1
50
3
-
https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/files/original/9eca48e0e4cfcdf7691dc0e897253d23.pdf
ba0b050e83647554e015f8dd39dbc959
PDF Text
Text
�TOO FEW TOMORROWS
�&J!fJ!fJ&JO&J©OV ff&J[fi) @®{ff)~®fl(lffMfJiJiJ fJJ!J'@~~
@J@@[fi)@" f}(j@fl(jifu ©&lfl@00{ff)@ Pdfl)@@fl)
�TOO FEW TOMORROWS
Urban Appalachians In the 1980's
~@JOa@@l
IPJ'if ffJ!JiJOOOO!fJ ell" @/PJ@fl{f[liJ000@fl
l§f0000&J{f[liJ l§f" ffJ!JiJOOOO!PJ®fl
<@
�The Appalachian Consortium was a non-profit educational organization
composed of institutions and agencies located in Southern Appalachia. From
1973 to 2004, its members published pioneering works in Appalachian studies
documenting the history and cultural heritage of the region. The Appalachian
Consortium Press was the first publisher devoted solely to the region and many of
the works it published remain seminal in the field to this day.
With funding from the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the National
Endowment for the Humanities through the Humanities Open Book Program,
Appalachian State University has published new paperback and open access
digital editions of works from the Appalachian Consortium Press.
www.collections.library.appstate.edu/appconsortiumbooks
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons BY-NC-ND license. To view a
copy of the license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses.
Original copyright © 1987 by the Appalachian Consortium Press.
ISBN (pbk.: alk. Paper): 978-1-4696-3705-1
ISBN (ebook): 978-1-4696-3707-5
Distributed by the University of North Carolina Press
www.uncpress.org
�THE APPALACHIAN CONSORTIUM
The Appalachian Consortium is a non-profit educational organization comprised
of institutions and agencies located in the Southern Highlands. Our members are
volunteers who plan and execute projects which serve 156 mountain counties in seven
states. Among our goals are:
Preserving the cultural heritage of Southern Appalachia
Protecting the mountain environment
Improving the educational opportunities for area students
and teachers
Conducting scientific, social and economic research
Promoting a positive image of Appalachia
Encouraging regional cooperation
THE MEMBER INSTITUTIONS OF THE APPALACHIAN CONSORTIUM ARE:
Appalachian State University
Blue Ridge Parkway
East Tennessee State University
Great Smoky Mountains Natural History Association
John C. Campbell Folk School
Lees-McRae College
Mars Hill College
Mountain Regional Library
North Carolina Division of Archives and History
Southern Highlands Handicraft Guild
U.S. Forest Service
Warren Wilson College
Western Carolina University
Western North Carolina Historical Society
�This page intentionally left blank
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
PREFACE, Maureen R. Sullivan
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
1
1.
TOO FEW TOMORROWS, Thomas E. Wagner
3
2.
A DECADE IN REVIEW: The Development of the Ethnic Model in
Urban Appalachian Studies, Michael E. Maloney
13
APPALACHIANS IN MIDWESTERN CITIES: Regionalism as a
Basis of Ethnic Group Formation, William W. Philliber and
Phillip J. Obermiller
19
URBAN APPALACHIANS & CANADIAN MARITIME
MIGRANTS: Comparative Study of Emergent Ethnicity, Martin N. Marger
and Phillip J. Obermiller
23
5.
LABELING URBAN APPALACHIANS, Phillip J. Obermiller
35
6.
THE ETHNIC ENTREPRENEUR IN THE URBAN APPALACHIAN
COMMUNITY, Sharlotte K. Neely
43
PART II: CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG
APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
49
7.
MOVING ON: Recent Patterns of Appalachian Migration,
Phillip J. Obermiller and Robert W. Oldendick
51
8.
THE CHANGING COMPOSITION OF APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS,
William W. Philliber
63
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN LIFE
67
TWO STUDIES OF APPALACHIAN CIVIC INVOLVEMENT,
Phillip J. Obermiller and Robert W. Oldendick
69
3.
4.
9.
10. THE IMPACT OF THE URBAN MILIEU ON THE
APPALACHIAN FAMILYTYPE,James K. Crissman.
81
11. EFFECTS OF SCHOOLS & SCHOOLING
UPON APPALACHIAN CHILDREN IN CINCINNATI,
Michael E. Maloney and Kathryn M. Borman.
89
12. APPALACHIAN YOUTH IN CULTURAL TRANSITION,
Clyde B. McCoy and H. Virginia McCoy
99
13. BLACK APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS: The Issue of Dual
Minority Status, William W. Philliber and Phillip J. Obermiller
Ill
CONCLUSION: The Future for Appalachians in Urban Areas,
William W. Philliber
117
BIBLIOGRAPHY
123
CONTRIBUTORS
139
INDEX
141
�This page intentionally left blank
�PREFACE
Between 1940 and 1970 an estimated three million people left their home places in
Appalachia in search of jobs. Many migrated to industrial centers in the Midwest and
settled in cities like Cincinnati, Chicago, and Detroit Although they were, in a way,
"just looking for a home"-a better life for themselves and their families-many did not
find the promised land they sought. The fate of perhaps a third of the migrants was to
become long-term dwellers in the underclass.
But even for those who made it into secure blue-collar employment, the dream
was not without pain. Both research and personal experience point to a socially
different group of people who are struggling with questions of identity, rootlessness,
and cultural negation. Research done in Northern Kentucky indicates that a sizeable
number of urban Appalachians there do not regard the area as home even if they were
born or long settled in Northern Kentucky communities. For them, home is a family
place in the hills of Eastern Kentucky.
Brenda Ann Nix, an Appalachian woman living in Northern Kentucky, writes
poignantly about the experiences of her family:
Marnau and Papau lived around Corbin and Pathfork, Kentucky. We never
called ourselves Appalachians. Still we have things in common. I
remember intense religious services. One of my uncles was a Holiness
preacher who could touch snakes when he was in the Spirit. .. Mamau and
Papau moved to Detroit but home remained Corbin and Pathfork. Mamau
was leery of foreigners. Detroit was a strange city... You know my mom
hates being called a hillbilly. She thinks it's a put down. I've known
people who liked the country accent. Others looked at it as a sign of
ignorance. And me-I'm still trying to understand me and my family ...
Papau worked in the coal mines. Mamau just kept trusting her Bible and
all the while their children felt the strain.
i
�As the third generation of mountain people, I feel sometimes ashamed of
my background-sometimes I'm proud. Appalachians ... I've never known
a tougher people.
Her words address the dichotomy of being an "urban Appalachian" with its
combination of pride and pain, with the constant question, "What does it mean to be
who I am?"
This book addresses some of the contemporary questions facing urban
Appalachians. It is, I believe, the third part of a trilogy which began with The
Invisible Minority: Urban Appalachians, a book which focused on migration and
documented the early experiences of Appalachian migrants. Next came Appalachian
Migrants in Urban America: Cultural Conflict or Ethnic Group Formation? which
compared first- and second-generation Appalachians with other groups in the city. This
volume continues the tradition of documenting Appalachian migration and settlement
patterns by presenting current information on urban Appalachian social movements and
leadership, on new trends in migration, and on social problems faced by urban
Appalachians.
The past decade has seen three issues dominate the study of Appalachians who
have migrated to urban areas outside of the region. One of the most important of these
is the context in which Appalachian migrants and their descendents are to be viewed.
The most developed analogy indicates that in many ways Appalachians can best be
understood as an ethnic group. Yet challenges remain suggesting that they can be better
understood in the larger context of class relationships while some maintain that there is
simply nothing to understand. Part I of this volume presents those developments which
have led to the increasing belief that Appalachian migrants and their descendents have
become an ethnic group in the urban areas where they moved. Continuing a long
tradition in the study of Appalachians, the second issue documents the magnitude and
characteristics of Appalachians moving from the region. This issue has become more
critical in recent years as interest has focused on migration into the area to the neglect
of those leaving. However, as Part II of this volume illustrates, people continue to
move out of Appalachia into the urban areas of the Midwest. Part III presents findings
from a lesser-developed side of research on urban Appalachians-their participation in
the urban milieu. These papers document participation in politics, family, and
education as well as analyzing what it is to be young and Black as an Appalachian
outside of the region.
11
�PART ONE
From Social Problem To Ethnic Group
The past decade has witnessed a change in the framework used to study and
understand people who migrated from Appalachia to urban centers in the
Midwest Prior to the mid-seventies these migrants were usually seen as a
social problem. Journalists and social scientists competed to see who could describe
the most poignant examples of maladjustment. While the documentation of social
problems was successful, serious observers began to question whether the identification of these people as Appalachians added anything to understanding their experiences. Their problems might develop because they were rural to urban migrants,
because they were migrants from the South to the North, because they were of lower
socioeconomic status, or just because they were migrants. It was not enough to document that people from Appalachia had problems; it was necessary to demonstrate that
those problems could not be explained from other existing frameworks.
In the mid-seventies people of Appalachian descent living outside the
region began to be viewed as an ethnic group. The shift from social problem to ethnic
group was brought about by both academic and political forces. Ethnicity
was a major topic among social scientists. Models of ethnic pluralism had
arisen in contrast to the assimilation model which had dominated the field for a number
of years. Appalachians were included among those groups for whom an ethnic
analogy was made. Politically it was useful to treat Appalachians as an ethnic
group. Those groups who were recognized as such were eligible for private and public
funds as well as legislative protection from discrimination.
The chapters contained in this section describe the work of political
organizers and social scientists in applying the ethnic analogy to people of
Appalachian descent living outside the region. The Urban Appalachian Council, under
the leadership of Michael Maloney, provided the political organization from which
the ethnic analogy emerged. Under its auspices a group of researchers,
merely asked to study Appalachians, began to make an ethnic analogy. This
work went in two related directions. The first step was to determine to what extent
Appalachians were an ethnic group. The second step was to try and understand the
causes for such an ethnic group formation. These papers describe both the process and
the results of that work.
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(1
�This page intentionally left blank
�TOO FEW TOMORROWS
According to demographers the movement of rural people to urban industrial
centers continued nearly unabated for thirty years following World War II. Tradiitional port-of-entry neighborhoods in urban areas, which in years past received migrants of urban ethnic origin, were receiving centers for white rural to urban
migrants. In numerous midwestern industrial centers, the greatest influx of rural
to urban migrants were from the Southern Appalachian region. Estimates are that
as many as seven million people permanently migrated out of the Southern
Appalachian region during the 1940's, 1950's, and 1960's. Called "the great
migration," this movement may be one of the most significant migrations of this
century (Brown and Hillery, 1962).
During the 1940's a booming war-stimulated economy attracted Appalachian
migrants to Detroit, Chicago, Cincinnati, and other manufacturing cities where plenty
of jobs were available for unskilled labor. The region's net population loss
due to migration during the forties was 705,894 persons (Brown and Hillery,
1962:58). During the fifties, automation and the switch to natural gas as a
primary fuel brought mass unemployment to the eastern Kentucky and West
Virginia coal fields and 1,569,000 left the region looking for work elsewhere.
During the 1960's, the push/pull of regional unemployment and the promise of
work served to keep the migration stream flowing, even though at a slower rate.
Between 1960 and 1970, 592,000 people migrated out of the mountains (Brown,
1971). This migration of Appalachians to midwestern cities is nearly as great as
Irish and Italian immigration in the late 1800's, and is much larger than the recent
migration of Asians to this country. It was a mass movement of people that has gone
largely unnoticed, perhaps, in part, because the migrants were white rural
people moving from one part of the United States to another.
With little variation, the reasons for migrating were nearly always the
same: the desire to improve one's economic status, and the knowledge of a relative
PART/: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EJHNIC GROUP
(3
�living in an urban location (Hyland, 1972; Hanneling, 1969). Throughout the stories
told to Gitlin and Hollander by Chicago's uptown residents, there is the consistent
theme of moving north then south and then north again, depending upon economic
conditions and family circumstances: "They go to Ohio, go up here to Chicago, or
to Michigan or to somewhere around there because there is no work whatsoever-any
real good paying jobs-in Harlan" (Gitlin and Hollander, 1970:263). Often migration
in one direction or the other occurs immediately following a change in family status,
a death, separation, divorce, or marriage (Gitlin and Hollander; 1970, Harmeling,
1969). Personnel officers in many northern manufacturing companies followed the
common practice of filling vacancies by asking workers from the mountains to
notify some of their relatives (Cincinnati Human Relations Committee, 1956).
Schwarzweller, Brown, and Manglam (1971) verify the recruiting efficiency of such
kinfolk messages. In some plants in Cincinnati, the number of Kentucky-born
workers was reported to be as high as 50-70% of the work staff.
The migratory streams were generally regional in nature, with individuals from
certain areas or counties tending to move to the same northern destination.
Migrants from eastern Kentucky counties came to southwestern Ohio, while those
from West Virginia "headed out" for northeastern Ohio. Thus, Cincinnati, Hamilton,
and Dayton, Ohio are commonly known as "Kentucky cities," while Columbus,
Cleveland, and Akron are known as "West Virginia cities" (Brown, 1971).
The Cincinnati metropolitan area, including the counties in north central
Kentucky and southeastern Indiana, was one of tl:le primary receiving centers for
Appalachian migrants from eastern Kentucky and adjacent West Virginia counties.
It is estimated that over 100,000 migrants moved to the Cincinnati area during the
thirty years of the "great migration." When one adds the children born to these
migrants, the first and second generation Cincinnati area urban Appalachian
population is estimated at over 213,000 people (Obermiller and Oldendick,
1984).
In Cincinnati and other midwestern urban areas, Appalachian migrants did not
find the same ethnic "melting pot" found by earlier immigrant groups. There was
no migrant infrastructure, with its economic opportunities and support services
of so much benefit to earlier immigrant groups, to improve the quality of urban life
for Appalachians moving to the city. The plight of urban areas after World War II
was one of shrinking revenues, continued urban sprawl, "white flight," and
strained social services. The large influx of rural to urban migrants created additional
pressures and problems for urban social welfare, educational, health, and justice
systems. As a result, urban Appalachians, as they came to be called, were
largely ignored and misunderstood by city residents and service agencies. In some
instances, the neglect was made worse by prejudicial actions toward the "hillbillies,"
"ridge runners," and "briar hoppers."
In Cincinnati, the response to this neglect was the formation of a coalition of
individuals from diverse backgrounds and with an uncommon commitment to bring
about improvements in the quality of life of the city's urban Appalachians. The
primary objective of this paper is to trace the development of the Appalachian avocacy
organizations which emerged within the migrant community.
Although ad hoc groups came together in some other midwestern cities to
work on behalf of migrant Appalachians, it is the Urban Appa-lachian Council of
4)
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�Cincinnati, its forerunners and affiliate groups, that is synonymous with the "urban
Appalachian movement." One can only be impressed by the gains and accomplishments of this organization on behalf of urban Appalachians particularly, in the
Cincinnati metropolitan area.
The history of the urban Appalachian movement in Cincinnati goes back to the
early 1950's. A fairly large group of individuals and agencies including the Mayor's
Friendly Relations Committee-the predecessor of the Cincinnati Human Relations
Commission-Berea College and the Council of Southern Mountains developed
an interest in the problems caused by mountain-to-urban migration. Virginia Coffey,
former Director of the Cincinnati Human Relations Commission described the early
days as follows:
The Cincinnati Urban Appalachian Council is a reality today because of
the foresight, interest, and determination of a few individuals. Back in
1948-49 Marshall Brogdon, then Executive Director of the Mayor's
Friendly Relations Committee and I, the Assistant Director, were the
city's lone human relations professionals. In carrying out our job to
ensure justice, racial and religious freedom and equality for all citizens of
Cincinnati, it soon became apparent that adjustment problems facing
Black migrants from the rural South were similarly common to
Appalachian migrants from the hills of Virginia, Kentucky, and
Tennessee. While making this city aware of discrimination and unequal
treatment to its Black minority, we also felt compelled to call attention
to the plight of urban Appalachian migrants. (Mountain Life and Work,
1976:19)
Marshall Bragdon, in addition to his duties as Director of the Mayor's
Friendly Relations Commission, served on the Executive Committee of the
Council of Southern Mountains, located in Berea, KY, where he developed a
lasting friendship with Perley Ayer, the charismatic leader of the Council. Bragdon's
intense interest in the migration of Appalachian people brought early solid
linkages between the mountains and the city. Virginia Coffey, Assistant Director
under Bragdon and later Director, organized many local efforts to aid migrants, and
began to build a constituency of concern among a wide range of the city's citizens. The
Mayor's Friendly Relations Committee's commitment went well beyond expressing
verbal concern. They sponsored several workshops, the first in April, 1954,
where the keynote speaker was Roscoe Giffin, a professor from Berea College.
The workshop was based on several assumptions:
1. The heavy migmtion from the hills will continue;
2. The newcomers' urban adjustment is vital to the city;
3. Too many make a poor adjustment: agencies and institutions
don't know how to help the migrants;
4. Active intercultural study of this problem would yield facts,
insights, and techniques of pmctical value; and
5. De-stereotyping the city man's and urban agencies' views of, and
attitudes towards hillfolks is a vital first step in affecting
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(5
�migrants' view and behavior (Cincinnati Human Relations
Commission, 1956).
It is interesting to note that these objectives are similar to the
objectives of the Appalachian Committee, established in 1972 by Frank Foster,
Louise Spiegel, Stuart Faber, Mike Maloney, and others with the support of the
Cincinnati Human Relations Commission.
There was a great deal of activity in Cincinnati following the 1954
workshop. An Episcopalian "ministry to mountaineers" began in 1955 and the
Emanuel Community Center developed services to "hill families" funded by a
grant from the Appalachian Fund. The Emanuel Community Center program resulted
from the efforts of Ray Drukker, the Executive Director of the Appalachian Fund,
Inc. Drukker began efforts to develop a Cincinnati program after he read a series of
articles about the problems encountered by Appalachian migrants in the Cincinnati
Enquirer.
In 1959, a team of eleven Cincinnatians representing the public schools,
social services, police, and churches participated with teams from seven other cities in
a three-week workshop at Berea College sponsored by the Council of Southern
Mountains and led by Perley Ayer. Each team member was required to develop
materials and educational programs for city agencies and services in support of
Appalachian migrants in greater Cincinnati. These activities seemed promising, and by
1960 Marshall Bragdon was able to write, "The future looks fruitful. Yes, much has
happened since 1954" (Cincinnati Human Relations Commission, 1956:2).
During the 1960's, a small cadre of committed individuals continued to
work diligently on behalf of Appalachians in Cincinnati. Among this group was
Stuart Faber, a trustee of the Appalachian Fund, and President of the Council of
Southern Mountains; Louise Spiegel, a volunteer at the Mayor's Friendly
Relations Committee, who helped coordinate many conferences and to consolidate
membership of the early organizations; Frank Foster, a former college
president who had retired to Cincinnati; and Ernie Mynatt, an outreach social worker
at Emanuel Community Center.
Under the leadership of Stuart Faber, the Appalachian Fund provided a
grant to the Emanuel Community Center to hire a social worker to work in the Overthe-Rhine area as a "detached"
social worker providing services to
Appalachians. After limited success by two different workers, the Center hired Ernie
Mynatt. The Council of the Southern Mountains formally commissioned
Mynatt's work by presenting him a "certificate" signed by Perley Ayer. In
1964, the Cincinnati Archdiocese provided funding for the establishment of the Main
Street Bible Center directed by Father John Porter and Sister Shirley Gallahan.
Shortly thereafter, Mike Maloney, a young migrant mountaineer, started working
at the HUB Social Services Center, a multi-service social welfare agency in the
Over-the-Rhine.
The primary energy for the Bible Center effort came from dozens of young
volunteers, mostly Roman Catholic seminarians and nuns or former nuns and
seminarians. The Bible Center and Old St. Mary's Catholic Church in Over-the-Rhine
became the base of operations for this small army of volunteers who did door-to-door
home visiting and conducted recreation activities and Bible classes for children
6)
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�and teens. Some of the volunteers lived in tenement apartments in the manner of a
previous generation of settlement house workers. With this corps of inner-city
volunteers and the support of the Archdiocese and Virginia Coffey, who during this
period was Director of Memorial Community Center, Ernie Mynatt was able to
begin support services directly aimed at the Appalachian migrants and displaced
Blacks from Cincinnati's West End urban renewal areas. Many of the Bible
Center volunteers became community organizers, social workers, and teachers in
the inner city and continued to work on behalf of Appalachian migrants in these
roles.
"The Hub" (not an acronym originally) was opened in 1966 as a branch of
Memorial Community Center. It was a storefront social service agency staffed by
professional as well as indigenous workers including migrants from eastern
Kentucky. In 1968, HUB Services was funded as one of fourteen Pilot Cities
Centers, the predecessor program to Model Cities.
It was not long before a coalition formed between Mynatt, Maloney, and
others working out of the Emanuel Center, HUB Services, and Main Street Bible
Center. This loose coalition made its first attempt at organization in 1969 when
Maloney and Mynatt formed the United Appalachians of Cincinnati (UAC). The
organization was organized to "promote the self-awareness and self-activity of
the Appalachian people in Cincinnati, to encourage our urban institutions, respond
to the needs and interest of Appalachians, and to show the community-at-large the
power and beauty of our culture" (Maloney, unpublished).
Membership in the United Appalachians of Cincinnati was accomplished by
joining the Council of the Southern Mountains. By-laws were drawn up and about
fifty individuals were listed as members of the organization. The group
disbanded when Mike Maloney left Cincinnati to attend graduate school in North
Carolina. However, Frank Foster, Louise Spiegel, and Stuart Faber kept the
coalition together by calling periodic meetings of an "Appalachian Committee," an
organization open to anyone who was willing to attend the meetings. The
movement was at a crucial but formative stage and a number of individuals who
would later provide important voluntary support for the Urban Appalachian
Council were recruited into the movement.
In 1970 Ernie Mynatt received a grant from the Appalachian Fund and opened
the Appalachian Identity Center. Its importance was that it was the first support
and advocacy program anywhere in the midwest run by urban Appalachians
themselves. Ernie Mynatt directed the Center while continuing his work as a
detached social worker on the streets in Over-the-Rhine. The youth attending the
Appalachian Identity Center formed the Sons ~nd Daughters of Appalachia, an
organization to raise consciousness and provide service to urban Appalachians living
in Over-the-Rhine.
The "Appalachian Committee" led by Frank Foster continued to meet, and in
the Fall of 1972 became a subcommittee of the Cincinnati Human Relations
Commission. At the same time, Louise Spiegel formed an Appalachian research
committee, also under the sponsorship of the Cincinnati Human Relations Commission.
Mike Maloney, having completed his studies, returned to Cincinnati and was
hired by the Cincinnati Human Relations Commission with support from the
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EFHNIC GROUP
(7
�Appalachian Fund to staff the Appalachian Committee of the Cincinnati Human
Relations Commission. In December, 1972 the Appalachian Committee opened an
outreach office on Vine Street just at the southern edge of the Over-the-Rhine
neighborhood. Katie Brown became the first volunteer worker for the committee.
Serving as secretary several days a week, she was instrumental in developing the
Appalachian Committee's library and in forming a Miner's Benefit Program.
Seemingly unrelated, but of equal importance, was the city's first Appalachian
Festival, sponsored in 1972 by the Junior League of Cincinnati under the leadership of
Diane Williams. The Appalachian Festival grew to become a major Appalachian
cultural activity. Funds generated by the Festival have supported many activities on
behalf of urban Appalachians.
In the spring of 1973 the Heritage Room was founded by the Appalachian
Committee at Washington Park School and in the summer the first urban
Appalachian women's organization, the Appalachian Women's Organization was
formed. Through the efforts of Mike Maloney, the City of Cincinnati agreed to include
Appalachians in its Affirmative Action policy statement. This was an important
accomplishment since it was the first official recognition of Appalachians as a
legitimate minority population.
By early 1974, the Appalachian Committee had grown in size and influence to
the point where it could stand as an independent organization. In February, the
Committee assumed the charter of the Appalachian Identity Center, expanded its Board
membership, and became the Urban Appalachian Council (UAC). The new
organization continued to carry out the programs developed by the Appalachian
Committee and the Identity Center. Initial financial support came from the Cincinnati
Human Relations Commission, the Appalachian Fund, the Greater Cincinnati
Foundation, and the Community Commitment Foundation. The objectives of the
Urban Appalachian Council were to:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
establish a program of research to document the needs and problems
of Appalachians in Cincinnati and the gaps in services and other
resources;
formalize a structure for helping urban professional workers to
become more sensitive to the needs of Appalachians;
use documented evidence and other resources to urge policymaking officials and administrators to make changes in their
programs in order to better serve Appalachians and others;
improve the urban migrants' self-image and to attack stereotypes
by establishing programs to help Appalachians establish their culture;
promote efforts to organize Appalachian neighborhoods;
establish a resource center which would make both cultural and social
planning information on mountain migrants accessible; and
establish programs at local universities that would make university
resources and greater community resources available to Appalachians
and other people on campus (Urban Appalachian Council, 1979).
The mid-1970's must be considered a period of great success and accomplishment
8)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�for the urban Appalachian movement. UAC Executive Director Mike Maloney
published the Social Areas of Cincinnati Report in 1974, which had significant
influence on
the planning done by
human service agencies in Cincinnati
(Maloney 1974).
A new Appalachian Heritage Room designed to serve the community was established across the street from Washington Park School. Under the sponsorship of
the Battelle Institute, the first national research conference on urban Appalachians was
held in Columbus, Ohio.
In 1975, the Appalachian Community Development Association was formed
to assume "community control" of the Appalachian Festival. In July, 1975, the
first of three summer institutes on urban Appalachians co-sponsored by the
University of Cincinnati and UAC was funded by the Ohio Board of Regents.
Also in the summer of 1975, Larry Reddin was hired as the first UAC worker to
work in the Camp Washington and Northside neighborhoods. The following year,
Mountain Life and Work (1976) devoted a special issue to urban Appalachians by
highlighting the work of UAC.
By 1976, the Urban Appalachian Council had become a full-fledged service
and advocacy agency for Appalachians in Cincinnati. The Cincinnati Human Relations
Commission had ceased providing financial support for the Director's salary, and UAC
developed a purchase of services agreement with the Cincinnati Community Chest.
The Council also started to diversify its efforts by extending its focus to several
neighborhoods in addition to Over-the-Rhine. Although the attempts at community
organizing outside of the Over-the-Rhine area were a natural step in the progress of the
UAC, the efforts caused clouds on the horizon that foretold the storm that was coming.
Expansion of the urban Appalachian movement caused two issues to arise.
One was related to an original goal of the United Appalachians of Cincinnati, "to
promote the self-awareness and self-identity" of Appalachians in Cincinnati. This
identity model was central to the history and philosophy of the urban Appalachian
movement. Many people involved in the work in the 1960's had been trained by Ernie
Mynatt. Many of the early activities were supported or not supported, based on
whether they were consistent with Mynatt's philosophy and methods. Several people
believed the identity model, which was the basis for the Appalachian Identity Center,
would not work in other communities. A second critical issue was how to involve
new people, particularly non-Appalachians, in the movement. How could the
newcomers share the early vision and appreciate the history of the urban Appalachian
movement? How could the movement open itself to new concerns and maintain its
original core of beliefs and philosophies?
The community organizing projects continued to expand as programs were
developed and implemented in the communities of South Fairmont and Norwood. In
late 1976 and early 1977, the Council received substantial new funds and staff
members through an LEAA Grant for Youth Service Training, CETA, and VISTA
Programs. Further, UAC and the urban Appalachian movement in Cincinnati were
growing in fame and reputation. Executive Director Mike Maloney carried the urban
Appalachian concerns to the national level by testifying before a Federal Task Force.
This was the first federal recognition of the urban Appalachian movement. Visits to
Washington would become a regular activity for the Executive Director and staff of
UAC as federal agencies and the Executive branch began to show interest in and
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(9
�support of the urban Appalachian movement. The overall strength and influence of the
organization was demonstrated by the lay role UAC played in the formation of the
Inner City Neighborhood Coalition. The Coalition was successful in overturning the
City of Cincinnati's "triage" policy which would have withheld support and services to
"dying" inner city neighborhoods.
Despite the important accomplishments of the past several years and the promise of even greater achievement on behalf of urban Appalachians, the period from 1977
to 1982 was marked by internal organizational turmoil and strife. The growing rift
between the community organizing and identity model proponents was compounded by
the phenomenal growth of the staff and the involvement of a number of new
individuals attracted to the movement. A second split involved the middle class
professional Appalachians who wished to support the UAC and grassroots community
residents. This "class" struggle was further exacerbated by an ideological difference between "those on the left and those on the right politically." The differences in philosophy, political views, and the organizational growing pains prompted the Executive
Director to hire a consultant to bring harmony, a sense of direction and common
commitment back to the movement. Even so, 1977 ended with the South Fairmont
and Norwood Neighborhood organizations moving to become autonomous urban
Appalachian organizations. The consultant's efforts resulted in the development and
adoption of a new Long Range Plan for UAC. In adopting the new plan, the UAC
Board announced that the original objectives of the Appalachian Committee had been
achieved and that new directions were called for to benefit Appalachian migrants
throughout the Midwest (Urban Appalachian Council, 1979).
The turmoil did not subside and 1978 came to be known as the "year of the
conflict." Disputes over ideology and organizational philosophy resulted in the resignation of several key staff and board members over the next two years. Some of these
individuals had been a part of the movement since the old coalition preceding the formation of the Urban Appalachian Council. Several continued their work on behalf of
urban Appalachians by supporting the Appalachian Festival and serving on the
Appalachian Community Development Association Board of Trustees. Others left to
take up new endeavors.
Even with the turmoil, UAC continued to sponsor programs and extend successful efforts on behalf of Appalachian migrants. A Career Education Program was
funded by CETA, a Drug Education Program was implemented, and the Urban Appalachian movement achieved recognition as a viable social movement supported by a
number of agencies and organizations at the federal, state and local levels. In 1981,
two major books on urban Appalachians, both the outgrowth of UAC research efforts,
were published. (Philliber and McCoy, 1981; Philliber, 1981).
By 1982, however, the internal dissention and fluctuating patterns of the funding
brought the organization to near collapse. The CETA and VISTA grants had been
reduced and the Community Chest was threatening to discontinue its support. Mike
Maloney resigned as Executive Director, along with several board members. The individual hired to replace Maloney did not complete a probationary period and was replaced by Maureen Sullivan, a former president of the UCA Board. Shortly after Sullivan's appointment, the board decided to end all CET NJTP A funding. At the same
time, although unrelated to the problems, the Identity Center was closed.
The 1983 to 1985 period is one characterized as a return to "original values."
10)
PART!: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
�Under Sullivan, the board and staff were reorganized and attempts were made to reestablish several programs. Ties were developed with community schools in urban Appalachian communities and a Client Advocate program begun. The reorganized UAC had
regained credibility in the community and the Community Chest and City Council
moved to reinstate funding.
The Urban Appalachian Council serves today as the centerpiece of an organizational network that includes several "storefront" educational centers, neighborhoodbased social service centers, and two inner-city identity centers. In cooperation with
the Urban Office of the Appalachian People's Service Organization and a community
organizing agency called Working in Neighborhoods, the Urban Appalachian Council
sponsors the Appalachian Issues Network, a coalition of five low-income Appalachian
neighborhoods. Through its Frank Foster Library on Appalachian Migrants and its
staff and volunteer resources, UAC sponsors or supports a broad variety of cultural
activities, such as neighborhood festivals and workshops for teachers, church leaders,
and all types of professional workers.
UAC maintains ties with other rural and urban Appalachian organizations
through its relationship with such organizations as the Appalachian Development
Projects Assembly of the Commission on Religion in Appalachia, the Council of the
Southern Mountains, and the Appalachian Alliance.
Perhaps the greatest success of the urban Appalachian identity movement
spearheaded by UAC is illustrated by this volume. UAC Research Committee
members or former members have participated in the Appalachian Studies Conference
and in conferences in the various disciplines, such as regional and national conferences
of sociologists and anthropologists.
UAC's research and cultural activities have made Cincinnati a major center of the
larger Appalachian movement. Its success in empowering of the poor through
community organization and in developing a positive Appalachian identity has, to a
certain extent, been replicated in other Ohio cities such as Dayton, Hamilton,
Columbus, and Cleveland.
Dayton, Ohio is the second most important center of Appalachian cultural and
political activity. Our Common Heritage (OCH) was founded in Dayton as The
Kentucky Mountain Club. Our Common Heritage, like UAC, has sponsored citywide cultural events, has been effective in advocacy, and has multiplied its efforts
through spinoff organizations and influence on other agencies. Partially through the
efforts of OCH, Dayton has also become a major center of Appalachian culture. Much
of that cultural activi~y is promoted by OCH "spinoffs," the 1500-member OhioKentucky-Indiana Bluegrass Association and City Folk, a multi-ethnic arts
organization.
The Hamilton (Ohio) Appalachian People's Service Organization (HAPSO)
owns its own building and operates a program of community organization, advocacy,
cultural affirmation, and service, primarily in the North End. HAPSO received
national press covemge for its successful efforts to force cleanup of the Chem-Dyne
industrial site, a major hazardous waste site in the middle of the city. Like UAC
and OCH, HAPSO also sponsors cultuml programs such as arts and crafts festivals.
In Columbus, Ohio, the Central Ohio Appalachian Council flourished briefly
around 1976 and 1977. It failed through the inability of initial leadership, primarily
professional, to agree on goals and methods, and its demise was a severe setback to
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(11
�UAC's effort to promote a statewide network. While it functioned, this organization
illustrated the importance of having an organization in the state capitol. The initiative
for legislative action to form an Ohio State Appalachian Commission came from the
Central Ohio group.
From about 1970 to 1972, Appalachians in Cleveland were organized by the
Appalachian Action Council, which helped establish the first urban Appalachian
library. It folded when its leaders withdrew because they felt that United Way and
university-based professionals had taken over the organization.
When one reviews the thirty-year history of the urban Appalachian movement,
one cannot but be impressed. Appalachians in Cincinnati, with the help of many
allies, successfully organized an urban social movement which has become a positive
force in the life of the Greater Cincinnati community. The movement has a
significant record of accomplishment and there has been a true gain in the quality of
life for many Appalachian migrants living in Cincinnati and other urban areas. But at
the same time there is a nagging sense of work undone, and that there are too few
tomorrows left in which to do it. There is a need to renew efforts and restore to the
movement the commitment of the individuals who worked so diligently in the 1950's,
1960's and 1970's. In many urban neighborhoods, Appalachian migrants continue to
be displaced persons. Their children, having lost faith in themselves and respect for
their heritage, are seeking a life in the streets. Honesty, independence, pride, and a
sense of place, the essence of Appalachian heritage, are being lost to the hard, grabwhat-you-can, values of the city. By the turn of the century, another generation of
urban Appalachians will have grown up in the streets resenting their heritage and the
city that destroyed it. Perhaps their ability to survive in the urban community will be
greater than their parents', but they will have paid a high price. They will have lost
their heritage; a loss that affects all of society.
12)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
�A DECADE IN REVIEW
The Development of the Ethnic Model in Urban Appalachian Studies
The purpose of this paper is to review the principal developments in
research relating to urban Appalachians since 1974, when the first national
conference on urban Appalachians was held in Columbus, Ohio.
In the spring of 1974 a national conference on urban Appalachians was
sponsored by the Academy for Contemporary Problems in Columbus, Ohio. The
primary purpose of that conference was to bring together and focus the
existing body of information on urban Appalachians. Grace Leybourne and
Roscoe Giffin had done early research in Cincinnati, and James Brown of the
University of Kentucky had collected facts and developed a theory concerning "the
Great Migration." In 1971, Brown and his associates had published the landmark
Mountain Families in Transition. Clyde McCoy, Gary Fowler, Larry Morgan,
Brady Deaton, Kurt Anschell, and other students and colleagues of Brown's
published research regarding Appalachian migration and adjustment. In a project
commissioned by the Office of Economic Opportunity, Abt Associates had
published its findings on the causes of rural-to-urban migration among the poor.
Robert Coles had written vivid descriptions of Appalachian migrants in The South
Goes North. Griffm and Hollander had published Uptown: Poor Whites in Chicago.
Mountain Life and Work and People's Appalachia had published special issues on
urban Appalachians.
From the Appalachian Committee office and the Cincinnati Human Relations
Commission came The Social Areas of Cincinnati, which introduced the neighborhood
and census tract as units of analysis to students of urban Appalachians. Thomas
Wagner's dissertation study focused on the plight of Appalachians in the public
schools. Staff members of the Urban Appalachian Council and faculty members from
the University of Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky University began a series of
working papers, which focused on school and neighborhood issues or analyzed special
census-bureau data on 1965-1970 migrants to the Cincinnati metropolitan area.
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
( 13
�Much of this work (and some not mentioned here) is summarized in The Invisible Mirwrity, which grew out of the Columbus conference.
In the concluding chapter of The Invisible Mirwrity, this author summarized
the state of knowledge in 1974 and the need for further research as follows:
The conclusion is that we still do not know all that we need to know.
Most of our data in these studies are based on surveys of recent migrants.
The peak period of Appalachian migration was the 1940's and the early
1950's. We still lack a comprehensive survey that includes the people
who migrated before 1955 and their descendants. I am convinced that
when such data become available, they will show that a large percentage
of first- and second-generation Appalachians still live in central-city lowstatus areas and that, in some cases, the status of the second generation
will be lower than that of the first generation. Another important
characteristic of the needed studies should be that they compare
Appalachians to other groups. A base of information is being developed
for instance, showing that the status of Cincinnati's white Appalachian
population is comparable to that of the black population. (Maloney,
1981:171)
Another challenge to future research was posed in Phillip Obermiller's article in The
Invisible Mirwrity:
We must begin to look at Appalachian success patterns and social
competence, and not just the social disorganization that is
present within some segments of the Appalachian community. . .We
should begin therefore to examine those instances in which the system
has been exploited by Appalachians, and look for patterns of success
which can be reinforced by policy and planning decisions. Research. . .
should take into consideration the concept of neighborhood ... Information
is urgently needed on the present situation of the Appalachian
family. (Obermiller, 1981:18)
In their article "Stereotypes of Appalachian Migrants," McCoy and Watkins,
(1981) issue a similar call to rid ourselves of "an unbalanced and distorted image,"
which emphasizes the evils of the city and projects a view of all Appalachian
migrants as "maladjusted and malcontented." They suggest that research be directed
toward replacing these "mythical" images with facts and role models that permit the
development of a positive Appalachian identity.
We can summarize the concern of the contributors to The Invisible Mirwrity in
this way: that exclusive focus on the social problems of urban Appalachians would
lead to blaming the victim and to policies and plans that ignore the self-help capacity
of family, church, and neighborhood, and to continued projection onto Appalachians
and others of a negative image lacking in positive role models. In the opposite
direction, some contributors were concerned that continued reliance on census data on
recent migrants would paint such a rosy picture that the realities of poverty and related
social conditions would be ignored.
14)
PARI 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�The Development of Urban Appalachian Research:
1975-1984
Urban Appalachian research responded, at least in part, to the challenges issued
in The Invisible Minority.
Multigenerational research has been conducted in
Cincinnati, though not in other cities. Researchers and practitioners have been ·more
careful to emphasize the achievements of the majority of Appalachians, who are
employed and have a relatively stable family and community life. Research on the
family, neighborhood, church, and other social institutions has made steady
progress though few ethnographies have been produced. Research and popular
writing oriented toward positive Appalachian identity and role models is very
limited.
An annotated bibliography of research on urban Appalachians distributed by the
Urban Appalachian Council enables us to make some generalizations about the
scope and extent of research during the past decade. Of a total of 172 entries in the
UAC bibliography, 77 have publication dates later than March 1974.
These
include two hardbound books and several articles in hardbound anthologies, several
softbound books, nine Ph.D. dissertations, one Congressional report, several special
issues of magazines, and a broad array of working papers, research bulletins, and other
types of publication.
Although more publications still focus on Cincinnati than on any other
city, the geographic range is gradually broadening. Studies now exist that focus
on Northern Kentucky, Clermont County, Hamilton, Dayton, Columbus, Akron,
Cleveland, Toledo, Chicago, Lexington, and Baltimore.
The topics covered include various aspects of migration (6), culture (6),
education (8), family (3), neighborhood (3), women (4), policy (4), health
(3), religion (3), stereotypes (3), ethnicity (8), poverty (3), housing (1), the elderly
(1), youth (1), black Appalachians (2), and demographic studies (9).
These
classifications are somewhat misleading; more than six publications focused on
culture, for example, but some are not counted because they have some other primary
classification. Even so, these statistics indicate some general trends.
Demographic studies, ethnicity, education, migration, and culture received more
attention than housing, youth, and the elderly. Women's studies are emerging, and
return migration is still a relatively undeveloped field of study.
The First Multigenerational Study
In 1975 the Cincinnati Area Project completed the first multigenerational
survey research on urban Appalachians.
In the succeeding nine years, the
Urban Appalachian Council has made substantial use of the results of this study
in its advocacy work. Since 1981, the full study has been available in a hardbound
book, Appalachian Migrants in Urban America, by William Philliber.
Philliber's study provided answers to a broad array of questions, and in doing
so it compared first- with second-generation Appalachians and white Appalachians with
blacks, white natives, and migrants from other areas. The results addressed those
who were concerned about the perpetuation of the poverty stereotype as well as
those who were concerned that the realities of poverty, socioeconomic status, and
individual and community health were underplayed.
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO El'HNIC GROUP
( 15
�The true picture was mixed. As this author had predicted, the Philliber study
showed a substantial rate of downward mobility among second-generation
Appalachians. The study also concluded that social participation tended to be limited
to labor unions, that most Appalachians in Hamilton County were employed
in semiskilled or unskilled jobs, and that Appalachians lagged behind white native
Cincinnatians in educational and occupational attainments.
Philliber concluded that Appalachians have low levels of attainment in
education, occupation, and income not because their cultural values and family
structure are unadaptable to the urban environment, but because they belong to
families of lower socioeconomic status, come from rural areas, and value
traditionalism, all of which result in fewer years of educational attainment.
Fewer years of education combined with lower (SES) family
origins and rural backgrounds, in turn result in lower occupational
attainment plus the fact that wives are less likely to participate in the
labor force result in lower family income. (Philliber, 1981:87)
Philliber challenges the poverty stereotype and the victim-blaming
approach with his conclusion that Appalachians are heavily suburbanized and that
their values are not radically different from other groups. His research has effectively
countered the belief that all Appalachians are clustered in inner-city "ports of entry"
and are trapped in a cultural system that causes failure.
In opposition to the
welfare-malingerer stereotype, he found that only 20 percent of the sample were
currently on welfare and that 55 percent had never received welfare.
In the area of physical and mental health Philliber found that Appalachians
suffer more from family difficulties and personal stress than other white groups. He
also found that Appalachians, unlike blacks, have a tendency to blame themselves
rather than society for their problems.
Appalachians as an Urban Ethnic Group
In answer to the question, "Are Appalachians in Cincinnati an ethnic group?,"
Philliber concluded that Appalachians are an ethnic group in Cincinnati; they meet
seven of eight major criteria for being considered an ethnic group, and lack only a
unique culture. He proposes a theory that attributes to the way they have been
stereotyped and denied opportunnity for advancement.
