Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found athttp://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rclc20

Download by: [FU Berlin] Date: 09 December 2015, At: 05:09

Canadian Journal of Latin American and CaribbeanStudies / Revue canadienne des études latino-américaines et caraïbes

ISSN: 0826-3663 (Print) 2333-1461 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rclc20

Shifting spaces: a Peruvian family’s negotiationswith translocality(ies)

Felipe Rubio

To cite this article: Felipe Rubio (2015) Shifting spaces: a Peruvian family’s negotiationswith translocality(ies), Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies / Revuecanadienne des études latino-américaines et caraïbes, 40:2, 258-273

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08263663.2015.1044724

Published online: 28 May 2015.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 22

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Shifting spaces: a Peruvian family’s negotiations with translocality(ies)

Felipe Rubio*

Institute for Latin American Studies, Freie Universität Berlin, Berlin, Germany

(Received 3 February 2014; accepted 22 November 2014)

Through chasing the idea of family reunification, this article explores the movementsof one Peruvian family through different continents. In doing so, it examines howdifferent conceptions of space play integral roles in the constant reshaping of trans-local social networks. In concentrating on Madrid, Spain, this article sheds light onhow seemingly localized everyday spaces are often negotiated with community mem-bers in other urban centers throughout the globe. Lastly, with a focus on the everydaystruggles and successes of individuals, families, and communities, this article examineshow a household imagines their “being in the world”.

Cet article, en chassant l’idée de la réunification familiale, explore les mouvementsd’une famille péruvienne à travers les différents continents. Dans ce procès, il examinecomment les différentes conceptions de l’espace jouent un rôle intégral dans leremodelage constant des réseaux sociaux trans-locaux. En se concentrant sur Madrid,Espagne, cet article met en lumière la façon dont des espaces quotidiens apparemmentlocalisées sont souvent négociés avec les membres de la communauté dans d’autrescentres urbains à travers le monde. Enfin, avec un accent sur les efforts et les réussitesquotidiennes des individus et communautés, cet article examine comment de diversesfamilles imaginent leur « être dans le monde ».

Keywords: translocality; migration; space and place; Peru; Spain; family

Introduction

Migration is often investigated with a focus on numbers; and although an important andrelevant form of analysis, at its core, however, migration begins and ends as a verypersonal experience. This article explores how translocal social networks as macro-structures influence the daily physical, imagined, and social spaces of a Peruvian couple.It concentrates on Johnny and Elisa Azumi’s spatial dispersal from where they met,Tokyo, Japan, to their transpacific return to Lima, Peru, and, lastly, by their transatlanticcrossing to Madrid, Spain. Findings in this article arise from ethnographic work conductedin Madrid, Spain. It links what Hage (2005, 474) refers to as the “double gaze of capturingboth descriptively the lived cultures with all their subtleties and analytically the globalwhich structures them”.

Since the 1910s, Peruvians have dispersed throughout the globe. Currently, Peruviancommunities reside in urban centers throughout Latin America, the Caribbean, the UnitedStates, Canada, Japan, Australia, Spain, and throughout Europe (Paerregaard 2009;Durand 2010, 20).

During the 1910s and 1920s, Peruvians abroad resided for the most part in the UnitedStates and western Europe. Communities in these two geographies differed, however.Whereas New York and New Jersey became home to blue-collar workers in the textile

*Email: rubio@zedat.fu-berlin.de

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies, 2015Vol. 40, No. 2, 258–273, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/08263663.2015.1044724

© 2015 CALACS

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

industries, upper-class criollos (of Spanish ancestry) were spatially linked to westernEurope for reasons of “education, prestige, and power” (Altamirano Rua 1999, 25).Traffic halted beginning in the late 1930s, and did not resume until the end of theSecond World War. During the 1950s and 1960s, the majority of Peruvians residing inSpain still consisted mostly of young upper-class criollo males, who attended Spanishuniversities as a rite of passage. The 1970s brought a further dispersal of Peruvians.Geographies differed; from an increase in labor and entrepreneurial migration to theUnited States, university students to the Eastern Bloc and western Europe, withMexico, Argentina, and Venezuela as central destinations within Latin America.

The 1980s and early 1990s were a time of violence, conflict, and economic disparity.Underlying reasons for this “lost decade of 1982–1990” (Robinson 2004, 139) includedhyperinflation, which in the 1980s rose by 6 million per cent, in part as result of StructuralAdjustment Programs (SAPs) installed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) (Isla 2009,67, 72). Moreover, violent conflicts between the National Government, Sendero Luminoso(Shining Path), and the Movimiento Revolucionario Túpac Amaru (Tupac AmaruRevolutionary Movement) guerrillas (Marrow 2005) forced many from the Andean regionto pack up and leave in search of security and employment. During this lost decade, therewas a strong internal migration from the country’s Andean region to its coastal cities. Themajority settled in Lima, the capital, with many also deciding to leave the country(Altamirano Rua 2006). Currently, estimates of Peruvians around the globe range between1.8 and 3 million (Durand 2010, 22; Paerregaard 2009, 2; Altamirano Rua 1999, 26, 27).

Although the United States continued to be the desired destination, migrations to westernEurope, especially Spain, and Japan also began to gain momentum. As the economic andpolitical crises deepened, the socioeconomic and ethnic makeup of Peruvians abroad alsochanged (Leinaweaver 2010; Paerregaard 2009; Durand 2010; Takenaka and Pren 2010).This dispersal also induced the expansion of translocal social networks.

In the case of Spain, the influx of Peruvians was made up mostly of mestiza/o (mixedpopulations) and andina/o (indigenous populations). Many arrived either on tourist visas,which they overstayed, or, as some in Elisa’s family, with a cupo (work-permit) thatlegally bound employee to employer for a specific period of time (Paerregaard 2009, 63).According to previous research, more women than men arrived with work permits beforethe 2008 financial crisis, as there was a significant market for healthcare workers,especially to work with the elderly (Escrivá 2003, 11).

