Tongue-tied

National conventions are supposed to be the beacon of democracy. But the Democratic National Convention left many people wondering what constitutes democracy in post-9/11 America.

As the 2004 Democratic National Convention descended into Boston, so did a major affront to democracy. Although a free speech zone was erected to keep the peace amongst various interest groups and concerned citizens vying to have their voices heard, this space proved to be anything but democratic. Epitomizing the stringent security measures have become the norm in our post-9/11 world, authorities stifled the voices of groups competing for space to express their opinions on matters of significance to them.

But the predictability of this censorship didn’t assuage my concern. A Canadian with a long-standing interest in American politics, I was elated at the prospect of covering the Democratic National Convention. After all, political conventions are where history is made, where a party’s image and ideals are showcased to the world, and where people begin to think more deeply about a nation’s state of affairs. The potential for change becomes tangible and one can feel hope in the air with impassioned and inspirational speakers like Illinois Senatorial hopeful Barrack Obama, who eloquently spoke of reviving a proud and patriotic nation where the American dream of opportunity and prosperity could become attainable for all people.

As songs like Sister Sledge’s 1979 smash hit “We are Family” blasted through the loudspeakers, people jostled back and forth clapped their hands and swayed from side to side. It was in these moments that a sense of unity prevailed. But as I walked around the Fleet Center where the convention was held, I realized that what was occurring outside in the free speech zone was equally as important as what was happening inside, even if it was antithetical to the spirit of the convention.

Naturally, there was no shortage of cameras and media representatives inside the Fleet Center. The convention walls were adorned with CNN banners, ABC signs, and the names of other major media outlets. But despite the wealth of media coverage of the convention, the mainstream media showed no interest in what was occurring in the so-called “free speech” zone, save for the chaos that ensued when four protesters were arrested for disobedience on Thursday afternoon.

Considering the ease with which one could get in and out of the convention without even seeing the demonstrators and hearing what they had to say, I decided to engage these silenced voices of dissent.

Welcome to the terror dome

Along with several delegates and convention attendees, I snaked around a hidden entrance to the Fleet Center where we could catch wind of the protesters‚ messages. Greeting us was a blaring loudspeaker announcement mocking the security checks we would soon encounter. As a man dressed in a bear costume with makeshift plastic buttocks dangling from his rear, who identified himself only as 47-year-old Boston-based Vermin Supreme, bellowed, “Please prepare yourself for a full-body cavity rectal search. Remember,” he cautioned, “It is in the name of national security, and it will make you safer; much like the Patriot Act which John Kerry voted for. Smile. Have a nice day,” he jeered. Hearing this as they filed inside, even delegates and other convention attendees couldn’t help but muster a grin or laugh outwardly.

Ari Maller, a 29-year-old Boston area representative from Rock the Vote, was competing for a space to be heard. Because he believes that youth have the power to influence and affect positive change collectively, he’s passionate about engaging youth in the electoral process. “This is about empowering youth to vote. Only 33 percent of people under the age of 24 voted in the last election (2000),” he explained. “A lot of issues are important to youth, such as education, jobs and war. We‚re just making sure that they have the information they need to make a difference.”

Protesters chanted, “If you‚re trying to bring democracy to Iraq, think of us too!” And with abortion surfacing as a divisive issue along the campaign trail, a group of female demonstrators yelled, “Choice for women. Protect our right to choose.”

Bob McLane, 43, who traveled from Texas to attend the convention, was selling bumper stickers that boldly read: “George Bush, Jr. couldn’t run a laundromat.” Selling these stickers for $1 each, McLane boasts that he sells about 100-150 per day, which helps supplement the travel and lodging expenses he incurs from traveling across the nation. “When someone sticks one of these on their car,” he roared, as he beckoned towards the stack of bumper stickers in his hand, “they’re not going to vote for Bush if they’re an undecided voter. This is about competence. This man is way under qualified to be a spokesperson for our country, much less to try and run it. I’m from Texas, and I’ve been around George a long time, and I’ve seen what an idiot he is,” he hollered. “New Yorkers are my best customers, because they know what a dummy Bush is.”

Carrying a sign that read, “Troops out of Iraq,” Jeff Knudsen, 44 and from the Boston area, explained why he chose to be in the free speech zone on the final day of the convention. “I’m not a Democrat, and although I often vote Democratic, I really wish the Dems would go back to their roots and become a People’s party once again — to be pro-peace, pro-working class, pro-women’s rights, and pro-minority rights. They need to increase social justice spending and to increase money for schools, job training, welfare and social security.”

As the crowd began to disperse on the last night of the convention, 54-year-old Bostonian Michael Schwartz, articulated a sentiment that was increasingly palpable throughout the four days of lockdown in the “free speech zone”: “The police have conflated dissent and terrorism, so to dissent is to be a terrorist. They‚re allowing the two separate issues to become one in the public eye, which is completely irrational. There‚s been an overwhelming police presence here. It’s provocative and it’s overkill.”

Troubled times

With civil liberties being drastically curtailed in the wake of 9/11, protesters are increasingly faced with difficulties as they attempt to organize demonstrations that seek to subvert conventional wisdom and to challenge those in power who serve to stifle the emergence of meaningful debate and dialogue on the array of issues facing the world’s lone superpower.

Such demonstrators, regardless of their motivation, demand a stake in the decision-making process. They seek to permeate the public’s conscience with their messages of hope, anger, disillusion, and a healthy dose of sardonic humor, epitomized by Vermin Supreme’s wry warning of “a full-body cavity rectal search.”

It was a sad four days for democracy in a nation that extols the virtues of such ideals and continues to use the issue of democracy to justify — at least in part — its disastrous invasion of Iraq. At the DNC, American hypocrisy was on full display for the world to see. I spent much of the four days of the convention holed up in the so-called “free speech zone,” where it often seemed as if there were more police in riot gear, citing “security” concerns to justify their excessive presence, than protesters, who symbolically placed duct tape over their mouths as a sign of the times. That is, times where to speak one’s mind and where to waver from conventional wisdom is tantamount to treason. The Patriot Act only serves to confirm this widespread sentiment.

Over the course of the convention, it became increasingly apparent that John Kerry’s Democrats could have used the convention’s glimmering spotlight to prove to Americans that this party is truly a people’s party. That they’re serious about fostering meaningful debate on the complex issues facing a divided nation.

Essentially, Kerry and the law enforcement officials could have succeeded in doing this by welcoming the protesters onto the convention’s premises, where they could be heard and where they could be visible and not on the outskirts of the site, down a dingy alley littered with Dunkin’ Donuts coffee cups, cigarette butts, and discarded pizza boxes.

Voters may now be inclined to think that Kerry won’t be the “man for all people” after all “that the image of inclusion and tolerance that he and his vice-presidential running mate, John Edwards, have projected is nothing more than a façade aimed at deceiving the American populace.

With three months before the much-anticipated election takes place, Kerry will have to do a massive overhaul if he hopes to garner much-needed votes from the disillusioned people who have seen no indication that he’ll be open to diverging viewpoints thus far.

STORY INDEX

Commentary >

“John Kerry’s Waffles” by Michael Grunwald
URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2096540/

Legislation >

The Patriot Act
URL:
http://www.epic.org/privacy/terrorism/hr3162.html

 

Crossing borders

A gallery of the art featured at the magazine's Coming Out Party on July 16, 2004, in New York.

Click here to enter the gallery.

 

The curse of interracial marriage

“Just because he’s Israeli and I’m Palestinian, we’re not allowed to be together … And just because we choose to be together, now we have like some kind of curse, not to be around the people that we love: his family, my family.” Abir, a Palestinian woman married to an Israeli, is speaking about an Israeli law that may tear her family — which includes their new two-month-old son — apart.

The Israeli parliament passed the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law on July 31, 2003, and in so doing prohibited family unification for Israelis who are married to Palestinians from the Occupied Territories. The law, which is a temporary measure instituted by the Israeli government as a measure to protect its citizens, has been extended for another six months. The Israeli government views this law as both temporary and necessary; according to the Israeli government, 23 Palestinians living in the Occupied Territories who obtained residency permits during the past three years to live in Israel for the purpose of family unification have been “involved in providing meaningful assistance in hostile activity against state security.”

Amnesty International has condemned the law on the basis that it “institutionalizes a form of racial discrimination based on ethnicity or nationality,” and the UN Committee on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination has asked that Israel repeal the law.

While the law has significant political ramifications, it is the personal impact of the law that is the most heartwrenching. As Murad, Abir’s husband, states: “Here is our home, here is our land, and here is our family and our tribe and my people and my schools and my work. And I see myself here and not in any other place in the world.

Mimi Hanaoka

 

Rockin’ the vote

issue banner

These days it’s almost impossible to avoid turning on the news or reading the paper without hearing stories about the politics of politics — that is, tales about the campaign trail, candidates’ families, scandals, and occasionally the candidates’ platforms.

Save for those moments when the candidates seek the support of voting blocs — the Jewish vote, the Latino vote, the female vote, the black vote — the predicaments of those on the margins of the United States and the world at-large receive scant attention. In this issue of InTheFray Magazine, we seek to broaden this year’s election dialogue by illuminating the interests and stories of the politically invisible.

Writing from the Democratic National Convention in Boston, ITF Contributing Writer Ayah-Victoria McKhail explores the media’s failure to cover the repression of free speech at the DNC in Tongue-tied. Harvard Ph.D. candidate Scott Winship, meanwhile, assesses the risks that the Democrats are taking by Compromising politics in order to send President George W. Bush back to Crawford, Texas. Complemeting Tak Toyoshima‘s Secret Asian Man cartoon about taking the Jap road,< b>Mikhaela B. Reid, our newest cartoonist, pokes fun at queers supporting President Bush in The boiling point. On Monday, August 16, ITF columnist and Managing Editor Henry Belanger will share his thoughts on the DNC.