Phillip Obermiller's contribution to the question of urban Appalachians as an
ethnic group began with an article in Appalachian Journal (5:1, Autumn, 1977). He
reviewed various definitions of ethnicity and various authors' views of Appalachian
ethnicity. Obermiller concluded that there is a case, though inconclusive, for
considering urban Appalachians an ethnic group. His subsequent research has tended
to emphasize class over ethnicity.
One of the studies reviewed in Obermiller's 1977 article was conducted by
Tommie Miller (1976) among Appalachians and non-Appalachians in Norwood, Ohio.
Like Philliber's 1975 study, the Miller study included first- and second-generation
Appalachians. Miller concluded that others' identification of Appalachians as an ethnic
group was stronger than Appalachian self-identification. Obermiller asked whether
16)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
�standard sociological techniques were adequate to address the question, and both Miller
and Philliber stressed the need for further study. Obermiller called for the use of both
value-expressive and psychological indicators in such research (Obermiller, 1981:1718).
Martin Marger (1981) offers an implicit explanation of why the question of
Appalachian ethnicity has received more attention in urban than in rural Appalachian
studies. "... Ethnic group formation in the United States and other modem societies
is a uniquely urban phenomenon (emphasis ours), particularly as a result of voluntary
migration."
Marger's central concept is that ethnicity is an "emergent" phenomenon. It can
take various forms, can be created deliberately under certain ecological and political
conditions, and can be weak or strong. Ethnicity, he believes, can be strong in
some members of the group and weak in others. There is no clearcut path to
ethnicity but the changing political and ecological forces best explain Appalachian
ethnicity and will provide the sources of its political evolution. If Marger is
correct, we should not conclude summarily that urban Appalachians are ethnic or
not ethnic; rather, we should ask whether they are in the process of becoming
an ethnic group and, if so, in what individuals or subgroups this movement is
most advanced.
For urban Appalachian scholars, the question of ethnicity amounts to this: What
conceptual framework do we use in studying urban Appalachians: ethnicity, race, or
class? The concept of "poor whites" implies both race and class, while the concept of
"working class" could imply an approach across racial and ethnic lines. The concept of
"Appalachian" ethnicity has been used for a combination of pragmatic and
philosophical reasons too complex to discuss here, and the concept of "minority
group" has also been used by Appalachian advocates. Unfortunately, the idea of
minority-group status is often confused by the question of ethnicity.
The developments in research described in this paper have taken place, for the
most part, without major government or foundation support. The scholars,
practitioners, and community volunteers who have conducted efforts with and
for urban Appalachians are to be commended for their hard work and creativity during
the past decade. They have shown how scholarship and social practice can be linked
in efforts to document the needs of a minority group and to develop programs to
meet some of those needs.
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
( 17
�This page intentionally left blank
�APPALACHIANS
IN MIDWESTERN CITIES:
Regionalism as a Basis of Ethnic Group Formation
The purpose of this paper is to analyze the experiences of Appalachian
Evidence from a
migrants from the perspective of political economy theory.
number of studies conducted over the past few years will be brought together to
demonstrate the ability of this approach to recognize the emergence of
Appalachians as an ethnic group in Midwestern cities.
Political economy theories see ethnic groups forming as a reaction to discrimination from more powerful groups. When the supply of the labor force exceeds
the supply of available jobs, competition for those jobs is inevitable. The more the
supply of labor exceeds the supply of jobs, the greater that competition will be. In
order to reduce the competition to their own advantage, more powerful groups seek to
establish discrimination against less powerful groups. Discrimination ensures that
members of the dominant group will be first in the choice to fill available jobs.
Members of groups discriminated against fill less desirable jobs or become
unemployed when the supply of jobs is exhausted. A collection of people who are
labeled by others as members of a common group and discriminated against
because of that identification begin to identify with one another and to develop
patterns of interrelationships and behaviors which are the distinguishing marks of
ethnic groups (Bonacich, 1972; Hechter, 1974; Philliber, 1981).
Between 1950 and 1970 a net shift of more than three million people left the
Appalachian region, most moving to cities in the Midwest (McCoy and Brown, 1981).
During this period large numbers of southern blacks migrated to those same cities. But
the industrial base in the region receiving large numbers of migrants had already begun
to decline. The native population faced increased competition with one another
because of the declining growth in jobs and further pressure from Appalachians and
Southern blacks entering the Midwest in search of jobs. The situation was conducive
to discrimination against Appalachians whose reaction would result in the development
of a new dhnic group.
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(19
�Among the early attempts to document discrimination against Appalachian
migrants was McCoy and Watkins' (1981) collection of ethnic jokes told about
Appalachians in Midwestern cities. Ethnic jokes imply some negative feature
about members of a group, i.e. they are seen as lazy, ignorant, shiftless,
uncultured, or what have you. Jokes function to spread stereotypes and to
reinforce them by emphasizing negative images about the group in question.
McCoy and Watkins were able to demonstrate that Appalachians are frequently
the target of ethnic jokes which are well known and often repeated among the native
population in the receiving cities. Politicians and celebrities alike feel free to engage
in such humor to obtain a favorable reaction from native audiences.
It would
appear that the number of ethnic jokes is limited since the jokes told about
Appalachians are told about other ethnic groups as well. Members of dominant
groups merely change the butt of the joke to whichever group they are in
competition with.
The humor of the dominant groups where Appalachians
migrated thus establishes and supports images about the unsuitability or
inherent inferiority of Appalachians.
Obermiller (1982) documents the extent and nature of labeling of
Appalachian migrants. He finds that the strongest negative images of Appalachians are
held by middle class persons of Appalachian origin and by working class whites who
are not from Appalachia. The strong negative images of Appalachians held by higher
class persons of Appalachian origin suggest that many Appalachians who obtain
higher status pass into the mainstream and reject an Appalachian identity. To be
identified as an Appalachian could make them vulnerable to discrimination threatening
the loss of their middle class status. They may maintain some interest in Appalachian
artifacts by doing such things as attending festivals or collecting quilts, but they take
care to separate themselves from the type of people about whom ethnic jokes are told.
Working class whites who are not from Appalachia are in most direct competition
with Appalachian migrants for jobs and income, and therefore stand to benefit most
from discrimination against Appalachians. For that reason, they also express strong
anti-Appalachian sentiment.
That discrimination results against Appalachians in Midwestern cities is
documented in Philliber's (1981) study of the socioeconomic attainment process of
Appalachians in Cincinnati. Appalachians who had college educations and came
from middle class homes did as well in the competition for jobs and income as
did others. However, Appalachians without those resources did less well than either
natives to the area or migrants from other places. Discrimination against
Appalachians in the working class was fairly intense. College education is a scarce
resource in an industrialized society; those who obtain it are often able to convert it
into jobs and income irrespective of their place of origin. Those without college
educations (which includes almost all Appalachians livirig in the Midwest) must
compete for those jobs which remain. Philliber's data indicate that the best of those
jobs go to white natives or to non-Appalachian migrants with Appalachians hired
next. Whatever jobs remain are then available to blacks.
When the key indicators of educational attainment, occupational status, and
income are combined to form a socioeconomic index for residents in the
Cincinnati area, the situation of highly stereotyped cultural and racial minorities
becomes clear. Important differences exist between non-Appalachian whites, Appa20)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�lachians, and blacks in both the high status and the low status
categories. Appalachians are almost twice as likely and blacks are over three times as
likely to be of low socioeconomic status than are non-Appalachian whites.
Conversely, close to half of the non-Appalachian whites are of high socioeconomic
status while the same is true of less than a third of the Appalachians and
only a fifth of the blacks. It is clear that in terms of schooling, work, and
earnings blacks are much worse off than the other two groups. Appalachians are
faring better than blacks but worse than their non-Appalachian white counterparts.
Other residents of the area are significantly better off than either blacks or
Appalachians (Community Chest and Council of the Cincinnati Area, 1983).
Philliber goes on to demonstrate the development of patterns of
association among Appalachians which isolate them further from the mainstream.
They were found to live in predominantly Appalachian neighborhoods, to
disproportionately choose other Appalachians as marital partners, and to
associate with one another in predominantly Appalachian organizations such as
fundamentalist Protestant churches. When given a choice, they did not
frequently associate with people of other heritages.
Finally, research findings suggest that people who moved from Appalachia
identify with one another and recognize themselves as an ethnic group.
Miller's (1976) study of Appalachian identification in Norwood, Ohio, found that
over a third of those with Appalachian backgrounds believed that Appalachians were an
ethnic group and almost as many identified themselves as members of that group.
While Philliber (1983) and Obermiller (1982) found lower levels of in-group
identification, Appalachian identification is found to be stronger among Appalachian
migrants who are not middle class, supporting the economic basis of the emergence of
Appalachian ethnicity.
Theories based on cultural conflict have most often been used to explain the
experiences of Appalachian migrants as well as the experiences of other minority
groups. However, Philliber's study demonstrates the failure of cultural conflict
explanations. In brief, his findings show that (1) cultural behaviors and values
supposedly characteristic of Appalachians are not more common among Appalachians
than among other groups, and (2) people who have those values and behaviors do not
do less well than others in the competition for jobs and income. Appalachians were
not more family oriented, more independent, more fearful of institutions, or more
fatalistic. They were slightly more traditionalistic, but none of these variables were
found to affect occupational or income attainment.
The findings are most consistent with a political economy approach to
understanding ethnic group formation. Midwestern cities have been areas where
competition for jobs and income is severe. Appalachians have been stereotyped in
those cities as unsuitable in comparison to native whites or white migrants from other
places. The stereotypes are particularly virulent among those people who benefit most
directly from discrimination against Appalachians. That such discrimination exists is
demonstrated in the attainment of jobs and income: among people without college
educations and middle class origins, Appalachians do not acquire jobs and income equal
to other whites. Neither cultural differences nor migrant status account for this
difference. The most plausible explanation is that Appalachians are excluded in order
to reduce the competition for native whites.
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(21
�The reaction of working class Appalachians to this discrimination is resulting in
the formation of Appalachians as an urban ethnic group. They have already established
patterns of interaction which bring them together with one another and isolate them
from non-Appalachians. In-group identification has developed to a level which is
comparable with what is found among other ethnic groups. They are brought together
not so much by common cultural bonds as by common subjection to discrimination.
22)
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EJHNIC GROUP
�URBAN APPALACHIANS AND
CANADIAN MARITIME MIGRANTS:
Comparative Study of Emergent Ethnicity*
Studies of North American ethnic groups have generally concentrated on the
conditions and processes which contribute to either their endurance or decline over
several immigrant generations. By contrast, little focus has been placed on their
structural emergence and development. Our purpose in this paper is to investigate
the processes of ethnic group formation, or what we will refer to as ethnicization,
as they apply to two internal migrant groups, Appalachians in the United States and
Maritimers in Canada. These two groups display key social similarities despite their
distinct societal contexts and may be seen as appropriate comparative cases to shed
light on the social conditions which give rise to, or impede, the development of
ethnicity.
In looking at the processes of ethnicization two assumptions are made. First,
ethnicity is not a constant or uniform social experience either for individuals or for
groups. Rather, it is a variant, processual, and emergent phenomenon and will
therefore reveal itself in different forms and with varying degrees of intensity in
different social settings. Several ingredients of ethnicity are fundamental, however,
though variable from case to case. In- and out-group perceptions of a common origin
and culture, and an institutional structure or community based on that perceived
commonality, are the major components of ethnic groups as they have traditionally
evolved in industrial societies. Not only is each component a variable, evident in a
variety of combinations and degrees, but each may develop naturally through sociohistorical circumstances, or may be created in basically artificial form for political or
economic purposes.
.
Second, ethnic group formation in North America is primarily an urban
phenomenon, particularly among groups which emerge as a result of voluntary
migration, either internal or external.l It is in the heterogeneity of the city that
ethnic identity and community emerge, the products of confrontation and competition
amongst a variety of groups for the society's rewards - jobs, housing, education,
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(23
�etc. Here the interaction of collectivities and individuals of varied ongms and
behavioral modes leads to the development of ascriptive and voluntary identities, which
in tum create in-group cohesiveness and out-group ethnic categorization. It is thus to
the urban environment that we must look to investigate the processes by which ethnic
groups are established and subsequently mature. We have chosen to focus on two
contemporary internal migrant groups since, within their respective societies, they are
cases which seem to most closely reflect the formative stages of ethnicization.
Models of Ethnicization
While the processes of ethnic group formation have been largely neglected in
the literature, several theoretical approaches to these processes are implicit in
most analyses of North American groups.
The most traditional model of ethnicization assumes that migrants come to the
host society with particular cultural characteristics which, as an adaptive response, are
gradually modified by, and fused with, traits of the society's dominant group. Particularly in the urban environment, a hybrid (i.e., ethnic) culture evolves which becomes
the attrac"tive bond around which an institutional structure is molded and sustained, and
which thereby fulfills the psychological and social needs of migrants (Francis, 1976;
Gordon, 1964; Handlin, 1951). The chief focus of ethnicity in this view is the collectivity's distinctive culture.
A second model emphasizes the synthesis of host and immigrant group
perceptions as the basis of ethnic group formation (Barth, 1969; Sarna, 1978;
Shibutani and Kwan, 1965).
In this view, the host or dominant group
prescribes an ethnic identity to immigrants who respond with the development of an
ethnic cohesiveness, partially as a protective device and partially as a means of
establishing an identity within a pluralistic environment. Ethnicity is, in this
view, not a particular array of culture traits, but a form of social organization, the
boundaries of which are flexible in various social contexts. Perceived cultural
features may disappear with little or no damage to the continuation of ethnicity (Barth,
1969; Patterson, 1975). More simply, so long as people define themselves and/or
are defined by others in ethnic terms, they constitute an ethnic group. To understand
the emergence of ethnicity, it is necessary to look primarily at how group identities
are formed and the manner in which persons manipulate and deal with those identities.
A third approach to ethnicization stresses the ecology of the urban
environment which sets the foundation for the development of ethnic community
and identity. The basic assumption is that ethnic groups are products of structural
conditions which are linked to ecological processes (Hershberg, 1979; Taylor, 1979;
Yancey et al., 1976). Rather than islands to which migrants gravitate on the basis of
a common cultural heritage or the constraints of ascription and self-awareness, ethnic
groups crystallize in response to fluid urban conditions such as changing industrial
bases, housing, and transportation patterns. These conditions subsequently produce
varying degrees of group cohesion by creating common life styles, work relationships
and voluntary associations. Such cohesion in tum leads to ethnic community and
identity. Ethnic collectives, in this view, are not cultural or ascriptive constraints, but
emergent units, subject to different developmental patterns in a variety of ecological
circumstances.
24)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�Finally, ethnicization, particularly in contemporary societies, has been
viewed as the product of the organizational efforts of collectivities to secure a
greater share of the society's rewards. Most simply, ethnic groups are political
interest or solidary groups, comprised of individuals who share common economic
and social concerns; and who therefore, cohere in response to competition from other
groups (Bell, 1975; Cohen, 1969; Glazer and Moynihan, 1970; 1975; Lyman and
Douglass, 1973).
Cultural symbols, in this view, are important only as
demarcating mechanisms among competing groups.
None of these models is by itself sufficiently inclusive to constitute a
complete explanation of ethnic group formation; rather, they are partial and
complementary approaches, highlighting particular variables that must be
viewed in different combinations. Despite their inter-dependence, however each model
emphasizes a set of factors which may prove more vital in the developmental stages of
ethnicization for particular groups which exhibit varying degrees of cultural and
identificational clarity. Moreover, one or the other of them has been favored by social
scientists. The latter three models have been generally preferred in recent years while
the cultural model has been de-emphasized.
In the remainder of this paper we will outline the social characteristics and
experiences of Appalachian migrants in the United States and migrants from the
Atlantic provinces in Canada, using these models as a framework in which to
analyze the extent and nature of ethnic development among them. We will conclude
with a discussion of some of the theoretical and empirical questions which are
prompted by our comparison of the two groups and the extent to which these models
are supported by our analysis.
Migrant Appalachians and Maritimers
The value of comparative social analysis lies in the opport.tmity to move
beyond individual case studies and to hypothesize on the basis of recurrent and parallel
patterns within divergent social settings. The comparative approach is of even
greater utility when groups in different societies, displaying generally similar social
characteristics, may be placed side by side. Migrants from the Southern Appalachian
region to cities of the American Midwest and from the Atlantic provinces of Canada to
cities of Ontario provide such a comparative case. Much of our description will focus
specifically on migrants in the receiving communities of Cincinnati and Toronto, but
patterns evident in these cities are assumed to be generally prevalent in comparable
cities of the two regions. Let us briefly delineate the common characteristics and social
settings of these two groups.
The process of ethnic group formation necessarily begins with a migratory
movement from one society or, in the case of internal migrants, from one region to
another. The push-and-pull factors of migration and the regions of origin of these two
groups are closely analogous. The Atlantic, or Maritime provinces of Canada -Nova
Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island, and Newfoundland - traditionally
have been economically backward and depressed by comparison with other provinces.2
The region is typified by rural non-farm communities, a large proportion tied to the
fishing industry. In addition to fishing, extractive industries, particularly mining and
lumbering, characterize the economies of three of the four provinces. Net outPART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
(25
�migration has been characteristic of the region since the late nineteenth century,
prompted traditionally by the decline of small farming and the mechanization of
extractive and fishing industries. For example, employment in the coal mines of
Nova Scotia declined from 13,500 in 1940 to 10,000 in 1955, and to 7500 in 1959
(Dasgupta, 1975). Farming, though ordinarily of the subsistence type, has also
declined, thereby channeling more people into out-migration streams.
Migration streams in Canada flow primarily westward. The Atlantic provinces
send their out-migrants principally to Ontario, by-passing the adjacent province of
Quebec (George, 1970; Stone, 1969). In the post-World War II era, Ontario has
been the industrial heartland of Canada, thus offering the most job opportunities for
relatively low-skilled workers.
Though net out-migration from the Atlantic
provinces has been evident throughout the twentieth century (McDonald, 1968;
Levitt, 1960; Stone, 1969), it reached its peak in the early 1960's. This
movement coincides with markedly high unemployment rates in the region during
these years.
The Southern Appalachian region includes the mountainous portions of Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia, and all of West
Virginia. Extractive industries, specifically coal mining, have been the region's chief
economic base, although some textile manufacturing, timbering and farming can also
be found. The forces impelling out-migration from the Southern Appalachian region
of the U.S. are similar to those affecting migration from the Atlantic provinces of
Canada. Push factors include the residual effects of the Great Depression and World
War II.
Between 1940 and 1970, the Southern Appalachian region lost over three
million persons through net out-migration; half of this loss occurred during the
period between 1950 and 1960 (McCoy and Brown, 1981). Of the top fifteen
receiving cities for Appalachian migrants between 1955 and 1960, six were major
midwestern metropolises such as Cincinnati. In short, out-migration from Appalachia
and the Atlantic provinces has followed the customary pattern of most migratory
movements: a surplus population in an economically depressed area seeks ecomonic
betterment through migration to a society or region which promises improved
conditions.
In addition to the similarity of migration and region of origin, both groups display
strikingly similar characteristics of age, race, religion, language, and social class.
Both migrant populations are relatively young (Levitt, 1960; Brown and Hillery,
1962), heavily Protestant (Steeves, 1964; Brewer, 1962), white and English-speaking.3
As to social class, the majority of both Appalachians and Maritimers are working
class, specifically unskilled or semi-skilled blue-collar workers. Educationally, both
migrant groups are below the national and state (for Maritimers, provincial) averages
(Steeves, 1964, Wagner 1973). The general class profile of the Appalachian migrant
to Cincinnati and the Maritime migrant to Toronto is an under-educated, unskilled
blue-collar worker.
Once they enter the urban environment, Appalachian and Maritime migrants
may be further subdivided into two class elements. One comprises those individuals
who make a rapid adjustment to the city, fmd steady employment, establish residence
in a working-class suburban community and are quietly absorbed into the dominant
26)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�group. The other subset is comprised of those who do not fmd stable work, remain in
low-income, transitional neighborhoods and eventually come to the attention of welfare, police, and other community agencies, and, ultimately, the community at large.
It is the latter element of the migrant that becomes the referent of negative group
stereotypes and out-group recognition in general.
Emergent Ethnicity Within the Two Groups
THE CULTURAL MODEL Both Maritimers in Toronto and Appalachians in
Cincinnati bring elements of a common regional culture to the city, but elements
which in toto do not sharply set them off from other groups. The parameters of
Appalachian culture have been widely discussed (Billings, 1974; Erickson, 1976;
Fischer, 1983; Ford, 1962; Philliber, 1981), but many of its outstanding features are
characteristic of a wide spectrum of American social groups, and are commonly
attributed to working and lower-class groups in genera1.4 Similarly, Maritimers lack
culture traits sufficiently different to set them apart from the dominant Anglo-Saxon
group in Toronto.
Their lack of cultural distinctness has impeded the development of ethnic
community for both groups. Breton (1964) posits that when an ethnic group
displays great differences from the host community, institutional self-sufficiency is
likely to develop within the group. Ethnic communities may range from those which
are institutionally complete, wherein individuals need make no use of the host
society's institutions, to those which are almost entirely institutionally incomplete,
wherein the network of interpersonal relations is almost totally within the context of
the host society. Both urban Appalachians and Maritimers presently seem very close to
the latter extreme. Almost all needs of social life are met primarily within and through
institutions of the host or dominant group. For both groups, then, the cultural factor
appears to be a weak component in the emergence of ethnicity.
THE ETHNIC BOUNDARY MODEL At present, there is lacking any solid data
base through which the extent of ethnic self-perception among Maritimers in
Toronto might be deduced. We may reasonably conclude, however, that, given their
relatively weak institutional structure and lack of political mobilization, such group
awareness remains slightS
Among urban Appalachians, ethnic identity has been little studied, but a few
preliminary investigations indicate a relatively weak ethnic self-perception (Miller,
1976; Obermiller, 1982; Philliber, 1981; Traina, 1980). Organizations in the city
with an explicit Appalachian self-consciousness are small and relatively few in number, given the size of the Appalachian population in the metropolitan area.
The development and maintenance of ethnic boundaries, however, are not
simply dependent on individual choice but also, and perhaps more fundamentally, on
out-group perception and categorization. The extent of out-group identification of
Maritimers in Toronto is largely unmeasured, but there is at least some evidence to
confirm the application of negative stereotypes. This is particularly the case for
Newfoundlanders,
though migrants from
the Atlantic provinces
are
frequently viewed in the aggregate. This largely negative "Newfle" stereotype
is prevalent among Canadians generally (Anderson and Frideres, 1981). Indeed,
"Newfie" jokes, suggesting the innate lack of intelligence of Newfoundlanders,
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
(27
�constitute a common fonn of Canadian ethnic humor.
Out-group recognition of Appalachians in Cincinnati is primarily of two
types. Positive aspects of Appalachian life are presented on a city-wide basis by
acceptance of Appalachian culture. However, negative stereotypes of Appalachians
abound in the media, popular and scholarly literature, in various marketing devices, and
in the common lore of the city (McCoy and Watkins, 1981). While the emblematic
term "Appalachian" is not widely used or accepted, stigmatic epithets such as
"hillbilly," "briar-hopper," and "ridgerunner" are frequently used to label anyone
speaking with a southern accent.
THE ECOLOGICAL MODEL While the cultural and ethnic boundary models of
ethnicization seem to yield only fractional manifestations of emergent ethnicity among
either urban Appalachians or Maritimers, urban ecological patterns provide more
substantial evidence of ethnic group fonnation, particularly for Appalachians.
While Atlantic migrants in Toronto and other Ontario cities collectively occupy
mainly lower-level blue collar positions, they are not concentrated exclusively, or even
generally, in any particular industry. Their position in the occupational hierarchy is
shared with members of first-generation European, Asian, and West Indian immigrant
groups in the city. As well, the relatively diversified industrial base of Toronto makes
for a dispersal of blue-collar workers in many industries.
Urban Appalachians in Cincinnati and other cities of the lower Midwest, by
contrast, are more clearly concentrated in particular industries requiring large semiand unskilled labor forces, such as automobile production. These have traditionally
served as prime occupational areas for migrant Appalachians since large-scale inmigration began in the 1940's. Moreover, in Cincinnati, the chief rivals for such
jobs are not first-, or even, second-, generation immigrants, but blacks, who represent
another internal migrant group, one even less skilled and traditionally subject to more
customary and institutionalized discrimination (Philliber and Obermiller 1982).
Patterns of residential clustering are also clear for Appalachians in Cincinnati,
and moderately evident for Maritimers in Toronto. Residential clustering among
Appalachians well into the second migrant generation in Cincinnati and other
Midwestern cities has been well documented (Davies and Fowler, 1972; Fowler and
Davies, 1972; Henderson, 1966; Hyland, 1970; Killian, 1970; McKee and Obenniller,
1978; Peterson et al., 1977; Schwarzweller et al, 1971). Their concentration in lowskilled occupations has created Appalachian working-class enclaves in Cincinnati and
its surrounding area where large manufacturing industries are located. Appalachian
patterns of residence in the city are thus the product not simply of social congruity but
of urban ecology (Philliber, 1981). In this, Appalachians have followed patterns not
unlike those of earlier immigrant groups in American cities (Hershberg, 1979; Ward,
1971).
In Toronto, city-wide surveys, census data and other municipal records do not
include items concerning province of origin. As a result, patterns of residence for
migrant Maritimers are undocumented. Moreover, since they are English-speaking,
Maritimers are not identifiable by mother tongue as are other Toronto ethnic groups.
In addition, the fact that upwardly mobile maritimers are quickly and silently absorbed
into the dominant group makes it difficult to ascertain the residential patterns of this
grouping. Nonetheless, certain areas of metropolitan Toronto are recognized for their
sizable element of Maritimers. Basically, two types of residential areas are evident.
28)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ErHNIC GROUP
�One comprises the central city transitional zones which serve as port-of-entry for
most, but which are relatively quickly abandoned by those who acquire steady
employment Some do remain, however, but share these areas with the lower-class
segment of other urban groups. The other type is the working-class suburb which
contains the bulk of Toronto's heavier manufacturing enterprises.
THE POLITICAL MODEL Although the potential for political ethnicity seems
to be in place for both urban Appalachians and Maritimers, in neither case has this
potential been tapped to any significant degree. In the case of urban Appalachians, an
incipient ethnic movement arose as part of the urban welfare and civil rights activism
of the 1960's (Maloney, 1979), but it did not display the growth of other ethnic
advocacy movements which evolved during that period. A few groups at the
community level have continued to pursue issues relevant to the status and recognition
of Appalachians in the urban area (Maloney, 1979; Neely, 1979), but their impact has
not been of major proportions. Most importantly, urban Appalachians have not yet
developed into a clear-cut political force, able to exert significant influence in local
elections. Moreover, political leaders have not made strong efforts to court this group,
despite its sizable electoral potential in Cincinnati and several other cities of the
region. At best, urban Appalachians have acquired a minimal degree of recognition as
a distinct constituency by government agencies and private support groups.
Maritimers in Toronto have displayed an even less obvious political presence.
No appeals to this group on the part of political leaders have been made, and even
welfare and educational institutions have not seen fit to create programs aimed
exclusively at Maritimers. Rather, social services and programs have been rendered
under the umbrella of general community services. Combined with their lack of
cultural distinctness, the relatively dispersed residential pattern of the Atlantic
migrants in Toronto restrains political leaders from dealing with them as a separate
client group. In a sense, Maritimers have been lost in the extremely variegated ethnic
mosaic of post-World War II Toronto. During this period, the city has served as one of
the major points of destination for European immigrants, and much of the
metropolitan area's substantial growth is attributable to foreign immigration. As a
result, Toronto politicians, educators and social service agencies have been
preoccupied in the past twenty years with European and, to a lesser extent, Asian and
West Indian immigrant groups. These are the groups in Toronto which have displayed
clear patterns of residential clustering.
This has not been the case in Cincinnati where large European ethnic
communities have ceased to typify the general populace. The relatively substantial
black community (one-third of the city's populace), however, has served in a somewhat
similar manner to camouflage Appalachians from political leaders and social service
agencies. Just as policy makers and opinion leaders in Toronto have focused their
attention on more visible groups, those in Cincinnati have focused on the black
community.
Discussion
Our description of Appalachian migrants in Cincinnati and Atlantic migrants
in Toronto indicates that the emergence of ethnicity for either group is not
firm or even entirely visible. Indeed, it might be argued that it is premature to speak
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EJHNIC GROUP
(29
�in ethnic terms of groupings that lack readily distinguishable culture or
physical traits, that have a minimal sense of corporate self-awareness, that have
developed only the most primitive of institutional structures and that have not yet
engaged seriously in collective political action. We would argue, however, that the
process of ethnicization has begun for both groups to the extent that 1) each
has become ·distinguishable on the basis of perceived group differences which have
given rise to the development of out-group stereotyping, and 2) both have displayed
ecological characteristics somewhat similar to those of older,
solidly
established urban ethnic groups that should naturally engender further group
cohesiveness and an awareness of commonality of fate. In short, certain key factors
are in place for these two groups which appear critical in the ethnicization
process.
At the same time, however, the prognosis for the furtherance of ethnic group
development among both urban Appalachians and Maritimers suggests a
movement limited in scope and degree. We would assert that this is
attributable primarily to these groups lack of visibility-either cultural or phenotypical-which in tum induces mobilization and the pursuit of group interests along class,
rather than ethnic, lines.
The potentialities for a more complete ethnicity for either of these groups
cannot lie in the engendering of group awareness based on culture, as has been the
case most commonly for urban immigrant groups. Nor can the discrimination
arising from physical distinction lead to a more advanced level of institutional
completeness, as has been the experience of blacks and other racially-defmed groups
in the United States (Taylor, 1979). Given their lack of strong cultural or physical
features, more advanced ethnicization for Appalachians and Maritimers lies in one
or more of the following paths: 1) the strengthening of out-group recognition
through the deliberate promotion and amplification of those group features
already prominent; 2) the stabilization of ecological patterns; or 3) the
formation of these groupings into political interest groups, or what Gamson
(1968:36) calls solidary groups, that is, collections of individuals "who think in
terms of the effect of political decisions on the aggregate and feel that they are in
some way personally affected by what happens to the aggregate."
All of these possible courses, however, are strongly influenced by the factor of
absence of visibility. As a result, class interests, community and identity tend to
supersede ethnic interests, community and identity. Out-group identification, we have
concluded, is well established for urban Appalachians and somewhat less so for
Maritime migrants. But upward class mobility for individual members of these groups
spells the demise of out-group recognition, and hence the diminishment of in-group
awareness and community based on ethnic features. Since their major culture traits are
already those of the dominant group, and they are not physically distinct, cultural and
structural assimilation are rendered meaningless for these groups. For them,
assimilation is more accurately a class, rather than an ethnic, phenomenon. Upward
class mobility is a movement "up and out" instead of "up within," as is the case for
the first two generations of culturally defined groups, or for an indefinite number of
generations of racially-defined groups.
Likewise, given their relative lack of dissimilarity to the dominant group,
ecological patterns for these groups are more critically a function of class differences,
30)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�not ethnic consolidation. While cultural and physical dissimilarities may explain a
great part of the residential segregation of other urban groups (see Darroch and
Marston, 1971), as well as their concentration in particular occupational areas, for the
most part they cannot account for the residential and occupational patterns of urban
Appalachians or Maritimers.
Political development for these groups is also very much a function of
class rather than ethnic interests. This is based on both external as well as internal
perceptions of political interest. Since the majority of both groups remain well
ensconced in the lower echelons of the working class, efforts at political mobilization
must be directed primarily to this subset of the larger group. Lacking cultural or
physical distinctness, these groups' ethnic interests are apt to be dismissed
by external political leaders and bureaucracies who place them into more
inclusive class categories (e.g., "working class" or "urban poor"). Failure to gain
recognition as an ethnic unit by political elites and agencies further detracts from
the creation of collective group awareness.
Internally, ethnic political mobilization requires a kind of artificially created
ethnicity, based on the perception of political benefits to be derived from such a group
membership. Because of weak group visibility, class interests easily displace potential
ethnic interests. For both class segments of these groups - those who are regularly
employed and those who are chronically under or unemployed - there is little
compulsion to organize politically or to perceive community issues along ethnic lines;
for them, political benefits are dispensed through comprehensive class interest groups
such as labor unions or social welfare organizations.
For both urban Appalachians and Maritimers an ethnically-based political
movement is not likely to be attractive since its purposes cannot speak to either their
economic needs or their problems of self-definition.6 Patterson's (1975) principle of
"optimization of interest" seems appropriate to both groups. He maintains that
individuals will be most intensely involved with that allegiance which is in their own
best social and economic interests. Thus, where ethnicity yields a payoff, it will be
stressed over class, though where the two are in conflict, class will always take
precedence. In short, class interests determine the strength of ethnicity. In the case of
both urban Appalachians and Maritimers, there is insufficient incentive to identify
and to mobilize along ethnic rather than class lines; political action thus turns on
class, not ethnic, cleavages.
The two cases we have analyzed suggest that a group's cultural and/or physical
visibility is vital to the development of ethnicity; where either is lacking, ethnicity
can emerge only to a limited level. Given a group's marginal perceptibility in the host
society, it cannot be expected to move far beyond what Yinger (1976) has called
"stereotyped" ethnicity. In such cases, there is some degree of social definition of the
group in ethnic terms, but other aspects of ethnicity are essentially lacking. Class
definitions of group members - both self and other - pre-empt ethnic definitions. At
best, such groupings may be viewed as ethnic categories rather than ethnic
collectiveness or groups (Cohen, 1969; McKay and Lewins, 1978; Williams, 1979). It
may be hypothesized, then, that in cases where groups lack salient cultural or physical
distinctness from the dominant group, class factors supersede ethnic factors in political
mobilization, ecological patterns and, to a lesser extent, group identification.
Our analysis also suggests that ethnic group boundaries are not totally flexible.
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(31
�Structuralists have argued that ethnicity is a reactive phenomenon in which group
boundaries emerge in response to institutional discrimination or to negative
stereotyping by out-groups. Our study suggests that factors of cultural commonality
and/or physical visibility are nonetheless vital to such boundary establishment.
Conceptualizations of the ethnic group which depend essentially on self- and otheridentification or on the establishment of favorable ecological or political conditions are
inadequate without the antecedent of a perceived common culture or physical
distinction upon which some conception and consciousness of a distinction upon
which those identifications and conditions are based. The experience of Appalachians
and Maritimers in the urban environment supports van der Berghe's (1978:xvii)
assertion that "there can be no ethnicity (or race) without some conception and
consciousness of a distinction between 'them' and 'us'. But these subjective
perceptions do not develop at random; they crystallize around clusters of objective
characteristics that become badges of inclusion or exclusion." Although ethnic
boundaries are flexible and may be essentially artificial creations of socialpsychological, ecological, or political circumstances, they are nonetheless necessarily
founded on a cultural and/or physical basis. There must be a perceived commonality on
the part of both in-group and out-group to engender ethnic identity and community.
Such a feeling of oneness ordinarily derives from the perception of a unique cultural
heritage or common phenotypic traits.
NOTES
* Reprinted from lnternatiorud Jourrud of Comparative Sociology, 24:229-43.
1.
Relatively isolated
rural ethnic groups in the U.S., notably Scandinavians, as
well as self-contained groups such as the Amish, are what Francis (1976) calls
"primary ethnic groups." In these groups, the basic social needs of members are
satisfied almost totally without direct participation in the host society. The very
opposite conditions obtain for urban immigrant groups.
2.
The original Maritime provinces are Nova Scotia, New Brunswick,
Edward Island. Newfoundland did not enter the Canadian confederation
Since then, the four eastern provinces have generally been referred
Atlantic or Maritime provinces. Our references to Atlantic migrants or
are synonymous.
3.
There are segments of Brunswick, where they constitute about 30 percent of the
population, are French-speaking groups of any numerical significance. Because they
settle mainly in Quebec rather than Ontario, Francophone migrants will not
enter into our analysis. Indians, Inuit, and, in Nova Scotia, blacks, make up insignificant numbers in the region, and do not represent more than a handful of the
migrant populace.
4.
Although much has been written about Appalachian culture, no consensus exists
as to what characteristics properly belong to the culture, or even whether such a
culture exists at all.
32)
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
and Prince
until 1949.
to as the
Maritimers
�5.
A moderate corporate consciousness can be found among Newfoundlanders, due to
the more distinct culture traits this subgroup displays. Some have maintained,
rather exaggeratedly, that Newfoundlanders are as distinct as Italians, Greeks, or
any of the European groups of the city (see for example Horwood, 1979). Though
this may be an overdrawn perception, there are unquestionably certain identifying
features of Newfoundlanders which serve to more sharply set them off from other
groups in Toronto, as well as from other Atlantic migrants. But the intensity of
both in- and out-group identification cannot be said to resemble that of other more
culturally and/or physically distinct groups in the city.
6.
Other impediments to political mobilization, whether encouraged internally or
externally, are the proximity of the region of origin for both groups and their
relatively frequent physical mobility. The two are not unrelated.
Given the
proximity of the regions of origin, native community ties are maintained that do
not fully permit a sense of permanence among group members in the urban
environment. Unlike previous immigrant groups, which essentially removed
themselves from their native societies and severed their roots, urban Appalachians
and Maritimers engage in a constant back-and-forth movement between old and new
social settings. A psychological commitment to the new community-even after
lengthy residence-is thus not complete, and inhibits political involvement.
Political mobilization is made difficult as well by the physical mobility during the
migration experience exhibited by members of both groups, particularly those who
do not find steady employment. In the case of Maritimers, many are perpetual
drifters who move on to other Ontario cities if they do not find suitable work in
Toronto, or return to their original communities. Moreover, those who do not
experience a stable employment outcome of their move to Toronto (i.e., those who
remain in the transitional neighborhoods and who are clients of welfare and police
authorities) are the least likely to respond to efforts at political mobilization.
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(33
�This page intentionally left blank
�LABELING URBAN APPALACHIANS
The boundary model of ethnic group formation has been used but never subjected
to empirical investigation among Appalachian migrants (McCoy and Watkins, 1981).
This model, which deals with· in-group and out-group perceptions of group identity,
suggests that stereotypes are among the most common markers for delineating social
boundaries and therefore establishing social identities. This paper will explore the role
of stereotypes in the formation of social boundaries among urban Appalachians, as
well as among blacks, Appalachians, and other white residents of a large metropolitan
area.
The stereotyping of rural Appalachians is a consistent phenomenon which has
been documented extensively (Billings, 1974; Fisher, 1983; Ergood, 1983; Shapiro,
1978). From an urban perspective, however, little consensus is found concerning
Appalachian stereotypes. Maloney and Huelsman (1972), in a review of the behavioralscience literature on Appalachian migrants, remark on the prevalence of popular
stereotypes in what presents itself as scholarly writing. On the other hand, McCoy and
Watkins (1981) propose that scholarship be used to debunk popular stereotypes of
urban Appalachians. Some commentators interpret stereotypes of Appalachian
migrants negatively as "barriers to assimilation" (Branscome, 1976:72), while others
see them as positive sources of in-group cohesion and consciousness (Billings and
Walls, 1980).
Lewis Killian, in writing about white southerners in Chicago, makes several
important points regarding stereotypes of Appalachian migrants. He notes that
"hillbilly" is an ephithet used to designate "a mountaineer, a white southerner whose
caricature is to be seen in the Snuffy Smith of the comic strip" (Killian, 1970:13).
Killian also points out that the "traits considered typical of white southerners were
similar to those found in the stereotypes of many other minority groups" (Killian,
1970: 107). These traits include racism, violence, clannishness, low standards of
hygiene, laziness, and a general apathy towards education. The function of such
PAKI' 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHN/C GROUP
(35
�stereotyping, according to Killian, is to justify discrimination against "hillbillies" in
in urban public facilities, housing, and employment.
The Study
In general, experimental studies of the stereotyping of groups such as Appalachian migrants follow one of two methods. Either a laboratory situation is
established, in which subjects are exposed to various stimuli such as pictures while
researchers note their reactions, or subjects are asked to formulate or select traitdescriptive adjectives or phrases that reflect their attitude toward the object group. Katz
and Braly (1933) conducted an experiment of the latter type at Princeton in 1933
which, with some modification, has been used successfully in contemporary largescale survey research on stereotypes (Ehrlich and Rinehart, 1965; Guichard and
Connolly, 1977; Kutner, 1973).
This study has modified Katz and Braly's method in several ways. It limits the
number of labels being tested to fourteen, and divides them evenly between positive
and negative stereotypes) The stereotypes are not presented as single adjectives, but
are phrased as statements, and a range of possible responses is offered.2
The data used in this paper were gathered in 1980 as a part of the Greater
Cincinnati Survey, a RDD telephone survey. The survey involved 1,111 adult
residents of Hamilton County, of whom 237 were identified as either first- or secondgeneration Appalachians. First-generation Appalachians were defined as anyone born in
one of the 396 counties in the Appalachian region; second-generation Appalachians
were defined as having at least one parent born in that area.3 Although the survey
acquired information on black Appalachians, only the data on white Appalachians were
tabulated. 4
Findings
It is essential to compare the basic social characteristics of the three groups as
a preliminary step toward understanding their attitudes. Appalachians in greater
Cincinnati have the same general age profile and sex distribution as blacks and nonAppalachian whites, and all three groups on the average have lived in the area
approximately the same number of years. Distinct differences appear, however, when
the three groups are compared for educational attainment, occupational status, and
income.
Disproportionately few Appalachians (36%) and blacks (31%) have had any
college experience in comparison to the non-Appalachian white population (48%). In
addition, these three groups are quite distinct in occupational status. Blacks are
represented disproportionately in the operative and labor/service job categories, but are
underrepresented in the professional and managerial occupations in comparison to both
Appalachians and non-Appalachian whites. Appalachian whites differ from their nonAppalachian counterparts primarily in the high percentage of operatives among
Appalachians (19% vs. 7%) and in the relatively low percentage of Appalachians in the
sales/clerical job categories (38% vs. 26%). The distribution of family income for
Appalachians and for other whites in Hamilton County is quite similar, but a much
higher percentage of blacks is found in the lowincome range; 46% of black families
have annual incomes of less than $15,000.
36)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
�In overall socioeconomic status, white Appalachians are distinct from both nonAppalachians and blacks.5
White non-Appalachians are generally in the higherstatus group, while a higher percentage of blacks is found in the low socioeconomic
category. Appalachian whites fall between these two groups in their overall
socioeconomic status.
This brief demographic profile of the three groups provides a context for
studying the images they have of urban Appalachians. Table 5:1 presents the
fourteen positive and negative stereotypes of Appalachians that were included in the
study. The labels are rank ordered by the percentage of each of the three groups in
agreement with the stereotypes
Each of the three groups is more positive than negative in its typification of
Appalachian migrants, although, as might be expected, Appalachian whites accept
more positive labels than do non-Appalachian whites or blacks. The positive labels
"familistic," "religious," and "loyal" rank high among all three groups, while
"apathetic," "alcoholic," and "violent" have least acceptance among Appalachian and non-Appalachian whites. Approximately three out of five people in each
group agreed that Appalachians seemed to speak with a distinct accent. "Racist" was
the next most widely accepted negative label. Spearman's measure, however, which
was used to compare the rank ordering among the three groups shows no great
diversity among the rankings.
