Posted: Sat 25 Jun 2005 07:09 Post subject: Lisa See and Gregory Howard Williams: 2 Sides of a Coin?
Has anyone heard of the author Lisa See? Ms. See is the author of several highly regarded books about Chinese Americans, including a biography of her family, On Gold Mountain: The One Hundred Year Odyssey of My Chinese-American Family.
From her website: lisasee.com
Quote:
Ms. See serves as a Los Angeles City Commissioner on the El Pueblo de Los Angeles Monument Authority. She was honored as National Woman of the Year by the Organization of Chinese American Women in 2001 and was also the recipient of the Chinese American Museum's History Makers Award in Fall 2003.
When she was a girl, Lisa See spent summers in the cool, dark recesses of her family's antiques store in Los Angeles Chinatown. There, her grandmother and great-aunt told her intriguing, colorful stories about their family's past- stories of missionaries, concubines, tong wars, glamorous nightclubs, and the determined struggle to triumph over racist laws and discrimination. They spoke of how Lisa's great-great-grandfather emigrated from his Chinese village to the United States to work on the building of the transcontinental railroad as an herbalist; how his son followed him, married a Caucasian woman, and despite great odds, went on to become one of the most prominent Chinese on "Gold Mountain" (the Chinese name for the United States).
As an adult, See spent five years collecting the details of her family's remarkable history. She interviewed nearly one hundred relatives- both Chinese and Caucasian, rich and poor- and pored over documents at the National Archives and several historical societies, and searched in countless attics, basements, and closets for the intimate nuances of her ancestors' lives.
The result is a vivid, sweeping family portrait in the tradition of Alex Haley's Roots that is at once particular and universal, telling the story not only of one family, but of the Chinese people in America itself, a country that both welcomes and reviles immigrants like no other culture in the world.
From a reviewer on Amazon.com:
Quote:
Born into a predominately Cantonese family, Lisa See is surprised when as a young girl, her chinese uncles point at her and describe "white ghosts, like you". Surprised, she realized she appeared white, but felt chinese. Surrounded by her older relatives, she listened to their stories and became determined to capture their memories. Approached by her elder female aunties, they expressed a desire to document the family history. As the primary family members became aged, Lisa took up the rewarding challenge to pen the history of the incredible See family.
I think it's cool that Ms. See, who has a predominately "white" phenotype is embraced by the Chinese American community. It used to be that hapas were shunned from full acceptance.
I think her internal view of herself as "Chinese" and not "Caucasian" is very similar to Gregory Howard Williams, who wrote Life on the Color Line : The True Story of a White Boy Who Discovered He Was Black. Had I met either of them on the street, I would have thought of them as "white." In doing so, I would be denying them their ethnic heritage.
I understand that some people object to Williams calling himself "black." However, I think there is a difference between "race" and ethnic cultural. Both See and Williams present "white" phenotypes but were raised in predominately non-white cultures, thus forming in each an identity of "Chinese American" and "Black American," respectively.
Williams, unlike See, however, did face the business end of the racism stick growing up in 1950s Indiana. His loss of white privilege and experience of oppression as a child and teenager and the absurdity and evil of racism and the One Drop Rule are surreal. (I wonder about the similarity of paranoia of the 50's fear that one's neighbor could be secret a Communist was as much source of angst as Caucasians' fear of their "white" friend or paramour being a secret Negro, as it were.)
So, my thought are that Williams, like Clayton Powell or Malcolm X. or Jesse Jackson, has every right to claim his African American identity proudly.
Truthfully, I don't understand why some people would deny Gregory Williams his ancestry and expect him to just identify as "white." To me it seems absurd for anyone to slap a label of "white" on either See or Williams if they choose to self identify differently. Doing so dismisses not only their right to choose their place in the world but the very history of their lives.
Posted: Sat 25 Jun 2005 10:25 Post subject: Re: Lisa See and Gregory Howard Williams: 2 Sides of a Coin?
triguy wrote:
[Gregory Williams's] loss of white privilege and experience of oppression as a child and teenager and the absurdity and evil of racism and the One Drop Rule are surreal. (I wonder about the similarity of paranoia of the 50's fear that one's neighbor could be secret a Communist was as much source of angst as Caucasians' fear of their "white" friend or paramour being a secret Negro, as it were.)
Very true. The first time that the ODR appears in history (in the sense of an utterly European-lookng person being Black somehow) was in the 1830s Ohio Valley, in and around Cincinnati. It was during the panic that swept the area after reports of the Nat Turner incident (when rebelling slaves killed many White families in gruesome ways). White Northerners feared a general uprising and massacre. This fear was fueled by newspapers suggesting that murderous Blacks were infiltrating the White world, that they looked just like "you or me," and that even your neighbor or closest friend might be a secret Black just waiting for the signal to strike.
In the 1850s (VA) and again in the 1890s (SC), Southerners debated and rejected such an irrational idea. The ODR finally triumphed and and was accepted nationwide for an entirely different reason when Jim Crow started. But its earliest origins look remarkably like the McCarthy era's irrational fear of secret communists.
Posted: Mon 27 Jun 2005 14:37 Post subject: Re: Lisa See and Gregory Howard Williams: 2 Sides of a Coin?
triguy wrote:
I understand that some people object to Williams calling himself "black." However, I think there is a difference between "race" and ethnic cultural. Both See and Williams present "white" phenotypes but were raised in predominately non-white cultures, thus forming in each an identity of "Chinese American" and "Black American," respectively.
Only if others-including Williams-accept that definition. As I stated earlier, there's no consensus on what black means and even individuals will embrace different definitions of blackness depending on the situation or person they encounter.
According to Williams' own autobiography, once his father's business collapsed and he moved with his sons back to Indiana, he informed them that they would now be colored or Negros, in other words, they would be racially black. In fact, there are parts of the book where the father referred to his two sons as "niggers".
Throughout his youth in Indiana, he experienced ill-treatment by whites because he was now racially black, not because he was part of another culture known as African American. Indeed, his black identity is a racial one rooted in the notion that one can look white (or Asian, etc.) and still be black racially.
Posted: Mon 27 Jun 2005 19:11 Post subject: Lisa See and Gregory Howard Williams
There are big political and social differences between Lisa See and Gregory Howard Williams. Lisa is not running all over the country promoting a "one drop" rule for all people of Asian/white ancestry.
Here's Charles Michael Byrd on what's wrong with Williams:
Quote:
Gregory Howard Williams is the Dean of the Ohio State Law School and author of "Life On The Color Line" (Plume/Penguin 1996), the story of a young lad born in Virginia who thought he was "white" until he moved to Indiana and then suddenly found out he was "black." Williams is quite the darling of the hypodescent crowd (hypodescent: the inheritance of only the lowest status racial category of one's ancestors), as they see him as someone more than willing to play the game of looking very white yet steadfastly identifying as black. Having read his book, however, I believe Williams is genuinely sincere about owing a debt of gratitude to the black side of his family in Indiana who raised him when many of his white relations shunned him, ergo his solid "black" identity.
What's unsettling about Gregory Howard Williams (photo right) is that those on this country's political left who have opposed any discussion of multiraciality from the movement's inception have manipulated him -- with his tacit consent or not -- and employ the Williams paradigm to further bash both Broyard's memory and those of us who eschew a false "black" identity. They proudly point to Williams as an example of how a loyal and obedient "light-skinned black" should act, while decrying Broyard as the quintessential "race-traitor," running away from "blackness." (Personally, I believe Broyard made the decision that, being the intellectual that he was, he was going to do what he wanted to do in life and was going to travel in those social circles in which he wanted to travel and to hell with anyone who objected.)
A couple of months before last year's Multiracial Solidarity March in Washington, D.C., Williams appeared on ABC's Nightline program with Ted Koppel. In short, Williams stated that he views race as an artificial, social construct, yet strongly proclaimed that he was "black" primarily based on the one drop rule. Not once, however, did Williams speak to the validity of a multiracial identifier that many of us have adopted.
I don't care how Gregory Howard Williams identifies. He can call himself a Martian, a Venusian or a Jovian, because, after all, that's his business. I submit, though, that he has a moral responsibility -- due to his high-profile status not only as an Ivory Towers type but as an author enjoying national attention and notoriety -- to not leave the impression with those who read his writings, hear him on radio or view him on television that hypodescent is still the rule of thumb vis-à-vis identity formation in mixed-race individuals.
Posted: Thu 30 Jun 2005 06:02 Post subject: Williams has a right to self-identification. Left vs. Right
Quote:
A couple of months before last year's Multiracial Solidarity March in Washington, D.C., Williams appeared on ABC's Nightline program with Ted Koppel. In short, [bold]Williams stated that he views race as an artificial, social construct,[\bold] yet strongly proclaimed that he was "black" primarily based on the one drop rule. Not once, however, did Williams speak to the validity of a multiracial identifier that many of us have adopted.
