedthe“ideologicaltask”ofvalidatingAmericanimperialexpansionandracismwithinandbeyondAmericanterritorysincethecolonialtimesonwards(10).1 heroicandaggressiveinterventionsthatAmericannationalidentityhascontinuouslybeencelebratedandreasserted.Paradoxically,theyhavealwaysreinforcedAmericanimperialism,racismandaggressiveexpansionismacrosstheglobe.Brewedinaculturalmilieuthatputsmuchstressontheheroicexplorationofbothliteralandfigurativefrontier,McCarthy’sWesternsrecastthehistoricalfrontierasanarrativetropetoreplay,criticizeandtranscendfrontierideologyascementedbyAmericanhistorianFrederickJacksonTurner’sFrontierThesis.AsMarkBusbywrites:“WhatMcCarthyaddstotheolderfrontierformulaishisuseof‘lafrontera,’theNorth/SouthborderbetweentheAmericanSouthwestandNorthernMexico,astheboundarylinebetweenwarringforces”(“IntotheDarkening”229).Otherwisestated,McCarthyreliesonthefrontiermotiftoreformulateortransposethisverymotifonto“lafrontera”inhisWesterns.ThisdissertationstudiesMcCarthy’sappropriationofthefrontiermotifinhisthreerepresentativeWesternsfromtheperspectiveofideologicalanalysistoanalyzethefrontierasanideologicalconstructwhich,intheserviceofAmericanimperialexpansion,captainshischaracters’imagination.Hischaracters,betheylivingintheheydayofAmericanfrontierexpansionornot,arestillmoreorlessassimilatedintothepre-fabricatedparadigmoffrontierideologythathaspropelledgenerationsofAmericanstoseekafurtherfrontiertohonortheAmericannationalcharacter.ThisdissertationchoosesMcCarthy’sBloodMeridian(1985),thefirstandthelastbookoftheBorderTrilogy,AllthePrettyHorses(1992)andCitiesofthePlains(1998),toexplicatetheirreplaying,criticismandtranscendenceoffrontierideologyanditsrelationshipwithAmericanimperialism.ThereasonsforselectingthethreeWesternsforanalyzingtheirrepresentationoffrontierideologyareasfollows:firstly,theycameintobeingasMcCarthy’smajorWesternsinachorologicalorder;secondly,theyfocusontheimpactsofthehistoricalfrontier,particularly,theAmericanSouthwest,onprecipitatingAmericans’participationinandre-imaginingoftheself-conceivedfrontier;lastly,theomissionofdiscussingfrontierideologyinthesecondbookoftheBorderTrilogy,TheCrossing(1994),isduetothepersistentinfluenceoffrontierideologyontheprotagonistJohnGradyCole,whichprecipitateshisrepeatedpursuit2 ofself-imaginedfrontier.Furthermore,thisomissionistenableonthegroundthattheprotagonistBillyParhaminTheCrossing,likeJohnGrady,fallsintothetrapoffrontierideologyinsupportinghisconceptualizationofMexicoasanunopenedfrontiersuitableforaccommodatingAmericanfrontiermyth,onlytofindhisimperialdreamshattered.Mostimportantly,itisBillywhoeventuallysurvivesinCitiesofthePlaintoseethroughthedeceptivenessoffrontierideologyandthehollownessofAmericanimperialismandre-integrateintothehybridizedfrontier.AlargeswathofMcCarthyscholarshiphasbeendevotedtoclarifyinghisWesterns’indictmentofAmericanimperialism.Forinstance,BarcleyOwensinherbook-lengthdiscussionofMcCarthy’sWesternscontextualizesBloodMeridianinthepost-VietnamWareraandanalyzesitsallusiontoandrepudiationofAmerican2imperialismdemonstratedbyitsenmeshmentintheVietnamWar.Similarly,SaraL.SpurgeoninExplodingtheWestern:MythsofEmpireonthePostmodernFrontier(2005)comparesMcCarthytoJosephConradwho“savagelysubvertstheverymythsheevokessolovingly”andshowshowwellMcCarthy’snovelsechoAmericans’longingfor“theoldWest”whilesimultaneously“deconstructingtheimperialistaimsandjustificationsoftheoldmyths”(17,18).Convincingandinsightfulasthesereadingsare,however,theirreadingsseldomtouchupontheideologicalmechanismthatfunctionsinenticingMcCarthy’sprotagonistsintounconsciousengagementwithAmericanimperialcause.Furthermore,theyunanimouslyconcludethatMcCarthyisananti-imperialistwriter.Yet,bynomeansdotheynoticeMcCarthy’sambivalencetowardAmericanimperialismandhistranscendenceofitrespectivelyreflectedinBloodMeridianandCitiesofthePlain.Thus,thisdissertation,fromtheperspectiveofideologicalanalysis,offersinsightsintotheroletheideologicalmechanismplaysinluringMcCarthy’sprotagonistsintoassimilatingthecorevaluesoffrontierideologyandimaginingafurtherfrontiertobeexploredandpossessed.Withquestionsaboutthesocial,culturalandpoliticalfactorsinformulatingthefrontierin2InCormacMcCarthy’sWesternNovels(2002),BarcleyOwensreassessesviolenceandliterarynaturalisminBloodMeridianandexaminesWesternmythsandthematicmotifinBorderTrilogy(xii).ShereachestheconclusionthatMcCarthyengagesuswithasusceptiblelookatthefoundingmythofAmericannationanditspresentimperialism.3 mind,wefindthatAmericanimperialexpansionintheAmericanWestanditscontinuedreappearancesinthepresentdayarecloselyrelatedtoAmericans’frontiermindsetastypifiedbyMcCarthy’sprotagonists.Furthermore,theanalysisoffrontierideologyinMcCarthy’sthreemajorWesternsenablesustoseethatAmericans’perceptionofthehistoricalfrontieruntilnowisfilteredbytheideologicalrepresentationsandpromulgations.McCarthy,bydrawingonthefrontiermotifinthetraditionalWesterngenre,re-examinesAmericanWesternhistoryfeaturedbyinternalcolonizationandculturalimperialismandexpresseshisdynamicandnuancedattitudetowardAmericanimperialism.A.AWorkingDefinitionof“FrontierIdeology”WhenconsideringtheWestwardMovement,onecanhardlymisstheexplorationofAmericanWesternfrontier,norcanoneforgetFrederickJacksonTurnerwhomythologizedthefrontierinhisrenownedarticle“TheSignificanceofFrontierinAmericanHistory”presentedat1893World’sColumbianExpositioninChicago.Originally,theterm“frontier”wascoinedbyFrancisWalkerandHenryGannettasastatisticaltooltomeasureAmericanoccupancyandtheexpansionoftheAmerican3nation-state.Borrowingtheconcept“frontier”fromtheCensusBureauof1890,FrederickJacksonTurnerdefineditasanareawherewhitepeoplenumberedlessthantwopersquaremile(Frontier38).Infact,theterm“frontier,”inTurner’susages,escapedconcretedefinition.Turnerjustifiedhimselfbyassertingthattheterm“frontier”is“anelasticone,andforourpurposedoesnotneedasharpdefinition”(Frontier38).RelyingonthespatialanalysisoftheCensusBureau,TurnerveiledthefrontierwithamythicauratiedwithwhichweremanyAmericannationalicons,liketheyeomen,frontiersmen,cowboys,horsesandwagons.Turner’sachievementliesin3FrancisWalkerfirstchartedthefrontierin“ProgressoftheNation”,whichappearedinhis1874StatisticalAtlasoftheUnitedStates.WalkercreatedthetechnicalconceptofthefrontiertotrackAmericannationalsettlementintheWest.Latter,HenryGannettfurtheradoptedthefrontiertostratifythenation’slandbysimplepopulationdensity.Thespecificevolutionofthefrontierastechnicalconceptcanbeseenin“FromMapstoMyth:theCensus,Turner,andtheIdeaoftheFrontier”byDeborahEpsteinPopper,RobertE.LangandFrankJ.Popper.4 transformingtheCensusBureau’susageof“frontier”asaunitoflandmeasureintoasacredmetaphorornationalsymbol.Suchachange“hasaffected—andoftendriven—theimageryandstudyoftheWestformorethanacentury”(Proper,LangandProper96).Itsinfluencestillcanbesensedinsuchfieldsasfrontierliterature,popularculture,andtheWesternmovies.ToquotePatriciaNelsonLimerick,thefrontierhasbecomea“mentalartifact”withits“astonishingstickinessandpersistence”(Something91).NootherpieceofAmericanhistoricalwritingthanTurner’sFrontierThesishassojustifiedAmericanhistoricalimaginationoftheWest,stimulatedsoaddictiveanAmericanpassionforthefrontier,andingraineditselfsodeeplyintoAmericanmind.TheFrontierThesismadeTurnerfamousnationwideandevenenabledhimtobepraisedbyTheodoreRooseveltforhisclarificationandfixationof“thethoughtthathasbeenfloatingaroundratherloosely”(qtd.inMorris479).Turner’sclearstatementofthe“floating”and“ratherloosely”thoughtcanbesummarizedinthefollowingaspects.Firstly,theFrontierThesisofferedaradicalmanifestoforhistorianswholikeTurnerconsideredthefirstperiodofAmericanhistorycametoanendwiththeclosureofthefrontierin1890.Secondly,TurnerproposedatheoryofAmericandemocracy.HeattributeditsemergencetoAmericanfrontierexperience.Otherwisestated,thefrontierbecamethecradleofAmericandemocracyandadvanceddemocracyinbothAmericaandEurope.Thirdly,heassertedthatthefrontierspawnedandforgedtheAmericannationalcharacterwhichinturndecidedauniqueAmericannationalidentityorAmericanexceptionalism.Turnerwrote:“tothefrontiertheAmericanintellectowesitsstrikingcharacteristics”(Frontier61).ThesedistinctiveAmericancharacteristics,accordingtoTurner,includedcoarseness,strength,acuteness,inquisitiveness,practicalinnovativemind,dominantindividualismirrespectiveofgoodandevil,optimismandenthusiasminconjunctionwiththefreedomofchoice,adeptnessatacceptingexpedients,obsessionwithmaterialthings,energyandvitality(Frontier61).TheAmericannationalcharacterhasbeenimmovablefromAmericansasaresultofmorethanacentury-longfrontierexperience.Fourthly,hedidnotthinkthatAmericannationalidentitywas5 foundedintheNewEngland,nordiditcomeintobeinginthementalityoftheformerslave-holdingSouth.Rather,itderivedfromAmericanfrontierexperienceamongpeopleintheever-movingfrontier.Fifthly,heinsistedthattheendofthefrontierpushedAmericanstostandonthethresholdofanewageandproducedahistoricaldisjunctioninwhichtheformationoftheWesternfrontierremainedunwritten.Lastly,herecognizedthatAmericaofthe1890srepresentedtheendproductofagloriousvictoryofAmericanpioneerswhomarchedfromaplethoraofNewEnglandvillagesandsouthernplantationsacrosstheGreatPlainstothePacificOcean.Turner,bygeneralizingthesignificanceofthefrontierwithhindsight,lamenteditspassageandwonderedwhatthefuturehadinstoreforAmericannationwiththisformativeregionhavingbeenclosed.Ontheonehand,heofferedageographicallyorphysicallydeterminedvisionofculturedecline.Ontheotherhand,heparadoxicallyreaffirmedthatthefrontierasanidealizedplacemightbethecradleforthecontinuedAmericangreatness.ThewideacceptanceofTurner’sFrontierThesisbyAmericanswasduetoitsrecordingofaseriesofopen-endedadvancementofAmericannationwithoutmentioningitscolonizationandimperialisminconjunctionwiththewestwardexpansion.RayAllenBillington,afaithfuldiscipleandbiographerofTurner,arguedthatTurner’s“theorieswereacceptable—andaccepted—becausetheygavesubstancetofolkmythsthatsatisfiedtheneedofAmericansforarose-tintedviewofthefuture”(186).Literature,asNorthropFryeinformsus,ismainlyconsistedofaplethoraofmythsandhencepromotesthegeneralacceptanceofvariousnarrativeformsofmyths.Inthissense,AmericanWesternliterature,asaregionalistgenre,hasundoubtedlyparticipatedindeliveringandreinforcingthefrontiermyth.“Allliterarytexts,”asTerryEagletonwrites,“areinsomesenseideological”(“Ideology”66).ViewedthroughEagleton’slens,Westernsarecognitiverepresentationsconsistingofideologicallanguagesthatmaycurse,interrogate,celebrate,orglorifyAmericanfrontierexperience.Yet,situatedatahistoricalmomentalreadyideologicallymarkedbyTurner’sdefinitiveinterpretationofAmericanWesternhistoryasbifurcatedinto“frontier”andmodernityin1890,Americanmenoflettersundoubtedlyrehearsedand6 glorifiedtheeventsoftheirimmediatepastintheshapeofTurner’sideology.MartinRidgemainlyascribesAmericans’incessantfascinationwiththefrontiertoAmericannovelistsandwrites:ThenovelisthasremainedtheprimarypopularizerofanexaggeratedifnotdistortedviewofTurner’sAmericanexceptionalismbyutilizingthefrontierasthesettingforanincreasinglysubtlemoralityplayemphasizingthesignificanceofthefrontier’scontradictorycharacterizationofindividualism,senselessyetessentialnatureofviolence,andtheambiguousroleoftheexploitationofnaturalresourcesasbasicthemes.(“TheLife”12)Novelists’re-imaginationsofAmericanfrontierexperiencehavenotonlyprovidednarrativemodelsforAmericanswhowereincreasinglyawareofthenation’semergingroleintheworldleadershipandtheirdistinctivenationaltraits,butalsoprovidedanAmericanpastasgloriousasanycontinentalpower,spectacularAmericanlandscapeparalleledtoanyintheworld,andWesternheroesorheroinesandmythsasalluringasothernations’.Inthisway,themythologizationofTurner’sfrontieridealsinthepastcenturyhasbeensopervasivethatAmericansinTurner’sdayandsubsequentgenerationsareapttoneglecttheharshrealitiesofthefrontierlifeandtohavegreatexpectationsfortheirfuture.IfTurnerwerestillalive,hewouldbeastonishedbyhowAmericannovelistshavepromulgatedortrivializedhisviewsonfrontierarchetypes,regionalstruggles,andtheAmericannationalcharacter.ThenumberofnovelsbasedontheWesternsettingthatunderlineTurnerianthemesisbeyondourcalculation.RangingfromJamesFenimoreCooper’sLeatherstockingtales(1827-1841),WillaCather’sPrairieTrilogysetintheNebraskaplain,OwenWister’sTheVirginian(1902),A.B.Guthrie’sTheBigSky(1947),WallaceStegner’sAngleofRepose(1971),E.L.Doctorow’sWelcometoHardTimes(1960),LarryMcMurtry’sLonesomeDoveSeries(1985-1997)toCormacMcCarthy’stheBorderTrilogy(1992-1998),alltheseWesternstovariousdegreesdrawonTurner’sideasonthefrontier.AlthoughthestrippingawayoftheromanceofthefrontierinthecontemporaryWesternsenablesustoviewatruepictureoftheWest,themajorityofthemhavehadanimpactonthe7 tenorofnationalistfeelinginAmericawiththeirdisplayofexploringtheWesternfrontierinitsrelationtoadefinableAmericannationalidentity.Turner’sFrontierThesis,whilemyopic,hasproventobeculturallyresonantandexplainedthecorevaluesofAmericanexceptionalismforgenerations.Particularly,withtheburgeoningdevelopmentofcultureindustry,Turner’sversionofAmericanfrontierhasbeenscreenedinmanyHollywoodblockbusters,likeJohnFord’sWesternfilms,Stagecoach(1939),TheSearchers(1956),TheManWhoShootLibertyValance(1962),whichhaveremarkablycontributedtoestablishingandreinforcingtheperennialinterestinAmericanfrontierexperience.AsStanleyCorkinpointsout,theWesternfilmsare“particularlyeffective[…]Attheirbest,theyeffectivelyconjoinhistoryandmythtoappealpowerfullytoincipientnationalisminU.S.audiences”(6).Inthismanner,theloreoftheWesthasflourished,andtheideaofthefrontierhasshapedandheldontheAmericanimaginationsinceitsclosure.Notcoincidentally,Turner’sfrontierimageryhasenteredthepoliticalrhetoric.WhenAmericanswerefacingfrontieranxietysince1890sandstronglydoubtedthesafety-valvefunctionofthefrontierinthewakeofGreatDepression,PresidentFranklinD.Rooseveltusedtheclosingofthefrontierinaspeechjustifyingacallformoreeconomicplanningandmorecourageouspursuitofneweconomicfrontier(Wrobel,TheEnd132-36).In1960s,PresidentJohnF.Kennedy,drawingontheheritageofthefrontierandofferinghisenvisioningofa“NewFrontier,”withhighpitch,announcedthat“[f]ortheproblemsarenotallsolvedandthebattlesarenotallwon…andwestandtodayontheedgeofaNewFrontier…afrontierofunfulfilledhopesandthreats”(“Letthewordgoforth”101).AftertheassassinationofKennedy,hisambitiousNewFrontierplanbecameahistoricallegacy.Followingsuchanidealisticvision,PresidentLyndonB.Johnsonputforward“GreatSociety”planasapoliticalsloganandfuelledhisfellows’fascinationwithestablishingauthoritieslikeTennesseeValleyAuthorityonMekongRiver,sothatthebenefitsof“GreatSociety”andthepovertyreductionwouldbebroughttoVietnameselivingunderthetotalitarianruleofCommunism.Therhetoricof“GreatSociety”wasananalogytoWalterWebbPrescott’s“GreatFrontier”which,endorsingtheunfinishedexploration8 ofthefrontier,envisionedthecontinuedprosperityofthe“OldFrontier”onthebasisofindustrialization,urbanizationandmetropolitanism.Overall,thefrontierdefinedbyTurnerhasbeen“transplantedconceptuallytoanynumberoflocales,fromtheCaribbeantoEuropetoAsia”(Corkin8).Enteringthenewmillennium,withregardtoPresidentGeorgeW.Bush’sappearanceasacowboyimage,boththedomesticandforeignpressportrayedhimaseitherwesternbadmanorworldsheriffbecauseofhisdoctrineof“preemptivewarfare”onterrorismandinvasionofIraq(Malphurs188-92).Nootherpoliticiansintheworldusetheword“frontier”asAmericanstatesmendo.ItisnotexaggeratedtosaythatAmericanscallallareasinneedofexplorationandfilledwithopportunitiesfrontiersandspeakoffrontiersinmedicine,astronomy,physics,chemistryandevendentistry.FromthebriefglimpseoftheinfluencesexertedbyTurner’sFrontierThesis,wecanseethatitsmeaninghasextendedfromitsoriginalsenseasageographicalconcepttomanycultural,politicalandsocialdenotations.HistorianElliotWestdescribedtheconceptof“frontier”as“evocativeandelusive”andofferedfivepointstodefineitsparamountmeanings:humandiversity,anintricatesetofpowerrelationships,resourcesleadingtoeconomicopportunities,aregionofdynamictransformation,andalocusofsymbolicandmythicmeanings(“AmericanFrontier”115-16).But,whatevermeaningisgiventotheterm“frontier,”itishumanbeingswho,withsubjectivity,envisionafurtherfrontierforuswiththehelpofcognitiveabilityforgedbyaparticularculture.Thus,thisdissertationusestheterm“frontier”incomplex,overlappingyetdifferentways.First,theterm“frontier”referstoaparticulargeographicallocalethatbecameAmericanterritorywithAmericansettlerspouringintotheWestaftertheIndependenceofAmericain1783.Particularly,thefrontierasageographicallocaleinMcCarthy’sWesternsisconfinedtotheAmericanSouthwestthatbordersMexico.FrankJ.Popperclaimsthathardlydidthefrontierendonthelandandinthemindofpeople,anditisstillaliveinthelatetwentiethcenturyand“survivestothisdayasadistinctgeographicalregion”(101-21).FollowingPopper’sstep,DaytonDuncanonthecentennialoftheclosureofthefrontierdeclaresthattheCensusBureau“found9 132countieswithfifteenWesternstatesintheLower48thatstillhadfewerthantwopeoplepersquaremiles”andthislandcomprises“13percentofthenation’scontiguouslandmass”(6-7).Overall,thefrontier,withitsrecency,warswithitsoverwhelmingfinality.ItstwowarringforcesbecomethefundamentallinkageofwesternregionalismthatstillgripsAmericans’imaginationofexploringandtransformingfrontierspaceintoregionalplace.Second,theterm“frontier”isstretchedtocoverthepsychicorimaginedfrontierconveyedinMcCarthy’sWesterns.Metaphorically,McCarthy’sWesternsarelacedwithrepetitiveimaginingsofafurtherfrontierhischaracters,crossingbackandforththeMexican-Americanborder,unflagginglypursue.Inthesecondsense,thefrontierisfilledwithcontradictionsasitisbothconstructingandconstructed,availableandunavailable,andreachableandunreachable.ThesecontradictionsunderscoretheparadoxicalfunctionofthefrontierinMcCarthy’sWesterns:toimagineafrontierincharacters’mindwhiledenyingitsaccessinreality.Inthisway,McCarthy’sfrontiercontributestoconstructingandreifyingTurner’sself-servingversionoftheWesternfrontier.Nevertheless,italsofunctionsincriticizingTurner’smildmodelofthewestwardcolonizationthathasevolvedintoAmericanimperialdesireforexpansion,hegemonyandconquestoverthepastcenturies.Basedontheclarificationoftheterm“frontier”above,weattempttodefinetheconnotativeanddenotativemeaningoffrontierideology.Asfarastheterm“ideology”isconcerned,itsdefinitionvariessodifferently.Originally,ideology,coinedbyFrenchphilosopherDestuttdeTracyin1797,meansthescienceofideasorthegenericstudyofideasthatexistasuniversalsintherealmofreason.Inthenineteenthcentury,KarlMarxcompletelyreversedthemeaningandfunctionsofideology.Forhimandhiscollaborator,FriedrichEngels,ideologyisassociatedwith“falseconsciousness”thatrationalizestheinterestsofbourgeoiscapitalistclassandfunctionslikenarcoticreligiousbeliefsindisorientingpeoplefromviewingsocietyrealistically.DrawingonMarx’sanalysisofideology,KarlMannheimdistinguishesbetween“particular”and“total”conceptionofideology.Theparticularconceptionmeans“moreorlessconsciousdisguisesoftherealnatureofsituation,”while,the10 totalconceptionofideologymovesbeyondthepejorativemeaningofideologyandcharacterizesthethoughtofallparties(Mannheim81).Mannheim’scontributiontoMarxismliesinhiselaborationofthetotalconceptionofideologyintothefoundationsof“asociologyofknowledge”whichisabroad,criticalyetconstructiveperspectivetostudyintellectualandsocialhistory.Thus,thegoalofideologicalanalysisisto“understandthenarrownessofeachindividualpointofviewandtheinterplaybetweenthesedistinctiveattitudesinthetotalsocialprocess”(Mannheim81).Intheevolutionoftheconceptofideology,itwasMarxistsoftheFrankfurtSchoolwho,puttingasidethescientificMarxismleftbythenineteenth-centuryMarxists,embracedaculturalandphilosophicalMarxismandbroadenedtheexaminationofthefalseconsciousoftherulingclassintosocialandculturalanalyses.ToborrowfromTheodoreAdorno,“ideologymeanssocietyasappearance”(Prisms31).Otherwisestated,ideologyisconceivednotasapathtotherealityitcloaks,butasacrucialcategoryofknowledgethatmediatesexternalrealityandsubjectivity.Ideology,forWesternMarxists,becomestheterminusofanalysisinliterarycriticism,anditsfunctionliesnotinobscuringrealitybutin“whatinfactrevealsit”(Jehlen8).Whateverideologyimplies,theevolutionofthisconceptsummarizedbypost-MarxistSlavojŽižekfollowsthreestages:ideology-in-itself,ideology-for-itself,andideology-in-and-for-itself.Byideology-in-itself,ideologyisdescribedas“adoctrine,acompositeofideas,beliefs,concepts,andsoon”andconvinces“usofits‘truth’,yetactuallyservingsomeunavowedparticularpowerinterest”(Žižek,“TheSpecter”10).ForŽižek,ideology-for-itselfmeansthatideologyfindsitself“initsotherness-externalization:themomentepitomizedbytheAlthusseriannotionofIdeologicalStateApparatuses(ISA)thatdesignatethematerialexistenceofideologyinideologicalpractices,ritualsandinstitutions”(“TheSpecter”12).Inthelaststage,ideology-in-and-for-itselfentersthe“extra-ideological”spherewhich“bypassesideologyinitsreproductionandreliesoneconomiccoercion,legalandstateregulations,andsoon”(Žižek,“TheSpecter”12).Inthisway,ideologyfunctionsasan“elusivenetworkofattitudesandimplicit,quasi-‘spontaneous’presuppositions,11 whichconstitutetheirreduciblemomentofthereproductionof‘non-ideological’(economic,legal,political,sexual…)practices”(Žižek,“TheSpecter”15).Allthethreestagesensuretheeffectiveoperationofideology.Withoutoneofthem,ideologywouldnotbecondensedinconcretesocialpractices,norwouldthesesocialpracticesgeneratedoctrinesorbeliefs.Farfromdelineatingacompletegenealogyofideologywithinalimitedwritingspacehere,aglimpseofitsevolutionaimstolocatethefocusofideologicalcriticisminliterarypractices.Astheculminatingtransformationofideologyfromobjectivetheliesorfalseideastoautonomoussubjectivitytakesshape,itseemsthatideologicalcriticisminliterarypracticesshouldnotbeconcernedwithstrippingawaythehypocrisyandmisrecognition,butwith“politicalengagement”and“aestheticrelativism”(Jehlen13).SacvanBercovitchpointsoutthatcriticizinganypieceofideologyis“toseethroughit,toexposeitshistoricalfunctions,necessarilyfromanextrinsic,andusuallyfromahostile,perspective”(“Afterword”421).But,atanyrate,Bercovitchattachesimportancetothebothpositiveandnegativeanalysisofideologyandputsforwardtwomodesofideologicalanalysisintermsofliterarystudies.Thefirst,a“positiveoremphaticform”ofideologicalanalysis,foregroundstheoptimisticandutopiandimensionsofatextorcorpusandenvisionsthehumanpossibilitythat“providesthegroundforreconstitutingthemoralandmaterialnormsofsociety”(Bercovitch,“Afterward”432).Thesecondmode,a“pejorativeoradversaryform”ofideologicalanalysis,labelstheliterarydiscourseastheproductorproducerofthedominatingcontrolofcapitalistsocietyandrecognizes“thematerialprocessesthattherhetoricofmoralityandthespiritseekstoconcealordisguise”(Bercovitch,“Afterward”432).HistwomodesofideologicalcriticismremindusofFredricJameson’sadvocacythatMarxistcriticismoffersbothanegativeordemystifyingandapositiveorutopianhermeneutic.AccordingtoJameson,evenifideologicalcriticismfindsitswaytoseethepoliticalargumentsandsocialantagonisticstrugglesmuffledintonaturalforms,itstillendeavorstotranscendtheantagonismbetweenidealandideologyandtoenvisionautopian“collectivelogicbeyondgoodandevil”(ThePolitical286).Inthisway,ideologicalcriticismnotonlymakesusperceiveinliterary12 workstheliesandfalseidealsideologyattemptstoconceal,butalsooffersawaytolookalittlebeyondthem.Thus,ideologicalanalysisinliterarypracticeswouldfleshouttheideologicalunderworldandtranscenditbyofferingthealternativestoideologicaldeterminants.Similarly,theanalysisoffrontierideologyinthisdissertationproceedstorevealitsmeaningthatreferstoanabstractionofthesystemofbeliefs,valuesandconceptsthatdeemedtheAmericanWesternfrontierinthenineteenthcenturyasthegeographicalareawheretheAmericannationalcharacterwasformed.SuchanabstractionhadresonanceinTurner’sFrontierThesiswithitsdeeprootinManifestDestinyandwithprogressivenationalismasitssmallestbasicideologicalunitorwhatFredricJameson’s“ideologeme,”andbecamethedominantrulingideologyinthenineteen-centuryAmerica.Inthisconception,frontierideologymainlyfunctionedinjustifyingAmericanexpansionandthewestwardmoveofthewhite-maleAmericans,andexplainedthesocialstructurethatmuffleditscolonialism,classism,racismandgenderbiasesWiththegeographicalfrontiergoneinthenineteenthcentury,frontierideologyhasbecomeakindofpsychicresiduewhichspawnsitsdenotativemeaning.Frontierideology,bymeansofthefrontierrhetoric,consistsoftheunconsciousfantasythatconstructsAmericansocialrealityandinstructsAmericanstodesireforafurtherfrontierwheretheycanliveuptotheidealsoftheAmericannationalcharacter.SuchanunconsciousfantasysilencesthesocialandculturalconflictsorantagonisminAmericansocietyandexplainsitscontinuedexpansionandhegemony.Inthisway,frontierideology,relyingonthefrontierrhetoricthatenvisionsAmerica’spossiblegreatness,essentiallyreinforcesAmericanexceptionalismandeffectivelyjustifiesitsimperialismwithoutprovokingitsexpansionismwithinandbeyondAmericanterritory.Frontierideology,beitindenotativeorconnotativesense,coversupAmericanimperialism,racism,sexismandclassisminAmericanhistoricalprocess,butpurportstoseekamoralandjustifiablegroundfortheemergenceofAmericaasacontinentalpoweraswellasaworldsuperpower,sinceitsoriginisTurner’sFrontierThesisthat13 celebratedthewhitemale’sconquestofthefrontierbutdisregardedandevenmuffled“thevoicesofrace,class,andgender”(Ridge,“Thelife”10).NewWesternhistorianPatriciaNelsonLimerickscathinglypummelsTurner’sFrontierThesisforitis“fullofnonsenseandgoofiness,jammedwithnationalisticself-congratulationandtoxicethnocentrism”(Something92).Similarly,whenanalyzingproblemsfacingthepresentAmericanWest,DonaldWorsterarguesthattheadvancementofthefrontierwasa“violentimperialisticprocessbywhichtheWestwaswrestedfromitsoriginalowners”andwenthandinhandwith“violencebywhichithadbeensecuredagainstthecontinuingclaimsofminorities,womenandtheforcesofnature”(“Beyond”12-13).Indeed,thegeographicalfrontierinAmericawasshapedbyconflictsandbattlesamongpeopleofdifferentethnicitiesandhencebecameaplaygroundwherecompetingideologiesclashedviolently.Butitwasthewhite-maleAmericanswhowonthisideologicalandmaterialwar.SuchavictorydeterminedTurner’shistoriographyoftheWesternfrontierfromtheperspectiveofthemaleAnglo-Americanwithmiddle-classstatus,anddefinedhisbiasedperceptionofAmericanimperialconquestoftheWestandminoritieslivingtherepriortotheWestwardMovement.ThefrontierimagerydescribedbyTurner,ladenwithpositiveassociations,hasbeennonethelessuniversallyrecognizedandcontinuedtoaffectthewayinwhichAmericansthinkabouthowtheyshouldrelatetotheirneighborsandeventherestoftheworld.McCarthy’sprotagonistsaretruetothispoint.Theyseethemselvesaspartofalineagethatconqueredthewildernessandtransformedfrontierspaceintoregionalplaceandasposteritiesof“apeoplewhocarvedouttheirowndestinyandremainedbeholdentonoone”(White,It’sYourMisfortune57).Inparticular,whenfacedwiththedrasticsocialandeconomicchangesinthehistoricalfrontier,theyshowagreaterpreferenceforexploringafurtherfrontieroutsideAmericanterritorytorelivethefrontiervaluesorbeliefscentraltofrontierideology.TheysimplycasttheireyesonthelandconsideredasaTabulaRasawaitingfortheirinscriptionofAmericannationaltraits.Unwittingly,theybecomethecarriersoffrontierideologythatpushesthemtoembarkontheroadtoimperialconquestandexpansion.Thus,this14 dissertation,drawingonTurner’sFrontierThesisandmodifyingit,analyzesMcCarthy’sassimilation,repudiationandtranscendenceoffrontierideologyinhisthreerepresentativeWesterns,soastorevealtheoperationoftheideologicalmechanismthatrecruitsAmericansintoadvancingAmericanimperialcauseinthenameofprogressivenationalismandclarifyMcCarthy’sdynamicandnuancedattitudetowardAmericanimperialism.B.LiteratureReviewofCormacMcCarthy’sWesternsCormacMcCarthy,asoneofthemostimportantAmericanwritersinAmericanWesternliterature,ishighlyappreciatedbyrenownedAmericanliterarycriticHaroldBloomwhoasserts“nootherlivingAmericannovelist,”notevenThomasPynchon,DonDeLilloandPhilipRoth,“hasgiveusstrongandmemorableasBloodMeridian”(“Introduction”1).AlthoughCormacMcCarthyhaspublishednovelssince1965,hisreputationwasmainlylimitedtoaverysmallacademiccircle.ItwashisNationalBookAwardnovelAllthePrettyHorse(1992)thatbroughthimbelatedpopularityamongreadersandmadehimattractcriticalattentionfromliteraryscholarship.NowhisreputationhassurpassednationalborderswithmostofhisWesternsadaptedtoHollywoodblockbusters.Particularly,theCoenbrothers’adaptionofNoCountryforOldMen(2005),whichpulleddowntheOscarawardsforBestPicture,BestDirectorandBestAdaptedScreenplayin2007,madeMcCarthyahouseholdname.WiththepublicationofTheRoad(2006),McCarthygarneredhisbiggestaward,PulitzerPrize.Recently,McCarthyhasbeensteadfastlyworkingonanewnovelwhoseworkingtitleisThePassenger,andhasallegedlybeenmakingeffortstowriteanothertwounder-contractnovels.McCarthyhasalreadywrittenfictionsinseveralgenres.Apartfromhistwostageplaysandonescreenplay,histenpublishednovelscanbegenerallydividedwithinthreedifferentliterarygenres:theSouthernGothic,theWesternandthepost-apocalypticgenre.Hisfirstfournovels,TheOrchardKeeper(1965),OuterDark15 (1968),ChildofGod(1973),andSuttree(1979),belongtotheSouthernGothiccharacterizedbytheirdedicationtoSouthernregion,violence,andexaggerated,andevengrotesquecharacters,andtheysinglesoutMcCarthyasatalenteddiscipleofAmericanSouthernliterature.Duringthe1960sand1970s,McCarthyremainedinobscurityinliteraryscholarship.However,withthepublicationofhisWesternnovelsbeginninginthe1980s,McCarthyescapedtheobscuritythatsurroundedhisearlierSoutherngothicnovels.HisWesternsincludeBloodMeridian(1985),theBorderTrilogycomprisingofAllthePrettyHorses(1992),TheCrossing(1994)andCitiesofthePlain(1998),andNoCountryforOldMen(2005).ThecompletionoftheBorderTrilogyandotherWesternsmarkedtheheydayofMcCarthy’sliterarycreationandusheredaneraforcinematicadaptationsofhisworksbyHollywooddirectors.HislatestnovelTheRoad(2006)isapost-apocalypticnarrativethathasbecomeafilmpropertywithitsadaptationbyAustraliandirectorJohnHillcoatinNovember2008.Withhisreputationskyrocketinginbothliterarycriticalandcommercialcircle,McCarthyhasbecomeanimportantwriterwhosereadershipandscholarshiparequitediverseandimmenseinspiteofhisostracismfromthepubliceye.Infact,McCarthy’sreputationathomeandabroadmainlyreliesonhisWesternswhichcontinuetoreceivemorecriticalattentionsthanhisSouthernnovels.AccordingtoincompletestatisticsofMcCarthystudies,untilthewritingofthisdissertation,morethan40academicbooksorcollectionsofessays,over90dissertations,30theses4andabout180journalarticleshavebeenaccomplishedoverthepasttwodecades.ThefirstandforemostbookdevotedtoMcCarthy’swritingsisVereenBell’sTheAchievementofCormacMcCarthy(1988),whichexploresinlengththemes,motifsandtechniquesinMcCarthy’sfirstfivenovels.BellproposesthatMcCarthy’sworksarelackofmoralvalueandreekof“prevailinggothicandnihilisticmood”(i).Bellfurtherassertsthat“themotivationofthecharactersisusuallytantalizinglyobscure”and“meaningdoesnotprevailovernarrativeandtexture”(4,5).In“TheAmbiguousNihilismofCormacMcCarthy,”BellconcludesthatMcCarthy’snovels“areinnocent4ThisstatisticsismadebasedonDiannaC.Luce’sCormacMcCarthy:ABibliographyandotherresearchresultsfromreliableacademicdatabaseslikeProjectMuse,Jastor,Ebasco,andCNKI.16 ofthemesandofethicalreferenceastheyareofplot”(31).Thus,hedubsMcCarthyanihilist.Almostturninghisnegativecriticismintoasarcasticpraise,BellcontributestobringingMcCarthyfromobscuritytopublicity.ScholarlyattentiontoMcCarthyhasgrownsteadilysincethefirstconventionofMcCarthyconferenceatBellarmineCollegein1993.ThisconferencealsogavebirthtotheCormacMcCarthySociety.Withthejointeffortsfrommembersandscholarsofthissociety,thefirstInternationalCormacMcCarthyColloquywasheldin1998inElPaso.Upto2014,theSocietyhasalreadyheldAnniversaryConferencefor20times.WithitspublicationsofCormacMcCarthyJournalandcasebooksonhisindividualwork,bibliographiesofMcCarthyscholarshipathomeandabroad,andtranslationsofSpanishinhisnovels,theSocietyprovidesaforumforliteraryscholarsanddevotedMcCarthyfanstoexchangeviewsanddebates.Overall,McCarthystudieshavescoredeverburgeoningachievements.Diverseandcomplicatedasthesestudiesare,they,fromdifferentcriticalapproaches,havefiguredoutinMcCarthy’sWesternshisecologicalawareness,feministthought,historicalawareness,post-colonialthought,religiousandexistentialphilosophy,intertextuality,deconstructionoftheSouthwestideologyandremakingofAmericannationalmyths.However,itisimpossibleforthisliteraturereviewtoexhaustallilluminatingcommentsonMcCarthy’sWesternswithinalimitedwritingspace.Thus,thepresentreviewwillglossoverhowliterarycriticsassociateMcCarthy’sWesternswithhisrepresentationofthefrontiermotifandtheirideologicalimplications.McCarthy’sWesterns,particularlyBloodMeridiancalledbyBloom“theultimateWestern,”drawonmotifsandstereotypicalcharactersinthetraditionalWesterngenrelikeOwenWister’sVirginian(“Introduction”1).IndirectoppositiontoBloom,SusanKollinalignsMcCarthy’sWesternswith“anti-Western”genrewithregardtohisinterrogationoftheformulaicWesternandconcludesthatMcCarthyrepudiatestheideologicalprinciplesofthefoundingofAmericannationandpresentsabloodypictureofAmericannationbuildingwiththeprevalenceof“violenceensuringthesuccessoftheUnitedStatesencroachmentintheSouthwest”(563).Similarly,MaryMcBrideLascoclaimsthatMcCarthy,togetherwithhiscontemporarywriterslike17 LouiseErderich,JamesWelch,andLarryMcMurty,drawson“themythoftheWest”to“critiquethegenreoftheWestern”bymeansofeither“parody”or“revisionism”(iii-iv).HermeticulousanalysisofMcCarthy’stwoWesternsconcludesthatMcCarthy“undermine,critiqueandcondemnimperialistsystem”(Lasco,iii).OthercriticswhostudyMcCarthy’srepresentationoftheAmericanWesternlandscapereachtheconsensusthatMcCarthy,fromhisfirstWesternBloodMeridianonward,takesananti-imperialistwritingstance.Forinstance,StevenFrye,readingBloodMeridianandtheBorderTrilogyasur-textofanti-imperialism,insiststhatMcCarthyreveals“darkerrealtiesofAmericanconquest”andthepoliticsof“ManifestDestiny”(76).Similarly,accordingtoChristopherDouglas,McCarthyutilizesthehostilelandscapeandcarnageoftheAmericanSouthwestinBloodMeridiantoquestion“thesilenceoftheGodinthefaceofhumanmisery”(11).HefurtherillustratesMcCarthy’sdeconstructionofGodpurportstocriticizeAmerica’simperialconquestoftheWestbehindwhichChristianityfunctionsasatooltospreadtheso-called“civilization”tothenon-Americans.OtherworksindefenseofMcCarthy’scritiqueofAmericanimperialismandhisrevisionofthefrontiermythareSaraL.Spurgeon’sExplodingtheWestern:MythsofEmpireonthePostModernFrontier(2005),JohnCant’sCormacMcCarthyandtheMythofAmericanExceptionalism(2008),andMeganRileyMcGilchrist’sTheWesternLandscapeinCormacMcCarthyandWallaceStegner:MythsofFrontier(2010).SpurgeonfocusesonhowMcCarthyimplicateshisWesternswiththefrontiermythsoastorewriteorrectifytheculturalmythologyinpostmodernAmerica.WithregardtotheflattenedfiguresinBloodMeridian,theromanticandidealisticvisionoftheprotagonistinAllthePrettyHorses,theritualizedborderpassagesinTheCrossingandtheexceptionaldesireforfemalesinCitiesofthePlain,SpurgeonclaimsMcCarthy,byreplayingandre-appropriatingthefrontiermyth,revealsitsfailuretoaccountforviolenceandinequalitythatwereconstituentsoflifeintheAmericanWest.Whatismore,McCarthyreversestheunivocaldiscourseontheWesternhistorybyformulatingarathercomplexandmulti-voiceddiscoursethatservestorepudiateAmericanimperialexpansion.ShedrawsabalancedconclusionthatMcCarthy“both18 reproducesandcritiquesofimperialideology”(Spurgeon17).Spurgeon’sargumentthatMcCarthy’sdeconstructionofthefrontiermythfunctionsasarepudiationofAmericanimperialismisconsistentwithJohnCant’scontentionthatMcCarthyturnsupsidedownthemythofAmericanexceptionalism.Throughouthiselaborateanalysis,JohnCantpositionsMcCarthy’stextsascommentsonthemythologyofAmericanexceptionalisminoneformoranotherandfurtherassertsthatthesecomments“areexpressedasaseriesofanti-myth”(157).Incontrasttothetraditionalfrontierheroesthatassociatedwiththemalandoffreedom-lovingpeoplededicatingthemselvestospreadingdemocracy,notimperialconquest,intheAmericanWest,McCarthy’scharactersarenotwinnersoverthewilderness,butvictimswhosufferbitternessandtortureresultingfromtheirabortedplanstoreinvigoratethemonomythofthefrontierandAmericanexceptionalism.Thus,CantregardsMcCarthy’scharactersasrefutationsofthenotionthatthewhite-maleAmericansbrought“civilization”tothewilderness.Inthissense,McCarthyoffers“ananti-mythtothepretensionsof‘ManifestDestiny’andacountertotheoftenvaingloriousaccountsofthehistoryoftheSouthwestingeneralandTexasinparticular”(168).Cant’sbook-lengthanalysisispersuasive,butwhathemissesinhisdiscussionistheideologicalmechanismatplaytoproducethemythicsourcesthataffectMcCarthy’scharactersintheirconceptionofthefrontierlifeandthewholeWesternhistory.SeldomdoesMcCarthy’sfrontiermotiffailtogripthecriticalattention.InTheWesternLandscapeinCormacMcCarthyandWallaceStegner:MythsofFrontier(2010),McGilchristexaminesthetwoiconicauthorsasbookendsofthetumultuousperiodofthe1960sandearly1970swhentheColdWar,theVietnamWar,theCivilRightMovementandothersocialandpoliticalupheavalsinAmericagaveastrongjolttoandevenlethalattackonAmericanidealsthatderivedfromAmericanfrontierexperience.ShecontendsthatMcCarthyengagesina“deepquestioningofwidelyacceptedwesternmythicimagery”(2).McGilchristchronicleshowMcCarthydrawsonthecowboyarchetypetointerrogatethefrontiermythandassertsthatMcCarthyirrefutablypresentstheidealizedworldofthepastintheAmericanWestthatnever19 existedandmerelyfunctionedas“acanvasuponwhichthebloodypictureofManifestDestinywaspainted”(141).Besides,McGilchristoffersaconvincingreadingofAllthePrettyHorsesascriticismoftheWesternsocietythatexcludeswomenfrombeingpartofAmericanfrontierexperienceandinwhichthemalefailtocommunicate“withthefemaleinitshumanorenvironmentalmanifestations”(182).Drawingonmythcriticism,ecocriticalandfeministapproachesandpositioningMcCarthy’sWesternsinthehistoricalcontextagainstwhichtheycameintobeing,McGilchrist’sanalysisclarifiestheeffectsofthefrontiermythasindicatedbyitsculturalinfluencesonAmericans.However,herreadingreinforcestheviewthatMcCarthy’sWesternscreatewhatJaneTompkinscalls“awomanlessmilieu”(44).Infact,McGilchrist’scontentionconformstoNellSullivannotingthatMcCarthysystematicallyeliminateswomenfromhisnarrativeandarrangesbiologicallymalecharacterstoperformthefeminine.Byseparatingfemininityfromwomenandallowingthemaletoperformbothgenderroles,“McCarthyineffectcreatesaclosedcircuitformaledesire”(Sullivan230).Simplyput,McCarthydepictswomentobewomanfatalesorobjectifiesthemasmereobjectstosatisfythemaledesire.Thus,McCarthy,whounmasksunmistakableambivalenceaboutwomenstereotypedinthefrontiermyth,embraces“anoutrightmisogyny”(Sullivan230).FeministreadingsofMcCarthy’sWesternsimploreustoseehimasamisogynist,apositiontheauthorofthisdissertationpartiallyagreewith.However,thisdissertationwillundertakeclosereadingstoshowthatMcCarthy’scharacterizationsoffemalesarenotasnegativeasgenerallyclaimed.Infact,McCarthyusesthevoiceofthefemaletocounterattackthetotalizingdiscourseoffrontierideologywithinwhichthedominationofwomenwasformulaicallyreinforcedtocovertheimperialconquestoftheWestonthepartofthewhite-maleAmericans.Onthewhole,astoMcCarthy’sutilizationofthefrontiermyth,scholarstendtoconsiderMcCarthyasadeconstructionistconscientiouslyworkingtorevealthefantasieshandeddowntoAmericansbyit.However,hardlydotheyaccordcriticalattentiontothewayinwhichfrontierideologyisinculcatedinthemindsofMcCarthy’scharacterswhofalselyperceivesocialfantasiestoberealities.Butitis20 worthnotingthatWilliamCarlBrannon’sdissertation“RidingforaFall:Genre,Myth,andIdeologyinMcCarthy’sWesternNovels”figuresouttheconnectionamongMcCarthy’sWesterngenre,mythandideology.BrannonobservesthatMcCarthy’sWesternsexhibit“thenarrativeconventionsoftheWesterngenre”and“theculturalmythsandideologicalconceptsassociatedwiththeAmericanWest”andarrivesattheconclusionthatMcCarthy’sWesternstoriesbecomewhatJamesFalsomcalls“‘ametaphoricalparableoftheinconsistenciesandcontradictions’”that“informstheAmericanExperience”(iv,v).ThoughBrannon’smeticulousworkshedslightontheideologicaldimensionsinMcCarthy’sWesterns,itdoesnotmakeclearthespecificideologythattheyareengagedtoreplay,interrogateandeventransgress.Likewise,inherdissertation“BorderPlacesandFrontierSpaces:DeconstructingIdeologiesoftheSouthwest,”CordeliaElizaBarrera,focusingonspaceasafoundationalmetaphorfororganizingrealityanddirectingideologyinsomecontemporaryAmericanwritersincludingMcCarthy,McMurtry,SilkoandotherMexicanAmericanwriters,illustratesthatspaceintheAmericanSouthwestissituatedwithinafalseandevendestructiveculturalmythologyandcontendsthatMcCarthy’sAllthePrettyHorsesandTheCrossingworkto“memorializeandsimultaneouslysubvertthearrivalofEuro-AmericansettlementintheSouthwest—specificallythegeographicalareaboundedbytheRioGrande”(55).Forher,McCarthy’ssubversionofthegloriousAnglo-AmericansettlementinthefrontierundercutstheideologicalassumptionsthattransformedtheAmericanSouthwestintoahistory-lessplaceandbehoovesustoembracetheborderasahistoricalplaceofmultipleideologicalstrugglescausedbyAmericanimperialconquestintheWestwardMovement.IfBarreraandBrannondistinguishtheirstudiesfromothers’byemployingtheoriesofmyth,feminismandspacetounmaskMcCarthy’sinterrogationoftheideologicalbasisthatlegitimatedAmericanexplorationoftheWest,thenDavidHolloway,mainlyfocusingontheanalysisofform,exploreshowMcCarthycallsintoquestionthediminishingofmodernism’sonce-valorousstance.Suchastanceopposestothefinalstageofcapitalistproductionorexpansion.AttherootofHolloway’sprojectishisconcerntorestoreanoppositionalvitalitytoliteraryproduction,orwhat21 hecalls“perspectiveofestrangement”andrevealMcCarthy’sembodimentof5“ideologyclimateofitstime”hewrites(LateModernism2,3).HollowaydeemsMcCarthyasalate-modernistwhosesingularprosehighlightsandincorporatesthedeathlinessoflanguageinhisstoriesofacommercializedAmericanWestwhichindicatesthedestructiveravagesoftheU.S.capitalism.InHolloways’view,McCarthy’slatemodernismisdistinguishedbyitscapacitytoseizeuponthepostmodernsoasto“useitagainstitselfandnegateitfromwithin”(4).Furthermore,hepointsoutMcCarthyoffersusaclear-cutobservationoftherelationbetweenanerasingof“‘perspectiveofestrangement’”ataculturallevelandthegeneralizedclosingdownof“oppositionalpoliticalenergiesuponwhichcrisis-hiddenU.S….capitalismdependsforitsproduction”(Holloway4).Onthewhole,HollowaypertinentlylaysoutablueprintofthemostimportantaspectsofMcCarthy’slaterwritings:criticalinvolvementinAmericanhistory,revisionoftheideologyofManifestDestiny,anddepictionofprofoundlyalienatedcharactersbegottenbythelatecapitalisminAmerica(61-67).Thought-provokingasHolloway’sanalysisis,ithardlytakesintoconsiderationthestrategiesofcontainmentonwhichMcCarthy’sWesternsdependtoelicitthe“politicalunconscious”ofracismnowevolvingintoAmerica’sinternalcolonizationandculturalhegemonywithinandbeyonditsterritory.ThisunfilledterraininMcCarthystudieswillbeexploredinthisdissertationbytranscodingMcCarthy’sracialteleology.Comparedwiththeever-increasingacademiceffortstoMcCarthystudiesabroad,notmuchhasbeendoneinChineseMcCarthystudies.ItwasnotuntilthelaterhalfofthefirstdecadeinthenewmillenniumthatcriticalattentionswereaccordedtoMcCarthybyChinesescholars.Likescholarsabroad,ChinesecriticsmainlyelaborateonMcCarthy’sWesternsintermsofhisecologicalconscious,feministthought,existentialandreligiousteleology,philosophyofchaos,andAmericannessandtransnationality.Amongthethreedissertationssofar,scholarXiangXinnistudiesMcCarthy’sAmeriannessandtransnationalityreflectedbyhischaracters’border5“Perspectiveofestrangement”isoriginallyusedbyIrvingHoweinDeclineoftheNewwhichlamentsthelossofcriticaldistancebetweencultureandtheworld(203).Simplyput,bydistancingthemselvesfromtheactualworld,aestheticworksmightreevaluatesocietyfromadetachedperspectivewithrelativeautonomy.22 crossings.Inparticular,shedwellsontransnationalchronotopeandlove,reconfigurationofAmericannationbuildingandtranscendentalhumanisminMcCarthy’sWesternnovels(19,22).AmongChinesejournalarticlesonMcCarthy’sWesterns,JangNingkang’sstudystandsprominent.ProfessorJiangelucidatestheculturalheritageandnationalcharacterassociatedwiththeAmericanWestinMcCarthy’sWesterns.Equallyimportant,inhisAmericanWesternLiterature(2009),ProfessorLuoXiaoyundelineatestheevolutionoftheWesterngenreandparticularlyearmarksachaptertodiscussMcCarthy’secologicalvisionembodiedbytheBorderTrilogy.ItisworthmentioningthathisdiscussiontouchesupontheculturalconflictsbetweenAmericaandMexico.HearguesthatMcCarthy’streatmentoftheMexican-AmericanbordercannotcompletelyseenasascathingcriticismofAmericanimperialismsincehischaracters,whocrosstheMexican-Americanborderbackandforth,tovariousdegreesexemplify“Americansuperiority”and“nationalism”(161).SuchcontentionismoredialecticandcomprehensiveinthattheBorderTrilogy,asbothWesternandanti-Westerngenre,ontheonehand,mightsuittheaestheticmentalityofAmericanswhoholddearthespiritofindividualism,freedomandlibertynurturedbyAmericanfrontierexperience;ontheotherhand,theBorderTrilogyreflectstheextantproblemsfacingtheWestlikeecologicaldisasters,ethnicgenocideandinternalcolonization.Inthisway,theBorderTrilogysetsitselfagainsttheofficialmeta-narrativeandachievesitscriticalforcebydistancingitselffromthecommonly-acceptedviewontheAmericanWest.Affirmatively,McCarthystudiesinChinaasmentionedabovehavepromotedacademicinterestinhisworks.However,judgedfromitsdepthandbreadth,McCarthyscholarshipathomestilllagsbehindandneedstobeexploredfurther.Tosumup,Chineseandforeignscholars,thoughreachinganagreementonMcCarthy’sinterrogationoftheideologicalassumptionsassociatedwiththeorthodoxrepresentationofAmericanWesternhistory,haveseldomexploredthemechanismoftransmittingtheideologicalassumptionsatworktoaffectcharacters’cognizanceofthehistoricalpastoftheWesternfrontierandclandestinelyforgetheirimperialmentalityinactualizingtheirimaginedwayofthepastfrontierlife.Whatismore,23 theyunanimouslyaffirmthatMcCarthy’sWesternsrepudiateAmericanimperialismentangledwiththewestwardexpansionandkeepatbayitsimperialintentioninhisliteraryimagination.However,theydonotfigureoutMcCarthy’sdynamicandnuancedattitudetowardAmericanimperialismindifferentnovels,neitherdotheyworkoutMcCarthy’stranscendenceoffrontierideologyasindicatedbyhisadvocacyofre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontier.Thus,thisdissertation,basedonthepreviousMcCarthystudies,continuestorevealtheroleofideologicalstrategiesingeneratingafieldofdiscursivedifferenceswithintheWesterngenrethatjustifiesandrecuperatesAmericanimperialculture,itsnationalmyths,racism,classismandsexism.Equallyimportant,theanalysisofMcCarthy’srepresentationoffrontierideologywillenlightenustoseetheanti-imperialistwritingstanceinhisWesternsisnotasunanimousasgenerallyassessed.Rather,theygiveusaglimpseofdynamicandcomplicatedprocessinwhichtheauthorialapproachtowardAmericanimperialismchangesfromambivalence,criticalobjectiontocompletetranscendence.C.TheLayoutoftheDissertationIntheintroduction,aworkingdefinitionof“frontierideology”,literaturereviewofMcCarthy’sWesternsandthelayoutofthisdissertationarepresented.Inthefirstsection,abriefoverviewofFrederickJacksonTurner’sFrontierThesisanditscultural,socialandhistoricalinfluencesisofferedsoastodefinethetwo-layermeaningsoftheterm“frontier”discussedinthisdissertation.Thefirstsectionalsooffersageneralevolutionofideologytoincorporatetheperspectiveofideologicalcriticismintothereadingofliterarytexts.Proceedingfromtheprevioustwosteps,themeaningoffrontierideologyatbothdenotativeandconnotativelevelisspecified.Inthesecondsection,ChineseandforeignstudiesonMcCarthy’sfrontiermotifandideologicalconnotationsarereviewed.Onthebasisoftheearlierstudies,thediscussionsoffrontierideologyinMcCarthy’sthreemajorwesternsareset.Thelastsectionisasummaryofthemajorpointstobediscussedinthisdissertation.The24 introductionmainlyaimsatprovidingafoundationforthetextualanalysisinthefollowingchapters.ChapterOne,takingBloodMeridian(1985)asacasestudy,tracesbackMcCarthy’sreplayingoffrontierideology.McCarthy’sglorificationofFrederickJacksonTurner’sfrontiersmenandprogressivenationalismcomestosurfacewithhischaracterizationofthekidas“AmericanAdam”andofthenationalistandpatrioticfigureCaptainWhiteasspeakingfortheMonroeDoctrineandManifestDestiny.Fromthisperspective,McCarthy,byjustifyingtheunofficialactionsonextendingAmericanimperialcausetothehinterlandofMexicointheaftermathoftheMexican-AmericanWar,restagesTurner’shistoriographyofthefrontier.Meanwhile,McCarthycallsintoquestionManifestDestinywhichlegitimatelyexplainedandjustifiedthewestwardexpansionashedegradesAmerica’sseeminglynobleandcivilizingmissionintobarbaricorgiesofviolenceresultinginthedeathofmostofhischaracters,whoburytheirimperialdreamaswellasthemselvesinMexico.Inthissense,bynomeansdoesMcCarthyassenttofrontierideologyandAmericanimperialism.Paradoxically,McCarthy’srepudiationofAmericanimperialismreinforcesthe“politicalunconscious”ofracismthatgivesprivilegetothenarrativetropeofmoralrebirth,Americanwhitenessand“regenerationthroughviolence”generallycodifiedinthetraditionalWesterns.Thus,thewarringforcesbetweenMcCarthy’sglorificationandrepudiationoftheAmericanempirebuildinginBloodMeridianconstitutehisambivalencetowardAmericanimperialism.ChapterTwo,basedontheclosereadingofAllthePrettyHorses(1992),elucidatesthecriticismoffrontierideologyinthepost-frontier1940s.McCarthy’sprotagonistJohnGradyCole,unconsciouslyinfluencedbyfrontierideologywhichisimplicitlybuteffectivelyimpartedontoindividualsviathecultural,familyandcommunicationsIdeologicalStateApparatusinAlthusseriansense,journeyssouthwardtoseekhis“NewFrontier”Mexicowithaneyeforregaininghiscowboyempire.Mexicodoesnotpromisethe“safetyvalve”forAmericancowboys,butnurturesastronganti-imperialistpoweragainsttheAmericanintruders.Inthefiercebattlebetweenimperialistandanti-imperialistpower,JohnGradyloses,onlytobe25 reverselypenetratedbytheMexicanculture.HisabortedimperialplansuggeststhatMcCarthycriticizesfrontierideologyandquestionstheunsoundaspectsof“structuresoffeeling”residinginthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannation.InChapterThree,acarefulexaminationofCitiesofthePlain(1998)enablesustoseeitstranscendenceoffrontierideology.JohnGradyCole,duetohislackofhistoricalawareness,castsanostalgiceyeonthefrontierthathadgonewiththeruthlessforceofhistoricaltides,butisstillobsessedwiththecowboylifebothinspiritandinreality.Hisquasi-cowboybehaviors,likehuntingdogsandbreakinghorses,providethematerialexistenceforfrontierideologywhichstructuressocialrealityandmanipulateshimtoimaginea“symbolicfrontier”theMexicanprostituteMagdalenarepresents.JohnGrady,relyingonthepowerofAmericancapital,initiatesacommercialnegotiationwithEduardowhoownsMagdalena,aself-legitimizedactwhichironicallyleadshertobemurdered.InhighlightingJohnGrady’sfailuretoactualizehiscommercialplanandhisfinaldeathintheduelwithEduardo,McCarthybreaksAmericannewimperialismintopiecesandforeclosesthepossibleoperationoffrontierideology.Furthermore,McCarthy,byenvisioningthedysfunctionofAmericanimperiallogic,urgesAmericanstore-identifywiththehybridizedfrontier,soastoproperlyfacetheculturalheterogeneityanddiversityintheAmericanWest,particularlyintheMexican-Americanborderlands.Indoingso,Americanscansurpassthehomogenousdiscourseoffrontierideologyandcreateadiscursivecommunityinwhichheterogeneousdiscourses,insteadofsubordinatingonetoanother,intermingletocreateadialogicandhybridizedscenario.Theconclusionpresentsasummaryofthemainpointsinthisdissertation.Itarrivesatthefollowingconclusions:firstly,McCarthy’sappropriationandhisreformulationofthefrontiermotifinhisthreemajorWesternsaimtorevealtheirrationalaspectsoffrontierideologyoneofwhichisitsjustificationforAmericanimperialism;secondly,theanalysisoffrontierideologyinhisWesternsistolocatetherootcausewhichhasalwaysjustifiedAmericanimperialexpansionbyrelyingonthecultural,familyandcommunicationsIdeologicalStateApparatusandstrategiesofcontainmenttosubtlybutefficaciouslyinstigateAmericans’imaginingsconforming26 toitsimperialfantasy;thirdly,McCarthy’srepresentationoffrontierideologyinhisdifferentWesternsenablesustoseehisdynamicyetnuancedattitudetowardAmericaimperialismchangingfromanambivalentonetoacriticaloneandfinallytoatranscendentone;lastly,McCarthy’sWesterns,bydrawingandtransformingsomestapleelementsinthetraditionalWesterngenre,exceeditspopularityandvulgarityinthattheyofferaccuratediagnosticcommentsonandprofoundcriticismsofAmericansociopoliticalsituation.27 ChapterOneBloodMeridian:ReplayingFrontierIdeologyBloodMeridian(1985),CormacMcCarthy’sfirstWestern,drawsonthehistoricaleventofthebloodyexploitsofJohnJoelGlantonandhisbandofscalphuntersintheaftermathoftheMexican-AmericanWar,andthenovelcallstomindtheviolenthistoryofAmericanswhoadvancedtheWestwardMovementandexploredtheWesternfrontierinthenameofspreadingcivilizationandexpellingbarbarismacrosstheAmericancontinent.CriticalresponsestoBloodMeridianassessthatitdeconstructsthetriumphalisthistoryofAmericainitscourseofempirebuilding.ScholarslikeNeilCampbell,DavidHolloway,SaraSpurgeon,andmanyotherspersuasivelyarguethatMcCarthycriticizesfrontierideologybeneathwhichliedhiddenAmericanimperialismduringtheWestwardMovement.NeilCampbellanalyzesviolenceinthisnovelandlabelsitarevisionistnarrativeoftheAmericanWest.AccordingtoCampbell,byengaginginnegotiationwiththenumerousmythsofAmericanorigin,“McCarthyfollowstheirstrangelogictodarkconclusions,tothepointwherethemythsturninonthemselves,implodeandbegintodeconstruct”(218).Similarly,inExplodingtheWestern:MythsofEmpireinPostmodernFrontier(2005),SaraSpurgeondiscussesthearchetypalmythsandmythicheroesthatweretraditionallyusedtovalidatetheWestwardMovementandAmericanimperialismastheyareinBloodMeridian,andshecogentlyconcludesthat“McCarthyisdeliberatelydeconstructingtheimperialistaimsandjustificationsoftheoldmythswhiledisruptingassumptionsabouttheideasandidentitiestheywereintendedtohold”(19).Meanwhile,DavidHollowaymakesclearthetextualideologyofrepresentationinBloodMeridianfromMarxistperspectiveandsumsupasetofrigidlydefinedmetaphysicalpairingslikenature/culture,truth/falsity,andwill/fatesaturatedinthetext.HollowayarrivesattheconclusionthatBloodMeridianrestrainedlydisrupts“thenotionofManifestDestiny”since“resistancetothebinarymetaphysicsonwhichManifestDestinyisbuilt…isalso28 carriedoutinthenovel’srepudiationofbinarythinkingperse”(25).Glancingovertheoft-quotedcomments,itisnoticeablethatcriticsimploreustoconsiderBloodMeridianasa“revisionarywestern”oran“anti-Western”(Jarrett,Cormac69;Collin561).Byandlarge,criticsgenerallycategorizeBloodMeridianintoanti-imperialistnarrativeandhencedeclareMcCarthyiswritingagainsttheempire.Indeed,BloodMeridian,apartfrominvokingAmerica’svictoryoverMexicointheMexican-AmericanWarandbringingreadersbacktothehistoricalmomentoftheWestwardMovementwhichshapeddistinctiveAmericannationalidentity,laysbareAmericancounter-memoryofromanticimaginingoftheWest.McCarthydoessobyre-openingthetraumaofviolenceandimperialatrocitiesinthewestwardexpansion.ItisworthnotingthatscholarsunearththewayinwhichMcCarthyholdsdialogicnegotiationswithAmericanWesternhistoryandstresseshispurposeofdemythologizationoftheAmericanWest.However,theproductionoftextualmeaningisinseparablefromthecultural,politicalandsocialcontextwithinwhichaparticularliteraryworkisproducedandtowhichitresponds.Literature,asamodeofproduction,reliesonlanguagetoproducethedominantideologicalbeliefs,tocounterattackthemandeventoseekanin-between-nessbetweenthetwoextremes.Language,thoughseeminglyinnocentandspontaneous,isessentiallyadomain“scarred,fissuredanddividedbythecataclysmsofpoliticalhistory,strewnwiththerelicsofimperialist,nationalist,regionalistandclasscombat”(Eagleton,Criticism54).Alternatelyput,literaryworks,byvirtuesofre-organizationoflinguisticpatterns,provideaterrainwithinwhichthestrugglesofimperialconquerorswiththesubjugatedareexhibited.Eagletonconsidersliteratureas“agent”and“theeffect”ofsuchstrugglessinceitbecomesanessentialmechanismbywhichtheideologyofanimperialistclassestablishesitshegemony(Criticism55).Thusviewed,noliteraryworkcansimplyberegardedaspresentationofauthorialsensibilityorimagination;rather,itshallberedeemedasanideologicaloutcomeofaparticularhistoricaltimeataspecificplace.Inthissense,thetaskofliterarycriticismistolook“ratheratwhatsuchstatementsmustinevitablysilenceorsuppressandtoexamine“thewaysinwhichthenovelisnotquiteidenticalwithitself”(Eagleton,Literary155).29 AsFredricJamesonwrites,“thepoliticalinterpretationofliterarytexts”shallbe“theabsolutehorizonofallreadingandallinterpretation”(ThePolitical17).BloodMeridian,withitsdramatizationofhistoricalfactsandfragmentationofnarrativetimeandspace,engagesitselfwiththeapoliticalcharacteristicsofpostmodernistliteratureinbothformandcontent.Yet,itstillencodestherepressedideologueinitstextasMcCarthyproblematizestheideologicalstrugglesandtheethicalambivalenceofthewestwardexpansiontowhichnoyardstickcanbeappliedtomeasureitsdisputableeffectslikeimperialconquest,racismandsexism.Thus,unlikethesereadingsthathighlightMcCarthy’srewritingoffrontierideologyofthenineteenthcenturyandhisanti-imperialistauthorialapproach,thischapterproposesthatMcCarthyinBloodMeridian,bymeansofwhatFredricJamesoncalls“strategiesofcontainment,”restagesfrontierideologyinregardstohistransmissionofthecorebeliefscentraltofrontierideology,especiallyFrederickJacksonTurner’sFrontierThesis(ThePolitical653).Nevertheless,itisundeniablethatMcCarthyalsocriticizesfrontierideologybydeconstructingsuchbinaryoppositionsascivilization/barbarism,progress/degeneration,life/deathandwhite/non-whitewhichwerethediscursiveconstructionforgedbyfrontierideologyinitsdefenseofAmericanconquestoftheWest.Withtheerasureofsuchbinaryoppositions,thehollownessoffrontierideologyanditshypocrisyarelaidbare.Ontheonehand,McCarthystripsawaythenobleveilofManifestDestinyandforeclosesAmericans’“regenerationthroughviolence”bypresentingcharactersthatbecomesacrificialofferingsfortheso-called“progressive”causeoftheWestwardMovement.Inthissense,neverdoesMcCarthygiveanoddingagreementtoTurner’sidealizationandoversimplificationoftheAmericanWest,nordoesheconspirewiththethenofficialnarrativewhichclosedtheruptureofideologicaldisputesandstruggleswithaneyetocoverAmericanimperialexpansion.Nevertheless,McCarthy’srepudiationofAmericanimperialismfallsintothetrapof6“Strategiesofcontainment”isthemeansthatdeniestheintolerablecontradictionslyinghiddenbeneaththesocialsurfaceandconstructsontheverygroundclearedbysuchdenialasubstitutetruththatmakesexistenceatleastpartlytolerable.ThosecontradictionsareasintolerableasthatNecessitythatspawnstherelationsofdominationinhumansociety.Thefunctionof“strategiesofcontainment”istoallow“whatcanbethoughttoseeminternallycoherentinitsownterms”whilerepressingtheunthinkablewhich“liesbeyonditsboundaries”(Jameson,ThePolitical53).30 