TABLE 5:1
RANK ORDERING BY PERCENT OF AGREEMENT FOR ALL LABELS OF WHITE
APPALACHIANS CATEGORIZED BY CULTURE GROUP AND APPALACHIAN GENERATION
Rank
Order
NonAppalachian
Blacks
%
NonAppalachian
Whites
First
Generation
Appalachian
%
Appalachian
Whites
%
Second
Generation
Appalachian
Wh~es
%
Wh~es
%
1.
Familistlc
69.2
Familistic
79.2
Famlllstic
84.0
Religious
85.3
Loyal
86.0
2.
Religious
64.8
Loyal
762
Loyal
83.9
Familistic
82.0
Familistic
85.2
3.
Loyal
62.4
Religious
67.9
Religious
82.0
Loyal
82.0
Independent
81.5
4.
Independent
57.4
•Accent
62.8
Independent
74.1
•Accent
67.3
Religious
77.9
5.
•Accent
57.1
Independent
62.7
•Accent
71.3
Independent
67.0
•Accent
74.7
6.
Honest
48.1
Honest
582
Honest
67.6
Honest
64.6
Honest
69.2
7.
Patriotic
48.0
Patriotic
54.4
Resourceful
64.3
Patriotic
64.6
Resourceful
68.7
8.
Resouroelul
47.3
Resourceful
53.6
Patriotic
62.3
Resourceful
58.5
•Racist
62.7
9.
•Racist
43.7
•Racist
472
•Racist
57.1
.Racist
52.6
Patriotic
58.1
10.
•Apathetic
32.5
·uneducated
47.0
·uneducated
47.6
•uneducated
43.0
•uneducated
53.9
11.
·uneducated
27.5
·untidy
39.7
·untidy
36.4
•untidy
33.3
•untidy
40.3
12.
•Alcoholic
26.2
•Apathetic
292
·Apathetic
27.4
·Apathetic
26.8
•Apathetic
29.1
13.
•untidy
25.9
•Alcoholic
20.3
•Alcoholic
20.1
•Alcoholic
23.4
•Alcoholic
16.8
14.
·violent
22.7
"Violent
16.8
·violent
16.8
·violent
18.0
·violent
13.8
•Indicates Negative Label
Important differences do exist in the amount of agreement shown for any given
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EJHNIC GROUP
(37
�label. Appalachian whites have high levels of acceptance of positive labels, while nonAppalachian whites and blacks accept the same labels to a distinctly lesser degree.
Appalachian and non-Appalachian whites coincide in their relative rates of agreement
on only one positive label: "familistic." The black group differs significantly from
the Appalachian group in relative rates of agreement on every positive label; in fact,
fewer than half the black respondents agree that Appalachian whites are either "honest,"
"patriotic," or "resourceful." All three groups coincide in their relatively low levels of
acceptance of four negative labels: "violent," "alcoholic," "apathetic," and "untidy."
For the negative labels "uneducated" and "accent," however, Appalachians are much
harsher in their view of themselves than are the blacks. In addition, Appalachian
whites appear significantly more racist in their own eyes than in the eyes of either nonAppalachian whites or blacks.
TABLE 5:2
PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS AGREEING WITH POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE LABELS
OF WHITE APPALACHIANS CATEGORIZED BY CULTURE GROUP AND GENERATION
First
Generation
Appalachian
Whites
Second
Generation
Appalachian
Whites
82.0
85.3
82.0
58.5
64.6
67.0*
64.6
18.0
23.4
26.8
33.3
43.0
67.3
52.6
86.0
77.9
85.2
68.7
58.1
81.5
69.2
13.8
16.8
29.1
40.3
53.9
74.7
62.7
Label
NonAppalachian
Whites
Appalachian
Whites
NonAppalachian
Blacks
Loyal
Religious
Familistic
Resourceful
Patriotic
Independent
Honest
Violent
Alcoholic
Apathetic
Untidy
Uneducated
Accent
Racist
76.2*
67.9*
79.2
53.6*
54.4*
62.7*
58.2*
16.8
20.3
29.2
39.7
47.0
62.8
47.2*
83.9
82.0
84.0
64.3
62.3
74.1
67.6
16.7
20.1
27.4
36.4
47.6
71.3
57.1
62.4*
64.8*
69.2*
47.3*
48.0*
57.4*
48.1*
22.7
26.2
32.5
25.9
27.5*
57.1*
43.7*
•p <0.05
The calculation of stereotyping scores allows for a comparison of group attitudes
while controlling for selected demographic variables.6
Table 5:3 gives the
stereotyping scores for each group in the study. The raw scores indicate that, as might
be expected, non-Appalachian blacks have fairly strong negative images of
Appalachians, and white Appalachians have a rather strong positive attitude toward
themselves; less predictably, non-Appalachian whites were found to have moderately
positive images of Appalachians. Conversely, increasing socioeconomic status among
non-Appalachian whites shows a marked tendency toward positive images of
Appalachians while relatively little difference appears among non-Appalachian blacks
of varying socioeconomic status.
38)
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�TABLE 5:3: STEREOTYPING SCORES FOR THREE CULTURE GROUPS
AND TWO GENERATIONS OF WHITE APPALACHIANS
Negative Labels
Agreed With
Culture Group/
Generation
Positive Labels
Agreed With
B!i!llQOd 8ll!i![ag!i!
Number Score
CULTURE GROUP
Non-Appalachian
Blacks
0
.0
3
.43
-.43
Appalachian
Whites
7
1.0
4
.57
.43
Non-Appalachian
Whites
3
.43
2
.29
.14
GENERATION
First Generation
Appalachian
Whites
2
.29
2
.29
.0
Second Generation
Appalachian
Whites
5
4
.57
.14
.71
B!i!llQOd 8ll!i!rag!i!
Number Score
Stereotype
Score
Discussion
The research indicates an overall preference for positive rather than
negative stereotypes of Appalachian migrants. Of the three groups in the
study, Appalachians showed the strongest preference for positive labels; to a lesser
degree, the same can be said of non-Appalachian whites. Non-Appalachian blacks were
the least accepting of positive statements about Appalachians. Acceptance of
negative labels was less prevalent in all three groups but strongest among
Appalachians.
Race appears to be a major factor in interpreting these results; non-Appalachian
blacks are significantly less positive and only slightly less negative about
Appalachians than are the two white groups. Because of the limited nature of this
study, it is not possible to determine whether this response is related to Appalachians
in particular or to Appalachians as members of the dominant white majority in the
county.
Among the fourteen labels presented, the label "accent" was the most
problematic. Although presented as a negative label, "accent" ranks fifth in
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
(39
�percentage of agreement among the positive labels and well above the negative
labels. Moreover, it correlated highly with two strong, positive labels,
"familistic" and "loyal." It seems reasonable to conclude that speaking with an
accent may be perceived as a positive characteristic of Appalachians.
If "accent" is removed from the list of negative labels, the two most
widely accepted labels of white Appalachians are "racist" and "uneducated."
Although the strongest agreement with these labels is found among Appalachians, it
should be noted that more than one-fifth of the sample expressed doubts or
disagreement with the most popular positive stereotype of Appalachians. Likewise,
almost one-fifth of those surveyed expressed agreement with the least popular negative
stereotype. From these figures it is obvious that there exists a substantial
body of negative opinion regarding Appalachians.
The strongest negative labeling of white Appalachians emanates from a
cohort within the Appalachian group itself. Socioeconomic stratification among the
Appalachian residents of the county appears to account for an important
proportion of the negative stereotypes attributed to this group. Appalachian whites
with high educational attainment, white-collar occupations, and relatively
high incomes are the strongest negative stereotypers of Appalachians. This pattern of
intragroup stereotyping is also found among other urban minorities (Frazier, 1957;
Kilson, 1983).
Assuming that they are not derogating themselves, it is reasonable to
conclude that high-status Appalachians are directing these negative images
toward lower-status members of their own group. This negative labeling may be
attributed less to the competitive advantage gained in winning or keeping social
rewards than to an effort to seek social and psychological advantage by placing distance
between themselves and the less successful members of the same group. On the
other hand, non-Appalachian whites of low and medium social status appear to hold
negative images of Appalachians for ecological reasons: they may in fact be
competing with Appalachians for employment, housing, and social services.
Stereotypes of urban Appalachians form a complex network of social status
boundaries which divide along lines of race and socioeconomic status. The positive
images Appalachians have of themselves are not shared by urban blacks. Negative
images of Appalachians divide higher-status Appalachians from those of lower status,
and separate Appalachians from working- and middle-class whites. The isolation and
separation of Appalachian people living in the mountains has been largely overcome;
the isolation and separation of urban Appalachians through stereotyping is still a
reality.
40)
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EJHNIC GROUP
�NOTES
1.
The positive labels are: loyal, religious, familistic, independent, honest, patriiotic, and resourceful. The negative labels are: accent, racist, apathetic, uneducated, alcoholic, untidy, and violent. These labels appear frequently in the literature
on Appalachians, and are mentioned specifically as stereotypes in fifteen works
cited by Obermiller (1982:72). Moreover, twelve of the fourteen labels overlap
with those used by Katz and Braly (1933).
2.
The statements are as follows in the order they were presented and the label they
represent:
"Appalachians seem to stand up for their friends" (loyal); "Appalachians seem to have a high regard for the Bible" (religious); "Appalachians
often seem to be involved in violent crimes" (violent); "Appalachians seem to
have serious drinking problems" (alcoholic); "Appalachians seem to have a strong
concern for their families" (familistic); "Appalachians seem to get the most out of
the resources they have" (resourceful); "Appalachians seem to be unconcerned with
getting ahead in life" (apathetic); "Appalachians do not seem to be very neat
about their personal property" (untidy); "Appalachians seem to be pretty self-reliant in most situations" (independent); "Appalachians do not seem to to put a very
high value on getting an education" (uneducated); "Appalachians seem to be
truthful in their dealings with others" (honest); "Appalachians seem to speak with
a distinct accent" (accent); "White Appalachians seem to be unwilling to live in
racially integrated neighborhoods" (racist). Response categories were "strongly
agree," "agree," "disagree," "strongly disagree," "don't know," and "no answer."
3.
The Appalachian Regional Commission's definition of Appalachia includes 397
counties. The Greater Cincinnati Survey, however, deleted data on Appalachian
migrants from Clermont County, Ohio because it is directly adjacent to Hamilton
County, Ohio. Clermont County was excluded so that residents of eastern suburbs
of Cincinnati who have moved into the city would not be included in the data set
on migrants.
4.
The decision to delete black Appalachians from this study was based on their
small number (3.2% of the county's population).
5.
The socioeconomic status index was created by first collapsing income, education,
and occupation into the following categories:
INCOME
EDUCATION
$0-14,999
Less than high school
2
$15,000-24,999
High school diploma
3
$25,000 and over
Some college or more
Value
1
OCCUPATION
Bluecollar
------------Whitecollar
PART I: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(41
�These three variables were then summed, resulting in an index with scores ranging
from 3 to 9. Respondents with a score of 3 or 4 were classified as low SES, those
with scores of 5, 6, or 7 were categorized as medium SES, and individuals with
scores of 8 or 9 were categorized as high on the SES index.
6.
The score is derived according to the following formula:
Stereotyping Score = (Sp/Np)-(Sn/Nn)
where Sp is the number of positive stereotypes agreed to by a group which have a
higher percentage of agreement for all groups to be compared; Np is the number
of positive stereotypes; Sn is the number of negative stereotypes agreed to by a
group which have a higher percentage for each stereotype than the average
percentage of agreement for all groups to be compared; and Nn is the number of
negative stereotypes. The stereotyping score thus derived ranges from +1 to -1,
where +1 represents above-average agreement on all positive stereotypes and -1
represents above-average agreement on all negative stereotypes.
42)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
�THE ETHNIC ENTREPRENEUR
IN THE URBAN
APPALACHIAN COMMUNITY
Estimates vary on how many urban Appalachians live in the tri-state region
centering on Cincinnati, but perhaps one of the most impressive estimates is that
possibly one-third of the school children in Cincinnati are Appalachian. The problem,
of course, lies in defining an Appalachian. Appalachians are largely, but not
exclusively, white, English-speaking, Protestant, and native-born, "just like average
Americans." An academic debate has been conducted for some time about whether
Appalachian subcultural differences really exist, and there are numerous publications
describing the unique structure of the Appalachian family and other distinctive
traits. On the other side of the argument, most recently, is historian Henry
Shapiro's (1978) book, Appalachia On Our Mind, which suggests that the
Appalachian region and people are a creation of intellectuals and have no basis in
cultural reality.
In anthropology, Fredrick Barth (1969) offers a solution to the above extremes
which for our purposes here may come closest to reality. In Ethnic Groups and
Boundaries, Barth (1969: 13) suggests that the "critical feature" in defining the
parameters of an ethnic group are "self-ascription and ascription by others," a
phenomenon which certainly exists among Cincinnati's Appalachians. As Barth
(1969:13-14) explains:
A categorical ascription is an ethnic ascription when it classifies a person
in terms of his basic, most general identity, presumptively determined by
his origin and background. To the extent that actors use ethnic identities to
categorize themselves and others for purposes of interaction, they form
ethnic groups in this organizational sense.
As Barth (1969:15) goes on to elaborate, "the critical focus . . .becomes the
ethnic boundary that defines the group, not the cultural stuff that it encloses."
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(43
�Cultural signals mark the boundaries and some signals are more representative of
substantial cultural differences than others. Signals based on differences in
language or religion may be more significant than those based on different craft
items or music.
Despite the surface evidence that Appalachians are "just like other
Americans," numerous cultural signals mark off the boundaries of their ethnic
identity. Appalachians certainly are English-speakers, but most speak a
dialect of English which results in their ascription as Appalachians every time
they open their mouths to talk. Often the ascription is the negative equivalent of
Appalachian, such as "hillbilly" or "ridge-runner" or the like. Appalachians are
certainly predominantly white, but in the inner cities, where significant black
populations exist, whites, particularly poor ones, do stand out. Since Appalachians
who become better off economically can and do often leave Appalachian
neighborhoods and blend into the larger white middle class, the stereotype persists
that all Appalachians are poor whites. In a city like Cincinnati, to be Protestant is
not to be in the majority. Most Cincinnatians are Catholic, often middle class people
of either German or Irish origin. So here being Catholic is associated with economic
well-being, political power, and being a "native" of the city while to be Protestant
and Appalachian is to be poor, powerless, an outsider.
A most important ethnic signal for Appalachians is that of the homeland, the
region back in the mountains where one still has family ties and returns for
ceremonies, holidays, and vacations. Edward Spicer (1971) refers to the homeland
symbol as one of the most significant signals for an ethnic group and cites its
importance for peoples as diverse as American Indians and Zionist Jews. Other
signals also exist in the form of bluegrass music, mountain crafts, downhome
food, an annual Appalachian Festival, and a generalized notion of distinct
Appalachian values which range from a strong sense of family obligations to an
idea of independence which defies all authority.
It would seem that the role of an Appalachian entrepreneur is to maximize the
value in ascribing ethnically as an Appalachian and to create an
innovative political program based on the ideal of ethnic pluralism. Harald
Eidheim (1968) has done an excellent job of analyzing the role of the ethnic
innovator in the Lappish Movement in Norway, and his work and Barth's (1966)
offer insights into this situation. Barth and Eidheim have focused on the limits
of the role of the individual, such as the ethnic entrepreneur, in change in an
attempt to find a middle ground of analysis that falls somewhere between cultural
determinism and the great man theory.
Barth (1966) tends to focus on the decisions individuals make. He assumes that
individuals, operating under varying constraints and incentives, play roles which
allow them to make the most rational choices possible in their own best interest. As
individuals engage in new social transactions allowed by these roles, relative
values are revealed through real dilemmas of imminent choice. The most basic role
of the ethnic entrepreneur is to create new, more satisfying roles for the members of
the ethnic group to act out.
Barth (1966:17) suggests that the relevant characteristics of the ethnic
entrepreneur are that he manages the undertaking, he is an innovator, and he tries to
maximize the value in ethnic identification. The entrepreneur is involved in
44)
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHNIC GROUP
�multiple transactions and initiates new actlVlbes, such as creating political and
economic bridges between the ethnic group and the dominant power structure
(Barth 1966:18). A successful ethnic entrepreneur can change the basic values and
ethnic identity of an entire population.
Much as in the case of Lapps in Norway, Appalachians are viewed and often
view themselves as backward, inferior, and maladaptive. In such a situation, the
ethnic entrepreneur often offers a "package deal" which combines the promise of
a positive ethnic image with the prospect of economic and political gains. In effect,
the ethnic entrepreneur creates a new role where none existed before, a role wherein
ethnic identity actually aids in attempts to be successful and adaptive rather than in
the past when such identity insured only failure.
The Urban Appalachian Council seems to represent one successful outcome of
the larger Appalachian movement in this country, and, in my analysis, part of the
reason for that organization's success is to be found in its former director,
Michael Maloney, and an ethnic entrepreneur.
Maloney's basic contribution lay in his leadership ability which resulted in
adequate funding and staff for the organization. It is probably no accident that the twoyear existence of United Appalachians of Cincinnati ended when Maloney left
the city in 1970 or that remnants of that organization splintered into two new groups
with different kinds of members. Maloney has always seemed to enact the role of
unifier and reconciler. One of the key problems of any social movement is the threat
of factionalism. Up to a point, Maloney was able to avoid the two most obvious
types of factionalism, that of "real Appalachians," usually first-generation
migrants with strong ties to the mountains, versus the "not-so-real Appalachians,"
as well as the factionalism threatening between Appalachian people from Appalachian
communities versus non-Appalachian professionals working in both research and
applied roles in those communities.
The first type of factionalism, reasoned Maloney, could only surface if there
were no adequate definition of who was Appalachian. So the organization defined an
Appalachian operationally in three ways, as anyone who was born in the region or
whose ancestors were, as anyone who shares the Appalachian folk culture, or as
anyone who is intensely involved with Appalachians at the neighborhood level.
The last category made the definition quite broad and could hypothetically include
people not of Appalachian origin but to whom the Appalachian folk culture had
diffused. It was not until 1978 that this view of an Appalachian was challenged and
unsuccessfully so. Maloney himself easily falls into a "real Appalachian" ascription:
born in a log cabin in eastern Kentucky, the son of a coal miner and steel worker, a
migrant to Cincinnati as a young adult. His own total legitimacy as an Appalachian
has probably helped Maloney in successfully expanding the definition and role of an
Appalachian, since doing so is not viewed as self-serving.
The second type of factionalism, that of insiders ~.
outside
professionals, was taken care of in a different way. The Appalachian movement
generally probably has its origin in organizations of non-Appalachian
professionals who worked in Appalachian communities. Those people still wanted
input in an Appalachian organization, and when Maloney had left the city in 1970,
they had largely split off into a separate organization, the Appalachian Committee, as
distinct from Appalachians like Ernie Mynatt who worked with groups like the
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(45
�Appalachian Identity Center. When the Urban Appalachian Council was formed
in 1974, the problem of outsiders was met in a straightforward way via
the idea of advocacy which deliberately constructed a role for such people, which
allowed them input, but also limited their roles in favor of Appalachians. Advocacy
was defined as people who are "not a grass roots group and cannot speak for
Appalachians, rather [these] members are to use their knowledge and other
resources in such a way that the needs and problems of mountain migrants are
documented and solutions are effected." The group also espoused the goal of
promoting "efforts to organize Appalachians and to establish an organization whose
sole aim is to organize in Appalachian neighborhoods." Like the other type of
factionalism, this kind seems to have been avoided until 1978 when the issue was
unsuccessfully challenged.
Perhaps even a third type of factionalism was avoided when Maloney
consciously built in two different political ideologies into the organization in order to
make room for different kinds of people. Maloney has characterized the two as
"standard liberal opportunity theory" and "more radical social movement theory."
Both ideologies have managed to survive, and the organization has
members and staff from every political party, as well as the apolitical.
In short, Maloney meets Barth's criteria as manager of the whole operation by
providing the leadership which has consistently secured funding and staff to do work
on behalf of Appalachians. He meets Barth's criteria as an innovator by
building bridges between the Appalachian community and the political power
structure. He maintains recognition for Appalachians as an ethnic group, and that
recognition manifests itself in the local media who consistently use the term
Appalachian in referring to certain neighborhoods or organizations. Finally, he has
maximized the value in Appalachian identity by developing a broad definition of
Appalachian and convincing both Appalachians themselves and non-Appalachians
of the positive contribution of the Appalachian lifestyle.
Maloney's success in Cincinnati seems all the more significant when
contrasted with the failure or limited success of Appalachian organizations in other
cities. The organization in Cleveland, for example, ultimately ran aground on a
problem solved in Cincinnati, that of what is an Appalachian and what to do with the
non-Appalachians residing in Appalachian neighborhoods. In Columbus, Ohio the
insider/outsider question, as well as the problem of what an Appalachian is, doomed
the group. In Chicago, and Detroit as well, there was the problem of the
existence among poor whites of at least as many southerners generally as
Appalachians specifically. Efforts to organize Chicago people under the negative
"poor whites" label have had only sporadic success. In Dayton, Ohio there is an
Appalachian organization, but being organized largely by people with a middle
class orientation, it has remained largely cultural and fraternal and has not
sought the funding to develop economic programs in poor Appalachian
neighborhoods as Cincinnati has. Other cities with Appalachian populations have
no viable Appalachian organization such as Pittsburgh, Baltimore, Washington,
DC, and Atlanta.
In some towns where no Appalachian or other ethnic organizations have been
founded, other groups have moved in to fill the void. The most notorious is
probably the Ku Klux Klan, experiencing a national revival, which pits poor
46)
PART/: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO EfHN/C GROUP
�whites, whether Appalachian or otherwise, against other ethnic groups in an
attempt to improve economic and political conditions. An organization like the Urban
Appalachian Council addresses the legitimate grievances of its constituents,
instead, to the power structure in familiar ethnic terms.
The success of the Urban Appalachian Council in organizing Appalachians
ethnically for political and economic improvement is to a great degree the result
of the efforts of an ethnic entrepreneur. His insights into ethnic movements have
allowed the organization to avoid the factionalism and problems unsuccessfully dealt
with by other groups and have laid the groundwork for a positive image of
Appalachian people. The by-products of his efforts have resulted in reduced racial
and ethnic tension and the improvement of people's lives.
PART 1: FROM SOCIAL PROBLEM TO ETHNIC GROUP
(47
�This page intentionally left blank
�PART TWO
Continuing Development Among Appalachian Migrants
Having established the problems prevalent among Appalachian migrants, it
was necessary to know the number of people living outside the region. Clyde
McCoy and James Brown (1981) first did this important work and documented
their findings in The Invisible Minority. For a twenty-five year period
commencing with the end of World War II, large numbers of Appalachians left the
region. Few people moved there. However, the seventies saw a reverse pattern
of migration and the eighty census revealed that Appalachia had become a receiving
area for migrants from other places. While debates continue over whether Appalachia
gains more people than it loses, the two papers in this section look at those
people who are leaving the region. The paper by Obermiller and Oldendick
provides documentation of the extent of recent outmigration and the
destinations of these people. The paper by Philliber is concerned with the
characteristics of these people. The changing destinations and composition of these
migrants have important implications.
PART II: CONf/NUING DEVEWPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(49
�This page intentionally left blank
�MOVING ON
Recent Patterns of Appalachian Migration
Although migration studies make an important and useful contribution to our
understanding of the Appalachian experience, patterns of recent Appalachian migration
have been neglected. No effort has been made to compare current Appalachian
migration patterns with previously collected data on earlier Appalachian migration
patterns, nor have recent Appalachian migration flows been compared with national
migration trends. In this paper we will attempt to update the study of Appalachian
migration.
We will begin by examining the principal studies of Appalachian migration, and
will describe the data set used in the current study. Next we will present an overview of
Appalachian migration for the period 1980-81, including a brief analysis of migration
flows at the state level. This discussion will be followed by a description of current
migration streams to selected urban areas, along with the changes in migration to these
areas that occurred between the late 1960's and the early 1980's. We will summarize
these findings with a survey of recent patterns of net Appalachian migration by
national regions, census divisions, states, and selected urban areas. In conclusion, we
will discuss these findings both in light of the changes and continuity in Appalachian
migration patterns over time and in terms of the relationship between these patterns and
national migration trends.
Previous Studies
The field of regional studies has identified two basic economic options that
affect migration: the distribution of economic opportunities to regional populations
primarily through the creation of jobs, which inhibits migration, or the distribution
of regional populations to external areas of economic opportunity, which
encourages migration (Cumberland, 1973). Carter Goodrich and his associates
(1936) recommended the latter option as a result of a study they made in the mid-
PART II: CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS (51
�1930's, which included eighty-four coal-producing counties in the Cumberland
Plateau. The study advocated that the number of farmers and miners in this area be
reduced through the outmigration of more than a quarter of the area's population.
Brown and Hillery (1962) documented the fact that many persons did, in fact,
leave the Southern Appalachian region during the twenty-year period between 1940
and 1960. Although a great deal of movement took place within the region, southern
Appalachia also experienced a net loss of over thirteen percent of its population
between 1940 and 1950, and a net loss of nineteen percent between 1950 and
1960 (Brown and Hillery, 1962:59). In his review of the 1970 census data, James S.
Brown (1972) notes that between 1960 and 1970, outmigration from southern
Appalachia continued at a considerably lower rate resulting in a net loss by migration
of five percent for the decade (Brown, 1972:138). During the 1960's the metropolitan
areas within southern Appalachia increased by nearly eight percent, principally
through inmigration, since natural increase had declined significantly during this period,
with the exception of those in Georgia, the nonmetropolitan counties in each of the
ten states with Appalachian areas experienced an overall loss due to net migration
(Brown, 1972:135-138).
Paralleling national trends in rural-to-urban migration, the majority of
Appalachian migrants moved to large, industrialized metropolitan areas. Clyde B.
McCoy and James S. Brown (1981) have documented in some detail the migration
stream systems from southern Appalachia into major metropolitan areas of the country.
Their study identifies the thirty top-ranking metropolitan destinations for southern
Appalachian migrants, as well as the particular migration stream systems between
West Virginia and Kentucky and the ten metropolitan focal areas for these systems
(McCoy and Brown, 1981). Although the rate of outmigration decreased over the thirtyyear period ending in 1970, McCoy and Brown find a great deal of consistency in the
direction and proportions of Appalachian migration to the metropolitan focal areas they
have identified.
The major finding of the Appalachian Regional Commission's Report to
Congress on Migration (1979) is the turnaround in net Appalachian migration. An
analysis of the Social Security Administration's continuous work history sample
for 1965, 1970, and 1975 indicates that Appalachian migration changed from a net
loss to the region in the period 1955-1970 to a net gain in the period 1970-75.
The pattern of outmigration also changed: while Northern states remained the
destination of the greatest number of Appalachil.in migrants, states in the South showed
the largest gain in the percentage of Appalachian migrants received (Appalachian
Regional Commission, 1979b: Tables 11-3 and 11-4). The report concludes
that most outmigrants enjoy greater incomes than they experienced while in
Appalachia, and quickly gain income parity with workers in the areas where
they settle (Appalachian Regional Commission, 1979b:15).
The Current Study
The data for this study were compiled by the Bureau of the Census for the
Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from the Individual Master File, which includes a record
of every individual income tax return form 1040 and 1040A for 1980 and 1981. The
Area-to-Area Migration Flow Data were developed by matching the social security
52)
PART ll:CONflNUlNG DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
�numbers (SSNs) on returns filed in each year. When identical social security
numbers were found, the counties of residence on each return were compared to see
whether they matched. A match in county of residence was counted as an instance of a
nonmigrant; when the counties did not match, the taxpayer was considered an
outmigrant from the county of residence in the base year, and an inmigrant to the
county of residence in the subsequent year. The final step in the process was to tally
the exemptions on all subsequent year forms which had identical SSNs with the base
year, and to categorize them as either nonrnigrant, inmigrant, or outmigrant.1
The figures derived from the IRS Area-to-Area Migration Flow Data have
several limitations which should be noted so that the data presented here may be
evaluated properly. Individuals who fail to file tax returns, those who are not required
to file returns, and those who inflate the number of exemptions on their returns all
detract from the representativeness of the data. In addition, the IRS has applied rules
to make it manageable and to protect the anonymity of individual taxpayers.2 These
characteristics of the data set make it impossible to calculate the exact volumes of
migration or to describe the social characteristics of the migrants.
The definition of the Appalachian region and the definitions of metropolitan,
urban, and rural counties within the Appalachian region employed in this study follow
those used by the Appalachian Regional Commission (Appalachian Regional
Commission, 1979a).3 The "urban areas" referred to throughout the study are
actually the counties in which the cities named are located; these areas are not
necessarily congruent with the commonly used designations of urban places,
urbanized areas, or metropolitan statistical areas (Weller and Bouvier, 1981). In
addition, the data present migration flows for one year only; estimates for
more extensive periods cannot be extrapolated accurately from this small base.
The Findings
In the twelve months covered by this study, slightly more individuals left the
Appalachian region than entered it. Table 7: 1 shows that the leading sources of
outmigrants were the metropolitan counties in Appalachia. These counties, which
had 49% of the region's 1980 population, accounted for 55% of the outmigrants. The
urban counties had 25% of the population and 24% of the outmigrants; the rural
counties, which had 26% of the population, contributed 21% of the outmigrants.
Similar percentage distributions were found among metropolitan (54%), urban
(23%), and rural (23%) Appalachian counties for the flow of migrants into the region.
Internal migration flows within Appalachia indicate that rural counties are the
most frequent destinations for those who leave rural counties; of all rural-county
outmigrants, 44% moved to other rural counties, 32% to urban counties, and 24% to
metropolitan counties. Similarly, metropolitan counties are the most popular
destination for those who leave metropolitan counties. Of all metropolitan county
outmigrants, 67% moved to other metropolitan counties, 20% to urban counties, and
13% to rural counties. Residents of urban counties, however, tend to move to either
rural or metropolitan counties, with a preference for the latter. In the period 1980-81,
40% of all urban county outmigrants moved to metropolitan counties, 34% to rural
counties, and only 26% to other urban counties.
PART II: CONfiNUING DEVELOPMENf AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(53
�TABLE 7:1
1980-81 APPALACHIAN MIGRATION BY COUN1Y1YPE1
Destination
Metropolitan
Origin
Metropolitan
Urban
Rural
Out of Region
119,418
34,699
22,157
281,845
1980-81 Net Migration
Urban
35,147
22,262
30,452
119,830
Out of Region
Rural
22,831
29,475
41,365
119,671
289,752
127,870
114,123
-10,399
1 For county typology see Appalachian Regional Commission, 1979.
Source: IRS Area-to-Area Migration Flow Data.
Tables 7:2a and b show the non-Appalachian states with the most significant
migration flows during the period under study. When inmigrant flows are
compared with outmigrant flows, it becomes apparent that reciprocal flows
exist between Appalachia and California, Florida, Illinois, New Jersey, and
Texas. The flows from Indiana and Michigan to Appalachia are substantially oneway streams; few migrants move to these states from the region. The flows from
Appalachia to Arizona and Massachusetts are also substantially one-way, but in the
opposite direction: few migrants from these states move to Appalachia.
TABLE 7:2a
MIGRATION FLOWS TO AND FROM THE APPALACHIAN REGION
Migrants to
Appalachia
State
54)
State
(N)
(N)
5,135
2,135
2,122
1,946
1,836
1,724
1,266
Migrants from
Appalachia
Florida
Illinois
New Jersey
California
Michigan
Texas
Indiana
10,734
10,465
4,849
2,207
1,141
525
431
Florida
Texas
California
Arizona
Illinois
Massachusetts
New Jersey
PART ll:CONIINUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
�The non-Appalachian states that show the most significant net gains in
migrants from the region are Texas, Florida, California, and Arizona, in that order.
Those showing the most significant net losses are Michigan, New Jersey, Indiana, and
Illinois.
Table 7:3 presents a more precise view of recent Appalachian migration. The
table includes those non-Appalachian counties that had a net gain or loss of 200 or
more migrants from the Appalachian region in 1980-81. Since the counties are
invariably metropolitan, the name of the chief city in each county is used to
designate the "urban area."
TABLE 7:2b
NET APPALACHIAN MIGRATION FOR SELECTED STATES, 1980-81.1
t::!§lt Gain~
8,741
5,599
2,903
1,795
1'::1§11 Los~!i!~
-995
-1,266
-1,691
-1,784
~
Texas
Florida
California
Arizona
~
Illinois
Indiana
New Jersey
Michigan
1 Tables 7:2a and 2b do not include states with Appalachian counties.
Source: IRS Area-to-Area Migration Flow Data.
Houston and its environs had the largest net gain in migrants from
Appalachia of any non-Appalachian urban area in the United States: it had over
twice as many migrants as the second and third-ranked urban areas, Nashville
and Tampa/St. Petersburg, and well above three times as many as Phoenix,
Dallas, and Los Angeles, which ranked fourth, fifth, and sixth respectively.
Atlanta was the chief among those urban areas that sent more migrants to the
Appalachian region than they gained, and had by far the highest combined
Appalachian in- and outrnigration. These facts must be interpreted with
caution, however, since the county in which the city of Atlanta is located, Fulton
County, shares common boundaries with five Appalachian counties. Similar
conditions exist for the counties in which Cincinnati, Lexington, Roanoke, and
Montgomery are located. Although these areas are likely to have high rates of
exchange with neighboring counties, a situation that fulfills the technical
definition of migration, their position in the ranking becomes somewhat ambiguous
when compared with urban areas much more distant from Appalachia.
PART /1: CONf/NU/NG DEVELOPMENf AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(55
�TABLE 7:3
SELECTED URBAN AREAS RANKED BY NET APPALACHIAN MIGRATION, 1980-81.1
Net
Migration
From
Appalachia
Houston
Nashville
Tampa/St. Petersburg
Phoenix
Dallas
Los Angeles
Lexington
W. Palm Beach
Columbus
Jacksonville
Anaheim
Charlotte
Ft. Lauderdale
Mobile
Jackson
San Diego
Washington
Roanoke
6,570
3,140
2,992
1,635
1,537
1,482
940
838
691
623
593
576
492
401
345
320
221
207
7,883
5,314
3,684
2,047
1,658
2,851
2,745
1,126
4,365
948
643
2,033
2,163
1,162
554
767
331
860
1,313
2,174
692
412
121
1,369
1,805
288
3,674
325
50
1,457
1,671
761
209
447
110
653
Louisville
Indianapolis
Dayton
Cleveland
New York
Chicago
Miami
Detroit
Cincinnati
Atlanta
-243
-258
-463
-630
-632
-1,024
-1,046
-1,420
-1,933
-5,670
300
-0395
1,616
813
1'112
644
52
4,366
9,995
543
258
858
2,246
1,445
2,136
1,690
1,472
6,299
15,665
Urban Area
To
Appalachia
1Table excludes urban areas in the Appalachian region.
Source: IRS Area-to-Area Migration Flow Data.
Table 7:4 presents a comparison of the thirty top-ranked metropolitan
destinations for Appalachian migrants for the periods 1965-70 and 1980-81. Nine of the
destinations found in the earlier ranking-Washington, Detroit, Baltimore, Columbia,
Dayton, Norfolk, Richmond, New York, and Louisville-have been replaced in the more
recent rankings by Houston, Lexington, Montgomery, Ft. Lauderdale, Phoenix, Dallas,
Mobile, West Palm Beach, and Jacksonville. The positions of Atlanta, Birmingham,
Chattanooga, Knoxville, and Philadelphia have remained fairly constant in each order,
while Chicago and Cleveland ranked significantly lower in 1981 than in the previous
56)
PART ll:CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
�year. Pittsburgh, the Winston-Salem/High Point/Greensboro area, Charleston, and
Greenville have all moved to substantially higher positions in the 1981 ranking.
TABLE 7:4
TOP-RANKING METROPOLITAN DESTINATIONS FOR MIGRANTS FROM
SOUTHERN APPALACHIA, 1965-70,1
AND FOR MIGRANTS FROM THE APPALACHIAN REGION, 1980-812
Rank
1965-70
1980-81
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
Atlanta
Washington
Detroit
Birmingham*
Knoxville*
Chicago
Chattanooga*
Cleveland
Los Angeles
Nashville
Huntington*
Huntsville
Baltimore
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Columbus
Tuscaloosa*
Cincinnati
Greenville
Charlotte
Charleston*
Columbia
Tampa
Dayton
Norfolk
Richmond
New York
Louisville
Roanoke
Winston-Salem/
High Point/Greensboro
Pittsburgh*
Philadelphia
Pittsburgh*
Atlanta
Birmingham*
Houston
Knoxville*
Chattanooga*
Nashville
Greenville
Cincinnati
Columbus
Tampa/St. Pete.
Charleston*
Winston-Salem/
High Point/Greensboro
Huntsville*
Huntington*
Los Angeles
Lexington
Montgomery
Ft. Lauderdale
Phoenix
Charlotte
Tuscaloosa*
Dallas
Cleveland
Mobile
W. Palm Beach
Chicago
Jacksonville
29
30
Philadelphia
Roanoke
*Located in the Appalachian region. 1 Source: McCoy and Brown, 1981.
2 Source: IRS Area-toArea Migration Flow Data.
PART ll: CONFINUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(57
�As elsewhere, we advise caution in examining this table because two different
geographic definitions were used in constructing the rankings. In the later ranking,
the definition of Appalachia includes counties in the states of New York, Pennsylvania,
and Ohio, while the earlier definition excludes counties in these areas. This difference,
for example, could be the principal reason behind the radical change in the ranking of
the Pittsburgh area between one period and the other.
TABLE 7:5
NET APPALACHIAN MIGRATION TO SELECTED URBAN AREAS
BY CENSUS REGIONS AND DIVISIONS, 1980-81
Census
Region
Census
Division
Urban Area
Net
Migration
Division
Totals
South
9,420
-2,174
South Atlantic
Tampa/St. Pete., FL
West Palm Beach, FL
Jacksonville, FL
Charlotte, NC
Ft. Lauderdale, FL
Washington, DC
Roanoke, VA
Columbia, SC
Greensboro, NC
*Huntington, WV
Ba~imore, MD
*Charleston, WV
Miami, FL
*Greenville, SC
Atlanta, GA
2,992
838
623
576
492
221
207
63
36
19
-37
-434
-1,046
-1,054
-5,670
E. South Central
Nashville, TN
Lexington, KY
Mobile, AL
Jackson, Ml
*Huntsville, AL
*Knoxville, TN
*Tuscaloosa, AL
Montgomery, AL
Louisville, KY
*Chattanooga, TN
*Birmingham, AL
W. South Central
Houston, TX
Dallas, TX
3,487
3,140
940
402
345
267
256
168
-101
-243
-503
-1,183
8,107
6,570
1,537
(Table Continued on Next Page)
58)
Region
Totals
PART l/:CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
�(Table 7:5 Continued)
Census
Region
Census
Division
Urban Area
Net
Migration
Division
Totals
West
Region
Totals
4,030
West Pacific
West Mountain
2,395
Los Angeles, CA
Anaheim,CA
San Diego, CA
Phoenix,AZ
1,482
593
320
1,635
Northeast
-2,421
Middle Atlantic
-2,421
New York, NY
*Pittsburgh, PA
-632
-1,789
North Central
E. North Central
-5,037
-5,037
Columbus, OH
Indianapolis, IN
Dayton,OH
Cleveland, OH
Chicago,IL
Detroit, Ml
Cincinnati, OH
691
-258
-463
-630
-1,024
-1,420
-1,933
• Indicates urban area in Appalachian region.
Source: IRS Area-to-Area Migration Flow Data.
When net migration figures for selected urban areas are categorized by census regions
and regional divisions (Table 7:5), a clear pattern emerges. For 1980-81 the urban
areas in the Northeast and North Central regions show losses in Appalachian
migration-2,421 and 5,037 respectively-while Western states show a net gain of
4,030. Urban areas in the South have a regional net gain of 9,420 migrants from
Appalachia.
At the divisional level, new losses occur in urban areas located in the South
Atlantic states, despite substantial net gains in Florida, in East North Central states
(5,037), and in the Middle Atlantic states (2,421). Net gains are recorded for urban areas
located in the states of the East South Central (3,487), West South Central (8,107),
West Pacific (2,395), and West Mountain (1,635) divisions.
Discussion
Although the evidence is incomplete, the much remarked-upon "migration
runaround" of the 1970's, which saw the first net gain in migration to Appalachia in
five decades, may have come to an end in the early 1980's (Picard, 198la, 1981b). This
finding would correspond to a national trend detected in the early 1980's, in which the
flow of migrants to rural America decreased notably from that of the mid-1970's
PART II: CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(59
�(Agresta, 1985; Population Reference Bureau, 1982). Within Appalachia, however, the
migrants' preference for rural counties over urban counties continued from the 1970's
into the 1980's, but the flow of internal migrants away from metropolitan counties
appears to have ended (Picard, 1981b). The most frequent destinations for internal
migrants in this study were metropolitan counties, while the least frequent were the
formerly popular urban counties.
Appalachian migrants also reflect national preferences in their choices of which
states to enter and which states to leave. The 1980 census data document a preference
for destinations in Texas, Florida, California, and Arizona and a disinclination to stay
in Illinois, Indiana, New Jersey, and Michigan (Robey and Russell, 1983). The
national migration flows to states in the South and West and away from the North and
East are paralleled by the Appalachian migration patterns presented in this study
(Rogerson and Plane, 1985).
In their choice of urban destinations, migrants from Appalachia go where jobs
are available, but probably encounter intense competition from other migrants upon
arrival. Eight of the top-ranked urban destinations of Appalachian migrants are among
the twelve urban areas projected to have the greatest population growth between 1980
and 2000: Houston, San Diego, Dallas, Los Angeles, Phoenix, Anaheim, Ft.
Lauderdale, and Tampa/St. Petersburg (Holdrich, 1984). Similarly, six of the topranked urban destinations of Appalachian migrants are among the twelve urban areas
projected to have the greatest gain in employment between 1980 and 2000: Houston,
Los Angeles, Anaheim, Dallas, San Diego, and Phoenix (Holdrich, 1984).
Although recent Appalachian migration patterns parallel national patterns of
migration, they diverge significantly from historic patterns Appalachian migration.
Brown and McCoy (1981) found high correlations among the ranking for the
metropolitan destinations of Appalachian migrants in the 1950's, 1960's, and
1970's. Despite some inconsistency in the way the data were gathered for the 196570 study and the 1980-81 study, a substantial change in the pattern of migrant
destinations in the 1980's was noted. The change is clear and consistent throughout
the county, state, and regional levels of analysis. The focus of Appalachian migration has shifted from the cities and states of the Northeast and Midwest, and has
now turned toward the cities and states of the South, Southwest, and West.
