Gordon Lewis

Part 1.  Web Review

One of the most interesting aspects of this course is the opportunity to share in the insights, point of views, interests and thought processes of other students both in this class and in previous classes.  This sharing opens and expands numerous vistas that enrich the participant and this ‘web review’ assignment as part of the midterm is part of this process.  Although locating and reading papers is very easy, the time and enrichment process lies in the contemplation of the ideas in the paper you have just examined.  I found it impossible to narrow to just 3 submissions for this review as I located more than twice that many that were of interest to me and that I contemplated.

I chose to list JC’s paper from the 4333 class first because his subject matter (and his humorous title) are unique.  JC examines the Census Bureau in terms of how the concept of race has been handled in the enumerating process. As JC states:  “The concept of race plays a fundamental role in structuring and representing the social world.  . . . the OMB and the Census Bureau are instrumental . . . in this structuring.  . . . The categories used . . . are at best imprecise and at worst completely arbitrary.”

JC illustrates the arbitrary nature of the census process by showing that concepts of race, nationality and ethnic grouping are used interchangeably.  (The following material is not an exact quote, so I have used one mark instead of two to indicate that the material is paraphrased from JC‘s paper.)   ‘JC notes that in the 1930 Census, Mexican and Hindu were offered as choices for race.  Persons of White/Negro or Indian/Negro were to be classified as Negro unless the person was generally accepted as an Indian in the community.  Korean and Guam have been listed as a choice for race in some censuses. Blacks have been identified as Slaves, All Other Free Persons, Colored, Free Colored, Mulatto, Quadroon, Octoroon, Negro and Black in different censuses.’

Beginning in 1990, to resolve some of the confusion, the Census Bureau began a process of self identification, which led to new problems.  In 1990, when the Census Bureau allowed a write-in category for race, it received nearly 8 million responses which it compiled into 300 coded racial categories and 600 American Indian tribes.  . . . there were more that 250,000 multiracial . . . responses . . . which were recoded based on the first race written;”  In 2000, “More than 90 percent . . . who checked Some Other Race were Hispanic,”

JC concludes his interesting paper with the observation, with which I agree, that in spite of the numerous problems that exist in identifying the population, the end product still has value and is useful to the society.  Hopefully, the processes will continue to be refined.

A second concept that I enjoyed reading was the comparison between the migration in the Jewish Exodus and the migration of the English Pilgrims to North American, concepts that are discussed in objective 4 and are well developed in the essays by both BF and JC on the subject of the dominant culture in the 4333 class.  Both reference the Deuteronomy 7:3 prohibition against intermarriage and BF develops the idea that, “The nuclear family, the basic social unit in America today, was the means by which each group protected their religious purity.”  JC points out that, this resistance to assimilation . . . preserved group identity and viability.”  Both authors identify this element as leading to ‘the success the Jews have had remaining a distinct community,’ and “the pilgrim’s success, which helped insure that they became the dominant culture . . . (to which) all subsequent immigrant groups have assimilated.”

The assimilation of immigrants is one of the focuses of Objective 2 as a major factor in the development of the identity of what defines an American.  BF returns to this discussion of America as a melting pot and the land of opportunity, discussed in course Objectives 1 and 2 in his midterm essay on “Immigrant/Minority” where he states, “Our common perception of that story is that immigrants come willingly and expectantly to the Land of Opportunity.  Here they will work hard to become American and will be rewarded with prosperity.  . . . Because Immigrants come to America voluntarily, their Social Contract involves assimilation to the dominant culture.”

BF develops the contributions of the Pilgrims further in his Dominant Culture essay where he discusses the Protestant Work Ethic that permeates the dominant culture.  He states, “The Puritan work ethic is also an ideal which passed to them from Biblical origins.  In Exodus 23:12, God commanded the Jews: ‘Six days do your work . . . .’  . . . The final and perhaps most pervasive American characteristic that came from the Pilgrims is Capitalism.”

I enjoyed reading the work of BF and JC because it is well organized and because they use excellent vocabulary when expressing themselves, especially JC.  It is a pleasure to read their contributions.

A third concept that was well developed by student essays was the American Nightmare, recounting negative experiences of immigrants and minority groups.  Sample student midterms essays written by JLS and another by DG were particularly effective in addressing this issue and cited the works read in class such as Yezierka’s “Soap and Water” and James Baldwin’s “No Name in the Street.”  However, the piece that I wanted to comment on was the one done in the 5731 summer class by Carrie Arnett, “Breaking the Color Code: African American Assimilation.”  In referencing Patricia Smith’s poem, “Blonde White Women,” where products for making your appearance, ‘more white,’ are discussed, Arnett has explored this idea further with database research that led her to an article on “an ideology known as the bleaching syndrome . . . (which) stems from creams and beauty products used by African Americans to make the skin lighter.”  Arnett continues, “These products provide a way to assimilate into white dominant culture by using hair-straightening products and bleaches for the skin;  . . . Nevertheless, bleaching syndrome is not limited to the physical or literal meaning of the whitening one’s skin. Instead, the term goes beyond outward appearances and becomes metaphorical.” Arnett further discusses light skin as “the crucial factor in becoming fully assimilated . . . .”  In Arnett’s essay, this leads to a desire to marry lighter skinned African Americans or whites and thereby bring their children one step closer to being assimilated.

One aspect of Arnett’s essay that was particularly interesting was her effort to interview a friend and her mother who are dark skinned immigrants from Nigeria.  The mother acknowledged an incident of prejudice from an African American because her skin was dark and Arnett became aware that the daughter is dating a white male.  These interviews contributed to the depth of Arnett’s essay.  In its total impact, Arnett did an excellent job of conveying the impact of one of the issues, the Color Code, that is part of the American Nightmare of both the Black minority and of some immigrant groups.

In summary, as I stated at the beginning of this web review, I thoroughly enjoyed the learning experiences that emanated from examining the contributions of other students.  This process significantly enriches the course.