Race, Nation Building, and the Global Cold War: Mestizaje in Mexico’s 1968 Olympic Games

1 Mexico 1968 and Mestizaje

The scholarship on Mexico 1968 goes beyond a factual sport history. Literature has contrasted the messages of peace that the government wanted to convey with how the same government exercised violence towards political dissidents, particularly during the massacre of October 2, 1968. Intellectuals and young protesters that took to the streets were the first to mark these contradictions (González de Alba 1971; Monsiváis 1970; Poniatowska 1971). Nonetheless, it was not until the turn of the twenty first century, that scholars related Mexico’s 1968 Olympic project and used primary sources to trace its links to the political panorama in Mexico (Arbena 1991; Rodríguez Kuri 1998). Joseph Arbena analyzed the first Olympics in the “developing world,” while Ariel Rodríguez Kuri studied the urban changes, foreign diplomacy strategies, the perspectives of the Mexican Right, among other issues to see how Mexico attempted to become the “Museum of the Universe” (Rodríguez Kuri 2003, 2014, 2019). By the noughties, Kevin Witherspoon, and Claire and Keith Brewster, further contributed to the field (Brewster and Brewster 2013; Witherspoon 2008; Wrynn 2006). Eric Zolov provided tools to think about how the Olympics fit in the “long” and “global” sixties (Zolov 2004, 2005). By the 2010s, Mexican scholars such as Raúl Nivón, and Juan Porras provided new readings of archives in Mexico City and Switzerland to explain the domestic and international reach of the 1968 Olympics through branding campaigns and television broadcasts (Nivón Ramírez 2016; Porras Pulido 2018). In his monograph, Axel Elías included bottom-up approaches to analyze receptions and conflicts prior and during the Olympic Games (2021b). Other scholars expanded on the politics behind the creative capacities of the 1968 Olympics (Campos and Hartmann 2023; Castañeda 2014; Dorotinsky 2020; Flaherty 2016). From these works, Dorotinsky’s article on the folklore exhibition during the Cultural Olympiad of Mexico stands out since it highlighted the racial underpinnings of these campaigns.

From the Mexican side, the most common repositories for the study of Mexico 1968 have been the Archivo General de la Nación (Mexican National Archives), Archivo Diplomático Mexicano (Archive of Foreign Affairs), and the private collection of Pedro Ramírez Vázquez. In contrast, English speaking scholars have mainly relied on the Archive of the International Olympic Committee (IOC), the Avery Brundage Collection, as well as the official publications of the organizing committee and the press (Elías 2021a). Although not focusing exclusively on Mexico 1968, Heather Dichter’s work is a relevant given her analysis of NATO archives (2021). Dichter studied the bidding interests of NATO, opening the possibility to contrast these with the member nations of the Warsaw Pact or COMECON. The repositories analyzed here have been previously reviewed by the scholarship and have taken racial lenses to explain some elements of Mexico 1968; nevertheless, none thus far focused on Mexico’s processes of racialization from a broader perspective, nor have they contrasted these with IOC biased protocols and requirements.

By undertaking a study of these repositories under the lens of race and mestizaje, I highlight IOC’s Eurocentric and white biases that have indirectly shaped how non-European host destinations (Tokyo, Mexico, and more recently Seoul and Beijing, among others) have engaged with what has been labeled as Olympism and/or the Olympic movement. In this regard, Ana Laura de la Torre’s research provides strong arguments to question the monopoly of Olympism by the IOC as well as its simplified European genealogies (2021).

Also relevant to the discussions of race during 1968 is the literature that has studied the civil rights movements of the United States of America. In its intersections with the Olympics, scholars have studied how Black athletes protested against the racial violence exercised by the US government as well as that by international sport organizations (Bass 2002; Edwards 2017; Hartmann 2003; Moore 2017). Recently, authors have also highlighted the gender biases taken when recovering Black protests (Liberti and McDonald 2019; Waller et al. 2016). Interestingly, during 1968 the press did report on possible protests from female athletes such as Wyomia Tyus and Barbara Ferrell (Editorial El Día 1968). Concerning Mexico, Ariel Rodríguez Kuri studied how the COXIXJO engaged in cultural diplomacy strategies to prevent South Africa from participating given its apartheid while analyzing the government’s reaction to the protest of John Carlos and Tommie Smith (2015). Nevertheless, besides the importance of Black protests, Mexico 1968 had parallel processes of racialization. Images and messages of mestizaje appeared implicitly but constantly in Mexico City’s Olympic Games. Mestizaje can be broadly defined as a complex and changing foundational myth that assumes that racial mixing took place upon the contact of the Indigenous and the Europeans in the turn of the sixteenth century, and that this process shaped national identities in Mexico and in other Latin American contexts.

