Haoming Li
Comparative Literature 60AC
GSI: Matthew Gonzales (Friday 11-12)
Oct. 12, 2016
At the turn of the last century, a number of middle-class people in the US and England voluntarily move into poor neighborhoods to live lower income class, providing services such as daycare, education, and healthcare to improve the lives of the poor in these areas. This philanthropically motivated movement is referred to as the Settlement Movement. At around the same time, progressive social reformers in the US involved in the Playground movement, whose primary goal was to Americanize second generation America-born European immigrants.
Between 1890 and 1910, more than 12 million European people immigrated to the United States. They came from Ireland, Russia, Italy and other European countries and provided cheap factory labor, a demand that was created with the country's expansion into the west following the Civil War. Many immigrants lived in crowded and disease-ridden tenements, worked long hours, and lived in poverty. In order to help these low-income families improve their living conditions, a number of middle class “settlement workers” along with numerous social reformers moved into these communities to live with the immigrants.
Among these settlement houses, some of the most famous are Lenox Hill Neighborhood House, founded in 1894, Hiram House, founded in 1896 and Hull House, founded in 1889.
Lenox Hill Neighborhood House
The Street car to Hiram House
The Hull House
The Hull House, being the most famous settlement house, was founded in 1889 by social reformer Jane Addams along with her colleagues Ellen Gates Starr in a European immigrant community in Chicago. Renowned as “the center of social reform” of that era, Hull House incorporated facilities such as public playground, bathhouse, and public gymnasium, all first in the city of Chicago, and pursued educational and political reform, and investigated housing, working, and sanitation issues.
The founder of Hull House, Jane Addams, was also known for her devotion to juvenile right protection and her involvement with the playground movement, whose practice in Hull House had been notable for its effect among young America-born-European kids.
As these kids grew up, the progressive reformers realized that “Americanization” was necessary for them. Americanization, as the name suggests, meant to make them Americans; in other words, the reformers were determined to prepare these kids for American citizenship. Some even go further to claim that another thing those reformers kept in mind was to refine the children’s physical fitness to render them qualified for army enlistment, a claim to a large degree supported by the fact that the playground designed back then did have an emphasis on body exercise. Although the adoption of physical-exercise equipment might have been intended for its own sake, considering the outbreak of the first World War, the enlistment preparation theory holds its ground tight. The primary purpose of the movement, however, was to save these children, from their parents (their old culture) and themselves (their rebellious instinct).
“Playground Ball”, 1907
To start with, sand piles, or sandlots, were equipped as a standard practice for playgrounds. The first sandlot was opened in Boston in 1886, but the movement itself started in mid 1890s when playgrounds were opened in nine major cities in America. Settlement houses or civic groups opened early play lots, often modest dirt lots, on land donated or lent by philanthropists. A wide coalition of child-saving reformers including social settlement house workers, progressive educators, and child psychologists urged municipal governments to construct playgrounds where the city's youth could play under supervised and controlled conditions. Playground reformers believed that supervised play could improve the mental, moral, and physical well-being of children, and in the early twentieth century they expanded their calls into a broader recreation movement aimed at providing spaces for adult activities as well. Municipally controlled parks and playgrounds included trained play leaders and planned activities as well as special facilities like gymnasiums, fieldhouses, and swimming ponds.
playgrounds in 1910s
Discussion:
1. While Anglo-Americans considered European immigrants’ culture invasive and thus wanted to culturally assimilate them, African Americans had resided in America for more than two centuries and were totally neglected in art and literature. What does this different attitude reflect? How was this related to Harlem renaissance?
2. Ironically, one thing they taught on the playground was to be inclusive to other ethnical communities (e.g. Polish kids should get along well with German kids and Irish kids), the colored community was entirely excluded. How can we define who gets included and excluded? Does the inclusiveness of a communities depend on how inclusive they think they are?
Work cited:
“Hull House.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2016.
“Settlement Movement.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2016.
“American Studies 10” Christine Palmer, UC Berkeley, Fall 2016.
“Playground Movement.” Playground Movement. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Oct. 2016.
Comparative Literature 60AC
GSI: Matthew Gonzales (Friday 11-12)
Oct. 12, 2016
The Settlement Movement and The
Playground Movement
At the turn of the last century, a number of middle-class people in the US and England voluntarily move into poor neighborhoods to live lower income class, providing services such as daycare, education, and healthcare to improve the lives of the poor in these areas. This philanthropically motivated movement is referred to as the Settlement Movement. At around the same time, progressive social reformers in the US involved in the Playground movement, whose primary goal was to Americanize second generation America-born European immigrants.
The Settlement Movement in the US
Between 1890 and 1910, more than 12 million European people immigrated to the United States. They came from Ireland, Russia, Italy and other European countries and provided cheap factory labor, a demand that was created with the country's expansion into the west following the Civil War. Many immigrants lived in crowded and disease-ridden tenements, worked long hours, and lived in poverty. In order to help these low-income families improve their living conditions, a number of middle class “settlement workers” along with numerous social reformers moved into these communities to live with the immigrants.
