I found Baldwin’s paper on American-European relations particularly interesting. His commentary on status, claiming that Americans place greater emphasis on status than Europeans, aligned with some points made in the Great Gatsby, like those regarding social mobility, old money versus new money, etc. However looking at his claim historically, I don’t understand the origin of the American importance on status. While European traditions with status originate from monarchial and feudalist systems, America is derived from anti-European traditions which rejected the ranking of individuals.
3 thoughts on “The Discovery of What it Means to Be American”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Baldwin presents an interesting idea, that Americans have social paranoia. Therefore, they work hard to avoid lives of working as waitresses and waiters. This mindset possibly stems from Ideas of the American dream and meritocracy. The idea is that those that work hard will be successful. Likewise those that do not work hard are those who are poor. Therefore no one is settled with being a McDonalds worker– there stigma towards being a lower class citizen.
I think his point is that since America is a very young nation with a diverse set of national traditions, the question of status is unsettled. Baldwin says that America is can be a place “where everyone has status, it is also perfectly possible, after all, that no one has. It seems inevitable, in any case, that a man may become uneasy as to just what his status is” (20). In other words, I think in the world of Gatsby the former is the case: everyone has status. While in O Pioneers, perhaps the latter is the case: no one has status. In both situations, I agree with his point that there is certainly an uneasiness in the ambiguity.
Stephen, I agree that “since America is a very young nation” with “diverse traditions,” it may seem as though many people rely on materialistic status. However, I am having trouble understanding the quotation you include. How can someone have “no status?” I think that status is one of those words whose true meaning has evolved over time. Linguistically, it refers to a state which one assumes. However, I think it can also mean wealth or prestige. Does this change or modify your analysis of this quotation? Do others agree? I am still having a tough time completely deciphering the meaning.