Race and Color Jamaican Migrants in London and New York City

Race and Color: Jamaican Migrants in London and New York City Author(s): Nancy Foner Source: International
Migration Review, Vol. 19, No. 4 (Winter, 1985), pp. 708-727 Published by: The Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2546105 . Accessed: 02/11/2013 14:24
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
The Center for Migration Studies of New York, Inc. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Migration Review.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.63.180.147 on Sat, 2 Nov 2013 14:24:17 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Race in
and London
Color: and
lamaican New York
Migrants City
Nancy Foner State University of New York, Purchase of race among Jamaicans in New This article explores the significance it is York City and London. What it means to be a black Jamaican, on the of racial context the area. argued, depends receiving Although in the United States and Britain Jamaicans face racial prejudice and are in there to New York. discrimination, advantages living Being part of the larger black population cushions Jamaican migrants in New York from some of the sting of racial prejudice and provides them with easier access to certain occupations and social institutions. Since the end of World War II, several hundred thousand Jamaicans have moved to Britain and the United States. In the 1950s and early 1960s, Jamaicans were, as poet Louise Bennett (1971) ironically puts it, "colonizing England in reverse", and since the late 1960s they have flocked to the United States. Within each country, London and New York City have been the main areas of settlement. About half of the Jamaican population in Britain and the United States live in the Greater London region and the New York metro? politan area. This article compares the significance of race among Jamaicans in London and New York. Drawing on research among first-generation migrants in both cities,1 it is contended that being a black Jamaican must be understood in terms of the racial context of the receiving as it is for area. Difficult Jamaicans in both London and New York to adjust to being black in a white in New York, society, it is more of a problem in London. Paradoxically, where segregation of blacks is more pronounced, the large, and of being part local black cushions concentrated, residentially population Jamaican migrants from some of the sting of racial prejudice and provides them with easier access to certain occupations and social institutions. 1 My research in London in 1973 was funded by grants from the National Institute of Mental Health and the City University of New York, Faculty Research Award Program. I was assisted in the interviewing by Peter Braham. The London research is fully reported in Foner (1978). The New York study, carried out between February and July 1982, was made possible by a grant from New York University's New York Research Program in Inter-American Affairs. I am grateful to the Director of the Program, Christopher Mitchell, for his help throughout the research period and to Neva Wartell who served as a research assistant. For a fuller account of the New York research, see, Foner (1983). 708 IMR Volume xix, No. 4
Jamaican PA TTERNS
Migrants
in London
and New York City
709
OF MIGRA
TION
have long looked abroad for better job opportunities, Jamaicans higher and wages, improved life styles. Whether this search took them to Britain or the United States in the post-World War II period was largely a matter of for in Britain was the destination the two countries. immigration policies thousands of Jamaicans in the 1950s and early 1960s partly because the 1952 to move to the McCarran-Walter Act made it so difficult for Jamaicans United States. At the same time, the postwar years in Britain were a time of to economic workers with opportunities expansion, providing indigenous move into better-paying and on the and higher-status creating openings jobs lower rungs of the occupational ladder (Peach, 1968). While Britian ended Jamaicans' right to enter freely in 1962, the United States opened its doors to mass immigration from the Island with the passage of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act. Since then, enormous numbers of Jamaicans have head? ed for the United States, and this mass migration shows no signs of abating. In the British case, the 1950s and 1960s migration stream from Jamaica was the first mass movement of its kind; before 1951, arrivals from the entire West Indies apparently never exceeded 1,000 a year in Britain (Rose, et. al., in the 1950s and early 1960s Most who moved to Britain 1969:66). Jamaicans were skilled or semi-skilled standards and more skilled than the by Jamaican small a average Jamaican (Wright, 1968). Only minority, probably fewer the man in than 10 percent, were white-collar workers at home. Typically, the family came to Britain first, later followed by his wife (or common-law wife or girlfriend) to Britain was char? and children. Jamaican emigration of acterized from the start by a high percentage of women, but the proportion men in the migration was higher than for women ? and it was especially high in the early years (Rose, et. al., 1969:76). The Commonwealth and Act of 1962 changed the composition Immigrants volume of the immigration. There was a marked shift from men to women as well as from adults to children. of those already resident in Dependents Britain could still enter freely, but adults intending to work in Britain were now subject to strict limitations. The drop in the number of Jamaicans coming to Britain to settle after the 1962 Act was dramatic. From 1955 to just before the 1962 Act went into effect, 158,630 Jamaicans entered Britain 1962 Between and December 1968, 32,700 Jamaicans (Deakin, 1970:50). July were admitted for settlement, and the numbers declined still further in the 1970s. All told, by 1971, census figures available for West Indians2 showed that 446,200 people of West Indian origin were living in Britain, of whom 223,300 were born there (Lomas and Monck, 1977:12). A large percentage ? over half ? of the West Indians were Jamaican. 2In this paper, the term West Indian refers only to those with origins in the English-speaking Caribbean, including Guyana.
710
International
Migration
Review
