Cultural Configurations, Interstitial Identities, and Narrative

Cultural configurations (^{Grimson, 2011}) are shared frameworks that articulate the heterogeneity, historicity, and power relations that make up that which is social; these are fields of possibility that include institutions, representations, and the social practices made possible or not possible in a given context and by those other practices that have become hegemonic. These configurations are fields of interlocution, as they share common meanings through a system of meanings and identifications, ways of enunciating and interpreting reality that are understood by their members; they constitute identity toolboxes, sets of classifications and categories produced in society, whose meanings are linked to a specific historical moment. Individuals learn these tools in their socialization process, allowing them to recognize themselves and identify others in certain contexts (^{Grimson, 2010}, ²⁰¹¹). Finally, cultural configurations are heterogeneous fields where diverse inequalities (gender, race, class, etc.) are managed based on hierarchical relationships between social categories (^{Grimson, 2011}).

Taking María’s case as an example, the cultural configurations for her migratory experience would be São Paulo and Santiago,² which are delimited by the lifestyle of each metropolis, as well as by their respective languages and linguistic nuances (the São Paulo Portuguese of Brazil and the Spanish of Chile’s urban areas). Such configurations are made up of different identity toolboxes, that is, by the ways in which each city is organized according to the particularities of gender, class, ethnicity, state of origin, citizenship status, among others, and by how subjects relate to each other on the basis of these categories. Moreover, non-national cultural configurations maintain links with those configurations that make up a nation (^{Grimson, 2011}), so that coming from São Paulo also means relating to the meanings of being Brazilian in that context and sharing common systems of meaning and interpretation with individuals from other Brazilian cities.

As such, the contexts of migrant experience would be cultural configurations with more or less established frameworks. It is hypothesized that the latter do not necessarily overlap, however similar they may be in terms of interpretation of reality and social organization. Thus, the concept of third space (^{Bhabha, 1998}) is addressed: the space-time between old and new cultural models that emerges when the hegemonic discursive structures are in crisis at a given historical moment. This notion would allow the expression of dissident identities that bring within themselves traces of the traditions called into question in a translation of sorts (what the author calls cultural hybridization).³

Migration is considered to enable the emergence of this third space between cultural borders (^{Bhabha, 1998})⁴ by encouraging migrants to question the hegemonic ways of being in the place of origin, this by establishing links with otherness in the receiving society. Likewise, by arriving in the new society with the identity toolbox of their place of origin, migrants can also question the elements that structure the culture of destination. However, at a subjective level, this entails a constant negotiation between the individual and the identity limits imposed on him/her in each context.

^{Ricoeur (2006}) contributes to the understanding of identity negotiations in the space between cultural configurations. This author discussed the process of identity production based on the dialectical relationship between identifications (idem) and differentiations (ipse) in each life experience so that personal identity would be the whole emerging from the set of experiences lived up to a certain moment in time, in which such identity is subject to the contingent possibilities of being⁵ (Ricoeur, 2006). The above points to the processuality of identities: even the most stable areas of the personal identity, such as character, are produced over time through experiences of interlocution in specific contexts. Given the volatile nature of identity and its close relationship with lived experience, Ricoeur (2006) assumes that it is only possible to approach it indirectly, through the narration of life histories.

Identity is understood as a process constructed based on the relationships between individuals and the cultural configurations in which they are inserted. These conditions define what it is and what it is not possible to be in each situation. It is surmised that when subjects move from one cultural configuration to another in migration, they cross the borders of their systems of meaning, their social and institutional practices, and move minimally away from the identity toolbox (^{Grimson, 2011}) of the place of origin as they come into contact with that of the place of destination. In the case of transnational migration, the possibility of keeping simultaneous contact with the configurations of origin and destination would provide subjects with life experiences in both cultural frameworks. If we take into account that between one and the other there are interstitial spaces in which it is possible to configure alternative ways of being (^{Bhabha, 1998}), then the successive transnational experiences would make possible the emergent identity production between their borders through the subjective experience of migration.

Viewed in this way, interstitial identities are the subjective identity processes made possible by transnational migration, produced by the concrete experiences of moving between the limits of the cultural configurations of the societies of origin and destination. Such experiences would be shaped by encounters with otherness in each contingency,⁶ leading to processes of identification and differentiation (^{Ricoeur, 2006}). These processes would not depend solely on individual volition but, taking into account the power relations and inequalities present in cultural configurations (^{Grimson, 2011}), would be continuously negotiated between individuals and the conditions of possibility of each experience, thus sustaining the dynamics of identity production between agency and subjection⁷ to social structures (^{Hall, 2003}). Finally, it is hypothesized that it is possible to find clues to these complex identity processes through the narration of one’s own life (Ricoeur, 2006).

