Wesley Yang's "Paper Tigers" voices some of the deepest fears of the Asian-American community. "Here is what I sometimes suspect my face signifies to other Americans," he writes, "an invisible person, barely distinguishable from a mass of faces that resemble it...a mass of stifled, repressed, abused, conformist quasi-robots who simply do not matter."
When I met Yang in Koreatown last week, his face was certainly distinguishable enough. A young student interrupted our conversation to praise his story. "I really liked it. And so did a lot of my friends," she gushed, "Especially the guys." And far from invisible, Yang's eyes are plastered on the cover of this week's New York above the bold words "Asian Like Me." If nothing else, it is a profound expression of our newfound relevance.
Four months ago, the Wall Street Journal set off a veritable shit storm by running an excerpt from Amy Chua's Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother under the headline "Why Chinese Mothers are Superior." At the time, Yang bemoaned, "A dignified, nonhysterical account of our peculiar sufferings untethered to the American upper middle class's Ivy League fixation and (richly justified) fear of national decline remains elusive." He went on to produce precisely that account. What follows is just one of the many lively, long overdue, refreshingly honest conversations Yang's epic article spurred. Here's to many more.
SK: In a way, you take advantage of the racism your piece condemns. You wouldn't have been able to write this piece if you weren't Asian. And because people have this perception of the Asian-American community as a uniform one, you can approach this subject as an insider. In reality, you had a very different upbringing than the one you write about. You weren't raised by a Tiger Mother who demanded perfect grades and forced you to drill math. You aren't a member of that community.
WY: When the Amy Chua piece came out, my editors came to me and they said, "You're Asian! You should write something about Asian people!" And my attitude was that a story on "Asian people" as a whole can only be a kind of a failure because the term encompasses such large groups of people who have different immigration histories, class backgrounds, and nationalities. But the Tiger Mother phenomenon was about a very specific thing of interest to the readership of New York. I am writing about this group not because I shared all their experiences, but precisely because I didn't, and yet had to live all my life in their shadow.
So part of the devotion to study of this group that was always present, and that I always rejected, was their obsession with acquiring credentials at any cost. This created a large number of students who could, as one Stuyvesant graduate told me, get an 800 on the verbal section of the SAT "without being able to write for shit."
And the truth is that these people are out there, and everybody knows it. They are not a racist myth used to keep Asian people down -- although the assumption that all Asian people are like this is a racist myth. So, it's racism to look at a person with an Asian face and assume that he's just another Chinese kid who drilled his way to high scores who can't write. We have to call bullshit on that.
On the other hand, we also have to look at the way those other kids are being trained - where they are being pushed through this educational mill where getting the grade is all that matters, and where the student's focus on perfection leaves no room to discover their real passions, and real interests, and thus their real self, which can then be successfully projected in the real world -- and call bullshit on that too.
SK: But is the overall message of your piece provocative or just unusually direct? One of the people who you profiled, for example, offers a $1,400 course teaching Asian men to nail blonde-haired, blue-eyed women. Now, most Americans place a pretty high premium on that ability. It's phrased in a vulgar manner, but the goal itself is fairly mainstream. It's true that the Asian playboy and his students aren't deferring to white, Western expectations for Asian-American behavior, but is that kind of submission any worse than deference to white, Western definitions of success?
WY: The key point is not to mistake what I portray in others for what I really think. For starters, I never was interested in corporate success. Neither do I have a fetish for white women, even though my girlfriend happens to be white. Indeed, I was estranged from Asian women insofar as they were part of Asian culture and estranged from Asian culture insofar as it was totally materialistic and focused on corporate success. I think this is all there, implicit in my dropping out of society for many years while living on next to nothing in Jersey City.
SK: And in all fairness, Asian-Americans don't have a heightened responsibility to reject this framework. In fact, empowering us to achieve these rigid definitions of success is the only way we can truly reject them. Otherwise we're just accepting, on a practical level, that we can't win that game. And I'd certainly agree that some of the people you profile are exemplary in that they succeed without compromising -- because of their defiance, not in spite of it.
WY: I think Tony Hsieh (founder of Zappos.com) and the emergence of more people like him will destroy the bamboo ceiling. Once people see CEOs who are socially awkward Asian guys, they'll realize socially awkward Asian guys can be leaders and CEO's. Once we make that leap, they're no longer going to look at the way Asian people behave and decide that they can't be leaders. People need to be willing to make noise, and make themselves visible.
And that will mean the end of this rule that immigrant groups have to worry what people are going to think of us and we have to pretend for outsiders like we don't engage in cultural practices that deserve serious scrutiny. We must get stuff out into the open, tear the scab off this wound, apply a stinging astringent to it, and cauterize it with a blowtorch.
Follow Silpa Kovvali on Twitter: www.twitter.com/SilpaKov
If Yang hates Asian values so much, he has the choice of rejecting every one of them. By attacking these values across-the-board instead of giving constructive suggestions, his attack is only an expression of his deep-seated hatred, serving no good to nobody.
We all come from somewhere and move on in life from where we come from. Number one rule: accept and acknowledge who you are and where you come from. Number two rule: improve and make change at wherever improvement is needed and changes can be made. To those, white or black or yellow, self-hate is a huge burden on life's journey. It only serves a hastened self-destruction.
In fact, Yang hates not only the mainstream Asia values but most of all, he hates his own face. I must say Wesley Yang seems to be suffering some kind of hard-to-named mental illness. He starts his article with a derogatory self-description and with a very unflattering picture of himself, more like someone from a state jail house or more pessimistic than that.
Not done yet...
I recommended to my daughter Wesley Yang's article "Paper Tigers: What Happens to all the Asian-American Overachievers When the Test-taking Ends" May 8, 2011. After reading it, she made one comment, a rather pertinent one, "He has lots of anger."
Exactly so. In fact, he used one single word to summarize his feelings toward Asian values on filial piety, grade-grubbing, Ivy-League mania, deference to authority, humility and hard work, harmonious relations, sacrificing for the future, and earnest, "striving middle-class servility" -- that one word being an F-word. I try to understand why he chooses to use an F word here. My feeble brain fails here. Maybe he thinks it can grab global attention as Amy Chua's book has obtained. So vulgar!
He must have been severely traumatized by these values. After going through his long writing, I still cannot figure out what is wrong with these values. Why does he hate them so much? Something not right with this writer. What is it?
Yang suffers from two major crisis: identity crisis and self-image-hating crisis. To me, the real damage is he speaks on a major magazine as if he represented all Asian Americans. Even worse, he speaks on a major magazine New York magazine's cover article, as if he were the voice of millions of Asian Americans. Nothing is more hedious than this!
Not done yet....
I know Sandra Tsing Loh had something to say about this and remember she is a grad from Cal Tech.
The only problem with trying to be all inclusive is the fact that the readership has a minute attention span. Wesley's article was a gargantuan 11 pages, but imagine if he tried to include all groups.
It doesn't make it any more right, per se, but it certainly makes it more EFFECTIVE. After all, what's the enemy of being good? Trying to be perfect.
And to those who argue that the article was male-centric. You're completely 100% correct.
To which I would argue that the predominant (albeit rare) items that make it to the national level of American consciousness are primarily Asian American female demagogues and representatives like Amy Tan, Amy Chua, Lisa Ling, etc. As Asian men, we don't have a voice in the already incredibly small piece of the media pie.
But anyways, I enjoyed reading your response.
JT Tran
http://www.abcsofattraction.com