sugy's review against another edition
2.0
i was interested in this book based on the topic and based on the book sample from barnes and noble. however, after actually reading the book, i was quite disappointed. i had already known from the length that the author would not have been able to do more than skim the surface of the topic, yet i felt that the book itself was full of some stereotypes and inaccuracies that were from personal knowledge/experience rather than the literature base that was said to be the basis of the text. the author did cover quite a bit of territory on some of the root causes of continuing poverty and disparities in urban areas, many that i agree with particularly the attitudes of the general non-poor population about assisting the poor, the suburbanization of america and white flight, and the disproportionate number of african americans being arrested for different offenses and jailed (leading to further problems). however, i had three major problems with the book.
first, the discussion about how no single group of immigrants ever were marginalized to the proportion that african-americans were is disturbingly short. the immigrants that he speaks of were predominantly immigrants from europe. while they may not have been from a single ethnic group or country, they were not initially accepted as american by the caucasian majority. european immigrants who were poor or affluent were only able to leave certain areas after white americans accepted them and allowed them to assimilate. today they only call themselves white americans, but their path is very similar to immigrants to the united states today. move to this country where people like you live and where you have a support network, make a way to support your family, then help someone else come. speaking of marginalization, however, we should always remember that the majority of one group came here involuntarily while the other came voluntarily. the one that came voluntarily had a much easier road to acceptance but their path was not necessarily easy.
second, by focusing the book on african-americans in inner cities in america, the author continued the american perception that all inner city residents are african-americans or poor. most of the points he made were applicable to any inner city resident in poverty, not just african-americans. he may have written the book about african-americans since that is what he said he knew, but when the book started he stated he didn't know much at all. he drew quite a bit on the idea that these problems occurred among non-african-americans as well, but did not discuss it enough to make the point clear (more statistics would have been useful).
third, indicating that inner city residents have a different dialect than the rest of america is continuing to perpetuate the myth that slang (which the same slang exists outside of the urban inner city) is a different language than what the "haves" speak. the telephone test that the author speaks of isn't based on a "dialect" it is based on someone "sounding black". i speak perfect standard english as the author calls it and have multiple degrees and yet i have been discriminated against (just as have thousands before me) simply because i "sound" black (and no i did not grow up in an urban area). while there may be plenty of people that live in urban areas that choose not to enunciate or truly have not learned how to speak or how to form grammatically correct sentences, that would be a byproduct of the educational system rather than a cultural byproduct from living in urban areas.
the book could have been longer, which might have solved some of these problems since the author could have gone into deeper discussion of some issues. the topic is very important to understand for anyone in this country, but acceptance of the truth of these matters is more important because we must change the opinion of those that believe the problems are the result of the behaviors of the urban (or non urban) poor. i have a couple other books of the author in my list to read and i hope he discusses some of these topics a little more in depth.
first, the discussion about how no single group of immigrants ever were marginalized to the proportion that african-americans were is disturbingly short. the immigrants that he speaks of were predominantly immigrants from europe. while they may not have been from a single ethnic group or country, they were not initially accepted as american by the caucasian majority. european immigrants who were poor or affluent were only able to leave certain areas after white americans accepted them and allowed them to assimilate. today they only call themselves white americans, but their path is very similar to immigrants to the united states today. move to this country where people like you live and where you have a support network, make a way to support your family, then help someone else come. speaking of marginalization, however, we should always remember that the majority of one group came here involuntarily while the other came voluntarily. the one that came voluntarily had a much easier road to acceptance but their path was not necessarily easy.
second, by focusing the book on african-americans in inner cities in america, the author continued the american perception that all inner city residents are african-americans or poor. most of the points he made were applicable to any inner city resident in poverty, not just african-americans. he may have written the book about african-americans since that is what he said he knew, but when the book started he stated he didn't know much at all. he drew quite a bit on the idea that these problems occurred among non-african-americans as well, but did not discuss it enough to make the point clear (more statistics would have been useful).
third, indicating that inner city residents have a different dialect than the rest of america is continuing to perpetuate the myth that slang (which the same slang exists outside of the urban inner city) is a different language than what the "haves" speak. the telephone test that the author speaks of isn't based on a "dialect" it is based on someone "sounding black". i speak perfect standard english as the author calls it and have multiple degrees and yet i have been discriminated against (just as have thousands before me) simply because i "sound" black (and no i did not grow up in an urban area). while there may be plenty of people that live in urban areas that choose not to enunciate or truly have not learned how to speak or how to form grammatically correct sentences, that would be a byproduct of the educational system rather than a cultural byproduct from living in urban areas.
the book could have been longer, which might have solved some of these problems since the author could have gone into deeper discussion of some issues. the topic is very important to understand for anyone in this country, but acceptance of the truth of these matters is more important because we must change the opinion of those that believe the problems are the result of the behaviors of the urban (or non urban) poor. i have a couple other books of the author in my list to read and i hope he discusses some of these topics a little more in depth.
More...