Moisés González Navarro wrote about mestizaje in 1968, while in the turn of the twenty-first century, Florencia Mallón (1996) and María Lugones (2016) contributed greatly to the discussions of mestizaje in Latin America and the Caribbean by including gender in their scope. The network SURXE has also advanced the debates on the impact of mestizaje in the Americas (Gall 2021), but yet again English-speaking scholars, such as Peter Wade, have received most of the attention (2009). Historically, Mexican mestizaje became widely disseminated through artistic expressions, such as the publication of José Vasconcelos’s, The Cosmic Race, in 1925, and Octavio Paz’s, El laberinto de la soledad in 1950. Vasconcelos is often associated as the person behind the massive use of mestizaje, and thus has received heavy criticism for prioritizing European heritage over the multiple Indigenous groups (Manrique 2016). Mexican muralists also reproduced mestizaje during the twentieth century. For Christine Sue, mestizaje has been alluring because it has given Mexico a sense of exceptionality while appearing as nonracist (Sue 2021, 67). Yet Sue questioned this assumption by posing that mestizaje relied on the principles of non-Blackness while disregarding Asian and Middle Eastern influences and interactions.

Despite the growing scholarship on mestizaje, its intersections with sport and foreign policy have been understudied. The ’sixties were an exceptional period given the growing population and the expansion of live radio and television broadcasts, as well as anticolonial movements. These conditions shaped the ways in which Mexican organizers planned the 1968 Olympic Games. By the second half of the twentieth century, mestizaje was deeply associated with cosmopolitanism. For Fe Navarrete, multicultural or cosmopolitan mestizaje recovered the aesthetics from Europe, the United States of America, and Socialist countries to project modern images of the future (Navarrete Linares 2022, 146). The following section analyses how mestizaje was included in the main Olympic rituals under the scope of internationalization and cosmopolitanism which the IOC supported.

2 Mexico’s Path to Hosting the 1968 Olympic Games

Sport in Mexico has a long history. Mexican scholars have sustained what we know as sport did not all come from Europe and Britain as often suggested. Mesoamerican groups practiced forms of physical activities, mainly for ritual purposes, but also turned into entertainment (Aguilar-Moreno 2015). Several of these activities are still practiced today (Quecha Reyna 2016). Beyond these antecedents, forms of spectatorship and commercialism in New Spain (current Mexico) can be traced back at least to the late eighteenth century (de la Torre Saavedra 2021; Asperó 2019).

By the 1920s Mexican sport adapted to the international sport systems promoted mainly by organizations in Europe, United Kingdom, and the United States of America, and the country hosted events such as the Central American and Caribbean Games in 1926. In a parallel manner, government officials took actions to implement national physical education campaigns (Chávez González 2009). The ambitions grew over time and led to Mexico hosting the second Pan-American Games in 1955 (Elsey 2016). The economic growth of 6.2 percent from 1940 to 1970 augmented the interest in using large-scale international sport competitions to promote Mexico (Pettinà 2016, 745). President Adolfo López Mateos (1958–64) and Mexico City’s Mayor, Ernesto P. Uruchurtu (1952–66) backed the bids for the Olympic Games during the late ’fifties and early ’sixties.

Mexico’s political scenario was complex during this period. Party politics were dominated by just one political party: the PRI (Partido Revolucionario Institucional, the Institutional Revolutionary Party). The PRI exercised hegemonic control of Mexico’s representative democracy from 1946 to 2000, although its tradition could be traced back to 1926. For Wil Pansters, the PRI maintained its control over the country by combining the use of violence and coercion (2012, xiv; Gillingham and Smith 2014). In addition, Mexico was just one of many “developing” or “third world” countries that was going through a period of economic growth, and that tried to promote its achievements to be seen as a global leader (Ioris and Pettinà 2023).