It is important to mention some differences and similarities regarding concepts such as ^{Turner’s (1988}) liminal states, addressed by researchers of identities in migration such as ^{Hernández Pulgarín (2010}). Although both interstitial identities and liminal states make use of the idea of locating oneself in the interstices of social structures, the original point of the latter refers to a deconstructive state of passage concerning the initial characteristics of an individual or group to subsequently find a new place in the community (Turner, 1988). Conversely, interstitial identities do not comprise a final stage of integration or assimilation into a new culture but are the continuous exercise of being between different cultural frameworks. Moreover, unlike liminal identities, which pertain to individuals on the margins of legal apparatuses and social structures (Hernández Pulgarín, 2010), the concept of interstitial identities implies foregrounding the levels of agency of individuals: migrants are actors who negotiate their identities, but they are also the product of the social conditions in which they find themselves (^{Cornejo, 2006}).

Cultural Configurations for the Case of María: São Paulo and Santiago

The life and migratory experience as recorded in this case study mainly went through two cultural configurations: the city of São Paulo (Brazil) and the Metropolitan Region of Santiago (Chile). These territories share some common characteristics: both are metropolitan cities in South American countries, characterized by high demographic density-São Paulo is the most populated city in Brazil (^{Instituto Brasileiro de Geografía e Estatística [IBGE], 2011, p. 38}), while Santiago de Chile concentrates 40.5% of the people residing in Chile, according to the last census (^{Instituto Nacional de Estadísticas [INE], 2018, p. 5})-. Moreover, both cities are known for their high levels of social inequality and territorial segregation, a result of the recent urbanization of these countries only in the second half of the 20th century (^{Fuentes & Rodríguez-Leiva, 2020}; ^{Marques, 2014}; ^{Ropert Lackington et al., 2021}). Thus, inhabiting different sectors of them produces different life experiences for people at both the subjective and intersubjective levels (Ropert Lackington et al., 2021).

São Paulo is the capital of the state of São Paulo, in southeastern Brazil, and concentrates much of the country’s economic and industrial activities (^{Bógus & Pasternak, 2019}; ^{Magalhães et al., 2018}). This feature attracts migrants from other Brazilian regions (^{Barbosa de Souza, 2019}; ^{Braga & Matos, 2017}) and from countries as diverse as Bolivia, Haiti, and Japan (^{Fantin, 2015}; Magalhães et al., 2018). It also holds deep social inequalities and urban violence in the public and private spheres of social life (^{Amparo Alves, 2011}; ^{Marques, 2014}; ^{Villaça, 2011}). The southern zone, where María lived while in Brazil, is characterized by the heterogeneity of sectors that concentrate middle and upper-middle-class residences, although there are also some upper-class neighborhoods such as Campo Grande and Santo Amaro (Bógus & Pasternak, 2019).

As for Santiago, the city is inserted in the context of the recent growth of migratory flows to Chile. The number of foreigners increased from 187 008 to 746 465 (^{INE, 2018}) between the 2002 and 2017 censuses and reached 1 492 522, according to more recent estimates (^{INE, 2020a}). In 2019, most (77.6%) of those migrants were of Latin American and Caribbean origin, Venezuela, Peru, Haiti, Colombia, and Bolivia⁸ respectively being the five most important groups in terms of numbers, Brazil ranking tenth (^{INE, 2020a}). This immigration is slightly masculinized (about 105 men for every 100 women), while Brazil is the third most feminized group (83.7 men for every 100 women) (INE, 2020a). 59.4% of the total foreign population in Chile resides in Santiago (^{INE, 2020b}).

Despite the existing heterogeneity among migrants, they still have been mainly characterized by having limited economic resources, having Afro-descendant or indigenous features (^{Stefoni & Stang, 2017}), and migrating in search of a better socioeconomic standing (^{Márquez, 2014}; ^{Rojas Pedemonte & Silva Dittborn, 2016}; ^{Salgado Bustillos et al., 2018}). These characteristics threaten the imaginary of white-European national identity that has historically been attempted to be implemented in Chile (^{Sirlopú & Van Oudenhoven, 2013}; ^{Tijoux, 2016}). The differentiated treatment towards migrants in Santiago has depended on the valuation that local people attribute to them based on their nationality, skin color and socioeconomic status, as locals prefer light-skinned migrants of higher schooling levels (^{Sirlopú et al., 2015, p. 11}).

