Talk:John James Audubon/Archives/2018

I say he was American, not French-American, based on many sources calling him American, the people of the times when he was successful calling him American, and his origin not being of great significance from the point of view of the American he ultimately became as a man. Listen, almost everyone in America at that time came from somewhere. When they came, they came to be American. Not French-American. Not Scotch-American. Not Egyptian-American. Not Belgian-American.

Audubon may have been born outside America, but he tossed aside his French origin (by escaping to America to avoid conscription into the French Army) and went where? America. Why? He wanted to be American. What was his nationality when he did what made him famous? American. What did people call him at the time? American. What are his wife and children? Americans. What do scholarly sources call him? American. He wrote about the birds and mammals of where? America. He is buried where? America. Where are cities and parks named in his honor? America.

Not French-America. He is not French-American. This article should refer to him as an American, not a French-American.

What say you all? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 01:29, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

You know what else? Saying he is French-American means obliterating his true nation of birth, Haiti, by referring to the nation of Haiti by its colonial name and deferring to its colonial masters. Why not call him Haitian-American instead of French-American? Why? Because even though he was born in what is now Haiti, he become, and will forever be remembered as, an American. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 01:38, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

On the 200th birth anniversary of J.J.Audubon, more than 50 countries have issued stamps of his paintings. A webpage of these stamps is available at http://www.indiapicks.com/Artstamps/Artists/Audubon-1.htm. Please consider adding as an external link. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vstata (talk • contribs) 21:16, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

He was a French citizen before he was an American one; saying he was French-American helps people to know what was important in his life. He spent 15 formative years in France, where he grew up. You can say he was a native of Haiti, and in turn French and American citizens. He spoke French before he spoke English and became an American. I don't see a problem with that. Most accounts fully recognized that he was born in Haiti - and when he was born there, it was still Saint-Domingue, so it's appropriate to say he was born in Saint-Domingue. You needn't obliterate all historical fact. We can celebrate that people became American by showing the many places they came from.--Parkwells (talk) 16:32, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

In some book I read it said that there was a possibility he was actually the heir to the throne of France, but because of the economic problems they smuggled him out of France by way of Captain Audubon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Savedbyhisgrace&mercy (talk • contribs) 15:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

It's always a treat to read how many Americans can't accept the simple fact that they owe something to the French...

As Parkwells writes above, he spoke French and was raised in France, he was a Frenchman when he landed in America. Shall we soon learn that Du Pont de Nemours was American without further ado? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.22.116.176 (talk) 20:54, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Are there that many Americans who can't accept French stuff? I've never come across it, but I don't exactly ask people what they think certain contributions being French. 69.160.210.168 (talk) 00:21, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

In terms of Audubon’s nationality, the one thing we can be sure about is that he was French (at least). He was born on what was then French soil, with at least one French parent (in fact they both were), and that, in those days, conferred automatic citizenship. That of course doesn’t preclude him *also* being American, but if so he was dual (at least) nationality. Now, as to that American citizenship: well it’s arguable he was actually an illegal immigrant and as such is lucky not to have been born in modern times, especially with people like Trump trying to kick out everyone not called Bubba. Finally, consider that if he was as the article currently implies, *only* American, then the whole of section 2 really needs to go. Immigration to the US is something only non-Americans can do. Americans can merely go home. 70.112.38.105 (talk) 03:10, 17 April 2018 (UTC)

What Wikipedia does is summarize what reliable sources say, and nothing more. This is a good source, here's another; we follow sources. Also see MOS:OPENPARA, specifically the "Context" section. Audubon became a US citizen in 1812, and everything he did that makes him notable was done after 1812. Ewulp (talk) 04:14, 17 April 2018 (UTC)