Conclusion
Three major conclusions can be reached on the basis of this study. First, it
appears that patterns of outmigration from Appalachia changed substantially between
the 1960's and 1970's and the early 1980's. The urban areas that serve as the focal
points for current Appalachian migration flows are now more likely to be found
in the Southern and Western states than in those of the Midwest or Northeast.
Second, it appears that patterns of migration within Appalachia have changed
between 1970 and 1980. Migrants within the region are moving to metropolitan
counties at higher rates in the 1980's than in the previous decade. Third,
outmigrants from the Appalachian region move in a fashion quite similar to other
internal migrants in the United States. Current Appalachian migration streams flow
toward the same general receiving areas as do the larger national migration streams.
In their patterns of "moving on," recent Appalachian migrants are less similar
60)
PART l/:CONflNUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
�to earlier migrants from Appalachia than to their contemporaries in other parts of
the country.
NOTES
*
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support of the Urban
Appalachian Council, Cincinnati, Ohio, in obtaining the data set used in this
study. The suggestions of the UAC Research and Education Committee
during the data analysis stage of the study have been quiet helpful and are very
much appreciated.
1.
Only the returns in which the SSN in 1980 matched the SSN in 1981 were
included. Reasons for nonmatches include errors in entering or reading the SSN,
individuals marrying and having the second SSN on a joint return, deaths,
failure to file, and falling outside the guidelines for filing.
2.
When the number of returns indicating movement from one county to another
were ten or less, they were aggregated into the appropriate larger category:
"same state" or one of the four census regions. The present study makes no
allocation of the exemptions in these categories.
In addition, if county-to-county migration did not account for at least 0.5% of
the migrants to the county of destination on the inmigration data set or at
least 0.5% of the migrants from the county of origin on the outmigration data
set, this information was not presented by county but included in a larger
geographical category. This resulted in roughly one-third to two-fifths of the data
being reported on a higher geographical level than the county-to-county level.
Consequently, the figures presented in this study for county-to-county migration
are quite conservative.
Finally, since different aggregation rules may be in effect for inmigration and for
outmigration data, the results produced from the two data sets are not necessarily
symmetrical. An example may help to illustrate the discrepancies this may cause.
In the inmigration data, where Elk County, PA, is the county of destination, the
records show that 21 returns were filed by people who migrated from Allegheny
County (Pittsburgh), PA. The outmigration data, in which Allegheny County is
the county of origin, have no separate record for these 21 returns that indicate
relocation in Elk County, but have them aggregated with other "same state"
movers. These returns represent four percent of the returns for migrants into Elk
County, and accordingly they are listed individually in the inmigration data;
however, they account for less than 0.5% of the returns for migrants from
Allegheny County, and therefore are aggregated in the "same state" category in
the outmigration data. This aggregation procedure causes underestimates of the
county-to-county migration into counties
with large
population
and
underestimates of the county-to-county migration out of these counties. With
this in mind, we have used the outmigration data set when counties with large
population were the place of destination, and the inmigration data set when these
counties were the place of origin.
3.
Consensus is lacking on a geographic defmition of the region. In 1984 William
PART ll: CONI/NU/NG DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(61
�G. Frost defined "the Mountain Region of the South" as conslStmg of
194 counties (Walls, 1977); John C. Campbell (1921) included 254 counties in
the "Southern Highlands"; the U.S. Department of Agriculture (1935) variously
designated 205 or 236 counties as the "Southern Appalachians"; Brown and
Hillery (1962) define "Southern Appalachia" as 190 counties; McCoy and Brown
(1981) employ four different definitions of the region, one of which includes
303 counties; Philliber (1981) includes 396 counties in his study of Appalachian
migrants and the Appalachian Regional Commission (1979a) defines the region
as 397 counties. This study adopts the most inclusive definition in order to
obtain the greatest range of comparability with similar research.
62)
PART //:CONTINUING DEVEWPMENf AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
�THE CHANGING COMPOSITION
OF APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
The period from the end of World War II through the sixties has been
described as the Great Migration out of Appalachia. During the period an estimated
seven million Appalachians left, most to settle in cities surrounding the region
(McCoy and Brown, 1981). A high percentage of the migrants came from low income
families who brought little education with them (Philliber, 1981). They settled in
neighborhoods where other Appalachians lived (Fowler, 1981; Philliber, 1981) finding
work in lower blue-collar jobs (Schwarzweller, 1981).
The concentration of high numbers of people sharing a common geographic
origin and similar low socioeconomic status living in the same neighborhoods
created the critical mass necessary for the formation of an ethnic group. The reaction
of the host communities to their presence provided the catalyst which resulted in
Appalachian ethnic groups emerging in Midwestern cities (Philliber, 1981).
For the past several years a number of changes have been occurring among
Appalachians living outside of the region. Taken together, these changes created reason
to believe that Appalachian ethnic groups outside of the region are a temporary
phenomena soon to disappear. The purpose of this paper is to examine those changes
and look at their implications.
The first major change which has occurred in the pattern of Appalachian
migration is that the number of people moving from Appalachia to Midwestern cities
has declined. A look at the Midwestern cities included in Table 7:3 of the previous
chapter shows very few migrants moving to these cities. Louisville, Indianapolis,
Dayton, and Detroit all show fewer than five hundred migrants and no Midwestern city
has as many as five thousand. While people may choose to debate whether net
migration is to or from Appalachia, it appears that the Great Migration is over.
Not only has the Great Migration ended, it is unlikely to begin again. The
population base from which migrants are drawn has declined. Fewer children are living
in the region to migrate as they reach their late teens and early twenties
PART ll: CONTINUING DEVEWPMENf AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(63
�(Appalachia, 1983). The closing of coal mines and the migration from worn out
fanns has already taken place. Diversified manufacturing, trade, and service industries
are likely to provide a more stable economic base for the region in the future. The
factors which produced the Great Migration in the third quarter of this century are not
present as the century ends.
The second major change in the pattern of migration out of Appalachia is a
shift toward migrants who are economically better off than their predecessors. Watkins
and Trevino (1982) studied women who migrated from Appalachia to Cincinnati
between 1965 and 1970. They found these migrants to be disproportionately employed as professional. Again in Cincinnati, Philliber (1981) surveyed the general
population in 1975 and Obermiller (1982) in 1980. If the two studies are compared,
the latter study indicates that first generation white Appalachian migrants are better
educated (28% compared to 15% have some college) and have better occupations (24%
compared to 18% are employed as professionals or managers) than they did earlier.
Although only the Watkins-Trevino study shows Appalachians doing as well as nonAppalachians, the suggestion is there that recent Appalachian migrants are economically better off than was true in earlier years.
The third major change occurring among Appalachians living outside of the
region is their generation of migration. The Great Migration brought people to the
Midwest in their late teens and early twenties. Many of them bore children who were
second-generation Appalachians. Many of those people are now adults and have
their own families-third-generation Appalachians. Both Philliber (1981) and
Obermiller (1982) found as many second-generation Appalachians as they found firstgeneration migrants. In the conference on Appalachians held in Cincinnati in 1984,
service providers in neighborhoods where Appalachians had settled described their
populations as predominantly second- and third-generation Appalachians.
The history of white ethnic groups in America suggests that by the third
generation ethnic ties weaken as people move into the mainstream of a
community (Blau and Duncan, 1967; Goering, 1971). There are several reasons to
believe this will be true of Appalachians living in Midwestern cities. A
number of Appalachians remained in ports-of-entry for only a short time before they
secured sufficient education to also hold middle class positions (Philliber,
1981; Obermiller, 1982). Studies cited above indicate that large numbers of current
migrants are already middle class. Ethnicity is less of a factor in the lives of middle
class people (Massey, 1981). For people of some economic means, socio-economic
ties become stronger than ethnic ties. Middle income people have room below them.
Ethnic differentiation is likely to be stronger among lower income people who
have fewer human capital resources to protect them and may rely upon ethnic
discrimination for security. Middle income people, less vulnerable to
discrimination, lessen their ethnic ties.
Many Appalachians will not move into the middle class. Dropouts
from school and unemployment remain high among children born to migrants.
These second- and third-generation Appalachians will remain in decaying inner-city
neighborhoods, but they are unlikely to consider themselves Appalachians or be
considered so by others. First, there will be little about these people to identify
them as Appalachians. The distinctive accents of their parents will be replaced by
speech patterns of Midwestern city dwellers. They will have learned the ways of
64)
PART 1/: CONF!NUING DEVEWPMENf AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
�city people and know little of the ways people live in Appalachia. In the land of
their ancestors they will be known as "city slickers" and "Yankees." Unlike the
Appalachians who migrated, these people are stuck in the city. Early migrants were
able to return to the mountains when employment ran out in the city. These people
have no place to call home in Appalachia. Their families live outside the region.
They remain poor, but they do not remain Appalachian.
New migrants from Appalachia will not replace former generations in
Appalachian neighborhoods. Because they are economically better off, they will live
in middle income neighborhoods. Their identification with Appalachians will be
limited to collecting quilts and listening to mountain music. The economic
problems suffered by previous generations and their offspring will not be their
problem.
The emergence of Appalachians as an ethnic group in Midwestern cities has
been an important dynamic of the third quarter of the twentieth century.
However, the changes which have occurred in the last quarter will probably result
in an end to Appalachian ethnicity as it existed.
PAKf II: CONflNUING DEVELOPMENT AMONG APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
(65
�This page intentionally left blank
�PART THREE
From Regionalism To Urban Life
People of Appalachian heritage have now been a part of midwestern cities for a
number of years. During that time they have affected and have been affected by that
environment. Previous work documented the experiences of early migrants. This
section analyzes more recent experiences. Many of the people studied in these papers
were born outside of the region to parents who themselves were migrants. Others are
recent migrants who moved after the period of the Great Migration. Focus is placed
upon their relationship to urban forms of government, family, and education.
PART ll/: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
( 67
�This page intentionally left blank
�TWO STUDIES OF APPALACHIAN
CIVIC INVOLVEMENT
I. POLITICAL ACTIVITY AMONG
APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
The importance of ethnicity in the formation of a political culture among white
immigrant groups has received a good deal of attention since the "ethnic renaissance" of
the late 1960's and 1970's (Glazer and Moynihan, 1975). More recently, discussions
and documentation of ethnic group formation among white Appalachian migrants to
metropolitan areas outside the Appalachian region have begun to appear in the literature
(Philliber, 1981).
Marger and Obermiller (1983) have put forth a theory of emergent ethnicity
among Appalachian migrants based on a combination of four models of ethnic group
formation. The first model posits the development of a culturally based community
within the group in question; the second model requires the development of an ethnic
identity among group members and recognition of the group by outsiders; the third
depends on the development of clear ecological patterns (e.g., neighborhood or
occupational clustering) which contribute to in-group solidarity; the fourth represents
political mobilization of group members in response to competition from other ethnic
groups.
Data relating to the first three models have been collected and analyzed. Philliber
(1981) found little evidence that Appalachian migrants possess unique cultural traits.
Obermiller (1982) pointed to definite patterns in the stereotyping of urban
Appalachians by Appalachians as well as non-Appalachians. Other investigators
(Fowler, 1981; Schwarzweller, 1981) have documented the presence of predominantly
Appalachian neighborhoods in urban areas and the occupational clustering of
Appalachian workers. The purpose of this article is to examine Appalachian political
behavior in Hamilton County, Ohio, specifically to determine the degree to which a
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE ( 69
�distinct set of political activities characterizes the county's white Appalachian
population. I
Although a variety of historical and contemporary studies have focused on
politics in the Appalachian region (Gaventa, 1980; Ryan, 1975), few have dealt with
the political activities of out-migrants from Appalachia. Early studies (Giffm, 1962;
Schwarzweller, Brown and Mangalam, 1971) of the political differences between
Appalachian migrants and urban natives show little difference between these two
groups, while later investigations (Philliber, 1981) demonstrate strong differences
between them, but provide little evidence as to the reason for such distinctions. The
present study ftrst examines the factors of political involvement and affiliation in order
to test which of these conflicting interpretations is more accurate, and then determines
the salience of ethnicity in the political behavior of Appalachian migrants.
Analysis
The data employed in this study were collected as part of the Fall, 1980 Greater
Cincinnati Study.2 In this survey interviews were conducted with 753 white nonAppalachians, 237 white Appalachians, and 127 black non-Appalachians. Thirty-six
black Applachians have been excluded from the sample because of their small number
and because of a reluctance to confuse race with ethnicity in the present study (cf.
Philliber and Obermiller, 1982). Respondents were coded as Appalachian if they were
born in Appalachia or if at least one of their parents was born in Appalachia.3
Before discussing how Appalachians differ from or resemble other urban groups
political activity, it is necessary to compare their position vis-a-vis these groups in
terms of basic social characteristics. Appalachians in greater Cincinnati have the same
general age proftle and sex distribution as other whites and blacks. All three groups
have lived in the area approximately the same number of years, on the average. Distinct
differences appear, however, when the three groups are compared for educational
attainment, occupational status, and income.
Disproportionately few Appalachians (36%) and blacks (31%) have had any
college experience when compared with the non-Appalachian white population (48%).
These three groups are also quite distinct in occupational status. Blacks are found
disproportionately in the operative and labor/service job categories, and are
underrepresented in the professional and managerial occupations when compared with
both Appalachians and non-Appalachian whites. Appalachian whites differ from their
non-Appalachian counterparts primarily in the high percentage of operatives in this
group (19% vs. 7%) and the relatively low percentage having jobs in the sales/clerical
job categories (38% vs. 26%. The distribution of family income for Appalachians and
other whites in Hamilton County is quite similar, but a much higher percentage of
blacks is found in the low-income range, with 46% of black families having incomes
of less than $15,000.
In overall socioeconomic status, white Appalachians are distinct from both nonAppalachians and blacks.4 White non-Appalachians are generally in the higher-status
group, while a higher percentage of blacks is found in the low socioeconomic category.
Appalachian whites fall between these two groups in overall socioeconomic status.
These data show some similarities among the three groups in demographic
characteristics, but greater distinctions appear in social status. Is this variation among
70)
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�the groups also evident in their political activity? Prior research (Hill and Luttbeg,
1980; Milbrath and Goel, 1977) has shown that social-position factors such as
education, occupation, and income have a significant effect on an individual's political
behavior. To determine how Appalachian origin contributes to such activity, we
examined two aspects of political activity, involvement and affiliation. Involvement
was measured by questions on the respondents' general interest in politics, their interest
in political campaigns, whether or not they voted, and whether they knew the names of
their U.S. senators. The two questions which probed affiliation were related to party
identification and liberal-conservative self-placement.S
Although the figures in Table 9: 1 show variation across groups, they do not
present a uniform picture concerning the involvement of each of the three groups. In
general interest in politics, for example, white Appalachians and blacks are quite
similar, while non-Appalachian whites are more likely to say they follow politics
some of the time and are less likely to follow them "only now and then." A similar
distribution occurs on the campaign interest question. Again, white Appalachians and
blacks are very much alike, while white non-Appalachians are more inclined to follow
politics "somewhat" and less likely to say "not much." On the question of voting,
however, a lower percentage of Appalachians claims to have voted than either of the
non-Appalachian groups. Regarding the question of knowing their senators' names,
blacks are distinct; a much higher percentage in this group are unable to name either
senator than in either of the other two groups.
Turning to the question of political afftliation, the data demonstrate differences
among the three groups in regard to political identification. The figures for
partisanship show blacks to be much more Democratic and much less Republican than
Appalachian and other whites. On the question of self-identified political philosophy,
white non-Appalachians are less likely to be liberal than either Appalachians or blacks,
while a smaller percentage of blacks considers themselves conservative.
Although the variation among groups on these questions is not totally
consistent, a general pattern emerges to show that white Appalachians are similar to
blacks in terms of their political involvement, and that these two groups are distinct
from white non-Appalachians. This description, however, leaves unanswered the
question of how much Appalachian origin, as opposed to other social characteristics,
contributes to these differences. To examine this question, political activity measures
for involvement and affiliation were used as dependent variables in a series of multiple
regressions which included income, education, race, age, sex, and Appalachian origin
as independent variables.6 In this way the effects of Appalachian origin can be specified
separately from the effects of other social characteristics.
The data presented in Table 9:2 demonstrate clearly the importance of
demographic factors over Appalachian origin in explaining these political variables.
Education and age are the best predictors of political involvement; sex and income also
contribute to the explanation of variance on this scale. Race is the best predictor of
party identification, while income and age also contribute to this model. For political
philosophy, age is the most important predictor variable; race and income somewhat
less important. Appalachian origin contributes little to the explanation of any of these
variables, and does not make a statistically significant difference for any of the
dependent variables explained. While Appalachians may differ from non-Appalachian
whites and blacks in various aspects of their political activity, Appalachian origin
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE ( 71
�TABLE 9:1
RESPONSES OF WHITE NON-APPALACHIANS, WHITE APPALACHIANS, AND
BLACK NON-APPALACHAINS IN HAMILTON COUNTY, OHIO TO QUESTIONS
REGARDING THEIR POLITICAL INTEREST, PARTICIPATION, KNOWLEDGE, AND
AFFILIATION
White nonAppalachians
White
Appalachians
Black nonAppalachians
Political interest?a
Most of the time
Some of the time
Only now and then
34%
37%
28%
39%
27%
33%
36%
26%
38%
N
723
225
127
Campaign interest?a,b
Very much
Somewhat
Not much
39%
45%
16%
41%
33%
26%
45%
31%
24%
N
721
225
127
73%
27%
61%
39%
69%
31%
723
227
125
35%
29%
36%
31%
27%
43%
17%
25%
58%
N
726
225
127
Party identificationa,c
Democrat
Independent
Republican
23%
46%
32%
21%
42%
37%
56%
36%
8%
701
225
127
18%
44%
38%
25%
35%
39%
32%
41%
27%
681
208
108
Voted in last election?a,b
Yes
No
Able to name senators?a,c
Both
One
Neither
N
Political philosophya
Liberal
Moderate
Conservative
N
alndicates statistically significant differences at the .01 level between white nonAppalachians, white Appalachians, and black non-Appalachians using a chi-square
test.
blndicates statistically significant differences at the .01 level between white nonAppalachians and white Appalachians using a chi-square test.
clndicates statistically significant differences at the .01 level
Appalachians and black non-Appalachians using a chi-square test.
72)
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
between
white
�contributes little to the explanation of these differences when other social factors are
controlled in a multivariate model.
TABLE 9:2
BETA WEIGHTS FOR REGRESSIONS ON POLITICAL
INVOLVEMENT AND AFFILIATION
Involvement
Political
Involvement
Affiliation
Party
Identification
Political
Philosophy
Education
Age
Sex
Income
Race
Appalachian origin
-.38*
-.32*
.13*
-.11*
.02
.01
-.02*
.09*
-.03
.13*
.26*
-.03
-.02
.24*
.03
.09*
.11*
.04
Multiple R
.50
.32
.28
*Statistically significant at the .01 level.
II. APPALACHIAN PARTICIPATION IN
URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD GOVERNANCE
At present the city of Cincinnati recognizes 48 "statistical neighborhoods," which
identify the approximate neighborhood location of census tracts and are used primarily
for data collection and analysis (City Planning Commission, 1980). From another
perspective, there are 47 neighborhoods with at least one "semi-official" community
council operating in each. In some neighborhoods more than one council exists because
of political rivalries, because they are subdivided into block clubs, or because of specialinterest groups within the same neighborhood (Bordwell, 1983a). In mid-1983 there
was a total of 78 neighborhood-based councils or groups and two citywide coalitions of
neighborhood groups (Bordwell, 1983a, 1983b).
The Data
In the spring of 1981 the Behavioral Sciences Laboratory of the University of
Cincinnati conducted the Citizens Services Survey/1981,7 a random-digit-dialing
telephone survey of 4,275 adults living in Cincinnati. The survey identified 1,185
black respondents, 325 first-generation white Appalachians, and 2,492 other whites.
The research design recognized the importance of distinguishing among these three
groups because of their high-density concentrations in particular Cincinnati
neighborhoods (Maloney, 1974), and because they display distinct socioeconomic and
ethnic characteristics (Philliber, 1981).
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE ( 73
�Two limitations inherent in this data set should be taken into consideration when
reviewing the results of the study. First, the data understate the number of
Appalachians by at least half by including black Appalachians in the black group and
by including second-generation white Appalachians among "other whites." Second, the
data were collected primarily for descriptive rather than explanatory purposes; thus the
secondary analysis of such data is quite limited in its explanatory power. Even with
these constraints, however, the data set is the most current and complete source of
information on Appalachian participation in urban neighborhood governance.
The Results
In 1978 the Institute of Governmental Research reported that "while 71% (of
Cincinnatians surveyed) know of the existence of community councils in their
neighborhoods, only 12.4% report that they belong to the council" (Institute of
Governmental Research, 1978:3). Five years later slightly less than 55% of
Cincinnatians surveyed knew of such councils operating in their neighborhoods, and
only 14% indicated that they were members of a neighborhood council. More blacks
(62%) than Appalachians (44%) or other whites (53%) knew of a local neighborhood
association or community council, but among those who knew of such organizations
only 24% of the Appalachians and other whites and 27% of the blacks said that they
belonged in some way to a neighborhood council.
TABLE 9:3
AGE AND SEX OF MEMBERS OF THREE CINCINNATI GROUPS
WHO KNOW ABOUT AND BELONG TO NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS
AGE
KNOW
% (N)
BELONG
% (N)
BLACK
18-29 years
30-64 years
65 and older
61 (271)
69 (378)
53 (82)
13 (35)
35 (130)
40 (33)
APPALACHIAN
18-29 years
30-64years
65 and older
44 (30)
43 (81)
45 (31)
10 (3)
31 (25)
21 (6)
OTHER WHITE
18-29 years
30-64years
65 and older
44 (463)
62 (684)
47 (174)
11 (48)
30 (204)
31 (53)
SEX
KNOW
BELONG
BLACK
Males
Females
63 (270)
62 (467)
24 (65)
29 (134)
APPALACHIAN
Males
Females
42 (52)
45 (90)
28 (15)
22 (20)
OTHER WHITE
Males
Females
55 (591)
51 (721)
22 (128)
26 (183)
74) PART lll: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN LIFE
�As Table 9:3 indicates, age makes little difference in whether Appalachians know
about neighborhood councils, but among blacks and other whites, those between the
ages of 30 and 64 are more likely to know about the councils. For each of the three
groups, being over thirty years old increases the likelihood of belonging to a
neighborhood council. In all three groups the sex of the respondents seem to have little
bearing on knowledge of local councils. Sex also makes little difference in
membership patterns, although Appalachian men are slightly more likely to be
members than Appalachian women, in contrast to the prevalence of female council
members in the other two groups.
When the figures are studied from the viewpoint of key social characteristics
such as education, occupation, and income, a consistent pattern emerges. As the level
of education rises for members of each group, so does the possibility that they will be
aware of their community council. Having more than twelve years of education is the
largest positive influence on the membership patterns of each of the three groups.
Among the Appalachians in particular, an increase in educational attainment
accompanies a major increase in both awareness and membership.
White-collar workers in each of the three groups are more likely than blue-collar
workers to know about neighborhood councils and are more likely to belong to them.
The effect of higher occupation status upon know ledge is greater for Appalachians then
for blacks and whites; among Appalachians white-collar workers have significantly
greater knowledge of local councils than do blue-collar workers. The effect of
occupational status on membership patterns, however, is more pronounced for blacks
and for other whites; it is almost negligible for Appalachians.
Home ownership has a modest positive effect on neighborhood-council
awareness among members of all three groups, and a somewhat more substantial effect
on the likelihood that they will actually be members of a council.
Overall, neighborhood satisfaction has a positive correlation with knowledge of
neighborhood councils for Appalachians, but a slightly negative correlation for blacks
and other whites. For each of the three groups and particularly among Appalachians,
those who are satisfied with their neighborhoods are more likely to belong to a
neighborhood council.
Conclusions
It seems, therefore, that Appalachian ethnicity has very little direct influence on
the political activity of the county's Appalachian population. On the other hand,
socioeconomic factors such as education, age, sex, race, and income help account for
the observed differences in political involvement and affiliation found among the
county residents sampled. Taken in themselves, these factors would appear to lend
more credence to a social class explanation of the political differences observed than to
an explanation based on ethnicity.
This is certainly the case of Appalachian knowledge of and participation in
neighborhood councils. As socioeconomic status rises, a clear pattern of increasing
knowledge and membership emerges for all three groups. Education and income have
the strongest effect on awareness of neighborhood councils, while income has a
substantial influence on council membership. In addition, homeowners who are also
voters are consistently more likely to know about their neighborhood councils and to
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE ( 75
�TABLE 9:4
EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT, OCCUPATIONAL STATUS, INCOME,
AND SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS (SES) FOR MEMBERS OF THREE
CINCINNATI GROUPS WHO KNOW ABOUT AND BELONG TO
NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS
KNOW
% (N)
BELONG
% ( N)
Less than 12 yrs.
12 years
More than 12 yrs.
27 (32)
46 (49)
63 (61)
9 (3)
21 (1 0)
35 (21)
Less than 12 yrs.
12 years
More than 12 yrs.
39 (189)
49 (382)
61 (741)
18 (33)
18 (66)
29 (211)
BLACK
White Collar
Blue Collar
67 (264)
61 (410)
35 (94)
24 (96)
White Collar
Blue Collar
59 (81)
34 (52)
26 (21)
22 (11)
White Collar
Blue Collar
59 (882)
46 (355)
27 (239)
17 (60)
BLACK
Less than $15,000
$15,000-$30,000
More than $30,000
61 (318)
71 (195)
76 (73)
24 (75)
28 (54)
53 (38)
APPALACHIAN
Less than $15,000
$15,000-$30,000
More than $30,000
36 (47)
60 (54)
57 (22)
16 (8)
17 (9)
60 (13)
OTHER WHITES
Less than $15,000
$15,000-$30,000
More than $30,000
43 (341)
55 (421)
70 (291)
16 (53)
22 (91)
32 (93)
BLACK
High
Medium
Low
74 (108)
70 (237)
59 (199)
46 (50)
26 (64)
24 (47)
APPALACHIAN
High
Medium
Low
69 (36)
50 (58)
33 (25)
46 (16)
14 (8)
12 (3)
OTHER WHITES
76)
29 (63)
19 (50)
34 (87)
OTHER WHITES
SES
55 (217)
61 (266)
72 (253)
APPALACHIAN
INCOME
Less than 12 yrs.
12 years
More than 12 yrs.
OTHER WHITES
OCCUPATION
BLACK
APPALACHIAN
EDUCATION
High
Medium
Low
69 (420)
50 (463)
41 (125)
32 (133)
18 (83)
14 (17)
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
�belong to them than renters who do not vote. Except for Appalachians, people who
are dissatisfied with their neighborhoods are likely to be less aware of local councils
and almost totally uninvolved in them.
The larger the income, the greater the possibility that members of all three
groups will know about and be members of neighborhood councils. Among nonAppalachian whites, increasing income makes it most likely that they will know about
their local councils; by contrast, Appalachian council membership increases most
substantially as income rises.
One method of summarizing the combined effects of educational attainment,
occupational status, and income is to combine them in such a way as to indicate the
relationship of socioeconomic status (SES) within each group to awareness of
neighborhood councils and membership in the councils.S Overall, the higher the level
of socioeconomic well-being, the greater the probability of knowing about and
belonging to a neighborhood council. In fact, rising socioeconomic status appears to
TABLE 9:5
POLITICAL PARTICIPATION, HOME OWNERSHIP, AND NEIGHBORHOOD
SATISFACTION OF MEMBERS OF THREE CINCINNATI GROUPS WHO
KNOW ABOUT AND BELONG TO NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCILS
KNOW
Voters
Nonvoters
69 (408)
56 (328)
40 (161)
12 (38)
Voters
Nonvoters
59 (88)
31 (54)
31 (27)
13 (7)
Voters
Nonvoters
65 (860)
39 (451)
30 (252)
13 (59)
BLACK
Owners
Rent
69 (296)
59 (440)
40 (116)
19 (83)
APPALACHIAN
Owners
Rent
45 (80)
44 (62)
33 (26)
13 (8)
OTHER WHITES
NEIGHBORHOOD
SATISFACTION
BLACK
OTHER WHITES
HOME OWNERSHIP
% (N)
APPALACHIAN
POLITICAL
PARTICIPATION
BELONG
% ( N)
Owners
Rent
65 (838)
41 (461)
30 (252)
12 (56)
BLACK
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
62 (575)
64 (129)
28 (158)
22 (29)
APPALACHIAN
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
47 (130)
26 (1 0)
27 (34)
0 (0)
OTHER WHITES
Satisfied
Dissatisfied
53 (1147)
54 (128)
24 (276)
21 (26)
PART ll/: FROM REGIONAUSM TO URBAN UFE
( 77
�have the greatest effect among Appalachians: high-SES Appalachians are more than
twice as likely to know about community councils and almost four times as likely to
belong to a community council than their low-SES counterparts.
Apart from basic social characteristics, we can expect other factors to affect
community council awareness and membership. Political participation, home
ownership, and overall neighborhood satisfaction can be related to the knowledge of
neighborhood councils and the motivation to join them. Respondents who indicated
that they voted in the last Cincinnati city council election were more likely to know
about their neighborhood councils and to belong to them than those who did not vote.
The effect of political participation on neighborhood council membership patterns is
most evident among blacks, who were over three times more likely to belong to a
council if they were voters than if they were nonvoters.
Cincinnati's black residents are consistently more likely to know about and to
join neighborhood-based organizations than are Appalachians or other whites. The
relatively high levels of black awareness and participation in Cincinnati's
neighborhood-based organizations resemble national patterns of black participation in
voluntary organizations (Antunes and Gaitz, 1975; Cohen and Kapsis, 1978;
Williams, et al., 1973, 1977). On the other hand, awareness and membership are
lowest among the Appalachians surveyed; within the Appalachian group those with
less income, less schooling, and lower occupational status are least likely to know of
or be members of neighborhood councils.
Other issues in this area remain to be explored, such as the effect of community
organizers on Appalachian membership in local councils and different patterns of
community-council participation in heavily Appalachian neighborhoods.
Nonetheless, these basic insights can be derived from this consideration of the social
factors influencing neighborhood council awareness and participation among
Appalachians. First, because urban Appalachians are consistently more aware of their
local councils than they are willing to join them, the councils may benefit from
reevaluating the wisdom of depending on public announcements (e.g., newspaper
coverage, circulars, posters) to bring in Appalachian members. Second, because those
groups with greater ethnic self-awareness, such as blacks, are proportionately more
involved in local councils, less self-conscious groups, such as Appalachians may need
more intensive recruitment to ensure adequate representation in neighborhood council
membership. Third, to the extent that among Appalachians those under thirty years of
age, women, and individuals of lower socioeconomic status are less well represented in
local council membership, extra effort is necessary either to recruit them to council
membership or to identify and act on the issues which most concern them.
NOTES
1.
Hamilton County and its largest urban center, the city of Cincinnati, have long
been major destinations for Appalachian migrants (McCoy and Brown, 1981). In
1980 there were over 213,000 first- and second-generation Appalachians in the
county, constituting just under one-fourth of its population (Obermiller, 1982).
2.
The Greater Cincinnati Survey is a cost-shared semiannual telephone survey of
78)
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�residents 18 years of age and older in Hamilton County. Random-digit dialing
procedures are used for selecting the sample. The response rate for this survey,
including partially completed interviews, was 78.3%.
3.
At the suggestion of one of the reviewers, the analysis was performed with only
first-generation respondents coded as Appalachian. As would be expected, firstgeneration Appalachians were older and less educated than second-generation
respondents, but these distinctions did not alter the relationships between
Appalachian origin and other demographic characteristics, or the relationships
with the political variables examined. This fmding is consistent with the work of
Philliber (1981) and Obermiller (1982), who have shown that generation makes
little difference in the attitudes and behavior of Appalachians. Given the greater
statistical power which a definition using both Appalachian generations provides,
we chose this operationalization.
4.
The socioeconomic status index was created by first collapsing income, education,
and occupation into the following categories:
Value
1
2
3
Income
Education
Occupation
$0-$14,999
$15,000-$24,999
$25,000 and over
Less than high school
High school diploma
Some college or more
Blue-collar
White-collar
These three variables were then summed, resulting in an index with scores ranging
from 3 to 9. Respondents with a score of 3 or 4 were classified as low SES, those
with scores of 5, 6, or 7 were considered medium SES, and individuals with scores
of 8 or 9 were categorized as high on the SES index.
5.
These questions used the same wording as those in the National Election
Studies conducted by the Center of Political Studies at the University of
Michigan for the variable indicating interest in politics, voting behavior, party
identification, and political philosophy. Political knowledge was measured by
asking respondents the following question: "Now we know that a lot of people
don't always follow politics, but do you happen to know the names of the two
United States senators from Ohio?"
6.
The variables which
7.
Thanks
8.
Socioeconomic status was determined by considering level of income (less than
have been examined here represent two dimensions of
political activity: involvement and affiliation. For this regression analysis, the
involvement variables-interest in politics, campaign interest, vote, and knowlede
of senators' names-were combined linearly into an index which was used as one of
the dependent variables. Scores on this index ranged from 4 to 12. Separate
regressions were run, with party identification and political philosophy as the
dependent variables.
The seven-point party identification and political
philosophy measures were used as dependent variables.
to Dean Watkins of the Office of Research, Evaluation, and Budget,
City of Cincinnati, for making the Citizen Services Survey 1981 data available
for this study.
PAKI Ill: FROM REGIONAUSM TO URBAN UFE ( 79
�$15,000; $15,000-$30,000; more than $30,000), education (less than 12 years;
12 years; more than 12 years), and occupational status (white-collar; blue-collar)
and combining them into appropriate categories, in this case high, medium, and
low. A respondent with at least two out of three characteristics in the same
category was included in that category.
80)
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�THE IMPACT OF THE URBAN
MILIEU ON THE
APPALACHIAN FAMILY TYPE
Urbanization has produced a great number of changes in American society.
Along with industrialization, urbanization has changed the United States from a rural
society to a predominantly urban society. Especially affected have been the five major
social institutions: politics, education, religion, economics, and the family.
Perhaps the institution that has been affected the most has been the family. The
sociological literature indicates that the family has changed from an extended family
type to a nuclear family type. Parsons (1951:510) maintains that urbanization,
technology, and bureaucratization have produced an "isolated nuclear family."
According to Parsons (1955a:9; 1955b:354) and Zelditch (1955:307), the modern
American family, especially the urban family, is the product of the transition from an
extended family type in which there is a great deal of dependence on the kinship
network, to a nuclear family type in which there is a great deal of isolation from the
kinship unit.
The modern nuclear family tends to occupy a separate dwelling apart from the
family of orientation of either parent. The household is economically independent
of the kinship unit. Parsons (1955a:9) maintains that the modern nuclear family is
a product of "adaptive-upgrading" and is a more stable, improved type of family.
Leslie (1973:18, 53, and 213) suggests that urbanization and industrialization
have been instrumental in producing movement toward the nuclear family as the
dominant family type. Goode (1963) has proposed that, concomitant with the trend of
society toward modernization, industrialization, and urbanization, the extended family
becomes rare and the corporate kin structure disappears. Zimmerman (1947) and Wirth
(1938) express the view that the American family is characteristically of the
isolated nuclear form. Gleason (1956) maintains that the younger generation objects
to joint living arrangements and it is only with reluctance that most older people will
give up their freedom and become members of their children's household. McKee and
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALJSM TO URBAN UFE
(81
�Robertson (1975:387) state that the nuclear family is the established family form in
America.
FAMILY TYPE IN CENTRAL APPALACHIA. The early frontiersmen who settled
in the Central Appalachian mountains (Southwestern Virginia, West Virginia,
Eastern Tennessee, and Eastern Kentucky) tended to come seeking isolation. The
isolation sought and secured by these settlers was conducive to the development of an
extended family type. Outsiders were considered to be interested only in exploitation
(Appleby, 1970:34), so the extended family and extended kinship network became
important to the mountaineer.
The development of the extended family type made each valley the domain of a
single family. The extended family was responsible for the specialized roles of religion,
education, government, and even the military through the defense of the family
(Gibson, 1975:5). These specialized roles were taken over by clans or groupings of
extended families as they developed. The military role of the clan is best exemplified
by such conflicts as the Hatfield-McCoy and Allen-Edwards feuds in the late 1800's
and early 1900's (Caudill, 1963).
The literature indicates that the extended family is still very much in
existence in Central Appalachia. Brown and Schwarzweller (1974:64) in an
extensive study of the Appalachian family found that the extended family
continues to be important. Some noted Appalachian scholars maintain that the
extended family is still the typical family type in the Central Appalachian
Mountains. Gazaway (1974:94) in her study of a Kentucky mountain community
found that most family situations consisted of three generations of a family group.
Stephenson (1968:2) learned that related families tend to live in at least the same
neighborhood. He also discovered that it was unusual to find a family that had no
kin-at least a second cousin or uncle by marriage-in other neighborhoods. One of the
most noted of Appalachian authors, Weller (1966:13) states:
It is not unusual today to fmd families with four generations living side by
side in one narrow valley-brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, nieces, nephews,
and cousins-intermarrying to such an extent that in some fashion every
person is related to every other. It frequently happens that a girl
marries and does not even have to change her last name.
A major factor in the continued existence of the extended
Central Appalachia has been endogamy. Vincent (1898), while visiting
Kentucky, noted that there were isolated mountain families living
and coves with strong ties of kinship based upon three or more
of intermarriage. Matthews (1966:10) states that:
family in
the hills of
up hollows
generations
. . . cousin marriages and the tendency for brothers and sisters to
choose mates who are themselves either siblings or first cousins is
evident. For siblings of one group to marry siblings of another is
considered ideal and provides security in time of emergency.
Matthews (1966:xxiii) further states:
82) PART l/l: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�The condition intervening between kinship and other social networks is
local endogamy, the practice of choosing a marriage partner within the
bounds of the community. Endogamy must have had its beginning with
geographical isolation and valley families' practice of marrying
"conveniently" and it persists because it supposedly provides structural
stability. It provides economic stability, since marrying into
a neighboring farm means land and consolidates and conserves wealth. It
provides cohesion insofar as marriage between persons allied by blood
continually strengthens the kin network and reinforces the "mechanical
solidarity" that operates in such a system, and it gives personal
satisfaction inasmuch as persons marry those whom they are expected to
marry and whose way of life they share.
The present study was devoted to an analysis of family type in the urban milieu.
The author wanted to determine whether the urban environment is conducive to the
development of a nuclear family type. To perform this task, a group of urban migrants
from a rural geographical area where the extended family is still commonly found had
to be studied.
While the extended family type is considered to be prevalent in Central
Appalachia, the sparse studies of the family type of urban Central Appalachians have
indicated that the nuclear family type is dominant. Weller (1975:110) and
Schwarzweller, Brown, and Mangalam (1971:130 & 286) state that the migrants'
household is typically a complete nuclear family unit composed of husband, wife, and
their children. Those who do not join an established household when they move to the
city usually locate in the immediate vicinity of kinfolk and friends. However, they
rapidly take on the characteristics of the nuclear family. Schwarzweller, Brown, and
Mangalam (1971) found that in 85.5% of the cases they studied, the household was a
complete nuclear family unit; in most of the other cases (8.7%) it could be classified
as an extended family unit.
Since the literature suggests the prevalence of an extended family unit in Central
Appalachia and the prevalence of a nuclear family type among Central Appalachian
migrants, it was felt that urban Central Appalachians would be an adequate group to
study. Therefore, the family type of a group of Central Appalachian migrants
was examined and then compared with the family type of non-Central Appalachian
migrants in the urban milieu.
Procedure
The population in this investigation consisted of families in Akron, Ohio whose
names were listed in the current Telephone Directory for Akron and Vicinity.
The sample consisted of a random sample of 312 families residing in Akron whose
names were listed in the telephone directory.
Three hundred names were initially selected, through the random selection
procedure to serve as interviewees. A list of two hundred additional names was
compiled (employing the same procedure used in compiling the initial list) and utilized
when potential interviewees on the original list could not be reached or refused to
participate.
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
(83
�FAMILY BACKGROUND. Respondents were classified as either Central Appal-
achian migrants or non-Central Appalachian migrants. Central Appalachian migrants
were those who moved to the Akron, Ohio area after spending their lives in the
Central Appalachian mountains. Non-Central Appalachian migrants were those
persons who had lived their entire lives in Akron or had moved to Akron from
somewhere outside the Central Appalachian area (these persons had never resided in
Central Appalachia).
·
Seventy-three (23% of the total sample) of the persons participating in the
study were Central Appalachian migrants. Fifty-one (73%) were from West Virginia,
eight (11 %) were from Eastern Kentucky, twelve (16%) were from Eastern Tennessee,
and two (3%) were from Southwestern Virginia.
Two hundred thirty-nine (77% of the total sample) of the interviewees were nonCentral Appalachian migrants. One hundred forty-four (46% of the total sample)
were persons who had lived in Akron all their lives and ninety-five (31% of the total
sample) were individuals who had moved to Akron from somewhere other than
Central Appalachia.
FAMILY TYPE.
Family type was classified as either nuclear or non-nuclear.
Billingsley's (1968) classification of families as nuclear,
extended, or
augmented was originally employed. However, since only two families were
classified as augmented, families determined to be extended and augmented were
combined into the non-nuclear category. Twenty-two (7%) of the families were
considered to be non-nuclear and two hundred ninety (93%) were classified as
nuclear.
Results
The cross-tabulation of family background and family type revealed a significant
difference between Central Appalachian migrants and non-Central Appalachian
migrants in Akron, Ohio in relation to present family type (X2=7.817;
p< 0.01). The measure of association (C=0.17) indicates that Central Appalachian
migrants are slightly more likely than non-Central Appalachian migrants to live in
non-nuclear families and non-Central Appalachians are slightly more likely to live in
nuclear families than Central Appalachian migrants.
While a difference is indicated, it may not be an important difference. An
examination of cell frequencies and percentages (Table 10:1) indicates that there is
little percentage difference between Central Appalachian migrants and non-Central
Appalachians in terms of family type. Both are much more likely to reside in nuclear
families than non-nuclear families. Ninety-three percent (190) ofthe respondents in
this investigation were living in nuclear families. Eighty-five percent (62) of the
Central Appalachian migrant families and ninety-five percent (228) of the non-Central
Appalachian migrant families were nuclear.
Present Family Type And Family Type
Of The Family Of Orientation
Socialization is an important process in the life of an individual. Flacks
(1979:23) states that the family is "the primary institution for the inculcation of basic
84) PART /ll: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�TABLE 10:1
CROSS-TABULATION OF FAMILY BACKGROUND AND PRESENT FAMILY TYPE
Non-Central
Appalachian
Migrant
Central
Appalachian
Migrant
Present
Family Type
Frequency
%
Frequency
0
/o
Total
Frequency
Nuclear
62
85%
228
95%
290
93%
Non-Nuclear
11
15%
11
5%
22
7%
Total
73
100%
239
100%
312
100%
X2=7.817.
df=1
p<0.01
%
C=0.17
values and molding of culturally appropriate character structures. "Leslie (1969) notes
that the individual develops family values and attitudes toward the family early in life.