Given the economic volatility that has predominated during the past four years, few can deny the decisive role that the economy will play on November 2. But as ITF Index Editor Laura Louison suggests in her review of David Shipler’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book The Working Poor (this month’s featured book from Off the Shelf), poverty isn’t merely an election year concern. For many, Louison discloses in Will work for food, impoverishment is a stark, everyday reality that demands national attention.

Of course, economic insecurity knows no borders — or age limits. As ITF Contributing Editor Michelle Chen reveals in Migrant makeover, teens from rural China who migrate to the city hoping to lift themselves from poverty by working in salons often pay a high price while supporting the country’s economic expansion. In nearby Vietnam, street youth participating in the Street Vision Project expose their economic struggles through their cameras in Street vision. Complementing these photos and highlighting the pervasiveness of the oppression experienced by children who lack economic standing, Josh Arseneau shares his poignant photos of child soldiers in West Africa, which we’ll publish on Monday, August 16.

Rounding out this week’s pieces are the visual works of art and the four poems performed by spoken word artists Joyce Lin (Understatement), Kate Hanzalik (Marilyn Chin tells my skin to run), Andre Michael Carrington (Boy rock), and Chavisa Woods (Totems) at InTheFray’s CROSSING BORDERS benefit in Manhattan last month. Special thanks to these fine poets and artists — and to all of our readers and friends who have continued to support our work here at ITF.

Laura Nathan
Editor
Austin, Texas

 

Migrant makeover

Migrating from rural China to the big city and working at a salon has become a popular route out of poverty and stifling tradition. Such service workers are fueling China’s growing capitalist-style economy. But disappointing and sobering revelations await those with high hopes.

Xiao Yanzi and Xiao Li waiting for customers at Jin Mei Salon.

Under the salon’s sterile lights, the hairdressers sat in the waiting area — some in chairs, some squatting in a typical Chinese fashion that hinted at a provincial upbringing. Despite their neat hairdos and smart maroon polo shirts, the girls at Jin Mei, a salon in Shanghai surrounded by construction zones and high-rises, could not escape their slightly country looks, having migrated from rural villages in other provinces into the city.

They were celebrating the first night of Chinese New Year, or Spring Festival, in front of the television in the near-empty salon, busily gnawing guazi, or sunflower seeds, spitting the shells in a garbage can while glaring impatiently at the last customer of the day. Since Chinese New Year is the biggest holiday of the year, they were supposed to get off work at 5p.m., but at 8 p.m., Xiao Yanzi, the stylist, was fixing the last hairdo of the Lunar Year. The boss always orders them to keep serving customers as long as they keep coming.

Jin Mei’s employees mostly hail from Anhui Province, a relatively poor region that exports a large portion of its farming population to Shanghai, several hours away by bus or train. Most of these girls migrated around age 18 or 19 after leaving school. Most ended their schooling at middle or high school; the prospects of attaining a higher education in the impoverished rural school system are few, so extra years of school tuition seem like a waste when city jobs are readily available.

Shanghai’s booming economy, which grew 15 percent this past year and leads China in gross domestic product, has been drawing thousands of hopeful youth from the countryside for over a decade. Before the Reform Era began in 1979, peasants were essentially chained to the land. The government, fearing disorder, used a draconian household registration system — the “hukou” system — to enforce a huge economic gulf between the countryside and the industrialized cities. But over the last two decades of frenetic modernization in China, regulations have been loosened to facilitate economic development, and the massive tide of labor in the cities has inflamed the cultural and economic tensions along the rural-urban divide dating back to Chinese antiquity.

As I’ve researched the cultural identity of migrants over the past several months, certain patterns have become evident, both disturbing and banal. Youth are being siphoned into different strands of urban culture, from the seedy underground to the neon and polyester trappings of the twenty-something mainstream. I see them as individuals caught up in a mass phenomenon of unprecedented social change — some sink, others rise, and still more just drift. The Jin Mei salon is an unwitting laboratory, as its girls are transformed into passive recipients of modern ideas of beauty and leisure, as well as, for the first time in their lives, agents in control of their economic and social destinies.

Testing the waters

Though rural parents tend to guard their children closely, especially girls, the drive for economic advancement has eroded centuries-old child-rearing convention. Traditionally in both rural and urban China, youth are expected to remain at home until marriage, and afterwards, to serve their parents when they become financially self-sufficient. But the girls at Jin Mei revealed that their parents for the most part supported their leaving home for work, since even the lowest-paying job in the city is still viewed as a step up from “spending a life with your face to the ground and back to the sun” — an old saying describing a farmer’s toil. Farmland in China has historically been a ball and chain for peasants, especially under the household registration system, so it’s no wonder physical mobility in the Reform Era has been equated with economic mobility.

One factor that enables parents to be more relaxed about their children leaving the village is that youth workers are seldom truly “on their own.” Workers in salons and other enterprises rarely arrive in a new place without contacts or work arrangements. In many cases, a friend or relative helps arrange work in advance.

Nineteen year-old Chun Xiang, who arrived at Jin Mei around the time of the Spring Festival, mistakenly thought migrating would be her first experience living without her family. A girl with blank eyes and a soft smile, she exuded the kind of sweet restlessness characteristic of girls fresh from the countryside. Her older brother had tried to convince her to move to Beijing, where he worked as a migrant, because salons had a reputation for being “complicated” — a code word for being involved with the sex industry.

Instead, she decided to go to Shanghai, lured by the prospect of more independence. But once she found Jin Mei through friends and family, there was no shortage of concerned lao xiang, or fellow villagers, floating about the salon. Her lao xiang arranged to keep her out of the dormitories — cramped rented rooms down the street, each shared by several girls — and got her a place to sleep in the back room of the salon, presumably to keep her safe and more isolated. “I guess you could call me lucky,” she said, her bashful smile lined with a touch of disappointment. (By the summer, however, her father would order her to come back home, fearing she would xue huai, or “go bad,” living so far from home.)

Even with relatives in the city to act as guardians, parents are somewhat justified in worrying over how their children will fare. The migrants in Shanghai I’ve met, not just at the salon but in other vocations as well, always tell me that the youth fresh from the village all have one thing in common: their ignorance. Kids from the countryside are dai, or slow-witted, when they first arrive, easily taken advantage of, too willing to work for nothing.

My friend from Shandong, Xiao Chen, a pretty 26 year-old who first landed in Shanghai to work in a shrink-wrap factory, giggled as she recalled that her family feared she would be kidnapped and sold — a phenomenon not unheard of in China but primarily the stuff of urban lore. According to her, you have to “learn how to take care of yourself” sooner or later, since scam artists, criminals, and local prejudice against outsiders are rampant. Her main advice to younger migrants is, “If other people look down on you here, you just look down on them back.”

The process of adapting to city life requires one to build an armor of aloofness against those who seize every opportunity to exploit rural naiveté. Though the city might not be crawling with sexual predators as some parents fear, girls soon learn that shady guys in pursuit of short-term “girlfriends” abound, especially in the underground club scene, which is linked to drugs and prostitution. Girls must struggle to balance the quality of dan cun, or “purity” — the hallmark of Chinese female virtue — with the maturity needed for survival. The two elements may seem contradictory, but as many girls discover, maintaining the dignified, virginal exterior requires a special grade of toughness.

Young male migrants also tend to wise up quickly once exposed to the harsh urban environs. Chen Da Ji, a male hair stylist who recently left Jin Mei to open his own salon, recalled how he had struggled to survive as a migrant in Guangdong. In a quiet, weary voice that suggested a fragility incongruous with his loud golden highlights, he told me that the migrant youth who come into the cities today aren’t like the migrants of his “generation,” who left home several years ago. These new kids have nice clothes and pocket money. While most salon workers these days sport cute cell phones, when Chen first struck out on his own, he was constantly out of touch with his family and friends. He spent years scrounging for money through whatever odd job he could find, and he recalls bitterly having to sleep on the street in Guangdong for a time.

Among both males and females, there is a visible divide between the migrants who have been disciplined by city life and those who have been hardened by it. Jin Mei’s workers fill the salon with a teenish buoyancy — occasionally grumpy about overwork and low pay, but well-adjusted overall. The more jaded migrants I’ve seen, hanging out at night or at other salons, have distant, slithering eyes, and even though they seem carefree, drinking and smoking with friends, their forearms betray quiet moments of self-destructive boredom: rows of cigarette burns dotting tender skin.

A New Year’s banquet hosted by a salon owner for his employees.

Homecoming and going

If I visited her village and saw how the peasants lived, Song Jing, a hairdresser from Hubei just shy of 20, told me quietly one night during the week-long Chinese New Year celebration, “tears would start to flow.” Around closing time, as the last employees dawdled in front the television watching muted music videos, the native of Hubei with a head of frizzy highlights was getting ready to turn in. She was sleeping in the back room of the salon to keep an eye on it, since crime rates shoot up around the New Year celebration. She would soon be able to sleep in her own bed in her village, but ambivalence would follow her home.

Much of the warmth she once felt toward her lao jia or hometown had evaporated since she had settled in Shanghai. Everything there, she feared, would seem unfamiliar, including the old friends she had not kept in touch with since leaving the countryside over a year ago. But she knew that she would also seem unfamiliar to the people at home. The city had aged her. When she was living in the countryside, she was “like a child,” but now, she said, she carried herself more like an adult, more cultured than her rural counterparts. “I feel like I’m in a different world,” she reflected bashfully, as if embarrassed to reveal the softness she should have left behind in her village.

