Hello, I’m Marisela and this week I am one of the cohorts along with Angel and Bryant to be discussing the second half of the play Zoot Suits. I am particularly interested in analyzing El Pachuco because I feel that many of us have speculated about his role in the play and who he truly represents.
Throughout the play, El Pachuco is portrayed as this omnipotent presence. Whether you view the characters as moving around him or El Pachuco moving around the characters, it is clear that his presence is marked by confidence and control. Since El Pachuco appears to be in verbal communication primarily with Henry, there were some ideas that he was Henry’s inner conscience, his alter ego who is highly influential, yet still gives Henry a free will to make his own decisions.
How do you interpret the role of El Pachuco? Do you see him as being a separate entity or part of Henry’s inner self? Does he advocate Henry to make good moral judgements or does he lead Henry to the brink of temptation?
My analyzation of the role of El Pachuco changed after reading the second part of the play. In Act 2 scene 6 titled Zoot Suit Riots, Valdez describes the final brawl between the 38th Street gang and the servicemen. After El Pachuco breaks up the fight he says this,
“The press distorted the very meaning of the word “zoot suit”. All it is for you guys is another way to say Mexican. But the ideal of the original chuco was to look like a diamond to look sharp….”
And, shortly after El Pachuco gets into a fight with servicemen, they strip him of his zoot suit taking pieces of it away and leaving him only in a loin cloth.
In essence, when El Pachuco says, “All it is for you guys is another way to say Mexican,” here is where I feel that issue of identity becomes important. The individuals who wore zoot suits were not just Mexican; other races such as Italians, Filipinos, and African Americans wore them too. Through El Pachuco, Valdez asserts that wearing a zoot suit doesn’t define the race that wears it, rather the zoot suit is an identity itself, it goes beyond the wearer.
When El Pachuco’s is stripped of his zoot suit and left in a loin cloth Valdez is reinforcing the importance of the indigenous ancestors, the Aztecs. Like Andaluz’s description of the indigenous land being left in ruinas (ruins), the servicemen who pillage the zoot suit leave El Pachuco in ruins with just his loin cloth.
For these reasons, I believe that El Pachuco represents Henry’s culmination of identities, similar to Andaluz’s idea of the mestiza. El Pachuco is the Mexican, the Aztec, the zoot-suiter, and the American. He is the Mexican because that is his culture and his familia. He is the Aztec because the indigenous will always be the foundation of Mexican history. He is the zoot-suiter because its an identity that he wants to embrace, a style that defines him as a person but that society so strongly disapproves. Finally, he is the American because the clashing of the two very different cultures has brought about a need for coexistence in which Henry also wants to embrace as he joins the navy.
How do you think the ideas from Andaluz’s Borderlandsvmight be similar to this theme of identity throughout Valdez’s play? What other ideas from her writing can you connect with some of Valdez’s underlying themes?
English 4W: Transnational America 
Marielsa,
I think you bring up a very good question because while I was reading the play I actually sympathized more with El Pachuco and saw him as a voice of reason to Henry but when we watched the movie adaptation in class I though he came across as a temptress. I think this is because when reading Zoot Suits it is easy for El Pachuco’s role of narrator to synchronize with his dialog to Henry. When you actually see the two interact on screen however, the relationship stands out more on his own and doesn’t feel as warmhearted. For example, when I read the scene where they are getting ready for the party and El Pachuco hands Henry his knife I interpreted it as a friendly gesture but when I watched it in class it seemed scum. In that sense I guess I do see him as being part of Henrys inner self, but after watching the movie I think it’s certainly not his voice of morality.
I also like your argument on the plays theme. I think that it has many similarities to the idea of mestiza because the protagonists seem to be struggling with their multiple identities. This entire play, to me, is most importantly about a group of people trying to balance their different identities. When Henry says, “My worst enemy, my best friend…myself…” Luis Valdez is presenting us with 3 of the identities that Henry struggles to view himself as.
Great job!
Zach Fox
When I read Zoot Suit and when we watched the movie interpretation, I found the character El Pachuco the most compelling and interesting. He is the iconic figure representing the play as well as all the Zoot Suits and yet he is such an enigma. He does not fit into any clear category of good or bad or any defined role as hero. I agree with you that El Pachuco is very closely connected to Henry’s character. Seeing that he mainly interacts with Henry and personally addresses the audience, he is different from the other characters in the play. In my opinion, he is Henry’s mind and that is why he falls into a grey category. Henry is developing his identity and is caught between being Mexican and American. This inner conflict is represented through El Pachuco and Pachuco’s relationship with Henry. And it also applies to the entire new generation of people struggling with their identity.
