Response: Likeability vs Realism

As a reader I didn’t find Jin neccesarily likeable, but I could relate to him. Jin represents those painful, awkward, moments of adolescence that everyone experiences. Jin isn’t a wholly likeable character because he’s a reminder of all of our embarrassing moments and teenage angst. I think it’s easy for readers well into their college years and older to look back at that time in their  development and cringe, and watching Jin fumble through his school days and social life is definitely cringe-inducing i.e. on page 95 “Huh huh..at least I didn’t rake the breast.” I think Jin not standing up for himself is realistic (definitely not admirable), I think we all had moments of impotent rage in our adolescence that we didn’t know how to address. Who hasn’t wanted to tell off a popular kid only to cowardly back down and  later  fantasize revenge? I think what makes Jin easy to dislike is his treatment of Wei-Chen. Jin is desperate to distance himself from his cultural identity which has been the source of teasing and torment. It’s kind of heartbreaking to read how Wei-Chen describes Jin to Suzy when they’re locked in the closet when Jin tried to resist even befriending him in the first place. Yang is brilliant at accurately depicting the fickle nature of adolescent friendship without patronizing the reader with a big “here’s what we all learned” message. I think Jin gallantly standing up for himself and his friends would ring as false and unrealistic with most readers. The passivity which allows racism is definitely exasperating, and yet unfortunately very real. As terrible as it sounds, there’s something about the hardness and callousness of youth that makes overt racism seem more okay than it is in adulthood (for example the classmate asking Jin if he eats dogs), or perhaps racist adults are better at hiding their prejudiced views.

Overall, I definitely agree that Jin isn’t likeable, but Yang didn’t insult the reader by presenting a sugar-coated story.

Searcher: Yang and His Life Experiences in American Born Chinese

I stumbled upon this photo gallery during my research for this assignment. Because it’s presented in a photo gallery, I thought it was a much more interactive way to learn more about American Born Chinese. The questions and answers are from an interview with Gene Yang done by America.gov. It won’t let me embed, but if the link doesn’t work, it can be found at:

http://www.america.gov/multimedia/photogallery.html#/4110/gene_yang/

I particularly enjoyed learning more about Yang’s background, which I was curious about after he mentioned in that youtube interview Laura posted that he drew from his own life experiences when creating the stories. I thought his website Humble Comics would have offered enough insight, but I think the questions asked and his responses are interesting. He mentions specific instances in his childhood that inspired parts of the novel and the role religion played, a point Moriah brought up in a First Reader post. Yang also offers his view on modern culture and the impact he thinks it has on the Asian-American community. Towards the end of the gallery, he talks about comics as a medium for self-expression.

Monkey King

So far I am enjoying this book immensely, especially in comparison to our previous text. The work starts with an introduction to a piece of Chinese folklore called the Monkey King. This immediately caught my eye for two reasons, the first is because I am fascinated by folklore in general, and the second is that I realized I had seen incarnations of this “character” before in popular culture, so I wanted to learn more about it. The monkey king apparently originates from a novel written in the 16th century called The Journey to the West, and it is considered something of a national treasure. Indeed this story has been told many times in different ways over the last few hundred years, and some of them I have managed to absorb even on a casual basis. He is known in the west as the Monkey King, but in China he goes by Sun Wukong, and in Japan he goes by Son Goku. The flying nimbus, the magical red staff, and the tail are no coincidences; the main character of the famous DragonBall is the Monkey King himself, told with heavy creative license of course. I can’t say I see a great deal of paralell beyond the superficial but my experience with both subjects is limited. Perhaps someone more familiar with the imagery could point out more deeply running themes. Goku seems to be more human than monkey and any mischief he shows in the early series stems mostly out of the fact that he is a child, rather than being a deity of mischief.

Another little factoid was that in the 2008 film The Forbidden Kingdom Jet Li plays the monkey king, and a few aspects of his character are shown throughout the film. Also the nerd in me would like to point out that you can play as the Monkey King in little big planet, and an incarnation of him in Marvel vs Capcom 2.

I find it interesting that we see the Monkey King in popular culture, considering how steeped in popular culture the work American Born Chinese is. Has anyone else seen a a version of the Monkey King out and about?

Monkey King,

So far I am enjoying this book immensely, especially in comparison to our previous text. The work starts with an introduction to a piece of Chinese folklore called the Monkey King. This immediately caught my eye for two reasons, the first is because I am fascinated by folklore in general, and the second is that I realized I had seen incarnations of this “character” before in popular culture, so I wanted to learn more about it. The monkey king apparently originates from a novel written in the 16th century called The Journey to the West, and it is considered something of a national treasure. Indeed this story has been told many times in different ways over the last few hundred years, and some of them I have managed to absorb even on a casual basis. He is known in the west as the Monkey King, but in China he goes by Sun Wukong, and in Japan he goes by Son Goku. The flying nimbus, the magical red staff, and the tail are no coincidences; the main character of the famous DragonBall is the Monkey King himself, told with heavy creative license of course. I can’t say I see a great deal of paralell beyond the superficial but my experience with both subjects is limited. Perhaps someone more familiar with the imagery could point out more deeply running themes. Goku seems to be more human than monkey and any mischief he shows in the early series stems mostly out of the fact that he is a child, rather than being a deity of mischief.