In the case of Japan, Japanese-Peruvians began migrating following “the revisedimmigration law of 1990 that allowed Nikkeijin (Japanese descendants) to enter andwork in Japan. The policy was justified on the premise that Japanese descendantswould assimilate more smoothly than other foreigners due to their ‘shared blood andculture’” (Takenaka 2009, 2). Similarly in Brazil, in the late 1980s, Brazilian Nikkeijin leftfor Japan in search of the economic and cultural opportunities that a common ancestrycould bring (Tsuda 2003, 87). For a number of Japanese-Peruvians, it provided anopportunity not only to work but also to geographically reconnect with social and culturallinks. Japanese migration to Peru took place within the mass global migrations of the latenineteenth century. As one of the major strands stemming from Asia (China was also amajor source), between 1868 and 1942, 776,000 Japanese made the transpacific crossingto the Americas. In the case of Peru, the majority “were incorporated as indenturedlaborers in its transition from a slave economy to capitalism” (Takenaka 2004, 78, 83).For Peruvians without Japanese ancestry, since they did not qualify for a work visa,overstaying a tourist visa was the only way to remain and look for employment possibi-lities. Unlike Spain, the majority of Peruvians that headed for Japan were mostly male

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 259

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

(Takenaka 2009, 3; Takenaka, Paerregaard, and Berg 2010, 46; Paerregaard 2009, 46;Altamirano Rua 2006).

Methodology

This article stems from ethnographic fieldwork carried out with members of Peruviancommunities in Madrid, Spain, between March and October 2010. Specifically, it focuseson a couple’s (Johnny and Elisa Azumi) transpacific crossing to Tokyo, Japan, from Lima,Peru, in the mid-1990s, their subsequent transatlantic relocation to Madrid, Spain, adecade later, and how these migratory trajectories shape and reshape how they navigatetheir daily lives. I translated all interviews from Spanish to English.

In conducting ethnography, I chose to work with the extended case method (Burawoy1998). This technique works with both internal and external social forces that affect thedecision making of actors. Moreover, it works in overcoming the “localist prejudices ofethnographic tradition”, which “need to be overcome [in order] to deal with the con-temporary world” (Smart and Smart 2003, 275). In doing so, the extended case methoduses reflexivity as an analytical tool in order to ensure that pertinent information remainspart of the research process. Thus, in collecting empirical findings, I placed importance onwhat positivistic research attempts to minimize. First, by entering the daily lives of Johnnyand Elisa, I interrupted their day-to-day routine; this allowed me to have a closer look athow life is played out throughout different social spaces, which included familial organi-zation, business ventures, and ties to other Peruvian communities throughout the globe.Second, by placing importance on context, this allowed me to unpack Johnny and Elisa’s“situational experiences” by moving with them “through their time and space” (Burawoy1998, 14) and gather information on how internal social processes and external forcesaffect their everyday life and interaction(s) with other actors. Third, this placed anemphasis on how the social, spatial, and historical components of Johnny and Elisa’slives are under constant change; after all, history “is not a laboratory experiment that canbe replicated again and again under the same condition” (Burawoy 1998, 11, 15).

Lastly, ensuring the typicality of the researched subject through the use of a repre-sentative sample is not the only way to perform scientific analyses (Burawoy 1998, 10).Therefore, the findings in this article are not attempts to find generalizable empiricalfindings or “produce a monolithic” (Meerwald 2001, 390) concept of translocal socialnetworks. Instead, it aims, through a specific example, to intertwine and connect howinternal and external social and cultural forces affect migration and space.

This article is divided in two sections. The first part examines Johnny and Elisa’sgeographical and spatial dispersal. The second part explores how space at the physical,imagined, and social levels affects the couple’s daily life.

Spaces of migration

Research on migration takes on different views. For example, theories emphasizing push–pull factors often focus on individual migrants as rational actors that view migration interms of cost–benefit, where economic factors in sending and receiving countries deter-mine patterns of migration (Portes and Rumbaut 2006; Castles and Miller 1993).Arguments within this paradigm can include push factors such as demographic growth,low living standards, and lack of economic opportunities that entice individuals to migratefrom their areas of residence. On the other side, migrants are attracted by pull factors suchas demand for labor, availability of land, and economic opportunities. I diverge from these

260 F. Rubio

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

theories because they tend to be individualistic and ahistorical. They place emphasis onthe idea that a migrant’s decision is always a rational comparison between the costs–benefits of remaining in their region of origin or a rational consideration of variousalternative venues (Castles and Miller 1993, 20).

Other research on migration processes tends to steer between generalizing patterns ofmovement and local spaces as unique sites of social, cultural, and political interaction. AsHatziprokopiou and Montagna (2012, 710) argue, “macro theories often ignore the veryreality of place”, while, on the other hand, “empirical micro understandings of ethnicityand [local] space entail a risk of essentialism and of missing the broader picture”.Similarly, as Smart and Smart (2003, 264) note, “societies that consider only their internaldynamics distort history”.

At the macro level, for example, there is a tendency to argue that there is an“acceleration of migration” (Castles and Miller 1993, 8), which contends that migrationlevels are rising in volume in all major regions of the world. Contemporary migrations,however, as McKeown (2004, 10) argues, are comparable to that of the mass globalmigrations of the late nineteenth century. Not everything is the same, however: the highervelocity and lower costs of emerging technologies and methods of transportation(Appadurai 1996) through time–space compression (Smart and Smart 2003, 71) haveaccelerated migrations in speed, yet historically not necessarily in percentages of globalpopulations (McKeown 2004). Attention to larger patterns, however, are relevant toresearch on migration, since they determine how forces in one area of the globe affectmigration flows to another, as very few migrants ever make “choices only as isolatedindividuals” (McKeown 2004, 17).

At the local level, the concept of a locality as unique can skew how external forcesaffect it. For example, on one hand, political geography sets the specific borders andboundaries of territorial nation states and urban centers as “a spatial definition of groupidentity” (Williams and Smith 1983, 507). On the other hand, social geography blurssuch boundaries and borders through the inherent social and cultural overlapping thatethnic communities and diasporas bring with them. This produces “dislocation andfragmentation”, which forces us away from positions of duality, or extremes, to socialrelations that are “decentred and multidetermined” (Garcia-Canclini 2005, 258). Itcompels us to understand that events and ideas within one place resonate in others(Ruiz Baia 1999, 97). It is in this resonance across time and space that translocal socialnetworks play an important role in the lives of families spread out throughout theglobe.