If it is the case that family values and attitudes toward the family are
developed during the early years, one would expect persons from nuclear families to
establish nuclear families of procreation and persons from non-nuclear families of
orientation to establish non-nuclear families.
The results of the present study indicate that persons living in nuclear families
tende to come from nuclear families of orientation, but people residing in nonnuclear families also tended to come from nuclear families (Table 10:2). The vast
majority of the respondents in the study lived in nuclear families of procreation and
nuclear families of orientation.
CENTRAL APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS. Eighty-four percent (61) of the Central
Appalachian migrants in the study lived in nuclear families of orientation. Eightynine percent (55) of the interviewees living in nuclear families of procreation
had lived in nuclear families of orientation. Fifty-four percent (6) of those living
in non-nuclear families had lived in nuclear families of orientation. These are
important results in that they indicate that the majority of the Central
Appalachians had lived in nuclear families prior to establishing their own family
units. They also indicate (in contrast to the literature) that the majority of those
families that were non-nuclear in Akron had lived in nuclear families of orientation, and
that the majority of those whose family of orientation had been non-nuclear
established nuclear families of procreation in the city.
OTHER MIGRANTS. Eighty-eight percent (84) of those persons who had moved
to Akron from somewhere outside of Central Appalachia (other migrants) had
lived in nuclear families of orientation. Eighty-nine percent (83) of those living in
nuclear families had lived in nuclear families of orientation. Only one person residing
in a non-nuclear family had lived in a nuclear family of orientation and one person
residing in a non-nuclear family of procreation had lived in a non-nuclear family of
orientation.
PART///: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN liFE
(85
�TABLE 10:2
CROSS-TABULATION OF FAMILY TYPE OF THE FAMILY OF
ORIENTATION AND PRESENT FAMILY TYPE
Present Family Type
Family Type
of the Family
of Orientation
Nuclear
Frequency
Nuclear
Non-Nuclear
Total
/o
Non-Nuclear
Frequency %
Total
Frequency
256
88%
14
64%
270
87%
34
12%
8
36%
42
13%
290
100%
22
100%
312
100%
0
/o
0
AKRONITES. Eighty-seven percent (125) of the persons who had lived in
Akron, Ohio all their lives had resided in nuclear families of orientation. Eightyseven percent (118) of those persons presently living in nuclear families had lived in
nuclear families of orientation. Seventy-eight percent (7) of those respondents living
in non-nuclear families had lived in nuclear families of orientation.
Present Family Type and Family Type
Directly Prior to Moving to Akron
The results of this study indicated that, by far, the majority of the respondents
were living in nuclear families and had lived in nuclear families of orientation. It
seemed logical to expect, on the basis of these findings, that the family type directly
prior to moving to Akron, for Central Appalachian migrants and non-Central
Appalachian migrants would also be nuclear. Further analysis tended to support this
expectation.
Ninety-nine percent (153) of those residing in nuclear families had lived in
nuclear families prior to moving to Akron. Twelve (92%) of those living in nonnuclear families had lived in nuclear families prior to moving, and only one person
living in a non-nuclear family had lived in a non-nuclear family.
CENTRAL APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS. Ninety-seven percent (71) of the Central
Appalachian migrants had lived in nuclear families prior to moving to Akron. Ninetyeight percent (61) of the respondents living in nuclear families had lived in nuclear
families prior to moving to Akron. Ten (91%) of the Central Appalachian
migrants living in non-nuclear families had lived in nuclear families.
Again, we see the pattern. Most of the Central Appalachian migrants were
living in nuclear families and tended to move from nuclear family situations. Also,
those residing in non-nuclear family types, in defying the literature, tended to move
from nuclear family situations. Importantly, only two of the family types directly
prior to moving were non-nuclear.
OTHER MIGRANTS. Ninety-nine percent (94) of the other migrants resided in
nuclear families prior to moving to Akron. Ninety-nine percent (92) of those living in
86) PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�nuclear families had lived in nuclear families before moving. The two persons presently
residing in a non-nuclear family type had resided in a nuclear family before moving.
TABLE10:3
CROSS-TABULATION OF FAMILY TYPE DIRECTLY PRIOR
TO MOVING TO AKRON AND PRESENT FAMILY TYPE
(CENTRAL APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS AND OTHER MIGRANTS)
Present Family Type
Family Type
Directly Prior to
Moving to Akron
Nuclear
Frequency
%
Non-Nuclear
Frequency
%
Total
Frequency %
Nuclear
153
99%
12
92%
165
98%
2
1%
8%
3
2%
155
100%
100%
168
100%
Non-Nuclear
Total
13
Present Family Type And
Family Type Since Living in Akron
Based on the results previously discussed, the author decided to determine whether
respondents had, during their residence in Akron, ever lived in a family type
different from their present one.
Twenty percent (64) of the sample had lived in non-nuclear families at
some time during their life in the city. Only fourteen percent (42) of those persons
living in nuclear families had ever lived in non-nuclear family situations since
residing in Akron.
TABLE 10:4
CROSS-TABULATION OF FAMILY TYPE SINCE LIVING
IN AKRON AND PRESENT FAMILY TYPE
Present Family Type
Family Type
Since Living
in Akron
Nuclear
Frequency
%
Nuclear
248
86%
42
290
Non-Nuclear
Total
Non-Nuclear
Frequency
%
Total
Frequency
%
0
0%
248
80%
14%
22
100%
64
20%
100%
22
100%
312
100%
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN liFE
(87
�Twenty-six percent (19) of the Central Appalachian migrants, sixteen percent
(15) of the "other migrants," and twenty-one percent (30) of the Akronites had lived in
non-nuclear families at some time since living in Akron.
Conclusions
The original purpose of this study was to determine whether the urban
environment is a determining factor with regard to family type. It has provided little
evidence to indicate that this is the case.
The primary goal was to compare Central Appalachian migrants with nonCentral Appalachian migrants because the literature suggested that the non-nuclear
family was more prevalent in the Central Appalachian mountains. The results indicate
that, regardless of family background, the vast majority of the respondents (1) resided
in nuclear families, (2) lived in nuclear families of orientation, (3) resided in nuclear
families directly prior to moving to Akron (Central Appalachian migrants and other
migrants), and (4) had lived in nuclear families since living in Akron.
This investigation has provided an important indication that updated studies
of present family type in Central Appalachia need to be performed. There is every
indication that studies of family type in Central Appalachia are outdated and somewhat
restricted in terms of geographic locale. Only after more updated studies have been
performed can we draw more accurate conclusions concerning the comparison of
Central Appalachian migrants and other persons in the urban milieu.
88) PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�EFFECTS OF SCHOOLS &
SCHOOLING ON APPALACHIAN
CHILDREN IN CINCINNATI
Thomas Wagner's Appalachian School Project Committee (1973) established
the groundwork for study of the experience of Appalachian children in public
education. Sponsored by the Urban Appalachian Council in cooperation with the
Cincinnati Human Relations Commission, study group members conducted extensive
observations and interviews during the spring of 1974 in three predominantly
Appalachian public schools in Cincinnati: Oyler Elementary School, Roberts
Junior High School, and Western Hills High School. Although interviews were
carried out with teachers and administrators as well as with students, the results
of interviews with students were most revealing. Students expressed a strong
orientation toward neighborhood and family (as detailed, for example, in reports on
relationships with siblings and frequency of family visits to kin in the mountains)
and, by contrast, widespread alienation from the schools' academic and
extracurricular programs.
Principally as a result of the recommendations of Wagner's committee,
Cincinnati Public Schools, beginning in 1973, obtained data on county of birth for
students enrolled in city schools, their parents and grandparents. These data enabled
researchers to systematically determine the ethnic composition of the area schools.
Soon other studies followed. In order to establish a relationship between
student dropout rates and aggregate student (i.e., school) characteristics, Marvin
Berlowitz and Henry Durand (1977) isolated a set of school-related variables
including student characteristics such as racial or ethnic background, selfconcept and family income. In this study a school with 40% or more first, second,
and third generation students of Appalachian origin was considered predominantly
Appalachian. Results indicated that factors associated with high dropout
rates in these schools were high rates of absenteeism (Pearson r=.68), low
reading achievement (Pearson r=.89) and high rates of student suspension (Pearson
r=.49). By identifying specific variables related to student alienation
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE (89
�(dropping out), Berlowitz and Durand amplified the important finding in Wagner's
study of widespread student antipathy toward school.
COMPARING THE NEIGHBORHOODS.
A comparison of Cincinnati
neighborhoods on adult education and youth dropout rates shows how the education
problem in Cincinnati is distributed geographically. In Table 11:1 the
neighborhoods are listed by their 1970 socioeconomic status rank (Maloney, 1974).
A look at the educational statistics show that percent of high school graduates and
school dropouts varies greatly according to the socioeconomic status of the
neighborhoods. Some of the higher mtes are in such low SES areas as Camp
Washington (49.6), Lower Price Hill (57.8), and Over-the-Rhine (44.8). High
SES areas such as North Avondale (2.2) and Hyde Park (4.2) have relatively low
dropout mtes. The dropout problem is clearly a city wide problem, however. Even
Hyde Park had twenty 16-19-year-old dropouts in 1980 and Westwood had 246.
TABLE 11:1
ADULT EDUCATION AND YOUTH DROPOUT AND JOBLESS RATES FOR CINCINNATI
NEIGHBORHOODS LISTED BY 1970 SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS RANK
CIVILIANS 16-19 YRS OLD, 1980
%
0
/o
%
Camp
Washington
2,198 10.5 14.9 28.0
119
62.18
49.58
49.5
East
End*
3,230 12.6 11.7 24.0
266
46.61
36.46
28.6
Lower
Price
Hill
2,155
161
72.05
57.76
47.2
30.2
474
49.36
36.70
29.5
190 61.6 21.0 -----
145
80.70
66.20
51.7
SocioStat isEconomic
tical
Status Rank Neigh1970 1980 borhood
2
2
3
4
5
8
5
4
NR
Jobless
(Unemployed
Not
Not High or not
Enrolled School
Labor
in school Grad.
Force)
Percent
High School
Graduates
(25 years
Popuor older)
Total
lation %
1980 Black 1970 1980 no.
North
FairmontEnglish
Woods* 5,889
Queensgate1
0.5
60.9
15.1 23.3
----
90) PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�(Table 11:1 Continued)
Percent
High School
Graduates
Not
(25 years
Enrolled
PopuIat ion %
or older)
Total in school
%
1980 Black 1970 1980 no.
SociaEconomic
Status Rank
1970 1980
Stat istical
Neighborhood
6
South
CummingsvilleMillvale 4,908 92.2 20.2 28.0
535
West End 12,886 94.8 20.5 29.0
RiversideSedamsville
3,007
7
11.5
8
9
9
10
11
12
13
3
13
14
28
11.5
14
27
15
25
16
NR
6
21
Jobless
(Unemplayed
Not High or not
Labor
School
Grad.
Force)
%
%
22.61
11.58
6.0
964
25.82
17.84
13.3
19.9 31.8
249
61.84
50.20
45.4
Over-theRhine 11,914 66.7 15.2 21.2
758
54.74
44.8
37.7
Walnut
Hills
9,912 90.4 24.3 38.2
679
33.87
24.30
21.2
Mount
Auburn
8,889 72.6 31.0 50.0
855
31.22
20.93
19.8
FairviewClifton
Heights
7,940 10.0 27.8 53.0
457
36.10
18.16
10.7
39.0
308
61.04
46.75
28.2
38.9 60.2
236
34.32
22.88
19.1
28.5 52.7
63
57.14
42.15
33.3
696
30.17
20.11
15.9
179
46.36
17.87
17.9
South
Fairmont 4,104
Corryville
Winton
Place*
5.8 26.1
4,539 52.1
RiversideSayler
1,301
Park*
Winton
Hills*
0.7
6.2
7,711 88.8 30.5 50.1
2,739
11.7
---
47.6
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAllSM TO URBAN UFE (91
�(Table 11:1) Continued)
Jobless
(unemplayed
SociaEconomic
Status Rank
1970 1980
Stat istical
Neighborhood
Graduates
(25 years
Popuor older)
lation %
1980 Black 1970 1980
Not
Not High
Enrolled School
Total in school Grad.
%
%
no.
%
17
18.5
Carthage
2,782
147
18
15
Avondale 19,845
19
17
Evanston
NR
23
EvanstonE. Walnut
Hills*
2,241
20
16
21
18.5
22
45
Northside 11 ,884
24.3 40.6
51.07
40.13
32.7
28.80
19.36
13.4
832
26.20
11.29
6.5
142
23.23
6.33
6.3
33.6 43.8 1,495
49.83
32.48
19.9
32.77
21.9
77.2 36.3 44.0 1,451
9,089 92.3
East Price
Hill
20,361
Mount
Adams
0.0
30.0 46.5
67.7 39.6
4.4
or not
Labor
Force
53.3
12.4 31.6 45.6
894
48.88
1,958
4.1 45.8 81.0
43
27.90
636
0.0 16.9 55.9
49
40.81
26.53
55.9 42.6 53.4
853
30.94
15.59
9.1
23
29
California
24
20
Madisonville
12,242
25
30
Oakley
11,801
2.9 45.6 59.4
654
38.22
20.03
12.8
26
22
Sayler
Park
3,384
1.9 44.8 58.8
288
44.79
21.87
14.2
27
36
Univers~y
Heights 10,526
28
29
31.5
31.5
12.7 61.9 74.1 2,825
West Price
Hill
20,218
0.4 45.7 60.5 1,369
Central
Business
DistrictRiverfront 2,528
18.8 41.8 67.3
92) PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
1.4
29.80
93 48.38
0.92
4.3
14.24
6.4
6.45
6.7
�(Table 11:1 Continued)
Percent
High School
Graduates
Not
Popu(25years
Enrolled
Iat ion %
or older)
Total in school
1980 Black 1970 1980 no.
%
Jobless
(Unemplayed
Not High or not
School
Labor
Grad.
Force)
SociaEconomic
Status Rank
1970 1980
Statistical
Neighborhood
30
North-West
Fairmont* ---
36.5
---
Fay Apartments* 3,159 91.2
---
58.6
178
29.77
20.22
.001 ---
91.4
157
13.37
8.91
NR
31
NR
NR
10
46
39
Mount
Look
out*
3,533
%
%
12.4
Columbia
Tusculum* 3,132
3.9
46.9 74.1
156
33.96
14.47
5.7
0.3
30.0
111
62.16
14.46
36.9
47.7 59.0 55.6
249
41.36
13.25
13.3
NR
7
Linwood*
1,425
32
42
Rose
lawn2
3,541
33
37
East Walnut
4,106 32.9
Hills
59.6 74.1
192
19.79
13.75
3.1
34
24
Bond Hill 11,408 69.6
53.6 56.8
755
30.06
12.84
8.6
35
33.5
Hartwell
5,394 10.7
41.7 62.1
229
30.6
10.48
4.4
36.5 43
Clifton
9,240 12.3
70.7 84.1
490
22.9
16.12
12.9
36.5 26
Kennedy
Heights
6,591 75.5
61.0 71.1
507
34.5
11.24
9.3
38
Westwood
53.7 67.6 1,678
37.4
14.66
10.0
38
33,459
39
40
Pleasant
Ridge 10,181
40
35
College
Hill
41
33.5
Mt. Airy
4.5
15.9 62.9 71.7
456 30.48
17.98
12.7
17,264 33.9 60.5 68.6
1,153 28.53
11.70
4.8
496 40.92
10.28
4.4
8,199
10.2 66.9 72.6
PART /ll: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
(93
�(Table 11:1 Continued)
Percent
High School
Not
Graduates
Enrolled
Popu(25 years
or older)
Total in school
lation %
1980 Black 1970 1980 no. %
SociaEconomic
Status Rank
1970 1980
Stat istical
Neighborhood
42
47
Hyde
Park
76.0 84.8
707
18.4
43
41
North
AvondalePaddock
Hills
6,762 53.0 69.4 78.6
916
8.2
44
44
14,955
Mt. Washington
11,632
4.24
0.6
2.2
2.2
20.16
9.2
31.7
18.0
12.6
12.0 48.4 63.3105,595 29.7
13.1
8.6
3.8
0.5 66.6 74.7
600 42.2
CITYOFCINCINNATI 385,457 34.0 50.9 57.9 27,508
SMSA
1,401,491
Jobless
(Unemployed
Not High or not
Labor
School
Force)
Grad.
%
%
*Asterisk indicates name change from 1970 to 1980
1 Oueensgate population is primarily institutional. This neighborhood had only five
households in 1980. As of 1980, Cincinnati is considered to have 47 residential neighborhoods, not including Queensgate. In 1980, the number was 44.
2 Roselawn's 1980 SES rank excludes consideration of data for tract 62.02 (Longview
Hospital). 1970 rank includes 62.02.
SOURCE: Census of population and housing (PHC80-2-121 ), 1980, U.S. Department
of Commerce , Bureau of the Census . 1970 SES Rank: The Social Areas of Cincinnati, by Michael E. Maloney, Cincinnati Human Relations Commission, 1974. 1980 SES
Rank: The Social Areas of Cincinnati, 1980, forthcoming publication by the same
author. Data for Cincinnati portion of split tracts is deleted.
Although high school dropout rates tend to vary directly with the SES rank of
the neighborhood, the data show that there are exceptions. For example, Mt.
Washington, which had the highest SES rank of all Cincinnati neighborhoods, had
a 1980 dropout rate of 20.2, higher than for the West End, which had a 1970 SES
rank of 7 (44 being the highest, 1 the lowest rank) and dropout rate of 17.8.
The other exception to dropout rates varying according to SES is that
dropout rates in some Appalachian neighborhoods are even higher than their SES
rankings would indicate. For example, Carthage had a 1970 SES rank of 17, but its
dropout rate in 1980 is 8th highest in the city at 40.1. Eight of the ten neighborhoods
94)
PART Jll: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�with dropout rates above 40% are predominantly Appalachian (see Table 11:2).
Appalachian and Black are not mutually exclusive terms, of course. Over-theRhine, for example, has thousands of Blacks with roots in Appalachia.
Among the predominantly Black neighborhoods, North Fairmont, English
Woods, andOver-the-Rhine have extremely high dropout rates (Table 11:2). However,
there are some pleasant surprises that may indicate effective efforts to promote school
attendance among Black youth. South Cumminsville, West End, Avondale,
Evanston, Bond Hill, Kennedy Heights, and Madisonville have dropout rates of less
than 20%. Winton Hills, Fay Apartments, Mount Auburn, Walnut Hills, and Corryville are in the 20-25 percent range. These rates, of course, should not be considered as
acceptable.
TABLE 11:2
SES RANK (1970) AND DROPOUT RATE RANK (1980) FOR THE TEN
NEIGHBORHOODS WITH THE HIGHEST DROPOUT RATES
Predominant Ethnic
Group of Dropouts
Neighborhood
Dropout
Rate
Lower Price Hill
Sedamsville-Riverside
Camp Washington
N. Fairmont-English Woods
South Fairmont
Over-the-Rhine
Riverside-Sayler Park
Carthage
East End
Northside
57.8
50.2
49.6
48.4
46.8
44.8
42.9
40.1
36.5
32.7
Dropout
Rate
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
SES
Rank
Percent
Black
White
Appal.
3
8
1
4
13
9
15
17
2
21
0.5
0.7
10.5
60.9
5.8
66.7
6.2
0.0
12.6
12.4
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Black
Appal.
X
X
NOTE: For both Dropout rate and SES rank, 1=Worst case. Queensgate with a dropout
rate of 66.2 was deleted because youth population is institutional. Camp Washington
also has an institutional population (CCI) but is also a residential community with high
dropout rates.
Table 11:2 shows the percentage of the adult
ADULT EDUCATION LEVELS.
(over 25 years of age) population in each census tract and neighborhood for 1970 and
1980. Tract numbers for 1970 and 1980 show changes in census tract designations
made between the two censuses.
Both the lower and higher SES tracts and neighborhoods tended to increase
their percentage of high school graduates significantly during the decade. In order to
interpret the full meaning of these data, some questions need to be answered for each
PART 1/1: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE (95
�neighborhood. Tract 8 in the West End, for example, went from 19.4% high school
graduates in 1970 to 14.7% in 1980. Did more young people fail to complete school
or did the better-educated people move out of the tract? Did the tract boundary change?
Is this an urban renewal area?
The two tracts in Bond Hill showed relatively little change during the decade.
Is this because the neighborhood is very stable? Are younger presumably bettereducated people moving out or going away to college? The tracts in Fairview-Clifton
Heights had such a dramatic improvement in education levels that one should ask
whether "gentrification" is taking place. Or is the improvement mostly due to younger
people staying in school longer? Note that the youth dropout rate is still relatively
high in Fairview-Clifton Heights (18.2%).
The summary statistics at the end of Table 11:2 show that in 1970, Cincinnati
was ahead of the SMSA in percent of high school graduates. By 1980, Cincinnati
had fallen behind the metropolitan area as a whole. As of 1980, only 57.9% of
Cincinnatians over 25 had a high school education compared to 63.3 in the SMSA.
No doubt, migration is a factor in the relative decline for central city, but, regardless of
the causes, this decline has serious implications.
A comparison of dropout statistics between the two censuses is made difficult
by the fact that the 1970 census lists 16-17-year-old and 16-21-year-old dropouts.
From the 1980 census, we can get 16-19-year-old groups which cannot be compared
to the 1970 groupings. Nonetheless, these figures are useful because they clearly
indicate the nature of the neighborhood climate for school achievement.
It is fair to say that in a "typical" Cincinnati census tract only about half of the
population are graduates of high school and that about one-third of the young people
are dropouts by the time they are 19. Dropout rates continue to be highest in White
Appalachian tracts. The highest dropout rate in 1980 (excluding Queensgate) was in
tract 10 in Over-the-Rhine (64.4): tract 91 in Lower Price Hill (52.8) was
second. Tract 10 is Appalachian (Black and White) and Black, and Lower Price Hill is
Appalachian White.
The pattern of Appalachian dropouts shows up in the middle as well as in the
lower socioeconomic range. Carthage, Avondale, Evanston, East Price Hill, and
Northside are comparable socioeconomically, but the heavily White Appalachian
CIVILIANS, 16-19 YEARS OF AGE
Not in
School
East Price Hill
Westwood
Northside
Avondale
Over-the-Rhine
West Price Hill
96)
Not High School
Graduates
745
335
627
437
418
415
408
PART l/l: FROM REGIONAI.JSM TO URBAN UFE
247
293
281
319
195
�tracts generally have higher dropout rates than predominantly Black tracts of comparable SES.
Of the 8,702 16-19-year-olds in the city in 1980, approximately 3,854 are
estimated to be Black and 4,848 Appalachian White or Other White.
In each of these six neighborhoods, the number of dropouts, even when one
omits those under 16 and over 19, is large enough to justify the operation of a special
high school or major adult education facility. In the Western Hills plateau area, there
are nearly 2,000 out of school youth of whom 777 dropped out before completing
high school. Similar area concentrations exist in such neighborhoods as Avondale,
Walnut Hills, Evanston, Mt. Auburn, Corryville, and Madisonville on the east
side of the city, as well as in Northside and surrounding areas.
·For those interested in comparing Cincinnati dropout statistics with
Central Appalachian counties, another study is of interest. The University of
Kentucky Appalachian Center has published a study of dropout rates for related counties
in Eastern Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia, and West Virginia. The Central
Appalachian study uses census data on 16-19-year-olds and shows, for example, a
30.7 average dropout rate for Eastern Kentucky Appalachian counties. Dropout
rates in the 18 "worst case" Kentucky counties range between 35.9 (deKalb,
Tennessee), and 49.9 (Clay, Kentucky). By comparison, Cincinnati's 11
"worst case" neighborhoods have 16-19-year-old dropout rates ranging from 32.7
(Northside) to 57.8 (Lower Price Hill). The Cincinnati system is hardly
outperforming the poorest counties in Central Appalachia in retaining Appalachian
youth through the 12th grade. Although the nature of schooling and the
organization of schools may be different in urban as opposed to rural schools, the point
remains: the schools must address the issue of the uneven educational attainment of
their students.
IMPLICATIONS. Only about half adult Cincinnatians have a high school
education, and nearly one in five of Cincinnati 16-19-year-olds are school
dropouts. Whether one considers the ideal of free and universal education, looks at
education as a means to produce a highly trained labor force, or views schooling
as a vehicle for the prevention of social problems, the conclusion is the same.
The community needs to take concrete steps to provide a higher level of education for
its population.
When one adds to the statistics presented in this report the knowledge that
many of our high school graduates are ill-prepared for college, jobs, or further
vocational training, Cincinnati's situation could be considered one of crisis proportions.
The first step in the search for solutions is to acknowledge that a problem exists.
One definition of a problem is that a problem is merely the absence of an idea.
One idea that seems to be working on a small scale is the network of communitybased education centers sponsored by the Urban Appalachian Council, the Episcopal
Diocese of Southern Ohio, Santa Maria Community Services, Cincinnati
Union Bethel, and similar programs which provide Adult Basic Education and
G.E.D. preparation. These and other programs need to be expanded and their efforts
more broadly supported with public and private funds. Public and private schools need
to do more to keep young people in school and our colleges and universities need
to do more of the kind of linking with neighborhood-based programs that
Xavier and the University College at the University of Cincinnati are
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
(97
�trying to implement in Lower Price Hill and Northside. In these programs,
counseling and instruction are carried out in the neighborhood setting by
university-trained personnel. Students, the majority of whom are completing a
high school equivalency curriculum, are in this way prepared to take the next step
- attendance at a local college or university. The Cincinnati community can take
advantage of the new national interest in adult literacy by becoming an innovator in
this field.
98)
PART l/l: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
�APPALACHIAN YOUTH
IN CULTURAL TRANSITION
Education has received considerable attention in the literature on Appalachian
youth. Much of the literature points to cultural differences which created problems for
Appalachian youth in school. Language or accents of first-generation youth (and some
second-generation youth, as well) set them apart immediately (Rhodes, 1968; Wagner,
1974, 1975). Misinterpretation of mountain dialect, idiomatic expressions, accent
differences, and other cultural differences cause problems in relationships of
Appalachian youth with urban peers and school personnel (McCoy and Watkins, 1979).
Appalachian culture places emphasis on individual achievement and the value of
self-sufficiency - Appalachians are not "joiners" and do not relate readily to group
activities. Appalachian youth are less likely to seek, or readily accept, school personnel
support, such as sponsorship or encouragement by a particular teacher or counselor;
they try to deal with problems on their own. They are less likely to participate in
school activities (Rhodes, 1968; Wagner, 1975), and parents are less likely to
participate in PTA's (Watkins, 1976). Youth do not identify with their schools,
especially in junior and senior high school (Miller, 1979), since most youth are
placed in an unfamiliar neighborhood for those grades. In addition, since few youth
participate in school activities, few are in positions of leadership to serve as role
models for others. Parents are overwhelmed by school bureaucracy, by unfamiliar extracurricular activities, and by the educational jargon of such groups. Class differences in
terms of a mother's employment may conflict with meeting times and may preclude a
work schedule to attend those meetings.
High absenteeism and truancy are related to the cultural value placed on the
importance of the family, as well as to the traditional migration process. Familism
requires that family situations take priority over education (and in many cases, jobs).
High absenteeism (Adams, 1971; Wagner, 1974; Rhodes, 1968) is, at least in part, a
result of youth being needed at home to help care for siblings and household matters.
The traditional migration process, in the three to five years after initial settlement in
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE (99
�urban areas, involves frequent relocation (Schwarzweller, 1970). A family's
adjustment to an urban area can mean moving several times to find satisfactory
neighborhoods, jobs, schools, doctors, and shopping areas. "Indifference" or lack of
interest in education was cited by many authors as one of the prevailing features of
Appalachian youth in school (Wagner, 1974, 1975; Huelsman, 1969; Henderson,
1966; Moore, 1976). This attitude was described in various ways, as youth feeling
ambivalent toward school, being shy, reticent, passive, avoiding conflict, and
withdrawing. Few, however, perceived the significance of cultural conflict. Appalachian
parents see more value in basic education and skills development than in extracurricular activities and abstract idea training (Miller, 1977). Parents may encourage
Appalachian students into career/practical skills and vocational classes rather than
college preparatory or advanced placement classes.
Parents often sacrifice personal needs in order to have their children achieve the
educational level equivalent to their own (Adams, 1971). However, the low
educational level of Appalachians, traditionally, complicates parents' commitment to
higher education (Miller, 1977). Kunkin and Byrne found that the parents without
high school degrees considered education irrelevant (Kunkin and Byrne, 1973).
Moore and Pastoor (1976) were interested in whether educational values of
Appalachian youth were retained in an urban setting. They compared sixth graders in
Perry County, Kentucky, and Cincinnati, Ohio, and found that both groups felt that
education was moderately important to their lives. Urban youth, however, felt more
positive toward education than rural youth, in that urban youth had more confidence
in their teachers' abilities and urban students were more inclined to aspire toward a
college education. But based upon current evidence, urban Appalachian youth are
frustrated in accomplishing such goals.
Appalachian students have also experienced difficulty in racial, class, and cultural
conflicts. Wagner (1975) says, in describing the typical Appalachian student in his
sample:
If he attends a school where there are blacks, he will not understand the
blacks and will tend to keep to himself or to associate only with other
white students. If he is placed in a threatening situation, he will normally
withdraw, not because he is afraid, but because he does not understand the
more aggressive behavior of black students. If pressed too hard, he will
simply take action to avoid future incidents (such as avoiding the
lunchroom, the front hall, or, in the extreme situation, quit attending
school.)
Appalachians have traditionally had little experience with urban blacks, since the black
population in the Appalachian region is relatively small. Miller explains that this
lack of experience continues in urban schools in elementary grades since Appalachian
children attend school with other Appalachians in their own neighborhoods. However,
contact increases at the junior high school level where white Appalachians often
constitute a minority in the schools. Since the junior high and high schools take
Appalachian youth out of their own neighborhood, away from their own "turf," they
become fearful, believe rumors of reprisals, and generally feel intimidated.
100) PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
�Class differences cause Appalachian youth to feel "looked down on" and the lack of
attention given to Appalachian culture only adds to a defeated self-image. Differences
in language, dress, and values are seen by other classes as deficiencies or inferiority
(Miller, 1977; 1979). These feelings of inferiority and fear were found in Cleveland to
stem from the lack of skills and experiences in certain situations (Kunkin and Byrne,
1973).
The conditions affecting Appalachian youth in school have culminated in
extreme dropout rates. Maloney (1974) found that all twelve of the census tracts in
Cincinnati with dropout rates of 40 percent or higher were in Appalachian
neighborhoods
Several authors suggested methods of working with Appalachian youth to
improve educational levels, as well as relationships with school personnel and peers.
Some of these solutions have been alluded to: teacher training (Adams, 1971; Wagner,
1974; Henderson, 1966), curriculum development (Wagner, 1974) in Appalachian
culture, and the use of innovative teaching methods (Wagner, 1974). Parent and
community involvement in the schools (Wagner, 1974; Henderson, 1966; Watkins,
1976) was considered important in order to provide a personal approach and
commitment, as well as having parents and students feel ownership to their schools.
Future roles, expectations, and aspirations of Appalachian youth are
unclear. Wagner (1975) found Appalachian youths' job aspirations to be vague and
unrealistic considering low school achievement. Henderson (1966), in studying
Appalachian youth, did not find any relationship between school achievement and
employment aspirations. Moore and Pastoor (1976), on the other hand, observed a
positive relationship between the perception of a good education and a good job among
urban Appalachian youth. In addition, Ricco (1965) found a positive relationship
between achievement aspirations in both Appalachian and non-Appalachian males in
Whitehall, Ohio, a small urban area.
Other than school-related experiences, little information exists concerning the
behavior of Appalachian youth in urban environments. However, there is some
evidence that the transition from the mountains to urban life presents cultural
incongruities. For example, independence and freedom of movement were allowed by
parents in the Appalachian mountain environment. However, when migration occurred,
the spatial restrictions of the urban setting affected this lifestyle. Parental freedom,
combined with alienation experienced in the school systems, and peer pressure
(Huelsman, 1969) resulted in higher delinquency rates.
Examples of cultural clashes creating adverse attitudes toward authorities
among these (Appalachian) youth include domestic stress in the new
environment, individualism in the face of need for legal help, and perceived
prejudice in the legal system, both as to poor people and as to
Appalachians in particular (McCoy, 1976).
Inner-city Appalachian youth must also deal with restricted recreational
facilities. Facilities are often staffed by workers insensitive to the Appalachian value
system, or are controlled by other groups.
Appalachian youth find themselves caught between the values of the urban
society in which they live and the values from their heritage.
PART lll: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE (101
�Data
This study is based on survey data collected in 1975 to assess youth behavior
in four cities: Baltimore, Providence, Cincinnati, and Detroit. The National Center for
Urban/Ethnic Affairs (NCUEA) developed and tested the survey instrument, and then
contracted with community organizations in each city to collect the data.
NCUEA provided training and technical assistance to the community organizations during the data collection phase.
Questionnaires were administered in parochial and public schools in Detroit
and Baltimore. The Providence and Cincinnati organizations were unable to obtain
access to schools and utilized outreach programs to administer the questionnaire to
youngsters in the community.
The out-of-school populations were selected in specific predetermined ethnic
neighborhoods on the basis of a 20% sample of ethnic youths in each selected
neighborhood. Interviewers were instructed to find and interview youths fourteen
to twenty years old in the prescribed neighborhoods by locating youths where they
were known to "hang out," such as recreation centers, bars, churches, neighborhood
drop-in centers, and after-school programs.
Interviewers had to account for unique variations. For example in Cincinnati an
added consideration of low educational levels among out-of-school youth meant that
some interviews had to be conducted in small groups; other interviews needed to be
conducted with the interviewer reading the questions and filling in the answers.
Findings
Comparisons based on the survey data and on noting similarities and
differences among the various youths should provide a certain understanding of the
differences in behavioral patterns between Appalachians and other urban ethnic
youths and provide some further insights into the cultural transition experienced by
Appalachian youths.
The sample of 1458 youths included 445 (30.5%) Appalachians, 157 (10.8%)
Blacks, 307 (21.1%) Polish, and 549 (37 .7%) other ethnics. Each group contained
slightly more males than females: 43.4% of the Appalachians were females, 44.5%
blacks, 48.8% Polish, and 45.6% other ethnics.
The median ages of the ethnic groups in the sample are shown below.
Appalachian youths were the oldest in the sample, with a median age of 17.1 years.
Blacks were the youngest, 16.3 years.
Median Age
17.1
16.3
16.6
17.1
Appalachian
Black
Polish
Other
Total Sample
16.9
Religious affiliation for Appalachians and blacks was primarily Baptist, with
Roman Catholicism second in importance (see Table 12:1). Polish youths were
overwhelmingly Roman Catholic (90%), as were other ethnics (53.6%).
102) PART Ill: FROM REGIONAUSM TO URBAN UFE
�Fundamentalism underlies the religious beliefs of many Appalachians and strongly influences other values. These beliefs are founded on a literal interpretation of the
Bible, an expectation of reward in the next life, and a world view in which God is omnipotent and man is fallible (Jones, 1978).
TABLE 12:1
RELIGION
Appalachians
%
N
Blacks
%
N
Polish
0/o
N
Baptist
Black Muslims
Church of God
Congregational
Eastern Rite Catholic
Episcopalian
Greek Orthodox
Holiness
Islamic
Jewish
Lutheran
Methodist
Presbyterian
Pentecostal
Roman Catholic
Other
None
138 31.7
8 1.8
26
6.0
3
0.7
2
0.5
11
2.5
5
1.1
7
1.6
0
0.0
12
2.8
16
3.7
27
6.2
10
2.3
17
3.9
70 16.1
31
7.1
53 12.2
74
6
9
1
0
0
0
3
0
0
3
9
2
2
15
9
19
1
0
4
2
3
0
0
1
0
1
4
3
2
1
274
1
6
Total
436
152
48.7
3.9
5.9
0.7
0.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
0.0
0.0
2.0
5.9
1.3
1.3
9.9
5.9
12.5
302
0.3
0.0
1.3
0.7
1.0
0.0
0.0
0.3
0.0
0.3
1.3
1.0
0.7
0.3
90.7
0.3
2.0
Other
%
N
42
3
20
3
10
11
12
2
6
11
31
12
1
9
295
18
50
7.6
0.5
3.6
0.5
1.8
2.0
2.2
0.4
1.1
2.0
5.6
2.2
0.3
1.6
53.6
3.3
9.1
550
Religion in the mountains (and transferred to the urban environment) was less
focused on institutionalized ritual and ceremony than based on personalized beliefs
in God, Christ, and the church. Specific and literal interpretations of the Bible have
molded behaviors and emotions and have shaped a value system which permeates daily
life routines.
Fundamentalist churches which were delineated in the questionnaire include
Baptist, Church of God, Congregational, Holiness, and Pentecostal; 43.8% of the
Appalachians and 58.6% of the blacks belonged to these churches.
The surprisingly large number of Appalachians (12.2%) who did not identify
with any church may be indicative of the cultural transition Appalachian youths are
experiencing. The transition from the more traditional Appalachian values to the
more secular values and belief systems of urban youths could be due, in part, to
influence from their peers or from obtaining a more "realistic view" of life based on
their negative experiences in urban neighborhoods. The role of the church among
inner-city urban youths probably reflects ambiguity as to its purpose and value for
PART lll: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE (103
�many of them. The storefront churches prevalent in many inner-city areas represent a
lack of stability that does not provide for the type of support needed by the youths in
confronting various situations which occur during cultural transition.
Even though religion and the development of religious values are important to
Appalachians, church attendance is not. More than half the Appalachians in our study
either never attended, or else, only attended services a few times in the past year (Table
12:2). Even in grade school years, church attendance was considerably less than for
the other three groups. The importance of religion to Appalachians is in shaping
a belief system, not in regular church attendance.
TABLE 12:2
ATTENDANCE AT RELIGIOUS SERVICES
Appalachians
Grade Past
School Year
Never
Few times a year
About once a month
Few times a month
About once a week
N
Blacks
Grade
School
19.4
19.6
9.1
15.5
36.4
439
35.1
28.7
6.6
12.4
17.2
442
11.3
12.0
9.3
24.0
43.3
150
Polish
Past
Year
15.8
24.3
15.1
20.4
24.3
152
Other
Grade Past
School Year
Grade Past
School Year
2.3
5.0
5.6
11.6
75.5
8.3
23.4
6.9
10.9
50.5
14.6
15.7
6.8
20.8
42.0
303
547
302
29.4
31.1
7.9
14.5
17.1
544
As recent studies have revealed, Appalachian youths have substantial
problems with the urban school systems. Educational attainment, measured by a
median for highest grade completed, shows that Appalachians in the study had
completed fewer school years than any other group, even though they were one of
the oldest groups in the sample. Further, there were few Appalachians enrolled
in high school academic programs or college classes (Table 12:3).
Median Highest Grade Completed
Appalachians
Black
Polish
Other Ethnic
9.9
10.1
10.6
10.3
Total Sample
10.2
Since Appalachian youths' experiences with the public school systems have
been negative ones, some are apparently selecting other alternatives to
complete their education. Table 12:3 shows that Appalachians (10.9%) as well as
104) PART ll/: FROM REGIONAI..JSM TO URBAN UFE
�TABLE 12:3
CURRENT SCHOOL PROGRAM
Appalachians
%
N
Black
%
N
Polish
N
%
Other Ethnics
%
N
High School
Academic
60
22.6
34
25.8
119
49.0
125
35.1
General
83
31.2
47
35.6
70
28.8
102
28.7
GED
20
7.5
0
0.0
2
0.8
11
3.1
Business Course
22
8.3
14
10.6
19
7.8
41
11.5
Vocational or
Trade School
29
10.9
18
13.6
7
2.9
24
6.7
College
13
4.9
6
4.5
17
7.0
26
7.3
Other
39
14.7
13
9.8
9
3.7
27
7.6
Total
438
100.0
151
100.0
303
100.0
545
100.0
Blacks (13.6%) were in trade or vocational schools. An additional 7.5% of
Appalachians were enrolled in GED programs, which was a substantially higher
number than for the other young people.
Debunking all the stereotypes revealed in Polish jokes, the grades
reported by Polish students were substantially higher than those reported by the
other groups (Table 12:4). In addition, Polish students had the highest proportion
enrolled in high school academic programs with many enrolled in college programs
(7 .0%), as well as the highest median school years completed (10.6).
Black youths were similar to Appalachians in the area of education,
reporting the lowest grades of all groups, and low median grade completed
scores. None of the Black youths were enrolled in GED programs, but some, like Appalachians, were apparently selecting alternatives to the public school system in
that 13.6% were in trade or vocational programs.
Over one-fourth of the youths in the sample were not in school, but were of
school age. Appalachians comprised 49.2% of these, 34.2% were other
ethnics, 11.8% were Polish, and 4.7% were blacks. In revealing their reasons for not
completing school, 49.2% said they had dropped out. The majority of
Appalachians, Polish and other ethnics had dropped out of school, while Blacks
evidenced a greater variety of reasons for being out of school, including almost
a quarter whose education was disrupted by being in jail (Table 12:5).
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE (105
�TABLE 12:4
GRADES IN SCHOOL IN THE PREVIOUS YEAR
Appalachians
%
N
Black
%
N
Polish
%
N
Other Ethnics
N
%
Fail
D Average
CAverage
8 Average
A Average
36
52
206
105
39
8.2
11.9
47.0
24.0
8.9
8
15
88
34
6
5.3
9.9
58.3
22.50
4.0
9
16
110
132
36
3.0
5.3
36.3
43.6
11.9
35
68
245
162
35
6.4
12.5
45.0
29.7
6.4
Total
266
100.0
132
100.0
243
100.0
356
100.0
TABLE 12:5
REASONS FOR NOT COMPLETING SCHOOL
Appalachians
%
N
Black
%
N
Dropped Out
108
57.8
3
Suspended/
Expelled
12
6.4
Hospitalized
20
Jail
Other
Total
Polish
%
N
Other Ethnics
%
N
16.7
26
57.8
58
44.6
3
16.7
4
8.9
29
22.3
10.7
2
11.1
2
4.4
5
3.8
20
10.7
4
22.2
3
6.7
14
11.5
27
14.4
6
33.3
10
22.2
24
18.5
187
18
45
130
The post-high school plans of respondents (Table 12:6) show realistic
expectations of Appalachian youths, especially in light of their current
educational experiences. Only 16.2% planned to go to college, while nearly onefourth planned to go to work. Of the Appalachians, 20.7% had no plans after
high school and 12.7% did not plan to go to complete high school-not an
encouraging picture for further educational achievements. In light of Moore's
(1976) finding that urban youths aspired more toward a college education
than rural Appalachian youths, the youths in this study, who are older, have
apparently reduced their expectations by the time they reach high school age. Low
expectations, however, may also be a reflection of fatalism, another prominent value
among many others discussed by Jones (1978).
106) PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�More Black youths and Polish youths planned to attend college than to go to
work. Their higher expectations for the future are also revealed in the small
number who look forward to a future without a high school diploma.
