Back to School

By Kalah Johnson, Rico Allen, D’Amontae Warfield, Chanthavara Seng and Maria Umanzor

Tuesday, Oct. 27, seems like any other day at SF State, but after a four-day weekend due to budget cuts furlough days, many students didn’t want to come back to school because they said, the hassle of classes comes back as well.

“I am having a stress full morning,” said Edgar Baez, liberal studies major as he was sitting down at the food court typing his four-page essay he had to turn in at 2 p.m. Baez had trouble getting to his first class on time, which started at 9:30 a.m. because his bus line #43 left him. However, Baez acknowledged that that’s what he deals with every morning and it’s not a big deal that he had to come back from a long weekend.

But as the morning progressed, other students just sat around on campus as they waited for their next classes. Annette, a graduate student was sitting down at a bench in the Garden of Remembrance area, where she was reading a poem after she got out of her British literature class. “It was really nice to get work done over the weekend,” said Annette when referring to the long weekend break.

In the same area as Annette was Nicole who was reading a book "just for fun" called, Ishmael. The second-year and sociology major student said she didn’t want to come back to school, but she admitted she was awake during her Spanish class, her first class of the day which started at 11: 10 a.m.

Yes, it is like any other Tuesday on campus and even after a long weekend break were most students don't want to come back and deal with their class, the truth is they had to. At least some students didn't have their first class until later in the morning and that certainly helped them digest the "back to school" idea. Now let's wait for the next long weekend break!

Kalah Johnson, Rico Allen, D’Amontae Warfield and Chanthavara Seng are students at Fremont High School Media Academy in Oakland.

Ramparts, a Magazine to Remember

Last week, in my editing magazine class, I was editing a book review piece on “A Bomb in Every Issue: How the Short, Unruly Life of Ramparts Magazine Changed America” by Peter Richardson in the San Francisco Chronicle written by Jonah Raskin, who also had the opportunity to write for the Ramparts magazine once.

This piece seems more like criticizing what Richardson wrote in his book about what Ramparts magazine was. “‘A Bomb in Every Issue’ is a good title for a book about Ramparts, but this book doesn't capture the magazine's or the era's wildness, and irreverence, ” writes Raskin.

At first I didn’t give it too much importance. It was just another piece to edit and I wouldn’t probably see any similar article again, but I was wrong.

It seems like there are many reviews on this book because it sorts of brings the magazine alive again. Major newspapers have reviews about Richardson’s book mixed with information of what the magazine meant for Americans.

But what makes this magazine so especial? Is it its writers? Is it the way its writers covered the stories they covered? Or is it the stories written in the magazine?

It certainly can be all of the above, as a matter of fact, most reviews talk about all these.

The LA Times review book, for example, seconds and agrees with Richardson when acknowledging the fact the magazine changed American.

The New Press also explains the Ramparts contribution to change America by pointing out the kinds of issues it covered at a national and international level from publishing the "first conspiracy theory about JFK’s assassination" to covering first the Che Guevera’s diaries.

Locally, Richardson writes in his book that Ramparts was published in Menlo Park, California in 1962 and then in 1968, it moved to San Francisco's North Beach with a monthly circulation to almost 250,000 thanks to coverage it delivered.

Other book reviews on Richardson’s book, define the magazine as, “the groundbreaking muckraking magazine of the 1960s and early 1970s.”

Dream big, It's possible!

Since I was a little girl, I wanted to be someone in life. I wanted to have a good job doing I what like the most--working as a reporter for a news channel or for a newspaper. I grew up seeing my grandfather watching news and reading the newspaper so I got the love for it. Now that I am in this country, I am working towards getting there through my education.

I am from Honduras and I came here when I was 16 years old. Now, at 22, I am a senior at SF State, studying journalism and Raza studies. I am the first one in my family to go to college and I feel very proud of what I’ve achieved so far. But I want to continue until I achieve my dream like many other Latinas have, whether immigrants or from any Latino heritage background.

Personally, stories like Sonia Sotomayor's have inspired me and confirmed what my parents, my grandparents, my teachers and my counselors have told me: get an education.

Last week I heard another amazing story. Eva Guzman was appointed to the Texas’ Supreme Court by Gov. Rick Perry becoming so the first Latina nominated for that position. It’s like there’s no more excuse to keep ignoring that fact that there are talented, capable Latinos (in this case Latinas) and as a matter of fact, there’s this need to acknowledge the achievements of them in this country.

