Chang-Rae Lee: Literary Hero or Just Another Exploiter? | Asian American Issues

o Asian American male has ever enjoyed the kind of approval lavished on Chang-Rae Lee by the American literary establishment.

     But then no American novelist has ever loaded such mind-blowing guilt trips on his Asian male protagonists. Naturally even those AA readers who amply appreciate Lee's luminous, high-bandwidth prose come to wonder if there isn't some connection between the accolades and the deplorable moral profile of Lee's AM characters.

     In his first novel Native Speaker (Riverhead 1995) the narrator is Corean American Henry Park who has built a career with a shadowy private multinational intelligence firm by spying on notable Asians. This creepy professional life jeopardizes Park's marriage to a WASP princess, alienates him from society at large and, on some metaphysical plane, brings about the death of his young son. Park's no stereotypical Asian male in the conventional sense, but he does evoke not so subtley the stereotypical suspicion that Asian men are given to sneakiness, double-allegiance and profound social alienation. The effort earned Lee the PEN/Hemingway Award and the American Book Award, not to mention the prestigious job of director of the MFA program at CUNY's Hunter College.

     Lee's second novel A Gesture Life (1999) ups the angst ante. Turns out elderly narrator Franklin Hata had been, in a dim distant past, an officer in the Japanese Imperial Army who played a role in the deaths of two young Corean comfort women. The man's not exactly a monster but the skeletons in his closet aren't of the wholesome all-American variety either. The moral burden of Hata's past keeps him from cementing a promising relationship with an eligible widow -- not to mention developing a normal relationship with his adoptive daughter. AA readers might be excused for being flabbergasted at the sheer randomness of saddling the protagonist of an AA novel with the guilt of WWII sex slaves. The novel elicited high praise from the NY Times's Michiko Kakutani and won Lee a secure place among America's most promising young writers.

     The protagonists of both novels find redemption -- or at least the hope thereof. But the bleakness of their predicaments hardly advance the Asian American male quest for recognition as feeling, well-adjusted human beings. Instead, Lee's novels seem to confirm that, hell, yes, there are good reasons why Asian men can never fit comfortably into American life.

     That dark view finds little support in the outlines of Lee's own life.

     Chang-Rae Lee was born in Seoul, Corea on July 29, 1965. His family emigrated when he was either two or three, depending on source. He grew up in Westchester, New York and attended New Hampshire's elite Phillips Exeter Academy. He graduated Yale with an English B.A., then went to the University of Oregon for a masters in creative writing. A year as a Wall Street analyst convinced Lee to commit to a full-time writing career. In addition to his two novels, Lee has published stories and articles in The New Yorker, The New York Times and Granta magazine. He now lives in New Jersey with his wife and daughter.

  &nb Does Chang-Rae Lee's literary success expand possibilities for Asian American men? Or is he merely exploiting and reinforcing existing stereotypes?

CONTINUED BELOW

WHAT YOU SAY

[This page is closed to new input. Vote and continue this and related discussions at the new Interactive Area. --Ed.]

Proud AA Woman,

Yes. There are still conspriacies around. Just look at the Enron fiasco in today's headlines.

Just look at these facts that have slipped under the noses of americans with little or no press coverage also:

Taken from
http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/100days/environment.asp
This is a non profit organization that keeps track of fundraising sources and policies of many of our top politicians.

Bush received
1) $1.8 million from the oil and gas industry.
2) $1.3 million from the auto industry.
3) $300k from the timber industry.
4) $90K from tobacco and $100k from taboocao towards the "Bush Cheney Inaugural fund".
5) Look at http://www.opensecrets.org/bush/cabinet.asp to see how an OVERWHELMING majority of Bush's cabinet have strong corporate connections.

