My History of English-Only
Washington Post
May 30, 2006
By Richard Cohen
Tuesday, ; A17
To understand something of the current immigration
debate, it might help to look at New York's Lower East Side in the early
1900s through the eyes of Henry Adams, the great-grandson of one
president, grandson of another, ambassador to Britain and, toward the
end of his life, winner of the Pulitzer Prize for his autobiography. All
those Jews sickened him.
"God tried drowning out the world once," he wrote in a
1906 letter, "but it did no kind of good, and there are said to be
450,000 Jews now doing Kosher in New York alone. God himself owned
failure."
One of those "doing Kosher" at that time was my
grandfather, Rueben, a part-time garment worker and full-time no-goodnik
who placed his two boys in an orphanage when his wife, Judith, died.
When he came to visit, the older boy had to translate for the younger.
My grandfather never spoke English, and my father never spoke anything
but.
You can understand Adams's distress. The Lower East Side
of Manhattan was an alien place. Its denizens spoke Yiddish. They were
not Christians. They had their own newspapers and theaters and political
organizations, and when they rallied for one cause or another -- and boy
did they ever rally -- the calls for reform or revolution were uttered
in a foreign tongue. This pot was not melting.
Now, of course, the Lower East Side is the East Village
and it is cool and hip and young and expensive. The grandchildren of
those who did Kosher there have scattered throughout the country, and
the English their grandparents did not speak has been mastered and
enriched by Bellow and Roth and Chabon and Ephron, not to mention Irving
Berlin, if you are that old, or Jon Stewart, if you can stay up that
late.
The current immigration fuss has engendered more sloppy
thinking and rhetoric than any issue in recent times. The descendants of
immigrants wax romantic, confusing legal and illegal immigration -- it's
all the same. But it is not. My grandparents were legal immigrants. They
came through Ellis Island, papers in hand. It was easier to do so then,
but that is not the point. The point is that they broke no law and, as a
consequence, sought no amnesty.
But this anxiety about the fate of English and its
importance to the culture does have its antecedents, although they are
not, of course, exact. The non-English-speaking immigrants of the 19th
and earlier centuries could not simply get on an airplane and return to
the mother country for a visit. Once they came to America, they usually
stayed in America. This is not necessarily true of Spanish-speakers, who
can more easily visit Mexico or another Latin American country. Still,
the larger culture remains English-speaking and its pull is like an
ocean tide. It may take a while, but it will get its way.
In Los Angeles, for instance, radio station KDL shifted
in 2003 from Spanish to English because the Latino audience it wanted --
the young -- was increasingly bilingual and what's called "English
dominant." English was cooler, hipper and younger, younger, younger.
Spanish was the language of mom and dad, and nothing could be fustier --
or, in some cases, more embarrassing. The latter is why, to my regret, I
peevishly ignored my Yiddish-speaking grandmother, adamantly insisting
she speak English. I thought I was being very patriotic.
In New York City, the library system of a single borough,
Queens, typically has the highest circulation of any in the country.
That's not because the culturally ravenous Jews of myth and fact are
continuing their reading habits but because of a much newer influx of
Asians. Many of them read exclusively in their native language, some in
two and some, sooner or later, in English only. The richness of
Shakespeare's tongue, its universality in commerce and business and
above all in entertainment, make it unavoidable. Few things in life are
certain, but death, taxes and English certainly are.
It's reasonable, I suppose, to insist on
English-sufficiency for citizenship or even for a driver's license. But
the nation's so-called political conversation can be conducted in any
language -- just as long as it's conducted.
The Jews, the Italians, the Chinese, the Russians, the Germans and all
the other ethnic groups who once lived cheek by jowl in Manhattan had a
vibrant press and raised the roof with their political conversation. Now
their descendants rue, as I do, the virtual loss of a tongue. Henry
Adams need not have feared. I can read him but not the contemporaries he
so reviled.
|