Translocal social networks

Important aspects of migration include the spatial mobilities and social networks createdand developed over time by different groups. For example, Portes and Rumbaut (2001,66, 2006, 16, 18) argue that a shift has ensued which replaces the household over theindividual as the main research unit to a “new economics of migration”. This shift focuseson migration as another tool in the toolkit that families and households as actors use intheir repertoire of choices for investing. This shift helps to explain the creation, develop-ment, and maintenance of transnational social networks, first developed by “pioneer”migrants (Portes and Rumbaut 2006, 356). Following in the footsteps of such pioneersmakes it easier for others from the same country or region to follow suit, creating a“cumulative causation” (Massey 1990, 14; Portes and Rumbaut 2006, 18). Once

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 261

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

consolidated, such networks can become powerful enough to sustain themselves and nolonger require the original incentives of movement.

This article works with the household as the central unit of analysis. However, itdeparts from the transnational to the translocal. Although the difference is “one of scaleand scope rather than character” (Smith 2005, 3), this difference allows the examination of“local-to-local spatial dynamics” (Ma 2002, 131) that link Tokyo, Lima, and Madrid,rather than transnational ones (Smart and Smart 2003, 276) that connect Japan, Peru, andSpain. In connecting the macro-structures of translocal social networks, this article linksthe concepts of physical, imagined, and social space as a way of examining how thesenetworks move throughout different spatial forms at the everyday level.

Tokyo

Johnny Azumi is a native Limeño (from Lima) and part of Peru’s Nikkei or Japanesediaspora that first arrived as indentured workers in the late nineteenth century, when, asTakenaka (2004, 77) notes, people began to hear rumors “that a country called Perusomewhere on the opposite side of the earth was full of gold”. During the 1990s, in hismid-20s, Johnny decided to take a chance and leave for Japan on what he thought wouldbe a temporary move.

As stated above, along with the revised Japanese immigration law of 1990, in 1994,the Peruvian and Japanese governments signed a treaty that would officially allowPeruvian Nikkeijin to enter Japan as Dekasegui (temporary workers) (Takenaka 2009,8), since the Japanese government assumed that members of the Japanese diaspora wouldintegrate better into Japanese society than non-Japanese migrants. Johnny, however, asTsuda (2003, 353) argues, belongs to a number of Nikkeijin that “do not have the culturalability to assimilate, [and] react to Japanese ethnic and socioeconomic exclusion byretrenching themselves within the immigrant minority [Peruvian] community”.

Before migration, Johnny lived a middle-class life that never included performingmanual labor on an everyday basis. He found two deadbolts. Assuming that, in Japan, hecould use his accounting degree; he hit an impasse when he realized that this was notrecognized. And he did not possess fluency in Japanese (although his father taught him atan early age, it was mostly conversational Japanese, with an accent). Neither having the“right” accreditation nor language skills, Johnny, like the majority of Peruvians in Japan,relegated himself to low-skilled labor (Takenaka 2009, 8). He secured his first job at anearby factory, working in the assembly line. This job had to be renewed every sixmonths, which meant that he could become unemployed at any moment. Migrants,depending on whether they decided to pay taxes or opt out of the tax system, would,on average, earn the same as other Japanese workers (Takenaka 2009, 8). Although hiswork permit limited his time in Japan to one year, he decided to remain, work, and savefor at least two more years, and only then return to Lima. However, he ended up workingin the same factory for five years, and remaining in Tokyo for 11. During this time, heassociated himself mostly with other Nikkei and non-Japanese-Peruvians because, to theJapanese, they “were all the same [Peruvian], I was not like them [Japanese]” (JohnnyAzumi, 13 September 2010, narrative interview).

In associating himself with other Peruvians, Johnny met Elisa, another Peruvian whoarrived in Tokyo two years earlier. Similar to Johnny, Elisa worked as a cleaner in a localfactory. In 2000, although they could not legally wed because of their undocumentedstatus, they began a life together. Elisa is a representative of the low percentage ofPeruvian women that migrated to Japan because the majority of the work available was

262 F. Rubio

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

on the factory floor of different manufacturers (Paerregaard 2009, 69). Moreover, she alsorepresents a minority of non-Japanese-Peruvians that crossed the Pacific following the1994 treaty on tourist visas, which many overstayed.

Elisa viewed neither Tokyo nor Madrid as first choices. Many, including some ofElisa’s extended family, made the move to Miami during the hyperinflation and violentconflict of the 1980s and 1990s (Paerregaard 2009, 74; Leinaweaver 2010, 69, 2008, 62).Elisa regarded the United States, with its social networks already in place, as a logicaldestination. This extended family was able to carve out a middle-class life in Miami in thecity’s service industries. In 1991, following her graduation from nursing school, she“decided to do what others [as in her family] did before. . . I packed my bags and decidedto leave” (Elisa Azumi, 3 July 2010, narrative interview). Leaving, however, proved to bemore difficult than deciding where to go: legal prohibitions, as well as a lack of financialmeans, prevented her from migrating in 1991. She began to work as a nurse in a smallclinic and, although the pay was minimal, she “saved as much as possible” (Elisa Azumi,3 July 2010, narrative interview). It would not be enough, as she would later find out.

In 1994, when the Fujimori Administration signed the treaty that allowed Japanese-Peruvians to migrate on temporary work permits, Elisa saw an opportunity. Earlier that yearshe was denied a tourist visa to the United States because of insufficient funds. Since shecould not apply for a temporary work permit, in late 1994 she was able to secure a tourist visato Japan. She landed in Tokyo’s Narita airport in January 1995 with some money and atelephone number. Through social networks initiated in Lima, she was able to find a place tolive, and soon thereafter, a cleaning job at a local software factory. Elisa, as with Johnny,soon became embedded within a group of Peruvian émigrés, a number of whom worked inthe same factory. The next decade was dedicated to working in different low-skilled jobs.

Elisa and Johnny, and all their friends, became a closely-knit group. The friendshipsforged in Tokyo had two common characteristics. First, all migrated to Japan on tempor-ary employment or tourist visas, which they all overstayed. As this fact made everydaylife territorially bound to Japan, such geographical limitations on their social spacescreated and developed strong bonds between people that shared common restrictions.Second, and related to the inability to leave without jeopardizing the ability to return,many were relegated to working in areas outside their specific fields and, just asdisconcerting, downward social mobility.

