T.C Boyle’s The Tortilla Curtain has been described variously as the most controversial yet timely novel of the current times, at least in the context of the American situation. The novel, which revolves around cultural, financial and social differences of two families, is a manifestation of the themes of poverty, illegal immigration, class conflict, xenophobia and social strife. Boyle wrote this book before 1996, and got it published by Vikings press at a time when California had voted on and the rejection of what was referred to as Preposition 187 – a bill that would restrict illegal immigrants’ access to some public amenities. The novel sufficiently reflects the contemporary society, especially on matters of class differences, poverty and illegal immigration. Narrated in a way that allows the reader to enter the lives of both protagonist families, the book effectively creates a flow that carries away the reader. This paper seeks to explain the social, cultural and financial differences between the Mossbachers, a middle class American family, and the Rincon’s – a couple of Mexican immigrants wallowing in poverty and social strife.
This technique is particularly important as it makes the reader emotionally engaged all through the story. The author employs this tactic in various scenes, making the reader feel the helplessness of Rincon, when he is hit by Mossbacher’s car. In describing the scene, Boyle says, "For a long moment they stood there, examining each other, unwitting perpetrator and unwitting victim, and then the man let the useless bag drop from his fingers with a tinkle of broken glass" (Boyle, 8). This quote makes the reader get the true feeling that Rincon felt when he was hit. Apparently, the bag is described as being useless because he did not have much. The fact that his bag is described as useless, and him as a victim, it goes without say that the author creates a path through which the reader effectively enters the man’s life – a life characterized by vulnerability and social weakness. Allowing the reader to enter the lives of the characters is as well important as it not only contextualizes issues, but also creates though congruence. Thought congruence refers to the jig-saw fit between the reader’s expectations and the character’s realities.
In my opinion, I got to know the Rincon couple better than the Mossbachers. The main reason why this is the case is because, unlike the story of the Rincon couple, the story of the Mossbachers lacks a background. For instance, Boyle is efficient in explaining the reason why the Rincons are going through their plight. The story begins in Mexico where Boyle reveals the minutest details about the lives and events surrounding their problems. On the contrary, the story of the Mossbachers begins in the middle of their social circumstances. Notably, Boyles tells the story of Cándido Rincon and her current wife América Rincón right from their native village of Tepoztlan in Mexico. The novel keenly narrates how Candido Rincon abandoned his first wife Resurrecion, a sister to his current wife after discovering that she was cheating on him with a Sancho – a man who sleeps with men’s wives when they are away looking for money in the United States. Such fine details reveals the reason why Candido behaves the way he does. These details make the reader know the details about the life of Rincon.
Unlike the case of the Mossbachers, Boyle explains the nature of the factors that brought the Rincons to America – the endless chase for the American dream. In point of fact, the woman that accompanies Candido to America has simply eloped with him after he gives her extremely ambitious promises. As for the Mossbachers, we meet them at the Arroyo Blanco estate in Los Angeles. Hoe they made it there, Boyle does not reveal. While Boyle describes the Rincons as illegal immigrants hoping to gain wealth and build a home in the United States northern California, he does not reveal the future ambitions of the Mossbachers in fine detail. Essentially, therefore, Boyle reveals the past and the future of the Rincons, but does little on the part of the Mossbachers with regard to the same. Perhaps this is the message in the author’s explanation of how and why Candido Rincon was in desperate pursuit of the American dream.
Whether or not the reader knows the Rincons is a question that can be answered from the novel itself. Clearly, other characters know the Rincons perfectly. Explaining to his wide Kyra about the accident, Delamay speaks of Candido Rincon saying, "I told you - he was Mexican." (Boyle 15). This means that, following their vulnerability, the illegal immigrants are known better than the Mossbachers. Evidence about the information available on the two couples is the revelation of America Rincon’s age – 17 years old girl from Tepoztlan village in Mexico. Additionally, there is comprehensive revelation of the tribulations of the Rincons tells the readers more about the couple. The extent to which America Rincon is torn apart by stresses to the extent of hating her husband takes the reader right into the woman’s inner environment where they are able to explore and understand the special needs and desires of Rincon’s wife, among the most notable being the desire to go back home where she can be with her mother and sisters.
