I wasn’t Always a Desert by Gerardo Mena Analysis

The Decapitation of a Soldier

In 

Mena’s “I wasn’t Always a Desert”

In the poem “I Wasn't Always A Desert,” the poet Gerardo Mena uses the literary element of plot to describe the struggle that an unidentified narrator has to endure in order to become consciously aware of his actions and what was expected of him during war time as a “good” soldier. 

The dilemma that the narrator was forced to endure was an internal battle between his role as a soldier and his personal beliefs. Since the title itself “I wasn’t always a desert,” one can assume that the protagonist realized the difficult situation that he has to face. Rather than being an alive and innocent individual, he has become a  social death figure who has become unaffected with anything and seems empty out of emotions. Who has transformed him to become a “Desert”? Why? Is he just pretending to be unaffected in order to survive? 

Since the first stanza, Mena writes “I dreamed that I opened my mouth and slowly/ swallowed an entire country./ When I awoke,/I was Iraq” (Mena 35). In other words, Mena admits that the protagonist has dreamed that he has devoured an entire country and he became a country called Iraq literally. When one looks deeper, however, this quote serves as a metaphor that the unidentified protagonist has destroyed the culture or country that have become part of him culturally or mentally. When Mena begins with “I dreamed that I opened my mouth and slowly,” one can assume that the narrator has begun to dedicate time to the most fundamental activity of surviving which involved eating, talking, breathing and being intimate with members of his community. Because he has been interacting with them “slowly,” one can assume that he has been too assimilated to their culture on a subconscious level. The problem, however, was that the protagonist seemed to have the mission to destroy it when Mena mentions “swallowed an entire country” (Mena 35). Because the act of swallowing something is brutal on itself or an act of violence where the individual is consuming or destroying the basic nutrients to survive, one can assume that the protagonist has realized that he has begun to destroy the natural resource and land that provided food to this country and himself. Just like an Anaconda when it swallows its prey, the protagonist has killed his prey by constriction or brutal force rather than by any poison or firearm. Just like a snake, the protagonist have turned his body as his own murder weapon.  The fact that the protagonist is using his own body as a weapon to destroy an entire country, one can assume that he has become a capable weapon which has been trained to accomplish this. In a way, this swallowing or act of destruction by the unidentified protagonist and its ally served as an opportunity to open the gate to invade this foreign territory in an intimate way. The problem is, however, the protagonist has become feeling for this country as a human instead of a machine. 

When Mena mentions “When I awoke,” one can assume that the protagonist has obtained a level of consciousness and awareness of his surroundings that was not present for some reason before this act. Because the protagonist has become awake, a certain vision and clarity have been provided that allowed him to become alert of what was happening in his surroundings. Because Mena does not provide the name of this country, one can assume that he wants the reader to provide the name that they see fit or this technique served to include every country and individual in order to create a sense of fear and panic that it could happen anywhere. On the other hand, one can assume that the individual used to consider himself as a sleep walking in a way. He used to perform his daily activities in a state when he was not even aware what he was doing. Because one can argue that he would argue that his actions were not with intentions, he is not responsible,  but rather, he was simply following orders as his job entitled which was to do the dirty job that the society needs in order to remain independent and sovereign from foreign nations. The notion that he did not realize was that he became an altruist and lost his soul for being portrayed as a hero, but to himself, he was a monster who has gone against his own values and beliefs. One can argue that he was doing this practice of disinterested and selfless concern for the well-being of others and his society at this own expense. The assumption is that he always put himself and happiness second. Is it worth it? Was this act an act of courage or coward for fear of standing up to live his life?  In a way, one can assume that the protagonist was an adult with a child or teen mentality who wanted the approval of his society and to be a functional member of his society at all cost despite his timeless and inability to stand up for what he considered to be right. Once he realized that there is light, however, he can not go back to the darkness without lying to himself. 

When Mena mentions “I was Iraq,” (Mena 35)one can assume that this metaphor alludes that the protagonist has obtained a vision or understanding of what was happening in Iraq and he became part of the Iraqi civilization. The fact that Iraq is a country at war today, one can assume that he has become a country who is facing an internal dilemma in order to establish his independence from foreign domains and an internal system of religions beliefs and values to define what it is capable of without any thread.  

In the second stanza, the protagonist illustrates an understanding of his actions and the moral dilemma that he faced in order to accept his reality and the consequence of his actions. When Mena begins with “So I began to oppress myself./ I took away my electricity, my gasoline,/ and I cut off the heads of my children” (Mena 35). Why is he repressing himself? What was holding him back and what could have happened due to this action? What was he avoiding?  When one looks deeper at the first sentence of this stanza “ So I began to oppress myself,” one can assume the  emotional  states of the protagonist. Because the protagonist have realized the wrongness of his actions, he can not continue doing it without experiencing cognitive dissonance or finding an agreement between his beliefs and actions that would justify this atrocities against the human rights, the protagonist must justify his actions or control his emotions in order to change his behavior and stop the action that it is not accepted as right. Because the protagonist is unable to face that his behaviors are morally wrong, he can not take responsibility and, rather, justify his actions even when he knows that he is being irrational. By being to oppress himself, however, one can assume that he feels that he can handle the case on his own and does not need outside help because he still has control over the situation. Rather than to think and analyze the situation, it is easier for the protagonist to simply follow orders,  not speak up or even question the figures of authority as a good soldier which required total obedience and to follow the hierarchy of command rather than what he considered moral right. The inevitable effect was that the protagonist begins to dehumanize himself for the common good. In addition, the fact that he does not have criminal liability, but rather immunity, he feels like he is entitled to do everything and nothing would happen in a civil and criminal case against his persona. As a result, this individual would feel invincible and like a god who is unstopped by anyone.

Interesting, Mena mentions “I took away my electricity, my gasoline,” one seems a sense of guilt and self suppression as a punishment. In other words, the protagonist has eliminated his own ability to move from one place to the other physically and mentally. In a way, he has taken away his own light and resource that provided energy. By taking away his own electricity, he has taken away his light and mobility. In addition, the fact that he took away his gasoline, as well, indicates that  the oil that it is necessary to move or transport has been taken out of reach for himself and Iraq. In other words, he could be criticized for the USA's actions of stealing the natural resources from this region in order to profit. The bottom line, however, is the ability to move forward to a future and progress have been taken away from him when he allowed others to decide his life and his consciousness. 

The final straw is when he admits to committing "Pedicide" or the act of killing a child when Mena mentions “and I cut off the heads of my children” (Mena 35). The key word  is “my children” which it is “ Prolicide” which highlight that the protagonist have killed his own children. Why did the author use prolicide rather than "pedicide"? In a symbolic way, the protagonist is decapitating the potentiality or lives of the future generation of his own world, the ones who would save the world and have the possibility to do everything. The fact that he is decapitating his children served as a reminder that he is decapitating himself as well as committing suicide. Because he is killing his bloodline, he is killing the future generation and a part of himself and the future of the world that he is supposed to love and cherish. The fact that he is “cut off the heads,” implies that the narrator is not interested in the minds and its intelligence, but rather, he is more interested in a form of violence whose brutality ends up destroying everything that it is around him.

When Mena finished the third stanza with “I became/ Arid,” the protagonist realized that he has become too dry or barren to support vegetation or life itself due to his social deadness. This transformation from an innocent individual into a machine has turned him into a corpse who is living without emotions, desire, and passion due to the guilt and shame of the crimes that he has committed against the world and himself for being obedient to his role.