this Jamaicans wishing to move to the United States have, throughout been subject to immigration The 1965 legislation, restrictions. century, which ushered in the recent mass migration of Jamaicans, affected not only the volume but also other trends that characterized the movement. The 1965 law eliminated the small quota Jamaica had been subject to since snowballed as soon as it went into effect, 1952, and Jamaican immigration going from 2,743 in 1966 to 10,483 in 1967. From then, the number of to the United States kept a steady pace, Jamaicans legally immigrating in 1978 both and 1979. Legal immigration, of course, reaching nearly 20,000 is only part of the story. Whereas in Britain, illegal immigration of Jamaicans since 1962 is clearly insignificant, in the United States large numbers of have entered with Jamaicans temporary visitor's visas and stayed, often for the without many years, proper documents. Because so many Jamaicans are not legally registered, it is impossible to how live in the United States. Nor are say many Jamaicans published figures available on the large number of second-generation Jamaicans. The recent migration to the United States is, after all, not the first large wave. Thousands of Jamaicans came early in the century, before the restrictive 1924 immigration act. Between 1911 and 1921 alone, net Jamaican emigration to the United States amounted to 30,000 (Roberts, 1979:139-40). Even in the 1950s and early 1960s, there was a steady trickle from the Island. By 1980, according to census reports, there were about 200,000 people born in Jamaica living in the United States, and about 100,000 in the New York metropolitan area (Kraly, n.d.). In the United States, women, not men, dominated the movement, and it was common for women to migrate first, later followed by their children and, in many cases, their husbands as well. Between 1967 and 1979, with the exception of two years, women in the legal stream have always outnumbered men. The proportion of women was particularly high in the early years of the "new immigration", as high as 76 and 73 percent for 1967 and 1968. It was easier for women than men to get labor certification, largely due to the demand for domestic labor in American cities. Women could also easily visas as nurses, and about a third of the legal Jamaican obtain immigrant classified as professionals between 1962 and 1972 were nurses immigrants As the and a larger percentage (Palmer, 1974:576). migration progressed, for on basis of status the qualified immigrant family ties rather than women were men as as to have relatives in the occupation, probably likely United States to sponsor them. Women doubtless make up a high proportion of the illegal stream as well, partly because they can readily find jobs in as domestics, to the elderly and child-care private households companions helpers (Foner, 1985). As in Britain, migrants to the United States have been more skilled than the average Jamaican. The migration to the United States in the past two
Jamaican decades,
Migrants
in London
and New York City
711
has been marked by a much higher of however, percentage and other non-manual workers than the emigration to Britain professionals in the 1950s and early 1960s. Of the approximately 86,000 legal Jamaican between 1967 and 1978 who were listed as workers, about 14 immigrants technical, and kindred workers and percent were classified as professional, about 13 percent as clerical and kindred workers (U.S. Immigration and Naturalization United States immigration laws Service, Annual Reports). are mainly responsible for this occupational pattern since they have favored workers. highly-trained THE TWO STUDIES: AND NEW YORK 3
LONDON
In both New York and London, the main research technique was structured, with a sample of Jamaicans chosen to control for sex, in-depth interviews in the receiving society. All of the respondents of time and had age, length migrated to Britain or the United States when they were over 18 and, when interviewed, they were 28 or older. All had lived in Britain for at least 10 years, having arrived between 1952 and 1963, and all had lived in New York for at least seven years, having arrived between 1962 and 1975. Each sample had an equal number of men and women. in both cities lived in neighborhoods The people interviewed with large of Jamaicans: in London, in several working-class concentrations areas of South and North London; in New York, in Brooklyn (mainly Crown Heights and East Flatbush), southeast Queens, and the northeast Bronx. I located in London simply by knocking on doors in areas known to have respondents many Jamaican residents, while in New York I found respondents through In all, personal contacts and by attending church and association meetings. 110 people were interviewed in London (80 by me, 30 by an assistant), 40 in New York (30 by me, 10 by an assistant). in London Those interviewed were typical of first-generation adult and age. education, Jamaican migrants in Britain in terms of occupation, Nearly all were between the ages of 30 and 50; most had no formal educational qualifications beyond primary school; and the vast majority had working-class jobs before they left Jamaica and at the time of the London study. The New York sample was fairly representative of the wider, recent adult Jamaican migrant population in the United States in terms of occupation and education. a relatively It included of white-collar workers as well as high percentage school or secondary many who had attended or were presently attending 3 The methods used in the London study and the characteristics of the London sample are described fully in Foner (1978). For an elaboration of the methods used in New York and the characteristicsof the New York sample (as well as a detailed comparison of the methods used in the two studies), see, Foner (1983).
712
International
Migration
Review
college.4 Most of the men interviewed, probably like most recent adult male Jamaican migrants, were in their 30s and 40s, although the women were no doubt older (half were 50 or older) than the typical adult female migrant who moved to the United States in recent years. Important as the initial structured interview was, I also learned about the in other ways. In London, there were follow-up Jamaican migrant experience visits with 20 people from the original sample. And in both cities, informal talks, after the lengthy formal interview ended, gave people a chance to talk about topics that interested them and to tell me more about their lives. In New York, where I already knew many of the respondents or their close friends from my previous fieldwork in Jamaica (Foner, 1973), these informal talks sometimes and on a few lasted all afternoon or late into the evening, or other social functions with people I had occasions I went to weddings interviewed. BEING THE BLACK IN LONDON AND AND NEW YORK: SIMILARITIES DIFFERENCES
a settled in London or New York, they experienced Jamaicans in black was it had been more of a than painful change: being Jamaica. stigma As members of a racial minority group, they were subject to prejudice and of a sort they had not encountered discrimination back home. Whether This does not mean, of course, that black skin was not a stigma in Jamaica. on the Island, and this stems from Black skin has long been devalued as a Jamaica's history plantation colony based on African slavery. Whites, in the days of slavery, were masters, and throughout the colonial period, rulers. Indeed, a white bias has permeated the entire society since the 18th ? who not only comprise the majority century. To most lower-class Jamaicans of the population but who are, by and large, black ? being black is another symbol, along with their poverty, of their low social position. Blackness in Jamaica, however, is not in itself ? and has not been for the ? a barrier to past few decades upward mobility or to social acceptance "at the top". For one thing, blacks are a majority on the Island. According to the 1960 census, some 91 out of every 100 Jamaicans were, in Rex Nettleford's (1972:27) words, touched by the tarbrush: 76 percent were classified as pure African and fewer than one percent as pure white or European. For another, and wealth can override skin color in importance so culture, occupation, 4 According to INS figures, about 25 percent of the Jamaican workers who legally emigrated to the United States between 1962 and 1975were classified as professionals, managers, and clerical workers. This figure is lower than the proportion of the New York sample in these occupational categories in the three months before leaving Jamaica (50 percent) but not unlike the proportion of the sample in these jobs at the time of the study (33 percent). Because professional and white-collar jobs require comparatively advanced educational training, it is not surprising that so many Jamaicans interviewed in New York had gone beyond primary school: 50 percent had attended or were presently attending secondary school or college.
