Brazilian Migration to US Paper

8/8/2019 Brazilian Migration to US Paper

1/19

brazilian immigration and geographical imagination 481

* For alerting me to the Brazilian immigrant community in Greater Atlanta and for helping me initiate contacts,I thank Ilma Paixo of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Helen Marrow of Harvard University, MaxineMargolis of the University of Florida, Jeffrey Lesser of Emory University, and Cassandra White, David and AngelaMcCreery, and Sheldon Schiffer, all of Georgia State University. I also thank Tom Boswell of the University ofMiami for his sustaining academic endorsement and Richard Wilkie of the University of Massachusetts for his

inspiring encouragement and attention throughout my research.

Dr. Marcus is an assistant professor of geography at Towson University, Towson, Maryland 21252.

BRAZILIAN IMMIGRATION TO THE UNITED STATES

AND THE GEOGRAPHICAL IMAGINATION*

ALAN P. MARCUS

abstract. In the late 1980s more than 1 million Brazilians left Brazil without returning.

Today an estimated 2 million Brazilians live abroad, 1.2 million of them in the United States.

In this article I show that Brazilians migrate for a variety of reasons, including the geographi-

cal imagination. Why are so many Brazilians leaving for the United States? What are their

geographical imaginations, and how are they described in their migration process? Using

primary and secondary data and multiple methods, I address these questions by providing

insights into Brazilian migrants place perceptions, experiences, and reasons for migrating,

focusing on the geographical imagination. Those migrants who end up returning to Brazil

are more likely to cite financial and curiosity reasons for having migrated. A web of

transnational religious and social networks sustains those immigrants who remain in theUnited States. Reasons for migrating are not economic alone; rather, they are based on inter-

related and complex factors that range from adventure to curiosity, the cultural influence of

the United States, family members, education, and escape. Keywords: Brazilian immigration,ethnic geography, geographical imagination, humanistic geography, reasons for migrating.

Humans conjure up powerful images of placesthat is, the geographical imagi-nationas John Kirtland Wright ([1947] 1966), Yi-Fu Tuan (1976), and other geog-raphers have discussed; and, according to Denis Cosgrove, the geographical imagi-nation is part of the common experience of man (1979, 43). In the case of Brazilian

immigrants, the geographical imagination acts as a powerful inspiration factor intheir decisions to migrate. In the late 1980s more than 1 million Brazilians left Brazilwithout returning (Sales 1998, 60). Today, an estimated 2 million Brazilians liveabroad, of whom approximately1.2 million reside in the United States (mre 2002).I define the geographical imagination as the spatial knowledgereal or abstractthat allows individuals to imagine place, and I examine it here as a significant, andmainly noneconomic, component propelling migrants to leave for the United Statesand also prompting some to return to Brazil.

Unlike most Spanish-speaking Latin American immigrants to the United States(Portes and Rumbaut 1990; Falconi and Mazzotti 2007), and unlike most Mexican

immigrants who are generally rural laborers with low levels of education (Portesand Hoffman 2003, 71), Brazilian immigrants are not fleeing abject starvation orglaring economic troubles; nor are they political refugees seeking asylum, or escap-ing from civil war (Margolis 1994). Why are so many Brazilians leaving for the UnitedStates? What are the geographical imaginations of those Brazilians who migrate,


2/19

482 the geographical review

and in what ways do these imaginations shape their decisions? In this article I ad-dress these important questions, which are inherently tied to immigration, human-istic geography, and ethnic geography. I evaluate intersecting contexts of Brazilian

migration processes by looking at the importance of migrants geographical imagi-nations and their reasons to migrate, at their trajectories into U.S. territory, and attheir return to Brazil.1

This evaluation is based on primary data using multiple methods, as well as onsecondary sources and theoretical perspectives on Brazilian immigration to theUnited States (Margolis 1994, 1995, 1998; Sales 1998; Goza 1999; Martes 2000; Almeida2003; Beserra 2003; Marrow 2003, 2007; Martes and Soares 2006; Siqueira 2007; Jout-Pastr and Braga 2008). Immigrant experiences articulated in this study increaseour understanding of transnational migration flows (Basch, Glick-Schiller, and

Szanton-Blanc 1995; Tsuda 1999; Levitt 2001, 2004, 2007), for I show how migrationprocesses have shaped two receiving communities and two sending areas. Respon-dents geographical imaginations provide important glimpses and insights into theiridealizations, expectations and fascinations with the United States, and motivationsto migrate, and to return to Brazil.

Fieldwork and Methods

Myfieldwork took place in four locations in two countries: Framingham, Massa-chusetts and Marietta, Georgia; and Governador Valadares, Minas Gerais and Pira-canjuba, Gois (Figure 1). My approach comprised interviews, participant observa-

tion, and secondary analyses. Between September 2006 and September 2007I conducted twenty-five formal interviews in each location using structured (atwenty-question survey), semistructured, and unstructured interviews. Sixty-six ofthe 173 informal, unstructured interviews were in Brazil and 107 in the United States.Almost all of the interviews were conducted in Portuguese, with a few exceptions(U.S.-native schoolteachers and psychologists took part in the informal interviews).I supervised, conducted, and completed all translations and transcriptions.

I generated contacts in Piracanjuba mostly through immigrant Brazilian infor-mants in Marietta and through a Brazilian-based Presbyterian church in Marietta.

In Governador Valadares I generated contact networks from preliminaryfieldworkin Framingham and later through scholars at a nearby university and at a localCatholic seminary (which kindly housed me throughout myfieldwork in that city).I obtained all contacts through snowball sampling techniques; that is, after initialcontact and interview with one informant, I would ask for names of other Brazilianimmigrant or returnees whom I could also interview and thus exponentially in-crease my contacts as the interviews progressed, like a snowball, reiterating MaxineL. Margoliss statement that snowball sampling can be very credible when com-bined with qualitative ethnographic techniques (1994, xxi). Ethnographic tech-niques consisted of asking interviewees open-ended questions on multiple occasionsand settings using participant observationfor example, in-depth observations inchurches, stores, and households. Throughout this article I use pseudonyms for


3/19


Fig. 1For this study of Brazilian immigration to the United States I conducted 100 formal, struc-tured interviews and 173 informal, unstructured interviews in Framingham, Massachusetts, Marietta,Georgia, Governador Valadares, Minas Gerais, and Piracanjuba, Gois. (Cartography by Paporn Theb-panya Towson University; the maps originally appeared in Marcus 2009 and are reprinted here cour


4/19


U.S. territory legally).2 Overall, I interviewed slightly more women (51 percent) thanmen (49 percent); the average age of my interviewees was forty-two (ages rangedfrom eighteen to seventy-four), and I did not interview minors or mentally incom-

petent individuals.Fieldwork in both places of destination and origin was instrumental in provid-

ing a complete scope of Brazilian migration processes to the United States, confirm-ing the work of Wayne Cornelius (1982). I was able to establish rapport with mi-grants friends and family members in both sending and receiving communities,thus gaining trust within the Brazilian community and entre into various immi-grant religious, civic, kinship, and social networks. The study has its limitations,however. Its results are not intended to apply to all Brazilian immigrants in theUnited States or all returnees in Brazil; it is a study of Brazilian immigrants and

returnees in four locations and two countries, evaluating two migration corridorsand migrants intersecting experiences, perceptions, and interrelationships at themicrolevel.3

My goal was to study two migration corridors: a traditional one betweenGovernador Valadares and Framingham, well established in the literature and ex-tensively studied (Margolis 1994; Martes 2000; Almeida 2003; Levitt 2007; Siqueira2007); and a recent one between Piracanjuba and Marietta, unstudied until now.I selected Marietta for a number of reasons. During exploratory and informal in-terviews, several Brazilian immigrants in Framingham informed me that they hadrelatives in Marietta. In addition, U.S.-based scholars conveyed to me the need forresearch on the Greater Atlantas large but unstudied Brazilian immigrant commu-nity. Exploratory research in Piracanjuba indicated that most returnees had livedin, or had family members residing in, the Atlanta area, particularly in Marietta.Ongoing contacts generated a continual flow of successive contacts, which eventu-ally led to formal interviews.

Grounded theory allowed me to look at themes and patterns that emerged asI collected data (Glaser and Strauss 1967). Thus the thematic categories I discuss inthis article emerged directly from my data, from the ground up. I could turn todata analyses and find commonalities in different categories as several themes

emerged, then return to the field to collect more data. This flexibility allowed newand compelling categories to arise, without relying on predetermined stock cat-egories. In addition, and following Richard Wilkies Process Method (1974, 8), test-ing hypotheses was not central to my analysis, for I noticed relationships andconnections becoming visible and taking shape during the data-collection process;in line with Corrine Glesnes view, Qualitative studies are best at contributing to agreater understanding of perceptions, attitudes, and processes (1999, 24). Whereasquantitative researchers tend to code and analyze data only after the data have beencollected, qualitative researchers develop new conceptual frameworks from the start

and throughout the data-gathering process; Qualitative interviewing is not a labo-ratory experiment; it demands adaption, flexibility and accommodation (Hoggart,Lees, and Davies 2002, 234).


5/19


Ethnic Geography and Theoretical Approaches

Geographers have made great strides in showing how migration processes are shap-ing new ethnic landscapes in the United States (Berry and Henderson 2002; Frazier

and Tettey-Fio 2006; Kaplan and Li 2006; Miyares and Airriess 2007). Their findingsreflect changes in various U.S. citiesracialized assimilation, ethnic economies,ethnoburbs, and so forthand evaluate individual ethnic groupsfor example,Greeks (Constantinou 2002), Chinese (Li 2006, 2007), Japanese (Smith 2006), Por-tuguese (Teixeira 2006), Russians and Ukrainians (Hardwick 2006), Dominicansand Cubans (Boswell and Jones 2006), and Filipinos (Tyner 2007). However; withfew exceptions (Jackiewicz and Sun 2003; Allen and Turner 2004, for instance); ge-ographers have been slow to publish research on Brazilian immigration. I hope tofill this gap by contributing to the existing body of literature and adding Brazilians

to the long list of important ethnic geographies.Geographers have long used ethnographic methods (Hay2000), and the inval-

idity of qualitative methods has been long dispelled; as Keith Hoggart, Loretta Lees,and Anna Davies inform us, Assertions made in the 1970s that qualitative researchwas un-scientific were no more credible or creditworthy than assertions made inthe 1980s and into the 1990s that quantitative research had nothing to offer (2002,306). Participant observation has also long been used by geographers as a way togather information by participating in a cultural setting (Jackson 1983). Ratherthan emphasize causal explanation for the Brazilian migration phenomenon, es-pecially through statistical inference, I focus on understanding it, on how and whyparticipants construct meanings and actions in specific situations and locations(Charmaz 2006).

Background

In the 1940s, quartz was Brazils most sought-after product for war industries be-cause it was the only known commercial source of quartz suitable for radio-frequency control (Abreu 1946, 242). Southwestern Gois and east-central MinasGerais overlap precisely with areas of mica/quartz (crystal) extraction during WorldWar II (p. 224). American engineers established themselves in those areas in the

1940s and implemented a system of mechanized mica extraction (p. 242). There-fore, mica/quartz extraction, particularly in Governador Valadares and the surround-ing Rio Doce valley led to the development of ongoing contacts between localresidents and visiting U.S. engineers/geologists, generating ties between these localsand Americans as well as to subsequent first migrations. Local newspapers inGovernador Valadares widely covered the U.S. experience of local upper-middle-class exchange students, further inspiringthat is, whetting the geographical imagi-nation ofother local residents to migrate to the United States (Siqueira 2007).Additionally, U.S. Protestant missionaries, mostly Pentecostals, had proselytized inthose regions, particularly in Piracanjuba, during the 1970s and 1980s. Later, afterthe U.S. missionaries left Brazil, locals in those regions who stayed in contact withthem also gained access to religious and labor-market networksconstruction work,


6/19


for example available to them through those ties, particularly in Atlanta, generat-ing and sustaining successive and exponential migration flows.