Downward social mobility for Elisa and Johnny meant the loss of social status. Thisloss, however, was not linked to monetary or financial wealth since their wages weremuch higher in Tokyo than in Lima. According to Elisa, her family background, educa-tion, moral values, and financial means, as the last in this list, brought forth a shift in hernew socio-spatial surroundings. As she notes:

Although I left to be able to provide for myself, I was not ready for that kind of life. . . There[in Japan], I was making much more money sweeping floors than I would in Peru working asa nurse, but I felt that my entire education was wasted. . . For 10 years I was stuck. . . I feltshame. It was not until I came here [Madrid] that I told her [mother] what I did over there [inTokyo]. (Elisa Azumi, 3 July 2010, narrative interview)

Material life in Tokyo was not considered a problem, since both made enough money tolive on and save. However, as Johnny states:

We could never leave this place [Japan]. I became illegal after a year, and if they caught me, Iwould get deported porque no tenía papeles [without papers]. I went 11 years without seeing my

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 263

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

family. . . So, we decided to go back to Lima. Well, I guess things did not happen the way wethought because we’re here now [Madrid]. (Johnny Azumi, 2 July 2010, narrative interview)

Lima

In mid-2006, Johnny and Elisa decided that facing a future without direct family ties was notworth geographical isolation. It took just over a decade, but in December 2006, they returnedto Lima. Although Johnny and Elisa were aware that many migrated to places such as Miami,Madrid, and Sydney during the 1990s and early 2000s, this did not “hit home” until theyexperienced it within Lima’s spatial confines. As Elisa explains, it “was as if we were livingin a dream for such a long time. . . we made so many plans for when we went home [Lima],only to see that many had already left to Miami [and other places]” (Elisa Azumi, 3 July2010, narrative interview). Elisa’s imagined spaces of the urban center where she had spenther formative years and the social spaces present upon her return did not overlap, meaningthat the imaginary of “coming home” did not coincide with the new social spaces of Lima. AsJohnny states, “suddenly, I felt like I was back [in Tokyo]; I did not know anyone and had tostart all over again” (Johnny Azumi, 28 July 2010, unstructured interview).

They spent 2007 in limbo. Once again the decision to stay or leave came to theforeground. This time, however, geographical destinations changed. Although the UnitedStates was still high on the list, the decision-making process became split when Elisa’smother and her family mentioned Madrid as a possible option. Johnny preferred the UnitedStates, specifically Miami, because he thought that it would be easier to get ahead there (hehad three cousins in this city). However, the idea of the United States closed once therealization set in that they would once again have to enter a country illegally, and mostprobably remain with that status. Madrid, as with Tokyo, once again became perceived as theonly choice. At the time, Spain was still enjoying high levels of employment, and throughlocal social networks employment was relatively easy to acquire. Once the family sponsor-ship went through in September 2007 (all family members are Spanish citizens and thereforehave the right to sponsor), Elisa and Johnny left for Madrid in December of that year.

Madrid

Upon arrival, they resided in Elisa’s mother’s piso (apartment) in San Blas until theyfound a place in the same district, nine blocks away. The first few months were used notonly to find a piso, employment, and reunite with family and friends, but also tofamiliarize themselves with Madrid’s physical spaces.

With the economic boom that began in the late 1980s, many Spanish middle-class familiesbegan to be dual-income families; and with women entering the paid workforce in largenumbers, migrant women, for the most part, replaced them in the (health and home) careindustry (Diaz Gorfinkiel and Escrivá 2012, 134; Cachón Rodriguez 2002, 119). Elisa, as withthe majority of informants, was able to procure employment through social networks. Apartfrom the exception of three family members, all of Elisa’s extended family worked in differentareas within the health care industry. Elisa’s goal was to gain certification in Spain so that shecould practice as a nurse in a hospital. However, before she could apply to any position withinMadrid’s health care system, she needed to validate her nursing degree. The problem arosewhen she could not provide information of where she had been employed for a decade beforearriving in Spain. However, the securing of stable, gainful employment remained priority one.Through her family’s social networks, she landed a job as a caregiver to an elderly man twomonths after arriving in Madrid. This line of work was seen as temporary.

264 F. Rubio

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

As Elisa states:

It was supposed to be temporary. . . something that would provide some money and experi-ence so that I could get a nursing job. . . This temporary job lasted for a year and a half. I hadnever taken care of someone for eight to 10 hours a day; it was exhausting. That old man washorrible, he thought I was his maid, and sometimes he would start calling me names likesudaca [derogatory term for Latin Americans] when he thought I could not hear him. (ElisaAzumi, 24 September 2010, narrative interview)

For Elisa and other family members, a stable family life was not localized to Madrid.Stability meant keeping monthly remittances to family members in Lima, and on occasionto members of their social networks in other regions of the globe.

Translocal social networks, although an intrinsic aspect of a family’s economictoolkit, can be double-edged, especially at the economic level. Once remittances setin and become part of an individual’s or family’s monthly budget, sudden decreasesin this source of income can become destabilizing, since much of the remittances thatare sent back to Peru are used for nieces, nephews, and grandchildren’s schooltuition, private tutoring, as well as for access to private health care because thenational health care system is underfunded. Private education is seen as a must inPeru from kindergarten to university (but for the exception of the Universidad Mayorde San Marcos, a state university with a strong reputation). And since tuition at theelementary and secondary level is paid monthly, if remittances decrease or stop, theydirectly affect family members on the other side of the Atlantic. For example, it isestimated that 40% of Peruvians abroad make a substantial contribution to thecountry’s GDP in the form of remittances, which grew from USD 900 million in2001 to USD 2.6 billion in 2011 (El Comercio 2011; Altamirano Rua 2006). Elisaand Johnny’s extended family is located in Madrid, Miami, New Jersey, andMelbourne. People within this network decide on how much to send monthly toLima and what it will be spent on. In the case of this family, there are six nieces andnephews whose schooling (tuition, uniforms, books, and stationery) needs to be paidfor. Such networks and how they work together toward common goals are intrinsi-cally tied to each other. For example, the loss of employment in Madrid hasreverberations for families in other urban centers, especially for common projectssuch as house building. The stress placed on individuals to attain and, more impor-tantly, to retain gainful employment takes precedence over the quality of the position.Johnny placed this fact into context:

Leaving home is expensive, even for us [saved a significant amount in Japan]. . . We becameindebted to different members of the family. We also needed to get a job quickly because wehad to keep contributing to the rest of the family back home [in Lima]. . . It is very expensive,but this is what we have to do, no one else is going help us. (Johnny Azumi, 13 September2010, narrative interview)

In order for translocal social networks to function, reciprocity is expected, if notdemanded, in order to keep group cohesion. Therefore, in order to provide for the family’smaterial needs, everyone needs to be gainfully employed, working together (not always inunison) for what is seen as a common goal. The following section investigates howphysical, imagined, and social space(s) play(s) an integral role in how Johnny and Elisashape their every day; and, just as important, how it changes them.

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 265

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

Physical, imagined and social space(s)

Local physical spaces

Physical spaces are the “concrete and mappbale geographies of our social organizations”(Soja 1996, 74). These concrete forms, however, are socially produced; they are theoutcomes of human activity, they are formed from different experiences and behaviors.Physical space can be quantified, blueprinted, or fenced, and it has the ability to (re)shapepeoples’ social practices within different local socio-geographic areas (such as neighbor-hoods and urban centers) and abstract socio-spatial contexts (such as the trans-local, thetransnational, and the global).

Physical space for the past 200 years or so has been territorialized under the confines ofthe nation state (Hobsbawm 1990). The nation state, with its “fixed” territorial borders, hasbeen thought of a given, a concrete differentiation from one container to another, with powerover all that is considered to be parts of its “natural” property. This “methodologicalnationalism” (Beck 2007; Chernillo 2006) has come under question recently. Increasedcapital flows, global migration trends and network formations, and diasporas, to take a fewexamples, have compelled us think “beyond the nation” (Appadurai 1993, 411).

Johnny and Elisa’s story also forces us to reflect beyond the nation. The decision toreside in Madrid’s San Blas District provided Johnny and Elisa with what they had beensearching for for over a decade: familial stability. In longing for family reunification, Johnnyand Elisa did not take into consideration how much their lives had been shaped through theirprolonged geographical separation. Residing in Tokyo without everyday contact with familymembers re-shaped how Johnny and Elisa perceived their physical spaces. This socio-spatialisolation brought forth new habits of living; they became more independent.

Physical space and how it is conceived became a contemptuous issue once their move toMadrid was finalized. The issue of where to reside in Madrid surfaced. The first and obviousanswer for many was San Blas, even more specific, the neighborhood of Las Rosas, wherethe majority of the families reside. At first glance, both Johnny and Elisa thought it a positiveidea; after all, this was the culmination of a decade of searching for family ties. In searchingfor a piso, certain (internally and externally influenced) characteristics needed to be met.External pressures arose when some family members informed them that a two-bedroomapartment was not sufficient, and that at least a three-bedroom apartment was required. Therationale was that since people kept coming to Madrid, they needed to be housed; as theywere. At first, both Johnny and Elisa bowed to this external pressure; this would changerapidly. In searching for a three-bedroom apartment, accessibility to the subway was veryimportant, since both relied on this method of transportation to get them to and from theiremployment sites; Johnny, for example, had to leave the company car in the hospital afterwork, making the subway indispensable. They were informed, however, that a three-bed-room apartment close to a subway station would cost too much, and would also affect theirmonthly remittances. As Johnny states:

That was it, I told them, we would simply start looking for a two-bedroom apartment. . . In theend they backed down and said that they would help with the rent so long as we agreed to geta three-bedroom apartment. (Johnny Azumi, 28 July and 13 September 2010, narrative andunstructured interviews)

External intrusions by extended family members began to weigh heavily on their lives andon their relationship. The spatial proximity between family members, coupled with adecade of absence, placed Johnny and Elisa in a tough situation. Having contributedfinancially for a decade without having a strong voice in how remittances were spent

266 F. Rubio

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

provided them with the assumption that they could now take an active role not only inproviding financial means, but also on how it was to be allotted. As Johnny notes, “itbecame a constant struggle with these people [family members]. . . [We were] told thatsince we had not been a part [active member] of the family for so long, that we did notknow what and how to do it” (Johnny Azumi, 28 July 2010, unstructured interview).

Elisa found a piso that did not include one of the characteristics set out in the originalplan; it was not in the neighborhood of Las Rosas, it was not even in San Blas, but close to itsborders in the district of Ciudad Lineal. Otherwise, the piso fulfilled all other prerequisites.Johnny decided, and convinced Elisa, that it was close yet far enough so “that they could notjust show up whenever they wanted to” (Johnny Azumi, 28 July 2010, unstructured inter-view). This piso provided the required private physical space that he was looking for. Thisgeographical seclusion, even if artificial since Ciudad Lineal and San Blas border each other,provided Johnny and Elisa the ideal solution to living with family for two reasons. First, itprovided a buffer zone between them and the rest of the family. Residing in a differentneighborhood and district provided peace of mind from what they saw as meddling by familymembers in their private affairs. Second, it was close enough to be able to attend familyfunctions and gatherings without having to travel much throughout the city.

Elisa and Johnny’s views on physical space are that it could be used as common spacedepending on the situation; they clearly separated familial physical spaces betweenimmediate and extended family. Immediate family in this case had two different connota-tions. On one hand, Johnny and Elisa viewed the nuclear family (mother, father, andchildren) as immediate; on the other hand, the rest of the family did not hold this view,since they did not separate between nuclear and extended families.

According to Johnny:

They could not get the fact that we also wanted to be alone sometimes. . . All they saw wasthat we did not want to share anything with them. . . The entire thing became one big fightabout how we became selfish in Japan because we did not want to live all amontonados [ontop of each other], never having time to think or to be just be alone. (Johnny Azumi, 13September 2010, narrative interview)

The decision to physically separate themselves (if only to another district) from the rest ofthe family brought forth concerns about nation. For some informants, clear physicalseparations exist between what is Peru and Spain. Having lived as outsiders for a decadewhile in Tokyo, Johnny and Elisa made a conscious effort to fit in, not only with theirextended families but also with life outside the purview of the familiar. The concept ofnation was first brought to light when a “Peruvianization” of their piso did not occur; andalthough it included some pieces from their region in Peru, they did not “nationalize” theirphysical spaces. As Elisa states:

It is strange how they wanted to cling to everything [Peruvian] possible. . . Many thought thathaving these traditional things in the home made them backwards [not modern]. . . Theyalways wanted to live like the gringos [derogatory term for people from the USA] do. It is asif they cannot handle living in a different place, and need to be [constantly] reminded of whothey are. (Elisa Azumi, 24 September 2010, narrative interview)

Physical spaces were still under contention when fieldwork was performed; three cousins hadarrived from Lima in March 2010. Although, they did not partake in the research, I was ableto ascertain information from Johnny about them. I was informed that they seemed to beexperiencing similar problems in trying to find housing. However, since this was the first

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 267

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

time they had left the country, they “were easier to control since they needed people to helpthem do [everyday] things”. This, according to Johnny made it easier to “control what theywant, and where they live” (Johnny Azumi, 13 September 2010, narrative interview).