Jamaican
Migrants
in London
and New York City
713
that one can, in a sense, "change" color in Jamaica. Education, manners, ? not features as wealth, and associates just fair skin or such European ? are crucial. "In straight hair, thin lips, and a narrow nose Jamaica", one "we didn't have color we have class Brooklyn migrant said, prejudice, Black or who colored become or doctors prejudice". Jamaicans lawyers, for or civil who the cultural characteristics servants, acquire example, high-level associated with white Europeans, and who maintain a "respectable" standard of living are often thought of "as if" they were white. Black and colored Jamaicans in influential and important jobs are hardly "token representatives" of their race. Colored Jamaicans, in fact, have long in middle-class on the Island, a legacy from the predominated occupations of when free of color (the product of unions between days slavery people white men and slave women) had economic and other privileges denied to slaves. While after emancipation in 1838 whites virtually monopolized the on the Island and the lowest colored blacks, highest positions positions, and well-paid occupations, Jamaicans were preferred for prestigious partly because of prejudice and partly because they had prior access to education (Smith, 1970). The days of white rule are gone, of course, and middle-class Since the end of World War II, Jamaicans are less likely to be light-skinned. and especially since independence in 1962, black as well as colored Jamaicans have dominated and public affairs, and it is they who fill prestigious in is from the Island. This different professional positions quite obviously the situation in Britain and the United States. "I wasn't aware of my color till I got here, honestly", said one New York man. In nearly identical words, a London man told me he never knew he was black until he came to England. Both men, of course, knew they had black skin when they lived in Jamaica. But at home they had been in good jobs (one was a medium-sized and they were respected farmer, the other a policeman) in their communities. In England and the United States they are, as blacks, members of a definite minority. Education, income, and culture do not, as in Jamaica, partially "erase" one's blackness. Nor are whites sensitive to shade as people are in Jamaica. Whatever their achievements or their differences, in housing, shade, Jamaicans, as blacks, are victims of racial discrimination and education, and of hostility from sections of the white employment, Thus, the two men cited above, like so many other Jamaicans in population. New York and London, became for the first time acutely and painfully aware that black skin was a significant status marker. is black more of a stigma in London and New York, the Although being and effects of blackness are not the same among Jamaicans in the meaning two cities. This is related to the enormous contrasts in the structure of race relations in London and New York. in the racial contexts of the two societies is that in The crucial difference New York, unlike in London, there is a large, residentially segregated
714
International
Migration
Review
native black population. New York Jamaicans, submerged in the wider black in move a more "black" social world than their London coun? community, At the same time, however, terparts. Jamaicans in New York differentiate themselves from indigenous blacks. The net result is that their position as black Jamaicans is less painful and their contacts with whites more limited than in London. It is also easier for them to participate in many activities. THE STING OF RACIAL PREJUDICE
What was striking was that the Jamaicans I spoke with in New York seemed less upset by racial prejudice than those in London. Racial discrimination and prejudice were dominant in London. Again themes in the interviews and again, migrants expressed bitterness about discriminatory practices that limited their opportunities and about daily encounters with racial prejudice in informal and formal institutional In New personal relations settings. about racial less often in both came much York, complaints prejudice up informal conversations and answers to structured interview questions. Table 1 shows that a smaller proportion of New York Jamaicans mentioned racial in their answers to about home, prejudice explaining questions returning about expectations of life and job opportunities abroad, and about changes in their position since leaving Jamaica. A smaller percentage in New York also said that Jamaican migrants are definitely not treated the same way as native whites. When Jamaicans in New York did talk about race relations, differences from and interactions with American blacks ? not American whites ? were often uppermost on their minds. Expectations in New York complained less One reason why the Jamaicans interviewed than the London migrants is that they had more about racial prejudice of the racial situation, and thus were less disillusioned, realistic expectations when they arrived abroad {cf Sutton and Makiesky, 1975; Thomas-Hope, 1975). So many Jamaicans in London were especially bitter and pained by racial hostility because they simply did not expect it. When most left for London, not just as Jamaica was still a British colony, and they thought of themselves but as British citizens. Brought up with a respect for British Jamaican, culture and people and a "lingering faith in British fairmindedness" (Sutton and Makiesky, when they came to the "mother 1975:124), most expected, country", to have the right to live and work in Britain and to be treated, as they were taught back home, on the basis of merit rather than color. There were many sources of dis? They were in for a rude awakening. Palace The buildings looked ordinary and even Buckingham appointment.
Jamaican
Migrants
in London TABLE 1
and New York City
715
Percentage in New York and London Samples Mentioning Racial Prejudice in Explaining Answers to Interview Questions London Sample Mentioning Prejudice (%) N.Y. Sample Mentioning Prejudice (%)
Question Do you now intend to remain permanently in N.Y./London? How does life in N.Y./London compare with what you thought it would be like? Do you think your position now is better, worse, or about the same as it was in Jamaica? Do you think that getting a good job is easier in Jamaica or in the U.S./England?
17 18 15 25 London Sample Who Said Definitely No (%) N.Y. Sample Who Said Definitely No (%) 10
Do you think Jamaicans in N.Y./London are treated the same way as white American/English people? N=