Geographical Imagination

I use the term geographical imagination here to help bring insights into Brazilianmigrants understandings of place. This type of understanding is in line with NicholasEntrikins statement that place, to the humanist, is not a collection of empiricallyobservable objects and events, but rather is a repository of meaning (1976, 626). AsWright pointed out in his presidential address to the Association of American Ge-ographers in 1946, a geographer might portray a place or region with aesthetic sub-jectivity, and that could lead to illusion or error ([1947] 1966, 76). However, illusionand delusion differ fundamentally: We are not deluded by all of our illusions[,] . .

. and an illusion only becomes a delusion when it is either designed to deceive orunskillfully employed (p. 77). Thus Wright provided a compelling case for the le-gitimacy of illusion and the geographical imagination as devices for a deeper un-derstanding of place.

In this vein, humanistic geographers challenge intellectual persuasions that placesole emphasis on the quantitative methodologies so predominant in geographyduring the 1950s and 1960sthe so-called quantitative revolution. In the 1970s hu-manistic geographers stated that human phenomena could not, and should not,be quantified, and hence emphasized human agency (Entrikin 1976, 625). Accordingto Tuan, humanistic geographers strive to understand how geographical activitiesand phenomena reveal the quality of human awareness (p. 267). The geographicalimagination in this case provides insights into human agency and the interrelatedand complex understandings of place. As David Lowenthal stated, Every imageand idea about the world is compounded, then, of personal experience, learning,imagination, and memory (1961, 260).

Following these humanistic premises, the geographical imagination in Brazil-ian migration becomes a projection of migrants conceptions of place. This imagi-nation is embedded in the minds of those who wish to leave Brazil in search of theirdream. For example, twenty-three-year-old Lus, a returnee in Governador

Valadares, informed me, My family sent me photos and came back telling stories,and the imagery of how things were like in the United States . . . so I started to havethis desire to see how it was over there.

The United States held a fascinationI examine this fascination as a euphe-mism for the geographical imaginationfor most of my interviewees from anearly age. For example, Chico, aged forty-seven, a Piracanjuba-born former Pen-tecostal pastor who now lives in Marietta, explained: Ever since I was a child Ihad a wish to be in the United States. A similar example came from forty-six-year-old Moara, a Brazilian journalist from Governador Valadares. Now a resi-

dent of Atlanta, she too had the desire to emigrate to the United States when shewas only four years old. I used to tell my family that when I grew up I would goto the United States I grew up in the area of Governador Valadares and by the


7/19


age of seventeen I had started to learn English and more about American cul-ture. She also told me that, when she was seventeen years old, a cousin of herswho lived in New York invited her to join him. She accepted his invitation and

eventually made her way to Marietta, where she now lives with her husband andtheir daughter.

Two returnees in Piracanjuba articulated their geographical imagination as im-portant factors in their decision to emigrate. Jacinto, aged thirty-two, a former mili-tary policeman who returned from Marietta in 2006 after spending four years inthe United States, stated: The imagery I had as a child was as if the United Stateswas magical. And eighteen-year-old Sueli, who lived in Marietta in 20062007,explained, American films show the life there, and my aunt would send me photosof how life was like there when I was young. I was fascinated. . . . This fascination

only grew with time.On the other hand, the geographical imagination may come with unrealistically

high expectations. For example, Dirlene, aged sixty-four, a Brazilian communityleader born in Minas Gerais, had been living in Marietta for more than three de-cades. She informed me of the distorted U.S. image among Brazilians: Before theymigrate to the United States Brazilians will imagine a rich and developed countrywhere anything is possible, but after they arrive they get irritated with all the lawsthat are enforced. And thirty-seven-year-old, Marques, a returnee in GovernadorValadares, spoke of disappointment based on his high expectations prior to leavingBrazil: I had no idea what the United States was like. I thought it would be a thou-sand wonders, but everything I imagined was the opposite.

The common thread that wove throughout my fieldwork interviews was thepurported and embedded wish to migrate to the United States as a means to fulfilla dream. And the dream of one day returning to Brazil immediately follows. Thatis, the geographical imaginationwish, dreamoccurs in two ways: It first in-spires the idea of migration to the United States, then, later, prompts many mi-grants to return to Brazil.

Forty-one-year-old Josu, a store owner in Framingham, spoke of how he leftGois in 1991 because his father is an Evangelical pastor in that town; later, his brothers

came too. He explained, Every Brazilian immigrants dream is to someday returnto their native country. I have built my retirement in Brazil. I arrived here with asmall bag, now I return to Brazil with a container! Many Brazilian immigrants,however, do not share Josus dream to return to Brazil. For example, Marco, aformer officer in the Brazilian army, now forty-seven years old, lives in Framinghamwith his wife and two daughters. He spoke of how he had been enchanted with theUnited States before he left Brazil and conveyed his disappointment with Brazil; henever intends to live there again.

For most Brazilian migrants in the United States, this American dream entails

migration as a means to achieve financial stability. For others, it is an ideal based onU.S. cultural influencethe thrill and curiosity and adventure of traveling in searchof something different the e perience of another culture or the opportunit to


8/19


save money and return home someday. And to a few, it is a means to escape anabusive relationship, divorce, or a poignant event; the geographical imaginationprovides a means to seek emotional refuge. For example, forty-seven-year-old Mara,

from Piracanjuba, has lived in Marietta for more than two decades and owns ahousecleaning business. She explained how she feared her abusive boyfriend anddecided to leave Brazil. Carmen, a forty-year-old accountant, who returned toPiracanjuba, also told me how she feared her former boyfriend and how this fearwas a major reason for her to migrate to Atlanta in 1996:

My boyfriend of four years did not accept our breakup. He would appear at all placesand harass me. . . . He was bipolar and would threaten me with a gun to my head andonce said to me: I will shoot you in the head if you leave me. So I said to myself,I am going far away. I got my visa and left town. I was dependent and living in fear.

