Popular Culture Review Vol. 15, No. 2 | Page 85

Down with the “Homies” 81 Curiously, the artist and creator never claimed that his characters rendered a complete depiction of Chicano life or of the larger Hispanic population in general, nor were they created as “toys geared toward children.” In fact, his figurines carry a variety of in-group cultural codes that “mainstream” audiences may not be able to decipher and, in turn, are sure to misinterpret.^^ What the viewer must remember is that Gonzales’s figurines and their accompanying biographies are narratives that reflect barrio culture and the experiences and relationships he lived with while a member of this community. These characters and their written biographies weave realistic personal trials and tribulations into their fictional lives and an imaginary neighborhood in East Los Angeles that the artist has named “Quien Sabe.” Within the Homies social network, a range of human experience is represented and not strictly limited to the glorification of gang life that the wider community fears. He specifically notes that many of his characters are not actively involved in gang life, although the presence of gang activity is evident on the periphery of their presentation of self. With that said, die depiction of gang associations and the consequences of gang life that do appear in his work are not glorified. Gonzales provides a face and a story to ex-gang members and characters on the margins of gang life, and their narratives reveal the consequences of this lifestyle that are not just romanticized accounts of high-rolling urban gangsters. In addition to the reality of gang involvement, Gonzales portrays the life alternatives that are available despite previous gang activity. For example, the character Willie G is wheelchair-bound after a shooting, and Big Loco is an ex-gang member who served time in a state penitentiary but is now a gang counselor in his old neighborhood.^^ Thus, as in life, some in the barrio do become involved in gangs, suffering the consequences of their actions, and some survive the lifestyle to become productive members of the community. Still the criticism persists; to many the characters look “gangster.” Their distinct style of dress and grooming may have originated from the streets of the barrio and could be primarily equated with gang members (e.g., guilt by style), but, like many forms of street style, these forms of presentation of self have been adopted outside the initial realm in which they were created. To say that these figurines are glorifying gang life due to their physical appearance is to ignore the many other members of various communities who have appropriated this style, blurring the lines between barrio and mainstream. Additionally, to assume that everyone who dresses this way is a gang member is a one dimensional analysis of stylistic and personal expression by members of a lower-class, ethnic community. Ultimately, the artist challenges the viewer to question how they attach significance to these characters—a point missed by many critics who focus only on the most superficial vestiges of the characters’ personas.