Gender and the Negotiation of Daily Life in Mexico, 1750-1856

2. Space and Mexican Society

Mexican men and women lived in particular spaces, a kind of microenvironment that surrounded them, shaped their daily lives, and defined who they were. Individuals created personas by controlling their built environment as much as possible . Wealthy urbanites, for example, chose to live in the upper floors of their buildings to emphasize their superiority.1 Less prosperous Mexicans showed their moral natures by making sure that the doors to their houses or rooms were closed or open at the appropriate moment in the day. As well as the positioning of rooms, they had to ensure the morality of decor —for example, paintings or images that graced their walls, the ostentation or simplicity of furniture, and, finally, the company they kept inside their residence. They were acutely conscious of the moral and hierarchical implications of the built environment and their interaction with this architecture. Mexican housing was defined by an interior orientation that was associated with morality, but even inside these residences the decor and furniture had moral and hierarchical implications. The space through which Mexican men and women traveled on a 2. Space and Mexican Society Space and Mexican Society 32 daily basis in their work, leisure, or worship had potent significance that changed depending upon many factors. There was an architecture that was particular to Mexican cities and towns. Mexican housing arrangements were imbued with ideas of morality and honor that were derived from both Spanish and Nahua traditions. Buildings and cities provided a framework for space, but they are not one and the same. The architecture was the skeleton that encompassed and helped to create spaces and thus gave them meaning. Interactions with other people were also defined within spatial understandings. Thus, not only did Mexicans seek to define themselves through their built environment but they attached meaning to others because of their spatial situation. As a result, passersby would consider a woman who left her house to do errands in the day as correct in her behavior, but one who tried to accomplish the same task after dark was tarnished simply by being out after dark—the space changed at night. Her presence in the streets at night was not considered appropriate and so her being there made her vulnerable to “justified” attacks. Any dealings with other people had to be accomplished with care to respect the spatial hierarchy in what Christine Stansell aptly terms the “geography of social life.”2 Spaces were a backdrop for human interactions; they could be active or passive, conducive to violence or not.3 An active space could be one in which an aggressor would have an audience. For example, many Mexican women attacked others in front of their local church at the end of mass when there was a guarantee of spectators for any exemplary violence. Other places were simply a spot where passions erupted but often had no audiences. Places held symbolism that was particular to the culture—for example, in the Mexican countryside barrancas were the most common site of violence against women. In addition, taking a wife to the monte was an act imbued with a highly violent, punitive imagery. Space and Mexican Society 33 But the most pernicious transformation of space that Mexican women had to deal with was the sexualization of exterior spaces. When women left the domestic enclosure they had to contend with the fact that they entered into a masculine world—one in which they became eroticized.4 Some consideration must be given to ideas and theory regarding the role of space in people ’s lives and how Mexican cities and homes were organized and conceptualized. Ideas about Space People are constantly engaged in a dialogue with the spaces around them; they receive multiple messages from their built environment . Buildings can inspire fear and awe. They can make people feel small or big. Individuals feel comfortable or overwhelmed by their surroundings. According to Michel de Certeau , space “is composed of intersections of mobile elements.” He contrasts space, which is not fixed, to place, which is static. Space also has the capacity to be read and appropriated.5 Space can be imagined; something ephemeral happens in which people associate places and buildings with qualities, values, or even just belonging. Leonardo Fabricio Hernández argues that late colonial Guatemalans developed their own concept of neighborhood that had nothing to do with the boundaries of parishes but rather with either certain families or particular...