Mayor Uruchurtu appointed José de Jesús Clark Flores and Marte R. Gómez to lead the bidding team on December 7, 1962 (Uruchurtu to Brundage ABC B178). Alejandro Carrillo, Antonio Estopier, Manuel Guzmán, Eduardo Hay, Federico Mariscal, Armando Moraila, Josué Sáenz, and Lorenzo Torres completed the team. Clark and Gómez were IOC and PRI members, as well as government officials. Their condition was symptomatic of the organization of the Olympics. Their participation in IOC matters made them familiar with the way the organization operated, while their position as PRI members and government officials highlighted the interested actors in hosting the event. The bidding team they led convinced IOC members that Mexico City was a better option than Buenos Aires, Detroit, or Lyon (IOC 1963). The votes were secret, and individual intentions cannot be traced with the existing sources, yet it is relevant that Mexico won in the first round of IOC elections. The COXIXJO’s first Olympic Newsletter celebrated and wrote that the Olympics were a form of “world recognition of Mexico’s progress” and showed “the importance of our great metropolis … ” (COXIXJO 1964, [24], IOCA 1968SOG C-J01-1968/9).

Despite the best intentions of government officials, Mexico was not seen as an economically developed country. A day after the elections, Avery Brundage declared that Mexico City had been chosen to set an example for “smaller-scale nations” and to promote the Olympic movement around the world (New York Times 1963). Brundage’s statement was made just a few weeks prior to the Games of the New Emerging Forces (GANEFO). The mega-event in Djakarta was an openly political event that was in direct opposition to IOC’s vision of international sport, when trying to keep the Olympics “free of politics” (Elías 2021; Lutan and Hong 2005; Shuman 2013). The GANEFO used explicit anti-colonial and anti-racist language, unlike the Olympics. Mexican government officials received a formal invitation on April 23, 1963; nevertheless, they did not fully engage, and decided to mainly act as observers (ADM DAC III/2888-5). Mexican government officials changed their minds when they decided to send professional athletes to GANEFO (ADM DAC III/2888-5).

Mexico’s engagement with GANEFO was very important because despite being led by non-aligned countries, Mexican government officials prioritized IOC’s Olympism. For Jackie Hogan, the allure of hosting the Olympic Games is that these manage to make host countries appear metonymic with ancient Greece, “at the centre of a civilisation,” even if that is short lived (Hogan 2003, 107). These apparent universal aspirations seemed relevant for Mexican organizers.

The federal government had estimated that 130,000 visitors would enter the country from September to November 1968 (COXIXJO 1969, v.2, 167). They also expected more than 600 million people to follow the live television broadcasts, and many more through the press and radio. Consequently, planning the messages during the preparations for the Olympics was very important. The organizers used flyers, communiqués, press releases, official publications, governmental messages, television spots, films, radio broadcasts, and cultural diplomacy to communicate a cohesive campaign that promoted modern and developed Mexico. As stated in the ninth Olympic Newsletter, published by the COXIXJO, one of goals in hosting the Olympics was to create the “most advanced audio-visual educational system” to change the image of Mexico around the world (COXIXJO 1967, 4).

In August 1968, President Gustavo Díaz Ordaz (1964–70) highlighted that the Olympic Games were more than a sport event; these were an opportunity to show the union of “the arts, sciences and other manifestations of the highest and most noble values of the spirit” (AGN COXIXJO B1199 F219). Because the interest went beyond sport, organizers wanted the Olympics to be the “most seen and heard event in the world” (COXIXJO 1967, 5). More than 3.5 million issues of the Olympic Bulletins, designed by the COXIXJO were disseminated globally in French, English, and Spanish. In addition, 275,000 issues of the Olympic Newsletter were distributed among National Olympic Committees, National and International Sport Federations, cultural centers, universities, clubs, embassies, celebrities, and the press (COXIXJO 1969, v2, 278). These publications addressed issues of the 1968 Olympics, but also provided a guided interpretation of the country. The Mexican foreign service, as well as the Department of Tourism and the National Chamber of Tourism further contributed to reach countries with Mexican representation (George Natanson to Manuel Noriega de la Concha, 21 August 1968, AGN COXIXJO B539 F37-217). Furthermore, the COXIXJO also hired advertising firms in the United States, Mexico, and Europe to enhance international dissemination of these messages (AGN COXIXJO B452-33-429).