Among these settlement houses, some of the most famous are Lenox Hill Neighborhood House, founded in 1894, Hiram House, founded in 1896 and Hull House, founded in 1889.
Lenox Hill Neighborhood House
The Street car to Hiram House
The Hull House
The Hull House, being the most famous settlement house, was founded in 1889 by social reformer Jane Addams along with her colleagues Ellen Gates Starr in a European immigrant community in Chicago. Renowned as “the center of social reform” of that era, Hull House incorporated facilities such as public playground, bathhouse, and public gymnasium, all first in the city of Chicago, and pursued educational and political reform, and investigated housing, working, and sanitation issues.
The founder of Hull House, Jane Addams, was also known for her devotion to juvenile right protection and her involvement with the playground movement, whose practice in Hull House had been notable for its effect among young America-born-European kids.
The Playground Movement
As these kids grew up, the progressive reformers realized that “Americanization” was necessary for them. Americanization, as the name suggests, meant to make them Americans; in other words, the reformers were determined to prepare these kids for American citizenship. Some even go further to claim that another thing those reformers kept in mind was to refine the children’s physical fitness to render them qualified for army enlistment, a claim to a large degree supported by the fact that the playground designed back then did have an emphasis on body exercise. Although the adoption of physical-exercise equipment might have been intended for its own sake, considering the outbreak of the first World War, the enlistment preparation theory holds its ground tight. The primary purpose of the movement, however, was to save these children, from their parents (their old culture) and themselves (their rebellious instinct).
“Playground Ball”, 1907
To start with, sand piles, or sandlots, were equipped as a standard practice for playgrounds. The first sandlot was opened in Boston in 1886, but the movement itself started in mid 1890s when playgrounds were opened in nine major cities in America. Settlement houses or civic groups opened early play lots, often modest dirt lots, on land donated or lent by philanthropists. A wide coalition of child-saving reformers including social settlement house workers, progressive educators, and child psychologists urged municipal governments to construct playgrounds where the city's youth could play under supervised and controlled conditions. Playground reformers believed that supervised play could improve the mental, moral, and physical well-being of children, and in the early twentieth century they expanded their calls into a broader recreation movement aimed at providing spaces for adult activities as well. Municipally controlled parks and playgrounds included trained play leaders and planned activities as well as special facilities like gymnasiums, fieldhouses, and swimming ponds.
playgrounds in 1910s
Discussion:
1. While Anglo-Americans considered European immigrants’ culture invasive and thus wanted to culturally assimilate them, African Americans had resided in America for more than two centuries and were totally neglected in art and literature. What does this different attitude reflect? How was this related to Harlem renaissance?
2. Ironically, one thing they taught on the playground was to be inclusive to other ethnical communities (e.g. Polish kids should get along well with German kids and Irish kids), the colored community was entirely excluded. How can we define who gets included and excluded? Does the inclusiveness of a communities depend on how inclusive they think they are?
Work cited:
“Hull House.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2016.
“Settlement Movement.” Wikipedia. Wikimedia Foundation, n.d. Web. 07 Oct. 2016.
“American Studies 10” Christine Palmer, UC Berkeley, Fall 2016.
“Playground Movement.” Playground Movement. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Oct. 2016.
I find it interesting that playgrounds were a place for immigrant kids to become friends with kids of other European decent, yet African Americans were excluded altogether. This is by far not inclusive in present day standards, but in those days, German immigrant kids probably did not meet many Polish kids back in Germany. In this way, it may be said that inclusiveness depends on the degree at which the previous generation was homogenized and isolated. The more homogenized the previous generation, the less degree of inclusiveness the next generation will see to be normal.
ReplyDeleteAlthough I can see why the reformers might want to "Americanize" the second generation in order to have the kids become better integrated into the United States, at the same time, their heritage and culture may be eroded. For example, in The 42nd Parallel, Fainy changes his name to Mac, which is a generic Irish name. He loses his personal identity as a result.
Although a little more of a connection back to modernism in your post would have been interesting, I think you provide enough information for the reader to deduce some claims of his or her own.
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed how you highlighted the purpose of space, and how it fluctuated and expanded for Americans in the late 19th to early 20th centuries. Contrast this to the increasingly urbanization and mechanization of the new era, and its inclination towards compactness and factory lines. How is this the era of both more playgrounds/open space and factories, and how does this alter the Americans that engage in such spaces?
Additionally, your post insightfully mentions how Americans pushed their own culture on others. This only represents the tendency of this nation to view culture through a filtered lense in which our ways (our meaning traditional Anglo-American) are the right ways. Thus, any divergence in color, sexuality, and cultural practices are shunned and attempted to be altered immediately. Such practice commonly comes up in modernist literature, as we are currently seeing in 'Passing,' where even black Irene has become "Americanized" and owns a slave of her own.
