Goldschmidt claims that identifying Jews physically often rests on racial markers. However, in the areas he frequented, the population was of Ashkenzic Jews of European descent. I wonder what would happen to his experiment and observation if a Sphardi, or Ethiopian Jew fell into the mix. Yes, the generic image of a Jew is racially white, with that unsubstantiated large nose, and dark hair (versus Aryan looks), but such an image is inclusive only of a Jew whose family lived in European, white areas through the Diaspora. In Kew Gardens Hills, in Deal, NJ, in Israel, even, are scattered large populations of darker-skinned Jews who racially look more Hispanic, Middle Eastern, or African. Further in the chapter, Goldschmidt explores the differences in dress of various Jews, and of skin color between white and black Jews, but does not go much further into the discussion of race and religion as it applies to the racially diverse Jewish spectrum.
His discussion of physical stereotypes concerning Jews, made me think more about the other side in this book- that of the black community. Stereotypes against blacks often correlate with the way they stereotypically appear – not in terms of skin color (for that is unchangeable), but in terms of dress. Goldschmidt notes that a black man can wear dreadlocks, or a “business suit or track suit” and give across a different image. The stereotypes of the way a population behaves often correlates with the stereotypes of how they dress. But, therefore the beliefs in the stereotypes can be challenged by a manner of dress. Thus, there is something more than mere superficial appearances that identify an individual. Rather, there is something deeper. The individual can choose how to identify, can choose how to come across, and that can say much more than the physical appearance.
In his conclusion, Goldschmidt explores the construct of diversity in America. I thought it interesting that in class, many students offered understandings of diversity that involved an exchange of cultural material, while Goldschmidt’s version of diversity fits more in line with the Hassidic woman who wanted respect for her diversity. Goldschmidt employs the term “space” in relating with the form of celebrating American diversity, addressing the need to “create space in American society for other cultures and communities,” and to “create an America with conceptual and political space for all the … peoples.” Thus, he understands that there are divides between communities that are hard, if not near impossible, to bridge, often because of different operational languages and definitions at play, and that the wonder of America is that it creates the space for each structure to flourish, and not be forced to be submerged into a melting pot of assimilation. Thus, assimilation is not as correlated with diversity as is independent identity. This identity belongs to each individual to define, to create, to choose and is deeper and more complex than the mere appearances of race and physical stereotypes.