reinforcingthe“politicalunconscious”ofracismonthegroundthatheprioritizesAmericanwhitenessandgivesprecedencetothenarrativetropeofmoralgrowthand7“regenerationthroughviolence”commonlyfoundinthetraditionalWesterns.Hence,itcanbeseenthatthetensionbetweenthevalidationofimperialcauseandtheanti-imperialistorientationinBloodMeridianconstitutestheauthorialambivalencetowardstheformationoftheAmericanempire.A.FrontierExpansionduringandaftertheMexican-AmericanWarHistoricallyspeaking,theWestwardMovementmarkedtheachievementofAmericanfrontierexpansion.SinceitsindependencefromBritishdominationin1783,theU.S.becameaunitednationcomprisedofitsformerthirteencolonialstates.TheWarofIndependenceendowedAmericawiththepowerandcapabilitytoexplorethevastcontinentoftheWest.Fromthenon,theWestwardMovementtookitscourseuntil1890whentheCensusBureauofficiallydeclaredtheclosureofthefrontier.InmorethanacenturyoftheWestwardMovement,AmericaexpandeditsterritoryfromtheAtlanticOceantothePacificcoast.ThenineteenthcenturywasaneraofterritorialexpansioninthenameofAmericanprogressandcivilization.ManypurchasetreatieswerelivingproofsofAmericanexpansionism,suchastheLouisianaPurchaseTreatyof1803,whichexpandedAmericaby800,000squaremilesfromtheMississippiRivertotheRockyMountains;theAdams-OnísTreatyof1819-1821,whichacquiredFloridafromSpain;theMissouriCompromisein1820,whichbroughtstatehoodforMissouriandMaine;andtheTreatyofGuadalupeHidalgoof1848,whichputanendtotheMexican-AmericanwarandaddedtoAmericamorethan505,000squaremiles7Theconceptof“politicalunconscious”iscentraltoJameson’spoliticalreadingofliterarytexts.Whathemeansby“politicalunconscious”istherepressedelementsexistinginatroubledandantagonisticrelationtothoseoverstructureslikeideologyandculturethatmanageorchecktheirthreateningeruptions(Dowling36-37).Here,the“politicalunconscious”ofracisminthisstudyreferstotherepressedracialovertoneorthelatentmeaninglyingforcenturiesbeneaththeopenorexpressedormanifestassertionthatAmericaisnotaracialistsociety.Evenifprejudicesagainstthenon-whiteandcoerciveandevenviolentmeansusedtoquellracialconflictsexist,thereasonablefootingforsuchanexistenceistoimprovetheirsituations.31 oflandcoveringwhatisnowTexas,NewMexicoandCalifornia.Thesesignedtreatieswereatthecostoflarge-scalewars.TheMexican-AmericanWar,forinstance,wasanunjustwarprovokedbyPresidentJamesPolktobullytheeconomicallyweakanddomesticallyvolatileMexico.AlthoughMexicocedednearlyonehalfofitsterritorytotheUnitedStates,America’sthirstforterritorialexpansionwasnotquenched.Thenationalistmoodofexpansionandconquestinthatperiodcameintofullswing.Coincidentally,BloodMeridian,setintheyearsaftertheendingoftheMexican-AmericanWar,foregroundstheheydayoffrontierexpansionintheWestwardMovementandechoesfrontierideologyinjustifyingAmericanimperialcauseinitsassistanceoftheMexicangovernmenttoexpelandexterminateApacheswanderingintheMexican-Americanborder.FrontierideologyfounditsconcreteexpressioninFrederickJacksonTurner’sinfluentialessay“TheSignificanceoftheFrontierinAmericanHistory”addressedattheChicagoWorldExpoin1893.Reflectingontheendofthefrontier,TurnerintroducedFrontierThesisandassertedthat“theexistenceofanareaoffreeland,itscontinuousrecession,andtheadvanceofAmericansettlementwestwardexplainAmericandevelopment”(Frontier37).Turneraffirmativelyclaimedthefrontiershapedtheextantsocial,politicalandeconomicstructureofAmericabynurturingAmericancharacterslikeindividualism,loveforadventure,self-reliance,optimismandmanyotherpositivetraitsinherentinthevirtuesofAmericans.HecharacterizedAmericanswith“coarseness,”“strength,”“restless,nervousenergy”and“expansivepower”(Frontier50,61).ItisofgreatsignificancethatTurnerproposedthattheformationofAmericanidentitycountedontheexplorationoftheWesternfrontier.Turner’sAmericanidentitysetanexemplarforattributingAmericanexceptionalismtoitsfrontierexperienceandbeatthedrumforthedominantideologythatcompelledAnglo-AmericanstomovewestwardandreclaimthelandonwhichAmericandemocracysproutedandborefruit.TurneressentiallyspreadAmericannationalismandoptimismthatinstigatedmanyAmericanstomovewestwardandestablishthemselvesinthevastGreatPlains.ItisevidentthatTurnerwrotefromtheAnglo-Americanperspectivesinceheprimarilyidentifiedwiththeuppersocialclass32 whourgedthelowerclasstoreproducethelaborforce,sothatthesocialandclassconflictsbroughtbytheeconomicdiscrepanciesbetweentheWestandtheEastwouldberesolvedandevenignored.Indoingso,thepositiveidealsofsocialfreedomandclassequalitywouldberealizedforthepublicatthesynchronicmomentbecausetheywerenotconceptualizedasthepredominanceofmiddlebourgeoisindividualism.Infact,Turner’sFrontierThesissuccumbedtothedominantvaluesystemofbourgeoisclassregardlessofitsinternalideologicalstrugglesamongdifferentclassesandethnicitiesandhencebasicallyepitomizedthe“ideologeme”oftheWestward8Movement.FredricJamesondefinesideologemeas“thesmallestintelligibleunitoftheessentiallyantagonisticcollectivediscoursesofsocialclasses”(ThePolitical76).Itsfunctionistomediate“betweenconceptionsofideologyasabstractopinion,classvalueandthelikeandthenarrativematerials”(Jameson,ThePolitical87).Hence,ideologemeisanamphibiousformationwhosestructuralcharacteristicscanbedescribedasitspossibilitytomakeitselffeltaseitheras“apseudoidea”or“aprotonarrative”.Theformerrefersto“aconceptualorbeliefsystem,anabstractvalue,anopinionorprejudice”;whilethelattermeans“akindofultimateclassfantasyaboutthe‘collectivecharacters’whicharetheclassesinopposition”(Jameson,ThePolitical87).Ideologemeshallnotbemerelyregardedasthereflectionorreduplicationofitssituationalcontext,butalso“astheimaginaryresolutionoftheobjectivecontradictionstowhichitthusconstitutesanactiveresponse”(Jameson,ThePolitical118).IfFredricJamesonisrighttosaythat“ressentiment”ispartofthefundamentalnineteenth-centuryideologicalthoughtintheWesternculture,thenweshalladdTurner’sprogressivenationalismtoJameson’scategoriesofideologeme(The9Political88).MoospointsouttheFrontierThesis“becameadefinitivedocumentin8Theterm“ideologeme”isakindofminimalunitaroundwhichaclassdiscourseisorganized.Jamesondrawsonthenotionofthephonemeinlinguisticsastheminimalphonologicalunitthatcreatesawordorchangesitsmeaning,asthesoundrepresentedby“p”changes“bad”into“pad”(Dowling132).9“Ressentiment,”forJameson,isinvokedasthesmallestideologicalunitbyanineteenth-centurybourgeoisieanditsintelligentsia.Itrefersto“themindlessanddestructiveenvythatthehave-notsofsocietyalwaysanduniversallyfeeltowardthehaves,thusutterlydenyingtheoriginsineconomicexploitationofalldiscontentfrombelow”andinventingtheimaginaryresolutionstotheclassconflicts(Dowling134).33 organizingtheboundariesfortheAmericannationalawareness”(3).Turner’sprogressivenationalismwasarticulatedasabstractconceptualbeliefsorvaluesthatprovidedrationaleforimperialconquestofthenativeIndiansandotherminoritiesandconsideredAmericansinnocent,progressiveandoptimistic.TheFrontierThesisreconfiguredasetofarchetypesthatexplained“thetriumphalistandexceptionalistideologyofthenation-state[America]”and“markedaretreatfromhistory”and“anescapefromthematerialbaseofthings”(Robbins6).Otherwisestated,TurnerconceivedtheAmericanfrontierasanendlesssourceofAmericanprosperityandgreatnessavailabletothewhite-maleAmericanswhileneglectingclassexploitation,sexismandinternalcolonization.Hence,theFrontierThesisideologicallyofferedcoherenceorconsistencybetweenindividualperceptionofrealityandnationalimaginationinthenineteenth-centuryAmerica.SetintheaftermathoftheMexican-AmericanWar—theculminationofwhichresultedinthelargestfrontierexpansionofAmerica—BloodMeridiansimultaneouslyechoesthenationalistmoodcementedbyTurner’sFrontierThesis.Attheonsetofthenovel,McCarthyfollowstheofficialnarrativethatcastsaninnocenteyeonfrontierexpansion.HedoessoprimarilythroughhisevocationoftheexceptionalwestwardcauseinherentinthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericans.Theopeningpagesofthenovelchroniclethejourneyofthenamelessprotagonist“thekid”,likeawesteringman,leavingfromTennesseeforTexas.ThekidembodiestheidealizedimageofTurner’sfrontiersmensinceheislacedwithinnocence.Byinnocence,Americansputstressontheirinherentkindness,bountifulbenevolenceandinfallibleincorruptness.Thekidwasbornisinanightfullofmystery.McCarthywrites:“nightofyourbirth.Thirty-three.TheLeonidstheywerecalled.Godhowthestarsdidfall.Ilookedforblackness,holeintheheaven.TheDipperDove”(Blood3).Theinexplicablemysterysurroundinghisbirthisfurtherstrengthenedwhenwecometoknowthathisbirthcarriesoffhismother’slife:“Thefatherneverspeakshername,thechilddoesnotknowit.Hehasasisterinthisworldthathewillnotseeagain”(3).Thedeathofhismothermakesthekidmoreinnocentandworthyofsympathybecausehebecomesanorphandeprivedoftherighttobeunderlovingcareofmotherhood.34 Bycloselytracingtheoriginofthekid,McCarthyexhibitsnumerousfacetsofTurner’sprototypesoffrontiersmen.Hisdescriptioninvokesthewidely-heldbeliefthatAmericaisa“NewWorld”anditscitizensarea“newpeople,innocent—innocents”(Robertson347).Thekid,withbigwristsandhands,isnotverytall.Hisface“iscuriouslyuntouchedbehindthescars”andhiseyesare“oddlyinnocent”(McCarthy,Blood4).Itlooksasifthekidis“theAmericanasAdam”(Lewis5).InhismonumentalworkTheAmericanAdam(1959),R.W.B.Lewisdiscoveredinnineteenth-centuryAmericanliteraturetheAmericanAdamwho,regardlessofhissocialorigin,canachievespiritualregenerationandprogressthroughhiswanderingandlaborinthefrontier(5).Similarly,thekid,leavinghishomeinTennesseeattheageoffourteen,wanderswestasfarasMemphislike“asolitarymigrantuponthatflatandpastorallandscape”(McCarthy,Blood4).Here,McCarthydepictsthekidasasolitaryfrontiersmanwhogoeswhereverhewantswithoutsocialandgeographicalrestraints.Thus,thekid,crossingTexas,headsforNewMexico,ArizonaandCaliforniaandmanynorthernMexicanstatesinhopeoftransforminghimselfintoatrue“AmericanAdam.”Justlikeanindividualstandingalone,self-propelling,self-reliantandreadytoconfrontwhateverawaitshim,thekidisindifferenttohisunusualfamilialheritageandrace,andhismoralinnocence,despitehistastefor“amindlessviolence,”isunderscoredpriortohisdegenerateexperienceinhisrecruitmentinCaptainWhite’sfilibustertroopandtheGlantonGang(McCarthy,Blood3).Turnerpointedoutthateachfrontierfurnished“anewfieldofopportunity,agateofescapefromthebondageofthepast”andprovidedAmericanswiththesoilforthegrowthof“freshness,”“confidence”andwiththe“scornofoldersociety,impatienceofitsrestraintsanditsideas,andindifferencetoitslessons”(Frontier62).Thekid’swesteringmovefollowsthetracksummarizedbyTurner,andhisconcreteactionechoesthesoundingcallofthenineteenth-centurywriters.Forinstance,HoraceGreeleyencouragedpeoplewithlowsocialstatusfromwhateverplacetogototheWestasavehicleforresolvingfinancialpanicthatengulfedAmericain1837.Heasserted:“GoWest,youngman,goforthintotheCountry”(qtd.inCullen,140).ThoughwritingBloodMeridianafterthe35 endingoffrontierexpansionmorethanacentury,McCarthystillportraysTurner’simageoffrontiersmanbymeansofdescribingthefrontierasanidealizedplacetoaccommodatethedisadvantagedandthediscontentedlikethekid.McCarthy’sreconstitutionof“AmericanAdam”datesbacktothepopularrepresentationsofAmericansinthenineteenth-centuryAmericanliterature.LiteraryfigureslikeJamesFenimoreCooperandWaltWhitmanpublicizednationalismanddemocracyandcelebratedtheself-reliantandinnocentAmericanswhoreliedontheirowneffortstomakesuccess.Particularly,AmericanromanticismreinforcedtheideathattheAmericanWestwasalandofopportunitiesforall.Basically,writersduringthisperiodepitomizedprogressivenationalismandencouragedAmericanstogooutWestwheretheycouldachieveself-realization.TerryEagletoninformsusthatliteratureisanimportantinstrumenttoputindividualsinto“theperpetualandsymbolicformsofthedominantideologicalformation”anditaccomplishesthisfunction“witha‘naturalness’,spontaneityandexperientialimmediacypossibletonootherideologicalpractice”(Criticism56).Inthissense,mostliteraryworksofAmericanromanticisminthenineteenth-centuryassimilatedthedominantideologyandallowed“whatcanbethoughttoseeminternallycoherentinitsownterms,whilerepressingtheunthinkable…whichliesbeyonditsboundaries”(Jameson,ThePolitical53).Thus,itcanbepostulatedthatlyingbeneaththeuniversalpatternofromanticizingtheWesternfrontierinAmericanromanticliteratureisaperpetuationofTurnerianfrontierideologysince,asJaneTompkinssuggests,theWest,whereAmericansunflagginglyexploredtheirfrontierinthewestwardexpansion,hasbecome“asymboloffreedom,andoftheopportunityforconquest”andoffersescapefrom“amechanizedexistence,economicdead-ends,socialentanglements,unhappypersonalrelations,politicalinjustice”(4).Mosthistoriansinthe1840spreferredtochartthepoliticsthatledtotheMexican-AmericanWarandthepossibleprogressbroughttotheMexicansbyit.RarelydidtheynoticethestrongconflictsarousedinAmericaandtheimmeasurabledamageinflicteduponMexicoduringandaftertheWar.Thiselisionattestedtothepersistentdiscursivepoweroffrontierideologythatcateredforthepoliticalinterests36 andofficialnarrativeencouragingfrontierexpansion.JaimeJavierRodríguez’scogentsummationofthepoliticalframeworkinthe1840sisworthquotinginlength:Inthe1840s,U.S.Americanpoliticalmythologyframedadubiouswaragainstasovereigncountryasanactofself-defense,justifiedbymoralobligationsandgroundedin‘America’s’putativeroleasalightoffreedom,andmanyU.S.Americansoftheera,energizedbyasurgingnationalism,sawtheconflict’snecessityandjusticeasself-evidence.(112)NotmerelydidpoliticiansusethefrontierrhetorictogiveAmericaamoralandjustgroundintheWar,butalsowritersunquestionablyopposed,bydefinition,Mexico’sanachronismtoAmerica’sgloballyredemptiveanddemocraticpurpose,amongwhomyoungWaltWhitmanstoodoutasajingoisticwarsupporter.Likewise,McCarthy’svisionoftheAmericanfrontier,throughhisimageofthekid,compelsustoseeAmericansasinnocentAdamswholeavesbehindanunfortunatepastandendeavorstobeself-mademen.IfthekidasanAmericanAdamisexposedtotheauraofTurner’sfrontiersmaninspiteofhisaimlessdriftingattheinitialstageofhisjourney,thenitishardforreaderstomissanothernamelessmemberofCaptainWhite’snonmilitaryandunsanctionedtroop.WhenwanderingalongtheMexican-Americanborder,thekidcomesacrossCaptainWhite’sunjustifiedarmythatplanstomakeincursionintoMexicowithaneyeforincorporatingmoreMexicanlandintoAmerica’simperialmap.Thekidisenticedintojoiningtheunauthorizedarmedforcebyanamelessmanalreadyrecruitedintoit.Thenamelessmansetsanexampleforthekidbyhisownexperiencesandtellshimthat“[I]t’sachanceforyetoraiseyeselfintheworld”(McCarthy,Blood29).Hecontinuestosay:“Yougettokeepever-thingyoucanraise.WegointoMexico.Spoilsofwar.Aintamaninthecompanywontcomeoutabiglandowner”(30).Tomakethekidbelievethepromisingfuturewaitingforhim,themanfurtherrecountshispreviousexperienceofrejuvenatingfromthedespondencyandrisingfromtherags.Hetellsthekidasfollows:37 IbeeninTexassincethirty-eight.IfI’dnotrunuponCaptainWhiteIdontknowwhereI’dbethisday.IwasasorriersighteventhanwhatyouareandhecomealongandraisedmeuplikeLazarus.Setmyfeetinthepathofrighteousness.I’ddonetooktodrinkinandwhorintillhellwouldnthaveme.HeseensomethininmeworthsavinandIseeitinyou.(30)Theman’srebirthintheWestatteststothegeneralitiesofthefrontierasaplacewhereindividualcanrefrainfromthepastandaccomplishsuccess.Here,McCarthy’selisionoftheman’snameisoneofideological“strategiesofcontainment”thatcloakstheundesirableandconflictingelementsopposedtothethendominantideology(Jameson,ThePolitical256).Thiselision,whichmakesthenamelessmanuniversallyrepresenteveryAmericanintheWest,“avoidsknowinghistory”(Jameson,ThePolitical256).ItmeansMcCarthyobscuresthehistoryoffailureexperiencedbythoseunabletosurviveintheirstrugglesagainsttheharshenvironmentandclimateintheWestwhereDarwin’slawof“thesurvivalofthefittest”prevailedandwaslivedby.Theanonymousman’sexperienceisconsistentwiththebeliefspromulgatedbyTurnerin“ProblemoftheWest.”AccordingtoTurner,theWestwasatbottomaformofsocietywhereanewenvironmentwassuddenlyentered,thecakeofcustombroken,andnewactivities,newlinesofgrowth,nobleideasandnewinstitutionsformed(Frontier63).Noticeably,Turner’sviewconcurredtothenineteenth-centurystateideologythattooktheWestasabufferzonethatwouldtemporarilyalleviatethedomesticinstabilityandsocialstrugglesincurredbythesharpeconomicdiscrepanciesbetweentherichandthepoor.Thenamelessman’sregeneration,withtheredemptivehelpfromCaptainWhite,assureshisfellowsthebeliefthatthehistoricalfrontierindeedprovidednumerousopportunitiesforindividualstorisefrombondage,povertyanddrudgeryandacquireindependencewithasenseofpride.Consequently,inthefaceofsuchalarger-than-lifeexampleofrebirthandsuccess,thekid,withoutaslightesthesitation,findshisexistentialmeaningintheWesternfrontierandthenfollowsthemantojoinCaptainWhite’steam.Fromthenon,hebeginstheexpeditionofapromisedregenerationtoMexico.JoiningCaptainWhite’sillegaltroop,thekid,togetherwithotherrecruiters,38 beginshisimperialconquestoftheMexicans.BeforeenteringintoMexico,CaptainWhitejustifiestheirmissionofrecapturingSonorafromtheMexicanswithhiseloquentspeech.Hesaystohismembers:Whatwearedealingwith…isaraceofdegenerates.Amongrelrace,littlebetterthanniggers.Andmaybenobetter.ThereisnogovernmentinMexico.Hell,there’snoGodinMexico.Neverwillbe.Wearedealingwithapeoplemanifestlyincapableofgoverningthemselves.Anddoyouknowthatwhathappenswithpeoplewhocannotgovernthemselves?That’sright.Otherscomeintogovernforthem.(McCarthy,Blood34)CaptainWhite’slogicisacontinuationofthatofPresidentJohnPolkwho,asanimperialexpansionist,initiatedtheMexican-AmericanWarandcoercedtheMexicangovernmentintosigningtheTreatyofGuadalupeHidalgoof1848andceding505,000squaremilesofMexicanlandtoAmerica.CaptainWhite,unwillingtoaccepttheterminationoftheWar,planstocarryafarfrontierexpansionintothehinterlandofMexico.HeaimsatgarneringmoreeconomicgainsandcirclingonAmericanimperialmapmoreMexicanlandintheinterestofPolk’spoliticalideologyinthe1840s.WhenPresidentPolkexplainedthatitwasjustandbeneficialforalltocedetheSouthwesternterritoryundertheMexicangovernanceasaconditionofpeace,hedeclared:Numerousbandsoffierceandwarlikesavageswanderoverit[NewMexico],anduponitsborders.Mexicohasbeen,andwillcontinuetobe,toofeebletorestrainthem[Indians]fromcommittingdepredations,robberiesandmurders,notonlyupontheinhabitantsofNewMexicoitself,butuponthoseoftheothernorthernStatesofMexico.ItwouldbeablessingtoallthesenorthernstatestohavetheircitizensprotectedagainstthembythepoweroftheUnitedStates.(qtd.inCongressionalGlobe3)InPolk’sspeech,wecansensethatthesharpcontrastbetweentheIndiansas“fierceandwarlikesavages”andtheinnocentandlaw-abidingAmericansandthedisparagingabilitytoprotecttheircitizensbetweenAmericaandMexicogave39 legitimacytoAmerica’spracticesofIndianeradication,removalandreservationsopervasiveinthemid-nineteenth-century.Besides,itprofferedajustifieddiscursivepresuppositionofthedysfunctionalMexicangovernmentandthewholeMexicannationatlarge.SuchdiscursivepracticepositedAmericaasredeemerandvalidateditswaragainstMexico,anewly-foundedgovernmentwithoutabilitytomanageitsownaffairsandprotectitspeople.DiscussingthediscursiverepresentationofthestereotypicalMexicans,ReginaldHorsmangraspstherapidemerginghierarchyofthesuperiorandinferiorracesinthepoliticaldiscourseofthe1840sAmerica.WhentheWestwardMovementwasmovingintotopgear,theAmericangovernmentboosteditsexpansionistspiritbyelevatingtheAnglo-Americansto“thepurestofthepure—thefinestCaucasians”;whereas,itreinforcedtheethnologicalrepresentationoftheMexicans“whostoodinthewayofsouthwesternexpansion”as“amongrelrace,adulteratedbyextensiveintermarriagewithaninferiorIndianrace”(Horsman210).Withinsuchamanifestracialdestiny,CaptainWhite’sdebasementoftheMexicansanddefamationoftheIndiansreeksofbothPresidentPolk’spoliticalviewandbyextensionthedominantideologyofthe1840sAmericawhichfunctionedwellinmaintainingandstrengtheningthesociopoliticalcoherenceandnationalsolidityofAmerica.PromotedbyThomasJefferson’sLouisianaPurchaseof1803,PolkofferedtopurchaseCalifornia,anofferthatwasstraightforwardlyrefusedbytheMexicangovernment.Aftereverypossiblemeanswastriedandfailed,PolkappointedAmericanarmiestoinvadeandoccupytheNorthernpartofMexico.HisgunboatdiplomacywasdefendedbybothAmericanstatesmenandmenofletters.In1847,awriterattachedtoTheDemocraticReviewtellinglyspokeforAmerica’sinitiationoftheMexican-AmericanWarandpubliclywrotethat“whenanationsinksintoastateofanarchy,unabletogovernitself,anddangeroustoitsneighbors,itbecomesthedutyofthemostpowerfulofthoseneighborstointerfereandsettleitsaffair”(qtd.inHeitala269).Coincidentally,CaptainWhite’simpassionedwordsbearintertextualrelationshiptothewritingofmenoflettersthatundergirdedPolk’sdecisiontowagewaronMexico.Hisspeech,inadditiontolegitimatinghisinvasionofMexicoafter40 theWar,outspokenlyembodiesthepoliticalideologyofPolk’sgovernmentthatnationalisticallynurturedtheexpansionistdesignoftheAmericanfrontieracrosstheAmericancontinent.McCarthy’sCaptainWhite,whoseannouncementelicitsexpansionistnationalism,optimismandconquestinthedisguiseofspreadingAmericancivilization,callstomindthefundamentalassumptionsoffrontierideology.HeimaginesthathismembersarelikeliberatorsorsaviorswhoarepromisedvastrangesoffrontierlandwheretheycanplayouttheirskillsandtalentsandpublicizeAmericandemocracyandfreedom.Hence,hecontinuestoinstigatehisfollowersandregardsthemasliberationforceinadvancingAmericanexpansionwhenspeakingloudly:“Wearetobetheinstrumentsofliberationinadarkandtroubledland.That’sright.Wearetospearheadthedrive.WehavethetacitsupportofGovernorBennettofCalifornia(McCarthy,Blood34).Hisspeech,apartfromstressingMexicanlandwhoseinhabitantsneedprotectionandsecurity,invokesTurner’sfrontiersmenwithdauntlessspirittosurviveandflourishintheuncivilizedregionwherethey,bycarvingorderoutofdisorder,substitutedcivilizationforbarbarismandbackwardness.CaptainWhite’sspeechcomestotermswithTurner’scontentionin“TheProblemoftheWest”that“theindividualhasbeengivenanopenfield,uncheckedbyrestraintsofanoldsocialorder,orofscientificadministrationofgovernment”(Frontier69).Inthisway,theself-mademanepitomized“theWesternman’sideal”andsymbolized“thekindofmanallmenmightbecome”(Turner,Frontier69).JudgedfromTurner’sperspective,CaptainWhiteisthespokesmanforthenineteenth-centuryfrontierideologywhichhadtheedgeoverthenativesIndians,Mexicansandothernon-whitespopulatingtheWesternfrontierlongbeforeAmericansettlementthere.Inparticular,heinheritsthepoliticalideasofPresidentPolkwhonoticedthattheCalifornianportswouldmakeAmerica“commandthealreadyvaluableandrapidlyincreasingcommerceofthePacific”(qtd.inHeitala89).Commercially,acquiringCaliforniafromMexicosignificantlyaffectedtheeconomicpositionofAmerica,fortheportsinSanDiegoandSanFranciscoenabledAmericansto“facilitatetradewithAsia”(Hall171).ThisacquisitionpositionedAmericaasa41 continentalempirethatstretchedfromtheEasttotheWestandultimatelyledtoitshegemonyovertheIndianterritories.Overall,theannexationofCaliforniawouldboosttheeconomicandnationalgrowthfortheyoungRepublic.InlinewithAmericaneconomicinterests,CaptainWhite’sambitiousvisionthatAmericanswouldsomedaydirectlyheadforCaliforniawithoutpassingthroughMexicolinkstheenlargementoftheWesternfrontierwithhispatriotism.HeexpresseshispatrioticideaslikeapriestwhopassesonGod’screedstohisdiscipleswhenstating:RightnowtheyareforminginWashingtonacommissiontocomeouthereanddrawuptheboundarylinesbetweenourcountryandMexico.Idontthinkthere’sanyquestionthatultimatelySonorawillbecomeaUnitedStatesterritory.GuaymasaUSport.AmericanswillbeabletogettoCaliforniawithouthavingtopassthroughourbenightedsisterrepublicandourcitizenswillbeprotectedatlastfromthenotoriouspacksofcut-throatspresentlyinfestingtherouteswhichtheyareobligedtotravel.(McCarthy,Blood34)HisannouncementnotmerelymirrorsAmericannationalismflaringuplikeafire,butalsodebunksthecontinuedadvancementoffrontieroccupationwhoseessencewasnottoimpartcivilizationanddemocracytothedowntroddenareas.Instead,itsessencewastoprecipitatetheconclusionofunequaltreatiesthatenabledAmericatoconsolidateitsempirestatus.Furthermore,CaptainWhite’swordsbringtolightthatAmericangeopoliticsofthenineteenthcenturywasmuchlikeachessboardinwhicheachpowerendeavoredtocontrolthegreatestexpanseofspace.ThemoreterritoryAmericapossessed,thegreateritspopulation,naturalresourcesandgeographicaladvantageswere,andthemorepossibilitiestoweakenanddefeatitsrivalswere.RobertL.JarrettcharacterizesthehistoricalperiodBloodMeridiandepictsas“teem[ing]withpoliticalrhetoricandplotstoextendtheAmericanempirebywar,intrigue,orfilibuster”(Cormac69).IfCaptainWhiteandhisrecruitersarethecarriersofthespiritofAmericanexpansionisminperson,thenlyingbehindsuchaspiritisfrontierideologywhosepoliticalimplicationwasmisusedbyAmericanstatesmen,forinstance,PresidentPolkandhiscabinetmemberswho,withthesole42 aimofimperialexpansion,simplyignoredoppositionsfromtheWhigparty.InAmericanWhigReview,theanti-warWhigssummarizedwellthepoliticalrhetoricthatinspiredPresidentPolkandimpressedpeoplewiththemanifestmissionofAmerica.Itsaidasfollows:Mexicowaspoor,distracted,inanarchy,andalmostinruins—whatcouldshedotostaythehandofourpower,toimpedethemarchofourgreatness?WeareAnglo-SaxonAmericans;itwasour‘destiny’topossessandtorulethiscontinent—wewereboundtoit!(qtd.inHorsman236-37)ThepoliticalrhetoricsketchedabovecontinuedtotakedeeprootinAmerica,sothatitseemedthatAmericanvictoryoverMexicowasordainedinthesamewaythatAmericahadwonitsearlierindependencefromBritishcolonizers.HorsmanpointsoutsomepoliticiansbothduringandaftertheMexican-AmericanWarargued“Mexicowasdoomedasanation”(237).Obviously,aself-endowedmissiontocovetandconquerthewholeMexico,justasCaptainWhitewillfullyimaginesforhisrecruiters,sweptoverAmericashortlyaftertheterminationoftheWar.CaptainWhitethinksthatMexicoisthereforAmericanstotake.Hisattempttoobtainitssubstantialareascanbedubbedthe“Mexican-AmericanWarSyndrome,”whichforeshadowstheJohnWayneSyndromeexperiencedbyAmericansoldiers10duringtheVietnamWar.CaptainWhiteprolongsthewarlogicofAmericanstatesmen.FredricJamesonperceptivelynotesthat,bydiscerningthetracesoftheuninterruptednarrativeor“restoringtothesurfaceofthetexttherepressedandburiedrealityofthisfundamentalhistory,”“thedoctrineofapoliticalunconsciousfindsitsfunctionanditsnecessity”(ThePolitical20).Otherwisestated,thepracticeofliterarycriticismistounearththesubtextbeneaththesurfaceofthetext.Inthissense,whatwefindinCaptainWhite’seloquentwordsis,asindicatedbytheirintertextualitywithpoliticians’statements,the“politicalunconscious”ofracismrepressedandjustifiedin10JohnWayneSyndromeisfeaturedbyfeelingsofguiltforfailurestotakeheroicactionsonprotectingothersfromharm.WhenanalyzingitsinfluenceonAmericansoldiersinVietnamWar,RobertJayLifton,inHomefromtheWar:VietnamVeterans,neitherVictimsnorExecutioners(1985)observesthatJohnWayne,asafamousactorinHollywoodWesterns,impartsfallaciousconceptsofwarontoAmericans,likecourage,undoubtedfaith,noblemilitaryracesandarrogance,desireforwarandheroickillingsandfights(219).43 AmericanhistoryinwhichtheMexicanshaveallthemorebeendemonizedanddebased.Besides,hiswordsserveastherevelationofAmericanimperialismverifiedbythepoliticalrhetoricofbringingwhatTurnercalled“Americandemocracy”and“freedom”totheindolentintheprimitiveareas.However,historicalfactshaveprovedthattheannexationofTexasandotherstatescededtoAmericaaftertheMexican-AmericanWardidnotmeanthesharingofAmericanrightfordemocracy,freedomandequalitywiththeMexicansandnativeIndianspopulatingtheseareas.Instead,CaptainWhite’sillegalinvasionofMexicomakesnonsenseoftheassertionthatAmerica’swaragainstMexicowasintimatelyconnectedwiththerebirthofthenon-Anglo-AmericanswhobecameaheavyburdenandeventhreatforAmericancivilization.Undoubtedly,CaptainWhiteassimilatesthestateideologyformulatedbyPolk’sgovernment,whichintendedtofurtherimperialexpansionofAmericaatthepeakoftheWestwardMovement.LikemanyheroicandnationalistAmericanscelebratedbyTurner’sFrontierThesis,CaptainWhiteennobleshisteam’sunofficialandunsanctionedmission,andelevatesitsunjustifiedactionstoanationalistandpatrioticlevel.Inhiswords,histroopispatrioticallyfightingfortheUnitedStatesandlegitimatelytakingrevengeontheMexicansforbrothersandsisterswhoshedtheirbloodonthecorruptedMexicanland.Furthermore,CaptainWhiteconsidersthattheMexicansarenolessindolentandmentallybelatedthanthenativeIndians.Thetwominorities,wroteGaryClaytonAnderson,“hadlittleideaofwhattodowiththelandtheyclaimed,”andhence“AmericansweredestinedtoadvanceintotheWestbringingdemocracy”(212).Viewedfromthisperspective,CaptainWhiteopinesthattheAnglo-AmericanshavetheunshakabledutytohelpMexicomanageitscitizensandland.ButhisambitiondoesnotinvokesomuchprogressivenationalismaswhitesuperiorityandeconomicexploitationoverMexico.Forhim,acquiringlandmeanseconomicbenefitsandsocialfreedombasedonindividualacquisitiveness,socialmobilityandafluidclassstructurewhichmighthelprelieveclasstensionandracialconflictswithinAmericanterritory.Basically,CaptainWhiteegotisticallyconceivesanuncontestedfrontierforAmericanstoexploreastheyhaddonepriortothe44 Mexican-AmericanWar.InhismonumentalworkCultureandImperialism(1993),EdwardSaidhaspertinentlyobservedthatasAmericaincreasedinageandhemisphericpower,itenvisioned“distantlandstobedesignatedvitaltoAmericaninterests,tobeintervenedinandfoughtover”(8).Contextualizedinthe1840s,Americanexpansionofthegeographicalfrontier,ignitingmuchnationalistpassionforitsso-called“altruism”and“progress”whilerepressingits“politicalunconscious”ofracism,wasessentiallyaprocessofimperialconquestandracialextermination.Evidently,theMexican-AmericanWarwasanindisputablefactthatneverfailedtoremindusoftheAmericanempirebuildingatthecostofshamelesslootingoflandfromthenativesIndians,Mexicansandotherminorities.McCarthy’sCaptainWhiteisnotonlyproudofcarryingontheunfinishedprojectleftbyPolk’sarmymenwhofailedtocedeCaliforniafromMexico,butalsoreflectiveofthedeep-rootedexpansionistmindsetofAmericansaftertheWar.Whenurginghismemberstoconscientiouslydevotethemselvestohisnoblecause,CaptainWhitetellsthemthat“wewillbetheoneswhowilldividethespoils.Therewillbeasectionoflandforeverymaninmycompany”(McCarthy,Blood34).Hefurtherboostshisgang’smoraleandconfidencewithhisimaginingoffeasiblematerialwealthandpromiseofagloriousprospectforhisfollowers.Thus,heenvisionthat“finegrassland,”some“ofthefinestintheworld,”anda“landrichinminerals,ingoldandsilver”arebeyondAmericans’“widestspeculations”(34).Tellingly,hisrecruiters,insteadofexpellingfromMexicotheEuropeancolonizerswhoillegallysettlethere,castacovetouseyeonitslandandeconomicbenefitstosatisfytheinsatiableimperialappetiteofAmerica.InBloodMeridian,thepoliticalrhetoricofcivilizingtheprimitivepeopleandprovidingthemwithawideningarcofdemocraticinstitutionsgiveswaytoCaptainWhite’sracialprejudiceandimperialinvasion.CaptainWhite’simagination,asanepitomeoftheprevailingmoodofprogressivenationalism,seeksanideologicallyunifiedidentificationwiththesocialrealityandcreatesaromanticizedmythoffrontierexpansion.ByhighlightingCaptainWhite’sdenigrationoftheMexicansand45 nativeIndiansaslesserbeingsandhispatrioticspeeches,McCarthyobligesustoseenotsomuchhisindictmentofAmericanimperialcauseashisracismthatstrengthenswhitesuperiority.IfMcCarthy’sevocationofwhitesuperiorityjustifiesCaptainWhite’sforayintoMexicointhenameofoverstretchednationalism,thenhisreferencetotheMonroeDoctrinecanbetakenasapoliticalverificationforplunderingMexico.McCarthydoessothroughCaptainWhite’sexplanationforhisjusticeinsafeguardingAmericaninterests.WiththeendoftheMexican-AmericanWar,someNorthernpartsofMexicowerestillsettledbytheEuropeancolonialists.InBloodMeridian,thepresenceofFrenchcolonialistsintheMexicanstateofSonoraposesgreatthreatstotheMexicangovernmentanditscitizens,whichhasnochoicebuttocallforAmericanintervention.CaptainWhitewrapstheresidualofFrenchcolonizationintoAmerica’slegitimateinvasionandfrontierexpansionanderasesthepresenceofAmericanimperialmotivationbyreiteratinghismorallyjustandpoliticallyreasonableground.HepressesthekidtobeenlistedinhisteamandcontinuestorationalizehisactionsonfightingagainstFrenchcolonialists.Hetellsthekid:UnlessAmericansact,peoplelikeyouandmewhotaketheircountryseriouslywhilethosemollycoddlesinWashingtonsitontheirhindsides,unlessweact,Mexico—andImeanthewholeofthecountry—willonedayflyaEuropeanflag.MonroeDoctrineorno.(McCarthy,Blood35)CaptainWhiteconsiderstheFrenchcolonialists’settlementinSonoraviolatestheMonroeDoctrine.AndhenceitisnecessaryforAmericatousemilitaryforce,beitlegalorillegal,forthesakeofsafeguardingAmericanpoliticalinterestsintheNorthernhemisphere.TheMonroeDoctrine,whichwasputforwardbyPresidentJamesMonroeinearlyDecember1823,aimedtoputacodatoEuropeancolonizationintheAmericas.Itincludedthreeimportantaspects.Firstly,theUnitedStatesinsistedthatEuropeannationsshouldnotestablishanynewcolonyintheAmericas.Secondly,theUnitedStatesofficiallyassumedcontinuedneutralattitudetowardsEuropeanaffairsandwars.46 Intacitagreementwithhispredecessors,PresidentMonroeintendedtodisengagetheUnitedStatesfromtheconflictsthatoftenensnaredtheEuropeanpowers.Thirdly,PresidentMonroedeclaredthatEuropeanstatesshouldmakemutualcommitmentnottointerfereintotheaffairsofindependentAmericanstates,manyofwhichhadrecentlybrokentieswithSpain.Inaword,EuropewastotakethechargeofEuropeanaffairs,andinturntheUnitedStatesandothernewly-independentnationsintheAmericaswouldgoverntheirownaffairs.TheMonroeDoctrine,ontheonehand,protectedthenewly-independentnationsfromEuropeancoercionandsubjugation;ontheother,itallowedthenewgovernmentstosortoutthingsbytheirown.Asamatteroffact,theUnitedStatesforciblyexporteditsnationalidealsofself-determination,democracyandself-governancehighlyrecommendedbyfrontierideologytoothernationsthatjustachievedtheirindependencefromEuropeancolonizers.TheMonroeDoctrineprovidedanuncontestedgroundforAmericatoresorttomilitaryforcetofightagainsttheEuropeancolonialiststhemomenttheydisobeyeditsstipulations.Likewise,CaptainWhiteusestheMonroeDoctrinetoexplainhistroop’sillegalinvasionofMexico.BytakingadvantageofMexico’srelianceonAmerica,thenativeIndians’inabilitytouniteandresistdispossession,andthedeclineofFrance’scolonizingpowerinMexico,heendowshistroopwithAmericanpoliticalmissionofself-defenseandself-governance.Indoingso,heconfersonhistroopawarrantedpoliticalcorrectnessandanoverallsenseofjusticegiventheiranti-colonialistmissiontodriveawaytheFrenchcolonizersfromMexico.EdwinT.ArnoldarguesthatBloodMeridian,contextualizedinthehistoricalbackground,“mustbeconsideredasanindictmentofthewholeWesternphilosophyofManifestDestiny,ofmoralandculturalrightnesswhichhasruleourcountryfromthePilgrimstoVietnam,Nicaragua,andbeyond”(“Review”104).However,McCarthy’saccusationofManifestDestinyasareligiousjustificationforfrontierexpansionseemsdisputable.ApartfromhisdepictionofthekidasfrontiersmanwithinalienableinnocenceandCaptainWhite’sfollowersasAmericansaviorswho,withpatrioticandnationalisticfeelings,aredestinedtorunanobleerrandinavolatileworld,McCarthy’sportrayalsoftheMexicansasmongrelsunabletoprotecttheirland47 andsubjectedtotheattackofApachesgivejustificationforthe“politicalunconscious”ofracismwhichwasmuffledbyfrontierideologyandlaterevolvedintoAmerica’sinternalcolonizationoftheMexicansandnativeIndiansintandemwiththeimplementationofreservationpolicies.InBloodMeridian,theovertoneofracismcanbeillustratedbyitsnarrativewhichassociatesexoticismandbarbarismwiththeminoritygroups.DuringthejourneytoSonora,thekid,togetherwithotherrecruiters,seesagroupofwanderersconsistingoftheIndians,Mexicansandmanyothernon-whitesinthestreet.McCarthywrites:WithimmigrantsandTexansandMexicansandwithslavesandLipanIndiansanddeputationsofKarankawastallandaustere,theirfacesdyedblueandtheirhandslockedabouttheshaftsoftheirsixfootspears,allbutnakedsavageswhowiththeirpaintedskinsandtheirwhisperedtasteforhumanfleshseemedout-rageouspresenceseveninthatfabledcompany.(Blood38)Thisnarrativegreatlyexaggeratesthebestialityandbarbarityofthenon-whitesandcorrespondinglylaysjustifiablefoundationsforAmericanbrutalityandviolenceinthelattereradicationofApachesandplunderofthelocalMexicansonthepartoftheGlantongang.Thepejorativetraitsattributedtothenon-whitesassertasenseofwhitesuperiority.DavidSlaterwritesofatypeofracismhistoricallycentraltoAmericanterritorialexpansionandsumsupthatAnglo-Saxonismisethnologicallyconstructedontheprerequisitethatthe“Mexicanswerecaricaturedaslazy,ignorant,dishonestandvicious”(71).McCarthy’sdescriptionsoftheMexicansandnativeIndiansbringtosurfaceavarietyofimagesandgeneralitiesthatdifferentiatethepositivevirtuesofthewhitesfromtheunmistakablevicesofthenon-whites.Thusfar,McCarthyholdsanethnocentricgroundintermsofracialrelationship.InOrientalism,EdwardSaidpointsoutthattheideaofEuropeisacollectivenotionwhichpositionsEuropeansas“Us”whileallnon-Europeansas“Others”(3).HefurthercontendsthatthemajorelementsintheEuropeanculturereinforcethehegemonicstatusofEuropeinitsrelationtonon-Europeannations.ToquoteSaid,48 “[t]heideaofEuropeanidentityasasuperioroneincomparisonwithallthenon-Europeanpeoplesandcultures”reiterates“EuropeansuperiorityoverOrientalbackwardness”(7).AsarebelliousdescendentofBritishempirewhichwasnotoriousfor“PaxBritannica”fromthenineteenth-centurytotheearlydecadesofthetwentieth-century,Americahasimbibedtheculturaldrossofitsformersuzerainstateandbredinitsbonesasenseofracialpride.Toassertsuchpride,America“putitsOrientintheWest,asifitwerepreciselyinAmericathattheearthcamefullcircle”(DeleuzeandGuattari19).WecanfurtherproposethattheontologicalandepistemologicaldistinctionbetweentheAmericanEastas“theOccident”andtheAmericanWestas“theOrient”iswhatsetsapartthe“Anglo-Americans”fromthe“Indians”and“Mexicans.”Inthisdiscursiverepresentation,theAmericansareoftenconsideredrational,advancedandmorallyprogressive;while,thenon-Americansaredespotic,exoticandmorallyregressive.Likewise,McCarthy’sevocationofracialdifferencesconformstothediscursiverepresentationofthenon-white.QuitedifferentfromthejustificationforCaptainWhite’stroopandconfermentofinnocenceonthekid,McCarthy’sportrayalsofthenativeIndiansandMexicansarefrequentlyfilledwithsuchwordsas“beast,”“mongrel”and“mob.”TheracialinferiorityoftheMexicansandnativeIndiansversustheracialsuperiorityoftheAmericanshasfunctionedasanadvertisingmechanismthatworkssatisfactorilytotheUnitedStatesfavornotonlyduringtheMexican-AmericanWarbutalsothroughouttheWestwardMovementandevenwellintothetwentiethcentury.Proceedingfromthislogic,anyactionintheWestwardMovementtakentorepressanddemolishtheMexicansandnativeIndianswasjustifiable.DavidKazanjiansuggeststhatthe“indianizationoftheMexicansisacrucialU.S.tropeduringtheU.S-MexicanWar”andallows“whitenesstobewithdrawnfromMexican”(185).Likewise,McCarthy’sdescriptionsofthenon-whiteechothepoliticalrhetoricofAmericangovernment’spoliciesonthenativeIndiansandMexicansinthe1840sandfurtherverifytheAmericanempireconstructionbymeansofgarneringmorefrontierlandwithoutbeingrefutedforitsdisplacementandsubjugationofotherminoritygroups.49 AttheonsetofBloodMeridian,McCarthyendowstheAmericanswithinnocenceandmoralresponsibilitytoimprovetheMexicansandnativeIndians.Naturally,theAmericanshaverighttoviolenceinprotectingtheirnationalinterestsandadvancingfrontierexploration.Thisnotion,havingwontacitsupportandapprovalamongtheAmericansduringandaftertheMexican-AmericanWar,wascogentlydefendedbyfrontierideologywhichdeployed“strategiesofcontainment”tocoverAmericanimperialexperienceandracialeradicationandmademanyAmericansthinkwithinthecenteredandautonomousideologicalsystemthatappeared“internallycoherent”and“unproblematic”(Jameson,ThePolitical294).Likewise,McCarthy,insteadofdetailinghowAmericawontheMexican-AmericanWar,elaboratesonitsaftermathandlooksbackuponthisparticularhistoricalperiod.Toacertaindegree,hisretrospectionistrappedintothehistoricalstatesmen’srationalizationofAmerica’spreemptivewaronMexico,andbecomesthemouthpieceofofficialnarrativeinthewestwardexpansioninthathebuttressestheurgetoexpandthefrontierbeyondtheMexican-Americanborder.Inthisway,McCarthypromotesAmerica’sloftymission,itsnationalcomplacencyandracialsuperiority.TerryEagletonsuccinctlypointsoutthatliteraturebears“themostintimaterelationstoquestionsofsocialpower”(LiteraryTheory19-20).WhatBloodMeridianatitsonsetpresentsusisfrontierideologyappropriatedtomakecohesiveAmericansocialandpoliticalpowerwhichinturnverifiedandfortifieditsunstoppableimperialdriveforpossessingmorefrontierlandinthewestwardexpansion.FredricJamesonstressesthat“thefunctionoftheliteraryrepresentationisnottounderscoreandperpetuateanideologicalsystem;ratherthelatteriscitedtoauthorizeandreinforceanewrepresentationalspace”(ThePolitical231).Nevertheless,inMcCarthy’stext,therepresentationalspaceunwittinglyconformstothedominantideologythatjustifiedfrontierexpansionduringtheWestwardMovementashisnarrativeaddspatriotismtoAmericanexpansionismandstimulatesAmericanresolvetotakepossessionofmoreMexicanlandaftertheMexican-AmericanWar.Thus,McCarthy’snarrativeoffrontierexpansionaftertheMexican-AmericanWarasAmericanfulfillmentofnationalmissionassuresushisrestagingoffrontierideologythatwasusedtojustify50 Americanviolenceandmilitarismasnecessarymeanstoeliminateanyobstaclelyinginitswaytoempirebuilding.B.TheAlliancebetweenFrontierViolenceandImperialistPowerInoneofthethreeexistingMcCarthyinterviews,heassertsthat“[t]here’snosuchthingaslifewithoutbloodshed”(qtd.inWoodword32).McCarthy’sassertioninvitesustosurmisehisappreciationofviolenceandbloodshedasnecessarymeanstoregenerate.“Regenerationthroughviolence”hasbeencentraltotheexplanationforthegrowthandflourishofthenineteenth-centuryAmerica.RichardSlotkin’sRegenerationthroughViolencemeticulouslychronicleshowfrontierviolenceisvitaltotheconstructionofadistinctlyAmericanmythogenesis.FormanyAmericans,theirfoundingforefatherswerenotthosewhoformedanationatPhiladelphia;rather,theywerethosewhoviolentlyforgedanationoutoftheopulentwilderness.Consequently,“regenerationultimatelybecamethemeansofviolence,andthemythofregenerationthroughviolencebecamethestructuringmetaphoroftheAmericanexperience”(Slotkin4).Itcanbesaidthatnootherwordthan“violence”ismoresuitabletodescribeAmericanhistoricaltrajectory.Particularly,violenceinvolvedinconqueringtheAmericanWesthadbeencontributivetoformingandreinforcingAmericaasacontinentalempire.OnewouldhardlydenythatfrontierideologyasatotalizingdiscoursehadpositiveinfluencesonthesolidificationofthenascentRepublicandthereinforcementofAmericannationalidentity.Todismissfrontierideologyascompletelynegativeisonthesamesophomoricintellectualfootingasdeclaringthatallcarsevilbecausetheysometimeshurtpeople.Nevertheless,theformationofAmericannationalidentitysquarelyfallsintothelogicofthepoliticsofracismandimperialism,sincesuchaformation,toquoteSacvanBercovitch,as“anactofsymbolicappropriation,”wasmadepossiblevia“aprocessofviolenceunparallel”51 andsustainedby“arhetoricofholywaragainsteverythingun-American”(Rites8).America,asitshistoryhasunfolded,isbothasynthesisofcivilizationandbarbarismandadynamicsofviolentregressionandcivilizedprogress.Tosomeextent,Americahasnurturedaculturalcomplexofbarbaricdreamandprogressivevisioninwhichtheareasoutsideitsideologicalparadigmmustberepressedandeveneliminated.Infact,AmericanexpansionanditsneargenocidaldisplacementofthenativeIndianswerewelljustifiedbyManifestDestinywhosepresencefoundexpressionsinrepetitivereferencesto“God’swill,”“naturalright”and“providence”(Weinberg11).Religiosity,togetherwithnationalismduringtheWestwardMovement,fosteredAmericanambitiontobringfreedomtoandcivilizethenon-Americans,whichbecameRudyardKipling’ssobriquetof“thewhiteman’sburden.”Thus,entitledwithprovidentialmission,AmericalegitimatelyandbravelyproceededwithitswestwardexpansiontowardthePacificOcean.Intheliteraryimagination,worksthatglorifiesAmericanheroicconquestoftheWestabound,forinstance,MeriwetherLewis’andWilliamClark’sTheOriginalJournalsoftheLewisandClarkExpedition,1804-1806(1904-1905),JamesFenimoreCooper’sLeather-StockingTales(1827-1841),OwenWister’sTheVirginian(1902),andWillaCather’sOPioneers!(1913).Alltheseworks,providingthemildversionsofAmericanimperialconquestoftheWest,areinlinewiththedocumentationofAmericanWesternhistorybyhistorianslikeFrederickJacksonTurnerandRayAllenBillingtonwhotreatedtheWestwithoptimism,romanticismandnationalism.However,withtheemergenceofNewWesternhistorysince1980s,NewWesternhistoriansassertthatthehistoryofAmericanconquestoftheWest,basedonManifestDestiny,wasanimperialhistoryfilledwithviolenceandbloodshed.Simplyput,bymythologizingtheWest,theorthodoxWesternhistorycoveredtheracialexterminationandviolentmassacresandmademostAmericansbelievethattheirforefatherswereengaginginthenoblecauseofthewestwardexpansion.However,NewWesternhistoriansrefusetofullyacceptthe“mythologized”West,butadvocatetherevisionisttreatmentofAmericanWesternhistorybybringingtolighttherelationshipbetweenAmerica’sfrontierexpansionanditsgrowthinimperialistpower.52 PatriciaNelsonLimerickcontendsthatsomeofthestoriesoftheWest’spastputAmericannationintothenakedconfrontationwiththedarkestdimensionsofhumannature.“Torture,maiming,rape,mutilation,murder—alloftheworstinjuriesthathumanbeingsinflictoneachotherserveasthecapstonestothesestories”(Limerick,Legacy34).Likewise,McCarthy’sBloodMeridianturnsfrontierviolenceintheformsofmassacre,rapeandmurderintotheorgiesofsensationalimperialentertainmentandmakesitajustifiedmanifestationofimperialpolitics.Turnerclaimedthat“uptoourowndayAmericanhistoryhasbeeninalargedegreethehistoryofthecolonizationoftheGreatWest”(Frontier37).Centraltothisstatementwasthefactthattheprocessoftamingthewildfrontiermadecolonizedboththeminoritiesandtheland,sothatAmericanimperialistpowergrewoutofviolenceandgaineditsmomentumwiththeoccupationofthefrontierlandinchbyinch.TerryEagletonsays:“Anationisdefinedasmuchbywhatitforgetsasbywhatitremembers”(HolyTerror65).Turner’sdocumentationofAmericanWesternhistorywasbasedontheremembranceofAmerica’scivilizingmission,notonthememoryofitsracialdominationandslaughterduringthatperiod,sincehecalledAmericanenslavementofthenon-whites“anincident”(Frontier52).JustasTurnergavenegligentrenditionofracialcolonization,McCarthy’snarrative,attheonsetofBloodMeridian,justifiesthealliancebetweenviolenceandimperialistpowerbyencodingethnocentrismandOrientalisminhisportrayalsoftheminorities.Asdiscussedabove,theAmericanfilibustersareglorifiedbyCaptainWhiteasliberatorswhowouldsavetheMexicansfromtheattackofApachesandComanches.HisdeclarationdependsontheassumptionthatthenativeIndiansbelongtooneofthedegenerateraces.UponenteringMexicanland,thefilibusterteamencountersahandfulofraggednativeIndiansandMexicans.CaptainWhiteregardsthemasamongrelof“heathenthieves”(McCarthy,Blood53).Thisdebasementexemplifieshisjustifiedinitiationofviolenceonthenon-AmericansbehindwhichliesitslinkagetoimperialistpowerenablingAmericatowintheMexican-AmericanWar.McCarthyintoneshistextwithpalpableracialbiasesbasedonthebinarydivisionoftheAmericansandthenativeIndians.Thisracialdenigrationonwhichthelogicof53 dominationreliesisconsistentwithwhatEdwardSaidcallstheoppositionbetweentheOccidentalrepresentedbytheAmericansandtherelativelybackwardOrientaltypifiedbythenativesIndians.Thus,ifnecessary,violencecommittedonthenon-AmericansisdeemedasAmerica’sredemptiveforcetosavethemfrombackwardness,disorder,disharmonyandtyranny.WhatmattersmostisthatitallowstheAmericanfilibusterstoperceiveAmericannationasthespreaderofthegeneralwelfareofmankindandastheuniversalmodelof“specialness,altruismandopportunity”(Said,Culture8).CaptainWhiterecommendsviolenceasanessentialmeanstocarryouthismissionsincehedoessoforthesakeofimprovingthegeneralwelfareoftheMexicans.Heregardshisimperialcauseasaltruisticandpatrioticonethatenableshisfollowers,regardlessoftheirorigins,torealizethemselvesandbringglorytoAmerica.TheviolencehistroopresortstoiswhatLianaVrajitoruAndreasencalls“thejustifiedviolence”(24).Itreferstoviolencethat“useshistory,tribalrivalry,race,orwartojustifyactsofunimaginablecruelty,suchasdecimatingentirepopulations”(Andreasen24).Infact,thejustifiedviolenceiscommittedbytheAnglo-Americansonthepretextofracialarrogancewhichsetsapart“Us”from“Other.”“OnthefrontierIndiansbecameradicallytheother;theywereanenemytobeexterminatedorsegregatedinenclavesratherthanincorporatedincolonialsociety”(Alonsa68).Suchantinomiesbetween“Us”and“Other”aboundinBloodMeridian.Thenarrator’saccountscastacleardemarcationbetweentheAmericansandthenon-Americans.PriortoChapter13,thenarratorreferstoWhite’stroopas“Americans”onlyeighttimes(McCarthy,Blood78,84,101,102,103,114,121,and165).However,roughlymidwaythroughthebook,referencestotheGlantongangthekidjoinsafterthedisbandmentofWhite’steamas“Americans”increasetotwentytimesinthenext112pagesuntiltheYumamassacreinChapter19(167,169,170,174,177,178,180,182,184,190,191,193,205,221,230,254,255,263,274,and279).ThemorefrequentdenominationsoftheGlantongangas“Americans”demonstratethattheyarenotsosuchcontractuallyworkingforprotectingtheinterestsofthegovernmentofChihuahuaasforprotectingthebenefitsoftheAmericangovernment.Atthispoint,54 thefilibusterteam,ledbyCaptainJohnJoelGlantonandtheJudgeHolden,withthemajorityofmembersbeingAmericans,obligesustodeemitsmembersasraciallysuperiorsandremindsusofAmerica’s“ManifestDestiny”toexpanditsterritorywiththeprovidenceofGod.“ManifestDestiny”wascoinedbyJohnO’Sullivanandfirstappearedinhisessay“Annexation”publishedintheJuly-August1845issueofTheDemocraticReview.AccordingtoO’Sullivan,itwasthe“fulfillmentofourmanifestdestinytooverspreadthecontinentallottedbyProvidenceforthefreedevelopmentofouryearlymultiplyingmillions”(qtd.inSampson209).ThistimeO’SullivanusedthistermtovoicehissupportfortheacquisitionofTexas.Laterthatyear,onDecember27issueofTheNewYorkMorningNews,O’SullivanagainusedittoexplainhisviewontheclaimtotheannexationofOregon.HemaintainedthattheUnitedStateshadrighttoallofOregon.O’SullivanthendeclaredtotheeffectthatAmericawasbytherightofitsmanifestdestinyto“overspreadandpossessthewholeofthecontinentwhichProvidencehasgivenus[Americans]forthedevelopmentofthegreatexperimentoflibertyandfederatedself-governmententrustedtous[Americans]”(qtd.inMountjoy10).ThethirdtimewhenO’SullivanmentionedManifestDestinywasAmerica’sentryintowarwithMexicoin1846.Onthewhole,the1840sand1850sinAmericawitnessedthebulgingpublicityofManifestDestinywiththejointeffortsofmenoflettersandpoliticians.Initsentirety,ManifestDestinyendowedAmericawithprovidentialdutytoexpandacrosstheNorthernAmericancontinent,toreignsupremethere,andtoserveasanexemplarforpeopleeverywhere(Weeks60).Withequalforce,itgaveshapetoallthehopesandexpectationsofAmericanexpansionistsinthenineteenth-centuryAmerica.ThoughAmericaneverformallyadoptedManifestDestinyasanationalpolicy,theconceptindeedexertedimmeasurableinfluencesonitsnationalpolicy-makers.HistorianErnestLeeTuvesonarguesthatManifestDestinyincludesa“complexofideas,policies,andactions”whicharenot“allcompatible,nordotheycomefromanyonesource”(91).Inspiteofthesecomplexities,ManifestDestinygenerallymeantthatAmericaanditspeoplewereordainedtogainownershipofandestablishpolitical55 controlovermuchoftheAmericas.Atleast,therearethreeimportantaspectsinherentintheideaofManifestDestiny,namely,theexceptionalcharactersofAmericaanditsinstitutions,itsnoblemissiontosaveandremaketheworldinitsownimage,anditsdestinyunderGod’sentitlementtoaccomplishthismission.EachofthethreeaspectswasevidentinthepoliticallychargeddiscussionsofAmericanexpansionduringthe1840sand1850s.Inthesimilarvein,motivatedbythenotionofManifestDestiny,thefilibustergangundertheleadershipofCaptainWhitemakesitswaytoMexico.WhentheAmericanfilibusterscomeacrossalegionofComanchesforthefirsttime,McCarthy’sdepictionofComanchesisringingwithanexotic,bizarreandOrientalisttone.Theyareportrayedas“alegionofhorrible”in“atticorbiblical”“costumes”andwardrobe“outofafevereddream”(McCarthy,Blood52).Theircostumesaretracked“withthebloodofpriorowners,coatsofslaindragoons[and]froggedandbraidedcavalryjackets”(52).Theirfaces“aregaudyandgrotesquewithdaubingslikeacompanyofmountedclowns,deathhilarious,howlinginabarbaroustongueandridingdownuponthemlikeahordefromahell”(53).Comanches,“clothedinsmokelikethosevaporousbeingsinregionsbeyondrightknowing,”aremorehorriblethan“thebrim-tonelandofChristianreckoning,screechingandyammering”(53).Indeed,McCarthy’sdescriptionofthefilibustergangalsoreeksofbarbarismanddegeneration.Paradoxically,bydegradingboththeAmericansandthenativesIndiansintopaucityofcivilizingtraits,McCarthyreinforcesAmerica’sviolentyetlegitimatetreatmentofthenativeIndianssinceheimpartsonreadersthattheyareinnatelyassociatedwithcorruption,immorality,barbarityandinexplicableexoticismcommonlyfoundinthediscursiverepresentationoffrontierideology.ReginaldHorsmanhascarefullyshownthattheideologicalmanipulationofknowledgeingeneratingtheimageoftheIndianswhenclaimingthatbythenineteenthcentury“neitherthemassoftheAmericanpeoplenorthepoliticalleadersofthecountrybelievedthattheIndianscouldbemeldedintoAmericansociety”(190).Hence,theIndiansdeservedbeingexpungedfromtheAmericanlandscape.Withoutexception,theComanchetribesufferedalethaldefeatintheGreatComancheRaidof56 1840.Itwasreportedthat“Comanches,considered…thefiercestofallIndians…wereutterlycrushedandneverrecoveredfromtheirdefeat”(Brice82).InthelightofComanches’defeatedfateinAmericanhistory,wecanconjecturethattheGlantongang’slatercontractwiththegovernmentofChihuahuatoscalpComanchesandApacheswanderingalongtheMexican-Americanborderisnotsomuchaltruisticasegoistic,sincethescalp-huntingmightpreventthemfromthepossiblecounterattackagainsttheAmericansintheAmericanSouthwest.TheComancheslaughteralongtheborderlandswasoneofthedirectresultswiththeconclusionoftheMexican-AmericanWar.TheWarendedwiththeannexationofTexaswhereComanchespopulated.HistorianDavidG.McCombrecordedthedisappearanceoftheComanchetribeinTexasandwrote:“WiththeadvanceofAnglo-Americancivilization…theComanchemoonrosenomore.Afteryearsofsporadicoutbursts,theexhaustedanddefeatedComancheslefttheplains”(18-19).ComanchesbecamedisplacedandventedtheinfuriationoflosingtheirnativelandontheMexicanswhobetrayedthem.Asaresult,theysimplyturnedtorobbingandplunderingMexicansintheNorthernstatesofMexicowhich,inturn,employedirregularmilitiatoscalpthemforthesakeofprotectingitslocalcitizens.Inthissense,thenativeIndianswanderingintheborderlandsmustbescalpedandevencompletelyeradicated.Racialinferiorityconstructedbyfrontierideology,alongwiththeimmoralandinhumangroundintowhichthenativeIndiansareputduetotheirprovocativeviolence,continuestorundeepinMcCarthy’snarrationandhencegiveslicensetotheAmericanfilibusters’excursiontoMexico.AftertheambushofWhite’stroop,Comanchesstrip“theclothesfromthedead”andseizethemup“bythehair”(McCarthy,Blood54).Theychopatthe“nakedbodies”andripoff“limbs”and“heads”(54).Someofthemholdup“handfulsofviscera”and“genitals”whilefallinguponthedyingandsodomizingthem“withloudcriestotheirfellows”(54).ThedemonizationofComanchesintoinhumanitydisengagestheAmericanfilibustersfromtheimmoralityofviolenceandatrocitiesinflicteduponthenativeIndians.Themoreanimal-likeIndianslooktobe,themorelegitimatethefilibusters’mission57 appearstobe,andthemorenecessaryandinnocenttheirresorttoviolenceis.SlavojŽižekholdsthatcolonizationisfarfrom“theimpositionofWesternvalues”and“theassimilationoftheOrientalandotherOtherstotheEuropeanSameness”(Belief67).Instead,itisalwaysalso“thesearchforthelostspiritualinnocenceofOUROWNcivilization(68).McCarthy’sportrayalofComancheslargelyoffersacompressedaccountofaflawedracethreateningbothMexicoandtheyoungRepublic,andgivesaclearsenseoftheinnocentAmericanswhomustliveuptothedoctrinesofManifestDestinyinspiteoftheirinvolvementinviolence.AnotherscenethatdepictsthediscardedchurchesinMexicocontributestotheAmericanfilibusters’justifiedviolence.ThechurchinMexicoisnolongerasacredplace;rather,itisheapedwith“thescalped”andthenakedwhosebodiesarepartlyeaten(McCarthy,Blood60).Thesavageshavehackedholesinitsroof,anditsflooris“litteredwitharrowshafts”(60).Itsaltarshasbeen“hauldown,”withitstabernaclelooted,thegreatsleepGodoftheMexicansroutedout,andtheprimitivepaintedsaintscocked(60).Onthewhole,theMexicanchurchisblasphemedbythenativeIndians.McCarthy’sportrayalsuggeststhatitisimpossibleforCaptainWhite’strooptoretreatfromaMexicosomuchforgottenbyGod.Besides,italignsthenativeIndianswithkillingmachines.ThecruelactsofthenativeIndiansandthesqualidchurchawashinnakedbodiesandbloodbecomeevidencesoftheirbarbarism,savagery,andproclivityforviolence.AndhencetheepistemologicalbasefortheAmericanstounderstandthemasinnately“Other”iswellcemented.Here,McCarthydoesnotmakeaslightestconcessiontoanycontemporarymythologyofthenativeIndiansasRousseau’s“noblesavages”ruinedbytheillsofmoderncivilization.Instead,hedowngradestheAmericanfilibustersto“noblesavages”whohavenochoicebuttouseviolencetoadvanceAnglo-AmericanconquestofthenativeIndiansinaspiritofimprovingtheirmoralvaluesandcivilizingthem.Thus,theAmericanfilibusterscanlegitimatelyuseviolencetocounterattackviolence.FrontierhistorianT.R.FehrenbachnotedthatComanchesengagedinthemid-nineteenthcenturyAmerindianwarfareandexhibitedunprecedentedlevelofferocityandcruelty:58 Theshrieking[Comanche]attackersranamok,sparingnooneinthemelee.[…]Oldmenandwomentoofeebletofightorfleewerebutchered.Ofteninfantsweredestroyedruthlessly,axed,dashedtodeathagainstrocksortrees,tossedbloodilyonjaggedspears.Woundedorcapturedfemaleswereusuallyraped;iftherewasnotimeforthattheyweredispatchedandscalpedimmediately.(TheDestruction76)FacedwiththeconstantIndianraidsandpillagesthatindiscriminatelyinvolvedwiththekillingsoftheTexansandMexicansintheprocessoffrontierexpansion,mostAmericanstookrevengeagainstthenativeIndiansinawaythatlargequantitiesofreprisalswereoftenevokedandmercilessguerrillaandcounter-guerrillawarfaresoonfollowed.Insomeway,Americanfilibusters’participationintheborderlandwarfarewastenablebecausetheIndians’provocativeattackshadbroughtinestimablehavoconAmericancitizens.Likewise,itiscompellingforCaptainWhite’stroopoffilibusterstoconqueramorallydegeneratelanddrenchedinbloodyfetishesandtrophiesoffrontierwarfareforwhichthenativeIndianswereresponsible.Self-entitledwithahighermoralandpatrioticground,theoptimisticandpompousCaptainWhiteunderestimatesthecapabilityofComanchesandexpectsaquickvictoryoverthem.However,heislessfortunatethanthekidandafewotherswhonarrowlyescapefromtheComanches’attack.Hisrecoveredheadappearsin“aglasscarboyofclearmescal”inagrotesqueMexicanbazaar(McCarthy,Blood69).