In this week’s discussion (with no particular topic in Asian diasporas), we have seven readings. Of all of them, I found Ien Ang’s “Beyond ‘Asian Diasporas’” to be quite interesting in how they brought up transnational marriages and really well redefined the term diaspora. Transnational marriages with the complexities of gender politics, interracial and intrracial racism, religion, and the title of legalities, being a “legal” or “illegal” citizen. With even more complex topics of Vietnamese men and women being treated very differently when migrating to America, and the Japanese Brazilians being treated differently when they return to Japan. Even in the homeland are they not treated the same. Though out the rest of the reading, I found the definition of diasporas to be quite refreshing. The concept is definitely not new, but it was good review. I liked the example with the Jewish, because their history, it bring in a different level of complexity where they do not have a homeland necessarily. They were displaced multiple times, but a sense of “longing for a return to the homeland is classically assumed too be integral to diaspora consciousness” (Ang 286). But with what we’ve been talking about in class very often is just connection to the homeland, whether that is physically (born there and leaving) or ambivalence, like love/hate.
Q: Can we go over more common stories with multiple displacement outside of the Vietnam War? Or is that the biggest one in recent Asian history?
No comments:
Post a Comment