A pastor took me in.

Even after two decades both Mara and Carmen still live in fear of their formerboyfriends. In another example, Tatiana, a former teacher, left Brazil in 1992 be-cause of a bitter divorce. Now fifty-years old and the owner of a housecleaningbusiness in Framingham, she explained, I got divorced and this was an option. . . .I had a cousin here who was married to an American. Tatianas parents have sinceleft Brazil to join her.

Men also seek emotional refuge in the geographical imagination. For example,thirty-three-year-old Bira, a store owner living in Marietta, entered U.S. territory

undocumented in 2003. He explained: At that time, when I left Brazil, the father ofmy girlfriend humiliated me in front of her and her two brothers. He told me, Youdont have a family! I am from a family of politicians . . . you are nothing! SoI packed my bags and left Brazil.

Here the geographical imagination acted as an emotional solutionescapethrough migration. Over time Bira began to miss his family, his dog, andhis native state of Gois; and again the geographical imagination inspired migra-tion, this time back to his native Brazil. He eventually sold his shares in the store inMarietta, returned to Brazil in January2007, and opened his own store in Gois.

The new store has the same name as the one he had owned in Marietta.Although much of the Brazilian immigration experience reflects significant

unauthorized crossing into U.S. territory, it is important not to classify Brazilianmigration entirely within this framework. For example, Carla from Minas Gerais,aged fifty-two, is a schoolteacher in Atlanta and is married to an American. Shedescribed her experience:

The most traumatic and shocking aspect of the departure was the coffee they servedme on the airplane. I thought to myself, I am leaving everything behind. I hadgrown up in my house . . . and this is cafzinho [coffee]? I cried when they took away

my cream . . . [and] it all hit me. I was convinced that the distance between Brazil andthe U.S. was only distance[,] . . .but the coffee on the airplane was the wake-up callthat I was leaving behind everything I was familiar with.


9/19


Carla realized she was leaving Brazil and everything that was familiarthe geo-graphical imagination of home. Brazilians call this type of melancholic longingsaudades. Carla concluded, These are symbolic things. It is very different today.

I am not an immigrant! I came with my husband and not to earn a living. Now I ama U.S. citizen. Carlas geographical imaginations are just as poignant and complexas are those of immigrants who crossed unauthorized into U.S. territory.

In another example, Barbara, aged fifty-two, owns a housecleaning business inMarietta, where she lives with her husband and three sons. She was born in Rio deJaneiro and later moved to Minas Gerais, where she met her husband. The descrip-tion of her migration experience begins in a complex way, between searching foradventure, seeking something exciting, and being propelled by a personal poignanttragedy. She first heard about Atlanta through a Brazilian friend who purportedly had

made u.s.$2 million in one year working with granite and marble there, so Barbaradecided to move her family to the United States eight years ago. When I asked her whyshe left Brazil, she gave the following reasons, in order of importance: Because I aman adventurer! I saw a television program, and I liked the quality of life they hadthere I had a miscarriage and lost my son . . . my life was too normal, I was a merehousewife; you know? The complex, interrelated reasons and geographical imagi-nations that Barbara cited for leaving Brazil also illustrate the role of the broadermyriad of nonfinancial forces at play when Brazilians decide to migrate. BeforeI continue my evaluation of research results, it is important to review briefly a fewconcerns about the Brazilian immigrant undercount of the Brazilian diaspora.

Brazilian Immigration

Brazilian immigration is a relatively recent phenomenon that gained momentumin the 1980s in unprecedented numbers, largely because of Brazils political/eco-nomic upheavals. Margolis claimed that the 1990 U.S. census undercounted thenumber of Brazilians by at least 80 percent (1994, 105). Today, various sources pro-vide conflicting numbers. For example, James Allen and Eugene Turner reportedthat the number of Brazilians in Boston, Massachusetts increased by 332 percentbetween 1990 and 2000, rising to 22,592 Brazilians in 2000 (2004, 4). However, the

Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs estimates that Boston is home to the second-largest Brazilian immigrant population in the United Statesafter New Yorkwith200,032 Brazilians (mre 2002), a figure almost ten times higher than the estimatesAllen and Turner offered. The 2000 U.S. census summary of Brazilian foreign-bornin the United States indicated that Florida is home to the largest Brazilian foreign-born population, with 44,536 Brazilians, followed by Massachusetts with 36,669,and California with 22,931 (U.S. Census Bureau 2003) (Table I).

It is likely that the 2000 U.S. census estimates do not accurately reflect Brazilianimmigrant populations in each state, because Brazilians may have been confused byvague census questions regarding race and ethnicity (Margolis 1994, 1995; Sales 1998;Martes 2000; Marrow 2003, 2007). Estimates provided by the various Brazilian con-sulates in the United States and other countries show the number of Brazilians who


10/19


reside within these regional areas and utilize the respective consular services, suchas passport renewals. In some cities, particularly Miami, Florida, these numbers areprobably inflated. At the time of my analysis no consular service was available else-

where in the nearby U.S. South, Brazilians, for example, who live in Atlanta werelikely to use the Miami office, artificially inflating its enumeration estimates. In July2008, however, a Brazilian consulate opened Atlanta, so additional statistics are likely.

The twenty-five destinations most preferred by Brazilian immigrants representa truly global diaspora (Figure 2). The broader scale and scope of Brazilian emigra-tion has reached several major world cities. Of the total estimate of1,964,498 Brazil-ians living abroad (mre 2002), roughly half of them live in the United States. Brazilianimmigrants have made their way not only to numerous cities in the United Statesbut also in Japan, many European nations, and several South American countries.

