Korean American Diaspora. Dr. Young Rae Oum Hanyang International Summer School Session 7 Travels and Politics of Identity. Session 7 Travels and Politics of Identity. James Clifford, Diasporas
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Korean American Diaspora
Dr. Young Rae Oum
Hanyang International Summer School
Travels and Politics of Identity
James Clifford, Diasporas
Exploratory, postcolonial definition of diaspora in the changing global conditions, based on the articulations from contemporary black Britain and anti-Zaionist Judaism.
Transnational moment?--Explosion of terms related to movement across nations, cultures, and regions, such as border, travel, creolization, transculturation, hybridity, and diaspora.
The meaning of the term “diaspora” (once described Jewish, Greek, and Armenian dispersion) is much expanded now; used for immigrants, expatriates, refugees, guest workers, exile communities, overseas community, and ethnic communities.
Border theories and diaspora paradigms share interests in formerly marginal hisotories and cultural crossing.
Safran defines diaspora as “expatriate minority communities”
1) that are dispersed from an original center to at least two peripheral places
2) that maintain a memory, vision, or myth about their original homeland
3) that believe that are not, and perhaps cannot, be fully accepted by their host country
4) that see the ancestral home as a place of eventual return, when the time is right
5) that are committed to the maintenance or restoration of this homeland and
6) of which the group’s consciousness and solidarity are importantly defined by this continuing relationships with the homeland
Diasporic forms of longing, memory and (dis)identification are found broadly in minority and migrant groups and their active movement across the border became extremely common. It is hard to maintain exclusivist paradigm of diaspora research.
No diasporic group has all the features Safran listed, and ambivalence about returning to or attachment to homeland is often found in reality.
Safran’s definition of diaspora is restrictive and there is no such group that completely fits with the “ideal type” (closest one being the Jewish diaspora). Especially problematic with the teleology of “returning” to the (utopian) origin. (Safran is ambivalent about the definition and would not enforce the definitional checklist)
At different times, societies may wax and wane in diasporism, depending on changing possiblities (obstacles, openings, antagonisms, and connections) in their host countries and transnationally.
Diasporas are caught up with/defined against (1) norms of nation-states (requiring assimilation) (2) indigenous claims by “tribal” people. (Tribes=people who claim natural/first-nation sovereignty.)
Diasporic cultures are not necessarily anti-nationalist; some are most violently purist. Yet culturally, in practice, they can never be exclusively nationalist
Diaspora is different from “travel”; it is not temporary. It forms communities that share certain consciousness.
“Fourth World”—transnational alliance among people who share common historical experiences of dispossession, displacement, and adaptation.
Diasporic language is replacing and supplementing minority discourse; challenges the binary relation of Minority communties vs. Majority society.
Diaspora is not exactly immigrant communities; the latter is a temporary site where three generations stuggled through a hard transition to ethnic American status.
Diaspora is also different from cosmopolitans. (Examples from Ulf Hannerz and Aihwa Ong)
Diaspora is also gendered and
racialized and classed.
Women’s experience of dispora?
E.g. Haesu, from the Clay Walls
Mary Paik Lee, Quiet Odyssey
Race in Diaspora
Paul Gilroy, Black Atlantic: Inter-continental movement by black people (not only as commondities) who engaged in various struggles toward emancipation, autonomy, and citizenship.
Gilroy brought “black” back to “Union Jack”.
1. What does it mean to be a "model minority"? What is the origin of the term? (Who called whom a model minority and why?) Why is this term problematic? (Natalie)
2. How are the concepts of heterogeneity, hybridity, and multiplicity useful in theorizing Asian American identities? (Leah)
3. Provide examples of heterogeneity, hybridity, and multiplicity (one example for each) in Korean American diaspora, utilizing the Korean American narratives from “East to America,” the two documentary films, or the research findings in the reading.
4. How did early immigrants view the “American Dream” and how did their actual experiences differ form their initial expectations? (Susan)
5. How does the "Middle-Man Minority" explain why Koreans were victimized during the LA Riots? Why did the media create false stereotypes of Koreans during this incident? (Stephanie)
6. How did Safran define “diaspora” and how does James Clifford complicate Safran’s term? Do you agree with Clifford? Why or why not? (Please provide examples from the texts or documentaries.)