As a result, there is a recurrent lack of acknowledgment of immigrant sociocultural and identity diversity and of their condition of otherness in their daily encounter with the native Chilean population, which makes Santiago an arena of significant identity disputes, wherein migrants are constantly placed as an other “between what is their own and what is foreign” (^{Márquez & Correa, 2015}, p. 168). On the other hand, migrants have constructed transnational ways of being and inhabiting Santiago’s society by incorporating cultural elements and daily practices that update their relations with the societies of origin and partake in dialogue with the ways of living in their new place of residence (Márquez, 2014).

People from Brazil, like María, stand out in this scenario more for their sociocultural particularities than for their numbers. The fact that said country was a colony of the Portuguese and not of Spaniards, as most Latin American countries were, has had an impact on it being an other in the region (^{Lima, 2017}). The difference in the mother tongue, that is, Portuguese versus Spanish, and the fact of residing mainly in sectors of the city with better socioeconomic levels (^{Servicio Nacional de Migraciones [SERMIG], 2022}) makes Brazilians an otherness also in relation to their Latin American immigrant peers.⁹ This condition makes their life and migration experiences a propitious space for the investigation of identity dynamics in the specific context of international south-south migration. Furthermore, Brazilians are usually welcome in Santiago because of the portrayals of joy and sympathy built around this nationality and due to no colonial history or territorial dispute between Chile and Brazil (^{Silva Villar et al., 2021}; Lima, 2017).

Additionally, Santiago is characterized by social inequality and spatial segregation that forces people from the lowest socioeconomic strata to inhabit marginalized sectors of the territory (^{Fuentes & Rodríguez-Leiva, 2020}; ^{Ropert Lackington et al., 2021}). The district of La Granja-the locality in Santiago frequented the most by María-¹⁰ is one of the most impoverished territories; located south- west of Santiago, it holds higher levels of multidimensional poverty¹¹ and a higher percentage of people living in overcrowded conditions (^{Biblioteca del Congreso Nacional de Chile [BCN], 2021a}).

This way, María’s history is based on two quite different sociocultural experiences: on the one hand, the experiences of the upper-middle class of São Paulo; on the other, the relationship with the way of being and living of the lower classes of Santiago.

María’s Story

María is a 26-year-old white woman from an upper-middle-class family in southern São Paulo, Brazil. She introduced herself as an only child, whose father died when she was still a child. She described her mother as a woman who worked very hard throughout her life to provide her with the best possible education, allowing María to study at top private schools in her city. Towards the end of María’s high school years, she did not know which path to take, so she decided to fulfill her family’s wishes and study law at one of the top private universities in Brazil.

María told us how she was surrounded by upper-class people in Brazil and that she existed in a bubble, alienated from societal problems. However, she also stated having been afraid of the violence characteristic of São Paulo.

She made the decision to migrate upon graduating as a lawyer. Her boyfriend at the time (a son of Chileans) received a job offer in Santiago and invited her to join him, which María accepted as an opportunity to try something new, experience changes in her life, and discover herself.

Once in Santiago, María reports having been a victim of physical and psychological violence by her boyfriend, one of the few social networks she had in Chile. Despite this, she did not return to São Paulo; she believed that Santiago was a safe city where she could walk down the street without fear of being raped. Three months after arriving, María managed to leave the abusive relationship with the help of a psychologist and her cousin-who had been living in Chile for five years-and moved to live with this cousin on the outskirts of Santiago.

She later found a job selling tourist package deals, and it was there that she met Esteban, a Chilean colleague. He comes from a lower-class family from La Granja district; María fell in love with him and became pregnant a few months into the relationship. She relates that she felt very comfortable in his family and their way of life, mainly because they were happy with the little they had. She also stated feeling very happy with her current condition, regardless of her limited economic situation, mainly because of the good relationship she has with her partner and because she has finally been able to find herself in a life where the standards are very different from those of her family of origin. By pairing up with a poorer person and getting pregnant by accident, María realized that for the first time she was defining her own life, given that her Brazilian family is characterized by detailed planning of pregnancies and prioritizing professional careers. She also stated that Esteban’s family welcomed the news, and she associated it with the fact that it is common for them to have children at a young age-a cousin of Esteban’s became a mother at the age of 16-.