67 (110)
58 (40)
to what they had read and been told. Not all English was drab compared were "on a pedestal" like the government people, they quickly discovered, back home. and estate owners, officials, they encountered professionals More important, they soon realized that to most English people they were, as lower-class and inferior to whites. "We had been taught blacks, considered one man told all about British history, the Queen, and that we 'belonged'", we weren't part of things. My loyalty at me. "When I got here ... I discovered age 15 was to England. I felt that Jamaica was part of England. The shock was to find I was a stranger." And not just any stranger, but a black stranger who, else". as another informant put it, "is not a human being, is something the racial were not so shocked who to New York came by Jamaicans when they found that the city situation. To be sure, some were disillusioned than they had was less glamorous and offered fewer economic opportunities find. of what would had a idea But They had they good many imagined. and learned through the Jamaican mass media, heard through relatives on previous friends, and, in quite a few cases, actually seen for themselves
716
International
Migration
Review
visits what life was like in New York. What is important here is that Jamaicans were aware of American racism before they came. Of course, it was still difficult, as I have pointed out, to adjust to the reality of being black in white America. Nonetheless, migrants did not bring with them a notion of likeness to Americans, black or white, but rather an awareness of their distinctness as Jamaicans (Sutton and Makiesky, 1975:129). They knew about American whites' attitudes of racial superiority and about racial discrimination, the of successes earlier although migrants made them confident that despite American racism they, too, could succeed (Sutton and Makiesky, 1975:125). The Structure of Race Relations
But whatever the migrants' expectations of life abroad, the reality of the structure of race relations ultimately their experiences as blacks determined in their home ? and is the key factor explaining the why Jamaicans in New York complained less about racial prejudice than those in London. In London, are a highly and other West Indian, Jamaican, migrants visible minority. with from India and Pakistan, They, along immigrants moved into a society that, in racial terms, was homogeneous and white. The term "immigrant" soon became a code word among the English for the large A national numbers of blacks who, for the first time, lived in England. has taken hold as black are anti-immigrant ideology immigrants increasingly as a dangerous for social ills. In the course of perceived group responsible political debate, in the treatment of topics connected with them in the media, and in statements by public officials, black immigrants have been stigmatized as an inferior group (Rex and Tomlinson, 1979:65, 69). West Indians are all too aware that they are branded in this way. While West Indians in London are constantly in the public eye as a social problem or threat to the English way of life, in New York they are, as blacks, as immigrants to the white population largely invisible (Bryce-Laporte, is 1973). Large-scale immigration nothing new in New York and there is a of ethnic diversity. Far from being the center of public long tradition ? swallowed West Indians tend to be attention, ignored up in and partly sheltered by the already large native population whom among they live.5 West Indians do come to the attention of white society, they are usually compared with native blacks rather than with the white immigrant or total population 1973). In Britain, West Indians as well as (Bryce-Laporte, the British generally measure West Indians' achievements against those of the white majority, and this comparison West Indians at a clear places In the United their achievements "are viewed States, disadvantage. by the When 5 This invisibility as blacks in racially-divided America also has negative consequences for West Indians. As Bryce-Laporte (1973, 1979) points out, their "distinctive problems and unique proclivities are generally overlooked". Their demands and protests as blacks are also neglected by whites.
Jamaican
Migrants
in London
and New York City
717
dominant white majority, and come to be viewed by West Indians themselves, in the context of black America" (Sutton and Makiesky, 1975:129). Such a puts West Indians in a favorable light. West Indians in New comparison than black Americans. York are, in fact, more successful occupationally Because of the class composition of the migration, many brought technical skills with them to New York. As immigrants, and professional they tend to view work and wages by West Indian standards and are thus willing to at least in the first scrimp and save in low-status jobs to advance themselves, with black from societies Moreover, majorities and with generation. coming blacks has to a relatively wide occupational given them a basis for range open than black Americans assurance and ambition (See, Foner, 1979).6 greater is seldom affirmative" Thus, unlike in London, where "West Indianness 1978:91), in New York it has advantages. (Lowenthal, Stressing their dis? tinctness from American blacks often brings benefits. felt that One is a sense of ethnic pride. All the New York respondents in from American blacks. different New York were different Jamaicans By to black Ameri? what most meant was superior. A few people, sympathetic the differences in terms of the more severe racial cans' plight, explained ? that black Ameri? ? "the wholesale and conditions prejudice segregation" that or not, the majority emphasized cans have had to endure. Sympathetic harder West were "more and other Indians ambitious, workers, Jamaicans and greater achievers". Many claimed that West Indians save more and are more likely to buy homes than American blacks. Unlike American blacks, West Indians, a number said, do not go on welfare or live off of government benefits. Still others said that West Indians are less hostile to whites ? "don't have chips on their shoulders" ? but at the same time have more dignity and in dealing with whites. "We achieve more", one greater self-assurance woman said, "because we believe we can achieve more".7 has other rewards. Most apart from black Americans Setting themselves are West Indians generally, felt that and interviewed Jamaicans, people better than American blacks. Most striking was the response to the are treated the same way as American question about whether Jamaicans mentioned 40 this In whites. percent of the respondents question, answering treated 6An analysis of 1970 census data shows that West Indians in the New York metropolitan area achieve higher occupational status and higher incomes than American blacks (Sowell, 1978). For discussion of why West Indians are more successful than native black Americans, See, for example, Bryce-Laporte(1973);Foner (1979);Forsythe (1976);Glantz (1978);Glazer and Moynihan (1970); Lowenthal (1972); and Sowell (1978, 1981). 7 Negative as the stereotypes are that so many Jamaicans have of black Americans (and vice-versa), there are some bases of cooperation and amity between them. Black Americans and Jamaicans in New York have common interests, for example, on the basis of their occupation or class, and there are occasions ? trade union struggles, for one ? when they unite over specific economic issues. In the world of politics, race is sometimes a unifying factor. And friendships do arise between some Jamaican migrants and black Americans. See, Foner (n.d.).