The Brazilian undercount by the U.S. Census Bureau is not a new issue. Accord-ing to the 1990 U.S. census estimate, 94,087 Brazilians were living in the UnitedStates, but researchers estimated the number at more than 600,000 in 1996 (cited inMargolis 1998, 7). Margolis, incidentally, called them the invisible minority. Thediscrepancy between the Brazilian population shown in the 2000 U.S. census212,428(see Table I)and claimed by the Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs1.2 million(see Figure 2)is also blatant. Apparently, the 2000 U.S. census did not count fiveout of every six Brazilians in the United States.

According to a recent report produced by the Detention Working Group of the

Massachusetts Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild, Brazilians account for thesecond-largest national group, behind Dominicans, of detainees in Massachusettsfacing deportation from the United States (dwg 2005, 11). In addition, a high-rank-

Table IBrazilianBorn Residentsof the United States, 2000

state number of brazilians

Florida 44,536

Massachusetts 36,669

California 22,931New York 22,265

New Jersey 22,097

Connecticut 10,379

Texas 6,915

Georgia 5,144

Maryland 4,697

Illinois 3,488

Pennsylvania 3,264

Virginia 2,803

All other states 27,240

Total 212,428

Source: U.S. Census Bureau 2003.


11/19


ing official at the Brazilian Consulate in Boston informed me that, in 2002, the officeserviced about twenty-five Brazilians daily. In 2006 that number rose to 100.

In light of this undercount, designing a random statistical sampling frameworkfor all Brazilian immigrants in the United States is virtually impossible. And asStephen Castles and Mark Miller stated: Much of contemporary international mi-gration is simply unrecorded and not reflected in official statistics (2003, 5). To

Fig. 2The twenty-five metropolitan areas in which the largest estimated num-bers of Brazilians resided in 2002, the year in which the Brazilian Ministry of For-eign Affairs estimated that a total of1,964,498 Brazilians lived abroad. Source: mre2002.


12/19


circumvent this methodological challenge, I used the snowball sampling technique.Rather than draw on inferences from U.S. statistical surveys, which alone cannotqualify the deeper understanding and important subtleties, experiences, percep-

tions, and sociospatial relationships that are the overarching research goals of myresearch, I use multiple methods that help me attain those goals.

Deciding to Migrate

Neoclassical theoretical perspectives can be traced back to the geographer ErnestRavenstein, who formulated the laws of migration (1885), known as the push/pull factors in migration, that influenced later migration models (Castles and Miller2003). Neoclassical theory asserts that migrants make rational economic choices tomaximize their benefits by migrating, and that, therefore, they will search for the

best place in which to reside (Chiswick 2000). However, most reasons for migratingare mostly interrelated, multidimensional, and complex. These complex interrela-tionships are illustrated, for example, in New Economics of Migration, Dual Mar-ket Theory, and World Systems Theory (Airriess and Miyares 2007, 1620).

In Brazil, models of both internal migration and out-migration have evolved overtime. In the 1970s, choice models for migrantsmigrants perceive expected benefitsof migrating, versus the net benefits of not migratingwere inconclusive, for migra-tion trends reflected the structural changes in Brazils industrialization, agriculturalautomation, and governmental policies (Wagner and Ward 1980). Other models as-serted that the information factor contributed most to migrants decisions. Margolisaptly pointed to the importance of multidimensional approaches to understandingtransnational Brazilian migration, stating that traditional push-pull explanationsof international migration have proved inadequate in accounting for a worldwidephenomenon of such magnitude (1994, xv). Those explanations, she added, tend toignore macrostructural factors such as rising expectations in sending countries, theglobalized world of technology, and information factors (p. xv). These factors le-gitimize the multifaceted personal accounts discussed in this article and support theimportance of the geographical imagination in the migration process as it becomes atype or form of rising expectation in sending countries (p. xv).

Circular Brazilian migration is neither permanent nor temporary. As TakeyukiTsuda put it, migrants are in a liminal state (1999). Margolis called this phenom-ena yo-yo migration (1998). She informed us that Brazilian immigrants are so-journers, similar to commuters on a bus who go to work every day in the morningand return home in the evening. Peggy Levitts statement that movement and at-tachment is not linear or sequential, but capable of rotating back and forth andchanging direction over time (2004, 3), illustrates how transnational migrationpatterns are flexible and dynamic.

Reasons for Leaving Brazil

Rather than focus only on economic reasons for migrating, I also evaluated otherreasons for migrating, including the geographical imagination. I asked respondents


13/19


to describe the three most important reasons, in order of importance, for their deci-sion to leave Brazil and migrate to the United States. I then compiled a list of thesereasons in each of the four research sites, and identified six thematic categories.

Patterns appear between receiving and sending communities, suggesting thatthose Brazilians who cited financial and curiosity reasons for migrating are morelikely to return to Brazil than are those who cited other reasons (see Table II). The

open-ended interviews show that the same respondents are also the least likely todevelop wider and deeper local community network ties and connections. On theother hand, respondents who said they migrated in order to join family members

or pursue an education have a wider web of transnational networks, which help notonly with the out-migration process but also in sustaining and prolonging theirlength of stay; they are less likely to return to Brazil. These networks provide impor-tant local ties and connections to church membership, jobs, education, housing,and social and cultural capital; in short, they are powerful factors that support thosewho remain in the United States.

Marietta has the highest percentage of respondents (9 percent) who cited es-cape as a major reason for migrating; Piracanjuba the lowest (1 percent) (see TableII). These percentages suggest that those who are indeed escaping are all the more

motivated not to return to their sending community, in order to avoid contact withan abusive former spouse or boyfriend or become unhappy again. It is also plau-sible that Brazilian immigrants in receiving communities may have downplayedtheir financial need as a major reason for migrating in order to dispel the socialstigma of the poor immigrant stereotype; the so-called Statue of Liberty Myth(Daniels 2002, 17). Geographical imaginations are constructed in migrants ideali-zations, expectations, and fascinations with the United States and/or feelings ofsaudades, seducing migrants to return to Brazil.

