Alcoff and working with text
Writing to Prepare for Class
Student’s Name
Department/Institution
Course
Instructor
Date
- Alcoff and working with text
Passage 1:
These three major differences present obstacles to Asian Americans and Latinos following the path of white ethnics to “become” white. It is still proving difficult enough t to be seen as “American.” The claim that Asian Americans and Latinos will become white ignores the issues of color and other racial differences, takes no notice of the varying symbolic meanings and historical challenges posed by these groups in regard to “American” metanarratives of moral and political superiority, and forgets the problem of “assimilability.” It thus returns us to the problem of misidentification discussed earlier, refusing to recognize the specificity and complexity by which people are vilified. To give another example of this complexity, Asians and Jews have been similarly grouped together in the representative representations of their cultures as superior, threatening, and monolithic. In other words, unlike for African Americans and Latinos, Asians and Jews are not seen as having inferior intelligence or primitive cultures, but as groups with collective goals to take over the world and/or evil intent towards those outside their groups (the “yellow peril” and “Jewish world conspiracy”). This kind of ideology requires specific analysis, because it operates differently vis-à-vis, among other issues, affirmative action concerns in regard to higher
Paraphrase:
Compared to White ethnic groups, Asian Americans and Latinos face challenges that are different than the ones that the Whites faces when it comes to being seen as “American”. The assumption that these groups can become white ignores their unique cultural and historical experiences, including “yellow peril” or “Jewish conspiracy” stereotypes. These labels showcase that different groups have their distinct and unique ways and this undermines the assumption that race is just about Black and White.
Explanation:
I chose this passage because it shed light on how the racial experiences of Asian Americans and Latinos are oversimplified by the Black-White binary, ignoring the complexities of how racism targets different groups in distinctive ways. Alcoff support the recognition of this diversity instead of putting all non-whites into one category.
Passage 2:
Of the many questions that one might like to go back and pose to Charles Murray, perhaps the most obvious is the following: if black and white are oppositional terms, then, instead of black meaning nonwhite, doesn’t it just as logically follow that white could mean nonblack, in which case all people of color except African Americans would be white? This conclusion is no more or less fallacious or absurd than Murray’s conclusion that black means nonwhite. That such an idea was, apparently, beyond the imagination of the court at that time begins to reveal the strategy at work here. Defining whites as only those without one drop of “other”- blood has been a tool to maintain a clear and distinct border around white identity. On the other hand, the borders of other identities-their distinctiveness from each other-are not important for the law to define and maintain. The controlling term here is not race but whiteness. To be black is to be nonwhite, but this equation is not reversible if one is using the usual meaning of “black” today, since for Murray “black” includes virtually every Arian American, Latino, Native American, and mixed-race person as well as all those of African origin. Although this case began with a strategy to link the Chinese to American Indians, it ends in a ruling that prescribes a black/white binary. The ruling essentially allowed the state to make one all-purpose argument against the civil and political rights of nonwhites, thus increasing the efficiency with which it could maintain discrimination.
Paraphrase:
The assumption that “black” means “nonwhite” does not reverse logically, and this means that “Whites” does not necessarily mean “nonblack.” This distinction is crucial, particularly because the justice systems have historically maintained a clear boundary around whiteness, viewing and presenting it as opposition to all others while failing to rigidly define other nonwhite identities.
Explanation:
I decided to analyze this passage because it critiques the role of the legal system in the reinforcement of the Black-White binary, and this demonstrates how it has been strategically designed and positioned to protect whiteness as pure, exclusive category. This phenomenon maintains racial hierarchies. From a critical point of view, the law fails to put sufficient emphasis on other racial identities, and this paints a picture of how whiteness is prioritized.
Passage 3:
Racism can and has operated in ways in which color is not central but other physical features, cultural characteristics and original, and status as “native” or “non-native” operate to the same effect. It is important to note that these other axes are forms of racism that produce other ways to classify and delimit subsets of people and then justify discrimination against them.
Paraphrase:
Racism is not primarily centered in color as it can also be based on other characteristics, including physical features, culture, or status such as native or non-native. These are also some of the ways through which society justifies discrimination, categorizing people in order to maintain power.
Explanation:
I chose this passage because it plays an essential role in showcasing that laying emphasis only on color misses the broader ways through which racism works. Agreeably, limiting race discussions to Black and White only ignores other forms of discrimination on the basis of culture and origin, emphasizing the importance of gaining a more comprehensive understanding of race.
- Okihiro and working with text
Passage 1:
We are a kindred people, African and Asian Americans. We share a history of migration, interaction and cultural sharing, and commerce and trade. We share a history of European colonization, decolonization, and independence under neo colonization and dependency. We share a history of oppression in the United States, successively serving as slave and cheap labor, as peoples excluded and absorbed, as victims of mob rule and Jim Crow. We share a history of struggle for freedom and the democratization of America, of demands for equality and human dignity, of insistence on making real the promise that all men and women are created equal. We are a kindred people, forged in the fire of white supremacy and struggle, but how can we recall that kinship when our memories have been massaged by white hands, and how can we remember the past when our storytellers have been whispering amid the din of Western civilization and Anglo-conformity?
