Tag Archives: book

Week 5, Tuesday: Davé readings (13, 16, 17)

“‘Alllooksame’? Mediating Asian American Visual Cultures of Race on the Web”, Lisa Nakamura (13)
vs.
“Secret Asian Man: Angry Asians and the Politics of Cultural Visibility”, Yasha G. Oren (17)

I was immediately drawn to article on alllooksame.com, as it opened with internet usage and I’m a true nerdy tech. Because I’ve been a constant computer and internet user for about ten years now I’ve spent a lot of time surfing through the weird, entertaining, and educational nooks and crannies of the internet. And yet, while reading this article, I was realizing how visually influenced my browsing was by white culture unless I was specifically going against that (and unfortunately for the majority of my years on the internet, I  had yet to find those resources and have them be apart of my usual browsing). However, as soon as I began reading this article I thought of one predominant internet uses; the claimed “take off”of the internet (that also happens to be another HUGE can of worms that I am not going to open right now): porn. Because I’m writing this at work I can’t really search for the online articles on the portrayals of women of color in pornography nor those written on the entire sub-genres which fetishize Asian American women (even though the articles themselves are safe, I worry about other NSFW results. Yikes.) To sum up my train of thought without linking the articles: If a large part of the internet is accessible porn and if, with the lack of sex ed in schools (another can to be opened later), porn is a big “teacher of sexuality”, then these genres which portray Asian American women in a very aggressively fetishized way are making up a large part of the visual Asian American “culture” despite the actual, authentic representations by Asian Americans.

And then there are the websites which debate this depiction instead of affirming (a concept constructed on page 265). One of which being alllooksame.com, which challenges its audience to question their “imagining of Asianness”. A quote I found particularly important when considering the necessity for those who are racially oppressed to have accurate representation they determine authentic is on page 268: “The site exposes the participation of the user in this construction; it shows how individual acts of viewing and ‘typing’ or clicking create race just as surely as do large institutions such as schools, medial establishments, and the law.” The article also mentions the difference between Life magazine’s WWII publication of how to identify Japanese people through racist text of visuals )page 269). Because both the article and the magazine contain images that prompt the audience to try and identify what visually constitutes as Japanese or Chinese (and with the website- or Korean), the difference is in the intent. And from the intent comes the consequential results. With Life magazine, the intent was to truly make people believe they had the answer to identify (and that the necessity of identification was appropriate). The results of this belief were and are harmful, racist, and in some case even deadly. The website’s intentions oppose what the magazine taught: you cannot pin-point exact features to create another person’s identity. The results of the website lead us to realizing that we are wrong.

Another website which debates instead of affirm these depictions is discussed in chapter 17′s article on webcomic Secret Asian Man.  The webcomic not only challenges stereotypes applied to Asian men and the fetich of Asian pop culture but it was also written in a way that cut it up into bite sized pieces for the all-consuming white audience. For instance, the article mentions films Come See the Paradise and Snow Falling on Cedars are “not so much experienced as witnessed by the narratives’ white male protagonists, mirroring what a cautious film industry imagines to be its ‘general’ audience” (page 342). When I saw these films I felt the same way; disenchanted that the “safe” thing to do is create for a white audience which implies that the anger of a white audience is more relevant than the anger of people of color. Secret Asian Man (or SAM) uses comedy as the vehicle for responses to racist stereotypes of Asian Americans. (Just the title itself negates the stereotype of submissive, docile Asians and with anger so often equated to masculinity it also challenges the idea of the emasculated Asian American man.) The article also talks a little bit about the “bad form” of anger and how it is seen as a loss of self-control. In this sense, anger is seen as a double-standard depending on who is angry (page 344). In these ways this website, along with alllooksame.com challenge the visibility we see when it comes to Asian Americans online.

16. “Apu’s Brown Voice: Cultural Inflection and South Asian Accents”, Shilpa Davé .

This article made me questions a lot of things when it comes to acting and fictional characters. For instance, Bart Simpson character is voiced by female Nancy Cartwright. I thought of Bart/Nancy specifically because in our seminar’s small group discussion part of what was talked about what money and casting being a part of who gets picked. One can assume that with Azaria playing so many chracters on the Simpsons that he is a very talented voice actor, and some in our small group asked “why hire someone else for one role when another person can play them all?”. However, I think the difference comes with the history and the misrepresentation.

