In Min Zhou’s “Are Americans Becoming White?” he introduces and discusses several concepts and ideas that I was not at all familiar with. I found the ‘model minority’ stereotype to be particularly interesting mainly in the sense that I had never considered that there was a negative side to these stereotypes. The stereotypes that I knew of mainly involved individuals of Asian descent as being smart, structured, and successful. Initially I looked at these as good things. I thought “Who wouldn’t want to be thought of as being smarter than most people?”. But I now see how my thinking was flawed. These stereotypes can add unnecessary pressure and stress on Americans of Asian descent and limit their future career and life options as parents try to influence their children to fit these stereotypes, these imagined, but very present standards they must uphold. “Falling into this trap, a Chinese immigrant father gets upset when his son tells him he has changed his major from engineering to English. Disregarding his son’s talent for creative writing, such a father rationalizes his concern, “You have a 90 percent chance of getting a decent job with an engineering degree, but what chance would you have of earning income as a writer?”” (Zhou 34). Due to these stereotypes, many Asian families in America feel heightened social pressure to excel in STEM fields and, much of the time, disregard or look down upon many others.

Another point Min Zhou brings up that is of particular interest to me is the fact that immigrants of Asian descent are all over the spectrum when it comes to socioeconomic status, yet in the stereotypical, widespread, American cultural view, Asian Americans are thought to be highly intelligent and successful. “Chinese, Taiwanese, Indian, and Filipino Americans tend to be over-represented among scientists, engineers, physicians and other skilled professionals, but less educated, low-skilled workers are more common among Vietnamese, Cambodian, Laotian, and Hmong Americans, most of whom entered the United States as refugees” (Zhou 31). This was particularly surprising and interesting to me because I myself fell into stereotypical thinking that Asian Americans were more likely to be successful in certain fields just because they were and that’s how it was. Clearly this thinking was incorrect and Asian Americans, similar to every other racial group, fall all over the spectrum in regards to socioeconomic status and overall success.

A third concept that caught my attention specifically was the fact that relatively few second generation immigrants classify themselves as Asian American, in reality, they identify heavily with their country of origin, followed by American (Vietnamese-American for example), and that to around 60 percent of Asian youth living in America, this identification is very important. I found this particularly interesting because I personally was unaware how crucial this specification was to many Asian individuals. I think that this is because as a white person living in America I have the privilege of not being forced to constantly answer “where are you from” questions, and my ethnic identity and ancestral countries of origin are not always in question. Because I don’t look “different” I don’t need to, and actually have never heard phrases like “Scottish American” or “Greek American” or “Canadian American”. In contrast to identifications like “Mexican American” “Asian American” and “African American” the former three do not have physical markers of their heritage, so they are not discussed.

In the graphic novel American Born Chinese,  Gene Luen Yang does a great job both introducing the audience to the many stereotypes surrounding Chinese immigrants and, in the case of cousin Chin-Kee, exaggerating them to the point where it seems ridiculous that the stereotype even exists, because to imagine someone of any nationality acting that way is absurd.

One theme I would like to further explore is the idea of dual, battling identities, which is present most prominently in the chapters about Jin Wang. In the beginning of the first chapter, we see no signs of Jin being uncomfortable with his identity, or feeling out of place. That quickly changes when he is introduced to the class on his first day of school. When the teacher introduces him, she first says his name incorrectly, telling the class his name was Jin Jang instead of Jin Wang, a mistake based off of stereotypes. After this mistake, she goes on to tell the class that he moved here “all the way from China” (Yang 30), another, more obviously stereotypical mistake. Later on in the chapter Jin is seen eating his lunch of dumplings, when he is confronted by a group of boys who ask “what the hell is that” in regards to his food, and when he replies, the boy says only “stay away from my dog” (Yang 32). On page 34, Jin is seen having a sandwich for lunch, on the day he makes his first friend. I did not think of it while I was reading it, but I am beginning to believe that the timing of these two events was more relevant than I thought. It appears that on the day he takes a sandwich instead of dumplings, revoking his traditional culture for the one that wont get him in social trouble, he made a friend. This is significant to me because it represents a choice, hold on to what he is comfortable with, what he knows, who he is, or give it up so that he can fit in and not be ridiculed.

The theme of dual battling identities can also be seen in the case of the monkey king. In the beginning of his chapter, he was confident and content with himself.  It was not until later, when he is rejected from the dinner party, that he has a negative self image. When he returns to his royal chamber, he noticed the smell of monkey fur for the first time, then “he stayed awake for the rest of the night thinking of ways to get rid of it” (Yang 20). This is relevant because it was not until after he was shunned for being a monkey that the smell of monkey fur, a distinctive sign of his monkey-ness, bothered him and he wanted to get rid of it. In his second chapter, he changes his appearance to look more like a man, and tells all of his citizens to wear shoes, similar to the way men do. No matter how many arts he mastered or skills he perfected, he was still viewed as a monkey, so he did his best to change that. The thing he was so proud of in the beginning, erased to the best of his ability because he wanted to be viewed as more than what his physical shell was.

