Cousins and Strangers: A Harmonious Meeting

Moyas Cousins and Strangers is a monograph which encapsulates disparate aspects of a situation cultural phenomenonthe position of Spanish immigrants in Argentina. The author manipulations writings from primary feather sources such(prenominal) as letters to form the basis of his understanding of this phenomenon, taking an court to history that seems to present certified knowledge in terms of authenticity and corroborate details.The book covers the historical period from 1850 to 1930, when, in an unprecedented exodus, millions of people migrated from the vastly-overpopulated Europe to Latin America. This paper focuses on a comparative review of Moyas macro-structural and microsocial approaches, undercoat in chapter one and three respectively.The first chapter is an apt illustration of Moyas style. He examines emigration from Spain in a macro-structural light, examining the reasons for the movement of millions from one continent to a nonher. In terms of the methodology he has util ized, Moya observes that he does not validate the qualitative method, since he has found that the quantitative one is more likely to present dead-on(prenominal) results, and is less vulnerable to the risk of manipulationThis gross discrepancy between my findings and the qualitative evidence once again confirms the potential for deception inherent in qualitative sources and the peril of relying solely on this type of material. It validates the need for quantitative methods in social history. (p. 233)Although Moyas own book is based on qualitative research through the examination of census records, newspapers, magazines, and personal narratives, therefore, he still recommends that qualitative research cannot be the sole measure of a phenomenon or its attributes. As Moya observes, no study which aims at the uncovering of past social realities (p. 233) can afford to engage merely in the gathering of data through qualitative means.According to him, if the researcher does not discover an d implement quantitative means of gathering data, he or she is merely participating in a kind of literary criticismthe digest of texts (p. 233). This is not to deride literary criticism, but to illustrate a primary difference between literary and historical writingthe demands of the last mentioned imply that the writer or researcher engage in methods of exploration that are focused on real, empirical contexts, and not just on opinions on existing documentation, which would be akin to a literary analysis preferably than an exposition of freshly discovered facts.Moya begins the first chapter by addressing his central research incertitude directly to the readers Why did the Mataronese and 2 million other Spaniards migrate to Argentina between the midnineteenth century and the first decades of the twentieth? (p. 13) He goes on to precis the primary reasons, and quotes data from sources which ready previously been neglected as being of much value, such as an incidental remark made by Argentinean Vice-Consul Carrau, who described the push-pull lineation as the primary reason for the migration (p. 13).According to this method, which Moya describes as a useful heuristic device (p. 13), migration takes devote because push factors drive people out of a particular location, while pull factors entice them into venturing into a geographical area which may fulfill the migrating peoples requirements. As Carrau observed, the strikes and labor unrest that have goaded 5,000 workers into public charity push hundreds across the ocean, attracted by the flourishing economy of the River Plate (p. 13).However, Moya is a discerning researcher and does not accept easy answers. He points out that there is one basic flaw in the identification of such a reason for emigrationWe could find a myriad of places in which labor unrest, famine, wars, starvation, and a whole array of push factors never led to emigration and in which fertile, empty lands, flourishing economies, high wages, and other pull factors never enticed immigration. In other words, push and pull conditions have concurred in countless areas and countries of the world from time immemorial to the present, yet mass transoceanic migration occurred only during a particular historical epoch from the midnineteenth century to the Great Depression of 1930. (p. 13)It is clear from the outset, therefore, that Moya does not wish to apply generalizations to his area of research nor does he want to curb more credibility than is due to the push and pull argument, even if it is true in this case. As the author observes, the same conditions have existed over several cultures in disparate locations and periods in history, but none have led to migration on such a large scale. Consequently, it is clear that Moyas intention here is to divulge particular rather than universal reasons for the Spanish migration to Argentina. As he declares, one could easily compile similar lists for periods and places where no migrati on took place (p. 14). Although the question of why migration took place is itself simple, therefore, the answer is not (p. 14).This, however, is not to suggest that Moya debunks the push-and-pull theory in the context of this exodus. He acknowledges that As the trend matured, a more balanced approach began to emphasise the complex interplay between the premigration heritage and the force environment, between continuity and change (p. 4). As he observes, the concept of adaptation