Twenty-two year-old Ni Ke, a skinny hairdresser from Anhui with a shaggy bob, told me she no longer thinks about home much. When she talks about her life now, her mouth curls into a spunky smile with just a hint of a sneer. She has settled into Shanghai quite well since arriving three years ago at 19. Today, she shares an apartment with her boyfriend, a migrant from Jiangsu who works in a nearby salon. Though her parents are pressuring them to get married, she told me one night at the salon as she shampooed my hair, she values her personal space and is resolved to maintain her independence as long as possible. “There’s no point in getting married early,” she said, reflecting a modern concept of romance shared by many of her co-workers.

The financial security found through city work has chipped away at the village tradition of marrying young and settling down in the male spouse’s laojia. Ni Ke and her boyfriend have debated over where they would end up if they did get married — her hometown or his (an issue that many couples break up over, she told me). Or maybe they would opt to stay in Shanghai, free from the parental concerns that they had already shrugged off in deciding to live together.

The city also draws better-off youth, who have things other than poverty to escape. Xiao Li, a short young girl with brown bangs and a mischievous smile, came to Shanghai in 2000 at age 16 not to make money, but because her parents’ constant fighting was making her miserable. Xiao Li’s decision to leave high school for the city was outright rebellion, not filial duty. Her father was a local official who had invested heavily in the developing local economy. Her parents’ squabbling over finances, not a lack of income, drove her into the city.

Xiao Li thinks her family was happier when they were poorer. Watching their newfound wealth unravel her household taught her that “whenever you have money, it’s never enough, you always want even more.” But this February, Xiao Li went home for the first time in two years. She now finds that the rareness of a return visit makes her presence that much more valued. She also attracts the admiration of old friends who have not “experienced the world (jian guo shi mian),” and who group her among the “city girls … [who have] seen everything, experienced everything.”

Despite the economic limitations of their work, the glossy habitat of the salon symbolizes contemporary urban China in contrast with the muddy, messy countryside. Jin Mei offers an opportunity for these girls to see themselves in a different light. Instead of the drab backdrop of endless rice fields, mirrors and walls plastered with posters of models frame the girls as they lather and scrub the heads of customers with mechanical efficiency.

If the ennui of the service they provide is dulling to the senses, the city around them at least offers stimuli that they would never encounter in the countryside: chintzy, massive arcade-karaoke-entertainment complexes; the neon lights of the Bund — a famous strip of landmarks overlooking the Huangpu River, where many migrant youth spend their first awkward dates; and 24-hour convenience stores and noodle shops. Though they are not rich enough to enjoy the middle-class comforts of their wealthier customers, they are still exposed to urban life on the mammoth scale of China’s most rapidly developing metropolis. For many of them, seeing the world through the fogged glass of the salon window will wipe out the possibility of living in the country ever again.

Death by haircut

A typical migrant youth in Shanghai will tell you that his or her village is a ghost town during most of the year — populated only by elderly, disabled or incompetent people, and very young children, left in the care of grandparents as their parents work city jobs. The population exodus has been so dramatic that the domestic grain yield was at its lowest in 12 years in 2003. The only time of year when such villages ever seem full is during the Chinese New Year. And even then, not everyone goes back. The passing of Chinese New Year for Jin Mei’s workers indicates the flow of youth between the city and the countryside has worn holes on both sides of the culture gap. Of course, the workers, mostly in their late teens and early 20’s, seem hardly aware that they are products of a monumental population shift. The main shift they feel is a personal and physical one.

Soft and polished, hair carefully highlighted and layered in an approximation of the Asian celebrities featured on television screens and magazine pages, the female workers have been careful to erase signs that they were once country bumpkins. Betraying one’s rural background is anathema to the low-end beauty industry here.

The male workers trade in T-shirts for tight trousers, pointy shoes and sport jagged, streaked hair, emulating the swanky, vaguely effeminate image of Asian pop stars. The deflowering of Jin Mei’s girls begins with their first haircut — the hacking of the black ponytail. Xiao Li, who worked the register at Jin Mei through the New Year holiday, recalled that when she started her job at 16, she cried when they cut her streaming black locks and gave her a layered bronzed bob. Back then, she joked, she was so shy that when any of the male employees talked to her, she would turn bright red. Now, at 19, as she smacks her gum, grumbles about how uncool her uniform is, and flirts with male coworkers, she displays an impulsive boldness uncharacteristic of a country girl.

For Wen Wen, a petite, angelic 17 year-old — adored by older coworkers as a little sister — getting her hair dyed and cut for the first time at 14 was a jarring experience. After losing her black ponytail, which she had always liked before it was deemed unhip by the salon staff, her reflection in the mirror startled her. “I couldn’t get used to the sight of myself,” she said. But now, displaying coifed upswept locks that hint of a Japanese anime character, Wen Wen sees her new style as a step toward her dream of “making people beautiful.”

The symbolic death-by-haircut of their rural identity is a minor trauma soon to be forgotten in the midst of non-stop labor. Money is hard to hold onto in Shanghai, as the cost of living far exceeds that of the rest of the country. An ordinary female salon worker in Shanghai can hope to earn around several hundred to 1,500 yuan per month (US$180), while hairstylists (a profession reserved for men) can make around 5,000 yuan ($600). These wages are still much more than they could ever hope to earn back home, since farmers on average earn less than one third the salary of non-agricultural workers — 2,622 yuan compared to 8,500 yuan for urban residents — and the gap is growing as cities like Shanghai hurdle into the global economy.

With no dependents, young migrants feel less pressure to remit income to families back home, so they can instead save toward a new apartment or a long-term goal of starting their own business. But the work schedule and relatively low income means that employees are usually too worn out by the 70-hour work week to do anything on off-days but rest and spend extra money on Western fashions, cell phones, and Internet bars.

Yet such jobs, with set wages and hours, are coveted among migrants. Other jobs in restaurants and construction entail dangerous working conditions and perhaps even less possibility of advancement. Since kids are constantly trying to find ways to enter the city workforce, Jin Mei has easy pickings.

Workers are acquired by Jin Mei’s boss, Liu Bing, a former lawyer who found entrepreneurship more promising than the legal bureaucracy. His wife, herself a migrant who worked her way up in the salon business to the managerial level, provides valuable connections to friends and relatives in villages in her home province, Anhui.  The husband-wife team prefers youth who display a certain measure of suzhi or “class,” with some schooling and good Mandarin rather than a rural dialect, displaying docility as well as competence. The further they seem from the city dweller’s stereotype of the unkempt farmer girl, the better they are for business. As their boss and their caretaker, Liu is proud of the relationship he has with his staff. “We give them a stage,” he said, and they cultivate their own abilities until they are ready to “take off” on their own. If workers prove themselves competent enough, he gives them a share of his salon franchise.

The village girls the bosses commonly encounter are mostly eager to experience city life and the opportunities it promises. Still, some girls — who, according to Liu, don’t know what they’re missing — are reluctant to leave what is familiar. And some discover too late that they are not mature enough to handle the city, jumping from job to job in frustration, or even returning home, overwhelmed by the pressures of living and working in an urban environment.

The anything-goes atmosphere of Reform Era China leads some youth to move faster than they can afford. A 19 year-old hairdresser named Gu Xuan told me that she had already opened two salons with her parents’ savings in the town area of her laojia since the age of 17. She was unable to cope with the burden of managing a business, and both shops closed after a short time. “I don’t even like to think back to that time!” she said, remembering her parents’ deep disappointment. Now, she has resigned herself to a humbler position as a salon employee. She looks back wistfully on simpler days when she was still a student. “When you’re in school, all you want to do is just have fun. But when you’re out of school, you really wish you were studying again.”

For individual workers, mustering the drive to rise up and insist on more than just scraping by is the greatest challenge. Many of those seeking upward mobility are disappointed during the months or years it takes to establish financial stability. Unskilled jobs — entry-level positions in service industries like beauty salons — are much more abundant than skilled ones. Many migrants I’ve met have a relatively easy time finding work washing hair, waiting tables, or doing construction, but cannot break into office jobs or more skilled professions. They have an even harder time raising enough capital to start their own shops, since most people have to negotiate loans with parents or relatives, who often aren’t much better off than they are.

When they first arrive, girls are expected to pay a few hundred yuan in “deposit” money just for the opportunity to work. Some girls spend several months in the “apprenticeship” phase, during which they earn no wages. And even after the boss decides to finally put them on the payroll, economic advancement still rests upon the boss’s whim. It is a mild form of the commodification of youth, particularly females, as cogs in the global economy.

At Jin Mei, sharp gender distinctions in the workforce also impose limitations. Boys generally begin as apprentice haircutters, hoping to work their way up to stylist. Girls generally do not advance beyond hairdressing, massage, manicuring, and other beauty services, despite the fact that the apprenticeship period for women seems almost as intensive as that for male hairstylists. Gu Xuan told me one evening, kneading my arms absent-mindedly during a semi-professional massage session, that male customers don’t trust women to style their hair. In Shanghai, traditional men only trust male stylists, and the management reinforces the status quo by refusing to train female workers in a “male” line of work.

But for a typical girl from the countryside, even such limited economic opportunity was unthinkable a generation ago. Now that young women are streaming into the city and for the first time tasting independence — at least financially if not socially — many are determined to earn their way into a business of their own.

Xiao Yanzi, one of the senior hairstylists (and the only woman stylist in the salon), first came to Shanghai over ten years ago at age 17 with her cousins, to see the city and check out job prospects. Once she saw how much city life contrasted with her sleepy rural town back home, she knew she couldn’t return. She could earn up to 300 yuan  ($36) a month working in the city, more than ten times what her father was making as a rural laborer. She’s quietly worked her way up here, acquiring enough to buy a 30 percent share of another salon in the Jin Mei franchise, which includes several hairshops and a spa. She harbors distant dreams of starting her own salon, but the last time she tried, her grand opening unfortunately coincided with President Bill Clinton’s visit to Shanghai, which prompted the local authorities to crack down on all “illegal” salons that had yet to acquire a license.

