Home is not simply a place, but where the heart is. However, what about people in prison or those living in a shelter, is that their home? The solution of trying to find the most acceptable meaning of a home has been a dilemma for centuries. Some people run from their homes to seek a better future only to be detained while others live on the streets because they refuse to compromise what they believe in. Edwidge Danticat and Anna Quindlen utilize their writing by sharing emotional experiences to shed light on the treatment of immigrants and the homeless through their short essays Not Your Homeland (2005) and Homeless (1994).
At first glance each title is clearly about a separate argument. Digging deeper however a reader will find that the ideas …show more content…
Although she fails to contrast this to anywhere with immigration processes before that date, one can argue that it is common knowledge laws have become stricter since. She investigates a makeshift prison disguised as a Comfort Suites in Miami, where a three-year old little girl’s only wish is to sit under the warmth of the sun and feel the grass under her feet again, but her plea falls on deaf ears as she is incarcerated and holds no rights (para. 1). There are small things everywhere, often taken for granted. From the fresh air one breathes each day, to having a roof overhead, or as Quindlen writes about the homeless, some just long for one single room they can claim as their own and paint blue (para. 7). Danticat challenges the reader to understand her argument through the story of her uncle, who fled Haiti to seek asylum in the U.S. after U.N. peacekeepers put him in danger. Although he had the correct documentation, he was deemed a security risk, stripped of vital medication and dignity, all to die alone in a hospital where she was unable to visit him one last time (para. …show more content…
In fact, without a home one can lose hope, as well as any sense of control in their life. As Quindlen talks to Ann, a woman living on the streets for about two weeks, she begins to understand the dilemma of the homeless. According to the woman, she is merely passing through and once had a home she belonged to; she even has a photograph to prove it (para. 1). The author discovers that some prefer sleeping on the sidewalks or bus terminals instead of a shelter due to fear of trouble and violence present in the homes, while others cannot compromise the lives they knew to those unknown (para. 7). Others will not compromise themselves and settle for violence, they are hopeful but uncertain of the outcome. Danticat touches on this when she speaks of the famous boat landing of 2002, where illegal immigrants attempted to seek refuge (para. 6). These two instances have a comparison in the fact that each group lacks a place to call their own; in one case the individuals are imprisoned while the others are homeless. With little control of their outcomes, they were just hoping for better lives. Both groups have access to a house, a holding facility in one and shelters in the
At first glance each title is clearly about a separate argument. Digging deeper however a reader will find that the ideas …show more content…
Although she fails to contrast this to anywhere with immigration processes before that date, one can argue that it is common knowledge laws have become stricter since. She investigates a makeshift prison disguised as a Comfort Suites in Miami, where a three-year old little girl’s only wish is to sit under the warmth of the sun and feel the grass under her feet again, but her plea falls on deaf ears as she is incarcerated and holds no rights (para. 1). There are small things everywhere, often taken for granted. From the fresh air one breathes each day, to having a roof overhead, or as Quindlen writes about the homeless, some just long for one single room they can claim as their own and paint blue (para. 7). Danticat challenges the reader to understand her argument through the story of her uncle, who fled Haiti to seek asylum in the U.S. after U.N. peacekeepers put him in danger. Although he had the correct documentation, he was deemed a security risk, stripped of vital medication and dignity, all to die alone in a hospital where she was unable to visit him one last time (para. …show more content…
In fact, without a home one can lose hope, as well as any sense of control in their life. As Quindlen talks to Ann, a woman living on the streets for about two weeks, she begins to understand the dilemma of the homeless. According to the woman, she is merely passing through and once had a home she belonged to; she even has a photograph to prove it (para. 1). The author discovers that some prefer sleeping on the sidewalks or bus terminals instead of a shelter due to fear of trouble and violence present in the homes, while others cannot compromise the lives they knew to those unknown (para. 7). Others will not compromise themselves and settle for violence, they are hopeful but uncertain of the outcome. Danticat touches on this when she speaks of the famous boat landing of 2002, where illegal immigrants attempted to seek refuge (para. 6). These two instances have a comparison in the fact that each group lacks a place to call their own; in one case the individuals are imprisoned while the others are homeless. With little control of their outcomes, they were just hoping for better lives. Both groups have access to a house, a holding facility in one and shelters in the