288 



INSTITUTE OF SOCIAL ANTHROPOLOGY PUBLICATION NO. 6 



criticism is an unknown virtue — if such it is — 

 and failure is always due to elements beyond 

 one's control: the weather, bad luck, the un- 

 scrupulousness of other persons, but never is 

 it the fault of the individual himself. 



One aspect of the lack of self-criticism is 

 the tremendous importance of saving face, and 

 this in turn is reflected in the desire to conform 

 to established social norms. "What will people 

 say" is a much more potent factor in making 

 for a smoothly functioning community than the 

 combined force of Church and Government. One 

 hesitates to take a relative as a compadre: "they" 

 will say that it is done to avoid expenses. Wom- 

 en would rather be seen dead than without an 

 apron: "they" will say that she doesn't even 

 have enough to buy an apron. Jesiis Molinero 

 fulfills the obligation of being a carguero in 

 the Church, with its attendant heavy expenses, 

 for fear of "what people will say." He would 

 risk divine wrath by failure to comply, but he 

 can't stand adverse public opinion. "I will have 

 to leave Tzintzuntzan with my poor son, be- 

 cause of what people will say," wails Maria F. 

 after Isaac has been outwitted by another boy 

 in his attempt to elope with Lucia. Gildardo 

 M. beats his wife Carlota because the latter's 

 mother buys her a new and badly needed dress. 

 "People will say," explains the wife-beater, 

 "that I am unable to clothe my wife." 



And few people are hesitant in "saying," in 

 criticizing their friends and neighbors for failure 

 to conform, so that the fear is well grounded. 

 Tolerance is shown largely toward one's own 

 shortcomings. Mistrust, suspicion, and fear are 

 the common reactions to new persons or situa- 

 tions. One tends to jump to conclusions, to sus- 

 pect the worst rather than the best about both 

 old friends and new friends. In any new social 

 relationship it is assumed that the other person 

 is trying to get the better of one; hence, one 

 must keep oneself adequately covered, trying 

 if possible to outmaneuver the other. Overt 

 rivalry is not as characteristic of the people of 

 Tzintzuntzan as of those of larger towns, but 

 the struggle for survival is sufficiently intense 

 that one is constantly in competition with one's 

 fellows. 



At the same time, this competition does not 

 produce a furious struggle to outdo the other 

 person by harder work and greater cleverness. 



Quite the opposite is true; it is always surpris- 

 ing how many people work so little. Probably 

 the great majority of the villagers get down to 

 work only with a tremendous exertion of will 

 power, and most stop work upon the slightest 

 pretext. Those who work hard and steadily, like 

 the members of the Hernandez, Melchcr, and 

 Rendon families, and who profit accordingly, 

 are much in the minority. 



The same individual lethargy characteristic of 

 so many families usually is typical of everyone 

 when it is a question of attempts at group action. 

 Were it not for the sudden and wholly unex- 

 pected burst of enthusiasm displayed in the 

 group purchase of Carichauto Hill by the Co- 

 munidad Indigena (p. 281), I would have said 

 that there was not a spark of community spirit 

 or desire to work with the next fellow, even 

 though the ultimate result was of financial ad- 

 vantage to the individual. No one, by himself, 

 and but rarely with others, wishes to take any 

 responsibility. Perhaps this pattern is a surviv- 

 al from earlier coUectivistic days, if they exist- 

 ed, in which the group and not the individual 

 was responsible, a pattern which is incompatible 

 with the present individualism. 



The reason for this individual and group leth- 

 argy probably is both cultural and biological. 

 The ethnologist working alone can advance only 

 some of the hypotheses. The cultural factors 

 appear to center in the nature of life's goals, 

 and in the possibility of satisfying them. Basic- 

 ally, these goals are of two types: material suc- 

 cess and security, and the nonmaterial desire to 

 be thought well of, and to ensure one's spiritual 

 future. There is less relationship between these 

 two goals than might be expected. Visible suc- 

 cess stimulates rancor and ill-feeling in one's 

 neighbors. Though the relative economic status 

 of each family is known by all others, wealth 

 in itself is not a symbol of success, and one 

 attempts, as much as possible, to play down 

 material successes. One wants wealth for per- 

 sonal security, and to enable one to satisfy 

 Church obligations; after one once has carried 

 out a major Church obligation, money is of 

 little use in adding to one's social position. 



But, as will be pointed out, the possibility of 

 real material success is so limited by ecological 

 and economic factors that few persons ever can 

 expect to get far ahead. One realizes almost 