At the time of this research, María was living in an apartment in the San Miguel district with her partner. She left her job because of the pregnancy, and her leaving the house was limited to medical check-ups at the family health center in her neighborhood; they also visited Esteban’s relatives’ house on weekends. The migrant reports having been in daily contact with her friends and family in Brazil through social media, in addition to visiting them periodically and following news about her country of origin over the internet. Nevertheless, she did not participate in the Brazilian community of Santiago, as she preferred to live with people from the country where she was and learn their customs instead of being in the midst of other people of her same nationality.

It is worth mentioning that the participant showed essential differences in her identity narratives between the first and second interview sessions. In the first, the story revolved around the radical change from what María was in Brazil (a spoiled girl living in a bubble of privilege) to what she had become in Santiago (her awakening to things that really matter and getting to know the culture of the popular classes in Santiago), passing through the threshold of transformation represented by the three months of violence suffered with her ex-partner. Despite the difficulties of that stage, she emphasized how happy and calm she felt, and claimed to have no intention of returning to Brazil.

The second interview, however, took place after the participant returned from a trip to São Paulo accompanied by her boyfriend and a friend of both of them, also Chilean and the future godfather of her son. María stated that her two worlds met on that trip when she introduced her Chilean boyfriend and friend to her family. In addition, during her stay, her Brazilian family and friends organized a baby shower for her, which made María feel truly welcomed by her people in Brazil, as she stated.

After narrating that experience, she oriented her story towards talking about the limitations of the Chilean working-class lifestyle and distanced herself from the optimistic perspective with which she had developed the previous narrative. Her partner’s family, which in the first interview appeared as welcoming and affectionate-as her real home-now appeared as “dirty people”, sexist, who intervened in their life as a couple and who did not know how to be available as Brazilians do.

The Chilean lower class was now, in her story, an other different from us. The figure of María’s mother appeared strongly as a heroine now, and her family and friends in Brazil as the ones who really care about her. At this stage, our interviewee expressed her desire to stay in Brazil, and that, if her decision depended on her emotions, she would surely return there. At this point, she associated having to return to Chile with her pregnancy, since she already had her delivery scheduled in Santiago and because she considered that this city would be a better place for her child.

María as a Product of a Story

Each cultural configuration is composed of fields of heterogeneity and possibility that limit the actions of individuals regardless of their will (^{Grimson, 2011}). It is understood that the subjective migratory experiences depend on the social position of the migrant and his or her place in the hierarchy of social relations according to gender, ethnicity, class, sexuality, among others (^{Pessar & Mahler, 2003}). This position defines life experiences and influences how each person constructs his or her identity in the migration process.

Two major social dimensions frame María’s narrative: gender and social class. First, although the relationship between sex and gender is a social construct (^{Butler, 2007}). By being a woman, María is placed in a lower position in the hierarchy of social relations (^{Nawyn, 2010}; ^{Stang, 2014}). Gender establishes important differences in the migratory experience of men vs. women-reasons for migrating, meanings attributed to migration, and mode of integration into the destination society, among others (^{Gissi Barbieri & Martínez Ruiz, 2018}; ^{Godoy, 2007})-and is considered as the category that most determines inequalities in migration (^{Magliano, 2015}). Being a migrant woman also places the person in a position of vulnerability and risks that implies experiencing situations of violence before, during, and/or after migration (^{Asakura & Torres Falcón, 2013}; ^{Cárdenas-Rodríguez et al., 2018}).

Gender is a transversal axis in María’s story: her migration project was built upon the foundation of a love relationship, something common among migrant women (Cárdenas- Rodríguez et al., 2018; ^{Roca Girona et al., 2012}); she suffered gender-based violence by her ex- partner upon arriving in Santiago; her pregnancy became a fundamental factor to stay in Chile, which shows the central role of motherhood as a significant aspect in women’s migratory decisions (^{Gregorio-Gil & Gonzálvez-Torralbo, 2012}; ^{Stang, 2014}).

In María’s case, gender, understood as a way of acting in society (^{Butler, 2007}), creates tension for what is expected of her as a woman in each sociocultural configuration. In São Paulo, this role is related to financial independence and she is expected to achieve professional success through formal education, while in Santiago she is expected to perform well in household tasks, and success lies in the family.

I don’t do the cooking here in the house. Esteban does it. I help with what I know, but I don’t know how to cook and he’s very good at it (...) Everyone says, “this is great, but is Esteban the one who does the cooking?” So, it’s like they think that maybe I am very feminist, so it makes them wonder (María, personal communication, October 25, 2018).