During the preparations, the COXIXJO regularly tried to highlight Mexico’s “western” traits. These representations were associated with modernity, and did not challenge the principles of Olympism and were in tune with mestizaje. Both made claims to universality and multicultural participation, but prioritized European markers. For instance, when analyzing the international folk-art exhibition (part of the one-year cultural program), Dorotinsky analyzed how organizers communicated mestizaje and Indigeneity by stating that the racialized representations “safely contained Mexico’s ‘Indian’ (read darker) characteristics” as celebrations of “heritage,” while the ‘“modern’ (read whiter) characteristics were openly celebrated as a forward-looking embodiment of a new cosmopolitanism” (2020, 7). The torch relay was also embedded with elements of mestizaje that privileged whiteness and European markers.

3 Mexico 1968’s Torch Relay

The torch relay is one of the most symbolic Olympic rituals in the present (MacAloon 2019, 2013). This ritual has been important in the Olympic movement’s claims to universality, forming part of every summer, winter, and Youth Olympic Games. The relay is regulated by the IOC Protocol Guide and is thus an essential component of the opening ceremony (IOC 2023, 98). Currently, all decisions regarding the Olympic torch and flame are subject to the approval of IOC’s Executive Board (IOC 2001, 27). According to the Olympic Charter that regulated the 1968 Olympics: “The arrival of this torch carrying the sacred flame, is a most dramatic feature of the first day of the Games” (IOC 1966, 86). The IOC has associated the ritual with a universal Olympic movement, yet it has reproduced European symbols of “civilization” since its first implementation in 1936. As Hogan sustained, the torch relay reflects the “tensions between universalism and nationalism and the tensions between tradition and change” (Hogan 2003, 103).

In 1968, the COXIXJO prioritized showing proximity to European markers. Mexico City’s torch relay began with a ceremony in Olympia, Greece on August 25, 1968, when the Greek actor Maria Mosxoliou lit the flame. For over the following month and a half, 2,778 people carried the torch across two continents and the Atlantic Ocean for 13,536 km (IOC n.d.). The torch relay began in Greece and was then transported to Italy. In Genoa, it went through Puerta della Soprano, paying homage to the house where the “illustrious sailor,” Cristoforo Colombo, was born (COXIXJO 1969, V2, 228). The torch was then transported to Spain and across the Atlantic, stopping at Barcelona, Seville, Puerto de Palos, and the Island of San Salvador. The route retraced Colombo’s journey. In the bulletin for the foreign press, COXIXJO wrote: “There will be a new encounter with history in Barcelona … since that is where Colombo was welcomed by the Catholic kings when returning from the new continent [sic] …” (AGN B534 F37-139). The same bulletin also described the arrival of the flame to San Salvador as being a “symbolic monument to symbolize the union of classical cultures of the Mediterranean with the American, after the discovery of the Americas [sic] and the passing of the Olympic torch.” (Figures 1 and 2)

Figure 1:

Torch route (COXIXJO 1969, v.2, 168).

Figure 2:

New fire ceremony (COXIXJO 1968).

Once on Mexican soil, the route nearly retraced the 1,519 journey undertaken by Hernán Cortés, who led the Spanish expedition that formed alliances with several Indigenous groups which then sieged Mexico-Tenochtitlan (now Mexico City). The military defeat of the city was iterated in official history as one of the founding moments of Mexico, even though the Mexica were only one of many Indigenous groups in the current Mexican territory while the nation-state was not born until 1821.

