The Changing of the Guard: Power and Responsibility in the Immigrant Narrative

If American authors fail to explicate the immigrant narrative, American literature would have no basis of validity and/or survival because the immigrant narrative (quite frankly) incorporates America, as immigration to America and the subsequent opportunity for economic success has become the literal and figurative foundation of the American dream of democracy and individual freedom.  Even the statue of liberty (America’s supreme symbol of liberty and equality) asks for the international community’s “poor” and “huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”  Yet, this idealistic dream of an equitable America (accepting people from different cultures and religious backgrounds) has become a reality for some and a lingering falsehood for others.  In fact, the American dream—which advances an achievable notion of the attainment of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness for all men—helps to create a social contract that is rooted in various forms of power or the lack thereof.  Consequently, the social contracts in America have a subtle way of disseminating economic, social, and political power; the terms and rewards often change in regards to the racial/cultural group that it addresses.  By exploring, analyzing, and synthesizing the literary and cultural trends of the new immigrant in relation to its social contract with America, the literary and cultural objectives are vital.  Hence, literary objectives 1a, 1b, and 1c lay the groundwork by suggesting that the immigrant narrative is the story of the economic and technologic (a new form of power) evolving of a racially/culturally diverse America.  While the literary objectives establish the immigrant narrative’s place in American multicultural literature, the cultural objectives examine the invincible power of such social contracts in America thereby juxtaposing the successes and failures of America/Americans via the different storylines manifesting primarily from different power paradigms in the inevitable social contracts.

By juxtaposing Nicholas Mohr’s The English Lesson (assimilation and the American Dream) with Toni Cade Bambara’s The Lesson (a story of both assimilation and resistance), the immigrant narrative becomes a more complex narrative that scrutinizes the ideologies of an American democracy.  Because education has always been considered a liberating and thus democratic process in America, it is no small wonder that both stories make interesting critiques of the American educational process and the ways that education can be used to gain power/affect change in order to achieve the American dream or erase the American nightmare.

The English Lesson begins with an instructor speaking in an encouraging and diplomatic tone to a class of non-native English speakers.  Mohr uses this teacher’s characterization to exemplify the “ideal” educational process in America whereby mutual respect/tolerance is displayed; also, in this classroom setting, the students’ motivation to learn English (stage 4 of the traditional immigrant narrative) is matched by the instructor’s goals of assisting her students in grasping Basic English in order to rid themselves of their inferior markers.  A former student adequately explains this concept; she writes, “Mrs. Hamma was not only teaching English to the students, but she also tried to teach them the ‘correct way’ of speaking.  It is not enough to know the language, you must also speak like the Americans to gather acceptance.”  For, Mrs. Hammas knows that in order to gain acceptance and flourish economically in America, the dominant culture has to bestow credibility to the immigrant’s usage of speech.  Thus, if he/she is unable to speak standard American English, regardless of her/his schooling, the opportunities to advance will likely diminish.

Still, although many critics of Mohr’s The English Lesson easily discuss the expansive difference of perspective between Diego Torres and Stephen Paczkowski, I assert that the real tension in this story exists between Lali and her husband.  Many sociological studies prove that a woman’s immigration from a patriarchal society, in which women are restricted by their gender and treated like pieces of property by their husbands, to a democratic society proves to be more beneficial for her and less positive for the husband, as he often loses authority.  As Lali becomes more fluent in English, total dependence on her husband will likely decrease.  Towards the end of the story, Rudi begins to lament his decision to marry Lali (IA 32).  For, as she steadies herself to climbs the American social ladder by assimilating into the mainstream American society and ridding herself of undesirable cultural markers, Rudi will remain marginalized by his lack of English speaking skills.  Not only does her aspiration to comprehend and speak the English language empower Lali, but her sense of self-sufficiency and motivation to overcome the odds prove that she has taken a personal responsibility as a means of rapidly assimilating into the American society. 

Despite Nicholas Mohr’s romanticization of the American educational process and the opportunistic American dream, Toni Cade Bambara’s The Lesson is quite the antithesis.  In essence, Bambara’s The Lesson portrays stage three (shock, resistance, exploitation, and discrimination) of the immigrant narrative, and it illuminates a culture of people who have an unjust social contract with America.  Because Bambara is an immigrant of African descent, her narrative of resisting assimilation in order to advocate equity and justice for all, engages the minority experience within the immigrant narrative.  Additionally, The Lesson affirms the shortcomings of America’s promise of democracy, and the strength of this composition rests in the honest critique of America by a young girl who has been failed by the U.S. educational systems as well as its public policy for the poor.  Still this narrative reads more like the narrative of the ambivalent minority inasmuch as this teacher does not totally represent the characterization of either a minority or an immigrant within the narratives. In fact, she gives back to her community by mentoring the young children and encouraging them to make America a better place.  Also, this teacher advocates the usage of standard American English (she does not want the students to be marginalized in a society that bestows credibility to a minority/immigrant based on her/his speech pattern), and she teaches the students the importance of exposure and self-empowerment.  For instance, she never tells the students what to think or feel; instead she teaches the power of self-liberation via the ability to think for self.   Miss Moore (true to the minority narrative) speaks with a voice of consciousness when she tells the students, “Imagine for a minute what kind of society it is in which some people can spend on a toy what it would cost to feed a family of six or seven” (IA 145). 

The theme of ambivalent minority evidences in Martin Espada’s poem Coco-Cola and Coco Frio as well as Pat Mora’s Immigrants.   In both poems the reader is introduced to second generation Americans presenting with divided selves.  The usage of cultural objectives 2a and 2c apply to both poems.   However, in Espada’s  Coco-Cola and Coco Frio, the author  reasserts his ethnic identity while Mora’s Immigrants questions what will become of the third generation.  Judging by the ambivalent minority pattern, the third generation can either assimilate or resist.  However, both poems speak of a familial responsibility and strong familial ties.  Still, the Mexican American literature exhibiting the ambivalent minority social fabric is a complex narrative because some Mexicans feel that certain states within the United States are still apart of their native lands.

As a former 9^th grade English teacher, I only wish that I had come into the full knowledge of these critical literary and cultural frameworks when I was teaching, as they have proven to be very efficient in my analyzation of both class readings and personal readings.  Even though I dislike the connotation of assimilation (suggests a cultural hierarchy/ cultural imperialism), I do believe in the concept of transculturation.  I think if the American educational system is going to affect change, we’ve got to start here: in the cultural trenches.  We as educators have to take a responsibility to ensure equality within our classrooms.  Though no one person is right (as we all view society through our individual cultural lenses), critiquing literature via these frameworks certainly helps.  That’s why I think it is important to showcase the positives of self-sufficiency and self-empowerment in multicultural literature as opposed to the stories of victimization. [nj]