As for these tensions, social class both draws and blurs the limits of the cultural configurations that María knows: being in Brazil is linked to the experience of gender in the upper classes of São Paulo; while her encounter with Chilean cultural elements, as well as gender roles, took place in coexistence with the working classes of Santiago. Thus, her cultural adaptation processes are necessarily traversed by identifying with or differentiating from these classes in specific contexts.

However, her sense of belonging to the way of life of the popular classes, quite present in the first interview, is neither total nor definitive. It appeared in the different ways in which María describes Esteban’s family in the first and second research encounters, where she went from feeling “more at home than in my own house” (María, personal communication, September 5, 2018) to questioning her way of living among Chileans and disapproving of the differences between them and her Brazilian family.

The above is linked to another dimension not related to the sense of belonging to a particular class, but rather to resources that a migrant may have and how these become the field of possibilities (^{Grimson, 2011}) for his or her processes of identity negotiation. María is a skilled migrant (^{Stang, 2014}) and is white, which in Brazil (^{Cardoso, 2010}; ^{Dupas & Romero, 2017}) and in Chile (^{Sirlopú & Van Oudenhoven, 2013}; ^{Tijoux, 2016}) positions her in a privileged social position. Also, as a Latin American migrant, having Brazilian nationality plays out in her favor in a social context in which this is positively valued (^{Silva Villar et al., 2021}; ^{Lima, 2017}).

These conditions would give her a certain objective advantage in social relations in the context of migration and position her in better conditions compared to other Latin American migrant women from lower classes (^{Stang, 2014}). Likewise, although María suffered gender-based violence, her account still lacks any problems related to racial discrimination or xenophobia.

Finally, we hypothesize that the change of tones in María’s account, referring to what for her is Chilean culture-as represented by Esteban’s family-connects to her last visit to São Paulo, since she may have been more intensely linked to the identity toolbox of the place of origin. Upon returning to Chile, she related to Santiago from the perspective of someone from abroad, an alterity, which allowed her to compare both social realities and at that time identify more with the cultural configuration of origin than with that of destination. Additionally, having a support network in Brazil with ties sustained over time, as well as having financial resources that allow her to travel periodically to visit her relatives and friends in that country, would allow her a certain flexibility to return there when she needs to, and to sustain the tensions with the cultural configuration of the destination when they become evident.

María as an Actress in the Story

Although María acts within the possibilities of her conditions, migration expanded her identity toolboxes, allowing her to use them in both cultural settings (origin and destination) according to her needs and to question their limitations. Thus, she is understood to be between agency and subjection: she acts out her social roles (she is subjected to them) but provides them with new meaning to her life trajectory (agency) in her search for herself. Some examples meant to illustrate this mechanism are given below.

First, when she decided to migrate to Santiago, María used the migration project of another person (her boyfriend at the time) to build her own life project. On the one hand, she has acted according to the expectations around the role of women in being the companion of a man in migration (^{Roca Girona, 2016}; Roca Girona et al., 2012). On the other hand, this migration meant the beginning of a new narrative for herself, a new way of telling her story: now, she is María from “The Adventures of María lost in Chile” (María, personal communication, September 5, 2018), someone different from the María who “goes with the flow” of her family’s mandates.¹³

Then, María suffered gender violence and accepted working as a tourist package deals saleswoman, even though she is a lawyer, to get out of this situation. She experienced something common among skilled migrant women in Santiago: underemployment (^{Roca Girona, 2016}; Roca Girona et al., 2012). However, through that undertaking, she could distance herself from her aggressor boyfriend and provide a new meaning to her decision to stay in Santiago.

Third, motherhood is one of the most emblematic female roles and is considered an exercise of societal power over women’s bodies (^{Stang, 2014}). However, by becoming pregnant without planning it, she differentiated herself from her family of origin:

My cousins who are married and live with their partners still don’t have any children, because that is something you should plan. And then I show up with a child, you know? (...) It surprised them: ‘María is pregnant, but how come? She is just starting her relationship with her partner’ (María, personal communication, September 5, 2018).

Furthermore, with her pregnancy, María got even closer to the cultural configurations of her destination, which made her feel welcome in Santiago. In her words: “In Chile, a pregnant woman is immaculate. Being pregnant is good, I recommend it, they treat you very well (...) it is also good in Brazil, but I feel that here they idolize mothers a little bit” (María, personal communication, September 5, 2018).