The resistance between Johnny and Elisa on one hand and a majority of their extendedfamily on the other over the location and use of physical spaces brought forth differencesbetween different migration trajectories. The family can be divided between routes ofmigration that have taken them through a number of different urban centers and nationstates. Having a wider set of experiences in different cultural-spatial and socio-spatial settingsallowed these members to negotiate with their surroundings. On the other hand, many whosetrajectories are set within more narrow parameters have a tendency to place values, norms,and culture at binary opposites that on the surface have nothing in common. Johnny andElisa’s piso is an example of this tension, which can create “a dilemma for diasporic [andmigrant communities] as it imposes a binaric paradigm for cultural identification in howmigrants are urged to choose between their old and new cultures” (Meerwald 2001, 388).

Multiple imagined spaces

Imagined space(s) is the abstraction of physical space. It presents physical space throughlanguage in the form of ideas, symbols, and signs. In other words, imagined space is “madeup of projections into the empirical world from conceived or imagined geographies” (Soja1996, 78). Imagined space(s) can be thought of as the blueprint of a building, urban planningmaps, or a nation state’s political cartography. Imagined space, therefore, plays a strong rolein how we determine our spaces and, just as important, our places. Concepts such astransnational and translocal propose historical processes of combinations and adaptationsin all aspects of social life (Hannerz 1996). Such social, political, and cultural ruptures andcontinuities are blurring the once “static” nation state into becoming more porous, therebycreating a “more spatially fluid and territorially unbounded” globe (Smith 1994, 16).

For Johnny and Elisa, socio-spatial proximity became one of, if not the most importantaspect of family life. For just over a decade their imagination resided across the Pacific inLima. The imagined spaces they created provided an escape valve from their daily socio-spatial familial isolation. As Elisa notes:

We created a fantasy life [in Tokyo]. . . It is as if time just did not go by, and we expectedeverything to be just how [we] left it when we returned. . . For him [Johnny] it was a littledifferent, he did not mind it over there as much as I did [He saw it as a means to an end]. . .He tried to make a life there. . . All I wanted to do [for 10 years] was to go back to my life [inLima]. . . Sometimes I wonder if it would have been better to stay [in Tokyo], and keep [my]memories intact. (Elisa Azumi, 24 September 2010, narrative interview)

Spatial isolation from family and friends, much due to their undocumented status, formedan unintended fence through which they saw others’ lives as static and unchanging.

According to Johnny and Elisa, this assumption was:

What led [us] to return [to Lima]. . . [We mistakenly] thought that we could just pick-up andgo on from where we left-off. . . Obviously that did not happen; I lost 10 years without eventhinking about how others’ lives just kept going on. (Johnny and Elisa Azumi, 2 and 28 July2010, narrative and unstructured interviews)

268 F. Rubio

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

Imaginaries about life in Madrid did not occur until Johnny and Elisa landed in Lima andrealized that many members of their families had relocated, this time across the Atlantic.Spain in general and Madrid in specific existed only as concepts. As Johnny comments:

We never really thought about this place [Spain]. I always thought if I was going to leaveagain, it would be to the USA. . . Other than language, we really do not have anything incommon, we live in different ways, with different values, at least in the USA, there are manyof us [Peruvians and Latinos] where we could prosper, and help out [financially] the familyback home. . . But here. . . (Johnny Azumi, 13 September 2010, narrative interview)

At the city level, imaginary conceptualizations about Madrid are commonly thought aboutin binary forms. Since Madrid had never entered Johnny or Elisa’s imaginary until a fewmonths before migrating, they began to gather information about this urban center byasking people who visited, lived, or resided there in the past. Imagining Madrid became aconscientious task for both Johnny and Elisa. Such imaginaries traveled back and forthbetween what they had heard from others about Madrid, as well as their conceptualiza-tions of this city vis-à-vis Tokyo.

As Elisa notes:

It was difficult to get some kind of real information about what the city looked like, or at leasthow big it was. . . The majority of people compared it to Lima or Miami because those are thetwo cites that most are familiar with. . . We decided to do it with Tokyo; we went to thelocutorio [internet café] in Lima and started looking. . . We did this for a like a week or so,and I tell you, [we] did not like what [we] saw. . . It looked like some kind of museum, notlike Tokyo with its modern buildings and other things. (Elisa Azumi, 24 September 2010,narrative interview)

Although Johnny and Elisa’s views on Madrid have changed, for the most part they regardMadrid as a city with its best years behind it. Yet, as the next section examines, it is theurban center that they would like to settle in even if constantly having to struggle withthose that view a return to Lima as their primary concern.

Divided social spaces

Social space refers to the everyday lives of people and communities. Space, therefore, is a“social construct that anchors and fosters solidarity, oppression, liberation and disintegra-tion” (Ma 2002, 131), and reacts against “frames that incarcerate people into fixed spaces”(Meerwald 2001, 388). In short, it is where physical and imagined spaces take on socialforms, and acquire particular centralities (Soja 1996, 85) specific to a locality. However,there is a need to avoid assuming that locality only refers to static physical geographies(Appadurai 1996). Although translocal social networks have not necessarily created“localities without communities and cultures without locality” (Albrow, in Smart andSmart 2003, 42), locality has been de-territorialized (Garcia-Canclini 2005, 229) through-out the globe through the creation of “communities of sentiment” (Appadurai 1996, 8), inwhich groups, even if separated by oceans, can see a future together.

The reshaping of social spaces by migrant communities must be viewed within awider context that does not assume that a migrant, while traveling through time and space,sheds his or her skin, and upon arrival is ready for acculturation or assimilation. Migrants“do not come with a tabula rasa. They have habits, understandings, and perceptions ofmeaning ingrained over years” (Skrentny 2008, 72). It is these habits, understandings, and

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 269

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

perceptions, established through continuities, contradictions, conflicts, ruptures, articula-tions, and connections, which contribute to the constant (re)shaping of social spaces.

