The ANNOTICO Report

This is a response to Dominic Candeloro's Post on H-ITAM re: "Best
Wishes...to Vecoli on his retirement;
Vecoli's Legacy Worth Our Generous Support."

I have great respect for Professor Rudolph Vecoli, and the American Italian
Historical Association (AIHA) of whom he was one of the Founders, and who
this year is retiring as Director of Immigration History Research Center
(IHRC), at the University of Minnesota.

I also respect Dominic Candeloro, a former protege of Prof Vecoli, and the
current Executive Director of AIHA, and founder of H-ITAM.

I however had 3 Points at which I differed with Dominic's statement. One
concerned Goivanni Schiavo, the other about Filiopietism. Dominic has
subsequently modified his previous comments about Schiavo, so I will only
mention Schiavo briefly and move on to a More Important Disagreement about
Filiopietism, ant then regarding the funnelling of any gifts from an
Italian American organization for SOLELY Italian American purposes!!!

(1) ANY CRITICISM OF GIOVANNI SCHIAVO, the pioneering researcher on Italian
American topics is Extremely Undeserved. Schiavo was clearly the FIRST to
provide extensive and comprehensive well documented history of Italian
Americans. Schiavo, did not as charged, "desire to prove on every page that
Italians were without fault".

Schiavo did attempt to present the POSITIVE in response to the EXTREME
Negative Depictions that Italian Americans had been exposed to since the
immigration subsequent to the 1840s and the greater immigration between
1880-1922, and forward to this day!!!

In my estimation Schiavo's "Four Centuries of Italian American History" was
one of the Greatest contributions to Italian American History ever. But it
doesn't stop there. Schiavo also wrote "The Italian American Who's Who"
1935- 1967 (21 volumes), "The Italian in America Before the
Revolution"(1976), "Philip Mazzei, One of America's Founding
Fathers"(1952), Antonio Meucci- The Inventor of the Telephone" (1958),
"Italian American Biographical Bibliography" (5,000 entries), and at least
NINE other books.

Schiavo was the Pioneer, the Groundbreaker, and his work was the foundation
for the works of so many other writers who seldom gave him any credit. Part
of that was due to the "snobbish elitism" of those Professors (To their
everlasting shame), who could not condescend to recognize someone who was
not a "academic" historian, and was a "mere" historical researcher, BUT par
excellance.

Schiavo, in my humble opinion had no peer.This said when in fact I have
enormous respect for Salvatore La Gumina, the
Tomasi Brothers, Francesco Cordasco, Patrick Gallo, Andrew Rolle, and
Adolph Caso who all made great contributions, but who among those or any of
AIHAs 500 plus members over the 38 years, could measure up to Schiavo?

(2) FILIOPIETISM (Rejection of). I believe Profs Vecoli and Candeloro are
very misguided and misdirected.
Filiopietism (according to Webster's New Universal 1996 - 2,256 pages,
300,000 entries) is an excessive reverence of forbearers or tradition.

EXCESSIVE is the Key word. And a diluted form of Reverence is PRIDE.
Is a NON Excessive Pride a BAD thing????

Vecoli and Candeloro both thought in 1967 that "most ethnic historical
organizations were filiopietistic.... (and) most of those organizations
merely did public relations for their ethnic group, exaggerating the
accomplishments...."

They felt that AIHA should be different and maintain "a high academic
standard".

I disagree, and don't believe the work of those organizations were
exaggerations. Unless they are talking about organizations that promoted
Alexander Graham Bell over Antonio Meucci regarding the Invention
of the Telephone, OR promote Albert Einstein over Olinto De Pretto and the
Creating the Formula E=mc2 :).

I view the approach of those organizations as merely focusing on the
POSITIVE aspects of their Heritage, and leaving your enemies to focus on
the Negative, and that is NOT Filiopietism.

But even if we assume Vecoli and Candeloro were right (I'd like to see that
Report that Dominic wrote), EVERYTHING changed after 1970, after which
Ethnic Studies exploded exponentially, especially with the NON European, as
in Black, Latino, Asian, Native American, etc, etc. The MAIN PURPOSE of
Ethnic Studies were to INSTILL PRIDE in those Communities.

Were the Academics in THOSE studies Filiopiestic?? Were they maintaining
Low Academic Standards??

If not, then has not the OVER EMPHASIS on "filiopietism" become
counterproductive and outdated, IF it ever even really deserved a place???

In every other Ethnic group scores of Academics of that Community are
providing the Research and Ammunition for that Community to defend itself
against unjustified attacks and disinformation campaigns, and those
Academics are rightly honored for it the valuable work.

Not in the Italian American Community, and the AIHA is the LOGICAL
Organization!!!!!

AND, NO Other Ethnic Historical group has a comment about "filiopietism" in
their Mission Statement, AND all those other Ethnic Historical associations
have an equal or greater Reputation than AIHA!!!!!!!!

Additionally, As a matter of fact, IF any of the members of any other
Ethnic group were to be as Negative toward their Heritage as some of
AIHA/H-ITAM members have been toward Italy and Italian Americans, they
would have been "drummed out" immediately and unceremoniously, and from
then on "shunned"!!!!

Unfortunately after 38 years AIHA has fallen far short of the "high
academic standard", they set for themselves,
AND in encouraging the production of great works, so their DEDICATION to
ANTI FILIOPIETISM has done them little good, and their INACTIVITY toward
the Italian American Community a Great Deal of Harm!!!

But their greater FAILING has been that certain academics have taken that
to mean that one should eschew speaking positive of Italy or Italian
Americans, or else one might be considered "unscholarly", which in fact had
the tendency to encourage some, in an attempt to PROVE their Scholarly
credentials, to repeatedly "bash" Italy and Italian Americans, or pursue a
few areas that Italians or Italian Americans could be justifiably
criticized for, and "harp" and "nag" on them.