El Pachuco also plays a role as a figure of strength. Regardless of whether he intends good or bad, he always encourages Henry to be strong and to stand up for something. For example, on page 51, he tells Henry “Hang tough. Stop going soft.” This is a message to all people who are dealing with their identity. I like that you used the theme of identity to connect Borderlands with Zoot Suit because they both deal with this theme in different ways. Borderlands suggests that at times, the distinctions of identity create borders and conflict between people. It discourages such strict distinctions and encourages people to find a way to coexist and to accept all identities. Zoot Suit, on the other hand, takes a stronger stand. It promotes the strength and coherence people can find in identity. Through the story, it is shown that keeping and discovering one’s identity is crucial to survival. This is why Pachuco is so iconic, because he will never give up his identity, even if he is stripped of his zoot suit, a key part to his identity. This strength is meant to set an example, not only to Mexican-Americans, but to all.
At first glance it seemed as if El Pachuco served as Hank’s conscience telling him what to do, but after reading the second act it becomes clear that El Pachuco is Hank’s alter ego. This second self represents the part of Hank that refuses to allow Anglo society to degrade and abuse Chicanos. This idea is reinforced when the sailors overpower El Pachuco and strip him from his zoot suit. This particular scene depicts how Hank is left only watching helplessly. It is from this point on that Hank falls to his knees because he allowed himself to be influenced by the Anglo society. Alice plays a significant part as she greatly influences Hank. During imprisonment, Hank begins to lose his cultural connection as he is not aware of what is going on back home. Furthermore, El Pachuco is absent during the time Hank is imprisoned, signaling that Hank is straying away from the ideal Chicano. It is not until Hank returns home, that El Pachuco is fully reintroduced into the play. Hank asks El Pachuco where he has been all this time and El Pachuco states that he has been in the barrio. Once again, El Pachuco is representing the ideal Chicano, a man who is supposed to stick with his culture and his family. Overall, Zoot Suit exemplifies the duality a person faces throughout their life; whether to accept the influence of Anglo society, or contain their cultural roots.
Your interpretation of the play and characters is very insightful, Marisela. I agree that El Pachuco is part of Henry’s sense of identity and conscience, but I don’t believe that El Pachuco agrees with Henry’s decisions. The Pachuco is instead a stylized ideal that no man can live up to.
In Psychology, Sigmund Freud defined the psyche, or sense of self, as consisting of a struggle between the super-ego and the id, with the ego as the mediator and decider between the two. The id represents animalisitic urges while the super-ego represents the ideal and perfect examples of things. El Pachuco forms Henry’s super-ego, in that he directs Henry’s desires towards the ideal character portrayed through the zoot suit. On pg. 29, El Pachuco says “You’re Henry Reyna… the snarling juvenile delinquent. The zoot suiter. The better young pachuco gang leader of 38th Street…. Haven’t I taught you to survive? Play it cool.” Then on pg. 30 he says “…this ain’t your country… the barrio needs you… Remember, Pachuco” El Pachuco defines who Henry should be — even though Henry’s ego, his conscience, is struggling to define himself as a Mexican American considering joining the U.S. Navy. The ethereal form of El Pachuco tries to help Henry make decisions that correspond to the ideal of the Chicano zoot suit, but he leaves Henry the freedom to make choices for himself.
Anzaldua’s theme of identity is different from Valdez’s — she wants to ensure that the borderlands is a place where people do not have to pick firmly one identity or another. Valdez, on the otherhand, through the character of El Pachuco, advocates for a strong sense of identity represented through the zoot suit. The zoot suit is a very specific image, and the wearer abandons all other types of identity by putting it on. The zoot suit becomes a sort of uniform, clearly stating the beliefs, fashion preferences, and image of the wearer, without the wearer even having to say anything.
Maricela,
Based off of the first half of the play, I believe that El Pachuco is part of Henry’s inner self. Henry is the only person that El Pachuco directly talks to. For example, in the scene when Henry is getting ready to go the club, no one notices Pachuco’s presence. Only Henry does after receiving the knife from Pachuco. Another example is when when Pachuco inhibits Henry from stabbing the downey gang memeber. Both these scenarios indicate that El Pachuco is part of Henry’s conscience.
In response to wether El Pachuco leads Henry to making good moral
judgements or putting him on the brink of temptation, I believe he only wants Henry to make good moral judgements. Despit handing Henry the knife,
He did it to make sure Henry was safe. From what I know of growing up in tough neighborhoods, people only take knives with them for self protection. Pachuco says “I didn’t tell you to kill the vato,” because he wants Henry to do what is right. However, Henry needed something to defend himself with. What if he wouldn’t have had that knife with him? He would have been dependent on what the Downey gang memeber would do. Pachuco just wants the best for Henry.