The article talks about the use of blackvoice or brownvoice and its history with radio shows. The use of these sound affectations is in the way we begin to accept them as the accent which erases the many different parts of a place (such as India or the use of an “all-inclusive” Asian accent) but it also attributes the having of an accent to the being of the Other. While European accents are seen as sexy or hot, the historical use of blackvoice, brownvoice, yellowvoice, etc. has been to make fun of the people its portraying. So while the character of Apu does have his examples of being a political vehicle in the fictional Springfield (pages 322-323) and may break some stereotypes he still held the position of the only representation of Indian Americans for quite some time. And that representation was inappropriate and comedic. “In other words, the way you speak determines the way you are treated and the community to which you belong even before you are visually recognized” (page 328).

Language by those who have been deemed as the Other has been a part of culture that was forcefully stomped out. This article not only reminded me of immigrants who felt the pressured necessity to learn English and did not feel comfortable speaking their native language out of their home or community, but also of the Deaf community. Similarly to the way Native Nation children were forced into Indian schools that punished them for using their native language, there was a time when Deaf schools did not allow sign language and instead forced the children to practice oralism (reading lips and learning to speak without “Deaf accent” which has been proven to be not work Arden Neisser and Oliver Sacks both have books on this cruel practice). In both instances, English was forced upon those who did want to use and who did not benefit from it. So to have a character on television representing these groups who have, for so long, been ridiculed and oppressed for their accent who, at the end of the day, gets to hang up that accent on a shelf and walk out of the studio without it? Not okay!!

Indian American television writer and comedian Hari Kondabolu did a segment on Apu and the representation of Indian Americans on television. After this segment, an article by Huffington Post (September 2013) was post out stating that the voice-actor of Apu (done by white Hank Azaria) saw this and commented. That article can be found by clicking here. And then Kondabolu responded on his Tumblr, and to see this you can click here. His Tumblr post DOES include the original video segment where Kondabolu calls Azaria out.

 

Questions of Authenticity in East Main Street

Notions of authenticity are a running theme in the chapters I’ve read so far in East Main Street. In this post, I’ll be looking at authenticity in the three chapters for this week’s reading.
What does it mean to be Asian or Asian American? Where do the borders between race, ethnicity and nationality lie? Who is “authentically” Asian, and what right do they have to engage with Asian cultures outside of their ethnicity/nationality?

In the chapter “Model Minorities Can Cook”, Anita Mannur focuses on dissecting Asian fusion cuisine. She uses two celebrity chefs as focal points for her argument, Padma Lakshmi and Ming Tsai. Questions of authenticity arise when looking at the way that both chefs present (and subsequently commodify) a wide range of Asian cooking styles outside of their respective cultures or training. They claim all of Asian cuisine as their own, with no regard for establishing a pan-Asian culture, instead, ”Asianness, as it filters into their respective culinary styles, emerges as something that they instinctively understand because they are Asian American” (85).

In ” ‘Alllooksame’? Mediating Asian American Visual Cultures of Race on the Web” the website alllooksame.com  is put under scrutiny. The website has a series of quizzes to test the user in identifying Chinese, Japanese, and Koreans. Lisa Nakamura purposes that alllooksame challenges notions of authenticity by putting the user in the role of racial profiler. Who is Japanese? Who is Korean? The inevitable failure of the user in correctly categorizing “Asian” faces leads to the questioning and eventual discarding of essentializing notions of race. Alllooksame.com disconnects race from the realm of the visual, and reveals the role of the user in participating in the construction of race, “By calling into question what “Asian” is, at least in visual terms, Suematsue is interrogating the basis upon which racial taxonomies like ‘asian’ are built” (267).

