On June 4^th, 1993, a Chinese cargo ship ran aground on Rockaway Beach in New York.  This mishap revealed that almost 300 Chinese immigrants were packed aboard the cargo ship attempting to get into the U.S. illegally.  In order to avoid persecution, these immigrants jumped off the ship and tried to swim ashore and escape officials.  Unfortunately, while a majority of these immigrants were saved, 10 drowned before they touched American soil.  In Peter Cohn’s documentary Golden Venture, we follow a group of these survivors and learn about what they had to go through and where they are now.

In my opinion, this movie does a good job of telling the story of the Golden Venture from different perspectives.  After being rescued, all of the passengers (with the exception of the very few who were able to escape) were taken into federal custody.  They were kept in York County Prison for many years awaiting political asylum.  During this time, all of the immigrants were offered the choice of getting deported or staying in prison and await an uncertain future.  Of those who chose deportation, some chose to be deported to South America while most were sent back to China.  While the U.S. government promised these deportees that they would not be harmed in any way once they arrived in China, the Chinese government had something else entirely in store for them.

Another thing this movie did quite well was present its facts and events in a credible way.  We would first be told of the (presumably true) facts, for example, the fact that the U.S. government promised the deportees that they would come to no harm.  The movie then either proves or disproves these facts by having the Golden Venture passengers recount what happened to them.  Of the ~50 men who chose deportation, we are able to hear 2 of these men, Yan Li and Kaiqu Zheng, tell their story.  According to both men, despite the American governments assurance, after landing in China, they were detained in federal prison and punished before being allowed to go.  It is interesting to see the strikingly different environments all of the Golden Venture’s passengers have ended up in.  While some remained in prison for many years and are now working hard for their loved ones, others have chosen another path.  The two men who chose deportation ended up in very dissimilar situations.  While Yan Li managed to come back to America and now lives illegally in New York, Kaiqu  Zheng could be seen happily getting everything ready for his daughter’s wedding in China.  Yan Li, on the other hand, confesses that he has lost his family.

Though the movie was informative overall, it was clearly bias and did a very good job of making the immigrants seem like the victims who deserved to be saved.  Although they were victimized to an extent, the movie forgets to point out that these immigrants boarded the Golden Venture at their own risk and chose to enter a country illegally ready to face the consequences.  It’s likely that they never imagined they would have to deal with such a tragedy, but that does not mean they were not at fault.  Personally, I think the fact that these immigrants spent so much time in jail just shows that they should be entitled to remain in America.  Nevertheless, I felt that the movie exaggerated their time spent in prison by mentioning the paper sculptures they made, making it seem like that was all they were able to do during their time at York (I have trouble believing these people sat around making origami for over 3 years).  Nonetheless, I thought the movie was very informative and interesting and I was relieved when it came to a (mostly) satisfying end (especially considering the other movie we had to watch, Sentenced Home).

Midtown Manhattan, including neighborhoods Chelsea and Clinton, has some interesting housing trends.  About 60% of all property is worth over half a million dollars.  Although most housing units are rented, an overwhelming majority of residents pay over $1500 per month.  Interestingly, over 70% of Chelsea/Clinton’s residents live in a housing unit that includes 3 rooms or less.  In general, about 47% of all “houses” consist of only 1 bedroom and 20% consist of 2 bedrooms while 25% consist of “no bedrooms”, also known as studio apartments.      In other words, it is more common to live in an apartment with no bedrooms than one with 2 bedrooms in this neighborhood.  This came as a surprise as Chelsea is not a college neighborhood where it would be typical to have very little families and more people living alone.  To find out what kind of people live there, we decided to take a look at the social aspect of the neighborhood.

Though a majority of Chelsea residents are native to the U.S., 26% (over a quarter) are foreign born and of these foreigners, only 45% are naturalized citizens.  In addition, 11% of the population (both native and foreign) was living in another country 1 year ago.  From this, it seems that though diverse, a significant part of Chelsea/Clinton residents are people working and/or constantly moving around.  Using Social Explorer’s map, we found that unlike nearby neighborhoods, such as the Upper West Side, which are 60-80% white, Chelsea consists of a much more diverse population, about 60-30% white.  This led us to conclude that the non-white population in Chelsea is primarily non-married and contributes greatly to the neighborhoods non-married population.  Basically, a major reason for Chelsea/Clinton’s lack of families is the working, white-collar immigrant population living there.

As mentioned before, the white population is the dominant group to compose Chelsea/Clinton. Currently, however, there has been a heavy influx of Asian population immigrating into the community, according to the New York Times Census.  A distinct social element of both these ethnic groups is that those who live with another person almost always live with a non-relative (not including a non-married partner).  In other words, a person is more likely to be living with a roomate than with a spouse or child. Again, nonfamily households outnumber family households by more than a two to one ratio, as more than a majority of the residents are unmarried. This further explains why 1-bedroom/no bedroom apartments are the most common units since the number of married couples living in this neighborhood is sparse.

Another important social aspect to note is that more than 2/3 of Chelsea/Clinton’s inhabitants have an undergraduate degree or higher and a staggering 93% of all citizens have a high school education as well.

It is therefore reasonable to understand that the majority of Chelsea’s residents have white-collar jobs such as management, business, and science occupations. These statistics can now explain why residents are able to afford such high valued real estate along with the fact that most do not have to divert their resources to raising a family. Consequently, this predominantly educated district displays an assimilated and well-backgrounded body of workers.

