I was born and schooled in Manhattan (and continue to be) but I have lived on Staten Island all my life. This year is a bit different for me because I am living at the dorms (The Towers) most of the time. Most weekends, I take the bus or the ferry back to Staten Island to spend time from my family and to escape, temporarily, from the busy city life.

When asked to identify myself, I usually start by tracing my family’s roots. My mother is the first generation of her side of the family to reside in the United States. My father is the second generation on his side to do so. My mother is from Hong Kong and my father was born here.

I can speak English, Chinese (Cantonese) and a little bit of Spanish. I can read English and  Spanish, but not Chinese. Even though my Cantonese vocabulary is limited, I can understand more Cantonese than I can express in spoken words. I have found that sometimes I mix up the languages and end up substituting words or phrases in one language in place of another.

My cultural and ethnic background has led me to feel that I reside in two different worlds – Chinese and American. There are times when both worlds are melded together or defined separately depending on the people I interact with and the location I am situated in at the moment. For example, when I visit my grandmother’s apartment, I primarily embrace the Chinese aspect of my identity. My grandmother lives in Chinatown. She watches Chinese soap operas every day. She eats Chinese food every day. And the only way I can communicate with her is by speaking Cantonese. At home, I embrace both Chinese and American culture through language (my parents speak to my brother and I in both English and Cantonese), food (we eat a mix of Chinese and American cuisine), and entertainment choices (we watch Chinese soap operas and movies in Chinese, as well as American Hollywood films and television shows). I identify myself as both Chinese and American. I believe that the borderline between these two aspects of my identity are blurred rather than defined. I have learned to navigate the borders of both using culture, language, family ties, and food.

IMMIGRATION STORY

BLOG POSTS

Lingering Thoughts from Tenement Museum Visit

I think what striked me the most from our trip to the tenement museum is the fact that the family our tour focused on (the one that used the parlor as a dress factory) did not depend on the immediate family members, like the children, to sustain the father’s business, even though that was an option (and possibly, a money-saver too). Instead, others outside of the immediate family, like tenement neighbors, were hired to assist in the dressmaking. When I heard our tour group discuss that the reason for this may have been that the immigrant parents may have wanted a better life for their American children, I was reminded of my parents’ own words and actions towards creating a better life for my brother and me. No, that family and my family are not alike in our business endeavors or living situations. No, my parents are not completely  new to the country (although, my mom did immigrate here from Hong Kong). But the fact that both my parents and the parents of those first generation American children want the best for their children shows me that the values families place on the importance of schooling (the immigrant parents would rather send their children to school than have them work) and financing for the future (the immigrant family’s home business) have not changed much over the years, across generations. It also shows me that wanting-what’s-best-for-one’s-children is something that many people have in common regardless of background. Just as the desire for improvement of lifestyle and opportunities is something common to immigrant groups, life with new opportunities, including living without the dangers associated with war, political conflict, famine, disease, extreme poverty, and territorial conflict remain reasons that flocks of people still want to come to the USA both legally and illegally.

BOOK REVIEW

Beyond the Melting Pot: A Book Review

Introduction:

At a first glance the book, Beyond the Melting Pot is a work that supplies its readers with a compilation of analyses on US Census data specifically geared towards examining several distinct ethnic groups living within New York City. These groups include the Negroes, the Puerto Ricans, the Jews, the Italians, and the Irish. The writers have outlined each group’s historical background in the city, covering areas such as arrival to the city and reasons for leaving their home country, as well as statistical trends that can be used to describe characteristics specific to these distinct populations, such as occupation, community, and education. Each chapter focuses on one ethnic group. The last chapter, however, focuses on the future implications of the information presented in the previous chapters.

Author Background:           

In 1963, Nathan Glazer and Daniel Patrick Moynihan published this book.

Daniel Patrick Moynihan was Senator of New York for 24 years (since 1977). His Alma matter includes City College of New York ’43, Tufts ’48, Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy and London School of Economics and Political Science ’51. His vast involvement in New York City politics ranged from collaboration in campaigning with Robert F. Wagner Jr., Averall Harriman, and the Kennedy Presidential campaign (1960). He was a professor at Syracuse University’s Maxwell School 2001. In 2003, he passed away due to complications from a ruptured appendix[1].

Nathan Glazer is a sociologist and educator. His Alma matter includes City College ’44, University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, and Harvard University. Working positions include professor of sociology at the University of California at Berkeley, assistant-editor of “Commentary” magazine, contributing editor to “The New Republic,” and co-editor of “The Public Interest.” He has served on Presidential task forces on education and urban policy. He has also worked with the National Academy of Science committees on urban policy and minority issues (“New York Intellectuals”).

