Week 6 – Black or White? Alcoff – Visible Identities – Latinos, Asian Americans, and the Black-White Binary
Assignment details.
Black or White?
Reading
- Alcoff – Visible Identities – Latinos, Asian Americans, and the Black-White Binary
- Okihiro – Margins and Mainstreams (Chap 2: Is Yellow Back or White?) Note: This is quite long, please focus on the beginning and the ending ~ approximately the first 6 and last 6 pages.
- Yang – Black Ink on White Paper
Video/Images
- (In Class) Kondobolu – 2042
- (In Class) Kondobolu – Tolerance
- (In Class) Noah – Live at the Apollo
Writing to Prepare for Class
- A. Alcoff and working with text
- Find three passages that help you understand why Alcoff is critical of “the black white binary”. Copy and translate the passages, then say a bit about why you chose each.
- B. Okihiro and working with text
- Find three passages that help you to understand “Race” and/or “Racism” as constructed ideas (that is, made up, but with real consequences). Copy the passages, write them in your own words, and then say a bit about why you chose them.
- C. Dear Kao Kalia Yang …
- Write a letter to Kao Kalia Yang in response to Black Ink on White Paper. Tell her how you felt reading her work, and what parts struck you the most. Let her know if you have any questions. Kalia is a local author. If you want me to send your letter to her I can, just let me know. Otherwise I will keep them private.
A. 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
3
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
4
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.
5
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.