Response – February 15th

Although i agree with Marinna that slaves were crucial to the development of New York and a lot of America, I find it such a shame that this was so.  As I was reading all of the articles, I found myself forgetting that the slaves were actually real human beings.  The way in which the authors simply described the laborers as “slaves” made it easier to imagine them as a piece of property which could be bought and sold.  This is disturbing to me, because this was the mindset of most early Americans.

So even though America might not be what it is today if it weren’t for slaves, it also wouldn’t have attached all of the negative connotations associated with “black”.  As the last reading stated, even after slavery was abolished, blacks still had to fight to be seen as one of the Americans or New Yorkers.  People associated the color of their skin with derogatory terms and evil doings.  They would compare someone who had committed a lot of sins as having “skin as black as a Negro”.  I couldn’t help but feel sorry for those just trying to fit in.

Before reading these articles, I had always thought that New York was one of the colonies least associated with the slave trade, so I was very shocked to find out that it was in fact one of the largest ports for it!  Although we were one of the earliest colonies to abolish slavery, nothing can justify our means in putting all of the innocent people to work and giving them such cruel punishments for disobeying silly rules.

Posted in February 15 Peopling of NY: Colonial Period | Leave a comment

Response (2/15/11)

Like, Ashley, I agree that there were many parallels that could be drawn between Colonial New York, and Modern New York.  Like now, New York then also had a general air of diversity and tolerance, or at least relatively.  It was extremely interesting to read about the aspects of colonial New York, especially Dutch-controlled New Amsterdam!  I find it quite humorous that we didn’t learn about the “bigot” side of Peter Stuyvesant in grade school. Also, it is quite hard to imagine the island of Manhattan as a rural collection of log cabins and mills: I felt that the  articles really helped me get a feel of what it was like to actually live there in the 18th century!  I really got a sense of the social tensions and the runnings of daily life going on in colonial New York.

I find it so ironic that we view the north as such anti-slavery, and so inherently tolerant.  We all talk about the diversity we are blessed with here in New York, and especially Queens.  However, as Marinna described, according to these articles, slavery actually started out just as crucial to the north, if not more crucial, than to the south! Many of slavery’s uniquely American traits actually originated, and snowballed here in New York!  The articles showed the gradual change between the lenience afforded to slaves under Dutch rule, to the slow removal of rights under British and then American rule.  Marinna showed examples of how every time an argument was made against slavery, the base concept of slavery, rules of slavery, as well as the general viewpoint of the African American community was shifted and molded around that argument. It shows such hypocrisy, and such shameless desperate acts that can be taken to save a failing economy.

Posted in February 15 Peopling of NY: Colonial Period | Leave a comment

Spark- Feb. 15

I found it interesting to see that, in some aspects, Colonial New York is not much different from the New York we know today. It was ethnically diverse starting when European explorers first came to New York Harbor. The Dutch West India Company wanted to increase the population on Manhattan Island by asking people to immigrate from Europe. In the chapter “Slavery in Colonial New York,” observers noticed that half the population was non-Dutch and that eighteen different languages were spoken, and this was during the 1600s. There was also a sense of maintaing heritage, especially from the French living on Staten Island. Colonial New York was also a religiously diverse area. According to Binder and Reimers, since different religious practices weren’t tolerated in Europe, the settlers came here to have this opportunity, although it was limited because many had to worship privately. The Dutch were considered very tolerant people, which probably attributes to why many people came here. These ideas were prominent more than a century before the United States of America was formed.

However, slavery was also a big deal in Colonial New York. The Dutch brought slaves to New York to help support the economy and asisst the settlers, but as time went on, they were considered inferior and the colonists attempted to justify it. At first, the slaves had half-freedom, where they were allowed to defend themsleves in court and own property. Their freedoms, however, became limited especially after the conspiracy of 1741-42, when many different forts and buildings were being burned down. At first, the fires were treated as isolated cases, but as more occurred, arson was suspected. No one had an idea of who were behind the fire, but slaves were a suspected group. Many officials became afraid that the African slaves and white servants working together could become a great problem. In July 1827, after much debate, the slaves were given freedom, which happened quite some time before the rest of the country.

To a certain extent, New York was ahead of itself in tolerance, freedom, and the abolishment of slavery, although it still had a way to go.

Posted in February 15 Peopling of NY: Colonial Period, Sparks | Leave a comment

Spark – feb 15th

It seems to me that the image of slavery has been portrayed in a few different ways throughout history. It was interesting to learn that not all Whites who owned slaves treated them brutally or completely unequal. In many cases, slaves were given liberties by their owners, which were not granted to all slaves. Oftentimes, slaves’ lives would be spared by their owners, in exchange for only a severe punishment after they had comitted a crime or other wrongdoing.

