If You're Not White, You're Colored

One of the scenes in Mississippi Masala that I found particularly intriguing was the one in which one of the Indian men in the motel approaches Demetrius and Tyrone trying to prevent Demetrius from suing for whiplash. It is one of the few (if not the only) instance in which he speaks in favor of solidarity among different minority groups. “As long as you’re not white, you’re colored,” he says. It’s interesting that these sentiments are only brought out when it’s strategically useful, in the context of a financial dilemma. This early scene, in which the idea of cooperation among minorities is exploited for a financial end, criticizes the possibility of genuine third-world solidarity.

I guess the story of the relationship between Mina and Demetrius demonstrates a reach across racial borders in a more genuine way than this manipulation-- and, of course, as the main storyline, this relationship is more important to the overall theme of the film. However, even this model of inter-minority cooperation is full of problems. In order to be together, both Mina and Demetrius have to leave their families, which suggests that their relationship is not possible within the spheres of their communities, and that it can only exist in some isolated limbo land (which is never shown in the film). Their ending isn’t exactly a happy one, or at least not one that holds much suggestion of future success.

As Mississipi Masala suggests, the relationship between the African-American and Asian-American communities is a problematic one. Why is it that two groups with similar histories of mistreatment by the white majority have such trouble getting along? I think a few important differences between these groups contribute to this. First, as we’ve discussed, the African-American community is larger, visible enough to create a black-white racial dichotomy that other races-- including Asians-- have trouble fitting into. Second, a key aspect of the Asian-American experience is the immigrant experience. The stories in Sa-I-Gu are part of a standard trope of the Asian-American narrative: couples who left everything in their home countries to struggle in the Land of Opportunity for their children’s sake.

I was struck by one interview in Sa-I-Gu, in which the woman tells of how she’d expected America to be, essentially, whiter. She’s surprised by the number of Hispanics in her new neighborhood and says she could have believed it was Mexico, but not America. It made me begin to wonder whether the Asian immigrant’s American dream was a _white American dream. This brings up an interesting idea. We’ve talked about the Asian-American as the perpetual foreigner; but this interview suggests that, at least to this Korean-American woman, all other ethnic minorities are just as foreign. If you’re not white, you’re colored-- and, perhaps, not quite American enough.

An early sequence of Sa-I-Gu shows a Korean church singing “Amazing Grace,” a traditional African-American spiritual. This clip perhaps suggests that Asian-Americans and African-Americans have more in common than either community will admit. Watching _Sa-I-Gu reminded me of Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing, which deals with race in Brooklyn in the late ‘80s. While it mostly deals with black-white relations (no surprise there), the film also addresses tensions between other ethnic groups, and it features a corner grocery owned by a newly immigrated Korean couple. Below are a few clips from Do the Right Thing which focus on the Korean couple (it also includes the looting/burning scene, which I think is pertinent in light of the L.A. riots).  

Especially interesting is the moment in which the mob turns away from the burning, white-owned pizzeria, toward the Korean grocery, and decides to leave it alone after the owner yells, "I'm black! I'm black! You-- me-- same!"  Is this what it takes for people to even consider minority solidarity?  Angry mobs and threats of lawsuits?  Well, if these extreme situations are what it takes, then so be it.

Narrative Masala

Mississippi Masala was an interesting movie in the context of our class because we often discuss Asian Americans and their relationships with white America, whereas this movie concentrated on the interaction between Asian Americans and African Americans. The relationship between these two groups is very complex, as can be seen in the movie. For example, the figure who closest adheres to the image of the model minority in his work ethic, composure, and drive to succeed is actually Demetrius, who is black and not Asian, providing evidence contrary to the common stereotype. Despite his success, not many people in the movie acknowledge Demetrius' hard work. Admittedly, being a carpet cleaner is not too glamorous a job, but it is still admirable that Demetrius is running his own business. In spite of his success, Demetrius doesn't seem to receive the proper amount of respect in the movie, whether it be from Meena's Indian family, the white loan officer in the bank, or even his own fellow African Americans. I think this irony (and inequity) is best commented on when Demetrius confronts Jay, saying that Jay shouldn't think (in a white manner) that he is better than Demetrius because of race when Jay and his family are not so different from Demetrius, save for a few shades of skin color difference.

