Devouring Frida. Margaret A. Lindauer

of indigenous culture. The lush, fertile landscape extending beyond the composition accordingly ends abruptly just behind the women. Their bodies mark the edge of absolutely infertile land, which extends into the background on the right side of the painting, juxtaposed against the fertile land on the other half of the painting. Sexuality and duplicity continue to merge as the Malinche mythology of European conquest develops into the deviant “Malinchista” category threatening postrevolutionary investment in female subservience to the father, husband, son, and nation. Moraga remarks that within Malinche mythology, Malinche was betrayed by her mother, in other words, traitor begets traitor: “In his writings, Bernal Diaz del Castillo notes that upon the death of Malinche’s father, the young Aztec princess was in line to inherit his estate. Malinche’s mother wanted her son from her second marriage to inherit the wealth instead. She therefore sold her own daughter into slavery.”¹⁰⁶ Although the women in the painting appear to be roughly the same age, the Indian and mestiza simultaneously are a metaphorical reference to the Indian Malinche and the subsequent mestizo generations born of her conspiracy. The mestiza lesbian, in her defiant sexuality, inherits perfidious tendencies. The temporal conflation of Indian mother and the “birth” of mestizas/os corresponds to a conflation of nationhood. As Bartra notes,

      the formulation of the Black legend of the Malinche is directly related to the establishment of the idea of nationhood. The fact that Malintzin supported the Spaniards as an act of rebellion against the despotism of the tenochas (Aztecs) would soon lose ground to the belief that the Malinche betrayed her fatherland; it matters little that the idea and reality of a fatherland was not applicable to the aboriginal population.¹⁰⁷

      Thus the idea of an original fatherland or primordial nation, with its heroes and traitors, was an invention of nineteenth-century nationalism and was reiterated in postrevolutionary nationalism. And, as Bartra notes, “Malintzin was obliged to become the embodiment of infidelity and disloyalty.”¹⁰⁸

      Together, Self-Portrait with Cropped Hair and Two Nudes in the Forest represent the social dishonor symbolically associated with Kahlo’s divorce. Many interpretations of the paintings naively perpetuate Kahlo’s presumed social stigma by incorporating comments by friends and colleagues whose explanations for the couple’s divorce inscribed gender stereotypes. Interestingly, one of Kahlo’s most overtly cynical visual commentaries on marital prescription, Love Embrace of the Universe, the Earth (Mexico), Diego, Me, and Señor Xólotl (figure 9), is interpreted as an indication of her eventual resignation to a marriage that preserves masculine privilege.

      Kahlo’s status as a divorced person was brief. She and Rivera remarried in 1940, twelve months after their divorce. Basing their views on Kahlo’s letters, biographers remark that Kahlo let go of her vengeance and accepted Rivera’s infidelity. For example, in a letter to Dr. Eloesser, Kahlo wrote, “Remarriage is working well. Small amounts of arguing, greater mutual understanding, and on my part, fewer obnoxious-type investigations regarding other ladies who suddenly occupy a preponderate place in his heart.”¹⁰⁹ In another letter, she described the marriage, “Better than ever because there is a mutual understanding between the spouses without getting in the way of equal freedom for each spouse in similar cases.”¹¹⁰ The letters often are cited as an indication of her acceptance of Rivera’s overt sexual pursuits. Biographies also note that Kahlo’s resignation was not absolute; she was determined to resist the stereotypically dependent female role. According to Zamora, when Rivera and Kahlo remarried, Kahlo asked that they not resume sexual relations and that they share financial responsibility for household expenses.¹¹¹