In the case of Johnny and Elisa, at the time of the fieldwork, the struggle for control ofthe family’s social spaces was starting to separate family members. Through the everydayactions of its members, visions of the family’s future are in constant renegotiation. Thefamily broadly falls within two camps: those that view Madrid as a place of settlement,and those that view return migration as the central goal. Although such positions areseldom utilized or proposed in such binary extremes, they do have an effect on how dailydecisions are made. For example, making a home in Madrid, and thereby tying somefamily members to this city through real estate ownership, was a constant source ofconcern, which could either make or break the imaginaries of returning home. As statedabove, on arrival, Johnny and Elisa assumed that Madrid was the end of the line. Thisidea, however, entered a divided social space in which those who continued to see “home”in Lima and regarded return as the principal aim, a number of which are pioneer migrants,held the current financial cards. Entering what amounted to be new social spaces (theyformed part of the family through the virtual space that is the Internet) proved difficultground; and soon after arrival, the pressure to choose allegiances began.

As Johnny states:

As soon as we arrived talk of one day going back began. . . She [Elisa’s mother] was tellingme that all we were doing here was just saving, and that buying an apartment or gettinginvolved in any other things were not a good idea since we were only here temporarily.(Johnny Azumi, 13 September 2010, narrative interview)

Johnny regards home ownership as one of the paramount goals he needs to achieve inorder to view his life as successful. Home ownership became even more important duringtheir time in Tokyo. Since both were undocumented for the majority of the time, theywere never able to even think of owning a home because they were fearful of thequestions that would arise if they attempted to buy an apartment. The confinement oftheir social spaces due to their undocumented status produced an even stronger yearningto own a home. Since their tenure in Lima was cut short, home ownership took a backseat.Also in Madrid, once they were ready to invest in their piso, they faced concerns from anumber of family members who assumed that this would mean permanence, and not thetransitory space that Madrid represented to them.

These concerns appeared soon after they began looking for an apartment. In additionto the expectations of the size and location of their piso, Johnny was forced to compro-mise, which meant renting instead of buying. In hindsight, a number of family membersfeel vindicated by pressuring Johnny and Elisa not to buy because of the real estate crashthat followed the global financial crisis of 2008. At the time of fieldwork, Johnny wasbeginning to quarrel with other family members about the opportunity that he saw in realestate. He saw the recession in Spain as good timing in terms of buying a piso: pricescould only lower and he would be able to afford a house that was out of range before thefinancial crisis. Others, however, did not see the financial crisis as an opportunity, but aproblem that would not only affect them but also members of translocal social networks inother regions. As Johnny notes:

I understand their fears. . . They did not save enough during the good times, and that goes forthe majority of those here and elsewhere. . . Over there [in the United States], we have familymembers that are getting their homes repossessed. . . They bought more than they could

270 F. Rubio

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

afford, and then ask us for help, that is not going to happen. (Johnny Azumi, 28 July 2010,unstructured interview)

Johnny did have supporters; it was unfortunate that many resided outside Madrid, andEurope. Johnny’s main source of support came from family members in New Jersey andMiami, making the struggle for localized social spaces a translocal affair. According toJohnny, many implored him to move one last time. As he states:

In January [2010], I was talking to some people about this problem. . . [Almost] everyone toldme that I should get out of here [Madrid], especially over there in Australia and Canadawhere it looks like the economy seems to be doing well. . . But I do not know how to speakEnglish you know; I did, however, think about New Jersey or Miami. . . I heard that you donot really need to speak English in order to get around. . . There is a problem though: I am notready to go anywhere illegally anymore, I spent 10 years like that. . . I do not think she [Elisa]would like that anyways. But, you know, if it was just me, I would go, I mean, why not, therewould be nothing holding me here except these obstacles [opposing family members].(Johnny Azumi, 13 September 2010, narrative interview)

Johnny and Elisa’s daily negotiations, conflicts, appeasements, and agreements represent amicrocosm of how the everyday affected those involved in this ethnographic research.What can appear as decisions made in localized social spaces, such as buying or renting apiso, take on different translocal components since such decision-making processes affectthe daily social spaces of family members in urban centers across oceans and continents.

Conclusion

In focusing on a specific Peruvian family, this article illustrated how migration, a globalphenomenon involving millions of people, thousands of communities, and hundreds ofethnic groups, is also a household and personal experience. In focusing on a specificcouple and family, this article explored how translocal social networks and different formsof space affect their daily routine. In focusing on these aspects, it concentrated on the“double gaze” of capturing “both the experiential surrounding that people are aware ofand the macro-global structures that are well beyond their reach” (Hage 2005, 474), sincelife at the familial level is often spent struggling for, with, and against such macro-structures that attempt to shape the spaces that they inhabit. To achieve this objective,an analysis of a specific translocal social network was examined in order to provideinsight into how structures outside their reach, such as the global financial crisis of 2008,and those within their control, such as remittances, intertwine, resonate, and contourcircumstances in localities throughout the globe. Moreover, I explored how these net-works influence and play an integral role in the shaping of daily local physical, imagined,and social spaces.

In following Johnny and Elisa through time and space between Tokyo, Lima, andMadrid, this article presented an example of how locality cannot be viewed as a staticgeography, but through the creation of locality via the spatial dispersion of communities,its members, and the transformations of a family’s structure in different urban centersacross the globe. Moreover, it provides an insight into the larger phenomenon experiencedby other similarly situated migrants and minority communities, and how different forms ofspace play an integral role in the binding and dispersal of individuals and communities.

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 271

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

Notes on contributorFelipe Rubio is a Postdoctoral Fellow in the International Research Training Group “BetweenSpaces” in the Institute for Latin American Studies at the Freie Universität Berlin.

ReferencesAltamirano Rua, T. 1999. Los Peruanos en el Exterior y su Revinculación con el Perú.

Comunidades Peruanas en el Exterior: Situación y Perspectivas. http://www4.congreso.gob.pe/historico/cip/materiales/imigra/Peruanos_exterior_revinculacion.pdf

Altamirano Rua, T. 2006. Remesas y Nueva “Fuga de Cerebros” Impactos Transnacionales. Lima:Pontifical Universidad Católica del Perú Fondo Editorial.

Appadurai, A. 1993. “Patriotism and Its Futures.” Public Culture 5: 411–429. doi:10.1215/08992363-5-3-411.

Appadurai, A. 1996. Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis, MN:University of Minnesota Press.

Beck, U. 2007. “Beyond Class and Nation: Reframing Social Inequalities in a Globalizing World.”The British Journal of Sociology 58 (4): 679–705. doi:10.1111/j.1468-4446.2007.00171.x.

Burawoy, M. 1998. “The Extended Case Method.” Sociological Theory 16 (1): 4–33. doi:10.1111/soth.1998.16.issue-1.

