Immigrants in Our Own Land

The poem’s title is both intriguing and initially misleading. It is an oxymoron (derived from Greek words “oxus,” meaning sharp, and “moros,” meaning dull; therefore, “sharply dull”), a figure of speech in which two incongruous terms are placed in the same phrase creating a self-contradiction (e.g., loving hate or fiery ice). By definition, immigrants are people who are no longer in their own native land. Those who are in their own land are not immigrants, though they may have been immigrants before assuming citizenship in their adoptive country. However, it is gradually revealed in the poem that the title phrase does not refer to immigrants, but to prisoners. The poet suggests that, while most prisoners in the United States are Americans, they find themselves in a situation resembling that of immigrants. They are estranged in their own country, as if they did not belong there. (For more on similarities between prisoners and immigrants, see Themes.)

The opening statements could apply equally to both immigrants and prisoners. The speaker uses the first-person plural pronoun (“We”), signaling that he speaks for a group of people to which he belongs. They “are born with dreams in [their] hearts, / looking for better days ahead” (Lines 1-2). Taken literally, the statement implies that a desire for a better life is something innate to human beings; we are “born” with it. However, the context makes another explanation possible. When a person becomes a prison inmate (or when an immigrant arrives to a new land), they acquire a new identity; they are, in a sense, reborn, and this rebirth gives them new hope for an improved life. The first stanza supports that interpretation because it describes a kind of initiation, the process of becoming a new member of a group. “At the gates,” which suggests a threshold into a different space or state, arriving inmates are given new documents (Line 3) and new clothes (Lines 4-5). They go through a physical and mental examination (Lines 6-9), which prepares them for the life in “the new land” they have just entered.

Prisoners have been shaped by the experiences they had before incarceration. Some are skilled in using “our hands” (Line 11) and others in using “their heads” (Line 12). The distinction between “our” and “their” suggests that the speaker identifies with those inmates who are “proud of” their manual work (Line 11). Others are more “like scholars,” relying on their minds, except that they use “common sense” rather than “glasses and books to reach the world” (Lines 13-14). In other words, they use street smarts rather than bookish knowledge in their lives. However, most of the speaker’s fellow inmates “didn’t finish high school” (Line 15), as indeed many incarcerated people lack education. As they start their sentence, inmates’ “expectations are high” (Line 20) because they have heard that prison can lead to “rehabilitation” (Line 21) and enable them to “finish school” (Line 22) or learn a “good trade” (Line 23). These are the “dreams in [their] hearts” (Line 1) as they enter “the new land” (Line 8) of prison life.

Their very first glimpse of that life is not promising. Experienced inmates watch the newcomers “with deep disturbed eyes, sulking, retreated” (Line 17). Their demeanor suggests disappointment and resignation rather than improvement and rehabilitation. They are not engaged in useful activities but “stand around idle” (Line 18), with “shovels and rakes” (Line 19), not doing much of anything. Of course, there may be other inmates doing more productive work at that very moment, but this image of discouragement and wasted time embodies the poet’s argument about the prison experience. Exploitation, not education, is at the core of it. Not only must inmates work within the prison, for example as “dishwashers” (Line 24), but also outside, “in fields for three cents an hour” (Line 25). No doubt, someone profits from their cheap labor, while prison “administration” assures them that such work is just “temporary” (Line 26). Inmates obediently “go about our business” (Line 27), in part because the same administration encourages segregation within the prison population (Lines 27-30), preventing them from finding a unified voice to express their discontent with the situation. This ideology of “no mixing of cultures, let them stay apart” (Line 31) serves the same purpose in prison as it does “in the old neighborhood” (Line 32): divide and conquer. Inmates preoccupied with differences from and grievances against other inmates are less likely to challenge the prison administration that exploits them.

The speaker remembers the brutal behavior of “dictators in our neighborhoods, / who wore blue suits” (Lines 34-35). The word “dictators” is another element of the prisoners-immigrants analogy since fleeing from brutalities imposed by national or local strongmen is a frequent cause of immigration. However, the “dictators” in the poem are the police who use excessive force and arbitrary arrests to subdue the residents of certain neighborhoods (Lines 35-27). The poet expects his audience to know that police brutality occurs in minority and poor neighborhoods much more often than in white and wealthy ones. Inequity and injustice encountered in “the old world” outside prison are also present in “the new land” inside prison walls: “it’s no different,” only “concentrated” (Line 38). Medical and educational neglect make prisoners’ “bodies” and “minds deteriorate” (Lines 39-40). Instead of improving, their lives become worse (Line 41).

The perspective shifts in the fourth and fifth stanzas, where the speaker employs first-person singular pronouns (my, I), which were absent in the earlier stanzas. He depicts himself drying his clothes on laundry lines just like he did back home (Lines 42-45). He observes other inmates exchanging cigarettes (Lines 46-47) or complaining about misfunctioning sinks, toilets, and heaters (Lines 48-52). As he asks another inmate for more soap, he notices new arrivals with mattresses, haircuts, and boots that symbolize their new life (Lines 53-57). They look around the prison hoping it is “a chance to change their lives” (59). They have “a dream in their heart” (Line 58), just like the speaker and his cohort had “dreams in our hearts” (Line 1) when they arrived. At this point, the speaker knows from his own experiences that these dreams will probably remain unfulfilled.

The last stanza contains the speaker’s conclusion about the impact of prison life. Some inmates remember with longing “the old world” before prison (Lines 60-61). Younger inmates, who may have been imprisoned for a minor violation, now “become gangsters” (Line 62), entrenched in crime. Others lose their lives or their “reason to live” (Lines 63-64). Some will survive and eventually leave prison, but “with hate in their eyes” (Line 65), full of bitterness and resentment. Most will have lost some of their humanity (Lines 65-66): their hopes, their self-respect, their connection with the outside world (Lines 67-69). They have become estranged “from life itself” because “so many things have changed” (Line 70), both in the society from which they were temporarily removed and in their own minds, which have been subdued and demoralized by their experiences in prison.