AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST

Better to Be Hot than Caught: Excavating the Conflicting

Roles of Migrant Material Culture

Jason De Leon

ABSTRACT Since the mid-1990s, heightened U.S. border security in unauthorized crossing areas near urban ports

of entry has shifted undocumented migration toward remote regions such as the Sonoran Desert of Arizona, where

security is more penetrable but crossing conditions are more difficult. Subsequently, a complex smuggling industry

has developed in Northern Mexico that profits from helping migrants cross the desert on foot to enter the United

States undetected. Desert crossing is now a well-established social process whereby items such as dark clothes

and water bottles have been adopted as tools used for subterfuge and survival by migrants. This article highlights

ethnographic data on the experiences ofmigrants and archaeological data collected along themigrant trails that cross

the Arizona desert to illustrate the routinized techniques and tools associated with the violent process of border

crossing, as well as the dialectical and often oppressive relationship that exists between migrants and objects.

[material culture, undocumented migration, border crossing, U.S.Mexico, archaeology of the contemporary]

RESUMEN Desde los 1990s, el augmento de seguridad fronteriza de EE.UU. en areas cerca de puertos oficiales

de entrada ha desplazado la migracion indocumentada a regiones remotas como el desierto de Sonora en Arizona

donde la seguridad es mas penetrable, pero las condiciones para cruzas son mas dificiles. Posteriormente, una

industria para ayudar los migrantes a cruzar la frontera illegalmente ha desarrollado en el Norte de Mexico. Hoy

cruzando el desierto es un proceso social bien establecido. Los migrantes utilizan herramientas como ropa negra y

bottelas de agua para eluden la Patrulla Fronteriza y sobrevivir el desierto. Este artculo presenta datos etnograficos

de las experiencias de migrantes y datos arqueologicos hubo collectado en los caminos de migrantes en el desierto.

Ha demonstrado que las tecnicas y instrumentos associado con el proceso violento de cruce son normalizados,

tambien la relacion entre los migrantes y sus objetos son dialectica y a veces opresivo.

Im watching Victor and Miguel pack.1 We have just re-turned from a shopping trip where they bought four gal-lons of water, three cans of beans, 11 cans of tuna, two cansof sardines, half a kilo of limes, two bags of tortillas, a loafof bread, a bulb of garlic (to rub on their clothes as a defenseagainst snakes), and a can of chiles. They are both tryingto cram two gallons of water into their backpacks that arealready overloaded with food and clothes. Miguel tells me hehas an extra pair of socks in case his feet get wet or he starts toget blisters from his uncomfortable knock-off Adidas sneak-ers. He has also packed a couple of black T-shirts that hesays will help him avoid la migra [Border Patrol]. It makesit harder for them to see us at night, he says. I ask about thediscomfort from the extra heat generated by wearing black

AMERICAN ANTHROPOLOGIST, Vol. 114, No. 3, pp. 477495, ISSN 0002-7294, online ISSN 1548-1433. c 2012 by the American AnthropologicalAssociation. All rights reserved. DOI: 10.1111/j.1548-1433.2012.01447.x

in the scorching desert, and he says, Its better to be hot thancaught. Victor then jokes that he should make some roomin his small pack to take a couple of caguamas [one-quartbottles of beer]. We laugh at the ridiculous idea but deepdown no one is laughing about the fact that the two gallonsof water they are each carrying are not even close to whatthey will need to survive a multiday hike across the desertwhere recent temperatures have been in the low 100s. Theywill have to find water along the way and will likely endup drinking the green liquid from the bacteria-laden cattletanks that dot the southern Arizona desert. These men, whoI met several weeks prior while working in a migrant shelterin Nogales, have struggled for almost two weeks to comeup with the 30 dollars needed to buy enough food to last

478 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

them both on a multiday crossing. They have attempted thistrip several times before and will undertake this one withouta paid guide. There is no point in asking them questionslike why they dont wear hiking boots or take a compasswith them. Hiking boots are an unfamiliar and unattainablecommodity to these working-class men. A compass is tooexpensive and something that Border Patrol would use toclassify them as smugglers. If they get caught and labeledas smugglers, they face harsher punishment in the form oflong-term jail time. I dont ask them if the few meager goodsthey are carrying are going to be sufficient to get across theborder. I just sit and imagine the unforeseen perils that noone wants to talk about. Later, we hop on a bus and silentlyride to the outskirts of Nogales where they will enter thedesert on foot. Out of nowhere Victor turns to me and saysA lot of things are going through my head right now. Imthinking about my family and Im scared that I am going todie out there. Each time is different; you never know whatis going to happen. . . . The bajadores [armed border bandits]should be out partying tonight because its Saturday. Weshould be able to avoid them. We have food and water andGod willing we will get across. The three of us get off thebus and walk toward a tunnel that leads out of town. Wehug and say goodbye, and Victor walks away jokingly sayinghe brought the beer after all. I watch them disappear into thedarkness of the tunnel and I wonder to myself how anyonecan possibly try to prepare for something like this.

INTRODUCTIONThis article is about the materiality and technologies of un-documented border crossing between Sonora, Mexico, andSouthern Arizona. It is an analysis of seemingly ordinaryitems such as clothes, shoes, and water bottles that over thelast 20 years have been shaped by the institutionalized borderenforcement practices of the U.S. government, the humansmuggling industry in Mexico, and by undocumented mi-grants into a unique set of tools used for subterfuge and sur-vival. For people like Victor and Miguel, and the thousandsof other women, men, and children who attempt crossingseach year, these common items take on new functions andmeaning once brought into the desert and deposited along themany trails that lead from Mexico into Arizona. These itemsare the tools of the undocumented, and they are relied on toavoid detection by Border Patrol and to survive the SonoranDesert that has claimed the lives of thousands of people sincethe mid-1990s (Rubio-Goldsmith et al. 2006). Those whocharacterize the artifacts left behind by migrants as meretrash (see discussion in Sundberg [2008]) fail to recognizethe historical, political, and global economic forces that haveshaped border crossing into a well-structured social process(Singer and Massey 1998) with a distinct archaeological fin-gerprint.

Migrants like Victor choose to wear dark clothing be-cause they have been told (and believe) it will help camou-flage them in the desert. Although many migrants know that

dark clothing raises the bodys core temperature and signalsto law enforcement that one is a border crosser, this tech-nique continues to be used by thousands of people each year.In this article I demonstrate that while migrant technologyand material culture have become somewhat standardizedover the last 20 years, it does not necessarily mean that thesetools and techniques are effective or even safe. I focus myanalysis on three artifact classes (water bottles, shoes, andclothes) to illustrate that a dialectical relationship betweenborder crossers and these objects exists whereby materialculture is adopted and employed to achieve a social goal(i.e., successful crossing) and that material culture simul-taneously acts on peoples bodies, shapes their behavior,and becomes a medium that produces and projects socialdistinctions (Tilley 2006:61). Material culture is not just areflection of the social process of border crossing, it activelyconstitutes and continuously shapes it. I illustrate that theuse of these items is determined by a complex and culturallyshaped set of processes influenced by many factors includingeconomic constraints, folk logic, enforcement practices, mi-grant perceptions of Border Patrol, and the human smugglingindustry. Moreover, the techniques used during crossings,both individually and collectively, can often have unintendednegative consequences. By focusing on the complex and con-flicting roles of the deceptively simple objects used by bor-der crossers, I demonstrate how routinized the violent socialprocess of border crossing and its associated tool kit has be-come, how people mediate their experiences in the desertthrough everyday objects, and how objects and technologiescan create oppressive consequences through both somatictrauma and by marking people as vulnerable migrants.

