"why is there a dominant culture, and who enjoys that privilege?"

America is often referred to as “a nation of immigrants,” but if this is true, then why is there a dominant culture, and who enjoys that privilege?  In order to answer this question it is necessary to look back to the first European immigrants, since white Europeans make up the dominant culture of America (understanding that the Native American’s were actually the first to immigrate to America).  The Pilgrims, lead by William Bradford, immigrated to Plymouth Plantation in America in the early 1600s after a brief attempt to live in Holland.  Their primary purpose for leaving England was to escape the Church of England which was then associated with the Catholic Church.  Bradford and the Pilgrims were in protest of the old, bad ways and as a result they were “hunted and persecuted on every side” (Bradford).  What makes the Pilgrims different from traditional immigrants is that the Pilgrims immigrated to America as a group much like the ancient Jews of the Exodus story immigrated to Canaan. 

As Jeanette comments in her 2003 Final exam, “the narrative of America’s Pilgrims is tightly connected to the story of the ancient Jew’s narrative [as documented in the book of Exodus]. Both groups considered themselves to be God’s people, following the special plan of God for their lives.”  Essentially, there is a typology between the Ancient Jews and the Pilgrims.  One of the ways in which the Pilgrims are like the Ancient Jews is that, like Moses, Bradford documented their journey in what is his book Of Plymouth Plantation.  The Bible for the Pilgrims is model Literature because they believed that it “was the writing of God” and based their journey upon it (Exodus 32:16).  Bradford’s Of Plymouth Plantation is representative Literature because it is, in effect, Bradford’s documentary of his community’s journey and experiences. The ancient Jews were delivered from slavery and oppression in Egypt, and the Pilgrims believe God delivered them as well.  But, the similarities between the Pilgrims and the Ancient Jews do not stop here.

The Pilgrims, like the Ancient Jews, believed in monotheism (Exodus 20: 3) and believed that they "[should] not make for [themselves] idols in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below” (Exodus 20:4).  In other words, they were not to have any graven images, and neither group did.  Both groups adhered to the law which states that they should “not intermarry” with the natives of the land (Deut 7:3), and both groups believed in prayer (Exodus 32:6). 

Understanding the similarities between the Ancient Jews and the Pilgrims provides a basis for understanding how the Pilgrims became established as the dominant culture in America.  As discussed in class, the Pilgrims immigrated as a community rather than as individuals or nuclear families, and therefore did not assimilate or melt into the existing culture, distinguishing them from traditional immigrants.  Their decision not to intermarry preserves their distinction as a member of their cultural group, and their religious authority serves as a higher purpose that holds their group, and eventually the nation, together.  Adherence to these “directives” ensured that other smaller groups would not interfere with the Pilgrims’ higher purpose, which initially was to “[propagate] and [advance] the gospel of the kingdom of Christ” (Bradford, 26).

The Pilgrims were able to become and remain the dominant culture for many reasons.  They are able to repel attention to themselves as the dominant culture through plainness as the unmarked, colorlessness of the white, Anglo world, but especially through their distinctive work ethic.  In an effort to survive as a community, they actually became the first capitalists in America.  They rejected socialism believing that God made them competitive for a reason, so they insisted on the concept that each person should work for himself (Bradford, 133).  The Protestant work ethic was so strong, that they did not even take off to celebrate Christmas until the 1800s (Bradford 107).

Another way in which the dominant culture has successfully maintained its position is through theology.  Protestants constantly seek to improve by reverting back to their ancient purity and recover their primitive order.  They seek to come as near “the primitive pattern of the first churches as any other church” (Bradford 19).  This phenomenon is still evident in the dominant culture today with the constant “springing up” of churches like The Vineyard and other non-denominational churches.

In order to perceive the dominant culture in action, it is necessary to review texts written on the subject.  Evidence of the dominant culture is visible in Anzia Yezierska’s Bread Givers.  This novel is about a woman (Sara Smolinsky) who is part of the more recent group of Jewish immigrants who immigrated to America to escape the Holocuast in the 1940’s.  The novel centers on Sara’s perception of the dominant culture in America and provides many examples of how many immigrants assimilate in one way or another to the dominant culture.  In Sara’s case, she identifies with her traditional identity as that of a Jewish family, but she is also very aware of the “plain beautifulness” of the “real Americans” (212 and 210).  Initially her desire is to assimilate.  She attends school against the wishes of her father in an effort to become a teacher.  However, she does not intermarry.  Sara is an example of the immigrants who assimilate only partially in an effort to succeed in America.  Sara assimilated to the point of acquiring an education and a job, but she maintained her Jewish heritage through marrying another Jew.

Perhaps a more modern rendition of the perception of the dominant culture is through Jonathan Raban’s Hunting Mister Heartbreak: A Discovery of America.  He depicts the notion of “vertical immigration” whereby “societies are less identified by nationality and more by economics and technology” (Course Objective 6).  He compares the American class system to Macy’s.  He claims that “something had happened” to Macy’s since he first visited in 1972 (345).  His depiction of the American class system concludes that, like Macy’s, the more money one has, the higher he can rise to spend it and the higher he can rise above the “bloodcurdling news” of the lower classes (353).  In fact, “[t]he higher up [one is in society] the more free [one is] to live in a world of [one’s] own imaginative making” (352).  This is why Raban’s friend, Diane, can tune out the reality of life around her and simply choose to see the “solitary ships at sea, riding downtide in the early-morning mist” (352).  Diane is one of the “air people” as described by Raban.  She is a female member of the dominant culture and lives in a New York high rise, far above the poor immigrant “street people.”  Diane represents the people who have the freedom to shop in the upper levels of Macy’s where the clothes are the same, they just cost more.  Macy’s and Diane represent the ever-changing dominant culture that attempts to maintain stability, and attempts to move forward or change in an effort to keep control. 

Overall, as discussed in class, the dominant culture creates the impression of natural order and takes advantage of human nature in terms of profit motive, drive and competition.  The dominant culture is dominant because of its determination to “rise above,” and maintains its dominance through work, writing and faith.  Is this fair?  Is this the example set by the Ancient Jews and The Pilgrims?  Somehow, the dominant culture seems to have lost something.  It has become almost anti-social.  It emphasizes individualism over community and ambition over service.  The American dominant culture seems to be a marriage of righteousness and excess, and all of this began with Bradford’s effort to emulate the Ancient Jews?  I cannot help but wonder what Bradford would say if he could see us now. [JO’G]