Tuesday Title: Bird at My Window

Bird at My Window, by Rosa Guy, is a tragic story of a young man named Wade, who is burdened by the weight of family ties. Though he loves each and every member of his family, he inevitably loses their confidence, and more importantly, his mother’s affection – something he has been trying to win all of his life. This story is about sacrifice for one’s family, having one’s dreams crushed by the weight of the people’s belief in separating races and treating blacks as criminals, and one’s attempt to change what society has molded him into. I like this book because it demonstrates how society often blames an individual for his flaws or actions, this being the easiest thing to do. However blaming the individual does not solve the larger problem, which is rooted in society itself, something much bigger than the individual, and is stubborn to change. This problem is the people’s firm belief in the American system and its ideologies such as a racial hierarchy and individualism, which emphasizes the ability to succeed in life solely through one’s hard work.

This book does a wonderful job of throwing us a character – Wade – that we don’t immediately understand and cannot empathize with. Throughout the course of the novel however, we learn about a series of unfortunate events that ultimately shape Wade’s rough character and the good intentions behind many of his, what some would deem “sinful” and criminal behavior. Though we do not support his violent behavior or drunkeness, we suddenly find ourselves rooting for him – his past self – to get into that white school, to get the girl he loves, to gain that praise he deserves from his Mumma, and to finally move out of that “one goddamn room” that constantly mocks his class immobility even though he tries and brings home the most money Mumma has ever laid her eyes on.

Description from Amazon: “”What happens to a dream deferred?” asked Langston Hughes. Bird at My Window answers that question with a psychological study of a black man whose aspirations are subverted by his environment. Wade Williams wakes up in a mental hospital and is told he has assaulted his sister. As he retraces his steps during the course of the novel, the rich complexity of mid-twentieth-century Harlem and its problematic relationship to its residents is revealed in this powerful cultural critique.”

To purchase this book or read more, click here.

Post submitted by: Christina Trieu

Tuesday Title: Gods Go Begging

Book description from Amazon:

“Gods Go Begging by Alfredo Vea will stick in this brain for good, in the best possible way. I almost didn’t purchase this novel because of the book jacket-a picture of the back view of a solitary guitar/rifle/gas mask toting soldier in half regalia standing on what looks like an airport runway, a small bag with a Vietnam insignia resting by his boot. I assumed a story predominantly about war in the conventional sense. Could not have been more mistaken.

There are at least four wars being *raged* here among these taut and yet simultaneously lovely pages, all framed within rich language and insightful narrative.

Jesse Pasadoble is a defense attorney in San Francisco waging a war against the stupidity of the typical clients and prejudice in the courtroom. He is joined frequently in the courtroom, in the cafe, and in his daily life by others who share their recollections both of darkly humorous cases and the unacceptable unmentionable dark sides which eventually seal off all human beings from one another.

After a crime of tragedic proportions occurs, Jesse’s story and that of the victims and the perpetrators, here and now, plus the unmanageable then on another hill in Vietnam thirty years ago, unfold. What follows comprises an incredible novel of pain and waste, devastation and redemption, caring and investigation, revealed by passionate observation of the lunacy of existence through careful, perfect words.. But, and this is a big *but*, the novel flows like silk through the counterpoints of love, ultimate sadness, and intense meaning.

This is a modern day lawyer, detective story which encompasses inner city bleakness, evil, post traumatic shock syndrome, our *lovely* court system, the inability to share ourselves while our very core cries out to do just so, and a sense that metaphysical, mystical reality is just as real as beans.

My bottom line is that while the ideas and emotion rage rampant, the narrative is superb, nearly perfect. What a terrific story. I think it is very, very big in heart and scope, possessing a duality of the mundane and the metaphysical which meld perfectly for the reader, especially toward the conclusion of the novel.

I always yearn for the elusive words which are not forthcoming, those orbs needed for adequate expression, but inchoate, they are yet imbedded in the soul of this reader. Accused of hyperbole, so be it. This is one fine book.”

