Writing Homework Help

Click on the “three dots icon” located in the top right-hand corner and then click on “Show Rubric” to view the grading requirements for this discussion.

Shifting Perceptions of Americanization:  Progressive Era Press Coverage of Italian Immigration Phillip BarberDespite the Trump administration’s declaration that border patrol will “take into account certain criteria that enhance a refugee’s likelihood of successful assimilation and contribution to the United States,” mainstream media eschews lockstep efforts to “assimilate” the immigrant in favor of “integration” or “adaption.”1Yet, even to integrate or adapt an immigrant to the American way, one must define what it means to be American. The concept of American identity is evasive. The United States is uniquely built on immigration and has thus been dubbed the “melting pot” and the “nation of immigrants.” Despite this recognition, concern surrounding immigration is as much a hot ticket item in the United States as anywhere – and this is not a new phenomenon. But, as the “nation of immigrants,” the issue of what to do with immigrants once they have settled, is particularly vexing. Progressive era publications regarding immigration and Americanization exhibit remarkable similarities to political rhetoric today, but significantly depict a pro-assimilation consensus not seen in modern-day media. There is extensive literature on the Italian experience in America. Philip Marshman Rose’s 1975 The Italians in Americaprovides a comprehensive overview of Italian American history with a high-level analysis of many topics. The third chapter highlights the Americanization methods and their effectiveness as well as the social conditions that challenged Italians during the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.2 Giovanni Schiavo’s 1 Christopher Brennan, “Trump includes ‘likelihood of assimilation’ in refugee guidelines,” Daily News, 28 September 2017, (7 Mar. 2019); Neuhauser, Alan “Trump May Want Refugees Who Can ‘Assimilate.’ What Does That Mean?” U.S. News, 4 October 2017, (7 Mar. 2019).2 Philip Marshman Rose, The Italians In America (Hartford Connecticut: New York and George H. Doran Company, 1922).1Barber: Shifting Perceptions of AmericanizationPublished by Scholar Commons, 2019

591928 The Italians in Chicago, a Study in Americanization offers insight into the areas of American society and culture in which Italians participated throughout their Americanization process including occupations, social organizations, education, music, business, and religion.3 This paper contributes to the literature regarding the Americanization process of Italian immigrants during the progressive era through the lens of the contemporary press. Analysis of progressive era texts reveals contemporary views on the benefits, challenges, and methods of Americanizing Italian immigrants and their children during the progressive era, from 1890-1916. The news and media articles reveal an almost uniform assumption that Italian immigrants should assimilate into American culture. Further analysis in this paper contextualizes the historical experience within the greater progressive movement.   One of the more surprising arguments for bestowing American culture and values upon Italian immigrants, was as repayment for their own historical contribution to humanity. In 1909, the progressive Methodist magazine Zion’s Herald, later The Progressive Christian, published an account of an interdenominational conference discussing Americanization of Italians in Connecticut. Reverent C.S. Gillespie wrote of an epiphany in the room: “They have taught us that there are others besides us of who have done things. They remind us that Columbus was an Italian, and that civilization has been touched by Italian genius from the days of the Caesars down to the days of the Marconi and Victor Emmanuel.”4 The Italian empire earned, for its descendants, the coveted right to be Americanized. The progressive magazine, Outlook, reinforced this idea, describing Italian immigrants as “the sons of a country to which humanity 3 Giovanni Schiavo, The Italians in Chicago, a study in Americanization (Chicago: Italian American Publishing, 1928).4 C.S. Gillespie, “Mission for Italian Interdenominational Conference,” Zion’s Herald 87, no. 43 (October 1909): 1357.  2Historical Perspectives: Santa Clara University Undergraduate Journal of History, Series II, Vol. 24 [2019], Art. 9https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/historical-perspect…