Like Nakamura, Shilpa Dave locates race outsides of the body in “Apu’s Brown Voice”. Dave interrogates the role of accents in relation to power and cultural citizenship. Using the character of Apu from The Simpsons, Dave introduces the concept of “brown voice” to describe the particular Indian English accent that is mimicked by a white voice actor for the character of Apu. Brown voice homogenizes South Asian immigrant cultures, and because of the history of British colonialism, it aligns itself more closely with whiteness than with Asian American identity. Dave questions the authenticity of accent in performing Indianness. By performing brown voice, the user gains control over how they are going to be culturally received because of the accents association with class privilege. Examining the legacy of “mimicry” and the creation of the colonial subject, one is lead to question notions of authenticity in regards to voice and accent.

Week 4, Thursday. Talking points (fri seminar)

Chapter 6.

Other than discouraging male Asian American immigrants to stay in America by not allowing female immigrants to easily join them/their communities, in what other ways did this set Asian American men and their self-created communities up for queer discrimination?
Influenced by quote on page 124: “Until the post-1965 era, Filipino American communities were not exactly conventional domestic units” (Bascara).

Chapter 10.

“With the increase in multiracial participants, people’s attention was drawn to the issue of who, racially, could claim to speak for or represent the [Japanese American] community as a whole,” (page 215, King-O’Riain).
In this context, the focus is on beauty pageants, but on a broader scale: is there ever one perfect-fitting representative for any oppressed minority/community? And who gets to choose these representatives vs. who gets to choose if these representatives are accepted (both within and outside of the community)?

Chapter 14.

How do we, as a class looking at Asian Americans represented by others and representing themselves in pop culture, begin to look at those in the media who are passing white but multiracial (such as Keanu Reeves). How do we begin to interrogate our ideas of “what an Asian looks like” vs. begin to look at possible privileges of those who are passing white, multiracial people?
Influenced by quotes on page 284: “Is [Reeves] Asian because he ‘looks Asian’? Or Asian because he self-identifies as Asian? Or simply Asian because he has Asian blood” (Nishime) and, “Yet the two issues cannot be separated since Reeve’s stardom may depend on his ability to pass as white in the majority of American theatres” (Nishime).

 

 

Week 4, Monday: Lee pg 1-179

The first 179 pages of Lee’s Orientals repeated some information for me and I found that there was a bit of repetition (like how there was an ENTIRE PARAGRAPH, word-for-word, repeated on page 66 from page 65…?). Some of the repeated information felt more like reiteration, especially when it came to Acts or laws and dates and I appreciated that, because I feel very confident in explaining a certain Act or situation but am not always as confident on the exact title or year. However, even with the repeat information (whether appreciated and less personally needed) I found myself wanting to highlight and add marginalia to basically half of every page. The idea of organizing all of my ideas for these six chapters is daunting and overwhelming but also exciting. I doubt I will be able to include everything (and some of it my be fragmented and frantic) but here it goes…

Immediately, Lee introduces the book with a modern example of yellowface and quickly explains the “six faces of the Oriental” (page 8) as well as begins to grab hold of the purposeful difference between Oriental and Asian. This was a difference that I have never encountered in depth. In fact, a lot of the ideas and history that was brought up in the reading was more in depth because it focused on the Asian American Representation history instead of the immigration, day-to-day history.

For example, I have most definitely heard of Barnum and Bailey’s circus but have never thought of the origin or how it could have been developed through discrimination, especially racism and ableism (nor was the term “Siamese Twins” ever analyzed in previous readings). The discussion about the history and development of minstrelsy in relation to multiple People of Color in America was also an in-depth first. This history of yellowface, blackface, redface, and brownface is so deeply apart of American culture that it continuously pops up in our modern media and entertainment. Here’s a video I found by searching “fake Asian accent [TW: yellowface, racism]. In the video a non-Japanese/ non-Asian man dresses as a geisha and uses a fake accent as a promotional vehicle. And while the book clearly gives evidence to how yellowface has had much acclaim and was widely accepted (illustrated through the song in the 1880s as seen on page 37 and into the 1900s, page 70; then into 1957′s Sayonara Cuban actor dons yellowface for character who dons “whiteface”; and finally into last week’s analysis on How I Met Your Mother.) The difference now, one may argue, is that people are more critical of this and don’t accept it nearly as readily. There is more push-back and more the dynamic of racism has definitely changed. However, people are still using yellowface to be comedic. People are still viewing it as an acceptable thing to do. Even if they know it will “get a rise out of people”