In analyzing this balance, it comes out clear that the author intentionally refuses to reveal too much of the Mossbachers in a bid to further the element of irony. Apparently, Delamay is an anti-racist as he is a champion of immigrant rights, believing that they should be subjected to the same treatment as the locals. However, in a unique and unforeseeable turn of events, Delamay appears obviously racist. This is seen where he refuses to believe that the wall of the real estate property was vandalized by a white boy. He argues that Candido must be the culprit – obviously because he is Mexican. His constant clash with Rincon contradicts his belief of equal rights for immigrants. Notably, it is Boyle’s failure to allow the readers to understand Delamay very well that fosters his capacity to employ irony – one of the literary tools that keep the story flowing in an interesting manner.
Another reason why, in my opinion, the author allows us to know the Rincons better is because they are the characters through whose lives and tribulations main theme of the book – illegal immigration – is elaborated. As opposed to the Rincons’ lives, the Mossbachers’ lives have little to do with illegal immigration. Describing the residence of the Mossbachers, Boyle writes, "It was a private community, comprising a golf course, ten tennis courts, a community center and some two hundred and fifty homes, each set on one-point-five acres and strictly conforming to the covenants, conditions and restrictions set forth in the 1973 articles of incorporation." (Boyle 30). Such living conditions are incompatible with the torturous conditions that the Rincons live in. in actual fact, the author, who for untold reasons does not take a position on the matter, seems to have an implied position on the matter of illegal immigration. He allows the reader to make a decision by comprehensively describing the plight of the Mexican immigrants – the Rincons.
The main themes of the novel – poverty, social strife, illegal immigration, financial distress and so on – revolve around the Rincon’s. It therefore follows that the reader should know more about this couple more than the well-to-do Mossbachers. Clearly, there is no balance in the extent to which the reader is capable of knowing the two couples. The imbalance, however, is justifiable, considering the above given reasons. The pursuit of the American dream is another reason why the Rincons are more prominently covered. While the Mossbachers appear to be living the American dream, the Rincons are in desperate need of the power to attain it. The imbalance is also a way of employing contrast. Giving such fine details as the fight between Rincon and the Sancho explains why he is so different from Delamay, who is described as "a liberal humanist with an unblemished driving record and a freshly waxed Japanese car with personalized plates." (Boyle 8). In contrast, Rincon does not own a thing. His promises to America now seem empty, perhaps false, and the couple seems to be in bad terms. Ultimately, the failure to endorse either side explains why the imbalance prominently exists.
Whether or not Boyle was fair in the portrayal of each couple is a matter of debate. However, in my opinion, and from my personal analysis, he was not fair in his portrayal. The reason why I take this position is because Boyle is extreme in his descriptions of the social conditions of the couples. While he brings out the Rincon couple as being extremely poor, he exaggerates the life of the middle class family – the Mossbachers. Speaking of contemporary times, the illegal immigrants in the United States are not landmark sufferers. On the contrary, they are part and parcel of the normal society. Boyle’s description of the manner in which the Rincons went around begging and eating from the leftovers section of a fast food restaurant lacks in realism. Secondly, Boyle describes Rincon’s promises to America as being false promises. This amounts to unfair portrayal because, essentially, the predicament that America Rincon finds herself in is a result of ignorance on her husband’s part.
Boyle portrays Rincon as a desperate man ready to settle for less. While this may bear some degree of truth, the portrayal is exaggerated because looking at it from the real world perspective; the extent to which he was injured deserves more than just 20 dollars, especially where the perpetrator of the act is an illegal immigrant sympathizer. To this extent unfairness is conspicuous, thanks to the highly exaggerated content. Illegal immigrants, poor as they may be, do not practically lack food to eat as they always resort to menial jobs and other informal ways of making earnings. As such, the extreme conditions are not realistic. Additionally, the strife of the Rincons is not fairly brought out. As much as the immigrants undergo social strife, the exaggerated nature of the couple’s consistent failures makes little sense – from the cheating wife, to the accident, to the rape, and eventually the loss of a baby, Boyle seems to be sending a message that is clouded with distortion of the reality.