In Gloria Anzaldúa’s Borderlands the author relays to the reader her experience as a Chicana girl growing up and now as an adult.  She, and her fellow Chicanos, were excluded from both their Spanish speaking communities and the English speaking ones. She describes how in school she would be punished for speaking Spanish, even at recess amongst her peers. And how those in her community who grew up speaking Chicano Spanish were told that their language was “illegitimate, a bastard language” (Anzaldua 80), and how many Chicanas had internalized those views and used them against each other. She outlines to the reader how, as a result of this internalization, Chicana girls were hesitant around other Chicana girls. She states, “To be close to another Chicana is like looking in the mirror” (Anzaldua 80). To many cultures, this would not be something that was undesirable or something to be feared, but because of the ostracization and prejudices against their language, it is not desirable to see the same broken spirit mirrored across from you.

The author identifies very deeply with her native tongue, and throughout the chapter she references it many times. She argues for the idea that until all of her languages are able to be recognized and spoken with the same level of respect as traditional Spanish, English etc. she will not be able to truly identify as who she is. She expressed this view succinctly when she said, “Ethnic identity is a twin skin to linguistic identity” (Anzaldua 81). She brings up the idea that until her language is fully accepted, to the point where she no longer has to accommodate English or Spanish speakers, or to choose one when she wants to speak Spanglish, her language, and, with that, her identity, will be considered illegitimate

Since Analzuda associates her personal identity so strongly with her language choice, I believe that she switches languages intentionally to represent the disconnect between what was classically accepted and what was not. I know for many readers, it was the English parts that were understandable, and the foreign ones that were not. In just this situation, it appears that the authors point was proved. If she wants to communicate with the vast majority of the country, she is going to have to be speaking English in order for them to understand. I also believe she may have used this technique as a sort of representation of the parts of cultural identification she missed out on because of her identity and language. Although that the reader could use context to try and piece together what they think the author was saying, we will always be missing a piece of it until we are able to see both languages equally well. And, in real life, Analzuda constantly had to choose between her language and fitting in, between her culture and the accepted culture, between her identity and the identity she was expected to have, and finally she decided that she was done with that, and the switching between languages I believe represents, at least as one function, the constant internal struggle she experienced throughout her life.

In the introduction to “Playing Indian” by Philip Deloria, he introduces the concept that he elaborates on throughout the intro that wearing the disguise of an Indian has played a consistent role in American culture and identity from the time of the Boston Tea Party to the present. Deloria introduces the idea that Americans had a battling dual sense of identity. They wanted all of the liberties and order granted by the new land, but at the same time, they desired the freedom and wildness of the Native Americans. They were presented with battling ideals, to destroy them or glorify them. “Second, Americans (and he did not hesitate to generalize) had been continually haunted by the fatal dilemma of “wanting to have their cake and eat it too,” of wanting to savor both civilized order and savage freedom at the same time” (Deloria 3). Deloria clearly depicts the inner conflict between the two battling ideals, and elaborates on the result later in the introduction. He references the author D. H. Lawrence and his thoughts on American identity. Lawrence believed that Americans possessed an incomplete sense of identity and that it was attributed to the inability to receive the “spirit of the place” due to the presence of former inhabitants not being killed or assimilated.  “”No place,” Lawrence observed, “exerts its full influence upon a newcomer until the old inhabitant is dead or absorbed.”” (Deloria 4). This concept, once the Americans identified it, lead to increased popularity to the former part of the original argument. Deloria also mentions that Native Americans served, and are serving, a similar role in the formation and development of American culture to that of African Americans.

I agree with Deloria’s sentiment that ‘playing Indian’ has played an important role in the development of American identity both in the distant past and present. Even just last year at Coachella, there were several viral tweets claiming cultural appropriation in reference to white girls wearing traditional Native American headdresses in attempts to make themselves appear trendy and hip by stealing aspects of native culture that they found appealing, or, as Deloria put it, playing Indian. This concept can be seen all over today’s world. From Halloween costumes to film, this concept is present even in modern times. Disney’s popular classic Pocahontas is a prime example of how Indianness is presented and absorbed in today’s world. The movie profited off of glamorizing an unhappy story into a magical land that erases much of the ill treatment that was suffered by the Native Americans at the time.

Overall, I believe agree with Deloria’s point that Americans were uncertain on the best way to handle Native Americans, as they did view them as having some ‘man’ in them, they were still treated as vastly inferior beings. I do however, have questions about the extent to which all of this is deliberate, as opposed to something unintentional or coincidental. Even in the examples I mentioned above, what if Disney wanted to make the movie appropriate for children and perhaps try to start a conversation about these people that appear to be different than us. There are multiple ways to arrive at the same conclusion or end result. I do not however, mean to state that I am wholly unconvinced, as I am not, I simply have more questions.

