The purpose of the article seems to be to map the vulnerabilities that individuals make as they migrate to the U.S. through Mexico and Central America so I think some sort of spatial activity involving her interlocutors. For example, by asking them to visually represent their journey and explore their different mappings of danger/vulnerability.
"This would be effectively presented in a documentary or a dramatic film or play."
I agree with Mary. However, I wonder how given the subject of this study (male migration, U.S./Mexico border) it can be relayed in a more unexpected form that might go beyond reproducing the popular images of migration.
I'm interested in the methodology of the author. Mary mentions that the author did fieldwork for over two years and spent time with individuals at all stages of their migration journey. I'm curious about that - did the author first meet her interlocutors at the shelter where she was working? Did she begin in one of the Central American countries she describes? How does this influence the work she produced?
The cover is just what you might expect from a book on this subject - a photography of male migrants riding on top of a train. A few appear smiling, which is different from typical representations. However, I found this to be quite an overused image for books on migration. I generally feel uncomfortable with book covers that have identifiable faces on them.
No visuals are used. Organized around various scales of identity. "The article is actually organized by the story of identity from a national lens, and then identity from the migrant’s lens, and lastly, the idea of identity and statehood/nationality from the general scholarly perspective."
This ethnography is about individuals from Central America who are hoping to migrate to the U.S. by crossing the U.S./Mexico border and the violence which meets them at the various stages -- in their home countries, during their journey, and at the border.