Chapter 1, The Rules of the Game (pgs. 3-40)

1. Discuss the structure of chapter one. Urrea opens in the middle of the action, with five men stumbling around the desert near death. He vividly and disturbingly describes them. He then jumps around from past to present, from myths and legends to documented facts of the present day. What effect does this dramatic opening and jumping around have on the reader?
2. Why does Urrea (briefly) detail some of the people who once lived/live on or near the Devil’s Highway: Yaqui Indians, Hohokam, O’Odham, etc. and their myths, stories, legends? Why does he tell of the first documented death—a white man, Melchior Diaz—on the Devil’s Highway? Are these stories about the people or the land, the Devil’s Highway—or both? He rewinds and fast-forwards through hundreds of years and thousands of bodies. Why? Does this establish the Devil’s Highway as a sort of character itself? If so, what kind of character is it?
3. The title of the first chapter is “The Rules of the Game,” and in several places (like on page 28) Urrea uses game lingo. Is illegal immigration like a game? Explain.
4. On page 23, we read that Border Patrol agents feel judged by civilians, Chicanos, liberals, conservatives, politicians, human rights groups, and lawyers; there’s a lot of pressure on them to behave—because everybody’s watching. Many people villainize illegal immigrants, but do people also villainize the Border Patrol?
5. There are some gruesome descriptions of bodies in this chapter, of the impact the desert has on them. Is gore necessary or exploitative? Explain.
6. What effect does the list of things they carried (32) have on the reader?
7. “Nobody wanted them when they were alive, and now look—everybody wants to own them” (33). Is this a fair statement? Why does everybody want them when they’re dead? Why did nobody want them when they were alive? What might people gain from borders?

Chapter 2, In Veracruz (pgs. 43-53)

1. Urrea opens this chapter by describing the geographic area, the land, and the products produced and manufactured here. Discuss the connections between land, work, capitalism, and immigration.
2. “[T]he only illegal immigration that greatly affected Veracruz back then was the unwanted horde of aliens coming north to sample the good life in Mexico: illegals … were taking all the low-paying jobs in the cities, Panamanians were making tacos and fireworks, Nicaraguans and Colombians were sweeping streets and cleaning toilets. Hondurans in the schools” (44). Are US-Mexico border issues just a chain reaction from what’s happening south of Mexico? Do you think Mexicans say about Central and South Americans what those in the US say about Mexico? Does everyone just want “something better”? And is something better always somewhere else? Even outside of the border, it seems like “something better” is always somewhere else; we tell “urban” kids to get educated so they can “get out” of their bad neighborhoods. Obviously, in places of war or genocide people should find safety, but why is the narrative more often “leave” than “stay and make it better here”?
3. We read about financial hard times as motivation for traveling north, but we also read about the pull of the material, of “success”: “satellite dishes, air conditioners, boom boxes, guns, cattle, televisions, coffeemakers…” (46). How much does capitalism and “keeping up with the Joneses” factor in some people’s decisions to take such a risky trip? How much is consumerism tied into the American Dream and the idea of success? What is it about the United States and/or the American Dream that draws people? Why do people leave their families and risk life even when they don’t “have” to? And do we have the same empathy for the guy who comes illegally to work for a summer so he can buy his wife furniture as we do the child who comes to escape genocide?
4. How does Don Moi “set the hook” (49) and “[reel] them in” (50)? What tactics does he use to get men to come along? And why is fish imagery used? Is it a fair metaphor? Why or why not?

Chapter 3, The Coyote and the Chicken (pgs. 54-65)

1. On page 56, we read about the survival kits the Mexican government offered the walkers, with water, snacks, and condoms. Are the survival kits unreasonable? Do they encourage more people to try to cross? Are they an attempt at humanity or an invitation to invade the US? Explain.
2. Are increased security measures at the border necessary or do they just increase the dangers to the walkers by making them have to take harder trails, more remote paths? (See pages 58-59)
3. Consider the fact that the Border Patrol’s duty is to secure the border and the fact that the desert environment is deadly to any human being regardless of nationality. What responsibility does the US have to protect the border from illegal entrants and what responsibility does it have to ensure the safety of illegal entrants? Should they only be doing one of these? Both? Explain.

Chapter 4, El Guía (pgs. 66-70)

1. Discuss the role of the guides. “The leader of the Wellton 26 group was a nineteen-year-old boy from Guadalajara” (67)—he was around the age of some students at IUN. Some of the reasons young men become guides are listed in the text. To what extent are these young men to blame for the deaths of walkers and to what extent are they pawns? Discuss the reasons they get into this business and discuss how they think of themselves and their work.
2. This chapter refers to immigration/trafficking as a kind of business: the words “organization” and “trade” are used. There are bosses, coyotes, guides, safe houses, drivers, and immigrants who pay them to get across a desert border, so is it a business? Goods and services emerge from a need/want for them; what factors were present to create this “business”?