I found this extremely interesting because Jay is not American, but Ugandan, yet the issues of racial division and perhaps superiority still make their ways into his actions. I thought that it would have made more sense that Jay feel more affinity to African Americans, seeing as how African people are who he grew up around. Additionally, I think minorities in the United States at least on a loose level, form solidarity due to a sense of common oppression from whites. On the other hand, Asians like Jay were kicked out of Uganda precisely because they were perceived as closed off and well off elitists by the black African majority, and in the United States, Asians are placed on a different tier of minority than blacks as well.

Ultimately, from a media point of view, the portrayal of Indians in this movie includes many Indian and Asian American stereotypes, including the ownership of motels, the closed traditions and community, the concern with money, and the sense of superiority and sacredness that the family seemed to show with regards to their traditions. At the same time, Meena's family's journey is also unique because they are not simply Indian Americans or Asian Americans, and as such, their narratives cannot be easily placed into those categories. Throughout the movie, there was no one way to term Meena's nationality/origin, masala being the best characterization of her identity. In this sense, I think this movie shows the complexities of identity well, showing viewers that there could be more to an individual than can be gleaned from a limiting categorical term like Asian American or Indian American.

Better luck next film

I should first fully disclose that this is not the kind of film I enjoy at all, and so--predictably--I did not like this film, though I WILL give that it did do a few things well and a few things in interesting ways.

Anyway, the good (as pretty much everyone has already said): it peels the skin off of the "model minority" facade, shows what's lurking underneath, and spins it all as if the Asians were the ones in control... by which I mean it gave Asians guns. Okay, I see that I really have nothing more to add about the GOOD points of this film (people who actually liked it seemed to have covered those points pretty well), so I'll just move onto my critique.

As Melissa mentioned, the plot was nothing new--it's already been done in other suburbia-gone-bad films about white teens. In fact, it seemed merely like one of those overdone bad teenaged suburbia movies with Asians as the main characters and the model minority issue foregrounded... it didn't seem to go anywhere else, and that's what disappointed me the most. Sure, it ends on a semi-poignant comment that these kids are still KIDS and they don't know what the heck they're doing even though they can work the system so well... but they already made this point when Virgil cried in the car, so the ending, for me, brought nothing but a depressing sense that these guys are really, really damaged and nothing in their environment will fix them.

...Which is actually not TOTALLY removed from the truth. A professor of mine (in the education department) is always talking about how the "model minority" image is covering up severe problems in some Asian-American youths that don't show until it's already too late to fix (she usually cites Asian-American students who hate their parents and move across the country for college). The way these students were raised and the environment in which they were raised are always big contributing factors to the problem. This film illustrates an off-the-charts worst-case-scenario of that idea.

However, I think the film can be taken in a VERY wrong way, especially now after incidents like Virginia Tech. The film does not really stop the audience from imagining that ALL privileged, smart Asian students are capable of doing such horrific deeds, since the liberal use of stereotypes and the endearing internal monologue from Ben make these teens seem like your normal, average Asian-American honor student... when they are NOT. Despite what popular movies portray, what the boys did was HIGHLY abnormal of teens of ANY race. There is something seriously wrong with EACH of the main Asian male characters and they definitely needed punishment or serious therapy at the end. Yet, there doesn't seem to be any end in sight... the boys are just left in a lawless, parent-less Lord of the Flies scenario that won't do squat to help them.

So what does the film do for Asian-Americans? Well, it shows that we, like our white counterparts, can ALSO be seriously damaged people. Okay, that's a good point but where does it go from there? Does it offer a non-destructive solution to the main characters' dilemma? Does it show the ROOT CAUSE(S) of or REASON(S) for all the violence and crime the boys commit? Does it give any preventative role to the community, parents, teachers, or other authority figures? ...I guess we need another film to fill in those gaping voids between this film and reality.

