In an article titled Judging Asian Americans by Our Book Covers, the author laments on the stereotypical covers, symbols, and etc. used for Asian writers. I for one have mixed feeling regarding the lack of genre diversification. More often than not, we make judgments based on the outlook that we ‘see’. After publishers saw the success of Amy Tan’s The Joy Luck Club, they continued to exploit the formula because it was profitable. The book should have served as a turning stone for Asian writers but that somehow went awry. Instead of acting as a stepping stone for expanding genres, writers became stagnant in their style and limited their ability to think outside a box. Many modern day writers need to diversify in anything else besides historical fiction and proverbs.
At the same time, it is difficult for another Asian writer, let alone any writer, to redefine a genre that has become a selling point for many. Critics complain about the ‘chinkiness’ of the novels because of the disproportionate parity found in the writing. To them, the cultural themes and images overplay the underlining message of the story. In defense of the Asian writers, they are merely adding their personal flare. There is no definitive manor in which to define ‘chinky’. Varying viewpoints will skew the stereotyping along a wide spectrum. In any case, the disparity between ‘normal’ writing and ‘ethnic’ writing is so pronounced because we base our criteria upon western literature. Consequently, the conflicts that critics have with the novels are often socially biased. They fail to see the nuances in western literature because they have been trained to turn a blind eye to it. Without a doubt, Americans writing and adapting their stories for Asian countries will have a ‘Yankee’ twist.
*Can someone send me the info as to where I send this letter to. I am totally clueless and don't have the syllabus on me.
**Just another shameless plug. I usually blog about less objective things there.
0 comments:
Post a Comment