I draw on ethnographic and archaeological data fromthe Undocumented Migration Project (UMP), a long-termstudy of border crossing along the U.S.Mexico border (seeFigure 1) that I have directed since 2008. This project wasconceived in an effort to better understand various elementsof border crossing, deportation, and the human smugglingindustry in Latin America, as well as demonstrate the effec-tiveness of using an archaeological approach to understandan ongoing and clandestine social process. Archaeologicalsurveys of migrant trails and ad hoc resting areas known asmigrant stations were conducted in the Arizona deserts north-west of Nogales during the summers of 2009 and 2010. Thesesurveys occurred in the Border Patrol jurisdiction known asthe Tucson Sector, extending from the New Mexico stateline to the Yuma, Arizona county line. Migrant stations areplaces where people rest, eat, change clothes, and leave itemsbehind while crossing into the United States (see Figure 2).To date, the UMP has mapped dozens of migrant stationsand collected thousands of artifacts, including water bottles,clothing, and other materials. The ethnographic data werecollected in the Mexican towns of Nogales and Altar (seeFigure 1) in the summers of 2009 and 2010. Semistructuredand informal interviews were conducted in Spanish withhundreds of migrants either before crossing or immediately

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 479

FIGURE 1. Map of study area with major towns and cities mentioned in text. The light gray rectangular areas designate national forest and federal

nature reserve lands. The dark shaded circle around the town of Arivaca represents the approximate boundaries of the archaeological survey area.

following deportation. In addition, hundreds of hours of ob-servational data on the day-to-day experiences of deportedpeople in Nogales were collected. Several migrants werealso given disposable cameras and asked to photograph theircrossing for anonymous publication (see Adler et al. [2007]for similar project), some of which are included here. Al-though migrants attempt to cross the Sonoran Desert at alltimes of the year, I focus on the summer months because thisis the period when people face the highest risk of death fromexposure. Although undocumented migration has slowedover the last several years (see Table 1), summer fatalitieshave risen suggesting that desert crossings are more danger-ous and violent than ever before (McCombs 2011a). Theinterviews that I collected with migrants during this time ofyear provide important insight into how people experiencethe summer desert and the role that material culture playsin surviving this process.2

Prevention through DeterrenceSince the mid-1990s, heightened U.S. border security inunauthorized crossing areas near urban ports of entry hasshifted undocumented migration toward remote regionssuch as the Sonoran Desert of Arizona, where security ismore penetrable but crossing conditions (e.g., geographyand environment) are more difficult. This federal enforce-ment strategy is known as Prevention through Deterrence (PTD)(Government Accountability Office [GAO] 1997:6465).PTD along with ever-evolving technologies of enforcementcontrol have increasingly turned the U.S.Mexico borderinto a militarized zone where Border Patrol practice a strat-egy modeled on the Pentagons Low-Intensity Conflict Doc-trine, a policy first designed to suppress domestic insurgen-cies in the Third-World (Dunn 1996). The rampant un-official racial profiling of Latinos, the impenetrable fencingsurrounding ports of entry, the surveillance technologies

480 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

FIGURE 2. A) Resting at a migrant station. B) Over the course of repeated

use, migrant stations can develop into sizeable archaeological sites

(e.g., motion sensors), and the desert itself all contribute toa hostile and oppressive environment for migrants.

Initially it was thought that the desert would act as anatural deterrent to migration (Cornelius 2001), but over adecade of research has shown PTD to be ineffective (e.g.,Cornelius and Salehayan 2007). This is especially true inArizona, where despite hundreds of migration-related deathsannually, hundreds of thousands still attempt to cross the vastdesert on foot each year to enter the United States withoutauthorization. Rather than deterring, the strategies and poli-cies associated with PTD have helped shape border crossinginto a well-organized, dangerous, and violent social process.In Arizona, the busiest crossing point along the southernborder, migrants must negotiate a rugged and inhospitablelandscape characterized by extreme environmental condi-tions (e.g., summer temperatures exceeding 115 F) andfew water sources. In the summer, injuries and death arecommon, and many fail to successfully cross after runningout of water, becoming dehydrated, or sustaining an injury.Adding to these environmental factors, migrants must alsocontend with bajadores who assault them and coyotes [humansmugglers] who may abandon them in the desert. If migrantsare able to overcome these obstacles, they must still evade

Border Patrol who employ sophisticated ground and aerialsurveillance technology to detect and capture people.

It is important to note that the data presented here werecollected during a moment when major shifts in undocu-mented migration began to occur. This included a decreasein migration levels linked to the economic crisis of 2008, in-creased anti-immigrant sentiment sparked by Arizona StateBill 1070 that sought to give state police the authority tocheck the legal status of suspected undocumented people,increased federal spending to secure the Arizona border,and new deportation strategies that were initiated to de-ter multiple crossing attempts (De Leon in press; Slack andWhiteford 2011). Recent apprehension statistics (see Table1), a notoriously problematic measure of undocumented mi-gration (Andreas 2009:85112), suggest that border cross-ing is at its lowest level in decades. Despite this slowing ofmigration and the fact that the Tucson Sector is now one ofthe most heavily monitored regions with the highest fatalityrate, Arizona continues to be the preferred crossing pointfor those who would rather risk the desert than attempt tocross elsewhere along the border where drug cartel violencetoward migrants has been escalating (Slack and Whiteford2011:11). Recent research by Slack and Whiteford (2011)suggests that increased attacks against migrants, high deathrates, and anti-immigrant sentiment have done little to deterthose still desperate enough to undertake an Arizona crossingin hopes of finding work in a failing and hostile U.S. econ-omy. Others have shown that deportation programs such asthe Alien Transfer and Exit Program may be transportingpeople to Sonora where crossing the desert is the only option(De Leon in press).

This analysis centers on the act of crossing fromNorthern Sonora into Arizona. It is, however, importantto highlight that undocumented migration is a complex pro-cess that extends far beyond the border region. There are keyplanning stages and social networks involved, which ofteninclude contracting a coyote from a persons home commu-nity (usu. through kinship networks) and relying on moneyfrom relatives already in the United States to pay for the costof transport (Spener 2009:166171). Speners (2009) workon the relationship between coyotes and migrants in southTexas provides insight into both the complexities of the hu-man smuggling business and the strategies that people useto find a reliable guide. Although Spener and others (e.g.,Parks et al. 2009) have shown that in many instances coyotesare important resources for undertaking a safe and successfulcrossing, these analyses have not focused on Arizona wherethe natural environment and social conditions are more diffi-cult and increasingly more dangerous (Slack and Whiteford2011:16). In addition, the relationship between migrantsand coyotes has been recently complicated by the increasinginvolvement of drug cartels in human smuggling, coyoteswho work in cahoots with bajadores, a rise in migrants fromsome of the poorest parts of Central America and South-ern Mexico who cannot afford to contract more expensivecommunity-based coyotes, and systematic attempts by Bor-

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 481

TA

BLE

1.

Sout

hwes

tbor

dera

ppre

hens

ion

statis

tics(

2000

201

0).

Sout

hern

bord

erse

ctor

s20

0020

0120

0220

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

10

San

Die

go,C

A15

1,68

111

0,07

510

0,68

111

1,51

513

8,60

812

6,90

914

2,12

215

2,45

916

2,39

211

8,71

268

,565

ELC

entr

o,C

A23

8,12

617

2,85

210

8,27

392

,099

74,4

6755

,726

61,4

6955

,881

40,9

6233

,520

32,5

62Y

uma,

AZ

108,

747

78,3

8542

,654

56,6

3898

,060

138,

438

118,

537

37,9

948,

363

6,95

27,

116

Tucs

on,A

Z61

6,34

644

9,67

533

3,64

834

7,26

349

1,77

143

9,09

039

2,10

437

8,32

331

7,70

924

1,66

721

2,20

2EL

Paso

,TX

115,

696

112,

857

94,1

5488

,816

104,

399

122,

689

122,

261

75,4

6430

,310

14,9

9812

,251

Mar

fa,T

X13

,689

12,0

8711

,392

10,3

1910

,530

10,5

367,

517

5,53

75,

390

6,35

75,

288

Del

Rio

,TX

157,

178

104,

875

66,9

8550

.145

53,7

9468

,510

42,6

3422

,919

20,7

6117

,082

14,6

94La

redo

,TX

108,

973

87,0

6882

,095

70,5

2174

,706

75,3

4274

,843

56,7

1543

,659

40,5

7135

,287

Rio

Gra

nde

Val

ley,

TX

133,

243

107,

844

89,9

2777

,749

92,9

4713

4,18

811

0,53

173

,430

75,4

7660

,992

59,7

66T

otal

Sout

hwes

tapp

rehe

nsio

ns1,

643,

679

1,23

5,71

892

9,80

990

5,06

51,

139,

282

1,17

1,42

81,

072,

018

858,

722

705,

022

540,

851

447,

731

Sout

hern

bord

erse

ctor

s20

0020

0120

0220

0320

0420

0520

0620

0720

0820

0920

10

San

Die

go,C

A0.

090.