She smiled tiredly when asked about her future plans. “I’ll just keep working here,” she remarked matter-of-factly. Xiao Yanzi is determined never to return to her hometown to settle down. Though she sees herself as an Anhui native — and although her new baby daughter has been sent to Anhui to be looked after by her parents — there is enough Shanghai in her and her husband to keep her firmly grounded here.

The countryside revisited

The New Year holiday or “Spring Festival” is the only occasion that brings migrant youth home in droves, if only for a few days. Every year, migrants with enough money for a ticket pack buses and trains bound for the countryside. In many villages, left desolate by the exodus of able-bodied men and women to the cities, this is the one truly vibrant time of the year, when the returnees shower family and neighbors with candy and red gift envelopes stuffed with cash.

Youth are also pressured to return home in order to maintain certain social institutions. Migrants in their twenties are often expected to xiang qin or look for marriage partners in their village. Matches are often made by parents, so the “introduction” process is accelerated.

Homecoming is also a way of making an individualistic contribution to the community, however. As young adults, migrants also find in the week-long celebration an opportunity to prove that the bitter work they have endured has finally paid off — in the warm smiles of their relatives, the feasts and dances of rural tradition, and the eagerly anticipated, if ephemeral windfall of money and gifts. In this respect, the real power of being a rural-to-urban migrant is felt not in the bittersweet benefits of city life, but in the importance a returnee acquires when demonstrating hard-won success and a cosmopolitan aura.

Then there are workers who stay in the city, either because their boss doesn’t allow them to leave or because they choose not to. Either way, their job has become the weight that anchors them to the city, the same way a fallow field grounded the peasants of the previous generation.

Wen Wen was determined to go home this year. Last year, as a new arrival, she was not in the portion of the staff allowed to go home, so she had passed the New Year in the salon. Wen Wen was at first excited to spend the holiday in the city. “As it was getting closer to the New Year, I felt really happy,” she recalled. “But when New Year’s Eve finally came, I felt very lonely.” She greeted the New Lunar Year in front of the television at the salon, bored and thinking of how happy she was as a girl when her whole family would gather in her village for feasts and traditional ceremonies. She missed her grandmother, who had raised her while her parents worked in another city situation common in migrant families.

But she has never regretted the decision to leave the village. “I felt Shanghai was really a city for young people,” she said. “I had to go there and see what it was about.” In her laojia, she felt smothered by relatives. “You can’t always depend on your mother and father,” she said, with the wisdom of a precocious child. “I wanted to live independently.”

Her mother and father at first did not want her to leave home at such a young age, but after she pleaded with them, they eventually let her take her first train ride — 24 hours — from Guangzhou to Shanghai. Two years shy of the legal employment age, she had relatives lie about her age to get her the job at Jin Mei. (By the time her boss discovered her real age, she had already ingratiated herself as a diligent worker.)

Wen Wen turned out to be a fast learner and got through her training period in just one month. Her co-workers were all charmed by her cuteness and good nature, she made friends easily, and her boss, she said, is very kind to her. She now lives with several other girls in a dormitory apartment near the salon, who play the role of older sisters. By observing the older employees, she studies how to be an adult and how to treat customers with impeccable courtesy. “I feel I’m older now, more mature,” she reflected.

This year, she was able to display her grown-up self in her hometown. She took a bus and arrived home just before midnight on New Year’s Eve. The reunion was only partial because her father had stayed to work in Guangzhou. But Wen Wen was ecstatic to see her grandmother waiting up for her, looking older than before. “I couldn’t say anything. The first thing I did was hug them. That felt good.” She repeated to her grandmother over and over that her salon job was wonderful, “just to keep her from crying more.” No one’s pride matters more to her than her grandmother’s. The first 500 yuan ($60) she earned at Jin Mei went to fulfill her promise as a young girl that “the first money I make, I’ll send home to you.”

But the initial euphoria of the Spring Festival soon passed. Her friends back home now regarded her awkwardly. “They’re not as nice to me as I am to them,” she said. “They all say I’ve changed!” When her old friends told her that she did not seem as talkative and outgoing as she was before she went to the city, she replied, “You’re just not making an effort to understand me. I’m still the old me.” But Wen Wen was not too hurt by the loss of her childhood friends, as she had made plenty of new ones among her coworkers in Shanghai.

It was as if the coziness of home had departed just as she had. “It’s not as bustling as it was before,” she said, “because many people my age and a little older have all left to work.” In the countryside, the year moves in cycles, and when the Spring Festival crowds leave, the dusty shell of a village begins another year-long wait.

Passing the New Year and passing time

Back in Shanghai, on New Year’s night, the Jin Mei workers were rewarded for their overtime with a night of singing along to overproduced Chinese pop music in a crowded multi-story entertainment center down the street. Shanghai does not offer much variety in terms of nightlife for youth of modest means, just a chance to croon along to your favorite pop singer in a cramped rented room or converse in a cubicle with a net friend or wang you. But despite the crushing density of the city, youth who are feeling out their new home manage to locate pockets of privacy, or at least anonymous gratification.

Shanghai spreads out before its migrants like a spilled toy box. For many, it offers at least a temporary oasis of social indulgences that make the countryside seem unlivable in comparison. For others, the city cuts deeper into them, and they enmesh themselves in a Hades of organized crime, drugs, prostitution, and gambling to obtain wealth and prestige.

Whether they are escaping pressures at home or chasing the fantasy of wealth, urban youth migrants are discovering that China’s developing economy has opened up a platform for self-exploration that never previously existed for their demographic. The decision to return home or to stay in the city for the Spring Festival plots a migrant youth on a matrix of space and time, on which two generations and two wildly different environments cross. At the crux of this clash between rural and urban cultures, migrant youth work, play, and carve out a place for themselves, and the beauty and peril lie in the fact that no one can tell just how long it will last. Whether or not the youths’ dreams ever materialize, the sense of individuality that flowers in the struggle to find one’s place in this congested city is priceless.

Go to part two

 

Migrant makeover (part two)

Migrating from rural China to the big city and working at a salon has become a popular route out of poverty and stifling tradition. Such service workers are fueling China’s growing capitalist-style economy. But disappointing and sobering revelations await those with high hopes.

Go to part one

STORY INDEX

TOPICS > CHINESE MIGRANT WORKERS >

“Hope for China’s Migrant Workers”
A detailed report on labor migration policy and its impact on women in the new Chinese economy from the China Business Review
URL: http://www.chinabusinessreview.com/public/0205/ye.html

“Dagongmei” — Female Migrant Labourers
An article from the China Labour Bulletin by Australian researcher Tamara Jacka
URL: http://www.china-labour.org.hk/iso/article.adp?article_id=5282&category_name=Economic%20Reform

“My Life as a Migrant Worker: Women in Rural-Urban Migration in Contemporary China”
Another article by Tamara Jacka, from Intersections
URL: http://wwwsshe.murdoch.edu.au/intersections/issue4/tamara_intro.html

TOPICS > CHINESE BEAUTY INDUSTRY

“China Plans Regulation to Guide Beauty Industry”
A March 2003 article from the People’s Daily
URL: http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200403/30/eng20040330_138927.shtml

“World ‘beauty makers’ knocking China door”
A June 2004 article by Mark Godfrey in China Today
URL: http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-04/06/content_321064.htm

TOPICS > CHINESE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

“China’s Divisive Development — Growing Urban-Rural Inequality Bodes Trouble”
A 2001 article by Joshua Levin in Harvard International Review
URL: http://hir.harvard.edu/articles/index.html?id=977&page=5

 

Street Vision

Photographs by working and street children in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.

Click here to enter the visual essay.

This series of photographs were taken by children living and working in the streets of Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam as part of the Street Vision. Vietnam’s economy is gradually shifting from a centrally planned socialist system to a market-based one. The rapid economic development has greatly widened the gap between the rich and poor, with the greatest effects being felt in the countryside. Driven from their rural homes by poverty, neglect, and the lure of profits, children are drawn to the cities in droves. Once there, with little or no welfare infrastructure to fall back on, they are forced to take on menial minimum wage jobs and often find themselves living on the streets.

Street Vision one of the many projects begun by Photo Voice, an international non-profit founded by Anna Blackman in 1998, based in London. Photo Voice has projects all over the world that teach photography to disenfranchised groups and people living on the fringes of society. Photo Voice aims to use photography as a weapon of economic and social empowerment, not only providing a marketable technical skill that will be useful in the future but also as a means of communication and self-representation.

Founded in 1998 and based in Ho Chi Minh City, Street Vision now exists as an in independent non-governmental organization (NGO) managed by the Ho Chi Minh Welfare Foundation (HCWF) and is partners with fellow NGO Education for Development. Each year Street Vision enrolls 20 working and street children into its photojournalism workshop, teaching them photography skills and organizing apprenticeships with local photographers. Over 20 participants have gone on to pursue professional photography careers. Exhibits of the children’s work have been held both locally and abroad, serving the dual purposes of fostering understanding within their own communities and increasing awareness and lobbying for change abroad.

All of the photographers have shared brief snippets of their life story as fitting captions for this piece, most in their own words.

Images for this photo essay were part of an exhibition held in London. All images are available for purchase with profits going towards the Street Vision Project. For more information on purchasing prints, please email Ho Chi Minh City Child welfare Foundation at hcwf@hcm.vnn.vn.

 

Compromising politics

Progressives need to remember that a Kerry victory would not be a mandate for their agenda. There's a reason everyone’s being so pragmatic.

