Sioux Center is a tranquil little town in the west of Iowa. The fields of corn transform almost imperceptibly into streets bordered by closely cut lawns and tall trees.
Two thirds of the population are of Dutch origin, the highest proportion in the United States. Orange City, a half hour distance away by car, is also a place of decided Dutch predominance. Under the welcome sign, a series of posts in the form of a wooden shoe point the visitor in several directions. On one corner, you are surprised by a telephone booth in the form of a perfectly detailed windmill. At the wooden shoe shop in the town center, in addition to selling cinnamon cookies and their own products, they give certificates of authenticity to accompany the purchase of Delft pottery from Holland.
I take a look at the Wikipedia entry about Dutch enclaves in the United States. Reading about Holland, Michigan - a place that I visited last year - I notice an entry that speaks about the "cultural clash" between the activist Calvinists who settled there in the middle of the 19th century and the original inhabitants, the Ottawa Indians. I can't imagine that a dialogue about customs and world visions led to the "displacement of the latter towards the north". We should agree to speak about this "clash" without adjectives, using its literal meaning. The same goes for the Sioux Indians of Iowa and other Indians around the country.
The European newcomers continued to widen the frontier in their realization of the "Manifest Destiny" that they had been promised, the acquisition of territories between the Atlantic and the Pacific masquerading as a "civilizing" mission of liberty and democracy. By the twentieth century this had probably turned into a global mission, once those territories had been exhausted.
For almost 150 years, some of these communities have continued to nourish their original European idiosyncrasies, either by the arrival of compatriots from their homeland, or by intermarriage and through the maintenance of their own universities, schools and churches.
You shouldn't be reminded of the movie "Witness" or the Amish: they've got nothing in common. These are communities that participate in all of US culture and lifestyle, while keeping this traditional bond strong, which is disconcerting for the European observer of today. But like so many other secular realities, it may become more and more diluted.
24 July 2008
23 July 2008
West
Today I start upon a journey of some twenty days through the American Midwest and West: first Iowa and South Dakota, and afterwards, in a second stage, Nevada, Arizona and California. Even though I have traveled often to the United States, I have never been west of Chicago - with the exception of Seattle- and so it seems that this youngest part of the country is a new world to discover. We will follow the frontier that advanced from New England towards the Pacific.
In spite of the temptation, I have not taken along any related reading. I did have Steinbeck in my hands, in a moment of hesitation before departure. Others have enthusiastically suggested On the Road by Jack Kerouac. I am halfway through (have been for ages) American Vertigo, an exploration of the continent that Bernard-Henri Lévy wrote for Atlantic Monthly, originally published as essays in the magazine. But I have preferred to avoid the excesses of suggestion and decided to make the journey more like the trips that I make on the train, during which I find reading difficult: the fast succession of landscapes has too great an appeal.
Lévy's aim - I quote his work, instead of others, for practical reasons only - is to put the European (read French) perspective in
relation with today's American space, to see qu'est que ça donne. Is there a progressive separation of the two societies? This is the question mark behind all levels of their relationship today (except in that of large corporations).
I believe, however, that the question has to be properly situated: in Europe and in the United States there are many people capable of merging, quite naturally, some huge differences. For example, on the North American side, the visibility of religion, active optimism, or the public expression of feelings; on the European side, open treatment of sex, the complexity of political and economic structures, or the extensive range of ideological views. It is a question, however, of knowing whether the two societies are evolving towards systems incompatible with their mutual communication. Europe has discovered a vast "progressive" America with Obama. Where was it until now? Had we really even looked, scratching deeper than the surface? Or were we satisfied with a televised image? From the European Left, from its social movements, have people ever thought seriously of "disembarking" in the United States to explain their vision of the world? Have we truly tried to find interlocutors and allies in civil society, workers, women, minorities... to improve our relationships?
It is necessary, on the other hand, to get rid of the idea of a North America that is "basically" the same as us, because we are disappointed when it is not so. I suspect that this concept is an invention of the cold war, or was at least reinforced by it. The 50s and 60s might have been the only moment of convergence, which led us to believe it had always been this way. The point is that until that moment, European societies mistrusted the laisser-faire attitude of the United States, in the same way that North American society has mistrusted the European laisser-passer.
In short, like all societies in today's global world, Europe and North America have both similarities and differences. The idea, to put it one way, that we are included in their E pluribus unum (or its war version, "United We Stand"), will have been a quite successful illusion in the construction of another West, that of cold war politics. Is the American west the heart and soul of this global west, of this fabulous construction? We shall see. I tend to think that this is a country with many people who just now are beginning to hear their voice and that they definitely don't want a world of cowboys. These are the same people who, for example, gathered in Idaho at one of the largest demonstrations of support for Obama, defying all stereotypes.
In spite of the temptation, I have not taken along any related reading. I did have Steinbeck in my hands, in a moment of hesitation before departure. Others have enthusiastically suggested On the Road by Jack Kerouac. I am halfway through (have been for ages) American Vertigo, an exploration of the continent that Bernard-Henri Lévy wrote for Atlantic Monthly, originally published as essays in the magazine. But I have preferred to avoid the excesses of suggestion and decided to make the journey more like the trips that I make on the train, during which I find reading difficult: the fast succession of landscapes has too great an appeal.
Lévy's aim - I quote his work, instead of others, for practical reasons only - is to put the European (read French) perspective in
relation with today's American space, to see qu'est que ça donne. Is there a progressive separation of the two societies? This is the question mark behind all levels of their relationship today (except in that of large corporations).
I believe, however, that the question has to be properly situated: in Europe and in the United States there are many people capable of merging, quite naturally, some huge differences. For example, on the North American side, the visibility of religion, active optimism, or the public expression of feelings; on the European side, open treatment of sex, the complexity of political and economic structures, or the extensive range of ideological views. It is a question, however, of knowing whether the two societies are evolving towards systems incompatible with their mutual communication. Europe has discovered a vast "progressive" America with Obama. Where was it until now? Had we really even looked, scratching deeper than the surface? Or were we satisfied with a televised image? From the European Left, from its social movements, have people ever thought seriously of "disembarking" in the United States to explain their vision of the world? Have we truly tried to find interlocutors and allies in civil society, workers, women, minorities... to improve our relationships?
It is necessary, on the other hand, to get rid of the idea of a North America that is "basically" the same as us, because we are disappointed when it is not so. I suspect that this concept is an invention of the cold war, or was at least reinforced by it. The 50s and 60s might have been the only moment of convergence, which led us to believe it had always been this way. The point is that until that moment, European societies mistrusted the laisser-faire attitude of the United States, in the same way that North American society has mistrusted the European laisser-passer.
In short, like all societies in today's global world, Europe and North America have both similarities and differences. The idea, to put it one way, that we are included in their E pluribus unum (or its war version, "United We Stand"), will have been a quite successful illusion in the construction of another West, that of cold war politics. Is the American west the heart and soul of this global west, of this fabulous construction? We shall see. I tend to think that this is a country with many people who just now are beginning to hear their voice and that they definitely don't want a world of cowboys. These are the same people who, for example, gathered in Idaho at one of the largest demonstrations of support for Obama, defying all stereotypes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