In the very beginning, settlers came to America looking for economic opportunity, religious freedom, and social security. After time, however, the colonies hit a sort of stand-still concerning growth. The last years under Dutch rule, there was an advancement in the growth and population of New Amsterdam. In order to continue their flourishing growth-spurt, labor needed a boost. Many of the settlers were either unwilling or just too unconcerned to pick up the slack, and instead began to use slaves as a labor source. This source never ran out or was weakened, because the slaves would mate and bring new slave babies into the picture (of course these babies didn’t start work right away).

There was much ironing out to do with this source of labor. In the beginning, there were many loopholes and not many laws ensuring the slave status of the Africans imported to the colonies. As time went on, curfews were implemented, laws were passed, and slavery became more solidified. Originally, the law that no Christian could be used for forced labor, included all Black Christians. But once the Whites realized their slaves were escaping slavery this way, a new law was soon passed, stating that the religion of Africans didn’t matter. Slaves were given basic rights, like the right to own property and the right to petition against their owners, until this too began to be used against slaveowners.

When New England and New Amsterdam joined together to create New York, slavery continued, and New York was one of the largest areas to use slavery and one of the highest black-populated areas. However, as the Binders and Reimers article points out, when the Northeastern areas created the Dominion of New England, New York City became merely an outlying city, and was no longer a main port for slave entry.

In The Shadow of Slavery, it is outlined the way that slave labor was necessary for America to grow and prosper the way it did. Without slavery, the economy of the Northeast would have fallen apart centuries ago. In Manhattan alone, 40% of all households had at least one slave. Slaves constituted the majority of New York City’s working class.

Eventually in 1827, however, slavery was finally completely abolished. But the long-lived existance of slavery is very telling of it’s influence in America’s growth and development. Without slavery in colonial times, we would, right now, still be in the midst of an undeveloped nation, living in New York City, which would still also be undeveloped, unaccepting of other cultures and religions, and unadvanced in all the ways we currently are.

Posted in February 15 Peopling of NY: Colonial Period, Sparks | Leave a comment

Response

As many have stated previously, America isn’t necessarily restricted to being described solely as a salad bowl or melting pot. True, immigrants may come here in search of new opportunity, culture, and life but that doesn’t necessarily mean that they will completely abandon the beliefs, traditions and values they held prior to immigrating. And the opposite is just as valid: immigrants living in America most likely do not live exactly as the way they did in their home country. American culture permeates the home of every type of immigrant, be it American cuisine, entertainment, technology, literature, and even morals. ( Just as you might see an American family sitting in front of the television screen while eating Chinese take-out or the Chinese teenager a few blocks down immersing herself into one of Dicken’s novels.) It is inevitable that some type of “diffusion” will occur, both ways.

Michael Walzer in his essay “What does it mean to be American” delves into the meaning of the adjective American. He states “[it] provides no reliable information about the origins, histories, connections, or cultures of those whom it designates.” In a way, I think that is something truly special about being American. For people who are coming to America to start out with a fresh identity, all they have to do is say “I’m American.” But even though the only binding force between Americans may be that we live in the same country and that we all value the fundamental principles serving as the foundation for this country, I think that is enough of connection; that is an adequate amount of unity that we can call both the fellow next door and ourselves American, in spite of our completely different backgrounds.

Building on Praveena’s analogy (which I liked!) I think that America is sort of like a tossed salad whose incredibly varied vegetables release flavor to one another. Although each one may have began as a rigid, perfectly sliced article, they loosen up over time and give off color to their surroundings. There is something uniform about this image: though all the parts seem so different, they essentially make up a whole. And, as Walzer remarks, “perhaps this adjective of ‘American’ describes this kind of oneness.”

Posted in February 8 Context: Race, Assimilation, and Ethnicity | Leave a comment

Response #1

A lot of responsibility is laid onto the term American. There really is no clear definition on who an American is or what the culture of America encompasses. Just like the articles discuss, unless you were settled here from the beginning, and are from Native American descent, you are an immigrant/foreigner to this country. Now this “definition” is sometimes overlooked and some people may claim to be the “natives” of this country when their ancestors were actually intruders to those already living here. Many new immigrants to this country are looked down upon and treated with obvious bias. However, the way America was constructed was through the various immigrants that came from all around the world. If we want to stand upon those principles and not be hypocritical, then new immigrants should not be criticized but rather welcomed. They should be welcomed into the land of the free and nation of unity, which has been the case during the settling of the colonies. In today’s time, the United States has indeed become something similar to a salad bowl. To refer everyone located in a melting pot would be accurate to some degree. People learn from each other’s cultures, and backgrounds, and appreciate the diversity of the world in this way. Although this mix may seem pleasing at first, one may be quick to judge another’s way of life very easily. We might also assume that our way is the right way to live, and the only one. However, there are eccentric backgrounds all over the world that cannot/should not be judged for their own individualistic style of living. We can see that defining the word American can sometimes be problematic in itself.