718
International
Migration
Review
whites treat Jamaicans and other West Indians better than that American In fact, a good number did not even talk about they do black Americans. treatment by American whites at all but immediately launched into a dis? cussion of whites' differential treatment of American and West Indian blacks. a few people, like one Bronx man, insisted that "once you are Although black you are not treated fairly, it doesn't matter where you're from", are more respected and readily many more stressed that West Indians "You're black, but you're not black", said a accepted than black Americans. nurse who felt it was easier for a Jamaican than a black American to get a job. One man went so far as to say that some whites don't even categorize West Indians as blacks. The difficulty, as several people noted, is that whites do is know "which not always black which". Until they find out, as one woman "I'm with kid told me, handled one man gloves". Once "you say something", "and they recognize you're not from this country, they treat you a explained, a little different".8 It is not just that Jamaicans in New York compared and themselves, were to American blacks. whites, thought they compared by favorably It is also important to emphasize that Jamaicans there live out much of their lives apart from the presence of whites. This social separation reduces the for racial and tensions conflict to opportunities develop. New York Jamaicans have varied contacts with whites at work, Although live in Brooklyn, they mainly in areas of black residence Queens, and the Bronx. Rarely are they found living outside the usual neighborhoods of West Indian residence or of the black population. When they walk in the street, go to the shops, talk to neighbors, worship, and send their children to whom school, it is, on the whole, other blacks (native as well as foreign-born) see with. and deal when And for they they compete housing and, especially in the case of service workers, for jobs, their rivals are apt to be blacks and other minorities rather than whites [cf Thomas-Hope, 1975). Indeed, when several Jamaicans in New York spoke of racial hostility, they referred to not from whites, but from American blacks who blamed West hostility, Indians for taking away jobs from American blacks. Those who expressed the most frustration and bitterness about racial prejudice came generally from the ranks of the high-level workers and skilled tradesmen white-collar ? that is, from the groups most likely to compete with whites for jobs.9 These white-collar workers and skilled tradesmen mainly complained about the difficulties they had, as blacks, in getting employment and advancing on 8Forty two percent of the recent Jamaican migrants in Monica Gordon's (1979)sample said that Americans were more friendly when they knew you were Jamaican, and a majority said that they always let others know they were Jamaican. 9 Although those who expressed the most frustration and bitterness about racial prejudice tended to come from the ranks of high-level white-collar workers and skilled tradesmen, this does not mean that all the white-collar workers in the New York sample complained about prejudice. Far from it. Indeed, given the comparatively high percentage of white-collar workers in the New
Jamaican
Migrants
in London
and New York City
719
the job and about their greater chances of being laid off than whites. as in New York, move largely in Jamaican (and Jamaicans in London, from contact with West Indian) social circles, but they are less insulated whites than Jamaicans in New York. In spite of the fairly dense concentration of West Indians in particular areas and in particular streets, there is not the same pattern of residential found in New York City. The highest segregation in West Indians formed of proportion any London borough's population 1971 was 6.5 percent and of a London ward's population, 21.3 percent (Lee, if little the other main non-white 1977:15, 24). The percentages change A large number and are included. Pakistanis, groups (Indians, Bangladeshis) in of whites (primarily lived most South London whites) working-class in the streets where I interviewed and white 1973, Jamaicans presence is in Britain. evident in most other areas of dense West Indian settlement In black sections of New York, as one West Indian activist in London pointed out, you can walk through and not see a white face, except passing in a car. "But that's not the case in Britain. We see them every day. We move with them every day" (Darcus Howe, quoted in Cockburn and Ridgeway, 1982:11). Mrs. S., who had been in London for 14 years before moving to New York in 1969, now lived in East Flatbush and worked, as she had in She was adamant that racial London, as a nurse's aide in a large hospital. was in "In worse prejudice England. England now, it face you every day. Here you don't feel it at all." In the street, parks, shops, pubs, and schools, Jamaicans in London see, that London and often must have dealings with, whites. Many incidents with described to illustrate their racial migrants experiences prejudice ? involved contacts with whites in the neighborhood queuing for buses, for or at the corner shop, speaking to neighbors, example, buying groceries as between local white and black children. And, observing fights compared to New York, Jamaicans at all occupational levels are more likely to compete for housing and jobs with whites. SOCIAL, POLITICAL, AND OCCUPATIONAL ACTIVITIES
in Evidence from the wider Jamaican, and general West Indian, population the two cities indicates that being submerged in a large native black population York, as opposed to the London, sample, one would have expected a higher percentage of New York respondents to complain about racial prejudice in answer to interview questions. Whitecollar workers experience the painful discrepancy between their high occupational status, on the one hand, and their low racial status, on the other. And in New York, they are the ones likely to compete with whites for jobs. But it is the expectations migrants had of New York and London and the different racial structures in the two cities ? not the different occupational composition of the two samples ? that explains why New York respondents complained less about racial prejudice. In both the London and New York samples, it should be added, men were much more likely than women to mention racial prejudice in answer to the questions listed in Table 1. In fact, in New York only three women mentioned racial prejudice in this context.
720 in New
International
Migration has other
Review implications for Jamaican
York, but not in London, migrants' lives. Church