Post submitted by: Christina Trieu

Considering Race Can Actually Lead to Racism: Casey’s Response to Affirmative Action Initiatives

Should the UC be allowed to consider race in the admissions proces? Why or why not?

No–I do not believe that the UC should be allowed to consider race in the admissions process.  While I see that considering race in admissions has the aim to promote diversity and give more access to minorities, I argue that it will, instead, give grounds for racism to fruition.  Furthermore, I argue that UC students should educate underrepresented high school students on the admissions process and motivate them to apply to UC’s from a young age.

Let’s start with a definition of the word racism: racism is “a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one’s own race  is superior and has the right to rule others” (Dictionary.com). Most people focus on the second part of the definition yet neglect the first part.  The second part highlights racial superiority; therefore, according to this definition, a racist believes his race is more superior than others.  However, what many people fail to realize is that racism also includes the belief that our racial differences contribute to our degree of achievement.  For example, some people hold the view that Asians are inherently smart, thus explaining their prevailing presence on top-notch universities in the U.S.  On the other hand, some people believe that African Americans or Latinos are inherently lazy or even uneducated, explaining their lack of presence in universities.  These beliefs, according to the said definition, are racist.

With that in mind, let’s consider the ramifications of considering race in the UC admissions process. Let’s say that an admissions officer reads over an entire application and has her mind set on admitting the student, but then she sees on the last page of the application that the applicant is African American. In her mind she thinks, “This student has shown strong academic performance at her high school compared to the other students, but I don’t know if she will be able to handle the competition here at UCLA.  Being academically successful requires a lot of hard work, and I don’t know if this student is cut out for that.”  Then she puts the application in the reject pile. No one would know the true reason she rejected the student; the officer’s reasoning all took place in her head.  Thus, there is no clear way to prevent such discrimination from occurring.

Speaking of rejection, I wonder how many minority students do not even apply to the UC system due to fear of rejection. In fact, how many minority students actually apply to schools like UCLA? Probably not as many as there should be because many are indoctrinated with the misconception that they won’t be able to survive here, let alone get in. They are constantly told by their peers, parents, society, people from their hometowns, even high school counselors that they aren’t good enough, which discourages them. Probably a lot of minority students are told that they aren’t smart enough to get into college, so they better focus on sports because that’s the only way they would have the opportunity to go to college.  This oppressive mindset inhibits the majority of underrepresented youth from even applying to college.

Instead of focusing on adding race to the admissions process, we should focus on motivating underrepresented minorities to stay focused in school and apply for colleges and scholarships. We should educate and motivate the youth, especially if they are discouraged or are not educated of how things work.   We need to educate them about resources like Fee Waivers, FAFSA, and the fact that UCLA, in particular, admits students based on the “holistic review” approach (see http://www.admissions.ucla.edu/Prospect/Adm_fr/fradms.htm).  In doing so, not only do we replace the aforementioned oppressive mindset with truthful statements, but we will also significantly increase the amount of minority students that apply to UC’s.  And with that, I believe we will further diversify the campuses.

Post submitted by Casey O’Neill

Free Speech Friday: David Banner on Systematic Racism

If you have watched the news, logged on to facebook, twitter or payed attention to any other media outlet lately then you have probably heard about the Trayvon Martin murder. To give a bit of backstory for those who do not know, Trayvon Martin was a 17-year-old Florida teen who was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch volunteer, George Zimmerman. The boy was coming out of a liquor store after buying snacks; Trayvon was unarmed and wearing a black hoodie. Mr. Zimmerman was on neighborhood watch duty and claimed that he called into the police about a suspicious prowler in the vicinity and Trayvon fit the description. After not getting much of a response from the police Zimmerman took matters into his own hands and followed Trayvon and shot him in a struggle that he claimed was in “self-defense” even though Trayvon was guilty of no crime. Zimmerman was not arrested after the shooting.