We Need More Than Better Luck Tomorrow

I found Better Luck Tomorrow to be a really interesting movie because the types of characters embodied by Virgil, Ben, Daric and Han were the very type of male characters I encountered among Asians around my age in New York City, where I grew up. Each of them, in trying to fit into society in America, revealed some of the limitations on Asian American identity that exist in America. The four Asian male characters in the movie represent the main Asian male identities I was familiar with growing up: the straight arrow Asian, studying hard and following rules towards a widely respected ideal of success; the somewhat "whitewashed" and manipulative Asian, who does what is needed to push for his own goals, embodied by Daric; the "cool" Asian, silent, strong, with a hidden temper and a willingness to break rules, embodied by Han; and the smart Asian who wants respect and to be cool, embodied by Virgil.

Characters like Ben for the most part accept the model minority stereotype, and try to find success in their lives by walking the paved road. Daric too tries to find success through education and overachieving, but he does so through different means; he does so by accumulating leadership positions in "white" clubs, like the newspaper, the environmental club, and quiz bowl. In taking up positions usually occupied by white leadership, Daric is also trying to reach success by means largely defined by white society, just like Ben. Han however, lives his life largely in rejection of white standards, and is successful I think, by not fulfilling the expectations of white society; he is an academic delinquent, commits scams, cheats, but at the same time, as an Asian, I can't help but respect Han, because he is independent of the burden of "white" success. Finally, there is Virgil, who is cut largely from the same cloth as Ben is, but also wants to break away from a strictly white society paved life and stereotype, evidenced by his affinity for his cousin Han.

It is Virgil with whom I sympathize most in the movie, because I think his ongoing struggle to be both academically successful, which is associated with whiteness, and be thuggish rebel at the same time, represents a struggle that many contemporary Asian males go through. To be too devoted to classes, grades, and exams is to fit into a white society defined stereotype. To aspire for high positions in clubs and for leadership positions seems too much like trying to be white. At the same time, it is also hard to be the delinquent rebel, who is respected, but at the cost of deliberately forgoing a fulfilling of one's full potential. In the end, Virgil doesn't seem to garner much respect from either side, because he is always seen as being a poser on both sides, yet these "sides" shouldn't have to exist in the first place, as they are both responses to white society defined roles for Asians. I think it says a lot that Virgil ended up being the one that tried to kill himself, because unlike the other characters, Virgil did not have his own crowd to return to after their Chinese gang basically broke down, when in reality, there is no reason why he had to belong to a specific crowd to be respected. The lesson I learned from watching Virgil is that Asian Americans should value themselves as individuals, not in response to the model minority stereotype, because as it is, the vicious cycle of trying to fit into or to vehemently fight stereotypes only leaves the ones who refuse to choose, as outsiders, when in fact, the independent individuals are the ones that one could say most embody the ideas which form the very fabric of American society, such as the ideal of the self made men.

Better Luck Tomorrow reflection

Justin Lin’s film Better Luck Tomorrow addresses the stereotypes many Asian youths face in regard to being labeled as the “model minority.” Lin paints the life of high school Asian students as one of constant pressure and stress as they grow up in a cutthroat environment where not going to an Ivy League university is not an option. The four Asian boys seem to think that the only way to escape their monotonous suburban lifestyle is to commit small crimes and break school rules hoping to bring some stimulation and excitement to their lives. But how do they first go about this? Alan Dale makes comments on the BlogCritics Magazine website that “at first their crimes are in the model-minority vein--cheat sheets and, to a lesser extent, figuring out how to return computer equipment and keep it, too” (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/05/14/235250.php). Thus, Dale seems to suggest that although these Asian high school boys are trying to live dangerously, they still at least at the beginning adhere to the familiar stereotypes of their race. Further, Ben, Virgil, Daric, and Han use their academic decathlon meetings in order to plan their illegal activities. Dale notes that although they “use academic decathlon meetings for planning crimes and unhinged partying, they’re still a championship team” (http://blogcritics.org/archives/2003/05/14/235250.php). So even though they are doing drugs, stealing computers, and robbing houses, these boys maintain the outward perception of being the model minorities. It is not enough for them to simply be on the academic decathlon team, they must win and be the champions. Potentially, the team could have served as a total front for their criminal operations in which they could have completely ignored studying and non take the competition seriously. Instead, they continued to study and prepare because as model minorities, even if they were rolling in dough, they needed to academically perform.