Now in only Bush's first 100 days of office, Bush has:
1) cut funding for research into renewable energy sources (looks like we will have continue buying oil and gas huh?)
2) Backed of the Kyoto Protocol so the auto industry can give Americans even more carbon dioxide emissions.
3) delay the Clinton-era rule that would reduce the arsenic content in our water.
4) publicly endorsed exploring and drilling for oil off Florida and drilling in Alaska.
5) kept the gov;t out of the California energy crisis making companies like Dynegy, Enron (yes Enron!), and Reliant even richer.
6) killing the Clinton impsed lawsuit on big tobacco indirectly by cutting off funds to support the lawsuit in his Congress approved budget. "The Washington Post reports that Justice Department lawyers have told Attorney General John Ashcroft that they may be forced to drop the case because Bush’s proposed budget doesn’t include enough funding to keep the lawsuit alive."

I know not really related to the topic but this should show that conspiracies still happen in the post cold war era. And as republicans can remember, Clinton was no conspiracy free administration either.

I think the fact that asian men hate "Joy Luck Club" and asian women hate "Madame Butterfly" and "Miss Saigon" conspiracy though are not part of an intentional conspiracy to make asians seem meek and undeserving, but rather arise from the need for the general public to scapegoat a race whenever they need someone to ridicule, to be victimized and saved, and to serve as a villain in the media whether it be books, movies, our news, etc.

And when authors such as Chang Rae Lee and Amy Tan, asians themselves reinforce these stereotypes and fulfill these needs for villains and victims, it says to the public and those in charge of the media that its ok to step on asians in order to make us feel better about ourselves. I really think its time we show some spine and determination by either creating works of art emphasizing the stronger and more positive characterstics of asians and asian americans or by simply standing up and telling bigots such as Sarah Silverman or Jon McCain that words like "chink" and "gook" are not to be used lightly.

Sorry about the long post. I know I got carried away but I am passionate about these issues which may seem "minor" to some. But I hope that people who have read this and my post to Lynn will realize that this is not a trivial issue. It is subtle and deceptive and if we continue to let it go on while we pursue the american dream of $$$, our children will sooner or later have their integrity questioned, self confidence and esteem hurt, opportunities diminished or even their safety threatened by the children of some other ignorant bigoted fool. The media is more powerful than you think. Think about that the next time you reach over for a Coke while having lunch at McDonald's with an acquaintance from Afghanistan.
An Avid Reader
Sunday, January 13, 2002 at 00:54:46 (PST)

Back To Main Page

Lynn,

Doh, that as a typo. I meant
"True that Asians are [NOT] the noblest of peoples. But for heaven's sake, stop jackhammering the negatives about asians into the public." Sorry for the confusion as this typo may or may not be obvious from the context of my statement.

As for why do people hate the "Joy Luck Club". Well most people don't. ONly Asian men hate the Joy Luck Club. Why? Because it portrays asian men a selfish misogynists. We know that already. Yet for some reason authors like to "jackhammer" such negative images into the public. Why not some positive images. Asian men have been strong and smart, and chivalrous. While historically Asian men have mistreated their women, many have also treated their women and country well. Many were devoted and hard working fathers. Many risked their lives for their family and children. Together with the women we have created great a kaleidoscope of histories ranging from heroic war epics to great works of arts to very influential philosophies and ideas in science and religion. Why don't authors gather some positive portrayals from here such the devotion, loyalty, determination and integrity from these positive aspects of asian culture (from the building of the Great Wall, the Epic of the Three Kingdoms, the rich trade and cultural centres of India in the 1400's and 1500's, and the ascension of Japan and Korea into the global economy in the post war era? Not to mention the countless true stories of filial piety, devotion to family, and chivalry that is championed by various asian cultures? If you don't know what I am talking about it is not because you have not been reading enough -- its because there probably isn't anything to read on it. But there are plentiful tales of conniving chinese spies, lustful Japanese sexual predators, evil fictional Fu Manchus, stoic stubborn old asian folks, and socially inept rotely learned asian dorks.