First consider patterns of church involvement. When Jamaicans moved to London in the 1950s and looked for churches to attend, what they found were white religious and groups where they came up against racial prejudice to from hostility, ranging condescending acceptance outright rejection. is the main reason why, as so many com? by white churches Rejection mentators note, there has been a noticeable fall-off in church membership and attendance among West Indians since they have moved to England (e.g., Hill, 1971; Pearson, 1981). In view of this trend, it is not surprising that only a minority in the London sample ? 25 percent ? attended church at least in addition, once a month. find services in white Many West Indians, dull and lifeless compared to what congregations home. Further, there is no social pressure from the as there was from the community back home, to go West whom Indians live and among working-classes active church-goers so that non-attendance can even they were used to back local white community, to church. The English work, are generally not be viewed as conformity
to working-class English culture (See, Hill, 1971). has fallen since West Indians came to church Although participation Britain, there has been, from the early 1960s on, a marked rise in Pentecostal sects among them (Calley, 1965; Hill, 1971; Pearson, 1981; Pryce, 1979). Indeed, one writer speaks of West Indian churches in England as synonomous with Pentecostal sects (Pryce, 1979). West Indian Pentecostal sects, with their and leadership, wholly black membership provide a haven in a largely white world. In these churches, West Indians need not fear rejection as blacks, and and prestige. of influence In they have the chance to rise to positions a sense of fellowship addition to providing and security among other West West Indians in Britain Indians, the sects, which appeal to working-class (Calley, 1965; Pryce, 1979), offer forms of spiritual release and promises of for the deprivations salvation to compensate and racism that migrants in this world. experience In New York, by contrast, Jamaicans who arrived in the 1960s and looked for churches did not have to attend white congregations. Living in mainly black neighborhoods, where there were often already many West Indian and black residents, they could go to churches where blacks predominated Of ministers tensions with course, presided. undoubtedly developed American blacks in church, and this is probably one reason why many churches underwent a process of West-Indianization as American blacks left and West Indians took over. Although some Jamaicans, who lived in where the racial was attended balance churches neighborhoods shifting,
Jamaican
Migrants
in London
and New York City
721
with many whites, they were rarely the only blacks or even members of a small racial minority in church. New York migrants were thus less likely in London to meet rejection in church on the basis than their counterparts Mrs. S., the Brooklyn of color. "I didn't go to church in England", explained woman who had lived for 14 years in London and who now attends a mixed American black-West Indian Presbyterian church in her neighborhood every week. "Didn't go there. English people more hate; they are more bitter." American blacks, unlike English working-class whites, have Furthermore, into which a vibrant and active church tradition so that the communities And when West Indians began Jamaicans moved did support church-going. on their own in Brooklyn, to dominate or form congregations Queens, and the Bronx, these were not strictly, or even mainly, Pentecostal groups. The in New York are higher in the vast majority of West Indian churches status hierarchy, both here and in the West Indies, and more religious "respectable" than Pentecostal churches, which are marked by a high degree and such practices as going into trance-like states of emotional participation is less appealing in New York and speaking in tongues. That Pentecostalism is linked to the fact that West Indian churches there draw ? constituents than those in London mainly because in New York contains a higher proportion of population but also because workers than in London, white-collar suspect, is more widespread New York. among the entire on higher-status the West Indian and professional I church-going, in West Indian community
is among Jamaican and other church participation Just how prevalent West Indian migrants in New York, and whether it has dropped significantly, there was is a subject about which we know little. In my own sample, 55 from Jamaica, and little fall-off in attendance relatively percent went to in These New York. church at least once a month figures, however, may have a number of respondents been high because (eight) were located through the Seventh Day Adventist church. Studies based on more representative samples are clearly needed to probe how many, and what types of, Jamaican migrants in New York are regular church-goers. Occupational Success
If the presence of a large native black population in New York eased Jamaicans' it has also provided into church groups, aspiring Jamaican acceptance with advantages and even politicians businessmen, they lack professionals, in Britain. more successful in the United In general, West Indians are occupationally of this issue). States than in Britain (See, Foner, 1979 for a full discussion has been to United States the the fact that the recent emigration Obviously, workers non-manual marked by a higher percentage of professional and other
722
International
Migration
Review
to Britain in the 1950s and early 1960s has a lot to do with than the emigration success. A larger number of West Indians who moved to the this differential United States brought with them the skills as well as the confidence that came and with their relatively jobs back home. But the presence high-status blacks in New York (and of so many American concentration residential other American cities where West Indians live) has also influenced their achievements. occupational West Indians in New York have been more successful in business than in London partly because there is a ready-made, rather their counterparts the American as they can cultivate for their enterprises: large, constituency in the Most black businesses well as the West Indian black community. United States depend on black patronage. Jamaicans and other West Indians I would in London are less likely to invest their savings in small enterprises, argue, because there are fewer West Indians in London than blacks in New York to furnish a market, because they are a minority in most boroughs and wards, and because they fear that English whites will not patronize black businesses. with professional have also benefited from the aspirations Jamaicans in the United States. In the past, presence of a large native black population and professional schools was extremely when entry into white universities in particular, Howard difficult for blacks, all-black colleges, University medical and other professional provided training for many West Indians. affirmative action programs More recently, (the result of the civil rights have enabled many Jamaicans and and civil rights legislation) movement at white-dominated other West Indians to acquire professional training In Britain, by contrast, no independent institutions. system of black higher has been available. Nor have affirmative action programs been West Indians to obtain university to encourage education and In Britain, moreover, West Indians in training for the learned professions. based on private practices might find it difficult to establish professions because the small size of the black population offers only a themselves limited market for their services, and they have to vie with British profes? In New York and other American cities, West In? sionals for white clientele. can attract American black as well as West Indian clients. dian professionals education instituted in Britain has also meant The absence of a sizeable native black population that potential West Indian political leaders have a narrow base, while West and the Indians in America have been able to utilize the black community for achieving black vote as a foundation positions of political prominence. Political Representatives