60owes a great debt.”5 These points were extrapolated to serve the interest of contemporary America. If the Italians had contributed so much in the past, they were certainly poised to contribute to America now.  As with most immigrants, the value of Italians was measured by their contributions to the labor force. Progressive magazines began their plea to Americanize the Italians by confirming their worth to the American public. “We like the Italian as a laborer,” established Harper’s Weekly in an article imploring further Americanization efforts.6 Military magazine, United Service, published a lengthy article in 1894 titled “Italian Laborers.” It argued that Italians were particularly productive workers and one could: “get more work out of them on a farm than any of their labor competitors.”7 The press claimed a relative superiority of the Italians, in this regard, qualifying them for more public support in the Americanization process. As the best laborers, Italians deserved the first chance to assimilate. The New York Timesexpanded the value of immigrant laborers and recognized their contributions to America’s glorious gilded industry. Through Americanization, the United States may “Promote industrial greatness by a plentitude of laborers…”8 To Americanize the Italians would not only repay humanity’s debt to their people, but also support the country’s essential labor force.  In a progressive claim, the contemporary press suggested Americanization of the Italians would foster democracy. Upon arrival but before assimilation, Italian interest in American politics was limited. The Italian would soon be introduced to the “boss” 5 Gino Carlo Speranza, “Solving the Immigration Problem,” Outlook 76, no. 16 (April 1904): 928.6 Harper’s Weekly, “The Italian Problem,” New York Observer and Chronicle 87, no. 33 (April 1909): 254.7 Burnet Landreth, “Italian Laborers,” United Service; a Quarterly Review of Military and Naval Affairs 12, no. 3 (September 1894): 240.8 William Michael Byrne, “Restricting Immigration,” New York Times, 23 March 1902, 5. 3Barber: Shifting Perceptions of AmericanizationPublished by Scholar Commons, 2019

61who would “‘Americanize’” him for the sake of his vote”9 When the immigrant moved into Italian colonies of American society, he entered a unified electorate that voted for the token Italian candidate. As Outlook reasoned: “it is obvious that such a system tends to perpetuate race distinctions and to prevent assimilation.”10If the Italian man did not vote for the “boss” or the local favorite, his vote was secured for the Republicans. Why? Because the Irish were democrats: “Here in politics, as a rule, Italian laborers hostile to the Irish Catholics, naturally take the opposite side, and become Republicans; and under a little persuasion nine-tenths of them could be turned over to Republicanism as they could be to Protestantism…”11 Such a system was not attractive to the progressive press. Democracy required active citizenship derived from informed voters. Americanizing the Italians meant educating them on the American values of the progressive era, one of which, was civic engagement. The same New York Times article that called for Americanization to “Promote industrial greatness by a plentitude of laborers,”believed the process would also: “guard the safety of the Republic by an intelligent and incorruptible electorate.”12Above all else, Americanizing the Italian immigrant was beneficial as part of a general effort to unify the country. The immigrant figures in the United States had risen quickly to account for a staggering percentage of the population – at least in the eyes of the contemporary press. The statistics changed over the course of the progressive era, but sentiments (and concerns) remained steadfast. With so many immigrants, America was challenged to maintain its national unity. A 1916 New York Times letter to the editor titled “The American Melting Pot Overwhelmed” called for Americanization on the grounds of unifying the country. The writer argued that recent press “doubtless(ly) stimulated many 9 Speranza, “Solving the Immigration Problem.”10 Ibid.11 Landreth, “Italian Laborers.”12 Byrne, “Restricting Immigration.”4Historical Perspectives: Santa Clara University Undergraduate Journal of History, Series II, Vol. 24 [2019], Art. 9https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/historical-perspect…

62minds to consider anew the factors adversely affecting national unity – among them the immigration factor.”13 The implication was clear; a unified America was a strong America, and this required immigrant assimilation. Assimilating and Americanizing Italian immigrants; however, posed countless challenges in the eyes of the press. First of all: the language barrier. To highlight the breadth of this issue, the New York Times, in 1908, reported that 75% of Italians did not speak English even after years of residence in America.14 Many articles attributed their poor English skills to a lack of basic education. In 1897, The Arena published an article filled with sweeping generalizations about Italians in Boston: “If we consider the Italians as a whole, we find that their ignorance is astonishingly great. Although education is not always a test of good citizenship, illiteracy is, in this case, an obstacle to assimilation. First of all, it is a hindrance to their acquisition of the English language; and then it cuts them off from such knowledge of our life and customs as might be gained by reading.”15 Attacks on Italian ignorance were frequent. The press was quick to characterize Italians as poorly educated but did not insult their intellectual capacity. As described by the popular press, Italians were smart, yet illiterate and uneducated, making it worthwhile but difficult to assimilate them. Some of the progressive press recognized the consequence of this rhetoric and of the resulting treatment of Italians by Americans and other immigrants. Both undoubtedly led to a resistance among Italian immigrants to Americanization. To many progressive journalists, this resistance came as no surprise. In 1904, Outlookproclaimed: “Indeed, many of our sins we conveniently saddle on the stranger, finding in him the responsibility for some of the evils of our own making. And so, a thoughtless majority fails to see that 13 E.E. Rittenhouse, “The American Melting Pot Overwhelmed,” New York Times, 6 May 1916, 10.14 A. Caccini, “More Italians Than in Rome,” New York Times, 4 June 1908, 6.15 Frederick Bushee, “Italian Immigrants in America,” in The Arena, vol. 17, 1896-1897, 732.5Barber: Shifting Perceptions of AmericanizationPublished by Scholar Commons, 2019

