When I refer to myself solely as an American – without any reference to my family’s ethnicity – I mainly do so to indicate two points: my birthplace, and my political freedom. I used to utilize the unhyphenated “American” title in order to differentiate myself from my foreign-born grandparents. Although I am also Irish and Italian like my elder relatives, I assumed that a simple label would culturally distinguish me from them, since I saw “American” as a culture in itself. This idea regarding the separation of family ethnicity and native birthplace has changed after consulting the readings, however.

Ashley brought up the point that immigrants in America have not exactly blended together as if in a “melting pot”; rather, they have maintained their individual and traditional values, as if in a “salad bowl”. I strongly agree with this statement; this clever analogy explains the existence of hyphenated titles in our country. Immigrants typically followed this categorization in order to maintain an identity while in a new and strangely diverse land. They indeed attempted to engage in American activities and contribute their own ideas to its development, therefore prompting the continual growth of “Americanization” (Gerstle gives the example of traditional immigrants embracing mass culture by participating in dances and attending local movies). However, they never entirely let go of their past, for it soon determined their social status. Color, according to Morrison, initiated Americans to “alienate” themselves from each other – in particular, whites against the “savagery” of non-whites.

This physical division is deeply rooted in our nation’s history, as Greg noted in his post. Caucasians with Angelo-Saxon ties declared that they were ordained to take over lands around them, because their governmental and commercial skills made them eligible. According to Horsman, “Americans found comfort in the strength and status of a distinguished racial heritage.” Likewise, immigrants in America in general found security in having an identity. Unfortunately, this caused the mixture of strangers to clash with one another over time; Gerstle mentioned how the Irish did not want to associate with those of dark skin because their wages were almost as equally low.

This week’s collection of readings made me realize that those in the United States – myself included – usually do not separate ethnicity and birthplace. They remain loyal to their cultural identity, and hold true to their American title as well. Realizing this, I now understand why my grandparents made the decisions they did about where to live in New York City – those with similar identities helped each other remain strong to their heritage while embracing the uncertainties of a new world.

Scrolling through the 932 songs on my iPod, about half of my music is sung in a language other than English and my Top 25 Most Played playlist includes artists from Italy, Columbia, Korea, Albania, Armenia, Romania, India and Israel. Sifting through the contents of my fridge, there are leftovers from my favorite restaurants: Thai Noodles, Shawarma, Spanakopita, Pizza, and Chicken Curry.   Anywhere else in the world, my taste in music and the contents of my fridge would seem bizarre and/or cause instant indigestion, but here in New York ethnic food and music is just a part of everyday life.

Our acceptance of and appreciation for other cultures is not at all surprising considering that everyone I know can trace their roots back a few generations to an immigrant from some corner of the world. It is because of this that I think that a purely American nationality does not exist (with the exception of Native Americans of course).  To be an American, more specifically, to be a “New Yorker” is to have no national identity: to be caught in-between worlds.

Nowhere else in the world will you find a more diverse mix who is both aware of and proud of their cultural heritage. The mentality of immigrants today has dramatically changed in the last few decades and the pride felt by the American-born children of immigrants towards their culture of origin is a relatively recent phenomenon. The abilities of immigrants and second generation Americans to speak other languages and practice the traditions practiced in other parts of the world have become skills to be coveted, opposed to things to be ashamed of.

In preparation for tomorrow’s in-class presentation, I spoke to my Grandfather on my mother’s side and my Father. Both were born and raised in the USA but have radically different perspectives towards their respective heritages. The contrast in beliefs between the two second generation Americans who are only one generation apart is, in my opinion, fascinating.

My grandfather, whose mother and father were both immigrants from Lithuania, was raised to  “become an American.” Instead of embracing his heritage, his parents pushed him to assimilate and were sure that only English was spoken in the household. Lithuanian culture and tradition were completely abandoned. He adopted the “American Dream” as his own and became an aerospace engineer and worked for Nasa.

