EDITED ABSTRACT
Adam W. Coon
“Saint Michael Screwed Me Over”: The Nomadism of
Nahuatl-Speakers in the Film Santo Luzbel
In this paper I explore how the film Santo Luzbel (1997) is the product of the simultaneous
relations between multiple and often contradictory systems (economic, linguistic, political, and
religious systems) and that an analysis of these relations identifies an ambiguity which prevents
one from making any overriding, “master” explanation regarding the film or “indigenous
identity.” In this analysis I focus principally on the production elements of this film in relation to
economic funding (both physical and symbolic capital), the actors, the script(s), and the crew,
and I then analyze principally how the figure Agustín (who represents Lucifer in the movie’s
inner-theatrical work) as a nomad (in the Deleuzian sense) brings attention to the simultaneous
and dynamic effect of these interrelated and overlapping assemblages in the overall assemblage
of Santo Luzbel.
Notably few have addressed this film outside of short film reviews, and the studies that do exist
tend to judge the value of the film according to whether or not it gives a positive or negative
depiction of indigenous groups. The most detailed analysis available of Santo Luzbel is that of
Gabriela Coronado Suzán in Las voces silenciadas de la cultura mexicana; nevertheless, this
study similarly results in a binary analysis of whether the movie gives an accurate or “authentic”
depiction of nahuatl-speakers. In contrast, it is important to avoid this limited and universalizing
treatment of films like Santo Luzbel and indigenous groups. To this end, I principally use the
concept of “nomadalogy” found in A Thousand Plateaues of Delueze and Guattari as well as in
Transpositions by Rosi Braidotti. According to Deleuze, the nomad is constantly in a state of
becoming and cannot be limited to any static positioning. Expanding upon this concept of
“nomadalogy” with the term “nomadism”, Braidotti challenges dualistic methodologies rooted in
distinguishing male/female, white/black, dominant/other, and instead argues for a strategy/ethic
that challenges such hegemonic power structures through identifying the multiple (and often
contradictory) processes that make such systems function and the “relocation of identities on
new grounds that account for multiple belongings” (69). The nomad Agustín traverses the three
main spaces in the film (the church, the store, and pre-Hispanic ruins), and in his constant
movement he shows the many different layers of relations and possible meanings within and
regarding these spaces (which in turn challenges the binary conception that the dominant
political, commercial, or religious discourses attempt to impose on them).
Lending itself to an analysis that deviates from the binary of dominator/dominated in which
many indigenous studies position themselves (and against which Deleuze and Braidotti direct
their criticism), Santo Luzbel poses an ambiguity in which the film could be interpreted as a
claim to the “authenticity” of an indigenous “identity” and simultaneously a dismantling of any
notion of a static and unitary “indigenousness”. Exposing this ambiguity is significant in
understanding the different levels of (economic, identity, national, cultural) discourse operating
simultaneously throughout this film, as well as in identifying the dynamic processes and constant
becoming of indigenous groups as opposed to the frozen time/authenticity in which they are
often positioned.