The Olympic torch was transported through Córdoba, Cholula, Tlaxcala, Huamantla, and Texcoco, among other cities; nevertheless, unlike Cortés, the organizers decided that a day before the opening ceremony, October 11, 1968, the torch relay would rest in Teotihuacan, one of the most iconic Pre-Columbian ritual centers in the country. The COXIXJO described Teotihuacan as a place where the “most amazing pre-Columbian culture developed” (COXIXJO Press Communiqué, September 11, 1968, AGN COXIXJO B534 F37-139). Given its cultural significance, the COXIXJO planned a “New Fire Ceremony,” inspired on the festivity (with the same name) of the ancient Mexica. The festivity took place every 52 years. The ritual marked the beginning of a new cycle and inspired hope of renovation and improvement. In the words of the COXIXJO, the ritual symbolized “the renewal of humanity and assured the existence of the latter … ” (AGN B244 F27-230). The new fire ceremony was a relevant decision of the organizers since they were precisely looking to renovate Mexico with the 1968 Olympics. Teotihuacán was used as a token of Indigeneity since the settlement was not Mexica while acknowledgements of other Indigenous groups were rarely done.

The organizers were careful in directing media attention to the points they wanted to disseminate. In a letter from Peter J. Celliers, foreign press coordinator, to Guillermo Rivera, executive secretary of the Olympic torch, the former communicated the publication of a bulletin for the international press that “would serve not only for direct publicity,” but would inform about the ritual and its meanings (AGN B534 F37-139). In that letter, Celliers also informed that the New York advertising office would disseminate the bulletin in the United States of America and Europe.

Distinguished figures of the Mexican political and cultural landscape participated in this event. Salvador Novo, an acclaimed Mexican writer, even created a theater play inspired by the new fire ceremony in Teotihuacan. The play was scored by another distinguished Mexican figure, composer Blas Galindo. The score was titled Teotihuacan, Ciudad de los Dioses, Teotihuacan, City of Gods (AGN COXIXJO B1605 F2676). The acclaimed Mexican choreographer Julio Prieto coordinated actors and dancers to stage the modern interpretation of the ritual. All the stage performers wore colorful attires in Olympic colors (red, blue, green, yellow). Their attires hinted at Indigeneity, but these were not based on ancient cultures nor on contemporary Indigenous expressions.

The ceremony was performed for 8,000 live spectators, but many more watched the recorded version that Durán Maldonado and Daniel López captured in their documentary film. The latter began with scenes from the archaeological area of Teotihuacan, while a voice over read: “Welcome to Mexico, modern country with ancient roots.” The cameras followed the colorful staged choreography of the 2,000 performers throughout some of two of the most emblematic sites of Teotihuacan: The Citadel and the Pyramid of the Moon. As these dancers continued to move in their colorful attires, a voice over read the poem, “mi hermano el hombre (man, my brother)” throughout the whole film. The poem was written five centuries prior by a noble person of Texcoco, Nezahualcóyotl (1,402–72). The poem was translated by distinguished Mexican historian, Angel María Garibay, a specialist in pre-Columbian history (COXIXJO Press Communiqué, September 11, 1968, AGN COXIXJO B534 F37-139).

The torch relay was embedded with European symbols, but the ritual in Teotihuacán and the replica of those involving pre-colonial cauldrons where the fire rested were meant to signpost Indigeneity. These symbols were in tune with Mexico being “a modern country with ancient roots.” For Miguel León-Portilla, distinguished Mexican historian of the pre-Columbian period: “A world of symbols, myths, and realities, will be part of our everyday lives.” León-Portilla traced parallels between the Greek Prometheus and the Mexica Xiuhtechuhtli, lord of time and fire when referring to the ritual. For the Mexican historian, fire had been important for both cultures and had an impact on both civilizations. León-Portilla concluded that “… descendants from the ancient fire carriers” would unite, because in the end, Mexico was also part of Mediterranean cultures (León Portilla 1968, AGN COXIXJO B1277 F22). León-Portilla’s academic view was what organizers wanted to communicate about Mexico with the torch relay. Organizers represented Mexico as an heir of European values and virtues. By hosting the Games in this light, Mexico was meant to be interpreted as a contributor to global progress and modernity.

