Scan barcode
Reviews
The Uprooted: The Epic Story of the Great Migrations that Made the American People by Oscar Handlin
lukescalone's review against another edition
4.0
Really interesting and important work--probably the best starting point to the literature on American immigration history. Handlin argues--not necessarily through information, but through style--that all Americans are part of the "immigrant experience." I'm not well-versed on conceptions of immigration at the time, but it seems like a very early and clear-headed articulation of this view. He does this by effectively flattening the immigrant experience. Instead of examining the subject chronologically or even by ethnic group, Handlin has thematic chapters on topics like the voyage to the United States, ghettoization, daily life, and more that compress many experiences (regardless of period) into a general accounting of what immigrants to the United States experience(d).
Although written in 1951, much that is written here could just as equally apply to immigrants to the United States 70 years later, in 2021. Rigorous scholarship of immigration has since far exceeded anything Handlin has written here--the material given in one paragraph often has an entire book dedicated to giving more detail now--but it continues to be a sober reflection on what all of our ancestors have experienced.
That said, he doesn't really discuss the earliest white American settlers or enslaved Africans, which he finds don't really fit the process of "immigration." The case of white American settlers has more recently been argued, from the same general perspective, in Lorenzo Veracini's works on settler colonialism, and the literature on enslaved Africans is immense. I think he's right here, but it also means that--theoretically--not all Americans are "immigrants." Some could potentially have ancestors who were entirely made up of settlers or enslaved peoples, although I don't know anyone in my own network where this is the case.
My primary criticism is that the immigrants that Handlin studies are all immigrants that had either become "white" or were in the process of becoming "white" by the time the text was published. That means he talks about the English, Scots, Germans, the Irish, Italians, various Slavic groups, Greeks, and Jews. However, there is little mention of Puerto Ricans, the Chinese, the Japanese, Filipinos, Levantines (mostly Syrian and Lebanese Christians, who were legally granted the status of being "white" in the 1920s), or Chicanos, all of whom constituted large numbers by the time Handlin published his work. When Asian peoples are mentioned, it is almost entirely in reference to exclusion and xenophobia, without thinking much about their own lived experiences.
Although written in 1951, much that is written here could just as equally apply to immigrants to the United States 70 years later, in 2021. Rigorous scholarship of immigration has since far exceeded anything Handlin has written here--the material given in one paragraph often has an entire book dedicated to giving more detail now--but it continues to be a sober reflection on what all of our ancestors have experienced.
That said, he doesn't really discuss the earliest white American settlers or enslaved Africans, which he finds don't really fit the process of "immigration." The case of white American settlers has more recently been argued, from the same general perspective, in Lorenzo Veracini's works on settler colonialism, and the literature on enslaved Africans is immense. I think he's right here, but it also means that--theoretically--not all Americans are "immigrants." Some could potentially have ancestors who were entirely made up of settlers or enslaved peoples, although I don't know anyone in my own network where this is the case.
My primary criticism is that the immigrants that Handlin studies are all immigrants that had either become "white" or were in the process of becoming "white" by the time the text was published. That means he talks about the English, Scots, Germans, the Irish, Italians, various Slavic groups, Greeks, and Jews. However, there is little mention of Puerto Ricans, the Chinese, the Japanese, Filipinos, Levantines (mostly Syrian and Lebanese Christians, who were legally granted the status of being "white" in the 1920s), or Chicanos, all of whom constituted large numbers by the time Handlin published his work. When Asian peoples are mentioned, it is almost entirely in reference to exclusion and xenophobia, without thinking much about their own lived experiences.
ynbvu's review against another edition
2.0
A decent read (albeit an evidently aged style) if this had been an attempt at creative nonfiction; not rigorous at all for a History book, even with Handlin's auto-justifications in the enlarged re-edition. I recognize that the book represents something brilliant and new at the time that it was published, but as a reader in 2018 I got through this with some impatience.
More...