It also becomes even more difficult for people who are second generation living in the United States, such as me. If I go back to Pakistan, I am considered an American and over here, I’m Pakistani, or just Muslim which is usually the first impression. It seems to me that many young people have an identity issue as they grow older. From these articles I get a sense that being American means to define that word for yourself, and make it part of your own life. This definition may contain your experiences from other cultures or maybe your life in America since you were born. Whatever it may be, it becomes a crucial part of one’s life to define oneself in American in this day and age.

Posted in February 8 Context: Race, Assimilation, and Ethnicity | Leave a comment

Response to 1!

The two concepts that Ashley mentions- the melting pot and the salad bowl- regarding America, I believe, both hold true. There are many people who claim they are strictly “American” in terms of ideals, personality, culture etc. while others who say they are from whichever country their parents/ancestors are from. I agree with Elizabeth that America can actually be considered as mix of the two.

However, if I had to choose one, it would be the idea of the salad bowl.  Because think about it, when you meet someone new in school, at work, anywhere one of you first few questions would be where are you from? – usually the answer would the country that their parents are from –their origin; but it is rare that one of the responses would be America. One might say that I was born here (I’m American) but I’m from _______. One more thing regarding this topic that I find interesting is people assume that one is born in America. For example, when I’m asked where I’m from, my response is India and many assume that I was born here.  Later when they do realize that I was born in India they say- “Oh, I thought you were born here.”

As of now, I consider myself Indian because I was born in India and have lived in the US for about 6 years; however maybe as the years come by I might being to consider myself an Indian-American. Thus, here comes the concept of a hyphenated-American. This I consider a huge part of “American culture” which also goes to agree with the mix concept of America (salad bowl and melting pot). While you are an American, you still hold on to your roots, making yourself identifiable as the “left part of the hyphen”.

Another thing that I find interesting is that when in America your asked where are you form the reply is his/her origin, but when asked the same question in the country of origin the answer tends to be America (that is if one considers him/herself American).

Anyways, to sum it all up- in the end it comes out to be that it is actually a mix of both- being American and your country of origin.

Posted in February 8 Context: Race, Assimilation, and Ethnicity | Leave a comment

Response #1 (for 2/8/10)

It seems that mentioning how much I agree with the tossed salad statement would be redundant at this point. Oh well.

Though in response to Elizabeth; I hope this doesn’t sound unprofessional and childish, but maybe we’re a bowl of tossed salad with dressing sizzled on top of us? We do maintain our homeland traditions to a great extent, but upon living in the states, we’ve got American culture sizzled on top of us, and after a while, it soaks in and dries into our veins? We’re still a tossed salad, but each of us now shares a key similar ingredient, some of us more than others?

That’s my cheesy, poorly thought out way of seeing it.

Though this does bring me to Kasinitz’s article. At the very end of it, it is stated that “many respondents sidestepped [the] ambivalent understand of the term  “American” by describing themselves as “New Yorkers” (16). I identified with this statement so well. For my art class, we recently had to do a project that had us focus on what had culturally and ethnically shaped us, and no matter what, I could not associate myself with the American flag. I couldn’t even associate myself with the New York flag. I’ve always considered myself a “New Yorker.” I was born and raised in Queens, the most diverse location in the United States, and arguably the world. Who wouldn’t want to be a part of this tossed salad?

Walzer’s “What does it mean to be an American?” delves further into the question of being American. In fact, I think he hits the nail on the head when he says “Similarly, the United States isn’t a homeland (where a national family might dwell)… it is a country of immigrants who, however grateful they are for this new place, still remember the old places” (634). I think this may just go back to that horrible analogy I made earlier with the salad dressing being on top of the salad. There’s still groups out there that stick together in a group like a nice round tomato, and there are smaller groups that bunch together like little croutons. However, we all have salad dressi- I mean this “American” culture slowing pulling us together, so that although we hold on to our old, unique traditions, we still are more than just random assortments in a salad bowl.

