 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|||||||||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
||||||
Recommitting Asian American Studies to Communities Outside the Academy: A Critical Task
by Clement Tsao
posted 12/29/03
This article is excerpted from Chapter 1 of Tsao's thesis paper, "Recommitting Asian American Studies to Communities Outside the Academy: A Critical Task."
Ever since its founding in the 1960s, the state of Asian American Studies- and Ethnic Studies as a whole- has been in crisis (Hune 1988; Loo 1988). Intellectually and institutionally marginalized, Asian American Studies has struggled for academic legitimacy and its survival in institutions of higher education (Nakanishi and Leong 1978; Wing 1999; Hu-Dehart 1995; Wang 1999). However, in the process of institutional survival and academic recognition, Asian American Studies has abandoned its founding principles, vision, and overall mission (Wang 1999). As a result, Asian American Studies- arguably- has become over and hyper-theorized, professionalized, and irrelevant to large sectors of the communities that the field was originally intended to serve (Nishida 1989; Kiang 1989; Omatsu 1999). According to author and historian, Manning Marable, “There is a chasm between the most influential scholarship produced by Ethnic Studies and the social movements and ethnic constituencies which gave rise to such programs” (as quoted in Wing 1999). Similarly, this trend has been true of other Ethnic Studies subfields like Asian American Studies. Historically, it was students, activists, community members, and intersections of these three constituencies who demanded, protested, and organized for Asian American Studies at San Francisco State and UC Berkeley in 1968 and 1969 (Unemoto 1989; Omatsu 2001). Ironically, now it is their involvement in the programs and classes they fought to establish which has slowly diminished to the point where today, they no longer find themselves significantly represented in the dominant discourses of the field (Wing 1999; Woo 1989). Institutional survival now takes precedence over its original radical mission (Wing 1999). Moreover, since the 70s, 80s, and 90s, major changes in the political climate have dramatically impacted the political, social, and economic landscape of Asian Americans and other communities of color. These changes in turn have had parallel influences within the dominant discourses of Asian American Studies.
In this era of multiculturalism and diversity, a new generation of student activists across the nation is continuing the fight for Asian American Studies. As a result, Asian American Studies classes are expanding and making their way into the established curriculum at many colleges and universities (Hu-Dehart 1995). However, over the years administrators and senior faculty have become increasingly savvy in dealing with student activism. Under the guise of multiculturalism, diversity, and cultural studies, they have- in many notable instances- quite successfully placated student demands and protests while, at the same time, avoiding any real issues of accountability (Wing 1999; Hu-Dehart 1995). In this chapter, I examine Asian American Studies’ commitment and accountability to communities beyond campus gates. In order to accomplish this, however, it will be helpful to first revisit the founding principles and mission of Ethnic Studies.
