Author Archives: Ashley Brea Tavarez

Question on the Reading: May 7

While reading the chapter in  Out of Three: Immigrant New York in the Twenty-First Century on Mexican immigration, it became more and more clear to me that with the number of illegal immigrants we have, there is seemingly no way to completely resolve the issue. The United States cannot deport every illegal immigrant and the illegal immigrants have little to no chance of being legalized. What other issue must be dealt with before one can think of stopping illegal immigration? (Such as the political issues in the immigrants home countries) Adding on to that question, is there anything that the United States can do to help resolve whatever issues exist?

Question on the Reading: April 30

The reading on chapter 3 in One Out of Three: Immigrant New York in the 21st Century states that “even when they are drastically underpaid, however, low-wage immigrants are greatly improving the quality of life of New Yorkers”. This made me think of my everyday life and the services that I have access to. How much differently would the economy of the United States have been if the 1965 change in federal immigration law had never occurred? Would U.S. born people have picked up the roles that immigrants now occupy?

Also the reading on chapter 7 in the same textbook speaks about the influence that  Jamaicans and West Indians seem to have African Americans already in the United States. Is there any other culture that is also influenced by the Jamaican and West Indian immigrants? What examples of this do we see?

Question on the Reading: April 23

The article from Food and Foodways focused on the research methodology that is food mapping. The author Lidia Marte introduces the concept of foodmaps as a useful tool to trace gendered boundaries. After reading the article on foodmaps in Dominican and Mexican cultures, what shared foodmaps exist in the cultures of others? Similarly what do you think an “American” food map would look like?

Review: Cesar Chavez

“If you really want to make a friend, go to someone’s house and eat with him… the people who give you their food give you their heart” – Cesar Chavez.

In the movie Cesar Chavez, Michael Peña, plays the role of the American labor leader that the movie is named after. Cesar Chavez – which is directed by Diego Luna – tells the story of the famous civil rights leader and labor organizer who was torn between his duties as a husband and father and his commitment to securing a living wage for farm workers. The film begins with Chavez having a conversation with a plantation worker surrounded by his wife and kids, where we see that he plans to move away from Los Angeles so that he can have a more direct connection with the farm workers he wants to help. The movie then covers the first 10 years of the United Farm Workers and their struggles, beginning with the grape strike in 1965. The boycott that followed the grape strike gained national support and helped to win the first UFW union contracts in 1970. The movie goes on to show the role of Cesar Chavez, his family and Dolores Huerta working with others to start the UFW.

Right from the beginning of this film, the audience can see the dedication and passion that Chavez had for this cause. His decision to move back to the farms especially shows the dedication he had. The fast-paced depiction of his decision and the way it was placed right in the beginning of the movie gave the whole issue at hand an overall sense of urgency. In addition, the way in which Diego Luna decided to shoot the scenes – almost like a documentary- and the lifelike performances on display gave me the feeling of actually being there watching as the action unfolds mere inches from me. I found myself completely absorbed into the movie and Chavez’s story. Throughout the film we see Chavez embrace the non-violent approach as he came up against greed and prejudice in his struggle to bring dignity to the people he once was like. We see not only the struggles of working on a farm but also the struggle of being an immigrant with a family to feed. One character that Chavez interviewed – whose children also works on the farms – shared that himself and others wanted better for their children but they also have to be able to feed their family. This shows how difficult it was for immigrants to stand up for their rights when they knew that their family’s wellbeing was at risk. Chavez’s struggle to unionize these exploited farm workers — his long marches, his hunger strike — create moments throughout the film where it is nearly impossible to not feel moved.

Although this movie does not focus entirely on all the themes we have discussed in class, it does touch on several such as social change, immigration, identity, and to a certain extend food. In terms of social change I would say that that would be the overall theme for the movie. Right from the start of the film, the audience can see that Chavez has to go up against the greed and prejudice the existed in the society that governed the farm workers. Thanks to the naturalistic performances and the documentary like film style, I was able to almost experience how poor the working conditions were for the braceros. I saw how the workers suffered from racism and brutality – both of which are social problems- at the hands of their employers and local Californians. The movie also encompasses the theme of immigration considering the majority of the characters, if not all, are immigrants. The role that the immigrants had and still have in our community directly connects to the theme of food. During the movie it is impossible to ignore the fact that the only workers on the farms are immigrants. We see the connection that immigrants had to the food supply in California. Taking all these themes into consideration, I also believe that the movie shows the struggles the farm workers have in finding their own identities both as individuals and as a subculture in the United States.

Overall I believe the movie was really good but also lacked certain details that would have added to the storyline. Due to my personal knowledge of Chavez, I felt like the movie was told in a very simplified way but was told in an accurate manner regardless. The details that were put into the filming and the acting definitely added to the already moving story.

My Rating:

 

 

Question on the Reading: Restaurants

In the Eating Out, Eating American chapter of Gastropolis, we are introduced to the sociocultural activity of eating out at a restaurant. The author, Mitchell Davis, states that “Like America, New York and its cuisine are modern and multicultural”. Going by this statement, what exactly would an “authentic” American restaurant have? For example when we think of an authentic Italian restaurant one may automatically just think of Fettucine Alfredo or Lasagna. Would the restaurant menu only have the “utterly authentic re-creations of foods from around the world” that the author introduces on page 299?

Question on the Reading: Gentrification

After reading “New Retail Capital and Neighborhood Change: Boutiques and Gentrification in New York City” one question I still have is does gentrification help or harm Urban neighborhoods in an overall sense? The reading states that “old stores and bars manage to shift gears, upgrade their merchandise and ambiance, and attract a new clientele. But in the process, they risk losing their old customers”. Is gentrification something where the means justify the end result? What parts of the gentrification process are more beneficial and which could be tweaked to accommodate the low-income inhabitants of certain areas? In other words how exactly can the public policy be changed to both accommodate the low-income inhabitants and local shops while still fostering the growth of new ones?