090.

110.

120.

120.

110.

130.

180.

230.

220.

15EL

Cen

tro,

CA

0.14

0.14

0.12

0.10

0.07

0.05

0.06

0.07

0.06

0.06

0.07

Yum

a,A

Z0.

070.

060.

050.

060.

090.

120.

110.

040.

010.

010.

02Tu

cson

,AZ

0.37

0.36

0.36

0.38

0.43

0.37

0.37

0.44

0.45

0.45

0.47

ELPa

so,T

X0.

070.

090.

100.

100.

090.

100.

110.

090.

040.

030.

03M

arfa

,TX

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

0.01

Del

Rio

,TX

0.10

0.08

0.07

0.06

0.05

0.06

0.04

0.03

0.03

0.03

0.03

Lare

do,T

X0.

070.

070.

090.

080.

070.

060.

070.

070.

060.

080.

08R

ioG

rand

eV

alle

y,T

X0.

080.

090.

100.

090.

080.

110.

100.

090.

110.

110.

13T

otal

Sout

hwes

tapp

rehe

nsio

ns1.

00l.0

0l.0

01.

00l.0

0l.0

0l.0

0l.0

0l.0

0l.0

0l.0

0

Not

e:D

espi

tean

over

alls

low

ing

ofm

igra

tion,

the

Tuc

son

Sect

orco

ntin

uest

oha

veth

ehi

ghes

tcro

ssin

gra

te.D

ata

from

ww

w.c

bp.g

ov

482 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

der Patrol to use lateral deportation to separate migrantsfrom their previously contracted coyotes. More than everbefore, it is common to see migrants arrive in Nogales (ei-ther through lateral deportation or by choice) and contracta local guide who is more likely to rob or abandon them inthe desert.

Given the rising anti-immigrant sentiment currentlybeing felt across the United States, it seems unlikely thatcomprehensive immigration reform will somehow precedeimprovements in the domestic economy. Moreover, thestrategies of border control that are currently in place willlikely continue (or escalate) as we approach an election yearwhen politicians often pander to the recurring public per-ception held by many that the borders of the United Statesare out of control (Nevins 2002:6294). This emphasis onborder security has long been an effective political smokescreen that diverts attention away from economic and foreignpolicy issues (Andreas 2009). In 2011, the Obama adminis-tration deported 396,906 people, the most in Immigrationand Customs Enforcement history (McCombs 2011b). Manyof these deportees were nonviolent offenders, people withlong histories in the United States, and those brought to thecountry as children. While visiting Nogales in the summerof 2011, I was struck by the number of people I encounteredwho had been deported after many years of living in theUnited States and who were now about to undertake a firstdesert crossing. This rise in deportations of long-time un-documented residents and young adults raised in the UnitedStates indicates that immigration enforcement policies arenow creating a new type of undocumented migration streamthat is fundamentally different from previous generations interms of life histories, as well as general awareness and pre-paredness for a desert crossing. My focus on the relationshipbetween migrants and the meager tools at their disposal tosurvive the desert thus has important implications for un-derstanding the day-to-day experiences of the thousands ofpeople who, despite the current U.S. economic crisis, arestill attempting to cross the desert (see Table 1) and howtheir experiences are linked to and continuously shaped bybroad-scale forms of immigration enforcement policy. Thehypersuffering that now characterizes the crossing processis likely to continue even once the U.S. economy improvesand migration flows increase, suggesting that for the nextseveral years, hundreds of thousands of people will continueto enter the desert and experience many of the difficultiesdescribed in this article.

MIGRANT MATERIAL CULTUREAs the PTD strategy began to shift undocumented migra-tion toward the deserts of Arizona in the 1990s, the humansmuggling industry in Northern Mexico grew to deal withthe influx of migrants to the region. Sleepy agricultural townssuch as Altar soon became major staging areas for hundredsof thousands of border crossers who arrived each year. Sub-sequently, coyotes, vendors, and local manufacturers beganto capitalize on migrants who needed guide services, tem-

porary housing, food, and equipment. In Altar, smugglinghas become a major industry, and many outdoor vendorsand convenience stores now specialize in the goods used bymigrants (see Figure 3). Crossings are typically chaotic, andpeople often have very little control over what will happento them. One of the few things they can control is whatthey choose to carry into the desert. Vendors exploit mi-grant fears and anxieties by selling them a variety of goodsat elevated prices under the promise that they are essen-tial for a safe crossing. In this case, desperation, folk logic,and predatory entrepreneurism play major roles in shapingconsumer decisions about what to purchase. I refer to thecomplex of smugglers, criminals, vendors, and manufactur-ers who profit by robbing and selling products and servicesto migrants as the Border Crossing Industry. This industry andits associated goods are constantly evolving as migrants,smugglers, and vendors attempt to adjust to changes in en-forcement practices and surveillance technology.

Over the years, desert crossing has become associatedwith a material culture that includes a codified set of darklycolored (sometimes camouflage) clothing (see Figure 3),cheaply made sneakers and hiking boots, consumables, andother accessories. Consumables include bottled water, elec-trolyte beverages, and high salt content foods (e.g., cannedtuna and salted crackers). Additionally, people equip them-selves with first-aid and utilitarian items such as gauze, painrelievers, and pocket mirrors used to signal Border Patrolin case a rescue is needed. These items are carried in smalldarkly colored or camouflage backpacks that once filled canweigh upward of 50 pounds. These goods foremost reflecttechnological attempts to avoid Border Patrol and cope withthe dangerous conditions in the desert. However, these itemscan also create physical and social problems for those who usethem. To illuminate the complex (and often-contradictory)aspects of migrant goods, I use a theoretical framework thatemphasizes the role of technology, as well as the dialecticaland somatic relationships between people and objects. Thisapproach allows for a better understanding of the forces thathave shaped migrant technology, the techniques associatedwith different objects, how these objects act in personaland public domains, and how these items come to be em-bedded with the traces of human suffering. Below, I brieflydiscuss each of these components of my approach.

Technology is a fundamental aspect of the human con-dition that is interwoven into the very fabric of our livesand implicated in all forms of cultural development (past,present, and future) (Mackenzie and Wajcman 1999:327).Reductionist views of technology have tended to focus ei-ther on the tools themselves or their effectiveness relativeto other technologies (Lemmonier 1986:150). Some of themost innovative studies of techniques (i.e., technology ortechnical processes) have shown that material objects arebut one (and not always necessary [Downing 2007]) ele-ment of complex technical systems that also include actionand cognition (Lemmonier 1986:147148). To understandhow objects are appropriated and employed in the context

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 483

FIGURE 3. Vendor in Altar, Sonora, Mexico that specializes in migrant goods. Photograph by Michael Wells

of border crossing, I draw on technological studies by AlfredGell (1988) and Bryan Pfaffenberger (1992). Gell points outthat minimally technology not only consists of the artefactswhich are employed as tools, but also includes the sum totalof the kinds of knowledge which make possible the inven-tion, making, and use of tools (1988:6). Analyses shouldthus neither focus primarily on an objects characteristics orits effectiveness at achieving a particular task. Tools cannotbe studied in isolation because the knowledge needed to ma-terialize them and employ them in set tasks is fundamentallyconnected to (and shaped by) the specific social context inwhich they exist (1988:6). This means that migrant tech-nology may involve commonly found objects such as shoesand water bottles, but their exact use can only be under-stood in the context of clandestine crossings. Pfaffenberger(1992:497) refers to these distinct contexts of technologicalactivity as sociotechnical systems and argues that they derivefrom the linkage of techniques (e.g., operational sequences,behavioral patterns, knowledge) and material culture to thesocial coordination of labor. In this case, the technologyand social coordination of labor are directed at helping mi-grants cross the desert undetected. In addition to contex-tualizing technological activity to understand how peoplemake decisions about what to use and how to use it, I alsodraw on theories that focus on techniques of the body (e.g.,Mauss 1973; Wacquant 1995) and the relationship betweenthe body and objects (e.g., Bordieu 1977:7295; Downey

2007:215). Pfaffenberger acknowledges that a key aspect ofany sociotechnical system is human action, but his approachis missing a more detailed analysis of the physical techniquesinvolved in object use. My framework gives equal footing tothe context and underlying factors that create a sociotech-nical system, as well as the bodily techniques involved inthe technological deployment of objects in the system. Thisallows not only for a better understanding of how technolo-gies arise but also the dynamic relationship between objectsand the human body. I use Border Crossing Sociotechnical Sys-tem (BCSS) to refer to the nexus of social, economic, legal,political, and scientific factors that have shaped the BCI aswell as the subsequent social processes, technologies, andbodily techniques of desert crossing.