(Photo by Dustin Ross)

The hopeful optimism of delegates at the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston was unmistakable. At the heart of this optimism lies a paradox. Democrats are more impassioned and energized than they have been in some time, yet the various wings of the party are united to an unprecedented degree.

Ordinarily, political passion is associated with an energized party base and squabbles pitting it against party moderates, as Howard Dean’s remarkable primary campaign suggested. But a pervasive anybody-but-Bush sentiment among Democrats — a sentiment that propelled John Kerry to a seemingly unexpected victory in this year’s primaries — has become the dominant feature of the election. Sure, primary voters flirted heavily with Dean and later Edwards.But in the end they voted for the (unsexy) candidate they believed had the best chance of sending Bush packing.

Even though convention delegates tend to be less moderate than other voters, this pragmatic approach to the 2004 election was everywhere you looked among Democrats in Boston. Michigan delegate Cheryl Hadsall, for instance, is concerned with jobs and health care. But her first priority is much more basic: “We need to take back the White House.”  

Similarly, California delegate Judith Katzberg, a nurse who volunteers in a clinic serving the poor and an advocate of universal healthcare coverage and abortion rights, is well aware that the Democratic nominee’s proposal would fall far short of universal coverage. She is also aware that Kerry believes that life begins at conception. Yet she’s willing to make concessions this year, emphasizing that “you have to be pragmatic” first and then “always try to get more.”

Katzberg is hardly alone in this sentiment. Standing in solidarity with the anybody-but-Bush pragmatists, many single-issue interest groups have united under the moniker “America Votes” in an unprecedented campaign to increase voter turnout and boost the electoral prospects of Democratic candidates around the country. Howard Dean, once the beacon of “the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party,” played nice as he stood before delegates at the convention, declaring, “We’re all here to represent the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party.” Even hardcore lefties like Michael Moore are urging their supporters not to vote for Ralph Nader to ensure Bush’s defeat.

Biding their time

But because this anti-Bush consensus conceals important rifts within the party, it seems destined to yield to further intra-party battles beyond the election. Should John Kerry and John Edwards triumph in November, progressives who misinterpret the outcome as a mandate for their agenda, rather than a referendum against Bush, run the risk of setting back the party — and the progressive agenda — in the long run.

There are ample signs that party unity will fail to hold after the election.  Despite Representative and former presidential hopeful Dennis Kucinich’s proclamation that “Out of many, we Democrats are one,” he waited until the eve of the convention to release his delegates to vote for Kerry. A unanimous nomination eluded Kerry because a number of the delegates voted for Kucinich anyway.      

Andrew Stern, the liberal president of the liberal Service Employees International Union (SEIU), professed his belief early in the week that a Kerry Administration would be bad for the Democratic Party and bad for unions. By his Marxian reasoning, a Kerry victory would delay the progressive change needed to transform the party, while a second Bush term would naturally produce a leftward lurch.

And a group called Progressive Democrats of America was launched at the end of convention week with an eye toward post-November organizing. As Field Director Kevin Spidel explained, “Our goal is to win back the presidency from the Republicans, and also to wrest the Democratic Party from the free-trading-Iraq-invading-Patriot-Act-supporting leadership it has now.” Needless to say, this perspective is notably at odds with the Kerry-Edwards agenda and the party platform.

While the impulse behind these strategies is often noble, they reflect a misunderstanding of the electoral constraints impeding a more progressive agenda. The 2000 election was essentially a tie, with Al Gore winning 48.4 percent of the popular vote and Bush garnering 47.9 percent.

Still a 50-50 nation

Four years later, little has changed. Despite problems in Iraq and a lackluster economy at home, the current presidential race is remarkably close. A Time magazine poll the week before the convention indicated that when registered voters were asked to choose between Kerry, Bush, and Nader, 46 percent said they would vote for Kerry while 44 percent said they’d vote for Bush. Democrats have reason for optimism in that the 5 percent who say they will vote for Nader may yet adopt the pragmatism of other Bush opponents. And conventional wisdom states that voters who are undecided this late in the election vote against the incumbent, so the 4 percent of voters who are undecided may also ultimately vote for Kerry. According to a poll conducted by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, one in five voters potentially could vote for either major candidate.

Not surprisingly, the Democratic National Convention — which emphasized military strength and family values — sought to win over these undecided voters. And should the Kerry/Edwards ticket prevail in November, the new administration will need to tend to these voters to ensure that the Democrats’ return to the White House isn’t short-lived and give the Democrats a chance of regaining control of Congress in the future. These are the imperatives of enacting progressive change, and those who profess to be progressives must confront this reality more so than they have done previously.

Why? According to the nationally representative General Social Survey (GSS), 14 percent of voters in the 2000 election considered themselves “liberal” or “extremely liberal.” But 20 percent considered themselves “conservative” or ”extremely conservative.” Not only do progressives constitute a small minority of the voting population, but they are outnumbered on the right. Furthermore, 60 percent of Democrats identified themselves as centrist or right of center, while just 40 percent of Republicans identified as centrist or left of center. So even among party loyalists, Democrats are more moderate than Republicans. When Republican voters and conservative voters are combined, this group outnumbers Democrats who are not conservative by a factor of five. Republicans and conservatives outnumber non-conservative Democrats and Independents three-to-one. Progressives’ idea of the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party constitutes a tiny fraction of the electorate.

Progressives like to argue that Democrats should increase voter registration and turnout rather than focusing on winning the swing vote. Moore, in particular, pushed this argument all over town last week, decrying polls’ shortsighted fixation on likely voters. Although such arguments are rarely accompanied by evidence, the available data refutes the idea that non-voters are more progressive than voters.  

According to the GSS, non-voters tend to be more moderate than voting adults. While 38 percent of voters identify as conservative, only 30 percent of non-voters do. But non-voters are also less likely than voters to call themselves liberal (25 percent versus 27 percent). In fact, according to the GSS, even if every eligible adult had voted in 2000, the popular vote would have remained unchanged. Thanks to the Iraq War, the outcome could be different this year. But in the absence of hard data, one can only speculate.

Potentially, Democrats could (and should) out-perform Republicans in registering new partisans to vote and getting disaffected partisan voters to the polling booth. But to the extent that this strategy succeeds, Republicans will presumably follow suit. The end result? Greater extremism on both sides of the aisle and more gridlock. Not exactly a promising strategy for achieving progressive ends.

The 2000 election demonstrates there is a great deal of room for the U.S. President to move beyond the center. Had Al Gore been installed as president instead of Bush, a much smaller tax cut would have likely been signed into law, freeing up money for other priorities. Perhaps there would have been more spending on health care or education. Maybe there would be a stronger safety net for workers who lose their jobs.  

With this in mind, many progressives argue that Democrats need to be as willing as Republicans to move beyond the center. This line of reasoning ignores or dismisses policy advances made by Democrats in recent years that involved real political risk. (Bill Clinton’s education tax credits, for instance, amounted to a larger program in spending terms than the G.I. Bill.) Similarly, the argument also dismisses that Republicans respond to centrist pressure, though Bush felt compelled to campaign on “compassionate conservatism” and has dramatically increased spending on education and health care for the elderly. It also ignores the extent to which voters punished Gingrich Republicans — and may punish Bush for his departure from bipartisanship.  

But perhaps most importantly, the argument ignores the fact that the average voter falls to the right of center. Consequently, Democrats have less freedom to appease their base than Republicans do. Additionally, the aforementioned figures neither account for the disproportionate weight attached to the votes of small-state residents (often Red-Staters), who have a greater voice than other voters in the Electoral College and the Senate, nor consider the gerrymandering that is currently helping the Republicans maintain control over the House.  

Pragmatism beyond 2004

If progressives impede efforts by a Kerry/Edwards administration — or future Democratic administrations — to build a politically sustainable coalition, they’ll end up ceding power to those who are openly hostile to progressive ideals. The 2004 election, though dominated by the Iraq war’s saliency, is really a particular case of the general problem facing progressives. In his memorable formulation, the Prussian statesman Otto von Bismarck declared politics the “art of the possible.” There is a reason Bill Clinton attempted to move the party to the center and why pragmatism in 2004 is necessary. It is the same reason why pragmatism will be necessary beyond 2004. The alternative is unacceptable. Progressives who don’t like Bismarck’s perspective may be more sympathetic to that of the American economist and diplomat John Kenneth Galbraith: “Politics is not the art of the possible. It consists in choosing between the disastrous and the unpalatable.”

At a forum sponsored by the liberal Campaign for America’s Future last week, Dean wrapped up his fiery speech on what was intended as an optimistic note. Insisting that progressives could win over southern voters, he thundered, “There are 105,000 kids without health insurance in South Carolina. I don’t know why they’d ever vote for another Republican.” But they will vote for more Republicans, and progressives must address this reality if they want to advance their agenda in the next four years and beyond.

STORY INDEX

ARTICLES >

Dean, Kucinich quotes from convention
URL: http://www.dems2004.org/site/apps/nl/newsletter3.asp?c=luI2LaPYG&b=131063

Michael Moore on Nader
URL: http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=503232,

Kucinich and his delegates
URL:  http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-naliberals31jul31,1,4291214.story?coll=la-home-nation

Stern and SEIU
URL: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A16387-2004Jul26.html

Progressive Democrats of America
URL: http://www.commondreams.org/news2004/0720-06.htm

Polls >

2000 popular vote
URL: http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/2000presgeresults.htm

Time magazine poll
URL: http://www.pollingreport.com/wh04gen.htm

Pew poll
URL: http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=217

 

Will work for food

The price tag on the White House reveals that living the American dream isn’t cheap. And as David Shipler suggests in The Working Poor, the American dream also doesn’t come easy to most — no matter how hard they try.

(Courtesy of Knopf)

To read ITF’s interview with David Shipler, please click here.

