
Lamentations that the history of immigration has largely been written as a history of men today sound quite banal. It seems a bit after-the-fact to implore historians of ethnicity to rethink their androcentric biases of the past and to recognize that women as members of families and communities helped shape the processes of migration and adaptation to America. In dissertations, articles, books, essay collections, and conferences ethnic historians who previously universalized from the experiences of men and who deemed male activities to determine history have changed decisively. The lion's share of the credit for this change in the writing of immigration and ethnic history belongs to a new group of scholars whose training dovetailed with the rise and legitimization of women's history. Donna Gabaccia happens to have been one of the key players in this intellectual transformation. In her book, From Sicily to Elizabeth Street (1984), in several significant essays and conference papers, she indirectly and often bluntly chided immigration and ethnic historians to rethink their categories, forcing them to recognize that communities consisted of men and women and that to focus on only the former not only left out the latter but actually detracted from the intellectual enterprise of analyzing the whole. Placed as centrally as she has been in the debate among immigration historians about the need to rethink gender categories, Donna Gabaccia may have been the most appropriate scholar to take on the ambitious task of writing a synthetic work that tackles the entirety of the immigration experience from the point of view of women and gender. From the Other Side brings together the fruits of this new era in immigration history. It can be read as a tribute to the new scholars and their scholarship. The author implies throughout the book that this cadre of historians, mostly although not exclusively women, self-consciously and successfully leveled the old edifice of immigration history and rebuilt it, brick by brick (or more appropriately, group by group) and replaced it with something richer, more variegated, and
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 0 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