Cachón Rodriguez, L. 2002. “La Formación de la España Inmigrante: Mercado y Ciudadanía.” REIS97 (2): 95–126.

Castles, S., and M. J. Miller. 1993. The Age of Migration: International Population Movements inthe Modern World. 1st ed. London: The Guilford Press.

Chernillo, D. 2006. “Social Theory’s Methodological Nationalism: Myth and Reality.” EuropeanJournal of Social Theory 9 (1): 5–22.

Diaz Gorfinkiel, M., and A. Escrivá. 2012. “Care of Older People in Migration Contexts: Local andTransnational Arrangements Between Peru and Spain.” Social Politics 19 (1): 129–141.doi:10.1093/sp/jxr028.

Durand, J. 2010. “The Peruvian Diaspora: Portrait of a Migratory Process.” Latin AmericanPerspectives 37 (5): 12–28. doi:10.1177/0094582X10379103.

El Comercio. 2011. “Remesas ingresadas al Perú superarían este año los US$2.600 millones.” ElComercio.

Escrivá, A. 2003. “Peruvian Families Between Peru and Spain.” Paper read at Latin AmericanStudies Association, Dallas, March 27–29.

Garcia-Canclini, N. 2005. Hybrid Cultures: Strategies for Entering and Leaving Modernity.Translated by C. L. Chiappari and S. L. Lopez. Minneapolis, MN: University of MinnesotaPress.

Hage, G. 2005. “A Not so Multi-Sited Ethnography of a Not so Imagined Community.”Anthropological Theory 5 (4): 463–475. doi:10.1177/1463499605059232.

Hannerz, U. 1996. Transnational Connections: Culture, People, Places. London: Routledge.Hatziprokopiou, P., and N. Montagna. 2012. “Contested Chinatown: Chinese Migrants’

Incorporation and the Urban Space in London and Milan.” Ethnicities 12 (6): 706–729.doi:10.1177/1468796811434909.

Hobsbawm, E. J. 1990. Nations and Nationalism since 1780: Programme, Myth, Reality. 2nd ed.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Isla, A. 2009. “The Eco-Class-Race Struggles in the Peruvian Amazon Basin: An EcofeministPerspective.” Capitalism Nature Socialism 20 (3): 21–48. doi:10.1080/10455750903215720.

Leinaweaver, J. B. 2008. “Improving Oneself: Young People Getting Ahead in the Peruvian Andes.”Latin American Perspectives 35 (4): 60–78. doi:10.1177/0094582X08318979.

Leinaweaver, J. B. 2010. “Outsourcing Care: How Peruvian Migrants Meet Transnational FamilyObligations.” Latin American Perspectives 37 (5): 67–87.

Ma, E. K.-w. 2002. “Translocal Spatiality.” International Journal of Cultural Studies 5 (2):131–152. doi:10.1177/1367877902005002568.

Marrow, H. B. 2005. “Peruvian Americans.” In The Encyclopedia Latina: History, Culture, Societyin the United States, edited by I. Stavans. New York: Grolier.

Massey, D. S. 1990. “Social Structure, Household Strategies, and the Cumulative Causation ofMigration.” Population Index 56 (1): 3–26.

272 F. Rubio

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015

McKeown, A. 2004. “Global Migration 1846–1940.” Journal of World History 15 (2): 155–189.doi:10.1353/jwh.2004.0026.

Meerwald, A. M. L. 2001. “Chineseness at the Crossroads.” European Journal of Cultural Studies 4(4): 387–404. doi:10.1177/136754940100400402.

Paerregaard, K. 2009. Peruvians Dispersed: A Global Ethnography of Migration. Lanham:Lexington Books.

Portes, A., and R. G. Rumbaut. 2001. Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second Generation.Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Portes, A., and R. G. Rumbaut. 2006. Immigrant America: A Portrait. 3rd ed. Berkeley, CA:University of California Press.

Robinson, W. I. 2004. “Global Crisis and Latin America.” Bulletin of Latin American Research 23(2): 135–153. doi:10.1111/blar.2004.23.issue-2.

Ruiz Baia, L. 1999. “Reconstructing National Identities among Peruvian Catholics in New Jersey.”Journal of Interamerican Studies and World Affairs 41 (4): 93–109.

Skrentny, J. D. 2008. “Culture and Race/Ethnicity: Bolder, Deeper, and Broader.” The Annals of theAmerican Academy of Political and Social Science 619: 59–77. doi:10.1177/0002716208319761.

Smart, A., and J. Smart. 2003. “Urbanization and the Global Perspective.” Annual Review ofAnthropology 32: 263–285. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.32.061002.093445.

Smith, M. P. 1994. “Can You Imagine? Transnational Migration and the Globalization of GrassrootsPolitics.” Social Text 39: 15–33.

Smith, M. P. 2005. “Transnational Urbanism Revisited.” Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 31(2): 235–244. doi:10.1080/1369183042000339909.

Soja, E. W. 1996. Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places.Cambridge: Blackwell Publishing.

Takenaka, A. 2004. “The Japanese in Peru: History of Immigration, Settlement, and Racialization.”Latin American Perspectives 31 (3): 77–98. doi:10.1177/0094582X04264745.

Takenaka, A. 2009. “How Ethnic Minorities Experience Social Mobility in Japan: An EthnographicStudy of Peruvian Migrants.” In Researching Social Class in Japan, edited by H. Ishida and D.Slater. London: Routledge.

Takenaka, A., K. Paerregaard, and U. Berg. 2010. “Introduction: Peruvian Migration in a GlobalContext.” Latin American Perspectives 37 (5): 3–11. doi:10.1177/0094582X10379102.

Takenaka, A., and K. A. Pren. 2010. “Leaving to Get Ahead: Assessing the Relationship betweenMobility and Inequality in Peruvian Migration.” Latin American Perspectives 37 (5): 29–49.doi:10.1177/0094582X10379106.

Tsuda, T. 2003. Strangers in the Ethnic Homeland: Japanese Brazilian Return Migration inTransnational Perspective. New York: Columbia University Press.

Williams, C., and A. D. Smith. 1983. “The National Construction of Social Space.” Progress inHuman Geography 7: 502–518.

Canadian Journal of Latin American and Caribbean Studies 273

Dow

nloa

ded

by [

FU B

erlin

] at

05:

09 0

9 D

ecem

ber

2015