Taking migration away from the construction of nations and nationalities is something that I have always thought about but have never been able to put into words. The essay by Gabaccia really examined what the movement of people means to the people themselves instead of simply tying it up into the narrative of nations. This view is something that I hope to do as we begin our project as well. While we’re researching the impact of a group on our area we cannot forget that they are also individuals and were not necessarily concerned with carving out a corner in this area of the world. I think it is very important, as an aspiring historian, to be aware of the limitations of the field of history as well as its trends. The discussion at the beginning of this essay about the role of history as a nation building story or, conversely, as the search for truth despite the national narrative was one that I also found very interesting. It is always important to consider if your work is helping to contribute to a certain national myth. This is especially true when considering migration and putting people in boxes based on nationality. Goodmans argument to me was one of decolonizing language and thought. By calling into question the United States myth of immigration it is easier to examine migration and migrants instead of borders and the qualifications for citizenship that we discussed last class. I really enjoyed reading this article and it pulled into focus for me the importance of the work that we’re doing. If we can help shift the narrative away from the ‘nation of immigrants paradigm’ as he calls it and towards a more inclusive view of the movement of people, we will have done excellent work. The introduction by Gerstle brings the focus back to the United States specifically. The look at race and how racial injustice has shaped the idea of American identity is not a new perspective for me. The discussion of war as central to the idea of a nation is also not new for me but it is nonetheless true.