In the following discussion, I demonstrate that the deci-sions to adopt particular techniques and objects result fromthe influence and logic of the BCSS. For migrants, it is of-ten the perceived efficacy (i.e., folk logic) that drives theselection of certain types of goods, which can sometimes beineffective or detrimental. However, my point is not thatmigrant technology is illogical. As Pfaffenberger points out:

That a sociotechnical system develops does not imply that it is alogical system, or the only possible system, that could have devel-oped under the circumstances; social choice, tactics, alternativetechniques, and the social redefinition of needs and aspirations allplay a role in the rise of sociotechnical systems. [1992:499]

484 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

Instead, my focus on technology and its impacts onmigrants allows for a better understanding of the socialdimensions of how this particular set of techniques is used inthe context of crossing and how these techniques are assessedby migrants. Similar to Wacquants (1995:85) finding thatthe boxing universe has its own internal logic that may appearirrational to outsiders, the migrant techniques presentedhere can neither be judged or subject to critical evaluationthat blames individuals for using what often appear to becontradictory or somatically damaging practices. AlthoughI am interested in how material culture (mis)functions atthe individual level of use and how collectively these goodshave the unintended (or at least unwanted) consequence ofserving as markers of illegality, my intent is to highlight thedialectical relationship between people and objects and toexamine the blurry line between the two (Keane 2006b).

Two decades of research on material culture has demon-strated that objects have social lives (e.g., Appadurai 1986),agency (e.g., Hoskins 2006), and can oppress users (e.g.,Latour 1992). My analysis draws on the concept of objecti-fication (Tilley 1996), which posits a dialectical relationshipbetween people and material culture whereby we create ob-jects to improve our capacity as humans and these objects candevelop their own autonomy, which may eventually come tooppress us (Miller 2010:59). Whether it is the high fencingand cameras at urban ports of entry that shift migrant streamstoward more remote border regions, the motion sensors andunmanned aerial drone planes that detect migrants, or theharsh desert that is used as a geographic deterrent, the bulkof the surveillance and deterrent technologies used alongthe U.S.Mexico boundary are inherently oppressive to theflow of undocumented people. Like the panopticon, thesespecific technologies require very little human input to dotheir jobs effectively. However, it is not just law enforce-ment technologies that oppress migrants. The seeminglyordinary objects that have been co-opted for crossings havealso come to negatively impact migrants but in more sub-tle, less obvious manners. This objectification is visible inthe ways that migrants try to use objects to improve theirpersonal capacity to avoid detection and survive the desertwhile simultaneously adopting a uniform set of goods thatincreases stress on their bodies and publicly marks them asvulnerable and illegal to others.

An analysis of the personal and public qualities of migrantmaterial culture allows us to understand both how peopleconceptualize border surveillance technology and how theiradoption of certain goods makes possible or inhibits newpractices, habits, and intentions (Keane 2006a:193). Thisframework provides insight into why material culture (e.g.,dark clothing) that has negative impacts on peoples bodiesand social interactions continues to be used by migrants overtime. Karen Hansen notes:

The subjective and social experiences of dress are not alwaysmutually supportive but contradict one another or collide. Thecontingent dynamic between these two experiences of dress givesrise to considerable ambiguity, ambivalence, and, therefore, un-

certainty and debate over dress. Dress becomes a flash point ofconflicting values, fueling contests in historical encounters, in in-teractions across class, between genders and generations, and inrecent global cultural and economic exchanges. [2004:372].

Focusing on the conflicting role of migrant material cul-ture is fertile ground for improving our knowledge about thesocial process of border crossing, as well as the embodiedexperiences of migrants. As part of this analysis, I argue thatmigrant-specific habitus (Spener 2009:226229) in the formof routinized physical suffering can be gleaned from detailedstudies of migrant artifact classes and how they were usedor modified. In particular, I employ the archaeological con-cept of use-wear (i.e., modifications made to objects asa result of usage) to provide a more intimate understand-ing of the somatic relationship between people and objects.Studies of artifact use-wear and discard show how the re-peated patterning of empty water bottles, worn out shoes,and sweat-drenched clothes reflect years of individual andcollective suffering in the desert. Migrant habitus is not onlyrepresented in the traces of human activity embedded inindividual artifacts but also in the long-term systematic useof particular objects associated with the alleviation of suffer-ing that derives from exposure to the desert environment(e.g., pain medication, gauze). In the following sections,I describe three classes of commonly used artifacts (waterbottles, shoes, and clothes), highlight the technique and logicbehind their use, and document the somatic and social effectsthese goods have on people.

WATER BOTTLESBy far the most ubiquitous artifact type found at migrantstations is the water bottle. This is no surprise given thatthe leading cause of migration-related injuries and death arenow linked to hyperthermia (failed thermoregulation causedby exposure to excessive temperature) (GAO 2006:15).Outside of avoiding heat and exposure to the sun (often animpossibility in the desert), the only way to combat thisproblem is through the continued consumption of water andother hydrating liquids. In no uncertain terms, bottled wateris what keeps people alive.

Most of the water purchased by migrants is bottled lo-cally in one of the many plants in Northern Mexico thatcater primarily to this transitory population. In Altar alone(population approx. 9,000) there are at least six water bot-tling plants, all of which produce the typical plastic onegallon rounded jug that is commonly used by migrants(see Figure 4a). Migrants favor this style because its largehandle and thick walls make it durable and easier to carryon long walks. This vessel style is not typically used by U.S.water companies, making it easy to distinguish country ofmanufacture based on bottle shape alone. Prior to 2009, allof the one gallon Mexican bottles were manufactured usingeither clear or white opaque plastic. For many years migrantseither painted these bottles black or fashioned covers out ofplastic, burlap, or cloth (see Figure 4b-c) in an attemptto camouflage the object from Border Patrol. A common

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 485

FIGURE 4. A) One gallon white bottle. B) Bottle with plastic cover. C) Bottle that was once painted black with shoe polish. D) Black plastic bottle

assumption is that white bottles are a disadvantage. As oneperson stated: We got caught on the first night of our tripbecause Border Patrol saw the light reflecting off of a wa-ter bottle. Toward the end of 2009, companies began toproduce one gallon bottles out of black plastic (see Figure4d), a sign that technological changes at the factory levelwere the direct result of migrant preferences. However,agents working on the ground primarily rely on sign cutting(i.e., foot tracking), ground sensors, infrared cameras, andsound to locate people, suggesting that it is unlikely thatdarkly colored bottles provide a strong tactical advantage.The insistence by migrants (and border vendors) that cam-ouflaged bottles help you avoid detection probably reflects acombination of peoples lack of understanding about currentsurveillance technology, as well as entrepreneurial attemptsto capitalize on migrant folk logic. In addition to specializedcolor and shape, many company brand names overtly targetmigrant consumers and their religious beliefs. For example,one company in Altar is called Santo Nino de Atocha andtheir label features a drawing of the Latino version of theChrist child believed to assist pilgrims on dangerous journeys(Thompson 1994; see Figure 5). To an observer familiar withthe BCI (incl. Border Patrol), the shape, color, and labelson these bottles are easily recognized as both being manu-factured in Northern Mexico and linked to undocumentedmigration.

Technique and LogicAlthough human water needs range widely depending onmetabolism, climate, diet, clothing, and activity level (Sawkaet al. 2005:3133), estimates of the average U.S. AdequateIntake (AI) (i.e., the level of daily water consumption neededto prevent the deleterious effects of dehydration) are ap-proximately 3.7 liters and 2.7 liters for middle-age menand women, respectively (Institute of Medicine 2004:73).3

However, this AI is likely insufficient for desert environ-ments where studies have shown male soldiers losing anaverage of 4.9 liters of water a day from sweating alone

(2004:411). Some postulate that active adults in warmclimates have a daily water need of six liters (Sawka et.al 2005:32), a conservative estimate for those doing in-tense desert hiking. If we use six liters as a minimum AIfor adults walking several miles a day during hot summermonths, a person would need to consume approximately1.6 gallons a day to prevent dehydration. If someone walksfor three days, which is the approximate time it takes toget from the border to one of the common rendezvouslocations in southern Arizona (e.g., Three Points) (seeFigure 2), they minimally need to carry 4.8 gallons. A gallonof water weighs 8.35 pounds, which means that someonecarrying four gallons starts their trip with 33.4lbs of liquid.This weight would be augmented by food, extra clothes, andother supplies. Based on my observations and interviews, themaximum amount of water an adult can carry is four gal-lons, with many opting to bring between one and two (seeFigure 6a).

