The readings for week 8 attempted to evaluate the processes of transnational migration according to separate veins of influence. Ho’s writings observed transnational migration as an engendered process. Rogers’ writings in “Black Like Who?” observed the transnational process in the West Indian diaspora according the way that West Indian and American blacks identify themselves. Waters observed the effects of transnational migration on the entire family as a means to highlight the changes in attitudes towards one’s West Indian heritage according to class and place in the family line. All of these writings added to the entire picture of the effects of transnational migration on the individual and their family.
“Caribbean Transnationalism as a Gendered Process” by Christine G. T. Ho observes the differences in the role that each sex plays in the process of migration. This article was initially intriguing because none of the other articles that we have read have observed the power of gender in the process of West Indian migration. Gender is a very important part of West Indian culture as the societal expectations for the male and female sexes are clearly defined and heartily observed. I most enjoyed Ho’s analysis of the matrifocality of the Caribbean household as being different from concept of a female-headed household. I felt that this idea correlated well with the familial structure that we observed while reading “Brown Girl Brownstones” by Paule Marshall. This is to say that the same matrifocal but male-headed household described in Ho’s writings was exemplified in Marshall’s writings.
Reuel Rogers’ article entitled “Black Like Who: Afro-Caribbean Immigrants, African Americans, and the Politics of Group Identity” helped to define the differences in the ways that African Americans and West Indians differ in terms of the ways that they associate with their countrymen. Generally, Rogers illustrates American blacks as being concerned with the success of their race because they perceive it as being strongly related to their own success. In contrast, Rogers asserts that West Indian blacks see their own success as separate from the success or failure of their entire group (i.e. other West Indians). The part of this issue that I find most interesting is the idea that West Indian migrants in America- especially those in the middle class- identify most with their West Indian roots yet, they do not see their successes or failures as having anything to do with their constituents. Still, the well being of the families of transnational migrants is deeply intertwined with the success of their family members abroad. Many of he ideas presented in Rogers’ writings compete with ideas that we have seen throughout the semester.
Lastly, “Growing Up West Indian and African America: Gender and Class differences in the Second Generation” by Mary C. Waters uses data that she collected through research to characterize first and second generation West Indian immigrants according to their class and their association with their West Indian culture. One of the main assertions that Waters made- which was also discussed in Rogers writings- is the idea that West Indian immigrants (especially those in the middle class) don’t see racism as an insurmountable issue. I struggled with this idea because Waters’ findings also show that middle class Caribbean migrants are least likely to identify as being black. How can one honestly assert that he can overcome racism when he works to avoid being associated with the most racially oppressed race? This is analogous to a person who’s never been on well fare saying that well fare is not so bad. With this in mind, I thin that the middle class West Indian –American assertion that racism can be overcome by hard work is misinformed and hypocritical in that West Indian Americans make every effort to not be associated with the black race in order to avoid racism. In other words, they are not overcoming racism but rather cheating/ avoiding it by staying outside of the span of racism’s scope.
