Maylei Blackwell offers one of the most satisfying feminist histories I’ve read in a long time. The book is ostensibly “the first book-length study of women in the Chicano movement” (3). Yet, as Vicki Ruiz points out Blackwell’s use of critical theory is “deployed with such insight and verve.” Blackwell uses the historical narrative to transform not only the accepted genealogy of the Chicano Movement and the rise of Women of Color Feminisms, but to challenge the way we conceptualize oral history (a memory performance she calls it), and to theorize the ways that social movement participants create new forms of oppositional consciousness.
One of her most important contributions is the concept of retrofitted memory, “a form of countermemory that uses fragments of older histories that have been disjunctured by colonial practices of organizing historical knowledge or masculinist renderings of history that disappear women’s political involvement in order to create space of women in historical traditions that erase them” (2). Retrofitted memory creates new forms of subjectivity in the gaps of the uneven hegemonic narratives fracturing these dominant narratives and forms of political subjectivity.
It is also important to note how Blackwell reconceputalizes the narratives of the rise of women of color feminism. She rejects the narrative that sees Chicana feminism as a late reaction to patriarchy in the last years of the movement. Rather, Chicana feminism emerged at multiple locations and in multiple ways in the Chicano movement and was present from the earliest moments in the movement. As she explains, “Understanding that these Chicana groups were not separate or separatist is crucial for historical accuracy, because the emergence of Chicana feminisms is often narrated as occurring outside of and after the Chicano Movement rather than within it. They functioned as a parallel counter public within the movement as Chicana activists multiplied he subjects enlisted in the Chicano Movement’s project of liberation” (90).
Consequently, she argues that we need to recognize “multiple feminist insurgencies” to recognize the “multisited emergence of women of color as a historical political formation” (21). This “requires historical to look toward other social movements and other, unexpected social locations for feminist roots and practices” (21).
Thus, in the textured narratives Blackwell weaves, she succeeds in providing an excellent example of her own argument that “a multiple insurgencies model is not only an analytical framework for interpreting social movement histories and interrogating the politics of historiography; it also serves as a basis for theorizing and producing new forms of feminist knowledge and epistemology” (27).