American Identity

Advanced Placement U.S. History was a class in which I discovered many different, significant concepts, relevant to not only this nation’s history but also to the way in which society today operates. One of the most profound and thought-provoking concepts we constantly undertook was the concept of the American Identity. What is a genuine American Identity? Or can one concrete definition even be prescribed?
We analyzed the stories authored by Horatio Alger, which share the common theme of “rags to riches”; the preconceived notion of the early 20th century that any hard working and dedicated man can easily climb the social ladder here in America. However, as we read along we would stop and have conversations debating Alger’s theory of how one can become prosperous in America. We discussed two sub points, access to opportunity versus self help. To what extent was the success of the wealthy Americans at the time, such as Andrew Carnegie and John D. Rockefeller, success earned by hard work or success which was given to them through certain opportunities. Furthermore, Alger’s theory was one shared by not only many Americans, but also, shared by a large majority of the world. America was seen (and arguably still is seen) as a beacon of hope and opportunity to all those in impoverished nations. One can see this as a fact because during the time when this theory became widely accepted (late 1800s- early 1900s), the number of people immigrating to America proliferated greatly. In fact, the late 1800s was the time in which more people from around the globe started to immigrate to America in mass, in contrast to only the Northwestern Europeans as before. This is the time when America received a tremendous influx of Chinese, as well as individuals from Mexico and Southern America.
The question of an American Identity became an issue largely tackled by the authors of the early 20th century, namely the Women’s Rights Movements and Harlem Renaissance authors. To a degree, America’s questions of who it was are owed to the influx of immigrants from around the world. For the first time, the term “American” was being given to men and women of color; “yellow” “brown” and “black”. Unfortunately, this sparked a number of violent physical and emotional clashes between the characteristically-typical Anglo Saxon community and the newly formed “colored” Americans.
This concept of the American Identity intellectually excites me because of all the social struggles and lives devoted, and that continue to be devoted, to answering this one question. The many social movements: for rights of equality, to vote, to live freely, to end wars, and so on, that have taken place in America have by great measure been centered on the question of who Americans are. Are we a nation where yes, all men and women are created equal, a nation where war is but our last resort not our first decision to combat a problem, a nation where any hard working person can someday receive great success?

A New Meaning To The Term...

The term being: What is mightier, the pen or the sword?

As I sat in my 2nd period class- AP English Lit- I was thinking about what Miss Hill asked us.

"Is war the only way to fix a WORLD WIDE issue?". We were discussing speeches made by W. Churchill and by Ghandi. Churchill being the "warhog" and Ghandi (of course) the "nonviolent".

I swiftly made up my mind, YES. War fixes the world's problem. Look at the American Revolution, the Civil War, and many of the numerous of wars during the 1900s- all those wars eventually served as a greater good. Right?

However, what we too are in the middle of, in that AP class, is a novel by Richard Wright, "Native Son". "Native Son" deals with the life of Bigger Thomas, a young black male whom does not know how to deal with the fact that (during the early 20th cent.) as a black person, he WAS considered as unequal.

This of course brings me to the Harlem Renaissance, and this is what truly made my mind change. no, war is not ALWAYS the answer. I'd actually argue, that 9 out of 10 times, war IS inevitable.

The Harlem Renaissance was not merely a "renewal of life" (dicitonary.com) for the Negroes and other minorities of America, goodness, it was a movement which shifted- or began it's way towards shifting- an entire nation's identity Black and White, together. Yet, the weapons which allowed this shifting to take place, were NOT weapons of physical destruction such as: guns, tanks, ships, planes, bullet, and such. The Generals and Lt.s of this emotional war- that is the people whom fought against an enemy- Langston Hughes, Billie Holiday, Abel Meeropod, Richard Wright, etc., fought with their intangible ammunition.

A civil war had already been fought in order to "free America of slavery, and racial prejudice" (as much of Americans would say), but in the end, it was not a war with an eventual greater good ending. The Civil War (1860s) is today considered a war, by many historians and myself, which was about state's rights (North v South), power and greed. NOT FOR THE MORALITY OF SLAVERY. (Moreover, that war was what sparked the high emotions in a people who killed one of America's most promising President, Lincoln). Though the conclusion of the war did leave the South economically, emotionally, and politically shattered, and thus the 13th, 14th, and 15th amendments were made law. Which abolished slavery, gave the freedmen and freedwomen citizenship, and granted the male freedmen the right to vote.

The overall effect of those amendments were (I hesitantly say this, but whole-heartedly believe it), worhtless. The government, the Constitution can "change" the way America behaves politically, and economically. (Yet, the Jim Crow South and Black Codes enacted to continue the oppression even after those amendments) However, the government CAN NOT control or "change" the way America behaves, psychologically/emotionally. (in the mind of a white supremist)- just becuz my govinmnt saiz I can not enslave them negroes, that dont mean I have to view dem as equal, either! (Ughh, forgive me I sometimes fall victim to stereotyping as well, I AM HUMAN TOO!).

As I was saying, the Government can only control the tangibles in one's life: money, laws one follows, and things in like fashion. Yet, no government can ever make one not be racist- it could enact anti-racist legislature, but passion to hate will always find it's way around through loop-holes.

Thus, the individuals of the Harlem Renaissance had to be innovative in order for their voices to not only be heard, but to be followed. Another war, physical, would not solve anything, two wars do not make a right. Hence, the novels, poems, songs, and art that came out of that most paramount event in American History.

The Harlem Renaissance is a perfect example of why sometimes, war is simply not the answer and only adds fuel to the fire. Langstog Hughes, among many, took the mighty pen in hand and proved that a sword is but a mere sign of weakness and tyrancy. For if one wishes to change or "swift" a part of the world, the most powerful weapons are the ones which come from with in.

I wrote an essay on this topic, well more about the Harlem Renaissance, will post later.