Chapter 5, Jesús Walks Among Us (pgs. 71-83)

1. The title of this chapter evokes religious imagery, but the Jesús in the chapter is not a religious figure; why does Urrea evoke religious imagery in this immigration story?
2. Urrea writes, “In this milieu, it was quite attractive to be a Coyote. You could tell yourself you were a kind of civil rights activist” (77). Urrea also uses words like “macho,” and “gangster,” and there are songs about injustices. Discuss perception vs. reality, the truth vs. the stories we tell ourselves. Why might people in the book skew the things they do?

Chapter 6, In Sonoita (pgs. 84-97)

1. Early in the book, we read about people who once lived along the road and about people who died there. Throughout the book, we read sections about the road—the Devil’s Highway and other roads—detailing its harshness and detailing more deaths. Discuss how the road / the Devil’s Highway is personified and/or becomes a character in the book. What kind of character is it? How are readers left to think about it (or what impression do readers have of it)?
2. “Don Moi didn’t make it to Nelly’s. By the time they wondered where he was, he was on the bus, heading home” (97). Do a character analysis of Don Moi. He’s such a prominent figure—in the book and in the men’s lives—then he disappears. Think about how he’s introduced, the fish imagery, the role he plays, and how he exits. What do his actions (and/or inactions) say about who he is, what’s important to him, his motivations, and his intentions?

Chapter 7, A Pepsi for the Apocalypse (pgs. 98-105)

1. Discuss the title of Chapter 7: “A Pepsi for the Apocalypse.” In other words, do a close read of this title. Obviously, “Pepsi” and “Apocalypse” are the most important of the five words. What do they mean? How long have they been around? Do they both literally appear in the text/chapter? How do they relate to each other and to the men in the desert?
2. We read what the men bought before their walk: candies, chocolates, salted prunes, sweetened chile paste, water, and Pepsi. What do their purchases say about them and their expectations?
3. “They trotted along the road, Mendez in the lead, the other two gangsters taking up the rear. Nobody told the walkers anything. They thought they were going to jump a big fence and hide in trees as helicopters bore down. But they ran in sand, slipping and struggling, and they dropped into a dry wash and up the three-foot bank on the north side, and they stepped over a dropped and rusted barbed wire fence.
   ‘Los estados unidos, muchachos.’
   That’s it? That’s the border? This is North America? It don’t look like much!” (103)
   
   Do a close read of this passage. How might it be a synecdoche for immigrants who come to the United States chasing the American Dream?

Chapter 8, Bad Step at Bluebird (pgs. 106-114)

1. The Border Patrol and Mendez each blame the other for things going wrong. Are both to blame? Who is responsible for the deaths of these men, for the deaths of so many people along the border? Can blame be put on one person/agency? Explain.
2. Urrea calls the light that appeared “the midnight light game” (110), and he writes, “that wasn’t a game any Migra agent would enjoy” (111). Remember, the first chapter of the book is called “The Rules of the Game.” Discuss the events in this chapter through the lens of immigration as a game. How does this game lens make readers reconsider/reframe how we think about the border?

Chapter 9, Killed by the Light (pgs. 115-129)

1. Urrea writes, “In the desert, we are all illegal aliens” (120). What does he mean by this? And does this apply only to the desert in the book? Does it apply only to deserts? Think about this line and how it might relate to the world, various terrains, the weather, etc. Who is the “we” in the line? And how much does our race, ethnicity, class, background, etc. matter in the context of this idea?
2. The last several pages of Chapter 9 go into graphic description of heat death/hyperthermia. Revisit the question of gore. Did these descriptions reveal something—some detail—you hadn’t known or thought about before? Why is it important (or not important) for people to read descriptions like this? Do you think reading these descriptions would change anyone’s mind about the need for humanitarian efforts? Or do they just reinforce that need to people who already believe in it? (This is a question of intent and reception: consider these descriptions in the context of the world we live in and the power they have, if any.)

Chapter 10, The Long Walk (pgs. 133-142)

1. “The dead were coordinates on topo maps, identified by GPS numbers” (133). Discuss the language used in this sentence (as well as the language in the list of “do-gooders” in the same paragraph). How might this language de/humanize people involved?
2. We read some of the specific reasons some of the men went on this dangerous journey: to build a house, to break away from parents’ help, to build cement walls for a mother’s house, etc. And we learn that some of their loved ones were against leaving: “He was walking for his wife, Octavia, even though she didn’t want him to go” (142).
   
   Did these men leave their homes and loved ones for stuff? Is the drive for “better” so ingrained in us that we are willing to die for it? Is that what is happening here? Is it something else?
   