The reasons for leaving Brazil varied widely, from financial/work-related fac-

tors and curiosity, to escape and adventure seeking (see Table II). They are notmutually exclusive or one-dimensional but interconnected and multifaceted. I cat-egorized responses into six thematic clusters based on the interviewees own words.

Table IIPrincipal Reasons for Brazilian Migration to the United States

site of survey

thematic cluster of reasons(%)

Financial CuriosityU.S.

Influence Family Education Escape

Framingham, Massachusetts 26 14 18 23 18 2Marietta, Georgia 32 9 14 14 21 9

Governador Valadares, Brazil 50 22 8 15 3 2

Piracanjuba, Brazil 38 27 23 8 3 1

Average 37 18 16 15 11 4

Source: Survey conducted by the author.


14/19


Returnees initial migration strategies already included return to Brazil after work-ing for four to six years in the United States. For those who remain in the UnitedStates, family reunion, escape, education, and other noneconomic reasons emerged.

Overall, reasons for leaving Brazil fall into six categories:

Financial (37 percent) (e.g., work, opportunities, money, dollars,prosperity). Most immigrants and returnees cited financial reasons forleaving Brazil, for it is the most socially acceptable reason for migrating.However, other reasons also appear in the results, shown below.

Curiosity (18 percent) (e.g., curiosity, adventure, experienceseekingsomething new, excitement of learning about another culture, to get toknow America and travel, urge for experience, search for something

diff

erent). That curiosity was the second most cited reason for migratingillustrates the impact of the geographical imagination.

U.S. influence (16 percent) (e.g., adoration for U.S. culture and/or U.S. tele-vision shows, Hollywood culture, United States is better, enchantment,U.S. fascination, affection for Americans). This category also typifies theimportant role of migrants geographical imagination in their decision tomigrate.

Family or other loved ones (15 percent) (e.g., to be with my husband, mysister, mother). Almost all of my respondents had at least one relative in the

United States prior to their departure from Brazil, highlighting the impor-tance of kinship and of social and religious networks in transnational mi-gration processes.

Education (11 percent) (e.g., to study, to learn the language, to studyEnglish, to complete my studies). Respondents who selected this categoryare the most likely to remain in the United States.

Escape (4 percent) (e.g., divorce, unhappiness, escape from abusiveboyfriend, family, or husband). Some of the respondents who selected thiscategory were also the ones who took the longest time to trust me in the

interviewing process.

Although half the returnees in Governador Valadares (50 percent) and almosttwo-fifths in Piracanjuba (38 percent) gave financial reasons for migrating, fewerthan one-third of immigrants in the receiving communities cited economic fac-tors (32 percent in Marietta and 26 percent in Framingham). Those who left Bra-zil for reasons that included education, family, and escape are more likely to remainin the United States. The geographical imagination of these immigrants includedthe prospect of social upward mobility and the satisfaction of reuniting with familymembers.

Those who said that they had left Brazil for financial and curiosity reasons arealso the most likely to return to their homeland. Their strategy consisted of imag-i d id fi i l i i h i d B il f f i


15/19


More important, the sending community regards eventual return to Brazil as a he-roic trajectory and views returnees as heroes. The mayors office in GovernadorValadares installed a plaque in the plaza of a major city that translates as: The

tribute to emigrants brings justice to the dignified work of these heroes for theircontribution to the development of Governador Valadares. The unlikely date ofthe plaque inauguration, 4 July, coincides with the citys official Day of the Emi-grant. The geographical imagination here consists of returning to their place oforigin to be treated as a hero, as a brave migrant who traveled abroad, faced di ffi-culty as a Brazilian national, and successfully completed the journey by returningto Brazil and bringing back the gold, as one informant put it.

Commentary

Although financial and work factors are almost always the overtthat is, publiclydisclosedreason Brazilians cite for migrating to the United States, other signifi-cant, complex, interrelated, but seldom revealed factors are involved in deciding toleave Brazil. Here the geographical imagination, a subjective device, provides im-portant insights into migrants understandings of place and their motivations toleave and/or return to Brazil. Multiple methods used in this study revealed private/personal reasons and experiences. The respondents accounts provide insights intoplace perceptions and spatial behavior, and they can also help both Brazilian andU.S. public policy decision makers in the future understand why Brazilians migrateto the United States.4

Migration is at the forefront of numerous recent public and academic debates,especially as national and cultural identities are called into question. Some authorsrank it as one of the most important factors in global change (Castles and Miller2003, 4). Migration processes are fluid and complexthey shape, and are shaped by,various forces in places of destination and/or origin. Decisions to migrate are basedon a variety of interrelated reasons that are not economic alone but involve a num-ber of intricate factorssuch as adventure, curiosity, educational pursuit, familyreunion, U.S. cultural influence, and/or escapetied to kinship and to social andreligious networks that generate and sustain migration processes. Brazilians are se-

duced by the geographical imagination first when they decide to migrate and againwhen they decide to return to Brazil.

Notes

1. A few definitions are in order. Although, traditionally in the literature of migration studies, theterm migrant is commonly used for internal migration, I use it here loosely in the context of inter-national migration. The term emigrant refers to those Brazilians who are leaving Brazil; the termimmigrant, to those Brazilians who have arrived or are already residing in the United States. I usethe term returnee to refer to those Brazilian immigrants who have returned to their homeland fromthe United States and now reside in Brazil.

2. Confidentiality agreements strove to maintain respondents total anonymity and avoid any

detection or any form of host-community reprisal, especially in regard to undocumented immigrants.The average length of stay in the United States for all Brazilian migrants interviewed was seven years.Immigrants who remained in the United States had been in the country an average of ten years; re-


16/19


3. This research follows the recommendations of Karl Raitz, who asserted the importance ofmicrolevel studies in ethnic-group analyses: If geographers are to bring fresh answers to the ques-tions of ethnic economic success, acculturation and assimilation, settlement location and stability,and cultural transfer, there must be more studies at the local or microscale (1979, 94).