There’s a popular liberal bumper sticker that reads, “If you’re not outraged, you’re not paying attention.” Following in the tradition of other canonical anti-poverty works like Let Us Now Praise Famous Men and Cold New World, David Shipler’s The Working Poor incites a similar sentiment. His investigative journalism delves deep into the seamless nature of poverty by unveiling the poor we are most likely to overlook: those who work.

This investigation is a formidable challenge — partially because poverty isn’t an easy subject to read about, but also because tackling the roots of cyclical poverty in America is like navigating a spider web: Everything is interconnected. In attempting to address the manifold causes and effects of poverty, Shipler bounces between migrant workers and drug-addicted mothers, homeless men and college-educated women. His subject shifts can at times be jarring or feel cursory, but Shipler’s work is ultimately powerful and moving because it is imminently readable. When Ron Suskind reviewed The Working Poor in February 2004 for The New York Times Review of Books, he explained, “This is clearly one of those seminal books that every American should read, and read now.” And this is a book many people can read. Shipler explores his subjects’ lives in an easy narrative, resisting the temptations of dry academic discourse. The book’s strength lies in Shipler’s ability to step aside and give his subjects the floor. His role is that of a guide, not merely a witness.

Budgets, bank accounts, and other enemies of the working poor

The working poor occupy an economic position the middle class typically only know from their summer job experiences in high school, a position we have difficulty acknowledging as anything other than transitory. But the working poor are always floating in our peripheral vision: the man who hands us our coffee, the woman who watches our children, the housekeepers who come through our offices at night while we relax at home, the bank teller who collects food stamps to support her kids. The job opportunities available to those who live on the brink of poverty are, for one reason or another, largely minimum wage. Such work doesn’t pay sufficiently in either salary or benefits to sustain a family. The stories — and struggles — of those Shipler terms “the working poor” poignantly illuminate the gap between what we consider poverty and what it really looks like for millions of men and women.

Why the gap? Americans, it seems, remain largely incapable of reading between the lines when it comes to the reality of the economic crisis. Part of the problem lies in the fact that the American dream doesn’t make room for ambiguities. We want people to climb from poverty to wealth (or at least the middle class) through hard work, to sweat their way off the welfare rolls. The media jumps on success stories as evidence of our socio-economic fantasy. But as Shipler suggests in the aptly titled chapter, “Work Doesn’t Work” — or rather, not all work works. Shipler argues that the American dream positions the poor as scapegoats and allows the middle class to ignore the trauma and hardship that frame their need. The working poor are left balancing their fragile lives against myths of hard work and perseverance.

To demonstrate the tenuous position occupied by the working poor, Shipler asked his subjects to keep budgets. Presented in the same easily navigable storytelling style that characterizes the rest of his work, the budgets, broken into simple numbers, reveal just how little budge room people working for minimum wage have, as they treadwater. Christie, a childcare worker, had a budget that looked like this:

Income:  $37.68Child Support Check
$660.00Monthly take home
$697.68

Expenses$15.00Gas
$6.00Take day care kids to zoo
$3.00Fee to cash paycheck (no checking account)
$172.00Rent (w/ late fee)
$31.47Layaway for Christmas presents
$40.00Shoes for two kids
$5.00Corduroy pants (second hand)
$5.00Shirt
$10.00Bell Bottom Pants
$47.00 x 2Bi-weekly car insurance
$43.00Phone
$34.00Gas (apartment)
$46.00             Electricity
$8.00 to $15.00        Prescriptions
$150.00Car payments
$72.00Medical insurance
$43.00Cable
$784.47

Simply put, it’s expensive to be poor in America. America’s working poor pay a double fee their predecessors never encountered. First, the working poor are required to pay surcharges to cash paychecks, wire money, receive child support, and file their taxes. They also face a marketing establishment that has argued successfully over the last 20 years that all Americans — rich and poor alike — deserve cable TV and the opportunities to dine out and wear name-brand apparel.

As Shipler demonstrates, poverty knows no racial, gender, or language lines — but it does disproportionately affect women. The majority of Shipler’s subjects are female, and many are single mothers. His sample reflects a gendered wage gap where women earn 77 cents to every dollar earned by a male. As the Institute for Women’s Policy Research reveals, this statistic has a devastating effect on women’s long-term earnings.

Poverty’s trail of tears

But budgets and the poverty line alone cannot define poverty. One of the book’s most exciting contributions to the popular discussion on poverty is the causal link it draws between trauma and endemic poverty — a correlation long familiar to academics and anti-poverty workers, but often invisible to those distanced from the front lines. Shipler explores this connection through Sarah’s personal narrative

I got molested twice as a child … When my mom and dad broke up and my mom moved out, my mom decided that she wanted to be a kid again ‘cause she had me when she was eighteen. She went to bars quite a bit. I was nine years old, and I stayed home by myself. So that was real hard. I was in foster homes, group homes. I was molested by an uncle and a family friend. I have a lot of mental health problems because of my upbringing. That’s why I can’t work. I suffer from severe anxiety, panic, post-traumatic stress syndrome, all kinds of different stuff.

Unless treated, trauma — particularly childhood trauma — profoundly impairs human beings’ ability to reach their potential. Shipler cites a 1997 study finding evidence that children subjected to stress often continue to display high levels of cortisol that then affect their neurological development. Childhood trauma is frequently linked with adult chemical dependency and exposure to violence. Dr. Sandra L. Bloom’s literature review, The PVS Disaster: Poverty, Violence and Substance in the Lives of Women and Children, reveals that between 50 and 70 percent of women on welfare have been in an abusive relationship at some point, a significantly higher proportion than the general population.

Trauma survivors are marked by a sense of powerlessness, what Shipler calls a “corrosive suspicion of worthlessness.” This feeling is compounded by his subjects’ sense of economic irrelevance. As one of Shipler’s subjects, Ann Brash, observes: “People who don’t call when they can’t come to work probably don’t think they’re important enough … It’s more than low self-esteem. It’s invisibility.”

Partisan politics and nonpartisan money matters

In incorporating this discussion of trauma within his examination of poverty, Shipler blows open partisan dialogue about poverty programs — making The Working Poor an essential read during this election season. Current political dialogue fails to address the endemic nature of poverty when it chooses to see people as either bad or lazy, or to place full blame on insufficient funding. As Shipler indicated when I spoke with him, “Liberals tend not to want to see the families’ individual failures, and conservatives tend to see only those [failures, ignoring] societal issues … only if you define the problem thoroughly can you invent thorough solutions.”

Shipler posits that the solution lies in part with integrated programs, like So Others May Eat (SOME) in Washington, D.C. Anti-poverty initiatives must not only address concrete issues like job training and benefits advocacy, but also what Shipler calls “soft skills” — how to show up for work on time, how to negotiate with peers and employers, and perhaps most importantly, how to heal from emotional injuries.  Dr. Bloom’s work has focused on helping service providers create trauma-informed systems that teach healing skills as a means for growth.

In order to create trauma-informed and integrated services, liberal and conservative social service ideologies must meet. Shipler writes:

In Watts, I asked the math teacher at Grape Street Elementary what problems could be solved with more money. ‘Practically everything except the trauma that kids are exposed to,’ he said. ‘And with more money we could provide services that deal with that better.”

Pleas for more money and discussion about trauma aren’t popular issues in election years, and, unsurprisingly, as of this writing, neither candidate has sufficiently addressed an anti-poverty platform capable of effectuating large-scale change. Given President George W. Bush’s history of programmatic cuts and tax reform designed to assist the upper echelons of American society, liberals look to Democratic candidate John Kerry for leadership. While Kerry’s plans to raise the minimum wage to $7 per hour and expand health care coverage for larger percentages of the population demonstrate a desire to reach low income voters by speaking to their concerns, his agenda is at best a superficial attempt at appeasing liberals rather than a genuine attempt to address poverty and mobilize voter turn out. This failure, of course, could hurt the Democrats as much as it hurts the working poor since the vote of the latter is essential to the former’s prospects of electoral success.  As Shipler points out in an op-ed piece for the Los Angeles Times, “Historically, the lower a person’s income, the greater his support for the Democrats — but the less likely he is to vote.”

The poor may not vote because, like Ann Brash, they feel invisible or because they don’t have transportation to the polls or child care. But they also don’t vote because they don’t see answers to their everyday problems in the candidates’ rhetoric. Kerry’s claim that the minimum wage raise will positively affect working mothers is accurate, but it still won’t raise them above the poverty level. Most living wage campaigns define a living wage as $8.20 for a family of four (although in urban areas, this rate is correspondingly higher). Raising the minimum wage for a 40-hour per week employee would amount to $3,800 more annually; enough to buy more groceries and jeopardize food stamp and welfare benefits, but not enough to ensure a family’s financial stability.

Focusing on minimum wage and job creation as solutions to poverty neglects the larger picture. As the Center for Law and Social Policy points out, 42 percent of projected job growth over the 20 years will be for workers with post-secondary training. But Bush proposes doubling the number of students trained by the workforce — without increasing the program’s funding. Minimum wage jobs are disappearing, and as Shipler writes in his conclusion, “the minimum wage is a blunt instrument, and the skill to use it is not perfected.” Shipler’s call for increased employment training and the revival of vocational education necessitates that Sen. John Kerry and other Democrats challenge private industries to step forward and bear responsibility for training workers.

But given the tendency of most politicians to consistently place a greater emphasis on middle-class families than on low-income workers, will private industries have any incentive to expend the resources necessary to train lower-income workers? It’s difficult to tell. After all, talking about poverty too much is derided as a liberal malady, the territory of left-wing journalists and activists incapable of seeing the long-term economic future; politicians are reluctant to tackle the issue whole heartedly for fear of alienating those constituents whose votes they rely on.

