hi i am shaun . I agree with my brother's view that it is a mistake to view Rosaldo's discourse as primarily "Chicano." Rather, it seems to us, that this book is grounded in an anthropological discourse which privileges the interpretation of texts and rhetorical strategies. Rosaldo is not trying to develop a Chicano anthropology (he has never rather as an analyst of the "literacy" narrative text. Related to the issue of narrative is the current interest in the so-called "life history" method. It has become so popular, in part, because it focuses on issues of representation and foregrounds agency and voice as people "tell" their lives. Yet this method seems to be ahistorical. While Rosaldo evokes notions of class, race, and gender within the ethnographic texts, one can be left with the question of whether narrative can also describe the large context in which the narrative takes place. Contrast this approach with that of George Sánchez in Becoming Mexican Americans (1993) or Carlos Vélez-Ibañez's use of ethnography or ethnobiography in his most recent Border Visions (1997).