of peoples to new cultures, and their subsequent assimilation into the host culture, form the a priori position of this study (p. 4).Although most works on cultural migration focus on the movement itself and on its possible causes, Moya chooses to go post to an earlier time, covering the three decades prior to the migration, to analyze the pre-arrival traits (p. 4) of the migrant community, thus prioritizing the dynamics of interaction with their new environment that the migrants faced, and the ways in wh ich environmental changes squeeze their adaptation to their new host culture.A particularly useful feature of Moyas text is that he also provides occasional commentary on his methods, and uses such instances to himself outline the possible drawbacks of his approaches. For example, in his chapter on migration, he discusses the validity of the macro-structural approach During the decades when macro- structural conditions obstructed emigration, the microsocial networks became inactive but not inert, the chain became dormant but did not die (p. 68). In the light of this recognition, Moya bases his next section on the microsocial approach, utilizing it to complement and sometimes counter the evidence and recommendations suggested by the macro-structural approach.The primary factor which encourages Moya to implement the microsocial approach in his quest to discover why the immigration took place is the fact that there was a socio-historical precedent for such migration Emigration from Ma tar to Buenos Aires dated back at least to the middle of the octonaryeenth century and was originally related to transatlantic trade (p. 61). At this point, Moyas microsocial approach takes the text into a hitherto-unexplored area of interpretation, as he takes the argument back full circle to Vice-Consul Carrau, and the manner in which his appointment as an official impacts our quest to discover the reasons behind the migrationYet the real clue to understanding Mataronese immigration to Argentina lay not in the protocol and formality of that appointment but in the less formal truth it concealed If one scrutinizes the consulates, odd and unconventional consuls appear. Indeed, the Argentine vice-consul at Matar was neither a diplomat nor an Argentine. Sr. Carrau was a Matar druggist with personal and commercial foreign relations, married to the daughter of Josep Riera Canals, an americano, or successful returnee who maintained business and family relations with Buenos Aires. (p. 6 3)Moya goes on to outline other such business and personal connections between Carraus succeeding consuls and Buenos Aires as well. He comes to the discovery that in provinces that lacked social linkages with Buenos Aires, like Valladolid and Crdoba, the results in terms of attracting immigrants proved disappointing (p. 64). Thus, Moya considerably expands the scope of his analysis by including such non-formal reasons for immigration as social precedents and interconnectedness between the act of immigration and intra-city links, which must have provided the incentive for their Spanish cousins to enter areas in Argentina which had established links with immigrant cultures.In his microsocial analysis, Moya also looks into such empirical factors conducive to immigration as the availability of roads and other transport routes that may have facilitated travel. He points out that such factors as the transportation (sometimes illegal) of such refuges in cargo and passenger ships are an imp ortant consideration in identifying why the Spanish migrants decided to go to Argentina, rather than any other neighboring location. For example, he observes that from 1840 to 1860, there were only four ship routes from Europe to the River Plate, and only five ports in Spain, out of which only one, Genoa, was the primary point of departure for emigrants (p. 64).Other ports remained inaccessible to immigrants Moyas research of passenger lists from the time revealed that Barcelona, for example, had no record, of any vessel carrying more than eight such passengers, barring one exception, which was also limited to only sixteen passengers. Also, Barcelona was not a stop on many of the routes. It was only in the 1880s, when the use of larger and faster carriers and more frequent ocean crossings enabled steamships from the Genoa route to make stops in Barcelona (p. 64) that Large-scale migration to Argentina began. Thus, Moya resources empirical causes for the mass migration, which gives u s a realistic picture of what actually happened, rather than relying on sociological or ethnological theory to outline the reasons for why the migration took place.Among Moyas strengths is the fact that despite his scrape area being a large demographic population and also covering a long historical period, he does not focus overly on the broader, more generalized aspects of such research, but instead provides detailed in coiffureion, often in the form of charts and tables (e.g., pp. 16-17) which provide the reader with a quick at-a-glance format in which to assess information. Also, he does not restrict his work to national boundaries by prioritizing either Spain or Argentina as the point of focus, but rather focuses on the migrating population itself. This gives his work an objectivity that transcends issues of cultural and ethic domination.ReferencesMoya, J. C. (1998). Cousins and strangers Spanish immigrants in Buenos Aires, 1850-1930. Berkeley The University of California Pres s.