“Inthiscontainer,”ahumanhead“turnedupward,”with“apaleface”andfloating“hair…[and]eyes”(69).Hisdecapitatedbodyisthrownintoawallowandbecomeshalf-eaten“bythehogs”(70).ThedeathofCaptainWhiteinMexicohereimpliesMcCarthy’sinsinuationofthejunglelawinherentinfrontierviolence.ButthedoomedfateofCaptainWhitedoesnotmakethekidandothersurvivorsawareoftheperilslurkinginthestarchedlandofMexico.TheinformalAmericanmilitiaproceedstocarryfrontierviolencefromTexastoChihuahua,withthekidjoiningupwiththeGlantongang.TheGlantongang,asIainBernhoftnotes,embodies“enterpriseandexpansionism”andescalatesfrontierviolencetoanunimaginablescale(71).Thus,itisquitereasonabletosaythatthe“beacon”forprogressivenationalismandimperialexpansionformerlycarriedbyCaptainWhiteisnowpasseddowntoaruthlessformer59 TexasRanger,JohnJoelGlantonandthebald,hairless,physicallypowerful,albino-likebutmysteriousJudgeHolden,aculturedandintelligentmanwhoindulgeshimselfandtakesdelightinviolenceonthenativeIndiansandMexicans.RatherthanbelittlingthevictoriesoftheAmericanfilibustersthatsopervadetheborderregion,McCarthyreplacesthemwithJohnJoelGlantonandtheJudgeHoldenwholeadtheGlantongangtoChihuahuaknownfor“thescalpcapitalofAmerica…duringtheeighteenthandnineteenthcenturies”(Smith20).Thissubstitutionreinforcestheunmitigatedimperialistpowerandshowslittlesusceptibilitytotheideologicalassumptionsofthewestwardexpansion.Infact,thestrengthofAmericanimperialistpowernotonlycomesfromtheideaofnationalismandracialsuperiorityundertheaegisofManifestDestiny,butalsofromthefailedresistanceorcounterattackagainstit.Moreimportantly,itcanabsorbtheresistantpowerbymeansofprojectingmorepowerfulimagesofimperialists.McCarthydoessobyofferingalternativestothekilledmembersformerlyledbyCaptainWhite,evenifthepreviousbattlewithComancheshasproducedintheteamacertainbloodlust.ReginaldC.Stuartassertsthat“ManifestDestinyimpliednotsimplyterritorialgrowth,butsanctifiedideologyandinstitutions”(85).Contextualizedinthewestwardexpansion,ManifestDestinyideologicallysanctifiedAmericanimperialcausebyconcealingthecorruptedandcruelconquestoftheWestinthenameofGodandadaptingnocircumspectiontowardtheusageofviolence.Insodoing,itgavesoundfoundationstofrontierideologywhichmadepeopleidentifywiththebroadertermsofnationaldestinyandsocialreality,andfurtherinculcatedthenotionthatthosewhorelinquishedviolenceandlaydowntheirgunsmightblasphemetheGod-endowedmission.Thus,nomatterhowatrociousviolencewasafflicteduponthemandhowlargequantityofthedeathtollswascaused,thenativeIndiansdeservedtheirunsympatheticfate.AsopposedtothefewdeathtollsoftheAmericans,thecasualtiesoftheIndiansexceededtheirenemiesintheviolentclashestakingplaceinthewestwardexpansion.AmericanhostilitiesagainsttheIndiansweresobrutalthatstatemilitiaandlocalvolunteersreadilyanddelightfullyparticipatedinthewarsofIndianextermination.“By1880,anestimatedeightthousandNativeAmericanmen,women,60 andchildrenhaddiedviolentlyatthehandsofwhiteAmericans”(Alemán65).ThispointisquitetruetoMcCarthy’sdescriptionoftheIndianmassacres.McCarthyevenpushesthedeathofthenativeIndiansintobeingforgotten,atleastintolesserimportance.WhenrecountingthedevastatingsceneaftertheGlantongang’sdemolishmentofapeacefulIndianvillageonitswaytoChihuahua,McCarthywrites:thedestructionofthesepeople“wouldbeerased.Thedesertwindwouldsalttheirruinsandtherewouldbenothing,norghostnorscribe,totelltoanypilgriminhispassinghowitwasthatpeoplehadlivedinthisplace”(Blood174).TheGlantongang’satrocitiesleavenoimprintontheMexicanlandscape.Symbolically,suchadeletionprovesthatMcCarthyfollowsthesamestepineliminatingthenativeIndiansfromAmericanhistoryashistoriansdidinhistoricizingtheracialcleansinginfrontierexpansion.AlongwiththeimpliedreferencetothemarginalizationandevendeletionofhistoricalpersecutionsofthenativeIndians,McCarthy’snarrativedoesprovideuswiththetextualforminwhichthemuffledhistoryofthenativeIndiansresurfaces.However,itentailstheideologicalcontainmentthatwhitewashedsomehistoricalfactsofthewestwardexpansion.McCarthy,bybelittlingthedevastatingeffectsuponthenativeIndiansevokedbyAmericanscalphunters,makesJohnJoelGlantonandtheJudgeHoldenideologicalsuccessorstoPresidentPolkandhissupporterswhousedtheMexican-AmericanWarasessentialmeansbywhichthewhitesrelearnedandstrengthened“theprincipleofrace-loyalty”(Slotkin,Gunfighter47).AstypicaloftheWesterngenre,BloodMeridianinvokesAmericanracismcoterminouswithAmericanexpansiontogainlandfromMexico.AmyKaplanarguesthattheWesternrenders“imperialconquestandthestruggleforpoweroverothersasnothingmorethanthereturnhometotheembodiedAmericanman”(684).Toputitinanotherway,theWesternoffersusAmericanfidelitytoracialpurity,nationaldestinyanddistinctiveAmericanidentityinparticular,sodoestheWesternfocusingonthesouthwesternfrontierinwhich“threeculturescontendedforterritorialandculturalhegemony:theAmericanAnglo,NativeAmerican,andHispanic”(ThompsonandLamar7).61 Infact,AmericanterritorialandculturalhegemonyintheSouthwesternfrontiermarcheditswaywithmucheasebyrelyingontheadvancedtechnologicalequipmentwhichtremendouslyassistedtheAmericanstoconquerandkillthenon-Americans.ThispointfindsexpressionintheGlantongang.McCarthyconfersonthegangforcefulweaponasdemonstratedbytheColtrevolverwith.44-caliber.LedbyGlantonandtheJudge,eachmanintheGlantongangisequippedwithaColtpistolwhoseexistenceandpopularitywerefacilitatedbythenineteenth-centurymodernity.AccordingtoRobertM.Utley,the1840sand1850switnessedtheColtpistolasadecisiveweaponofwarintheSouthwesternTexanfrontier.“TheColtfive-shootershadgiventheRangerstheconfidencetoundertakedaringadventures”(Utley74).TheTexanRangersfurtherimprovedtheColtpistolwith.44-caliberandsix-shooters.SamWalkerworkedwithSamuelColtontheimprovements.Theireffortsgavebirthtothefirstsix-shooterspistolnamedbytheinventorWalkerColt.“WalkerColt”wasaheavyandpowerfulhandgun,“weighingfourandone-halfpounds…withanine-inchbarrelandalargecylindertoaccommodatesixroundsbackedbyheftypowdercharges”(Utley75).Sooner,theColtrevolversweredistributedtofrontierregularsandirregularsduringandaftertheMexican-AmericanWar.Facedwithitssix-shootersColtrevolverasapowerfulfirepower,thenativeIndians,previouslytakingadvantageofmountedarchersovertheAmericanswhowereobstructedinfightingonhorsebackbysingle-shotweapons,werenolongerparalleledtotheirenermiesbothtechnologicallyandtactically.Inparticular,Americandragoonsandmountedparamilitaryforces,suchastheTexasRangers,werearmedwithsix-shootersrevolversandbecamemoresuperiorintheircombatswiththeIndianbands.Likewise,inBloodMeridian,McCarthyforegroundsthefirepowerthatColtrevolversrepresentedintheWestwardexpansion.UponenteringCorralitos,CaptainGlantonhasatrialonalong-barreledsix-shootersColtrevolverinthecourtyard.Glanton,levelingthehugepistolinonehandandthumbingbackthehammer,firesatabird.Theexplosioninthedeadsilenceissoenormousthathisfollowersareastounded.Withthebirdsimplydisappearing,nobloodisspurted,noriscryingheard.AnotherscenedemonstratingtheAmericanfilibusters’overwhelmingpoweroverthe62 nativeIndiansisMcCarthy’sportrayalofCaptainGlantonwhoshotsanoldMexicanwomanwithhisColtrevolver.Thenarratortellsthat“afistsizedholeeruptedoutofthefarsideofthewoman’sheadinagreatvomitofgoreandshepitchedoverslaininherbloodwithoutremedy”(McCarthy,Blood98).Thetwoscenesnotonlyforeshadowthecruelty,inhumanityandhyper-violenceaslaterindicatedbyhisgang’sindiscriminatekillingsofthenativeIndiansandMexicans,butalsopresentAmericancolonizers’unmatchabletechniquewhichdefinitelyarousespsychologicalfearinthenativeIndians’andstrengthensAmerica’sprevailingsuperiority.CaptainGlanton,togetherwithhismembers,isarmedwithnewColtpistolandhugeBowieknives.Theymoveon“likemeninvestedwithapurposewhoseoriginswereantecedenttothem,likebloodlegateesofanorderbothimperativeandremote”(McCarthy,Blood152).Withtheequipmentofadvancedfirearms,theGlantongangchangesthepowerstructureoffrontierwarfareinwhichtheAmericanssurpassthenativeIndianstechnologicallyandtactically.Inthisway,they,withmucheaseandefficiency,scalpIndianheadsasreceiptsformoneyfromthegovernmentofChihuahua.Infact,thepossessionofadvancedweaponlaysbarethattheGlantongang’sengagementinscalpingtheIndianstoprotectMexicofromtheIndians’ravagesamountstoimmoralandimperialconquestbytakingadvantageofAmericanscientificprogress.RickWallachhaspertinentlynotedthatscientificprogressinthenineteenthcenturywasconnectedwith“thecrucibleofAmericancapitalismtotheBiblicalinjunctionto‘subduetheearth.’Thisparadoxicalamalgamofempiricalandreligiousimperatives,lionizedasmanifestdestiny,droveexpansion”(9).IftheColtrevolvermadepossiblebythescientificprogressobviouslyensuresAmerica’sexpansionistpoweranditsunavoidableviolenceinrootingouttheIndians,thentheendlesssourceofgunpowderprovidedbytheJudgeHolden’sexpedientrecipeguaranteestheAmericanfilibusters’victoryovertheIndians.Atonepointinthenovel,thekid,afterhisreleasefromaMexicanprison,istoldbytheex-priestTobinthattheJudgehelpsthegangbeatbackanApachewarband.TheJudgeHolden,withhismasterfulknowledgeofscienceandgeology,makesgunpowderinthewildernessfromthe63 mixtureofnitre,charcoal,sulphurandurine.AstheApacheswarbandapproachandthreatentheGlantongang,theJudgetellshiscompanionsto“pissforyourverysouls”intothemixtureofminerals(McCarthy,Blood132).Asthefoulmixturefermentsanddries,itbecomesgunpowdertochargethegang’sfirearmstocutdowntheaggressiveApaches.AsTobintells,He[theJudge]commencedtokillIndians.Weneedednosecondinvitation.Goditwasabutchery.Atthefirstfirewekilledarounddozenandwedidnotletup.Beforethelastpoorniggerreachedthebottomoftheslopetherewasfifty-eightofthemlayslaughteredamongthegravels….Thelastofthemshotwasareckonablepartofamilefromthemuzzlesofthegunsandthatonadeadrun.Itwassharpshootinallaroundandnotamisfireinthebatchwiththatqueerpowder.(Blood134)Tobin’sretellingrevealstheescalationofmassacrewiththeaidofscientificprogressandillustratesthatAmericanimperialistsmisuseittoedgetheirwaythroughahordeofdisadvantageousApaches.InBloodMeridian,asfarasthenativeIndianscontinuetounsettletheMexicanlandscape,AmericansareverifiedtoresorttoviolencesincetheybelievethenativeIndiansdisturbthesolacefoundintheprovidentialnotionofAmericandestiny.Insuchcircumstances,Americansmustplaytheroleofpioneersorredeemersasiftheyaretheavatarsofthewholeworld.Inreality,thewanderinglifeofApachesandComancheswascausedbytheannexationofvastareasintheSouthwesthometomanynomadicIndiantribes.Duringthenineteenthcentury,thechoicegivenbytheAmericangovernmenttothemwaseithertoacceptthewhitecivilizationandliveinthereservationsortobeexpelledfromtheirland.ManyIndiantribes,unwillingtolosetheirlandtothewhites,armedagainstAmericanencroachment,whichindeedfundamentallychangedthelifestyleoftheIndiansandalmostledtheIndianculturetodisappear.Inall,theIndiantribesborethebruntofAmericanfrontierexpansion.Similarly,McCarthy’sself-acclaimedAmericansaviors,relyingontheadvancedmilitaryforce,invinciblywinvictoryovertheIndiansanduseviolencetoestablishimperialistpowerwhiletrampinguponpilesofIndiancorpses.McCarthy’sunblinkingportrayalsofthescalpedheadsanddecapitatedbodiesof64 theIndianspopupwithmorefrequenciesandfunctionaswarningsforthosewhomaydisrupttheimperialdreamofAmerica.Speakingdifferently,inthespatialandtemporallocalesoftheMexican-Americanborder,beheadingandscalpinghavebecomemajordisciplinaryapparatusesusedtoestablishAmerica’suncontestedpowerandauthority.“Docilebodies”and“thebodyofthecondemned”inFoucaultiansense,whichappearinBloodMeridianastheslaughteredsavages,areatdisposaloftheAmericanfilibusterswhoscalpthemandlooptogetherthescalpedheadsastrophies.AsFoucaultexplains,thebodyofthecondemnedinthenineteenthcenturywasutilizedasavisiblepoliticaltechnologytoconveytheknowledgeofdocilityandsubjection(Discipline26).ViewedfromFoucault’sassertion,powerrelationsinwhichtheGlantongangissuperiorarelaidbare,sincetheeye-witness,viscerallyexperiencedbythenativeIndiansandMexicans,forcesthenon-AmericanstobearinmindtheirinferiorityandspontaneouslyproducestheirsubjugationtotheAmericans.McCarthy’sexhibitionoftheforcedbeheadingsofApachesmakesthewitnessesfeelthecrueldisciplinarypowerviolencemayincurandcorrespondinglyworkstoachieveAmericancontroloverthebodiesoftheethicalminorities.Thus,theslaughterofApachesinthenovelunmaskstheeffectiveandlegitimatewayofassertingAmericanimperialistpowerwiththeaidofviolence,anditservesasanintimidatingreminderthatnoracethatattemptedtopreventAmericanimperialexpansionwouldevadethepunishmentofdisciplinarypower.ThelegitimateconnectionbetweenviolenceandimperialistpowerisstrengthenednotonlybytheGlantongang’spresentationofslaughterscenesbeforethenativeIndiansandMexicansbutalsobytheMexicangovernment.Beforethegang’sengagementwithscalping,theMexicangovernorholdsafarewellceremonytoencouragetheAmericanfilibusterstokeepuptheirinvinciblespiritanddrinkfortheirhealthandfortunes.Afterthisceremony,theyaretreatedbythelocalswithwarmwelcome.Whenridingoutthroughthestreetswiththegovernorandhisparty,theAmericanfilibustersareadmiredbythelocalcitizens.Dark-skinnedgirlsthrowoutflowersandkissestowardsthemfromthewindows,whilesmallboysandoldmenwavetheirhatstothem.McCarthymakesthegangmemberslooklikeheroes65 whoaretofulfillthealtruisticmissionofstampingouttheIndiansfortheMexicans’benefits.Hisdepictiononceagainlaysajustifiedfoundationforthepervasiveviolence.CatastrophicscenesofkillingthenativeIndianslitterthebook.Forinstance,aftermassacringtheinhabitantsofoneoftheApachevillages,theAmericanmercenaryfilibustersmovebackandforthamongthedeadinthepurposeof“harvestingthelongblacklockswiththeirknivesandleavingtheirvictimsrawskulledandstrangeintheirbloodycauls”(McCarthy,Blood157).Theamputatedbodiestestifytheirvulnerabilityandabjection,andtheybearwitnesstoAmericanhistoryofconquest,warfare,holocaustandtheManicheanconflictbetweencivilizationandsavagery,whichwereallthejustifiedideologicalassumptionscentraltoAmericandestinyforfrontierexpansion.AccordingtoMarkSelzer,thepublicrepresentationofviolatedbodiesplentifulinfictionsandofficialaccounts“hascometofunctionasawayofimaginingandsituatingournotionsofpublic,social,andcollectiveidentity”(21).Hence,theexhibitionsofatrocitiesinserialkillings,apartfromindicatingthepropensityformindlessviolenceandthemoralfailurethatconstituteAmerican“woundculture,”alsofunction“asawayofimaginingtherelationsofprivatebodiesandprivatepersonstopublicspaces”(21).Viewedfromthisangle,McCarthy’srepetitiveportrayalsofbeheadingandviolatingtheIndianbodiesexternalizeandgeneralizetheformationofAmericannationalidentityunderthebannerofManifestDestinythatexcludedtheIndiansandotherminorities.Furthermore,suchscenesenabletheAmericanfilibusters,andevenAmericansascommonreaders,totakedelightinbeinganAmericanwithunparalleledpower,for“aconveningofthecrowdarounddisplaysofexposedandviolatedbodiesandpersons”affirms“thewitnessingassurvival”andstitchestogether“thetraumaofwitnessingandthetriumphalismofsurvival”(Selzer277).Atleast,ifwitnessingviolenceisa“triumphalismofsurvival,”thenthepresentationandthewitnessingoffrontierviolencecreateanunnamablehorrorandevenadmirationinthewitnesseswhomayconsiderviolenceasanecessarymeanstoadvancefrontierexpansionastheromanticcodesofhonorandchivalricaltruismare.Whatismore,theyceremoniouslygiveavictorytoManifestDestinyandinscribe66 ontothecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannationviolenceasapossiblemeanstoconstructandensurethesmoothandjustifiedgrowthoftheAmericanempire.Withasenseoftriumph,theGlantongangarrivesatChihuahuaandisdescribedbyMcCarthyashuntersreturningfromthewilderness.Itsmembersaredecoratedwithbundlesofscalpshangingfromtheirsaddlepommelsandheadsonpoles.Theirtrophies,whichconsistofrangesofscalpedheadsandcirclesofears,becomesymbolsofcolonialcultureandcreateatypeofethnicconnotationsthatstillassertsimperialvictorybytheirpresenceintheactofwitnessing.However,theGlantongang’simperialmotivationforkillinganddominatingtheMexicansgoesunnoticedforlocalcitizensandofficials.Contrarily,theAmericanscalphuntersaresowarmlywelcomedbylocalsandhighlyappreciatedbytheMexicancitygrandeesledbyAngelTrias.Thegangmembersarefetedwithdeliciousfoodandfinewines.Theyarejustlikefrontierhunterswhoreturnhomeintriumphtobeadmired.Essentially,thetriumphalceremonycomestrueatthecostofbarbaricextirpationofthenativeIndiansasaresultofIndianRemovalpoliciesinthenineteenth-centuryAmerica.HistorianFrederickMerckinhismasterworkTheHistoryofWestwardMovement(1978)incisivelypointsoutthatthehistoryoftheIndianswasahistoryofcontradictionbetweentheNativeAmericansandthewhitepioneersonthefrontier(88-89).Inparticular,withtheencroachmentoftheAmericansintoTexasandtheNorthernMexico,therelationbetweentheIndiansandtheMexicanswasalsodrasticallychanged.PopulationpressureinthisregionheightenedthetensionbetweentheIndiansandtheMexicans,andeventuallyviolenceeruptedacrosstheSouthwest.In1849,theMexicanauthoritiesinitiatedthegenocidalcampaignagainstApaches.Later,governorsofSonoraandChihuahuaactivatedthe“policyofApacheexterminationconductedbymeansofbountiesofferedforApachescalps”(Hall161).Thefinancialrewardforscalps,varyingfrom“onehundredpesosforanApacheman’sscalp,”“fiftyforawoman’s,”to“twenty-fiveforachild’s,”alluredmanyAmericanstoforayintoMexicoforeconomicgains(Anderson232).AccordingtoJohnSepich,JohnJoelGlantonandtheJudgeHolden,ashistoricalfiguresinparticipatinginscalphuntingfortheMexicangovernment,werenotoriousfortheir67 crueltyandinhumanity(22).Judgedfromthisaspect,theGlantongang,apartfromgainingimmediateeconomicbenefits,inrealitypreemptivelyforestallthepossibilitiesforthenativeIndianstofightbackandfurtherclearthewayforAmericatoestablishitscontinentalempireintheNorthernhemisphere.Thus,bydrawingonthehistoricalfigures,McCarthylegitimatelytiesviolencetotheemergenceandprosperityoftheAmericanempirebymeansofwhichAmericahascreatedanexceptionalhistoryofitsnationbuilding.WiththeAmericanfilibustersenteringthetownofCarrizalandridinghorses“festoonedwiththereekingscalpsoftheTiguas,”theycreatetheeffectsoftheunconquerablespiritofAmericannationupontheMexicans(McCarthy,Blood175).UponseeingalargenumberofIndianscalps,theMexicantownspeopleareastoundedintosilentobservation.“Theywatchedthepassingofthatbloodstainedargosythroughtheirstreetswithdarkandsolemneyes”(175).ThisdescriptioncreatesanauraofmysteryconcerningtheoriginoftheAmericanriders.“Theseriders”seemtojourney“fromalegendaryworld”(175).CommentingontheeffectsofviolenceinBloodMeridian,StevenShaviroarguesthattheorgiesofviolencearedisturbingbecauseoftheirfailureto“constituteapattern”orto“serveanycomprehensiblepurpose”(114).ThisexplanationisquitecommoninMcCarthystudiesforhisdisplayofviolenceseemsgratuitous.Butlittleagreementcanbegiventothispopularinterpretation,forthemotivationforviolenceisasimportantastheeffectitcanachieve.AsWalterBenjaminenlightensusin“ThesesonthePhilosophyofHistory,”historicalrecordsarewrittenby“thevictors”andpresentedintheformof“thetriumphalprocessioninwhichthepresentrulersstepoverthosewhoarelyingprostrate”(256).BymythologizingtheoriginoftheAmericanriders,McCarthyrecastsgenocideasanaturalandnecessarymeansofassertingthepowerofManifestDestinyandthusunwittingbecomesthemouthpieceoffrontierideologythatlegitimatelyinterweavedhistoriographyofdenialwithAmericannationalnarrativeandelidedtheintensepriceofthosedestroyedwithintheriseofAmerica.Toitsverycore,violenceinBloodMeridianbecomesaverifiedtooltoregulateandcontrol“Others”toaconsiderabledegree,anditplaysacomplexroleinthe68 institutionalizationofpolitical,culturalandideologicalsystemforexercisingimperialistpoweranddominationoverthenativeIndianswhohavebeenhistoricallydemonizedandexcludedfromtheWesternhistoryasaresultofthediscursivepoweroffrontierideology.Thusenvisaged,McCarthy’sverificationoftheinterconnectednessbetweenviolenceandimperialistpoweriscomplicitwiththeofficialhistoryofthewestwardexpansionthatsilencedthevoiceoftheminorities.C.Anti-imperialistPowerandAmbivalenceof(Anti-)ImperialismThehistoricalconsciousnessofthe1840s,asnotedabove,returnedtothewords“destined,”“ordained”and“manifest”sooftenthatthefixedpointofitsattentionwasAmerica’svictoriousmomentintheWestandthenativeIndianspopulatingthere.FrancisParkmaninhisprefacetoTheConspiracyofPontiac(1926)definedthe“moment”inthefollowingterms:theIndiantribes“aredestinedtomeltandvanishbeforetheadvancingwavesofAnglo-Americanpower,whichnowrolledwestwarduncheckedandunopposed”(qtd.inFisher26).BloodMeridianworksextensivelywiththenineteenth-centuryhistoricalsources,andthenovelretrospectivelyunfoldsthegrowthoftheAmericanempireacrosstheWestwherethejustifiedviolenceprevailedgiventhefactthatthenativeIndiansandotherminoritieswereimpossibletobeassimilatedintothemainstreamofAmericansociety.JohnBranniganclaimsthat“literarytextsdonotjustmakesenseoftheworldwhenexaminedinhistoricalcontext,”butalso“serveaparticularfunctioninpersuadingpeopleofaparticularview”(60).ByenvisioningapromisingfuturefortheAmericanfilibustersinMexico,McCarthy’stextobligesustobelieveTurner’sfrontierideology.However,withtheunfoldingofthenovel,theGlantongangdoesnotmarchtoever-lastingvictory.Instead,itencountersanti-imperialistpowerthatforcesmostofitsmemberstofacetheirdoomsdayexcepttheJudgeHolden.Fromthisperspective,weclaimthatMcCarthyinterrogatesfrontierideologythat69 promulgatedtheperpetualgloryofwinningtheWest.Nevertheless,McCarthygivesprioritytothenarrativetropeofmoralgrowthinthetraditionalWesterngenreasindicatedbythekid’smoralprogress.Besides,hisdepictionoftheJudgeHoldenprojectsanimageofapowerfulimperialistwhoregeneratesthroughviolenceandtrieseverymeansathandtoappealtoothers’desireforimperialconquest.Inthisway,interspersedthroughoutthenovelisthestrongtensionbetweenitsjustificationanddenunciationofAmericanimperialismwhichinturnconstitutesitsambivalenceof(anti-)imperialism.McCarthy,bygivinglegitimacytoAmericanimperialexpansiontypifiedbyCaptainWhite’stroopoffilibustersandthekidasAmericanAdam,indeedepitomizesTurner’stotalizingviewontheWestandAmerican“politicalunconscious”ofracismsimmeringinAmericanpsyche.However,McCarthyalsoarrangestheIndianambushoftheCaptainWhite’steam,whichlandsitsmembersonthebrinkofbreakdown.TheirfateisforeshadowedbytheMennonite’swarning.WhenthekidjoinsinthefilibustersinLaredo,Texas,theyarewarnedbytheMennonitewhoforetellstheirjourneytoMexicowillbefiercelyresisted.TheMennoniteadmonishesthattheycarrythe“warofamadman’smakingontoaforeignland”andwillawaken“morethanthedogs”(McCarthy,Blood40).Hiswarning,insteadofawakeningthefilibustersfromtheirromanticyetconceitedimagination,invokesabusesfromCaptainWhite.Later,hisgang’sexperiencetestifiesthepredictionoftheMennonite.ItisinadesertedMexicanvillagethathisgangisattackedbyComanches.Duetolackoftopographicalknowledgeofthelocalland,histroopissurreptitiouslyambushedandsuffersseriousdamages.Atstorylevel,McCarthy’spresentationsofthenativeIndianslinkthemwithinbornviolenceandbestiality,which,inturn,maketheexcursionoftheWhite’stroopintoMexicoanecessity.Nevertheless,violencealsobecomesaneffectivepowerfortheIndianstorecreatethemselves.TheforefatherofpostcolonialstudiesFrantzFanonclearlyadvocatesviolenceasessentialmeansfortheoppressedtocounterthecolonialists.Violenceis“acleansingforce.Itfreesthenativefromhisinferioritycomplexandfromhisdespairandinaction.Itmakeshimfearlessandrestoreshis70 self-respect”(Fanon69).Toitsverycore,violenceonthepartoftheoppressedisaformofanti-colonialistandanti-imperialistpowerthatcanhamperandlessenimperialistpower.Facedwithsuchpowerfulviolence,CaptainWhite’stroop,thoughendeavoringtoprevailwhereveritappears,becomesweakerandweaker,withitsmembersaimlesslyhidinginthedesertedforestsandvillagesandfallingdownonebyone.Ironically,itisoutofCaptainWhite’sexpectationthatheisscalpedinthesamewaythathisfollowersscalpthenativesIndiansformonetaryrewards.WithitsleaderCaptainWhitekilledanddecapitated,thefilibustergangdisbands.However,thedeathofCaptainWhitedoesnotmeanthefailureofAmericanimperialistpower,nordoesitmakehismembersrealizetheperilsawaitingthem.Thekidandtheex-priestTobinjoinupwiththeGlantongangundertheleadershipofCaptainGlantonandtheJudgeHoldenwhoescalatesviolencetonauseatingorgies.Againstthebackgroundofasumptuousbanquetinwhichthebelchingmercenarymembersridehorsesintothediningroomandindulgeinrandompistolfireandfistfighting.Later,theywreckthecity’scantinasandviciouslypreyontheMexicanwomen.Theirheinousbehaviorsquicklyturnthelocalcitizensagainstthem.Whenfinallyridingoutintothedesert,theybecomesadisticandindiscriminatekillerstowhomthesimilarityinappearancebetweenthedark-hairedMexicans,themestizo,andIndianscalpsmerelyrepresentsanopportunitytoclaimmore“receipts”formoneyfromthegovernmentofChihuahua.FarfromaccomplishingthemissionofassistingtheMexicanstoexpelthenativeIndianswhomolestvillagersintheNorthernMexico,thecontractedAmericanscalphuntersindiscriminatelyscalpthedark-skinnedMexicans,onlytoparadoxicallyrevealthattheyareasmorallydegenerateandinherentlyviolentasthenativeIndiansare.Inthe1840s,ChihuahuawastheplacewherealargepopulationofthenativeIndiansandthemestizolived.Themestizo,whosehairresembledtheaveragesofComanchecolorandtexture,weretargetedbytheAmericanfilibusterswhofound“Chihuahua’s‘problem’ofidentifyinghairtobetotheirbenefit”andcouldnotresistthetemptationofscalpingthemestizoanddark-skinnedMexicansto“whichJohn71 Glanton,historically,succumbed”(Sepich127).ScalphuntingincreasedbyleapsandboundsasthegovernorsofthattimeinsomeoftheNorthernMexicanstatesestablishedscalpbountiesandturned“Indianscalpsintocommoditiesredeemableforcash”(Limerick,Legacy235).Asaresult,otherminoritieswithdarkhairandskinwerekilledandbecamethescapegoatsforApachesandComanches.Withoutexception,McCarthy’sfilibustersalsodosoinnumerousmassacresandthereforetheirinitialjustifiedcontractwiththegovernmentofChihuahuaisdegradedintoself-interested,immoralandimperialplundering.TheGlantongang’sunselectivepreyonthelocalMexicanssoonarousesthealertnessfromtheMexicanstatesofChihuahuaandSonora.TheMexicanofficialscometoknowthattheGlantongangisdoingasmuchdamagetotheMexicansastheIndiansare.ThefilibustersrapeMexicanwomenandchildrenandrobtheMexicancountrysideasComanchesandApachesinitiallydid.Theonlydifferenceisthattheformer,byrelyingonadvancedtechnologicalmeans,slaughtersthelocalpeoplewithmucheaseandefficiency.Thefilibusters’violationofthecontractmakesAmericansillegitimatecontractualpartnerswiththeMexicangovernment.Inthemeantime,itturnsMexicans’trustonthemintoenmity.TheyfinallyconfronttheirformeremployersintheformofMexicanlancersinshakosandbreastplates.“Thesulphuroussmoke,”writesMcCarthy,“hungoverthestreetinagrayshroudandthecolorfullancersfellunderthehorsesinthatperilousmistlikesoldiersslaughteredinadreamwide-eyedandwoodenandmute”(Blood182).TheGlaontongang’srecruitersparadoxicallybecome“receipts”formoneytheyhavepreviouslygarneredandarepursuedbyMexicanGeneralEliasandasmallgroupofsoldiers.Forthefearofbeingcaptured,theGlantongangfleesfromMexicounderthedistantpandemoniumofthesunandescapestoArizona.InsteadofwitnessingthefortificationofAmericanimperialistpowerandeconomicforce,theAmericanfilibustersaredrivenoutofMexico.ThereisnoexceptiontoCaptainGlantonwhorepresents“theimperialaggressionofAmericanexpansion”withhislustfulandruthlesskillings(Bernhoft72).UnderthecrushingforceofMexicansoldiers,hisintentiontostretchimperialexpansiontoMexico72 becomesfragmented.Nevertheless,theexpulsionfromMexicodoesnotmaketheGlantongangrefrainfromtheparanoidpropensityforviolenceandimperialconquest.WhiletemporarilysettlinginArizona,thefilibustersrobtheferryontheGilaRivermanagedbytheYumaandseizethecontrolofit.Theprofit-drivenAmericansrobthelocalsandincreasethefaretoanunacceptablelevel,sothattheYumaIndians,feelingbetrayedbythegang,surreptitiouslyambushthem.ThisattackkillsmostoftheAmericanirregulars.Thekid,Toadvine,DavidBrown,andtheex-priestTobin,aftertheirnarrowescapefromdeath,hurriedlyfleeintothedesertwheretheyarestillhuntedbytheirfellowsurvivor,theJudgeHoldenrescuedbysomefriendlyKumeyaayIndians.LaterToadvineishangedinSanDiego,sodoTobinandDavidBrownfacetheirdoomsday.Onlythekidtemporarilyescapesthegripofdeath,butbecomesanitinerantwanderer.McCarthy’spresentationoftheabortedplanoftheGlantongangundercutsthegenerally-heldassumptionofManifestDestiny,whichhasalwaysputtheAmericansinanobleandmoralplace,andquestionsthewidely-acceptedbeliefthattheoldfrontierwasalandofwealth,opportunityandrebirth.HisalignmentofthewhitescalphunterswiththenativeIndians—bothofwhomareneithermorallyprogressivenorsociallycivilized—downplaysAmericanmissionintheWestasagloriouscause,andunveilstheunthinkablebarbarityandsavageryoftheAmericans.Withthedisappearanceofthedividinglinebetweenrightandwrong,moralandimmoral,goodandevil,andprogressiveandregressive,TheAmericanscalphunterstotallysubverttheprogressiveimageofTurner’sfrontiersmenorR.B.Lewis’sAmericanAdam.ThesubversionofAmericanmissionrevealsthewrongnessandfalsityoffrontierideologywhichhasleftideologicalimprinton“acreationmyth…ataleexplainingwherewhitememberscamefromandwhytheyarespecial,chosenbyprovidenceforaspecialdestiny”(Limerick,Legacy322).Infact,thismythwasbornoutofthecolonizingdisplacementofthenativeIndians,oftheracialbiasesagainsttheMexicansintheformofinternalcolonization,andofthediscursivehegemonyofAmerica.McCarthydoesnotallowtheAmericanfilibusterstomakethemythcometrue.Instead,heturnsitupsidedownandinterrogatesthecredibilityofthe73 orthodoxiesofAmericanWesternhistory.AsopposedtotheofficialnarrativeoftheWesternhistoryinwhichfrontierideologymadeitsdominantbeliefsandvaluescoherentandundisputable,McCarthy’ssubversionofthehistoricalfactdisruptsthediscursivecirculationofknowledgeaboutAnglo-Americanracialsupremacy.Inthissense,McCarthyinterrogatesTurner’shomogenizinghistoriographyoftheWestandpositsBloodMeridianasananti-imperialisttext.McCarthy’sarrangementofthemercenaries’deathsreflectstheimpasseoffrontierexpansionandremindsusthatthefrontierwasaplaceofblood,violenceanddeathinfullreignintheprocessofconstructingtheAmericanempireacrosstheAmericancontinent.EdwardSaidobservestheideologicalpowersettingrestrictionsontheproductionofsocialdiscoursesandpointsout:Everysocietyandofficialtraditiondefendsitselfagainstinterferenceswithitssanctionednarratives….TheUnitedStates…hasapublicdiscoursemorepoliced,moreanxioustodepictthecountryasfreefromtaint,moreunifiedaroundoneiron-cladmajornarrativeofinnocenttriumph.(Culture314)Here,unlikethenineteenth-centuryhistorianswho,withunsusceptibleeyes,mythologizedthefrontierintothetriumphofAmericaninnocenceandprogressoverbarbarismandsilencedminoritiesintheWesternhistoriography,McCarthyendowsthesubjugatedwithpowertochallengeandevendefeatthewhiteimperialistswhosedesireforMexicoisashamelesseconomicexploitationandanaggressiveattackonMexicansovereignty.Indoingso,McCarthyforeclosestheromanticrepresentationofbuildingtheimperial“cityuponahill”intheWesternfrontier.Whatismore,thedeathoftheAmericanfilibusterscallsintoquestionromanticismandoptimismenshrinedinthefrontiermyth.Whenanalyzingtheideologicalbackbonesofthefrontiermyth,RichardSlotkinarguesthat:Itsideologicalunderpinningsarethosesame‘laws’ofcapitalistcompetition,ofsupplyanddemand,ofSocialDarwinian‘survivalofthefittest’asarationaleforsocialorder,andof‘ManifestDestiny’thathavebeenthebuildingblocksofour[American]dominanthistoriographicaltraditionandpoliticalideology.74 (Environment15)Theseunderpinnings,asimportantrationalesforfrontierideologythatcoverAmericanimperialintention,justifythevictoryoftheAmericansoverotherminorities.Suchajustificationfollowsthenaturalprocessofhistoricalevolutioninwhichthesuperiorraceascendstoreplacetheinferioroneandprogressivismanddemocracysubstitutebarbarismandtyrannyrespectively.However,McCarthy,reversingtheascendencyoftheAmericanfilibustersasnationalheroes,debunkstheirimperialmotivationandcrueltyinextricablytiedwithAmerica’sfoundingideology,whichisinscribedintomythsthrough“theirpersistentusage”(Slotkin,Regeneration5).AsFredricJamesonpointsout,“ideologyleavesitsmarkonmythcriticism,”insofaras“thelatterproposesanunbrokencontinuitybetweenthesocialrelationsandnarrativeformsofprimitivesocietyandtheculturalobjectsofourown”(ThePolitical68-69).InthecontextofAmericanfrontierexpansion,itwasonthefrontiermyththatideologyhasleftitsimprintbynaturalizingtheorthodoxWesternAmericanhistoryandhallowingitoutintoaclosedandindisputableprocess.Inthisway,thefrontiermythfunctionedinde-politicizingtheworldandcreatedwhatTerryEagletoncalls“arealmwhichhaspurgeditselfofambiguityandalternativepossibility”(LiteraryTheory135).Besides,ithasprovidedandcontinuestoprovideuniversalbeliefsformostAmericanswhowereandarecoercedintoactingoutthemythofAmericanoriginandtrusting“regenerationthroughviolence”inthelawlessandindividualizedfrontier.SuchamythwastiedwithwhitesupremacyandperennialrebirthwhichweredesignedtostrengthenAmericanvalidityofthewestwardexpansionbyobscuringanddenyingclassconflictsandracialstruggles.McCarthydethronestheAmericanridersfromraciallyandmorallyhighgroundandsubvertsfromwithinthemythofwhitesupremacy.HeportraystheGlantongangtobeequaltoandevenexceedthenativeIndiansintermsoftheircrueltyandbarbarity.HisdescriptionsofmassacresinvolvingtheprovocativeIndianwarriors,innocentMexicansandpowerlesswomenandchildrenreachanextremelygrotesque75 level,sothattheslaughters“becomegeneral”(McCarthy,Blood155).ThebloodlustoftheGlantongangforcesustoassociatetheAmericanswithApacheswhoskintheMexicansandcut“thesolesoffthefeetofalivingperson(77).Saddlingonthehorseback,thefilibustersmoveonwiththetrappingsoftheirhorsesfashionedoutofhumanskinanddecoratedwithhumanteeth.Theywearscapularsandnecklacesmadeofdriedandblackenedhumanears.Whatisworse,theyevenslaughtertheMexicanstheyproposetoprotectfromtheso-called“barbarous”nativeIndiansandhang“thescalpsoftheslainvillagers”(185).Ironically,theAmericans,despiteclaimingtobemostcivilized,committhemostrepellentcrimesandlandthemselvesintotheabyssofdeath.WiththedeconstructionofManicheanantinomies,America’sself-denominatedmissionofbringingcivilizationanddemocracytothevolatilelandofMexicoturnstobeavulgarprocessofcolonizationandimperialconquestandprovestheself-complacencyofAmericanexceptionalism.IfthebasisforlegitimateracialmassacreandextirpationonthenotionofprogressandcivilizationdemonstratestheuntenablelogicofAmericaimperialism,thenthedistortedimageofhuntersepitomizedbytheGlantongangseemstoforeseetheordainedfateofAmericanimperialism.InSlotkin’sview,thehuntermyth,asanevolvedversionofthefrontiermythintheliterarysymbolism,celebratesthefrontierexperienceasregeneration(Environment36).Simplyput,iftheAmericanswillinglyorunwillinglyenteraprimitivelandandcanmaintaintheirracialpuritythere,thenontheirreturntheywillabletorenewtheirmoralorphysicalpoweroftheworldtheypreviouslyleft.Thehuntermythhighlightstheheroicmasculineadventureduringwhichfrontiersmenexpropriatedandexploitedthewildernessandglorifiedthehunter’svictoryoverhispreys.However,thehunteris“theheroicagentofanexpansivecolonialsociety”andalso“anindividualist,bentonestablishinghimselfoutsidethepaleofcolonialauthority”(64).Thefamoushunterheroes,includingDavidCrocketstandingtriumphantlyalongastackofbearskins,PaulBunyanexploringmilesofvirginlandwithasingleox,KitCarsonandBuffaloBillpillingbuffaloskullsovertheGreatPlains,attesttothevictoriousconclusionofwarordisputesandgeneratetheirheroicadventuresintoprideinthewestwardexpansion76 andtheabsorptionofnewterritoriesintothenewRepublic.Unlikethetraditionalhunterinthefrontiernarrative,McCarthy’shuntersmakeparodyofitbytargetingnotatbuffalosbutattheIndiansandtheinnocentMexicans.Theyreplacepilesofbuffaloboneswiththeircollectionsofscalps,ears,humanskin,teethandotherhumanorganscutofffromthenativeIndiansandthedark-skinnedMexicans.OncetheAmericanriderspreyonhumanbeings,Anglo-Americanracialsuperiority,whichisdeployedasameansof“strategiesofcontainment”tocensorthe“politicalunconscious”ofracismimmanentinAmericansocialimagining,isdownplayed.Inotherwords,McCarthy’shuntersaremereimperialistswhocommercializethespuriousandblood-drenchedenterprisesofscalpingthenativeIndiansandotherminorities.McCarthy’satrocioushuntersaremuchlikeJosephConrad’sKurtzorHermanMelville’sCaptainAhabwhoareliterarymanifestationsofsavagerycentraltoimperialconquest.JustasKurtzisunabletoreturnfromCongowithhisilluminatingtrophyofivoryandCaptainAhabfailstoreturnwiththedeadbodyofthewhitewhale,thekid,CaptainGlantonandhisfollowersarenotinpossessionoftheinitiallyimaginedtrophieslikefineland,moneyandothermaterialwealthinMexico.MostmembersoftheGlantonganggothroughthestageofinitiationandexperience,butdonotreturnwithvictory.Forthem,thefrontierdoesnotprovideacradleforAmericandreamofsuccess,nordoesitgivebirthtoregeneration.Rather,itpushesasideallmoralprinciplesandedgestowardsaparanoidmovementinwhichtheAmericansdegradethemselvestoruthlesskillerswithoutescapingtheirowndeath.ThedeathoftheAmericanridersapproachesthehuntermythwithascathingirony.Irony,accordingtoLindaHutcheon,is“adiscursivestrategyoperatingattheleveloflanguage(verbal)orform(musical,visual,textual)”anddisruptsthenotionofmeaning“assingle,stable,complete,closed,innocentortransparent”(10,12).Authorsmakeironycomeintoeffectsbyadoptingacooperativestancewiththedominantculturewhilestealthilyundercuttingitshomogeneityandauthority.McCarthy’sironyonthehuntermythworkswithinthedominantdiscourseoffrontierideologythatmakesitsbeliefsimmanentlycohesiveandreasonable;meanwhile,it77 managestoarticulatequestioningsaboutandofferalternativestothehuntermyth.Inthisway,McCarthyundoesthemonopolyoffrontierideologywhichgeneralizedataintlessWesternhistory.ThedeathofmostmembersoftheGlantongang,asareversionofTurner’ssummarizationoftheWesterntraits,deconstructsthenotionofManifestDestinywhichgaveassenttothewestwardexpansionandhenceprovesMcCarthy’sincredulitytofrontierideologyanditsvalidationofAmericanimperialexpansion.However,McCarthy’squestioningofAmericanimperialismappearsambivalentashestillforegroundstheessentialaspectsofthefrontierbeliefsgenerallyvalorizedinthenarrativetropeofthetraditionalWesterngenre.McCarthy’sreflectionofthecorevaluesimmanentintheTurner’sFrontierThesisfindsexpressioninthenarrativetropeofmoralgrowthasdemonstratedbythekid’sexperience.In“History,Bloodshed,andtheSpectacleofAmericanIdentityinBloodMeridian,”AdamParkesarguesthatacarefulreadingofBloodMeridiansuggeststhat“inadditiontotheobviousreferencetoviolence,thetermbloodshedhasasecondmeaning,unnervinglyrelatedtothefirst:thesheddingofbiologicalorigins,theseveranceofbloodties”(104).Inthissense,thekidwhoentangleshimselfintheunreasonablebloodshedfromtheonsetofthenovelistoprovehiscapacitytofreehimselffromthepast.Evenifheisimplicatedinviolence,thekidisunderthewaytodiscoverhisself-consciousnessandgraduallyembarksontheroadtomoralredemption.Thekid’sself-consciousnesscanbeillustratedbyhisoppositiontotheJudgeHoldenwho,asthespiritualmentoroftheGlantongang,designslargescalesofmassacresandtakesdelightinscalpingtheIndiansandMexicansandrapingchildren.Intheex-priestTobin’snarration,theJudge,likeanomnipotent,omnipresentandomniscientfigure,disbelievestheexistenceofGod.Paradoxically,theJudgerefusestolistentoGodwhoendowshimwithallhumanabilitiesandmerits.HetriestoincorporateeverymemberoftheGlantongangintohisepistemologicalparadigm.LikeGodwhopreachestohisdevoutfollowers,theJudgeimpartshisphilosophyofwar,cognizanceofthephysicalworldandprinciplesoflawsoneveryoneinhis78 presence.TotheJudge’sdisappointment,howevereloquentandconvincinghisassertionsare,thekidturnsadeafeartohimandrefusestocarryouthisdoctrines.Thekid’sself-consciousnessenableshimtodefytheJudge’sabuseofpower.Forinstance,thekiddarestohelponeoftheinjuredcompanionspulloutthearrowinhisleg.Afterhisbenevolentbehavior,TobintellsthekidthattheJudgewillnotlovehimanymorebecausehechallengestheJudge’sphilosophyofjunglelaw.Asaresult,thekidpitshimselfintolong-standingconfrontationwiththeJudgewhotoleratesnodefianceorchallengeofhispower.Thekid,insteadofbeingmanipulatedbytheJudgeasmostofhisfellowsare,disregardshischarisma,legerdemainandprowess—thetraitswhichinstigatetheGlantongangtoturntoviolenceandthatlinks“entertainmenttoempire,spectacletoconcealment,magictrickstoviolenterasure,showman’shumbugtothemachinationsofconquest”(Bernhoft79).Byshowingconcernabouthisinjuredcompanion,thekidavoidsbeingcompletelyenmeshedintheJudge’sphilosophicalparadigmofwarandfindshisownself-consciousness.Inthisway,hegrowsfromtheinitialpenchantformindlessviolencetomoralintegrity.Thekid’smoralgrowthisalsoembodiedinhisactofsparingtheJudge’slifewhenchancesareathand.AftertheYumamassacre,onlythekid,theex-priestTobin,Toadvine,DavidBrown,andtheJudgesurvive.TogetherwithTobin,thekidwandersindeserttoavoidthepotentialambushfromthenativeIndians,butheunfortunatelymeetsthearmlessJudgewhoregardsthekidasatraitorofhisteam.ThekidisurgedbyTobintokilltheJudge,buthedeclinestodoso.HisrefusaltokilltheJudgecanbereadashiscompleterejectionoftheJudge’sphilosophyofwar.IntheJudge’sview,menareborntoplaythegameofwar,andwarenduressolongasmancanbreatheandeyecansee.Hehopesthekidtobehisdiscipleandsurrogatesonofwarwhocanmatureintomanhoodthroughwarexperience.Butthekid’sreluctancetostandoutandshoottheJudgeblasphemeshishyper-masculinelogicofwar.Thoughfullyawareofthefutureinstoreforhim,thekidturnsdownTobin’sproposalandsquarelyfaceshisfateofbeingkilledbytheJudge.Thekid’srejectionofviolenceandwarspiritshowsthathismoralconsciousnessovercomeshisinbornmotivationforgratuitousviolence.Gradually,hecomestoachievemoralgrowthasthefrontiersmen79 didintheirerrandintothewilderness.Insharpcontrasttohisfellowswhoareunabletoreturnwithmoraltriumphalism,thekidgraduallyachievesmoralprogress,whichposesthequestionregardingMcCarthy’sattitudetowardfrontierideologyjustifyingAmericanimperialisminthewestwardexpansion.ItisundeniablethatMcCarthyburiesAmericanimperialfantasyofconqueringthenativeIndiansandotherminorities.Nevertheless,McCarthy’sdemythologizationofthefrontiermythisincompleteashehighlightsthekid’scontinuedmoralprogress.IntheyearsafterthedisbandmentoftheGlantongang,thekidwandersacrosstheWestlonely.Duringhisjourney,thekidcomesacrossanoldMexicanwomanhebelievestobestilllivingandtriestosaveher.Thenhetellsherhisnationality,birthandsubsequentinvolvementinwarandhardships.Thekideventellsherhewouldbringherto“asafeplace”wherehercountrymenwouldwelcomeandtakecareofher;otherwise,shewouldprobablydieinthedesert.ThekidhasapparentlylearnedSpanishandsaystoher:“Abuelita...No11puedesescúcharme”(315).Withoutreceivingresponsefromthegrandma,thekidbecomesawarethatsheisadriedmummy.Thefactthathewhisperstoawitheredcorpsecanbeseenashisgradualprogresstowardmoralawarenessviaconfession,self-revelationandevenapologyinpursuitofredemption.Thekid’ssympathywiththeMexicanwomanandhislamentationforherdeathrevealhisrestorationofhumanityandmorality.Hismoralconfessionmakeshimselfdistinctivefromthecruelandinhumanimperialistswhointendtodominate“Other.”Thekidtriestoreturnasahero,buthewandersaimlesslyandsolitarilyinaworldofbonesandimpishchildrencursedbytheviolencecommittedbytheirforefathers.“Thiscountrywasfilledwithviolentchildrenorphanedbywar....Theyweresimplybearingthebodyoffoverthebonestrewnwastetowardanakedhorizon”(McCarthy,Blood322-23).Here,McCarthyagainbringstolightthedevastatingeffectsofimperialwarontheAmericansandrepudiatesfrontierideologythatdeludesfrontierheroesintovoluntarilysacrificingthemselvesfortheAmericanempire.Whenthenovelabruptlylapsesthreedecadesintotheyear1878,thekid,now11OriginalinSpanishmeaning“Grandma…Cann’tyouhearme?”80 calledbythenarrator“theman,”becomesthelastsurvivoroftheGlantongang,exceptfortheJudge,andarrivesatFortGriffin,Texas,wherehemeetstheagelessJudgeinthetownsaloon.ThekidisaccusedbytheJudgeofbeingundulymercifulwarrior.Shortlybeforekillinghim,theJudgeendeavorstoprovokedisputeswiththekid.Hetellsthekid“youhaveshownclemencyfortheheathen”andcontinuestodictatetohimhisphilosophyofwar(McCarthy,Blood299).WithoutengagingintheJudge’strick,thekidrepetitivelyretortstohim:“Youaintnothing”(331).Intheend,theJudgekillsthekidandreturnstothesaloontodanceandfiddlewiththedrunkardsandwhoreswhileproclaimingthat“hewillneverdie”(335).ThedeathofthekidattheJudge’shandisduetohisinabilitytochampionhisforefathers’penchantforwarandviolenceasaneffectivemeanstore-enactthefrontiermythwhichinturnstrengthensfrontierideologyviaitspenetrativecirculation.Infact,suchare-enactmentamountstoreinforcingtheideologicalpowerofAmericanimperialism.TheimperialistpowertheJudgerepresentsmustcontainanyforcethatstandsagainstitbywhatevermeans.Inthisway,thecontradictoryco-existenceofenactmentandfailedre-enactmentofthefrontiermythreflectsthetensionbetweenMcCarthy’sjustificationofAmericanimperialexpansionanddisapprovalofitandhenceconstitutesthefluctuationbetweenimperialismandanti-imperialisminhistext.Asdiscussedabove,McCarthyindeeddesignstheGlantongangtoencounterresistancefromoutsideandwithinandtofailtoreturninvictory.TheAmericanfilibusters,whetherledbyCaptainWhiteorbyGlanton,areunabletoestablishagloriousimperialcauseinMexico.Instead,theywitnessthedownfallofAmericanimperialexpansionwiththeirfollowerstotteringtowardsdead-end.ThispointcanberecognizedasMcCarthy’santi-imperialistattitudeinregardstohisinterrogationoffrontierideologywithinwhichAmericanimperialismwascoveredandvalidated.Nevertheless,McCarthy’santi-imperialismisambivalentonthegroundthatheparadoxicallyevokesastrongimperialspiritassymbolizedbytheJudgewhoseeternalitymaycontinuetoinflamemanyAmericans’desireforconquestandexpansion.TheJudgeHolden,afterhiskillingofthekid,becomesthelastcarrierof81 Americanimperialspirit.IfCaptainGlantonisnominalleaderoftheGlantongang,thentheJudgeisthespiritualcommanderofthewholeband.Hugeandhairlessasheis,theJudgeseemsphysicallyunchangedwiththepassageoftimeandlooks“likesomethingnewlyborn”and“anenormousinfant”(McCarthy,Blood282,335).Robustinconstitutionandeloquentinspeech,theJudgeisaversatilemanknowinggeology,zoologyandmanyotherdisciplines.Heuseseverywittoenticehisfollowersintothieving,shooting,slashing,hanging,scalping,burning,hacking,andstabbingwhileenjoyingthegrotesqueandnauseatingviolencetheyincur.Allviolentactsareconveyedbythe“bloodmusic”of“someofthemostimpressiveAmericanproseofthis[twentieth]century”(Josyph170).TheJudgeremindsreadersofmanyliterarycharacterswhoarethemouthpieceofimperialism,likeConrad’sKurtzandMelville’sAhab,tonamejustafew.Theysharethefollowingsimilarities:insidious,cunning,ambitious,hyper-aggressiveandimmoral.Contextualizedintheheydayofthewestwardexpansion,theJudgesymbolizesthespeakeroffrontierideologywhichwhitewashedAmericanimperialconquestoftheWestanddefendedthemanifestprogressofAmericannationintheWesternhistoriographytypifiedbyTurner’s.ThemostimportantimagethatillustratestherandomandunreliablehistoriographyistheJudge’sledgerbook.DuringhisjourneyinMexico,theJudgesketchesthegeologicalspecimensandwhateverthingshelikesinhisledgerbookandthenerasesthem.UnlikethepopularreadingsthatregardtheJudgeasadeconstructionistversionofJacquesDerrida’sgrammatology,wetendtointerprethisledgerbookastheprocessoftheWesternhistoriographyinwhichthoseappearedandthosedisappearedwerequitedependantontherecorderwhogenerallyconformedtothedominantinterestsoftheruler,specifically,ofthosewhomanipulatedthenotionofManifestDestinyandfrontiersmen’sromanticimaginationoftheWesttoexpandnationalinterests.Forinstance,whatappearedinhistorianTurner’sFrontierThesisweretheself-reliantwhitefrontiersmeneulogizedtobeindividualistic,all-mightyandstubborninbravingnewfrontier.Meanwhile,whatdisappearedinitwereAmericanimperialcontrol,racism,environmentdevastation,classismandsexismwhichhavealreadybecomethetargetsforNewWesternhistoriansaimingatrepudiatingand82 revisingtherecordingsofthepast.Likewise,dissolvingtheexternalworldintosignsandthendemolishingthem,theJudgerepresentstheomnipotentpowersincetherecanbenoverifiedexistenceoutsidehisledgerbooktochallengehisauthorityoverthetruth.Inthissense,theJudge’sruleandmisruleoverhisledgerbookbecomesMcCarthy’sallusiontotheprocessofhistoricizingoftheAmericanWestquitedependentontheperspectivefromwhichhistoriansrecordedandcontinuetore-recordit.IntheJudge’sserpentineandmercurialjustificationforhisledgerbook,nothingoutsideithaslegitimateexistence.EvenifthegenocideofthenativeIndiansandAmericanimperialviolencearewritteninhisledgerbook,theyonlyserveascolonialsouvenirsthatinciteAmerica’snationalvisionofimperialglory.StephenGreenblatthaspointedoutthattheNazisdidnotseemsomuchinterestedinexterminatingthenamesofthemurderedasinkeepingtheminfullrecordsbecausetheylookedforwardtoatime“inwhichtheycouldsharetheiraccomplishmentwithagratefulworldbyestablishingamuseumdedicatedtothecultureofthewretchestheyhaddestroyed”(4).TheJudge’satrocityandpathologicaltasteforviolenceparallelandevensurpasstheNaziswhoboreresponsibilityforthegenocideofJewsinWWII.Hisledgerbook,toalargeextent,servesasareminderthatprojectsthemassacresofthenativeIndiansasthecolonialaccomplishmentsforadmiration.Incorollary,theJudgesuggeststhat,liketherecordingsinhisledgerbook,historywritingisatthedisposalofpeopleinpowerwhorepressclassstrugglesandcoverimperialatrocitiesbyliftingthebarbetweencivilizationandsavagery,violenceandnon-violence,andwarandpeace.Ifnecessary,peopleinpowercanresorttowarandviolencetoensuretheirpower.TheJudge’slogicinexplainingtheoriginofwarfareisfrightening.Hereasonsthat“beforemanwas,warwaitedforhim”(McCarthy,Blood248).Tohim,war“isthetestingofone’swill”and“theultimategame”(249).Bysaying“warisgod,”theJudgeconsecratesthewarandconsidersitinevitable,infiniteandlegitimate(249).Thus,fortheJudge,thenumerousinitiationsofwarsonthenativeIndiansareconductedfortheGod’ssaketoensureAmericans’survivalandtheirsuperiorityanddominanceover“Other.”83 Contextualizedinthepoliticalbackgroundofthe1840sAmerica,theJudge’sphilosophyofwaressentiallyreflectsPresidentPolk’sinitiationofwaronMexico.Forbothofthem,MexicoisanobstructionforthemtoensuretheflourishofAmericaneconomyandracialsuperiority.However,theirpilgrimage-likejourneytoMexicograduallytransformsfromaltruismtoimperialexpansionismandselfisheconomicenterprise.RichardSlotkinhassuggestedthatviolenceintheMexican-AmericanWarledto“theregenerationofboththeAmericaneconomyandtheracialvigoroftheAnglo-Saxon”(Environment189).Moreimportantly,itboostedAmerica’slustformoreMexicanland.Mexicointhe1840s,asanascentnation,wasweakineconomy,troubledbyfrequentpoliticalunrestsandlackofabilitytofightagainstAmericainguardingitsterritorialintegrity.Besides,Anglo-AmericanethnocentrismandnationalismwentberserkinAmericasincemanyAmericansconsideredthattheMexicans,asacorrupt,evilandlowerrace,wereprovocativeinthewakeoftheMexican-AmericanWar.TheJudgeisemblematicofPresidentPolkandhiswar-lovingcitizenswhospokefortherightnessoftheMexican-AmericanWarandthelegitimacyofviolence.TheJudge,justastheexpansionistpoliticiansinthe1840s,disregardsmoralboundandsaystotheAmericanmercenariesthat“morallawisaninventionofmankindforthedisenfranchisementofthepowerfulinfavoroftheweak”(McCarthy,Blood250).Thus,whateversituationhefaces,theJudgeresortstowarandviolencesimplybecausehebelievesthat“warendures….Warwasalwaysthere.Beforemanwas,warwaitedforhim....thatisthewayitwasandwillbe”(245).FortheJudge,itisinwarthatAmericannationisennobled,historyvalidated,nationhoodestablishedandmanhoodconsecrated.ToquoteHaroldBloom,thejudgeisa“War-Incarnate”(How259).Hecarriesarifleinscribed“EtinArcadiaEgo,”aRenaissanceproverbandmemorialfortombsmeaning“eveninArcadiathereamI[Death]”(McCarthy,Blood259).ThisinscriptionsuggeststhathebringsdeathtoMexicoandtheAmericaWest.Thoughtwicesparedbythekid,theJudgerepayshiskindnessforingratitudebykillinghimbecausehebelievesthat“[t]here’saflawedplaceinthefabricofyour[thekid’s]heart….You[thekid]aloneweremutinous”84 (299).TheJudgeforeshadowshisrighttokillthekidwhenheruminatesonhisepistemologicalframeworkwhenstating“[w]hateverinthecreationwithoutmyknowledgeexistswithoutmyconsent”(198).AsRonjaViethasserts,theJudgereveals“whatGrosscalls‘afierceterrorismattheheartofAmerica’sfoundingideology’(36)”(143).Tellingly,theJudgecherishesthefoundingprinciplesofAmericannationthatendorseditsimperialconquestofthevastfrontierandsubjugationofthenativeIndians.Thus,wherevertheJudgeappears,hetrieseverymeanstodominatethoseheregardsasexternalandinferiortohisownknowledge,andhencetoleratesnorebellionwhereveritcomesfrom.TheJudgedefinitelypunishesthosewhodonotjoinupwithhisdanceofimperialwarashedoesincaseofthekid.Thus,theJudge,justasthecolonizersindiscriminatelyrepressandslaughtertheirrebels,mustenacthisauthoritythrough“practices(erasure,exchange,sleight-of-hand)thatsustainimperialacquisition”(Bernoft73).BearingresemblancetothehistoricalfiguretheJudgeHoldeninSamuelChamberlain’sMyConfession:theRecollectionsofaRogue(1956)whichrecordsHolden’sparticipationintheMexican-AmericanWarandscalpingandportrayshimtobearacialistandimperialist,McCarthy’sversionoftheJudge,synonymouswithbothserialkillerandpractitionerofviolence,becomesasymbolof“whitesupremacyandthedevil’sgenocidalshibboleths”(Lincoln87).Attheendofthenovel,McCarthydescribestheJudgetobe“hugeandpaleandhairless,likeanenormousinfant”(Blood335).Hisphysicalfeaturesdemonstratethathe,asanalbino-likefigure,issuggestiveofAmericanwhiteness.T.Muraleedharanarguesthat“whitenessisnotalwaysinvisibleinaestheticrepresentations.Skincoloremergesasasignificantfactordefiningidentitywhenitsdifferencefromblacknessisinescapableandatissue”(61).Simplyput,whitenessbecomesperceptibleonlywithreferencetothatwhichisnotwhite,likeblacknessandbrownness.Itisnon-whitenessthatgiveswhitenesssubstance.McCarthy’semphasisontheJudge’sskincolorimplicitlygivesprecedencetoAmericanwhitenessthatsymbolicallyreclaimsAmericandistinctivenessandpurity.TheJudge’swhitenessrecallsracialsupremacythatdrovetheAmerican85 governmenttostretchitsimperialpowertoMexicoandnowjustifieshisover-poweringstancetowardsanyonewhoresistshim.Inthiscase,hiswhitenessbecomesasymbolforAmericansuperiorityandevenpossibledominationovertheotherizedgroups.McCarthy’slinkageofwhitenesstotheJudgeinvokeshisemploymentofabarrageoflinguisticdenominationslike“thewhite”and“American,”asnotedintheprecedinganalysis,tojustifyAmericanimperialismontheethnologicalfooting.AngleChabram-Dernersesianwrites:“Whitenessispartneredbothwithstructuresofdominationandwiththeeffectsofdomination”(114).InBloodMeridian,sucheffectsincludedifferenttypesofloss:thelossofMexicanterritory,ofMexicansociallocation,ofaperceivedthreattoMexicannational,ethnicorregionalidentity,andofeconomicwell-beings.Thus,theJudgeHolden’swhitenessisinpartnershipwithimperialconquest,dominationandracismthroughtheextensivepowerofthislarger-than-lifearchetypalWesterner.TheJudge’swhitenessconfirmsthatMcCarthy’sconstructionofwhitenessequalshegemonicdiscursivepracticesthatsustainimperialistpowerandnurtureatotalizingimpulsetomaintainAmericansuperiority.Attheendofthenovel,theJudge,afterkillingthekid,returnstoabrothelatFortGriffinandcontinuestopracticehisdanceofwar.ThenarratortellsusthattheJudge“neversleeps”and“willneverdie”(McCarthy,Blood335).Thispowerfulmanifesto,whilerepletewithMcCarthy’spredictionofthecontinuanceofAmericanimperialismcrossingtimeandspaceintothepresentdayandthepossiblenightmarebroughtbyit,alsofunctionswellinspurringAmericandesireforimperialistpower.Thus,theimmortalityoftheJudgesymbolizesAmericanimperialistpowerofeliminatinganystumblingblockthatmayobstructitswaytoanempire.SaraL.SpurgeonnoticesMcCarthy’sreproductionandrepudiationoftheimperialistideologyofAmericaandcontendsthatMcCarthy’s“frontierheroes…arebothacontinuanceofthetraditionofWesternrewritingandadarkandcomplexcounterpointtoit”(17).SpurgeongraspsthecoreofMcCarthy’scounter-discourseofAmericanimperialism.Onthepositiveside,McCarthyshakesoffallheroicandnationalisticelementsspringingfromthepracticeofwarandmakestheGlantongang86 facefierceanti-imperialistresistance.Inthisway,hemakespeopleknowthattheimperialwarisalwaysnothingbutanembodimentofAmericanclamorforexpansionandhegemony.Onthenegativeside,McCarthyalsomakesanypossibleresistanceagainstimperialistpowerintonil,sincetheJudge,asacrypticsynthesizerofAmericanimperialexpansioninactionandinspirit,surviveswithoutaslightestdamageinhisencounterwithrebellionandresistanceagainsthim,andwillcontinuetowriteanddeletehisledgerbooksymbolicoftheofficialnarrativeoftheWesternhistorymassagedbyfrontierideology.Insum,BloodMeridiannotonlyinvokestheoldmythofAmericanorigin,butalsoshedsnewlightonit.McCarthy’sevocationofTurner’sFrontierThesis,whichcanbedemonstratedbytheidealizedexpectationofCaptainWhite’sexpeditionintoMexico,undoubtedlyinsinuatesthelong-cherishedvaluesofAmericannationlikeinnocence,racialsuperiorityandarrogantnationalismcentraltofrontierideologythatwasshapedandpromulgatedtodefendAmericanfrontierexpansioninandaftertheMexican-AmericanWar.McCarthy’scharacters,asAmericanpoliticiansinthe1840sdid,maketheirexpansionistplanlooklikeagloriousmissionofbringingcivilizationandprogresstothedarkplaces.EveniftheyrelyonviolencetoeradicatethenativeIndians,theyarejustifiedtodosoduetoAmericansuperiorityover“Other.”Inthissense,McCarthy’sretrospectionofthisparticularperiodinAmericanhistoryaddsaglorioushalotoAmericanimperialism.But,hisdepictionsoffrontierviolenceinBloodMeridian,ifhistoricizedinthecontextoftheMexican-AmericanWarandtheIndiangenocideinthe1840s,debunktheatrociousanduglyfactsoftheAmericanpast,andfurtherrevealthatimperialviolenceisneitherregenerativenorbeneficial,butalethalanddestructiveforcethatpushespeopleofdifferentracialoriginstoembarkontheroadtodestruction.Fromthisperspective,McCarthytakespartinthecounter-discursivestruggleinwhichthemarginalizedandthesilencedaregivenvoice.Indoingso,McCarthydeconstructsthehomogenizingimperialistpowerofAmerica.Contradictorily,McCarthy’spredictionoftheeternalspiritofAmericanimperialconquestasembodiedbythesurvivaloftheJudgespeakswithequalforceforthevalidationofAmericanimperialism.Thus,McCarthy’sjustificationof87 AmericanimperialisminBloodMeridianrunsalongwithhisanti-imperialistnarrative.Givenhisshunningofpubliccoverage,McCarthy’spoliticalviewisunknownforus.However,McCarthy’sreplayingoffrontierideologyandhisrevisionistutilizationofthetraditionalWesterngenreinBloodMeridian,apartfrombehoovingustoreaditsimultaneouslyasaWesternandananti-Western,perforcemakesusperceivehisambivalenceaboutAmericanimperialism.88 ChapterTwoAllthePrettyHorses:CriticizingFrontierIdeologyIfBloodMeridianreflectsMcCarthy’sreplayingoffrontierideologythatdrovetheexpansionistAmericanstobeentangledwiththeaftermathoftheMexican-AmericanWarandhisunclearstandagainsttheAmericanempire,thenAllthePrettyHorses(1992),thefirstvolumeoftheBorderTrilogy,narratingtheadventureofJohnGradyColeinMexicowhereheseekscowboyparadiseleftbehindinTexasofthelate1940s,worksinadifferentwayfromBloodMeridianasMcCarthygraduallymakesclearhiscriticalattitudetowardstheimperialspiritofAmericanexpansioninhiscriticizingfrontierideology.AsDonaldW.Meinigremindsus,“Americansneverceasedtospeakofthefrontier”andhenceithasbecome“enshroudedinmythandsymbol”andbeen“accordedaspecialimportanceinthedevelopmentoftheAmericannationandofthecharacteroftheAmericanpeople”(TheShaping31).Likewise,McCarthy,bydrawingonthefrontiermotifinvokedbyhisprotagonist’scrossingoftheMexican-AmericanborderinAllthePrettyHorses,extendsthegeographicalfrontieroftheAmericanWesttothe“NewFrontier”Mexicoandprobesintothelingeringeffectsoffrontierideologyinthepost-frontiereraofthelate1940s.Asitsnarrativetimemainlyrevolvesaroundthepost-WWIIerawhenAmericaemergedasaworldsuperpower,AllthePrettyHorsesworksasadisruptivere-workingoftheWesternandusesthisgenretoofferalternativeviewtotheexceptionalistAmericanhistory.Writtenandpublishedintheearly1990s,thisnovelisformulatedasacriticalcommentonAmericansocietyanditspolitics.VinceBrewtonbrilliantlyfindstheBorderTrilogyreflects“alandscapebestevokedbytheReaganpresidencyandthe[Persian]GulfWarwithIraqin1991”(121-22).Hence,aglossoverthepoliticalandsocialbackgroundofthe1990swillcontributeto89 