Often times, anthologies of Latino literatures divide texts by nationality of the author such as Mexican American or Puerto Rican Literature or etc.What differences are there among the texts that...
Often times, anthologies of Latino literatures divide texts by nationality of the author such as Mexican American or Puerto Rican Literature or etc.
What differences are there among the texts that would confirm the validity of this classification of Latino literature based on the author's nation of origin?
There are several things to consider, although I am not sure if you are referring to differences in specific texts or not.
First, the dialects of Spanish vary from country to country and region to region, so the literature, the language and the connotations will vary accordingly.
Second, each region/peoples' colonial and historical experience vary greatly too, therefore so do the cultures, and the issues they face that literature expresses. So categorizing them in that way allows us to view and study these differences, and enjoy them in their proper context.
Lastly, ask any Latino about the difference between a Venezuelan and a Mexican, a Peruvian and a Salvadoran, and they'll be able to tell you, there's plenty.
I would say that part of the reason for the division of experiences of different Latino cultures reflects the reality that the term "Latino" is not monolithic. There are many subdivisions of the genre, different forms of experience that help to bring out the Latino experience. One would make a grave error in presuming that all Latinos are the same. Geography and sectionalism play a role in helping to define the experience. This is reflected in the divisions of regions to help illuminate where Latinos are and how their narratives might differ. The anthologies that acknowledge this seek to broaden the experience of what it means to be Latino, which is why they include other regions' narratives in the process.