63such procedure can result only in race prejudice and prevent rather than foster that very assimilation which we all desire.”16 The article backed this point with a description of the violation Italians felt when interrogated by border guards. But the prejudice did not stop at Ellis Island. The contempt continued even to school playgrounds: “Take the Italian…His children make good students in our public schools, for they are bright boys; but many more would attend if they did not have to face the stigma placed upon them by their classmates, who look down upon them as ‘dagoes’.”17 Similarly, the United Service magazine asked: “ostracized by laborers of other nationalities, unfamiliar with our language, is it any wonder that they adhere to their half-civilized habits of herding together for companionship and safety?”18Many Italians did live together in colonies in urban America. The communities were usually called “Little Italy” and were established destinations for Italian immigrants at the beginning of their journey to the United States.19 These communities, while safe havens for many Italians, served to slow down the progress of assimilation. The Italian, according to the United Service, finds it convenient “to settle in communities for mutual protection and society, and as a consequent of such conditions he retains the old country habits of squalor, and is slow to learn our language.”20 The colonies published their own newspapers written in Italian, about Italian matters, promoting Italian culture. An immigrant’s letter in the New York Times confirmed the “Italianization” resulting from the Italian press: “I have always entertained the idea that the Italian Newspapers give more space to news which tends either to obscure 16 Speranza, “Solving the Immigration Problem.”17 Ibid.18 Landreth, “Italian Laborers.”19 Donna R. Gabaccia, “Inventing ‘Little Italy,’” The Journal of the Gilded Age and Progressive Era 6, no. 1 (January 2007).20 Landreth, “Italian Laborers.”6Historical Perspectives: Santa Clara University Undergraduate Journal of History, Series II, Vol. 24 [2019], Art. 9https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/historical-perspect…

64the mind of the newly arrived Italians, or to Italianize those already half Americanized.”21Described as “probably the most complex character that comes to our shores, and the least understood,” the Italians raised concerns about how their culture would mix in with the American way.22 Certain journalists believed that being of the Latin race meant a greater challenge in assimilation: “the Latin race is as distinct from the Saxon as are the olive-trees of Italy from the pines of Germany.”23 Particular Italian tendencies worried the press. Within the colonies, families remained extremely tight knit. As the New York Times articulated, “Immigrant parents are hesitant to let their children be taken away from them for as a result they lose their ties to the family and Italy.”24 The progressives believed that if the immigrants failed to assimilate, their children had a far better shot of becoming Americanized through the public-school system. This, of course, was dependent upon attendance. The Arena wrote of Italians in the Boston school system: “The knowledge acquired beyond [English] is comparatively little, for the parent is impatient to put the child to work in order to swell the family earnings, and the child is scarcely less anxious to make the change.”25Truancy was not the only potential barrier to Americanization. Other threats included the “Black Hand,” an Italian crime organization that, like many such organizations, targeted troubled youth for recruitment.26 The Black Hand represented the antithesis of progressive efforts, taking children out of the classroom and perpetuating their isolation from American culture. Competing with the Black Hand, tuberculosis stole the lives of many Italian immigrants and their children. In 1910 the 21 A Half-Naturalized Italian, “The Italian Newspaper,” New York Times, 6 September 1911, 8.22 Speranza, “Solving the Immigration Problem.”23 Landreth, “Italian Laborers.”24 “Characteristics of Italian Immigrants,” New York Times, 18 May 1902, SM12.25 Bushée, “Italian Immigrants in America.”26 Caccini, “More Italians Than in Rome.” 7Barber: Shifting Perceptions of AmericanizationPublished by Scholar Commons, 2019

