I had to pare the original question. Each of the four
questions originally asked would occupy one entire answer. I hope you can repost them
at a later time because each of them are
compelling.
Rodriguez's essay claims many elements. It's a
complex essay because immigration is a complex topic and he knows it. I think that it's
important to understand that I don't think Rodriguez is capitulating into a prepared
soundbite that traditionally extols the virtues of the immigrant. He does point to
their immense energy and how they transformed the landscape of
California:
Suddenly, foreign immigrants were
everywhere--Iranians were buying into Beverly Hills; the Vietnamese were moving into San
Jose; the Chinese were taking all the spaces in the biochemistry courses at UCLA. And
Mexicans, poor Mexicans, were making hotel beds, picking peaches in the Central Valley,
changing diapers, even impersonating Italian chefs at Santa Monica restaurants... But
immigrants are most disconcerting to California because they are everywhere working,
transforming the ethos of the state from leisure to labor. Los Angeles is becoming a
vast working city, on the order of Hong Kong or Mexico
City.
Consider the
implications of this particular set of quotes. On one hand, the openness of the
California vision helped to construct a reality that was open to everyone. Contrary to
the idea of immigration to California moving in a linear pattern from East to West, it
really became impacted from the immigration South to North, West to East, and West to
more West. The openness of Calfornia's vision helped attract immigrants that helped to
make California vastly different from what it was originally seen. Rodriguez makes the
point that the idea of energy of immigrants was one that helped to make California
different in both composition and mere look. When the Greeley comment of "Go West,
Young Man" took hold in America, it was not seen to mean that everyone immerse
themselves in California and make a life for themselves there that permanently alters
how the state looks and acts. Yet, in fact, this is what
happened.
The energy and transformation that Rodriguez
articulates comes out of a fundamental belief, though, that the immigrant is a renegade
from all and to all. This is where he pivots in terms of the traditional immigrant
debate. He argues that the energy that the immigrant brings to an area, in particular
California, is because they have nowhere else to go. Immigration, he argues, offends
everyone. It is "offensive" to the "Native" voice because of the perceived fear of
invasion, something that Rodriguez himself critiques as the openness of "California,"
and by extension, America, reveals that there is "no native voice." The only possible
exception would be the Native American, whose voice is silenced in Rodriguez's mind.
The immigrant "offends" their own sensibility because no one leaves their home
willingly. For Rodriguez, the immigrant leaves their home and their village in order to
pursue another end. Financial, escape, better life for those at home are all reasons.
The energy they bring to this new world is a reflection of the fact that they have
nowhere else to go. Sent out by home and by receivers, their energy is all they have,
their only release.
No comments:
Post a Comment