Part of this is explained in the racist excerpt from March 1867′s edition of the Springfield Republic, “Nature seemed to have furnished them [Chinese immigrants] with that particular appendage [braided queue] for the benefit of the Anglo-Saxon” (page 39). Another way to look at is the entitlement of white consumption (which is later illustrated through the changing of True Womenhood into New Womenhood and how the New Women was defined not by her Victorian motherly traits but by her desire and capitalist consumption as seen on page 177. This also touches on the male-centered homophobia and homoerotica that the Oriental eventually stood for). White consumption which not only is seen through the appropriation and aggressive stealing of culture but also in the entitlement to consume citizenship, land, jobs, and women.

We see examples of consuming citizenship and land in the history of not allowing immigrants to own land unless they become citizens but denying any Asian immigrant the right to naturalization through the Naturalization Act of 1790. Likewise, we see the consumption of land through the villainous depiction of created-space, such as Chinatowns. This is seen in Sax Rohmer’s Fu Manchu series (page 114).

We see the example of consuming jobs through the rivalry of Irish immigrants and Chinese immigrants. As two minorities (of the time) that were pitted against each other, there was high tension for Irish immigrants to prove themselves as white and reclaim the jobs they were not given based on discrimination. On page 65, Lee explains how white workers and Chinese workers worked together but there was still major steps taken to expel the Chinese workers.

And we see the consumption of women (both Asian and white) through the Page Act of 1870  which interrogated Chinese women who wished to immigrate yet there was an illegal trade happening which forced Chinese women into sex work (page 89). Media such as Poor Ah Toy or magazines (page 97) influenced white women to view their interactions with Chinese men (which- at the time- would still be mostly in house) as service workers as something to be weary and suspicious about. On page 129, Lee explains how the “dirty old man” trope was created with Asian men in mind and how the seemingly-innocent stranger became the one true fear for women (whereas domestic violence and abuse of all types were overlooked). Because white women who married men of color would lose their citizenship this effectively kept white women single for white men but also internalized the idea that there was something unnatural or wrong about marrying an Asian man.

Also noted: the TESC faculty Stephanie Coontz reference (page 86).

Week 3, Monday. Chapters 10 -13.

I. Chapters 10-13 were relevant to other readings I’ve done and I enjoyed making those connections throughout the book and to other texts. Like previous readings there are examples as to how immigrants were forced to abandon culture (page 463). In order to be accepted they must assimilate and in order to assimilate they must pass as with everything they can, which means going above and beyond with language, dress, etc. finally leading to loss of original culture. Of course there were new points and experiences within these chapters and I found that they wove in and out with other experiences.

II. Pages 361-365: The Korean veterans of World War II, who were denied service at a restaurant and whose stories are similar to other veterans of color, such as the African Americans or Japanese who served; when  these veterans they came home they realized that not only was citizenship not enough to be accepted, but risking their life to honor that citizenship was not enough either. It seems that many of the Asian American experiences post-World War II have become forgotten stories when generally thinking of segregation. In recognizing oppressed groups it is important not to delegitimize the experiences and struggles of one over the other, as this could lead to erasing the experiences and struggles of other groups. Instead, it’s important to look at the history behind both and where both of these experiences are coming from and in recognizing the similarities and differences we begin to individualize the different communities. For example, both Korean and Japanese veterans were targeted through racial violence and segregation during and after World War II because they were both Asian and therefore profiled as the “enemy”. However, with the evacuation of Japanese immigrants and Japanese Americans land and jobs on the west coast opened up (Takaki, page 365). By digging deeper into these forgotten stories, we then are able to trace the road that leads to the present. 