TABLE 12:6
PLANS AFTER HIGH SCHOOL
Appalachians
%
N
Academic
College
Vocational
Training
Work
Go into
Business
Marry/Raise
Family
Join Army
Other
Don't Know
Don't Plan to
Graduate
Total N
Black
N
%
Polish
N
%
Other Ethnics
N
%
61
16.2
50
35.5
82
30.4
80
16.8
30
93
8.0
24.7
10
27
7.1
19.1
20
62
7.4
23.0
41
107
8.6
22.5
11
2.9
6
4.3
10
3.7
35
7.4
14
24
18
78
3.7
6.4
4.8
20.7
2
9
9
24
1.4
6.4
6.4
17.0
14
19
10
44
5.2
7.0
3.7
16.3
20
33
15
107
4.2
6.9
3.2
22.5
48
12.7
4
2.8
9
3.3
37
7.8
377
141
270
475
Current employment data show that Polish and other ethnic youths had the
highest proportions employed (fable 12:7). Appalachians, on the other hand, had
the highest unemployment. Appalachians, traditionally, have tended not to seek jobs
through state employment services or employment agencies, but have utilized the
kin and friend network to find jobs (Schwarzweller and Brown, 1970). This
method of finding jobs is not nearly as productive in times of high unemployment
as when jobs are plentiful, and may be part of the explanation for the high
number of unemployed Appalachian youths.
The conditions of inner-city Appalachian youths in this survey reveal some very
discouraging patterns. The culture of Appalachian youths is undergoing change.
This process of change in the urban environment has created new situations
with which a changing culture must deal, but the Appalachian youths in this survey
were armed with few resources for this task other than support from family and their
own inner strength. In summary, the findings showed that Appalachian youths had
completed fewer school grades than the comparative groups, although they were
older in age. Few were enrolled in high school academic programs; however, some
were selecting vocational education and GED programs as alternatives. More of the
Appalachians than other groups were school dropouts, and many of those who
were in school had either no plans or low expectations for their future. Some
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
(107
�TABLE 12:7
EMPLOYMENT
Appalachians
%
N
Part-Time
78
Black
%
N
Other Ethnics
%
N
Polish
%
N
29.0
25
50.0
88
57.1
116
38.3
6
12.0
30
19.5
93
30.7
2.0
4
2.6
10
3.3
Full-Time
62
23.0
Homemaker
18
6.7
Not in
School/Not
Employed
111
41.3
18
36.0
32
20.8
84
27.7
Total N
269
100.0
50
100.0
154
100.0
303
100.0
did plan to go to college and about one-fourth planned to work. However, if the
high unemployment of this young age group is any indication of what the future
holds, their chances for employment in adult life will be less than other groups.
Implications For The
Future Of Appalachian Youth
The above research findings show consistently, that compared to other
urban ethnic youths, Appalachians exhibit great symptomic behavior, indicating severe
difficulties in coping with urban environments.
Why these greater difficulties of adjustment should exist for urban
Appalachian youths is not clear at the present time. Further study is needed to
understand the relationship between these behaviors, patterns, and the differences
in cultural conditions for Appalachian youths. The recency of the migrant experience
of Appalachians relative to other ethnic youths is certainly one factor that
need to be considered. Empirical confirmation is needed to determine more
specifically what accounts for these differences. Conflict with public institutions
(in particular, the school system) is a critical factor in any attempt to understand
Appalachian youths. Consistent evidence exists that Appalachian youngsters
have high dropout rates, above average truancy rates, and in general, are dissatisfied
with school.
Many Appalachians do not have the family and religious support systems
that are needed to address medical, social, and psychological needs.
Only a proper understanding of Appalachian culture and the needs of
Appalachian peoples will permit the development of appropriate community
support systems. Several factors have been cited as significant to the design of
support systems intended to serve urban communities containing large
numbers of Appalachians.
108) PART ll/: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
�These systems should be:
1.
FAMILY AND KINSHIP ORIENTED
Family and kinship networks have been an important source of
support for mountain families (Brown, 1970). In making the
transition from mountain lifeways, there is a deterioration of these
kinship support networks. The University of Kentucky Medical
Center and the Betheseda North Hospital in Cincinnati found that
by developing a familial orientation of health delivery, the services
and responsiveness among Appalachian families improved (Watkins,
1973).
2.
COMMUNITY AND NEIGHBORHOOD BASED*
Support systems for Appalachians should be neighborhood based,
rather than being associated with the presently structured schools or
other institutions. Experience has shown that Appalachians respond
best to services that are located near their homes. In Cincinnati in
recent years, response by Appalachians has been favorable to
programs like youth drop-in services, community organizing, and
cultural heritage projects whose primary functions are based upon
self and family defined needs. Human services or referrals to such
agencies are provided as a secondary function. Self-involvement has
served to instill ownership in the programs by Appalachians, as well
as helping them to feel that they have given something in return for
the services received.
3.
CULTURALLY SENSITIVE*
Cultural sensitivity is another important characteristic of a support
network responsive to the need of Appalachians. Cultural sensitivity
does not necessarily mean that a program would be culturally specific.
A program within the Appalachian community would need to deal
with several variants of Appalachian culture, as well as other
ethnic groups.
4.
NON-BUREAUCRATIC*
Another factor that is necessary in providing services to Appalachian
youths in particular, is that support systems should be flexible, open,
personal, and family oriented. A personal approach has been
described by David Looff (1971) in his work with mountain children.
He strongly emphasizes the Appalachian characteristics of personal
support and familism as crucial to his success in working with the
children. Youths tend to respond well to approaches which recognize
them as people with problems, but not when labels such as "sick" or
"mentally ill" or "bad" are placed on them.
5.
COMPREHENSIVE
A fifth factor to consider in developing supports for Appalachians is
suggested by James S. Brown, a long-time scholar of Appalachian
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAUSM TO URBAN UFE (109
�migration and migrants. He suggests that Appalachians are multiple
problem families; that their arrival in the cities presents many unique
problems for the family which differ for each member of the family;
and that these problems are cultural inasmuch as they are economic.
Urban conditions affect each member of the family in such a unique
way that the support systems usually offered by kinship and family
are less effective in the new environment than they were in the moun-
tains.
Multiple, sociocultural conflicts combined with a lack of initial
opportunity to gain meaningful employment create multiple
problems for the family. Since the Appalachian family relied very
heavily upon the support system of kinship and familism in the
mountains, the conflicts and stresses confronted in the urban
environment also deteriorate that support system so that it is not as
effective as in the mountain tradition.
*Categories similarly named in Watkins, (1975).
Conclusions
In conclusion, an increased understanding of Appalachian culture and needs, with
the provision of appropriate support systems, could improve the conditions for
Appalachian youth. Although economic conditions are also part of the problem, for
Appalachians, all the problems cannot be solved through economic support. Neither
should these be school based at the present time due to the alienation of the youth from
the schools. These supports must be rooted in the communities and neighborhoods and
involve the tremendous strength that family and kinship can offer to Appalachian
youths.
110) PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
�BLACK APPALACHIAN MIGRANTS
The Issue Of Dual Minority Status
A greater proportion of blacks moved out of Appalachia during the great
migration of the fifties and sixties than did whites, reducing the percentage of blacks
in Appalachia to 7.3% of the population by 1970 (Appalachian Regional
Commission, 1971). As a result of this selectivity, blacks are more common
among Appalachian migrants than among those who remained in the region. An
estimated one out of five Appalachians living in Hamilton County, Ohio, for example,
is black. While studies were being conducted among Appalachian migrants who
were white, black migrants were either excluded from the analysis or grouped with
other blacks. Too few Appalachian blacks were found in any single survey to
analyze as a separate category, and researchers feared combining blacks and whites
together lest the importance of origin be confounded by race. Today the educational
attainment of black Appalachian migrants is substantially lower than their white
counterparts (Fowler, 1980).
There are reasons to believe that black Appalachians may have little in
common with white migrants. First, their origins in Appalachia were different. While
most white Appalachians living in Cincinnati, for example, came from Kentucky
and Tennessee (McCoy and Brown, 1981), blacks moved from Alabama, Georgia,
and Mississippi (Appalachian Regional Commission, 1971; Fowler, 1976).
Appalachia is not a single cultural entity and migrants from different parts of the region
may be as different as Appalachians and non-Appalachians. Second, within the
same part of the region black Appalachians have usually lived isolated from whites
(Allen, 1974; French, 1975; Cabbell, 1980). As with the rest of the nation,
blacks were excluded from the mainstream in Appalachia. Having shared little
in Appalachia, it seems doubtful black and white Appalachians found much in common
after they migrated. Third, although migration brought many Appalachians-black and
white-to low income neighborhoods of the city, they settled apart from each other
(Fowler, 1981). Blacks from Appalachia moved to black neighborhoods where they
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE (111
�identified with, and were identified as, blacks, but perhaps not as Appalachians (Zigli,
1981).
On the other hand, there are reasons to believe that Appalachia has had an
influence on black migrants similar to that of whites. One of the frrst studies
on black culture in Appalachia concluded that while blacks were isolated, they
nonetheless developed value systems similar to whites in the area (French, 1975).
While the importance of such a value system has recently been a subject of criticism
(Billings, 1974; Philliber, 1981) any influence it has upon the life chances of
white migrants should also then be true of blacks. The only research which has
analyzed black Appalachians as a separate category supports that conclusion.
Fowler's (1981) study of residential distribution found that both black and
white Appalachians were more likely than their non-Appalachian counterparts to
live in low-income areas of the city.
Whether blacks from Appalachia integrated into the local black community
where they migrated or remained distinct because of their Appalachian heritage in the
same manner as white migrants remains an unanswered question. The purpose of
this paper is to provide a partial answer to that question by analyzing the
socioeconomic attainments of black Appalachian migrants in Hamilton County,
Ohio, relative to non-Appalachian blacks, white Appalachians, and non-Appalachian
whites.
Data
Data were obtained by combining three surveys conducted in Hamilton
County, Ohio. They were the 1971 Model Cities Survey (Sherrill, 1972), the
1975 Cincinnati Area Project (Philliber, 1981), and the 1980 Greater
Cincinnati Survey (Obermiller, 1982). While neither methods of sampling nor
measurement were the same, combining the studies produced 113 black
Appalachians. That yielded a large enough group to provide a basis for at least
some tentative observations.
There are four differences in the ways the three surveys were carried out which
may contribute to errors in the fmdings here. Two of those differences are minor and
two are of some consequence. First, the Greater Cincinnati Survey was
conducted by telephone, while the other two were collected in-person. Findings
from telephone surveys are generally consistent with in-person interviews, so
this difference should matter little (Tuchfarber and Klecka, 1976). Second,
participants in the Model Cities Survey were selected as part of a multistage
probability sample stratified by race; the Cincinnati Area Project used a multi-stage
probability sample of blocks with quotas proportional to the population; and
the Greater Cincinnati Survey selected people using Random Digit Dialing.
These differences also probably matter little (Tuchfarber and Klecka, 1976;
Sudman, 1966). On the other hand, the Model Cities Survey is drawn from the
population living within the inner-city low-income area designated as the target for
the Model Cities program while the other two studies are drawn from the
population of Hamilton County. As a result, the combination of the three samples
disproportionately represents people in low-income neighborhoods. Finally, the
Cincinnati Area Project and the Greater Cincinnati Survey classified people as
112) PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
�Appalachian if they were born in Appalachia or had at least one parent born there,
while the Model Cities Survey classified people as Appalachians if they had moved to
Cincinnati directly from Appalachia. As a result, the Model Cities Survey classified
some persons as non-Appalachians who would otherwise be Appalachian. We have
no reason to believe that any of these factors seriously altered the findings, but they
should be remembered before reaching any final conclusions.
Findings
Although migrants from Appalachia generally are better educated than nonmigrants who remained (Larkin, 1973), Appalachians average fewer years of education than natives and other migrants in their places of destination (Philliber, 1981).
Table 13:1 shows that only 58% of the white Appalachians in the three studies had
completed high school, but 78% of other whites graduated. However, while white
Appalachians are left at a competitive disadvantage to other whites, black Appalachians
are not much different from other blacks. 38% of the black Appalachians compared to
39% of other blacks were high school graduates. Both groups are seriously less
educated than whites, but their differences from each other are small.
TABLE 13:1
PERCENT HIGH SCHOOL GRADUATES BY RACE AND APPALACHIAN HERITAGE
Race
Appalachian
Other
Black
35%
(1 01)
39%
(380)
White
58%
(359)
78%
(1 ,015)
TABLE 13:2
PERCENT OF LABOR FORCE EMPLOYED IN SKILLED TRADES OR WHITE
COLLAR POSITIONS BY RACE AND APPALACHIAN HERITAGE
Race
Appalachian
Other
Black
41%
(54)
30%
(231)
White
60%
(248)
81%
(783)
PART Ill: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN I.JFE
(113
�The same pattern emerges with respect to occupational attainment among those
in the labor force. White Appalachians have a lower percentage employed as whitecollar workers or in skilled trades than non-Appalachian whites have, 60% and 81%,
respectively. Both black groups have even fewer such employees. All but 41% of the
black Appalachians and 30% of other blacks are employed in semi-skilled or unskilled
jobs. Although the difference between the two black groups is still small, it should
be noted that what difference does exist is in favor of black Appalachians.
The pattern is repeated in family incomes. The average annual income of
other whites in the three surveys was $16,470. White Appalachians had average
annual incomes of $14,182. Both black groups were considerably poorer. The
average family income of black Appalachians was $7,742 and the income of other
blacks averaged $6,719.
TABLE 13:3
AVERAGE INCOME BY RACE AND APPALACHIAN HERITAGE
Race
Appalachian
Other
Black
$7,742
(98)
$6,719
(403)
White
$14,182
(366)
16,470
(1 ,017)
TABLE 13:4
RELATIVEATTAINMENTSOFBLACKAPPALACHIANS, WHITE APPALACHIANS, &
OTHER BLACKS AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE ATTAINMENTS OF OTHER WHITES
Group
Education
Job
Income
Black Appalachian
45%
51%
47%
Other Black
50%
37%
41%
White Appalachian
74%
74%
86%
100%
100%
100%
Other White
Table 13:4 summarized relative attainments of the four groups. On each of the
three variables non-Appalachian whites averaged higher achievements than other
groups. 78% were high school graduates, 81% had white-collar or skilled jobs, and the
group averaged $16,470 in family income. If these figures are set equal to 100%, then
the relative attainments of white Appalachians are shown to be about three-quarters of
114) PART ll/: FROM REGIONAliSM TO URBAN UFE
�the attainments of other whites. Each of the surveys used in this study have
previously been analyzed to show the relative attainments of white Appalachians so
these findings are not new. They are reported here only to provide a ready
comparison with black Appalachians.
The data collected from black Appalachians are not entirely consistent. Black
Appalachians have fewer high school graduates, but better jobs and higher
incomes than do other blacks. However, none of the differences within the black
group are actually very large. When the attainments of either group are compared to
non-Appalachian whites, both groups are shown to have half or less of what nonAppalachian whites have. Their differences from each other are trivial when
compared to their differences from whites.
It should be noted that the higher socioeconomic attainments of nonAppalachian whites can not be explained by age or by length of residence. In each
of the three studies no significant differences existed for either of these variables. The
explanation for the advantage of non-Appalachian whites lies in other directions.
Conclusion
The best conclusion from this study of the relative attainments of black
Appalachians is that black Appalachians experience the same life chances as other
blacks. They are restricted by being black, but they are not further restricted because
they are Appalachian. The ethnogenesis which is characteristic of working class and
poor white Appalachians is not shared by Appalachians who are blacks. Black
Appalachians have become a part of the larger black group.
There are two factors which may explain why black Appalachians are not distinct
from other blacks in the same way Appalachian and non-Appalachian whites are.
First, ethnogenesis is partially the result of labeling and discrimination by others.
White Appalachians were singled out from the general white population by
stereotyping and discrimination, thereby giving impetus to the formation of a group
identity (c.f. Chapter Three). Black Appalachians were not similarly distinguished from
the general black population; labeling and discrimination affected all members of that
group equally; giving no momentum to the rise of a separate black Appalachian
identity.
But ethnogenesis can also come from stereotyping and discrimination which is
internal to the group itself (Obermiller, 1982). In this case, race recedes in importance
and socioeconomic stratification becomes critical. Intergroup labeling among
white Appalachians in urban areas is quite negative and originates in the
higher status cohort. The absence of large differences in socioeconomic status among
blacks in the county, particularly when compared to whites residents, may lead to a
diminution of intergroup stereotyping. This phenomenon may account for the
absence of ethnogenesis among black Appalachians (Lewis, 1978). For both
of these reasons, Appalachian blacks do not appear to have emerged as a group
separate from blacks who are non-Appalachian.
PART Ill: FROM REGIONALISM TO URBAN UFE
(115
�This page intentionally left blank
�CONCLUSION:
The Future For Appalachians In Urban Areas
There is probably little consensus on what the future holds, or should
hold, for people of Appalachian heritage living outside the region. In most of the cities
where Appalachians migrated little recognition appears to be made of the thousands
of people who came from Appalachia. Fifteen years ago the popular press was
filled with journalistic tales of Appalachians moving to Chicago, Detroit, Cincinnati,
and other cities of the Midwest. Political organizers and social service providers
directed efforts to reaching this population. Times have changed, and interest in
Appalachians outside of the region is waning.
There is little to indicate that Appalachians moving from the region
thought of themselves as a group. They identified with family and community, but
region of origin was not important. The recognition and treatment of
Appalachians in urban areas as a group came from the outside. The journalists came
first. The newspapers of Cincinnati, Chicago, Detroit, and Cleveland carried
stories of "hillbillies" who had moved to Uptown, Over-the-Rhine, and other inner
city neighborhoods of those Midwestern cities. Appalachians were the "in-topic"
and feature articles were found in all the newspapers of these cities. The service
providers came next. Agency heads in the neighborhoods where Appalachians
settled tried to understand this new clientele. What they seemed to have in common
was an origin in the mountains of the southern part of the United States. They had
little education, seemed to be hard workers, stuck together in family groups, and had
little familiarity with urban ways. Programs were called for to service the needs of
this new population. Both journalists and service providers looked at Appalachians
and saw a social problem.
Social scientists in the sixties and seventies began to develop theoretical models
to explain the behavior of Appalachians. Brown and his colleagues were especially
interested in the family structure of Appalachians. The concept of the stem family was
introduced. Appalachians were characterized as strong extended families with roots in
CONCLUSION (117
�Appalachia and branches in the cities of the Midwest A reciprocal relationship
existed between these parts providing support as needed from one part to the other. In
the seventies the emphasis on family declined and a new emphasis on ethnicity
emerged.
The ethnic model provided some new approaches to the understanding of
Appalachians in urban areas. For the frrst time Appalachians were recognized as a
group. They were more than people with problems in common, they were a group
who at some level associated with one another in churches, bars, and neighborhoods.
They married other people with Appalachian heritage at a rate greater than chance.
They lived close to one another. At some level they even identified with others like
themselves.
The basis of ethnic group formation among people with an Appalachian heritage
was the treatment they received from residents in the cities to which they migrated.
The cities of the Midwest had begun an economic decline at the time Appalachians
migrated there in large numbers. Blacks from the South also came to these cities.
Natives of Midwestern cities faced economic threats from the declining economic base
of the region. Because Blacks and Appalachians had just arrived in those cities they
were recognized as the cause of the problem. Hillbillies became a target of
discrimination. Negative stereotypes were used to characterize these people in the
same way that recent European and Asian immigrants were characterized in other cities.
These negative images created and reinforced the belief that Appalachians were unsuited
for employment and probably unsuited for life in the city as well. Discrimination
against them became common. The reaction to that discrimination brought
Appalachians together resulting in the formation of an urban ethnic group.
The ethnic model shifted attention from Appalachians to the urban milieu.
Earlier approaches had seen the problems of Appalachians resulting from their inability
to adjust to urban life and the solution to their problems in the strengths of their
families and character.
The ethnic model saw the experiences of Appalachians resulting from the
treatment they received from other people. Their problems reflected a lack of
opportunity, not a lack of ability; and the solution to those problems was in political
action. The ethnic analogy provided a way of servicing the needs of Appalachian
migrants and their families. In the sixties and early seventies money was directed by
government and foundations to meet the needs of racial and ethnic groups. No one was
interested in providing services to poor WASPs. Recognition of Appalachians as a
group provided a basis for securing these funds. Organizations were founded which
provided legitimate vehicles to conduct services to these people. That was yesterday.
The idealism of the sixties has been replaced with the reality of the eighties.
Part of the decline in support for services to the poor is because so many programs of
the sixties were fruitless. Probably the largest benefactor of those programs were the
service providers who found steady work. In many cases people who were provided
services would have succeeded without those services. Funding became disillusioned
with the lack of success. The economic difficulties of the past decade have further
eroded support for social services. High rates of inflation have reduced the real income
of many families. People, insecure about their own futures, have been reluctant to
press for expensive social reforms addressing issues of inequality. Finally, the civil
rights movement has faced internal dissension. Instead of working together, different
118) CONCWSION
�groups have fought between themselves over the issue of whose needs are greatest.
Philosophical positions have become more important than the needs of people. The
pragmatic utility of ethnicity is not what it was.
The evidence is clear that Appalachians living outside the region faced problems.
The initial migrants had little education and few experiences which could provide a
basis for good employment. They found work as lower blue collar laborers and
housing in inner city neighborhoods. The unfortunate fact is that the children of these
migrants did not fare better. They, too, left school before graduation and often faced
unemployment. Subsequent generations of Appalachians continue to face such
problems.
For most of the past thirty years, Appalachian migrants have been a people who
didn't belong. Studies of Chicago, Cleveland, and Cincinnati clearly indicate that
Appalachians were regarded as outsiders, denied access to opportunity because of their
origin. At the same time they were forgotten by the region they left behind. As
Appalachia became a political entity funds were funneled into the region to serve the
people living in the region. Migrants were outsiders with no claim on those funds.
Two new problems emerge for descendents of Appalachians living in the cities
of the Midwest First, early migrants had a support network in the region. In the
family system which Brown described relatives remained on family farms. Weekends
were times to return to the mountains for social visits. Unemployment in the cities
was dealt with by returning again to those same mountains where relatives would take
a person in and provide food and shelter until work was once again available. Probably
more important, these families provided emotional support. Life in the city wasn't
expected to be pleasant and family understood the desires of mountain people forced to
leave their communities.
Second- and third-generation Appalachians have lost much of this support.
Close relatives who remained in the mountains have grown old and died. Parents,
brothers, and sisters are city people who live in the same neighborhoods where thy
live. The family farms are worked by distant cousins or have been sold to strangers.
The option of returning to the region is closed. They don't belong.
The second problem occurs as each succeeding generation has less of an
identification with their origin. The time is approaching when the majority of
Appalachians living in urban areas are two or more generations removed from the
mountains. A second-generation Appalachian's closest relative in Appalachia was a
grandparent and for a third-generation migrant the closest relative was a greatgrandparent. These Appalachians have grown up outside of the region. They are city
people whose only contact with Appalachia comes from visits with kin. Their parents
and grandparents may have identified with someplace in Appalachia but Appalachia has
never been home to these people. It is a situation which has happened in every white
ethnic group in America. The third generation has little identification with the region
of origin from which their ancestors came.
There is another limitation which has always kept ethnicity among
Appalachians at a minimum. For a century the people of Appalachia denied the
existence of pluralism. In the nineteenth century when the communities around
Appalachia developed strong identification with local areas in opposition to
identification at a national level, Appalachians resisted. They thought of themselves
as Americans. When the communities around them revolted and attempted to withdraw
CONCLUSION (119
�from the Union, Appalachians stayed. Even within the region today, Appalachians are
more likely to identify themselves as Americans and less likely to identify with a
region than are people in surrounding areas. This has had an effect on the development
of ethnicity among Appalachians living in urban areas outside of the region. Despite
the discrimination, despite the labeling, these people seldom see themselves as
members of a group base on region of origin.
If the ethnic model has served its purpose and the time has come for other ways
of understanding the experiences of Appalachians living outside the region, what is
appropriate? This will be the issue for the next decade. Although only speculation is
possible, some options already exist.
The problems of Appalachians outsid~ the region in future years may best be
understood as problems of class. Estimates differ but probably between a quarter and a
half of the people with Appalachian origins remain in low income neighborhoods of
Midwestern cities. One of the greatest disappointments has been the lack of upward
mobility among succeeding generations of people of Appalachian origin. A major
cause lies in the tendency to leave school before graduation. Manufacturing has
become technologically demanding. People without education simply lack the skills
to operate the machinery industry requires. The only jobs available for people without
education are in service areas and unskilled labor. These jobs bring low pay and
frequent layoffs. For many Appalachian people this has become their fate.
In a sense these people have melted into the inner city neighborhoods where they
live. They have grown up on the streets. They are probably not identified as
Appalachians by others; they have neither strange accents nor rural ways which make
them stand out from other natives of the cities where they live. When they think of
where they belong they are most likely to identify with the cities where they were born
and raised. Appalachia is where their grandparents and maybe great-grandparents came
from, but not them. They have become city people living in and identifying with the
Midwest.
Many of these descendants of Appalachian migrants have become a part of the
emerging urban underclass found in many of our cities. They lack the skills to succeed
in a market place which has increased its technological demands. They lack identifying
traits necessary for the survival of ethnicity. They have become a people society will
pass by. They will continue to live in inner city neighborhoods. Trapped in a cycle
of poverty, their children will suffer the same fate. They will become invisible people
we will choose not to see. For these people there truly are too few tomorrows.
Cincinnati may remain an exception to this pattern. While other Midwestern
cities have already assimilated their Appalachians, Appalachians in Cincinnati appear
to remain a strong and viable ethnic group. There are two reasons for this difference.
One of the factors in the Cincinnati experience is the existence of strong identifiable
neighborhoods. The geographical layout of Cincinnati creates many residential areas
easily separable from other areas. Many neighborhoods are identifiable by the type of
people who live in them. Institutions like churches and neighborhood bars draw from
local areas and provide a place where people come together. As a result, customs
survive longer than would otherwise be expected. For example, churches provide an
opportunity for singing songs learned in the mountains. Potluck dinners provide
people an opportunity to socialize. What are basically rural customs survive in the
churches and bars of Appalachian neighborhoods.
120) CONCWSION
�The second factor important in the survival of Appalachian ethnicity in
Cincinnati is the presence of strong leadership. Cincinnati has people who have spent
large portions of their lives in working for Appalachian people. The Urban
Appalachian Council has become a well-organized and stable advocate for Appalachian
issues. To a small extent, Appalachian identification has become a basis for political
support. Appalachian ethnicity has not been allowed to die in Cincinnati. For these
people there remain a few more tomorrows.
CONCLUSION (121
�This page intentionally left blank
�BIBLIOGRAPHY
Adams, James
1971.
"Series on Appalachians in Cincinnati: children face special problems in
school." Reprinted from the Cincinnati Post and Times-Star.
Agresta, Anthony
1985.
'The migration turnaround: end of a phenomenon?" Population Today,
13:6-7.
Allen, Fayetta A.
1974.
"Blacks in Appalachia." The Black Sclwlar, 15 (June):42-51.
Anderson, Alan B. and James S. Frieders
1981.
Ethnicity in Canada: Theoretical Perspectives. Toronto: Butterworths.
Anglin, Mary.
1983.
"Experiences of in-migrants in Appalachia." in Allen Batteau, (ed.),
Appalachia and America: Autonomy and Regional Independence.
Lexington: The University of Kentucky.
Antunes, George and Charles M. Gaitz
1975.
"Ethnicity and participation: a study of Mexican-Americans, Blacks, and
Whites." American Journal of Sociology, 80:1192-1211.
Appalachian Regional Commission
1984a. "Appalachian unemployment, November, 1983." Appalachia, 17:2.
1984b.
"Projects funded in distressed counties in FY 1983." Appalachia,
17:6.
1983.
"Appalachia: the economic outlook through the eighties." Appalachia,
17:1-14.
1982a. "Appalachian population and per capita money income." Appalachia,
16:22-23.
1982b.
"Poverty status of household population in Appalachia." Appalachia,
16:24-25.
1979a.
Appalachia- A Reference Book. Washington, DC: Appalachian Regional
Commission.
1979b.
A Report to Congress on Migration. Washington, DC: Appalachian
Regional Commission.
1971.
"Blacks in Appalachia. Population trends: 1960 to 1970." Current
Statistical Report Number 4. Washington DC: Appalachian
Regional Commission.
Appleby, Monica Kelly
1970.
"Human development problems in Appalachia." in Max E. Glenn (ed.),
Appalachia in Transition. St. Louis, MO: The Bethany Press.
B/BUOGRAPHY (123
�Ball, J.C. and W.M. Bates
1970.
"Nativity, parentage and mobility of opiate addicts." In J.C. Ball and C.D.
Chambers, The Epidemiology of Opiale Addiction in the United
Stales, edited by J.C. Ball and CD. Chambers 95-111. Springfield,
IL: Charles C. Thomas.
Barth, Fridrick
1966.
Models of Social OrganizaJion. Glasgow: The University Press.
1969
Ethnic Groups and Boundaries. Boston: Little, Brown.
Barron, Hal Seth
"A case for Appalachian demographic history." Appalachian Journal,
1977.
4:208-15.
Belcher, John C.
1962.
"Population growth and characteristics." in Thomas R. Ford (ed.), The
Southern Appalachian Region: A Survey. Lexington: University of
Kentucky Press.
Bell, Daniel
1975.
"Ethnicity and social change." inN. Glazer and D.P. Moynihan (eds.),
Ethnicity: Theory and Experience. Cambridge: Oxford Univeristy Press.
Berlowitz, Marvin J. and Henry Durand
1977.
"School dropout or student punchout? A case study of the possible
violation of property rights and liberties by the de facto exclusion of
students from the public schools." Working Paper #8. Cincinnati: Urban
Appalachian Council.
Beschner, George and Kerry Treasure
(forthcoming) "Female adolescent drug use." In Friedmand, Alfred S. an
Beschner, Youth Drug Abuse: Problems, Issues and Trealment. Edited by
Alfred S. Friedman and George Beschner:4-7.
Billings, Dwight
1974.
"Culture and poverty in Appalachia: a theoretical discussion and
empirical analysis." Social Forces, 53:315-23.
Billings, Dwight and David W a1ls
1980.
"Appalachians." in Stephan Thernstrom (ed.), Harvard Encyclopedia of
American Ethnic Groups. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Billingsley, Andrew
Black Families in White America. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall,
1968.
Inc.
Blau, Peter and Otis Dudley Duncan
1967.
The American Occupalional Structure. New York: John Wiley and Sons.
Bonacich, Edna
"A theory of ethnic antagonism: the split labor market." American
1972.
Sociological Review, 37:547-59.
124)
BIBUOGRAPHY
�Bordwell, Ken
1983a. Community Council Directory. Department of Neighborhood Housing and
Conservation, Division of Planning and Neighborhood Assistance,
City of Cincinnati.
1983b.
Appendix to Cornmu.nity Council Directory. Department of Neighborhood
Housing and Conservation, Division of Planning and Community
Assistance, City of Cincinnati.
Branscome, James
1976.
"Appalachian migrants and the need for a national policy." in Bruce
Ergood and Bruce E. Kuhre (eds.), Appalachia: Social Context Past
and Present, 1st Edition. DuBuque, lA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing
Company.
Breton, Raymond
1964.
"Institutional completeness of ethnic communities and the personal
relations of immigrants." American Jourru:zl of Sociology, 70:193205.
Brewer, Earl D.C.
1962.
"Religion and churches." in Thomas R. Ford (ed.), The Southern
Appalachian Region: A Survey. Lexington: University of
Kentucky Press.
Brown, James S.
1968.
'The family behind the migrant." Mountain Life and Work, September
1968:4-7.
1971.
"Population and migration changes in Appalachia." in Changes in Rural
Appalachia. John D. Photiadis and Harry K. Schwarzweller
(eds.).Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
1972.
"A look at the 1970 census." in DavidS. Walls and John B. Stephenson
(eds.), Appalachia in the Sixties: A Decade of Reawakening.
Lexington: University of Kentucky Press.
Brown, James S. and George A. Hillery
'The Great Migration 1940-1960." in Thomas R. Ford (ed.), The Southern
1962.
Appalachian Region: A Survey. Lexington: University of
Kentucky Press.
Brown, James S. and Harry Schwarzweller
1974.
'The Appalachian family." in Frank S. Riddel (ed.), Appalachia: Its
People, Heritage, and Problems. DuBuque, lA: Kendall/Hunt
Publishing Company.
Campbell, John C.
The Southern Highlander and His Homeland. New York: The Russell Sage
1921.
Foundation.
BlBUOGRAPHY (125
�Caudill, Harry M.
1963.
Night Comes to the Cumberlands. Boston: Little, Brown and
Company.
Cabbell, Edward J.
1980.
"Black invisibility and racism in Appalachia: An Informal Survey."
Appalchian Journal, 8 (Autumn):48-54.
Chein, Isidor, Donald L. Gerard, RobertS. Lee and Eva Rosenfeld
1964.
The Road to H: Narcotics, Delinquency and Social Policy. New York:
Basic Books.
Chitwood, Dale D., Duane C. McBride and Clyde B. McCoy
1976.
'The extent of substance abuse among high school students." Miami-Dade
Metro County School System.
Cincinnati Human Relations Committee
1956.
Report of a Workshop on the Southern Mountaineer in Cincinnati.
Cincinnati: Cincinnati Human Relations Committee.
Cisin, I.H. and D.l. Mannheimer
1971.
"Marijuana use among adults in a large city and suburb." Annals of the
New YorkAcademy of Science 191:222-34.
City Planning Commission
1980.
1980 Statistical Neighborhood Approximations. Cincinnati: City
Planning Commission.
Cohen, Abner
1969.
Custom and Politics in Urban Africa. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
Cohen, Stephen M. and Robert E. Kapsis
1978.
"Participation of Blacks, Puerto Ricans, and Whites in voluntary
associations: a test of current theories." Social Forces 56:1053-71.
Community Chest and Council of the Cincinnati Area
1983.
Regional Overview Report II: Profiles of Change, Greater Cincinnati
Region. Cincinnati: Community Chest and Council.
Cumberland, John H.
1973.
Regional Development: Experiences and Prospects in the United States of
America. Second Edition. The Hague: Mouton.
Darroch, A. Gordon and Wilfred B. Marston
1971.
'The social class basis of ethnic residential segregation: the Canadian
Case." American Journal of Sociology, 77:491-510.
Dasgupta, Statdal (ed.)
1975.
Structure and Change in Atlantic Canada. Charlottetown: University of
Prince Edward Island.
Davies, C.S. and Gary L. Fowler
126) BIBUOGRAPHY
�1972.
''The disadvantaged urban migrant in Indianapolis." EcoTWmic Geography,
48:153-67.
Ehrlich, Howard J. and James W. Rinehart
1965.
"A brief report on the methodology of stereotype research." Social
Forces, 43:564-75.
Eidheim, Harald
''The Lappish movement: an innovative political process." in M.J. Swartz
1968.
(ed.), Local Level Politics. Chicago: Aldine.
Ergood, Bruce, and Bruce E. Kuhre (eds.)
Appalachia: Social Context, Past and Present, 2nd Edition. Dubuque, lA:
1983.
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.
Erickson, K.T.
1976.
Everything in its Path. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Fisher, Stephen L.
1983.
"Victim-blaming in Appalachia: cultural theories and the southern
mountaineer." in Bruce Ergood and Bruce E. Kuhre, (eds.),
Appalachia: Social Context Past and Present. DuBuque, lA:
Kendall/Hunt Publishing Co.
Flacks, Richard
1979.
"Growing up confused." in Peter I. Rose, (ed.), Socialization and the Life
Cycle. New York: St. Martins Press.
Ford, Thomas R. (ed.)
The Southern Appalachian Region: A Survey. Lexington: University of
1962.
Kentucky Press.
Ford, Thomas R. and Gordon F. DeJong
1963.
''The decline of fertility in the Southern Appalachian Mountain region."
Social Forces, 42:89-96.
Fowler, Gary L.
1976.
"Regional mobility among people in Central Cincinnati." Urban
Appalachian Council Research Bulletin (May):1-3.
1980.
Appalachian Migration: A Review and Assessment of the Research.
Washington: Appalachian Regional Commission.
1981.
"The residential distribution of urban Appalachians." in William W.
Philliber and Clyde B. McCoy (eds.), The Invisible Minority:
Urban Appalachians. Lexington: The University Press of
Kentucky.
Fowler, Gary L. and Christopher S. Davies
"The urban settlement patterns of disadvantaged migrants." Journal of
1972.
Geography.
Francis, E.K.
1976.
Interethnic Relations. New York: Elsevier.
BIBliOGRAPHY (127
�Frazier, E. Franklin
1957.
Black Bourgeoisie. New York: Free Press.
French, Laurence
'The isolated Appalachian Black community." Paper presented at the
1975.
Annual Meeting of the Rural Sociological Society. San Francisco.
Gamson, William A.
1968.
Power and Discontent. Homewood: Dorsey.
Garkovich, Lorraine
"Kinship and return migration in eastern Kentucky." Appalachian Journal,
1982.
10:62-70.
Gaventa, John.
1980.
Power and Powerlessness: Quiescence and Rebellion in an Appalachian
Valley. Urbana: University of lllinois Press.
Gazaway, Rena
The Longest Mile. Baltimore: Penguin Books, Inc.
1974.
George, M. V.
1970.
International Migration in Canada: Demographic Analyses. Ottawa:
Dominion Bureau of Statistics.
Gibson, Arrell M.
1975.
"Myth and reality of the melting pot thesis." in Emmett M. Essin, ill
(ed.), Appalachia: Family Traditions in Transition. Johnson City,
TN: The East Tennessee State University Research Advisory
Council.
Giffm, Roscoe
1962.
"Appalachian newcomers in Cincinnati." in Thomas R. Ford (ed.), The
Southern Appalachian Region: A Survey. Lexington: The
University of Kentucky Press.
Gitlin, Todd and Nanci Hollander
Uptown: Poor Whites in Chicago. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
1970.
Glazer, Nathan and Daniel P. Moynihan
1970.
Beyond the Melting Pot. Cambridge: MIT Press.
1975.
'1ntroduction." inN. Glazer and D.P. Moynihan (eds.), Ethnicity:
Theory and Experience. Cambridge: Oxford University Press.
Gleason, George
Horizons for Older People. New York: MacMillan Publishing Company,
1956.
Inc.
Goering, John M.
1971.
'The emergence of ethnic interests: a case of serendipity." Social Forces,
49:379-84.
128)
BIBUOGRAPHY
�Goode, William J.
1963.
World Revolution and Family Patterns. New York: The Free Press.
Goodrich, Carter, Bushrod W. Allin. C. Warner Thornwaite, et al.
1936.
Migration and Economic Opportunity: The Report of the Study of
Population Redistribution. Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press.
Gordon, Milton M.
Assimilation In American Life. New York: Oxford University Press.
1964.
Guichard, Charles P. and Margaret A. Connolly
1977.
"Ethnic group stereotypes: a new look at an old problem." The Journal of
Negro Education, 43:344-57.
Handlin, Oscar
1951.
The Uprooted. Boston: Little, Brown.
Harmeling, Mary B.
"Social and cultural links in urban occupational adjustment of Southern
1969.
Appalachian migrants." Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, Forelhorn
University.
Hechter, Michael
1974.
'The political economy of ethnic change." American Journal of
Sociology, 79:1151-78.
Henderson, George
"Poor urban whites: a neglected urban problem." Journal of Secondary
1966.
Education. 41:111-14.
Henson, Michael
1976.
'There's nothing better to do." Mountain Life and Work, August:20-29.
Hershberg, Theodore, et al.
1979.
"A tale of three cities: blacks and immigrants in Philadelphia: 1850 to
1880, 1930 and 1970." The Annals, 441:55-81.
Hill, David B. and Norman Luttbeg
1980.
Trends in American Electoral Behavior. Itasca, IL: Peacock.
Holdrich, Martin K.
1984.
''Trends: prospects of metropolitan growth." American Demographics.
6:33-37.
Horwood, Harold
'The biggest outport." Globe and Mail Weekend Magazine, 29(March
1979.
31):12ff.
Huelsman, Ben R.
1969.
"Southern mountaineers in city juvenile courts." Federal Probation
33:49-54.
BIBliOGRAPHY (129
�Hyland, Gerard A.
1970.
"Social interaction and urban opportunity: the Appalachian in-migrant in
the Cincinnati central city." Araipode, 2:66-83.
1972.
"A social interaction analysis of the Appalachian in-migrant."
Unpublished masters thesis, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati,
Ohio.
Institute of Governmental Research.
1978.
A Citywide Analysis of the Service Area Monitoring Survey. Institute of
Governmental Research, University of Cincinnati.
Jones, Loyal
1978.
"Appalachian values." In Perspectives on Urban Appalachians, edited by
Steve Weiland and Phillip Obenniller. Cincinnati: Ohio Urban
Appalachian Awareness Project.
Katz, Daniel and Kenneth Braly.
"Racial stereotypes of one hundred college students." Journal of Abnormal
1933.
and Social Psychology, 28:280-90.
Killian, Lewis M.
1970.
White Southerners. New York: Random House.
Kilson, Martin
1983.
'The Black bourgeoisie revisited." DissenJ, 30:85-96.
Kleinman, P.H. and Irving Likoff
1978.
"Ethnic differences in factors related to drug use." Journal of Health and
Social Behavior. 19:190-199.
Knoke, David and Richard B. Felson
1974.
"Ethnic stratification and political cleavage in the United States,
1952-1968." American Journal of Sociology, 80:630-42.
Kutner, Nancy G.
"Use of an updated adjective check-list in research on ethnic stereotypes."
1973.
Social Science Quarterly, 54:640-46.
Kunkin, Dorothy and Michael Byrne
1973.
Appalachians in Cleveland. Institute for Urban Studies, the Cleveland
State University.
Larkin, Robert Paul
1973.
Out-Migration from Altoona, Pennsylvania: Mobility Response to
Changing Opportunities. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation.
Pennsylvania State University.
Leslie, Gerald R.
1969.
The Family in Social ConJext. New York: Oxford University Press.
1973.
130)
The Family in Social ConJext, 2nd Edition. New York: Oxford University
Press.
BJBUOGRAPHY
�Levitt, Karl
1960.
Population Movemen!s in the Atlantic Provinces. New Bnmswick:
Atlantic Provinces Economic Council.
Lewis, Michael
1978.
The Culture of Inequality. New York: Meridian Books.
1981.
"Appalachian migration to Midwestern cities." In William W. Philliber
and Clyde B. McCoy (eds.) The Invisible Minority, pp. 35-78.
Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.
Loof, David H.
1971.
Appalachian Children: The Challenge of Menial Health. Lexington:
University of Kentucky Press.
Longino, Charles F., Jr.
1984.
"Migration winners and losers." American Demographics, 6:27-45.
Luckoff, Irving F.
1972.
Social and Ethnic Patterns of Reported Drug Use and Con!iguity with Drug
Users. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Law
Enforcement Assistance Administration.
Lyman, Stanford M. and W.A. Douglass
1973.