The case has sparked a windstorm of controversy across the country about the issue of race and justice. The widespread opinion is that Zimmerman, a White Hispanic man,  racially profiled Trayvon as being a “suspicious and presumably dangerous” individual because he was young and black. In this interview, rapper and producer David Banner speaks with Black Enterprise magazine and gives his view on what implications the Trayvon Martin murder gives about racism and classism in our society today.

Listen to his words and formulate your own opinion.

Post submitted by Jadessa

Wednesday Word: Critical Race Theory — What it is and why Arizona misunderstands it

The New York Times has an excellent op-ed out explaining critical race theory and its unfair censorship under Arizona’s House Bill 2281 (yes, the infamous one which prohibits instruction that promotes “racial resentment” and solidarity).  The article does an excellent job of pointing out that, although critical race theory has been vilified by the bill’s supporters and recent media coverage, the discourses that fall under the purview of this field are not nearly as monolithic as portrayals make them seem. That is, critical race theory isn’t an area of scholarship that asserts certain ethnic groups have a core set of experiences and traits which oppose other ethnic groups.  Rather, many critical race theorists and involved in interrogating the conception of race having any sort of essence to it at all.  Indeed, essentialist constructions of race is the way in which racism permeates.  Moreover, it tackles issues of cultural assimilation and integration:  Can ethnic individuals assimilate into dominant culture?  How can one integrate without losing one’s history and difference?  Can a racial culture or experience be said to exist at all?  These are the important issues interrogated by critical race theory.  While some theorists could be seen as hostile to, for example, ‘whiteness,’ this isn’t a universal.  Just as it is questionable as to whether blackness carries with it an ingrained set of experiences, it is likewise questionable as to whether once can be opposed to ‘whiteness’ — both whiteness and blackness lacking rigid definitions or essences.  While some theorists could be said to be hostile to their own constructions of ‘whiteness,’ others question the reinscription of whiteness/blackness or rigid binaries in general.  And the back and forth discourse on this is necessary for any people to be fully informed and fully thinking about the word around them.

Read the article here.

Posted by Lee.

The Real Wednesday Word: You Maaad!—How Fox News Uses Hip-Hop to Create Race Panics

Quote: “Is gangsta rap hurting America’s children?”

Today’s Wednesday Word is an article from Colorlines.com by Adriel Luis, titled “You Maaad!—How Fox News Uses Hip-Hop to Create Race Panics“.

The critical essay features a video interview between Lupe Fiasco and O’Reilly, as well as an interactive timeline of Fox News’s Race-Baiting through Hip-Hop.  What do you think?  Agree or disagree?  Click here to read the whole thing! 

The Creation—and Consequences—of the Model Minority Myth

Below is an article by Julianne Hing copy & pasted straight from Colorlines:

Asian-Americans face significant challenges to getting their education, says a new report out from the National Commission on Asian-American and Pacific Islander Research in Education. And the study has got everyone from experts to students talking, because the findings fly in the face of conventional wisdom about Asian American students as high-achieving, so-called model minorities.

The picture of Asian Americans is distorted by the broad lens too much research uses. While Asian Americans as a group record high levels of educational attainment that match and occasionally surpass that of whites, large sectors actually deal with high dropout rates from high school and college. The study also underscores the complicated reality of the Asian-American community. Asian Americans are not a monolithic group and the experiences of Hmong, Laotian and Cambodian Asian Americans differs greatly from that of, say, East and South Asians growing up in the U.S.

Here’s some of the hard math:

• Nearly 70 percent of Indians in the U.S. over 25-years-old have a bachelor’s degree, according to the study, and over 50 percent of Chinese, Pakistani and Korean-Americans over 25 also have college degrees.
• But fewer than one in 10 Samoan-Americans can say the same. Cambodian, Hmong and Laotian Americans also record college degree attainment levels that hover around 12 and 13 percent.
• All this is crucial because educational attainment translates directly to unemployment levels. Between 2006 and 2008, 15.7 percent of Tongans were out of work, according to CARE, a level that is close to the unemployment levels of black Americans, while just 3.5 percent of Japanese-Americans were unemployed in the same time period.