positioningAllthePrettyHorsesintothelargefabricofNewWesternhistorywhichnegatesthetriumphalistassumptionsofAmericannationalhistoryanddestiny.The1990switnessedtherampantAmericanexpansionismanditsculturalimperialism.Inparticular,thePersianGulfWarin1991wasoneofthelivingproofsofAmericanimperialexpansiontosolidifyitsoilfrontier.Later,OperationRestoreHopefrom1991to1993testifiedAmerica’sexportationofitsconceptofdemocracyandfreedomtoSomalia.SaraL.Spurgeonpointsoutthatthefrontiermythstillshapesanddirects“U.S.foreignpolicyandAmericanattitudestowardstherestoftheworld”(47).BeneathsuchattitudesisAmerica’sexplorationofwhatRichardSlotkincallsanewnarrativeform,namely,the“NewFrontier,”atermborrowedfromPresidentJohnF.Kennedy(Gunfighter489).Infact,Americaninterventionsintoothercountries’domesticaffairsdidnotandwillnotbringpeaceanddemocracytothem;rather,theyexacerbatetheirsituationsandlandtheinnocentpopulaceintotheabyssofdeathandlife-threateningstatus.AllthesephenomenahavecompellinglyindicatedAmericanimperialismintheinternationalarena.Besides,giventhetimespanfrom1992to1998whentheBorderTrilogycameintofruition,McCarthymighthavebeeninfluencedbythere-appearanceofdemocraticidealismandliberalismofBillClinton’syearsandperceivedinhindsighttheideologicalclashesinvolvedinanti-communism,thearmracesbetweenAmericaandSovietUnion,andtherhetoricofAmericanexceptionalism,whichhadbeenthekeynotesofAmericanpoliticsforalmostfourdecades.Thisparticularpoliticalclimate,atleastontheAmericanside,whichwasjustifiedtosafeguarditsso-calleduniversalhumanvalues,essentiallyaimedatensuringitsimperialdominationacrosstheglobe.Itisagainsttheabove-mentionedsocial,politicalandhistoricalbackgroundthatMcCarthywroteandpublishedAllthePrettyHorses.AsWesternMarxistcriticsstoutlyinsist,literaryworksarenotamerereflectionorrecordingofthesociety,neitheraretheymysteriouslyinspiredandinterpretablesimplyintermsoftheirauthors’psychologicalorsentimentalprojections;rather,theyareconstitutedbyvariousformsofperceptionor“particularwaysofseeingtheworld;andassuchtheyhavearelationtothatdominantwayofseeingtheworldwhichisthe‘social90 mentality’orideologyofanage”(Eagleton,Marxism6).Similarly,AllthePrettyHorses,asaliterarymodeofsocialproduction,ismoreorlessimbuedwiththeideologicalovertonesandparticipatesinnegotiationwiththem.McCarthydoessobyrevealingtheconceptofManifestDestinyandthefrontiermyththatarerepetitivelyformulatedbyAmericatojustifyitsimperialactions.Moreover,McCarthywittinglyrespondstoAmericanculturalimperialismwhichisessentiallyamodernversionofexploringtheWesternfrontierinthenineteenthcentury.CriticalresponsestoAllthePrettyHorsesreachaconsensusthatMcCarthyre-makestheWesterngenretoexpresshiscriticismofAmericanimperialism.Forinstance,MaryMcBrideLascoarguesthatMcCarthydebunkshisprotagonist’s“attemptatconquest”whichis“motivatedbyanimperialistagenda”(21).Likewise,SaraL.SpurgeonagreestoLasco’scontention.Byanalyzingthedeathofnationalfantasydemonstratedbythecrumbleofthecowboymyth,SpurgeonconcludesthatMcCarthychallengesreaderstoreflectuponthelethalconsequencestoAmericancultureandtherestoftheworldatlargewhenAmericansaccept“thefigureofsacredcowboyasour[American]definingmyth”(58).ItisalsoworthnotingthatJordanSavagecontendsthatMcCarthygivesaretrospectivereflectiononthelegacyofAmericanimperialexpansioninAllthePrettyHorsesand“criticizestheAmericanestablishmentforitsimpositionofanarbitraryandracistborderbetweenTexasandMexico”(1001).Affirmatively,theabove-quotedscholarsexplorethesocialfunctionsofMcCarthy’sWesternsandexpandthecriticalparadigmofMcCarthystudieswhichlaysafoundationfortheargumentationofMcCarthy’scriticismoffrontierideologyinthisChapter.However,theirstudiesfailtoclarifythemythicsourcesthatinfluenceMcCarthy’scowboysintheirassimilationoffrontierideology.WheredoesJohnGradylearnaboutthevaluesAmericancowboysrepresent?Howdoestheideologicalmechanismplayitsroleinenticinghimintoseekingafurtherfrontierfortheobsoletecowboylife?TheseareunresolvedquestionsinregardstoMcCarthy’sappropriationofthefrontiermotiftorepudiateAmericanimperialexpansioninthetwentiethcentury.Bearinginmindtheunresolvedproblemsmentionedabove,weclaimsthat91 McCarthycriticizesfrontierideologywhich,viatheoverwhelmingyetimplicitfunctionofIdeologicalStateApparatusesinAlthusseriansense,hailstheprotagonistinAllthePrettyHorsestoseeka“NewFrontier”wherehecanreinvigoratethecowboymyth.Ontheonehand,thenoveldrawsonthetraditionalWesterngenretoretellthemythicnarrativeoftheWestthatplaysitsideologicalroleinhailingthecharacterstoexplorethe“NewFrontier”andhencedebunksthenegativeeffectsofthelong-cherishedfrontierbeliefsanchoringinthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannation.Ontheotherhand,thenovel,basedonthefrontiercomplex,interweaveswithinitasubtexttorepudiateAmericanimperialism.McCarthyusesthepursuitofcowboydreaminanimagined“NewFrontier”MexicotorecapitulatethecontinuedAmericanimperialexpansionandclashestheactualizationofcowboydreamwithanti-imperialistresistance.InthecontinuedconfrontationbetweenAmericanimperialistpowerandMexicananti-imperialistone,McCarthyoffersananti-imperialistresolution:anAmericancowboy,afterbeingreverselypenetratedbythecolonizedculture,leavesbehindhimtheshatteredimperialdreaminMexicoandreturnstoAmericawithspiritualandbodilytrauma.ItisthisresolutionthatconstitutesMcCarthy’santi-imperialistwritinginAllthePrettyHorses.A.TheImperialistImaginingofthe“NewFrontier”IntheFrontierThesis,TurnerarguedthattheWestwardMovementtoaconsiderabledegreeshapedtheAmericannationalcharacterandgaveAmericauniquenationalidentity.Thoughlabeledas“themeetingpointofcivilizationandsavagery,”thefrontierwastheplacewhereAmericancivilizationwasbornandflourished(Turner,Frontier38).InTurner’sview,thefrontierprovidedmanyAmericanswith“expansionwestwardwithitsnewopportunities”and“itscontinuoustouchwiththesimplicityofprimitivesociety”thatfurnished“theforcesdominatingAmericancharacter”(Frontier38).MostoftheearlyAmericans,upholdingManifestDestinyentitledbyGodandtakingprideinaddingglorytoGod,ranintothespaciousGreat92 Plainsandcreatedthefrontiermyth.Infact,thefrontierbecameabattlegroundwheretheAmericansgrappledwithotherethnicgroupstoestablishAmericancoloniesanditsculturalhegemony.Theofficialclosingofthefrontierin1890borewitnesstothesignificantvictoryofAmericanimperialism.Thefrontier,whichevolvedfromvacuousspacesintosettledplaces,hasbecomeanemotionalcomplexformanyAmericansandstillcapturedtheirimagination.Nevertheless,thefrontier,intheeyesoftheAmericans,isaculturalproductproducedbywhatRichardSlotkincalls“industrialpopularculture”like“thedimenovel,thenineteenth-centuryhistoricalromance,thestagemelodrama,theWildWestShow,themovie,themodernpaperback,andtheTVminiseries”(Gunfighter25).WiththeflourishofcultureindustryinAmerica,itscitizensarealluredandevencozenedintobelievingthefrontiermyth,whichmightnotexistandwillnevercometrueinreality.Essentially,suchamythislacedwithfrontierideologythathadservedtheinterestsofAmericanexpansion.Throughthecontinuousmyth-making,frontierideologyhasexerteditsinfluencesonthehomogenizinghistoriographyoftheWestthatfailedtotakeintoaccountsAmericanimperialisminthewestwardexpansion.RichardSlotkinassertsthattheWestern,beingcloselyidentifiedwithAmericanhistory,provides“superbopportunitiesforartiststoreexamineourpastandreimagineourmyths”(“Gunsmoke”68).Inotherwords,theWesterneitherbecomesmouthpieceoforpititselfagainstsuchmyths.SarahGleeson-Whitefurtherattributes“theon-goingmyth-makingtendencyofWesternnarratives”toTurner’sFrontierThesis(24).Withoutexception,thecowboys,whoareobsessedwiththemythoftheWestinAllthePrettyHorses,arehailedbyfrontierideologyintoperformingtheirroleasTurnerianarchetypeoftheWesternmen,butareunwittinglyassimilatedintotheprefabricatedideologicalparadigmofAmericanimperialism.Morethansixtyyearsaftertheofficialclosingofthegeographicalfrontier,McCarthy’scowboys,withtheirimperialistimaginationandromanticheroism,marchontheirhorsebacksanddirectlyridetotheirimagined“NewFrontier”Mexicoinpursuitoftheiridealizedcowboylife.93 Attheonsetofthenovel,McCarthymakesabigdealabouttheobsolescenceofthemythoftheWest,withitsopeningpassagesleavingonreaderstheimpressionofdeathandloss.McCarthydescribesthedeathofJohnGradyCole’smaternalgrandfatherwhoseforefathershavebeenrunningtheirfamilyranchinTexasforseventy-sevenyears.HisdeathsymbolizesthepassageofcowboylifeandthedecliningdayoftheWest.SetinTexasofthelate1940s,thenoveldoesnotchroniclethegoldeneraofcowboyswhobroughtintofullplaytheirskillsinthefrontier,butwitnessestheranchingindustryundertheoverwhelmingencroachmentofindustrializationandurbanization.Withtheincreasingpaceofmodernity,ranchesandthemagnificentWesternlandscapehavedisappearedfromhumansight.Unexceptionally,cowboyswhoonceworkedontheGreatPlainsandlivedinharmonywithnatureandanimalshavebecomeahistoricalrelic.McCarthyusestheComanchetribeasadisappearedracetoremindusthatthesituationbeforeAmericancowboysismuchliketheonefacingComanchescenturiesago.Comanchesoncerodelikeghostsofthenationpassinginthe“softchoraleacrossthatmineralwastetodarkness,”“bearinglosttoallhistoryandallremembrancelikeagrailthesumoftheirsecularandtransitoryandviolentlives”(McCarthy,Horses5).JustasComanchesdisappearedintheWest,Americancowboys,who,likechivalricknights,onceweededoutthewickedandchampionedthegoodintheWildWest,nowbecometraceless.McCarthy’slamentationonthedisappearanceofcowboysintooldmemoryarousesasenseofsadnessandhelplessnessinthefaceofachangingworldwherethemythoftheWestisimpossibletoberestaged.ThemythoftheWesthasbeenimmersedintohistorylongbeforethebirthofJohnGrady.Thepresentsituationfacinghimisratherbleak.Thedeathofhismaternalgrandfather,thedivorceofhisparents,thedoomedfateofhisneighbors’ranchesandhismother’sintentiontoselltheranchjointlyadduptoadesolatebutrealisticpanoramaoftheWesternfrontier.Apartfromthegloomyreality,thedesertionbyhisgirlfriendmakesJohnGradyaboredcowboyandexacerbateshislossofconfidenceinhisfuturelife.McCarthyusesthesefallenimagesandtrivialitiesineverydaylifetorepresentthedyingofthemythoftheWest.94 ThemythoftheWest,accordingtoFredErisman,includesthreegeneralizednarratives:thecowboymythwhichembodiesanationalhero;themythofthegardenwhichadherestoseekingtheabundanceofnaturalresourcesintheWest;andthefrontiermythnarratingtheWestasaregionwhichworksinaspecialwayinthevisionofthenation(168).ThecowboymythhasexperiencedaconstantchangeasAmericangeographystretchedincreasinglywestward,andgraduallyevolvedintothemythoftrapper,hunter,pioneerandscout.Whateveritsimagemightbe,thecowboymythisstampedwithfrontierideologywhich,whilemufflingclassstrugglesandcapitalistexploitation,hasmadecowboysserveastheagentsofstubbornness,diligence,individualism,integrityandjusticegenerallyaccordedtothefrontierideals.Thecowboymyth,asoneofthenarrativesofthemythoftheWest,hascomeintobeingoutofsheernecessity.Thepositivetraitsattributedtocowboysarebothareflectionofnationalessenceandanideologicalrepresentation.Thewestwardexpansionglamorizedtheexploitivelaborsituationofcowboys.Harshenvironment,poorearningsandunstableemployment,asthemajorfactorsthataffectedtheaccomplishmentofthecowboywork,wereneglected.Gradually,AmericancowboysweredisengagedfromtheirworkenvironmentandequatedtothequintessentialAmericanmaleandAmericannationhoodatlarge.Thisdisengagementhallowsoutthehistoryofcowboysaspoorcowhandswho,inordertosurvive,wouldhavetotoleratethesordidandharshaspectsoftheranchlife.Inthisway,thecowboymythisformedandcoloredwithwhatRolandBarthescallsthedominantideology.Here,thedominantideologyinthenineteenthcenturyAmericawasconsistentwithfrontierideologyassummarizedinTurner’sFrontierThesis.Insteadofunderstandingmythaseitherfableorstory,RolandBarthesregardsmythasanembodimentofthedominantideology.InhisgroundbreakingworkMythologies(1957),Barthesarguesthatmyth,consistingofalanguage,needstobeanalyzedwithsemiotics.Creativelyre-appropriatingFerdinandSaussure’stheoryofsign,Barthesproposesdifferentlevelsofsignificationforthestudiesofmeaningandsign.Thefirstordersigniscomposedofsignifierandsignified.Thefirstordersignthenbecomesthesignifierofthesecondorder.Thissecondordergivesthe95 connotativemeaningbyaddinganothersignifiedtoit.Thefirstordersignandthesecondorderonetakeplacewithinthelinguisticsystemandmetalinguisticonerespectively.Thecombinationofthetwolevelsofsignproducesthemyth(107-59).Inregardstothecowboymyth,itsformationrequiresconsideringitsfirstandsecondordersign.Inthefirstorderofsignification,cowboy,asthesignifier,meansfarmhandorcowtenderandproducesalinguisticsignthatisthesignifierinthesecondorderofsignification.Inthesecondorderofsignification,anothersignifiedisproduced.InthecaseofAmericancowboys,thesecondsignifiedtakesshapewiththeemergenceandflourishofcultureindustry.Historically,multi-media,dimenovels,oraltraditions,ballads,andfolklore,theBuffaloBill’sWildWestShow,andRodeoshavepresentedmanyattractiveimagesofAmericancowboys,replacingthepoor-wagedcowboyswhoworkedforranchbaronsinthewestwardexpansionwiththatofthevalorizedAmericannationalheroes.WiththepopularityofthecowboyastheepitomeofAmericanmanhoodandnationhoodbyextension,thesecondorderofsignificationattachesthesignified—cowboyasanexpansive,strong,masculineandself-independentfigure—tothefirstordersign“cowboy.”AccordingtoRolandBarthes,itisatthismomentthathistoryevaporatesandmeaningbecomesform.Inthissense,theinitialmeaningof“cowboy”asapoor-wagedcowhandlosesitsvalueandthecowboymythasthespiritofconquestandhegemonicmasculinityisnaturalizedandtransformedintoafantasyofpower,masteryandcontrolthatenticesAmericancowboysintoseekingthenever-endingfrontierforranchbarons.Ineffect,thecowboys’workintheWesternfrontiercatersto“theideologicalneedsofthenewindustrialandcorporateorder”(Slotkin,Environmentxii).Withthedesireforconquestandrebirth,Americancowboysunwittinglyplayedouttheimperialconquestof“Others”andunconsciouslycarriedafarfrontierideology,inspiteofbeingsubjugatedtocapitalistexploitation.Thispointcanbeillustratedbytheoverlappingaspectsofthefrontierandcowboymyth.ViewedfromBarthes’elaborationonmyth,thefrontiermythisinscribedwiththeideologicalimplicationsthatpromulgatedthefrontierbeliefsbymeansofsubstitutingthefrontierasageographicallocalewithasetofvalueslikerebirth,conquestandenterprisingspiritin96 thesecondorderofsignification.However,suchamythhollowsoutthehistoryofAmericanimperialconquestanditsdominationover“Others”intheWesternfrontierwherethenativeIndiansweredisplaced,theblacksenslaved,andthefemalesdominated.Althoughmystifyingandlegitimatingdifferentexpressionsofpower,thefrontierandcowboymyth,asoffshootsofthemythoftheWest,workcooperativelytotrickAmericancowboysintoseekingafurtherfrontierforconquestanddomination.McCarthy’scowboysinAllthePrettyHorsesareattractedbythecowboyandfrontiermyththatcoercethemintoexploringthefrontierfortheranchingindustryintheWest.JohnGrady’sforefathersarecasesinpoint.Thevastplainsfilledwithfinegrassesandthickvegetationallurethemtobeartheharshconditionsinthewildernessinordertoachieveself-realizationandsuccess.Theever-increasingcoverageoftheirfamilyranchisaproofthatJohnGrady’sforefathersfollowedthetrekdirectedbyfrontierideologyinthenineteenthcentury.In1866,atimewhenthefrontierwasbeingrapidlysettledfollowingthe1862HomesteadAct,theirfamilyranchcoveredtwenty-threehundredacres.In1871,hisgreat-grandfatheraddedsixhundredsteerstothesametrail.Bythentheranchcoveredeighteenthousandacresofland.In1883,thefirstbarbedwirewasrun.In1886,thebuffaloweregoneandabaddie-upappeared.Theyear1889sawthedisbandmentofFortConchoandthediscoveryofoilinTexas.McCarthy’schronologicmappingoftheranch’scoveragemanifeststhecowboyheydayinthelatedecadesofthenineteenthcentury.AgainstthegrandnarrativeoftheWestwardMovement,theranchinghistoryofJohnGrady’sfamilywasnotaregenerativeexperiencewhichhonoredthecommitmentofthefrontierbeliefs;rather,itwasabitteronethatcateredforfrontierideologywhichfunctionedasadisciplinarypowertomakeindividualsdocileandusefulfortheprosperityofAmericaneconomy.“Inthelatterpartofthenineteenthcentury,farmingandranchingfueledtheeconomyandthensetthetoneofpolitics”(McComb100).Withinsucheconomiccontext,theexpansionofJohnGrady’sfamilyranchconformedtothecapitalistregimeandtheeconomicinterestsoftherulingclasswhousedfrontierideologytomakepeopleformwhatLouisAlthussercallstheimaginaryrelationshipto“therealconditionsof97 existence”andacquirethesubjectwithcowboyidentityandtheverysenseoffreedomandself-realization(Lenin162).Incontemporarycapitalistsocieties,theconceptoffreedomismerelyanideologicalconstructionusedbyboththepowereliteaswellasthosebeingoppressedtojustifytheirspecificconditionsofexistence.Notacknowledginganymaterialrealityassociatedwiththeideaoffreedom,Althusserinsiststhatthenotionthatallpeoplearefreeismerelyanimaginaryconstructionwhichworksto“mystify”theexploitedandkeepthemintheirplaceswhilereinforcingthepoweroftherulingclass(ForMarx235).Inthissense,thenotionof“freedom”,whichwasmaintainedandupheldbothbytherulinggroupandtheoppressedgrouplikecowboysinthewestwardexpansion,madebothofthetwogroupsenmeshedinasetofrelationshipsthatwasnecessaryinofferingsomeexplanationsoftheirspecificmaterialconditionofexistence.Furthermore,bygivingfreedomtoAmericancowboys,frontierideologydeceivedthemintoformingtheirsubjectidentityandmadethemvoluntarilyparticipateinthereproductionoftheproductionofcowboylaborforce.Inthisway,cowboysspontaneouslyacceptedtheirsubmissiontotherulesoftheestablishedorder.Thusviewed,theexpansionofJohnGrady’sfamilyranchnotonlyprovidesthematerialformwhichhasfacilitatedtheproductionoflaborforcetoguaranteethesmoothandsoundcirculationofcapitalisteconomy,butalsostrengthensareproductionoftheabilityto“manipulatetherulingideologycorrectlyfortheagentsofexploitationandrepression,sothatthey,too,willprovideforthedominationoftherulingclass‘inwords’”(Althusser,Lenin132-33).However,theranchingindustryinthefrontierwasnotabusinessaspleasantandprofitableasthecowboymythsuggestsJohnGrady’sforefathers.Thedie-upandthesnowstormreinedacrosstheTexanplain.Thedisgustingnaturalcondition,togetherwiththevolatilemarketconditions,landedtheTexanranchersintoaseaoffearandeventhegraspofdeath.Insuchcircumstances,JohnGrady’sforefathershadwontheexpansionoffamilyranchatthecostoftheirlife.Hismaternalgrandfatherwastheoldestofeightboysandtheonlyonetoliveovertheageoftwenty-fiveinhisfamily.Somemaleforefatherswere“drowned,shot,[and]kickedbyhorses”or“perishedin98 fires”(McCarthy,Horses7).TheirearlydemiseprovesthattheWestwardMovement,whichwasalwaysaccompaniedwithpainsandmiseries,registeredthehistoryofbitternessandbale,nottheoneofoptimismandindividualismromanticizedbyfrontierideologywhichleftitspermanentmarksonAmericannationalmythstodeceivemanyAmericansintobelievingthepossibilityofachievingfreedomandeconomicgainsinfrontierexpansion.Inotherwords,frontierideology,byrelyingonthemythoftheWestofwhichthecowboyandfrontiermytharemajornarrativemodes,stitchestogetheracomprehensibleandseeminglyreasonablenarrativeoutofacomplicatedandcontradictoryworldinthepurposeofexplainingandjustifyingboththenatureofthatworldandpeople’sparticularplaceinit.Correspondently,peoplearefirmlypositionedinaproperplaceandunconsciouslyensurethesmoothoperationofsocialproduction.Inthissense,JohnGrady’sforefathersbecametheconscientiouspractitionersoffrontierideology,onlytobedisciplinedintobodilyandspirituallydocileindividualswhowereusableforthecapitalistproductionandexplorationoftheeconomicfrontier.Evenifthesituationoftheranchisonthedowngrade,McCarthy’scowhandsstillworkdiligentlyinthefearof“dyinginbed”(Horses7).Withtheintroductionofbarbedwireknownas“theDevil’sRope,”theopenranchfaceditsdecliningdays.WhenJosephFarwelGliddenpatentedbarbedwireonOct.27,1873,theproductionofbarbedwirewithinsevenyearsincreasedfrom2.84millionpoundsto80.5millionpounds.“Withbarbedwireandtherailroads,thecowboy’sdayswerenumbered”(Lamar80).JohnGrady’sfamilyranchisnoexceptionasithasrunbehinditsexpensesforconsecutiveyears.McCarthy’sdescriptionofthefencedranchesinSt.Angelonotonlyheraldstheendoftheshort-livedopenrange,butalsomakestheranchbecometheplaceforthematerialexistenceoffrontierideology.Thebarbedranch,asaminiatureofMichelFoucault’s“panopticon,”signifiesthesmalllivingspaceforcowboysandfurtherfacilitatesthesmoothdisciplinaryoperationoftheideologicalpowertoproduceusefulcowboysforsocialandeconomicproductionandpermittheresolutionofthecontradictionsandthetotalityofsocialrelationsthatwouldguaranteethespecialprivilegeclaimedbytherulingbourgeoisclass.99 ItisquiteobviousthatJohnGrady’sforefathers,byidentifyingthemselveswiththeroleofthecowboy,unconsciouslyformedtheirrelationtotherealconditionsofexistencerepresentedtothembyfrontierideologythatnotonlyexploitedthelaborforceofthecowboysbutalsomadethemassumeasenseoffreedom,fullnessandsuccessbylivingoutthecowboyandfrontiermyth.Suchmythswereengraftedwiththeideologicalconnotationsthataggrandizedthewhitepeople’sspiritofconquest,expansion,individualismandself-reliance.Instarkcontrasttotheidealizedifnotexaggeratedimageofthecowboy,JohnGrady’sforefathersunconsciouslyfellintothetrapoffrontierideologythatmadethewestwardexpansionspontaneous,unproblematicandvictorious.Here,thefamilysagaofJohnGradybecomesacountervoiceagainstthemonologueofthetraditionalWesternhistoriography.Withthedeclineofthegoldenageofthecowboy,whatremainedintheSouthwestwasnothingbutthevanishingormeltingoftheonceprosperousranchingbusiness.JustasDiannaC.LucesuccinctlysummarizesthekeynoteoftheBorderTrilogy,“vanishing”isthemostsuitablewordtodescribetheworldinwhichJohnGradylives.Theworldaroundhimis“avanishingworld,beginningwiththedeathofJohnGrady’sgrandfatherandendingwiththedeathofJohnGradyhimself”(“TheVanishing”163).Allthatissolidmeltsintoairunderthehistoricalcrushofmodernity.However,themythoftheWestitselfhasnotcompletelyvanished;instead,forJohnGrady,itbecomessomethingholyandattractivethatcannotbeprofanedandresisted,andstillexistsasaloomingspecterconstantlyhauntingandenthrallinghim.Thenheturnssouthwards“alongtheoldwartrail,”dismountsfromthehorsebackandstands“likeamancometotheendofsomething”(McCarthy,Horses5).JohnGradyrepresentsthefinishinglineofthewestwardmoveandthelastcowboyhauntedandcaptivatedbythemythicalWest.HehasbeenontheranchforsixteenyearssincehisbirthandunconsciouslyaffectedbyfrontierideologyencouragingmanyAmericanstoexplorethefrontierduringtheWestwardMovement.Yearsofranchinglifehavebredinhimalovefornature,apenchantforadventureandalongingforfreedom,buttheyhavemadehimmisrecognizeinfrontierideologyhisimaginaryrelationshiptotherealbutpastconditionsoftheexistenceofthefrontierlife.100 Indeed,frontierideologywasnolongerthedominantideologyinthe1940sAmericathataccordedmuchimportancetoindustrializationandurbanization.ThispointcanbeillustratedbytheappropriationoftheTexanlandbyoilcompaniesforprospectioninAllthePrettyHorses.McCarthyhintsthattheTexanlandfallspreytostAmericanindustrialization.ThediscoveryofoilatSpindletop,Texas,onJan.11901attractedlargehordesofpeopletoseekfortunesthere.Spindletopwasa“forlornsaltdomenearBeaumontontheEastTexasGulfCoast”andcreatedanalluringnewsourceofincomethatenticedmany“would-becowboysawayfromtherange”(MaloneandEtulain32).“‘Oilfever’infectedthestate…thewildcatoilprospectorsfannedoutoverthesouthwestwithvisionsofblackgoldgurglingintheirbrains”(McComb121).ThecontinuedoildrillingforsixdaysatSpindletopmarkedtheoilboomthatchangedtheeconomicpatternofTexasfromlivestockandfarmingbusinessintoindustrialproductionofoil.EvenafterSpindletop,cottonplantingcontinuedtobeTexas’maineconomicfountain.Withmorediscoveriesofoilfieldinthedecadestocome,Texas“becametheleadingoil-producingstateinthenation”(McComb121).Becauseoftherapidandsurprisinggrowthofthestate’spetroleumindustry,theearlyyearsofthe1920sbecamea“periodmarker”inTexas’economichistory(HendricksonandSanford419).Thatis,oilindustrybecametheprimaryeconomicforceofTexasinplaceofcottonandranchingindustry,andthefederalgovernmentincreaseditsinvestmentsinpetroleumindustryinordertosatisfyitsever-increasingdemandforoilafterWWI.Byandlarge,theoilboomerafromthe1910stotheearly1970sfundamentallychangedtheeconomicstructureinTexas.Uponenteringthe1940s,theranchingeconomyalmostcametoanendasthedominantideologyofthe1940sunderlinedtheindustrialproductionofoilthatwouldmeettheincreasingconsumptionofmodernmenandboostAmericaneconomicgrowth.Onsuchanoccasion,frontierideologythathadhailedindividualstoestablishthemselvesintheWestgraduallygavewaytotheextensiveexplorationoftheindustrialandeconomicfrontier.Itisintheabove-mentionedsocialandeconomicconditionthatJohnGrady’sfamilyranchexists.TexasdoesnotneedcowboyslikeJohnGradyand101 correspondinglyattacheslittleimportancetothecorevaluestheyrepresent.Facingsuchadiresituationandthewould-besaleofthefamilyranchbyhismother,JohnGrady’scowboydreambecomesoutofreachsinceitsrealizationwoulddisruptthestableprogressofAmericanindustrializationandobstructitsgeneralideologyfromdiscipliningindividualsintodocileandusablesubjectsthatwouldreproduceusefullaborforceforindustrialproduction.ThecowboylifeintheWestismerelyacastleinairforJohnGrady.JohnGrady’sfather,whojustreturnedinjuredfromtheWWIIbattlefield,realizesthedrasticchangesoccurringinAmericaandtellshim:“We’reliketheComanchestwohundredyearsago”(McCarthy,Horses26).Whatisgoingto“showuphere”and“whatcolorthey[will]be”areunknownforall(26).HiscomparisonontheonehandimpliesthatthecowboylifehasalreadybecomeanuncatchablesignmuchinthesamewaythatComanches,whooncelivedintheGreatPlains,particularlyinTexas,weredoomedtodisappearwiththeencroachingsettlementandlandrobberyoftheAnglo-Americans.Ontheotherhand,itcallstomindtheprocessofAmericanimperialconquestoftheWestinwhichtheracialextinctionofmanyIndiantribesthatmadepossibletheemergenceandprosperityofAmericanranchingbusiness.McCarthy’sreferencetoComanchesinsinuatesthefactthattheadvancementofAmericancivilizationwasunderitswaythroughacenturyofcontestswithnatureandthenon-whites,andfurtherrevealsthatAmerica’scontinentalexpansionwasaprocessof“AmericanequivalentofEuropeanimperialismandimperialadventuring”(Abbott14).TerryEagletonwrites:“Allliteraryworkscontainoneormoresuchsub-texts,andthereisasenseinwhichtheymaybespokenofasthe‘unconscious’oftheworkitself.Thework’sinsights…aredeeplyrelatedtoitsblindnesses”(LiteraryTheory155).SowhatMcCarthydoesnotsaybyreferringto“Comanches”isasimportantaswhathearticulates.Whatseemsabsenthere,namely,thefrontierexpansionatthecostofimperialconquestoftheIndians,comestofore.Whatismore,thereferenceto“Comanches”invokesthedeep-rootedspiritofconquestthathauntsthewhitemaleslikeghostsandforeshadowstheimperialdreamofJohnGradywholatterembarksonhisjourneytoMexicointhesamewaythathisforefathersonceset102 footontheWestforexploringandconqueringthevastfrontier.EvenifthesaleofhisfamilyranchbyMrs.Coleisimpending,JohnGrady’sfascinationwiththeWesternfrontierasanarenaforrealizingheroicindividualismandunfetteredfreedomandhisadherencetocowboyliferemaininhisheart.HestillnegotiateswithMrs.Coleinanattempttopersuadeherfromsellingit,buthiseffortendsinvain.Becauseofhisparents’divorce,JohnGrady,accordingtothelawsofprimogeniture,isdisinheritedfromtheranch,whichbecomesaterriblethingforayoungboyholdingthebelief“thatlifeonthecattleranchinwestTexasisthesecondbestthing”thangoingtoheavenafterdeath(McCarthy,Horses17).Withsuchanideainhismind,JohnGradyrideswestwardsatnightsandshareswithhisfriendLaceyRawlinshislongingfortheobsoletecowboylife.Infact,hislongingisthewhitemales’imperialistfantasytoridefreelyintheGreatPlains,toshootoutproblemswiththenativeIndiansandbadguys,andfinallytoheadhishorseoffintoasunset.ToquoteAmyKaplan,thelongingforanirretrievablepasttendsto“abetmodernimperialforce”ratherthancontestit(660).Byanalogy,JohnGrady’sfascinationisbornoutofhisunconsciousinternalizationofthefrontierandcowboymyth.Hispsychologicalbelongingtothepast,togetherwithhisbereavementofprimogeniturerights,makeshimmuchlikethe“injuredinnocents”whoimplicitlycelebratethe“empireofinnocence”(Limerick,Legacy44).MarkBusbypointsout“thecowboy,”asthemostrecognizableindigenousAmericanhero,is“theproductofTexas’frontierlegacy”(“Goodbye”222).Asthelegacyofthefrontiermythology,thecowboyisideologicallyassociatedwithcourage,determination,ingenuity,individualism,manhood,nationhoodandthespiritofconquest.ThesetraitsareengrainedinthemindsoftheAmericanswhoareexposedtotheboomingofcultureindustry,particularlytheHollywoodWesterns.ThispointissotruetoJohnGradythatwecannotdismissitintermsofhowfrontierideologyworkstohailhimtoseekcowboylife.JohnGrady’simaginingoftheWestandhisdedicationtoanidealizedfrontierlifecomestraightlyfromHollywoodcowboyimages.Inaconversationwithhisfather,JohnGradyistoldthatShirleyTemplewasdivorced.ThereferencetoShirleyTempleinvitesustoassociateHollywoodWestern103 movieswiththeirpublicityoffrontierexperienceanditscorrespondingvaluesatanationalscale.Accordingtothenovel’schronologicalframework,ShirleyTemplehadjuststarredinJohnFord’sFortApache(1948),atypicalHollywoodWesternmoviethatdepictsthelonelycowboyorcowgirlridingoffintothesunsetandthemythiclandscapetoactualizecowboycodes.ThatthenewsofTemple’sdivorcereachespeopleinTexasillustratesTexans’accesstomassmedia.AlthoughMcCarthydoesnotexplicitlytelltheinfluenceofmassmediaonshapingJohnGrady’sconceptionofthefrontierlife,itcanbeconjecturedthatShirleyTempleasacelebrityinHollywoodWesternmoviessetsanexampleofanationalheroiccowgirlwhocanspeakforthepastoralidealsandrelieveAmericans’psychologicalpaincausedbythedisturbingindustrializationandmodernizationsincecelebritycultureallowsindividualstobe“usedbycapitalistsocietyinavarietyofways—asmarketstimuli,asrepresentationsofidealsocialtypes,asfocalpointsforthedesiresandlongingsoftheaudience,andsoon”(Moran60).Hence,McCarthy’sreferencetoaHollywoodstarnotonlyunderscoresthefictitiousconstructionoftheWesternheroes,butalsoallowsustoseethatJohnGrady’sidealizedvisionoftheWestisbuiltupontheillusoryfoundations.Whatismore,thereferencetoShirleyTemplemanifestshowmassmediaworkasaformofthecommunicationsISA(IdeologicalStateApparatus)toinculcatefrontierideologyinthemindsofthepublic.LouisAlthusserproposesISAinplaceofRSA(RepressiveStateApparatus)asthedominantwayinwhichideologygivessignificancetotheexistenceofsubjects.AlthusserfurthergivesanaccountofalistofISAsincludingthereligiousISA,theeducationalISA,thefamilyISA,thelegalISA,thecommunicationsISA(press,television,radio,etc.)andtheculturalISA(Lenin143).InoppositiontoRSAwhich,comprisingofthegovernment,theadministration,thearmedforce,theprisonsandsoon,functionsbyviolenceoratleastinarepressiveway,ISAsfunction“massivelyandpredominantlybyideology,”buttheyalsofunction“secondarilybyrepression”orina“veryattenuatedandconcealed,evensymbolic”way(Althusser,Lenin145).ViewedfromthelensofISAs,theauthor’smentioningofShirleyTempleistodemonstratethatfrontierideology,thoughbeinganideologicalresidueinthelate1940s,stillexertsimplicitinfluencesonJohnGrady104 bymeansofthecommunicationsISAand“interpellates”himtobeasubjectwithcowboyidentity.However,thesocialsituationduringthisperiodallowsnoplaceforhisideal.Hisidealizedcowboylifethenprecipitateshimtoseekafurtherfrontierwherehecanbringintofullplayhisskillsinbreakinghorsesandraisingcattle.WhencowboyslikeJohnGradyarenolongerusableforAmericatoboostitseconomicgrowth,theresolutionitoffersiseitherrequiringthemtoworkforindustrialproductionormarginalizingthemtobesocialwoodwormwhichmaygnawawaytheworkethicsofcapitalistsociety.AsEdwardSaidenlightensusinCultureandImperialism,Britishsocietyeasedoutthesocialscumbydispatchingthemtoitsoverseacoloniesinthenineteenthcentury.ThedismissedBritishcitizens,byre-establishingthemselvesinthecolonizedplaces,subtlypromotedandsolidifiedtheBritishEmpire.Inthesimilarmanner,JohnGrady,insteadofstayinginTexastobecomeamerewheelintheproductionlineofoilprospection,voluntarilyleavesforMexicoinsearchofhiscowboyparadise.HeandLaceyRawlins,justlike“thewarriors”who“wouldrideoninthatdarknessthey’dbecome”andsing“softlyinblood,”ridesouthward“acrosstheplainstoMexico”(McCarthy,Horses6).Infact,JohnGrady’sdepartureforMexicofallsintothelogicofimperialexpansion.HisabsencefromAmericawoulddefinitelyalleviatethesocialandeconomicconflictsinAmericansocietyandsubsequentlyensurethesmoothdisciplineofindividualstoturnoutusablesubjectsforAmericanindustrialization.LivinginTexaswhichbordersMexico,JohnGradysimplycastshiseyesonMexicofortherealizationofhiscowboydreambecausetheporousborderbetweenthetwoneighboringcountriesprovidesAmericanmerchantsandcolonialistswithadventuresandfortunes.ToquoteLimerick,theterminationoftheMexican-AmericanWarhas“madetheregionintowhatitremainstoday:atruefrontier”inwhich“twonationsconfronteachotherandcompeteforcontrolofthelocalresourcesandtheroutestoopportunity”(Legacy228).WhenJohnGradyisdeprivedoftheranch,hesimplyforaysintoMexicoforits“localresources”necessaryforhimtocontinuehiscowboylife.Inthissense,JohnGradytakesMexicoasthe“NewFrontier”tore-establishthecowboyempireleftbehindhiminTexas.105 McCarthyusesMexicoasametaphorof“NewFrontier”andJohnGradyColeanew“AmericanAdam”who,withacowhidewhipinhishands,gallantlyridesonhorsebackacrossthevastgrasslandofthe“NewFrontier”Mexico.Originally,the“NewFrontier”wasapoliticalrhetoricofPresidentJohnF.Kennedy.WhenacceptingtheDemocraticParty’snominationforpresidencyin1961,Kennedyappealedto“frontier”forAmericaninspirationforconqueringnewfrontiersastheirforefathersbuiltanewworldintheWest.Forhim,theAmericansinthetwentiethcenturyshouldbe“determinedtomakethatnewworldstrongandfree,toovercomeitshardships,toconquertheenemiesthatthreatenedfromwithoutandwithin”(Kennedy,MemorableQuotations275).ThisanalogybecameKennedy’spoliticalslogan.“Iamaskingeachofyou,”Kennedysaid,“tobepioneersonthatNewFrontier”(MemorableQuotations276).Inthe1960s,itwaseasytofindthatKennedyandtheAmericanpublicreferredto“frontier”asanattractivemetaphorforthenewchallenges,unexpectedhardships,ideologicalconflictsandimperialexpansion.RichardSlotkinassertsthatKennedy’ssloganof“NewFrontier”is“aprogramofrenewedeconomicexpansionandforwardmovementonthebordersoftheAmericanempire”(Environment17).InAmerica,thefrontierrhetorichasbeencontinuallyre-appropriated,reshapedandrevaluedinitsadjustmenttoAmericanconditions.Likewise,Mexicobecomesa“NewFrontier”forJohnGradywhenhefindsTexasleavesnoroomforhiscowboydream.HisjourneytoMexico,regardlessofperilsthatfollow,isaffectedbyhisidealizedimaginationofMexicoasaplaygroundtotestwhatRichardMaxwellBrowncalls“theCodeoftheWest”:centralto“thatCodewasthedoctrineofnodutytoretreat,theimperativeofpersonalself-redress,andanultrahighvalueoncourage”(“Violence”394).JohnGrady’sidealizationofthefrontierbecomesformalizedintermsofthatthefrontierequatestoitsperpetualexistencebothinAmericaandotherplaceswiththedefinitionofAmericaitself.StanleyCorkinclarifiestherelationsoftheWesternandtheWesternmoviestothePost-WWIIAmericannationalismandsuggeststhattheunspokenorrepresseddimensionoftheWesterngenreisits“relationshiptoimperialism”(Corkin24).Corkinhaspointedoutthatthepost-WWIIWesternmovies“promotedparticularconstructionsofnationalidentityinaperiodmarkedbyintense106 chauvinismandbroadacceptanceofakindofeconomicandculturalhegemony”(24).Thusviewed,whenreferringtoShirleyTemplewhostarredinthepost-WWIIHollywoodWesternmovies,McCarthyimpliesthatJohnGradyimplicitlyassimilatesthespiritofimperialexpansionthaturgeshimtoleavehomeandextendthefrontiertootherplaces.FollowingthereferencetoShirleyTempleisMcCarthy’sdescriptionofgallanthorsesonacanvasinJohnGrady’shouse,whichalsoplaystheroleofthecommunicationsISA.Onthisoilpainting,thereareadozenofhorseswithlongmanesandwildeyes.Thesehorsesarefullofvigor,mightandenergy.Withtheirpowerfulforce,thepicturedhorseslureJohnGradyintopursuinghiscowboydream.Whenaskinghisgrandfatherwhatkindsofhorsestheyare,JohnGradyistold:“thosearepicturebookhorses”(McCarthy,Horses16).JohnGrady’sblindadmirationforhorsesandhisgrandfather’signoranceofhorsespeciestestifytheresidualyetcompellingeffectsoffrontierideologywhich,oncemanipulatingitspowertoproduceknowledgeabouttheWestwardMovement,hasnowbeenpersistentlypromulgatedbythecommunicationISA.IntheWestwardMovement,thecowboysandhorsesaresymbolicofjusticeandcourage,whiletheIndiansandMexicansarerepresentedascannibals,killers,orrobbers.Inthisway,theIndiansandMexicans,as“Others,”arepittedagainsttheAnglo-Americans“Us.”Suchbinarieshavelongbeenbuiltbypowerwhichhasproducedthelop-sidedtruthandknowledgeconsistentwiththedominantideology.Otherwisestated,theAmericangovernmentinthenineteenthcenturyutilizeditspowertoforgeknowledgeaboutthenon-Anglo-Americanswhobecamevictimsofracismandimperialism.ThisdistortedtruthhasbeenimplicitlypublicizedbyISAsamongAmericansandassimilatedintotheirinherentcognitiveframework.ItisobviousthatJohnGradyisimmersedinthecommunicationsISAthatsubtlyundergirdsAmericanexpansionof“NewFrontier.”Inthisway,frontierideologystillaffectsindividual’sidentificationwiththerealyetpastsocialconditionoftheexistenceofthefrontierlifeinthetwentiethcentury.Individuals,duetotheirmisrecognitionofsuchanideology,resorttoothersmeanstoplayouttheiridealized107 conceptionofthefrontierlife.TheverymeansadoptedbyJohnGradyistoescapefromtheindustrializedTexasandrideintoMexico,alandcomparativelylessindustrializedandmodernthanAmericainthelate1940s.Apartfromnewspapersandoilpaintings,whicharedifferentformsofthecommunicationsISA,theculturalISAalsoexertsconcealedinfluenceonAmericancowboys.JohnGradyandLaceyRawlinscomeacrossJimmyBlevinsandtakehimasapalontheirwaytoMexico,eventhoughRawlinshatesBlevinsandintendstoridiculehimbytestinghisgunskills.RawlinsurgesBlevinstohaveashow.WhenBlevinspreparestoshootRawlins’billfoldasitistossedhighintotheairbyJohnGrady,Rawlinsasks:“Youready,AnnieOakley?”(48).AnnieOakleywasafamouscowgirlplayingaheroicroleinBuffaloBillCody’sWildWestShowwhichlastedfrom1883to1916andshaped“Americanideasaboutthefrontierpastattheturnofthecentury”(Slotkin,Gunfighter66).Codyonceworkedas“trapper,CivilWarsoldierinaJayhawkregiment,PonyExpressrider,stagecoachdriver,posse-man,meathunterfortheKansasPacificRailroad,andarmyscout”(Slotkin,Gunfighter69).Cody,whobecameafamousWesternculturalicon,bestsuggeststhetrue-to-lifecowboyidentity.HislaterWildWestShownotmerelyestablishedhisfame,butalsohelpedmanyactorsandactressesachievesuccess.AnnieOakley,whoismentionedbyMcCarthy,achievedfameasoneoftheactressesintheWildWestShow.Sheexhibitedhersharp-shootingskillsandmadehersynonymouswithmarksmanshipandfemaleheroine.Alittlelaterinthenarrative,McCarthymentionsanotherrenownedhorseman.WhenRawlinsandBlevinshavedisputeoverwhetherornotJohnGradyisahorsemanasgreatandskillfulasBoogerRed.BoogerRed,whoserealnamewasSamuelThomasPrivett,wasaTexanbronc-busterwhowas“inductedintotheCowboyHallofFame”andhadhisownWildWestShowinthelate19thandearly20thcenturies(Young4).Hisshowspresentedmanyculturaliconscentraltothefrontierlife.McCarthy’sreferencestobothhistoricalandpopularculturalicons,inadditiontopresentingthefrontieranditscowboyinhabitantsasexcellentactorswhoseperformancescanberegardedascarriersofthecowboyandfrontiermythandfromwhomsuchmythshavebeenspreadwidelyandintensively,demonstratethatthe108 culturalISAalsoplaysitseffectiveroleinhailingindividualslikeJohnGradyandRawlinsassubjectswhoattempttoregaintheircowboyidentity.Infact,JohnGradyandRawlinsaremistakenlyinfluencedbytherepresentationsofAmericancowboysinthepopularculturewhichtendtodepictthemasauthenticheroicfiguresunbridledbysocialrestrictionsinfrontierexpansion.WhenfindingthatTexasisnottheidealplaceforthecowboylife,theybelieveMexicotobe“Eldorado”(McCarthy,Horses32).EldoradowasthelegendarycityofgoldthattheexplorersoftheNewWorldfailedtofindoutinthesixteenthcenturyandhastransformedintoanequationwiththeAmericanWestintheWesterngenre.Eldorado,inthetwoboys’eyes,morphsintoMexico.JustasLimerick’silluminatingremarkremindsus,thecompletionoftheconquestoftheAmericanWestessentiallymeantthatchapterofhistorywasclosed,buttheendingofthefrontiercouldnotburyeverythingintohistoryas“thehardinessandindependenceofthepioneersurvivedinAmericancharacter”(italicizedinoriginalLegacy323).ThispointcanbebestillustratedbyJohnGrady.Mexicoforhimisjustlikeablanksheetuponwhichhecandrawamagnificentpictureofhisdesiredcowboylife.Essentially,JohnGrady’sromanticimaginationofMexicoasagoldencountryforthebelatedAmericancowboysistheovertdemonstrationofAmericanimperialismwhichhasbeencloakedbyfrontierideologysincethenineteenthcentury.FrontierideologyinAllthePrettyHorses,unlikethatisreflectedinBloodMeridianasthedominantandsearingcryforfrontierexpansion,becomesakindofideologicalresidueinAmericansocietyandinimplicityeteffectivewayaffectsAmericans’imaginationofothercountriesthatarelessdevelopedthanAmerica.ThisveryimplicityetpredominantwayiscalledbyAlthusser“IdeologicalStateApparatus”.IdeologicalStateApparatus,whichmanifestsitselfintheformoftheculturalISA,canalsobesensedinLaceyRawlins’smentioningof“theBigRockCandyMountain”(McCarthy,Horses55).WhendiscussingwithJohnGradyaboutwhatonearthMexicois,RawlinssaysthatMexicoisabeautifullandfilledwithgrassylandonwhichfatcowsandhorsesgrazeandcowboysworkdiligently.Mexicoforthemislike“theBigRockCandyMountain”which,originallyappearingintheAmerican109 fairytales,symbolizesacarefreepastorallife.Theeponymousfolkmusicaboutthehobo’sideaofparadisewasfirstrecordedbyHarryMcClintockin1928andbecamepopularnationwidebyBurlIves’sversionintendedforchildrenin1949.Likehobos,McCarthy’scowboysemulatetheiritinerantlifestylebylivingavagabondlifeontheirwaytoMexico.Besides,in1943,animportantWesternwriterWallaceStegnerpublishedaWesternalsonamedTheBigRockCandyMountain.LikeMcCarthy’scowboys,Stegner’scowboyBoMasontriestofindaplacewhichheconsidersasthe“PromisedLand”forhimandallotherwhitemaleAmericansatlarge.BoMasonisenamoredoftherhetoricofnationalexpansion,butheishamperedbythebeliefthathehasrighttolandandwealth.Disregardinglegalrestrictions,heengagesinbootleggingacrosstheinternationalborders,onlytomeethisbitterends.McCarthy’sallusionto“TheBigRockCandyMountain”impliesthattheWesterngenrealsofunctionsasaformoftheculturalISAinstructuringhisbelatedcowboys’recognitionofMexicoasanidealizedplacefortheirconquestandpossessionoratleastaback-gardenfortheunemployedAmericancowhandswhoaresoeagertoliveapastorallife.TheculturalIAS,accordingtoAlthusser,isaseffectiveasschoolsandchurcheswhichusesuitablemeansto“‘discipline’notonlytheirshepherds,buttheirflocks”(Lenin145).Justasshepherdsareinterpellatedbythechurches,soareJohnGradyandhispalsbytheculturalISAbymeansofwhichfrontierideology,oncejustifyingcapitalistrelationsofexploitationoncowhands,frontiersmenandpioneersinthewestwardexpansion,nowmakesitsresidualpresencefelt.JohnGrady’sforefathersasdiscussedabovearesubjugatedcapitalistexploitationandevenlosetheirlifeinconformingtothereproductionoftheproductionoflaborforce.Tosaytheleast,JohnGrady’growthfromchildhoodtoadolescenceisthoroughlyimmersedinthedisciplineoffrontierideologyviawhatAlthussercalls“thefamilyISA”(Lenin143).JohnGrady,frombirthtoyouth,hasplungedintoaranchfamilywhoseforefathershadengagedintheranchingbusinessforalmostacentury.Inhischildhood,hewasdesertedbyMrs.Colewho,dislikingtheranchlife,lefthometorealizeherdreamofbeingatheatreactress.Forlittlechildren,familyisthefirstplacewheretheyknow110 theworldanddeveloptheircharacter.Judgedfromtheabsenceofmotherinhischildhood,itisnotverydifficulttodiscernthatJohnGrady’smaternalgrandfatherasacowboytruetohisboneswouldimparttohimmoreknowledgeaboutagribusinessandhusbandrythanthataboutindustrializationandmodernization.AsAlthusserwrites,thefamilyISAalsofunctions“massivelyandpredominantly”intransplantingthedominantideologyintheindividualmind(Lenin145).Broughtupinaranchingfamily,JohnGradyisunconsciouslyinfluencedbyfrontierideologythatencouragedmanyAmericansregardlessoftheirorigintoachievefreedomandsuccessintheWesternfrontier.ItsufficestosaythatJohnGrady’sranchingfamilyeffectivelymakeshimspontaneouslyacceptfrontierideologywhichmisleadshimtoseekfrontieradventures.Inthisway,hislivingenvironmentontheTexanranchfullyprovidesthematerialexistenceforfrontierideologywhichfallsbackonthehiddencoercionofthefamilyISAtomakeitsideologicalbeliefswell-acceptedandcemented.UndertheconcertedexertionsofthecommunicationsISA,theculturalISAandthefamilyISA,JohnGradyisundoubtedlyrecruitedintothepre-madesystemoffrontierideologywhoserolewastoensurethereproductionofsocialrelationsofproductioninthewestwardexpansionandcovercapitalistexploitationoftheworkingclassandimperialconquestof“Others.”Thuswhenknowingtheimpossibilitytorunhisfamilyranch,JohnGrady,regardlessofhismother’ssuggestion,ridessouthwardtohisself-conceived“NewFrontier”Mexico,butunwittinglyengagesinimperialconquest.McCarthy,bydesigningJohnGrady’sadventurousjourneyintoMexico,insinuatesthecontinuedimperialexpansionofAmericaandfurtherrevealsthenever-endingdreamofestablishingtheAmericanempireinthenameofrejuvenatingitsnationalideas.JohnGradyattemptstoreversetherotationoftheclockandreturntothepastbyspatialandgeographicalmovements,sothatheisabletoestablishthegardenofGodwhereuntarnishedAdamandEvecanliveinthewarmbosomofnature.EdwardSaidclarifiesthefunctionofimaginativegeographyinestablishingEuropeancoloniesandpointsout“imaginativegeography”helps“themindtointensifyitsownsenseofitself”(Orientalism55).Inthisway,peopleplace111 themselvesimaginativelywithinanimaginedterritorytopossessageographicalbelonging,whichisapartoftheprocessofproducingandsustainingnationalism.By“imaginativegeography,”Saidmeansanation’scognitiveimaginationofgeography,notthephysicalandconcreteterritory.Usually,imaginativegeographyisnotsomuchmotivatedbyapuregeographicalcognizancebutanimatedbytheideologicalpurposesthatsupportthenationalconceptionoftheworldorder.Furthermore,italsoshapesandlegitimizespeople’sattitudesandpracticesineverydaylife.Inthisway,imaginativegeographyspiralsintoandoutofasortofculturalparadigmof“Otherness.”ViewedfromSaid’s“imaginativegeography,”JohnGrady’sgeographicalimaginationofMexicoas“Eldorado[Goldencountry]”isaprojectionofAmericanimperialismwhichhasimposed“Otherness”onMexico(McCarthy,Horse32).Inactuality,theeverchangingMexican-Americanborderlines,inadditiontotestifyingtheimpactsofAmericanimperialismanditsgeopolitics,alsorevealtheimperialintentionofAmericaandfurtherboostanationalisticmoodofterritorialexpansionwhichreinventsmeaningsaboutthelandAmericacovetsandframesthediscoursesjustifyingwhyAmericahasclaimtothatregion.BeneaththepowerfulimpactofAmericanimperialismareitsarrogantnationalismandwillfulspiritwhichoriginatefromAmerica’soverestimationofitsnationalpoweranditsperceptionofimaginativegeography.JohnGradyself-conceitedlyseesMexicoasanideallandforhiscowboylife,butheessentiallyintendstotransplantAmericancowboycultureontheculturaltapestryofMexico.Byextension,hisobservationofMexicoepitomizesthatAmericawatches,perceives,gazesandinscribes;while,Mexicoiswatched,perceived,gazedandinscribed.Furthermore,Mexicoplaystheroleof“safetyvalve”TurnerascribedtothefrontierintheWestwardMovement.StoutlychallengingTurner’sargument,HenryNashSmithinVirginLand:theAmericanWestasSymbolandMyth(1950)haspointedoutthattakingtheWestasthesocial“safetyvalve”wasunanimouslyacceptedbymanyAmericansduringthenineteenthcentury.Nonetheless,itconcealedmanysocialconflictsandclassstrugglesbroughtbywealthgapinAmerica.SmithunveilstheromanticmaskoftheAmericanWestandunearthsproblemscausedbythe112 massivescaleofthewestwardmovewhenstating:Thedoctrineofsafetyvalvewasanimaginativeconstructionwhichmaskedpovertyandindustrialstrifewiththepleasingsuggestionthatabeneficentnaturestrongerthananyhumanagency,theancientresourceofAmericans,thepowerthatmadethecountryrichandgreat,wouldsolvethenewproblemofindustrialism.(206-07)Now,goneforeveristheWesternfrontierwiththecompletionofAmericansettlement;goneforeverisTexasastheideallandforraisingcattlewiththeonslaughtofmodernity;goneforeveristhecowboyfunwiththepopularityofmodernentertainment.AllthingsJohnGradyholdsdeardieawaylongbeforehisbirth.Hence,hechoosesMexicoasamoderncowboyparadiseinplaceoftheunspoiledfrontierintheWest.JohnGradywillfullyconsidersMexicoasaTabulaRasauponwhichhecandrawanimageofselfasadevotedloverandanexcellenthorse-breaker.Inhisview,Mexico,astheantithesisoftheheavilyfencedandmoremodernizedWest,isarelativelypastoralplacefreefromtheillsofmodernity.ThisidealizationisreflectedbytheconjecturethatnoelectricityandevennocararetherebyRawlinsandJohnGradyrespectively.ItistellingthatMexicoisconstructedintermsofitsfunctionas“safetyvalve”toeasesocialtensioncausedbythesweepingmodernityinAmerica.McCarthy’sMexico“becomesasubstitutefortheunscoutedterritoryoftheOldWest,asupposedlyempty…spaceuponwhichManifestDestinycouldmakeits‘scouring’mark”(Gleeson-White28).ViewedfromtheconceptofManifestDestiny,JohnGradyandRawlins,justlikemissionersappointedbyGodtore-enactthefrontiermythintheoldWest,aretodisseminatefreedom,liberty,andindividualismenshrinedinfrontierideologyandtakenbyimperialistAmericaas“universalvalues”applicabletoanyareaofthewholeworld.Ineyesofmanyecocritics,JohnGradyrejectstheanthropocentricattitudestowardsnon-humanentitiesasdemonstratedbyhisreverencefornature,respectforanimalsandloveforpoeticdwellingontheland.Forinstance,AndrewKellerEstescontendsthat“ranchinglifestylerespondstoCole’sexpectationofhowpeopleshouldtreatoneanotherandhowtheyshouldinteractwith113 environment”(139).Farfrombeingapoeticdweller,JohnGradyColeseeksneitherharmonywithnaturenorbiocentrismamongthecosmos,butre-enactmentofthefrontierbeliefswhich“supportsAmericanexceptionalismandexpansionismbybothmilitaryandeconomicmeans”(McGilchrist128).InAllthePrettyHorses,thefrontier,whichwasameetingpointofsavageryandcivilizationandademarcationbetweenregressionandprogress,istransferredontothe“NewFrontier”Mexico.JohnGradyCole,underthecovertinterpellationoffrontierideology,leavesTexaswithanaimtorestorehiscowboyparadiseinMexico,butunwittinglyfallsintothesnareofAmericanimperialism.Whendiscussingthesignificanceofrunninganerrandinthefrontierwilderness,RichardSlotkinarguesthattheAmericansmustrideinto“‘Indiancountry’andexperiencea‘regression’toamoreprimitiveandnaturalconditionoflifesothatthefalsevaluesofthe‘metropolis’canbepurgedandanew,purifiedsocialcontractenacted”(Regeneration14).“Indiancountry”forJohnGradyisMexico.Indeed,McCarthygivesanindicationofrebirthceremonytoJohnGradyandRawlins.UponcrossingtheRioGrande,whichisamarkeroftheMexican-Americanborderlines,RawlinsandJohnGradytakeofftheirclothesandstepintoittohaveabath.TheirbathisequivalenttoChristianceremonyofbaptisminwhichindividualpurgesthepastsins,purifiessoulandshakesoffthehistoricalburden.InsharpcontrasttothemoralandpsychologicalrebirthcodifiedinmanyWesterns,AllthePrettyHorsesdoesnotgivetheprotagonist’sfullrebirth,butthenovelchroniclesthehardshipsandfierceresistancethatexpulsehimfromMexico.JohnGradyandRawlinsarrogatetothemselvestherighttocrosstheMexican-Americanborder.NotbearinginmindthatMexicoisacastesocietywithatroublingpastcausedbyitsincessantdomesticturmoilandpoliticalrevolutions,JohnGrady,evenifhecanspeakSpanish,stillknowslittleabouttheculturalandsocialsituationinMexico.Inaddition,astrongantagonismtotheAmericanshasbrewedinsomeMexicancitizenssincethecedingofnearhalfoftheirlandtoAmericain1848.OnceJohnGradyandRawlinsstepontoMexico,theymustencounternumerousdifficultiesandvehementresistanceinthatanyimperialagendawouldprobablybe114 expungedinitsencounterwithanti-imperialistpower.Thus,JohnGrady,beingseeminglyinnocentbutessentiallyfilledwithimperialconsciousness,willundoubtedlysufferstrongresistanceinMexico.B.TheEncounterbetweenImperialistandAnti-imperialistPowerinthe“NewFrontier”TheWestwardMovementborewitnesstothegloryofAmericanexpansionanditsrapidgrowthinnationalpower,andreinforcedtheAmericans’beliefinthefrontiermyth.Untiltoday,thefrontierimageryfrequentlyrecursinAmericansocial,politicalandliterarydomain.Inliteraryworks,“thehigherfrontier”invokedbyG.K.O’Neil’seponymousnoveland“thefinalfrontier”madefamousbyStarTrek’sCaptainJamesT.Kirkinthe1970sappropriatedsymbolscentraltothefrontiermyth.Inthe1990s,thefrontierrhetoriconceagainappearedinAmerica’sinvolvementinthePersianGulfWarin1991forexpandingtheoilfrontier.ThefrontierrhetoricevenfounditsexpressionintheaircraftandspacetechnologycompanyBoeing,whichputforward“ForeverNewFrontier”initstwenty-firstcenturyadvertisementcampaign.Noticeably,inJanuary2004,PresidentGeorgeW.BushadvocatedaprogramtoreturnhumanbeingstothemoonandtolandthemonMars.RecallingthediscoveryadventureofLewisMeriwetherandWilliamClarkthatsymbolizedAmericanimpulsetoexplore,Bush,withmuchpassion,said:“Mankindisdrawntotheheavensforthesamereasonwe[Americans]wereoncedrawnintounknownlandsandacrosstheopensea”(qtd.inSturgeon80).ForBush,toexplorespaceistoimproveAmericanlivesandliftsitsnationalspirit.Thefrontierrhetoricinwhateversectorfunctionswithinthedominantcultureasanew“safetyvalve”thatenablesAmericatoitseaseculturalanxietiesaboutthepassingoftheoldfrontieranddivertsitsattentionfromtheextantsocialproblems.Nonetheless,itforcefullyexportsajustificationforAmericanimperialismandsolidifiesitssuperpowerstatusbeyonditsnationalborder.McCarthy,togetherwithhiscontemporarywriters,mighthavediscernedthe115 trickyappropriationsofthefrontierrhetoricinAmericansocialandpoliticalaffairstojustifyAmericanimperialismandsensitivelyrespondedtosuchphenomenainhiswritings.McCarthymighthaveseenthroughthephenomenonthatAmerica’sinterventionintoothercountries’domesticaffairsinthenameofspreadingitsso-calleduniversalvaluesofdemocracy,freedomandlibertyingrainedintheAmericannationalcharacterisnothingbutanextensionofthenineteenth-centuryfrontierideology.However,timeschangesandsituationdiffers.WhatAmericafacesintheneweraisnotthedocileandvulnerablecountriesatitsdisposal.Forthecontinuedre-emergencesofAmericanimperialism,whichrelyonthefrontierrhetorictojustifyitsexistence,McCarthydoesnotnodhisagreement.Thus,inAllthePrettyHorses,McCarthy’sarrangementofJohnGradyCole’sfrustratedexperienceinMexicoimpliesthatanyimperialactionwouldsufferanti-imperialistresistanceinreality.AndhencehewarnshisfellowsthattheWestwardMovementhadalreadyreacheditslimitandtheAmericansarebeyondtheirabilitytoreplayandre-invigoratethefrontiermyth.Indoingso,McCarthymakesrevisionstowhatRaymondWilliamscalls“structuresoffeeling”harboringinthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannation.MaryMcBrideLascopointsoutJohnGrady’sjourneytoMexicoisnotsomuchancoming-to-ageadventureas“acalculatedattemptatconquest,onethatitismotivatedbyanimperialistagendabutconcealedbyanappearanceofinnocentintentions”(21).Indeed,asdiscussedabove,JohnGradyappearsinnocentduetohislossoffamilyranchandbreakupwithhisgirlfriend.Hebecomesmuchlike“thevanishingAmerican”usedbyLeslieA.FieldlertodesignatethenativeIndians,sincetheWesternTexas,wherehehaslivedforsixteenyears,wasonceoneof“thelastbastionsoftraditionalpastoralisminAmerica,”butnowis“awastelandofoilderricks”(Cawelti,“CormacMcCarthy”172).Furthermore,JohnGradyisgivenaborrowedidentityinhisfather’sanalogyofcowboystothedisappearingComanches.PatriciaNelsonLimerickanalyzesthejustificationofseekingotherfrontiersforranchersandcowboyswhoresistedtheencroachmentofindustrializationandwrites:itis“inafamiliarmethodofborrowedidentity”thatthey“castthemselvesasthe116 nativesresistinginvasion”(Legacy158).JohnGrady,givenbyhisfathera“borrowedidentity,”islegitimatetoexplorehisself-envisioned“NewFrontier”Mexico.HelookslikewesteringAmericanswhowerehardly“criminals”but“pioneers”(Limerick,Legacy36).McCarthy’sdepictionintheearlypartofthenovelcolorsJohnGrady’sself-chosenroleasa“pioneer”withtheimperialisthues.JohnGradyandhispalarereferredtoas“thieves”(Horses30).Likeyoung“thievesinaglowingorchard,”writesMcCarthy,theyloosely“jacketedagainstthecoldandtenthousandworldsforthechoosing”(30).Therepetitivecomparisonsoftheguysto“thieves”dethronethemfromthelegitimate,innocentandhighmoralgroundthetraditionalWesternheroesoccupyandsuggestthattheyarejustliketheAnglo-AmericancolonizerswhomassivelytrespassedintothefrontierandforcefullyplunderedthelandofthenativeIndiansunchartedontheAmericanmap.MuchinthesamewaythattheirforefathersclaimedtheunmappedWesternlandwherethenativeIndianspopulated,RawlinsandJohnGradyperceiveMexicoasanunchartedareatowhichtheyhavetheright.OntheirwaytoMexico,Rawlins,forfearthattheymaylosetheirway,seeksonanoilcompanymaptheplacetheyareheadingforandasksJohnGradywhereMexicoislocatedonit.Rawlins,afteracarefulexaminationofthemap,assessesthatMexicohasnot“beenmapped”anditisnot“downthere”(McCarthy,Horses34).Maps,assourcesofpowerthroughknowledge,imposeorderontheunknownareaandbringasubjectivegazeattheunchartedspacebecausetheycommonlyeliminate,falsifyandevendistortspecificdetailstoimprovetheirefficacytowardsaparticularendthatisoftenpoliticallyandideologicallymotivated.Withtheaidofmaps,map-usersseewhatneedstobeseen.Rawlins’attempttofindthelocationofMexicoonthemapillustratestheirjourneytoMexicoispropelledbyahiddenaimofimperialconquest.AsM.H.Edneyassuresus,maps“definetheempireitself”andgiveit“territorialintegrityanditsbasicexistence”(2).Ontheonehand,thedisputebetweenRawlinsandJohnGradyoverthelocationofMexicoonthemapdemonstratesthattheyintendtomaketheirjourneytoMexicosmoothinthewaythatmapsoncehelpedtheirforefatherstoadvancethe117 constructionoftheAmericanempireintheoldWest;ontheotherhand,theoilcompanymaptheyrefertoenablesthemtoenterintopartnershipwithitscartographersoverthehegemonicassumptionssuchavisualrepresentationensues.Thispartnershipreflectsthepowerofgazetheysharewithmakersoftheoilcompanymap.Thedifferencebetweenthemliesintheobjectstheygazeat.MakersoftheoilcompanymapgazeattheWesternTexanlandwhichtheyconsiderasanunexploredterraintobefilledbytheindustrialproductionofoil,whileJohnGradyandRawlinsperceiveMexicoasanemptyspacetoinscribethescriptofpersonalknowledgeandnationalexperienceatlargeandtoseekremediestotheirlossoflandinTexas.Byandlarge,theirself-righteousclaimofhavingnomaptorecordMexicanterritoryimpliesthatMexico,withouthistoricalandculturalpast,isanopenlandwheretheycanleavetheirpermanentmarksonitslandscape.AsopposedtotheunmarkedMexicanlandscape,Americanlandiswell-mapped.WhenRawlinslooksatthemap,hesees“roadsandriversandtownsontheAmericansideofthemapasfarsouthastheRioGrande”(McCarthy,Horses34).BeyondtheRioGrande,whichseparatesAmericaandMexico,Rawlinssees“all”is“white”(34).Well-mappedAmericanolongerleavesthespaceforthedisplacedcowboys;whereas,Mexico,asanunchartedarea,promisesthemgreatpotentialstoexploreandrepresentitinanAmericanizedway.AccordingtoBenedictAnderson,themapisanimportantmeansforimperialiststomouldcolonies.Hedescribestheimpositionofthecolonialeyeonthepre-colonialconceptoflandthroughmappingandpointsoutthatthebird’s-eyeconceptofmappinginwhichtherelationshipbetweenplacesispresentedasascaledrepresentationofthegeographicaldistancesbetweenlocationsisaWesternconcept.Withthisconceptinmind,thecolonialistswereontheirmarch“toputspaceunderthesamesurveillancewhichthecensus-makersweretryingtoimposeonpersons.Triangulationbytriangulation,warbywar,treatybytreaty,thealignmentofmapandpowerproceeded”(Anderson173).Liketheformercolonialistswhousedmapstoadvancetheircolonizingprocess,Rawlins’referencetomapexplicitlyreflectsAmericancowboys’journeytoMexicoisnothingbutdesireforcolonialcontrolsincemaps,asmuchasgunsandwarships,“havebeentheweaponsof118 imperialism”(Harley,“Maps”57).J.B.Harleyobservestheideologicalandsocialmeaningsinmapsandclarifiesthestepsinmakingamap:“selection,omission,simplification,classification,thecreationofhierarchies,and‘symbolization’”(“Deconstructing”11).Allthesestepsare“inherentlyrhetoric”and“signifysubjectivehumanpurposes”becausethemapmakersalwaysdelete“thosefeaturesoftheworldthatlieoutsidethepurposeoftheimmediatediscourse”(Harley,“Deconstructing”11).Forthecolonialists,themapmakesuniformtherelationsofeveryunitofspaceandflattensthecomplexsocialspaceofthecolonizedterritory.Inthisway,themaphelpsthemsubsumethecolonizedterritoryunderitsuniversalgeographicalstability,whichinturnfortifiestheircontroloverthecolonized.Viewedfromthisperspective,McCarthy’smaphastwo-foldmeanings.First,theabsenceofMexicofromRawlins’maprevealsAmericancowboys’attitudetowardMexicoisanimperialoneinthatthey,thoughassumingthatitisaprimitivelandthatcanresistincorporationintoAmericanindustrialization,essentiallyfollowthelogicofputtingMexicoonthemapthroughtheirexpeditionastheAmericancolonizersoncedid.Second,itforeshadowsthewould-befailureoftheircolonizingjourneysincetheyaredeprivedofthemapthatdelineatesthedirectionsofnewterritories,theimportantpotentialresourcesforthecowboylifeandtheperilsindaystocome.Whendiscussingthefunctionofthemapinimperialexpansionandcolonization,RichardPhilipspointsoutthatthecolonialists“findthemselvesoffthemap”(77).Indoingso,thecolonizersprojecttheircolonialdesiresontoemptyspacesandunchartedareasonwhichtheycanimposetheirculturalnormsbychartingcoloniesontheirimperialmap.JohnGradyandRawlinsresembletheAnglo-AmericancolonialistsofthenineteenthcenturywhodeniedlandrightforthenativeIndianswhileemphasizingthenobleanddemocraticidealsbehindtheirmotivationforcirclingtheWesternfrontierontheirmapinchbyinch.Onthesurfacelevel,JohnGradyistofindaphysicalspaceinMexicowherehecanbeaccommodated.AsHenriLefebvreargues,spaceismistakenlyunderstoodtosimplybeacontainer;rather,itissomethingproduced.Infact,“spaceisnotapreexistingvoid,endowedwithformal119 propertiesalone.Tocriticizeandrejectabsolutespaceissimplytorefuseaparticularrepresentation”(Lefebvre170).Otherwisestated,spaceisnotmerelyaphysical,staticandcodifiedone,butfilledwithspiritual,psychologicalandideologicalimplications.Viewedfromthissense,JohnGradyessentiallytriestoregainaculturalorsocialspacewherehiscowboyskillscanbehighlyappreciated,sothathecanturncowboycodesintoMichelFoucault’s“truthandknowledge.”Whatheseeksisasurrogatespacewherehecanre-inventa“discoursecommunity”forthecirculationofknowledgeaboutAmericancowboyculture.Thus,beyondsimplytakingspiritualrefugeinMexico,JohnGradyplaystheroleofaculturalimperialistwhointendstotransplantthecultureofsuzerainstateontothecolony.Unbeknownsttohimthathisunconsciousimperialmotivationwillwreakhavoc,JohnGrady,togetherwithRawlins,ridesintoMexicoduetoasenseofruggednationalismunwittinglyfortifiedbyfrontierideology.Thetwopals’encounterwithaself-claimedcowboyJimmyBlevinsonthewaytoMexicoprovidesachanceforthemtoreassertAmericannationalismmainlyresponsibleforAmerica’sjustificationforitsimperialexpansion.TheyholddisparateviewsonwhetherornottheyshalltakeBlevinswiththem.RawlinsasksBlevinswhyheissuitabletobetheirpalandsays:“Whatthehellwouldwewantyouwithusfor?”towhichBlevinsreplies:“CauseIamanAmerican”(McCarthy,Horses45).Uponhearingthisreply,Rawlins,whoinitiallywarnsJohnGradyofthedangersoftakingBlevinswiththem,immediatelykeepssilentandacceptshim.ThetacitagreementonbeingAmericanmeansthattheyareAmericanAdamsfreeofaspeckledpastandabletomoldanillimitable“Self”upon“Other”inanywaytheychoose.Toform“Self”impliestofind“Other”forreferenceordifferentiate“Self”from“Other.”McCarthy’sevocationofthe“Other”forJohnGradyandhispalsisMexico.Thus,whatremainsfirmandconstantinJohnGrady’sbonesisthemotivationforimperialconquestbyinscribingAmericancowboycultureonMexicanterritorysincethecowboy,asapowerfulbeingwhoforcesotherstosuccumbtohisviewofjusticeandfreedom,is“aclearrepresentativesymbolofimperialismandaninappropriateimagetopresenttodemocraticcitizens”(Malphurs188).120 Later,JohnGradyfurtherpetrifiestheimageofaculturalcolonizerinaconversationwithLaceyRawlinswhothinksthattherewillbeabunchofthingsforthemtogetinMexico.JohnGradyagreeswithRawlinsbysaying:“That’s[abunchofthings]whatIamherefor”(McCarthy,Horses59).HisassertionrendershisstruggleformaterialwealthandintentionofenergizingthefrontiermythinMexico.JohnGradyessentiallycovetsMexicoforitspotentialstoestablishacowboycolonythere.Inhiseyes,Mexicoanditscitizensfallshortofprogressandcivilization.UponmeetingagroupofMexicanzacateros,JohnGradyshowcontemptforthemandrefusestotalktothemeveniftheyshownohostility.FocalizingthroughJohnGrady,thenarratorusessuchadjectivesas“wild,”“strange”and“dark”todescribetheMexicanswho“smelledofsmokeandtallowandsweatandtheylookedaswildandstrangeasthecountrytheywerein”(61-62).EvidentinthisnarrationareJohnGrady’sdenigrationbetween“Self”and“Other”andhisdebasementof“Other”thathavebecomethe“politicalunconscious”ofracismsimmeringinthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannation.Moreover,hisdemarcationbetween“Self”and“Other”delineatestheconcealedparametersofhisownracialistandimperialistcognitiveparadigm.Thus,regardingwhetherornotheshouldhelpBlevinsstealbackhishorsefromtheMexicansconsideredrelativelyuncivilizedandimmoral,JohnGradyfeelsthathehasthemissiontotakejusticeandlawintohisownhandsbecausethefrontierculturethatnurtureshimalwaysremindstheAmericansof“theirsenseofmission,theneedforaction,andtheirjustcause”(Aquila196).Outofhisexpectation,thisincidentbecomesanexcuseforRocha,theowneroftheranchJohnGradyandRawlinsworkforinMexico,toreportthemtotheMexicanauthoritiesthatinitiatethefierceanti-imperialistresistanceagainstthem.Inshort,JohnGradyrepresentsAmerica’simperialistpowerintendingtoexplore“afurtherfrontier,amythicspacebeyondthefrontier,amythicspacebeyondtheWesternlandscapeandAmericanhistory—whosepossibilitieshavebeenthoroughlyusedup”(Slotkin,“MythicSpace”279).HisfalsebeliefinthemythicalWestisthenegativelegacyofAmericanfrontiercultureinthenineteenthcenturyandepitomizesRaymondWilliams’“structuresoffeeling”whichreferstothegeneralfeelingand121 sharedpsychologicalandemotionalexperienceembodiedbypeopleataparticulartimeinaspecificplace.InRaymondWilliams’explanationof“structuresoffeeling,”theyaredifferentfrommoreformalconceptof“world-view”or“ideology.”Methodologically,“structuresoffeeling,”ashypothesesappliedtoanalyzesocialfeaturesofaparticularhistoricalperiod,have“aspecialrelevancetoartandliterature”(Williams133).Williamscreativelyappliestheanalysisof“structuresoffeeling”tothenineteenth-centuryBritishIndustrial.Hearguesthat“structuresoffeeling”ofBritishwritersatthattimewereconsistentwiththecorevaluesofthemiddlebourgeoisie.Forinstance,ifthecharacterencounteredtheconflictbetweenpracticalexperienceandmoralorethicalvalues,theconflictwasresolvedbytakingflightfromhomelandtoBritishoverseacolonies.Insuchcircumstances,theoverseacoloniesnotonlybecamethefirstandforemostplaceforthefrustratedtoachieverebirth,butalsoofferedanidealizedparadiseforthelow-classpeopletomakefortunes.Thus,arrangingthefrustratedtoBritishoverseacoloniesbecameaneffectivetunnelforwriterstoimaginativelysolvethedomesticproblemsorsocialconflicts,whichinturngavebirthtoits“structuresoffeeling.”Thisverystructureinevitablystrengthenedtheinterestsofthemiddlebourgeoisclasswhoreliedonimperialexperiencetodissipatethesocialandethicalconflictsandsubsequentlysustainedthedominantideology.InspiredbyRaymondWilliams’thought-provokingconceptof“structuresoffeeling”inanalyzingBritishIndustrialnovels,wearguethatifBritishoverseacoloniesinthenineteenthcenturyplayedanimportantroleinBritishaccumulationofcapitalwhichpavedthewayforitsIndustrialRevolutionandconsolidateditssocialstability,thentheWesternfrontierofthenineteenthcenturyasasocial“safetyvalve”alsoperformedthesameroleinengaginginAmerica’simperialconquestoftheWest,stabilizingAmericansocietyandpromotingitseconomy.