Paper #1 (5 pages): The "Chinese Question"
Discuss arguments for and against Chinese immigration in the nineteenth century, as expressed in the media, literature, and other historical documents of the time. How were arguments for and against the Chinese framed (in economic, cultural, religious, moral, health, sexual, legal, etc. terms)? Remember that some people were not necessarily pro-Chinese, per se, but anti-anti-Chinese agitators.
Use at least one source from the historical documents we read for Week 4, and one source from the literature we read for Week 3 (or use a political cartoon, or film). Think about how the imagery used in fiction (or cartoons/film) relates to the discourse used in the other historical sources.
Find one additional source through the libraries or WWW concerning Asian Americans in the 19c. This could be a cartoon, photograph, a written document, or statistical information, etc. The source may relate directly, or indirectly to the "Chinese question" (you might find a document arguing that Japanese are superior immigrants for example). Use this source to supplement the other sources you have chosen from the class readings.
You will use 3 kinds of sources in your paper:
A- historical documents in Week 4 readings
B- fiction from Week 3, or cartoon, or film (Fu Manchu, etc.)
C- your own source your find using the methods learned at the library workshop
In addition, write one page describing your source (C). How did you find it? How did you evaluate the reliability? What is the source? How does it shed light on the historical question we are exploring? Attach as an addendum to your paper.
6 pages total
Film List:
The Mask of Fu Manchu
Charlie Chan at the Opera
Shadows
The Bitter Tea of General Yen
Films are on reserve in 14N-430, film office.
Cartoons will be placed on reserve in the Reserve Reading Room at the end of the week.
Paper #2 History and Memory in Asian American Literature (7 pages [5 pages + 2 pages])
Part 1 – 5 Pages
Choose 1 work of Asian American literature from the class list (you may compare 2 writers max). Write a 5 page paper discussing how the author uses history and memory to construct an Asian American identity. Most of the works on the list are memoirs of some sort (Bulosan, Kingston, Houston), or loosely based on personal memoirs (Chin). Think about why the author chooses to write about memory. How does personal memory relate to Asian American history? How does historical memory shape personal identity? Discuss how the author tries to find a place for Asians/Asian Americans in America. What does it mean to be American? What does it mean to be Asian? Place the work of literature within the historical context of its time (to the best of your knowledge so far. No need for outside research. You can consult the Sucheng Chan book for background).
Some questions to think about:
How does the author deal with relations between the generations?
Does the author make a distinction between "Asian Asians" and "Asian Americans"?
Is gender an issue? Class?
Does the author present him/herself as representative of Asian Americans? Or as an idiosyncratic individual?
How does the author deal with interethnic relations?
THIS IS NOT A BOOK REPORT
This should be a critical paper. I don not want long plot summaries. You can assume I have read the books. Use quotations from the book only as EVIDENCE. I will deduct points for plot summary and excessive quotation. Be concise. Make your points succinctly and forcefully.
See the "Tips for writing papers" handout.
Part 2- 2 pages
Write a 2 page addendum to your paper in which you talk about your personal reactions to the literature. You can write about several works here, comparing why you liked one piece more than the others, or stick to the one work you chose for your paper. Feel free to express yourself here. This section can be less formal than the 5 page paper.
Total = 7 pages
12-point font, double spaced, use margins and page numbers!
Follow MLA guide for footnote format.
Paper #3: The Debate over Asian American Panethnicity (7 pages [5 pages + 2 pages])
(see the passages below)
Yen Le Espiritu (Asian American Panethnicity) and Eric Liu (The Accidental Asian) present different perspectives on the issue of "Asian American Identity." You might say that Espiritu is a "believer" in Asian American panethnicity (that is, she accepts that viability and usefulness of this concept), while Eric Liu is a "skeptic." Yet, in some ways, what they have to say about Asian Americans is not so different: both emphasize the diversity of the Asian American community, and both acknowledge that Asian Americans have shared political interests. A central difference between the two arises from the fact that Espiritu focuses on institutions, while Liu focuses on culture. Another difference arises from the fact that Espiritu equates the term "Asian American" with the panethnicity concept, while Liu equates the term with the concept of race. Espiritu emphasizes the notion of "constructing and sustaining" Asian panethnicity, whereas Liu emphasizes the "accidental" nature of this identity. Therefore, because they take the term "Asian American" to mean different things, they arrive at different conclusions regarding the viability of "Asian American Identity."