4. Brazilian immigrants told me of the difficulty of transnational travel after 9/11 terrorist attacksand the November 2005 Mexican legislation requiring visas for Brazilians who travel to Mexico. Thesedifficulties have thwarted some entries by undocumented Brazilians on a broad scale, but in reality suchattempts continue. Ironically, the transnational difficulties of returning to Brazil are likely to inadvert-ently generate additional undocumented Brazilian entries. Because the undocumented cannot travelback and forth easily, their family members are entering the United States in order to join them.

References

Abreu, S. F. 1946. The Mineral Wealth of Brazil. Geographical Review 36 (2): 222246.Airriess, C. A., and I. M. Miyares. 2007. Exploring contemporary ethnic geographies. In Contempo-

rary Ethnic Geographies in America, edited by I. M. Miyares and C. A. Airriess, 126. Lanham, Md.:

Rowman & Littlefield.Allen, J. P., and E. Turner. 2004. Bostons Emerging Ethnic Quilt: A Geographic Perspective. Paper

presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Association of America, 1 April 2004, Boston,Mass.

Almeida, Z. M. de. 2003. Fazer a Amrica: Insero e Mobilidade do Imigrante Brasileiro em umaEconomia de Base tnica (The Making of America: Inclusion and Mobility of Brazilian Immi-grants in an Ethnic Economy). Coronel Fabriciano, Brazil: Unileste Edies.

Basch, L., N. Glick-Schiller, and C. Szanton-Blanc. 1995. From Immigrant to Transmigrant: Theoriz-ing Transnational Migration.Anthropological Quarterly68 (1): 4863.

Berry, K. A., and M. L. Henderson, eds. 2002. Geographical Identities of Ethnic America: Race, Space,and Place. Reno: University of Nevada Press.

Beserra, B. 2003. Brazilian Immigrants in the United States: Cultural Imperialism and Social Class. NewYork: LFB Scholarly Publishing.

Boswell, T. D., and T. A. Jones. 2006. The Distribution and Socioeconomic Status of West IndiansLiving in the United States. In Race, Ethnicity, and Place in a Changing America, edited by J. W.Frazier and E. L. Tettey-Fio, 155180. Binghamton, N.Y.: Global Academic Publishing.

Castles, S., and M. J. Miller. 2003. The Age of Migration: International Population Movements in theModern World. 3rd ed. New York: Guilford Press.

Charmaz, K. 2006. Constructing Grounded Theory: A Practical Guide through Qualitative Analysis.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.

Chiswick, B. R. 2000. Are Emigrants Self-Selected? An Economic Analysis. InMigration Theory: Talkingacross Disciplines, edited by C. B. Brettell and J. F. Hollifield, 6176. New York: Routledge.

Constantinou, S. T. 2002. Profiles of Greek Americans. In Geographical Identities of Ethnic America:Race, Space, and Place, edited by K. A. Berry and M. L. Henderson, 92115. Reno: University ofNevada Press.

Cornelius, W. A. 1982. Interviewing Undocumented Immigrants: Methodological Reflections Basedon Fieldwork in Mexico and the U.S. International Migration Review 16 (2): 378411.

Cosgrove, D. E. 1979. John Ruskin and the Geographical Imagination. Geographical Review 69 (1):4362.

Daniels, R. 2002. Coming to America: A History of Immigration and Ethnicity in American Life . NewYork: HarperCollins.

DWG [Detention Working Group]. 2005. Give Me Your Tired, Your Poor: A Report on Due ProcessIssues in the Handling of Immigration Detainees in Massachusetts. Boston: Detention Working Groupof the Massachusetts Chapter of the National Lawyers Guild. [www.nlgmass.org/DWGreport070105.pdf].

Entrikin, J. N. 1976. Contemporary Humanism in Geography.Annals of the Association of AmericanGeographers 66 (4): 615632.

Falconi, J. L., and J. A. Mazzotti, eds. 2007. The Other Latinos: Central and South Americans in theUnited States. Harvard University, David Rockefeller Center Series on Latin American Studies.Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.


17/19


Frazier, J. W., and E. L. Tettey-Fio, eds. 2006. Race, Ethnicity, and Place in a Changing America .Binghamton, N.Y.: Global Academic Publishing.

Glaser, B. G., and A. L. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for QualitativeResearch. Chicago: Aldine Transaction.

Glesne, C. 1999. Becoming Qualitative Researchers: An Introduction. 2nd ed. New York: Longman.Goza, F. 1999. Brazilian Immigration to Ontario. International Migration 37 (4): 765799.Hardwick, S. W. 2006. The Geography of Whiteness: Russian and Ukranian Coalitions of Color in

the Pacific Northwest. In Race, Ethnicity, and Place in a Changing America, edited by J. W. Frazierand E. L. Tettey-Fio, 329337. Binghamton, N.Y.: Global Academic Publishing.

Hay, I., ed. 2000. Qualitative Research Methods in Human Geography. New York: Oxford UniversityPress.

Hoggart, K., L. Lees, and A. Davies. 2002. Researching Human Geography. London: Arnold Publish-ers.

Jackiewicz, E. L., and Y. Sun. 2003. The Ties That Bind, or Not? The Assimilation of Brazilian Mi-grants in South Florida.North American Geographer5 (12): 114128.

Jackson, P. 1983. Principles and Problems of Participant Observation. Geografiska Annaler, Ser. B,

Human Geography65 (1): 3946.Jout-Pastr, C., and L. J. Braga, eds. 2008. Becoming Brazuca: Brazilian Immigration to the UnitedStates.Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University, David Rockefeller Center for Latin American Studies.

Kaplan, D. H., and W. Li, eds. 2006. Landscapes of the Ethnic Economy. Lanham, Md.: Rowman &Littlefield.