Book Analysis:

Moynihan and Glazer paint a picture for its readers as it begins to answer the question – What does New York City look like? Through careful and thorough analysis of US Census data along with sociological research of New York City population, the writers present the readers with an in-depth examination into the make-up of a city that has become known to many as the “melting pot.” But what is the melting pot? The writers do a good job at attempting to answer this by outlining the “ingredients” to this “stew.” Individual groups are described separately, in-depth, as different sections in the book. Thus, the work, if viewed through the lens of a cookbook, would be analogous to only the beginning of such a book. The Negroes, the Puerto Ricans, the Italians, the Jews, and the Irish are the ingredients to the “stew.”  

Now that we know what the ingredients are, we may be able to anticipate what the “stew” that will be “cooked” in the “melting pot” will turn out to be. But have the ingredients “melted” together yet? The end of the book leaves us with a sense that this “melting” process remains, to this day, incomplete. In the book, Glazer and Moynihan write that “[they] have tried to show how deeply the pattern of ethnicity is impressed on the life of the city” (310). Ethnic neighborhoods are but one example of this phenomenon. Other instances involve social and political institutions that “exist for the specific purpose of serving ethnic groupings” which, in turn, preserves them; they are recognized, rewarded and therefore, encouraged (310).  Moynihan and Glazer are not suggesting that in order for this “melting” to occur that these institutions and neighborhoods have to be demolished but rather that a sort of catalyst is needed for the “melting pot” to work. As of yet, New York City resembles more of a “salad[2]” rather than a “melting pot.” Its “ingredients” can easily be picked out.

Now, we are left with the question – what kind of catalyst is needed for this reaction to occur? How does one honor his/her ancestry and take part in American culture at the same time? Do you have to give up one or the other? This of course brings up another defining question – what is American culture? Some may say it is a conglomeration of all the parts that make up the whole. It is like a conglomerate of rocks. In this context, it is a conglomeration of the Irish, Jewish, Italian, Puerto Rican, and Negro populations. However, it has not been “metamorphosed.

Conclusion:

If we approach this work as an examination into an expanded metaphor – hence, the title “Beyond the Melting Pot” – we can see that the image that has for so long been attributed to NYC remains a work-in-progress. New York City, a dense microcosm of America, can serve as an indicator of the future image of our country. This book is an outline of the situation as the writers saw it and even though it was written 50 years ago, the information presented, as well as the interpretation of that information, is still relevant today. In the words of Moynihan and Glazer, “the American nationality is still forming; its processes are mysterious, and the final form, if there ever is to be a final form, is as yet unknown” (315). It is a “stew” that still needs time to prep and simmer.

 

INWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD

Walking through Fort Tyron Park (@Inwood) reminded me of my trips to Bear Mountain, New York. Experiencing all that this place has to offer – the air, the trees, the big hills, the river – for the second time brought to me a sense of unmeasurable joy.

And what better time to go that at the beginning days of the spring season?

It was so peaceful and serene. Sometimes I forget New York City can be so beautiful, in terms of natural landscape. I was so overwhelmed by the grandeur of my sightseeing that I had literally become breathless during the first few seconds I spent looking over the water. The tree leaves in their spring foliage were just beginning to bud. Some even began to bloom. Soon the flowers’ petals would cover the ground in a winter demise, appearing like fresh snowfall on a green lawn. The bushes were a deep green and the flowers, rooted strongly in the ground, were blooming.

Not to mention, the weather that day was unusually warm. Contrary to the day’s weather forecast from the night before, the sky was a pleasant shade of blue, without any traces of rain. I had arrived dressed in my goulashes, trench coat and carrying an umbrella. But I didn’t care if what I wore made my feet ache as I walked for miles around the area.

This, I believe, is the “magic” of this place, of the park’s ambience. I can let go. I can forget about everything else and just embrace the world as I see it then and there.

Even so, I am brought back to reality. As I turned my head I could spot the Henry Hudson bridge, connecting the northern tip of Manhattan island to the Bronx. And as I began exiting the park, I could see residential apartment buildings and small convenience stores lining the streets. Slowly, I was being brought back into city life.

I believe this is why I like this place so much. For a girl who’s basically grown up in the city and is used to commuting for hours, a place such as Fort Tyron Park, in all its beauty, allows me to mentally escape from the hustle-bustle that city life entails.