III. I found important connections (page 378) to internalized “Girl-hate” [sexism] and how there is so much internalized and social competition that it overwhelms consideration and morality and blinds people into thinking in terms of 1. “on my side” and 2. “not on my side so I hate them”. This can also be seen with cultural appropriation. For example- the craze for moccasins in the recent years but the historical brutality that was done to Native Nation people in order to “assimilate” them. It lends itself to control of an oppressed group those with privilege and power make the rules for the oppressed (what is normal). Similarly, selfishness and entitlement are so ingrained in American culture but “being selfish” is seen as a very negative attitude which then leads to excuses as to why certain selfishness is okay (“I’m appreciating the culture, not appropriating it”).

IV. Page 393 inspired the analysis on “names to numbers”: a way in which taking away the individuality of a name from a person and then shifting them into number not only affects them psychologically but it also allows the person who is using the number to detach and allows for insensitivity. (Even if not all those using the number mean for that to happen.) There are multiple examples of this happening, where society and media has and does erase oppressed identities. Some of those examples include the incarceration during WWII (Japanese family names), Hawai’ian plantations, prison systems, and sex-culture (how many people you’ve slept with which determines your worth), and fat-shaming (how much you weigh/what size you wear determining your worth).

V. “Racism is like a wall. You cannot break through” (page 463).
The importance of solidarity and how wrecking solidarity (page 416) hurts everyone except for those with the unshakable power. Likewise, going at the wall alone brings overwhelming fear and stress (page 415), which does not support a healthy attitude towards oneself. And without that healthy attitude and the feeling of being powerless it is much easier to believe what others are saying about you and how you are being treated. On page 409 there is a connection with this and how it is necessary to reach back when one advances to pull others up too.

VI. One of the biggest connections I’ve found within this reading as well as with other texts I’ve explored is relationship that education had with race and poverty. On page 424 there is an example of the importance placed on education. For immigrant people who have had to start over in America and who are treated as unintelligent people despite their credentials it does not take much to understand why they would put so much importance on higher education. Likewise, page 427 really connected with 458 leading me to think about conditions inside labor/factory jobs  (being terrible and exhausting) which, in turn, effects life after work/ home life.  Therefore,”free time” is not easily spent learning English or going to night classes, because their free time isn’t really free. Instead, those with exhausting factory jobs may find themselves doing necessary self care or continuing onto another job or going home to care for other family members.

With this cycle it puts all of the pressure on the individual to rise to standards they did not create. If they do not rise, they are an example. If they do rise, they are met with a new set of obstacles. Examples of this can be seen on page 430, where a young Vietnamese immigrant was basically pushed out of school based on unfair expectations (being put into a class that was much more advanced in the subject than he was) and then joined a gang of boys as a way to belong. 

VII. “To be out of sight is to be without social service” (page 478). This was such a powerful, true quote. To be misrepresented is to be placed out of sight. To be erased is to be out of sight. To be incarcerated is to be out of sight. To be reduced to anonymity and stripped of individuality is to to be out of sight. To be told that your language is not acceptable but the resources to learn the “acceptable” languages is to lose your voice and be out of sight. To be under law that restricts your rights is to be out of sight. To be beaten and murdered is to be out of sight. To have your culture appropriated, stolen, and trivialized for profit is to be out of sight.

VIII. Why this program exists: “Asian Americans blame the educational system fr not including their history in the curricula and for not teaching about U.S. society in all of its racial and cultural diversity” (page 482). If we generally do not learn about this history and our usual input of Asian Americans comes from mass media then do we not need to critically analyze the type of media we are being fed? We need to see where it comes from and who is offering us indulgences. There is an incredible explanation on the importance of cultural representations and the stereotypes in media on pages 480-481.

IX. I believe the addition to chapter 133 was very necessary. Chapters 1-12 have such detailed and rich information about Asian Americans and their immigration/refugee story and while I think it’s important to develop a the ability to make connections between then and now it was helpful to have the “relevant to now” addition. For instance, the 1992 LA Riot happened the year I was born (page 497). While so much can change in 22 years there is also so much that resides and does not fully resolve. Enrollment is still effected today and that perpetuates the race, gender, class, etc. roles that are still very much alive. So by adding chapter 13, not only do we see the change and progress over time but we see why Takaki is still writing and how more change is still necessary.

X. ”To confront the current problems of racism, Asian Americans know they must remember the past and break its silence” (page 484).