El pasado en el presente: La historia en la novela mexicana (1980-1993)

Abstract

This dissertation analyzes how the Mexican novel (1980-1993) incorporates history. The introductory chapter details the main technical and thematic tendencies of the Mexican novel produced during the 1980's. It also outlines the evolution of the historical novel since Sir Walter Scott to the present marking the changes and transformations of the traditional historical novel to what critics now called, the new historical novel. The latter section of this chapter defines the literary theories employed as the basis of this study, namely, Michel Foucault's discourse, Roberto Gonzalez Echevarria's myth and archive, Linda Hutcheon's historiographic metafiction and Hayden White's metahistory.

The second chapter studies novels that incorporate historical events that occurred before the birth of the biographical author: Gonzalo Guerrero (1980) by Eugenio Aguirre, Los pasos de Lopez (1982) by Jorge Ibarguengoitia, Ascencion Tun (1981) by Silvia Molina and La campana (1990) by Carlos Fuentes. Chapter three deals with novels that incorporate recent history, Morir en el golfo (1985) by Hector Aguilar Camin, Charras (1990) by Hernan Lara Zavala and Pasaban en silencio nuestros dioses (1987) by Hector Manjarrez. The fourth chapter includes novels that employ history as narrative strategy, La familia vino del norte (1987) by Silvia Molina and Una pinata llena de memoria (1984) by Daniel Leyva. Chapter five studies a novel written by a historian, Como conquiste a los aztecas (1990) by Armando Ayala Anguiano and compares his emplotment to Cortes' Cartas de relacion. A final chapter provides conclusions and generalizations about the narrative techniques, themes and social and political messages present in novels included under the different groups.

This study proposes that the Mexican novel of the 1980's reviews and revises traditional historical accounts, providing new versions of old tales. It gives voice to people who previously could not narrate their version of events. It explores the process of writing history and poses the impossibility of recuperating a faithful account of any event and that we must read versions produced from different perspectives if we wish to obtain a version closer to the truth.