Author: juliasaccamano

Friends, Foes, or Forces- Essay #1

Julia Saccamano

Professor Murphy

MHC 10201

7 March 2016

Friends, Foes, or Forces: The Types of Multiracial Relationships Involving Irish Immigrants in Mid-Nineteenth Century New York City

Through the portrayal of personal relationships between characters such as William Cutting and Amsterdam Vallon, and of general group relationships between Irish, Nativists, and government officials, Martin Scorsese’s film Gangs of New York depicts two distinct types of multiracial coexistence that were present during mid- nineteenth century New York City: one that is power orient, and one that is friendship orientated. While the film highlights on the Civil War and 1863 New York City Draft Riots and the antagonistic racial relationships present in New York City at the time, it also illustrates the fact that not everyone was anti-immigration all the time. Many of the people who accepted immigrants and were willing to coexist with them, however, were not this way because of fondness but rather because of power. These people found ways to use the immigrants to promote their own needs. Yet, occasionally there were actual positive multi-racial relationships like the one between Amsterdam and Bill (at least for a short time).

The film does an adequate job conveying the discontent and tensions between the various groups that were present in New York City during the the 1860s. There was abundant hostility between immigrants and nativists. The nativist American opposition is exemplified through Bill “the butcher” Cutting and his blatant animosity towards all things Irish; at one point he even claims he would shoot every immigrant coming into the harbor if he could. He cites both history and religion as reasons against continued Irish immigration. He is proud of his American heritage; it’s as if he views America as a possession that he is unwilling to share. He claims: “My father gave his life, making this country what it is.” No new Irish immigrant has that history, so what right does one have to occupy America? Americans also were suspicious of the religion many Irish followed: Catholicism. It was feared that it would spread and that followers would be more loyal to the Pope than their country. Overall, New York City was a hostile environment where the nativists hated the Irish and vice versa.

While all of the discontent and and hostility among the nativists and Irish are made clear, Gangs of New York also shows relationships in which (semi-) peaceful coexistence is achieved. Throughout the film, immigrants and nativists seem to be living in harmony, or at least without battles like the one that occurred between Priest Vallon and Bill occurring daily. However, this coexistence comes at a price. It seems the only time there is ‘coexistence’ between groups is when the more powerful group is getting something from the less powerful one. For example, immigrants coming off the boats are met by Boss Tweed with open arms, smiling faces, and warm welcomes. Yet this kindness is not done out of the goodness of Tweed’s heart, but rather to gain their votes. In the movie, he tells Bill: “You may or may not know, Bill, that everyday I go down to the waterfront with hot soup for the Irish as they come ashore. Its part of building a political base.” During the Draft Riots when many poor immigrants died, Tweed wasn’t unhappy because people died bit rather because votes were lost. When standing over a mass grave he morosely says: “We’re burying a lot of votes tonight.” He doesn’t think of the immigrants as people or feel compassion, but rather he manipulates them to serve his own needs.

In addition to the gilded façade of welcome from Boss Tweed, there is the blackmail- type aid offered by the army to immigrants. During one of the scenes where Irish immigrants are coming off the boats they are lined up in front of an army recruiter who tells each of them “That document makes you a citizen, and this one makes you a private in the Union army. Now get out there and serve your country.” They are promised food, money, and clothes when they enlist. They don’t know where they are going, or what they are fighting for, but they are persuaded to partake because of promises that were made to them.

Aside from politicians and the government, the ‘coexistence’ immigrants faced with nativists was even more precarious in places like the five points. Like in the other cases, the peace for immigrants was only kept because the more powerful group wanted something from them. For example, on more than one occasion Bill claims to own the five points and he holds the power of it as if it were his fist. When Amsterdam meets Bill for the first time as a man, Bill threatens him because he doesn’t pay Bill enough. “Don’t you never come in here empty handed again. You gotta pay for the pleasure of my company” he says. The less powerful group, the Irish immigrants, have to live under the control of the nativists, with constant fear and exploitation.