I think that the themes are similar but not exactly the same. Anzaldúa talked a lot about actual mexicans and I feel as if this play is directly focused towards Chicanos. Anzaldúa celebrated her Meztizaness. She was proud to be mexican-american. I feel as if the Pachucos only celebrate themselves. They did not call themselves Mexicans or Americans because they were not accepted by either group. They were their own group.
Hey Emanuel,
I agree with you in that I believe that El Pachuco is a part of Henry’s conscience and that he is there to ensure that Henry thinks twice and reflects on his own character before he makes any regrettable decisions. I do agree that the Chicanos had a self-focused attitude and seemed to be celebrating themselves and did not explicitly call themselves Americans or Mexicans. I do believe however, that throughout the play there is this sort of push for a coexistence with the Americans:Henry joining the Navy, Henry developing feelings for the American reporter Alice, Henry including an American member into the 38th street gang, are just a few examples.
Do you think El Pachuco might subtly adovacte for Henry to embrace the American culture? Or do you think El Pachuco wants Henry to maintain his Chicano attitude?
The personage of El Pachuco has had the brightest impression on me. Though the main hero of the play is Henry Peyna, the author presents El Pachuco so that he stands out on the background of other heroes. I think that by depicting him that way Valdes identifies El Pachuco with the spirit of the Mexican people, their coloring and way of thinking. To my mind Valdes implies that El Pachuco is a prototype which lives in any Mexican man, as a symbol of pride, confidence and struggle for his people. “The cops are still tracking us down like dogs”, he reminds, showing that el Pachuco is an inseparable part of each Mexican, which reminds him that struggle is not over yet. They have to fight for their rights and honor of their nation.
As to the drawing parallel between mestiza and El Pachuco, I think that on the one hand, they have a common issue concerning struggling for their place in the society, on the other hand, mestiza is more depressive personage, which suffers from loneliness and disintegration, while El Pachuco is brave and self-confident without inclination to give in.
Hi Marisela,
Thank you for your blog post and your insight on the play and its characters. I agree that El Pachuco is part of Henry’s conscience. I pretty much agree with your analysis of El Pachuco and his role as an idealized Zoot Suiter, and I found your final comments about him being a culmination of Henry’s identities especially interesting.
Going back to talking about the role of El Pachuco in relation to the structure of the play, I would argue that the character functions as the “Greek chorus” of the piece. Plays of classical Greece, especially those of the famous Greek playwrights Sophocles and Euripides, used a Greek chorus to further the story. A Greek chorus is a non-individualised group of performers in a play, who comment with a collective voice on the dramatic action. Classic Greek plays, which arguably lay the foundation for the Western theatre tradition, would utilize Greek choruses to offer a variety of background and summary information to help the audience follow the performance. The Greek chorus comments on themes, often breaking the fourth wall to communicate to the audience directly. The chorus also represents the general population of the particular story on stage, as contrasted with many of the themes of the ancient Greek plays which tended to be about individual heroes, gods, and goddesses. For instance, in Sophocles’ Electra, the chorus is made up of the women of Argos. In many of these plays, the chorus expressed to the audience what the main characters could not say, such as their hidden fears or secrets. The chorus often provided other characters with the insight they needed.
In Zoot Suit, El Pachuco narrates the play and performs the songs and represents an idealized Zoot Suiter, representing the population that the story is about.
Including what most of the other students commented, I believe El Pachuco to be many things, most significantly as Henry’s conscience and his alter ego, but also as an omniscient narrator (because El Pachuco knows everything that is going on and almost as if he controls the play and which direction the action goes) and an iconic symbol to the audience (he is the embodiment of the “zoot suit” the secret fantasy of every Chicano male youth). Emphasizing on what I feel El Pachuco to be Henry’s physical form of a conscience and also his alter ego, I would contend that El Pachuco is both a physical and separate entity yet also a part of Henry’s inner self. In the movie, the scene where Henry is unsure of whether he should take his switchblade and El Pachuco insists he take it supports his physical existence and the scene where Henry is just shy of stabbing the Downey Street gang leader and El Pachuco questions Henry’s judgment suggests that El Pachuco is his inner conscience as well. In terms of his intentions, El Pachuco does not fall under the supportive nor destructive conscience but rather serves Henry as a voice of rational. When he insist’s Henry to carry a switchblade he does so not so that Henry could kill the opposing gang leader but rather as a safety caution and that El Pachuco stops Henry from killing the gang leader would suggest that El Pachuco does not intend to harm Henry.