But perhaps we are moving away from these traditional divides: The poverty crisis in this country is attracting increasing attention from those in the center. Barbara Ehenreich’s bestselling book, Nickel and Dimed: On (not) getting by in America, was a fixture on bestseller list and selected as summer reading material for students at the University of North Carolina.

If a dialogue concerning poverty is to move to the center of our nation’s agenda, it will require not just armchair liberals willing to read a book or two, but political participation of all types at  all levels of the economic spectrum. James Agee wrote in 1936, ”Let us then hope better of our children, and of our children’s children; let us know there is a cure, there is to be an end to it, whose beginnings are long begun …”

But if Shipler’s work teaches us anything, it’s that it isn’t enough to merely hope anymore. Incisive investigative journalism has only so much power to effect change As Shipler writes in closing: ”We do know how to do much more than we choose to do. Our insufficient will has not carried us even close to that twilight region where our competence fades.”

Shipler made the working poor visible, but the rest, it seems, is up to us — the readers, the voters, the workers, the employers, the privileged. We’re the ones who have to figure out how to make them feel visible — and powerful.

To read ITF’s interview with David Shipler, please click here.

STORY INDEX

MARKETPLACE >
A portion of the proceeds from the purchase of these books will go the InTheFray if the following links are used

The Working Poor
URL: http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/partner?partner_id=28164&cgi=product&isbn=0375408908

Nickel and Dimed: On (not) getting by in America
URL: http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/partner?partner_id=28164&cgi=product&isbn=0805063897

ORGANIZATIONS >

SOME program
URL: http://www.some.org

Center for Law and Social Policy
URL: http://www.clasp.org

America’s Second Harvest
URL: http://www.secondharvest.org

U.S. Census Bureau’s Poverty Measurements
URL: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html

ACORN’s Living Wage Campaign
URL: http://www.livingwagecampaign.org

National Low Income Housing Coalition’s Voter Registration Project
URL: http://www.nlihc.org/vrem/

National Coalition Against Homelessness’ Voter Rights Manual
URL: http://www.nationalhomeless.org/vote2004/

Jobs with Justice
URL: http://www.jwj.org

Let Us Now Praise Famous Men: Agee and Walker’s Great Experiment
URL: http://history.hanover.edu/hhr/hhr93_5.html

Dr. Sandra Bloom’s work
URL: http://www.sanctuaryweb.com

 

Working with the poor

A conversation with David Shipler regarding The Working Poor.

Runner-up for BEST OF ITF INTERVIEWS (SO FAR)

Recently, InTheFray Contributing Writer Laura Louison spoke with David Shipler about The Working Poor, the upcoming election, and the potential for investigative journalism to effectuate change:

The interviewer: Laura Louison, InTheFray Contributing Writer

The interviewee: David Shipler, author of The Working Poor

In the introduction to The Working Poor you state that you were curious about working people who’d been left behind as the economic boom took off and as welfare reform was put in place. Tell me a little bit about your incentives for undertaking this project and your reaction to what you learned through your research.

My incentive is part of a quest to understand my own country. I was working abroad for many years, and then covering foreign policy after I returned. I began to feel that that subject was too vicarious, and what I liked to do when I was living overseas as well, [was] write about the country I was living in. Since I was living in the United States, I wanted to focus on the most vexing problems facing America, so I began with race relations, and wrote A Country of Strangers, which was published in 1997, that [raised many] questions of poverty. I think both those issues are enormous ones for this country, and I wanted to try and understand them as well as I could. When I set out to write about poverty, I felt that since that particular condition was freighted with so much ethical baggage — that is, the idea of work as a moral enterprise in this society, and so many poor are vilified for not working, that I would try to remove as much of the moral element from the equation as I could by looking at only the people who were working, or who were [working] periodically at least, and trying to get ahead that way. So that was my motive for focusing on the poor or nearly poor, who were actually at work.

As for what I found, well that’s a very big question with a very big and long answer. I’m a liberal, but I’m also a reporter so what I tried to do was to take my ideological lens and put it aside, and look with clear eyes, if I could, at this condition, this situation, and talk to people about what forces converged upon them to bring them where they were — namely working, but not able to move out of that zone of the edge of poverty. And what I found was that the forces were both societal and personal. That is, there were failures of the society’s institutions: public education, private enterprise, government services — and there were also terrible family problems that weighed people down and created in them legacies of hardship and disability from which they found it difficult to recover. [The] whole pattern [of domestic violence, for instance,] is tied in with alcoholism often, drug abuse, and so forth. I think [this cycle] affects people’s ability to function well in the economic marketplace.

So many women told me they had been sexually abused as children, and they had to say that, I think, as a way of explaining why they distrusted men — no surprise – and why they had difficulty forming lasting relationships. [This] has both an emotional and an economic consequence. If you’re earning low wages, and you’re part of a family that has two or three wage earners, that’s one thing, but if you’re a single wage earner, that’s quite a different thing. So, that realization that the problems of these folks really encompassed a broad array of issues, both those that are family-based and those that are societally based, led me to a couple of conclusions.

One was that the best way to address the issues was to reform not only societal institutions and policies, but also to provide services that could help people recover personally. And you know, if institutions where [poor] people go very often — schools, medical clinics, so forth — can become gateways to arrays of services, either containing them under one roof or at least referring people to services, and trying to address the whole range of problems that a given person or family faces, then some headway can be made, I think. The other [conclusion] is that in the political arena — and this sounds like a very naïve thing to say in an election year — that liberals and conservatives have to stop shouting at each other and start listening to each other if any headway’s going to be made here.

I find a lot of liberals — and this does not include people who actually do anti-poverty work who actually understand the problems — who are rather doctrinaire, and I’m one. I’m not doctrinaire, but I’m a liberal and tend not to want the family’s individual failures, and conservatives tend to see only those [failures, ignoring] the societal issues. If liberals and conservatives — and I include here conservatives who really want to do something, and not those who say, “Well, it’s their fault therefore we don’t have any obligation,” pieces of the jigsaw puzzle that everyone carries around, then they’d have a [complete] picture of the whole problem. And only if you define the problem thoroughly, can you invent thorough solutions. So that’s a plea for political dialogue across the ideological lines, which is not a very likely element, but I still think it’s necessary.

It’s also in many ways, I think, a plea for political involvement by people in lower socio-economic classes, which is really not something that I think is possible for many people who are struggling.

Well, I think you’re right … I just did a 568593.story?coll=la-news-comment-opinions”>piece that ran in the L.A. Times about how important it [is] for Kerry to mobilize low-income voters with economic appeals because, as you probably know, the lower you go down in the income strata, the lower the voter turn out, but the higher the Democratic support among those who do turn out. So, it ran in 2000 from 75 percent of eligible voters turning out who earned over $75,000 turning out down to, I think it was 38 percent of those earning under $10,000 a year. And I did a little arithmetic and figured that if, that you could have added 6.8 million voters if those under $25,000 turned out at the same rate as those under $75,000. Of course, there are many reasons that low-income people don’t vote.

Among them, the exhausting lives that they lead, the complex logistics of getting to the polls when they have to juggle strange job shifts and child care and all of that, but I think beyond that there’s a sense of disengagement that exceeds people at other income levels. I mean, it’s a petty universal phenomenon in the United States, that sense of : “What difference is it going to make, the politicians are all the same. I can’t believe them, They’re not talking about my issues.” That’s not [an attitude] restricted to low-income people, but I think those of low-income feel it a little more acutely, and don’t see the connection between a vote and a policy. That’s certainly a key, a key issue in this election year especially I think. And I know there are pro-Democratic organizations, such as Emily’s List and People Coming Together, that are targeting low-income voters, and working on it.

Well, it really taps into the invisibility of poor people that Ann Brash talks about in your book.

A lot of people [feel invisible] I think a lot of people internalize that perception of themselves. They don’t feel that they matter, and that comes out of not just the way that society treats them when they’re poor, but also their own repeated failures. I mean, if you failed in school and in relationships and on the job repeatedly, you don’t have a lot of confidence in your own ability to affect change. The sense of powerlessness is really quite overwhelming. Some people will say that it’s their fault that they are where they are, they’ve made mistakes, they should have done things differently, they’ve saddled themselves with huge debt, and I think that too is an internalization of society’s view of them, and I think it belies their underlying doubt about their ability to make change. It’s like Sara Goddell [and Willie in The Working Poor] who said, “Yes, it’s our fault,” but Sara said she felt powerless to change. I think there are lots of reasons for that. You can encounter this surely in the women you counsel, this sense of powerlessness?

[That’s certainly an integral dynamic of] domestic violence because you give power over your life to an intimate partner. But most of the women I work with are people who, once they get to me, are system veterans — people the system has failed at many levels —  and so I think they don’t see themselves as powerful in their relationships, but that’s also part of a whole dynamic. They don’t see themselves as powerful in relation to their welfare worker, [or] in relation to their children and youth worker … The list goes on and on and on.

I wonder if you looked at the way they were parented, whether that sense of powerlessness began there. That the parents, or the parent, or the older grandmother, or whoever was the primary caregiver, took from them the decision-making abilities, or the right to control what they could control. You know, people who have looked at the patterns of play in children, and who use play therapy, have seen how important it is to let a child set the course of play, make some decisions, and have the decisions impact the way the adult interacts with the child. So the child does something, the adult interacts, reacts, and then there’s a circle of interaction, and the child then reacts and does something else, and so forth. That kind of play may not happen in certain families. I don’t know if it’s based on socio-economic levels — but I’m sure, it’s a lack that exists at other economic levels as well — but for people who are poor and have a lot of other issues piling up on them, that one can help to create a whole syndrome.

