Immigration to the United States, 1820-2007

by Cliopatria

Each dot represents 100 people:

Immigration to the US, 1820-2007 v2 from Ian Stevenson on Vimeo. Hat tip.

This striking graphic does, for example, illustrate South American immigration's dramatic growth in recent decades. Three things about the graphic, however, make me skeptical of its usefulness as much more than a gimmick:
1) the use of dark blue dots against a black background to represent the African migration makes it difficult to see them well.
2) the graphic depicts the United States exclusively as migration's destiny. We've known for a long time that, at least so far as the European migration is concerned, there was a substantial rate of return to the homeland and that it varied dramatically over time and from one nation of origin to another.
3) depicting the United States exclusively as migration's destiny also obscures far more complex and interesting patterns of international and regional migrations. You would never know from this graphic, for example, that at least in the early years the African migration to the Caribbean and South America was far larger than the migration to the United States. It doesn't even attempt to suggest the large European migration to South America; or the substantial redistributions of population in Asia.

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Ralph E. Luker - 12/18/2008

Whatever.

Les Baitzer - 12/18/2008

While your opinions might be valid, I think you're reading way too much into it in causing you to be "skeptical of its usefulness."

The graphic was not proffered as "Everything You Ever Need To Know About World Migration," Ralph. Had it been, your comments would be entirely relevant.

Most likely it was just a randomly chosen subject used to demonstrate the animated graphic technique.

"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."

Ralph E. Luker - 12/18/2008

I was well aware of what you observe about points 2 and 3. The fact remains that a graphic that concentrates attention on America as destiny must necessarily ignore complexity -- both the recidivism of many immigrants to the United States and concurrent tides of migration elsewhere in the world. That simplification feeds an exceptionalist notion of American history that is challenged by looking at the bigger picture. I suspect that you are correct that this particular graphic form is not the best form for even the limited information it attempts to convey.

Les Baitzer - 12/18/2008

Ralph, your comments 2) and 3) appear to ignore that the graphic is titled, "Immigration to the US 1820 - 2007." [my bold]

Accordingly, one would expect that it is "depicting the United States exclusively as migration's destiny" and not expect it to depict "international and regional migrations," or it likely would be titled "World Migration Patterns."

That said, I think the graphic is mostly useless. I make graphics and can make this type of "animated graphic" as well, but it is not the proper type of graphic for this use. It is far too difficult and confusing to follow the marching dots and the decades clicking by simultaneously.

This same information could be shown in simple slides, organized by decade and "frozen" so that the observer could readily see and compare the trends and patterns, much as graphics have been displayed in history books for ages.

Sometimes, graphic designers get too infatuated with a particular "new" technique just because it can be done, rather than focusing on the ultimate utility of the display.

I saw this same graphic over a week ago and thought about sending it to you but chose not to for the reasons I mentioned.

Barry DeCicco - 12/18/2008

In addition, there is a surprising (to me) number of people shown emigrating from Australia to the USA, even in the early 1800's.

I second your point about emigration from Africa to the USA - you've got to be watching Africa closely to see most of it.

Kelly Woestman - 12/18/2008

This type of visual is exactly what gets our students engaged into learning more of the nuances of the topic of study.