“Structuresoffeeling”reflectedbytheWesterngenreinthatperiodgenerallycametotermswithfrontierideologywhichchampionedprogress,freedom,individualism,democracy,rebirth,andmanifestexpansionentitledbyGod.However,hardlywerethepracticalexperienceoffrustration,harshness,enslavementoftheblacksandimperialconquest122 ofthenativeIndiansmentioned,norweretheseunjustphenomenaacknowledged.Besides,theseunknownaspectsdidnotreachedcommonpeopleviathepopularityoftheWesterns,dimenovelsandtheWildWestShow.Instead,nowtheseculturalartifacts,workingastheculturalIdeologicalStateApparatus,havecontinuedtoforgemanyAmericans’sharedpsychologicaloremotionalfeelingsofoptimism,nationalism,unbridledexpansionandfreedomofself-choicewhichcollectivelyconstituted“structuresoffeeling”atthatspecifichistoricaltime.Inthisway,such“structuresoffeeling”misledmostAmericanstoturnablindeyetothecolonizingexperienceofAmerica.Here,aglimpseoftheliteraryworksduringthenineteenthcenturywillsufficientlyillustratethispoint.Duringthenineteenthcentury,Westernwriters,likeMeriwetherLewis,WilliamClark,JamesFenimoreCooper,tonamebutafew,playedtheirduepartinproducingsuch“structuresoffeeling.”Theirworks,celebratingtheconceptofManifestDestiny,verifiedtheAmericanexpansionfromtheAtlanticOceantothePacificOcean.Forinstance,TheOriginalJournaloftheLewisandClarkExpedition,1804-1806byClarkandLewiswhowereappointedbyPresidentThomasJeffersontoformtheCorpsofDiscoveryoftheNorthwestrecordsthegeographyofthevastWest,theircontactswiththenativeIndiansandthefolkloreintheWesternfrontier.AlltheirrecordingsprovedtobeinstructiveintheWestwardMovement.Moreimportantly,theconfirmationofgeographicalterritoryfomentedAmerica’sexpansionistawarenessthatfacilitatedtheopeningofatraderoadfromtheAtlanticOceantothePacificOceanandeventriggereditsambitiontofindthewaytoChinaandIndian.Besides,thefederalgovernmentinalliancewithtradecompaniesgainedimmeasurableeconomicbenefitsthatsubstantiallyfurtheredAmerica’sfrontierexplorationanditsimperialexpansion.Bysettingapersuasiveexampleofsuccessbeforetheirfellows,Lewis’andClark’stravelogueconvincedthatgoingWest,asarewardingexperience,wassynonymouswithbeingself-dependent,hard-working,optimisticanddemocratic.Gradually,withthebirthofCooper’sinfluentialromancestheLeatherstockingTales,theAmericansatthattimespontaneouslyinternalized“structuresoffeeling”featuringthenaturalrightforland,freedom,rebirth,successandotherpositivevalues;123 meanwhile,theyalsoreinforcedracialprejudicesagainstthenon-whitesandhenceconferredagreementandvalidationontheprevalenceofAmericancolonizationandimperialism.Eventoday,sostronglyhastheculturalweightofthefrontierbeenfeltthatmanyAmericansreturntotheWestinpursuitofspiritualrecoveryafterundergoingfrustrationandhardship.Onthewhole,thefrontierexperience,whichhassurvivedthroughcenturies,continuestoforge“structuresoffeeling”ofAmericannationwhichinturnshapeitsnationalvalues.Unexceptionally,duetohisdeepimmersionintovariousIdeologicalStateApparatuseswhichjointlyworktohailhimtoidentifywiththeroleofbeingacowboyandthefrontierdoctrines,JohnGradyunconsciouslyharbors“structuresoffeelings”handeddowntomanyAmericanssincethenineteenthcenturyonwards.ButMcCarthydoesnotmakesuch“structuresoffeeling”completelyconsistentwiththedominantideology,butpositionsthemintoopposition,oratleastquestionstheirunreasonableaspects.BymakingJohnGrady’sjourneyintoMexicosuffersanti-imperialistresistance,McCarthycallsintoquestion“structuresoffeeling”breedingandevengoingawryinthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannation.Firstly,McCarthyreplacestherebirthoftheAmericancowboywithanunfortunatebeginningofJohnGrady’slife.Americancowboys’misfortunesbeginsoonaftertheirsouthwardjourney.IntheWestern,thelandscape,throughwhichtheheroestravel,hasthepowerto“exemplifyinvisualimagesthethematicconflictbetweencivilizationandsavagery”(Cawelti,TheSix-Gun24).TheMexicanlandscape,asindicatedbytheheavystorm,ishostiletoAmericanintruders.TheharshclimateintheMexicanlandscapeactslikealivingpersonagainsttheintruderswhowilldisturbitsnaturalexistence.JimmyBlevins,frightenedbythestorm,attemptstoescapetheoverwhelminglyantagonisticforceemanatingfromtheMexicanlandscape,onlytolosehishorse,clothesandgun.Gunandhorseareimportantsymbolssignifyingcowboyidentityandrepresenting“thesymbolicreclamationof‘masculinesupremacy’inanindustrialeconomy”(Emmert48).Blevins’lossofallhisbelongingsparallelsthefailureofhisself-conferredcowboyidentityandshattershisarrogantideaofshakingofftheburdenofhis124 tarnishedpast.Inasense,thehostilelandscapeisofvitalsignificanceinthatitnotonlysymbolizesthepunishmentforBlevins’conceitedideathatbeinganAmericanautomaticallygiveshimtherighttodisregardanynationalborderlinewithoutabidingbysocialandculturalconventions,butalsopresagestheill-fatedfutureofthetrioinMexicansociety.However,theypaynoattentiontothepotentialfiercenesstheMexicanlandscapeforebodesforthem,nordotheyhalttheirjourneytoMexico.Proceedingontheirjourney,thetrioweatherunfortunateaccidentswhicharesymbolicofthefierceoppositionfromtheMexicans.Uponencounteringagroupofcandlemakersencampingalongtheroad,theyareofferedaneveningmealbyoneoftheMexicansoutofhospitality.Latter,theirkindnessisreplacedbytheirhostwhoentertainsasinisterschemeforBlevins.TheMexicancastsasexualeyeonBlevinsandmeanstopurchasehimbecausehisblondehairandslightconstitutionelicitanunnaturalandirresistibledesire.Here,byconferringexotictraitsonBlevins,McCarthyreversesexoticismthattheAmericansgenerallygleanfromtheMexicans.JohnGradynotices:“They[Mexicans]didnotlookevil,”buttheygive“nocomfort”(McCarthy,Horses76).ThewildnessandviciousnessharboringintheMexicansdenyAmericancowboystheiridealizednotionthatMexicoisalandofhopeandrebirth.Later,theyareagainputintodangerwhenBlevinsfindsthathislosthorseispossessedbyaMexican.JohnGradydisregardsRawlins’warningandthelegalprovisionsinMexico.Attheriskoflosinghislivesinpursuitofwhatheperceivestobejust,JohnGradysucceedsinreclaimingBlevins’horse.HisactionisreminiscentofthechivalricknightsoftheMiddleAgeswhoprotectedthefemalesandtheoppressedandbroughteviltojustice.Ironically,sugaredbeneathJohnGrady’schivalricbehaviorarethesubsequenthardships.Thus,withgrowinghostilityandresistance,Rawlins’initialpredictionthatsomethingbadisgoingtohappentoJohnGradycomestrue.Whenworkingashorse-breakersontheHaciendadeNuestraSeñoradelaPurísimaConcepción,aMexicanranchownedbyDonHéctorRochayVillareal,JohnGradyandRawlinsareresistedbytheMexicanranchersuspiciousoftheirskillsinbreakinghorses.Theduohaveconfidenceinbreakingsixteenhorseswithinfourdays.125 Theirsuccessinaccomplishingthistoughtasknotonlyprovestheircompetenceasqualifiedcowboys,butalsodemonstratestheirmotivationforinscribingAmericancowboycultureonlaPurísimaandonMexicansocietyatlargeinthesensethatAmericancowboysaremuchadeptatraisingcattleandbreakinghorses.Later,JohnGrady’sexchangewithDonHéctorRochaonhorsespeciesprovidesawindowtoseehismasteryofknowledgeabouthorsesandfurthersuggestshisintentiontobeculturallyacceptedandadmiredinMexico.Inthisway,JohnGrady,apartfromensuringahigherstatusaboveallhisco-workers,canputintopracticehismethodsofbreakinghorseshehaslearnedinTexas.Hisexcellentskillsinhandlinghorsesindeedattractattentionfromtheneighboringpeople.Oneafternoon,whenJohnGradyandRawlinscomebackfromthehorse-breakingground,theyareawaitedbypeoplefromneighboringcommunitiestoseetheirspectacularsceneofbreakinghorses.McCarthywrites:“thereweresometwentypeoplestandingaboutlookingatthehorses—women,children,younggirlsandmen—andallwaitingforthemtoreturn”(Horses105).Thehorse-breakingscenebecomesapublicspherewhereJohnGradyshowshisunparalleledAmericanizedskillsinbreakinghorsesandsymbolicallyassertsthesuperiorityofAmericancowboyculture.JohnGrady’sexhibitionofmarkedhorse-breakingskillsistantamounttoakindofculturalimperialism.Culturalimperialismreferstoaprocessinwhichthecolonizersinsistonthenecessitytoenlightenthecultureofthesubjectsandinfiltratetheirself-claimedsuperiorandprogressivecultureintothecolonizedculture.Itisintheprocessofculturalpenetrationthatthecolonizersrealizetheirdominationandcontroloverthecolonized.Differentfromthetraditionalcolonizerswhosetaskwastotakelandandconstructcoloniesinthecolonizedareas,JohnGradyisamoderncolonizerwhomanipulatesthetransplantationofAmericancultureintoMexicanone,sothatthehegemonyofAmericanculturalimperialismissustainedandhencefortified.JohnGrady’shorse-breakingperformanceinvolvesmuchmorethansimpledemonstrationofhiscompetenceasaqualifiedcowboy.Withequalforce,itbecomesaculturalformthatfortifies“theformationofimperialattitudes,references,andexperiences”(Said,Culturexii).126 Inreality,anyimperialistwhoresortstoculturalformstoestablishanimperialcauseisdestinedtoberesisted.Likewise,JohnGradyfacesthissituation.Again,takingthespectacleofhishorse-breakingasanillustration,wefindthathisspectatorsareneithervaquerosnormenofthelabor-readyage,butchildren,women,theelderlyandtheyoungadultswhocometowatchhisperformancesimplyoutofcuriosityorforthesakeofentertainment.TheydonothaveafullunderstandingofthesuperiorityofAmericancowboyculture,nordotheyidentifywithit.Instead,theychangethehorse-breakingsceneintoacommunalgatheringoracarnivalinwhichafestiveambiencefilledwithbonfires,music,danceanddrinkingtakesshape.AnunexpectedsilencesubstitutestheapplauseJohnGrady’sspectacularperformancewouldbringtohimanddisruptsthesender-receivercommunicativemode,thusprotectingtheMexicanwatchersfrombecomingthetargetsofimperialculturalpenetration.Inthisway,JohnGradyencountersanti-imperialistpowerasindicatedbytheMexicanmultitude,onlyto“circlearoundwithinalargerconstraintofspacethatusuallycannotcontainthem”(Ellis4).AnothersceneinwhichJohnGradyencountersMexicans’anti-imperialistpowerisinthetownofLaVegawhereheandRawlinsracetheirhorsesformoneyandmerriment.Thelocalsreacttothemappropriately:thecampesinos[farmers]afootintheroadwithbasketsofgardenstufforpailscoveredwithcheeseclothwouldpresstotheedgeoftheroadorclimbthroughtheroadsidebrushandcactustowatchwideeyedthehorsemenontheirhorsespassing.(McCarthy,Horses119)Here,McCarthyreversesEdwardSaid’spatternoftheOccidentalversustheOrientalbypositioningJohnGradyandLaceyas“aliens”totheMexicanpeasants.AmericancowboysfromtheSouthwesternAmerica,privilegedbytheirnationalaffiliation,aregazedbythelocals.However,JohnGradyisunawareofthepersistentindifferenceandcontemptfromthelocalsirrespectiveoftheirclassbecausehetakesforgrantedthatMexicoisthe“NewFrontier”forhim.Hemistakenlytakes“structuresoffeeling”nurturedinthenineteenth-centuryAmericaastheembodimentofhis127 existentialvaluesandthecriteriaforhisself-realizationandspiritualregeneration.Thus,hecontinuestofollowhisbigotedcourse,onlytofacethefierceviolenceasaresultofhisdisrespectforthenormsofMexicansociety.McCarthy’sMexicoisnotabountifulsupplyofopenlandthatcanmakecompensationfortheexhaustionoftheAmericanfrontier,norisitanunsulliedterritorythatneedsAmericancowboystoinscribeorderandlawonit.Infact,Mexico,muchlikeitsNorthernneighbor,alsoembarksontheroadtoindustrializationandmodernization.McCarthyhintsthispointbymakingDonHéctorRocha’shaciendaaminiaturecounterparttoAmericansociety.DavidHollowaysuggeststhatlaPurísima’sobjectiverealityis“theindustrialbreedingofhorsesformarket”(191).ThisaspectcanbesensedbyRocha’smodernlifestyle.Rochaemploysmanycowboystoraiseathousandofhorsesonhisranch.ThelargeamountofmoneyearnedbyraisingcattleenableshimtokeepahouseinMexicoCityforhiswifetoliveandfinancehisdaughterAlejandrainhereducationoverseas.Moreover,itaidshiminpossessingaprivateairplanebymeansofwhichhecanflytotheranchforregularinspection.Obviously,itistheindustrializedhorsebreedingforsalethatgivestheranchbaronsomanymodernconveniences.ExceptforitsEden-likesurrounding,laPurísimabearsaremarkableresemblancetotheindustrializedTexasfromwhichJohnGradyhastakenflight.Nevertheless,JohnGradyfailstoseethroughtherealityandstilltakesdelightinhiscowboylife,onlytobesubjectedtocapitalistexploitationAmericancowboysonceexperiencedintheWest.Whatisworse,hegainsafalsesensethatRochahasapartialityforhimwithregardtotheformer’swillingnesstoshareknowledgeabouthorseswithhim.Theyevenreachatacitagreementonhowtoraiseandbreakhorses.Therearetwothingstheyagreeuponwhollybutneverspeakof.Theoneisthat“Godhadputhorsesonearthtoworkcattle”(McCarthy,Horses127).Theotheristhat“otherthancattletherewasnowealthpropertoaman”(127).Rocha’sloveforhorsesisnotamanifestationofbiocentrictreatmentofnon-humanentities,butanillustrationofhisdesireforeconomicbenefits.Theprofit-drivenranchbaronbuyshorsesthroughanunseenagentatthespringsalesinLexingtonandsendshiscowhandstobringthemback.Tellingly,economicbenefitsaretheultimategoal128 fortheoperationofthehacienda.Workinginsuchacapitalisteconomicsystem,JohnGrady,farfromactualizinghisidealizedcowboylife,issubjugatedtothedisciplineofindustrialsocietyfromwhichhetriestoescapeinTexas.Infact,DonHéctorRocha’shaciendais“anever-neverlanddisconnectedfromhistory”(Slotkin,Gunfighter216).Contrarily,itisasymbolofaristocraticpowerforhisfamily.ThehaciendawasbuiltonalandgrantedtoRochabytheMexicangovernment.AsaworkingranchsincetheabdicationoftheMexicanemperor,laPurísimahassurvivedtheMexicanRevolutionandthetwoWorldWars.In1940,toensurethepossessionoflandbythecommonpeople,PresidentCamachograntedlandtooveronemillionofcommunalsharecroppers.Thismove“precludedareturnofthehaciendasystemforbiddingthetransferenceoftitlestoanypersonotherthantheimmediatefamily”(James324).ThepolicyadoptedbyCamacho’sadministrationmadelaPurísimaratheruniqueandreinforceditsexistenceasafamilybusinessonlyavailabletothoseinRocha’sfamilybloodline.DespiteconstantinterventionsfromtheMexicangovernment,despitepressuresfromagriculturalcovetingoflandanddespitegovernmentalaccommodationofpeasantdemands,DonHéctorRochahassuccessfullykepthishaciendaimmunefromtheexternalinterferences.Rocha,inordertoprotecthisfamilyproperty,takesintoaccountsthepotentialthreatsposedbytheoutsiderslikeJohnGradyandRawlins.SohebombardsJohnGradywithquestionsconcerninghisorigin,hometownandmotivationbeforemakingdecisiontoemployhim.HisalertnessreflectstheMexicans’psychologicalostracismfromAmericancowboys.WhendiscoveringthatJohnGradyhasprivatedatewithAlejandra,theonlyheiressofRocha’shacienda,RochaconsidershisbehaviorasapotentialthreattothearistocraticpowertheRochasrepresentandhencetriestoawakenhimfromhisidealism.WhenplayingbilliardwithJohnGrady,RochamakesallusiontoMiguelCervantes’sheroDonQuixote.Hesaysthatthereis“nogreatermonsterthanreason….TheideaofQuixote.ButevenCervantescouldnotenvisionsuchacountryasMexico(McCarthy,Horses146).Rocha’sreferencetoDonQuixotewhoinCervantes’snovelisanidealistandadventurerpursuinghischivalrydreamatawrongtimeaimsatdispellingJohnGrady’sunrealisticloveforAlejandra.Rocha129 continuestoenlightenJohnGradybymentioninganincidentinwhichhisbilliardwasmutilatedbytheFrench.TheFrench,whomadeforcibleentryintoRocha’shouse,stoppedatnoevils.Rocha’sallusionto“theFrench”amountstoassociatingJohnGradywiththeFrenchcolonizerswhointendedtocolonizeMexicointhenameofprotectingitfromotherEuropeancolonistsinthenineteenthcentury.Likeaquixotichero,JohnGradyconsidersthathisrelationshipwithAlejandraisequalandmutualandtheirpossiblemarriagecansaveAlejandrafromthepatriarchaldominationinMexicansociety.Rocha’steachingdoesnotmakesenseforJohnGradybecausehefailstoseetheexclusivityinMexicowhereclassdemarcationisclearlycut.Thelower-classman’sloveforsomeoneequaltoAlejandra’ssocialstatusisunacceptable.Itwouldbeafamilialshameandscandal.Finally,Rocha,inordertoprotecthisaristocraticinterestsandsocialstatus,accusesJohnGradyandRawlinsofstealinghorsesandaidingBlevinstokillthreeMexicansandreportsthemtotheMexicanauthorities.Theyareputintoajailwheretheyareforcedtoinvolveinviolentfightsanddiscoverthatitisbeyondtheirabilitytorecoverorreopenthefrontier.WhattheyfindinMexicoisstilla“‘closed’landscape,possessedbyanaristocraticcultureimpervioustotheallureofthecowboymyth”(Jarrett,Cormac101).ItisinthePeriqueraprisonofSaltillothatJohnGradyandRawlinscometoknowandexperiencecruelandviolentanti-imperialistresistancelurkingintheseeminglyhospitableMexicansociety.TheprisonintowhichJohnGradyisthrownisaself-containeduniversewhichisbothaminiatureofMexicansocietyandamicrocosmofthewholeworldatlarge.Theyarefornogoodreasonenmeshedinkillingsandfights.Afterspendingthefirstdayinfighting,theyareshutupinthecellwithbloodsoakingtheirclothesandwoundsinjuringthem.Theyarelandedintoahorribleworldinwhichindifference,violenceandthelawofthesurvivalofthefittestprevail.TheprisonissymbolicofMexicoallowingnoplacefortheAmericanintruderstorealizetheircowboydream.ForJohnGrady,MexicansocietyisamysterybeyondhisunderstandinginthesamewaythathecannotmakesenseoftheunreasonableviolenceimposedonhiminthePeriqueraprison.Thetycoonofthe130 prisonnamedPérezpointsoutJohnGrady’sunpracticalviewandexplainstohimtotheeffectthatitisbeyondhisunderstandingof“thelife”and“thesituationhere”(McCarthy,Horses188).PérezproceedstomakeJohnGradyawakenfromhisnaivetybysaying“[t]herealfactsarealwaysotherwise”(188).JohnGradydoesnotknowhowthingsoperateinMexicoduetohislackofhistoricalsensethatblindshimtotheanti-AmericansentimentcirculatinginMexico.HismasteryofSpanishdoesnotnecessarilymeanhebearsinmindtheculturalandhistoricalrealitiesofMexico.Thegeographicalbordercanbearbitrarilycrossed,buttheculturalonecannotbeeasilytrespassed.JohnGradymistakenlyopinesthathecanbeacceptedbyorevenvoluntarilyassimilatedintoMexicanculture.Itisquiteunexpectedthatheisviolentlyexcludedandunmercifullybanishedfromhisimaginedcowboyparadise.JohnGrady’sexpulsionislargelyduetohisculturalbiasesnurturedbyAmericanfrontierculturethatadherestotheinvinciblespiritofAmericansinvokedbythecowboyandfrontiermyth.Suchmythsareprejudiced,selectiveandexclusiveastheyarediscursivelyformedtocaterforAmericanimperialfantasy.ManyAmericansfailtoseethispoint,sodoesJohnGradywhoissoenamoredofthemythicalcowboylifethatmighthaveneverexistedintheoldWest.TocitePérez,“[i]tisnotthathe[American]isstupid.Itisthathispictureoftheworldisincomplete….Helooksonlywherehewishestosee”(McCarthy,Horses192).JohnGradyistheepitomeofPérez’scommentontheAmericans.Hislop-sidedviewofMexicoasthe“NewFrontier”toexploreandconqueristriggeredbythecontinuedinterpellativefunctionoffrontierideologythathasfundamentallyshapedmanyAmericans’unshakablebeliefsintheglorioushistoryofthewestwardexpansion.ItisnotthegeographicalrestrictionthatimpedesJohnGrady’sfromrealizinghiscowboydream,buttheclassbarrierandculturalblockadesthatobstructhiswaytobeacceptedinMexico.JohnGradyisanindividualimagebehindwhichliesthedominantideologygivingbirthtoAmericanprideandboosterism.Insteadofbecomingarespectablecowboyinhisimagined“NewFrontier,”JohnGradymuststruggleagainsttheperceivedindifferenceandevilforceinMexico.EvenifevilgoesaboutonitsownlegsinMexico,itsexistenceholdsagroundsofirmthatthelightofreasoncannot131 enlightenitandtheMexicanssimplyadmitthat“[e]vilisatruethinginMexico”(McCarthy,Horses195).Inordertosurviveintheprison,JohnGradymustfightwiththecuchillero.Since“somearrangements”arealwaysmadeinMexico,Rochaprobablyarrangesthecuchillero,whoprovokesfightswithJohnGrady,tokillhim.Thoughsuccessfullydefeatingthecuchillero,JohnGradyisseriouslyinjuredwithbloodsloshinginhisbootsandoozingthroughhisfingers.Evenifheisfacingalife-and-deathsituation,JohnGradystillimagineshissubsequentproposaltoAlejandrawho,inordertobailhimout,promisesherauntAlfonsatobreakherloverelationshipwithhim.Aftertherelease,JohnGradyreturnstolaPurísima,onlytofindthatAlejandrahasalreadygone.WhenknowingthatheandAlejandrawouldneverbetogether,JohnGradydriftsintopensivemelancholy,imagining“thepainoftheworldtobelikesomeformlessparasiticbeingseekingoutthewarmthofhumansoulswhereintoincubate”(257).McCarthy,insteadofglorifyingJohnGrady’sjourneyintoMexico,arrangesforhimtoexperiencestronganti-imperialistresistanceinMexico.Indoingso,McCarthynotonlyrevisesthetraditionalimageofcowboywhowouldwinvictoryoverantagonisticforces,butalsointerrogatestheWesternmythoscreatedbyfrontierideologywhichalignedthecowboyherowithAmerica’sself-image.RichardSlotkin,clarifyingtheideologicalfunctionofthefrontiermyth,arguesthatitsoriginalideologicalfunctionwastojustifytheWestwardMovement.AfterthecompletionofAmericansettlementinthenineteenthcentury,thefrontiermythhasnonethelessbeenappropriatedtoexplainAmerican“rapideconomicgrowth,”“emergenceasapowerfulnation-state,”anddistinctivelyAmericanattitudetoward“thesociallyandculturallydisruptiveprocessofmodernization”(Gunfighter10).Otherwisestated,thefrontierhasbecomeakindofmindsetfortheAmericans.Viewedinthisway,mostAmericans,underthecoercionanddeceptionofAmericannationalmythsthathaveideologicallyfunctionedwellinjustifyingAmericanexpansionismandimperialism,aredestinedtoseekafurtherfrontieroutsidetheirnationalterritory.InAllthePrettyHorses,JohnGradyisatypicalAmericanwhonourishesinhisheartthefrontiermindsetandremainspsychologicallydeep-rootedin“structuresof132 feelings”ofthenineteenthcentury.Such“structuresoffeeling”wereunivocalandtotalizingsocialvaluesinconjunctionwiththedominantideology.Readingbetweenthenarrativelines,wecansensethatfrontierideology,notdyingawaywiththeendoftheWestwardMovement,hassurvivedandembeddeditselfintonewformsintandemwiththeprosperityofcultureindustry.ItiscultureindustrythatprovidesvariousformsofIdeologicalStateApparatusesforthepersistenceoffrontierideologythaturgesJohnGradytounselectivelyassimilateitscorebeliefs.Consequently,hemistakenlyconsiders“structuresoffeeling”imposedonhimbyimperialcultureasindividualpursuitandself-realization.Hisfailuretoprolongcowboycodesandexplorehis“NewFrontier”withpioneeringspiritatteststoabundleofcontradictionsandhypocrisiesinherentinfrontierideology.JohnGradyworksincomplicitywiththeimperialcauseinpromulgatingtheAmericannationalcharacterascodifiedbyTurner’sFrontierThesis.Nevertheless,situationvaries.ItisimpossibleforhimtorejuvenatethevictoryofthewestwardexpansiontowhichAmericancowboyscontributedalot.McCarthy,bymeansoftellingtheabortedcowboydream,intendstotellhisfellowsthattheWestwardMovementhadalreadygoneandAmericashouldnottrespassonthelimitlineoftheWestwardMovementsymbolizedbytheMexican-Americanborderlines.IftheAmericansblindlyfollowthepathofthewestwardexpansionandcontinuetotaketheresidueeffectoffrontierideologyasacompellingcallforAmerica’scontinuedfrontierexpansionoutsideitsterritory,theywoulddefinitelyfailasJohnGradydoes.Thus,bypresentingtheunfortunatelifeandaborteddreamofJohnGrady,McCarthyessentiallydirectshisaccusingpointatAmericanimperialismverifiedbyfrontierideologywhichhasdeceivedAmericansinsubtlewaysintoparticipatinginitsseeminglyjustcause.Inthisway,McCarthymakesamendmentto“structuresoffeeling”whichcloakedtheAmericanimperialexperienceofthenineteenthcenturyandnowinstigatestheAmericans’unconsciousforexpansionandexplorationatwhatevercost.McCarthy’squestioningof“structuresoffeeling”notonlyliesinmakingJohnGrady’sadventureinMexicothebeginningofadoomedlife,butalsoinmakingan133 unexpectedresolutiontoJohnGrady’sidealizedlovewithAlejandra.SlotkinclarifiesfoursuccessivenarrativetropesintheearlyAmericanWesterns,namely,conversion,sacredmarriage,exorcism,andfinallyregenerationthroughviolence(Regeneration179).SacredmarriageaboundsintheWesterngenre.Thisgenre,centeringonaprotagonistwho,withcourage,senseofjusticeandunmatchedskills,journeysintothewildernessandthecivilizationbackandforth,safeguardswhatheholdsdearinhisownwayandfinallymarriesasweetheartafteraseriesoftests.OwenWister’sTheVirginian(1902)setsamodelforthelaterWesternstofollow.Theprotagonist,theVirginian,atypicalcowboy,duetohislackofknowledgeaboutsocialproblems,engageswithsomeevildoings,yetheadherestocowboycodestosolveproblems.AfterexperiencingchallengesfromhisopponentsincludingTrampaswhoproposestoMissMollyStarkWood,agirlcomingfromtheEasttotheWestforteaching,theVirginianregeneratesandwinsMolly’sheart.Similarly,McCarthyborrowsthisformulaicpatterninAllthePrettyHorsesinhispresentationoftheromanticlovebetweenJohnGradyandAlejandra,butheparodiesitbymakingwhatSlotkincalls“sacredmarriage”unavailabletohim.JohnGrady’sloveforAlejandraresultsinthefiercestanti-imperialistresistanceheexperiencesinMexico.JohnGradyatheartrepresentsamodelofculturalimperialismbyhispotentialinvasionintothecultureoftheextantconqueredpeople.AccordingtoFanon,imperialdominationgoessmoothbymanagingto“disruptinspectacularfashiontheculturallifeofaconqueredpeople”(45).JudgedbyFanon’sassertion,JohnGrady’sroleasanimperialistisferretedoutinhisloveaffairwithAlejandra.He,regardlessofclassbarrierandsocialhierarchy,hasloverelationshipwithAlejandrawho,asabetter-educatedaristocraticMexicangirl,isamereobjectenablinghimtoinheritlaPurísimafromRocha.IfJohnGradysucceededinmarryingAlejandra,theonlyheiressofRochaandhishacienda,hewouldprobablyimprintAmericancowboycultureonMexico.Inthisway,hewoulddisrupttheMexicanculturallandscapebymeansoftakingholdofAlejandraandthehacienda.ForJohnGrady,Alejandra,likethemysteriousandexoticMexicanlandscape,isabeautiful,youngandwealthygirl.JuliaV.Emberleyarguesthatoneoftheprevalent134 tropescurrentlymediatingpostcolonialdiscoursesisthemutualreferenceoranalogyofthefemalebodytothelandscape.Thatistosay,thefeminizationofcolonialterritoryisemployedbytherhetoricofimperialismtoimaginethewomanorherbodyasalandscapeinneedofmaleconquestandimperialpenetration.Emberleywrites:InitsmetaphoricalexpressionthistropefigurestheWoman/Bodyasalandscapeofnaturaldesire,theshapeofimperialexpansion;metonymically,theWoman/Body,initsmostfracturedandreifiedform,isdisassembledintoasynecdochicmachinereproducinganoriginaryfantasyofthevirginalsitethatenticesimperialpenetrationandconquest.(95)ExaminedfromEmberley’sview,JohnGrady’ssexualreunionwithAlejandracanbemetonymicallyregardedashispenetrationintohisimagined“NewFrontier”Mexico.TheanalogybetweenMexicoasavirginspaceandAlejandraasavirginbodycanbeillustratedbytheimagerysurroundingthescenewhereJohnGradyhassexualrelationshipwithher.Intheshadowsofmoonlight,JohnGradypullsoffhisclothesandboots,walksintothelakeandsubmergeshimselfinwater.Inthemeantime,heseesAlejandrastandontheshorewiththehorse.Alejandrawalksoutof“herpooledclothing”(McCarthy,Horses141).Shelookslike“sopale,sopale,likeachrysalisemerging”andwalksinto“thewater”(141).ThoughMcCarthywritesnothingdirectabouttheirlove-makingscene,thesexualconnotationisevident.WhenJohnGradypenetratesintoAlejandra’sbodywhichsymbolizestheMexicanlandscapeunderthedominationofanAmericanintruder,McCarthyevokesAlejandra’sMexicannessbyusingsuchwordsas“pale,”“burning,”“foxfire,”“blackhair,”“darkened,”“cold”and“larcenyfortimeandflesh”(141).Here,thesexualconnotationnotonlyhintsthatJohnGradyfemininizesanderoticizesAlejandraintoamysteriousfigurewaitingforhimtoexploreandpossess,butalsomeansthathesymbolicallypenetratesintoMexicancultureassuggestedbyAlejandra’sbodywithMexicanness.Later,Alejandrasneaksintohisbedforninenightsonend.ShemysteriouslyappearsbeforeJohnGrady,“steppingoutofherclothesandslidingcoolandnakedagainsthiminthenarrowbunk”(141).Atthismoment,JohnGradyisfascinatedwith“allsoftnessand135 perfumeandthelushnessofherblackhair”(141).JohnGrady’spenetrationintotheMexicanlandscapethatAlejandra’sbodyrepresentsharksbacktohisforefatherswhoconqueredtheWesternfrontierbyimaginingitasawoman’sbodyforpossession,penetrationandproduction.Inhergroundbreakingworksontheroleofwomeninthefrontierliterature,TheLayoftheLand(1975)andTheLandbeforeHer(1984),AnnetteKolodnypointsoutthattheAmericancolonizersfiguredthevastlandasfemalebodyformaledominationandproduction.Shearguesthat“theAmericanhusbandmanwascastasbothsonandloverinaprimalparadisewherethematernalandtheeroticweretobeharmoniouslyintermingled”(Kolodny,TheLand4).InKolodny’sview,therhetoricofthelandscapeorwildernessasavirginlandhadbeenalongtraditioninAmericanliterature.Itis“relativelycommonplaceforcolonialpromoterstopromiseprospectiveimmigrantsa‘ParadisewithallherVirginbeauties’”(Kolodny,TheLand3).ThistraditionreacheditspeakduringtheWestwardMovementandhadresonanceinTurner’sviewthattheAmericanwildernessopenednewprovincesandengulfednewdemocraciesinhermostdistantdomainswithhermaterialwealth.Similarly,JohnGrady,anillegalimmigrantlabeledbyAlejandraas“mojado-reverso[reversedborder-trespasser],”isenticedbyhisimperialdesiretorewriteAmericanculturalvaluesonMexico(McCarthy,Horses124).Thus,hisrelationtoAlejandraisnodoubtasimperialandmercenaryasitissexual.Infact,JohnGradycannotdifferentiatebetweenhissexualdesireforAlejandraandhisdesirefortheranch.WhenaskedbyRawlinswhetherhecovetsRocha’shacienda,JohnGradyfailstofigureouthistrueintention.Rawlinsaskshim:“yougoteyesforthespread?”towhichhereplies:“Idon’tknow,”and“Iaintthoughtaboutthat”(McCarthy,Horses138).Hisinabilitytoseehisimperialmotivationforacquisitionandexpansioncanbeallboileddowntotheirrationalityof“structuresoffeeling”whichjustifiedAmericansettlementduringthewestwardexpansion.ThoughbarredbysocialandculturaldisparitiesbetweenhimandAlejandra,JohnGradystillstubbornlykeepsrelationshipwithherwithoutconsideringconsequencesitmayincur.AsDiannaC.Lucepertinentlypointsout,JohnGrady’s“fatherhasshownhim136 thatifonecanneitherclaimnorinheritland,hecanmarryit,”evenifhecannotpossesslandinMexicointhewayhisgreat-grandfatherhad(“WhenYouWake”157).Hence,justashisfatheroncemarriedMrs.Colewhoisarancher’sdaughter,JohnGrady’sintentiontomakeaproposaltoAlejandranotmerelywouldrelievehisemotionaltraumacausedbyhisex-girlfriendwhodumpshimandembracesmodernitysymbolizedbyherpresentcar-owningboyfriend,butalsomakeshimbearsimilaritytotheAmericancolonialistswhoseultimatemotivationistoimpregnatetheimperialist“Self”upontheconquered“Other.”McCarthydoesnotallowJohnGradytomarryAlejandraandliveaneverlastinghappylifepopularizedinthetraditionalWesterngenre.Instead,heappropriatestheformulaicpatterninwhichromanticlovecomesintofruitiontorevisethisgenreandhenceinterrogatesitsroleasaformofculturalIdeologicalStateApparatusinblindlyspreadingasetofvaluesthatstipulatedtherolewomenoughttoplaywithoutconsideringtheroletheyactuallyplayedinthewestwardexpansion.Whendiscussingtheromancegenreofthenineteenthcenturyintermsofhowtosolvetheethicalproblembetweengoodandevil,FredricJamesonsuggeststhattheWesterncomesacrosstheethicaldilemma.Toresolvesuchadilemma,writerscanappropriatetheoldgenretorefashionitwithinaspecifichistoricalperiod.Initsemergentandstrongform,“agenreisessentiallyandintrinsicallyanideologyinitsownright”(Jameson,ThePolitical141).Simplyput,re-appropriatedandrefashionedinquiteadifferentsocialandculturalcontext,agenre,asanembodimentofideology,“persistsandmustbefunctionallyrecodedintothenewform”(Jameson,ThePolitical141).Viewedfromthisperspective,McCarthy’srevisionofthetraditionalWesterngenre,asindicatedbyhisreversionofromanticlovetypicalinthetraditionalWestern,notmerelystandsupagainstthisgenreoncedefensivelyresonatingwithfrontierideology,butalsomakeseffectivethesociopoliticalcriticalfunctionofcontemporaryAmericanWesterns.Inthisway,McCarthysideswithNewWesternhistorianswhohighlyappreciatethere-historiographyoftheWesttosquarelyfacetheirredeemableatrocitiesofAmericancolonizationandmasculinedominanceinthewestwardexpansionanditscontinuedculturalimperialisminflicteduponthenon-Americans137 withinandbeyondthisregion.UnlikehiscontemporarieslikeLeslieMarmonSilkoandN.ScottMomadaywhotaketheIndiantribesandtheirculturesasnarrativefocusestolampoonAmericanculturalimperialismintheAmericanSouthwest,McCarthy,bymakingMexicohisgeographicalsettinginhisWesterns,aimsatdivertingourattentiontoAmerica’soverseaculturalimperialismwiththeaidofthefrontierrhetoric.MexicobecomesthelensthroughwhichheperceivesAmericanculturalhegemonyinthecontemporarytime.ToquoteRochawhoconstantlyremindsJohnGrady,“onecountryisnotanothercountry”(McCarthy,Horses145).Mexico,definedbyitshistoricalandsocialpast,isaplacewherethoseinpowercanmaketruthanddriveawaytheunfriendlyintruders.JohnGrady,asadisplacedcowboyfilledwithimperialdesire,doesnothavethepowertoimposehistruthaboutAmericancowboycultureontoMexicowheretheMexicans“canmakethetruth”intheirdiscourseofcommunities(168).Hence,hisimperialendeavortobringthetruthAmericancowboysrepresenttoMexicoworksnoavail,butmakeshimselfinjuredanddisappointed.JohnGrady,apartfromfacingopposingforceintheformofphysicalviolencethatbelongstowhatSlavjoŽižekcalls“subjectiveviolence”typifiedbymurderandmassacre,alsoencountersanti-imperialistresistanceembodiedbyŽižek’s“systemicviolence”(Violence8-9).“Systemicviolence”referstoincitement,sexualdiscrimination,repressionandintimidatingwarnings.InJohnGrady’scase,systemicviolencemainlycomesfromhisencounterwithAlejandra’sauntDueñaAlfonsa.NarratingherunfortunatepasttoJohnGrady,AlfonsapurportstomakehimknowtherulesgoverningtheoperationofMexicansociety.ShetellsJohnGradythatitwillbringdamagetoAlejandraanddeputationtoherwholefamilyifsheisseenridinghorsealonewithhim.Shecontinuestosay:“youmustunderstand....Hereawoman’sreputationisallshehas”(McCarthy,Horses136).AlfonsatriestomakeJohnGradyunderstand:“thereisnoforgiveness....Amanmaylosehishonorandregainitagain.Butawomancannot”(137).EvenifJohnGradydeclareshisinnocenceofridingalonewithAlejandra,thedomineeringauntexplainsthatitisnotaquestionofhisorAlejandra’sdesire,norisitamatterofasenseofrightorwrong,but“amatterofwho138 mustsay”(137).Inthismatter,itisDueñaAlfonsawhohasthefinalsay,andbyextensionitisthecastesocietyofMexicothathasthefinaljudgment.Alfonsa’sstatementbecomesakindofsystemicviolenceinthesensethatitisaninvisibleembodimentofanti-imperialistpowerthatforcesJohnGradytoacknowledgethetruthinMexicoanddisciplineshissoultofollowtheculturalandsocialnormsofMexico.Inthisway,systemicviolenceJohnGradyencountersperformstheroleparalleltothatofMichelFoucault’sdiscoursewhichpromotesthecirculationofknowledgeandtruthandreinforcesanti-imperialistpowertheMexicanspossess.Alfonsa’sstatement,which,accordingtoFoucault,constitutesthebasicunitofdiscourse,revealsthedisciplinarypowerorinviolableregulationinMexico.Foucaultarguesthatstatement“circulates,isused,disappears,allowsorpreventstherealizationofadesire,servesorresistsvariousinterests,participatesinchallengeandstruggle,andbecomesathemeofappropriationorrivalry”(Archeology105).ItisobviousthatAlfonsa’sstatementistoprotectAlejandra’sinterestsandbyextensiontomakeMexicancultureexclusivetotheintrusionofanyforeigncultureandkeepundisrupteditscastesociety.Infact,JohnGradyisfallibleofnegatingwhatFranzFanoncalls“nationalreality”inMexico(236).Alfonsa,unliketheCaptainwhousessubjectiveviolencetoexpelJohnGrady’sidealism,resortstosystemicviolencetoachievethesameeffect.Indoingso,sheinitiatespreemptivedominationoverandstrongresistanceagainstJohnGrady.JohnGrady’smistakeliesinhisunwittinglyidealisticbutboosterishassumptionthatAmericanfrontierculturecanbetransplantedintoMexico.HetriestoacquirethehaciendabymeansofmarryingAlejandra,butheneglectsthefact“Mexico’scattleindustry,muchlikethatintheUnitedStates,wasanintegralpartofadevelopingfrontiertraditionofindividualdominance”(MachadoJr.65).Hence,anyonewhohasdesignsonpossessingothermen’sranchingbusinessmustbestronglyopposed,letaloneJohnGradywhoisatrueimperialistincloak.JohnGradytakesforgrantedthatMexicoplaystheroleof“safetyvalve”astheWestdidintheWestwardMovement.However,whatawaitshiminMexicoisnotalandofhope,chance,individualismandfreedomfeaturingtheAmericannationalcharacterinTurner’shindsightyetpartially139 wrongview,butanoceanofbitterness,baleandbetrayal.InAllthePrettyHorses,theproblemsleftbythetroublingrelationshipbetweenAmericaandMexicohavealreadyrundeepinthemindsofpeopleonbothsides.AmericanimperialistslikeJohnGradyslaveroverthingstheylackinAmericaandadoptviciousmeanstoquenchtheirdesire,onlytomeetfierceresistance.Finally,JohnGradyisrefusedbyAlejandrawho,firmlystickingtoherMexicanculturalheritage,ruthlesslydenieshimtheaccesstoherinnermostthought.HisrejectionbyAlejandra,symbolizingtheabortionofAmericanculturalimperialism,runscountertofrontierideologythathaswronglystructuredasocialfantasythattheWestwasandisstillanelixirforalleviatingindustrialconflictsandhealingallkindsofsocialills.Suchanideology,thoughnotdominantinJohnGrady’stime,iscirculatedbytheoperationofIdeologicalStateApparatuses,whichinturnmisleadinglyhailstheAmericanstoidentifywiththenineteenth-century“structuresoffeeling.”Tellingly,McCarthydoesnotglorifysuch“structuresoffeeling.”Onthecontrary,hisdepictionofJohnGradywhoencountersanti-imperialistpowerinthe“NewFrontier”MexicoreversesthefrontierandcowboymyththatcomprisethelargebulkofthemythoftheWestandbehooveshisfellowstointerrogatetheideologicalassumptionstiedwiththesenationalmyths.Indoingso,McCarthywarnstheAmericansagainsttheinterpellativefunctionoffrontierideologywhichnowfallsbackonthefrontierrhetorictovalidateAmericanimperialexpansionandculturalhegemonyacrosstheglobeandwithequalforcepredictsthatanyimperialistpowerwouldnotsustaininitsencounterwithanti-imperialistpower.C.TheDisillusionmentoftheImperialDreaminthe“NewFrontier”NohistoricaleventhasexertedsoprofoundaninfluenceontheAmericannationalcharacterastheWestwardMovement.AsRichardW.Slattapointsout,“[g]iventhecentralityofexceptionalism,individualismandviolence,thecontinued140 appealoffrontiermythshasrealconsequencesforAmericanpublicpolicy”(86).WhenAmericaisfacingexternalenemiesorinternalconflicts,politiciansmoreoftenthannotresorttothefrontierimagerytoboostAmericandesiretotakeactionsoastoshoreupitspolitical,socialanddemocraticideasandkeepout“Other”thatwoulddisaffirmitscommitmenttothegeneralwarfareofmankind.Inthisway,thefrontiermindsetandthepopularityoffrontierideologygainmomentum.WithvariousformsofIdeologicalStateApparatusespenetratingintopeople’sdailylife,frontierideologydoesnotdieawaywiththeclosureofAmericanfrontier.Rather,itbecomesakindofpowerfulideologicalresiduehardtoberinsedoutandcontinuestospeakforAmericanimperialwarsagainstothercountries.SomeAmericans,livinginthesocietywhereAnglo-Saxonismtakesdeeproot,unavoidablyturnablindeyetotheirprovincialismandbigotryandevenneverhesitatetoparticipateinAmericanimperialactivities.WilliamApplemanWilliamswroteofimperialismasbeing“intrinsicallyour[American]wayoflife”(ix).InAllthePrettyHorses,JohnGrady’sbehavioristhebestfootnotetosuchalife,andremindsusthatAmericanimperialismhasdevelopedintoanideologicaltropeconceptuallystructuringAmericansocialreality.McCarthydoesnotagreeaboutAmericanimperialism,nordoesheholdanambivalentattitudetowardsAmericanimperialactsashedoesinBloodMeridian.Instead,hemakesplaintheimperialcauseJohnGradyunwittinglycarriesforwardinthe“NewFrontier”Mexicoandbreakshisimperialdreamintopieces.Indoingso,McCarthykeepsatbayAmericanimperialismthatfrontierideologyhasalwaysrationalizedinitshistoricalprocess.InAllthePrettyHorses,McCarthyre-enchantstheMexicanlandscapeanddelineatesitasamythicalspacebeyondJohnGrady’smastery.Itisoutofhisexpectationthatsuchamythicalspacebecomestheplacewherehisimperialdreamistobeshattered.UnlikethetraditionalviewofthelandscapeinAmericanfrontierliteraturethat“thelandwas‘deplete’”and“exhausted,”McCarthy’sdescriptionoftheMexicanlandscapeisdeeplyatoddswiththefrontierlandscapewhichwasencoded,demarcatedanddecomposedintogeographicalsections(Cook199).UponenteringMexico,JohnGradyandRawlinsseebelowthemthemagnificentMexicanlandscape141 ofwhichtheyhavebeentold.TheyhaveneverseensuchabeautifulandvigorouslandscapeinAmericaandhencearedeceivedintobelievingthattheyhavefoundtheircowboyparadise.McCarthywrites:Thegrasslandslayinadeepviolethazeandtothewestthinflightsofwaterfowlweremovingnorthbeforethesunsetinthedeepredgalleriesunderthecloudbankslikeschoolfishinaburningseaandontheforelandplaintheysawvaquerosdrivingcattlebeforethemthroughagauzeofgoldendust.(Horses93)TheMexicanlandscapeleavesanEden-likeimpressiononJohnGradyandmakeshimfalselybelievethathewouldhavefreedomandenjoycowboyfunmadeimpossiblebythestricturesofAmericanindustrialization.Heissodeeplyobsessedwiththespectacularlandscapethathewouldliketostaytherefor“ahundredyears”(96).Byimplication,hiswillingnesstostayinMexicoforacenturyuncovershismotivationforexploringhiscowboyfrontierandde-mythologizingitsnaturallandscape,sothattheoldfrontier,asafantasizedplacewheretheimageofAmericawaswrestedfromjaggedlymountainsandvastplains,canberemodeledthere.JohnGrady,ashisforefathersoncedidintheWesternfrontier,ineffect,aimstodisenchantandincorporatetheMexicanlandscapeintoAmericanimperialmaponwhicheveryinchoflandisencodedandchartedintopermanentplaceswithsocial,historicalandculturalsignificance.TheexplorationoftheWesternfrontierbytheearlyAmericanswastotamethewildnaturebymeansofaseriesofrelatedpracticaloperationsaimingtodemythologize,secularizeordisenchantsomemythicalormagicalelementsinherentinnature.Withtheintensificationofdisenchantingthenaturallandscape,WesternerswroteamildversionofAmerica’simperialconquestofnatureandthenativeIndians.AsTheodorW.AdornoandMaxHorkerheimerremindus,“enlightenment”relapsesinto“mythology”(Dialecticsxvi).Inthissense,bypittingtheaggressivethrustsofthenativesIndiansandthewildnatureagainstthepeace-lovingcharactersoftheAmericansandtheircivilizationrespectively,theWestwardMovementundertheaegisofprogressandreasondisenchantednatureandcreatedthegeneralnarrative142 tropeofthemythofAmericanoriginwhichunavoidablyrelapsedintoanothermythology,namely,themythoftheinvincibleAmericanimperialismandethnocentrism.AccordingtoRichardSlotkin,thecowboy,asasubstitutefigureforthemythicalfrontierfigureslikepioneers,yeomenandtrappers,hassurpassedhisfrontierkinsmeninpopularityandenteredinto“alargepatternof[a]persistentmyth”(Gunfighter16).Gradually,theiconiccowboyexistsasasetofpositivekeywordslikediligence,self-independenceandjustice;nonetheless,ittransmitscodedmessageofAmericanimperialcultureasawholetoitsindividualmembers.Bythesametoken,JohnGrady,exposedtosuchacultureforalmostsixteenyears,ishardtoeliminatefromhismindsuchconceptsasconquest,imperialism,andcolonizationinvolvedintheinter-racialcontactsduringAmericanfrontierexpansion.Correspondingly,withhisultimatemotivationforrelivingthecowboymythinhis“NewFrontier,”JohnGradyperformstheroleofanimperialistwhointendstodecipheranddispelthemysteryenshrinedintheMexicannaturallandscape,sothathecanmakeitintelligibleandpredictableintheserviceofhisutilizationanddomination.However,McCarthy’srepresentationoftheMexicanlandscapeinvitesmythicalimaginationandconformstoMexicannovelists’preoccupationwiththemythicalMexicanlandscape.CarlosFuenteswritesaboutthemythicaspectoftheMexicanlandscapeinrelationtoitshabitants:“[The]physicalnatureofMexico…isfilledwithportentsofmagicaldistraction.EveryforceofnatureseemstohaveamythicalequivalentinMexico”(128).ThepowerofthevariegatedMexicanlandscapeinducesakindofvisionaryandevenhallucinatoryqualitybeyondhumanunderstanding.Similarly,McCarthy’sspaceofrepresentationmakestheMexicanlandscapealandofvigor,enigmaandenergyasopposedtoAmericancowboys’imaginingofMexicoasanemptyspace.ThislandscapeisindirectoppositiontotherepresentationofspaceontheencodedanddemystifiedAmericanmap.TheappealoftheMexicanlandscapedoesnotlieasmuchinthestaticandencodedspaceasthemythicspaceofrepresentationconsistingofcomplexinterplaysofnaturalimages.Here,byusingtheMexicanlandscapeasanantithesistothedullandmonotonousAmericanlandscapemarkedontheoilcompanymapJohnGradyandRawlinsconsultwhilecrossingthe143 border,McCarthydisaffirmsEnlightenmentideologythatdisenchantedthenaturalworldoftheAmericanSouthwestreducibletotherulesofimperialconquest.Furthermore,hisre-enchantmentoftheMexicanlandscapegivesasenseofcognitivebewildermentandmythicalphantom,sothatitisbeyondthegraspofJohnGradyandhispalswhointendtoremapitinanAmericanizedway.ThemysteryinherentintheMexicanlandscapethatcannotbeplattedinanAmericanizedwaysymbolicallyreflectstheunknowableaspectsofMexicanculturethatconstitutetheimpedingforceforsuchexpansiveintrudersasJohnGradytoactualizetheirimperialdream.ThefluidandmythicallandscapeofMexicoiscontrastivewiththestaticandcodedAmericanlandscape.SuchacontrastepitomizesMcCarthy’sdisagreementaboutconquestandexploitationinAmerica’srelationtoMexico.Furthermore,itlaysbarethetensionbetweentherepresentationofspaceonthemapandtheauthorialspaceofrepresentation,namely,imperialist/anti-imperialist,known/unknown,anddisenchanted/re-enchanted.McCarthy’sre-enchantmentoftheMexicanlandscapeasanarrativedevicetoasserthisrepudiationofAmericanimperialconquest,apartfromdemonstratingthatnature,likealivingentity,excludeshumancolonization,alsoformsauniqueplacethattoleratesnoimperialinvasion.AsWestleyA.Kortargues,“[p]lacesinnarrativehaveforceandmeaning;theyarerelatedtohumanvaluesandbeliefs;andtheyarepartofalargerhumanworld,includingactionsandevents”(11).Otherwisestated,placesintheauthorialrepresentationareconnectedwithanestofcultural,socialandpoliticalmeanings.Viewedfromthisperspective,McCarthy,depictingtheMexicanlandscapesurroundedbynaturalstreamsandclearlakes,notonlymakesitcontrastivewiththeAmericanWesternlandscapeoncedepletedbytheWesternersintheWestwardMovementandnowcovetedbyindustrializationandurbanizationinthe1940s,butalsowarnshisfellowsthattheoldWest,onceregardedasthelandofabundance,opportunitiesandrebirthwherecowboyssubstantiallysupportedtheexpansionofAmericancapitalismbyexploitingtheirskillstothefull,hadalreadygoneandtherewouldbenopossibilityofreturntotheoldWestorseekingthe“NewFrontier”forsubstitution.144 McCarthyinhislyricalwordsdescribestheMexicanlandscapesurroundedlaPurísimaasfollows:LaPurísimawasaranchofeleventhousandhectaressituatedalongtheedgeoftheBolsdndeCuatroCienagasinthestateofCoahuila.ThewesternsectionsranintotheSierradeAnteojotoelevationsofninethousandfeetbutsouthandeasttheranchoccupiedpartofthebroadbarrialorbasinfloorofthebolsonandwaswellwateredwithnaturalspringsandclearstreamsanddottedwithmarshesandshallowlakesorlagunas.Inthelakesandinthestreamswerespeciesoffishnotknownelsewhereonearthandbirdsandlizardsandotherformsoflifeaswellalllongrelicthereforthedesertstretchedawayoneveryside.(Horses97)TheplacewherelaPurísimaislocatedlooksliketheuntouchedfrontierlandscapeunavailabletoAmericansinthepost-frontierera,butitconformstoJohnGrady’sromanticimagination.ItsbeautifulsurroundingislaterinsharpcontrastwithcrueltyandviolenceprevailinginMexico.Throughsuchacontrast,McCarthyobligesustoseeMexicoasaprismthroughwhichthetruthabouttheoldWestisdebunked;thatis,muchlikeMexico,theoldWestwasaplacecoveredbyitsmagnificentlandscapebeneathwhichlurkedviolence,bloodshedandevilintandemwithAmericanimperialexpansion.Moreimportantly,McCarthyconstruesafiercetensionbetweenthedesiredclosureorfixityofphysicalspaceanditsimpossibilitywhicharerespectivelyrepresentedbyJohnGrady’simperialistimaginingandtheexpulsiveresistanceagainstsuchanimagininginMexico.Onthewhole,McCarthy,byimbuingwithmythicalelementstheMexicanlandscapethatbecomesinseparablepartofplaces,deprivesitofcognitivetransparency,andhemakesitradiantwithmythicalaura.Inthisway,heconveystheideathattheoldWesthadbeenengulfedbythetidesoftimeandanyonewhointendstore-liveorre-invigorateitsmythinhisorher“NewFrontier”equalstheperpetuationofthecolonizingpracticedestinedtofailwithitsencounterwithitssubjectsofcolonization.McCarthy’slandscapeisquitedifferentfromtheoneinthetraditionalfrontierliteraturewhichsoughtto“imagineWesternplacesintoexistencethroughembellishedandeffusivedescription”anddepictfrontierhomesas“promisedland”145 (Wrobel,PromisedLands2).Forinstance,WillaCather’sprairietrilogy,consistingofOPioneers!