Seeing housing from a social perspective helps us paint a picture of the people who live in Manhattan’s neighborhood of Chelsea/Clinton.  Like the rest of New York City, this neighborhood houses a unique and diverse population.  However, Chelsea is also shown to have a particular group of people making up a large part of its community: A well-educated, working, and non-married population (composed of both native and foreign).

During the mid-1800 to the early 20^th century, waves of immigrants flooded into the urban areas of New York City. One of the most popular of these areas was Manhattan’s lower east side, where the Tenement Museum now stands.  Last week, we were able to visit this historic neighborhood site to witness the wretched living conditions that European immigrants had to survive through.

Modern-day observers associate tenements with slums or ghettos. While not as bad as living on the streets, we saw that the earliest tenements were far from the standards of apartments today. As visitors, we saw the cramped hallways while maneuvering around the museum, the constant creaking of the staircase, the lighting and ventilation system, and the fear of an imminent fire. The New York State Assembly Tenement House Committee report in 1894 found New York to be the most densely populated city in the world, at an average of 143 people per acre.  Considering what we saw at the museum, this was not too hard to believe.  The first tenement we saw was made up of 2 very small bedrooms, which was a textile “factory” by day and a home by night.  Compared to the standards we have become used to today, imagining such a small and worn apartment housing so many people seemed almost impossible.  Fortunately, laws and reforms were under way by the time the Civil War was over. One of the first legislative actions taken was The Tenement House Act of 1867.  This act defined and set construction regulations on tenements. Of these requirements, it was especially important that there be at least one toilet (or privy) per 20 people.  One of the things that stood out to us was the lack of running water in the tenements.  Even with the Tenement House Act of 1867, having to share a single toilet with 20 other people seems as hygienic as using a public bathroom today (which is, in fact, not very hygienic).  Moreover, legislation was not enforced and conditions would have remained the same had it not been for the muckrakers.  Muckraker Jacob Riis would photograph what he saw in the tenements and have these emotional photos accompany his novel “How the Other Half Lives” which distinctly depicted the living conditions of the urban immigrant population to the rest of the world, especially the rest of America.

Finally, under implementation of President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s New Deal, the lower east side would begin its final transformation. Many of the low-income housing tenements would be cleared for the building of public housing. We found that it was because of Roosevelt’s New Deal that the tenement at 97 Orchard Street was boarded up in 1935 causing it to remain the same, as if in a time capsule, for the modern world to see.  Although, as our guide Jess told us, the furniture and decorations are not the originals, all of the things we saw in the museum are based on actual tenements through old records and recollections.  Unlike other museums, which allow you to see everything through a glass wall and prevent you from touching the artifacts (though we still do it anyway), the Tenement Museum is a doorway to the 19^th and 20^th centuries where we can walk around and get a taste of actual living conditions of past immigrants.  The museum, which could be described as New York City’s very own Pompeii, gave us the opportunity to visit the past and experience history firsthand.

One of the largest groups of immigrants that have come to the United States was from Germany.  In fact, up until the 20^th century, German immigration was increasing, albeit slightly.  A majority of these immigrants had always been poor farmers who would eventually settle in the south. However, as seen using the immigration explorer tool, much of this changed in the 20th century as immigration from Germany started to decline slowly.  This decline continued for the next few decades as political tensions in Europe, especially in Germany, rose.

Pre-WWII Germany became a very oppressive environment for the Jewish population.  Under the Nazi Party’s 25 Point Program, Jews were segregated from the “Aryan” population and could not participate in the simplest of tasks, such as going to schools or universities.   This, in turn, had a direct effect on German immigration to the U.S.  During the 1930’s and early 1940’s, a new group of immigrants started coming to America.  About 80% of these immigrants were Jewish.  Furthermore, a significant percentage of the immigrants (both Jews and non-Jews) were intellectuals, a group that had never before come to the U.S. in such large numbers.  In addition, these immigrants, unlike their predecessors, came to the U.S. and settled in cities, further emphasizing the deviation from earlier immigration patterns.

The intellectuals who settled in cities played significant roles in the U.S. during the World War II.  One of the most famous of these figures, perhaps, was Albert Einstein, a German-Jew who, at the time of the war, worked on the Manhattan Project (which allowed the U.S. to develop the first Atomic Bomb).  Similarly, Marlene Dietrich, a German-American actress, toured the states raising war bonds, being one of the first celebrities ever to do so.

During the war, President Franklin D. Roosevelt would also appoint two prominent Americans of German descent to top commands in the Army and Navy, General Dwight D. Eisenhower in Europe and Admiral Chester Nimitz in the Pacific. In fact, General Eisenhower would later become the 34^th president of the U.S.  Clearly, the influx of German immigrants not only affected American society, but also the outcome of the war.  Despite the slow rate of immigration during WWII, German influence in America remained strong.

German immigration may be on a slight decline for now, but past immigrants have fused well with countless other ethnic groups in modern day America.  Influences such as German pubs, Catholics, Lutherans, and craftsmen have all been incorporated into American society.  All in all, German immigrants remain the largest ethnic group in the United States, with over 45 million having made their way to the U.S. in the past couple of centuries.  As a result of this, German-Americans, comprising more than a fourth of the white population, have effectively assimilated into American culture all the while preserving their traditions while adapting to new ones to this very day.