To the question of whether or not I believe assimilation is a necessary process, regardless of the consequences, I believe I fall somewhere in the middle of the spectrum of opinion. I do believe wholeheartedly that in order for two groups to coexist, they have to respect each other. Things like language, culture, religion, and law practices all play a role in joining the groups, and certainly make things like business and trade more efficient and easy, but they are not necessarily mandatory for simple coexistence. If one group wishes to become a part of the other, then I believe that it is the responsibility of the group members wishing to join to introduce themselves into the culture and decide the extent to which they are interested in adopting their ways. Assimilation, in my opinion, does often require one to give up some parts of their old culture, but I do not believe that one has to completely abandon their old ways and their old life to be part of a new culture. The author observes “Assimilation could not, according to this logic, cope with the presence of the Native Americans whose customs and traditions were too alien, too different to become merged with the new American self”, in reference to a previous work which claimed essentially that natives were too savage to become part of the new society as they were. I feel that this sentiment, clearly, was incorrect, and that although there were massive cultural differences, neither could accurately judge the other because they did not understand one another.

I happen to have a unique experience with Native American culture as I grew up in the middle of a Hoopa territory in northern California. Because of this, I went to school with many Native Americans and through this I was able to gain a deeper understanding of both the differences and similarities between myself and many of my classmates. One example that I did not realize at the time was that we never observed Columbus Day, we had school just like any other day. Now looking back on it I realize the reason that we didn’t was because so many lives just in my area specifically had been affected by him (and what was to come after) and it not only was not celebrated, but would have been disrespectful to celebrate. Looking back it was easy to see the line between the culture that we all shared versus the Native American culture surrounding me. While the difference was there, unspoken and relatively minimal, but there all the same, it was clear to me that as a local culture, we had no problem functioning and even thriving despite the fact that both groups celebrated their own, vastly different, cultures. My personal experience further conveys my point that one does not need to completely revoke their original culture in order to be a part of another one.

On page 52 the author writes, “In the case of the Native Americans, assimilation, as Crevecoeur testifies, seemed impossible”. I find this to be particularly interesting simply because, if assimilation seemed impossible, and settlers were starting completely fresh, why did they follow the steps of previous leaders when that was exactly what they were trying to escape? I do not believe that assimilation, to the extent that the first European settlers turned American colonists took it to is at all necessary. I feel that the idea of assimilation to such an extent completely contradicts everything that the settlers claimed they were searching for. They were often fleeing persecution (religious or otherwise), and the first thing they do when they are faced with adversity in the new land, is persecute against it.

“How does it feel to be a problem?” This is the first sentence that really stuck out to me from ‘Of Our Spiritual Strivings’ by W.E.B. Du Bois. How would it feel to be considered a problem, and nothing more, by your neighbors and peers? This question brought to me a lot of questions and inspired great reflection, despite being mentioned only briefly. I personally have not had an experience being viewed as a ‘problem’ just for existing. Although I have certainly been problematic, and have accidentally caused problems, I know that I am privileged in the fact that no one will make it about my skin color. As I try to imagine what it would feel like to be viewed in such a negative light, despite what I know about myself to be true, I feel suffocated. From only briefly putting myself in these shoes, I am already beginning to understand how some victims of prejudice and racism have significantly altered viewed about the world we live in and the inherent qualities of the people around them. Interestingly, while thinking about this and how I would feel, I seemed to accidentally group together the opinions of prejudiced privileged people with all privileged people, which is similar to how those with these prejudices view every member of the race or group they are prejudiced against. These generalizations and false views about certain groups that are held when viewing only from the outside in reminded me of the Kaplan article about identity. In this article she quotes Charles Taylor who said “a person or group of people can suffer real damage, real distortion, if the people around them mirror back to them a conflicting or demeaning or contemptible picture of themselves”. I feel that this quote related closely to many of the things that Du Bois was depicting. He mentions directly how he was an outlier, how not all boys in his situation were able to rise above it as he tried to do. Instead, they suffered the ‘real damage’ previously mentioned. He states, “With other black boys the strife was not so fiercely sunny: their youth shrunk into tasteless sycophancy, or into silent hatred of the pale world about them and mocking distrust of everything white”. Because of the skewed perceptions others had of them and battling dual identities, children who were supposed to be playing together and having innocent wide eyed views of the world lost their childhood to hate and discrimination they didn’t understand and couldn’t fight. Even in their attempts to catch up to the other children their age proved to be a tremendous struggle. Du Bois describes this when he says,“the dark pupils of these schools know how faithfully, how piteously, this people strove to learn. It was weary work.” This quote reminded me that just because the hardest part was over for African Americans at the time, even though they cleared the highest hurdle, the rest didn’t just disappear. The views of those who looked upon them with disdain did not disappear just because of a few words on a page. The technical part of the problem was solved, but the personal, emotional, and mental battles were just beginning. I am surprised how even today the after effects of slavery are still things that we deal with and hear about in the news and on social media.