The irrational, wishful thinking of the Rincons appears quite like an unfair portrayal. The Rincons hope to acquire a home of their own in California. Towards the end of the novel, it is clearly indicated that Rincon finally wakes up to the reality – the American dream is far from attainable. According to my critical thinking, Boyle does not fairly portray the social circumstances of the Rincons. Why, one may wonder. Foremost, the age gap between America Rincon and her husband Candido Rincon is unrealistic – at least in the contemporary typical circumstances. On the other hand, while Boyle fairly portrays the Mossbachers, there is some element of unfair portrayal. For instance, one would find it difficult to understand why Dalamay’s treatment of illegal immigrants is so unlike his views. For this reason, one may question why he does not concur – in thought – with his wife, Kyra who is clearly against the idea of illegal immigrant rights.
Ultimately, Boyle’s portrayal of the Mossbachers is considerably fair compared to the Rincons because their lifestyle is a perfect reflection of the contemporary middle class family in the United States. Notably, the middle class United States family is affected by the work-life conflict – something that is characteristic of Kyra, a real estate agent who has the typical workaholic attitude of the United States middle class. Secondly, the fondness with which the Mossbachers treat their pets is a reflection of a middle class family in the United States. This portrayal is considerably fair because, even with regard to politics, the Mossbachers are a clear reflection – what with the resistance to the welfare of the illegal immigrants as brought out in Kyra? Speaking of a reflection of the middle class family, the Mossbachers live only with their one son Jordan and their two dogs. Such demographics are core characteristics of the middle class families in the United States today, and as at the time Boyle was writing the novel.
While some reviewer thinks that the novel’s descriptions are too harsh to the Mossbachers, I opt to differ. It is a matter of observation that the nature of the family is semi-dynamic. While Delamay is brought out as a person that contradicts his views and action, his wife Kyra is firm on her beliefs. She believes that the illegal immigrants are a menace, and treats them as such. On the contrary, her husband Delamay thinks illegal immigrants deserve equal rights and opportunity, but treats them otherwise. Such political dynamism is characteristic of the middle class families in the United States. According to social mobility studies, it is clear that people that were born poor remain in the lower rungs as adults. While the past lives of the Mossbachers are not clearly explained, it is presumable that they have led averagely well-to-do lives since they were kids. On the contrary, Rincon has been brought up in hardship, and is still wallowing in the same circumstances. The presumption that he is from a poor background is found in the preparatory quote by his father, "In times of extremity, his father said, when you're lost or hungry or in danger, ponte pared, make like a wall. That is, you present a solid unbreachable surface, you show nothing, and neither fear nor despair, and you protect the inner fortress of yourself from all comers." (Boyle 168).
Another point evidencing the fair portrayal of the Mossbachers is the fact that they are aware of their social wellbeing and health. This eliminates the notion that the Mossbachers are portrayed in a harsh manner because they are actually a representation of modern family life in the middle rungs. For example, Kyra insists on high fiber diet for her son Jordan. Additionally, she maintains a daily running routine for the purposes of keeping fit. She as well as her husband is a member of the Save the Children Initiative. Serious democrats, the Mossbachers are also members of the National Wildlife Federation. However, it is critical to mention that Kyra’s conspicuous distaste for the immigrants is somewhat harsh. The manner in which she eliminates the immigrants that are potential threats to her real estate property is disheartening. The situation is worsened by the fact that she is neither apologetic nor ready to pretend to be good to the foreigners. It is also worth mentioning that Boyle, to some extent, portrays her in a negative light with regard to sexuality. According to the novel, Kyra considers sex as a way of relieving tension and not as it ought to be.
In conclusion, the novel quite successfully airs its main concerns – the plight of illegal immigrants, poverty, class conflict, financial distress and social strife – through elaborating the relationship between the two couples. From the foregoing discussion, it is clear that the author’s approach, that of allowing the reader to enter the lives of the characters is considerably effective in making the flow of the story interesting, and creating a strong bond between the readers and the characters. Clearly, I got to know the Rincons better than the Mossbachers. The imbalance in how Boyle explains the two couples is of the essence as far as furthering the main themes is concerned. The portrayal of both couples was not fair, especially with regard to the Rincons – this is explained by the extremity of the conditions.
Work Cited
Boyle, Tom C. The Tortilla Curtain. New York [u.a.: Penguin, 1996. Print.