4 The Opening Ceremony and the Lighting of the Cauldron

The torch relay that began in Greece, arrived at Mexico and blended “two cultures” during the opening ceremony (COXIXJO 1969, v.1, 24). This Olympic ritual took place on Indigenous Peoples’ Day, October 12, 1968, or “día de la raza (day of the race),” as it was commonly known in Mexico over the twentieth century (COXIXJO, Press Bulletin March 15, 1968, AGN COXIXJO B65 F169). The messages of blending/mestizaje were further enhanced with the decision of the last torch bearer. Enriqueta Basilio was selected to create a climactic moment for Mexico ’68. For historian Celeste González de Bustamante, Basilio was “young, in shape, attractive, and mestiza, she embodied the modern image of Mexico that the organizers wanted foreign visitors to see” (González de Bustamante 2020, 21). The press communiqué that the COXIXJO distributed internationally described Basilio as being born in the border city of Mexicali, Baja California where she practiced several sports in her youth, but struggled to find one “completely of her liking” (COXIXJO, 9 October 1968, AGN COXIXJO B547 F37-316). It was not until her teenage years that Basilio found track and field. At the time of publication, Basilio held the Mexican record for 400 m and 80 m with hurdles. One of her sportive achievements was finishing seventh in the 80-m hurdles at the 1967 Pan American Games (Barragán 1968).

Basilio was a distinguished athlete in Mexico’s track and field circuit, but sport officials in Mexico did not project her as a medal contender for the 1968 Olympics. Yet, the COXIXJO chose Basilio to undertake the important task of lighting the cauldron. According to “Juana,” Mexican competitor during the XIX Olympiad, the COXIXJO chose Basilio because she “ran beautifully” (conversation with the author, May 12, 2016). Juana’s memories coincide with COXIXJO’s press communiqués when describing Basilio as running “with a wide stride, and looked as if she was floating, she barely touched the ground … ” (COXIXJO, October 9, 1968, AGN COXIXJO B547 F37-316).

Basilio was meant to bring the symbols of torch relay together. The European influenced route met with the Indigenous heritage in the archaeological site of Teotihuacan, and on the following day, “Columbus Day,” Basilio, a young, cosmopolitan, athletic, mestiza woman appeared in the Olympic stadium as the last torch bearer. Basilio gave a lap around the track, ran up the 90 steps on the eastern side of the Olympic stadium and lit the cauldron. Basilio wrapped up one of the most emblematic moments of the 1968 Olympic Games.

The COXIXJO recovered hundreds of newspaper clippings around the world with reports of the torch relay and the lighting of the cauldron. The compilation of the reports and their preservation in the National Archives further supports the idea that the torch relay was perceived as a key moment for the COXIXJO (AGN COXIXJO B1277 F22, B1326 F12 and B1336 F22). Beyond the press, the lighting of the cauldron was further disseminated with Alberto Isaac’s (1969) documentary film, Olimpiada en México. The first 3 min of the Isaac’s film focused on Basilio’s entry to the stadium and the lighting of the torch. The lap around the stadium was reproduced at regular speed, but her ascent to the cauldron was in slow motion while the credits rolled.

As noted in Figure 3, Basilio’s outfit was minimalist, yet highly symbolical. Basilio was dressed completely in white: a hair band, tank top, thigh-length shorts, ankle length socks, and trainers. Her lighter brown skin tone fitted in the category of a mestiza woman while her outfit and short hair continued disrupting the traditional stereotypes of Mexican women. Basilio had the athletic build of a sprinter and at 1.76 m was taller than most Mexican women. Her challenging forms reminded of the deco bodies that some women styled during the twenties (Sluis 2016, 382) and could be interpreted as the sixties version of what Rubenstein popularized as chicas modernas (Hershfield 2008; Rubenstein 1998, 210). The latter is a concept that has highlighted how women disrupted traditional expectations of femininity in the public sphere. Marjolein van Bavel applied the framework directly in sport and claimed that female representations here were considered as the embodiment of “the postrevolutionary state project” (van Bavel 2021, 354). Despite the contributions, the historiography on chicas modernas did not thoroughly study representations of mestizaje.

Figure 3:

Enriqueta Basilio at the Olympic stadium, October 12, 1968. Facebook group: “Juegos de la XIX Olimpiada México 68”.