But in the age of the Tiger Mom, who’s emerged as 2011’s spokesperson for the model minority myth, much of this information about Asian-Americans gets lost in the shuffle. The study calls for the disaggregation of data collection on Asian Americans and education issues and reiterates over and over the dangers of buying into the model-minority myth, which suggests that Asian Americans owe their relative wealth and high educational attainment to cultural values and hard work.

To get some perspective on the persistence of this myth of Asian American exceptionalism, I spoke with Oiyan Poon, a research associate at the University of Massachusetts’ Boston Institute for Asian-American Studies and former academic adviser at George Mason University and the University of California, Davis. Here’s what Poon had to say about the myth’s enduring legacy, and how it impacts other students of color.

====

On the ways the model minority myth plays out in real life:

People are not being blatantly racist, but as an academic advisor I’ve seen educators say, “Well, my class is half Asian, they must be doing something right.” That hyper-visibility may lead to an interesting invisibility. At UC Davis, we asked the institutional research office to go through their data set and one year everyone was shocked because Korean men in the early 2000s had one of the highest push-out rates. But no one would have known.

The lack of good data—and the pervasiveness of stereotypes and not looking deeper at a very complicated population and understanding those complexities—leads to things like this. There’s a lack of high school outreach programs and community partnerships and things that completely overlook the Asian-American community even though students may be low-income and there is serious need there.

On when the model-minority myth ends up excluding Asian-American students:

There are actually minority scholarships that exclude Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders, like the Gates Millennium scholarship. It’s a national scholarship geared toward low-income, first-generation college students that was only open to African American, American Indian and Latinos students. Advocacy organizations fought them on it and were able to get them to realize they should be open to Asian Americans because, in fact, around a third of Asian-American students are the first in their families to go to college. And for Hmong, Laotian and Cambodians, just [over 10 percent] of the population over 25 has college degrees, and that’s among the lowest of any population.

On the actual barriers Asian-American students face in college:

When I was working at UC Davis, there was summer orientation, and all these college campuses have a family track. What struck me was that at the student portion of the orientation, there were huge numbers of Asian students, but at the family or parent track, it was almost always all white. There’s a disconnect in parental support and a lot of students don’t get any help in putting together financial aid papers or figuring out how to navigate which classes they should take.

I met a lot of Asian-American students who faced sexual or racial discrimination and harassment on campus and they didn’t know where to turn for help. For many students who are the first in their family to go to college, they often don’t know there’s a counseling center that’s there for emotional support, or other campus resources.

Why Asian-Americans just can’t be seen as a monolithic group:

There are huge disparities within this population that make this title, “Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders,” sort of arbitrary. It’s a geographic identifier; it’s not a socioeconomic status identifier, though in some ways it can be.

The experiences that each group has—the migration histories; the culture; the language; the circumstances of arrival, from being refugees to being highly educated professional immigrants; and now you have a second and third generation that’s facing different issues—mean everyone has very different challenges. In a way you could say this about a lot of different populations and perhaps this is just a challenge of data systems in general. For Latinos, you’ve got Cubans, who tend to be more highly educated, and Puerto Ricans who don’t have the immigration issues that Mexicans or Central Americans have.

But for Asian-Americans, we end up having this conversation [about the need to disaggregate data] much more because the differences are so much more pronounced. And when there isn’t information, then there are just assumptions that people have to go on, and then the Tiger Moms of the world can keep going on and on as long as they want.

On the dangerous political utility of the model-minority myth:

People have to think about why this model-minority position came to be in the first place. It was to silence other people of colors’ attempts at demanding equity. Everyone who cares about racial equity should care about countering the model-minority myth because the whole purpose of it is to undermine claims of racism. People will say, “Oh, you’re going to riot and say there are inequalities and that blacks and Latinos face racism? Stop complaining, look at this non-white population over here. They’re doing fine.”