Finally, despite the limitations of belonging to the working classes in Santiago, María defied the rules of socioeconomic ascent associated with highly educated migrants (^{Gissi Barbieri & Martínez Ruiz, 2018}), especially due to her coming from a well-to-do family, and created spaces to develop her story in a different way than what was expected of her. It does not necessarily mean that María has completely freed herself from the standards imposed by her family-one might even think that, by constructing her narrative in opposition, she would be in the background still linked to them from denial-. In fact, identity production occurs through differentiation and mimesis of the other, that is, in relation to something or someone necessarily (^{Ricoeur, 2006}). However, it is also understood that even when attempts are made to mimic the object of identification, the original discourse does not translate identically, which allows certain levels of identity creation that can escape from what is already established (^{Bhabha, 1998}). Therefore, although María’s identity production is not free from negotiations with the cultural configurations through which she transits, she can incorporate another form of self-construction, a third way of narrating herself.

María as the Author of her Story

María’s case also shows how transnational migration promotes the transformation and mobility of personal identities by making it possible to exist between different cultural configurations, understanding that these identities are produced “from relationships and multiple interactions” (^{Bejarano Rodríguez, 2006}, p. 6). In this sense, the migratory experience amplifies such relationships and encounters with what is different (^{Bhatia, 2011}), which favors other ways of constructing the narrative about oneself and producing identities (^{Ricoeur, 2006}).

The question of identity is a structural axis in María’s narrative: she decided to venture to live in another country because she did not know who she was and did not recognize herself in her life in São Paulo. Despite the financial stability and privilege, she enjoyed, she felt she was merely “going with the flow”, without a life purpose that was her own.

Migration to Santiago was the “biggest happening” she has had in her life, which made her trajectory take a drastic turn. Migrating brought about her identity transformation and made her perceive herself as a different person, as can be seen in this quote: “I changed. I am a different person from Brazil to Chile (...) Living in another country makes you see other things you were not used to” (María, personal communication, September 5, 2018).

However, María’s identity change is more inscribed in transformations related to social class than those related to the national identities¹⁴ of the countries of origin and destination. Her encounter with otherness was framed in the reality of the working classes of Santiago, as represented by the family of her Chilean partner. The encounters with this specific cultural framework allowed her to break free from the bubble and become a different person.

I think I have come to realize to be more grateful, to see that you can live with less (...), and also to see that happiness is not related to money (...) Some people sometimes live with very little, and you can’t even compare to how happy they are. (...) I see people in my family who have everything, and you see the difference in terms of happiness (María, personal communication, October 25, 2018).

María’s identity changes and production are also related to the gap between the limited agency over her life in Brazil and the capability to choose for herself in Chile. For María, migration to Santiago represents the possibility of being someone who is the author of her own history.

In this sense, María perceived poverty as a cultural and a self-experience because it allowed her to produce new ways of inhabiting the world, relating to people, and perceiving social reality. Because of the privilege of being someone of good financial standing guaranteed in Brazil, she could choose the culture of the working classes of Santiago as part of a, according to her, more authentic self.

So I got to know another reality of life, you know? People who live with far less, (...) who really need their jobs. (...) Back in São Paulo, for me it was like this: “I don’t like this job, they don’t treat me well, I’m going to quit. I will find something else eventually”. Here I see that people can’t afford to do the same, because they rely on their salary single day (...) I started to look at myself differently. I was so used to so many things that are not really like that... Then another world opened up to me (María, personal communication, September 5, 2018).

However, María’s identity-construction process did not end when upon integrating into the Chilean-Santiago culture as a way of life. She stayed in contact with her family and friends in São Paulo, traveled to visit them, and, in doing so, she changed her narrative of identification with the Chilean way of life of the working classes to a posture more in line with her Brazilian-Paulista origins of the wealthy class, something that is evidenced in the second interview, wherein she aimed at differentiating herself from the way of life of her partner’s family.

As a hypothesis, we propose that the identities negotiated by María in her encounter with otherness through the migratory experience are constantly destabilized in the very exercise of relating to both sociocultural frameworks, and function as a pendulum swinging back and forth in the symbolic and material space between the Chilean and Brazilian cultural configurations she has experienced. This swinging makes María’s identity process mutable and continuous, even producing a polarized attitude in terms of belonging to one or another cultural configuration, depending on the experiences she has undergone at a given point. The very exercise of differentiating from one or the other in each encounter with otherness makes the identities that María is constructing characterized by its dynamism (^{Hall, 2003}).