(1913),TheSongoftheLark(1915)andMyÁntonia(1918),celebratesthemagnificentlandscapeofNebraskafromwhichtheprotagonistsdrawaspirationandwithwhichtheyformonenessandharmony,sothattheirdullnessineverydaylifeandfearforthedestructiveforceinnaturecanbealleviated.Inthisway,theprotagonists’fatesareboundupwiththespectacularlandscapewithinwhichtheygarnerspiritualrebirthandmaterialwealth.Insum,Cather’sre-enchantedlandscapeisthefountainthatgivesmoralandspiritualpowertopeoplelivinginit.Contrarily,McCarthy’slandscape,filledwiththere-enchantedaura,functionsdifferentlyinthatitbecomesamirrorthroughwhichtheevilofhumansoulandthevulgarityofhumanbehaviorareperceived.McCarthytransfersthepoweroftheAmericanlandscapepopularinthetraditionalfrontierliteraturetothatofMexicoandforcesJohnGradytofacetheinsignificanceandevennothingnessinhisstayinMexico.Unfortunately,JohnGradyisunabletoperceivethetenebrousaspectsbeneaththepastorallandscapeofMexico.Themysteriousandre-chantedlandscapeopensawaytotheparadoxicalco-existenceofInfernoandParadiseinMexicoforJohnGrady.ThefalseaccusationofstealinghorseandkillingaMexican,thelossofJimmyBlevinswhoisillegallykilledbysomeMexicanguardsontheirwaytothejail,theinvoluntaryinvolvementinfightsinprison,theseriousphysicalinjuriesandtheabandonmentbyAlejandra—whichadduptothesanguinaryanti-imperialistpower—befallJohnGradywhilehejoyfullyimmerseshimselfinhiscowboydream.Thus,undertheforcefulcrushingofMexicananti-imperialistpower,hisidealisticyetimperialdreambecomesshattered.StaceyPeeblesarguesthatMexicohelpsJohnGrady“seetheemptinesswithinhimreflectedinhisenvironment”(Peebles131).The“emptiness”canbefurtherapplicabletodenotethesignificanceofhisimperialjourneyintoMexicoand,byimplication,Americanimperialism.Aftersufferingaseriesofresistanceandpain,JohnGradygainsepiphanythatmarkshistransitionfrominnocencetoexperienceandcomestoknowthedirtinessanduglinesslyingbehindthegloriousveilofAmericancivilization.Herealizesthatbeneath“thebeautyoftheworld”lies“a146 secret”andthat“theworld’spainanditsbeauty”movein“arelationshipofdivergingequity”(McCarthy,Horses282).Whatisworse,“thevisionofasingleflower”mightultimatelybepresentedatthecostof“thebloodofmultitudes”(282).JohnGrady’sepiphanytakesshapeatthecostofintensepainhesuffersandbloodheshedsinMexico.HisepiphanyconsistsinhisperceptionoftheemptinessinanddisillusionmentabouthiscowboydreaminitiatedbythefrontiermindsetatthecoreofwhichhasalwaysbeentheideologicalmanipulationofindividualdesiretopushforwardAmericanfrontierexpansioninbothliteralandfigurativesense.SuchaperceptioncanbeseenasretrospectiononAmericanimperialexpansion.Withphysicalinjuriesandspiritualtrauma,JohnGrady,afterhisreclaimingofthehorsefromtheMexicancaptain,returnstoTexas,onlytofindhisfather’sdeaththatsymbolizesthecompletedefeatofthecowboylife.JohnGrady’sunwittingparticipationinexpandingtheAmericanempireinthe“NewFrontier”bringshimnothingbutasenseoflossanddisplacement.InhisconversationwithLaceyRawlinsaboutthingstakingplaceduringhisabsencefromTexas,JohnGradyfeelsatlossandsays:“Idontknowwhereitis.Idontknowwhathappenstocountry”(McCarthy,Horses299).UnabletoadapthimselftoAmericansociety,JohnGradyexperiencesanxietyabouthissocialidentitysinceheisdisqualifiedfrombeingausablecowhand,letalonehisdedicationtobeingatruecowboy.Hebecomesasout-of-dateasmanyAmericanswhostillcherishastronglongingfortherawedgeonwhichtorejuvenatetheoldfrontierinthismodernworld.HisexperienceexemplifiesthethwartedaimatruggedindividualismandlustfulimperialdreamandfurtherpushestheAmericanfrontiermindsetintoaseriesoffloatingsignifiersthatcannotpindowntheirsignified.IfMcCarthy’sre-enchantmentoftheMexicanlandscapeopensamythicalspacefortheentombmentofJohnGrady’simperialdream,thenhispresentationoftheMexicanhistoryandsocietyalsocontributestotheunknownaspectsofMexico,sothatthesocialsituationtherecanonlybeunderstoodbynobodybutpeoplelivingwithinandshapedbyitsculture.Indoingso,McCarthycloaksMexicancultureandhistorywithmysteriouselementsbeyondtheintruders’understanding,masteryand147 dominationandhenceprefigureshisanti-imperialistauthorialapproach.Inreality,Americanimperialismhasalwaysbeenundergirdedandvalidatedbyitsfrontierspiritwhiledenyingitsexistence.Forinstance,astotheMexican-Americanrelationship,Americahasallthemoreappearedasadominatorwhotrieseverymeanstoimposeits“universallyapplicable”valuesonMexico.Thisunbalancedrelationship,startingfromtheMexican-AmericanWarandcontinuinguntiltoday,iscausedbyasenseofAmericansuperiorityanditsexceptionalismwhichinturnmakeexplicititsimperialistpower.ThenotionofAmericansuperiorityhasoftenbeenbuttressedbytheargumentthatMexicois“apoorbackwardnationwhereastheUnitedStatesisarichadvancedcountry.Thisisparticularlytruetoday,whenthelatteristhemostpowerfulnationonearth”(RodríguezO.andVincent11).TakingadvantageofMexico’sbackwardness,Americahasalwaysassumedtheroleofasaviororaworldsheriffwhoseresponsibilityistoreducepovertyandspreadhumanrights,democracyandfreedomtotheMexicans.Nevertheless,itposesahegemonicstancethatexplicitlyrevealsitsimperialexpansionismandmotivationforincorporatingeverythingonitsimperialmapforseparationandpossession.However,AmericanexpansionismembodiedbyJohnGradyfailstoworkinAllthePrettyHorses.WhatJohnGradyfacesisnotabackwardcountrythatcanbetrampleduponatwill,butatroublinglandwithitsownhistoricalpastandculturalbackground.JohnGrady,insteadofachievingimperialgloryviahisculturalpenetrationintoMexico,experiencesthereversedculturalpenetration.InCultureandImperialism,Saidclarifiestheconnectionbetweenthepursuitoftheimperialdreamandthenationalculture,andanalyzestheroleplayedbyBritishliteratureofthenineteenthcenturyinpromotingBritishoverseacolonialism.Apartfromrelyingontheeconomicormilitarycontroloverthecolonized,Britishimperialistsestablishedtheirunshakableandunchallengedpowerbyvirtuesofculturalimpregnation.AsSaidsuccinctlyputs,theprocessesofimperialism,exceedingthedomainofeconomiclawandpoliticaldecision,arealsomanifestedatanothersignificantlevelachieved“bypredisposition,byauthorityofrecognizableculturalformations,bycontinuingconsolidationwithineducation,literature,andthe148 visualandmusicalarts”(Culture12).Simplyput,literarynarrativehasbecomeanessentialtoolfortheimperialiststoconsolidatetheirempirebystitchingtogethertheirimperialcauseandnationalculture.However,thispointrunsinareversedirectioninAllthePrettyHorsesasJohnGradyfindshimselfpenetratedbyMexicanculture.Fortheimperialists,culturalcolonizationisthemosteffectivewaytoformandconsolidatetheircontrolanddominationoverthecolonized.However,McCarthyundercutssuchanotionbymeansofcharacterizingthematriarchDueñaAlfonsawhoservesasanantithesisofAmericanculturalimperialist.WhendiscoveringthathernieceAlejandrahasprivatedatewithJohnGrady,AlfonsainitiatesbothdidacticinstructionsandculturalpenetrationtoJohnGrady.She,fromawoman’sangle,narratestoJohnGradythelowstatusofwomeninMexicansocietybypointingoutthesocietytowhichtheMexicanwomenareexposedislargelylikeasuppressingmachine.Whatismore,Mexicansocietyisnotanegalitarianoneinwhicheveryonehastherighttovote,anditspoliticsissovolatilethatthecommonpeoplealwaysbecomethescapegoatsforpoliticalstruggles.FromAlfonsa’snarration,itiseasytoseethatwomeninMexicoareprescribedtobeeasilysubjectedtomaledominationandpoliticalpersecution.Laterinherrecounts,wecometoknowherfailedlovewithGustavoMadero,whichisalivingproofofthepatriarchalpowerinMexicansociety.Thus,thereisnopossibilityforJohnGradytomarryAlejandrawhoseauntandfatherstrictlyfollowandadvocatethepatriarchalrulesandclassdemarcationinMexico.InhisencounterwithAlfonsa,JohnGradyisatadisadvantageevenifhebelievesthatindividualshaverightforfreedomofloveandmarriage.Theirdisparateviewsonself-choiceareduetodifferentculturalbackgrounds.JohnGrady,undertheimplicitinfluenceoffrontierideology,holdsdearsuchvaluesasliberty,self-responsibilityandfreedomassociatedwiththefrontierbeliefs.Contrarily,AlfonsaintendstoimparttoJohnGradythebeliefthatoneshallsuccumbtosocialnorms.Toacertaindegree,Alfonsa,whointerweaveswiththeranch“oldties,”“antiquity”and“tradition,”shapestheyoungcowboy’sfateontheranch(McCarthy,Horses132).Aruthlessandunsympatheticwomanassheis,Alfonsohasnopityon“peopletowhom[bad]thingshappen”(240).Whatevershehasdoneandisdoingis149 tosafeguardherfamilyreputationandtoavoidthebadluckinstoreforherfamily.Thus,JohnGradywhoseeducationbackgroundandnationalityAlfonsaseeminglydoesnotcareaboutisconsideredunsuitableformarryingAlejandra.DespiteAlfonsa’sstatementthatsheprefersAlejandratohaveaverydifferentmarriagefromtheoneMexicansocietydemands,shestillforbidsAlejandra’saffairwithJohnGradysimplybecausebeingaMexicanmeansthatoneisnotcutofffromthecontactswithitstraditionalsociety,fromallthosebulwarkstheMexicanshaveerectedtoprotecttheirculturefromexternalintrusion.WhatAlfonsasaysistomakeJohnGradyrealizethat,thoughtheextantworldholdsanilluminatingfascination,itdoesnotrevealitstrueexistentialnature.Inalong-termsense,shehopesJohnGradytomakesensethathispassagetoMexicoisnotassimpleandinnocentasitseemstobeandthatitstruenatureistoextendtheAmericanempireinthecloakofpursuingindividualfreedomandromanticizedcowboylife.Likeadreamersuddenlyawakenedfromanidealisticreverie,JohnGrady,undertheculturaldidacticismofAlfonsa,isforcedtofacetheharshrealityofMexico.Mexicoisnotapastoralparadisebutatroublingplaceburdenedbyitsownhistoryandculture.JohnGradyfindsinMexicowhatTomPilkingtoncalls“anactualandmetaphysicalhorror”(315).InthestarkfaceofthesocialrealityinMexico,JohnGradycomestoknowthedeceptivenessofAmericanfrontiercultureandispossessedwithadisturbingsenseofbetrayal.Heseesveryclearlyhowhislifeis“led…tothismoment,”with“somethingcoldandsoulless”enteringhimandmakinghim“likeanotherbeing”(254).JohnGrady’sdisregardofMexicancultureemulateshisforefathers’imperialaggressionthatalmostdisplacedtheMexicansandnativeIndiansintheirerrandsintothewildfrontier.However,whenthewildfrontierwasnolongeravailableforlattergenerations,theyhavealwaysharboredapsychologicallongingforthefrontierasamythicalspacewhichismoreimportantthanitsactualgeographicallocation.SuchaspaceissocontinuallyandefficaciouslyfosteredbyvariousIdeologicalStateApparatusesthatthefrontierdoctrineshaveinfiltratedintoeverynookandcornerofAmericansocietyandnurtureditscitizens’blindbeliefsinthepossiblegreatnessof150 conquestandexpansionandtheirunconsciousimperialsentiment.McCarthydoesnotmakethemythicalspaceaccessibletoJohnGrady,butchallengesthevaluesherepresents.Thus,McCarthy’snarrativethatthwartsthetriumphalistvictoryreadersusuallyexpectfromaromanticadventureservestodeepenourunderstandingofthetrickyorchestrationoffrontierideologythatoncehailedmanyAmericanstostriveforimperialcauseandpinneddownthegrandhistoricalnarrativeofthewestwardexpansion.EdwardSaidpertinentlyobservesthatauthorsareunavoidablydeterminedby“ideology,classoreconomichistory,”buttheyare“verymuchinthehistoryoftheirsocieties,shapingandshapedbythathistoryandtheirsocialexperienceindifferentmeasure”(Culturexxiv).InsharpcontrasttoauthorswhotrumpetforAmericanimperialexpansion,McCarthyself-consciouslyparticipatesinrevisingthewrongself-definitionofAmericaandgivesprecedencetothecolonizedculture,whichactivelyandsuccessfullyavoidstheimperialists’culturalpenetration.Itisundeniablethattheclass,towhichJohnGradyandtheRochasbelong,isawideandimpassablegapthatobstructshisintegrationintoMexicansociety.However,withregardtothedifferentculturesJohnGradyandtheRochasrepresentrespectively,wetendtoconsiderthatculturaldifferencesareasdefinitiveindeterminingJohnGrady’sfailedimperialcauseasclassbarrieris.Moreimportantly,AllthePrettyHorseswaswrittenandpublishedatatimewhenAmericawasentangledinthePersianGulfWar.McCarthymighthaveseenthroughthetrickofAmericanimperialexpansionforeconomicgainsandhencerelocatedtheWesternfrontierofthenineteenthcenturytoMexicoofthelate1940stointerrogatetheprevailingorthodoxiesoftheAmericanfrontierbeliefs.Indoingso,McCarthyrevisesAmericanperceptionofthefrontierinthetraditionalWesterngenreasaplaceofregenerationoraneweraofrighteousprogress.Inthissense,MexicoisasymboliclocaleinwhichanextendeddramaofconqueringtheWestisrehearsedbutfails.Atthesametime,McCarthy,seeingMexicoasaworldinmicrocosmwherethecurrentsoftrueanti-imperialistvitalityandpowerrununstoppable,offersarallyingcryforcautiousreexaminationofthepresentAmericanimperialismwhich,bydintofitsculturalandeconomicsuperiority,151 boostsAmericandesireforfindingafurtherfrontiertoconquer.ApartfromimpartingJohnGradythesocialnormsofMexico,McCarthyalsostrengthensthereversedculturalpenetrationbyhighlightingAlfonsa’snarrationoftheMexicanhistory.AfterhisreleasefromtheprisoninSaltillo,JohnGrady,inhopeofrecoveringhisrelationshipwithAlejandra,isagaintaughtahistoricallessonbyAlfonsa.AlfonsaexplainstheMexicanRevolutiontoJohnGradyandherfailedlovewithGustavoMaderowhowasthebrotherofMexicanPresidentFranciscoMaderofrom1910to1913.ShetellsJohnGradyhowtheMaderobrothersfellaftertheRevolution.Inheropinion,itistheirpassionforfreedom,idealismofhumanityandignoranceofMexicansocietythatledthemtobepersecutedbythelatterpoliticalcoopintheaftermathoftheRevolution.JohnGradyandtheMaderobrotherssharethesimilaritiesintheirrefusaloftheirownsocialstatusandtheirattemptstoimprovethesocialconditionofMexico.WilliamH.BeezleyandColinM.MacLachlanpointsoutthat“[i]nmanywaysMaderorepresentedtheleastableofthedisenchantedprovincialelites:inferiorinalmosteverywayexcepttheonethatcountedmost”(14-15).WhattheMaderobrothersintendedtodowastosharethepoliticalsystemwithmoreMexicans,withaneyetolimitreelection,provideanhonestvoteandrestorereliablelocalgovernment.However,whenFranciscoMaderotookoffice,hebrokehispromisetoreturnthelandtotheMexicanpeasantsandfailedtosatisfytherevolutionarieslikeEmilianoZapatawhodemandedlandforvillagersintheSouth.Infact,“MaderoassumedcontroloftheexistinggovernmentalapparatusthathadservedtherepublicunderDíazandthatinhisviewdidnotneedtobereplaced”(BeezleyandMacLachlan21).Inthissense,theMaderobrothersessentiallysubstitutedDíaz’sdictatorshipwithanotherformofdominationovertheMexicans.Facingrebellionsfromallsides,theMaderobrotherswerearrestedandassassinatedbyVictorianoHuertowhomadeatreatyofvillainywithFelixDíazandestablishedanewgovernment.Alfonsa’sdescriptionoftheRevolutionnotonlyaimstomakeJohnGradyrelinquishhisidealismandself-importance,butalsorevealshistruemotivationforimperialinvasionintoMexicoinherreferencetotheMaderobrothers’failuretohonortheirpromises.152 AsEdwardSaidremindsus,“writingtextsareneverneutralactivities:thereareinterests,power,andpassions,pleasuresentailed,nomatterhowaestheticorentertainingthework[is]’’(Culture318).Bythesametoken,McCarthy’srepresentationoftheMexicanRevolutionisnotaneutralevaluationbutaroundaboutsociopoliticalcriticismofAmericainthesensethatMexico,whichstandsasadarkselftoAmerica,resortstoviolenceandexpressesidealisminanopenway;whereas,America,seemingtobemorecivilizedandprogressivethanMexico,remainstruetoviolenceandidealisticvisioninanimplicitway.AlfonsaforcefullytellsJohnGradythatshedoesnot“believeknowingcansaveus”andwhatremains“constantinhistoryisgreedandfoolishnessandaloveofblood”(McCarthy,Horses239).Alfonsa’scommentmocksattheAmericanswhoself-arrogantlyconceivethemselvestoknowabouteverything.Inthisway,Alfonsa,whileavoidingbeingmanipulatedandimprintedbyAmericanimperialculture,challengesthevaluesystemJohnGradyidentifieswithandforceshimtoadmititshollownessofwhichmanymisledAmericansarestillproud.Withastaunchanti-imperialistresolveinmind,AlfonsaalertsJohnGradythatthewaningofhistoricalawarenessisdoomedtorepeatthehistoricalmistakesandthatindividualchoiceisshapedbytheuncontrollableforceofthehistoricalpast.SheunsympatheticallytellsJohnGradythat“theworldhasalwaysbeen”like“apuppetshow”(McCarthy,Horses231).Whenonetriestolookbehinditscurtainandtracethestringsthatformit,hefindsthepuppetis“inthehandsof…otherpuppets”withtheirownstringscontrolledbyothers(231).Theoriginsofthesestringsare“endless”andspawn“thedeathsofgreatmeninviolenceandmadness”(231).Theinvisibleforceofthepastthatdirectsthepathofhumanbeingsissopowerfulthatnoonecanescapefromthefinaljudgmentofreality.Similarly,JohnGradycannotchangethesocialandhistoricalpastofMexicothatstillexertstremendousimpactsonMexicancultureanditspeople.ItisbeyondhisabilitytopossessanddominateAlejandra,laPurísimaandtheMexicancultureatlargesinceMexicois“likeararevasebeingcarriedaboutbyachild”(233).“Everything”there,though“seem[ing]possible,”ispronetobefiredby“electricityintheair”(233).IfJohnGradycontinuestobe153 stubborninpursuinghisidealisticdreamofregainingcowboyparadisewhichisequaltoenlargingAmericanimperialdominationoverMexico,whatawaitshimistraumatizedsentimentandevendeathbecausetheworldheinhabitsisquiteruthlessandmerciless“inselectingbetweenthedreamandthereality”(238).TheroleAlfonsaplaysingivingJohnGradyepiphanyisessentiallylikethatofacolonialistwhocolonizespeopleincoloniesbymeansofculturalpenetration.Withherlessonsinmind,JohnGradystilladherestohishopeuntilthereisnowayout.Later,hismeetingwithAlejandrawhoruthlesslyrefuseshisproposalcutsofftheonlywayforhimtorealizehisimperialdream.Withemotionaldistressandphysicalinjuries,JohnGradyresortstoviolenceinretrievingBlevins’horsefromtheCaptainattheprisonofSaltillo,whichbecomestheonlymeanstodemonstratehisexistentialvalues.However,materialpossessioncannotcompensatehimforhisspiritualtrauma.OnhiswaytoTexas,hefeelsestrangedfromtheworldthatseemstocarenothingfor“theoldortheyoungorrichorpoor,”for“theirstruggles”and“theirnames”and“forthelivingorthedead”(McCarthy,Horses303).Later,backtoTexas,JohnGradycomestoknowhisfather’sdeathandthecompletedisintegrationofhisgrandfather’sranch.Withastrongsenseoflossandloneliness,JohnGrady,ridesonhorseback,with“longshadowspassing…intothedarkeningland,theworldtocome”(304).Here,theimageoftheriderandthehorsepalingintothedarkeningworldcanbeinterpretedastheabortionofJohnGrady’simperialvisionandprefiguresthathisutopiandreamisnothingbutarecessiveexpressionofimperialhegemonywhichisdefinitelytobelaidinrestinitsconfrontationwithanti-imperialistpower.JohnGradyrepresentsAmericannation’sexcessiveobsessionwiththemythicalfrontierthatdeterminesitspropensityforexpansionismandculturalimperialisminthecollectiveunconsciousofitspeople.WiththegrowthofAmericaninfluenceinallareas,itsimperialvisionemergesrepetitivelyandbecomesincreasinglynoticeable.HowevermuchAmericahasprofessedtobea“agoodneighbor”toMexicoandothercountriesintheNorthernhemisphere,thosecountriesstillholdanambivalentattitudetowarditsinceits“expansionists’ethnocentrism”has“sowedtheseedsofdiscordbetweentheUnitesStatesandthepeoplesofLatinAmerica”(Hietala269).America’s154 expansionistintentionasdescribedinMcCarthy’sBloodMeridianhas“preparedthewayforbothlate-nineteenth-centuryandtwentieth-centuryimperialism”(Hietala270).WithitsfrequentinvolvementinimperialexpansionasindicatedbytheMexican-AmericanWar,theSpanish-AmericanWar,theVietnamWartothePersianGulfWarthebirthofAllthePrettyHorsewitnessed,Americahasexplicitlyrevealeditshegemonicandexpansionistmentalityforgedbyitsfrontierexperience.McCarthy,asaconscientiousliterarytalent,deploystheliterarypowertocriticizefrontierideologythathasalwaysverifiedAmericanimperialexpansion.SuchanexpansionundoubtedlybringsdevastatingeffectstomanyAmericanslikeJohnGradyinAllthePrettyHorses.Inthissense,AllthePrettyHorsenotonlyreflectsthelingeringeffectsoffrontierideologystillmanipulatingandsolidifyingthefrontiermentalityofAmericannation,butalsopredictsthecatastrophesincurredbyitsoveremphasisonexpansiononthebasisofthehigh-soundingfrontierbeliefs.JohnGradyisanindividualpersonwithhisimperialimagining,buttheunderpinningthatjustifieshisbehaviorisfrontierideologythatessentiallyboostsexpansionism,conquestanddominationinthenameofprogress,freedomanddemocracy.Throughtheanalysisabove,itisconvincingthatJohnGradyisacomplicatedimageasatruebutfailedculturalimperialist.HishiddenimperialmentalityisanextensionoftheeffectsofAmericanculturalimperialism,whichcanbesensedbyhisvisittothepriestafterhisreturntoTexasfromMexico.InordertoreturnBlevins’horsetoitsrealowner,JohnGradyvisitsthepriestandreferstohimforinformationaboutBlevins’family.Throughtheirconversation,weknowthattherearemanypeoplenamedJimmyBlevinsandAmericanreligiousbeliefshavereachedmanycountrieswhosecitizenswritetothepriest.ThisphenomenondemonstratesthepenetrativeeffectsofAmericancultureasradiosignalstraversethousandsofmiles.McCarthyintendstoconveythat,aslongasAmericanculturalimperialismexistsandbecomesmorepowerfulwithfrontierideologypenetratingintoeveryporeofitssocialtexture,itscitizenswilldaretoventureuponseekingafurtherfrontierforconquestandpossession.JohnGrady’sbehaviorinCitiesofthePlainsprovesthispoint.Inthisnovel,JohnGrady,outofhisimperialimagination,makes155 thesamemistakeinidealizinghisdreamofengravingexceptionalAmericannessontoMexico,onlytolosehislife.HisdeathconfirmsthatMcCarthydisapprovesoftheAmericanempireandurgeshisfellowstoabandonortranscendfrontierideologythathailsthemintoblindlypursuingtheirimperialcause.Thus,thenarrativecurrentsinAllthePrettyHorses,bymakingrevisionsof“structuresoffeeling”consistentlyspeakingforAmericanimperialism,perforcebehoovetheAmericanstocastacriticaleyeonfrontierideology,andseriouslywarnthemthatself-decisionis“neverthedumbthing”butthat“somechoice[s]”madebeforeitaredumbthings(McCarthy,Horses9).156 ChapterThreeCitiesofthePlain:TranscendingFrontierIdeologyTheconcludinginstallmentoftheBorderTrilogy,CitiesofthePlain(1998),bringingtogetherBillyParham,theprotagonistinTheCrossing(1994)andJohnGradyCole,theprotagonistinAllthePrettyHorses(1992),explorestheharmfuleffectsofthewestwardexpansiononthenaturalenvironmentanditsunfailinginfluencesonthecharactersholdingstrongattachmenttothefrontierlifestyle.TheforemostsimilaritybetweenAllthePrettyHorsesandTheCrossingistheplot.Ineachnovel,McCarthydepictsanadolescentmaleprotagonistridingintoMexicowhereheexperiencesallkindsofdifficultiesinpursuitofhisidealsandthenreturnstoAmericawithhisidealsshattered.TheovertsimilaritybetweenthetwonovelshighlightstherecurringfrontiermotifusedbyMcCarthytoprobeintotheresidualeffectsoffrontierideologyasindicatedbyhiscowboys’unwittingparticipationintheirimperialcauseinthemodernera.Thus,withregardtothecontinuousdepictionofJohnGradyColewholongsforafurtherfrontiertomaintaintheobsoletecowboylifeinthelate1940sandearly1950s,thepresentdissertationomitsthediscussionofMcCarthy’scriticismoffrontierideologyinTheCrossing,butfocusesonelaboratingonhowfrontierideologyfunctionsinCitiesofthePlaininprecipitatingJohnGradyintomakingthesamemistakeinengaginginimperialconquestashedoesinAllthePrettyHorses.Critics’responsestoMcCarthy’sCitiesofthePlainarefewer,becauseitbearstoomuchresemblancetohistwoearlybooksoftheBorderTrilogy.SeldomdocriticsconsiderthefunctionofCitiesofthePlainasanexampleoftheWesterngenrethatinterrogatesandtranscendsfrontierideology.Indeed,frontierideologyisevokedinbothAllthePrettyHorsesandCitiesofthePlainbyMcCarthy’sre-formulationofthefrontiermotiftoformthenarrativebasisfrequentlyfoundintheWestern.However,157 theinnovationinCitiesofthePlainliesinitstranscendenceoffrontierideologyandmimicryofthematerialexistenceuponwhichtheoperationofsuchanideologydepends.Furthermore,McCarthy’sappreciationofthehybridizedfrontiersetsamodelforAmericannationtore-identifywiththehybridizedAmericanidentity,sothattheAmericanscanfairlyfacetheculturalheterogeneityanddiversityleftbyAmericanfrontierexpansionintheWest,especiallyalongtheMexican-Americanborderlands.Thus,thepresentchapterwillillustrateMcCarthy’sappropriationofthefrontiermotiftonegateandtranscendfrontierideologybyenvisioningthedysfunctionofAmericanimperiallogicandmakinghischaracterre-integrateintothehybridizedfrontier.FrontierideologyinCitiesofthePlainnotonlyaffectsJohnGradyCole’sidealisticbehaviorinrescuinghislover,butalsoaccountsforothercharacters’nostalgiaforthepastfrontierlifewhichisequaltoimperialistnostalgia.Besides,itacceleratesJohnGrady’sunconsciousdesireformaintainingthewhite-maleimperialconquestanddominationbytakingadvantageofAmericancapital.Inthisway,John12GradyfallsintothetrapofnewimperialismofAmerica.Moreimportantly,CitiesofthePlaintranscendsthehomogenousdiscourseoffrontierideologyinitsemphasisonre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontier,sothattheAmericansandAmericaatlargecanovercomeimperialistnostalgiaandstepouttheimperiallogicofsubjugating“Other”againstthebackgroundofglobalization.12By“newimperialism,”thisdissertationmainlydrawsonDavidHarvey’selaborationonthisconcept.ForDavidHarvey,newimperialism,unlikeimperialismthatwasanextensionofthesovereigntyofnation-statesoutsidetheirownterritories,doesnotestablishterritorialcenterofpower,nordoesitdependonfixedterritorialbarriers.Rather,itencompassestheentireglobewithinitsopenandexpandingfrontiersbytearingdowntheterritoriallimitsandaccumulatingcapitalintimeandspace.Thus,newimperialismforDavidHarveymeansaspecificformofprimitiveaccumulationor“imperialismasaccumulationbydispossession”(137-82).IncaseofAmerica,itsnewimperialismgainsmomentumviapathsforsurplusabsorption,particularlytheenforcementofNAFTAwhichhasenabledAmericatoopensubordinateeconomyofMexicoandincreaseitsvulnerabilitytoAmericanimperialcapital.CitiesofthePlainwaspublishedintheyearof1998witnessingtheever-increasingimpactsonMexicaneconomybytheenforcementofNAFTA.McCarthymightobservesuchinfluencesandhenceinsinuatesAmericannewimperialismofthe1990sinhisincorporationofAmericancowboys’naiveactionofresolvingdisputesviatheirresorttoAmericancapital.158 A.TheFrontierasaFinishedProjectandFrontierNostalgiaSetintheearly1950s,CitiesofthePlainrevolvesaroundthetragicquestofJohnGradyColeforhisloverMagdalena,aMexicanprostituteownedbyavillainousMexicanpimpEduardo.InterspersedwiththetragicromancearetheworkingexperiencesofJohnGrady,BillyParhamandothercowhandsonMac’sranchandBillyParham’sreflectiononhiswholelifeinthenewmillennium.Intheirpursuitofanidealplacetoliveandtheirlamentationforthepassageofthefrontierlifestyle,McCarthy’scowboysembodyfrontiernostalgia,whichisperforceanexpressionofimperialistnostalgiainconjunctionwiththecontinuedinterpellativeeffectsoffrontierideology.ThecontemporarysettingofCitiesofthePlainallowsMcCarthytoreconsiderfrontierideologyanditsrelevantconsequencesonhiscowboysinthemodernera.VariouscluesinCitiesofthePlainsuggestthattheexplorationofthegeographicalfrontierhadalreadygoneinconcurrencewiththedevouringcommercializationandtheofficialappropriationoftheSouthwesternlandformilitarybasesintheearly1950sAmerica.TheopeningsceneinCitiesofthePlainmarkstheeclipseofthecowboylifeandfurtherdemonstratesthecompletionofthefrontierera.McCarthydepictsahordeoflonesomeandboredcowboyswho,crossingtheMexican-Americanborder,frequentwhorehousesinJuárez.Billy,TroyandJCenjoyexchangingbanterwithoneanotherconcerninghowtochooseaprostitute.HistorianPaulaPetrikarguesthattheclosureofthefrontierismarkedbythecowboys’frequentvisitstowhorehouses.HavingstudiedprostituteinHelena,Montana,Petrick,basedoncensusrecords,countylegaldocumentsandpersonalletters,arguesthat“thefrontierendswhenthepimpscometotown”(25).McCarthy’scowboys,insteadoffrequentingwhorehousesinAmericawhereprostitutionwasstillavailableinthe1950s,simplycrosstheporousMexican-Americanbordertoseekexoticexperiences.Theirbehaviorremindsreadersofthefallendayofthefrontierliferesultingfromindustrializationandurbanizationthatfollowedontheheelsofthewestwardexpansion.TheSouthwesternsocialmilieuobviouslysetsmanyobstaclesforthemtomaintaintheirfrontierlifethatenablesthemtoplayouttheirroleofheroicandhard-workingcowboys.159 Othersignssignalingtheendofthefrontieremergewiththeprogressofthenovel.ThetrappingsofmodernlifefindtheirexpressioninthemodeoftransportationusedbythecowboyswhocrosstheborderlinestoJuárez.InAllthePrettyHorses,JohnGrady,togetherwithLaceyRawlins,ridessouthwardintoMexico;while,inCitiesofthePlain,JohnGradytakestaxitoJuárezwhereWhiteLakewhorehouseislocated.ThetaxiridesubstitutesthetraditionalformoftransportationbymeansofwhichtheformulaiccowboystriumphantlyrodeintotheWesterntowns.AsMcCarthywrites,“[t]heydrovethroughthefloodedandpotholedstreets,”withthedrunkdriverfreelycommentingonpedestrianswhocrossedbeforethem(Cities55).TheconvenientmoderntransportationindicatesthedramaticchangesbefallingtheAmericanSouthwestanditsSouthernneighborseenbytheAmericancowboysas“anothercountry”(218).Similarly,BillyandTroydrivetovisitTroy’sbrotherandreturntoMac’sranch.“Theydroveon.Roundingacurvewithasteepbanktotherightoftheroadtherewasasuddenwhiteflareandasolidwhumpofasound”(34).Here,“[t]heydrove”and“[t]heydroveon”replace“herideson”usedtodescribeJohnGrady’sjourneyintoMexicoinAllthePrettyHorses.Therepetitiveappearancesof“theydrove”arousethechangeabilityofthemodernworldthatreducestherelativelypastorallifeatMac’sranchintoasocialanomalyandforebodestheimpossibilityforthesedislocatedcowboystomaintainthefrontierlifestyle.Byandlarge,McCarthy’sdescriptionofthecontemporarysettinginTheCitiesofPlainunderscoresthefactthatthegeographicalfrontier,whichhadgonelongbeforethesestubborncowboys’birth,providesnoopportunitiesforthecowboyswhonowharborintheirheartsasenseoffrontiernostalgia.Inthenovel,Johnson,anoldcowhandonMac’sranch,isacaseinpoint.Hiseccentricbehaviorsarebeyondtheunderstandingofhisco-workers,exceptforJohnGradywhopatientlylistenstohisstories.Johnsonisconsideredmadbyhisfellowswithrespecttohisunnamablesorrowandundecipherablestrangeness.Johnson,bornin1867intheEasternpartofTexas,cametoworkthereasayoungman.HehasborewitnesstothecrucialchangesthattookplaceintheAmericanSouthwest.Hewitnessedthatthecountryhadgonethroughthechangesrangingfromtheusageofoillamp,thehorse,thebuggyandjet160 planesaspopularmodesoftransportationindifferenttimes,tothetestofatomicbomb.Thesehistoricalchangesdonotmakehimconfused,butthedeathofhisdaughterMargaretincurshisunshakablesorrowandbewilderment.Infact,itisnotthedeathofhisdaughterthatmakesJohnsongloomy,butthesymbolicmeaningofherdeathrepresentsthatweighshimdown.GillianRosearguesthat“WomanbecomesNature,andNatureWoman,andbothcanthusbeburdenedwithmen’smeaningsandinviteinterpretationbymasculinistdiscourse”(94).Inthisway,“[t]hefemalefigurerepresentslandscape”(96).InlinewithRose’scompellingassertion,Johnson’smourningforthedeathofMargaretamountstohislamentationfortheeternaldisappearanceofthefrontierlandscapeuponwhichtheAnglo-Americanmaleswouldimprinttheirmasculineknowledgeofconquest.Herdeathsymbolicallyclosesthechannelthroughwhichthemalescanescapeintothesensualtopographyoflandmappedbymasculineandheterosexualgazeasacentralrhetoricoffrontierexpansioninthenineteenth-centuryAmericanWest.Generallyspeaking,landandwomeninthetraditionalWesterngenrearemutuallysignified.HenryNashSmithelucidateshowthefrontiercomplexhasinfluencedthewhitemale’streatmentofthevirginlandinAmericanliteraturesincetheeighteenthcentury,especiallyitsinfluencesasexpressedbytheCaucasiancowboys.Hefurtherpointsout“thecharacteroftheAmericanEmpirewasdefinednotbystreamsofinfluenceoutofthepast,notbyculturaltradition,butbyarelationbetweenmanandnature”(Nash187).Naturesymbolizedbythefemalewasatthemale’sdisposalwhichstrengthenedtheimperialconquestandmaledominationoverbothlandandwomeninthewestwardexpansion.Viewedthroughthislens,Johnson’smourningoverhisdeaddaughteressentiallydivulgesthepsychologicaldisturbancesandthenever-endingimperialintentiontodominatenaturewiththeclosingofthephysicalfrontierinthe1890.HislamentationaboutthebygonefrontiereracanbesensedinhisconversationwithJohnGrady:ThedayaftermyfiftiethbirthdayinMarchofnineteenandseventeenIrodeinto161 theoldheadquartersattheWildewellandtherewassixdeadwolveshanginonthefence.Irodealongthefenceandranmyhandalongem.Ilookedattheireyes.Agovernmenttrapperhadbroughteminthenightbefore….Iaintheardawolfinthiscountrysince….Iaintheardawolfhowlinthirtyoddyears.Idontknowwhereyou’dgotohearone.Theremaynotbeanysuchaplace.(McCarthy,Cities126)Johnson’scommentonthedisappearanceofthewolvesandhisretellingofnumerousadventuresasayoungmansingleoutthisseniorcowhandasamererelicandhearkensbacktothecolonizationofthefrontierunderitswaywiththeeradicationofthewolvesthatwerethenaturalenemiesofthedomesticatedcattleandhorses.Inthelatenineteenthandearlytwentiethcentury,thefederalgovernmentworkedtogetherwithrancherstowipeoutthewolvescompetingwithhumansfornaturalresources.PatriciaNelsonLimericknotesthat“ranchersjoinedhuntersincondemningthenonhumancarnivores,andgovernmentralliedtothecause—trapping,poisoningandshooting”(Legacy310).Besides,ranchers,unsatisfiedwiththeprogressineliminatingthewolves,initiatedcampaignsthatdemandedthefederalgovernmentto“organizeandfundafinalsolutiontothewolfproblem”(McIntyre129).Toensurethecompleteerasureofthewolfspeciesandtheprosperityofcattleindustry,thegovernmentemployedwolftrapperstopatroltheSouthwesternborder.Bytheturnofthetwentiethcentury,thewolfhadbecomeavanishedspecies.Johnson’smentioningofthediminishingwolfbyimplicationbringstolighttheimperialconquestofthewildernessintheaggrandizementoftheAmericanfrontier.WhatcountsmoreisthatitembodiesfrontiernostalgiathaterasesAmericanimperialists’complicityinmakingtheendangeredspeciesseemlikeamereside-effectof“progress”intheprocessoffrontierexpansion.Ironically,thewildernessandthecowboyswhoseverylivelihooddependsuponitsexistencealsobecomesacrificialofferingsfortheso-called“progress.”Ineffect,Johnson’sfrontiernostalgiaisundergirdedbyhisfascinationwiththefrontiermythwhosetask,asRichardSlotkinputs,“wastoexplainandjustifytheestablishmentoftheAmericancolonies”(Gunfighter10).Furthermore,itreflectswhatRenatoRosaldocalls“imperialistnostalgia.”RenatoRosaldodefines162 “imperialistnostalgia”asanambivalentfeelingofthecolonizersorimperialistswhomournoverthethingstheyhavedestroyed(69-70).Itresortstoaposeof“‘innocentyearning’bothtocapturepeople’simaginationsandtoconcealitscomplicitywithoftenbrutaldomination”(Rosaldo70).Originallytheworld“nostalgia,”coinedbySwissphysicianJohannesHoferinthelateseventeenthcentury,conjoinsGreekwordsnostos(areturnhome)andalgos(apainfulcondition)andrefersto“pathologicalconditionsofhomesicknessamonghisnation’smercenariesfightingfarfromtheirhomeland”(Rosaldo71).Simplyput,“nostalgia”denotesapainfullongingforaconditiontiedwithanotherplaceandanothertimewhichalwaysappearunreachable.ContextualizedinCitiesofthePlain,Johnson’slamentationonthedisappearanceofthefrontierremindsusofmanyAmericans’psychologicalmentalitywhichhasremoldedthefrontierintoa“‘stateofmind’”thatis“ratherdifficulttomap”(WrobelandSteiner,“Discovering”11).Besides,italsomapsoutanxietiesaboutthepresentconditionfromwhichJohnGradywantstoescapesoastoprolongthetraditionalfrontierlife.ThediminishingvistaoftheoldfrontierseizestheimaginationofMcCarthy’scowboys.Betweenhisnarrativesisembeddedabitternostalgiaforthefrontierlife.Forinstance,Mac,theowneroftheranch,feelsatlossinthefaceofthepotentialbankruptcyofhisranchandispossessedwithanincreasinglywearingsenseofbereavement.Lamentationoverthepastorallifeheoncelivedfillseverymomentofhisexistenceandvexeshimlikeanillnessthatgrowsevermoredifficulttobear.Whathecandoistorelyonthepastmemories:[w]hentheyhadusedtospendwintersattheoldhouseonthesoutheasternmostsectionoftheranchthelastthinghewouldhearbeforehefellasleepatnightwasthebawlofthetraineastboundoutofElPaso….Theherdersinthehillsstandingwiththeirserapesabouttheirshoulderswatchingthetrainpassbelowandthelittledesertfoxessteppingintothedarkenedroadbedtosniffafteritwherethewarmsteelrailslayhumminginthenight.Thatpartoftheranchwaslonggoneandtherestwouldsoonfollow.(McCarthy,Cities117)StandingprominentinMac’smemoriesisthesymbol“train.”Inthemythopoesisof163 theAmericanWest,thetrainisadualsymbolofprogressandcivilizationontheonehand,andofmonopolycapitalism,destructionandevengenocideontheother.“Train”isarecurringimageintheBorderTrilogy.McCarthyusestheimageof“train”astheliterarytropeofwhatLeoMarxcallsan“interruptedidyll”thatcausesaruptureintheotherwiseharmoniousrelationshipbetweenhumanbeingsandthenaturalworld(27).Theimageof“train”disturbstheextantequilibriumbetweenmanandnatureasaresultoftheirreversibleforceofmodernityintheWest,andhintsthedefunctfrontierlifefeaturedbyhorsesandwagonsasthemajormodesoftransportationinthewestwardexpansion.IntheBorderTrilogy,changesinthemodesoftransportationfromhorses,taxistotrainchartthefundamentaltransformationofeconomicpatternfromagribusinesstoindustrializationintheAmericanWest,andconstantlyremindreadersofthefactthatthefrontierlife,thoughasahistoricalrelicnow,begetsastrongsenseofnostalgia.McCarthy’sprojectionofnostalgialaysbarethebankruptcyofthecontemporaryexperienceofmodernmeninFredericJameson’ssense.Jamesonargues“weseemincreasinglyincapableoffashioningrepresentationsofourowncurrentexperience”(“Postmodernism”68).Ifpeoplerelyonnostalgia,itisduetotheirinabilitytoexperiencehistory.AccordingtoJameson,culturalformationsinthelatecapitalism“projecttheillusionthatthingsstillhappen,thateventsstillexist,thattherearestillstoriestotell”evenifsuchnarrativepossibilitieshavebecomeexhausted(Signatures87).McCarthy’sinfusionofthefrontierpastandthemodernpresentnesshighlightsthecowboys’nostalgicpursuitofthepastoral,free-will,self-reliantfrontierlifethatneverreallyexistedexceptforitsexistenceintheillusionprojectedbyfrontierideologywhichhasleftitsdeepimprintsonthefrontiermyth.McCarthy’scowboyscastanostalgiceyeonandseeksignificanceinthepastbecausethefull-fledgedmodernityhasmadethefrontierlifeimpossible.Furthermore,thetransitiontopostmodernisminthe1950shasbeguntofragmenthumanexperiencesandmadedepthlessthepresentlife.Onsuchoccasions,thecowboyshavenochoicebuttore-imaginethepastfrontierlifefromwhichtheyoncefoundtheirexistentialvalues,sothattheycanrelieveanxietiesbefallingthemintandemwiththe164 overwhelmingforceofmodernityandevenpostmodernity.Nevertheless,theirimaginingsarebasedonthefrontiermythfilteredbythepopularculturethathasallthemorefunctionedwellininculcatingthecentralbeliefsoffrontierideology.Thus,whattheygleanfromthefrontierlifeisapastthathasgraduallybeencommercializedintoanunrealfantasybytheengulfingsweepofthecapitalistlogic.IfMcCarthy’sdescriptionofmodernityinTexasconstituteshiseulogyforthefinishedprojectofthefrontier,thenhisdescriptionofcommercialexchangesinMexicofurtherindicatesthatthecapitalistlogicdominatespeopleineverydaylife.Numerousexamplescanbecitedtoprovetheunimaginablereachofcapitalfetishism.InAllthePrettyHorses,JohnGradyisofferedfreemealsandunstintinghelpfromtheMexicans.Now,hospitalityrecedesintomemory.WhereverhegoesinMexicoinCitiesofthePlain,JohnGradyischargedtovariousdegrees.HeisrequiredtopayanamountofmoneyinhisattempttofishforinformationconcerningwherehisloverMagdalenaisworking.Besides,hiscouplingwithMagdalenaisalsochargedwithotherparticipantsinvolvedtoensureitssmoothconduction:Si,si.Shetookthemoneyandopenedthedoorandhelditoutandwhisperedtoamanontheotherside.Hewastallandthinandhesmokedacigaretteinasilverholderandheworeablacksilkshirt.Helookedattheclientforjustamomentthroughthepartlyopeneddoorandhecountedthemoneyandnoddedandturnedawayandsheshutthedoor.(McCarthy,Cities69)Theexplicitmonetaryexchangeinthisepisodeimpressesonreaderscommercialismthathasalreadyexceededtheconfinementofnationalborders.Mexicoisladenwithawidevarietyofcommercialexchanges,rangingfromthepeddlersJohnGradycomesacross,cafeshefrequents,toshoe-shineboywithwhomhediscussesthemeaningofmarriage.MexicoisneitherbackwardnorprimitiveasgenerallyimaginedbymostAmericans.AllthesecommercialexchangesconstituteMcCarthy’srevisionsoftheimageofMexicointhetraditionalliterarynarrativeswhichdescribeditfromanOrientalistperspective.McCarthyusesMexicoasarefractortoperceivethetransnationalcommercialization.Indoingso,heprojectsanimageofuniversal165 modernityacrosstheborders,andwarnshisbelatedcowboysthatrelyingonAmericancapitaltoretrievetheirimaginedfrontierisadangerousideasinceitperpetratesthenewimperialistlogicshapedbyAmerica’sabilitytowininexpandingitseconomicfrontier.AlthoughtheoldfrontierhasalreadygoneinCitiesofthePlain,Americancowboysstillsimmerabitternostalgiaforit.Infact,nostalgiadoesnotforgeanewfutureforthem,butunveilstheirunabatedfrontiermindset.EvelynA.Schlatter,commentingonthepersistenceandstubbornnessofthefrontiermentality,pointsoutManifestDestiny“providedthefoundationfortheconstructionofaculturalmythaboutAmericancharacter”(53).ThispointistruetoMcCarthy’scowboyswhosefrontiermentalityrevealstheiryearningforthepastglorycreatedbythewhite-malecolonizerswhotriumphedoverlandandhuman“Others.”ThealluringgloryoftheoldfrontierenticesthemintorepetitivelycrossingtheMexican-Americanborder,sothattheycanre-asserttheirmasculinityandracialsuperiority.Border-crossinghasalwaysbeenadisputableissuefortheU.S.andMexico.McCarthy’sborder-crosserstestifytheone-directionalrestrictionontheborder-crossingbetweenthetwoneighboringcountries.Theircrossingsforseekingfuninwhorehouseswithoutabidingbylegalrestrictionsontheentryauthorizationattheopeningsceneofthenovelarenotprivatestories,butinsinuateruggedindividualismoftheAmericansandtheirimperialmindsetthatregardsMexicoas“anothercountry”(McCarthy,Cities218).MarcelaAlvarezPerezandMarkT.BergerpointouttheunbalancedrestrictionsontheMexican-Americanborderandwrite:Theborderhereisonlyreallyaborderinonedirection.IfyouenterMexicoonfoot,itisunlikelythatanyonewillevercheckyourpassportoridentitypapers.However,theprocessofcrossingtotheUnitedStates(elotroladoastheMexicanscallit)requiresthatyoupossessapassport.(2)McCarthy’scowboysaremembersoftheirculturalandregionalpublicsandalsopartsofthenationalcollectivethatnaturalizetheconceptsofracialandculturalsuperiority.AsMexicanwriterOctoviaPazsummarizes,“Ingeneral,Americanshavenotlooked166 forMexicoinMexico;theyhavelookedfortheirobsessions,enthusiasms,phobias,hopes,[and]interests”(358).Alternativelyput,manyAmericansobserveMexicofromtheOrientalistorthewhite-maleperspective.Infact,beingawhiteman,accordingtoEdwardSaid,is“anideaandareality”(Orientalism227).Largelyrelyingontheculturallysanctionedhabitofdeployinggeneralizations,sucharealityiscategorizedinto“language,races,types,colors,mentalities,eachcategorybeingnotsomuchaneutraldesignationasanevaluativeinterpretation”(Said,Orientalism227).Inthissense,McCarthy’scowboys,ignoringtheconfinementsontheMexican-Americanborder,championthedichotomiesbetweenAmericaandMexico,thewhiteandthenon-white,andthecivilizedandtheprimitive.JuárezandElPaso,thetwincitiesoftheMexican-AmericanborderMcCarthy’scowboysalwaysvisit,historicallysymbolizetheprimitiveandthecivilized,andtheevilandthepurerespectively.ThesebinaryoppositionsareproducedbytheideologicalpowerofwhitesuperioritythatattributesallevilanddirtyaspectstoMexico.Withthepenetrativeinfluencesofmassmedia,theMexicanbordercitiessuchasMexicaliandCiudadJuárezinthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannationarecitiesoften“equatedwithsin,corruption,politicalandsocialnegligence,andlawlessness”(Cota-Torres53).Theseimages,deeplyimprintedinthesocialimaginationofMexico’sNorthernneighbor,havecreatedtheborderregionas“laleyendanegra[theblacklegend]”(Cota-Torres53).InCitiesofthePlain,Juárez,whichMcCarthy’scowboysfrequenttoseekfuninwhorehouses,belongstopartofthe“sixteen-hundred-milepleasurestripmeasurablyorientedtogringoswithlowlibidinalthresholds”(Demaris4).TheirvisitstoJuáreznotonlyenablethemtoimmerseintothefountainofsexualthrills,butalsostrengthenthepurityofAmericabychannelingtheeviltoMexico.TheybearanoticeableresemblancetoAmericanwriters,likeJohnSteinbeck,JackKerouac,who“intuitedsomethingdistinctive,aprofound‘otherness’borderingonanationalmystique”(Walker12).Moreimportantly,theybecomeaccompliceswithManifestDestinythathasalwaysprescribed“Mexicaninferiority”versus“Americansuperiority”ontheracialbasisandhenceworkedsatisfactorilytoquenchAmericanthirstforexoticism167 bothduringthemomentofconflictsbetweenthetwoneighboringcountriesandthroughoutthetwentiethcentury.Furthermore,perceivingMexicanwomenasmerelycommercializedsexualobjects,McCarthy’scowboysmakesthemselvesmorallyavailable“withinacodeofracism”thatratifiesandextends“therightofAngloconquesttotherealmofthesexual”(Limón278).Bytakingtheirwomenviaprostitution,theAnglo-Americancolonizersare“sexuallyaffirmed”anddiminish“thealreadydesexualizedMexicanmale”(Limón278).VisitingwhorehousesinMexicoenablestheAmericansextractfromtheMexicansbotheconomicsurplusvaluesymbolizedbytheMexicanwomen’scorporalityand“racial-culturalsurplusvalue”representedbytheculturalothernessofMexico(Flores194).Hence,McCarthy’scowboysfallpreytothebiasedconceptualizationofMexicoasafallenandcorruptplacethathasbeenpopularizedinAmericaeversincetheexplorationoftheSouthwesternfrontier.Forthem,Mexicoisanexoticlandwheretheycanenteratwill.Individualisticastheirbehaviorsseemstobe,theystronglyreflectthefrontiermentalityofmanyAmericanswhoalwaysexploreafurtherfrontierwithoutrespectingothers’cultures.TomR.SullivaninCowboysandCaudillos:FrontierIdeologyoftheAmericas(1990)arguesthatthecowboysunwittinglybecomethemouthpiecesofAnglo-Americancolonialism.“Thesurvivalistfrontiersman,firstatrapperandahunterbutlatertothecowboy…embodiedthenewhero”(Sullivan11).Suchheroesweremen“whocouldmakenewspacesafeforcolonists,[and]whocouldcreatetheorderAngloculturerequiredintheNewWorld”(Sullivan11).AfteranalyzinghowthecowboysreflectthefrontiermindsetintheworksofThomasBergerandE.L.Doctorow,Sullivanconcludesthat“itisdifficult,perhapsimpossible,tocompletelyeradicatesuchdeeplyembeddedform[frontierideology]fromourminds”(164).Sullivan’sconclusionistruetoMcCarthy’scowboys,andmuchtruertoJohnColeGradywhoisundergirdedandmisledbysuchanideology.NumerousexamplescanillustratehowJohnGradyisinfluencedbyfrontierideology.Attheopeningsceneofthenovel,JohnGrady,togetherwithhisfellows,frequentsaMexicanwhorehouseinJuárez.BillyParham,uponhisarrival,loudly168 asks:“Where’stheall-[A]mericancowboyat”(McCarthy,Cities1).Asapopcultureimage,“all-Americancowboy”hasenjoyedagreaterpopularitywiththeeponymousmoviedirectedbyHowellUpchurchandscreenedin1985.Theyearof1985witnessedthepublicationofMcCarthy’sfirstWesternBloodMeridian.McCarthyoncesaid:“[t]hereisn’taplaceintheworldyoucangowheretheydon’tknowaboutcowboys”(qtd.inWoodward32).Inthelightofhisassertion,wecanspeculatethatMcCarthymighthasnotedtheinfiltratingeffectsofthepopcultureasameansoftheculturalIdeologicalStateApparatuswhichhassucceededinignitingandmanipulatingtheAmericanimaginationofthefrontierlife.Infact,McCarthy’sreferenceto“all-Americancowboy”tonameJohnGradymockshisself-claimedcowboyidentityandcreatesasituationalironyinwhichhisexpectedcowboylifeturnsouttobesomethingunavailable.JohnGradyisunawarethathehasalreadybeendeprivedofthecowboylife,buthestilladherestohiscowboyidentity.Hissubjectidentificationprovesthathiscognizanceisstructuredbyfrontierideologythatmakeshimformanimaginaryrelationshiptohisself-conceivedrealyetpastconditionoftheexistenceofthefrontierlife.However,suchaconditionisamisplaced,unreachableandunreliableone.AccordingtoLouisAlthusser,ideologyhailsindividualsassubjectssincethereisnoideology“exceptbythesubjectandforsubjects.Meaning,thereisnoideologyexceptforconcretesubjects,andthisdestinationforideologyisonlymadepossiblebythesubject”(Lenin170).Statedinanotherway,ideologymustdependontheindividualsubjectionwhichfunctions“bythecategoryofthesubjectanditsfunctioning”(italicizedinoriginalLenin170).ViewedfromAlthusser’sview,tohaveanameof“all-Americancowboy”forJohnGradymeansthatheisrecognizedasauniquesubjectwhoselivingdependsontheideashehasinallconsciousnessfreelychosen.Ideologyfunctionsinawaythatitrecruitsindividualsandtransformsthemintosubjects.ThisoperationiscalledbyAlthusser“interpellationorhailing”whichcanbeillustratedby“thelinesofthemostcommonplaceeverydaypolice(orother)hailing:‘Hey,youthere!’”(Lenin174).Whenhearingthehailing,thehailedindividualturnsaround.Itisin“thismereone-hundred-and-eighty-degreephysicalconversion”that169 theindividual“becomesasubject”(Althusser,Lenin174).Thehailedindividualrecognizesthatthehailisreallyaddressedtohim.Theindividualturnsround,believing,suspectingorknowingthatthehailisforhim.Throughthehailing,theexistenceofideologyfunctionsinanimplicitwaytomakeindividuals“always-alreadysubjects”thatrecognizetheexistingstateofaffairs(italicizedinoriginalAlthusser,Lenin176).Bythesametoken,BillyParham’shailingof“all-Americancowboy”receivesapositiveresponsefromJohnGrady.Itisinthiseffectivesender-receivercommunicativemodethatweperceivethatfrontierideologyhasalreadysucceededinhailingJohnGradyasasubjectwithcowboyidentity.Ideology,beitintheformofRepressiveStateApparatusesorIdeologicalStateApparatuses,contributestothesameresult:toquoteAlthusser,thereproductionof“capitalistrelationsofexploitation”(Lenin154).Likewise,frontierideologyhadachievedsucharesultbymeansofthereproductionoflaborpower,soastomaintainthecapitalistexploitationofthecowboyswhoplayedanessentialroleinthewestwardexpansionandensuretheirsubmissiontotherulesoftheestablishedorderortotherulingideology.However,thecowboysclimbingoutoftheclassordertobecomethedominatinglaborforceintheearly1950sAmericawouldbeimpossibleinalandsorichinindustrialproductionpotentialandsoshortofadvancedlaborforce.Againstsuchasocialcondition,McCarthy’scowboysinCitiesofthePlainarebeyondtheirabilitytoreversethesweepingtidesofindustrializationandcommercialization.Nevertheless,cowboyslikeJohnGrady,stillmakethelastefforttomaintaintheirdominatingstatusaslaborpower.Inthisway,theirendeavor,thoughcominginvain,atteststotheremainingeffectsoffrontierideologyaccountingfortheirfrontiernostalgia.AtypicalexamplethatillustratesthehauntingeffectsoffrontierideologyisJohnGrady’sadherencetocowboycodes.InascenewherethetradingofhorsesonMacMcGovern’sranchisconducted,JohnGradycomesacrossatallmanwho,undertheemploymentofWolfenbarger,wantstoleavealamehorseatMac’sranch.JohnGradyisofferedtendollarashushmoneybythetallman,sothathewillnotreporttohisemployerthatthehorseisinjured.JohnGradyobviouslydisregardstheman’soffer.170 Hisrefusalmakeshimstandoutasatraditionalcowboyhero.AssociatedwiththetraditionalAmericancowboysisasetofspiritualvalueslikeintenseindividualism,self-reliance,self-integrityandastrongantipathytosocialforgeryandhypocrisy.JohnGrady,withhisminddeeply-rootedincowboycodes,refusestodeceivehisemployer.ThisepisodeofcommercialexchangeoffersawindowthroughwhichJohnGrady’sidentificationwith“all-Americancowboy”canbeobserved.Whatismore,JohnGrady’sattachmenttocowboycodesmoldsthematerialorpracticalexistenceforthefunctioningoffrontierideology,sinceherecognizesthatheisasubjectwithcowboyidentity“inthepracticalritualsofthemostelementaryeverydaylife”(Althusser,Lenin173).His“practicalrituals”suchashisnegotiationwithhorsesellersandhorse-breakingaffirmhisrecognitionofthesubjectwithcowboyidentityfrontierideologyascribestohim.Thisrecognitiongives“theconsciousness”ofhis“incessant(eternal)practiceofideologicalrecognition”(Althusser,Lenin173).Inthisway,JohnGrady,justasheishailedbyIdeologicalStateApparatusesinAllthePrettyHorses,isagainunconsciouslydisciplinedbyfrontierideologywhosefunctionwastoputpeopleintheirproperplacewithoutinvokingitsimplicitlyrepressiveandexploitativenatureinthewestwardexpansion.Indeed,frontierideologyfueledthefastdevelopmentoftheWestinthecenturyofAmericanterritorialexpansionandpropelledAmericaintothepositionasasuperpoweracrosstheAmericancontinent.Equallyimportant,itgavebirthtothemythoftheWestcentraltowhichwasthefrontiermyth.McCarthyoncesaidinaninterviewbyRichardWoodward:“Thereisn’taplace”wherepeople“don’tknow…themythoftheWest”(qtd.inWoodward32).Inotherwords,thecowboy,asaniconoftheWest,wherevertheygo,representAmericancoloniesofpopularcultureandpromulgateitsnationalmyths.RichardSlotkinnotesthatthemythconsistedof“aplethoraoftraditionalnarrative”exemplifiesandhistoricizes“ideology”(“Myth”70).Judgedfromthisperspective,itisthroughAmericannationalmythslikethefrontierandcowboymyththatfrontierideology,asanabstractionofthesystemofbeliefs,values,andinstitutionalrelationships,hastiedtheAmericanWestwithopportunity,worldly171 heavenandlotusland.JohnGrady,whosestrongattachmenttotheAmericanWestisshapedbythemisleadingaspectscentraltothefrontierandcowboymyth,exhibitsnotonlythefrontiermentalityloominglargein1950sbutalsothe“post-frontieranxiety”(Wrobel,TheEnd85).Despitetheclosed-frontierthemewasadominatingelementinthesocialandpoliticalthoughtofthe1930s,itcontinuedtobeahotlydebatedtopicafterWWII.AsWrobelnotices,“eveninthepostwarerathefrontierthemedidnotloseitspotencyaltogether,becauseitsunderlyingconcernoverthelimitsofindividualismhasneverbeenfarfromthecenterofAmericanthought”(TheEnd142).Thusenvisaged,JohnGrady’srefusaltoparticipateincommercialfraudfurthersuggestshisdeep-rootedensnarementinfrontierideologywhichleadshimtocastanostalgicviewonthepastfrontierlife.AccordingtoDavidM.Wrobel,thenostalgiaforthepassingageofthecowboylifeandthewildfrontierandfrontieranxietyhadrundeepintothecultural,socialandpoliticalambienceofAmericasincethe1890s.Inspiteofinternalsolutions(“themovementforlandreform”)andexternalstrategies(“creationofnewterritorialfrontiers”)adoptedbythefederalgovernmenttopreservethefrontiersincethe1890s,frontieranxietyreacheditsapexduringtheGreatDepressionandcontinuedtohauntmanyAmericansthroughoutthe1940sandthe1950s(Wrobel,TheEnd42,54).Wrobel’sobservationgraspsthesocialandideologicaltraitsofAmericansocietyinthefirsthalfofthetwentiethcentury.Inparticular,AmericawaspreoccupiedwithexpandingitseconomicfrontierintheWestinthe1940sand1950s.StanleyCorkinnotesthenineteenth-centuryfrontier,asaconceptualdevicemadematerialbyitsplacementintheNorthAmerica,“isasitedirectlyequitablewiththeeconomicfrontiersofthelatefortiesandfifties”(“CowboysandFreeMarkets”77).Againsttheabove-sketchedsocialandeconomicbackgroundinwhichheisplaced,JohnGradyasacowboyundoubtedlyisnolongerusablefortheneweconomicpattern.Hiseffortstomaintainthecowboylifesimplymakehimanironicherowhotriestocircleasmalllandofthefrontierforhisidealizedlife.Nonetheless,hisfruitlessbehaviorsinmaintainingthecowboylife,withequalforce,implytheeffectivemanipulationoffrontierideologyrelyingonthematerialexistenceatthe172 unconsciouslevelofindividuals.TheunconsciousfactorsbecomesignificantininterpretingJohnGrady’sinternalizationoffrontierideology,for,asStuartHallpointsout,ideologicalanalysiswouldgiveprioritytotheneglectedissuesof“howideologybecomesinternalized,howwecometospeak‘spontaneously’withinthelimitsofthecategoriesofthoughtwhichexistoutsideusandwhichcanmoreaccuratelybesaidtothinkus”(29).Inthe1950sAmerica,frontierideologyfunctionsinalimitedwayneitherby“thegraceofGod,”norby“virtueoftheseizureofStatepoweralone,”butbytheinstallationof“IdeologicalStateApparatuses”(Althusser,Lenin175).TheISAscreatethis“unconscious”andthenuseittoforgeagroupofpeoplewho,likeJohnGrady,mistakenlysubjugatethemselvestohavetheimaginaryrelationshiptotherealyetpastconditionsoftheexistenceofthefrontierlifeandthentoasocietythatfeignsindividualismandopportunityforthemorgiveshopetothemwithintheframeworkoftheirusefulnessascheaplaborers.ToquoteBillyParham,“Daybreaktobackbreakforagodgivendollar…Ilovethislife….Ilovethislife”(McCarthy,Cities10).JohnGradyalsohasacrushonsuchdrudgingworks.HisloveforhardworkintheWestcomestospontaneoustermswithfrontierideology,whichhasmystifiedtheexploitedwagelaborasaformoffreedom.Asintepellatedsubjects,McCarthy’scowboysbecomerelevanttounderstandinghowfrontierideologyinscribesitselfuponthemandmakesthemsocialized.Infact,JohnGradyandParhamareonlysocializedsubjectswithintheframeworkoffrontierideologywhich,withitspromiseofequalchanceandfreedom,wearsouttheirusefulnessandstillkeepsthemintheirsocialandeconomicplace.OncefrontierideologyisthoroughlyengravedinthemindsofJohnGradyandhisco-workers,theirsubmissiontotheestablishedsocialorderandthereproductionoftheirsubmissiontofrontierideologyareinevitable.Withtheseaccomplished,thecowboysaslaborpowerareassured,evenifthey,ascheaplaborers,aremisplacedandunsuitableforthepresenteconomicandsocialstructure.Whattheycandoistore-openafurtherfrontiertomaketheirusefulnessfelt.Oncecowboysdoso,theirunconsciousadherencetoimperialexpansionforgedbyfrontierideologyresurfacesandhence173 makesthembecomemouthpieceofAmericanimperialconquest.Duringtheverytimeoftransitiontoanewsocialandeconomicstructureinthepost-WWIIAmericanWest,ranchesandcattle-raisingwereunwelcomeandevenbecameimpedimentforthefederalgovernmentwhichsparednoefforttoreinforceitsmilitarypowertocopewiththethreatsfromCommunism.WWII,EarlPomeroywrites,“broughtthemostdrasticchangesinthefarWestsince1849”(ThePacific297).SimilarviewcomesfromGeraldD.Nash.NashpointsoutthatnoothersingleeventthanWWIIstimulatedmanufacturingandindustryintheAmericanWest.“Sleepywesterntownshadbeentransformedintoteemingcities”(Nash18).AmorescathingcommentisfromPaulaGunnAllenwhounearthsthelong-termAmericanmilitarismintheMexican-Americanborderlands:FromthetimeofearlyincursionsacrosstheborderagainstPanchoVillaorinpursuitofstoppingGermanpowerplaysinMexicopriortoWorldWarIandovertheenduingdecades,themilitaryhascontinuedtoplayacentralroleintheborderlands.DuringWorldWarIandII,FortBliss,thelargebaseatElPaso,wasamajortrainingandstatingarea,asitremainedthroughtheGulfWaroftheearly1990s.(358)Againstthebackgroundofthechangingsocialandpoliticalstructure,theplace,whereMac’sranchislocated,undoubtedlyiscovetedbythefederalarmy.ThefederalgovernmenthassentpeopletosurveythesevenstatesintheSouthwestandfindthesorriestlandformilitarybases.Mac’sranchisrightinthemiddleofthesevenstates.TheexpectedtakeoverofMac’sranchbythefederalgovernmentremindspeoplethatthephysicalfrontierwouldbetransformedintotheeconomicandmilitaryfrontierandaneweconomicandsocialorderwithitsoverwhelmingforcewouldsubstitutethecattle-raisingeconomy.Facedwiththedrasticchangesindaystocome,JohnGradyisunabletoexplainthereasontoBillywhiletheyarelookingafteraherdofcattle.Inhisview,thiscountryisnotthesame,norarethingsinitunchanged.“Thewarchangedeverything.Idon’tthinkpeopleknowityet”(McCarthy,Cities78).WhenBillyaskshim“howdidthewarchangeit,”JohnGradysimplyreplies:“Itjustdid.Itaintthesameno174 more.Itneverwillbe”(78).Thepost-WWIIerawasindeedcomplicatedandbeyondcommonpeople’sunderstanding.Particularly,thegeopoliticalorideologicalaffairssincetheColdWarwerebeyondthereachofordinarypeople.ButtheWarbroughttomostofAmericans,betheyveteransorcommonpeople,nothingbutasenseofspiritualtraumaanddisplacement.PierreLagayettereadsthegovernment’sappropriationofthelandinCitiesofthePlainas“anaptmetaphorfortherapaciousandimperialisticinstinctofamilitarizedsuperpowerwhosedecisioncannotorshouldnotbeopposed”(82).McCarthy’scowboysdonotknowthehiddenmotivationbehindthefederaltakeoveroftheSouthwesternland,letalonethepotentialAmericanimperialismreinforcedbytheappropriationoftheSouthwestlandformilitarytests.BillyonlyknowsthattheSouthwestisnolongerthesameplace.However,thefollowingconsequencesbroughtbythefederallandappropriationareobviousforAmericancowboysbecausetheymustliveanomadicandunstablelife.ForBilly,hissubsequentvagrancychallengeshisveryidentityasacowboyandevencoerceshimintoreconstructinghisidentitybymeansofworkingasanextraintheWesternmovies.Tohisdisappointment,workingasanextradoesnotensurehimarespectableandrichlife,butleadshimtoinevitabledisillusionment.Americannationalvalues,suchasrebirth,ruggedindividualismandindependencepersonifiedbythefrontier,arestillattractiveforthecowboysinCitiesofthePlain,fortheyendeavortoliveaquasi-cowboylife.McCarthy’sdescriptionofthehuntingofwilddogsisequivalenttothatofwolvesbytheearlierWesternsettlers.Hiscowboyshuntwilddogsnotduetotheirintentiontoeradicatethem,buttoasenseofmimickingfrontiersmentolivearealcowboylifeanddemonstratetheiridentityascowboys.McCarthywrites:Theyellowdogrolledandbouncedandgotupagainandcontinuedrunningwiththenooseaboutitsneck.JohnGradycameridingupbehindBillyandswunghisropeandheeledtheyellowdogandquirtedthehorseonwiththedoubleropeandthendallied.TheslackofBilly’scatchropehissedalongthegroundandstoppedandthebigyellowdogrosesuddenlyfromthegroundinheadlongflighttaughtbetweenthe175 tworopesandtheropesresonatedasinglebriefdullnoteandthenthedogexploded.