Migrants typically never carry enough water to sustainthemselves on a multiday crossing, and this is influencedby several factors. First, many crossers are unfamiliar withdesert environments and greatly underestimate how muchwater they will need to consume to avoid hyperthermia ordehydration. This is often exacerbated by conflicting infor-mation they may be told by their coyote (who almost alwaysunderestimates the actual distance that will be walked), sto-ries they have been told by other migrants who crossed withlittle water, or a persons inability to purchase water. Theamount of water a person carries is also influenced by theirphysical (in)ability to carry multiple gallons, the size of theirbackpack, and how much other gear they are carrying (seeFigure 6b). In an excerpt from a typical interview with aperson preparing to cross, they talk about the difficulty ofcarrying water:

Im bringing one gallon of water. I know it is not enough, butwater is really heavy. I cant carry more than one gallon. Look atmy bag [points to a small duffel bag] . . . I dont want to drink toomuch water before I leave . . . I dont want to get a cramp . . . I

486 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

FIGURE 5. A) Santo Nino de Atocha is a Latino version of the Christ child who is thought to assist travelers on journeys. B) A bottle from the Santo Nino

de Atocha factory in Altar, Sonora, Mexico

just take little sips of my bottle and hope that I find more wateralong the way if I run out.

Those who find gallon bottles too heavy or expensivewill opt for smaller sizes (ranging from 500 milliliters to 1.5liters). It is common to see people traveling with less thanone gallon of water in their packs, and the high density ofsmall bottles found at migrant stations suggests that this is awidespread trend.

Somatic ImpactsHaving insufficient water for a crossing inevitably createsphysiological stress, and the majority of people I interviewedwho spent more than a day in the desert described sufferingfrom various effects of hyperthermia:

I thought I was going to die out there . . . I couldnt take it. Myheart was pounding and I started to see things. I was delirious.I was hallucinating. I was looking at the trees but I was seeinghouses and cities all around me . . . I would stop and take a smalldrink of water but five minutes later I would see things again . . . Ionly brought a gallon of water with me. [Raul, 36 years old]

Additional water sources for those who run out arelimited in the desert. Although some humanitarian groupsmaintain permanent water tanks and water drop locationsfor migrants, these sites are few and far between. Those whorun out of water often rely on stagnant ponds or bacteria-laden water tanks used for livestock, if they are luckyenough to encounter one (see Figure 7a). This practice isarchaeologically visible via use-wear on refilled bottles (seeFigure 7b). Moreover, many commented that drinking thiswater causes intestinal illness and increased dehydration:

We crossed with another man who was 62 years old. He couldnthandle it. He drank some water from a cattle tank that made himsick. Well, we all drank it but he got an infection. The water hadlittle animals swimming in it but we were so thirsty. . . . He startedvomiting and had diarrhea so we took him back into Mexico.

Even if you have enough water to stay hydrated, itmay heat to a temperature that renders it virtually undrink-able. During the summer of 2010, as part of the UMP field

school, University of Washington undergraduate studentSteven Ritchey conducted an experiment to test the tem-perature differential between white and black bottles. Hefilled both types with water and exposed them to direct sun-light over the course of a typical summer day. Measurementsof the internal temperature of the water in each bottle weretaken at one hour intervals, along with the correspondingexternal air temperature (see Figure 8). The results showedthat within the first hour, the black bottles temperatureeclipsed both ambient temperature and the white bottle. By12:30 p.m., the temperature differential between bottlesreached 15 degrees (black bottle= 121.8 F, white bottle=106.8 F). The black bottle would eventually heat to 126.3F, 6.3 degrees higher than the recommended temperaturesetting for a domestic water heater. Drinking hot water raisesa persons core temperature forcing the body to expend ad-ditional energy to cool the hot liquid. This can increaseexhaustion levels even if the liquid is consumed while rest-ing. Additionally, gulping hot water in the desert is not onlyunpleasant but also sometimes physically difficult.

SHOESBecause of their close connection to the body and their abil-ity to maintain shape even when the wearer is absent, shoesare an artifact class whose physical properties are stronglytied to those who once wore them. For example, in mu-seum contexts they are often used as stand-ins for thosewho cannot be physically present. However, making shoesmetonyms for people or their embodied experiences canbe ethically questionable (Jones 2001) and theoretically re-ductionistic. I argue that the hundreds of shoes recoveredby the UMP that belonged to women, children, and menare an important artifact class. However, instead of func-tioning as metonyms for migrants, these objects providephenomenological insight (via use-wear) into the dialecticalrelationship between people (in this case their feet) and thedesert.

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 487

FIGURE 6. A) Shopping for water. B) Packing a backpack

The shoes most commonly worn by migrants are inex-pensive Chinese- or Mexican-made sneakers, usually replicasof higher priced U.S. models (see Figure 9). These shoes areoften ill-fitting, poorly constructed, and generally not well-suited for rugged desert hiking (see Figure 10). They offerlittle ankle support, have hard rubber bottoms that easily

FIGURE 7. A) Filling up bottles at a cattle tank. B) Recovered bottle filled with green cattle tank water

wear through, and have soles that frequently detach fromtheir leather or plastic uppers. It is common for people tocarry an extra pair of shoes (in case their first pair breaks)and super glue for ad hoc repairs. Sneakers are common,but those who cannot afford them or who choose to wearsomething more familiar will attempt to cross the desertin styles including cowboy boots, dress shoes, cheap hikingboots, and traditional sandals.

Technique and LogicMost migrants cannot afford high-end hiking boots, but theirpreference for sneakers is not a simple economic issue. In-dividuals may be familiar with hiking boots, but opt forsneakers because they have never worn hiking boots, theybelieve that sneakers are more appropriate for the desert, orthey choose to wear the shoe style they think will both getthem through the desert and stylistically help them blendin once in the United States. It is not uncommon to seeMexican and Central Americans crossing the desert withfresh haircuts and new sneakers. Many undocumented mi-grants assume that the best way to avoid detection is to notlook poor, a strategy that can backfire. I once observed aMexican immigration official board a bus in Chiapas and sin-gle out and remove a group of Central American migrantswhose new wardrobes, fresh haircuts, and shiny sneakerscaused them to stand out against the rest of the passengerswho appeared to be working-class, underdressed Mexicans.Although sneakers may be the most accessible and culturallypreferred type of footwear for migrants, their use in thedesert has harmful impacts on peoples feet.

Somatic ImpactFriction blisters are subdermal pockets of fluid caused byforceful rubbing. After hyperthermia-related injuries, blis-ters on feet are the most common physical trauma expe-rienced by migrants (see Figure 11). During normal long-distance hiking these injuries can be caused by poorly condi-tioned feet, ill-fitting shoes and socks, improper footwear,heat, and moisture, all of which are typical conditions forborder crossers. Migrant blister problems are exacerbatedby cheaply made shoes (esp. if they are not broken in), a

488 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

FIGURE 8. Results from an experiment comparing the water temperature in white and black plastic bottles (Courtesy of Steven Ritchey)

persons failure to recognize and adequately treat the earlystages of a blister, and unhygienic desert conditions that canlead to infection. Migrants who employ a guide are often atthe mercy of their coyote who typically dictates if and whenthe group can stop and rest. Additionally, Border Patrolsrelentless pursuit of migrants by air and land, combinedwith a persons desperation to cross the border, may leadpeople to ignore foot and other injuries until they can nolonger walk. By the time people get a chance to change theirshoes, socks, or apply first-aid, their blisters may have be-come severe. Indirect evidence of this foot trauma is visiblearchaeologically in the bloody socks, gauze, and worn outshoes (see Figure 12) that are often recovered at migrantstations located several days walk from the border. Thosewho develop severe blisters sometimes only stop walkingonce they are captured by Border Patrol or when their feetliterally give out. This extreme walking behavior is logicalif one considers that many who undertake crossings are es-caping some of the most impoverished communities in LatinAmerica (and beyond) or trying to return home to theirfamilies in the United States at any cost, even death. Ivewitnessed this desperation when I have encountered peoplein the desert who were suffering from extreme dehydra-

tion, excruciating blisters, and life-threatening injuries buthad to be thoroughly convinced to go to the hospital to avoidimpending death.