The model-minority myth tries to tell people: there are no structural barriers; it’s all in your mind.

It’s true that some Asian Americans are doing well. Sure. It’s true. But does that mean that we ignore the people who aren’t doing well? What’s my responsibility, and what’s our responsibility as people who are concerned about equity, knowing that there are specific groups facing distinct patterns of inequality? Do we say to that a Hmong kid who kind of looks like me because we both have black hair, it’s okay, her struggles are not an urgent issue?

Tuesday Title: The Lonely Londoners (1956)

In 1956, British Caribbean author Samual Selvon wrote and published the novel The Lonely Londoners, a novel that chronicled the lives of West Indian immigrants in post-World War II London.  London, at the time, was becoming a place where the divides between English and West Indian culture became more and more prominent.  Caribbean people began establishing their own separate culture on their own terms as both the English and West Indians avoided integration.  Racism was a common occurrence in post-World War II London.

Upon reading The Lonely Londoners, the first thing that one might notice about the novel is its narrative voice.  Perhaps what distinguishes this immigration story from many others is Selvon’s usage of the protagonist’s “creolized” form of English.  The narration provides another dimension to how the story is read and emphasizes the realism of these immigrants’ hardships in a very segregated city.  Lastly, as the novel follows the lives of these “lonely Londoners,” Selvon addresses themes such as social mobility, isolation, and interracial intimacy.

Samuel Selvon (1923-1994) was born in Trinidad and was of East Indian descent.  Most of his later work focuses on the immigration of West Indians to Britain after the conclusion of World War II.  His other works include Moses Ascending (1975), Foreday Morning (1989) and The Housing Lark (1965).

Post submitted by: Crystal Maranan

Is calling a University “Too Asian” Racist?

It seems as though “TOO ASIAN” is becoming a common term to talk about racial imbalance on university campuses in the U.S.  The article “Too Asian” by Stephanie Findlay and Nicholas Kohler has been stirring international controversy over the issue of racial imbalance (or rather, segregation)  on college campuses and causing a disturbing uproar within the Asian American community for antagonizing an entire population.  White parents are complaining that their kids didn’t get into XYZ University because another Asian student took the seat.  How unfair is that?  The dangers of the blame game scapegoat Asian students when the real problem should be pointed at our fractured educational system and the University’s lack of diversity efforts to constantly conduct racial awareness and empathy through campus programming and diversity learning requirements.

Below is a brief excerpt from the original article where a student expresses her annoyance at schools becoming “Too Asian”:

“Alexandra puts it—she asked that her real name not be used in this article, and broached the topic of race at universities hesitantly—-a “reputation of being Asian.”

Discussing the role that race plays in the self-selecting communities that more and more characterize university campuses makes many people uncomfortable. Still, an “Asian” school has come to mean one that is so academically focused that some students feel they can no longer compete or have fun. Indeed, Rachel, Alexandra and her brother belong to a growing cohort of student that’s eschewing some big-name schools over perceptions that they’re “too Asian.” It’s a term being used in some U.S. academic circles to describe a phenomenon that’s become such a cause for concern to university admissions officers and high school guidance counsellors that several elite universities to the south have faced scandals in recent years over limiting Asian applicants and keeping the numbers of white students artificially high. “

There are so many things terribly wrong with this statement–not to mention overtly ignorant.  Let’s recap the main points:

1) The student implies that Asian students are hard workers, high-achievers and maybe even genetically engineered to be smarter because she feels like she cannot compete. (Spoiler: Asian students are NOT genetically engineered to know Calculus, Stats or even the Political History of the Middle East any better than the next student.  This is not possible. This is just a lame excuse for those who are unhappy with their grades and choose to point out the “abnormality” of Asians rather than self-reflect on what they could’ve done better or how they could’ve worked harder.)