In New York, large numbers of Jamaicans live in districts that are represented state legislative in the City Council, bodies, and even the United States black who speak for black interests. In some sections politicians Congress by
Jamaican
Migrants
in London
and New York City
723
in fact, they have been represented of Brooklyn, by elected officials of West Indian descent, Shirley Chisholm the best known among them. This is a far in London and indeed the rest of Britain where cry from the situation are and, on the whole, in by whites in Westminster Jamaicans represented local councils as well. This is despite the fact that Jamaicans have, since their had the right to vote in Britain, whereas most recent arrival, automatically citizens, Jamaican migrants in New York, because they are not naturalized cannot vote.10 in concentration of the black population Again, the size and geographical New York are crucial. In New York, most Jamaicans live in districts where while in London they are outnumbered black voters predominate by whites. those of Asian as well as Indeed, the black electorate in Britain (including West Indian origin) is a minority in virtually all constituencies. The different structure of American and British politics is also a factor. Ethnic politics is the stuff out of which American urban politics is made, and ethnic groups have long provided blocs of votes to elect ethnic candidates who represent this pattern to gain political the groups' interests. Blacks have followed in class terms. Rex in is Not so where Britain conducted politics leverage. in that the of British politics has and Tomlinson class basis fact, (1979) argue, from black there ethnic prevented migrants mobilizing through organizations to "buy" their way into the political system. Another difference in the British and American systems works against blacks in Britain. Because political there are fewer electoral posts to compete for than in the United States, British parties do not have the same opportunity as American parties to "absorb the growing political ambitions of an emergent minority" (Crewe, have increasingly been chosen in 1983:261). It is true that black candidates Britain to stand in heavily black wards in local elections ? and by 1982, there were about 70 local councillors from the Asian and West Indian communities, mainly in London (Crewe, 1983:278). Yet the growth in the number of black in Britain has, as Crewe (1983:278) notes, been glacially slow. councillors Even when blacks are selected to stand in local elections, inter-ethnic animosities non-white the different among groups may prevent them from round the Due to racist black candidate. there is also the sentiment, rallying loss of white votes (which may not compensate for the gain in black votes) to contend with (Phizlackea and Miles, 1980:36).
CONCLUSIONS This article has made clear that the responses of Jamaican migrants to life abroad are neither inevitable nor "natural". Much depends on where they 10The majority of the London respondents, like West Indians in Britain generally, are Labor Party supporters (See,Foner, 1978:145-48).Although I did not probe voting patterns among New York respondents who were U.S. citizens, it should be noted that only three people (men and women in high-level professional jobs) said they had become or planned to become citizens because they wanted the right to vote.
724
International
Migration
Review
move. Structural features of British and American societies play a large role in shaping have of themselves and of their the perceptions Jamaicans situations as well as their patterns of behavior. The focus here, of course, is on race ? a critical factor in Jamaican migrants' lives. In Britain and the United States, Jamaicans come to have "a heightened consciousness as a black minority enclosed within a world of of themselves more powerful whites" (Sutton and Makiesky, 1975:130). While Jamaican in have a sense both countries new of racial because consciousness, migrants in a white in New of the difficulties confront as blacks the York they society, that their coun? racial context provides Jamaicans with certain advantages terparts in London do not share. of the large black community in The presence and residential segregation New York means that Jamaicans there are less apt than in London to meet, and thus to have painful contacts with, whites in various neighborhood arenas such as stores, churches, restaurants, and schools. Even their political in New York are often black. The large New York black representatives and market for the services of offers a potential clientele also community in London, and And whereas professionals entrepreneurs. Jamaican of as are constant focus attention a social a Jamaicans public problem, in New black faces. York they are largely invisible to whites in a sea of anonymous When white New Yorkers do become aware of the Jamaicans and other West Indians in their midst, they often compare them favorably to American blacks. Indeed, Jamaicans in New York are eager to let whites know their because they believe they will then receive better treatment. A nationality ? and a source of York of New own a and Jamaicans' identity pride key aspect sense of self-worth ? is their difference from, indeed, their feeling of super? iority to, black Americans. These comments pertain to first-generation Jamaican migrants who were born and raised on the Island. A crucial question is how the structure of race in Britain and the United states affects the migrants' children. relations in either Although my own research did not include the second generation London or New York, being black and of Jamaican descent undoubtedly means something Jamaicans in the two very different to second-generation cities. studies have shown that the racial structure of British society Numerous Jamaicans in London in a kind of limbo. On the one puts second-generation hand, they are less likely than their parents to identify themselves as Jamaican. ? On the other hand, encounters with discrimination including their extreme ? undermine by the police difficulty in getting decent jobs and victimization their belief that they are British. "You feel as if you're in a no-man's-land because you have an English accent ... but you've got a black skin", said a 21-year-old Londoner of Jamaican descent. "I was born here, but I don't feel British ... But the West Indies isn't home either, it's some place thousands of
Jamaican
Migrants
in London
and New York City
725