Which side of the debate do you support? Do you agree with Liu or Espiritu? Is Asian American identity feasible in the face of diversity or not? Are there any drawbacks to this panethnic concept? Any benefits?
A. Write a 5 page paper (Argue! I want to see the words "I argue that...")
Step 1 – lay out a brief exposition of their arguments
Step 2 – use historical and statistical evidence to support your own stance.
For Step 1:
Use the excerpts I have given you.
You may draw on other material from their books, but you must analyzethese passages thoroughly. Otherwise, I take off points.
You will need to explain the difference between the primordialist theory of ethnicity and the instrumentalist theory (two sentences only!) before you get to Espiritu and Liu.
Espiritu is clearly instrumentalist: she sees "Asian American Identity" as a product of institution building.
Is Liu a primordialist?
Which side of the debate do you support?
Address the difference between "ethnicity" and "race" and show how these concepts are tangled together.
Generally - "Asian American" = ethnicity
"Asian" "Yellow" "Brown" = race
What does "Asian American" or "Asian" mean to Eric Liu? Espiritu? To you?
This leads to step 2:
Use evidence from the class to show cases of unity and disunity in the Asian American Community[ies] historically.
Show how "Asians/Orientals" have been lumped together, and show how they have been distinguished from one another.
Use census statistics to show common points and diversity.
Discuss benefits and drawbacks of "unity/lumping".
Weigh external and internal factors.
Should Asian Americans "assimilate" or maintain a distinct identity? Can they ever assimilate?
Some things to think about:
What does Eric Liu mean by the term "accidental Asian"?
How does he feel about "assimilation"?
Liu often defines "Asian" in opposition to "White". Which group[s] does Espiritu use has her reference point?
How do they deal with the question of ethnicity (sometimes called "Asian American subethnicity") v. panethnicity? Are you born with your ethnic identity? Or do you learn it?
How do they treat the question of "cultural entrepreneurs"?
Liu protests that you cannot hear a unitary voice from "Asian Americans." Espiritu acknowledges that there is no unitary voice (for example, Asian Americans are nearly equally divided between Republican and Democrat), but does not see that as a problem. What do you think?
THIS IS A LOT TO DO IN 5 PAGES !!!! BE CONCISE, YOU WILL NEED TO REVISE.
THIS IS EXCELLENT PRACTICE FOR THE FINAL EXAM (hint).
B – 2 pages
Personal statement. Your own thoughts and experiences. Free form.
Excerpts
Yen Le Espiritu, Asian American Panethnicity, p. 164.
Constructing and Sustaining Asian Panethnicity
"The primordialist-instrumentalist debate in the ethnicity literature is primarily a debate over the relative importance of internal, cultural factors as opposed to external, structural factors in explaining the development and maintenance of ethnic groups. The present study indicates that, at least in its origin, pan-Asian ethnicity was the product of material, political, and social processes rather than cultural bonds. Asian Americans came together because they recognized that pan-Asian alliance was important, even essential, for the protection and advancement of their interests. But this is not to say that pan-Asian ethnicity is devoid of culture and sentiment. On the contrary, while panethnic groups may be circumstantially created, they are not circumstantially sustained (see Cornell 1988b). Once established, the panethnic group – through its institutions, leaders, and networks - produces and transforms panethnic culture and consciousness. In the process, the panethnic idea becomes autonomous, capable of replenishing itself. Over time, it may even outlive the circumstances and interests that produced it, creating conditions that sustain and revivify it."
Eric Liu, The Accidental Asian, pp. 73-74.
"Asian Americans belong not to a race so much as to a confederation, a big yellow-and-brown tent that covers a panoply of interests. And while those interests converge usefully on some points – antidescrimination, open immigration – they diverge on many others. This is a "community," after all, that consists of ten million people of a few dozen ethnicities, who have roots all across America and around the globe, whose families have been here anywhere from less than a week to more than a century, whose political beliefs run the ideological gamut, who are welfare mothers and multimillionaires, soldiers and doctors, believers and pagans. It would take an act of selective deafness to hear, in this cacophony, a unitary voice."