CLOTHINGRecent anthropological studies of clothing have focused onthe dialectical relationship between people and the objectswith which they adorn their bodies (Miller 2010:1241).Moving beyond previous semiotic studies of clothing thattended to emphasize the ways in which these items repre-sented differences (e.g., class), these new analyses highlightthe active and substantial role that dress plays in creating andshaping peoples experiences and determining what consti-tutes the self (e.g., Banerjee and Miller 2003). For example,in her study of sarongs in Eastern Indonesia, Catherine Aller-ton (2007:2537) found that they are intimately tied to thewearers body and bodily substances while also projectingmessages that are interpreted by the outside world. Here Idemonstrate a similar pattern whereby the clothing adoptedby migrants for clandestine crossings impacts their bodiesand simultaneously sends messages to others about theirsocial and juridical status.

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 489

FIGURE 9. New pairs of men and women sneakers typically worn by

migrants

Migrants typically wear darkly colored clothes, usu-ally black T-shirts, dark denim jeans, and dark sweatshirts(see Figure 13b). These items either come from a personswardrobe or are bought from border vendors. Unlike spe-cialty hiking clothes that are designed with lightweight fabricfor optimal ventilation and quick drying, most migrants wearclothes constructed with thick cotton, synthetic fibers, or

FIGURE 10. Climbing over rocky terrain in sneakers

denim. These clothes are heavy, absorb heat and moisture,and are not well-suited for desert environments or hiking.This apparel is usually supplemented with dark socks andshoes, as well as black, blue, or camouflage backpacks (seeFigure 13a).

Technique and LogicSimilar to black bottles, dark clothing is thought to be aneffective form of camouflage, especially when walking atnight or when resting in shaded areas during the day. How-ever, as previously noted, most of the methods Border Pa-trol uses to detect migrants rely on remote sensing, sign-cutting, and infrared. A description of the infrared thermalimaging used by Border Patrol suggests that dark clothingis useless against (and may actually assist) this surveillancetechnology:

All objects that are not at absolute zero temperature emit varioustypes of electromagnetic radiation including infrared. The hotteran object gets, the more infrared radiation is emitted. . . . Blackercolors and duller surfaces usually have a higher emissivity andradiate infrared energy more effectively. . . . Due to their ownlevels of infrared heat energy, people are easily seen 24 hours aday. [Mesenbrink 2001]

Somatic ImpactsDark clothes absorb more heat, which can raise a personscore temperature and increase the rate of dehydration andheat-related exhaustion. Compounding the issue of heat ab-sorption is the added weight of thick insulated clothes and aheavy backpack along with the low moisture permeability ofmaterial such as denim. Together, these factors contributeto increased physiological strain in the form of more wettedskin, higher skin temperatures, and greater general discom-fort. This stress is often seen in the recovered clothes andbackpacks that emit intense perspiration odor and displaylarge, crystalline sweat stains.

490 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

FIGURE 11. A woman having her blisters bandaged after a failed desert crossing

The physical stress caused by wearing dark clothes im-pacts people individually, but for migrants as a group theseclothes create the unwanted signal that a person is a bor-der crosser. Border Patrol agents I have spoken with com-mented that when using remote cameras or visual spottingtechniques they can easily distinguish among hikers, narco-traffickers, and migrants based on a combination of pheno-type, clothing style, backpacks, water bottles, and behavior.In essence, walking through the desert wearing dark cloth-ing arouses suspicion. My personal tendency to wear darkclothes and a large backpack while conducting archaeologi-cal surveys has repeatedly caused me to be dusted by BorderPatrol helicopters and stopped and questioned by agents onthe ground.4 It is not just agents who read signals from mi-grant clothing. Both the bajadores who assault migrants inthe desert and the criminals who prey on recently deportedpeople at ports of entry use clothing as an indentifying char-acteristic when selecting their victims (De Leon in press).

DISCUSSIONDespite repeated use over many years, the migrant tech-niques and goods described here are at best minimally ef-fective at helping someone avoid detection and at worstsomatically and socially injurious. In essence, the paradox ofobjectification (Miller 2010:59) is visible in the contradic-tions created by the reliance on particular types of water bot-tles, shoes, and clothing that often do more harm than good:the black water bottles that marginally help someone avoidbeing seen while simultaneously heating up its life-savingcontents to an almost undrinkable temperature; the cheapsneakers that migrants assume will be suitable for hiking buteventually rip apart while traversing a rocky and thorny ter-

rain, but not before causing excruciating blisters; the darkclothing that is supposed to provide camouflage but is use-less against Border Patrols sophisticated technologies andinstead raises the bodys core temperature and helps speedup the dehydration process. Close inspection of these objectsshows how each betrays their user in different ways. Whenexamined collectively as an archaeological assemblage thatgoes back as far as the 1990s, a pattern of use-wear emergesthat is indicative of routinized and intense human sufferingresultant from millions of systematic attempts to overcomeinstitutionalized enforcement practices. If we look at mi-grant material culture from the perspective of those whoencounter border crossers and read the messages encoded intheir quasi-uniforms, we see that the clothes, water bottles,and cheap sneakers further betray people by broadcastingtheir vulnerability to those seeking to either apprehend orassault them.

In their seminal paper on border crossing, Singer andMassey argued that border crossing is a well-defined socialprocess whereby migrants draw upon various sources of hu-man and social capital to overcome barriers erected by U.S.authorities (1998:562). People accrue migration-specific cap-ital (i.e., the human and social capital gained from the cross-ing experience such as where, when, and how to cross)during each attempt, and as this capital increases so doesones likelihood of success (1998:569). Others have sinceconfirmed these findings (e.g., Spener 2009). The questionthen arises: If migrants accumulate knowledge during eachcrossing attempt, why do the seemingly negative or ineffec-tive techniques described here continue to be replicated? Theanswer to this question is not straightforward and requires adissection of the many factors that shape the BCSS.

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 491

FIGURE 12. Shoes with use-wear. A-B) A childs cowboy boot with hole

worn through the sole. C-D) A womans sneaker with detached soles. A red

bra strap was used to refasten the two parts. E-F) Shoe with detached sole

that the user has attempted to re-connect with a sock and binding from a

t-shirt.

Border crossers, even first-timers, are often aware ofthe general obstacles involved in the process. Still, this phe-nomenon is chaotic and rife with physical and emotionaldifficulties that can make focusing on the minutia of mate-rial culture quite challenging. The tendency to downplay orignore material culture in this setting relates to what Millercalls the humility of things:

Objects are important, not because they are evident and physicallyconstrain or enable, but quite the opposite. It is often preciselybecause we do not see them. The less we are aware of them, themore powerfully they can determine our expectations, by settingthe scene and ensuring our appropriate behavior, without beingopen to challenge. They determine what takes place to the extentthat we are unconscious of their capacity to do so. [2010:50].

FIGURE 13 A) and B) Migrants wearing dark clothes

Among those facing injury and death, the failure torecognize the negative impact of black water bottles or cheapsneakers is not only excusable but also expected.

Additionally, the ineffectiveness of different types oftechniques can be subtle and difficult to disentangle fromthe general chaos, violence, and suffering of border cross-ing. Migrants already expect the process to be miserable,and the fact that one technique might add additional dis-comfort can be easily overlooked. Moreover, the ephemeralnature of border crossing communities and the diversity ofindividuals involved in the process (e.g., migrants from dif-ferent ethnic and economic backgrounds) means that thereis often little regulation of folk knowledge and a great deal ofmythology about what the process is like. One only needs tospend an hour talking with a group of recently deported mi-grants to hear a wide range of crossing techniques that rangefrom rational (e.g., drinking a lot of water) to preposter-ous (e.g., a person once told me he almost evaded BorderPatrol in the dark by walking on all fours and pretending

492 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

FIGURE 14. Victor and his backpack. Photograph by Michael Wells

to be a wild animal). Migrants often lack the means to crit-ically evaluate and test different techniques in the desert,and many will often accept that certain technologies are ef-fective (even if they are not) because they see others usingthem. The BCSS has its own internal logic that is difficult tocritique from within the system. Furthermore, the BCSS isnot strongly regulated, and misinformation can both easilybe incorporated into and perpetuated by the system. A mi-grants crossing success is strongly determined by tenacityand luck (Cornelius et al. 2008), which means many havebeen able to cross despite their use of seemingly harmfultechniques.