Despite the abusive relationships and outright antagonism, the film does show a few occasions of actual multi-racial friendship and bonding. This only happens when the characters get to know each other personally, instead of just as their racial classification. Throughout the film, for example, as Bill and Amsterdam spend time together a bond is formed. They begin to act like father and son and Bill especially starts to see past Amsterdam’s Irish immigrant label. That’s not to say that he begins to see the Irish differently, just that he can see Amsterdam that way. When criticizing the Irish, he goes out of his way to placate Amsterdam: “On the seventh day the Lord rested, but before that he did, he squatted over the side of England and what came out of him… was Ireland. No offence son.”

It seems that the only time there is multiracial coexistence in the move Gangs of New York is when the government or nativists (aka the powerful) have something to gain from the other races. Yet, in the movie when characters actually spend time together and bond, the racial divides seem to fade away or are, for the most part, ignored. It seems there is only outright hatred for groups when they are thought of in the abstract, and not as individuals. The film shows how racial tensions were not as black- and- white as people like Bill and Amsterdam would like to believe. Not only does the film depict the widely known racial tensions present in New York City at the time, but it also draws attention to the other types of relationships members of various races had with each other. Whether the were friends, foes, or forced into coexistence, the film Gangs of New York shows just how many different types of relationships there were across the races.

Bread Givers and Bread Eaters

  1. Reflect on the meaning of the title in light of your reading.

When it comes to the novel: Bread Givers author Anzia Yezierska chooses an apt title. Bread giver, similar to the common term breadwinner, incites ideals of the person in a family who earns enough to provide for the needs of the family. In traditional ideals, this person is usually the father/ husband/ male head of the family. Interestingly enough, in Sara’s family this is not the case. Instead of the father being the provider for the wife and children, in her case it’s the children (and wife) being the provider for the father. By titling the book Bread Givers, Yezierska is essentially defining the Smolinsky daughters.

The majority of the novel focuses on bread giving: the act of earning wages, providing for the family, working, looking for jobs, marrying wealthy, etc. Every crisis in the book occurs when one of the ‘bread givers’ roles is challenged; when Bessie’s hand is being requested, when no one can find jobs, when Sara’s mother (Shena) asks Reb to become a bread giver…

According to their father, Rabbi Reb Smolinsky, the best bread giver in the family is Sara’s oldest sister Bessie. Bessie, as the Ideal bread giver, always gives up all of her wages to ‘the family’ and never spends anything on herself. She also works tirelessly to be everything the family needs. On the other hand, the laxest of the Smolinsky bread givers is arguably Masha who, while she does help the family in some ways, spends the majority of her time and wages on herself.

While all of the Smolinsky daughters could be coined ‘bread givers,’ the few times the phrase is actually mentioned in the book is when possible suitors are being discussed. This is because in a usual situation the bread giver the male of the household. This draws even more attention to how in the Smolinsky situation the girls are the providers and the only person that cannot be considered a bread giver has total control.

After watching this abusive, unbalanced situation for years, Sara decides to break the cycle. Sara does not want anything to do with the term bread giver. Her actions break her off from the role her father has shoved her in. She does not want to be depended upon and abused by her father. Sara moves out, gets her own room and job, and no longer ‘gives bread’. Symbolically, she is the bread maker, breadwinner, and the bread eater. She refuses to give her bread.