That may not have been the Intention of Vecoli or Candeloro, but that is
the Result.

SO, it MAY be Time to REVISIT that Term of "filiopietism" and the attendant
"attitude".

(3) ANY CONTRIBUTION should indicate that it be used ONLY for the
Furtherance of Italian American Studies. DO NOT Give the Contribution
Generally. And if NEH do not permit such a thing, then Contribute it in
Prof Vecoli's name for Italian American Studies, to OSIA, NIAF, UNICO,
either Local Chapter or National Hdqtrs.

In the Meantime, let's also Honor Prof Vecoli at a Dinner, at the AIHA
Conference in October in Los Angeles, at which time he may permit me the
opportunity to persuade him of the merit of my position. :)

By Dominic Candeloro D-Candeloro@govst.edu <mailto:D-Candeloro@govst.edu>

 Rudolph Vecoli, Professor of History and the Director of the Immigration
History Research Center at the University of Minnesota for the past 38
years has announced that he will retire in July. More than any other
individual, Professor Vecoli has made the study of Italian American history
a legitimate and respected pursuit in the halls of academe.

His big break came in the early 1960s when he used his research on Italians
in Chicago to challenge the prevailing "melting pot theory" in the works of
Harvard Professor Oscar Handlin. Handlin had talked of a "brutal filter"
that had blocked the transit of culture from the old country and that
forced the immigrants to melt into American culture rapidly. Vecoli
insisted in an article in the Journal of American History that Italian
Americans had maintained many of their values, customs and practices for
generations after the original migration.

The idea of a young scholar challenging the  interpretations of one of the
most respected professors in the nation brought considerable attention to
Vecoli. The University of Illinois hired him away from Rutgers in the
mid-1960s.

That's when I met him. We had many conversations about the Amasenesi  in
Chicago Heights. My mother was born in Amaseno and Vecoli had written about
the group in his dissertation. This was the first time that I had connected
my academic interests with my personal background as the child of Italian
immigrants. He subsequently hired me as his  graduate research assistant.
In the winter of 1967 Vecoli went to New York for a convention of the
American Historical Association and came back as the founding president of
the American ITALIAN Historical Association.

And he asked me to dig up information on all the other ethnic historical
groups. It turned out that most of those organizations merely did public
relations for their ethnic group, exaggerating the accomplishments of
prominent individuals and failing to relate their ethnic history to the
national scene or to the important urban, political, and social issues of
the day. In short, most ethnic historical organizations were
filiopietistic.

As president of AIHA, Vecoli set a high academic standard and rejected
filiopietism. AIHA was dedicated first to the principle of rigorous
scholarly research and writing. Improving the image of Italian American was
NOT the primary purpose of AIHA. Meticulous scholarship that produced an
accurate historical narrative might lead to an improved image, but then
again, it might not.

Vecoli at that time was a harsh critic of Giovanni Schiavo, the pioneering
researcher on Italian American topics. The problem with Schiavo was that
his desire to prove on every page that Italians were without fault
undermined the credibility of his considerable research. Vecoli and the
other leaders of the Association demanded that scholarship prevail over
ethnic loyalty and replace a pious perspective on our past with an
objective one. I believe that this principle has been responsible for the
success and the longevity of AIHA.

The institution since 1967 has published 30 books containing 600 articles
and over 6000 pages of scholarly writing on Italian American culture. Its
conferences have been the launching pad for the careers of hundreds of
scholars in the fields of history, political science, sociology,
literature, and anthropology. In short, Vecoli's  leadership and his high
standards have given the Italian American community its intellectual voice.

To the larger academic community Vecoli gave the Immigration History
Research Center. In the late 1960s Vecoli moved on to the University of
Minnesota to become the Director of the IHRC. He used his broad interest in
immigration over the next 38 years to develop a priceless archival
collection that documents the history of the full range of ethnic groups
present in Minnesota. He became a globetrotter in search of letters,
reords, documents, photographs and memorabilia that scholars could use to
write their story.

Just five years ago, the IHRC was given new (state-of-the-art) facilities
in the Elmer L. Anderson Library. The University also embarked on a project
to endow a professorship in Vecoli's name and to endow fellowships for each
of the major ethnic collection in the IHRC.

As Rudolph Vecoli moves into active retirement, he leaves an enormous
legacy. Under normal circumstances Italian Americans usually honor such a
hero with an elaborate "Man of the Year" dinner dance. This time---let's
skip the dinner and simply visit www.ihrc.umn.edu <http://www.ihrc.umn.edu>
and make a nice contribution to the NEH  matching grant program that will
continue the great work of this good man.
 

I misrepresented Vecoli's view of Schiavo--
>From Dominic Candeloro

In a recent post in tribute to Professor Vecoli I erroneously characterized
his view of the work of pioneer Italian American scholar Giovanni Schiavo.
I deeply regret the misinterpretation. Vecoli recently pointed out in an
email " I just read your column, and agree with every word---except I was
(and am) not a harsh critic of Schiavo.

I regard him as a true pioneer of Italian American historiography when
there was no field and it had no academic standing. His works remain
sources of useful information."

I myself have used his reserarch on Chicago and included him as a speaker
in an Italians in Chicago Project event. AIHA honored Schiavo at a 1980s
conference at Rutgers and dedicated a volume of its proceedings to him. I
once spent a marvelous day with him in NYC when we visited Ellis Island
(before it was restored).

I should have deleted that reference to Schiavo in the article. Beginning
with me--sometimes we are our own worst enemies. Mea culpa! Dominic