But how is Williams promoting anything other than telling his life's story? Did Williams really promote the One Drop Rule or explain that his life led him to proudly declaring himself "black." Why doesn't he have a right to tell his story? Moreover, why must he be a spokesman for the multiracial movement? Wasn't it Nightline's job as producer of a journalistic program to provide a counterpoint to Williams?
If the goal of the multiracial movement is to permit self-identification, why can't Williams identify as he sees fit? Why does Williams owe anything to the multiracial movement if all he wants to do is tell his story? The man had a hell of a childhood. He's writing a history of his life. Would he suddenly be a hero if he said that he's "white"? Why? How does that reconcile with his life? From what I've read, Williams just wants to be left alone by the multiracialist to live his life.
I've never read of Williams saying that he wants everyone to follow his example.
As for Lisa See, how is her writing a biography of her family any different than Williams' biography?
Quote:
Having read his book, however, I believe Williams is genuinely sincere about owing a debt of gratitude to the black side of his family in Indiana who raised him when many of his white relations shunned him, ergo his solid "black" identity.
That's right. Williams is sincere. Williams has a right to decide who he is. If someone in the same circumstances sees herself as white, then fine. However, vilifying Williams, tearing away at someone who suffered and lost so much, seems incredibly mean-spirited and selfish.
Race is a social construct. How someone else defines us or himself should have no bearing on we define ourselves.
Quote:
What's unsettling about Gregory Howard Williams (photo right) is that those on this country's political left who have opposed any discussion of multiraciality from the movement's inception have manipulated him -- with his tacit consent or not -- and employ the Williams paradigm to further bash both Broyard's memory and those of us who eschew a false "black" identity.
Broyard's memory? Come on. Williams book, his whole life and acceptance of a "black" identity came way before the revelations about Broyard. If someone wants to point to Williams, how is that his fault? Again, Williams has said that his choice if for him and not for all. What else is the man to say.
[bold]Frankly, the attacks on Williams's character are re-victimizing a survivor of child abuse (hell, a victim of mental and spiritual rape) all over again because other victims don't like how he's dealt with pain. [\bold]
[quote]Lisa is not running all over the country promoting a "one drop" rule for all people of Asian/white ancestry. [\quote]
[bold]
So, like a good little victim of abuse, Williams should suck it up and live in a box and never tell a soul about what happened to him? [\bold]
As for the talk of the "left," aren't these attacks on Williams's character just as, if not more so, reprehensible than the supposed evils of "leftist" Political Correctness? Aren't some of Williams' critics imposing their own repressive and vindictive speach codes and correct ways of thinking about race on Williams? It sure as heck seems that because Williams isn't following the "multiracial party-line" it's off to Siberia for him. Talk about Stalinism in action!
Moreover, this whole thing about vilifying the "Left" makes little sense in terms of the history of the US. Had the Right and the wingnuts in the John Birch Society, the National Review, and Nixon's yahoos who created the Southern Strategy had their way all people of color would still be playing the role of good darkies, coolies, etc.
Good grief, I don't recall reading about Strom Thurmond lovingly introducing his biracial daughter to Washington society. Of course, he was only too happy to throw her some hush money. And, hey, gotta love those Right wing senators who refused to sponsor the anti-lynching statement in the U.S. Senate. Wasn't the folks at the Right-wing, racist Pioneer Fund that funded the debunked and odious book "The Bell Curve." Wasn't it the Right wing Hoover Institute that funded D'nesh D'Souza's racist work. (D'Souza has made a career by playing the dark brown stooge of the Right by eviserating African Americans and their so-called pathologies. Glen Loury, a mixed-race African American quit the Hoover Institute in disgust over D'Souza.)
Who are the Right-wing friends of us mixed-race folks? What is their real motivation? In light of the recent demonization of gays and lesbians by the Right as a wedge issue to secure votes, shouldn't mixed race folks question any support from them since their goal is portray the Left as modern one-droppers to gain votes? After all, for 40 years the Republicans used race as their wedge issue, demonizing and belittling people of color to secure votes.
When I look at the legislation the supposed Right wing friends of multiracials want to pass, it all seems like ways to divide and conquer and reposition the playing field to their advantage using mixed race people as pawns. The California proposition to get rid of all government use of racial categories? Gee, how do we tell if there is a discrimination occuring if there is no record of the race of the victims? (Hey, how about the recent revelations that Ward Connerly's funding came from 6 millionaires including Rupert Murdoch.)
There's a reason why Barak Obama is a Democrat and not a Republican.
(P.S. This isn't a ringing endorsement of all liberals. I've met my share of liberals who talk a good game but who will drop their guard and show their true condescending views of people of color.)
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