In 1993, González de Bustamante interviewed Basilio and asked about the reasons behind her selection as the last torch bearer. Basilio described herself as being part of a “new generation.” Basilio’s actions were in fact groundbreaking in Olympic sport and Mexican history. Unfortunately, starring in an important Olympic ritual did not necessarily mean that her “generation” of women participated more actively in sport or party politics. Basilio served as diputada federal (federal deputy) for the PRI after the Olympics, so it explains why she felt “part of a new generation.” It was not until 1988 that a woman was part of a presidential cabinet. Basilio also declared that lighting the cauldron had been an “unforgettable” responsibility she fulfilled as a woman (Televisa 1993). Women’s athlete participation did increase from Tokyo 1964 to Mexico 1968, but just slightly above 10 percent for both Olympic Games (IOC n.d.). In Paris 2024, parity was achieved in athlete participation; nevertheless, women are not as common in the direction of international sport organizations (Aragón-Pérez and Jiménez 2019).

In one of the last interviews of the chair of the COXIXJO, Claire and Keith Brewster asked about Basilio. Ramírez Vázquez said that the decision to use Basilio as the last torch bearer was intentional and had been an accomplishment. For Ramírez Vázquez, it was one of Mexico’s many “firsts” that happened during the Olympics, such as being the first developing and Latin American country to host the Olympics; the first to apply drug and gender tests; and the first to have an Academy Award Nomination for the documentary film, The Olympics in Mexico (Brewster and Brewster 2013, 160). Nevertheless, Ramirez Vázquez did not address the importance of women’s participation in Mexico’s social and economic development during the sixties, nor did he highlight the breakthroughs of women in the Olympic movement.

In an interview released in 2016, two years short of the fiftieth anniversary of the 1968 Olympics, Ramírez Vázquez spoke once again about the selection of Basilio. Ramírez Vázquez recalled that Basilio was an athlete, but considered that she did not have “good records.” With this comment, the Chair of the COXIXJO seemed to minimize Basilio’s athletic achievements and instead highlighted the “elegance of her Mexican female figure.” For Ramírez Vázquez: “[the lighting the torch] … had to be a unique spectacle during the Olympics … that was our obsession” (Noticias 22 2016). Beyond Ramírez Vázquez’ comments on Basilio’s body and stride, the athlete from Mexicali played an important role in embodying COXIXJO’s desired representation of Mexico (Dymond 2011, 2; Zaragocin and Caretta 2021). The organizers tried to communicate to the world that Basilio’s gender, age, phenotype, body markers, attire, and stride synthesized modern Mexico.

The lighting of the Olympic cauldron that Basilio starred in 1968 was a key moment for the Mexican government and the IOC. It was perceived as a sign that the first Olympics in Latin America were inaugurated peacefully and seemingly without any major organizational challenges. Despite being the first woman to light the cauldron, neither the Mexican government nor the COXIXJO highlighted Basilio’s accomplishment as important in terms of gender in the public sphere or Olympic participation. Neither the government nor the IOC emphasized the relevance in overcoming a history of exclusion of women in relevant Olympic rituals and they did not frame Basilio’s participation as relevant for equality and equity.

The COXIXJO framed Basilio as an embodiment of Mexican identity. Basilio culminated the ritual that was meant to position Mexico as an heir of European culture and values, usually associated with modernity, and development. The single stop at Teotihuacan as a marker of Indigenous heritage was meant to feed the narrative of Mexican exceptionality. Nevertheless, it did not recover contemporary Indigenous groups, nor did it provide a complex understanding of multiple Indigenous experiences.

5 Representations of Race during the Closing Ceremony

From the moment that the COXIXJO began to organize the Olympic Games in Mexico City, its members also tried to disseminate the idea that Mexico was not racist. The COXIXJO took actions to not allow South Africa to compete in the 1968 Summer Olympics given the violence of apartheid (El Día 1968 AGN COXIXJO B1326 F12; Rodríguez Kuri 2015). During the Olympic Games, the COXIXJO decided against Brundage’s demand to punish John Carlos and Tommie Smith further and expel them from Mexico (ADM DAC92-2 B37). Nevertheless, these actions should not lead to the conclusion that the COXIXJO was free of racism, especially if analyzed in retrospect. The five-volume Official Report, as well as the documentary, Olimpiada en México (The Olympics in Mexico), released in 1969, were the last official materials that the COXIXJO used to promote Mexico. The film is available on the IOC’s website and YouTube channel, with more than 800,000 reproductions. The closing ceremony as well as the film carry an important representation of racialized communities that can be reinterpreted up to this day.