Ethnicity: strategies of collective and individual impression
management." Social Research, 40:344-65.
McBride, Duane C.
1977.
Social
Kentucky.
Control
and
Drug
Use.
Ph.D.
Dissertation,
University
of
McCoy, Candace
1976.
"Attitudes of Appalachian youth towards legal authority." Focus on
Law. 2:11-12.
McCoy, Clyde B. and James S. Brown
1981.
"Appalachian migration to midwestern cities." In William W. Philliber
and Clyde B. McCoy (eds.), The Invisible Minority: Urban
Appalachians. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.
McCoy, Clyde B. and Duane C. McBride
1976.
"Socio-cultural theories and techniques in the explanation for social
research on drug abuse." Miami: Center for Social Research on
Drug Abuse
1978.
"Drug use in metropolitan society." Final report to National Institute on
Drug Abuse. Miami: Center for Social Research on Drug Abuse.
McCoy, Clyde B. and Virginia M. Watkins
"The migration system pattern of Southwest Ohio and its relation to
1975.
Southern Appalachian Migration." Research Bulletin. Urban
Appalachian Council.
1981.
"Stereotypes of Appalachian migrants." In William W. Philliber and
BIBliOGRAPHY (131
�Clyde B. McCoy (eds.), The Invisible Minority: Urban
Appalachians. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.
McDonald, D.J.
"Population migration and economic development in the Atlantic
1968.
provinces." Research Paper No.6. New Brunswick: Atlantic
Provinces Economic Council.
McKay, J. and F. l..ewins
1978.
"Ethnicity and the ethnic group: a conceptual analysis and
reformulation." Ethnic and Racial Studies, 1:412-27.
McKee, Dan M. and Phillip J. Obermiller
1978.
'The invisible neighborhood: Appalachians in Ohio's cities." Research
Bulletin. Cincinnati: Urban Appalachian Council.
McKee Dan M. and Ian Robertson
Social Problems. New York: Random House, Inc.
1975.
Maloney, Michael E.
1974.
The Social Areas of Cincinnati: Toward an Analysis of Social Needs.
Cincinnati: The Cincinnati Human Relations Commission.
1978.
'The implications of Appalachian culture for social welfare practice."
Perspectives on Urban Appalachians, edited by Steve Weiland and
Phil Obermiller. Cincinnati: Ohio Urban Appalachian Awareness
Project.
1979.
"Just looking for a home: urban Appalachians in Ohio." St. Luke
Journal, 22:117-41.
1981.
'The prospects for urban Appalachians." In William W. Philliber and
Clyde B. McCoy (eds.), The Invisible Minority: Urban
Appalachians. Lexington: The University of Kentucky Press.
Unpublished. By-Laws, Urban Appalachians of Cincinnati.
Maloney, Michael E. and Ben Huelsman
1972.
"Humanism, scientism, and southern mountaineers." Peoples Appalachia,
2:24-27.
Marger, Martin N.
1981.
"Ethnicization and urban Appalachians." Working Paper 10. Cincinnati:
Urban Appalachian Council.
Marger, Martin N. and Phillip J. Obermiller
1983.
"Urban Appalachians and Canadian Maritime migrants: a comparative
study of emergent ethnicity." International Journal of Comparative
Sociology, 24:229-43.
Massey, DouglasS.
"Social class and ethnic segregation: a reconsideration of methods and
1981.
conclusions." American Sociological Review 46:641-50.
132)
BIBUOGRAPHY
�Matthews, Ebnora Messer
1966.
Neighborhood and Kin: Life in a Tennessee Ridge Community.
Nashville, TN: Vanderbilt University Press.
Milbrath, Lester W. and M.L. Goel
Political Participation: How and Why Do People Get Involved in
1977.
Politics? Chicago: Rand McNally.
Miller, Tommie R.
1976.
"Urban Appalachians: cultural pluralism and ethnic identity in the city."
Unpublished MA. thesis, University of Cincinnati.
1977.
"Education and urban Appalachian youth." Youth Services Training
Handout. Urban Appalachian Council.
1979a.
Information obtained in discussion on Appalachian youths with Virgina
McCoy Watkins.
1979b.
Information obtained in discussion on Appohn D. Photiadis and Harry K.
Schwarzweller (eds.). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania
Press.
Moore, Detlef H. and Dirk J. Pastoor
1976.
"Appalachian values: are they transferable from a rural to urban setting?"
The Institute for Community Development. University of
Louisville.
Mountain Life and Work.
1976 Special issue:
Work, Vol. 52 (August).
Urban Appalachians.
Mountain Life and
Murdock, Steven H. and Clyde B. McCoy
1974
"A note on the decline of Appalachian fertility, 1930-1970." Growth and
Change, 5:39-42.
Neely, Sharlotte
'The ethnic entrepreneur in the urban Appalachian movement." Paper
1979.
presented at The Annual Meeting of the American Anthropological
Association.
Obermiller, Phillip J.
1977.
"Appalachians as an urban ethnic group: romanUclSln, renaissance, or
revolution?" Appalachian Journal, 5:145-52.
1981.
'The question of Appalachian ethnicity." In William W. Philliber and
Clyde B. McCoy (eds.), The Invisible Minority: Urban
Appalachians. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.
1982.
Labeling Urban Appalachians: The Role of Stereotypes in the Formation
of Ethnic Group Identity. Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation, Union
Graduate School.
Obermiller, Phillip J. and Robert Oldendick.
1984.
"Political activity among Appalachian migrants." Social Science
Quarterly, 65:1058-64.
BIBUOGRAPHY (133
�Parsons, Talcott
The Social System. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
1951.
1955a.
'The American family: its relations to personality and to the social
structure." in Talcott Parsons and Robert E. Bales (eds.), Family,
Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
1955b.
"Conclusion: levels of culture generality and the process of
differentiation." in Talcott Parsons and Robert E. Bales (eds.),
Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: The
Free Press.
Patterson, Orlando
1975.
Context and choice in ethnic allegiance: a theoretical framework and
Caribbean case study." InN. Glazer and D.P. Moynihan (eds.),
Ethnicity: Theory and Experience. Cambridge: Harvard Univerity
Press.
Peoples Appalachian Research Collective
"Urban migrants: industrial heartland refugees." Special Issue. Peoples
1972.
Appalachia, 2.
Peterson, Gene B., Laure M. Sharp, and Thomas F. Drury
1977.
Southern Newcomers to Northern Cities: Work and Social Adjustment in
Cleveland. New York: Praeger.
Philliber, William W.
Appalachian Migrants in Urban America: Cultural Conflict or Ethnic
1981.
Group Formation? New York: Praeger.
1983.
"Correlates of Appalachian identification among Appalachian migrants."
In Barry M. Buxton (ed.), The Appalachian Experience. Boone, NC:
Appalachian Consortium Press.
Philliber, William W. and Clyde B. McCoy (eds.)
1981.
The Invisible Minority. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.
Philliber, William W. and Phillip J. Obermiller
"Black Appalachian migrants: the issue of dual minority status." In Rick
1982.
Simon (ed.), Critical Essays in Appalachian Life and Culture:
Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Appalachian Studies Conference.
Boone, NC: Appalachian Consortium Press.
Pickard, Jerome
1981a. "A decade of change in Appalachia." Appalachia, 14:1-9.
198lb.
"Appalachia's decade of change- a decade of inmigration." Appalachia,
15:24-28.
Population Reference Bureau
"U.S. population: where we are; where we are going." Special Issue
1982.
Population Bulletin, Vol. 37, (June).
134) BIBUOGRAPHY
�Reeves, David
"Black Appalachians in the city." Mountain Life and Work, 52
1976.
(August):18-19.
Rhodes, Charles
1968.
"Appalachian child in Chicago schools." Appalachian Advance,
October: 6-10.
Ricco, Anthony
1965.
"Occupational aspirations of migrant adolescents from the Appalachian
South." Vocational Guidance Quarterly, Autumn:26-30.
Robley, Bryant and Cheryl Russell
1983.
'Trends: altered states." American Demographics, 5:34-36.
Rogerson, Peter A. and David A. Plane
1985.
"Monitoring migration trends." American Demographics, 7:27-47.
Ryan, John P.
1975.
Cultural Diversity and the American Experience: Political Participation
Among Blacks, Appalachians, and Indians. Beverly Hills: Sage.
Sarna, Johnathon D.
1978.
"From immigrants to ethnics: toward a new theory of 'ethnicization'."
Ethnicity, 5:370-8.
Schwarzweller, Harry K.
1970.
"Adaptation of Appalachian migrants to the industrial work situation: a
case study." In Behavior in New Environments: Adaptation of
Migrant Populations, edited by Eugene B. Broey. Sage
Publications.
1981.
"Occupational patterns of Appalachian migrants." In William W.Philliber
and Clyde B. McCoy (eds.), The Invisible Minority: Urban
Appalachians. Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky.
Schwarzweller, Harry K., James S. Brown, and J.J. Mangalam
1971.
Mountain Families in Transition. University Park, PA: The Pennsylvania
State University Press.
Shapiro, Henry D.
1977.
"Appalachia and the idea of America: The problem of the persisting
frontier." In J.W. Williams (ed.), An Appalachian Symposiwn.
Boone, NC: Appalachian State University Press.
1978.
Appalachia On Our Mind. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North
Carolina Press.
Sherrill, Samuel B.
1972.
Cincinnati Model Neighborhood Survey: A Statement of Research
Objectives Metlwdology. Cincinnati: Institute for Metropolitan
Studies, University of Cincinnati.
Shibutani, Tamotsu and Kian M. Kwan
Ethnic Stratification. New York: MacMillan.
1965.
BIBliOGRAPHY (135
�Simpkins, 0. Norman
1974.
"An informal, incomplete introduction to Appalachian culture." In
Marshall University Distinguished Reading Series 2. Huntington,
wv
Spicer, Edward H.
1971.
"Persistent cultural systems: a comparative study of identity systems that
can adapt to contrasting environments." Science, 1974:795-800.
Steeves, Allen D.
1964.
"An analysis of internal migration with specific reference to the flow of
people from the Atlantic provinces to Guelph, Ontario."
Unpublished M.A. thesis, University of Toronto.
Stephenson, John B.
1968.
Shiloh: A Mountain Community. Lexington: The University of
Kentucky Press
Stone, Leroy 0.
1969.
Migration in Canada: Some Regional Aspects. Ottawa: Dominion
Bureau of Statistics.
Sudman, Seymour
1966.
"Probability Sampling with quotas." Journal of the American Statistical
Association, (September):49-71.
Taylor, R.L.
1979.
Migration In Canada: Some Regional Aspects. Ottawa: Dominion
Bureau of Statistics.
Traina, Frank J.
1980.
'The assimilation of Appalachian migrants in northern Kentucky."
Working Paper 12. Cincinnati: Urban Appalachian Council.
Tuchfarber, Alfred and William Klecka
Random Digit Dialing. Washington: Urban Institute.
1976.
Uhlenberg, Peter
1975.
"Noneconomic determinants of nonmigration: sociological considerations
for migration theory." Rural Sociology, 38:296-311.
Urban Appalachian Council
1979.
Urban Appalachian Counci/1978 Annual Report. Cincinnati: Urban
Appalachian Council.
V ailliant, G.E.
1966.
"Parent-child cultural disparity and drug addiction." Journal of Nervous and
Mental Diseases. 142-534-9.
Vance, Rupert B.
'The region: a new survey." In Thomas R. Ford (ed.), The Southern
1962.
Appalachian Region: A Survey. Lexington: University of
Kentucky Press.
136) B/BUOGRAPHY
�van den Berghe, Pierre L.
1978.
Race and Racism. New York: Wiley.
Vincent, George E.
1898.
"A retarded frontier." American Journal of Sociology, 4:1-29.
Wagner, Thomas E.
1973.
"A study of selected Appalachian migrant students attending urban junior
high shools in the Cincinnati, Ohio, area." Unpublished DED.
Dissertation, University of Cincinnati.
1974.
"Report of the Appalachian school study project." Urban Appalachian
Council Working Paper No.4. June.
1975.
"Urban Appalachian school children: the least understood of all." Urban
Appalachian Council Working Paper No. 6. January.
Walls, DavidS.
1977.
"On the naming of Appalachia." In J.W. Williamson (ed.), An
Appalachian Symposium. Boone, NC: Appalachian State
University Press.
Ward, David
1971.
Cities and Immigrants. New York: Oxford University Press.
Watkins, Virginia McCoy
1973.
"Consideration of factors relevant to the development of health support
systems for Appalachian migrants." Master's Thesis, University of
Cincinnati.
Watkins, Virginia M. and Diana G. Trevino
1982.
"Occupational and employment status of Appalachian migrant women."
In Rick Simon (ed.), Critical Essays in Appalachian Life and
Culture: Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Appalachian Studies
Conference. Boone, NC: Appalachian Consortium Press.
Watkins, Virginia McCoy and Clyde B. McCoy
1979.
Drug Use Among Urban Ethnic Youth. Report to the National Institute
on Drug Abuse. (January).
1980.
Drug Use Among Appalachian Youth. Services Research Monograph.
National Institute on Drug Abuse.
Watkins, Virginia McCoy and Ray West
1976.
"Relationships and potentials between the urban Appalachian family and
the neighborhood school and neighborhood stability." Case study
prepared for the National Center for Urban Ethnic Affairs. Urban
Appalachian Council.
Watts, Ann DeWitt
"Cities and their place in southern Appalachia." Appalachian Journal,
1981.
8:105-18.
BTBUOGRAPHY (137
�Weller, Jack
1966.
1975.
Yesterday's People. Lexington: The University of Kentucky Press.
"Urbanization and the disappearance of a heritage." In Emmett M. Essin,
ill (ed.), Appalachia: Family Traditions in Transition. Johnson
City, TN: The East Tennessee State University Research Advisory
Council.
Weller, Robert H. and Leon F. Bouvier
Population: Demography and Policy. New York: St. Martins Press.
1981.
White, Stephen E.
1983.
"Return migration to Appalachian Kentucky: an atypical case of
nonmetropolitan migration reversal." Rural Sociology, 48:471-91.
Williams, J. Allen, Jr. and Louis St. Peter
1977.
"Ethnicity and socioeconomic status as determinants of social
participation: a test of the interaction hypothesis." Social Science
Quarterly, 57:892-98.
Williams, J. Allen, Jr., Nicholas Babchuk, and David R. Johnson
1973.
"Voluntary associations and minority status: a comparative analysis of
Anglo, Black, and Mexican Americans." American Sociological
Review, 38:637-46.
Williams, Robin
"Structure and process in ethnic relations: increased knowledge and
1979.
unanswered question." Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the
American Sociological Association.
Wirth, Louis
1938.
"Urbanism as a way of life." American Journal of Sociology, 44:1-24.
Yancey, W.L., E.P. Ericksen, and R.N. Juliani
1976.
"Emergent ethnicity: a review and reformulation." American Sociological
Review, 41:351-403.
Yinger, J. Milton
1976.
"Ethnicity in complex societies: structural, cultural, and characterological
factors.: In Lewis A. Coser and Otto N. Lasen (eds.). The Uses of
Controversy in Sociology. New York: The Free Press.
Zelditch, Morris, Jr.
"Role differentiation in the nuclear family: a
1955.
comparative study." In Talcott Parsons and Robert F. Bales (eds.).
Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. Glencoe, IL: The
Free Press.
Zigli, Barbara
1981.
"Appalachian Blacks-the 'double minority" Cincinnati Enquirer
5):A-6.
Zimmerman, Carle C.
1947.
Family and Civilization. New York: Harper and Brothers.
138) B!BUOGRAPHY
(May
�CONTRIBUTORS
Kathryn M. Borman is Associate Professor of Education in the Department of
Educational Foundations at the University of Cincinnati.
James K. Crissman is Associate Professor of Sociology in the Department of
Sociology at Illinois Benedictine College.
Clyde B. McCoy is Professor of Sociology and Associate Director for Cancer
Control at the Papanicolaou Comprehensive Center at the University of Miami.
Michael E. Maloney is Executive Director of the Appalachian Peoples Service
Organization - Urban in Cincinnati.
Martin N. Marger is Professor of Sociology in the Department of Social
Sciences at Northern Kentucky University.
H. Virginia McCoy is Visiting Assistant Professor in the Department of
at Florida Atlantic University.
Sharlotte K. Neely is Associate Professor of Anthropology in the Department of Social
Sciences at Northern Kentucky University.
Phillip J. Obermiller is Assistant Professor of Sociology in the Department of Social
Sciences at Northern Kentucky University.
Robert W. Oldendick is Assistant Director of the Institute for Policy Research at the
University of Cincinnati.
William W. Philliber is Professor and Chair of the Depar1ment of Sociology at the State
University of New York at New Paltz.
Maureen R. Sullivan is Executive Director of the Urban Appalachian Council in
Cincinnati.
Thomas E. Wagner is Professor of Planning and Administration and Senior Vice
Provost at the University of Cincinnati.
CONTRIBUTORS 139
�This page intentionally left blank
�INDEX
A
Appalachian entrepreneur, 44, 45, 47
Abt Associates, 13
Appalachian Festival, 8-10, 44
Academy for Contemporary Problems, 13
Appalachian Fund, 6-8
accent, 28, 37-41, 44, 65, 99
Appalachian Identity Center, 7-9, 46
advocacy; organizations, 5-12, as role for
outsiders, 45-46, see also support
services
Appalachian Issues Network, 11
age profile of Appalachians, see
demo graphic characteristics
Akron, OH, 4, 15, family type study in,
83-88
Alabama; migration patterns, 55-58
alcoholism, as stereotype, 37-38, 41
Allen-Edwards feud, 82
Anschell, Kurt, 13
apathy, as stereotype, 37-38, 41
Appalachia; defmition of, 53-58, dropout
rates in, 97, economy, 64, inmigration,
52, 60, migration within, 54, 55, 6062-regions of; central, 58, 59,
southern, 3, 25, 26, 52, 58, 62
northern, 59, 61
Appalachian Action Council, 12
Appalachian _Alliance, 11
Appalachian Committee, 6-8, 10, 13
Appalachian Community Development
Association, 9-10
Appalachian Development Projects
Assembly of the Commission of
Religion in Appalachia, 11
Appalachian Migrants in Urban America:
Cultural Conflict or Ethnic Group
Formation?, ii, 15
Appalachian movement, urban, 5-12, 4547
Appalachia On Our Mind, 43
Appalachian People's Service
Organization-Urban Office, 11
Appalachian Regional Commission, 53,
Report to Congress on Migration, 52
Appalachian School Project Committee,
89
Appalachians; defmition of, 45-46
Appalachian Studies Conference, 11
Appalachian Women's Organization, 8
Archdiocese of Cincinnati, 6
Area-to-Area Migration Flow Data, 52-54
Arizona, migration patterns, 54-60
ascription, 43
assimilation, 30
Atlanta, GA; migration patterns, 55-58,
INDEX (141
�c
Appalachian movement, 46
attainment, socioeconomic, 16, 20-21,
26, 36-37, 70, of blacks, 21, 36-37,
70, and community council
participation, 74-79, of Maritimers, 2627, of recent migrants, 51, 64
automobile industry, 28
California. migration patterns, 54-57, 59,
60
Camp Washington, 9
Career Education Program (UAC), 10
Catholics, in Cincinnati, 44, involvement
in Appalachian movement, 7
Ayer, Perley, 5, 6
B
Baltimore, 15, 46, migration patterns, 5658, youth study, 102
Central Ohio Appalachian Council, 11
CETA, 10
Barth, Frederick, 43-44
Charleston, WV, migration patterns, 57,
58
Battelle fustitute, 9
Chattanooga. TN, 57, 58
Berea College, 5, 6
Chern Dyne industrial site, 11
Bethesda North Hospital (Cincinnati), 109
Chicago, studies of, 15, Appalachian
movement in, 46, migration patterns,
56, 57, 59
Birmingham, AL, 56-58
blacks; dropout rates, 90-95, involvement
in community councils, 74-79, political
influence, 30, views of Appalachians,
37-40, youths, 102, 104-107, see also,
attainment, socioeconomic
black Appalachians, 90-95, 111-115,
culture, 112, education, 113, income,
114, migratory patterns, 111,
occupations, 113-114, residential
patterns, 112, studies of, 15
blaming the victim, 14, 16
Bragdon, Marshall, 5-6
Brown, Katie, 8
Brown, James, 13
Bureau of the Census, 52
Cincinnati, OH; Appalachian population
of, 4, as center of urban Appalachian
movement, 5-11, migration patterns, 4,
25-27, 56-57, youth study, 100
Cincinnati Area Project, 1975, 15, 112
Cincinnati, City of; affmnative action
policy statement, 8, City Council, 11,
Human Relations Commission, 5-9, 13,
89, Mayor's Friendly Relations
Committee, 5, 6, Public Schools, 89
Cincinnati Enquirer, 6
Cincinnati Union Bethel, 97
Citizen's Services Survey, 1981, 73
City Folk, 11
civil rights activism, 29
142)
INDEX
�class relationships, ii, within urban
Appalachian movement, 16, vs
ethnicity, 16, 17, 30, 31, see also
upward mobility, middle class
Appalachians
43-44, sensitivity to, 107
D
Dallas, TX, migration patterns, 55, 56,
58, 60
Clermont County, OH, 15
Cleveland, OH; Appalachian movement in,
11, 12, 46, migration patterns, 4, 56,
57, 59, studies of, 15, youth, 101
Dayton, OH, Appalachian movement in,
11, 46, migration patterns, 4, 56, 57,
59, 63, studies of, 15
Deaton, Brady, 13
Client Advocate Program (UAC), 11
delinquency, 99, 100, 101
coalitions of neighborhood groups
(Cincinnati), 74-77
coal industry, 3, 64
demographic characteristics of
Appalachians, 26, 36, 70-71, 73-75,
studies, 15
Coffey, Virginia, 5, 7
Depression, effects on migration, 25, 26
Coles, Robert, 13
Detroit, MI; Appalachian movement, 46,
migration patterns, 56, 57, 59, 63,
youth study, 102
Columbia, SC, migration patterns, 57, 58
Columbus, OH, 4, 15, 46, Appalachian
movement in, 11, migration patterns,
56, 57, 59, national conference, 9, 13
discrimination, 4, 5, 19-22, 36
Community Chest (Cincinnati), 10, 11
dropout rates, 64, 89-97, 101, 106
Community Commitment Foundation, 8
Drug Education Program (UAC), 10
community councils, participation in, 7479
Drukker, Ray, 6
downward mobility, 16
E
community organizing, 9, 11, 46, 74-79
ecological patterns, 28-32, 40
competition for jobs, 19, 21, 36, 37, with
blacks, 28
Council of the Southern Mountains, 5-7,
11
culture, Appalachian, i, 44, 99, 100, 108,
establishing, 8, 9, existence of, 21, 27,
education; Appalachian attitude towards,
99-101, studies of, 15, see also schools
education, lack of, as stereotype, 38
educational attainment, 16, 36, 64, 70-71,
100-101, 113, of blacks, 70, of
Cincinnatians, 96-97, improving, 101,
by neighborhood, 90-94, in rural
Appalachia, 96
INDEX
(143
�elderly, studies of, 15
fear of institutions, 21
Emmanuel Community Center, 6,7
federal recognition of urban Appalachian
movement, 9
endogamy, 82, 83
Florida, migration patterns, 54-60
Episcopal Diocese of Southern Ohio, 97
Ft. Lauderdale, 56-58, 60
ethnic boundaries, 27-28, 30-32, 35, 44
ethnic entrepreneur, 44-45, 47
ethnic group, Appalachians as, ii, 16, 17,
22, 46, further development, 30-31, 6366
ethnic group formation, 19, 22, 23, 6365, conditions for, 23, 25, cultural
model, 22, 23, 25, 27, ecological
model, 24, 28, ethnic boundary model,
24, 27, 35, 43, political economy
explanation, 17-21, political model,
24, 29-30, 69
Foster, Frank, 67, library on Appalachian
Migrants, 11
Fowler, Gary, 13
fundamentalism, 103
G
Gallahan, Sister Shirley, 6
great migration, 3, 13, 63, 64
Greater Cincinnati Foundation, 8
Ethnic Groups and Boundaries, 43
Greater Cincinnati Survey, 1982, 36, 112
ethnicity, 16, 17, 21, 24, 27, 64,
"stereotyped," 31, see also ethnic group
formation, culture
Greater Cincinnati Study, Fall1980, 70
Greenville, 57
extractive industries, 25, 26
Griffin, Roscoe, 5, 13
F
Faber, Stuart, 6, 7
H
Hamilton Appalachian People's Service
Organization, 11
factionalism, 45-46
family, importance of, 21, 89, 99, 100,
109, 110
family type, 44, nuclear, 81-83, extended,
81-83, in urban milieu, 83-88, of
orientation and procreation, 84-86
Hamilton, OH, migration patterns, 4,
Appalachian movement in, 11, studies
of, 15, 16
Hamilton County, OH, black Appalachians
in, 111-115, political activity, 69
Hatfield-McCoy feud, 82
farming, in Maritime provinces, 25-26, in
southern Appalachia, 25-26
health, studies of, 15
fatalism, 21, 106
Heritage Room, 8, 9
144)
INDEX
�homeland, i, 44, 65
jokes, ethnic, 20, 27
home ownership, 78
Junior League of Cincinnati, 8
K
honesty, as stereotype, 12, 37, 38, 41
Kentucky; migration patterns, 56-58,
northern, i, 15
housing, studies of, 15
Houston, immigration, 56-58, 60
HUB Social Services Center, 7
Huntington, WV, migration patterns, 57,
58
Kentucky, eastern, dropout rates, 97,
migration patterns, 3, 4, 58
Kentucky Mountain Club, 11
kinfolk messages, 4
Knoxville, 1N, 56, 57
identity, Appalachian, 7, 9, 11, 15, 2021, 24, 28, 30, 35, 45, by out-group,
15, 28, 30, see also stereotypes, ethnic
group
Ku Klux Klan, 46
L
Illinois, migration patterns, 54-57, 59-60
labor unions, 16
income, 20-21, 36, 52, 70-71, 112, of
recent migrants, 64
Lappish Movement, 44, 45
independence, 21
LEAA Grant for Youth Service Training, 9
Inner City Neighborhood Coalition, 10
Lexington, KY, 15, 19, migration
patterns, 55-58
Indiana, migration patterns, 54-56, 59, 60
Leybourne, Grace, 13
Indianapolis, 56, 59, 63
Los Angeles, inmigration, 55-57, 59
Institute of Govenmental Research, 74
Louisville, KY, migration patterns, 56-58,
63
interaction, patterns of, 22
loyalty, as stereotype, 37, 38
Internal Revenue Service, 52, 53
The Invisible MiMrity, ii, 14, 15
isolation, 21, 40
McCoy and Watkins, 14, 20
McCoy, Clyde, 13
J
Jacksonville, 56-58
M
Main Street Bible Center, 6
Maloney, Michael, 6-10, 44-46
INDEX
(145
�Marger, Martin, 17
Morgan, Larry, 13
Maritime provinces of Canada, economy,
25, 26, outmigration, 25, 26
Mountain Life and Work, 9, 13
Mountain Families in Transition, 13
Marltimers, culture, 27, occupations, 25,
26, political presence, 29, residential
patterns, 28, self-perception, 27,
stereotypes, 28
Multigenerational research, 14, 15
Mynatt, Ernie, 6, 7,9,45
N
Massachusetts, inmigration, 54
Memorial Community Center, 7
Nashville, TN, inmigration, 55-58
Michigan, migration patterns, 54-56, 59,
60
National Center for Urban/Ethnic Affairs,
102
middle class Appalachians, 20, 26, 44, 64
National Conference on Urban
Appalachians, 1974, 9, 13
migrants, i, ii, 3, 4, 19-21, generation of,
63-65, recent, 63-65, SES, 20, 21, 26,
28,37,41, 52, 64,90,94,95,see
also ethnic group, attainment,
socioeconomic
migration, .rural-to-urban, i, 3, 4, 20, 21,
25, 26, 52, adjustment to, 6, 7, 100,
101, 108, 109, within Appalachia, 5360, of blacks, 19, decline in, to
Midwest, 59, 60, 63, and decline in
education, 90, process, 3, 4, 100, pushpull factors, 3, 25, recent, 51-60,
studies of, i, ii, 13, 15, 51, 52, 53,
"turnaround," 52, 60
neighborhood, 13-15, 109, -based
education, 96, 97, -based support
systems, 109, Cincinnati, 74, 89-90,
and dropout rates, 90-94, satisfaction
with, 75, see also Camp Washington,
Over-the-Rhine, Northside, Norwood,
South Fairmont, community organizing
New Brunswick, 25
Newfoundland, 25
"Newfies," 27
New Jersey, migration flows, 54, 55, 60
migratory streams, 4, 51, 52, in Canada,
25, 26
New York, migration patterns, 56, 57, 59
Miller, Tommie, 16
Norfolk, VA, migration patterns, 57
Miner's Benefit Program, 8
North Central region, migration patterns,
59,60
minority group, concept of, 17
Mobile, AL, 56-58
North East region, migration patterns, 59,
60
Model Cities, 7, Survey, 1971, 112
North End (of Hamilton, OH), 11
Montgomery, AL, migration patterns, 57,
58
Northern Kentucky University, 13
146)
INDEX
�Northside (Cincinnati}, 9
Pittsburgh, P A, Appalachian movement in,
56, 57, migration patterns, 59, 61
Norwood, OH, 10, 16, 21
policy, studies of, 15
Nova Scotia, 25
0
Obermiller, Phillip, 14, 16, 17
occupational status, 16, 20, 28, 36, 70,
78, 112, 113
Office of Economic Opportunity, 13
Ohio, migration patterns, 56, 57, 59
Polish youths, 102, 105
political behavior of Appalachians;
affiliation, 71-73, development of, 31,
effect on neighborhood council
involvement, 73-75, importance of
ethnic origin to, 71, involvement in,
71, studies of, 70, strength of, 29,
within urban Appalachian movement,
46, see also solidary groups
political economy theory, 19-21
Ohio State Appalachian Commission, 12
"poor whites," 17, 46
Ohio-Kentucky-Indiana Bluegrass
Association, 11
Porter, Father John, 6
Ontario, inmigration, 28
ports of entry, 3, 16, 29, 64
"optimization of interest," 31
poverty stereotype, 15, 16
Our Common Heritage, 11
poverty, studies of, 15
outsiders in the urban Appalachian
movement, 9, 10, 11, 45
Prince Edward Island, 25
Providence, RI, youth study, 102
Over-the-Rhine, 6, 7, 90, 91
p
Protestants in Cincinnati, 44
R
patriotism, as stereotype, 37, 38
racial conflicts, 100
Pennsylvania, outmigration, 56-58
racism, a stereotype, 37, 38, 40, 41
Philadelphia, 57
recreational facilities for youth, 101, 102
People's Appalachia, 13
Reddin, Larry, 9
Perry County, KY, 100
Phoenix, AZ, inmigration, 56, 57, 59, 60
religion, 26, 102, 103, as stereotype, 37,
38, studies of, 15
Pilot Cities Center, 7
residential clustering, 28, 31
INDEX
(147
�resourcefulness, as stereotype, 37, 38
"stereotyped ethnicity," 31
Riclunond, VA, 56, 57
suburbanization, 16
Roanoke, VA, migration patterns, 55-58
success patterns of urban Appalachians, 14
s
St. Mary's Catholic Church, 6
Sullivan, Maureen, 10
support systems, 4, 99, 101, 107, 108,
109
Santa Maria Community Services, 97
schools, Appalachians in, 13, 99, 105,
106, 108
self-image, Appalachian, 8, 45, among
youth, 101
self-sufficiency, 99
T
Tampa/St Petersburg, FL, inmigration, 5558,60
Toledo, OH, 15
Tennessee, migration patterns, 56-58,
dropout rates, 97
Shapiro, Henry, 43
Texas, migration flows, 54-58
Social Areas of Cincinnati Report, 9, 13
Toronto, 25-29
social participation, 15
socioeconomic status, see attainment,
socioeconomic
solidarity groups, 30
Sons and Daughters of Appalachia, 7
The South Goes North, 13
southern states, inmigration, 52, 59, 60
traditionalism, 16, 21
"triage" policy, 10
u
unemployment, 65, in Appalachia, 3, in
Maritime Canada, 26, among youths,
107
United Appalachians of Cincinnati, 7, 9,
45
South Fairmont (Cincinnati), 9
Spiegel, Louise, 6, 7
stereotypes of Appalachians, 28, 30, 31,
36-40, held by blacks, 36-40, held by
middle-class Appalachians, 20, 40,
through jokes, 20, need to eliminate, 7,
9, 14, positive, 36-40, in scholarly
writing, 35, studies of, 15, 35
"Stereotypes of Appalachian Immigrants,"
14
148)
INDEX
United Way (Cleveland), 12
University of Cincinnati, 13, Behavioral
Sciences Laboratory, 73, summer
institutes, 9, University College, 97
University of Kentucky; Appalachian
Center, 97, Medical Center, 109
upward mobility, 28, 30
�Urban Appalachian Council, 5, 8, 45-47,
advocacy, 9, 15, 89, growth, 9, Long
Range Plan, 10, objectives, 8, research,
10, 11, 13-15, 89, turmoil within, 10
v
v
youth, 99-110, cultural transition, 99,
100, 103, job aspirations, 101, posthigh school plans, 107, religion, 102104, relationship to school, 99, 100,
studies of, 15, 102
values of Appalachians, 16, 21, 44, 100,
black Appalachians, 112
violence, as stereotype, 37-38
Virginia, migration patterns, 55-58
visibility, absence of, 30-31
VISTA, 10
w
Wagner, Thomas, 13
Washington, DC, Appalachian movement
in, 46, migration patterns, 58
welfare, 16
West Palm Beach, FL, 56-58
West Virginia, migration patterns, 4, 57,
58
western states, migration patterns, 59, 60
Whitehall, OH, 101
Williams, Diane, 8
Winston-Salem. NC, area, 57
women, studies of, 15
Working in Neighborhoods, 11
World War IT, effect on migration, 3, 26
X
Xavier University, 97
INDEX (149
�about the authors
phillip obermiller holds graduate degrees in philosophy from
the Athenaeum of Ohio and in sociology from the Union Institute.
His cross-national studies have been funded by the Canadian Social
Sciences and Humanities Research Council. He has also held a
Postdoctoral Fellowship for Advanced Research in the Humanities and
Social Sciences from the Andrew A. Mellon Foundation. He currently
holds joint appointments as a research associate at the Appalachian
Center of the University of Kentucky and as a visiting scholar in the
U.C. School of Planning. Obermiller’s research has been published
in the International Journal of Comparative Sociology, Social Science
Quarterly, Ethnic Groups, Social Insight, Urban Education, Appalachian
Heritage, Now and Then, Pittsburgh History, Appalachian Journal, and the
Journal of Appalachian Studies.
william philliber, one of the founders and senior partners of
Philliber Research & Evaluation, holds a Ph.D. in sociology from
Indiana University and has more than forty years of experience in
program design, development, and evaluation. He has written several
dozen articles, and is the author or editor of six books including, The
Invisible Minority: Urban Appalachians and Equal Partners: Successful
Women in Marriage.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Appalachian Consortium Press Publications
Description
An account of the resource
This collection contains digitized monographs and collections from the Appalachian Consortium Press.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Appalachian Consortium Press
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Appalachian Consortium Press
Date Issued
Date of formal issuance (e.g., publication) of the resource.
June 1, 2017
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
<a title="Digital Scholarship and Initiatives" href="http://library.appstate.edu/services/digital-scholarship-and-initiatives" target="_blank">Digital Scholarship and Initiatives</a>
Publication
Digital Publisher
Digital Republication
Appalachian State University
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Too Few Tomorrows: Urban Appalachians in the 1980's
Description
An account of the resource
<span>Between the 1940s and 1970s, approxiately three million people left the Appalachian mountains in search of jobs in Midwest urban areas, such as Cincinnati, Chicago, and Detroit. Unfortunately, about a third of these people were forced into a life of long-term underclass dwellers. Struggling with questions of identity, rootlessness, and cultural negation, these people were given the name of “urban Appalachians.” Published in 1987, </span><em>Too Few Tomorrows</em><span> addresses some of the pressing questions regarding urban Appalachians and their story of migration to city life.</span><br /><br /><a href="https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CWjy0eKA23dyk2k6sA6ocIk2Z3ARzC2q" target="_blank">Download EPub<br /><br /></a><a title="UNC Press Link" href="https://www.uncpress.org/book/9781469637051/too-few-tomorrows" target="_blank">UNC Press Print on Demand</a>
Subject
The topic of the resource
Ethnicity--Appalachian Region, Southern
Ethnology--Appalachian Region, Southern
Regionalism--Appalachian Region, Southern
Appalachian Region, Southern--Social conditions
Appalachian Region, Southern--Social life and customs
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Obermiller, Phillip J.
Philliber, William W.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1987
Language
A language of the resource
English
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Appalachian Consortium Press
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Appalachia
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
PDF
E-books
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed" target="_blank">https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed</a>
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
https://www.geonames.org/12212302/appalachia.html
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a title="UA 76 Appalachian Consortium records" href="https://appstate-speccoll.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/9" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener"> UA 76 Appalachian Consortium records </a>
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a title="Appalachian Consortium Press Publications" href="https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/collections/show/82" target="_blank"> Appalachian Consortium Press Publications</a>
Appalachians
class
culture
economic
race
social
sociology
urban
-
https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/files/original/d47d3f00118356458180d7869cd55996.pdf
a622385fe3ac77894560f3867fc5ad54
PDF Text
Text
���������������������������'
/£
/-F
£*--<2--^^-f^
*z-—-^-?^C^—
>•
v?"i*---*7
������������������
https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/files/original/77173558c1b57d0e621ea12a600fdd76.pdf
53e83597abd3511c17eaed4dfd89ab80
PDF Text
Text
�����������������
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Andrew Jackson Greene Collection
Description
An account of the resource
The Andrew Jackson Greene Collection consists of more than 160 diaries written by Greene who describes Watauga County's education system, including Appalachian State Teachers College, cultural and religious life, and agriculture from 1906 to 1942. <br /><br /><strong>Biographical Note.</strong> Andrew Jackson Greene (March 2, 1883-August 12, 1942) was a life-long resident of Watauga County, North Carolina and instructor in several Watauga schools including Appalachian State Teachers College (A.S.T.C). Greene worked as a farmer, public school teacher, and college professor. Greene was an enthusiastic diarist maintaining regular entries from 1906 to the day before his death. He also recorded A.S.T.C. faculty meetings from January 9, 1915 to May 3, 1940. He married Polly Warren, and they had three children, Ralph, Maxie, and Lester.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Greene, Andrew Jackson, 1883-1942
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://appstate-speccoll.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/190">AC.105: Andrew Jackson Greene Collection</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1906-1942
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">No Copyright - United States</a>
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Number of pages
45
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Diary of Andrew Jackson Greene, Volume 43 [August 26, 1921 - November 13, 1921]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Greene, Andrew Jackson, 1883-1942
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a title="Andrew Jackson Greene Collection, 1906-1942" href="https://appstate-speccoll.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/190" target="_blank">Andrew Jackson Greene Collection, 1906-1942</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1921
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
45.9MB
Language
A language of the resource
English
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
105_043_1921_0826_1921_1113
Description
An account of the resource
This diary contains daily entries by Andrew Jackson Greene on a range of subjects such as weather, church, school, community events, and travel. The diary contains entries from August 26 through November 13, 1921. Greene travels to a multitude of places throughout this diary some of these places include, Willowdale, Boone, Mabel, Zionville, Deep Gap, Cove Creek, and Elizabethton, Tennessee.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Watauga County (N.C.)--Social life and customs--20th century
Baptists--Clergy--North Carolina--Watauga County
Greene, Andrew Jackson, 1883-1942
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">No Copyright – United States</a>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Diaries
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a title="Andrew Jackson "Greene collection" href="https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/collections/show/39" target="_blank"> Andrew Jackson Greene collection </a>
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Watauga County (N.C.)
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
<a title="https://www.geonames.org/4497707/watauga-county.html" href="https://www.geonames.org/4497707/watauga-county.html" target="_blank"> https://www.geonames.org/4497707/watauga-county.html</a>
Appalachian Training School
Bethel
Boone
Boone Trail Highway
Bushy Fork
church
Community
Cove Creek
Deep Gap
Elizabethton
Lan Davis
Leonard Hardin
McBride’s Mill
school
sociology
Susan Ledford
Tennessee
Travel
Watauga
Weather
Wilkes
-
https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/files/original/bc2f2a91ab8fbb45d2640c7ec17719b9.pdf
906b4b9b8ef6d92573287a2177a0ebad
PDF Text
Text
�����������������������������������������������������������������
https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/files/original/4e4eb30211d110190127ed308dc86a7b.pdf
8918c4ec90864342feb929c1d861ff99
PDF Text
Text
Nov. 7.-- This is a great day. It brings me much work. In fact every day brings this to me. I
think that it is great to have a job--a real hard one. The idle man deserves no envy.
The great event in school history today is basket ball. AT night we have a double-header. This
game is with Newland High School. The boys have the first round and are victors. Our girls also
win. It will be good for our teams to get a licking. Victories are not best.
Nov. 8.-- At chapel we have Dr. Johnson, ofElon College. He talks a few minutes for us. He
makes himself agreeable. Often we have visitors who drop some good thoughts for us.
In the afternoon I go home on the Jitney. Almost all the passengers are light girls. They delight
in going with the jitney-man.
In my home I find Mrs. Greene a very sick woman . It is not often that she finds it necessary to
take her bed. All the others are in good condition.
Nov. 9.-- This is one day that we have remain[ed] at home. I have the doctor to come and see
Mrs. Greene. I find it necessary for her to have some treatment. It is a rare thing that we miss church
service. In the morning we have some time to read and rest. In the afternoon we have too many
visitors for rest and reading. Sometimes I think it would be a good thing for us if people would stay
away. We have a certain old crowd all the time.
Nov. 10.-- The good weather is a thing of the past. Signs tell us that winter is near at hand. The
heavy overcast, the chilly wind, and the pierceing [sic] mist tell us that bad weather is on the border.
I remain at home until noon. I read some, work a little and enjoy a quiet hour. I love to remain
940
�A
J
Greene Diaries
at home until noon. I long to have a good hour at home.
At noon I start to Boone. I have four rides and five walks. I am not long in going. I do not
remain long in the town. I soon go to my room for study. I love t get even in my work. I have so
many papers to read. I am not able to give them all the attention that they ought to have.
Nov. 11.-- This morning the fog is dense and it appears that bad weather is at hand. By noon it
is one of the finest days that we have had in a long time. The weather may be good for a long time.
Today I have been busy. There has not been an idle moment. I finished reading the New
Testament the fourth time since July. I try to read some every day. I get even with my paper work.
At chapel we have a program. Prof. Wilson makes a talk. At times he is a little spicy. We have
some music. The male quartette [sic] delights us much. All will listen to music.
Nov. 12.-- At chapel today a man from Winston-Salem gave a reading. He declaims as it was
done in the old school. We are sure that it is an effective way of teaching English.