Something else that Dale suggests that I didn’t really think about before is the role of (or in this case, the lack there of) parents during this whole film. From speaking with a lot of other Asians, there is the stereotype that the model minority Asian child is a reflection of their model minority traditionalist parents. However throughout the film, there is little discussion of parental pressures and I found it interesting that the film didn’t focus in at all on introducing Ben and company’s parents to the audience. I expected to see the interactions between the sons and parents, but these relationships were never shown in the film. My own assumption is that these parents were traditional and very strict, which might explain why Ben felt he must attend an Ivy League school and participate in dozens of clubs, but we will never know for certain. I wonder, did we really need to see the parents? Or was the assumption of who they were and what they are like so stereotyped and ingrained in our thoughts that it wasn’t necessary?

Bruce Lee as the model minority

To expand Clarissa’s post regarding Fu Manchu vs. the Model Minority, I would like to bring up the question of language. Clarissa wrote, “In true Fu Manchu-mode, Han is an urbane, evil genius who aims to infiltrate Western society and bring about its moral collapse.” The fact that Han is an urbane genius should be explored further. In my view, it is no coincidence that Han’s English is near flawless, with a slick sonorousness that is befitting of a ruler, while Lee’s English is heavily accented and somewhat mousy to boot. Lee’s character never has the booming vocal presence of Han, and his exaggerated screaming is at times cringe-worthy.

The point of such a distinction is that the figure of the Oriental madman, as an emblem of the Yellow Peril, is threatening for the very reason that he is able to blend into white society. He is capable, if he chooses, of threatening the cultural exclusivity of white assimilation. By the same token, the model minority is never threatening because he is always marked by demeanor and speech as ineluctably foreign. It is reminiscent of early gangster films, in particular Scarface (1932), starring Paul Muni as the titular character. In that film, Scarface represents a dangerous model of assimilation—he abandons his first-generation Italian mother, speaks a slangy, urban English, and shortens his given name Antonio to simply Tony. Tony Calmonte buys all the luxuries of American life, including an Anglo girlfriend. Han, incidentally, also has a blonde white woman as his closest assistant. About midway through Scarface, we are shown a citizens’ meeting in which various representatives of an urban community gather to discuss Calmonte’s crime spree. The representative from the Italian-American community, speaking only at the end when the Anglos have had their bits, shakes his fist and rattles off “That’sa true-a, he’sa disgrace-a to my people!” It is a typical device in these films to contain the threat of the alien by marking the “ideal” ethnic citizen with traits that are foregrounded and superficially apparent. In being largely incapable of speech and more or less inhuman in fighting prowess (Bruce Lee is never seriously challenged in any of his matches), Lee is inadvertently playing into a construction of racial otherness that is contained by whiteness.

This is the same sort of contained racialization that allowed whites to appreciate non-white fighters like Joe Louis, whose manager John Roxborough forced to be on his “best behavior” at all times, outlined by the following seven commandments:

1. He was never to have his picture taken along with a white woman.

2. He would never go into a nightclub alone.

3. There would be no soft fights.

4. There would be no fixed fights.

5. He was never to gloat over a fallen opponent.

6. He was to keep a dead pan in front of the cameras.

7. He was to live and fight clean.

Joe Louis was loved by whites for the reason that he was not Jack Johnson, who held the championship from 1908-1915. Johnson lived large, boasted, boozed around, and married white women, essentially living his life just to piss off the white man. In Enter the Dragon, Bruce Lee is Joe Louis to Han’s Jack Johnson.

This is not to say that Bruce Lee's other films are devoid of conscious radicalism. This one is just a real stinker, even though it has some of the greatest martial arts sequences ever filmed.