Scene Analysis- Amsterdam Hangs the Dead Rabbit

The scene that I would like to analyze starts 1:53:00 in the movie and lasts only about a minute overall. Amsterdam is making his first trip into public after healing from Bill’s humiliation. An interesting aspect of this scene is the way the camera moves to show what Amsterdam is seeing, or coming from Amsterdam’s point of view. The camera is at eye-level and moves with the not- quite- smooth movements of him walking through the square. This adds to Amsterdam’s character. It shows his strength as he refuses to be ashamed or hide himself from the public. During his entire walk, the camera never lowers (as if Amsterdam was hanging his head) and his stride is not too slow or fast and never hesitant. When the camera does finally break from this point of view, it focuses on Amsterdam’s back, which is tall and broad rather than slouching. After focusing on his back, the camera then stays on his determined face when he turns around and next on the crowd as they stare at him. This increases the suspense of the scene. The camera doesn’t show what Amsterdam was doing until the very end, and the view of grotesque pelt of the dead rabbit hanging with Amsterdam walking away is the perfect conclusion to the scene.

The only sound that can be heard throughout the scene (except for the indiscernible grunts and mumblings from the crowd) is that of an unseen drum and whistle. The rhythmic, pulsing drum beat and an unsettling tune both increase in volume throughout the scene. The beat seems reminiscent of a battle drum and the escalation invites more anticipation and suspense.

Additionally, while no dialogue is discernable in this scene, there are a lot of things being said silently. Everyone Amsterdam passes in the crowd stops quietly to look at him and judge him. This silence of the onlookers is as damming as if they all were yelling profanities at him. Nevertheless, Amsterdam strides confidently through the crowd, telling all of the city, and Bill, that he refuses to be ashamed or run away. Then, before he shows the public what he’d done he stares down the crowd, as if daring them to confront him. The dead rabbit that he hangs in the middle of the square is a loud declaration of war.

This scene, which occurs two thirds of the way into the movie both advances the narrative, showing that all is not peaceful and defeated in the Five Points, and reveals Amsterdam’s strong and determined character.

Summary for Chapter 4 of Joanne Reitano’s the Restless City

During the mid-1800s New York City was overwrought with conflicts due to economic, political, and population changes. Between 1840 and 1860 there was a huge influx of immigrants settling in New York City. The city’s geography and economy grew as a result. However, there was such a large disparity between wealth and population that the majority of New Yorkers of the time were forced to live in poverty-rife slums where gangs, drugs, alcohol, gambling, violence, and sex prevailed.

In 1849 the Astor Place Riots caused the deaths of almost 30 people and injury of 150. In the city at the time there were two actors who played the same role of Hamlet in two different theatres. The English actor, William Macready got the more prestigious position at the upper class and affluent Astor Place Opera House while the American actor, Edward Forrest, worked in a Broadway theatre that catered to the lower class. Many lower class New Yorkers viewed the English Actor as an insult to their culture, class, and nationality. In May this discontent led to a huge crowd of anti-Macready protestors being assaulted by a state militia manned by 350 men and horses. Many viewed the battle as the government attacking American citizens to protect a British man. The carnage sparked a protest rally in City Hall Park that became another mob that stood outside of the Astor Place Opera House days later. The Opera House was protected by almost four thousand soldiers, policemen, and deputized constables.

The Astor Place Riots drew national attention that caused debates about American society and government. What was the future of democracy? How should the riots have handled? Was the police force too rash, or should they have open fire as soon as there was disorder? Newspapers in Boston, Philadelphia, New York and Rochester covered the story. It was recognized that the riots originated from the timeless battle between upper and lower class, capitalists and workers. The working class had a universal resentment of those they worked for, believing that they were little better than machines the rich used. In the years leading up to the riots the working classes in New York City were organizing themselves by forming groups, parades, protests, and strikes. After the Astor Place Draft Riots, these organizations grew in popularity. One tailors’ protest led police killing two and arresting forty, which caused even more resentment.

During the 1840s and 1850s, New York City was becoming more diverse than many New Yorkers (the once dominant Anglo-Saxon Protestants) desired. There were cultural and economic battles between Anglo- Saxons and the Irish, the Irish and African Americans, etc. Education and religion became a major topic of debate in the ever present battle between Protestants and Catholics. Irish born Bishop John Hughes petitioned and campaigned for public funds for Catholic education. During elections, Catholics would only vote for those who supported Hughes’ claims which caused the appointment of ten Democrats. The number of voting Catholics and the potential power they yielded gave way to riots on election day of 1842. During the battle of religions, Protestants set out to reform Catholics by setting up missions in poor neighborhoods, distributing bibles, etc. Irish Americans held firm to non- assimilation.