My father, on the other hand, was raised completely differently. His mother and father, who were both immigrants from Sicily latched on to their traditions and never let go. They both named and raised their children according to tradition.  Named after my grandfather’s father and mother, my father and aunt learned the Sicilian dialect as their first language and spent every Sunday morning in church and every Sunday afternoon at their grandparents house along with their nine aunts and uncles Gandolfo, Jimmy, Michael, Robert, Rosa, Gandolfa, Gandolfa, Josephine, and Gina and seven first cousins Salvatore, Salvatore, Angela, Felicia, Felicia, Lucia, and Joseph.

Today, my grandfather and father behave exactly how they were raised to. My grandfather hosts barbeques on the Fourth of July and my Father makes the best stuffed shells in the family and continues to visit his mother, aunts, and uncles every Sunday. In the long run, I think my dad is way better off and way more American.

The differences between the citizens in this country is what makes America so great and draws so many different people to come here. The best part of living in New York for me is the fact that everyday I meet someone who is completely unique. There is always something new to learn, a new food to try, a new lifestyle to be exposed to. The great thing about our generation, in spite of its many pitfalls, is that we are much more open to other cultures compared to the generations before us. While neighborhoods in the past have been very culturally specific, I think that, in a few decades, that is going to change. The definition of “American” needs to be redefined from WASP to include everyone who lives, works, and contributes to the American society and economy not just the brandy sipping, wine swirling, White European elite. To be an “American” is to be an immigrant.

I agree with Ashley that America is more of a salad bowl than a melting pot.  We discussed in history last semester a number of attempts to turn America into a melting pot: everything from the role of eugenics to banning the teaching of foreign languages in school.  However, I think this is impossible–especially in a place like New York where there are new-comers every day.  One major reason, I think, is that even if you could somehow get everyone to speak and act the same way, our physical differences are too much.  There will always be people with blue eyes and people with brown.  There will always be the variety of skin tones, from albino white to dark as night black.  For a lot of people, unity isn’t just about actions–it’s about appearance.  Racism happens, which is counter-acted by cultural pride.  It’s the way it is, and the way it always will be.  I think that cultural pride has to do with what Ashley pointed out about second generation immigrants being more successful native-born counterparts.  When you’re America, you’re just…American.  But when you’re African-American, or Italian-American, or Pakistani-American, you’ve got to uphold both sides of the hyphen.

While cultural pride is good, too much isn’t a great thing.  It leads to ethnocentrism and  as Greg points out, ethnocentrism “provides a means for making moves guilt free”.  I also want to comment on what he said about non-white people tending to reserve American terms for whites, and using their cultural ties to identify themselves.  Even people who come from mixed cultures (example European father and Asian mother) like to point out both heritages when it comes to describing themselves.  In fact, the diversity is often a form of pride for them.

One last comment on Morrison’s obvious disdain of hyphens and her use of the term Africanist–I think to lose the hyphen is to lose half of one’s identity.  Half of one’s identity comes from one’s genes, and the other from one’s choices–and living in America counts as a choice.

All in all, I found the articles to be informative.  I won’t lie and say that they were always interesting, because they weren’t.  But I could relate to a lot of what they said, and I was able to appreciate the views they presented.

I definitely agree with Ashley, and several others who mentioned the idea of America as a “Salad Bowl” as opposed to a melting pot.  Whereas the earliest immigrants to this country may have assimilated, forming a “melting pot” of one unified, “American” culture, that is no longer the case.  People now develop a sense of being American while still retaining their native cultures. It is definitely true that assimilation is not an easy and quick thing, as Gerstle brought up in his article, and became more difficult with the coming of industrialization.  In fact many immigrants in the early 20th century had to form close-knit communities in which their own cultures flourished as a means of survival!

Greg brought up the point that New York is one of the most culturally diverse places in the world, and I would have to agree.  One of the ideas in Kasinitz’s article was that the face of immigration is changing because of this newfound diversity, especially in New York.  Now, immigrants are living among other immigrants, instead of being faced with a sharp divide from a predominant white culture.  Morrison said that the true “American” culture was only formed by the “presence of a racial other” to compare against…but the line is becoming less clear in certain parts of the country.

