Author Archives: John DeFilippo

Question on the Readings – 5/7/14

The article states that undocumented Hispanics are actually less-prevalent in New York than they are throughout the United States. I found that somewhat surprising considering New York would have many construction and development jobs that these workers could obtain. Is it possible that undocumented Hispanics are turned away by the diversity in New York, opting for more wholly Hispanic communities that they’d feel at home in? Is it perhaps just a money/economic reason?

4/30, Question on the Reading

I thought it was surprising that, in the article, a focus was on Koreans reserving managerial positions for Koreans only, but were happy to have Hispanics doing lower level work. Generally when one thinks of racism/discrimination, one thinks whites are usually the oppressing side. In this case, we see an immigrant group oppressing another. This kind of makes me think of the cycle of bullying, where people who are bullied can become bullies themselves. Is it possible that the Koreans mentioned in this article behave in such a way because they were discriminated against or used for another immigrant/ethnic group’s interests? If so, what group(s) could that be?

April 23rd: Q on the R

Initially, I was very surprised that the Gastropolis reading focused on Roosevelt Avenue and Jackson Heights, which is just about the same area my group is doing our project on. The article points out how the various senses are used to savor food in Hispanic dining, making a particular note that auditory and visual senses are also used through flags, pictures, etc. However, I think saying this is specific to only Hispanic culture is incorrect. In the Restaurants reading, we were shown how an Indian and a Pakistani restaurant used pictures and mirrors to affect the customers’ experience. For America, the average McDonald’s or Dunkin’ Donuts will usually have top Billboard hits playing over the radio. A particularly upscale Burger King in Douglaston has pictures of various celebrities like Will Smith and George Clooney adorning each booth and a red muscle car in the middle of the restaurant that serves as a table. So, isn’t it reasonable to say that all the senses play a crucial part in dining anywhere, not just Hispanic restaurants?

Review of Goodfellas

The film I chose to review is Martin Scorcese’s “Goodfellas”. The film stars Ray Liotta as Henry Hill, a real-life Irish-Sicilian mobster who rises up the ranks of the Italian criminal underworld starting in the 1950’s, alongside his friends Jimmy and Tommy, after being drawn in by the lures of money and respect. However, he later sees the risk this carries with it as he falls in a cocaine habit, the FBI comes down on him, and his fellow mobster friends are betrayed, jailed, or killed.

While the film doesn’t inherently concern itself with immigration problems, there are traces of it that come into play in the film. Early on, Henry and Jimmy are singled out because they aren’t Italians (and therefore, not trustworthy). Because they both have parents who are immigrants from Ireland, they cannot become “made” men – essentially untouchable mobsters. However, both of them learn to assimilate into the Italian-run mafia and their way of speaking is indistinguishable from the Italians. Somewhat contrary to our discussions of the children of immigrants being reminiscent of their countries’ cultures, the non-Italians are extremely enveloped, not in American culture, but of the Italian culture that is most useful to their survival. Henry heavily suppresses his Irish heritage; no mention is made of it outside of two of his voice-overs throughout the film, wherein he says it has negative connotations. Thus, we can see the pressure to fit in with the surrounding population.

Food, but more specifically, restaurants have a big role in the film. When Henry takes his future wife, Karen, to a date, he takes her to fancy Italian joint. His social status is immediately exemplified when they are allowed in ahead of the other patrons, Henry is greeted by numerous people as they walk through the restaurant,  and when the restaurant is full, another table is brought out specifically for them. To top it off, as the two sit down, a group of gentlemen immediately send over a bottle of wine with their compliments. The first appearance we see of Jimmy in the film is also at a restaurant, albeit outside. Henry is working as the busboy there and quickly observes Jimmy throwing twenty dollar tips and surrounding himself with several other mobsters. Instantly, Henry sees that Jimmy is a person to be respected. This relates to our discussion about how one behaves in restaurants displays one’s power and social standing.

In two separate scenes in the film, Tommy is shown killing two characters, both in restaurants, because he believes they’re insulting him. The first time he is seen with Henry, he seems like he is going to have a similar reaction before he is calmed down by Jimmy. In the same way that one’s behavior shows one’s status, Tommy reacts very badly when his status is threatened.

There’s also a scene/voice-over wherein Henry and Tommy set fire to a restaurant after the local capo, Pauly, has sucked it dry, run up tabs, and used it to ship drugs and illegal goods. This demonstrates the concept of restaurants being used simply as a means for making money. Unlike the Vado Pao restaurant run by Mukherjee, there’s very little concern with bringing over culture so long as fire insurance money can be claimed.

However, food is also used to represent an aspect of freedom in a later scene, when Henry and several other wise guys are in prison. Henry has his wife smuggle in Italian bread, cheeses and meats for them, which they cook later on while laughing and joking. In a somewhat small sense, the Italian food brings them comfort and connectivity while they’re isolated from the world. In this way, while Henry was not born Italian, he has fully adopted the culture as his own and identifies as one of the Italians.

My review of the film, as a whole, is that it’s expertly directed and driven by amazing performances from the lead cast to display the aspects of the real-life Italian mob between the mid-50’s to late-80’s. The detail put into the story to match Hill’s version of the events is extremely close, considering the film is two and half hours and encompasses 30 years of activity. Many of Scorsese’s shots are perfect, including his 3-minute long shot of Henry and Karen entering the Copacobana restaurant. While the film does depict Italian-Americans in a generally negative light, I feel it’s more about the mobsters who happen to be Italian. Jimmy, an Irishman, is as cold and murderous as the Italian mobsters.

Goodfellas is a spectacular telling of a true story and, among it’s concerns with culture and identity, it gives an amazing look at organized crime of the time period and a brutal depiction of how it all leads to an eventual downfall.

Careful! That’s precise merchandise… right? (2/26/14 reading)

The treatment and conditions that immigrants were forced to endure in coming to America were definitely brutal and were certain to dishearten these people. At the time, immigration was extremely healthy for America and was a crucial part of expansion and production. Immigrants could be seen as an asset to America. So, why were the conditions so bad? The amount of work a single, healthy immigrant worker could put in was extremely valuable. A horde of them could accomplish massive feats. Wouldn’t it be in the best interests of Americans (more specifically, the businesses who employed a large number of these immigrants) to have at least semi-decent conditions for these workers so that they would be in shape and ready to go to work and, by extension, earn those Americans a lot of money? Of course, humanely, the conditions should have been better from the get-go but I would think that, even back then, Americans would’ve been especially concerned in protecting their investments.

Lenapes: Ahead of their Time?

So, despite this course being food-based, I was a bit shocked in seeing that the Lenapes weren’t very patriarchal, not nearly as much as I’d have expected a society thousands of years ago. In one paragraph, it’s stated that the women were given large roles in communal affairs and were able to get a divorce without much hassle, as well as retain their lineage and their children. I found that rather revolutionary. So, were the Lenapes just one of the odd groups that held women to an equal/almost-equal standard as men, or was it just that, at that time period, males and females weren’t treated in such an unequal manner?

Also, as a side comment, I think it’s rather ironic that the Lenapes were apparently barbarous and primitive, yet their progress in gender division appeared to be much better than societies of nowadays.