I’m sorry that this entire response was based off such an analogy. It was hardly intended!

Posted in February 8 Context: Race, Assimilation, and Ethnicity | Leave a comment

Response (Feb. 8)

Living in America, especially in New York City, we are exposed to many different cultures. Like Greg mentioned, New York City is very diverse, with only a small percentage claiming to be natives. Kasinitz described New York City as “overwhelmingly a city of minorities and immigrants,” which makes this city unlike others because of how inclusive it is of different cultures. I think about how, during the summer, people have their car and home windows open and music is blaring out. On one block, I can hear not only pop songs but also Indian, reggae, hip-hop, and Spanish songs as well, and this is only a sample. Also, here it’s normal to like things outside your culture while also embracing your own.

I agree with Ashley and everyone else that believed America is more like a salad bowl. I always grew up hearing that New York was like a melting pot because of how diverse it is, but I think the salad bowl concept is more accurate. Immigrants came to America to live, work, and learn, but they also wanted to keep their old customs as well, which contributes to the “hyphenated American” idea. Every culture is distinct and stands out, and while we live together, we keep our uniqueness as well. There is no one definition for “American” because America is not just one culture or one nationality, but it embodies pretty much the entire world. As Waltzer said, anyone can live here because the country deosn’t belong to one particular group but to everyone here.  Waltzer summarizes what he believes “American” stands for by repeating the country’s motto, e pluribus unum. We are many people, but we all live together.

Posted in February 8 Context: Race, Assimilation, and Ethnicity | Leave a comment

Response to Week 1!

I agree with everyone else who posted that America is definitely not a melting pot because clearly, as everyone has been saying, there isn’t one uniform “American” culture.  But I also wouldn’t say America was totally a salad bowl either because that would imply that the various cultures present in America stayed exactly the same and neither influenced or became influenced by each other and by being in America.  I think that it is impossible to say that cultures were not affected by immigration, because of course they would be influenced by the new things they are exposed to in their new environment (America), so I think America is neither a salad bowl or a melting pot, its just kind of a mix.  I can’t really explain it in a good analogy.  Like, there have been so many times that I’ve been walking down the street and someone walking in front of me is having an interesting phone conversation in English so I listen in, and right when we get to the good part they switch back to their native language and I can’t understand anymore.  But the point of that story is that they retain aspects of both American culture and their unique culture and language-they aren’t totally American (melting pot) or totally their own culture (salad bowl).

Also, another thing that everyone keeps mentioning is the definition of America and American culture.  Again, I agree that there is no set definition or category that is strictly “American”, but at the same time there are some things that ARE considered American.  For example, freedom is a huge American ideal- freedom of religion, freedom of speech and expression- this is the American value that even allows all its inhabitants to be so unique and diverse and hold on to their original cultures, which I think they do.  I disagree with Park who says that immigrants come to America in order to leave behind their cultures and ethnicity.  Quite the contrary, I think when they come to America for whatever reasons they come (freedom, more opportunities, education) they actually make an effort to maintain their cultural heritage. Just think of all the ethnic neighborhoods in America- Chinatown, Little Italy, Harlem-clearly these are neighborhoods struggling to hold on to their identity, not lose it in a mad dash to America.

Also, we have to keep in mind that coming to America isn’t such a big deal anymore.  I mean, it is, but right now we are heading towards globalization and uniformity among countries and we are losing our diversity.  For example, I went to Israel over winter break, and aside from the Old City, a lot of cities in Israel look very similar to New York- its modern, there are buildings, side walks, the same stores… When I got home and showed my siblings pictures, they were surprised that Israel looked so similar to America (not all parts, but some). There is just so much cultural diffusion, for example, with McDonald’s.  McDonald’s was an American fast food restaurant, and now it has become part of global culture and can be found in Israel, Japan and all over!  So I think that while immigrating to America will present a struggle in preserving your cultural identity, that struggle is being forced upon many people of many cultures who aren’t even immigrating or moving anywhere!  They’re not going to McDonald’s, McDonald’s is going to them, but they still need to confront these new influences and learn to reconcile moving forward and being present in our time, with staying true to their past and culture.  That struggle is even more forefront in America, but it is happening all over.  Fashion, food, phones, ipods, electronic devices- all of these things are becoming more and more similar among different countries.  I think it is SO important for everyone to hold on to their unique culture and individuality, or else we will all be homogeneous.  The same people, same places, same scenery- it would be a very boring world.

Posted in February 8 Context: Race, Assimilation, and Ethnicity | Leave a comment