Kristin Hamon

Reading and Reviewing: 45 minutes

Writing Response: 70 minutes

Submission Review #1

S. Lockett

Summer 2006 Midterm Essay

“Multicultural Literature: Narratives of Hunger”

http://coursesite.uhcl.edu/hsh/Whitec/LITR/4333/models/20065731/midterm/mt06ess/mt06esslockett.htm

I immediately gravitated toward Lockett’s midterm essay due to her original title and premise. She built her essay on the foundational concept that both the minority and immigrant American experience could be described as “narratives of hunger” (SL). This concept demands inquiry considering its paradoxical nature. Using the metaphor of hunger seems to create a feeling of unification in desires among these groups, while it simultaneously and conversely exposes the desires as quite different in nature. One of the most entrancing phrases she employed was explaining human hunger for identity as leading to a “quest for satiety” (SL). Not only eloquently stated, I found this concept appealing because it breaks so many boundaries that seem to exist among race, gender, and socio-economic distinctiveness. In order to use the narrative of hunger to separate minority and immigrant groups, she defines immigrants as hungering for “opportunities, newfound identities, and independence,” while describing minority groups as longing for “ethnicity, unity, and equality” (SL). Although these distinctions seem to beg for analysis, Lockett only seemed to mention them as an aside, after securing textual evidence that fit appropriately with each of her individual paragraphs. I found myself wanting more. For example, she referred to the “color code” momentarily in her 4^th paragraph by using an example found in a selection by Nellie Wong. Lockett spent time developing support that Wong’s protagonist battled with the “color code,” but the student did not seem to develop the idea past the initial identification. It seemed as though there was also a great opportunity for the discussion of a narrative of conversion as a way of comparing it to the concept of a hunger narrative. So many biblical parables and verses seem to focus on a natural “thirst” or “hunger” for Christ, that a Biblical response to hunger might have been an interesting development. Overall, Lockett seemed to do an adequate job of fulfilling all requirements of the essay.  I was fascinated by the concept of a hunger narrative and have found myself rereading some of our texts to look for its presence. I was, however, disappointed that she seemed frightened to travel off the paved path of assignment requirements into the rugged domain of free thought. For example, as she concluded, she made the statement that “America continues to satisfy the hunger” of a variety of minority and immigrant groups (SL). I almost think this would have been a better question to ask initially and would have helped take the essay in a more creative direction. 

Submission Review #2

K. Fisher

Summer 2006 2^nd Research Posting

“Trekking through Whiteness Studies”

http://coursesite.uhcl.edu/hsh/Whitec/LITR/4333/models/20065731/rschpost/rpost2/rpost2su06fisher.htm

Continuing my search for new theoretical concepts, I found myself stumbling upon a 2006 research posting by K. Fisher. Although our class must primarily focus on the immigrant and minority narrative and distinctions, I found his concept of “Trekking through Whiteness Studies” as a subject matter that might potentially offer up some sort of solution to the racism and distinctions that seem to exist among people of our nation. His major premise is that the dominant culture’s identity remains unseen, while it concurrently enjoys lording ultimate control over groups trying to assimilate to it. I really enjoyed his hypothesis that if we, as a nation, expose the “white” culture’s unseen privileges, racism might start to subside. This made me think about Dr. White’s explanation of immigrant and minority groups being able to “avoid marginalization and discrimination” if they would only remain “quiet” (Objective3???). Fisher did not seem to take his essay in this direction, however, but it might be an intriguing concept to explore. If American society (still a very loaded term that perhaps needs further defining) were to expose “white culture” in the same way that minority and immigrant groups are often exposed, then perhaps the same form of oppression that is used to flatter the dominant culture could take on a more hegemonic effect resulting in the reduction of tension among ethnic groups, including Caucasians. I found Fisher’s desire to break through the ignorance of the dominant culture quite provocative. I know that even in class, students seem frightened to admit that they may have played a certain integral role in the oppression of any minorities or immigrants aspiring for their own identities. Being able to discuss that “whites” are ignorant to their place of privilege seemed to me an honest and bold claim and one that might be further explored in order to encourage more people (not just academia) to become exposed to the narrative of immigrants. The only qualm I had with his conclusion is that he stated in his final sentence that “scholars” have “assigned whites” their “field of influence” (KF). It seems as though academia might be one of the only areas, conversely, that desires to have conversations about “field(s) of influence” and their “assignment(s)” (KF). Ideally, we would look to academia for help in educating all of society instead of bemoaning their wicked (and as Fisher seemed to think – seemingly white) ways.

Submission Review #3

K. Daniel

Summer 2006 Midterm Essay

“The Differences We Have in Common”

http://coursesite.uhcl.edu/hsh/Whitec/LITR/4333/models/20065731/midterm/mt06ess/mt06essdaniel.htm

I was immediately drawn to Daniel’s essay because it read as a narrative of her learning. My curiosity seemed to overtake and push me through her piece in an attempt to understand how she saw immigrant literature and what she learned from the same readings with which I have come in contact this last couple of weeks. Her initial concern seems to be that she cannot understand why immigrants would ever desire to come to America after she read horrific accounts of sorrowful and shameful stories of assimilation. This inquiry drove her essay and started encouraging me to wonder why many would ever choose to come to a place that makes retaining one’s identity so difficult. One of the textual references she noted really stood out to me as a fresh concept that I seem to have witnessed with many of my Mexican American students. She used the story In the Land of the Free by Sui Sin Far to describe how “the child is certainly assimilated in the dominant culture at the expense of his relationship with his parents” (KD). Although this was a paragraph intended for discussion primarily about immigrants, I started to see how immigrants might be able to relate to minority culture. When a child has become so Americanized that he or she starts to reject or become embarrassed of his or her parents, it could threaten to implode the family structure. It seems as though no parent ever dreamed in coming to America that they would lose the respect of their children through the Americanization process. This realization leads to a nightmarish existence for the adults while the children entertain full assimilation and wonder why their parents are so “slow” to understand the culture around them. I found this concept fascinating because it seems like a possible link to minority culture. These immigrant parents (from any country – not just the New World) seem like they might feel slighted due to the loss of relationship with their children. Perhaps this could be a link between minority and immigrant culture instead of a divisive point? Some further thought or research might prove quite interesting.

The other concept I do not think has been discussed that often in our class is the dominant culture’s surreptitious plan to rid itself of immigrants. Daniel explains that the dominant culture does “everything in its power to discourage or prevent the immigrant from true assimilation and from sharing the American dream” (KD). I know this has been discussed very little, because it seems like most of our class is made up of the dominant culture and is embarrassed to admit our association or even partial belief in Daniel’s theory. The last two theories that grabbed my attention were two statements about minority culture. Daniel argues that minorities are actually a mirror image of immigrants. Minority cultures have to decide whether or not to stay in a nation that has oppressed them for many generations, whereas the immigrant culture has to decide whether or not to travel to a nation that could oppress them for many generations. It seems this might be some equal, if not paradoxical, footing on which minority and immigrant cultures could meet. Obviously, I was completely enthralled with Daniel’s essay. I found her account of her learning process to be so honest and as a result she exposed many concepts that I had not previously considered. I look forward to reviewing many of my texts to see if I can add to the ideas or theories that she introduced. This web review was entirely enjoyable and encouraged me to think about new concepts of the immigrant narrative I had not yet discovered. I now look forward to reading all of the essays of my classmates in hopes that our seminar will create contributions as original as the 2006 seminar.