2) The student implies that Asian students do not have fun. (I am having fun right now. And I am also Asian.)

3) Rather than adjust to the competitive environment and be challenged in her capacity and potential, she implicitly admits that she prefers an easier academic experience so she can have more fun.

4) Instead of pointing to her lack of drive, she points to Asians as having too much drive—thus, messing up the college experience for others; thus, the Asians must be removed!

5) Now, university admissions officers and high school guidance counselors want to punish overachieving students? What happened to a high caliber of learning?  So all those years of schools telling us “Be the best you can be!” was false pretense? That’s like them saying, “Be the best you can be. Well, wait, now you’re better than everyone else and the white kids and white parents are complaining so we have to deny what you rightfully worked hard for all 18+ years.”  Pure abursdity.

When schools were “Too White” (most still are) A.K.A. not enough students of color (blacks, Latinos AND Asians) having access to higher education, historically marginalized groups pointed out the inequities.  Officials responded with (this is a paraphrase), “Well, let’s not blame white people’s success for the problem.  Maybe if your people focused LESS on shooting each other,  stopped being lazy and focused MORE on working harder, the American dream can be theirs too!”  Now, how is today’s claim of “Too Asian” any different?  It’s not.  It is racism, as blatantly showcased by reactions and responses.

The article,  “Yes, Calling a School ‘Too Asian’ is Racist” by Anna North, provides a firm argument as stated in its title. Read for extra insight.

Another serious (and all too common) problem with the discourse of “Too Asian” is the ignorant clustering of ALL ASIANS as the same.  Generally, when non-Asian people talk about Asian people, they fail to distinguish the difference because most likely, they are ignorant of the distinctions.  The culture, political histories and immigration/refugee backgrounds vary dramatically across different Asian ethnicities (Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, Cambodian, Sri Lankan, Indian, etc.).  Some populations have been here for 4+generations (e.g. Chinese railroad workers), while some have been here for only a few decades (e.g. Southeast Asian refugee diaspora).  By framing all Asians as overachieving (blanket statement), it disregards the language and cultural barriers many recent Asians still face in their struggle to live in America.  When everybody believes that “all” Asians are too damn smart for their own good, Asians from recent immigrant and refugee backgrounds become forgotten in the creation of laws, policies and resources to provide much-needed community support in their academic/professional endeavors.

Ultimately, the article exposes several layers of problems: 1) institutional issues with diversity/segregation, 2) personal self-reflexive issues of drive and achievement, and 3)  interpersonal issues of racializing the problem and pointing fingers at entire populations. Rather than respond to “Too Asian” complaints by rebuking Asian American students, educational institutions need to protect any and ALL populations from the dangers of becoming antagonized.  Universities and schools are responsible for promoting cultural awareness, ethnic diversity and racial understanding by addressing hostility (by rebuking THOSE who express hostile sentiments against OTHERS), being proactive in creating diversity programming and courses, and being committed to providing a safe learning environment for ALL students.  For the complainers, rather than point fingers at students who are working “too” hard and blaming others for their lack of success, they need to reflect upon their own motives, intentions and desire for the success they claim is being “taken away” from them.  On an interpersonal level, the issue expands beyond a “white” vs. “Asian” matter.  By incriminating Asians as the problem, this plants the false and negative perception in the minds of all others within “lower academic achievement”—pitting Asians against other races such as blacks and Latinos.  And all this because of what?  Because Asians (not all) are performing high in academia?  Where’s the justice in that?  From poverty to overcrowded classrooms, there are many problems in this country—but Asian American students as success stories is NOT one of them (unless in the eyes of the seemingly threatened racist).  The real problem here is the overt ignorance and racism in wanting to denounce a group of hard working students for the shortfalls of our educational system and indignantly self-righteous individuals.

Thank you for reading. I welcome your thoughts, comments and questions.

Post written by Sahra