(Cities167)ThehuntingsceneremindsusofthehunterarchetypeintraditionalWesterns.Thisarchetypeisanimportantelementinconstituting“NationalSymbolic”(Berlant5).NationalSymbolicisaLacaniantermusedbyLaurenBerlanttodescribeaconglomerateoflegal,political,experiential,linguisticandterritorialforcesatworktodefinethetraitsofanationanditscitizens.ItisconstructedbymeansoftheproductionofNationalFantasyandworkstodefinenationalityandidentityatthelevelofnationalmemory(Berlant5).InAmerica,NationalFantasyincludesthecowboyheroes,frontiersmen,thesacredhuntersandothersymbolsassociatedwiththefrontier.Inthissense,McCarthy’sdoghuntersemulatetheNationalSymbolicthatgaverisetoAmericannationalidentity.Nevertheless,McCarthydoesnotennoblethehuntermythinwhichthevictoriousmomentiswitnessedbybonesorwildanimals’bodiesheapingupbesidesthehunter.Theironyinthecowboys’usingtheirropingskillstocatchandkillferaldogsisrevealedbyBilly’scommentintheearlydog-huntingsceneinwhichhecallshisfellows“dogropers”andmuses“Iknewit’dcometothis”(Cities164).ThedwindlingheroicstatureofJohnGrady,Billyandothercowboysinthedog-huntingsceneconstitutesMcCarthy’sparodyofthetraditionalhunterintheformulaicWesternanddemystifiesthefantasizedWestwhichhasalwaysglorifiedAmerica’striumphalistconquestandfulfilleddestiny.Indeed,thehuntingexperiencemakesthesecowboysfeelthatthefrontierlifeseemsrealandretrievableinthe1950ssinceitprovidesthematerialexistencefortheoperationoffrontierideology.AlthusserpointsoutthatIdeologicalStateApparatusesdesignatethematerialexistenceofideologyinideologicalpractices,ritualsandinstitutionstotheeffectthat“ideas”or“representations”whichmakeupideologydonothave“anideal”or“spiritualexistence,butamaterialexistence”(Lenin165).Hefurtherillustrateshisideabylistingreligiousbeliefasanexample.Religiousbeliefisnotmerelyaninnerconviction,butalsoreliesonthechurchasaninstitutionanditsritualslikebaptism,prayandconfessionwhich,beyondameresecondary176 externalizationoftheinnerbelief,standfor“theverymechanismsthatgenerateit”(italicizedinoriginalŽižek,“Specter”12).Simplyput,ifonekneelsdown,oneshallbelievethatsheorhekneelsdownbecauseofherorhisownbelief.Thusfollowingtheritualisanexpressionoreffectofone’sownbelief;inturn,theritual“performativelygeneratesitsownideologicalfoundation”(Žižek,“Specter”13).PatriciaNelsonLimerickobservesthat,tomanywhiteAmericans,“beliefinthemythic[o]ldWesthascometoresemblebeliefinmoreconventionalreligiousdoctrines”(Something314).Bythesametoken,McCarthy’scowboys,whoemulatethehuntingpractices,exposetheirfirmbeliefinthemythicalWestwheretheywouldliveafrontierlife.Theirmimicryofthehuntermythrunscounterto“aparticularkindofcommunalexperience”and“aspecialformofsharedfantasy”thathavebeenpasseddowntotheAmericansbyvariousIdeologicalStateApparatuses(Arlow5).However,theirperformancenegatesthematerialexistenceuponwhichtheoperationofideologydependsasMcCarthymakesaparodyofthehuntermyththatpresentsnotsomuchatruefrontierlifeasaquasi-frontierlife.Indoingso,McCarthy,firmlyconvincedoftheinterpellativepoweroffrontierideologyjustashestronglyinterrogatesitsregenerativepower,enablesustoseethepathologicalmentalitybehindAmericans’blindbeliefinthemythicfrontierandtheirnostalgiaforit.InthischangingworldoftheAmericanSouthwest,thecowboysinCitiesofthePlainhavenowayout,onlytospirituallydistancethemselvesfromthemodernsocietywherehopeisalwaysundersiegetonostalgiaanddisappointment.Retellingcowboystoriesandadventures,thoughenablingthemtoidleawaytheirtime,stillconstitutesthecontemporaryfantasizedvisionoftheoldWest.Watchingtherodeoandstockshowremainstheirbiggestinterestbutsolidifiestheiridentificationwithfrontierideology.Forinstance,Troy,whoworksasacowhandasBillyandJohnGradydoatMac’sranch,tellshisexperienceofwatchingspectacularrodeoafterhisdischargefromtheWWIIarmy:“WhenIgotoutofthearmyIwentuptoAmarillowithGeneEdmondsfortherodeoandstockshow”(McCarthy,Cities21).InAmerica,therodeoisapubliceventforentertainmentthatprovidesaplatformforthecowboystoexhibittheirhorsemanshipintheirperformanceofridingwildhorsesandcatching177 cattlewithropes.TherodeoinAmericahasalonghistorydatingbacktothe1880s.Thelong-runningrodeo“wasadvertisedastheWorld’sChampionshipRodeowellintothe1940s”(Fredriksson24).Withthenationwidepopularityoftherodeo,thecowboyspiritisunquestionablyspurred,sothatcommonAmericansareinundatedandhailedby“theculturalISA”(Althusser,Lenin143).Troy’saccountreflectsthatthefrontierlifecowboysoncelivedpersistentlyattractsAmericanimaginationoftheWest.Eveniftheycannotlivearealcowboylife,butstillpsychologicallyidentifywithit.Inthisway,frontierideologyrunsdeepintheheartsoftheAmericansinasilentbuteffectiveway.McCarthy’scowboysareunabletoperceivetherulingideologyunitingadisparatehostofIdeologicalStateApparatuseswhich“‘function’massivelyandpredominantlybyideology…despiteitsdiversityanditscontradictions”(Althusser,Lenin146).Therulingideologyinthe1950sAmericawasnolongerfrontierideologyasitfunctionedinthewestwardexpansion.Nevertheless,frontierideologyhasbeensuccessfullyimprintedinthemindsofthegeneralpublicviaIdeologicalStateApparatuseswhoseeffectscanbesensedinthebelatedcowboys.MarkBusbyarguesthatMcCarthy’scowboysstruggle“withtwoopposingforces,theforceofmemoryandhistory—thepresentnessofthepastinsouthernlife—andthehistorylesspost-WorldWarIIalienatedself”(“IntotheDarkeningLand”228).Theirstrugglesubsumesthemintothemarginalizedstateandmakesthemsufferthebitterendsoffrontierideologywhichstructurestheirunconscious,sincetheyarelistening“storiesoftheoldwestthatoncewas.Theoldermentalkedandtheyoungermenlistened”(McCarthy,Cities91).TheseoldstoriesperformthefunctionofwhatAlthussercalls“theculturalISA”(Lenin143).Themorefascinatedwiththerodeoandcowboylegendsthebelatedcowboysare,themorenoticeablethehauntingeffectsofthevanishedfrontierareandthemoreattractivetheirfrontierfantasiesare.InCitiesofthePlain,timechanges,andtheprogressofhistoryoverwhelmsanybattlingforcethatimpedesitsway.ThepastfrontierlifeisbeyondthereachofMcCarthy’scowboysinthisdayandage.Yet,itislikethespecterhauntingthemwithoutprovidingaspacetocontaintheirideals,andpushesthemtorelyonnostalgia178 toassuagethepainfulexperiencetriggeredbymodernity.Thisnostalgiaisineffectakindofimperialistnostalgiathatprecipitatesthecowboysintopursuingafurtherfrontieronwhichtheywouldre-liveanauthenticcowboylife.Inthissense,toseekafurtherfrontieristore-invalidatefrontierideologythathascloakeditsimperialmotivationandinternalcolonization,foritsideologicalpropsarebasedontheprinciplethatmightisrightandthatviolenceislegitimate.WilliamChristieMccleodpointsoutthat“[e]veryfrontierhastwosides”(vii).Indeed,noonecandenythepositivefunctionoffrontierideologyinitshistoricalcontext,particularlyinthenineteenthcenturywhenAmericanswerebusywithdevelopingtheWest.But,ifAmericannationoveremphasizesitspositivesideswithouttakingintoconsiderationthepresentborderissuesandinternalcolonization,itwillprobablybeentrenchedinthepermanenceofthepast.FrontierideologyimprintingitselfonAmericannationalmythshasnurturedinthecollectiveunconsciousofmanyAmericansasenseofwhitesupremacy,imperialisttendency,ruggedindividualism,andabitteraversiontosocialrestrictions.ThispointisquitetruetoMcCarthy’scowboyswhobelievetheyareacutaboveothers.Inparticular,JohnGradybecomesanembodimentof“frontierism.”“Frontierism”referstothecowboyswhoattempttoresurrectan“imagined,romanticizedpastinhabitedbywhitearchetypestriumphingoverlandandhumanothers”(Schlatter3).Suchwhitearchetypesencode“race(white),gender(male),andplace(frontier-outWest)”(Schlatter56).InherentinthethreeencodedtropesisAmerica’sinternalandexternalcolonizationwithoutcolonies.Viewedfromthisperspective,JohnGrady,evenifheisnotinapositiontoliveoutthefrontiermyth,stillunflagginglypursueshisself-conceivedfrontierlife,whichissymbolicallyexpressedbyhisintentiontobuyMagdalenaforhispossession,andhencebecomesanewimperialistwhoselogicisrootedinfrontierideologythathasmadeunproblematicthenotionsofunbridledindividualism,unlimitedpursuitanduncheckedincreaseandevennowrecaststhefrontierasasignifierforsaleintheglobalmarketviaAmericancultureindustry.Unfortunately,inCitiesofthePlain,JohnGrady,ashedoesinAllthePrettyHorses,overlooksthesocial,historicalandpoliticalrestrictionsontheMexican-American179 borderandrepetitivelycrossesittobuywhathethinkshehasrightto,onlytoencounterunexpectedresistancethatabortshisself-conceivedplan.B.TheFailedAgentofNewImperialismforthe“SymbolicFrontier”InAllthePrettyHorses,JohnGradyimaginesMexicoasthe“NewFrontier”whichwouldfulfilltheroleofsocial“safetyvalve”asdubbedbyFrederickJacksonTurner.ThisforeigncountryJohnGradyconsidersashiscowboyparadisedoesnottoleratetheculturalvaluesherepresents.Similarly,inCitiesofthePlain,JohnGrady,mistakenlyintendingtoimposeAmericannormsonMexico,becomesanewimperialistwhoresortstoAmericancapitaltocommercializeeverythinginMexico.Yet,Mexicoisnotanemptyvesselintowhichhecanpourouthisdiscontentcausedbythesocialchanges.JohnGrady’sintentiontobuyandmarryMagdalena,aMexicanprostitute,whobecomeshis“symbolicfrontier”invertingthefrontierethos,13fallsintoanimperialrut.InAllthePrettyHorses,JohnGradylosesmorethanhiscowboydreaminMexico.HelosesthecorevaluesthatdefinehisverysenseofselfandAmerica’sverysenseofitselfatlarge.Hewillnotregainhiscowboyidentityuntilthecorevaluesheadherestohavebeenrepairedorcompensated.Thus,inCitiesofthePlain,hemustanswerthecallofpossessinghis“symbolicfrontier”soastoliveuptoacohortofthefrontiervaluesheholdsdearasaresultofhisinternalizationoffrontierideology.However,hisself-endowedmissionofliberatingandpossessingMagdalenaaborts,onlytoleadhertoatragicendofbeingmurdered.HisabortedplancanbeseenasMcCarthy’sinsinuationofAmerica’snewimperialismwhichranwildduringthelate1990swhenCitiesofthePlainwaspublished.13InspiredbyJohnF.Kennedy’s“NewFrontier”,JohnHellmanncreativelyadoptsthe“symbolicfrontier”todesignatetheopenlandscapeofchallengeandpossibilityinmetaphoricaldimensions(36).Inthis“symbolicfrontier”,AmericanswouldregeneratetheirtraditionalvaluesdefinedbyAmericanfrontierexperiencewhileservingfutureprogress.Likewise,AnnetteKolodny,inTheLayoftheLand(1975)andTheLandbeforeHer(1984),clarifiesthesymbolicsemblancebetweenwomanandlandinthefrontierliterature.Fromthisperspective,malepossessionofwomenisequaltothatofthe“symbolicfrontier”tobeexploredandconquered.Thus,inthisdissertation,wecallMagdalenathe“symbolicfrontier”forwhichJohnGradyintendstopossessatwhatevercost.180 JohnGrady,asanunconsciouscarrieroffrontierideology,changesfromaculturalimperialistinAllthePrettyHorsestoanewimperialistinCitiesofthePlain.InCitiesofthePlain,hecrossesbackandforththeMexican-AmericanborderforfourteentimeseithertoseeMagdalenaortonegotiatewiththepimpEduardowhoownsandcontrolsMagdalena.TheMexican-AmericanborderhasalwaysbeenpermeableformanyAmericanssincetheendoftheMexican-AmericanWarin1848.However,manyAmericans,particularlythefederalofficers,repudiateillegalMexicanimmigrantsfortheiroccupationofthejobmarketintheAmericanSouthwestanddeclareAmerica’slossofcontrolovertheMexicanborder.AsPatriciaNelsonLimerickasserts:Intheabsenceofhistorians,afuzzynostalgia[is]usuallysubstitutedforthehistoricaleventsthatshapedthepresent.When,forinstance,publicofficialscalledforimmigrationrestriction,theyoftenusedthephrase,“WehavelostcontroloftheMexicanborder.”(Something26)Ironically,McCarthy’sborder-crosserswhozigzagintoMexicowithoutabidingbylegalrestrictionsdebunkthelop-sidedcontroloftheMexican-AmericanborderonthepartofAmericanfederalgovernment.MarcialGonzálezpointsoutthattheMexican-Americanborderhas“anideologicalfunction,”whichaimsatwhippingup“racisthysteriaamongU.S.citizensbycreatingscapegoatsofundocumentedimmigrants,effectivelyblamingthemforhighunemploymentratesandotherdepressedeconomicconditions”(281).Inthisideologicalrepresentation,theAmericansareinnocent;whereas,theMexicansareguiltyfortheirillegalcompetitioninAmericanjobmarket.Infact,manyAmericanswhoillegallyenterMexicoeitherforentertainmentorforadventureaimtoexplorethenewspacefortheirhopes,toplundermaterialwealthortoescapefromthepunishmentofAmericanlaw.JohnGradyismuchlikehisfellowswhoinsistthat“Mexicoisacharming,picturesquecountryofsomeinteresttothediversion-seekingtouristwhosepocketfulofcreditcardsinsureshimareadywelcomefromthenatives”(Walker18).Ineffect,heisatypicalnewimperialistwhocovetsotherpeople’spropertywiththeaidof181 Americaneconomicsuperiority.Unawareofhisinherentimperialmotivation,JohnGradyrestageshimselfasatraditionalWesternheroendowedwiththemissiontorescueandredeemafallenwomanMagdalena.MagdalenaisaMexicanprostituteownedandabusedbythepimpEduardo.Inregardstoherhumblebirth,herforcedexperienceofworkingasaprostitute,hersubsequentrapesbyMexicanpolicemenandothermisfortunes,JohnGradyseemstobeonanoblemissiontorescueherfromthediresituation.HiseffortstoredeemMagdalena,includingdrawinganadvanceofsalariesfromMac,sellinghisbelovedhorseandpawningthepistolleftbyhisgrandfather,inadditiontodemonstratinghisdeterminationtomarryherandhiscouragetosquarelyfacethesatanicfigureEduardo,paradoxicallyembodyhiscapitalistlogicheinitiallyresistsandfurtherhintthatalltheindicatorssignifyinghiscowboyidentitysuccumbtotheruthlessforceofcapitalistmarketization.Thusfar,McCarthydethronesJohnGradyfromthemoralandsocialgroundJohnGrady,asacowboy,isdesignatedtooccupyandmakesascathingironyonhisself-endowedcowboyidentity.JustifiableandnobleasJohnGrady’smissionseemstobe,hisintentiontobuyMagdalenaremindsusofthebuyer-and-sellerrelationshipbetweenAmericaandMexico.Historically,America,relyingonitscapitalpower,boughtnaturalresourcesfromMexico,sothatMexicobecameheavilydependentonitsinvestment.AglimpseofincrementalAmericaninvestmentinMexicowillillustratethispoint.AsJamesD.Cockcrofthasnoted,AmericaninvestmentinMexicoattheturnofthetwentiethcenturytotaledmorethan$200millionandsurpasseditsinvestmentintherestoftheworld(85).Inthetwodecadestocome,AmericaninvestmentinMexicoquintupledandwasestimatedtobegreaterthanthoseoftheMexicanbourgeoisiesandthoseofotherforeigninvestors(Cockcroft85).Enteringthe1940sand1950s,MexicobecamemorereliableonAmericanforeignremittances.JohnWegnerobservesAmericaninvolvementinMexicaneconomyandassertsMexico’seconomicweaknessisinparttriggeredby“Americans’controlofMexicancapital”(254).UndertheleadershipofMiguelAlemán(1946-1952)andAdolfoRuíz(1952-1958),MexicocontinuedtorelyonAmericancapitalinordertofunditsindustrializationandmassivepublicprojects.182 Besides,“Mexico,however,wasverycooperativewiththeUnitedStatesduringWorldWarIIbyallowingnearlyunlimitedaccesstoextractsuppliesofmineralsandpetroleum”(Adams63).Inthisway,AmericabattereddowntheclosedeconomicdoorofMexicoandsolidifieditshegemonybyeconomicmeans.America’scontrolovercapitalwithaneyeformaintainingitsempireiscalledbyDavidHarvey“newimperialism”whichmanipulatescapitalcirculationbymeansof“temporal”and“spatial”displacementorthecombinationofthetwo(109).However,theAmericanempireisactualizedinastateofdenial.Inotherwords,theimperialactionsonthepartofAmericaarenottobetalkedofassuch,noraretheyallowedtohaveramificationsforitsdomesticsituations.Similarly,neverrecognizinghisintentiontobuyMagdalenaasanenactmentofnewimperialism,JohnGradyconsidersitasamissionofredemptioninthathe,atleast,cansaveherfromthemaliciousabuseofEduardo.Giventhetimeof1998whenCitiesofthePlainwaspublished,JohnGrady’sactioninhindsightremindsusofAmerica’sinvolvementinSomaliain1993,whichwasknownasOperationRestoreHope.InsteadofbringingdemocracyandfreedomtoSomalis,AmericansandthosewhocametotheirrescueinSomaliawereshotatfromallsides,andwomenandchildrentherewereusedasshieldsorfiringweapons.OperationRestoreHopewasgenerallyregardedasanimperialwarthatwreakedhavoconboththeAmericansoldiersandtheSomaliswhobecamethevictimsofideologicalstruggles.JustastheAmericansoldiersdidnotbringhopetotheSomalisandspeedprogresstowardsamoreflexibleworldorderorreturntoAmericaasnationalheroes,JohnGrady’spersonalattempttorescueMagdalenaandbringhernewlifeendsinvain.Instead,hisattemptexplicitlyrevealstheimperialmotivationforsymbolicallypossessingMexicancapital.JohnGrady,thoughlivingintheearly1950s,findshisparallelinthe1990s.The1950sandthe1990sdidnotwitnesstheslightestchangeinAmerica’simperialboosterisminhandlingitsinternationalaffairs.EdwardSaidtrackstherampancyofAmericanexceptionalismtoitscontinentalexpansionandpointsoutwithacidtongue:183 [T]heUnitedStatesafterWorldWarTwoconsidereditselfresponsibleformanypartsoftheThirdWorldwhichtheBritishandFrenchhadevacuated…and,becauseofanexceptionalhistorybasedonthelegitimacyofanti-colonialrevolution,largelyexemptfromthechargethatinitsownwayitbegantoresembleBritainandFrance.(Culture242)SinceWWII,Americanimperialismhaslurchedinanunstablefashionfromavagueconceptionofempiretoanexplicitone.MuchinthesamewaythatAmericaalwaysmeasureseverythingwithitsmonolithicyardsticksandimposesits“universalvalue”onothers,JohnGradyendeavorstoimposeAmericanfrontiervalueslikefreechoice,individualismandjusticeonMexico.Thus,heentrustsBillytonegotiatewithEduardoonthepriceheshallpayforbuyingMagdalena’sfreedom.Whennegotiationfails,hesimplyplanstosmugglehertoTexas.Onthesurface,heisaheroiccowboywhofollowshisownheartandactsuponhissenseofjusticeinthelightofhisloveforMagdalena.Nevertheless,heisanewimperialistwhoobjectifiesanddespisestheMexicanwomen.AnepisodethatdepictshisvisittoaMexicanwhorehouseprovesthatheobservestheMexicanwomenfromtheOrientalistperspective.WhenJohnGradyfrequentsthebrotheltofindwhereMagdalenaisworking,heperceivestheMexicanwomenasmadwomenandassociatesthemwithpromiscuity.FocalizingonJohnGrady,thenarratortells:JohnGradylookedintotheirfaces.Whotheymightbebehindthecakedsizingandtherouge,theblackgreasepaintliningtheirdarkindianeyes.Theyseemedalienandsad.Likemadwomendressedforanouting.Helookedattheneondeerhangingonthewallbehindthemandthegarishtapestriesofplush,offoilandbraid.(McCarthy,Cities55)“Black,”“darkIndianeyes”andhiscontemptuouseyesallsignalhisdemonizationoftheMexicanwomen.SuchconceptionperpetuatestheformulaicrepresentationoftheMexicanwomenandMexicoatlarge.InTheTexasRangers:aCenturyofFrontierDefense(1935),historianWalterPrescottWebbcharacterizedtheMexicansinadisparagingway:“thereisacruel184 steakintheMexicannature....ThiscrueltymaybeaheritagefromtheSpanishoftheinquisition;itmay…beattributedpartlytotheIndianblood”(14).QuotationssuchastheonemadebyWebbthatillustratetheregionaldiscriminationagainsttheMexicansaboundinAmerica.AprofoundprejudiceagainsttheMexicanshasrunamokinAmericasinceAmericanracialistsbelievethat“theprogenyofraciallydifferentparentsinheritedtheworstqualitiesofeach”(Paredes52).ParedespresentsaconclusiveAmericanconceptionoftheMexicansandanalyzesasetofattitudesandbeliefsabouttheMexicansthatformsabiasedlegendabouttheminthesocialimaginationofAmerica.HeconcludesthattheMexicansareconsidered“cruel,”“cowardly,”“inferior,”“passive,”“mongrel,”and“treacherous”(Paredes16).ThoughnotamonolithicviewallAmericanshold,thisideologicalrepresentation,whichhasoperatedinthesamewayfrontierideologyjustifiedAmerica’sclaimontheMexicanlandforbettermanagementinitsprovocationoftheMexican-AmericanWar,alsomakeslegitimateAmericandominationoverordebasementoftheMexicans.ConsideringtheculturalbackgroundinwhichJohnGradyisbroughtup,itishardtodismissthathedespisestheMexicanssincehehaslivedformostofhislifeinTexaswhereTexansshownomorerespecttotheMexicansthantotheblacksandIndians.JohnGradydoesnotknowthatheunconsciouslyviewstheMexicansasinferiorsandmistakenlybelievesthathisloveforMagdalenaisbasedonmutualattractionandself-volition.Magdalena,asaprostitute,islowinsocialstatusinbothMexicanandAmericansociety.WhatmattersmostisthatMagdalenaisaMexicanwomanwhosemarriagewithanywhitemanregardlessofhissocialandeconomicstatuswouldbeconsideredillicitbylocallaws.AsPeggyPascoenotes,thecampaignagainstmiscegenationlawsin1950sledtoapoliticsofracialrespectabilitythatregardedmarriageasapersonalrightandspokeintermsofsuchfundamentalAmericannationalnotionsasindividualism,libertyanddemocracygrowingfromAmericanfrontierexperience(WhatComesNaturally243-44).Shefurtherpointsoutthat“TexasandOklahoma”were“theonlytwowesternstatesthatfailedtorepealtheirmiscegenationlawsinthisperiod”(Pascoe,WhatComesNaturally244).WithinsuchlegalstipulationsinTexas,JohnGrady’s185 possiblemarriagewithMagdalenawouldbestronglyopposedbyTexansinthatitisaformofmiscegenationviolatinglegalstipulations.Althoughmiscegenationlaws,whichwereformulatedandreachedmaturityaftertheCivilWar,wereonlyapplicabletoAfricanAmericans,theyweretimelyextendedtothenewlyfoundWesternstates.AsPeggyPascoenotes,“itwasintheWest,nottheSouth,thatthey[miscegenationlaws]reachedtheirmostelaborate,evenlabyrinthine,development,coveringthebroadestlistofracialcategories”(“Race”216).Shefurtherenumeratesalistofgroupsprohibitedfrommarryingthewhite,includingtheAmericanIndians,Chinese,Japanese,MexicansandFilipinos.Coincidently,Texas,whereJohnGradywasbornandnowlives,wasthefirstWesternstatetopassmiscegenationlawsin1837(Pascoe,“Race”217).Morethanonehundredyearslatter,Texanswouldstillnottoleratethemarriagebetweenawhitemanandanon-whitewoman,letalonethereunionbetweenawhitemanandaprostitutewithethnicidentity.Thus,itisimpossibletoforJohnGradytobringMagdalenatoTexasbecausetheimplicitsocialandracialtabooingrainedinAmericanmindswoulddespisetheirmarriage.EvenifJohnGradyandMagdalenagotmarried,theirrelationshipwouldnotbeauthorizedbylaws.Thelegalbiasagainstmiscegenationwouldimpedehismarriage,becausewomenofcolorhadbeenhistoricallyassociatedwith“hypersexuality”andjudgesgenerallybrandedtheirsettledrelationshipwiththewhiteas“‘mere’sexrathermarriage”(Pascoe,“Race”220).Thus,lawyersabidedbythesebiasedassumptionsby“reducinginterracialrelationshipstointerracialsex,”andthendistinguished“interracialsexfrommarriagebyassociatingitwithprostitution”(Pascoe,“Race”220).SufficeittosaythatMagdalenaasaMexicanwomanwoulddefinitelybeexcludedfromthemainstreamofAmericansocietygivenherignoblelifeexperience.Thus,whatevereffortsJohnGradymakestosaveherfrombeingtrampledandravishedbyEduardo,Magdalenaisdestinedtofaceherdoomsday.Essentially,JohnGrady’sinitiationonbuyingMagdalena’sfreedomisinstigatedbyhisintentiontomarryandpossessherashis“symbolicfrontier.”InanalyzingtheWesterngenre,KimNewmansuggeststhattheabilitytodistinguishbetweenthelegitimateandillegitimateclaimstosuchthingsaspower,landandwomenarethe186 mostpowerfulideologicalaspectsoftheWestern.AccordingtoNewman,theWestern,whilecouchedintermsofthecomingofcivilization,isperforce“aboutconquest”(1).Indeed,theWesterngenre,takingthewestwardexpansionasitsnarrativefocus,presentsallkindsofwhite-maleconquests.ChivalriccowboysconquertheIndians;hardworkingpioneersconquerthewilderness;justlawmenconquereviloutlawsandindividualsconquertheircircumstances.“Butwitheachconquest,anotherstretchofterritory,whethergeographicalorphilosophical,comesunderthehegemonyoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica”(Newman1).McCarthygoestotheheartofNewman’sargumentbydepictingJohnGradyasapossibleagentofnewimperialismforthe“symbolicfrontier.”KennethHadaassertsthatJohnGradysees“Mexicoasafrontier,asmythicspaceavailabletoonestrongenoughtoenterandtonegotiateitstrickyundercurrents”(34).However,McCarthydoesnotmaketrueJohnGrady’sdreamofoccupyinga“littlepieceofland”symbolizedbythebodyofaMexicanwoman(Slotkin,Gunfighter422).Furthermore,JohnGrady’splantobuyMagdalenafromEduardoreflectsthelop-sidedcommercialrelationshipbetweenAmericaandMexicowhichhasbecomeincreasinglyprominentsinceWWII.Particularly,Mexico’scertificationofNAFTAin1992hasexacerbatedtheeconomicsituationinMexico.JohnGradyismuchliketheAmericansupportersforNAFTA,whichhasenabledAmericatoconductfreetradeoneverythingMexicohas.CommentingonNAFTA’seconomicimpactontheborderregion,DavidE.Loreynotes:“Ingeneral,businessesthatbenefitedfromfreertradewerethosethatwerealreadycompetitive,thatis,industriesthatwereoperatingwithgreatefficiencyandwereactiveintheglobalmarketplace”(174).Inotherwords,NAFTAbenefittedthebusinessesthatwerealreadydominantinthemarket,whichweremostlyAmericancorporations.McCarthydoesnotfollowthetrackofthetraditionaleconomicrelationshipbetweenthetwoneighboringcountriesinwhichtheAmericansalwaysgainbenefits,butsatiricallyridiculesthenotionthatAmericancapitalisanomnipotentpowerbyabortingJohnGrady’scommercialplan.JohnGrady’s“freetrade”onawomanmakesanexaggeratedparodyofAmericantraderswhocommercializedandboughtresources187 fromMexicotosatisfyitsincreasingdomesticneedinthe1990s.Thus,inconsiderationofJohnGradyasaproductofanexpansionistculturewhosehistoricalrelationtoMexicohasalwaysbeencharacterizedbyoppression,dominationandexploitation,heismorethananindividualrepresentativeofnewimperialism,butalsoacollectiveagentwhoseimperialcultureforgedbyfrontierideologyhasgivenshapetohisindividualidentity.DisregardingwarningsfromBillyParhamwhograduallyknowstheincorrectnessofAmericanimperialculturethroughhisthree-timecrossingsintoMexicoinpursuitofwhathehaslostinAmerica,JohnGradywillfullypersistsinbuyingMagdalenafromEduardo.BillyenvisionsthepossibleperilsbefallingJohnGradyandpersuadeshimfromactingarbitrarilybylistingtheobstaclesfacinghim:Magdalenaisnot“American,”norisshe“acitizen”;sheworksinawhorehouseandisownedby“asonofabitch,”EduardowhowillkillJohnGradyifhemesseswithhim(McCarthy,Cities137).BillyconsidersJohnGrady’sinsistenceonbuyingMagdalenaasacrazybehavior,andhecontinuestopersuadehimfromcarryingonhisself-envisionedplanofredemptionbycomparinghiscrazyandalmostdisastrousnotiontothatofsettingloosethepoorbastardsinjailandlettingthemfreelywanderinthestreet.Howeverstrongobjectiontohisplanis,JohnGradysimplyoverlooksitbecauseheunconsciouslydevoteshimselftothefrontierbeliefswhicharenonethelessdilutedandsubmergedinthepost-WWIIAmericaneconomiccodesofbuyingandconsumingcommoditiesviacapitalmanipulation.JohnGrady,alluredbythefrontiermyththatconferredonthecowboysamissionofprotectingwomanfrombeingdefloweredbytheIndiansandothernon-whites,doesnotrecognizetheflawsinthepopularimageofthefrontierheroandhencenevershrinkaninchfromdifficultiesinbringingMagdalenatoTexas.InJohnGrady’sconversationwiththeranchownerMac,wecometoknowtheinsurmountablebarriersinhiswould-bemarriagewithMagdalena.HerMexicannationalityisnottheworstproblemofwhichMachasheard,buttheproblemkeepsgettingworsegiventhatMagdalenaisanunder-agedMexicanunabletospeakEnglish(McCarthy,Cities142-43).DespitehiseconomicsupportforJohnGrady,Mac’srepetitionsof188 “Mexican”andhistwicereferencesofMagdalena’sinabilitytospeakEnglish,alongwithBillyParham’spreviousassertionthatMagdalenaisneitheranAmericannoranAmericancitizen,giveaglimpseoftheundercurrentsoftheanti-Mexicansentimentthathasloomedlargesince1930s,especiallyduringtheGreatDepression.Theunderlyinganti-MexicanmoodhasitshistoricaloriginslikethebattlingrelationshipamongTexanranchers,AmericancowboysandMexicanvaqueros.Whentracingthenatureandhistoryoftheanti-MexicansentimentorHispanophobiainAmerica,RaymundA.Paredesproposesthat“spontaneouscultureconflictandempirebuilding”aretheinevitableifnotexclusivereasonsfortheenmitybetweenthetwopeoples(46).Texas,givenitshistory,itssizeandethnicdiversities,anditscohesiveandself-consciousculture,ashistorianT.R.Fehrenbachhasnicknamedit,isa“nationwithinanation”(LoneStarxiv).ToquoteculturalgeographerD.W.Meinig,Texasisan“empire”(ImperialTexas7).Otherwisestated,Texashasalwaysbeenahugereserveofxenophobiatotheblacks,Indians,andMexicans.Insuchcircumstances,itisquitereasonabletobelievethattheTexancowhandswithwhomJohnGradyworkdiscourageandevenopposetohiswould-bemarriagewithMagdalena.Infact,JohnGrady’sco-workersfallintotheshackleofethnocentrism.The1950switnessedAmericanpersecutionoftheMexicansinTexas.ArnoldDeLeónpointsoutthatAnglo-Americanshaveshowednomore“toleranceforMexicansinTexasthantheyhadtowardtheothertwopeopleofcolor(theblackandthenativeIndians)”(265).Onsuchethnocentricfooting,mostAmericans,especiallyTexans,exploit,bullyoreveninflictphysicaltortureonMexicans.Untiltoday,“withinMexican-Americancommunities,”“theresurvivefolklorictalesrecallingterribledeedsofinjuryandevendeaththatAnglosinflictedonMexicansevenintothe1950s”(DeLeón265).Thus,thediscussionsofproblemsinvolvedinbringingMagdalenatoTexasbyimplicationforegroundtheracialbiasesandimperialconquestinTexasandinAmericaatlarge.KennethHadanoticesthehiddenanti-immigrantrhetoricinCitiesofthePlainandcomments:189 Fearoflosingourpopulist,Americandream,ourlittlepieceofAmericaisfrustratinglyhardertoobtainandmaintain,sointhesecomplexities,immigrantsbecomeaneasytarget,andwetargetthem,inpart,basedonourpresuppositionsregardingmythicalspaceandculturalidentity.(34)Americannativismanditsanti-Mexicansentimentreachedatanunprecedentedpeakinthe1950sas“economicrecessionintheearly1950sagainturnedpopularsentimentagainstMexicanimmigrantsandheighteneddiscriminationagainstMexicanAmericans”(Magaña21).ConcerningthelargenumberofillegalMexicanimmigrantswhoeitherlookedforworkorsettleddowninAmericaforotherreasonsandunderthepressureoftheMexicangovernment’sstrongcomplaintaboutitsseriouslaborturnover,OperationWetbackin1954wasadoptedbytheImmigrationandNaturalizationServicetoapprehend,curbandreturnillegalMexicanimmigrantsbacktoMexico.During1954,morethanonemillionillegalMexicanimmigrantsweredeportedandhandedofftotheMexicangovernment.SuchphenomenaprovedthatAmericahasalwaysboughtMexicans’cheaplaborforcefromwhichitbenefitedalot.Giventhefictionaltimeoftheearly1950sinCitiesofthePlain,itisquitereasonabletoclaimthatJohnGrady,apartfrominsinuatingAmerican“freetraders”inthe1990s,alsofollowsthepopularpracticeofobjectifyingandcommercializingMexicancitizensanditsgoodsinhiswillfulplantobuyMagdalena.ToquoteasatiricalcommentfromacabdrivertakingJohnGradytoWhiteLakewhorehouse:“inahealthysocietychoiceshouldalwaysbetheprerogativeofthebuyer”(McCarthy,Cities56).ThisassertionservesasbothasituationalironyonJohnGrady’sself-aggrandizingyetfailedplantobuyMagdalenafromEduardoandascoffingcommentonAmerica’snewimperialismwhichhaspenetrateddeeplyintoMexicoandthewholeworldatlarge.RonaldG.WalkernoticeswhatMexicoproffersforitsoutsidersandwrites:“Mexicoassaultstheoutsiderwiththeinscrutable,withbewilderingcontradictions,withtheoverwhelmingsenseofarealitybeyondtheworldofHardFacts”(18).Bythesametoken,MexicooffersBillyParhamandJohnGradyforcefulrepulsionwithitshostileattitudetowardAmericancapitalistlogic.WhenJohnGradyputshisideal190 ofbuyingMagdalenaintopracticebyaskingBillyParhamtonegotiatewithEduardoinWhiteLakeWhorehouse,hiscapitalistlogicisstoutlychallenged.Eduardo,recognizingthatBillyisactingonbehalfofJohnGrady,directlyrefuseshisoffer.HeperceptivelypointsoutthatJohnGradyispossessedwith“anirrationalpassion”andhasinhismind“apictureofhowtheworldwillbe”(McCarthy,Cities134).JohnGradyfalselyconceives“inhisheadacertainstory”whichisdefinitely“notatruestory,”butstilltakesforgrantedthat“theworld”istheonehe“dreamsof”(134).AfterhisrefusalbyEduardo,BillyParhamearnestlydissuadesJohnGradyfromhisunrealisticplan,buthispersuasionbearsnofruit.JohnGradyaffirmshisdeterminationtoillegallybringMagdalenatoTexasbyrefurbishingMac’sderelictadobehouseashisweddinghouseinBellSpring.BellSpringseemstobethelasthaventhatJohnGradycanreserveforhimselfandMagdalena.Inhiseyes,BellSpringwouldprovidehimandMagdalenawithapastorallife.HeimaginesthatMagdalenawouldworkwithSoccoroinkitchenafterhercoming.ThereasonwhyJohnGradyrebuildsMac’ssqualidhouseinBellSpringisthathebrewsinhisheartthedesireforthereturntoasimplerlifepromisedbythefrontiermythwhichisperceived“throughaculturalfilterofoptimism,ManifestDestiny,andpurestubbornness”(Hyde361).BarcleyOwensarguesthatJohnGrady’ssimpledreamofbuildingahouseforhisMexicanbride“replaysthepioneer’sdreamofforgingagarden-paradiseinthewilderness”andfurthersuggeststhatJohnGrady’sfateisdoomedsincehechoosesMagdalenaashisEvebyafatalparadox:“MagdalenaiscontrollednotbyGodbutbyEduardo,andtoopposeEduardoinevitablymeanstoloseMagdalena”(116).Barcley’sargumentholdsground,butscratchesthesurfaceoftheproblembecauseofherfailuretoperceiveJohnGrady’spotentialdominationoverMagdalena.Infact,JohnGradyperpetratesgenderingthefrontiermythwhichhasalwaysconsideredwomenlessimportantandconfinedthemtothedomesticspace.AnnetteKolodnyblamesthefrontiermythforitsexclusionordebasementofwomenbycreatingmalearchetypes.InheranalysisofAmericanfrontierliteraturefromthesixteenthcenturytotheeighteenthcentury,shepointsoutthatwhenmen191 soughtnewEdenandcreatednewArcadiasforthemselvestomakethelandcomplywiththeirdreamsofreceptiveandbountifulrealms,womenpatchedquilts,darnedsocks,cookedmealsandmadehomecleanandtidy(Kolodny,TheLand54).Inthisway,menweretomasterandpossessthevastnewcontinent;whereas,womenweretoberestrictedtothedomesticspaceinwhichtheyplayedlesserandprivaterolestherein.Thusenvisaged,BellSpringislocatedinaveryremoteplacefarawayfromthepublicspacetowhichthemalesbelong.JohnGrady’sself-madeweddinghousemightbeahavenforhim,butamodernjailforMagdalena.BellSpringwouldbecomeaplaceforJohnGradytoexerthispatriarchalcontroloverMagdalenaandguaranteethefunctionofmaledominance.Ironically,Mac’sranchanditsvicinitieswhereJohnGrady’sweddinghouseislocatedaretobeappropriatedbythefederalarmyformilitarybases.Insuchasituationalirony,McCarthyforeshadowsthefailureofJohnGradywhoseactionsarecoterminouswithAmericancapitalistlogicandimperialconquest.JohnGrady,afterhisfailednegotiationwithEduardo,planstosmuggleMagdalenaintoTexas.Inspiteofherwillingnesstobe“smuggled,”Magdalenarepresentsmorethanherself.SheinvokesMexicannessthatsetsoppositiontoAmericannessJohnGradysymbolizes.Furthermore,hisillegalsmugglingbyviolatingimmigrationstipulationsisadistortedversionofcowboys’heroicbehaviors.HisplantoclandestinelybringMagdalenatoTexasisdiscernedbyEduardowhoisa“seriousman”of“certainvigor”asdescribedbytheblindmanwho,workingasamusicianinWhiteLakebrothel,remindshimofthepotentialodds(McCarthy,Cities189).Unfortunately,JohnGrady,insteadofrescuingMagdalenafromhermiserablesituation,leadshertobekilledbyEduardo’saccompliceTiburcio.Magdalena’sdeathdoesnotmakeJohnGradyrealizehismisdoing,butaccelerateshisdesiretoliveuptocowboycodesbybringingtheeviltojusticemuchinthesamewaytheWesternersdealtwiththecriminalsintheoldWest.JohnGradywithouthesitationsneaksintoMexicoandtargetsatEduardo.BeforehisduelwithEduardo,JohnGrady’sdoomedfateisforetoldbyBilly’svisittoWhiteLakewhorehousetoforestallhisfoolishplan.WhenaskedbyBillytorelease192 JohnGrady,EduardofuriouslyattributesthedeathofMagdalenatoJohnGrady’scovetingfor“anotherman’spropertyandhiswillfuldeterminationtoconvertthatpropertytohisownwithoutregardfortheconsequences”(McCarthy,Cities240).“Anotherman’sproperty”hastwo-foldmeanings.Literallyspeaking,itreferstoJohnGrady’sintentionofowningMagdalenawhobelongstoEduardo.Symbolicallyspeaking,itmeansthatAmericahasalwaysbeencastingacovetouseyeonMexico.Equallyimportant,“anotherman’sproperty”alsoinsinuatesthefederalgovernment’seyeforMac’sranchtobeusedformilitarybaseswhichwillcauseJohnGradytolosethelastfrontiertoplayhiscowboyroleindaystocome.JohnGradysimplyappliesthesamelogictodealwithMagdalena’scase.However,bothheandBillymakemistakesinobjectifyingandcommercializingeverythinginMexicosincetheyembraceanewimperialistlogicwhichcharacterizesAmerica’sglobalempirebyitseffectivemanipulationandcirculationofcapitalsinceWWII.Inthissense,JohnGrady’sproposalforeitherbuyingorsmugglingMagdalenatoAmericaamountstocompensatehiswould-belossofthelastfrontier.Eduardo’sassertionisrevealinginthesensethathedebunksmanyAmericans’falseexpectationofMexicoandbyextensiontheirfalseidealismforgedbyfrontierideology.UponhearingBilly’sreplythat“Iknowthiscountry,”Eduardoretorts:“[n]ooneknowsthiscountry”(McCarthy,Cities241).Billy’sreplyreflectshisarroganceandoversimplificationofMexicansocietyaswellasitspeople.ThetroublingrelationshipbetweenAmericaandMexicoaftertheMexican-AmericanWarhascausedmanyMexicanstodespiseandevenabhortheexpansionistAmericanswhonotonlyplunderednearonehalfoftheMexicanlandbutalsountilnowcontinuetorepressandexploitthecheapMexicanlaborforceandnaturalresources.Simplyput,theMexican-Americanborderis“wheretheThirdWorldgratesupagainstthefirstandbleeds”(Anzaldúa3).Consequently,manyMexicansareabhorrentandevenantagonistictothecitizensofitsNorthernneighbor.Billy’sexperienceinTheCrossingisacaseinpoint.HeisrefusedwhenofferingAmericanWhiskeytoaMexicansoldieroftheMexicanRevolutionwho,thoughdrunken,insistsondrinkingMexicanwine.BillyencounterswhatVinceBrewtoncalls“Mexicanstand-off”(138).193 Thoughrespondingtotheinsultwithbellicosity,BillycannotchangethemindofMexicanveteranwhoserefusalsignifiestheanti-AmericansentimentrunningitscourseinMexicoandthehatredforthecollusionoftheAmericangovernmentwiththedespoticMexicanregimeinexploitingtheMexicans.ItcanbesaidthatMcCarthy’schoiceoftradingMagdalenainhisplottingamountstohisstrongrepudiationofAmerica’snewimperialism.AsMichaelHardtandAntonioNegripertinentlypointout,“throughoutthepostwarperiodtheUnitedStatespresenteditselfmoreasthepoliceforceoftheoldimperialismsthantheagentofnewhope”(250).Sinceitsindependence,theUnitedStateshasbeenfaithfultotheideaofexpansionismbasedontheMonroeDoctrineandManifestDestinythatverifieditscontinentalenlargementduringtheWestwardMovement.Inparticular,WWIIaffirmedAmericaasaworldsuperpower.However,America’seconomicgrowthanditspoliticalpowerhavealwaysbeenacquiredatthecostofsqueezingsuchthirdworldcountriesasMexicoandexploitingtheircitizens.Particularly,duringWWII,Mexicanworkers,whoenteredtotheAmericanSouthwesteitherlegallyorillegally,considerablyalleviatedtheseverelaborshortageofAmerica.AsLeeStacynotes,“[t]hecheaplaborprovidedbyMexicanworkersisenormouslyimportantfortheU.S.economy”(449).Withthelaborshortagelastingintothe1950s,MexicanmigrantworkerswereimportedtoAmericawiththeaidofAmericanofficialswhoviolatedinternationalagreement.SuchaviolationundoubtedlytestifiedthehistoricalexploitationofMexicanlaborbyAmericaandledtothelaborshortageinMexico.Mexicanfarmownershelplesslysawtheircropsgetrottenintheirlargecoverageofcropland.Consequently,Mexico’seconomyexperiencedaterribledownturn.JustasMexicanPresidentPorfirioDíazoncesaid,“PoorMexico,sofarfromGod,soclosetoAmerica”(qtd.inBass136).ThisassertionhasasoundingringofMexico’sdiscontentwithAmerica,butundoubtedlysoundstrue.InherentinmanyMexicansareadeepfearforandevenbitteraversiontotheAmericanswhoalwaysconsidertheirneighborprimitive,backwardandcorrupt.RegardingtheundercurrentsofabhorrenceinsomeMexicans’hearts,itiseasytounderstandwhyEduardodeclaresJohnGradyandtheexpansionistculturethatnurtureshimarecoveting“another194 man’sproperty”(McCarthy,Cities240).InCitiesofthePlain,McCarthydoesnotgiveanapprovingnodtoAmerica’snewimperialismformedbythefrontiermindsetwhosedevastatingimpactscanbefoundintheexperiencesoftheIndians,Spaniards,andMexicans.Instead,bymakingJohnGradysacrificeforhismaintenanceofthe“symbolicfrontier,”McCarthyoffersafranklookattheviolentimperialistprocessinwhichtheMexican-AmericanborderlandsandbyextensiontheAmericanWestwerewrestedfromtheoriginalowners.JohnGrady,underinterpellationoffrontierideology,hasexperiencedbitternessandpaininAllthePrettyHorses.ThescaronhisbodycausedbyhisentanglementinthenumerousfightsattheMexicanjailreversesAlfonsa’scommentthatscarhasthepowertoremindpeopleoftherealexistenceofthepast.JohnGradywillnevergiveuphisillusoryidealuntilhecomestohistether’send.Hebecomesthe“legacyofconquest”describedbyPatriciaNelsonLimerick,alegacywhichhasstronglydenieditsrealimperialconquestoftheminorities,womenandnature(TheLegacy23-24).However,neitherdoesthelegacyofconquestbringJohnGradyspiritualrebirthandeconomicbenefits,nordoesitenablehimtoescapefromtheharshrealitiesintoaworldofromanticloveandfrontierheroism.Contrarily,itlandshimintodisillusionmentanddeath.JohnGradytakesavengeagainstEduardoforMagdalena’sdeath,whichbecomeshislastefforttoasserthissenseofjusticeandself-worth.Ironically,heisdeniedthepossibilitytoasserthisidentityasacowboyherotoprovethevalidityofAmericannationalmyths.Beforebecominginvolvedinthebloodyduel,JohnGradyisadvisedintodismisshisirrationalandfatalplanbyEduardowhoaskshimtochangehismindandgobacktoAmerica.JohnGrady,turningadeafeartoEduardo’swarninganddemonstratinghisunswervingvolitiontokillhim,insistsonalife-to-deathfightwithhim.EduardocontinuestotoywithJohnGradyandassertsthathehasseenmanyAmericanswhocometoMexicoforimperialconquestasJohnGradydoes.Theyfightwithknivessymbolizingtheprimitiveifnotatavistichostilityinhumannature.McCarthydeprivesJohnGradyofthematerialtrappingsofmodernworldliketherevolverhebringsinAllthePrettyhorses,butmakeshimcarryaknife195 andengageinhand-to-handfightwithEduardo.Indoingso,McCarthyconveysthattheAmericansareessentiallyasprimitiveastheMexicansrepresentedinAmericandiscursiveknowledgeofethnocentrism.Inabroadersense,McCarthycontemplatesontheprimitivenessofAmericancivilizationandnegatestheconceptofAmericanexceptionalism.DavidM.Wrobelhasnoticedthatthepost-WWIIerawitnessed“arevivalofthenotionofAmericanexceptionalismrootedinthenation’sfrontierheritage”(“GlobalWest”2).Insuchaculturalclimate,itwascommontoassumenotjusttheprimacy,buteventheabsolutehegemonyofexceptionalistvisionofAmericaanditsWest.JohnGrady,nurturedbyAmericanfrontierculture,unwittinglyassimilatesitsculturaldrossofoveremphasisonAmericanoriginalityanddistinctiveness,abumptiouswhitechauvinismandaself-justifiedmissiontoexpeltheso-called“evil.”Eduardo,thoughbeingevilandruthless,iscertainlynotthebestrepresentativeofthecommonMexicans.HerepresentsanexaggeratedversionofaMexicanthatdespisesandfeelsrepelledbyimperialintrusiontypifiedbyJohnGradyintheguiseofjustice,progressandcivilization.AsRichardSlotkinputs,“‘Mexico’isthemirrorinwhichwe[Americans]appeartoourselvesinaglass,darkly”(Gunfighter427).Thatistosay,MexicoholdsupadarkmirrorforAmericancowboystoreexaminetheirdarkimagesasself-claimedheroes.JohnGradytakesMagdalenaashis“symbolicfrontier”thatsubstituteshislostfrontierinAmerica.HemistakenlytakesAmericanfrontierculturalvaluesasuniversalonesthatcanbetailoredforanyoneinanyplace.ButneitheristheMexicanwomanhis“symbolicfrontier,”norisMexicohis“NewFrontier”whichaffordsthespaceforthefrontierheritageofAmericatogrowandflourish.InEduardo’swords,manyAmericansdriftsouthwardoutoftheir“leprousparadise”toseek“athingnowextinctamongthem”(McCarthy,Cities249).Butthethingtheylookforhasno“name”(249).Here,Eduardo’sderisiononAmericancitizensreflectstheirinabilitytoperceivethelimitationsoftheirowncultureandtheirfailuretoacknowledgetheirintrusionsintoMexicancultureandeconomicexploitationoverMexico.EduardoregardsJohnGradyasanunrealisticdreamerwhobelieves“crazinessissacred”(251).196 Contrarily,JohnGradybelieveshejustlyassertstherighttochampionjusticeandcorrectamisdoingsincehismindiscloudedbyAmericansuperioritywhichshadowshisperceptionoftherealsituationandunwittinglyforgeshisappetiteforimperialexpansion.ToquoteEduardo,“ofcourselonginghascloudedtheirminds.Suchmindsastheymaypossess.Thesimplesttruthsareobscured”(249).JohnGradyisatypicalAmericanwhounderratesMexicoforitsviolence,crueltyandmystique,andthusitisnecessaryforhimtoresorttoviolenceforthesakeofputtinganendtotheevilforcerepresentedbyEduardo.Indoingso,hecanforcetheviolentMexicanstoaccepthismoralcodesandculturalvalues.UnliketheAmericanWestwhichmanyAnglo-Americansassumedtobealandofhopeandahavenforthefrustratedandthediscontented,MexicoisbeyondthecompassofAmericanlawsanditsculturalnorms.JohnGrady’sbehaviormakeshimmuchlikeanewimperialistappearingasneitheraviolentinvaderofaforeignlandscapenoranexplicitcolonizerestablishingcoloniesintheforeignland.AnneMcClintockclarifiesAmerica’snewimperialisminLatinAmericaandpointsout:‘Post-colonial’LatinAmericahasbeeninvadedbytheUnitedStatesoverahundredtimesthiscenturyalone….Inthe1940s…UnitedStates’relationswithLatinAmericawerewarmedbyaneconomicimperialpolicyeuphemisticallydubbed“GoodNeighborliness,”primarilydesignedtomakeLatinAmericaasafebackyard.(296)JohnGradyimbibesthebadnourishmentofAmericanimperialcultureandendeavorstorewriteagloriouschapterforAmerica’s“GoodNeighborliness”byredeemingMagdalenafromEduardo’sabuse.Whencommercialnegotiationandillegalsmugglingfail,heimaginesthathecandefeatEduardo.DespiteJohnGradysucceedsinkillingEduardo,healsodiesoflethalinjuries.Hisdeathputsanendtotheimpossibledreamofpossessingthe“symbolicfrontier.”ThroughouttheBorderTrilogy,JohnGradyembodiesthefrontiermindsetdeeplyingrainedinmanyAmericans.ManyAmericans,likeJohnGrady,areleftwithahistoricalburdenbytheirforefatherswhosteppedintothevastWildWestand197 createdthefrontiermyth.SuchamythhasmisledsomeAmericanstobelievethatthewestwardexpansionwasaGod-endowedmissionforAmericatospreadandexpand.ManyAmericansinthenineteenthcenturyhardlyconsideredthenegativeaspectsoftheWestwardMovement.HistorianRichardHosfstadterenumeratesacatalogofthesignificantelementsofthewestwardexpansionthatreceivedlittleornoneofTurner’sattentioninhisFrontierThesis:thefailureofthefreelandstoproduceasocietyfreeoflandlesslaborersandtenants...thecrudenessanddisorder,thereadinesstocommitandwillingnesstotolerateviolence…thearrogant,flimsy,andself-righteousjustificationsofManifestDestinyengenderedbyAmericanexpansionism.(147-48)Allthesenegativeaspects,whichhavesomeresonancesinMcCarthy’scowboys,especiallyinJohnGrady,havebeenwhitewashedbyfrontierideologywhosefunctionwastosupportandensurethesmoothprogressofAmericanimperialexpansionintheWestwardMovement.McCarthymakesJohnGrady’simperialdreamsubmergedinthemodernera.Indoingso,heburstsopenthedarksideoftheWesternhistory,andthuschallengesthesuppositionsofWesternheroismcentraltothefrontiermyth.InEduardo’swords,thefrontiermyth,justlikea“superstition”motivatingAmericans’“hungerformysteries,”isabundleofuncatchablesignsandsymbolsthatinstigateJohnGradytojourneyintoMexicotoseekhis“symbolicfrontier”(McCarthy,Cities253).WhatJohnGradyseeksis,inRichardSlotkins’words,“alittlepieceofland”wherehecanliveafrontierlife(Regeneration422).Unfortunately,hispursuitfallsshortoftheimaginativeconceptionofthefrontiermyth.Myth,ReginaldDyckwrites,is“producedoradaptedwithinparticularsociohistoricalcontextsinordertomeetthespecificneedsofaculture”(56).Asmentionedinthepreviousdiscussion,thefrontiermyth,asaculturalconstruct,hasbeendeeplyimprintedwiththedominantbeliefsoffrontierideologyintheinterestsofthoseinpowerwhoshowedagreaterpreferencefortheWesternfrontiertofindsolutionstoeconomicandsocialproblemsinthewestwardexpansion.Butfrontierideologyhassucceededininculcatingitsimperial198 consciousintogenerationsofAmericans.Notsurprisingly,somescholarsclaimsthatthecorestructureofAmericanimperialismlies“righthere‘athome’”(Churchill5).JohnGrady,influencedbyAmericanimperialculturewhichhasrundeepinhisheartastheanalysisaboveindicates,viewsMexicoasavacuuminwhichhecanenterandnegotiateatrade.RichardSlotkinasserts:“Thenasnow,NorthAmericansperceivedMexicothroughaglazeofpreconceptionsandexpectationsbornofourownpeculiarhistoryandculture”(Environment174).However,withhisbigotedpreconceptionsinmind,tooversteptheMexican-AmericanborderlinesforJohnGradymeanstoenterintoa“fatalenvironment”(Slotkin,Environment10).This“fatalenvironment”iscreatedbythefrontiermythanddestinedtoinundatemyth-holders’expectationsandimperatives.JohnGrady’sdeathcompletelyturnsupsidedownthefrontierdoctrinesandreflectsmodernman’sexistentialsenseoflosscausedbytheexaggeratedandevendistortedpromulgationoffrontierideology.JohnGrady’sfateenablesustoseefrontierideologyasavapidandhollowillusionthatinthefinalanalysisshowssomethingmoredestructivethanuseful.TheoptimisticfrontierliferepresentedbyfrontierideologyforwhichJohnGradyaspiresgiveswaytotheunfathomableambiguitiesofborderviolence.HisrepeatedyetfutilecrossingstoMexicomakepaletheauraofthemythicalWest.TheharshrealitiesofMexicooverweighhisidealisticimagination.Eduardo’sridiculeonJohnGradybringstolightthecommonattitudetowardsMexicoinAmericaandMexicanaversiontoAmerica:Thatiswhathasbroughtyouhereandwhatwillalwaysbringyouhere.Yourkindcannotbearthattheworldbeordinary.Thatitcontainnothingsavewhatstandsbeforeone.ButtheMexicanworldisaworldofadornmentonlyandunderneathitisveryplainindeed.Whileyourworld—hepassedthebladebackandforthlikeashuttlethroughaloom—yourworldtottersuponanunspokenlabyrinthofquestions.Andwewilldevouryou,myfriend.Youandallyourpaleempire.(McCarthy,Cities253)ByallyingJohnGradyandAmericawith“paleempire,”EduardoexplicitlysiegesontothelongexistentconflictsbetweenAmericaandMexicowithinabroader199 Americanexceptionalistandexpansionistheritage.ThoughEduardoiskilled,JohnGrady’ssubsequentdeathreflectsthatAmericansdonotalwayswinintheirimperialgameandwillneverbeinapleasantsituationastheirexceptionalistculturedelineates.JohnGrady,asafailedagentofAmerica’snewimperialism,teachesasolemnlessonforhisfellowsandinvitesthemtocastasuspiciouseyeontheirnationalmythswhichhavealwayspersisteddowntothecontemporarytimeintandemwiththeinterpellativefunctionoffrontierideology.Onthewhole,CitiesofthePlaingivesaglimpseofthedeceptivesideoffrontierideologythatmaygotoanextremeforminthenearfuture.JohnGrady,appearingasaculturalimperialistinAllthePrettyHorsesandasanewimperialistinCitiesofthePlainrespectively,becomesavictimofthetrickymanipulationoffrontierideology.HisfailedexperienceallowshisfellowAmericanstoreckonwithsomber-mindednesstheJanus-liketraitsoffrontierideologyandappealstothemtostepouttheviciouscircleofAmericanimperiallogic.C.Re-integrationintotheHybridizedFrontierFrederickJacksonTurneroncesaid:“agenerationthatdoesnotattempttoconsideritsrecentpastislikethemerchantwhoignoreshisledger,themarinerwhotakesnoobservations”(TheSignificance208).WhatTurnertoldusisthatthemerchantwhoconsultedhisledgerandthemarinerwhotookhisobservationswouldbeamerchantwho,understandingtheirrecentpast,couldthenmakebetterandmoreeffectiveplansfortheirfuture,andamarinerwhocouldbequalifiedtosizeuptheirsituationsinlife.FromaculturalimperialistinAllthePrettyHorsestoanewimperialistinCitiesofthePlain,JohnGradyisdoomedtofailduetohislackofhistoricalawarenessinTurneriansense.McCarthy,bymakingJohnGradyanegativeexampleforthosewhostillharborintheirheartsthedesireforafurtherfrontier,ineffectimploreshisfellowstofairlyacknowledgeandtreatthehistoricalburdenleftbythewestwardexpansionwhosecorewastriumphantlyimperialist,racialist,sexist200 andclass-biased.McCarthyenvisionsthedysfunctionofAmericanimperiallogicandhighlightshischaracter’sre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontier.Indoingso,McCarthysurpassesthemonopolizeddiscourseoffrontierideologyandurgeshisfellowstoembracecultural,racialandlinguisticheterogeneityanddiversityintheAmericanWest,particularlyalongtheMexican-Americanborderlands.InCitiesofthePlain,McCarthy,byprovidingacommonlyacceptedfateforhiscowboyprotagonists,whilealteringthespecificsofeachcowboy’sfate,envisionsthedysfunctionofAmericanimperialimagination.JohnGrady’sfinalconfrontationwithEduardoinCitiesofthePlainmocksthetraditionalfateofcowboyinthat,he,ratherthanregeneratethroughviolence,incursignobledeath.JohnGradydiesinasqualidstreetofJuárezandbecomesavictimoffrontierideologythatvalidateshismale-centeredandimperialcodesofbehavior.JohnGrady’sexperiencesinAllthePrettyHorsesdonotenablehimtorealizehisirrationalcodesofbehaviorthathaveleadtothedisastrousperilsfromwhichhewoulddisengagehimself.ThereemergenceofhisimperialbehaviorinCitiesofthePlainnotmerelyallowsMcCarthytoenvisionthepotentialdangerbroughtbytheunselectiveassimilationoffrontierideology.Frontierideologyisasconvincingandeffectiveasitisillusory.Nonetheless,it,acrosstimeandspace,effectivelyexcitesJohnGradyintobehavinginaccordwithitsfantasizedbeliefs.Itisinhisdeaththatwediscernthedestructiveforceoffrontierideologywhich,asakindofpsychicresidue,exposesitsownunreasonableaspectsinstructuringAmericanimperialunconscious.ThedysfunctionofAmericanimperiallogiccanalsobeillustratedbyBillyParham’sexperiences.InTheCrossing,Billyholdsdeartheconceptofwildnessandthemythicalcowboylife,buthecomestofacethetragicfateoflosingshe-wolfandhislittlebrotherBoydinMexicoandtheirparentswhoarekilledbythenomadicIndians.Aftergoingthroughthesetraumaticexperiences,BillyattemptstojointheWWIIarmy,sothatthecowboycodesheupholdscanbeappreciated.Butheisturneddownbythelocalauthoritiesbecauseofhisheartmurmur.HisintentiontogotothebattlefieldremindsusofWillaCather’sfictionalcharacterClaudeWheelerinOneofOurs(1922).ThedestructiveforceofmodernitywhichruthlesslydestroysWheeler’s201 idealizedvisionoftheoldWestalsoshattershisdreamofreenactingthefrontierbeliefsthroughwarexperience.SittingonthestatehousestepsinDenverandlookingatthestatueofKitCarsonwho,accordingtoHenryNashSmith,wasamemberof“thefirstgenerationoffictionalWildWesternHeroesafterCooper—thesonsofLeatherstocking”(81),Wheelerassertswithgreatgrimness:“TheStatue…pointedWestward;buttherewasnowest,inthatsense,anymore….Heretheskywaslikealidshutdownovertheworld”(Cather118).However,hispioneeringspiritdriveshimtothewarinEuropewhichhebelievestobealandforfrontiersmentoliveouttheirnationalqualities.Tohisdisappointment,Wheelerfindsneithercourageousdeedsnorheroicvaluesinthebattlefield,onlytobetraumatizedbothspirituallyandphysicallybywarmachine.Similarly,ifBillywenttotheWWIIbattlefield,hewouldbedisillusionedbytheharshrealityofWWIIjustasWheelerisbyWWI.Hewouldbecrucifiedonthecrossofwarinthesamewaythathisforefathersweresacrificedtothealluringyetdeceptivefrontierdoctrines.Infact,theideologicalunderlayofgoingtoWWIIforAmericaamountedtothereenactmentofthefrontiermythinherentinAmericanvictoryintheWest.WinningtheWest,accordingtoRichardDrinnon,meansadressrehearsalfor“winningtheworld”(465).Inthissense,frontierideologywhichpropelledAmericanimperialconquestoftheWesthasagainspurreditsdesiretocarryforwardthemissionofbanishingmysteryandextirpatingtheevilforce,soastomakethewholeworldsubjectedtotheregimentedacceptanceoftheself-evidentAmericanvalues.InNovember1944,astheendofWWIIapproached,PresidentFranklinRooseveltremindedhisfellowsofthenewfrontiersofthemindbeforethemwhenassertingwithhigh-pitchedtone:ifAmericansarepioneeredwith“thesamevision,boldness,anddrivewithwhichwehavewagedthiswarwecancreateafullerandmorefruitfulemploymentandafullerandmorefruitfullife”(qtd.inBush3-4).Indeed,Americagainedmucheconomicbenefitsandpoliticalcapitalthroughitsvictoryoverfascism.Nevertheless,itdidnotnecessarilymeanallAmericansbenefitedfromWWII.Inthe1950s,theAmericangovernmentdidnothonoritscommitmenttoitscitizens.Thecowhands’lifeinCitiesofthePlainisthebestfootnotetoAmerica’sbreachof202 commitment.Forexample,Troy,afarmhandwhoworksonMac’sranchwithJohnGradyandBillyParham,isaveteranofWWIIandstillbecomesdisplacedandunemployedafterhisdischargefromthearmy.ThesharpcontrastbetweenidealizationandrealityfacingtheAmericans,particularlythosewhowenttotheWWIIbattlefield,laysbarethehollownessandineffectivenessoffrontierideologythathaspromisedabrightfutureforthem.ApartfromforegroundingBilly’srejectionasaWWIIsoldiertoinsinuatethemalfunctionofAmericanimperiallogicinTheCrossing,McCarthy,inCitiesofthePlain,alsousesBilly’sfailuretoachieveself-independencebyworkingasanextraintheWesternmoviestonegatetheideologicalconceptsassociatedwiththeWesternfrontier.Theseideologicalconcepts,bymeansofimprintingthemselvesonthescreeningsoftheWesternmovies,encompassandpromulgatethefundamentalnationaltraitsofAmerica.AfterthedeathofJohnGrady,BillydoesnotfindthewaythathecanliveuptotheAmericannationalcharacterprescribedbyfrontierideology.Intheoncomingyears,“aterribledroughtstruckwestTexas…Therewasnoworkinthatcountryanywhere.Pasturegatesstoodopenandsanddriftedintheroadsandafterafewyearsitwasraretoseestockofanykindandherodeon”(McCarthy,Cities264).ThedevastatingenvironmentaldisastercompletelydestroystheArcadiaenvisionedbyTurnerandatteststothefactthatAmericans’colonizationoftheWesthasmadethemselvescolonizedandvictimized.Billyhasnochoicebuttorideonandon.Inthespringofthesecondyearofthenewmillennium,BillylivesintheGardnerHotelinElPasoofTexasandworksasanextraintheWesternmovies.RatherthanearningenoughmoneytomakeendsmeetbyactingintheWesternmovies,Billysellshissaddleandisevictedfromthehotel.McCarthywrites:“hesetforthintothestreetwithjusthisAWOLbagandhisblanketroll”(McCarthy,Cities265).Withthesoleofhisbootsbecomingthinnerandthestitchingpullingthroughtheleather,Billy,nowseventy-eight-yearold,wandersinthecentralArizonawithoutaplacetolive.RichardSlotkinpointsoutthesituationofsome“unemployedcowboys”who“lookedtoregionalandHollywoodmoviecompaniesforwork,asoncetheyhadlooktotheWildWest”(Regeneration235).ButwhatBillyfindsisnotarespectablelife203 broughtbythemovieindustrywhoseglobalinfluencedemonstratesthepowerofAmericanculturalhegemony.Whenthefrontierhadpassed,itsformerinhabitantsfoundrefugeintheirincreasingfascinationwiththefrontierpastwiththehelpofactualfrontiersmenwhoworkedinHollywoodblockbustersandquenchedtheirthirstforthefrontierglory.McCarthydoesnotglorifytheillusoryandunreliableconstructofthefrontierpastwhichprovidesanescapeforpeople’s“consciousnessoftheultimateinsecuritiesandambiguitiesthatafflicteventhemostsecuresortoflife:death,thefailureoflove,[the]inabilitytoaccomplishallthat[they]hadhopedfor”(Cawelti,Adventure16).Billy’svagrancyputsintoquestiontheconceptofsuccess,freedom,justiceandwealthpromulgatedbytheWesternmovies,which,astheculturalIdeologicalStateApparatus,efficaciouslycontinuetomotivatemostAmericanstotransmitandconformtotheirnationalideas.Inthisway,McCarthylaystheblameontheWesternmoviesfortheirmisleadingroleincultivatingAmericannationalism.Ironically,BillyParhamdoesnotknowthathehasbeeninterpellatedbyISAsassubjugatedsubject.ItlooksasifBillykeepsabreastofhistimeswhenfacingtheintrusionofcontemporarylifeintotherelativelypastorallifeofferedbytheemploymentatMac’sranch.BillyshowshisappreciationofthemodernconvenienceswhendiscussingwithJohnGradyabouttheplantorefurbishasqualidadobeshackforhisbride:IthinkI’dlikeit.ItellyouwhatIlike.What’sthat?Whenyouthrowaswitchandlightscomeon.(McCarthy,Cities77)Later,BillysaysthathehasalreadygivenuphisidealshehelddearbeforeandimpliesthattheseidealsarebasedonunrealisticthinkingandimaginativevisionasdemonstratedinTheCrossing.BillytellsJohnGradythatthecowboylifeisnotaspleasantandpromisingastheyexpect;rather,itishardtobear.Gradually,BillyknowslivingacowboylifeishischildishdreamandsaystoJohnGrady:“When204 you’reakidyouhavethesenotionsabouthowthingsaregointobe….Yougetalittleolderandyoupullbacksomeonthat”(Cites78).ComparedwithJohnGradywhofailstoknowhisimperialexpansionbehindhissimpleneed,BillyParhamseemsmorelikearealist.AlthoughBillyseemstohaveescapedfromtheenslavementoffrontierideology,heisstillensnaredbyfrontierideologywhosefictionalityheknowsbetter.ToquoteSlavojŽižek,“thesteppingoutof(whatweexperienceas)ideologyistheveryformofourenslavementtoit”(italicizedinoriginal“Specter”6).TheonlydifferencebetweenJohnGradyandBillyliesintheformer’sunknowingnessofhisinterpellatedsubjectasacowboy.JohnGrady’smodeofthinkingisatypicalformulaofcynicisminaclassicMarxiansense.Hedoesnotknowhisrealdesireforimperialexpansion,buthestilladherestopursueit.Hedoesnot“knowit,”butheis“doingit”(Žižek,“Specter”8).Onthecontrary,Billyismorelikethosewhoknowwell“whattheyaredoing,yettheyaredoingit”(Žižek,“Specter”8).ForBilly,frontierideologyhasbecomethe“‘spontaneous’ideologyatworkattheheartofsocial‘reality’itself,”sinceitisnolongerconceivedasahomogenousmechanismthatguaranteedsocialandeconomicproductioninthewestwardexpansion,nordoesitfunctionasanomnipotentgluethatwouldstitchtogethersocialandeconomicdisparitiesintheprocessofAmericanfrontierexpansion(Žižek,“Specter”9).Inthisway,theWesternfrontier,despiteitsclosure,alwaysgripsmanyAmericans’imagination.AlthoughthefrontiercomplexresidingdeeplyinthecollectiveunconsciousofAmericannationsignifies“progressandpromiseinsteadofaperiodoftimeinwhichpeoplewentwestwardtobuildnewtowns”(Wrobel,TheEnd145),therealexperiencethatbefallsBillyundoesthefrontieridealsandmakesproblematicthedominantnarrativelabeledbyhistorianWarrenSusmanas“theofficialAmericanideology”(qtd.inGrossman2).Billy’sfailureasafilmextraoffersacounter-narrativeoranendtotheimplicitimperialrhetoricembeddedintheWesternmovies.TheWesternmovieshavealwaysplayedaneffectiveroleinconjoininghistoryandmythtoappealtoincipientAmericannationalisminAmericanaudiences.AsRobertBurgoynehaspointedout,“inthetwentiethcenturyUnitedStates,thenarrativeformsthathavemoldednational205 identitymostprofoundlyarearguablythewesternandthewarfilm”(8).TheeffectsoftheWesternmoviesusuallygobeyondthecultivationofAmericannationalismandalsolieintheirenactmentsofarangeofmeaningsexpressingalongingforprolongingthegloryoftheAmericanempire.Consequently,theWesternmovies,withtheirpopularityatthenationwidelevelandevenacrosstheglobe,asserttheircontinuedfunctionasboththeculturalandcommunicationsIdeologicalStateApparatus.WhatcountsmoreisthattheyattesttothepowerofAmericancapital,whichmakespossibleitsfortificationofculturalimperialismwithoutestablishingconcretecolonies.AsBlakeAllmendingernotes:In1989…TheSovietUninondistributedcopiesofapropagandapieceentitledAmericanCulturalInvasionofEurope.ThebookarguedthatAmerica’s“‘bourgeoisideologyandculture’wereoverrunningtheOldWorld,”anditadvertisedthatpremiseontheillustratedbookjacket,whichshoweda“satyrewearingacowboyhat.”Themythologicalfigurewasintheprocessofrapinga“nakedwoman”orapersonificationofAsiaandEurope,whichhadbeenvictimizedbybourgeoisAmerica.