How the Other Half Lives 9, 10, 12, 13:
I found it interesting the parallels that Riis draws between race and religion.
"John Chinaman", as Riis so racistly puts it, follows no faith (according to Riis who is obviously ignoring Confucianism, Taoism, or Buddhism) because their "gentle teachings" are "beyond his grasp". Again he is reinforcing the contemporary notion of racial hierarchy, in which the Asians occupy the bottom rung. He continues to say that it is impossible for them to understand Christianity and if "he adopts [it] at all [...]" it is for an "ulterior motive", one of scam or thrift. This stereotyping is typical of the time considering the age of imperialism and colonialism in which Riis writes.
The next group he goes to are the Jewish people, set apart from everyone in race and religion. When discussing the schools that teach the Talmud he states that the professor's "native instinct for money making having been smothered in the process that has made him a learned man". Again the Jewish people are seen as vulture-like, parasitic creatures on society, who exist for the sake of "thrift", and swindling others out of their money. It seems strange then that Riis states he is tryng to bring awareness to their situation for the purpose of improving it. Riis is obviously more guided by his racist "native instinct" then that of a progressive individual.
Finally he comes to the Bohemians who are "Roman Catholics by birth, infidels by necessity, and Protestants by history and inclination". The Germans and others of their genealogy are the most physically and culturally similar to the WASPs of the new world, and yet they are still vilified. For Riis it seems to be not only a question of race and religion but also social class that makes the people groups valuable to soceity.
Is there anything else worth noting in Riis' work other than his racism and protrayal of racial groups?
Bye,
Jon
No comments:
Post a Comment