With the idea of diaspora
and transnationalism, it is important to remember that even though there is a specific definition for the term “diaspora,” it does not limit what diaspora can become. Diaspora exists
in the transnational context which keeps a community connected to their
homeland origins, therefore, diaspora can change when homeland values or
culture changes; diaspora itself too changes depending on the environment where
it is located, such as class and wealth. From Regina Lee’s Theorizing Diasporas: Three Types of Consciousness, she argues that
“diasporic communities tend to exhibit, broadly, three main types of psychological
states, or forms of consciousness, which are: idealization of homeland,
boutique multicultural manifestations, and transitional/transformational
identity politics” (Lee 53). The process of mobility is closely tied to
“economic materialities of diaspora because it can either facilitate or impair
movement or migration” (Lee 54). Given Lee’s argument, the degree to which
these forms of consciousness’s occur is tied to the level of success that one
is able to migrate. Successful migration leads to a smaller idealization,
manifestation, and politics because high success results in greater access to
the homeland. On the other hand, unsuccessful migration results in a larger
consciousness because the isolation and alienation away from the homeland pulls
these individuals closer to the homeland.
Question: How do these three
types of consciousness impact the “assimilated” individuals in the diaspora?
Does it make an impact?
Works Cited:
“Theorizing Diasporas: Three
Types of Consciousness.” Asian Diasporas:
Cultures, Identities, Representations. Ed. Robbie Goh and Shawn Wong. Hong
Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2004. Online.
Image:
https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiVFFw-QV6ACiMLBeha3QIjinrJ-1yw2tvu7NGOIL677dEUX2mYG2Id8qf39q85lUK3HLws0qyhYL0tgL6vWGMelT0dWfqNBklhGWrbUwYB2oNomyda1gfPKnQKoqZnoLI1AHMWTu8UAWA/s400/Villinski_Paul-Diaspora.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment