Diane Palmer

Immigrant Narrative of the Mind

            When I first entered the class, and Dr. White asked us to tell the class what our experience was in class, I merely answered that I had read the works of Frank McCourt.  I sincerely thought that was all I could bring to the table in the class.  Little did I realize that immigration affects us all whether we realize it or not and in many ways.  I had lived with a first generation immigrant without even thinking twice about it, and I come from a family of French and Jewish immigrants myself.  After the first day, I knew I wanted to know more about “why”?  Why did people want to immigrate to America, why were those who immigrated here treated differently, why would a nation built on immigration want to mistreat those newly immigrated, and finally, what is this dominant culture that Dr. White keeps persistently talking about?

            So what makes an immigrant narrative an immigrant narrative?  It is not about the journey alone, but the process the immigrants make once in America.  Assimilation is one the most important themes in immigrant literature.  In Nicholasa Mohr’s “The English Lesson,” there is a sense of why assimilation is so desperately required for immigrants.  One of the immigrant’s assignments is to tell why they are taking the English course.  Many say they are there to improve their station in life, to get a better job, to become successful.  Stephan Paczkowki was forced to immigrate to America and was a professor at a major university who is now reduced to working as a porter because of his poor understanding of English.  There is no irony lost in the fact that Mrs. Hammond is teaching a man who has twice her credentials.  If he chooses to not assimilate, he remains a lowly porter, but if he chooses to continue his “Americanizing” education, he can “’be able to return to my position of professor of history of music’” and return to his former glory.  This is the chance that is the “American Dream.”

            Assimilation is not only important to those who journey here but also to the generations that come after.  In Joseph Papeleo’s poem “American Dream: First Report,” we get a sense of all three generations and the basic stages of immigration.   Stage 1 is to leave the Old World and journey to the New World which is Stage 2.  Papaleo sums up the tragedy and heartbreak in the situation stating “the end of those voyages, the agony of steerage,/ insults from the Yankees, the tenement rooms/ without windows” (88).  They suffer, so they can better their lives.  Shock sets in when the immigrants realize the hardship and the discrimination they face by the dominant culture who “said we smelled/ and looked too short and dark” (88).  The shock wears off and the immigrants begin to assimilate as “well-dressed citizens/ devoted to disinfection of our carpets” (88).  After an immigrant assimilates, there comes a time when the immigrants or future generations want to rediscover their heritage, which is Stage 5.  Immigration becomes a circular process of losing or hiding ones culture to become accepted and once accepted, can rediscover or reassert their culture.

            Once there is an understanding of immigrant literature, it is then important to understand and ask the question “What is the difference between immigrant literature and minority literature?”  Again, the importance of assimilation is called into play.  While it is imperative for the immigrant to assimilate as in “The English Lesson,” this is not the case for minorities.  First, you must understand the idea of the social contract: the idea that there are obligations to those who travel here.  Their first obligation is, of course, assimilation; they must become one of us.  In Richard Rodriguez’s selection from Hunger of Memory, he is traveling on a bus when a group of black teenagers board.  The narrator listens “to their shouted laughter, I realize my own quiet.”   He, as an immigrant, has become soundless like one of the dominant culture, but the black boys do not have this obligation.  Because they were forced here, they are not responsible for upholding a social contract.

             Because they lack the social contract, minorities are able to criticize unlike the immigrants who came here by choice.  While immigrants in stories like “In the Land of the Free,” where they must follow the government without complaint or lose their son, the minorities were so poorly treated that they are allowed to protest the government that has oppressed them.  A perfect example is the case of the Native Americans.  Chrystos writes “Everything the United States does to everybody is bad/ No this US is not a good idea  We declare you terminated” (304).  These same sentiments are expressed in “The Lesson” by Toni Cada Bambara when the students are slyly being taught a lesson about equality.  One student, Sugar, understands the lesson and says “’this is not much of a democracy if you ask me. Equal chance to pursue happiness means an equal crack at the dough” (151).  These are statements that would be considered a breach of social contract if mentioned by an immigrant because it is of their own free will that they are there.  If they are discontent then by social contract, they should return to the country they left or immigrate to another country.  Criticism is not acceptable of those who came to find the “American Dream.”

            One similarity that immigrants and minorities share is the discrimination and bias from the dominant culture.  You find yourself asking “Who is this dominant culture?”  While I will go into detail about whom or what the dominant culture is in the second half of the final, this question led me to one of my research postings.  There is no denying that all immigrants regardless of color or race were at some point discriminated.  Jewish immigrants are considered one of the “Model Minorities” because they are hard working and strive for education, but even in “Soap and Water” we can see she is discriminated because she is not as clean and well kept as the dominant culture.  Yet, in “Soap and Water” as well as other Jewish stories, they are never openly pointed out and discriminated against as are the Irish.  Signs were posted on doors and front stoops that said “No Irish allowed.”  I was amazed that one predominantly white, hard working culture could be considered a “Model Minority” while another was so openly shunned.  The research helped me understand that there was still much anti-Catholic prejudice in a country founded by Protestants.  This also helped understand the dominant culture and perhaps another requirement to be part of the dominant culture.

            At first, I was confused as to why we didn’t focus on the dominant culture first then switch to readings about minorities, immigrants, and those who fall in between.  I thought it would be more important to learn the standard before delving into the literature, so we could understand this “force” that immigrants and minorities seem to always be up against.  In hindsight, I realize that the enigma that is the dominant culture can never be fully understood.  The best way to grasp it was to first understand immigrant literature and then understand what it is not, so when you begin to delve into this idea of the dominant culture, you have some background to work with.  If we had started with the dominant culture, it would have been an uphill battle trying to get past the concept and get the focus back on immigrant literature.

            Understanding immigrant literature has opened doors to literature that I would have never considered using in my classroom, but will strongly do so now.  Even in today’s society, there exists this idea of “The Color Code.”  Students are biased to students because of their culture, their skin color, or their religion.  Perhaps in using immigrant literature, we can teach the students that everyone here is an immigrant or a minority, and all have struggled to create this country we live in.  In showing students that all have struggled in one form or another, they can realize the importance in working together rather than pushing each other apart.  If they can realize that the cause is the same for everyone, to succeed, to better oneself, to have a brighter future, then they can work as a group rather than an individual to guarantee success.