|
2016 Midterm1
(assignment) |
LITR 4340
American Immigrant Literature Model Assignments |
|
Thomas Kibodeaux
There’s Always Dissenting Opinions on the American Dream
The first midterm essay I chose to review is titled
In Search of the American Dream. For
starters, the title caught my attention because the American dream is a concept
I’ve long been fascinated with and it is interesting to review others’ accounts
of what the American dream means. The author, Jo Ann Pereira, introduces the
concept by defining the differences between minorities and immigrants and the
inevitability of being labeled as both. She recounts the story of an African
immigrant who was able to buy his freedom. However, he soon realized that his
freedom did not stand a chance against the societal norms and society’s views of
minorities in general; at least not immediately. He would still face challenges
in his attempts to assimilate. This narrative is all too familiar for immigrants
in search of fulfilling the American dream. While they may reach the economic
status they had hoped for, it does not always transcend into avoiding
discrimination as a minority. There are countless ways in which individuals cope
with their new found environment. There is an internal struggle of retaining
individual culture and heritage while embracing the dominant culture of their
new home. Pereira does an excellent job of conveying these struggles in her
essay by giving many different examples of Polish, Puerto Rican, and Hispanic
immigrants and their different viewpoints of the dominant culture. Whether it be
a desire to be accepted, or resentment and resistance in the name of their home
country.
Pereira’s final paragraph gives a personal account of her own family as
one of the only minority families in her neighborhood. She paints this picture
by saying that she and her family “ate the same foods, shopped in the same
places, drove the same kind of cars, wore the same kind of clothes and went to
the same school that she did.” They had found solace and stability in
assimilating with the dominant culture. However, her friend notices one
difference: “when your momma got mad, I couldn’t understand a word she was
saying, because she was talking so fast in Spanish.” This is an interesting way
to conclude her essay. It’s as if to say that despite their flawless execution
of blending with the dominant culture, it was still possible to carry elements
of their own.
The next essay I’ve chosen for review is titled
It’s Not the Destination That Matters.
This title grabbed my attention because it seemed to go against the concept
of the American dream mentioned in the previous essay. Aren’t all immigrant in
search of better lives? It would seem that immigrants have certain goals in mind
when coming to America. Why would reaching those goals not matter? Stephen
Rodwell, the essay’s author, supports his title’s claim by placing emphasis on
immigrant’s journeys and how it shaped them far more than the destination would.
Rodwell does this by retelling the story of different immigrants and the ways
that their journey overshadowed the final destination. For example, Diego from
English Lesson is resistant to
American culture. He did not come to America in hopes of assimilating and
America is not his final destination. Rather, Diego plans on learning English,
attaining a better paying job, and perhaps gaining some skill through this.
Then, he will go back to his home and use his resources for his family. He says
in broken English, “this is no my country.” Diego is an image of an immigrant
who has a lot of pride in his own culture, and does not want to lose that pride
while he is away from home.
Rodwell also speaks about the term “The Model Minority.” Which is
basically a minority group who makes every effort to blend with the dominant
culture and overcomes obstacles such as “language barriers, cultural barriers,
economic barriers, and ill treatment by the dominant culture, to become
successful American Citizens.” Another point Rodwell emphasizes is that “The
Model Minority” obeys the laws of the land. They respect the laws already in
place in America and follow the law without question. While this may seem like
the right thing to do, it does prove difficult for many immigrants who are
perhaps not familiar with America’s law. Rodwell gives the example of Asian
Americans as a model minority but recounts the story of a couple in
The Land of the Free who is greeted
by American officials who determine that they do not have adequate paperwork and
as a result, their baby is taken and placed in a government foster care system.
The law is complied with, although it is not always the easiest thing to do.
Rodwell concludes by stating it is these types of situations that impact the
lives of immigrants and minorities. Thus supporting his thesis that it is the
journey of assimilation and encountering the dominant culture that matters.
Upon reviewing these two essays, it is clear to see that they connect
with each other. Both essays present the concept of assimilating with the
dominant culture through immigrant/minority perspectives. The final component of
this review takes a look at what exactly the dominant culture is in America.
What is “White” and Why? takes a look
at the dominant culture and gives some perspective on why it may be difficult to
define, and in turn making it difficult to blend in with for those who are not
from here. This research report, written by Dorothy Noyes, presents this
question: Aren’t the majority of Americans immigrants? Aside from Native
Americans, many white Americans can trace their lineage back to European
immigrants. The dominant white culture in American is made up of immigrant
descendants. Isn’t this a testimony to the fact that anyone, from any culture,
can migrate and make enough of a positive impact that they become the dominant
culture? Noyes claims that this dominant culture did not appear suddenly
overnight. She mentions different immigrant groups who many associate as being
similar, such as Scottish, Irish, and English, as having their own history of
culture clash. This history proves that discrimination is not a problem caused
by “race.” Rather, it is from cultural and societal differences that
discrimination is created. Many fail to realize that whites are not exempt from
discrimination. In fact, they are an easy target for minorities and immigrants
because many fail to realize that the term “white” covers a group of people with
a history as diverse as any other.
After reading the two essays that present America through the eyes of
immigrants, and then reading the research report that looks at America’s
dominant white culture, I think it is wise to conclude that in order to create a
better America, we must welcome the idea of the melting pot. The best America
must accept to accept all cultures, white culture included. After all, it is the
cultures brought in by immigrants blending with the existing cultures here that
makes America so wonderful. It is foolish to pander to minority groups through
government aid programs at the expense of our own citizens. If we are to
perpetuate the idea that all men are created equal and provide equal
opportunities for all, then we must abolish the agendas to regard immigrants or
minorities as “special.” If our response to immigrant/minority discrimination is
White American discrimination in the name of vengeance, then we have done
nothing to evolve as humans in America. Noyes has an optimistic view of this:
“White, black, or purple, no one’s history or identity is inherently more
important and only through a clear recognition of individuality and sense of
respect can we as Americans continue to grow in our identity as just that:
Americans.” Unfortunately, I feel that identifies are beginning to hold more
sway over a person’s dedication to their fellow country people, as they are
choosing to identify themselves as x-American rather than American. Basically,
hard work contributing to the betterment of America is what unites and makes
proud Americans, Americans. The same opportunity is there for everyone, and
here, I must do my duty to point out that equality of opportunity does not
necessarily equal equality of outcome; and, this is okay.