miles away'" (quoted in Lowenthal, 1978:91). The response of many has been In fact, certain to focus on their blackness as a basis for identification. ? devotion involvement in the behaviors to reggae music, for example, Rastafarian movement, and using a Creole dialect ? symbolize their identity as British-born blacks (Cashmore and Troyna, 1982; Sutcliffe, 1982). in New York influences How the racial structure second-generation is an open question. As far as I know, there are, to date no studies Jamaicans of second-generation Jamaicans or West Indians in New York. How does in wider black population affect their lives? In what the being submerged in New York remain apart from, or do ways second-generation Jamaicans Do the American black integrated into, population? they share in the larger as black Americans? Do black cause? Do they begin to identify themselves in or West Indian? And still themselves some as regard Jamaican they ways do they capitalize in any way on their distinctive cultural background? Whether we look at first or second generation it is Jamaican migrants, in and New that the effects of blackness plain vary considerably meaning York and London. This article has explored some of these contrasts. Further studies will doubtless shed additional comparative light on the significance of race to Jamaicans on both sides of the Atlantic.
REFERENCES Bennett, L. Edited by A. Salkey. 1971 "Colonization in Reverse", Breaklight:The Poetry of the Caribbean. Garden City, N.Y.: Doubleday. Bryce-Laporte, R.S. 1979 "New York City and the New Caribbean Immigrant: A Contextual Statement", Interna? tionalMigrationReview, 13(2):214-234. 1973 "Black Immigrants", ThroughDifferentEyes. Edited by P.I. Rose, S. Rothman, and W.J. Wilson. New York: Oxford University Press. Calley, M. Sectsin England.London: Oxford University Press. 1965 God'sPeople: WestIndianPentecostal Cashmore, E. and B. Troyna 1982 Black Youthin Crisis.London: George Allen and Unwin. Cockburn, A. and J. Ridgeway 1982 "Revolt of the Underclass", The VillageVoice,Jan. Pp. 6-12. Crewe, I. 1983 "Representation and the Ethnic Minorities in Britain", EthnicPluralismand Public Policy. Edited by N. Glazer and K. Young. London: Heinemann. Deakin, N. and BritishSociety.London: Panther Books. 1970 Colour,Citizenship
726
International
Migration
Review
Foner, N. n.d. "The Jamaicans:Race and Ethnicity among Migrants in New York City", New Immigrants in New York. Edited by N. Foner. New York: Columbia University Press. In preparation. 1985 "Sex Roles and Sensibilities: Jamaican Women in New York and London", International Migration:The Female Experience.Edited by C. Brettell and R. Simon. Totowa, N.J.: Rowman and Allanheld. 1983 "JamaicanMigrants: A Comparative Analysis of the New York and London Experience", Occasional Paper No. 36, New YorkResearchProgramin Inter-American Affairs,New York University. 1979 "West Indians in New York City and London: A Comparative Analysis", International MigrationReview,13(2).-284-297. 1978 Jamaica Farewell: Jamaican Migrantsin London.Berkeley: University of California Press. 1973 Statusand Power in RuralJamaica: A Study of Educational and PoliticalChange.New York: Teachers College Press. Forsythe, D. 1976 "Black Immigrants and the American Ethos: Theories and Observation", Caribbean Immigrationto the United States. Edited by R.S. Bryce-Laporte and D.M. Mortimer. Washington, D.C: Research Institute on Immigration and Ethnic Studies, Smithsonian Institution. Glantz, O. 1978 "Native Sons and Immigrants: Some Beliefs and Values of American-Born and West Indian Blacks at Brooklyn College", Ethnicity, 5:189-202. Glazer, N. and D. Moynihan 1970 Beyond the MeltingPot. Cambridge: MIT Press. Gordon, M. 1979 "Identification and Adaptation: A Study of Two Groups of Jamaican Immigrants in New York City", Unpublished doctoral dissertation, City University of New York. Hill, C. 1971 Black Churches:WestIndian and AfricanSects in Britain. London: Community and Race Relations Unit of the British Council of Churches. Kraly, E.P. n.d. "U.S. Immigration Policy and the Immigrant Populations of New York",New Immigrants in New York. Edited by N. Foner. New York: Columbia University Press. In preparation. Lee, T. 1977 Race and Residence: The Concentration and Dispersal of Immigrantsin London. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Lomas, G.G.B. and E. Monck 1977 The ColoredPopulationof GreatBritain:Employmentand EconomicActivity,1971.London: The Runnymede Trust. Lowenthal, D. 1978 "West Indian Emigrants Overseas", Caribbean Social Relations.Edited by C.G. Clarke. Monograph No. 8, Center for Latin American Studies, University of Liverpool.
Jamaican
Migrants
in London
and New York City
727
1972 West Indian Societies. London: Oxford University Press. McLaughlin, M. 1981 "West Indian Immigrants: Their Social Networks and Ethnic Identification", Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Columbia University. Nettleford, R. 1972 Identity,Race and Protestin Jamaica.New York: William Morrow. Palmer, R.W. 1974 "A Decade of West Indian Migration to the United States, 1962-1972:An Economic Analysis", Socialand EconomicStudies,23:571-588. Peach, C. 1968 West IndianMigration: A SocialGeography. London: Oxford University Press. Pearson, D.G. Indiansin Britain.Westmead: Gower. 1981 Race,Classand PoliticalActivism: A Studyof West Phizacklea, A. and R. Miles 1980 Labourand Racism.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Pryce, K. 1979 EndlessPressure.Harmondsworth: Penguin. Rex, J. and S. Tomlinson in a BritishCity.London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. 1979 ColonialImmigrants G. Roberts, 1979 The PopulationofJamaica.Millwood, N.Y.: Kraus Reprint. Originally published in 1957. Rose, E.J.B., et.al 1969 Colourand Citizenship. London: Oxford University Press. R.T. Smith, in Comparative SocialStratification. Edited by 1970 "Social Stratification in the Caribbean",Essays L. Plotnicov and A. Tuden. Pittsburgh: University of Pittsburgh Press. Sowell, T. 1981 EthnicAmerica.New York: Basic Books. 1978 Essaysand Data on AmericanEthnicGroups.Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute. Sutcliffe, D. 1982 BritishBlackEnglish.Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Sutton, C. and S. Makiesky andDevelopment. 1975 "Migration and West Indian Racial and Ethnic Consciousness",Migration Edited by H. Safa and B. duToit. The Hague: Mouton. Thomas-Hope, E. 1975 "The Adaptation of Migrants from the English-Speaking Caribbean to Select Centres of Britain and North America". Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society of Applied Anthropology, Amsterdam. Wright, P.L. 1968 The ColouredWorker in BritishIndustry.London: Oxford University Press.

Race and Color Jamaican Migrants in London and New York City

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Race and Color Jamaican Migrants in London and New York City

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Race and Color: Jamaican Migrants in London and New York City Author(s): Nancy Foner Source: International

lamaican New York

and New York City

and New York City

and New York City

and New York City

and New York City

and New York City

Migration has other

Review implications for Jamaican

York, but not in London, migrants' lives. Church

and New York City

and New York City

and New York City

and New York City

Potrebbero piacerti anche