Violence isn’t a rare occurrence for women with a South Asian identity. Besides cultural reasons for abuse, many Indian women face issues of citizenship as a cause of domestic violence. It is very common for South Asian immigrants to marry for the sake of attaining green/legal status. The violence erupts once the convenience of marriage is over, and divorce isn’t a culturally-acceptable option in South-Asian society. However, if they do divorce, the women fear isolation from the rest of the community since their social network is shared with their husband’s. For South Asian women who immigrate to America for the sake of marriage, she most likely doesn’t have a support network nor is she aware of resources she could tap into like Apna Ghar (Rudrappa 70-3). Defined by the network theory, the concept of depending on a social network in a host society is the only way these women believe they will survive in their alien environment (Portes). Many of these women are also illiterate, which leaves women much more vulnerable to domestic violence. Most commonly, these women depend on their husbands economically and couldn’t do without their financial support. Ultimately, these women fear a loss of identity if abandoning their abusive relationship, and wouldn’t know where to go or what exactly to do with themselves in an unfamiliar land with certain traditions they are not used to. Apna Ghar attempts to cater to these women by fostering a sense of independence through Americanization.
Since America viewed Jewish, Italian, and Southern European immigrants as culturally backwards, it gives Apna Ghar reason to hold classes for their clients on how to be more “American”. Apna Ghar teaches them how to raise children to be “rugged” individuals, to be skeptical and not sheltered from the real world, how to be independent and creative thinkers. The women are trained to shop, cook, and dress like Americans, some of them are given English lessons. Beyond the shelter, social workers interfere with the lives of many working class immigrants, attempting to improve their social and economic condition through Americanization. “Old standards must be changed if we are sincere in our desire to attain a higher form of civilization” is a general notion among many social workers, driving them to Americanize immigrant women based on their viewpoints as white, middle-class women. Instructing them on proper infant care, parent-child relationships, diet, hygiene, and family life, social workers believes that being American means adopting a certain set of household practice rampant in their white middle class families (Rudrappa 153).
Although Apna Ghar and social workers are effectively driving South Asian immigrants to exchange their original nationality for a new one, and propelling them into a highly industrial and consumer society, they don’t always received praise for their work. In fact, domestic violence services are perceived as home-wreckers and slayers of Indian culture. Many believe that these shelters advise women to leave their homes instead of follow the traditional route of being good wives and forcing their marriage to work. They believe that shelters like Apna Ghar are destroying the ethnic identities of their Indian women and preventing the nuclear family structure and consequently community solidarity. What is interesting about this situation is that it implies that South Asian diasporic communities in America desire to retain their native identity and refuse to assimilate to western culture. Although Apna Ghar states that it attempts to make immigrant women feel at home, the Americanizing through education and training renders them contradictory in their purpose. Considering how they direct their immigrants towards a more American lifestyle, ethnicity seems to be the source of their problems especially with patriarchy and their submissive dependence. They attempt to professionalize their women, rather than provide a space to return to their ethno-traditional ways.
The Indo American Center also deliberates over what practices are crucial to becoming American, but they also make a concerted effort to help South Asian immigrants maintain a proud dual identity. Established in the same year as Apna Ghar in Chicago, the IAC intends to
“help all immigrants maintain balance of pride in being Indian and appreciating all that India offers, but also accept, wholeheartedly, the privileges and responsibilities of American citizenship, developing loyalty, and commitments to the adoptive country, and integrating the best of both cultures” (Rudrappa 100).
In order to improve the well-being of Indian-Americans, the IAC attempts to foster a sense of community among them regardless of social status or religion; they help them adjust to American life through training and education; and they also propel mainstream Americans to recognize these immigrants as productive and good citizens so that hostility directed towards them would wane. The Center acts as an open space for new, working-class immigrants, in which they can learn English, prepare for the citizenship process, and also function as an agent in which participants integrate the best of both cultures by offering classical Indian dance lessons, Indian language classes for middle-class suburban children and hold workshops to school children about Indian culture. This serves to define and bolster Indian practices for both the Indian immigrants and the general American public. In fact, the Center believes that by increasing the average American’s knowledge and understanding of the Indian American community, the assimilation of immigrants into mainstream America won’t be as overwhelming for them. Ethnic Neighborhood Tours attract many American tourists because it displays an idealized view of Indian immigrants, which also does not threaten the collective American identity. According to this concept, their Indian identity is expressed only in the privacy of their own homes, but once they step out of their geographical containment, they are nothing but American. The IAC intentionally molds its own definition of what it means to be an American-Indian, which of course makes the immigrants more palatable to the American public by becoming model minorities with a culture influenced by its sending country, yet restricted by American principles (Rudrappa 108).
Although Apna Ghar is mostly composed of economically-dependent, middle-class South Asian women, the Indo American Center welcomes new Indian immigrants of both genders and of all ages. This demographic helps to better understand the transnational body, and how it affects the definition of their American identity. The push-pull theory clearly applies to the skilled migration among South Asians because many of them perceive the United States as their opportunity to up their economic and social status. Push factors include employment problems, political corruption, and inadequate educational opportunities in India. Pull factors for many South Asians are the greater job opportunities, higher education, and reunifying family that previously migrated to the United States (Portes). This explains the predominance of skilled migration from India as many Indians intend to pursue a better education or job. They also hope to return to their sending country or at least send remittances to India, which evidently helps offset the Brain Drain and encourage economic development in their homeland. As skilled migrants, their reputation for pursuing a higher education and highly-skilled professions in the sciences, technology, and business contributes to how they their identity is perceived by other Americans (Cornelius). Immigrants at the Indo-American Center recognize their reputation for positively contributing to maintaining the economic success of the United States. They are known for their diligent work ethnic, which is engrained into their youth and carried on into their professional lives This has helped Americans recognize Indians as among them, facilitating the assimilation of Indians into America.