America is becoming more and more culturally diverse, and generally a place where people can openly express cultural individuality. I believe that this diversity and constant contact between numerous nationalities and beliefs is what is actually creating the unique “American” culture we are searching for.

When you’re asked, “Where are you from?” people aren’t looking for the answer “American” because it doesn’t mean much.  They want to know your roots and your background; so unless you’re a Native American, or your lineage can be traced back several generations in this country, chances are you aren’t strictly American.  So I agree with Ashley that being a “hyphenated American” is one way to hold onto one’s roots.  Since “‘American’ is not one of the ethnic groups recognized in the United States census,” (Walzer 5) claiming our roots is also how we identify ourselves to the general public and society.  For the immigrants who come to this country, they do so with hopes for a better life and to accomplish that they need to fit in (i.e. learn another language) but at the same time, they don’t want to let go of what they’ve lived with their whole lives, like their traditions and religion.  New York, being one of the most immigrant filled places in the states, demonstrates how far we’ve come from the early immigration days.  Rather than shed their culture, many ethnic groups have formed communities of similar backgrounds but also branch out.  Neither the salad bowl nor the melting pot idea is completely true, because while we all try to fit into American society, its the fact that we can be different (and are almost expected to be if you go by the lack of the ethnic group labeled “American” in the census) that lets us hold onto our cultural backgrounds.

When I first began reading the articles, I realized that it had never occurred to me that there is technically no ethnic group called “American”.  This fact struck me as very odd, because for all of my life, I have just accepted the idea that I am an American.  And I say this with a deeper meaning than that of just the country of my birth.  For me, the idea of an “American” has taken on a much larger meaning.  It defines who I was, who I am, and who I will always be.

I agree with Ashley in her disregard for Park’s assumption that all immigrants come to America only to leave behind their ethnic past and culture, assimilating entirely to the American lifestyle.  Many – dare I say ‘most’ – immigrants are coming to America to make a better life for themselves and their families, becoming Americans yet never losing the part of them “on the left side of the hyphen.”  I think that immigrants of long ago felt more pressure to assimilate quickly due to the sheer fact that racism and discrimination was a very popular thing among so called “native-born” Americans.  In more recent times, however, I feel that immigrants do not feel the same need to fit in.  American society is embracing the many different cultures coming to this country, and as was stated in the Kasinitz article, the ethnic groups and cultures are meshing very well with one another, creating an entirely new group altogether.

As Ashley and William said, I feel that America can now be seen as more of a “salad bowl” rather than a “melting pot”, which to me, is a very cool thing.  I mean, how boring would life in America be if everyone just melted into society, shedding their unique cultural backgrounds to become exactly like everyone else?

I agree with the concept of immigration that Ashley discussed in her spark. For example, Ashley talked about the salad bowl concept of immigration; this concept shows that even though people did immigrate to the United States, they still held onto their culture and past.  I thought that this was true because as you look at immigration today, there are so many cultures that preserve their ethnicity without completely assimilating to an American way of life. However, I thought of immigration and how much it changed over time because in the past, it was not even close to  salad bowl.  I think of the Horsman article  which discusses the famous doctrine of the ideal American being a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant.  To me, that doctrine was what promoted this idea of assimilation and caused so much conflict in the beginning years of immigration; if you were ethnically different from the WASP ideology during early immigration, you were looked down upon because you did not meet that criteria.   Although immigrants did come in enormous numbers, at times quotas and exclusions were placed on immigrants because they failed to meet the WASP criteria; it was during these years of immigration that immigrants did not have the opportunity to show uniqueness because it was not even encouraged. During this time, I could not see immigration as a salad bowl, I see being what Park said in the Gerstle article; that immigrants assimilated in order to strive for something that they could not find in their own country.  Immigrants wanted to achieve a hope of success and live that American dream and if there ethnicity had to be hyphenated with American and have assimilation then so be it.