Paraphrase:
African Americans and Asian Americans have a link that is characterized by shared migration, cultural interactions, and trade. This link is also characterized by similar histories of European colonization, late independence, and continued struggles under new control forms. In the United States, for instance, African Americans and Asian Americans experience exploitations in the form of slaves and cheap labor, exclusion, as well as mob violence. However, their shared fight for freedom and equality plays an essential role in upholding the idea that all humans are born equal despite the distortion of this shared memory by white dominance, which often makes it hard for them to remember their unity.
Explanation:
I chose this passage because it demonstrates the role of historical experiences and external forces such a White Supremacy in shaping race and racism. It also proves to us that the construction of race has real consequences, particularly in cases when the shared history of marginalized communities undergoes alteration or erasure. Additionally, it provides useful insights into how collective straggles can be undermined by dominant narratives, and this shows us how racism is not only an individual prejudice but also a broader social manipulation of both history and identity.
Passage 2:
The question is multilayered. is yellow black or white? is a question of Asian American identity. Is yellow black or white? is a question of Third World identity, or the relationships among people of color. Is yellow black or white? is a question of Ameri can identity, or the nature of America’s racial formation.” Implicit within the question is a construct of American society that defines race relations as bipolar-between black and white-and that lo- cates Asians (and American Indians and Latinos) somewhere along the divide between black and white, Asians, thus, are “near- whites” or “just like blacks.” The construct is historicized, within the progressive tradition of American history, to show the evolution of Asians from minority to majority status, or “from hard- ship and discrimination to become a model of self-respect and achievement in today’s America.”
Paraphrase:
The question “Is Yellow Black or White?” is a reflection of Asian American identity in a contemporary society, defining race primarily through a Black-White binary. In most cases, Asians tend to viewed either as “almost white” or just like Blacks”. As a result, they are portrayed as having risen from hardships to model minority status, a phenomenon that masks the complexity of their racial experience.
Explanation:
I decide to focus on this passage because it shed light on how society is organized by racism into a Black-White dichotomy, resulting in the erasure of the nuanced experiences of other races. In addition, it questions the relevance of the binary approach that a significant number of people, especially Whites adopt to race and expounds on how this simplified approach results in the maintenance of inequality. Besides, through this passage, one realizes that different groups can be marginalized in unique ways when people view race relations as more complex, perpetuating stereotypes like the model minority myth.
Passage 3:
But yellow is not black either, and the question posed is, in a real sense, a false and mystifying proposition. The question is only valid within the meanings given to and played out in the American racial formation, relations that have been posited as a black and white dyad. There are other options. Whites considered Asians “as blacks” or, at the very least, as replacements for blacks in the post-Civil War South, but whites imported Chinese precisely because they were not blacks and were thus perpetual aliens, who could never vote. Similarly, whites upheld Asians as “near-whites” or “whiter than whites” in the model minority stereotype, and yet Asians experienced and continue to face white racism “like blacks” in educational and occupational barriers and ceilings and in anti-Asian abuse and physical violence. Further, in both in- stances, Asians were used to “discipline” African Americans (and other minorities according to the model minority stereotype). That marginalization of Asians, in fact, within a black and white racial formation, “disciplines” both Africans and Asians and constitutes the essential site of Asian American oppression. By seeing only black and white, the presence and absence of all color, whites render Asians, American Indians, and Latinos invisible, ignoring the gradations and complexities of the full spectrum between the racial poles. At the same time, Asians share with Africans the status and repression of nonwhites as the Other-and therein lies the debilitating aspect of Asian-African antipathy and liberating nature of Asian-African Unity.
Paraphrase:
The idea of viewing Asians as either Black or White is not only false but also founded on a racial framework that fails to take other racial identities into consideration. Asians have been historically placed by Whites in different roles, including those of being replacements for Blacks and at other times being “near-whites” through the model minority stereotype.
Explanation:
I chose this passage because it challenges the Black-White racial construct in a direct manner, and this plays a crucial role in painting a vivid and clear picture of how Asians and other non-Black, and non-White groups are marginalized. Besides, this passage demonstrates the ways through which racism is leveraged to divide minority groups whereby they are positioned against each other. From a critical point of view, this underscores the need to recognize the diversity within racial identities and experiences instead of oversimplifying them via binary frameworks.
- Dear Kao Kalia Yang
I just concluded reading Black Ink on White Papers and I wanted to let you know that it has resonated deeply with me. The way you have explored the Asian American experiences within a predominantly White cultural framework felt significantly powerful. I was particularly struck by your description of the erasure and distortion of our stories in mainstream narratives, as well as how other communities, especially Whites oversimplify or ignore the complexity of Asian Americans identity. From a personal standpoint, your work has played an essential role in helping me reflect on the criticality of reclaiming our voices.
I have also been moved by your personal encounters and how they connect with broader themes of identity and belonging. Your expression of how Hmong community suffered and struggled add an extra layer of depth that is not only enlightening but also informative. This made me think about the challenges that a significant number of immigrant families faces while navigating their cultural identities and seeking acceptance in a new and unfamiliar world.
However, I have a few questions. How do you envision the future of Asian American literature? And what advice would you give to aspiring writers who wish to tell their own stories?
I am grateful for your remarkable work and I am inspired to think in a critical manner about representation and my identity.
With gratitude,
Student’s Name.