We are no more selfish and misogynist as any other culture IN THE PAST. One of the greatest Emperors in China was a women in the Tang dynasty. Women today in China and Taiwan have obtained many seats in government. Many women are college educated today in China and are not oppressed. I am unsure about how women are treated in other asian countries, but this should show that asian men are capable of admitting their mistakes and ridding their culture of outdated unethical traditions (just like Europeans have).

Remember Europeans of yore also often treated women as objects to be traded for land and whose interests were secondary to that of the man. In fact wasn't it colonial europenas that enslaved, raped, and abused native american indian women, african slave women, asian women, etc.? Why don't authors dig up these atrocities and base their tales on these things? Why because no one wants to hear it. No one wants to hear that their ancestors were selfish cruel misogynists guilty of genocide. So far such topics are considered taboo and criticism is discussed as an academic "feelgood" exercise. And when people are confronted with their "negative" past the response often is : "Get over it. Its in the past..." They don't realize the double-standard and the hypocrisy.
Sheesh.

So it boils down to this:
Let's say you write a book about or loosely based on the genocide about a specific tribe of native american indians by colonists (be they from England, Spain, POrtugal or France). Would it sell? No, no matter how spellbindingly well-written it is. Why? Because its negative, ie not what white americans want to hear. And another reason is that Native Americans are only 1% of the population...too small a demographic to target book sales on. While that 1% is has the freedom to complain and cry injustice, the 99% has the right and will exercise their right to cover their ears.

Finally let's say you write a book about heroic (white) Americans in WWII preventing the genocide of Jews in Europe. Will that sell? Yes if its well written. Might even be made into a TV or Hollywood movie. See my point?

An Avid Reader
Sunday, January 13, 2002 at 00:15:49 (PST)

What wonderfully provocative questions! I happen to love Lee's writing precisely for his brooding protagonists whose wretched liminality (between Asian and American) allows Lee to figure Asian American-ness in the deep, rich colors of philosophical gravity. These characters have weight to them. And through Lee, they also have voice. No doubt we as a community have been trying to put our voices out there, but the genuine strife and psychological turmoil of Lee's protagonists seem to make privy that space of Asian "inscrutability" in order to blast the stereotype altogether -- in effect, once we get into the heads and lives of these characters, they become to us as tragic as Ellison's Invisible Man, as Shakespeare's Hamlet. The notion of tragedy in itself, I think, is not at question here as either debilitating or liberating for the Asian American identity. I think the empathy with which a reader comes to identify with the tragic hero almost succeeds in erasing ethnic boundaries by calling attention to them. Outside of the circumstances of these characters' race stands the question of how these circumstances are brought to bear upon the human.

This is not to claim that the Korean American part does not matter for Lee. As a Korean American, I know that Lee's ethnicity matters to me -- it's what initially drew me to his books. And it would be foolish not to think that Lee understands that his ethnicity has that drawing power. But he clearly holds two languages, two cultures, two identities in a delicate balance, knowing that stereotype can speak to ignorance, and that American tolerance can understand irony, satire, injustice, and confliction.

Do I feel, as an Asian American male, that his literary success can expand possibilities for me? YES! He offers amazing points of contention to bring Asian Americans into the dialogue. Do I feel that his characters reinforce stereotypes used against Asian American males? I think it would be foolish to expect Lee to create a novel that speaks to all Asian Americans in a universally accepted format. Has not the "militantly, white-washed Asian American" become to some extent unstereotypically stereotypical in the last several decades? But, I'll say it: sometimes I felt that I WAS one of Lee's protagonists! It seems that the stereotypes functioned for me in such a way as to place me into a context, a history. How affirming, no?
YW
itsl8@aol.com Friday, January 11, 2002 at 21:38:06 (PST)

NEWEST COMMENTS | EARLIER COMMENTS

Asian American Videos

Dance & Stage Channel

Travel Channel

CONTACT US | ADVERTISING INFO

© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.