Essay Draft One

Zhouwei
05-08-2007
Draft1

Title

The significance of native-cultural protection was highlighted, when the world was treading toward equilibrium in the sense that the gaps between national capabilities had been relatively narrowed. Nevertheless, since the gap still existed, the cultural invasion and the panic the invasion created brought about accusations against the powerful nation’s cultural extension of vicious view.

The word “Americanization” essentially dealt with cultural interaction. In “The Americanization of Shadrach Cohen”, the author expressed his understanding on the controversial word-“Americanization”, by telling the story of an old and stubborn Jewish immigrant, Shadrach Cohen, who was invited to America by his two sons, and eventually showed the young men the essence of Americanization which, as I assumed, lies in the leniency toward non-native cultures.

We should realize the influence that the author’s conception exerted on the way he arranged the plot. Thus it is natural to believe that the scrutiny into Shadrach Cohen, being the main character, reveals directly the author’s conception of Americanization. Americanization indicates, or bears, a process of change. Shadrach Cohen did not merely stick to his old beliefs. We are informed that, after tiff and miff with his sons, Shadrach Cohen “was slowly undergoing a change” (50), “he become broader-minded, more tolerant, and, above all, more flexible in his tenets.” (50) Without considering the context, the “flexibility in his tenets” can be recognized in two opposite ways: Shadrach Cohen’s devotion in his tenets is diluted, or he accepted religions other than Judaism, customs other than Jewish ones as reasonable existence. It is not so hard to exclude the possibility of his apostasy or defection, judging from the author’s possible intention to defend America against the accusing (or misunderstanding) of vicious cultural extension, and from the piousness of Shadrach Cohen depicted by the story. Hence, the assumption that Americanization concerns the attitude towards foreign cultures is a valid one.

It is directly articulated that the “liberty and democracy” (50) attracted Shadrach Cohen, as a reason of his changing. Both of the two words carry an implication of tolerance, when the subject of these words is the entire body of Americans-prototypes of Americanizing immigrants. Thus it is fair to reason out that the process of fitting socially into the American life embraces the recognition and gaining of these features. In some way, those features stand for the basis of the national ideology, according to the author, “the charm of American life” (50). Here it is not so farfetched to shed light on the interrelationship between being Americanized and being lenient and tolerant.

In concerning that the behavior of the Americans effectively reflects the spirit of Americanization, I suggest further probe into the author’s reference to the Americans. At least two of them could be noticed: the one concerning the “American business men” and that concerning “Miriam”. The American businessmen “seemed to show to Shadrach Cohen an amount of deference and respect which they had never evinced toward the sons” (50). They literally viewed a person in the unbiased light, with no consideration of exterior, no discrimination on exotic customs or preference for the so-called “Americanized” behavior of mimicry. Similarly, when Miriam was introduced to Shadrach Cohen, “impulsively she ran toward him and seized his hands. And, with a smile upon her lips, she said: ‘Will you not give me your blessing?’ ” (51) Miriam had an insight through the appearance of a “newly landed Russian Jew” (46) into the mind of Shadrach Cohen, where she found shrewdness and tenderness. It is quite sarcastic that Miriam reacted contradictorily to Gottlieb’s worry. The two cases are vivid illustrations for the truly Americanized way of life, which matched with the assumption mentioned.

The author also expressed his ideas through ridiculing the behavior of those who were Americanized plausibly, or superficially, without even touching the skirt of its quintessence. Such examples include the description of Shadrach’s two sons and that of their employee. The sons of Shadrach Cohen dressed in the way most Americans did (“wore a flaring necktie with a diamond in it” (46) ), greeted their father in an American way (“promptly threw their arms around his neck”, “an effusive greeting” (46) ), grew out of the old customs (“omit the prayer after meals” (47) ), demonstrating the word “superficial” in every aspects of its sense. Later they learnt from their father, knew how shallow, how limited, how meagre their conception had been, but still kind of unwilling to follow their father’s way of Americanization (“in a stiff, embarrassed manner Gottlieb presented her to his father” (51) .). Their employee, the young man taught a lesson no less bitter than bile by the father of his employers, was too arrogant to be called Americanized. His discrimination over immigrating customs runs contrary to the author’s notion. The connotation here is quite clear: the sons and their employee stood for two sorts of misunderstandings: blindness and discrimination, which “coincidentally” share the same antonym: leniency towards exotic cultures.

The assumption that the essence of Americanization lies in the leniency toward non-native cultures are substantiated in the facets as mentioned. In the view of the author, American society is a collage rather than a melting pot, in the sense that no form of elimination, corrosion or negative alternation was encouraged. People from different cultures join hands together, enjoy the melodious symphony of brotherhood. Respects are expressed to each other. With every inch of the land occupied by liberty, thoughtfulness and leniency, the accusation of “cultural invasion” finds no place to stand.



Work Cited
Bruno Lessing. “The Americanization of Shadrach Cohen.” 1903.