CONCLUSIONThis article provides insight into the complexities and con-flicts of the material culture and techniques that hundredsof thousands of undocumented migrants rely on each yearduring dangerous border crossings. This material culturehas been shaped by 20 years of institutionalized enforcementpractices that have funneled people toward the SonoranDesert, by the human smuggling industry that profits byresponding to and overcoming changes in border securitystrategies, and by the migrants who for many years onlyneeded to evade Border Patrol and survive the lethal desertgauntlet before being welcomed through the literal and fig-urative backdoors of low-wage labor markets in the UnitedStates. The recent rise in deportations and state-based anti-immigration laws directed at policing the undocumentedlabor force suggest that things are going to get worse formigrants before they get better, and it remains to be seen

whether the rate of border crossings will rise if and when theU.S. economy improves. Although apprehensions are at anall-time low, there are still thousands of both impoverishedmigrants and recently deported long-time undocumentedresidents who are entering the desert. This dynamic nexusof suffering, politics, economics, and contradictions contin-ues to shape the BCSS today.

My analysis has focused on the dialectical relationshipbetween migrants and their material culture to highlightthat these objects and technology: (1) are fundamentallyconnected to (and shaped by) the BCSS, (2) are formal-ized and have a clear technological purpose, (3) are logicalwithin the context of the BCSS but often have conflictingsomatic impacts, and (4) emit social messages at every stageof the crossing process. I have shown that peoples percep-tions about the functionality and efficacy of particular goodsare often in direct conflict with the social and somatic im-pacts associated with the use of those of objects. In manyinstances, migrant material culture is profoundly oppressiveand often runs counter to the goals of avoiding detectionand surviving the desert. However, migrants have limitedeconomic means to purchase equipment that would maketheir trip more bearable. People make conscious decisions topurchase and use certain goods because they are relatively af-fordable, they are rational based on the collective knowledgeassociated with the crossing process (influenced by vendors,coyotes, and previous migrants), and the sometimes dys-functional nature of different techniques is camouflaged bya host of factors that make the crossing experience a chaoticsetting where no one particular object or behavior will en-sure success. Many have either been caught or lost their livesbecause of ineffective or harmful techniques, but millions ofothers have successfully crossed with little water and cheapsneakers.

I have focused on the techniques, as well as the op-pressiveness of migrant material culture. My intent has notbeen to provide evidence that all undocumented migrantsare easily identifiable based on what they wear and carrybut, rather, that in the Sonoran Desert, one can expect tofind a relatively uniform collection of material culture thatreflects a specific groups set of techniques used to overcomeborder enforcement. To declare that migrants can somehowbe identified solely on shoes or clothes foolishly ignores thecomplex and dominant role that racial profiling plays in bor-der enforcement. Simply put, the primary measure BorderPatrol uses to identify suspected undocumented migrantsis phenotype. You only need to ask documented Latinoswho live in southern Arizona what arouses suspicion at im-migration checkpoints to understand that ones skin color,last name, and accent supersede clothing or shoes. The studypresented here should also not be seen as an attempt to of-fer insight into how to avoid detection. No technology thatis readily accessible to impoverished border crossers couldever hope to match the level of sophisticated machinery thatis used to detect and capture people. The best that any mi-grant technique can hope to accomplish is assuage some of the

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 493

suffering experienced in the desert and possibly help some-one avoid an untimely death. Although I have highlightedsome of the conflicts associated with migrant techniques,future research will need to address the contradictions ofBorder Patrol surveillance technologies that are relativelyineffective in deterring people from migrating but highlysuccessful in making the crossing process more miserableand dangerous.

Intensified border enforcement, increases in violenceassociated with border crossing, and more punitive measuresdirected at apprehended migrants have all made it moredifficult for undocumented Latinos to work in the UnitedStates on a temporary or seasonal basis over the last twodecades. As a result, the undocumented Latino work force isnow more permanently settled (Massey et al. 2002) and lesslikely to voluntarily return to Mexico periodically. Todaythose who successfully cross the desert are well aware ofthe magnitude of this accomplishment. Two months afterI watched him and Miguel walk into a dark tunnel on theoutskirts of Nogales, I caught up with Victor and asked himhow he finally entered the United States (see Figure 14):

We walked for five days. . . . We ran out of food and spent thelast two days without anything to eat. . . . I got very sick fromwalking so far. My blood pressure dropped very low while I wastrying to climb out of a wash. . . . We ran out of water but wereable to find a cattle tank. . . . The water was very dirty but wedrank it anyways. . . . We ended up throwing away our backpacksand our extra clothes on the fourth day. We put all our waterinto one backpack and took turns carrying it for a few hours at atime. . . . In the end I think we walked more than 60 miles. Thiswas my fifth time trying to cross the desert and I finally madeit. . . . I keep this backpack as a memento of that last trip.

Jason De Leon Department of Anthropology, University of

Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 481091107; jpdeleon@umich.edu

NOTESAcknowledgments. Parts of this research were funded by theNational Science Foundation (Award # 0939554), the University ofWashingtons Royalty Research Fund, and the University of Michi-gan. I wish to thank Bob Kee, Michael Wells, Jackson Hathorn,Aaron and Madeline Naumann, Ran Boytner and the Institute forField Research, Consuelo Crow, Robyn Dennis and the Center forAdvanced Spatial Technology at the University of Arkansas, and allof the students who participated in the 2010 field school. Specialthanks to Steven Ritchey whose data on water bottle temperatureswere used in the article and Michael Wells for Figures 3 and 14. Inaddition, Hannah DeRose-Wilson, Emma Duross, Anna Forringer,Sarah Rybak, and Joia Sanders assisted with the laboratory analysisand photography of artifacts. Mara Inclan proofread the Spanish ab-stract. The archaeological field work could not have been carriedout without the help and support of the many residents of Arivacaincluding Fern Robinson, Penny and Steve Shepard, Maggie and RichMilinovitch, Shaun Quintero, Ronnie, Uncle Jojo, and everyone atthe La Gitana Cantina. The ethnographic fieldwork could not have

been carried out without the support of Dona Hilda and Don PacoLoureido at the Albergue Juan Bosco migrant shelter in Nogales. I amindebted to my friends Chapo, Chava, Eric, Polo, Netchy, Fernando,and Panchito who introduced me to La Linea and whose stories areinterwoven into this narrative. This article has greatly benefited fromfeedback from several people. First, I am indebted to my wonderfulwife, Abigail Bigham, who read many drafts of this article from startto finish. Kirk French, Mara Elena Garca, Anthony Graesch, andJose Antonio Lucero provided comments on an early draft of this ar-ticle. University of Michigan graduate students and faculty providedfeedback on this article through the Anthro-History Programs writ-ing workshop. I wish to thank the four anonymous reviewers whoseinsightful comments and critiques significantly improved the qualityand coherence of this piece. I also want to thank Tom Boellstorff atAmerican Anthropologist for all of the editorial comments and assistancein translating the reviewer comments into major themes that madethe revising process immensely easier. Any mistakes or omissions inthe final product are my own. Finally, this work would not have beenpossible without the help and trust of the many people I have metalong the border who have graciously shared their powerful storieswith me. Although I cannot name them here, I have tried to repaytheir generosity by doing my best to accurately document what theyexperience on a daily basis. Gracias.

1. All names are pseudonyms.2. Conditions during other seasons such as winter can also be ex-

treme and many people have died from exposure to freezingtemperatures. Compared to the summer, the experiences ofthose crossing during the winter are less known and warrantfurther research.

3. One liter equals 0.26 gallons.4. Dusting is a tactical maneuver whereby helicopters descend on

migrants in the desert and attempt to blind and disorient themby kicking up dust with their propeller blades.

