American Dirt: Illuminating or Offensive

This was written by Alice, one of our student interns. The opinions expressed herein do not reflect those of Civitas other than respect for the value of open dialogue.

American Dirt by Jeanine Cummins is a thrilling, emotional book that tells the tale of a Mexican mother fleeing from Acapulco with her son after her family is killed from gang violence in the area. While some consider the book an eye-opening story about the struggles of American immigrants, others have spoken out against it because of inaccuracies in fact, and the furthering of already-present stereotypes about Mexico. The major source of contention however, is the fact that the author, Jeanine Cummins is not Latinx, and was published by a majority-white publishing company. The book has raised questions about who is able to tell what stories. Is it fair for a white woman to be profiting off of the harrowing struggles of Mexican immigrants? 

Personally, I read the book, cover to cover, and really enjoyed it. I thought it was a thrilling tale that furthered my empathy towards immigrants. As I read American Dirt I was not sure how accurate the story was. Does this really happen? Is this story just reinforcing the stereotypes about Mexico and Mexican culture? There was a sense that the book catered to a white audience, an attempt to create a heartbreaking, intense immigrant story that portrays America as the promised land. While I enjoyed the book, I wanted to hear both support and critiques. 

The critiques range from claims of inaccuracy, to the irony that the book was published by a predominately white publishing company, to the claim that the book has the feel of an overdramatized telenovela, “something I would love watching for cheap entertainment, like a narco-thriller on Netflix.” Esmeralda Bermudez, who works for the Los Angeles Times, has been one of the most vocal critics of the book. She describes how in her 17 years of journalism, interviewing thousands of immigrants, she has never come across someone like the main character in American Dirt, Lydia. Other critics call the book “pity porn,” exploiting the violent, intense experience of immigrants for a book. After all, Cummins did walk away with, “a seven-figure advance, a film deal, and Oprah’s book club selection.” As for inauthenticity, writer Myriam Gurba describes her amusement at the fact that the main character, Lydia, did not know that winter sports were practiced in Mexico, something any lifelong Mexican immigrant would be aware of. Another issue is the use of Spanish. Many Hispanic people have spoken up about the inaccuracies of the portrayal of the bilingual household in American Dirt, claiming their use of Spanish and English is odd, and even confusing. There are various details like this that highlight that the writer is not Latinx, and misunderstands the cultures and stories she is portraying. Which brings us to another issue, that many Mexican/Latinx/immigrant narratives written by actual immigrants, Mexicans, or Latinos, receive way less recognition and support than American Dirt, which was written by a white woman. 

Mexico does have significant levels of corruption, ranking 124th out of 180 countries in a scale measuring corruption. For reference, America is ranked 25th. In addition to corruption, Mexico does have significantly higher murder rates than the US, but, in pretty much every other aspect the US has higher rates of illegal activity, especially involving guns. All of which is to say, it is undeniable that American Dirt is not critical enough of the US in its portrayal of it being the Promiseland. 

The reviews of American Dirt were not all bad, however. Cummins herself said, “I don’t know how to respond to this. … Not everyone has to love my book. I endeavored to be incredibly culturally sensitive, I did the work, I did five years of research. The whole intention in my heart when I wrote this book was to try to upend the stereotypes that I saw being very prevalent in our national dialogue. And I felt like there was room … for us to examine the humanity of the people involved.” And for the record, I do think Cummins does a good job of humanizing Hispanic immigrants that were extremely demonized at the time because of Trump. Latina actresses Gina Rodriguez and Yalitza Aparicio have voiced their support of the book, as well as Oprah, who famously endorsed the book for her book club. Other prominent figures such as Stephen King, Sandra Cisneros and Ann Patchett, also praised the book. Cummins claimed she did five years of research, and wrote the book for the, “Faceless brown mass,” which has been heavily disputed, with claims that the book simply caters to guilty liberals. A common justification of the support of the book is that, while there were inaccuracies and perhaps harmful narratives, it raised awareness for the issue, and “started the conversation.” Whether or not this is a valid claim is heavily disputed; but, it is true that the scandal has raised questions about the predominately white publishing industry, stereotypes surrounding immigration, and the ethics behind a white author writing a non-white narrative. 

All in all, the controversy surrounding American Dirt is complicated, to say the least. I want to emphasize that the critiques are not all based in the fact that Cummins is white, but rather the much wider issues of stereotyping and systemic discrimination in the publishing industry. As for my opinion, I’m not sure. As a white person, it is not my place to invalidate the critiques of POC, and in this case, of Mexicans and Latinos. I do, however, agree with Oprah, “If one author, one artist is silenced, we’re all in danger of the same. I believe that we can do this without having to cancel, to dismiss or to silence anyone.” Conversations like the ones surrounding American Dirt are vital, and we need to work towards a place where we can have these courageous conversations without “cancelling” anyone.