During the mid nineteenth century there was a politician, Fernando Wood, who was able to draw enough power to become the city’s first strong mayor. Although he was corrupt, he was also well spoken, well liked, and had powerful friends. He served three terms as mayor starting in 1854. He had somewhat socialistic views, was power hungry, and used bribes and gangs to stay in power. He also naturalized immigrants, took more city control over municipal affairs, and tried to improve the lives of the poor. When Albany passed several bills in 1857 Wood’s power was weakened and he was arrested. The Metropolitan police force, which took Wood’s power, then faced several battles and riots among Irish gangs, Germans, and other Five- Point inhabitants. There was an economic crisis that was caused by banks attempting to collect after distributing too many loans and over one hundred thousand people were unemployed. This led to the 1857 Bread Riots where participants demanded the right of employment. New York City’s economy became tied to the South and, during debates on abolition and secession, Wood’s ‘free city’ program was discussed. Washington started to get worried but when the Civil War began, the city’s businessmen decided to support the Union.

Another conflict of the time was the 1863 Draft Riots, during which over a hundred people were killed, thousands fled, hundreds were injured, and property was damaged. With the Civil War came a need for soldiers to fight in it. The national draft was inaugurated and there was little getting out of it. Only those who could pay three hundred dollars for a substitute were exempt from the lottery. The Civil War became “a rich man’s war and a poor man’s fight.” During the riots the rich were targeted, the politicians were targeted, and African Americans were targeted. The effect was President Lincoln agreeing to halve the number of people drafted in New York State. Organizations worked to help buy out firemen, policemen, and poor men who were needed to support their families. “The Draft Riots were the most brutal riots the nation had ever experienced and remain so to this day.”

In the mid nineteenth century population, race, politics, and the economy all caused New York City to become a passionate city rife with turmoil and changing views.

Broken Legs and Amputations

Julia Saccamano- Response to: Quinn makes a comparison between slave trade and the holocaust and famine emigration early in the essay on to reject it later. Why?

Broken leg or amputation, both are extremely painful and debilitating. However, despite them both being injuries it is hard to compare the two. The months of repairing a broken bone is nothing when compared to the years of healing and adjusting to the disability of a lost limb. Similarly, while the Holocaust and the Irish Famine can both be considered injuries to ethnic groups they can hardly be compared. In the Essay: “In Search of Banished Children” Irish- American writer Peter Quinn makes a similar point. In his work, Quinn discusses Irish history, shares their struggles, and recounts his own family’s history. He also discusses the Holocaust and why the two shouldn’t be equated.

Many do find ways to compare the Holocaust and Irish famine. In his essay Quinn quotes Robert James Scally, a historian, when he compares Irish emigration to the stuffed boxcars of the Holocaust (48). Yes, in both cases there was a large migration of people. In both cases millions died. In both cases survivors didn’t wish to relive it through discussion (47). However, while over a million Irish died in the famine (44), over 5 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust. While Irish survivors struggled to find ways to feed themselves and make money so as not to starve, Jewish survivors struggled to not get separated and murdered (in addition to not starving). While Irish immigrants did not wish to discuss the famine and its effects, the public was extremely aware. During the Holocaust there were people who denied its even occurrence. Moreover, the Irish famine was an environmental cause sparked by plant disease… The Holocaust was a deliberate horror that was caused and enforced by every single Jew’s murder. The Irish faced apathetic outsiders, the Jews faced murderous soldiers.

In his essay, Quinn makes all of these points which is why he declares:“ The Irish Famine of the 1840s and the Jewish Holocaust of the 1940s are very different events and should not be confused or equated”(53).