The weather has never been finer. We think that each day will be the last. Grim winter will be
upon us one of these days.
I am in the Library one period. I am sure that I should like this work. It is an interesting place
for a lover of books.
In the afternoon Mr. Rupe and I drive to my home. We find that Mrs. Greene is much better.
We have a pleasant hour. Just after dark we return to Boone and do some work.
Nov.13.-- Examinations are on hand. This is a hard time for a teacher. We read papers until we
are almost exhausted. We believe in short papers. The best thing that I can see in this part of school
work is that it gives an opportunity for a good review.
One serious thought comes to me. Our home life is loose. Small boys and girls wish to have
their way. Some parents are so weak and careless that they do not offer restraint. What is to be the
result? I fear to think about the consequences. Modem conditions are such that it is difficult to hold
the home together. Perhaps we can stem the tide.
Nov. 14.-- The day is gloomy. This morning there is a dense fog. At times during the day mist
has fallen . In the west dark wintery clouds hang low. Winter is likely to be upon us at any hour.
The heavy air has been depressing. A time like this is hard on a man who has to work with a crowd
of young people. Conditions make life miserable.
The examinations are concluded. It has been a long hard pull for us. In the main I have come
through it as easily as any. There is no class of work that is so trying on a teacher as reading
examination papers.
Nov.15.-- This is a gloomy day. The fog is dense. There is some rain. A stiff breeze is blowing.
From all appearances we may expect winter at any time.
This is a hard day in the school room. These damp days have a bad affect [sic]. The denseness
of the atmosphere has a depressing affect upon teachers and pupils. It does not take much to disturb
941
�a man.
In the afternoon I start for home. I do not find any way to ride, so I start home walking. It looks
as if I am in for a long hard tramp. Just after I leave town Carl Henson picks me up and carries me
to Adams. Here I get with Ralph Bingham and go in home. This is the best part of any journey. A
good fire and a cozy comer greets me.
Nov. 16.-- Today is cool. On the mountain there is frost on the timber. The wind howls. This
reminds us that winter is corning.
At Sunday School we have a good crowd. I am somewhat encouraged with our people. There
may be a better day for us.
In the afternoon I go to Mabel. First I visit my father. I spend some time with him. He seems
to have many visitors. From here I go to my old home. I spend the night here. It seems a little like
home. There are many associations connected with the place.
Nov. 17.-- This morning I am out early. In fact we are out much earlier that [sic] we figured on.
I go to Mabel and catch the mail for home. I must confess that I love my home better than I thought.
I remain at home until noon. I start to Boone walking, but Carter Farthing takes me in his truck
and carries me to Boone.
Court is in session. Judge Harding, of Charlotte, is presiding. This is for the trial of civil actions.
It has been a long time since we have had a court of this kind.
My next stop is at the Baptist Church. Rev . W . R. Bradshaw, of Hickory, makes an address. He
talks on the 1925 program of the Baptist[s].
After corning to the Hall I move from room 31 to room 25 . I am delighted with my new quarters.
A man usually likes a new change.
Nov. 18.-- The first snow of the season greets us this morning. It is a light skiff. This is a
reminder that more is corning.
I must confess that I have felt well today. For a long time I have not enjoyed life so much.
During the night I rested well. Sleep puts us in a conditio for work.
At chapel we have Dr. A. W. Dula, of Lenoir. He lectures on the eye. I suppose that this is one
of his ways of advertising. In fact he says some interesting things .
In the afternoon I hand in my report for the quarter. This is a hard job. It is the hardest thing that
I have to do.
Nov. 19.-- The weather is ideal for winter. It is cool, but the sun shines. In many respects we
have never had more delightful days.
In school it has been a little hard on me. Things have not gone so smoothly as I wish. We have
a few students who do not have any ambition to work.
I work all the afternoon. I take a part of the time to read papers. A man must keep on the heels
of many student[ s] , or there will be no work done. The most of people work under compulsion. We
do not work from the love of it.
942
�A
J
Greene Diaries
Nov. 20.-- This is one of the finest days that we have had this autumn . It is the opinion of many
that it has been a long time since we have had such fine weather in the autumn. To-day has been
warn [sic]. The sun has shone all day. In reality it is a glorious time to live.
We have had a fine day in school. There are many students who are trying to do some fine work.
This makes school work worth while. Among the many good ones we find a few who are sorry and
useless.
The greatest thing for me is the study of Social Problems. The origin and development of the
family captivates my attention. There is no doubt but what the family life holds the key to the
situation in all modem problems. Laxness here is felt all along the line.
Nov. 21.-- The bout of good weather is a thing of the past. The rain pours in abundance. The
dry weather is over. For the next six months it will be cling to overshoes and wraps.
Today has been a busy one for me. I work from early dawn until a late hour at night. It seems
that I have never had so much to do.
The social problems in our county is something that concerns us much. One of the most serious
is the laxness in our homes. Children of tender age are allowed to go when they please and where
they please. Another problem is the sale and drinking of intoxicants. The drink evil has too many
friends . Still another serious question is the limitation of amusements. It seems that many of our
people are mad over trivial amusements. All these and others are a menance 128 to our social welfare
and religious culture.
Nov. 22.-- The second snow of the season came today. There was not enough to cover the
ground. Also, there was some sleet and some rain . The wind is rather strong.
.
In school we have much to do. At the end of a week both the teachers and the students are tired.
We have so many students who do not take their work seriously.
In the afternoon I start for home. I do not get farther than town until I catch a way to ride. At
three o'clock I am at home.
After a rest I go to see Paul Bingham, who is suffering from a shock in a car wreck.
Nov. 23.-- I have many things on hand. In fact Sunday is my busy day. First I visit a neighbor.
Upon my return I prepare for Sunday School. We have a good number present. From here I go
home. I work until it is time to return to the church. I practice some of the children for a program
that we are to render on the Fifth Sunday. By night I am tired enough to rest. I am giving all my
time for others. I do not get time to visit the neighbors.
Nov. 24.-- Today we have had many kinds of weather. There is a dark overcast during the
morning; in the afternoon it is clear and cool.
I arrive in Boone early. I spend some time in town. I see many things that amuse and interest
128
Menace?
943
�me. I come to my room and commence work. I have many things that need my attention.
In the afternoon I visit Mr. Ward's and Mrs. Cook's. I have a pleasant time. I return to my
boarding place for supper., and then I am in my room for study.
Nov. 25.-- This is real winter. It is the coldest day that we have had this season. The truth of the
matter is that we enjoy our winter wraps. In some of our rooms we do not have any too much heat.
I have been a very busy man. The classes have done some very good work. The most annoying
thing that we have to contend with is students coming in late.
At night I make out the county examinations. This is a job that ought to be done with the greatest
care. It seems that I have more than I can do.
Nov. 26.-- The day is cool. We do not look for much more good weather. Winter is likely to
close in any time.
I do my work in school. It goes on well. I find so many things to do. There is no time for me
to rest.
In the afternoon I go home for Thanksgiving. We have just one day off. I start home walking.
Thos. Hopkins, of Newland, gives me a ride in his car.
At night Mrs. Greene and I visit Mrs. John Dugger, a sick lady. We remain with her for more
than one hour.
Nov. 27.-- This is a day full of activity. The first job that I have is drilling the children on some
pieces for next Sunday.
We have a fine time at home. Mrs. Alice Cook, Annie Cook, and Arthur Rupe come from Boone
and Mr. and Mrs. Glenn , of Sugar Grove. We have a fine time. Mrs. Greene has a good dinner.
Late in the day I start for Boone. I walk a part of the way. I arrive at my room just a little after
dark. Mr. Howell ande I have a pleasant hour. In due time I am in the bed for rest.
Nov. 28.-- This is a fine day. I long for it to remain this way. We think every day that winter will
soon be on hand.
Our work in our classes has been all right. We have enjoyed it real well.
In the afternoon I grad[ e] papers for more than two hours. This is the hardest job that a teacher
has.
At night I work. A job is always waiting for me. In enjoy reading some in good papers and
books.
Nov. 29.-- The weather is cold today. The wind is stiff. The howling winds of winter are upon
us.
After the work of the day I start for home. I stop in town. I start home walking. I do not go far
until I catch a truck and it is not long before I am at home.
At night the children come and we practice for our program at the church on Sunday. This is the
kind of work that we love to do. Really it is the most encouraging. The young folks are the ones to
944
�A
J
Greene Diaries
train.
Note: Dec. 1 and Nov. 30 are reversed in Greene's journal.
Nov. 30.-- This is a day long to be remembered. The air is cutting. The dust flies. It is real
winter.
At Willowdale Baptist Church we have a Thanksgiving program. The program is rendered by
the children. They did well. M. J. Willians [sic] delivers a short address. On every hand we hear
the remark that the children did well.
In the afternoon we visit some. Uncle John Smith has a little cold. He still knows how to
become blue. Late in the day we visit J. H. Brinkley. He is enjoying a new house. In the whole this
has been a fine day. Much pleasure has come my way. I can see that there is much good in life.
DECEMBER
Dec. 1.-- The sun shines today, but there is a heavy breeze. In fact it has been too cold for a man
to travel much.
I come to Boone. I take the oath as Justice of the Peace. The new county officers are sworn in.
It is a big day for some. L. M. Farthing is the new sheriff. He is the second Democrat that has been ·
elected in thirty years.
In the afternoon I come to my room and try to work some. The heat is not heavy enough. I soon
have to go for my supper. At night we put in much time in studying.
Dec. 2.-- This is a real cold day. The wind has been something fierce. In school many of the
rooms have been cold. We have so many folks who are always wanting to complain or shirk.
At night I attend a musical at the new theater. It is given by a trio from Chicago. The program
has great variety. A program of this kind is restful to a man who has to work all the time. A man
can not do his best without some rest.
Dec. 3.-- When I awake, the train is going out. This is the latest that I have slept for many years.
I wish that I could sleep more.
The weather is fierce, although it is much calmer than it was yesterday. It seems that winter is
upon us.
At chapel we have the Rev. Mr. Wooseley, of the Methodist Church. He makes some timely
remarks.
At night I prepare a lesson on Social Problems. This a subject that I am much interested in.
Dec. 4.-- The weather is much warmer. We may look for some rain soon.
In school we have made a good honest effort. We have so many people who do not care a snap
945
�whether they learn any thing or not.
The school has three distinguish[ ed] visitors--Dr. Hillman, Dr. Alexander and Dr. Hunter. They
come to see our school.
I put in some time in studying conditins. There is no field in which I am more enthused about.
Dec. 5.-- This morning we had rain, and it continued to pour until afternoon. The sky is seen and
it looks as if we might have some fair weather.
At chapel we have Dr. Hunter, President of Cullowhee Normal. 129 He addresses the student
body.
In the afternoon Dr. Alexander, of Columbia University, delivers an address. He talks to the
student body about our bad teaching. It is one of the most thoughtful addresses that we have heard
in a long time.
At night we have a basketball game with Crossnore. It is one of the most interesting games that
we have had in· a long time. The game goes to the visitors 28 and 26. The spirit of the game is good.
Dec. 6.-- The day gives us a great variety of weather. This morning it is clear, just afternoon it
is cloudy, and at night there is much rain.
After doing my work in the schoolroom, I try a law suit in town. The case is continued until
Monday. I catch a car and am soon at home.
At night we have a box supper at Cove Creek High School. The weather is so bad that the crowd
is small, but the crowd is lively and the supper is a great success. The fun continues until late at
night.
Dec. 7.-- I attend Sunday School at Willowdale. We have a good crowd present. We have some
interest in this kind of work.
Just afternoon I walk to Dr. W. 0 . Bingham's. I spend several hours with him. It is interesting
to see the shop of a doctor. It is a great science.
Upon my return I stop at Attorney John H. Bingham's. We have a pleasant hour with him. It
is late when I arrive home. It seems that I have had no time to study and rest on this trip.
Dec. 8.-- This is one of the worst days that we have had in a long time. The rain has fallen all
day. At times it comes in torrents. Several times during the day there was electric storms. The old
people say that this is the sign of cold weather.
I have been engaged in the law. I have had the honor of having two cases.
Just afternoon I have my eyes examined by Dr. English, of Johnson City. He gives me every test
that a man needs. When he finishes with me, I am almost blind.
During the afternoon I visit Mrs. Cook's. I have a pleasant hour with her. It seems that I have
returned home. I stayed here for more than two years. I certainly feel that I am among those that I
129
Now Western Carolina University.
946
�A
J Greene Diaries
know.
Dec. 9.-- The weather is much cooler. A man feels best in his winter clothes. Thus far I have
been wearing summer clothes.
Today I have not done much book work. My eyes have not been in shape for reading. I have put
in much time in talking and lecturing to my classes.
At night I rest a short time and then I go to bed. At a close distance I am not able to do work.
I can read a few lines at once.
Dec. 10.-- The weather remains cool. It is the kind of weather for vigorous thinking. At this
time of year we do the best work when it is cool.
In school we get on well. We are able to read and we do several things. We read the paper,
continue our Bible reading and write some letters.
At night we follow our work as usual. We have a fine supper of fried parsnips, but that has no
ill effect on us. After all it is a fine day.
Dec. 11.-- This is one of the finest days that I have had in a long time. During the night I rest
well. I have felt my best all day. The world is a good place in which to live. The people are good.
In fact I do no[t] see much wrong.
The biggest job that we have is putting deportment on the report. This is a matter of form.
Perhaps it is worth something for a student to be checked occasionally. Doubtless we grade in a
careless way.
Dec. 12.-- This is a day full of work. It seems that every minute is full. I have no time to rest.
Some one or some duty calls for each moment.
In the Gymnasium at night there is a game of basket ball between A. T. S. And Cove Creek. It
is one of the most exciting as well as the fastest that we have seen this season. The score stood 22
to 15 in favor of the home team. The game gave room for much laughter.
Dec. 13.-- This is a day of high wind. It is cutting. The chill goes through and through. In many
[places?] the dust is fierce.
Our work in school goes well. It is pleasant all the time. Some of the students do not work, but
it is a congenial crowd to deal with.
In the afternoon I start for home. I do not leave town before I catch a ride. It is not long until
I am at home. By some means I do not feel as well as a man ought.
Dec. 14.-- This is another cold day. The sun shines, but the frost flies. The wind is something
dreadful. It is a very disagreeable time to be out.
At Sunday School we have a good crowd. Not all of our people have lost interest in the best
things of life. After Sunday School Elder G. W . Trivett preaches.
After dinner I rest a short time and then I start for Boone. I arrive in a short time. I indulge in
947
�reading and preparing for tomorrow. ·
Dec. 15.-- We are having school today in order that we may close Friday for the holidays. The
first event of the day is the janitor does not know about the great event and we do not have any heat.
We find, in the second place, that the student body ~sin good shape for a pleasant day.
The day is much warmer. In fact the weather has not been finer in a long time. I enjoy the gentle
rays and the cool, healthful breezes.
Dec. 16.-- The weather is a little bad. There has been a little rain. The air is cutting. A damp
time is oppressive.
This is a hard day on me. I have not felt well. A man cannot do good work unless he is felling
[sic] his best.
Today I have been reading an oration by Burke. He is one of the best that I have ever read. His
argument is a fine specimen of eloquence. His great endeavor is to convince his associates that he
is right.
Dec. 17.-- The weather continues cold. It is ideal weather for health and enjoyment of life. It
is a fact that no one has any complaint to make about the weather this autumn.
In the school room we have had some hard work. It is difficult to get students to work this near
Christmas. By some means we fill up on enthusiasm and we let our work hang lightly on our
shoulders. In fact very few have appetites for work.
Dec. 18.-- Great and stirring events come our way. Some of our boys have the spirit of the
season and enjoy noise very much. We have enough today to last the remainder of the year.
The event of the day is a game of basketball between our girls and the girls from the Crossnore
School. The game is well-contested, but the visitors are a little strong for our team. During the game
we have enough noise to last a whole year.
Dec. 19.-- This is a hard day for all of us. We close with examinations. I conduct five. It is
difficult to hold students in line at this season. So many of the students want to go horne. There are
all kinds of demands made on a man.
In the afternoon I start for horne. I walk almost three miles, before I catch a car for horne. I must
confess that I was a little tired. How good it does seem that I am to have a rest. I have so many
things planned that I may not rest much after all.
Dec. 20.-- Our work today is light. We do not plan any thing elaborate. During the day we make
two trips to the store. It has been a long time since we spent much time at the store. I like to make
this trip occasionally in order to hear the community gossip. It is a wonderful place to hear all the
trash of the countryside.
The weather has been fierce. It has been almost too cold for any one to be out. The wind has
been terrible.
948
�A
J Greene Diaries
Dec. 21.-- The first job that I have on hand is building fires in the church so that we may have
Sunday School. This is no easy job. I must state that we have comfortable room when it is time for
school. How much our people do enjoy a good comfortable place to hold our school!
In the afternoon I am at home. By some means I am not able to rest as I ought. There are so
many things to disturb a man from real rest and work.
Dec. 22.-- This ought to be called cold Monday. It has been close to zero all day. I go out to
Boone on business. It is so cold that I do not remain long. The wind is sweeping the streets. I attend
to affairs and return with the mail. I am glad to return home.
In the afternoon I look at some land. I love to travel over the hills and look at real estate. There
is a joy in being alone.
Dec. 23.-- There is great variation in the weather. It is cold enough to snow, there is some sleet,
a little rain and some sunshine.
With the boys we have some wood hauled. It does not take long for me to work all that I can
stand. I regret that I am not able to stand work. I do not have wind enough to endure for only a short
time. In the afternoon I remain in. I put some wood in the house.
Dec. 24.-- We have stirring times today. Many are preparing for Christmas. We think that we
must do great things at this season of the year. All our spending must be compassed within a few
days.
Late in the day I go to Sherwood's store. It is a good trip. I am tired enough to rest when I
return.
At night we have a large crowd in our home. We have a jolly time. Santa Claus and his wife
comes to see us.
Dec. 25.-- This is Christmas Day. It is a great time for the young folks . In fact many of the older
ones enjoy it.
Mrs. Greene and I are invited to the home of J. J. Glenn's for dinner. We go early and return
about the middle of the afternoon. We have a splendid time and a good dinner.
At home we have several young people. I am too tired to enjoy much. I have had too many
things to eat.
Dec. 26.-- I remain at home until almost noon. I ride in a car to Mabel with Mrs. Jenkins, of
Bristol. From here I go to Walter Fletcher's for dinner. I do not stay long. I go to my place on the
North Fork. I do some business. There is a sad feeling about the old ground. I wish that that I could
get away from it never to return. There are so many sad things in our lives. Old memories come
trooping back.
Dec. 27.-- This morning I make an early start for home. I leave with the ideal of not returning
for a long time. I catch the mail at Mabel, and in a short time I am at my home. After all the best
949
�of any trip is getting home.
Mr. and Mrs W. M. Thomas and little daughter take dinner with us. We have a splendid time.
Noah Church comes to see us on business. I do not get much time for study. I must talk wisely.
Dec. 28.-- The first job that I have is making fires at the Church. We have every thing in good
shape for Sunday School. We have a fine session. The number is good and the interest is intense.
After Sunday School we go to John Dugger's for dinner. We have a great spread. A part of the
afternoon is spent here. Upon our return home we try to read some, but we are in no condition for
this. We just while away the time in an idle manner.
Dec. 29.-- Today is full of activity. I go to Vilas early. I have a long wait for the Elk Park jitney.
At a late hour it comes and I am on my journey. At noon we arrive at Grace Hospital at Banner Elk.
We remain here for two hours. This is a desirable place for a sick person. I look over the buildings,
grounds and town. I love to come in contact with new places and people. It is almost night when
I start for home. It is after night when I arrive home. I am tired enough to rest.
Dec. 30.-- This is a real bad day. It has rained the most of the time. We have every kind of
weather at this season in this part of the country.
A part of the day is spent in the bed. I am unable to sleep much. I am too nervous. I have been
eating too many rich things.
At night we have some fine music. All of us are musicians in the making. Some day we hope
to do things on a grand and noble scale . .
Dec. 31.-- Today I am at home until almost noon. It rains so hard that I am not able to do much
on the outside. It seems that I am not able to get much rest.
At noon I start to Mabel. I go to my old home on business. I do not remain long. I start home
walking. I walk almost all the way. The rain pours. I am in much of it. Mr. Will Payne picks me
up and gives me a short life. It is late when I return home.
950
�CHAPTER 20: 1925
JANUARY
This year has been good to me. I have had many good things. The greatest regret that I have is
that I have allowed little things to rob me of much in life.
Qan.l.-- The New Year finds me at home. !remain here all the day. Misses Julie Parker and
lstJ Velma Hodges visit us.
I am delighted to see them. They are visiting in the community.
At night we have a prayer meeting. Asa Greene is leader. A number of our people come out.
This is the season of the near for forming New resolutions. By some means I am afraid to make
one fear that I shall not be able to carry it to a conclusion. I am resolved that I am going to read more
in the Bible than has been my custom.
Jan. 2.-- I have a hard day before me. -1 read the examination papers for the county. I do this
nearly all day. This is a job that I do not like. It is a hard matter to be just in every respect. There
are so many angles from which to look at things.
At night we have some company. In order to please them we make some music. We have two
violins and a banjo. Perhaps there is no better music than that made on stringed instruments.
Jan. 3.-- The weather is much better, It seems to me that the winter is going to be light. This has
not been much snow. The cold has been dry.
I make some trips. I go to the store with Mrs. Greene. It is almost noon when I return.
In the afternoon I plant some trees. We are planning to have some shade at our home. Of course
it will take some years to do it.
At night I go to Mr. E . F. Sherwood's and hear the radio. This is the most wonderful thing that
I have ever come in contact. Without wire we hear for more than a thousand miles. This invention
will give us the latest in amusement.
Jan. 4.-- This is a fine day. Perhaps we never have a finer one at this season of the year.
At Sunday School we have a fine session. It seems that we have some interest in the better things
of life.
951
�Mrs. Greene and I take dinner at Mr. Mast's. We have a splendid time. I have had too much to
eat during the holidays.
Some of our people go to the revival at Henson's Chapel. It has been running for two weeks.
The interest is wide and intense. There are about one hundred seventy-five convertions [sic] and
reclamations. Rev. R. A. Taylor is doing the preaching.
]an. 5.-- This morning is the time for me to leave my home and return to my work. I have not
been able to rest much. There has been something for me to look after all the time.
I come to Boone before noon. I have many things to do. I have my glasses fitted in the Hospital.
People come freom all sides to be treated. I have many things to do in the town.
In the afternoon I go to the school buildings and assist in the work. I soon come to my room and
do some work. It seems that we are getting ready for business. Many of us are anxious to start and
complete the year's work.
]an. 6.-- Today finds us at our old job. There are many new students. Almost all are on the job.
There are a few who must drag along. After all I believe that we have more pleasure when we have
much to do. An idle person never tastes the real good things of life. The busy folks do the work of
the world. The more that I see of life, the more that I am convinced that there is merit in work.
]an. 7.-- This is a real fine winter day. The sun shines and the wind is stirring.
After school I cross the ridge and buy some apples from Mr. Hayes. This trip gives me some
good exercise. By night I am tired enough to rest well.
After supper I go to Supt. Hagaman's on business. I find out some new things about the school
business. Upon my return I do some work in my books. I have all that I can do.
]an. 8.-- This is a dark, damp day. There is some rain. The mud is something frightful.
At chapel Prof. Williams makes a talk on his trip to Florida. Many items have an interest for us.
At night I attend the Lyceum course. The program consists mostly of impersinations [sic]. By
some means I do not think highly of this kind of entertainment. It seems to be exaggerated.
]an. 9.-- Today we have had some real winter. Early there is some sleet, but soon it turns to a
snow. By noon the earth is wrapped in white. This is much more pleasant than so much mud.
In the afternoon I go to town on business. I see that the small boys are having some fun riding
on sleds. It seems that a boy can see no danger in his doings.
]an. 10.-- This is a gloomy day. This morning is difficult to go from place to place. There is
a fog that hangs closely to the earth.
The day is a little hard on me. By some means I become very tired at the close of a week. It is
one steady grind.
In the afternoon I go home. I arrive long before night. I read some before supper. At night we
have a teachers ' meeting at John Dubbers. Rev. Dan Wheeler is with us.
952
�A
J Greene Diaries
Jan. 11.-- This is a day filled with activities. In fact it is one of the hardest days that I have had
in a long time. The first thing that we have is Sunday School. At eleven o'clock I preach from the
theme, "No Room". This is the first time that I have ever spoken in the new church. At three
o'clock I lead in a prayer meeting. We make a brief study of the Eight great Covenants in the Bible.
This is enjoyable work.
Jan. 12.-- This is another day of activity. I have some business to transact. It seems that there
is no rest for me.
Roy Eggers, of Cincinnati, took dinner with me. There are many things for us to talk about. In
the afternoon we go to Boone on business. We manage to see several parties.
At night I do much work. It seems that I have more school work than I can do. I am pressed to
the limit all the time.
]an. 13.-- There is a change in the weather today. The temperature falls rapidly. There is a brisk
wind. The heat is at a low ebb and we suffer from cold.
Sometimes we are inclined to boast. I have done much work. In truth I have not lost any time.
All my waking hours have been in toil. I suppose that this is about the time that we can have. There
is joy in work.
Jan. 14.-- The day is a little cool. In fact it is one of the coldest days that we have had in a long
time. The ground does not thaw much during the day.
The news comes today that Dr. J. W . Jones, of this town is dead in Knoxville, Tennessee. He
has practiced medicine in this town for more than twenty years. In many respects he was a very
brilliant man.
Jan. 15.-- In school this has been an easy day. I have been in good shape for work. More
depends upon a man's physical condition how he gets along than any other one thing.
In the afternoon I put in some time at the law business. I think that I am full to the brim. A man
cannot afford to fool with the job for what there is in it. My time is worth more at something more
valuable.
Jan. 16.-- This is a real bad day. There has been some rain. The ground is real slick. It is
difficult to go from one place to another. The weather is much warmer.
In the afternoon I go to town for a lawsuit. We do not have any trial. This law business is
getting on my nerves. It takes too much of my time. There is some one who always want to have
some kind of a suit.
]an. 17.-- This is a damp and gloomy day. There has been some sleet on the ground. The fog
has been low and heavy.
In the afternoon I go to town and attend to some business. At a late hour I start for home. It is
almost night when I arrive.
953
�The work of the day is concluded by having a meeting of the Sunday School teachers. We have
a fine discussion of the lesson. There are a few who wish to succeed in our work.
]an. 18.-- This is another dreary day. The air has been oppressive. It seems that we have never
had a more gloomy period of weather.
At Sunday School we have a good crowd. It seems that only a few of us have the burden of day
to bear.
In the afternoon I climb the mountain. I do this in order to rest. I have a nervous spell. I long
to be away from a crowd. In fact I cannot rest unless I am.
]an. 19.-- This is one of our worst days. There is a heavy sleet on hand. The fog is close to the
earth and is freezing to the timber.
I come from home to Boone. There is much difference in the temperature. I come to my room
and work. I grade papers almost all day.
At night we have a game of ball with the East Tennessee Normal. The visitors are too strong for
our boys. The visitors have had superior training.
]an. 20.-- A heavy sleet covers the earth. It is a real dangerous time for a person to travel from
one place to another.
In school we have a good day. Our work goes on well. I do much hard work reading papers.
I work at the job until almost night.
In the evening the Literary Societies have their annual reception. This is a great day for some
of them. The social hour delights all. It gives the keenest pleasures.
]an. 21.-- The sun is shining. What a beautiful sight when it shines upon the sleet that covers
all the trees! Its description is left to the poet. By Noon the ice has melted and there is mud in
abundance.
In school we move along well. There are days that move smoothly. This is one of them.
In the afternoon I go to town on business. I do not spend much time in the town. I have too
many things to do. On every hand I find work to do.
Jan. 22.-- The weather continues fine. The sun dries some of the mud. It is a tough time to go
from one place to another.
I have many papers to read. In order to do the best work I find that a man must keep on the track
of student. It seems to be our nature to do only what we are compelled to do. On every hand duties
are calling us. There is no time for rest. I have no time for idleness. It is push forward.
]an. 23.-- This is a fine day. During the night we had a terrific wind storm. Perhaps it has not
blow[n] so hard in Boone in a long time. It ceases sometime during the day.
I am having a hard time to keep my classes at work. Some of the individuals are very indolent.
All they want is a good time.
954
�A
J
Greene Diaries
At night the Klu Klux Klan [sic] bum a cross near the town. It is pretty. To many people it ts
a mystery.
]an. 24.-- This is a great day. One of our greatest events is recorder [sic] today. The sun is in
eclipse. It is total in the northern part of the United States. At Boone It is about four-fifths. All the
students tried to get a good look at the great event.
In the afternoon I go to my home. I find that all are coming on in good style. By some means
I am not able to rest as I ought. There are so many things that claim my attention.
]an. 25.-- This is a fine winter day. In truth it is extra fine for this season. By some means we
do not have much snow. There is no season for driving.
At Sunday School we have a fine session. There seems a growing interest in our work. Our
people love the best things. I do not think that we have gone to the bad and that there are no good
people in the world. The best people do not go through a great wave of emotionalism.
Jan. 26.-- This is the great day. The following gentlemen come from Boone in order to hunt
rabbits: J. T. C. Wright, A. R. Smith, A. K. Moore, Worth Speas and Guss Peterson. We go below
Sugar Grove. The result is ten races and four rabbits. In the afternoon the result is three rabbits and
seven races. This has been a great day for some. Hunting is a cruel sport, but we have enough
savage in us to enjoy.
Late in the afternoon we start for Boone. I am tired enough to rest. By the time that I get to my
room I am almost too tired to read. I realize that I must do just a little work. I manage to keep awake
until nine o'clock.
]an. 27.-- This morning we have splendid weather. It looks as if we might have a few fine days.
To our sorrow it is raining and threatens to get cold. At this season of the year we can never tell
what a day will bring us.
In school we have so many people that do have no ambition for progress in their work.
In the afternoon I join a class in physical education. I soon realize how much that I need it. Just
a little work makes me very tired.
At night I spend some time in studying family problems. In many respects it is a gloomy time.
Family life is not as intact as it ought to be. We need checking.
]an. 28.-- This is a great day at the chapel. Dr. McNairy, of the Caswell Training School, spoke
on Heredity. This is one of the most thoughtful addresses that I have ever heard. He is trying to
correct one of the weakest spots in our civilization. We hardly know how weak that we are.
On every hand I see things for me to do. I see much that I must leave for the present. It is
wonderful how things do multiply as age comes on us.
]an. 29.-- Today we have a variety of weather. This morning there is a light sleet. Soon it
becomes heavier. On the timber it presents a wonderful spectacle. By night we have high winds and
955
�__________________........
a little snow.
At chapel we have a Mr. Shaw. He represents the F. A. Owen Publishing Company. He presents
his claims in a modest way.
Today I take a lesson in physical education. A man feels good after taking it.
Jan.
30.-- This is a cold day. There is not much thawing even in the sunshine. The air is raw
and piercing.
The most depressing work that I have to do is grading papers. I read almost one hundred in the
afternoon. I must confess that it is the hardest work that I have to do.
At night I study social problems. This is one among my delightful tasks. I think that we ought
to know conditions as they are about us. We are blind to many things.
Jan. 31.-- The day is fine. It seems that we are going to have some weather for farming.
In school we have much to do. Duty is calling us on every hand. We have many interesting
things. After all school work is more or less of a grind.
In the afternoon I go home. I must confess that I am tir~d. A week of labor about does a man.
At night we have a teachers' meeting. We discuss the prospects for the future. Our people look
upon it lightly.
FEBRUARY
Feb. 1.-- This is a fine day. It seems that the spring of year is here. We are able to sit on the
front porch and enjoy the sunshine.
At Sunday School we have a fine time. There seems to be much interest in our work. I see no
reason why we should not succeed.
At night we hear Rev. G. W. Sebastian preach at our church. He is a great talker. In fact he is
a great preacher. His subject is handled with skill. He is commencing a revival.
Feb. 2.-- This is Groundhog day. He sees his shadow, therefore we are doomed for another
period of bad weather. At least this is what the prophets of evil tell us.
Before noon I come to Boone on the mail. We came very near having a serious wreck. I help
get some electric fixtures for our Church. It seems that we need so many things.
In the afternoon and at night I work on my books and lessons. I am busy all the day. I do not
find time to rest.
Feb. 3.-- This is a close day. The fog is dense. This is one of our real damp day[s]. On every
hand it is depressing.
The school adjourns to attend the funeral of little Kathl yn Hartzog. It is one of the most touching
that I have attended in a long time.
956
�A
J
Greene Diaries
In the afternoon I find many things waiting for me. I use all my time for study, except a short
period for exercise. I find that I can do more when I engage in exercise.
Feb. 4.-- This is a fine day for winter. It seems that spring of the year has come. In fact it is too
good to remain so very long.
We have done much work today. We took a little time for exercise. This enables me to do more
and better work. The hardest task that I have is reading papers. It takes about two hours of my time.
At night I work until a late hour. There is something for me to do all the time.
Feb. 5.-- The weather continues almost ideal. In a few days the mud will be gone. How pleasant
it is for the mud to be gone!
Today has been one of pleasure for me. My classes have been a delight. On every hand pleasure
has come my way.
After supper I visit the home of Mr. and Mrs. W. G. Hartzog. Just recently they lost their only
child. They are immersed in grief. Our hearts go out to them in their distress. It is hard to comfort
them.
Feb. 6.-- We must record another fine day. It seems that summer is near at hand. In a short time
the buds will begin to swell.
Our work has been interesting. We drive on the best that we can. My most delightful hour is
reading in a Latin Testament. It makes a book vivid to read it in another language.
At night I attend a basket ball game between the Freshmen and the Sophmores [sic]. To say the
least it is a battle between giants. Many great deeds are done on both sides. The final outcome is
12 to 6 in favor of the Freshmen. Edwin Dougherty brought a hom. He did not fail to use it. A boy
loves a noise beyond measure.
Feb. 7.-- This is a fine day. In fact it is too good to last long. It is fine for this season of the year.
We do not need to wear our wraps.
In our school work we do well. Our classes seem to do good work. At times we find them a
little weak.
In the afternoon we go home. It does not take me long to make the trip. I am glad to get home.
It is a long time until night. I have several things to do.
At night I attend service at the Church. Rev. Mr. Sebastian is conducting a revival. There is a
large crowd present. By the time that this is over, I am tired enough to rest.
Uncle W. S. Farthing is with us. He is a welcome visitor with us. There is no better company
to have in a home.
Feb. 8.-- This is an active day for me. There is no time for rest. I am in Sunday School. We
have a large number. There is much interest. From this we have the preaching service. By the time
this is through I am tired enough to rest. I must look after company until it is time to return for night
service. The crowd is immense. There are more than can be seated. I am glad when it closes. I am
957
�too tired to rest well. I wish that I could get away from the crowd.
Feb. 9.-- This is a bad day. On every hand the bad weather greets us. It is rain, wind and fog.
It seems that we are in for a bad time. I wonder what is in store for us.
I come to Boone. I do some business and then I come to my room. I remain here all day. I try
to do much work, but I am too nervous to do the best. By some means I pull through the day and
work some at night. On every hand there is a job waiting for me.
Feb.10.-- The weather is much better than I expected. It has been a warm day. This temperature
will soon bring the fruit into danger.
In the schoolroom we have come on well. Our classes have done some work. I love to meet my
classes. I am hungry to help them. On every hand I find something to do. I do not have a minute
to idle.
At night I visit some of the boys in their rooms . I find many of them engaged in work. After all
the boys are excellent. There are not many rough necks. Of course boys are full of mischief, but
they are full of the best things of life. We must not forget that we were boys once.
Feb. 11.-- There are many things for us to record. The first is the rain that was falling when I
awoke. Just before no[o]n we have a severe hailstorm. The ground is covered. During the storm
there is thunder and lightning. The clouds break away and it seems that we are going to have some
pretty weather. By night another storm is on and soon we are having some snow. The wind is going
at a terrific speed.
The work of the day is over. On every hand there is work to do. We never get even. Something
is calling to us all the time. Mr. Rupe and I go to my home. At night we attend service at
Willowdale Baptist Church. This is the concluding service of the revival. Rev. Mr. Sebastian has
"The Last 130 Day for a theme. Seventeen people united with the church. After the service we return
to Boone. The wind is driving the snow at a terrific rate. We go to Mrs. Alice Cook's and spend
the night. We are glad that the return trip has been made.
Feb. 12.-- This is the roughest day of the season. There has been a terrible storm of wind with
some snow. Because the weather has been so warm, it is a little pinching. The sun shines. This is
a severe type of cold. It is a bad time to go from place to place.
I am out early. I dress and come to my boarding place. After a good breakfast I go to my room
to work. We have a very pleasant time. It is desirable to remain indoors. A man can take on more
work than he can do. It seems that I can get no relief in any way. Tonight I am in my room striving
to get even with my work.
Feb. 13.-- The weather is so much better today. The wind has ceased; the sun shines; the day
958
�A
J
Greene Diaries
is fine. There is one thing that we can look for; and, that is, bad weather.
Examinations commence today. This is a trying time for us . There are many thing[s] to be
looked into.
On every ha[n]d I find some things that call for my attention. I do not get time to do much
general reading.
In the afternoon the cooking class gives the faculty a dinner. This is a very happy occasion. I
believe that they call it a Valentine Party. We had much fun. In fact all who are present have a gay
time. By some means we desire more occasions like this one.
Feb. 14.-- The weather is much better today. The worst thing that we have is mud. On every
hand we have plenty of that.
The examinations are completed. This has been a long hard grind. I dread to have so many
papers on hand at once. This is the toughest part of a student's as well as the teacher's life.
In the afternoon I go home. I stop on the way and fix some legal papers. I certainly do enjoy
coming home once in a while.
Feb. 15.-- This is a bad day. The rain pours the greater part of the day. In fact it is too bad for
many to travel.
We have a good crowd at Sunday School. By some means our people are coming to the front.
We are having some interesting work in our community.
In the afternoon I visit some and read some. In fact it is one among the best Sundays that I have
had in a long time. I have managed to rest some.
Feb. 16.-- This is a busy day. I catch the mail and arrive in Boone before noon. I transact some
business. I come to my room and work the entire afternoon. I have many papers on my hands. It
is a difficult job to do all this paper work.
There is at night a game of basket ball between First Year High School and First Year College.
There seems to be much applause. It seems that we are giving too much attention to athletics and
not enough to real work.
Feb. 17.-- We have had several kinds of weather during the day. In the morning it is damp and
foggy. Next we have some rain. By night it is clear and cooler.
We start a new term of school. The interest is good. There are so many things for us to do.
Some new things are coming up all the time.
0. V. Wooseley, a Sunday School man, of the Methodist Church, makes a fine address at chapel.
In the afternoon I attend a meeting of the faculty. This is the first one that I have attended this
year. By some means these meetings bring us into closer touch with things.
At night we attend a Sunday school lecture at the Methodist Church. It was full of good common
sense. To say the least it was a fine presentation of the subject of Sunday School. The best thing
is the period of worship. We can make a botch of it, or we can use it for the highest good.
959
�Feb. 18.-- The weather is very fine. The sun shines. The air is cool enough to be pleasant. In
fact it is an ideal winter day.
There have been many things on hand. The most urgent matter is the reports. It seems that all
have an incentive to finish the job at the earliest possible moment. We have been very careless in
regard to being prompt in making reports.
The most interesting thing that I have observed recently is the variations in a person' s moods in
a single day. On every angle something new comes to us. During the first part of the day I am at
peace with all the world. In the afternoon I am nervous and am not able to stand the jar. There is
such a thing as a man working to the limit. A man's physical condition has much to do with his
disposition. The sick man is not able to advance the world.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Andrew Jackson Greene Collection
Description
An account of the resource
The Andrew Jackson Greene Collection consists of more than 160 diaries written by Greene who describes Watauga County's education system, including Appalachian State Teachers College, cultural and religious life, and agriculture from 1906 to 1942. <br /><br /><strong>Biographical Note.</strong> Andrew Jackson Greene (March 2, 1883-August 12, 1942) was a life-long resident of Watauga County, North Carolina and instructor in several Watauga schools including Appalachian State Teachers College (A.S.T.C). Greene worked as a farmer, public school teacher, and college professor. Greene was an enthusiastic diarist maintaining regular entries from 1906 to the day before his death. He also recorded A.S.T.C. faculty meetings from January 9, 1915 to May 3, 1940. He married Polly Warren, and they had three children, Ralph, Maxie, and Lester.
Contributor
An entity responsible for making contributions to the resource
Greene, Andrew Jackson, 1883-1942
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://appstate-speccoll.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/190">AC.105: Andrew Jackson Greene Collection</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1906-1942
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">No Copyright - United States</a>
Document
A resource containing textual data. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre text.
Number of pages
65
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Diary of Andrew Jackson Greene, Volume 52 [November 7, 1924 - February 18, 1925]
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Greene, Andrew Jackson, 1883-1942
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a title="Andrew Jackson Greene Collection, 1906-1942" href="https://appstate-speccoll.lyrasistechnology.org/repositories/2/resources/190" target="_blank">Andrew Jackson Greene Collection, 1906-1942</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1924-1925
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
47.8 MB
Language
A language of the resource
English
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
105_052_1924_1107_1925_0218
Description
An account of the resource
This is a diary kept by Andrew Jackson Greene from November 7, 1924 through February 18, 1925. He includes information about special visitors for chapel, such as Dr. Johnson from Elon College, as well as information about his daily activities. For example, Greene frequently recorded visits with Ralph Bingham, John Dugger, and many more. He also writes about his work at Appalachian Training School. He teaches sociology, and Latin. In addition to writing about his classes, he frequently writes about the school’s basketball games.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Watauga County (N.C.)--Social life and customs--20th century
Baptists--Clergy--North Carolina--Watauga County
Greene, Andrew Jackson, 1883-1942
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/NoC-US/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">No Copyright – United States</a>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
Diaries
Is Part Of
A related resource in which the described resource is physically or logically included.
<a title="Andrew Jackson "Greene collection" href="https://omeka.library.appstate.edu/collections/show/39" target="_blank"> Andrew Jackson Greene collection </a>
Coverage
The spatial or temporal topic of the resource, the spatial applicability of the resource, or the jurisdiction under which the resource is relevant
Watauga County (N.C.)
Spatial Coverage
Spatial characteristics of the resource.
<a title="https://www.geonames.org/4497707/watauga-county.html" href="https://www.geonames.org/4497707/watauga-county.html" target="_blank"> https://www.geonames.org/4497707/watauga-county.html</a>
Alice Cook
Annie Cook
Appalachian Training School
Banner Elk
basketball
Boone
Carter Farthing
Cove Creek
Dr. Hunter President of Cullowhee Normal
Dr. J.W. Jones
Dr. McNairy of the Caswell Training School
Dr. W.O. Bingham
Edwin Dougherty
Elon College
G.W. Trivett
J.J. Glenn
J.W. Brinkley
John Bingham
L.M. Farthing
Latin
Mabel
Newland high school
Paul Bingham
R. Bradshaw
Reverend W
sociology
Willowdale Baptist Church