(7)Simplyput,thecowboy,asacross-culturallyconstructedandadmittedimage,impliesthesuccessofAmericancapitalismaswellasitsgenerallyacceptedroleasanAmericanculturalcolonizer.Thusenvisaged,ifheroesintheWesternmoviescometoreinvigoratetheethosofimperialconquesttiedwithAmericanfrontierexpansion,thenMcCarthy’sfailedextraintheWesternmovies,toaconsiderabledegree,neitherlooktoanationalistsensethatdefinedAmerica’scontinentalconquestinthenineteenthcentury,nordoesitcreateafantasytoexplainthemosttroublingissuesinAmericansocietybynegotiatingapossiblefutureforthedisenfranchisedAmericans.McCarthy’sdepictionofthecowboystockasneitherasaviorfigurenoraheroicidolattemptstorightthemisleadingrepresentationoftheformulaiccowboyandnegatesthesocialandculturalfunctionscowboysusuallyperformintheWesternmovies.Inthismanner,McCarthyundercutsthecircuitofAmericancapitalismintheformoffilmsandmassmediapropagandacontributivetoAmericanculturalcolonizationoutsideitsnationalterritory.TheWesternmovies,asculturalartifacts,206 relevantastheyaretosocialissuesinaparticularhistoricalera,mirrorthecultural,social,andpoliticaldisturbancesandconcernsinAmerica.JohnH.LenihanpointsouttheideologicalfunctionoftheWesternmoviesandremindsusthattheyhaveservedasoneofthemechanisms“ademocraticsocietyusedtogiveformandmeaningtoitsworriesaboutitsowndestinyatatimewhenitspositionseemedmorecentralanditsvalueslesssecurethaneverbefore”(9).TheWesternmovies,whilecoveringupsocialproblems,havedeliveredafalseconceptionofAmericannationalvaluestoAmericansandconstitutedwhatJeanBaudrillardcalls“thehyperreal”whichrefersto“thegenerationofmodelsoftherealwithoutoriginorreality”(169).Putanotherway,thehyperrealmovesbeyond“reduplication”and“parody”in“substitutingsignsoftherealfortherealitself”(Baudrillard70).InlinewithBaudrillard’sargument,itcanbesaidthattheWesternmoviesinwhichBillyactsasanextraareconsistedofanetworkoffree-floatingsignswhosepurposeisto“incitedesire”(Baudrillard3).Specificallyspeaking,theirsolepurposeistoigniteAmericans’passionforsustainingAmericannationalidealswhileparadoxicallyreinforcingtheirimperialunconscious.Usually,theWesternmovies,byresortingtowords,images,andsymbolicactions,haveallegorizedtheformulaicpatternofhonest,courageousandhardworkingAmericanswhoarethreatenedbyevilforcesfornogoodreason.Besides,theyhavereestablishedthesuperiorityofAmericaninnocenceandprovidedaparadigmofjusticethatiseffectiveandefficient.WhatmattersmostistheirjustificationforAmericannationalismintermsofmoralcodesthathaveaJudeo-Christianreligiousheritageastheirfoundation.Onthewhole,theyexplainfordefensiveactionstakenbycontemporaryposteritiesofthatwhichwasforgedintheWesternfrontier.However,Billy’sfailureasanextraintheWesternfilmsburstsopentheinconsistencyandincongruityinthefrontieridealsinculcatedintoAmericanmindsbytheWesternmovieswhichhavealreadyfunctionedwellastheculturalandcommunicationsIdeologicalStateApparatus.Inthisway,McCarthyrepudiatestheWesternmoviesfortheiroveremphasisonthedesirabilityofthefrontiertenets.ThroughoutTheCitiesofthePlain,asenseofsplitselfbefallsMcCarthy’scowboyswhospontaneouslyassimilatethecentralbeliefsoffrontierideology.Such207 anideologyhaswontacitapprovalfrommanyAmericans,withthepopularityoftheWesternmovieswhichformsthesocial-ideologicalfantasy.Thisveryfantasyconstructsforpeople“avisionofsocietywhichdoesexist,asocietywhichisnotsplitbyanantagonisticdivision,[and]asocietyinwhichtherelationbetweenitspartsisorganic,complementary”(Žižek,TheSublime142).Inthisway,AmericanstrytobehaveinspontaneousaccordwiththeAmericannationalcharacterforgedbyitsfrontierexperience,withoutnoticingthattheantagonisticfissureshiddenbeneaththefrontierasafreeandequalsociety.Suchfissuresaremaskedbysocialfantasyconstructedby“anideology”thattakes“itsownfailureintoaccountinadvance”(italicizedinoriginalŽižek,TheSublime142).However,McCarthyseesthroughthisfantasyandwarnsthatAmerica’snostalgiafortheoldWestanditsaspirationforafurtherfrontierbeyondthehistoricalfrontierareasfutileastheyarevoid.JohnGrady’sdeathandBilly’sfailedlifearecausedbytheirpreviousindiscriminateassimilationofandstubbornobsessionwiththeAmericannationalcharacterwhichessentiallydeterminestheirhomologizingviewaboutthefrontierandimperialattitudetowards“Other.”TheyfailtoseetheWesternfrontierasahybridizedcontactzonewheredifferentcultures,languagesandracesareinterweavedandmutuallyinfluenced.Infact,JohnGradyisbroughtupinaninterculturalfamilybackground.HismasteryofSpanishandpreferenceforMexicanfoodathomeareindicatorsofhishybridizedculturalidentity.WhatmattersmostishisupbringingunderthecareofaMexicanwomanLuisaandherhusbandArturo.JohnGrady’smotherhadbeenabsentduringhischildhoodandyouth.HisfatherhadbeenputintowarprisonforseveralyearsduringWWII.Hisfamilymembershadneverexpectedthathewouldreturnandsomeofthemevenintendedtosellhisbelongings.Duringthelong-termabsenceofhisparents,JohnGradytakesLouisaandArturoashissurrogateparents.HeisspirituallyidentifiedwithLouisahecallsAbuela[grandmother].LouisahasworkedinJohnGrady’sfamilyranchsincethenineteenthcentury.LouisastayswithJohnGrady’sfamilyuntiltheranchissold.Besides,SanAngelo,whereJohnGrady’sfamilyranchislocated,isgenerallyregardedasthenorthernfrontierofthe208 Mexican-Americanborderandlabeledas“aMexicanAmericanhomeland”(Montejano2).However,suchahybridizedsocialandfamilialbackgrounddoesnotnecessarilymeanJohnGrady’sintegrationinthishistoricallyheterogeneousfrontierregion,sincetheprocessofacculturationhappensbeyondthescopesofhismasteryofalanguageandpracticeofdailyetiquette.MeaganMcGilchristpertinentlydiscernsthat“JohnGradyviewsmostMexicansinthewayheviewsanimals”(176).Justasheconsidershorsestobetamed,mostMexicansshallbesubjugated.Thus,centraltoJohnGrady’sbonesisasenseofracialsuperiorityandbyextensionanembodimentofadistinctiveAmericannationalidentity.Whatisworse,withtheinterpellativefunctionofvariousIdeologicalStateApparatuses,hisimperialunconsciousisforcefullystrengthened.Consequently,hemustseekafurtherfrontiertorepairhislossoflandandcowboylife.HisrepetitiveimaginingofMexicoandaMexicanwomanashis“NewFrontier”and“symbolicfrontier”respectivelytestifieshisrejectionofthehybridizedculturalidentitysoastodistinguishhisuniqueAmericanness.HisfailuretoacceptandrespectthehybridizedsocialandculturaltraitsleftbyAmericanfrontierexpansionbringsnootherbenefitsthandisillusionmentanddeath.Hisbitterexperiencescallforhisfellowstore-identifywiththehybridizedAmericannationalidentity,notwiththehomologizingoneexclusivelyattributedtotheAnglo-AmericansbyTurner.McCarthy,byhighlightingBillyParham’sre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontier,givesaglimpseofhopefortheheterogeneous,diversifiedandintermingledco-existenceofdifferentethnicities,culturesandlanguagesintheAmericanWest.Astothediscussionoftheconceptof“hybridity,”HomiBhabhacanbynomeansbemissed.Bhabhadisengagestheconceptof“hybridity”fromthebiologicalsphereofmiscegenationandmakesitencompasstheculturalfieldofpower.Ashetellsus,“welocatethequestionofcultureintherealmofthebeyond”(italicizedinoriginal1).Simplyput,thecomplexinterconnectionofhistoryandtheculturallycontingentborderlinesofmodernnationhoodhavespawnedasenseofhybridizedimaginedcommunity.Likewise,NéstorGarcíaCanclinialsoadvocatesculturalhybridityinLatinAmericanpoliticsandcultureandconsiderstheinterculturalmixtureasthe209 extantconditionofallhumancultureswhichexperience“continuousprocessesoftranculturation”featuredbymutualborrowingandlendingamongdifferentcultures(xv).Itcanbesaidthattheconceptof“hybridity”exceedsitsoriginaldomainofmiscegenationtoincorporatetheinterweavingdomainofrace,culture,languageandethnicity.InCitiesofthePlain,McCarthyhintsthatthehistoricalfrontierhasalwaysbeenahybridizedoneinwhichvariousculturesandethnicitiesareinextricablytiedwithoneanother,andsuggeststhatre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontierisofvitalimportanceforAmericansandAmericaatlargetogiveuptheirinternalcolonizationandglobalimperialismhistoricallyandculturallyforgedbyitsfrontiermindset.McCarthy’sportrayalofBillyParhamintheepilogueistosuggesthisvisionofre-identificationwiththehybridizedfrontier.AfterwanderinginDeBacacountyofNewMexicoinseekingofhislittlesister’stomb,BillyistakeninbyahospitablefamilyjustoutsidePortalesofNewMexico.ItisinthisfamilythatBillyfindsawarmhousethatresembles“theroomhe’dsleptasaboy”(McCarthy,Cities290).ThisparticularlocaleisofgreatsignificancegiventhefactthatBillyandhisfamilymembersoncelivedinNewMexico.Besides,thegeographicallocationisimportantinbringingpeopleandthingstogether.PortalesisthecountyseatofRooseveltCounty.AmericansettlementinPortalesoccurredinthelatenineteenthcenturywithcattleraisersdiscoveringawatersourcethatemanatedfromarockyledgeresemblingaSpanishporch.BeforeAmericansettlementthere,Comanchesruledthisareaduringthemajorpartofthenineteenthcentury.Enteringthenewmillennium,theracialcompositionofthecityofPortaleswaswhiteAmericans,AfricanAmericans,nativeIndians,MexicanAmericansandotherminorities.Amongthesedifferentethnicities,HispanicorLatinoriginwas38.13%ofitstotalpopulation.Initsentirety,PortaleshasalwaysbeenahybridizedlocaleinwhichracialderacinationandbiashavegraduallydiminishedwiththenativeIndians’restorationofre-attachmenttotheirimpairedhomelandandwiththeaccommodationofMexicanAmericansandotherminoritiesinthisplace.McCarthy’sselectionoftheplaceforBilly’sresettlementisnotpurposeless;rather,itengageswithfarmorethanphysicalfeatures,butwith210 culturallyspecificmeaningsandpsychologicalormentaldimensions.WhatMcCarthyarousesisessentiallytheculturalandethnichybridityintheculturallandscapeofNewMexicoandbyextensionthatofthewholeSouthwest.McCarthy’sdepictionofBilly’sresettlementinPortaleshighlightshisrejectionofahomogenizingsocialandculturalidentity.Infact,BillyisamestizowhosematernalgrandmotherisaMexican.Hisactiontolocatehissister’stombdemonstrateshiswillingnesstoreturntohishybridizedidentityandeffortstoalleviateup-rootednessledbyhispreviousexperiences.Thoughhefailstofindhissister’stomb,Billy’ssenseoflossisrepairedbyhisresettlementinPortales.Sucharesettlementunderlineshisembracementoftheheterogeneityandinter-dependenceofdiversifiedculturesthere.JohnCantpointsoutthatBilly’seventual“fateisinpartduetohiscrossingofaculturalborder,ofhisfailuretoappreciatethemeaningsthatwillbemediatedbyMexicanculture”(204).Cant’scontentionfleshesoutthereasonforBilly’sfailureintheBorderTrilogy,butignoresthesignificanceofhissettlementinPortales.McCarthy’sre-positioningofBillyintotheculturalmatrixofthehistoricalfrontierregioninwhichIndian,Mexican,andAmericanculturehavecollidedwithandmutuallyinfluencedoneanotherrestorestheculturalandethnicalhybridizedaffiliationinBilly,andprovidesamoreinclusiveandpluralisticvisionoftheAmericanWest.Insodoing,McCarthyexhortsAmericannationtoadmitthetightlyknottedandoverlappingexperiencesandhistoriesoftheWesternfrontier.Billy’sre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontiercomestruewithhisrestorationofhistoricalawareness.DuringhiswanderinginArizona,Billycomesacrossastranger.Heistoldthestranger’stalewhichisframedinadreamwithinadream.BillysurvivestointerpretthesignificanceoftheeventsintheBorderTrilogyandgoesthroughtheprocessofcontemplationonhislife.Thestrangerrecounts:Theworldofourfathersresideswithinus.Tenthousandgenerationsandmore.Aformwithoutahistoryhasnopowertoperpetuateitself.Whathasnopastcanhavenofuture.Atthecoreofourlifeisthehistoryofwhichitiscomposedandinthatcorearenoidiomsbutonlytheactofknowinganditisthisweshareindreamsandout.(McCarthy,Cities281)211 Thestranger’saccountsinsinuatetheinterconnectednessbetweenthepast,thepresentandthefuturebyallegorizingtheinfluenceofthepastonthepresentandthefuture.Here,McCarthysubtlyhintsthatthehistoricallegacyleftbyfrontierexpansionhasalreadydeterminedthepresentcultural,ethnicalandlinguistichybridityintheWest.Thepast,likealivingdead,alwaysspeakstothepresentwithitsinerasabletraces.Likewise,thehistoricalfrontier,withitsimmovablehybridizedtraits,continuestoremindAmericansnotoftheirtotalizingnationalidentitybutofahybridizedone.RichardSlotkinexaminestheWesterntotracethethematicchangesthatmakebearingsonthechangingsocialandpoliticalmilieu,andarguesthattheWesternforthemostpartreflectsandadaptsitselftotheideologicaldisputes,butfailsto“envisionthenationasapolyglot,multicultural,andegalitarian”(Gunfighter658).Nevertheless,McCarthy’sevocationofBilly’sre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontierdismantlesdiscursivebarriersthathaveseparatedtheAmericansfromthenon-Americans,andmakesuntenablethedistinctiveAmericanidentityimaginedforthewhitesonly.Billytraversesthesocialfantasycreatedbyfrontierideology,onlytofinditsnothingness.Withthegrowingawarenessofhisfalseadherencetotheobsoletecodesofbehavior,hecomestoknowthatthethingshewantedinyoutharenolongertheoneshereallyneeds.Billyistoldbythestrangerthat“[o]ur…desiretoshapetheworldtoourconvenience”invites“allmannersofparadoxanddifficulty”(McCarthy,Cities283).ThisassertionpiercesthroughthehiddendesireofMcCarthy’scowboyswhocannot“standoutsideofone’sdesires,”but“seethings”out“oftheirownvolition”(269).Thestranger’sretellingofthedreamofthetravelerhedreamsofadvisesBillytogiveuphisfalseideas.Thetravelertells:“hesawintheworld’ssilenceagreatconspiracy”(282).Ifhehadanyrevelation,itwouldbethis:“hewasrepositorytothisknowingwhichhecametosolelybyhisabandonmentofeveryformerview”(282).ThestrangerappearsasaphilosophicalandspiritualmentorforBillyandAmericaatlargeandenlightensthem:Thethingthatissoughtisaltogetherother.Howeveritmaybeconstruedwithin212 men’sdreamsorbytheiractsitwillnevermakeafit.Thesedreamsandtheseactsaredrivenbyaterriblehunger.Theyseektomeetaneedwhichtheycanneversatisfy.(287)Here,“men’sdreams”and“theiracts”metaphoricallyrefertoAmericans’imaginingofpossessingafurtherfrontierandmaintainingAmericanimperialglorydrivenby“aterriblehunger”whichwillneverbesatisfied.Thestranger’saccountsofthedreamwithinhisdreambehooveAmericanstorelinquishtheircelebrationoftheruggedwhite-malefrontierheroandunrealisticimaginationofre-glorifyingthepastsoastoreassertadistinctiveyethomogenizingAmericannationalidentity.CommentingonthedreamrecountedbythestrangertothehomelessBilly,RobertL.Jarrettarguesthatthedreamtalefunctions“asmeta-narrative”whichisanarrativeaboutnarrative“thatundercutsandcritiquesthemixtureofgeography,historiography,andbiographythatcomprisesthemainnarrativeoftheBorderTrilogy”(“SenseofEnding”336).McCarthy’suseofmeta-fictionaldeviceinCitiesofthePlainistoexposetheartificialityofsocialandculturalassumptionoffreedom,individualismandprogressfalselynormalizedandcementedintohiscowboys’minds.ThisveryartificialityhasbeensomisleadingthatmanyAmericansareapttoredeemtheirnationasanexceptionalonewithunmatchednationaltraits.ThequestionsputforwardbythestrangerwarnthattheAmericanscannotfashiontherealityatwill:Youthinkmenhavepowertocallforthwhattheywill?Evokeaworld,awakeorsleeping?Makeitbreatheandthensetoutuponitfigureswhichaglassgivesbackorwhichthesunacknowledges?Quickenthosefigureswithone’sownjoyandone’sdespair?Canamanbesohidfromhimself?Andifsowhoishid?Andfromwhom?(McCarthy,Cities285)Answerstotheseuninterruptedquestionsareabsolute“No.”TherecurringexperiencesofJohnGradyandBillyParhamtimeandagainbringnothinggloriousandregenerativeastheirimperialculturepromisesthem,butbleakandeventragictaleswiththeirhopelessness.HistorianRichardWhiteacknowledgesthevalidityoftheWesternwhenhenotes213 that“storieswetellabouttheWestmatter.Theynotonlyrevealhowwethinkaboutourselvesbutalsohelptodeterminehowwechoosetoacttowardeachother”(“FrederickJacksonTurner”55).McCarthy’sstoriesabouttheWest,judgedbyWhite’sassertion,suggeststhatAmericansshallbesuspiciousoffrontierideologythathashomogenizedtheWestintoaunivocalandmonotonoushistoriographyandaggrandizedamonolithicAmericannationalcharacterwhosereassertionhaspushedmanyAmericanstore-embarkontheimperialroad.Toavoidtheimperialroad,McCarthyobligeshisfellowstore-integrateintothehybridizedfrontierasBillydoes.Billy’sup-rootednessandhisre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontierconveyanewsenseofculturalandnationalidentificationthathighlightsJamesClifford’s“dwelling-in-travellingandtravelling-in-dwelling”(Routes2).WiththeconsideratecareofBettywhodoesnotknowthereasonforputtingupwithastranger,Billyfindsrelieffromthehostfamily.Thesimplereasonisthetranscendentallovethatstitchestogetherpeopleofdifferentethnicities,culturesandclasses.BettyepitomizeswhatChelaSandovalcalls“singularapparatus,”namely,“love”asoneofthe“modesofdecolonizingglobalization”inbuildingthetwenty-first-century(2).Inthefinalscene,Billy,wakeningfromhisdreamofBoydwhobecomesaMexicanheroincorridos[ballads],istimelycomfortedbyBettysothathisfearforandhisuncertaintyaboutlifearemitigated.Thefinalsceneisofvitalimportancenotonlybecauseitepitomizeslove,asastrategyofconstructingthedecolonizingglobalization,thathelpsBillyreintegrateintocommunitylife,butalsobecauseitwitnesseshisreaffirmationofahybridizedidentity.Inhisdream,BillyseeshislittlebrotherBoydwhobecomesaMexicannationalheroforhisheroicdeedswhicharerecordedincorridos[ballads].Inacertainsense,Boyd,whoisreturnedtoahybridizedidentityincorridos,becomesanotherselfofBilly.Originally,corridos,asoraltraditionsinMexico,“preservethedignityandhonor”ofMexicanfamiliesandcommunitiesinsituationscomplicatedby“poverty,racism,andattemptsbyboththeMexicanandAmericangovernmentsto‘tame’thelastfrontier”(Ragland124).Moreover,corridos“underlinetheimpossibilityofaunitarynationalidentityastheyincessantlyregisterthedisruptions,displacements,214 andmovementsthatprovidetheunstablegroundforassertingit”(Streeby287).Overall,corridos,whichdisseminatethememoriesofanotherAmericaandtherebyposenarrativechallengestoanexclusiveAmericannationalandindividualsocialidentity,arecharacterizedbyhybridity,heteroglossiaandheterogeneity.Fromthisperspective,Billy’sidentificationwithBoydsymbolizeshisreturntothehybridizedidentitysimilartoGloriaAnzaldúa’snewmestizo.Billy’sre-identificationwiththehybridizedidentityrepresentsthatanewAmericanmanwho,relinquishingthedistinctivenationalidentityconferredonthembyAmericanfrontierexperience,embracesthehybridizednationalidentityhistoricallydeterminedbytheculturalandsocialclashesandinter-influencesintheoldWest.Givenhisbiologicalmiscegenation,Billy’sre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontierdemonstratesMcCarthy’saffirmationofthediversifiedborderlandsculture.Billy,nowoldinhiseighties,withhishandsgnarled,rope-scarred,andspeckledfromthesun,becomeswitheredbyyears.Hishandsbecome“amap”whichis“enoughformentoread”anduponwhich“God’splentyofsignsandwonders…makealandscape”and“aworld”(McCarthy,Cities291).Nevertheless,Billy,notbeingdiscardedin“NoCountryforOldMen,”would14comfortablynursehisailmentsonBetty’sgenerousloveandcare.Billy’sre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontierandhisre-identificationwithhisMexicanoriginteardownanarrowsenseofessentialismandnationalismthatwentberserkandjustifiedAmericanimperialisminthehistoriographyoftheAmericanWest.Inthisway,McCarthysurpassestheculturalandpoliticalbarrierssetbyfrontierideologythathadgivenamonolithiccastingofAmericannationalidentityandjustifiedtheAmericanempirebymeansofpurgingtheabsolutedifferentiated“Other”from“Us”inthewestwardexpansion.IntheepilogueofCitiesofthePlain,McCarthynotonlygivesamassivejolttofrontierideologythatfalselyprecipitatesmanyAmericansintoruggedimperialconquest,butalsosubstitutesitsgroundofhomogeneityandpuritywithhybridityandmultiplicity.Hefurthersuggeststhatre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontiercan14“NoCountryforOldMen”isthetitleofMcCarthy’snovelpublishedin2005.215 bridgethegapthatseparatesAmericafromMexico,AmericannessfromMexicannessandthewhitefromthenon-white.Hisappreciationofthehybridizedfrontierobligeshisfellowstoadmittheirindebtednesstothehistoricallyotherizedcultures.Moreimportantly,McCarthypresentsaredemptiveworldthroughtheunclosedandunfinishedcross-culturalreconciliationandre-integration.Inthissense,wecanconcludethatCitiesofthePlainunderscoresMcCarthy’sliterarypresentationoftranscendingfrontierideologysinceheimaginativelyenvisionsthedysfunctionofAmericanimperiallogicandurgesAmericanstoadmit“Other”thatresidesin“Us.”McCarthy’simaginativere-integrationintothehybridizedfrontieristheprevailingtrendalongtheMexican-AmericanborderlandswheremanyAmericansgetridoftheirimperialconsciousandembraceaplanetaryconsciousnessandatranscendentalhumanity.ThispointappearsextremelyimportantwhenAmericaanditscitizensareincreasinglyconnectedtotherestoftheworldinanageofglobalization.ItismuchmoreimportantforAmericawhenhandlingitsrelationtoMexico.WhenanalyzingthepresentandfutureproblemsconcerningtheMexican-Americanborder,RomeroFernandoasserts,withtheconstantexchangesofgoodsandhumanresourcesacrosstheMexican-Americanborderincreasingandthereciprocalnatureofsistercitiesbecomingmoreimportant,thetwonations“havearrivedatanunforeseenandunprecedentedstateofinterdependence”(94).McCarthy,whooncesojournedintheMexican-Americanborderregionformanyyears,probablyhasrecognizedthispoint.Thus,inCitiesofthePlain,heattachesmuchimportancetotheculturallyandhistoricallyheterogeneousAmericanfrontierandurgeshisfellowsnottosingle-mindedlyseekculturalandeconomichegemony,buttoestablishco-existenceandmutualprosperityforpeoplesacrossthissensitiveregion.216 ConclusionAlthoughthefrontierhadendedmorethanacenturyago,politicianshaveoftenmadeuseoftheideaforitsideologicalreferencetoanimaginednational,social,andpoliticalcohesion.JustsixdaysaftertheattackoftheWorldTradeCentertwintowersthbytheAlQaidaorganizationonSept.11,2001,PresidentGeorgeW.BushaddressedthenationanddeclaredAlQaidaleaderOsamabinLadenthepublicenemyoftheU.S.byinvokingtheoldtropesofjusticeandcowboyvigilantismcentraltotheAmericanWest.Bush,whenaskedbyareporterwhetherhewantedbinLadendead,repliedthat“Iwanthim—Iwantjustice.Andthere’sanoldposteroutWest…thatsaid‘Wanted:Deadoralive.’AllIwant,andAmericawantshimbroughttojustice.That’swhatwewant”(qtd.inMoos1).PresidentBush,throughhisexplicitreferencetotheimageryoftheAmericanWest,notonlycertifiedhisculturalaffinityfortheAmericanWest,butalsoequatedjusticewiththecodeoftheWestandmadetheregionalallegiancetothenationatlarge.DespiteregularlywearingcowboybootswiththeTexasstateflagonpublicoccasions,PresidentBushwasonnoaccountthefirstAmericancowboypresident.HispredecessorslikeRonaldReagan,LyndonB.Johnson,JohnF.KennedyandTheodoreD.Rooseveltwerelarger-than-lifeWesterncowboysorfrontiersmenwhopepperedtheirspeecheswithallusionstotheWesternfrontier.Bymeansoffrequentappropriationsofthefrontierimagery,politiciansgive“lifetoits[American]fabledhistoryandsetittoworkfortheirpoliticalagendas”(Moos2).Theirrhetoricalinvocationsofthefrontierimageryhaveprovedthatthefrontier,thecowboyandthecattleranches,asiconicimagesoftheAmericannationalcharacter,epitomizethespecialgreatnessofAmericanhistoryandexplainitsstatusasaworldsuperpower.Whatismore,theybecomepartofalarger“semi-officialnarrative”inwhich“America,aforceforgoodintheworld,regularlycomesupagainstobstaclesposedbyforeignconspiracies,ontologicallymischievousandagainst‘America’”(Culture217 324).Ineffect,thetransferenceofthemythicalfrontiertothe“semi-official”cultureoftheAmericangovernmenthasalwaysgivenlicensetoitsactionsoneradicatingtheso-called“evil”andcalledforunanimoussupportforitsimperialagendafromitscitizenswithoutelicitingitsracewar,ethnocentrism,classandgenderbiasesandculturalimperialism.Tellingly,thenarrativeofthewestwardexpansionasaheroicandvictoriousundertakingandthepoliticalrhetoricofthefrontierasalandofindividualism,rebirth,self-relianceandjusticehavepersistedfromtheinceptionoffrontierexplorationwellintothetwenty-firstcentury.WhentheWesthousedavastrangeofunexploredfrontier,manyAmericanswerecalledtoseektheirfortunesandtoleavebehindthesqualorandinequalitiesintheEastwithaneyeforachievingwealthandrebirththere.Whenthefrontierwasdepleted,theyarenowurgedtosustainAmericanideaslocatedinthelargeplethoraofthemythoftheWestvialookingforandconqueringthe“NewFrontier”or“symbolicfrontier.”TheirdriveforfrontierexplorationnotonlydemonstratestherelevanceofthemythologiesofAmericannationalidentity,itsself-definition,self-volition,andliberalism,butalsorevealstheideologicalaffiliationofAmericanimperialismtothefrontiermindset.ThispointismuchtruertoMcCarthy’sfrontierseekersinhisWesterns.TheprecedingchaptershaveanalyzedfrontierideologyinthreerepresentativeWesternsofMcCarthy’scorpus.ThecentralargumentinthedissertationhasbeenthatMcCarthyembraces,criticizesandtransgressesfrontierideologybyinvokingandtransformingthefrontiermotifsoastore-examineAmericanimperialisminthecontextofcross-culturalexchangesandinteractionsalongtheMexican-AmericanborderlandsfromtheaftermathoftheMexican-Americanwartothetwentiethcentury.Traditionally,theWesterngenrehasdeemedtheWesternfrontierastheoriginofAmericanexceptionalnationalidentityandcharacter.Itsnationalexceptionalism,whichhasprovidedanacceptableexplanationforAmericanimperialconquestduringandaftertheWestwardMovement,resonateswithsomefundamentalpatternsofthefrontiernarratives.Inthesenarratives,thefrontierwasdepictedasa“PromisedLand”218 repletewithinexhaustiblenaturalresourcesandvastexpanseoflandwaitingforthemaleAnglo-Americanstoconquerandpossess.ThefrontierthengavebirthtotraditionalAmericanvalueslikeindividualism,pragmaticism,courage,justiceandadventurousspiritthatdistinguishedAmericafromtherestoftheworldandtheAmericansfromthenon-Americans.Inreality,thetraditionalWesterngenreprovidedamildversionoftheconquestofthefrontier,sinceitreinforcedthebinaryoppositionbetweenthewhiteandthenon-whiteandjustifiedAmericanimperialism,classexploitation,racism,anddominationoverthefemalesinthenameofprogressivenationalismandManifestDestiny.Untilnow,thefrontierhasnotlostitsallurementandbecomeasetofimageriestowhichpoliticiansaswellasthegeneralpublicresortforinspiration.Similarly,McCarthyhasutilized,withrevisionswhereheconsidersnecessary,theconventionalrepresentationofthefrontiertoreplay,criticizeandtranscendfrontierideology.InBloodMeridian,McCarthyinitiallyinvokesanidealizationofthefrontierlifeandjustifiestheruggedwhite-maleheroeswhointendtoextendtheWesternfrontiertoencompassthewholeNorthernpartofMexicointhefollowingyearsaftertheMexican-AmericanWar.Inthisway,McCarthyelicitsthe“politicalunconscious”ofracismandretellstheimperialnarrativesofinnocentfrontiersmenandwhitecivilizationthatthedominantideologyhassoughttoenact.However,McCarthydoesnotcompletelyconcurwiththesetraditionalnarrativesandinterrogatesthembydeconstructingManifestDestinyanddegradingthewhite-maleAmericansintotheimmoral,degenerateandviciousfilibustersandaggressorsusuallyassociatedwiththenativeIndians,Mexicansandotherminorities.Fromthisperspective,McCarthyengageswithhistoricalinterrogationtodebunktheunreasonablerationaleforfrontierideology.Nevertheless,insteadofcompletelytopplingdowntheconceptualbasisoffrontierideology,McCarthyembracesanambivalentattitudetowarditbyhighlightingthetraditionalnarrativetropeof“regenerationthroughviolence,”AmericanwhitenessandmoralrebirthasrespectivelytypifiedbytheJudgeHoldenandthekid.ThroughoutthenarrativeofBloodMeridian,McCarthyinterspersesthevalidationoffrontierideologywiththe219 interrogationofitandmakesanunclearattitudetowardsAmericannationalandracialsuperiorityintandemwiththeunprecedentedterritorialexpansionofAmericasincetheJacksonianera.Inthissense,McCarthyreflectsanambivalentattitudetowardAmericanimperialism.AsisevidentinthediscussionofAllthePrettyHorses,thefrontier,withitsofficialclosurein1890,hasstillcaptainedtheimaginationoflatergenerationsofAmericans.InAllthePrettyHorses,theimperialconquest,whichispredicateduponfrontierideologythatsupportsbounty-huntingforApachescalpsorforanydark-skinnedanddark-hairedscalpstoensureandconsolidatetheAmericanempireinBloodMeridian,istransformedintothepursuitofcowboyparadiseintheself-imagined“NewFrontier”Mexico.JohnGrady’simaginingofthe“NewFrontier”forconquestoutsideAmericanterritoryisduetotheinfiltrationoffrontierideologyintoeveryporeofthesocietyviadifferentIdeologicalStateApparatuseswhichhavealreadybecomeimportantmeansofideologicaloperationmechanism.Therhetoricof“NewFrontier”isanalogoustothetropeoftheoldWest.Bothoftheminvokefrontierideologythatlegitimatesthewhite-maleAmericans’engagementwithacontestofphysicalprowesstofortifyAmericanimperialexpansion.Nevertheless,McCarthydoesnotassenttofrontierideologythatinstigateshisprotagonist’sexplorationofthe“NewFrontier”asanakedmanifestationofAmericanculturalimperialism.HebelittlestheimperialistpowerAmericancowboysrepresent.Byempoweringthecolonizedwithastronganti-imperialistpowertoresistAmericanculturalpenetration,McCarthyrevisestheunreasonablerespectsof“structuresoffeeling”inheritedbymanyAmericansfromthenineteenth-centuryfrontierexperience.Theserevisions,thoughfailingtoexerttransformativeinfluencesontheprotagonist,undofrontierideologythatconstructsandunderpinsthefantasyofAmericanimperialismrunningamokinreality,andhenceremindusthatMcCarthyiswritingagainsttheempire.InCitiesofthePlain,McCarthytakesastepfurtherinundercuttingfrontierideologybynegatingandtranscendingit.Frontierideology,thoughappearingasakindofpsychicresidueinthepost-frontierera,stillfunctionsinaffectingcharacters’codesofbehavior.Castinganostalgiceyeonthepassingofthefrontierandengaging220 inthequasi-cowboyactivities,McCarthy’scharacterstrytosustainthematerialexistenceforthecontinuedoperationoffrontierideology.EverytimethebelatedcowboyslikeJohnGradyColewhoputtheirskillsintopracticestoreenactthefrontiermyth,McCarthymakesironyonorparodyofit.JohnGrady,likethesettlersoftheoldWest,iscompletelyassimilatedintothefabricatedideologicalsystem,andasaresultshroudshisimperialdominationovertheMexicanswithacloakofliberatinghisMexicanloverMagdalena(“symbolicfrontier”)fromtheabuseoftheMexicanpimpEduardo.Byconcealinghisnewimperialistagendawitharedemptiverhetoric,JohnGradyinitiatesaplantobuyMagdalena’sfreedomwhichisemblematicofAmerica’seconomicexploitationanddominationoverMexico.Uptothispoint,McCarthydisapproveshisredemptiverhetoricbydepictingJohnGradyasafailednewimperialistunabletobenefitfrompossessinghis“symbolicfrontier.”McCarthy’sironictreatmentofJohnGrady’sseeminglyredemptiveplandemonstrateshisdisagreementaboutfrontierideologythathasjustifiedAmericanimperialexpansionintheformsofbothterritorialexpansionandculturalandeconomichegemony.Withequalforce,McCarthy’sstressonre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontierblazesanewtrailforsubstitutingthetotalizingandmonopolizeddiscourseoffrontierideologythathasprescribeddistinctiveAmericannationalidentityandspurreditsimperialexpansion.Inthissense,McCarthytranscendsfrontierideologywhosefunctionhashistoricallyreinforcedAmericannostalgiaforanidealizedpast,andwithserioustoneurgeshisfellowstoembraceahybridizedAmericannationalidentity,sothatAmericacansquarelyandcorrectlyfacethehistoricallegaciesthatwereleftbyAmericancolonizationintheWest.Thus,McCarthy’svisionofre-integrationintothehybridizedfrontieroffersanalternativetotheimperialist,nationalist,ethnocentricandmale-dominateddiscoursepetrifiedinfrontierideologythathaspersistentlyinsistedupondivisions,demarcationsandoppositionalstructuresasabsolutecriteriafordefiningAmericannation.McCarthy’steleologyoffrontierideologynotmerelyaimsatrestagingthegloriousundertakingoftheAmericanempire,butalsocriticizingandtranscendingit.HisdynamicandnuancedattitudetowardAmericanimperialismisduetohis221 perceptionofthetrickofAmerica’scontinuedexplorationofafurtherfrontierfromtheoldWesttoMexico,thePhilippines,Vietnam,Somalia,Iraq,andnowtoitsnewlyproposedplantoreturntoAsia.Alltheseself-conceivedmissionsofexploringafurtherfrontierinbothliteralandfigurativesensearelikeahangoveroftheWestwardMovement.Lyingbehindthesereoccurrencesofthefrontierrhetoricistheever-burgeoningfermentationandfunctionoffrontierideology.Asareclusivewriter,McCarthyseldomallowshimselftostepintothelimelight,nordoesheexplicitlyasserthispoliticalview.McCarthymighthavediscernedthetrickbehindAmericanpoliticians’repetitiveallusionstothefrontierimagery.Hence,heimplicitlyconveysusinhisWesternsthattheso-calledAmerica’s“preemptivewarfare”strategyisanevolvedversionoftheWesterncowboyswhofiredthequickestshottogaintheinitiative.McCarthy’sappropriationandhisreformulationofthefrontiermotifinthetraditionalWesterngenreenableustonotethetrickyorchestrationoffrontierideology,andofferusamirrorthroughwhichweperceivehisinitiallyambivalentattitudetowardsAmericanimperialismgiveswaytohiscompletenegationandtranscendenceofit.Thus,McCarthy’sWesternsnotonlygivesociopoliticalcriticismsonAmericansocietybutalsodemonstratethatcontemporaryAmericanWesterns,exceedingthevulgaritygenerallyascribedtothetraditionalWesterngenre,gainbothaestheticandsociopoliticalsignificance.222 WorksCitedAbbott,Carl.FrontiersPastandFuture:ScienceFictionandtheAmericanWest.Lawrence:UPofKansas,2006.Adams,JohnA.BorderingtheFuture:TheImpactofMexicoontheUnitedStates.Westport:PraegerPublishers,2006.Adorno,Theodor.Prisms.Trans.SamuelandSherryWeber.Cambridge:MITP,1967.Alemán,Jesse.“HistoricalAmnesiaandtheVanishingMestiza:TheProblemofRaceinTheSquatterandtheDonandRamona.”Aztlán:AJournalofChicanoStudies27.1(2002):59-93.Allen,PaulaGunn.“CuentosdelaTierraEncantada:MagicandRealismintheSouthwestBorderlands.”ManyWests:Place,Culture,&RegionalIdentity.Ed.DavidM.WrobelandMichaelC.Steiner.Lawrence:UPofKansas,1997.342-65.Allmendinger,Blake.TheCowboy:RepresentationsofLaborinanAmericanWorkCulture.Oxford:OxfordUP,1992.Alonso,AnaMaría.ThreadofBlood:Colonialism,Revolution,andGenderonMexico’sNorthernFrontier.Tucson:UofArizonaP,1995.Althusser,Louis.LeninandPhilosophy,andOtherEssays.Trans.B.Brewster.NewYork:MonthlyReviewP,1971.---.ForMarx.Trans.B.Brewster.LondonandNewYork:Verso,1969.Anderson,Benedict.ImaginedCommunity:ReflectionontheOriginandSpreadofNationalism.LondonandNewYork:Verso,1983.Anderson,GaryClayton.TheConquestofTexas:EthnicCleansinginthePromisedLand,1820-1875.Norman:UofOklahomaP,2005.Andreasen,LianaVrajitoru.“BloodMeridianandtheSpatialMetaphysicsoftheWest.”SouthwesternAmericanLiterature36.3(2011):19-30.Anzaldúa,Gloria.Borderlands/LaFrontera:theNewMestiza.SanFranscico:AuntLuteBooks,1987.223 Arlow,J.A.“Ego,PsychologyandtheStudyofMythology.”PsychologyandMyth.Ed.RobertSegal.NewYork:Garland,1996.1-24.Aquila,R.“ABlazeofGlory:TheMythicWestinPopandRockMusic.”WantedDeadorAlive:TheAmericanWestinPopularCulture.Ed.R.Aquila.Urbana:UofIllinoisP,1996.191-215.Arnold,EdwinT.“ReviewofBloodMeridian,byCormacMcCarthy.”AppalachianJournal13(1985):103-04.Bass,HerbertJ.TheStateofAmericanHistory.Chicago:QuadrangleBooks,1970.Barrera,CordeliaEliza.“BorderPlacesandFrontierSpaces:DeconstructingIdeologiesoftheSouthwest.”Diss.UofTexas,2009.Barthes,Roland.Mythologies.1957.Trans.AnnetteLavers.NewYork:HillandWang.1972.Baudrillard,Jean.JeanBaudrillard:SelectedWritings.Ed.MarkPoster.Stanford:StanfordUP,2001.Beezley,WilliamH.andColinM.MacLanchlan.MexicansinRevolution,1910-1946:AnIntroduction.Lincoln&London:UofNebraskaP,2009.Berlant,Lauren.TheAnatomyofNationalFantasy.Chicago:UofChicagoP,1991.Bernoft,Iain.“‘Somedegenerateentrepreneurfleeingfromamedicineshow’:JudgeHoldenintheAgeofP.T.Barnum.”TheyRodeon:BloodMeridianandtheTragedyoftheAmericanWest.Ed.RickWallach.N.p.:theCormacMcCarthySociety,2013.65-81.Bell,Vereen.TheAchievementofCormacMcCarthy.BatonRouge:LouisianaStateUP,1988.---.“TheAmbiguousNihilismofCormacMcCarthy.”SouthernLiteraryJournal15.2(1993):31-41.Benjamin,Walter.Illuminations.1950.Ed.HannahArendt.Trans.HarryZohn.NewYork:SchockenBooks,1969.253-64.Bercovitch,Sacvan.Afterword.IdeologyandClassicAmericanLiterature.Ed.SacvanBercovitchandMyraJehlen.NewYork:CambridgeUP,1986.418-42.---.TheRitesofAssent:TransformationsinthesymbolicConstructionofAmerica.NewYork:Routledge,1993.Bhabha,Homi.TheLocationofCulture.NewYork:Routledge,1994.Billington,RayAllen.FrederickJacksonTurner:Historian,Scholar,Teacher.NewYork:Oxford224 UP,1973.Bloom,Harold.HowtoReadandWhy.NewYork:TouchStoneBooks,2001.---.Introduction.Bloom’sModernCriticalViews:CormacMcCarthy.NewYork:InfobasePublishing.1-8.Brannigan,John.NewHistoricismandCulturalMaterialism.NewYork:St.Martin’sP,1998.Brannon.WilliamCarl.“RidingforaFall:Genre,Myth,andIdeologyinMcCarthy’sWesternNovels.”Diss.TexasTechnologyU,2003.Brewton,Vince.“TheChangingLandscapeofViolenceinCormacMcCarthy’sEarlyNovelsandtheBorderTrilogy.”TheSouthernLiteraryJournal37.1(2004):121-43.Brice,DonalyE.“TheGreatComancheRaidof1840.”TrackingtheTexasRangers:theNineteenthCentury.Ed.BruceA.GlasrudandHaroldJ.Weisss,Jr.Denton:UofNorthTexasP,2012.62-86.Brown,RichardMaxwell.“Violence.”TheOxfordHistoryoftheAmericanWest.Ed.Clyde.A.Milner,II,CarolA.O’Connor,andMarthaA.Sandweiss.NewYork:OxfordUP,1994.393-426.Burgoyne,Robert.FilmNation:HollywoodLooksatU.S.History.Minneapolis:UofMinnesotaP,1997.Busby,Mark.“IntotheDarkeningLand:theWorldtoCome.”Myth,Legend,Dust:CriticalResponsestoCormacMcCarthy.Ed.RickWallack.NewYork:ManchesterUP,2000.227-48.---.“GoodbyeOl’Paint,HelloRapidTransit.”Twentieth-CenturyTexas:ASocialandCulturalHistory.Ed.JohnW.StoreyandMaryL.Kelley.Denton:UofNorthTexasP,2008.220-44.Bush,Vannevar.Science—theEndlessFrontier:AReporttothePresidentonaProgramforPostwarScientificResearch.1945.Washington:NationalScienceFoundation.1960.Campell,Neil.“LibertybeyonditsBounds:CormacMcCarthy’sHistoryoftheWestinBloodMeridian.”Myth,Legend,Dust:CriticalResponsestoCormacMcCarthy.Ed.RickWallach.Manchester:ManchesterUP,2002.217-26.Cather,Willa.OneofOurs.NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf,1922.Cawelti,JohnG.Adventure,Mystery,andRomance:FormulaStoriesasArtandPopularCulture.Chicago:UofChicagoP,1976.225 ---.“CormacMcCarthy:RestlessSeekers.”SouthernWritersatCentury’sEnd.Ed.JeffreyJ.FolksandJamesA.Perkins.Lexington:UofKentuckyP,1997.164-76.---.TheSix-GunMystiqueSequel.BowlingGreen:BowlingGreenUPopularP,1999.Chabram-Dernersesian,Angle.“OntheSocialConstructionofWhitenesswithinSelectedChicano/aDiscourses.”DisplacingWhiteness:EssaysinSocialandCulturalCriticism.Ed.FrankenbergRuth.DurhamandLondon:DukeUP,1997.107-64.Chela,Sandoval.MethodologyoftheOppressed.Minneapolis:UofMinnesotaP,2000.Churchill,Ward.FantasiesoftheMasterRace:Literature,Cinema,andtheColonizationofIndians.Monroe:CommonCourage,1992.Clifford,James.TheRoutes:TravelandTranslationintheLateTwentiethCentury.Cambridge:HarvardUP,1997.Cockcroft,JamesD.Mexico’sHope:anEncounterwithPoliticsandHope.NewYork:MonthlyReviewP,1998.Cook,BarbaraJ.“ContestedLandscapes:JohnGraves’MeditationsonHardScrabbleTexasHistoryandEcosystems.”JohnGraves,Writer.Ed.MarkBusbyandTerrellDixon.Austin:UofTexasP,2007.190-204.Corkin,Stanley.CowboysasColdWarriors:theWesternsandtheU.S.History.Philadelphia:TempleUP,2004.Cota-Torres,Édgar.“DispellingtheBorderMyth:ZonkeyWritersandtheBlackLegend.”BorderTransits:LiteratureandCultureacrosstheLine.Ed.AnaMªManzanas.Amsterdam&NewYork:Rodopi,2007.53-60.Cullen,Jim.TheAmericanDream:aShortHistoryofanIdeathatShapedaNation.Oxford:OxfordUP,2003.DeLeón,Arnold.“RegionandEthnicity:TopographicalIdentitiesinTexas.”ManyWests:Place,Culture,&RegionalIdentity.Ed.DavidM.WrobelandMichaelC.Steiner.Lawrence:UPofKansas,1997.259-74.Deleuze,Gilles,andFélixGuattari.AThousandPlateaus:CapitalismandSchizophrenia.Trans.BrianMassumi.Minneapolis:UofMinnesotaP,1987.Demaris,Ovid.PosodelMundo:InsidetheMexicanAmericanBorderfromTijuanatoMatamoros.Boston:LittleBrown,1970.226 Douglas,Christopher.“TheFlawedDesign:AmericanImperialisminN.ScottMomaday’sHouseMadeofDawnandCormacMcCarthy’sBloodMeridian.”Critique45.1(2003):3-24.Dowling,WilliamC.Jameson,Althusser,Marx:anIntroductiontothePoliticalUnconscious.Ithaca,NewYork:CornellUP,1984.Duncan,Dayton.MilesfromNowhere:TalesfromAmerica’sContemporaryFrontier.NewYork:Vikings,1993.Dyck,Reginald,“FrontierViolenceintheGardenofAmerica.”Desert,Garden,Margin,Range:LiteratureontheAmericanFrontier.Ed.EricHeyne.NewYork:TwaynePublishers,1992.55-69.Drinnon,Richard.FacingWest:theMetaphysicsofIndian-HatingandEmpire-Building.Minneapolis:UofMinnesotaP,1980.Eagleton,Terry.“Ideology,Fiction,Narrative.”SocialText2(1979):62-80.---.LiteraryTheory:AnIntroduction．Oxford:BlackwellPublishing,1996．---.MarxismandLiteraryCriticism.1976.LondonandNewYork:Routledge,2002.---.HolyTerror.NewYork:OxfordUP,2005.---.CriticismandIdeology.1976.LondonandNewYork:Verso,2006.Edney,M.H.MappinganEmpire:TheGeographicalConstructionofBritishIndia,1765-1843.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress,1990.Ellis,Jay.NoPlaceforHome:SpatialConstraintandCharacterFlightintheNovelsofCormacMcCarthy.NewYork:Routledge,2006.Emberley,JuliaV.“Gender,HistoryandImperialism.”Feminism/Postmodernism/Development.Ed.MarrianneH.MarchandandJaneL.Parapart.NewYork:Routledge,1995.95-105.Emmert,Scott.LoadedFictions:SocialCritiqueintheTwentieth-CenturyWestern.Moscow:UofIdahoP,1996.Erisman,Fred.“TheEnduringMythandtheModernWest.”ResearchingWesternHistory:TopicsintheTwentiethCentury.Ed.GeraldNashandRichardEtulain.Albuquerque:UofNewMexicoP,1997.167-86.Estes,AndrewKeller.CormacMcCarthyandtheWritingofAmericanSpaces.Amsterdam:RodopiB.V.,2013.Fanon,Frantz.TheWretchedoftheEarth.1961.Trans.C.Farrington.London:Penguin,1986.227 Fehrenbach,T.R.LoneStar:AHistoryofTexasandtheTexans.NewYork:Macmillan,1968.---.Comanches:theDestructionofaPeople.London:GeorgeAllen&UnwinLtd.,1974.Flores,Guillermo.“RaceandCultureintheInternalColony:KeepingtheChicanoinHisPlace.”StructuresofDependency.Ed.FrankBonillaandRobertHenriquesGirling.Oakland:Sembradora,1973.189-223.Fisher,Philip.HardFacts:SettingandFormintheAmericanNovel.OxfordandNewYork:OxfordUP,1987.Foucault,Michel.TheArchaeologyofKnowledgeand“TheDiscourseonLanguage.Trans.AlanSheridan.NewYork:Pantheon,1972.---.DisciplineandPunish:theBirthofthePrison.Trans.AlanSheridan.NewYork:RandomHouse,Inc.,1979.Fredriksson,Kristine.AmericanRodeo:fromBuffaloBilltotheBigBusiness.CollegeStation:TexasA&MUP,1985.Frye,Steven.UnderstandingCormacMcCarthy.Columbia:UofSouthCarolinaP,2009.Fuentes,Carlos.“Mexico’sNewWave.”Venture3(1967):125-131.GarcíaCanclini,Néstor.HybridCultures:StrategiesforEnteringandLeavingModernity.Trans.ChristopherL.ChiappariandSilviaL.Lopez.Minneapolis:UofMinnesotaP,1995.Gleeson-White,Sarah.“PlayingCowboys:Genre,Myth,andCormacMcCarthy’sAllthePrettyHorses.”SouthwesternAmericanLiterature33.1(2007):23-38.González,Marcial.“AMarxistCritiqueofBorderlandsPostmodernism:Adorno’sNegativeDialecticsandChicanoCulturalCriticism.”LeftoftheColorLine:Race,Radicalism,andTwentieth-CenturyLiteratureoftheUnitedStates.Ed.BillV.MullenandJamesSmethurst.ChapelHill:UofNorthCarolinaP,2003.279-97.Grossman,JamesR.Introduction.TheFrontierinAmericanCulture.Ed.JamesR.Grossman.BerkeleyandLosAngeles:UofCaliforniaP,1994.1-5.Hada,Kenneth,“FarmBoy,PimpsandthePaleofEmpire:CormacMcCarthy’sCitiesofthePlain.”JournaloftheAmericanStudiesAssociationofTexas39(2008):29-37.Hall,ThomasD.SocialChangeintheSouthwest,1350-1880.Lawrence:UPofKansas,1989.Hall,Stuart.StuartHall:CriticalDialoguesinCulturalStudies.Ed.DavidMorleyandKuan-HsingChen.London:Routledge,1996.228 Hage,Erik.CormacMcCarthy:ALiteraryCompanion.Jefferson:McFarland&Company,Inc.,Publishers,2010.Harley,J.B.“DeconstructingtheWorld.”Cartographica26.2(1989):1-20.---.“Maps,Knowledge,andPower.”TheNewNatureofMaps:EssaysintheHistoryofCartography.Ed.P.Laxton.Baltimore:JohnsHopkinsUP,2001.51-82.Hardt,MichaelandAntonioNegri.Empire.Massachusetts:HarvardUP,2000.Harvey,David.TheNewImperialism.Oxford:OxfordUP,2003.Hellmann,John.AmericanMythandtheLegacyofVietnam.NewYork:ColumbiaUP,1986.Hendrickson,KennethE,andGlennM.Sanford.“TheSecondTexasRevolution:FromCottontoGeneticsandtheInformationAge.”Twentieth-CenturyTexas:ASocialandCulturalHistory.Ed.JohnW.StoreyandMaryL.Kelley.Denton:UofNorthTexasP,2008.417-42.Hietala,ThomasR.ManifestDesign:AmericanExceptionalismandEmpire.IthacaandLondon:CornellUP,2002.Holloway,David.TheLateModernismofCormacMcCarthy.Westport:GreenwoodP,2002.Horkerheimer,MaxandTheodorAdorno.DialecticsofEnlightenment.Ed.GunzelinSchmidNoerr.Trans.EdmundJephcott.Stanford:StanfordUP,2002.Horsman,Reginald.RaceandManifestDestiny:theOriginsofAmericanRacialAnglo-Saxonism.Cambridge:HarvardUP,1981.Hosfstadter,Richard.ProgressiveHistorians:Turner,Beard,Parrington.NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf,1969.Howe,Irving.DeclineoftheNew.London:VictorGollancs,1971.Hutcheon,Linda.Irony’sEdge.NewYork:Routledge,1994.Hyde,AnneF.“CulturalFilters:TheSignificanceofPerceptionintheHistoryoftheAmericanWest.”WesternHistoricalQuarterly24.3(1993):351-374.James,Daniel.MexicoandtheAmericans.NewYork:FrederickA.Praeger,Inc.,1963.Jameson,Fredric.ThePoliticalUnconscious.NewYork:CornellUP,1981．---.“Postmodernism,ortheculturallogicoflatecapitalism.”NewLeftReview146(1984):53-92.---.SignaturesoftheVisible.NewYork:Routledge,1992.Jarrett,RobertL.CormacMcCarthy.NewYork:TwaynePublishers,1997.---.“CormacMcCarthy’sSenseofanEnding:SerializedNarrativeandRevisioninCitiesofthe229 Plain.”CormacMcCarthy:NewDirections.Ed.JamesD.Lilley.Albuquerque:UofNewMexicoP,2002.313-42.Jehlen,Myra.Introduction.IdeologyandClassicAmericanLiterature.Ed.SacvanBercovitchandMyraJehlen.NewYork:CambridgeUP,1986.1-20.Josyph,Peter.AdventuresinReadingCormacMcCarthy.Lanham:ScarecrowP,Inc,.2010.Kaplan,Amy.“RomancingtheEmpire:TheEmbodimentofAmericanMasculinityinthePopularHistoricalNovelofthe1890s.”AmericanLiteraryHistory2.4(1990):659-90.Kazanjian,David.TheColonizingTrick:ImperialCitizenshipinEarlyAmerica.Menneapolis:UofMinnesotaP,2003.Kennedy,JohnF.MemorableQuotationsofJohnF.Kennedy.Ed.MaxwellMeyerson.NewYork:ThomasY.Crowell,1965.---.“LettheWordGoForth”:theSpeeches,Statements,andWritingsofJohnF.Kennedy.Ed.TheodoreC.Sorensen.NewYork:DelacortedP,1988.Kolodny,Annette.TheLayoftheLand:MetaphorasExperienceandHistoryinAmericanLifeandLetters.ChapelHill:UofNorthCarolinaP,1975.---.TheLandbeforeHer：FantasyandExperienceoftheAmericanFronties,1630-1860.ChapelHill:UofNorthCarolinaP,1984.Kort,WesleyA.PlaceandSpaceinModernFiction.Gainesville:UPofFlorida,2004.Lagayette,Pierre.“TheBorderTrilogy,TheRoadandtheColdWar.”TheCambridgeCompaniontoCormacMcCarthy.Ed.StevenFrye.NewYork:CambridgeUP,2013.79-94.Lamar,HowardRoberts,ed.TheNewEncyclopediaoftheAmericanWest.NewHaven:YaleUP,1998.Lasco,MaryMcBride.WritingagainsttheEmpire:McCarthy,Erdrich,WelchandMcMurtry.Diss.TexasA&MU.2002.Lenihan,JohnH.Showdown:ConfrontingModernAmericainWesternFilm.Urbana:UofIllinoisP,1980.Lewis,R.W.B.TheAmericanAdam:InnocenceTragedyandTraditionintheNineteenthCentury.Chicago:UofChicagoP,1955.Limerick,PatriciaNelson.TheLegacyofConquest:TheUnbrokenPastofAmericanWest.NewYork:W.W.Norton&Company,Inc.,1987.230 ---.Somethinginthesoil:LegaciesandReckoningsintheNewWest.NewYork:W.W.Norton,2004.Limón,JoséE.“Tex-Sex-Mex:AmericanIdentities,LoneStars,andthePoliticsofRacializedSexuality.”AcrosstheGreatDivide:CulturesofManhoodintheAmericanWest.Ed.MatthewBasso,LauraMcCallandDeeGarceau.NewYork:Routledge,2001.275-91.Lincoln,Kenneth.CormacMcCarthy:AmericanCanticles.NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,2008.Lifton,RobertJay.HomefromtheWar:VietnamVeterans,neitherVictimsnorExecutioners.NewYork:BasicBooks,1985.Lorey,DavidE.TheU.S.-MexicanBorderintheTwentiethCentury:aHistoryofEconomicandSocialTransformation.Wilmington:ScholarlyResourcesInc.,1999.Luce,DianneC.“TheVanishingWorldofCormacMcCarthy’sBorderTrilogy.”ACormacMcCarthyCompanion:TheBorderTrilogy.Ed.EdwinT.ArnoldandDiannaC.Luce.Jackson:UofMississippiP,2001.161-97.---.“‘WhenYouWake’:JohnGradyCole’sHeroisminAllthePrettyHorses.”SacredViolence.ndVol.2.2ed.Ed.WadeHallandRickWallack.ElPaso:TexasWesternP,2002.57-71.MachadoJr.,ManuelA.TheNorthMexicanCattleIndustry,1910-1975:Ideology,Conflict,andChange.CollegeStation:TexasA&MUP,1981.MacLeod,WilliamChristie.TheAmericanIndianFrontier.1928.London:Routledge,1996.Magaña,Lisa.MexicanAmericansandthePoliticsofDiversity:QuererEsPoder!.Tucson:UofArizonaP,2005.Malone,MichaelP.andRichardW.Etulain.TheAmericanWest:aTwentiethCenturyHistory.Lincoln:UofNebraskaP,1989.Malphurs,Ryan.“TheMedia’sFrontierConstructionofPresidentGeorgeW.Bush.”TheJournalofAmericanCulture31.2(2008):185-201.Mannheim,Karl.IdeologyandUtopia:anIntroductiontotheSociologyofKnowledge.Trans.LouisWirthandEdwardShils.NewYork:HarcourtBrace,1936.Marx,Leo.TheMachineintheGarden.NewYork:OxfordUP,1964.Mauraleedharan,T.“RereadingGandhi.”DisplacingWhiteness:EssaysinSocialandCulturalCriticism.Ed.FrankenbergRuth.DurhamandLondon:DukeUP.60-85.231 McCarthy.Cormac.BloodMeridian.1985.NewYork:RandomHouse,Inc.,1992.---.AllthePrettyHorses.NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf,1992.---.CitiesofthePlain.NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf,1998.McClintock,Anne.“TheAngelofProgress:PitfallsoftheTerm‘Post-colonialism’.”ColonialDiscourseandPost-colonialTheory.Ed.LauraChrismanandPatrickWilliams.NewYork:ColumbiaUP.1994.291-305.McComb,DavidG.Texas：AModernHistory.Austin:UofTexasP,2010.McGilchrist,MeganRiley.TheWesternLandscapeinCormacMcCarthyandWallaceStegner.NewYork:Routledge,2010.McIntyre,Rick.WaragainsttheWolf:America’sCampaigntoExterminatetheWolf.Vancouver:VoyageurP,1995.Meinig,Donald.W.TheShapingofAmerica:aGeographicalPerspectiveon500YearsofHistory:TranscontinentalAmerica,1850-1915,vol.3.NewHaven:YaleUP,1998.---.ImperialTexas:anInterpretiveEssayinCulturalGeography.Austin:UofTexasP,1969.Merck,Frederick.TheHistoryofWestwardMovement.NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf,Inc.,1978.Montejano,David.AnglosandMexicansinthemakingofTexas:1836-1986.Austin:TexasUP,1987.Moos,Dan.OutsideAmerica:Race,Ethnicity,andtheRoleoftheWestinNationalBelonging.Lebanon:UPofNewEngland,2005.Moran,Joe.StarAuthors:LiteraryCelebrityinAmerica.London:PlutoP,2000.Morris,Edmund.TheRiseofTheodoreRoosevelt.1979.NewYork:RandomHouse.2010.Mountjoy,Shane.ManifestDestiny:WestwardExpansion.NewYork:ChelseaHouse,2009.Nash,GeraldD.TheAmericanWestTransformed:theImpactoftheSecondWorldWar.Bloomington:IndianaUP,1985.Newman,Kim.WildWestMovies:HowtheWestWasFound,Won,Lost,LiedAbout,FilmedandForgotten.London:Bloomsbury,1990.Owens,Barcley.CormacMcCarthy’sWesternNovels.Tucson:UofArizonaP,2000.Pascoe,Peggy.“Race,Gender,andthePrivilegesofProperty:ontheSignificanceofMiscegenationLawintheU.S.West.”OvertheEdge:RemappingtheAmericanWest.Ed.ValerieJ.MatsumotoandBlakeAllmendinger.Berkeley:UofCaliforniaP,1999.215-30.232 ---.WhatComesNaturally:MiscegenationLawandtheMakingofRaceinAmerica.Oxford:OxfordUP,2009.Parkes,Adam.“History,Bloodshed,andtheSpectacleofAmericanIdentityinBloodMeridian.”CormacMcCarthy:NewDirections.Ed.JamesD.Lilley.Albuquerque:UofNewMexicoP,2002.103-24.Peebles,Stacey.“WhatHappenstoCountry:TheWorldtoComeinCormacMcCarthy’sBorderndTrilogy.”SacredViolence.vol.2.2ed.Ed.WadeHallandRickWallach.ElPaso:TexasWesternP,2002.127-42.Paredes,Américo.“WithHisPistolinHisHand”:ABorderBalladandItsHero.Austin:UofTexasP,1958.Perez,MarcelaAlvarezandMarkT.Berger.“BorderingontheRidiculous:MexAmericaandtheNewRegionalism.”Alternatives34(2009):1-16.Petrik,Paula.NoStepBackward:WomenandFamilyontheRockyMountainMiningFrontier,HelenaMontana,1865-1900.Helena:MontanaHistoricalP,1987.Philips,Richard.MappingMenandEmpire.NewYork:Routledge,1997.Pilkington,Tom.“FateandFreeWillontheAmericanFrontier.”WesternAmericanLiterature27.4(1993):311-22.Pomeroy,EarlS.ThePacificSlope.NewYork:AlfredA.Knopf,1965.Popper,DegorahEpstein,RobertE.LangandFrankJ.Popper.“FromMapstoMyth:TheCensus,Turner,andtheIdeaoftheFrontier.”JournalofAmerican&ComparativeCulture23.1(2000):91-102.Popper,FrankJ.“TheStrangeCaseoftheContemporaryAmericanFrontier.”TheYaleReview.76(1986):101-21.Ragland,Cathy.MúsicaNorteña:MexicanMigrantsCreatingaNationbetweenNations.Philadelphia:TempleUP,2009.Ramazani,Jahan.ATransnationalPoetics.ChicagoandLondon:UofChicagoP,2009.Ridge,Martin.“TheLifeofanIdea:theSignificanceofFrederickJacksonTurner’sFrontierThesis.”TheMagazineofWesternHistory41.1(1991):2-13.Robbins,WilliamG.ColonyandEmpire:theCapitalistTransformationoftheAmericanWest.Lawrence:UofKansasP,1994.233 Robertson,JamesOliver.Americanmyth,Americanreality.NewYork:Hill&Wang,1980.Rodríguez,JaimeJavier.TheLiteraturesoftheU.S.-MexicanWar:Narrative,TimeandIdentity.Austin:UofTexasP,2010.RodríguezO,JaimeEandKathrynVincent.“BacktotheFuture:RacismandNationalCultureinU.S.-MexicanRelations.”CommonBorder,UncommonPaths:Race,Culture,andNationalIdentityinU.S.-MexicanRelations.Ed.RodríguezO,JaimeEandKathrynVincent.Wilmington:ScholarlyResources,Inc.,1997.1-14.Rosaldo,Renato.CultureandTruth:TheMakingofSocialAnalysis.Boston:BeaconP,1989.Rose,Gillian.FeminismandGeography:TheLimitsofGeographicalKnowledge.Cambridge:PolityP,1993.Said.EdwardW.Orientalism.NewYork:VintageBooks,1979.---.CultureandImperialism.NewYork:VintageBooks,1994.Sampson,RobertD.JohnO’SullivanandHisTimes.Kent:KentStateUP,2003.Savage,Jordan.“‘WhattheHellIsaFloweringBoundaryTree?’:Gunslinger,AllthePrettyHorsesandthePostmodernWestern.”JournalofAmericanStudies46.4(2012):997-1008.Schlatter,EvelynA.AryanCowboys:WhiteSupremacistsandtheSearchforNewFrontier,1970-2000.Austin:UofTexasP,2006.Selzer,Mark.SerialKillers:DeathandLoveinAmerica’sWoundCulture.NewYorkandLondon:Routledge,1998.Sepich,John.NotesonBloodMeridian:RevisedandExtendedEdition.Austin:UofTexasP,2011.Shaviro,Steven.“‘TheVeryLifeoftheDarkness’:aReadingofBloodMeridian.”SouthernQuarterly30.4(1992):111-21.Slotkin,Richard.RegenerationthroughViolence:theMythologyoftheAmericanFrontier,1600-1860.Middletown:WesleyanUP,1973.---.TheFatalEnvironment:theMythoftheFrontierintheAgeofIndustrialization,1800-1890.NewYork:Atheneum,1985.---.“MythandtheProductionofHistory.”IdeologyandClassicAmericanLiterature.Ed.SacvanBercovitchandMyraJehlen.Cambridge:CambridgeUP,1986.70-90.---.GunfighterNation:theMythofFrontierinTwentieth-CenturyAmerica.NewYork:Atheneum,234 1992.---.“GunsmokeandMirrors.”Life15(1993):60-68.---.“JohnFord’sStagecoachandtheMythicSpaceoftheWesternMovie.”TheBigEmpty:EssaysontheLandasNarrative.Ed.LeonardEngel.Albuquerque:UofNewMexicoP,1994.261-82.Slater,David.“SituatingGeopoliticalRepresentations:Inside/OutsideandthePowerofImperialInterventions.”HumanGeographyToday.Ed.DoreenMassey,JohnAllenandPhilipSarre.Cambridge:PolityP,1999.62-84.Slatta,RichardW.“MakingandUnmakingMythsoftheAmericanFrontier.”EuropeanJournalofAmericanCulture.29.2(2010):81-92.Smith,HenryNash.VirginLand:TheAmericanWestasSymbolandMyth.Cambridge:HarvardUP,1950.Smith,Ralph.“TheScalpHunterintheBorderlands:1835-1850.”ArizonaandtheWest:AQuarterlyJournalofHistory6(1964):5-22.Spurgeon,SaraL.ExplodingtheWestern:MythsofEmpireonthePostmodernFrontier.CollegeStation:TexasA&MUP,2005.Stacy,Lee.MexicoandUnitedStates.NewYork:MarshallCavendish,2003.Steiner,MichaelC.andDavidM.Wrobel.“DiscoveringaDynamicWesternRegionalism.”ManyWests:Place,Culture,&RegionalIdentity.Ed.DavidM.WrobelandMichaelC.Steiner.Lawrence:UPofKansas,1997.1-30.Streeby,Shelly.AmericanSensations:Class,Empire,andtheProductionofPopularCulture.Berkeley:UofCaliforniaP,2002.Stuart,ReginaldC.UnitedStatesExpansionismandBritishNorthAmerica,1775-1871.ChapelHill:UofNorthCarolinaP,1988.Sturgeon,Noël.EnvironmentalisminPopularCulture:Gender,Race,SexualityandthePoliticsoftheNatural.Tucson:UofArizonaP,2009.Sullivan,Nell.“BoysWillbeBoysandGirlsWillbeGone.”ACormacMcCarthyCompanion:TheBorderTrilogy.Ed.EdwinT.ArnoldandDiannaC.Luce.Oxford:UPofMississippi,2001.228-55.Sullivan,TomR.CowboysandCaudillos:FrontierIdeologyoftheAmericas.BowlingGreen:235 BowlingGreenStateUPopularP,1990.Thompson,LeonardandHowardLamar.TheFrontierinHistory:NorthAmericaandSouthernAfricaCompared.NewHaven:YaleUP,1981.Tompkins,Jane.WestofEverything:TheInnerLifeofWesterns.NewYork:OxfordUP,1992.Turner,FrederickJackson.TheSignificanceofSectionsinAmericanHistory.1932.Gloucester:PeterSmithPub,1959.---.FrontierandSection:SelectedEssaysofFrederickJacksonTurner.Ed.RayAllenBillington.EaglewoodCliffs:Prentice-Hall,Inc.,1961.Tuveson,ErnestLee.RedeemerNation:theIdeaofAmerica’sMillennialRole.Chicago:UofChicagoP,1968.Utley,RobertM.LoneStarJustice:TheFirstCenturyofTexasRangers.NewYork:OxfordUP,2002.thstU.S.Congress.CongressionalGlobe.30cong.,1sess.,newseries,Washington,D.C.,1847-48.Vieth,Ronja.“AFrontierMythTurnsGothic.”TheyRodeon:BloodMeridianandtheTragedyoftheAmericanWest.Ed.RickWallach.N.p.:theCormacMcCarthySociety,2013.133-45.thWallach,Rick.“SamChamberlain’sJudgeHoldenandtheIconographyofScienceinMid-19CenturyNation-Building.”SouthwesternAmericanLiterature23.1(1997):9-17.Walker,RonaldG.InfernalParadise:MexicoandtheModernEnglishNovel.Berkeley:UofCaliforniaP,1978.Webb,WalterPrescott.TheTexasRangers:aCenturyofFrontierDefense.Cambridge:HoughtonMifflin,1935.Weeks,WilliamEarl.BuildingtheContinentalEmpire:AmericanExpansionfromtheRevolutiontotheCivilWar.Chicago:IvanR.Dee,1996.Wegner,John.“‘MexicoParalosMexicanos’:Revolution,MexicoandMcCarthy’sBorderTrilogy.”Myth,Legend,Dust:CriticalResponsestoCormacMcCarthy.Ed.RickWallach.Manchester:ManchesterUP,2002.249-55.Weinberg,AlbertKatz.ManifestDestiny:aStudyofNationalistExpansionisminAmericanHistory.1935.Chicago:QuadrangleBooks,1963.West,Elliot.“AmericanFrontier.”TheOxfordHistoryoftheAmericanWest.Ed.ClydeA.MilnerII,CarolA.O’ConnorandMarthaA.Sandweiss.Oxford:OxfordUP,1994.115-49.236 White,Richard.“It’sYourMisfortuneandNoneofMyOwn”:ANewHistoryoftheAmericanWest.Norman:UofOklahomaP,1991.---.“FrederickJacksonTurnerandBuffaloBill.”FrontierinAmericanCulture.Ed.JamesR.Grossman.Berkeley:UofCaliforniaP,1994.6-65.Williams,WilliamAppleman.EmpireasaWayofLife.NewYork:OxfordUP,1980.Williams,Raymond.MarxismandLiterature.1977.Oxford:OxfordUP,1988.Woodward,RichardB.“CormacMcCarthy’sVenomousFiction.”TheNewYorkTimesMagazine.19Apr1992.28-32.Worster,Donald.“BeyondtheAgrarianMyth.”Trails:TowardaNewWesternHistory.Ed.PatriciaNelsonLimerick,ClydeA.MillerandCharlesA.Rankin.Lawrence:UPofKansas,1991.3-25.Wrobel,DavidM.TheEndofAmericanExceptionalism:FrontierAnxietyfromtheOldWesttotheNewDeal.Lawrence:UPofKansas,1993.---.Promisedlands:Promotion,memory,andtheCreationoftheAmericanWest.Lawrence:UPofKansas,2002.---.“GlobalWest,AmericanFrontier.”PacificHistoricalReview78.1(2009):1-26.Xiang,Xinni.“BorderCrossing:AmericannessandTransnationalityinCormacMcCarthy’sWesternFiction.”Diss.NanjinU,2013.Young,Jerry.“RecallingaTexasLegend:SamuelThomas‘BoogerRed’Privett.”Cowboys,Cops,Killers,andGhosts:LegendsandLoreinTexas.Ed.KennethL.Untiedt.Denton:UofNorthTexasP,2013.3-14.Žižek,Slavoj.“TheSpecterofIdeology.”MappingIdeology.Ed.SlavojŽižek.London:Verso,1994.1-33.---.OnBelief.London:Routledge,2001.---.Violence.NewYork:Picador.2008.---.TheSublimeObjectofIdeology.1989.London:Verso,2008.罗小云:《美国西部文学》，合肥：安徽教育出版社，2009年。江宁康：“当代小说的叙事美学与经典建构——论C•麦卡锡小说的审美特征及银幕再现”,《当代外国文学》,2010年第2期，第115-24页。237