This post is a fascinating discussion of two movements, the settlement and the playground movements, that historical study often overlooks. On one hand, both movements embodied the admirable philanthropic impulse to provide services and improve conditions for European immigrants who resided in low income areas and faced poor living conditions. However, the effort to employ these movements as a means of Americanization of immigrants and their children demonstrates the assimilationist tendencies of the time period. It seems that such attempts to Americanize the immigrant population sought to diminish or even destroy cultural differences to align the population along a narrow ideal of what constitutes "Americanness".
ReplyDeleteI think that the inclusiveness of a community is dependent on the presence of biases in the people of that community. Having been born and raised in California as the daughter of immigrant parents, I've witnessed firsthand the increase in the inclusiveness of my hometown. Even in the short time that I've been alive, the increase in diversity in my community has resulted in an increase in exposure to multi-cultural people, beliefs, traditions, foods, etc. I think that the idea of inclusiveness is something that develops slowly over time, with younger generations proving to hold less biases and be less opposed to this change.
ReplyDeleteEuropean immigrants have their own form of "passing," in which they must convince others that they are properly American. The way in which white immigrants were encouraged to "pass" can be contrasted with the way in which African-Americans passing as white were looked down on by both the black and white communities.
ReplyDeleteI thought this was informative because I'd never heard of the Playground Movement before. Also, it's interesting that social constructs like "Americanization", assimilation, and "passing" are ingrained in children from such a young age and using such seemingly innocuous activities as outdoors playing time.
ReplyDeleteI found your analysis of the two movements to be very fascinating as I am not too familiar with either of them. I think this relates to the content in the class as the immigrants also had to learn the concept of passing, only their version was called "assimilation." Both passing and assimilation take away culture from an individual in order for them to seem "normal."
ReplyDeleteYour post highlights these interesting immigrant movements that I never considered. The interaction of European children in the playground movement, when first observed, is seemly harmless, philanthropic even, as you describe. But when you look closer, as you have, one sees the cultural blurring of their identities and Americanization at an early age as assimilation to a new culture. The intent of the movement, although, was to provide better conditions for immigrants with children who settled in low income housing as a way to get by. The undertones of these movements are typical of time since, American society did fear change from outside forces. This fear, as we have seen, caused these movements to come about, in an effort to reduce change from other cultures and defined “American ideals” as limited and static.
ReplyDeleteI found your last question particularly interesting. It seems that over time in our history, various ethnic groups are excluded for one reason or another, even though we have always championed America's inclusive reputation, the notion that we are a country made of immigrants. It is also interesting that all it takes for Clare to be included in society was her presumed whiteness by other white people. Although she really is a black woman, she is still accepted and celebrated. I think this shows the inherent ignorance of excluding people merely based on race or ethnic background.
ReplyDeleteI like the information you provide, but there are so many connections to what we're learning that you miss on elaborating on. There was so much social crusading in this time; muckraking journalism, prohibition advocates, anti-child labor protests that the advent of the charity house and playground movement completely reflects. However, there were very few social crusades to help black people, who were almost completely disregarded even though they needed as much help as the new European immigrants. What does this divide say about class structure in the United States?
ReplyDeleteI found this blog post particularly interesting because the playground movement is something I never knew existed prior to this reading. I am most interested in the criticism of convincing children to "play nice" with other ethnicities, yet people who were "too" different, such as African Americans, were completely left out of the picture. This connects to the readings in our class because in the Passing and other texts, whiteness is considered superior to blackness. Whites are not taught to "play nice" with blacks and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteI found this blog post particularly interesting because the playground movement is something I never knew existed prior to this reading. I am most interested in the criticism of convincing children to "play nice" with other ethnicities, yet people who were "too" different, such as African Americans, were completely left out of the picture. This connects to the readings in our class because in the Passing and other texts, whiteness is considered superior to blackness. Whites are not taught to "play nice" with blacks and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteAlthough you stated in class that your blog didn't connect to the texts we've been reading, I think it absolutely connects to the time period and gives us an important historical in-depth view. In response to your first question, I think that the reason Anglo-Americans refused to attempt to integrate African Americans after the end of slavery was because of their fundamental viewpoint on this race. Since they considered African Americans to be genetically different and subpar to them, often dehumanizing them, they did not view them 'worthy' of exerting resources for to assimilate. Although many immigrants faced racism, they were mostly accepted into American culture if they were white because of the widespread notions of eugenics at this time period. In regards to your second question, I think the notion of how inclusive a community is is entirely up to their own definition of inclusiveness. Since they didn't consider African Americans to be on their same level, they thought they were being wholly inclusive of immigrants when they really weren't. Overall, great post. I did not have much prior knowledge on this subject so I thought it was interesting!
ReplyDelete