   In the shadow of the dominant culture, are marginalized communities “damned if they do, damned if they don’t”? That is, damned if they give up so much of what they love (families, home countries, their lives) for a chance of a “better” life, and damned if they stay home with no real upward mobility and low pay?
3. Nearing death, some of the men start dreaming of home, saying they just want to go home, and some even turn back to follow their own footsteps back to Mexico. Author Tim O’Brien wrote, “proximity to death brings with it a corresponding proximity to life.” If this is true, what might the men’s dying thoughts indicate about what mattered in their lives?

Chapter 11, Their Names (pgs. 143-149)

1. Compare and contrast this list of names and personal details with the list of things they carried from Chapter 1. How are they the same and/or different? How is their effect similar/different?
2. We read about all the loans given to the men at high-interest rates; they took out the loans to pay for the “guidance” across the border, something that was going to make their lives “better,” an investment. Consider this compared to school loans and car payment plans. Is the border simply a business? And is the narrative that crossing into the US will lead to a better life promoted by coyotes (and/or others) to keep their own pockets full? Who benefits from the border?

Chapter 12, Broken Promises (pgs. 150-161)

1. The title of this chapter is “Broken Promises.” Who/what do you think this refers to? Use textual evidence to support your answer.
2. We get various versions of what happened, what went wrong, in this chapter. Is there a correct version? The first step in solving any problem is to understand the problem, so where does this problem start? Does it start with a person/people? Does it start with an agency? A law? Does it start with a story/stories?

Chapter 13, The Trees and the Sun (pgs. 162-168)

1. “Some of the men said he took the American money he had saved for their trip and tore it into small bits” (167). How might this be a synecdoche for the book/a theme of the book?
2. Aside from the format, how is Nahum Landa’s testimony like “modern poetry”?

Chapter 14, Helicopters (pgs. 169-176)

1. Do a character analysis of Mendez. He’s a teen with great responsibility; he’s responsible for the lives of many men. How much do we blame him for what happened? He couldn’t control his gait that leaned toward the left and got them off track; that’s just how he walks. Nobody gave him a compass or proper map. Was he just a kid acting like any kid? Or do you think he’s a more sinister character?
2. Don Moi “reeled” in the men. The walkers made choices to cross the border. Mendez didn’t know where he was going and kept them walking, literally, to their death. The Border Patrol, who call walkers “tonks," saved as many of them as they could, they “sped there so fast, with so many vehicles, over such vicious terrain, that they suffered twenty-six flat tires. Some agents drove on rims to get there” (172). Before all of this, there were laws put in place, walls erected, and people hired to enforce rules.
   
   Are there clear heroes and villains in this story?

Chapter 15, Aftermath (pgs. 179-193)

1. Reporters, TV crews, humanitarians, etc. flock to the hospital to see the men and try to get interviews with everyone. It’s quite a show—on both sides of the border (see pages 184 and 198). The governor of Veracruz makes a “mega-event” of the survivors’ return as “martyred heroes.” He blames the US for what happened and says, “These men were pursuing a dream.” The Wellton 26/Yuma 14 got more attention because of the number of men that died at once, but people die all the time crossing borders. Discuss the mania on both sides of the border surrounding this tragedy. Are the US and Mexico any different? Are the dead and/or the survivors, as the governor says, “heroes”? Explain.
2. Discuss Mendez’s letter and his prison sentence. Is his letter sincere? Did he get what he deserved? Did he get off easy? Hard? Was he just a pawn who got caught up in all this? After all, he, like the walkers, just wanted a better life. Do we have empathy for Mendez? He wasn’t running the show; he was an employee. Is he in some way also a victim? We hear of El Negro and the Cercas gang who work behind the scenes, but we never see much of them. Don Moi comes and goes. The people with the real power are off-stage, and it’s hard to blame people you don’t really see. The walkers, and maybe the reader, put a lot of the blame on Mendez. Is he just a scapegoat?

Chapter 16, Home (pgs. 194-220)

1. The Border Patrol acted quickly in the rescue, and they also made changes/improvements along the border after these men died. Urrea writes, “the towers are built, raised, maintained, and paid for out-of-pocket by those bleeding-heart liberals, the Border Patrol agents themselves” (214). Discuss the language here. What point is Urrea making?
2. “Mexicans still behind the barbed wire continue to listen to fabulous tales of Los Estados Unidos” (206). Revisit the question of the pull of the American Dream. Are the risks of immigration worth it?
3. “The Yuma 14 changed nothing, and they changed everything” (211). What does this mean? How do you understand it?
4. Several of the last pages detail the cost and benefit of illegal immigrants. Why does Urrea include this? What is the reader to take from these price tags?
5. Near the very end of The Devil’s Highway, Urrea notes that all of the Yuma 14 were listed as “WHITE MALE” on their files. Why does he note this detail? What is the significance of this identification?