Levitt, P. 2001. The Transnational Villagers. Berkeley: University of California Press.. 2004. Transnational Migrants: When Home Means More Than One Country. Migration

Information Source. [www.migrationinformation.org/Feature/print.cfm?ID=261].. 2007. God Needs No Passport: Immigrants and the Changing American Religious Landscape.

New York: New Press.Li, W. 2006. U.S. Immigration and Racialized Assimilation. In Race, Ethnicity, and Place in a Chang-

ing America, edited by J. W. Frazier and E. L. Tettey-Fio, 5765. Binghamton, N.Y.: Global Aca-demic Publishing.

. 2007. Chinese Americans: Community Formation in Time and Space. In Contemporary Eth-nic Geographies in America, edited by I. M. Miyares and C. A. Airriess, 213232. Lanham, Md.:Rowman & Littlefield.

Lowenthal, D. 1961. Geography, Experience, and Imagination: Towards a Geographical Epistemol-ogy. Annals of the Association of American Geographers 51 (3): 241260.

Marcus, A. P. 2009. (Re)Creating Places and Spaces in Two Countries: Brazilian Transnational Mi-gration Processes.Journal of Cultural Geography26 (2): 173198.

Margolis, M. L. 1994. Little Brazil: An Ethnography of Brazilian Immigrants in New York City. Princeton,N.J.: Princeton University Press.

. 1995. Brazilians and the 1990 United States Census: Immigrants, Ethnicity, and theUndercount. Human Organization 54 (1): 5259.

. 1998. An Invisible Minority: Brazilians in New York City. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Marrow, H. B. 2003. To Be or Not to Be (Hispanic or Latino): Brazilian Racial and Ethnic Identity inthe United States. Ethnicities 3 (4): 427464.

. 2007. Who Are the Other Latinos, and Why? In The Other Latinos: Central and South Ameri-cans in the United States, edited by J. Falconi and J. Mazzotti, 3977. Harvard University, DavidRockefeller Center Series on Latin American Studies. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.

Martes, A. C. B. 2000. Brasileiros nos Estados Unidos: Um Estudo sobre Imigrantes em Massachusetts(Brazilians in the United States: A Study of Immigrants in Massachusetts). So Paulo, Brazil:Editora Paz e Terra.

Martes, A. C. B., and W. Soares. 2006. Remessas de Recursos dos Imigrantes (Remittances of Immi-grants Resources). Estudos Avanados 20 (57): 4154.

Miyares, I. M., and C. A. Airriess, eds. 2007. Contemporary Ethnic Geographies in America. Lanham,Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.

MRE [Ministrio de Relaes Exteriores (Brazilian Ministry of Foreign Affairs)]. 2002. Estimativasde Brasileiros no mundo (Estimates of Brazilians throughout the world). Formerly at [www.mre.gov.br/portugues/questoes/1048 download/rcn2002.xls].


18/19


Portes, A., and K. Hoffman. 2003. Latin American Class Structures: Their Composition and Changeduring the Neoliberal Era. Latin American Research Review 38 (1): 4182.

Portes, A., and R. G. Rumbaut. 1990. Immigrant America: A Portrait. Berkeley: University of Califor-nia Press.

Raitz, K. B. 1979. Themes in the Cultural Geography of European Ethnic Groups in the United States.Geographical Review 69 (1): 7994.

Ravenstein, E. G. 1885. The Laws of Migration. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society48 (2): 167227.Sales, T. 1998. Brasileiros Longe de Casa (Brazilians Far from Home). So Paulo, Brazil: Cortez Editora.Siqueira, S. 2007. Migrantes e Empreendedorismo na Microregio de Governador Valadares: Sonhos e

Frustraes no Retorno (Migrants and Entrepreneurship in the Microregion of GovernadorValadares: Dreams and Frustrations upon Return). Governador Valadares, Brazil: Editora Univale.

Smith, J. M. 2006. Little Tokyo: Historical and Contemporary Japanese American Identities. In Race,Ethnicity, and Place in a Changing America, edited by J. W. Frazier and E. L. Tettey-Fio, 301308.Binghamton, N.Y.: Global Academic Publishing.

Teixeira, C. 2006. Residential Segregation and Ethnic Economies in a Multicultural City: The LittlePortugal of Toronto. In Landscapes of the Ethnic Economy, edited by D. H. Kaplan and W. Li, 49

66. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.Tsuda, T. 1999. The Permanence of Temporary Migration: The Structural Embeddedness of Japa-nese-Brazilian Immigrant Workers in Japan.Journal of Asian Studies 58 (3): 687722.

Tuan, Y.-F. 1976. Humanistic Geography.Annals of the Association of American Geographers 66 (2):266276.

Tyner, J. A. 2006. Filipinos: The Invisible Ethnic Community. In Contemporary Ethnic Geographies inAmerica, edited by I. M. Miyares, and C. A. Airriess, 251270. Lanham, Md.: Rowman & Littlefield.

U.S. Census Bureau. 2003. Census of Population and Housing, 2000. Summary File 3 (SF 3), PCT19,Place of Birth for Foreign-Born Population. [http://factfinder.census.gov].

Wagner, F. E., and J. O. Ward. 1980. Urbanization and Migration in Brazil.American Journal of Eco-nomics and Sociology39 (3): 249259.

Wilkie, R. W. 1974. The Process Method versus the Hypothesis Method: A Nonlinear Example ofPeasant Spatial Perception and Behavior. In Proceedings of the 1972 Meeting of the InternationalGeographical Union Commission on Quantitative Geography, edited by M. Yeates, 131. Montrealand London: McGill-Queens University Press.

Wright, J. K. [1947] 1966. Terrae Incognitae: The Place of Imagination in Geography. In Human Na-ture in Geography: Fourteen Papers, 19251965, 6888. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press.


19/19

Reproducedwithpermissionof thecopyrightowner. Further reproductionprohibitedwithoutpermission.

Documents

Brazilian Migration to US Paper