65Board of Health opened a new clinic in the Italian quarters of New York as part of their “extensive plans to stamp out tuberculosis, particularly among the Italians, who have been shown among all aliens to be most subject to the disease.”27 Tuberculosis itself posed a threat to Americanization because immigrants who survived the initial infection were sent back to Italy.28 The challenge was convincing Italian immigrants to receive treatment in America. The New York Times reported: “…we know that tuberculosis is more prevalent among the local Italians than among natives or the people of other alien races, and yet the presence of Italians in the hospitals for treatment or their visits to infirmaries is not in proportion to the disease among them.”29 According to the same article, “During one year only six Italian consumptives were treated in three of the largest clinics, four of them being Italian-American and two Italian Immigrants brought to the clinic by the district nurses of the Charity Organization Society.”30 In addition to fears of deportation, there was a strong resistance to American medicine. For instance, children were born at home. The sick were treated in house or shipped back to Italy where treatment was more trusted.31Italians were suspicious about many American efforts to interfere with the lives of their people. The contemporary press expressed concern about this cultural phenomenon but not surprise. According to the United Service magazine: “The Italian…does not assimilate with Americans as quickly as foreigners of Saxon blood…because he is forced to take the defensive the moment he places his foot upon our shores.”32 The progressive Outlookmagazine described the welcoming committee for the Italian immigrant. First the immigrant is interrogated by the federal border 27 “Battling with Tuberculosis,” New Yorke Times, 15 July 1910, 3.28 Antonio Stella, Some Aspects of Italian Immigration to the United States (G.P. Putnam’s Sons, 1924), 68.29 Caccini, “More Italians Than in Rome.” 30 Ibid.31 Stella, Some Aspects of Italian Immigration.32 Landreth, “Italian Laborers.”8Historical Perspectives: Santa Clara University Undergraduate Journal of History, Series II, Vol. 24 [2019], Art. 9https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/historical-perspect…

66officials in a manner that “you would refuse to answer…or else [would] assault the official” and then, having passed this necessary examination, his first experience in the land of the free is likely to be his acquaintance with the boarding-house “runner.” Who will force him to go with him, or the crook who will exchange his foreign money into Confederate notes or take him to the banker and padrone who want to sell his labor, or the district boss who will “Americanize” him for the sake of his vote.33The first step to Americanize the Italian was to get beyond their justified suspicion of Americans. Standing in the way of this goal were the corrupt systems causing the suspicion to exist in the first place. One the most influential of which was the Padrone.  The Padrone (“Boss” in Italian) would act as a middleman between American employers and the immigrant laborers. As soon as immigrants arrived on American soil, they were tucked under the wings of Padrones who introduced them to the American way of work. With no money, no alternatives, and children who depended on them, Italian immigrants were at the complete mercy of the Padrones. Some Padrones were well intended. There was certainly a market for their service as labor was in high demand and immigrants needed help navigating their new work environment. Unfortunately, the system was easily corruptible, and the Padrones took advantage of the vulnerable new arrivals. Immigrants were exploited for their labor. The abuse of power was not lost on American journalists. The Outlook reveals “An even greater difficulty [than labor exploitation] lies in the fact that a successful labor bureau for Italians in competent American hands means the breaking up of the much talked of padrone system. The padrones recognize this and are actively using their great influence against the Italian labor bureau.”3433 Speranza, “Solving the Immigration Problem.”34 Ibid.9Barber: Shifting Perceptions of AmericanizationPublished by Scholar Commons, 2019

67For every benefit that Americanization suggested, there were multiple challenges to overcome. With such an expansive and complex set of roadblocks, the contemporary press generated a range of strategies to Americanize Italian immigrants. The default solution was to promote public schools as tools to Americanize immigrant children. According to Harper’s Weekly, “Schooling in our public schools will make an enormous difference to those who get it.”35The Arena agreed: “The work of assimilation must be done principally with the children, hence we look to the public schools for a leavening influence which can scarcely be exercised by other means.”36 The New York Times concluded, “For complete assimilation and Americanization we will have to wait for their children’s children to pass through our schools.”37 The public-school system exposed the Italian child to the American way and provided an opportunity to reinforce American culture. Peer pressure was presumed to play a huge roll: “Their dread of appearing strange before their playmates stimulates them to imitate American ways, and soon their home becomes the single link which binds them to Italy. Even their euphonious names become distasteful to them, and a Marondotti wishes he were a Smith or a Brown.”38 This process occurred even beyond the public-school system. In 1916, the New York Times reported that Catholic schools in Chicago were discontinuing textbooks printed in the native language of the children, “thus, unifying and Americanizing the teaching in the schools which come under the control of the Roman Catholic School.”39 The press, in agreement about child education, also suggested adult school and night classes as additional help to Americanization. The New York Times proposed “a special school of citizenship for foreign adults,” claiming, “the 35 Harper’s Weekly.36 Bushee, “Italian Immigrants in America.”37 Rittenhouse, “The American Melting Pot Overwhelmed.”38 Bushee, “Italian Immigrants in America.”39 “To Americanize Schools,” New York Times, 12 May 1916, 22.10Historical Perspectives: Santa Clara University Undergraduate Journal of History, Series II, Vol. 24 [2019], Art. 9https://scholarcommons.scu.edu/historical-perspect…