Mexican cinematographer, Alberto Isaac, was appointed by the federal government to direct the audiovisual memoir, The Olympics in Mexico. Isaac had been a swimmer at a young age and medaled during the 1946 Central American and Caribbean Games (AGN COXIXJO B1040 F1). Isaac also worked as an illustrator and cartoon artist for the newspapers El Sol, El Universal, and ESTO. Because of his athletic career, experience with media, and cinema production, Isaac was seen as the ideal person to direct the documentary on Mexico City’s Olympics.

The Olympics in Mexico attempted to represent Mexico as a peaceful and multicultural country, and while doing so provided positions regarding race. The closing ceremony, held on October 27, 1968, followed the protocolary parade of athletes. Nevertheless, the orderly parade was altered when a Black athlete (most likely representing Niger) dressed entirely in white (robe, hat, and trousers) broke formations and joined the crowds. The voice over captured the moment in the following words:

Farewell parties always seem to sum up a shared experience. On October 27^th, 1968, in the principal setting of the Games, all formality, all protocol is tossed aside, and a rich flow of emotions sums up spontaneously the spirit of the Olympics in Mexico.

The documentary followed the athlete’s joyful embrace of people in the Olympic stadium, while juxtaposing these images with those of a white dove overflying the Olympic stadium. The white dove was presented as a symbol of peace during the 1968 Olympics. The first athlete was joined by another with similar attire and together they joyfully embraced other athletes and spectators. These images were contrasted with two white doves interlocking flights, supposedly happening during the same event. This use of Black bodies and the imagery of peace doves suggested that Mexico was providing a fertile ground for mutual understanding and peace in a festive environment.

The scenes described above were followed by the solemn protocols of the Olympic closing ceremony. These were scored with a military band as the athletes paraded for the last time during Mexico City’s Olympic Games, while the Olympic flag exited the stadium, and the Olympic flame extinguished. The board in the stadium welcomed Munich 1972 and transitioned to a pitch-black image and silence of several seconds. This was then disrupted with lively mariachi music, associated with Mexico. Jaranas, violins, guitars, and trumpets, among other instruments, joined to play “El son de la Negra,” serving as the score for the last seconds of the documentary where athletes and spectators broke “all protocol and formality.” The documentary suggested that organizers knew how to follow rules and protocols, but also provided opportunities for joyous and festive environments that would gather people around the world and benefit all humankind.

6 Concluding Remarks

In this essay, I used the opening and closing ceremonies of the 1968 Olympic Games to analyze the protocolary platforms where the organizers were allowed and expected to present an image of modern Mexico. In doing so, I show that mestizaje was engrained in these ceremonies because it fitted well with IOC protocols and expectations of a modern Olympic host. The racialized imagery was a simplification that fitted well with IOC’s Olympism, but this should not be read as cynicism. IOC protocols highlighted European symbols as a form of reinforcing their history and tradition. With the objective of appearing as modern, Mexico acknowledged Indigenous heritage as done previously with other representations of mestizaje, but racialized symbolisms were subordinated. By fulfilling IOC protocols, organizers often represented Mexico as an heir of western traits and a global leader. This was in line to previous Olympic hosts such as Tokyo and Rome, but while doing so they simplified multiple Indigenous heritage and silenced African and Asian. Given the international reach of the ceremonies and their register in publications and film, the Olympic Games provided a unique platform for the Mexican government where mestizaje took the international spotlight. The study of the racial underpinnings is necessary for the understanding of the Olympics and can also benefit further approaches to other mega-events not only those in racialized cities and countries.

Abbreviations

ABC

Avery Brundage Collection. IOC Archive, Lausanne

ADM

Archivo Diplomático Mexicano (Archive of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs)

DAC

Dirección de Asuntos Culturales (Directorate of Cultural Affairs)

AGN

Archivo General de la Nación (National Archives, Mexico)

COJXIXO

Comité Organizador de los XIX Juegos Olímpicos (Organizing Committee of the XIX Olympic Games)

IOCA

International Olympic Committee Archive

For all archives, I used “B” for Box, “F” for File and “D” for document.