Another woman, who in the last couple of weeks has made headlines, is Sonia Sotomayor. She is without doubt a big inspiration for many trying to pursue a dream. This woman with Puerto Rican roots has become one of the most important Latinas in the history. First chosen by President Barack Obama and then confirmed by the Senate to be the U.S. Supreme Court justice, Sotomayor became the first Latina, as she calls herself, to have such a job. It’s still unbelievable to learn that Sotomayor who was born in Bronx, New York; and who comes from a humble Puerto Rican family, made it to the country’s Supreme Court after a hard, long path. Again, her story leads to the idea that everything is possible.

It’s also perfect timing to point out these successful stories when Latinos represent the largest minority in the country. According to the Pew Hispanic Center, the Latino population in the United States will triple in size by 2050 making up 29 percent of the total U.S. population. It really emphasizes the fact that as a large group in this country, there should also be a growth at an educational level. In other words, as the Latino population grows, Latinos college graduates should also increase.

Unfortunately, Latinos in education continue to be characterized for high dropout rates. It seems very scary considering the fact that education is very important in order to succeed in life, especially in this country, and also considering the growth of the Latino population in the country. Stories like Guzman's and Sotomayor’s will hopefully inspire many to stay in college and graduate.

Both Guzman's and Sotomayor’s stories are rooted to humble beginnings portraying so the idea that it’s through hard work, effort and dedication that everything is possible and that we should dream big even in difficult times. Meanwhile, I will stay in college to complete my Bachelor’s degree in journalism and of course, will keep dreaming big. It’s possible! We’ve seen it!

Preferable Identities

A few days ago, a friend of mine asked me what was the difference between the terms Hispanic and Latino. I quite frankly didn’t know how to answer. After all I use both terms interchangeably.

I do, however, acknowledge that I use the term Latino more often than Hispanic.

The answer to this question is more complicated than what it seems like. After being caught up with a question I thought I should have known and after doing some research, I came up with a not so inspirational answer, but here it is: It depends.

Using Latino or Hispanic has to do more with a self-identification, which means it’s up to an individual’s preferable identification. Some identify with the term Hispanic, others identify with Latino and others use other terms: Mexicans, Mexican-Americans, Chicanos, Central Americans, Puerto Ricans, Cubans, and so on. Once again, it depends on what you identify yourself with.

People living in Latin America identify themselves as Latin Americans. I came to the United States when I was almost 16 years old. Back there, I never thought of myself as anything but hondureña (Honduran). Back here I am still Honduran, but I’m also Latina or Hispanic. However, it is not something that keeps me from sleeping though.

The use of the terms also has to do with a geographic location and how one grew up with, especially here in the United States.

“Often it depends on where in the country one live – SF [San Francisco] leans more towards Latino, Texas towards Hispanic,” said Cristina Azocar, a professor at San Francisco State University, who teaches cultural diversity.

According to Raza Studies Professor Carlos Cordova, the term Hispanic was created by the U.S. Census Bureau around the 1980s to identify people from Spanish-speaking countries, which includes Spain.

"Hispanic is more like a symbol of colonization and that many people don’t identify themselves with it," said Cordova.

Latino relates more to Latin American countries and “Latinos” from these countries relate more to it because the label Hispanic is more imposed to them, rather than a choice. In addition, Latino emphasizes gender. Latino refers to a male and Latina to a female.

Cordova who was raised in San Francisco, identifies himself first as Salvadoran; second as Central American; third as Latino and last as a human being. He said he deals a lot with these kinds of questions in his "acculturation issues of Raza" class at SF State.

“In New York people use the term Puerto Ricans and in Miami, Cubans,” added Cordova. “Mexicans don’t use Hispanic, they don’t like it.”

After all we are an ethnicity, not a race. We are very diverse in culture and color. We are dark-skinned and white-skinned, blue-eyed and blonde. Yet, we do have to mark an X in the non-white Hispanic category in government forms.

There isn’t a definitive answer for the proper use of the terms Hispanic and Latino. In the end it's not about what terms we use to identify ourselves or what labels the U.S. Census Bureau places us into, it’s about knowing where we come from. That's what makes the difference.