I’ve interviewed women who got pregnant in high school and dropped out and had babies out of wedlock, who if you talk to them for a while, you can’t help feeling that they were making choices but they either didn’t realize they were making choices, or didn’t realize the long-term impact of the choices, or made choices consciously for the wrong reasons, or were trying to gain autonomy or some kind of independence, a posture from their mother who’s on their case all the time. A lot of low-income parents are highly anxious about their kids, and are deeply afraid of their kids going astray, and react to that possibility with so much anxiety that they’re constantly telling their kids, “No, no, no,” when they live in dangerous neighborhoods, or are tempted by drugs and so forth. I’m thinking about a woman who dropped out of school, and when her daughter dropped out of school, she was just devastated. Her daughter wasn’t pregnant, but in terms of dropping out of school she was following her mother’s pattern, and it was just heartbreaking for her mother to see this happening.

I imagine that if you live in an environment where risks are very rarely rewarded, you’re reluctant to have your children take those risks because it seems like a very scary prospect.

Yeah. The risks are really foolhardy risks, not really risks [that are going] to pay dividends, the kinds of risks that nobody would want their kids to take. I think also you get another pattern here, too, especially in inner-city neighborhoods, of aggressive, pre-emptive anger. You protect yourself by getting in the other guy’s face before he gets in yours. That whole methodology works very well in the street but it doesn’t work at all well in the school or on the job. I remember visiting a school in Baltimore — I think it was a middle school — and talking to kids who were peer counselors, and they were interesting because they were doing mediation with kids who got tin fights, and they had to use techniques, or recommend ways of thinking that [contradicted] what they had all been taught by their mothers, their fathers, their older brothers as methods of survival on the street. So it was almost a code-switching operation where they walked to school every day and they got in everybody’s face, and they got to walk through the school doors and to function there. At least according to the rules [they got] to function with the adults in the school, they had to take a completely different approach. Of course, then there were all the other kids in school and they still had to get in their face. So it was really complicated. How do you sort that out?

And then, on the job, anger management is a big issue. It’s a huge problem for many low-income workers, and it’s one that employers are not equipped to deal with for the most part. So all of that comes into play, and I don’t know how you address it really. It’s very complicated.

To take a different tack, I was curious about what intersections you saw between race and poverty, or ethnicity and poverty. I know that the subjects in your book come from many different backgrounds in terms of language, age — and I know that you’ve written about race issues in America in the past.

(Laughs) At 600 pages about racial issues, I figured I had pretty much covered that subject. I didn’t really set out to ignore race in the book, or even play it down. But I went about this book by trying to find common ground among the experiences of the various demographic groups. So, I went to rural areas, I went to urban areas, to different occupations — agriculture, manufacturing, service. I went to blacks and Latinos and Asians and whites, men and women — although women dominate, as they do dominate the ranks of the poor in the United States in terms of households. [I] began to [see] themes transcending all of these categories. There were certainly differences, in terms of migrant workers in California and native-born Americans in South Washington, D.C., or New Hampshire. But there were also themes that ran through all these folks’ lives. I began to feel that given all that has been written by a whole lot of other people, it was important to focus on those themes and to make sure that readers understood that the phenomenon that they were reading about was not one that was limited to a particular racial group, so that they could see that this was a problem that went across cultures and across ethnic lines in the United States.

Having said that, though race is still a huge factor in poverty. The poverty rates among blacks are much higher than with whites, three times [higher], I believe. The school systems in which black kids learn are inferior to the school systems where even low-income white kids learn, in many ways. The degree of neighborhood dysfunction, if you can call it that, is more severe for blacks than whites, [though in many cases, not all, there are certainly bad neighborhoods for whites, too.] That is, the external factors are powerfully lined up against blacks.

In addition, there’s a whole pattern of discrimination in jobs and elsewhere in other
parts of the society and other parts of life that weigh on blacks in a way that whites just never experience.  The sense of marginalization, the difficulty of either getting a job or getting a promotion. [For instance, at] the rubber company [I visited in] Cleveland, the foremen are white, and there are black workers, and there are racial tensions. And the [boss] couldn’t explain why his foremen were white, but he acknowledged that this was an issue, a problem. So there’s a power structure thing, [and] all these factors make it more difficult for blacks.

The other part of this is the issue of net worth, which isn’t something that’s been explored sufficiently and is not a factor in determining the poverty line, and it should be. They hadn’t updated figures when I did this book, but the median net worth of white families in the United States versus the median net worth of black families with the same education level, and same income, is usually different. And I think that you can describe poverty not only as income but also as debt and net worth, because that has a huge psychological effect as well as a financial one, so that people carrying a whole lot of debt feel imprisoned by that and don’t see possibility and opportunity as attainable. Unless that gets thrown in the mix, you don’t have a full picture. You know the income gives you a still photograph of the present, but the debt gives you a longitudinal picture of what’s happened in the past. And people can argue that if you have debt, you’ve brought that on yourself. Part of that is sometimes true, when people run up huge credit card balances and can’t pay them, but if you’ve been poor and you don’t have medical care, and you have to go to the emergency room, and you don’t have insurance, they have to treat you, but they can also bill you, which means that if you can’t pay, that goes on your credit report. There’s this [white] guy Willy in New Hampshire, who had a pretty good job as a roofer, but he had this $10,000 debt from emergency rooms when his teeth were abscessed and he couldn’t afford to go the dentist. He couldn’t even get a phone installed in his own name because he had this debt, even though he had a fairly decent job at the time.

Black families coming out of the situation of deep poverty tend to carry with them debt, and you know everyone does, but they especially have that burden.

It’s not something that we talk about very much. Certainly the picture that a lot of politicians love to paint is that it’s sort of the black welfare queen, and statistics show pretty much across the board that white families are predominantly the largest force receiving public assistance.

Sure, there are many more whites in the country. More than half the poor in America are white. I remember when I did the race book I was in Alabama, [the city council was voting for some kind of benefit]. This black councilman took [a] white council man [who didn’t want to vote for the benefit] to the welfare office one day, knowing that most of the people there were going to be white, and the white guy was stunned.

I know that you were involved in your subjects’ lives for several years, and to go between that and your own life must have felt like quite a disconnect at times. What was like for you to move between two such different worlds?

It was difficult in a way, although my mother once told me that she had raised me to be comfortable whether I was in an embassy or a hut. (Laughs) And I think she succeeded, I’ve been in both in many parts of the world. She also taught me that you can learn something from everyone, and I learned a tremendous amount from these folks, and I admire many of them. I like them very much. I’m still in touch with a lot of them. It’s been a great education and growing personal experience for me.

At the same time I’m a reporter and a journalist, so I needed to restrain my impulse to open my wallet sometimes and just give them money. I think if anyone had been on the edge of real disaster, I probably would have just done that, but nobody was that I knew of, at least by talking to them.

I couldn’t pay them because it was just unethical. But what I have done since the book’s come out is give money to anti-poverty organizations. I’ve given part of the royalties in large enough chunks so that it can make a difference in programs. I’ve been in touch with organizations to find out what they would if they had some money that they can’t do now, so there are a couple of things going on that weren’t going on before, and I’m very happy to be able to do that. I think that money is most useful when it goes to an organization that can match it or can use it to get another grant to do something that they hadn’t been able to do.

For instance, the Korean immigrants group in L.A. that wants to start an organizing school for Korean grocery workers, to help them learn how to organize and learn what their rights [are], and possibly unionize. I gave them a grant to start that, and there’s a malnutrition clinic in Baltimore that had not been able to do any home visiting because they’d had some money for a while but then they’d lost it. So I talked with the director for a while to figure out how to give them money to fund a half-time person for a year. This is not extravagant, but they’ve now gone into partnership with the School of Nursing at the University of Maryland to get a person who will be seeing patients in the malnutrition clinic, and then will follow some of them home or go off and do home visits, to see the liaison and connection and interaction in the home which you know is very important in dealing with malnutrition. And then there [are] some other organizations I haven’t yet contacted or [that] haven’t gotten back to me that I’m trying to figure out how to best help.

The websites for these organizations [I’m helping] are on the Knopf website linked to my book so people learn more].

So from my standpoint, I don’t think [a book like mine] can turn around the lives of individual people. I wish it could, but it doesn’t. But I hope that the issue will be dated in a certain way. The book will be used to call attention to some issues and might have a policy impact eventually. I’m not sure whether that’s really going to happen, but it’s not really the reason I did it either. The reason I did it was to satisfy my own curiosity. That’s why you do a book. So you’re curious about it, and you want to understand it.

But to get back to your original question, yes, I felt very odd moving back and forth between the two worlds. I think it was Ann Brash who says that you know five dollars is big, and 25 is amazing, and that’s a huge amount. It was painful in many ways to watch people going through hell again and again.

It can be hard not to take that home with you.

Well, I did take that home with me. My wife’s a social worker, and she doesn’t deal most of the time with people who are in poverty. She does family therapy, so a lot of the issues I encountered were issues she’d dealt with in different forms. And we talked a lot about what I was learning. I always do when I do a book. She feels as if by the time she gets around to reading the manuscript, she already knows everything. And I always take these things home with me.

STORY INDEX

MARKETPLACE >
A portion of the proceeds from the purchase of this book will go the InTheFray if the link below is used

The Working Poor
URL: http://www.powells.com/cgi-bin/biblio?inkey=8-0375408908-0

 

Understatement

A poem. First in a series.

Understatement

Under the state
meant beneath notice,

Alien,
invader of this inner sanctum
bordered by ocean, river, mountain.

“Geography is destiny.”

The earth plotted, planned on paper,
fettered in lines penned by hand.

We come from brush languages we can barely speak.

Perhaps that is why
we commune so well with each other.

We live in understatement,
where meaning lives in a glance.

personal stories. global issues.