As it consistently focuses energies on molding their participants into “true Americans” with proud Indian heritage, concomitantly, there are debates on how authentic their identity was at the Indo-American Center. Calling both India and America their homes, instead of being bounded by loyalties to just one of the nations, Indian immigrants negotiate their identities in a quest for authenticity and establishment of a legitimate Indian voice in an American landscape. Crucial for the Diaspora to legitimize their “Indian-ness” as well as their “American-ness”, Indians are immediately “minoritized” upon their arrival into America, labeled non-White American instead simply Indian or Indian-American; whereas for their European counterparts in the early 20th century had to give up their ethnicity only to become White, allowing accessibility to higher social and economic mobility. In an effort to legitimize their place in a predominantly-white space, Indian Americans are compelled to authenticate their presence in the public space as they are cultural exiles in both India and the United States (Rudrappa 138). Regardless of how easily Indian immigrants can assimilate to western culture due to their contributions to the economy, it is still difficult for them to live in ethnic enclaves and create that authentic Indian community they desire without compromising their American identity. Therefore many of these immigrants strive to arrange their lifestyles and communities in accordance with ideals set by their White counterparts; therefore they are endorsing themselves as model minority Americans, while still struggling to authenticate their Indian-ness.
Multiculturalism seems to be a feasible answer for many Indians desiring an authentic dual identity. It gives them the impetus to establish their authenticity as it allows a more translatable understanding of how an American was defined. It is supposed to permit cultural differences entrance into the public sphere, yet many Indian-Americans don’t believe they can publicly identify themselves by their ethnicity, which is why organizations like the Indo-American Center exist and are so successful. They provide a free space, in which Indian Americans can exercise autonomy and create a niche in society that allows their own non-white presence to be felt, while still observing American culture. The IAC is able to perpetuate cultural diversity that does not endanger hegemonic American culture or challenge what entails American citizenship, at least blatantly.
Observing Rudrappa’s two case studies, one can now contemplate how Indian Americans define themselves, and whether it involves American citizenship. Of course, citizenship cannot solely make you American; rather one grows into being American through assimilation. One can draw parallels between Indian immigrants today and Catholic-Irish immigrants that immigrated to the U.S. in the late 19th century. American nativists were concerned throughout the migratory period of the Catholic-Irish that they inevitably were outsiders and could never be American. According to many nativists, American citizenship entailed the adoption of American principles in their public and private lives. Public education and the work culture contributed to the Americanization of European immigrants by respectively teaching English and American history and implementing working standards that made no exceptions for holidays and traditions among the immigrants. Concomitantly mutual aid societies were established to further Americanize their community, although it could be misinterpreted for attempting to create ethnic solidarity. Organizations like the National Croation Society began for the sole purpose of “helping our brethren in a strange country”. To the contrary, organizations like these actually worked hard to adopt secular notions of “liberty, individuality, and republicanism and take on a particular kind of consumer and work ethos”, which all required sacrificing their ethnic ways (Rudrappa 151). The Indo-American Center is just like the early European mutual aid societies in the way they promote the Americanization of immigrants. Just like the women of Apna Ghar, European women, who were perceived to be the foundation of the nuclear family structure, were targeted for Americanization in the 19th to mid-20th century. Such parallels between Indian immigrants today and European immigrants from the past allows one to believe that cultural organizations like Apna Ghar and the IAC may not be helpful to multiculturalism or retaining ethnic identity, after all.
Rudrappa’s book broaches upon some very crucial questions, but she does not answer any of those questions directly in her text. Instead, Rudrappa allows for her case studies to help the reader come to their own conclusions about what it means to be American especially for Indian immigrants; if a dual identity between the new and former nationalities is possible; and if cultural organizations in America are helpful in establishing this dual identity. After reading Ethnic Routes to Becoming American, I realized that the definition of America is constantly being altered because of the way other cultures’ commodities influence the diurnal affairs of middle-class Americans. I realize that my own definition of being American may not be the same as someone else’s, but that truly is the beauty of the American identity. And perhaps being American is a mindset that doesn’t need official papers to legitimize. An American citizen is one who is confident with who they are and what they believe, and at the same time, celebrates everyone else’s right to do the same. Every American is free to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness as long as it doesn’t prevent others from doing the same. Cultural organizations like Apna Ghar and Indo American Center are revolutionary in creating a comfortable space for Indian immigrants to settle down in America, only under the condition that they come out as Americans. Rather than balkanizing America as feared by many Americans, these ethnic organizations strengthen American pride and discipline them into the culture of American citizenship. No matter how hard one tries to retain their ethnic identity in America and deny their American-ness, our culture, language, and principles as Americans forge us into a united identity that is proud of our roots, but nevertheless, American.
Sources
Cornelius et al., The International Migration of the Highly Skilled. Selected Chapter.
Portes, Alejandro and Ruben Rumbaut. 2006. Immigrant America: A Portrait. Third Edition
Rudrappa, Sharmila. Ethnic Routes to Becoming American: Indian Immigrants and the _ Cultures of Citizenship. New Brunswick: Rutgers UP, 2004.