REFERENCES CITEDAdler, Rudy, Victoria Criado, and Breet Hunneycutt

2007 Border Film Project: Photos by Migrants & Minutemen onthe U.S.-Mexico Border. New York: Abrams.

Allerton, Catherine2007 The Secret Life of Sarongs: Manggarai Textiles as Super-

Skins. Journal of Material Culture 12(22):2246.Andreas, Peter

2009 Border Games: Policing the U.S.-Mexico Divide. NewYork: Cornell University Press.

Appadurai, Arjun, ed.1986 The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Per-

spective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Banerjee, Mukulika, and Daniel Miller

2003 The Sari. Oxford: Berg Publishers.Bourdieu, Pierre

1977 Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press.

Cornelius, Wayne2001 Death at the Border: Efficacy and Unintended Consequences

494 American Anthropologist Vol. 114, No. 3 September 2012

of US Immigration Control Policy. Population and Develop-ment Review 27(4):661685.

Cornelius, Wayne, Scott Borger, Adam Sawyer, David Keyes, ClareAppleby, Kristen Parks, Gabriel Lozada, and Jonathan Hicken

2008 Controlling Unauthorized Immigration from Mexico: TheFailure of Prevention through Deterrence and the Need forComprehensive Reform. Technical report. La Jolla: Immigra-tion Policy Center.

Cornelius, Wayne, and I. Salehyan2007 Does Border Enforcement Deter Unauthorized Immigra-

tion? The Case of Mexican Migration to the U.S. of America.Regulation & Governance 1:139153.

De Leon, JasonIn press The Alien Transfer and Exit Program: Migrant Perspec-

tives from Nogales, Sonora, Mexico. International Migration.Downey, Greg

2007 Producing Pain: Techniques and Technologies in No-Holds-Barred Fighting. Social Studies of Science 37(2):201226.

Dunn, Timothy1996 The Militarization of the U.S.-Mexico Border. 19781992:

Low-Intensity Conflict Doctrine Comes Home. Austin: Uni-versity of Texas Press.

Gell, Alfred1988 Technology and Magic. Anthropology Today 4(2):69.

Government Accountability Office1997 Report to the Committee on the Judiciary, U.S. Senate

and the Committee on the Judiciary, House of Represen-tatives, Illegal Immigration: Southwest Border Strategy Re-sults Inconclusive; More Evaluation Needed. http://www.gao.gov/archive/1998/gg98021.pdf, accessed March 1st,2011.

2006 Report to U.S. Senate; Illegal Immigration: Border Cross-ing Deaths Have Doubled Since 1995; Border Patrols Ef-forts Have Not Been Fully Evaluated. http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06770.pdf, accessed March 1st, 2011.

Hansen, Karen2004 The World in Dress: Anthropological Perspectives on Cloth-

ing, Fashion, and Culture. Annual Review of Anthropology33:369392.

Hoksins, Janet2006 Agency, Objects and Biography. In Handbook of Material

Culture. C. Tilley, W. Keane, S. Kuchler, M. Rowlands, andP. Spyer, eds. Pp. 7485. London: Sage

Institute of Medicine2004 Dietary Reference Intakes for Water, Potassium, Sodium,

Chloride, and Sulfate. Washington, D.C.: National AcademiesPress.

Jones, Ellen Carol2001 Empty Shoes. In Footnotes on Shoes. S. Benstock and S. Fer-

riss, eds. Pp. 197232. New Brunswick: Rutgers UniversityPress.

Keane, Webb2006a Signs Are Not the Garb of Meaning: On the Social Anal-

ysis of Material Things. In Social Analysis of Material Things.Daniel. Miller, eds. Pp. 182205. Durham: Duke UniversityPress.

2006b Subjects and Objects. In Handbook of Material Culture.C. Tilley, W. Keane, S. Kuchler, M. Rowlands, and P. Spyer,eds. Pp. 197202. London: Sage.

Latour, Bruno1992 Where Are the Missing Masses?: The Sociology of a Few

Mundane Artifacts. In Shaping Technology/Building Society:Studies in Sociotechnical Change. W. Bijker and J. Law, eds.Pp. 225258. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Lemonnier, Pierre1986 The Study of Material Culture Today: Toward an Anthro-

pology of Technical Systems. Journal of Anthropological Ar-chaeology 5:147186.

MacKenzie, Donald and Judy Wajcman (eds)1999 The Social Shaping of Technology. Buckingham: Open Uni-

versity Press.Mauss, Marcel

1973 [1934] Techniques of the Body. Economy and Society 2:7087.

Massey, Douglas, Jorge Durand, and Nolan Malone2002 Beyond Smoke and Mirrors: Mexican Immigration in an Era

of Economic Integration. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.McCombs, Brady

2011a Border-Crosser Deaths Reach a Low, But Still 182 PeopleDied. Arizona Daily Star, October 12. http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/article_97e908b45cb954a9-a03e-49341f85dcb6.html, accessed November 30, 2011.

2011b US Deportations Set Record Even as Those from Arizonafall. Arizona Daily Star, October 19. http://azstarnet.com/news/local/border/us-deportations-set-record-even-as-those-from-arizona-fall/article_bee8c9d0-cdfa-5890-b8fe-7a033d482c4d.html, accessed November 30, 2011.

Mesenbrink, Johh2001 Protecting Borders with Thermal Imaging.

http://www.securitymagazine.com/articles/protecting-borders-with-thermal-imaging-1, accessed July 25, 2011.

Miller, Daniel2010 Stuff. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Nevins, Joseph2002 Operation Gatekeeper: The Rise of the Illegal Alien and the

Making of the U.S.-Mexico Boundary. New York: RoutledgePress.

OLeary, Anna2009 The ABCs of Migration Costs: Assembling, Bajadores, and

Coyotes. Migration Letters 6(1):2735.Parks, K., G. Lozada, M. Mendoza, and L. Garca Santos

2009 Strategies for Success: Border Crossing in an Era of Height-ened Security. In Migration from the Mexican Mixteca: ATransnational Community in Oaxaca and California. W. Cor-nelius, D. Fitzgerald, J. Hernandez-Daz, and S. Borger, eds.Pp. 3161. San Diego: Center for Comparative ImmigrationStudies.

Pfaffenberger, Bryan1992 Social Anthropology of Technology. Annual Review of An-

thropology 21:491516.Rubio-Goldmsith, Raquel, Melissa McCormick, Daniel Martinez,

and Inez Duarte

De Leon Conflicting Roles of Migrant Material Culture 495

2006 The Funnel Effect and Recovered Bodies of UnauthorizedMigrants Processed by the Pima County Office of the Med-ical Examiner 19902005. http://immigration.server263.com/indexphp?content=B070201, accessed October 10,2010.

Sawka, M., S. Cheuvront, and R. Carter III2005 Human Water Needs. Nutrition Reviews 63(6):3039.

Singer, Audrey and Douglas Massey1998 The Social Process of Undocumented Border Crossing

Among Mexican Migrants. International Migration Review32(3):561592.

Slack, Jeremy and Scott Whiteford2011 Violence and Migration on the Arizona-Sonora Border.

Human Organization 70(1):1121.Spener, David

2009 Clandestine Crossings: Migrants and Coyotes on the Texas-Mexico Border. Ithaca: Corne ll University Press.

Sundberg, Juanita2008 Trash-Talk and the Production of Quotidian Geopolitical

Boundaries in the USA-Mexico Borderlands. Social & CulturalGeography 9(8):871890.

Thompson, John1994 Santo Nino de Atocha. Journal of the Southwest 36(1):

118.

Tilley, Christopher2006 Objectification. In Handbook of Material Culture. C. Tilley,

W. Keane, S. Kuchler. M. Rowlands, and P. Spyer, eds. Pp.6073. London: Sage.

Wacquant, Loc1995 Pugs at Work: Bodily Capital and Bodily Labour among

Professional Boxers. Body & Society 1:6593.

FOR FURTHER READING(These selections were made by the American Anthropologist editorialinterns as examples of research related in some way to this article. They donot necessarily reflect the views of the author.)

Dorsey, Margaret E2010 Miguel Diaz-Barriga Beyond Surveillance and Moonscapes:

An Alternative Imaginary of the U.S.Mexico Border Wall.Visual Anthropology Review 26(2):(128135)

Sandell, David P.2010 Where Mourning Takes Them: Migrants, Borders, and an

Alternative Reality. Ethos 38(2):179204Susan, Bibler Coutin

2003 Legalizing Moves: Salvadoran Immigrants Struggle forU.S. Residency. pp. 228 Ann Arbor: University of MichiganPress.