Another little factoid was that in the 2008 film The Forbidden Kingdom Jet Li plays the monkey king, and a few aspects of his character are shown throughout the film. Also the nerd in me would like to point out that you can play as the Monkey King in little big planet, and an incarnation of him in Marvel vs Capcom 2.

I find it interesting that we see the Monkey King in popular culture, considering how steeped in popular culture the work American Born Chinese is. Has anyone else seen a a version of the Monkey King out and about?

A Place to Belong

(I am unclear on whether we are supposed to have read the whole book, so I am going to, for purposes of this blog, only respond to the first half so as not to spoil anyone.)

It may be a little obvious, but all of the main characters are basically looking for a place to belong. Jin is mostly lost in his quest for Amelia. The Monkey King is looking to be ‘the great sage,’ when he is quite plainly a monkey. “Danny” is pretty much fully integrated into where he feels he belongs, but is thwarted in that attempt by his cousin; and even “Chin-kee” is trying to fit in, even if it doesn’t mean changing who he is at all (That may be a stretch. I get uncomfortable even trying to think about how to address Chin-kee, to tell you the truth).
The real catch is that none of them are very good at it. Which I suppose is the very catalyst for the story, the thing for them to overcome. An important lesson early on, for the Monkey king, is when he flies beyond the veil of reality, and relieves himself on a golden pillar, only to discover that he has peed on the hand of his creator. What the Monkey King wants is impossible, because there is simply a way things are; and he is not the great sage, he is just a monkey. Maybe a monkey that is an awesome martial artist, but, really, he’s basically just a monkey.

…

Don’t tell him I said that.

Much to say but I’ll focus on this detail of Christian imagery.

I’ll start of saying I really like American Born Chinese. I love the animation, I love the way the story is told, and I love that it has a poignant message without the grittiness of some of the other novels we’ve read. (I’ve enjoyed all those as well, but there is a lightness to ABC’s heaviness that I really enjoy whereas the others were very aware of their heaviness)

What stood out to me was the Christian imagery in the Monkey King’s story. I first noticed it with the appearance of the emissaries of Tze-Yo-Tzuh. This was on page 67 in ABC. They happen to be a lion, an ox, a human and an eagle. In Revelations 4:6-7 it talks about 4 beasts that surround the throne of God and give glory to His name. I thought it was cool that Yang chose to use such blatant (at least blatant for me) references to the throne room of Heaven. I couldn’t really understand why he would use such a Christian reference when the rest of the Monkey King’s universe is much removed from a Biblical reality.

Yang squeezes in  Christian imagery again on page 215. This time he doesn’t say it in the dialogue he shows us a traditionally Christian Christmas scene, but with a twist. The Monkey King says he became an emissary of Tze-Yo-Tzuh by completing his test of virtue. The panel suggests that he was among the wise men who visited Joseph, Mary and infant Jesus in the Nativity story. There is a small nod at Biblical verse because the Monkey King says he had to make his journey west to complete his test of virtue. This is funny because the Wise Men are known to have come from the east (Matthew 2:2)

I wonder why Yang has chosen to add such a heavy dose of Christian religious imagery into the novel. There are other religions with virtuous pillars that Yang addresses but he chooses to focus so much on images specific to Christianity i.e. the Nativiy.

If anyone has any insights as to why he does this it”d be great to hear!

“it’s easy becoming anything you wish…so long as you’re willing to forfeit your soul.”

It’s interesting to break down how these feelings of social inferiority work through three different angles. Mortification is the vehicle for prejudice: the monkey king gets ridiculed at the dinner party, Jin is embarrassed by his introduction the ignorant teacher presents to the class, and Danny is ashamed to an almost excruciating extent of his cousin Chin-kee, who embodies all the Asian stereotypes out there. All three of these characters abandon their values in order achieve respectable status in their various social outlets: Jin and Danny want to be seen as an equal among classmates, and the monkey king wants to be recognized in heaven. In an attempt to mimic the rules of heaven the monkey king forces his subjects to wear shoes, then leaves them behind unprotected to seek heavenly approval. Jin chastises Wei-Chen when he speaks to Jin in Mandarine, and Danny does his best to push away his cousin Chinkee. In trying to adjust their station in life, these changes manifest literally: Jin gets a perm, the monkey king’s humanoid body, and Danny…(find out later!) of course, his metamorphosis is much more abstract. It’s important to note how all of these characters progressively degrade throughout American Born Chinese. It seems as if they trade in their decency, their humanity – their soul – for a “new identity,” when they are who they are the whole time.

Likeability vs. Realism in “American Born Chinese”

After finishing reading “American Born Chinese”, I found myself wondering if I actually liked it. The art and the writing was clever and often powerful.  But except for the Monkey King (who actually grew as a character throughout the book), I personally did not like anyone in the book–not Jin who is filled with utter self-loathing and inability to stand up for himself, not Greg who simply hides his prejudices than Timmy, definitely not the walking stereotype of Chin-Kee. I understand that these are all for the most part kids but the close-mindedness of the non-mythical Asians and everyone else to be extremely bothersome. I didn’t like them. I didn’t root for them. And as characters, there was very little growth shown by any of them–quite often they grew backwards.

And maybe that’s real. I don’t know.

But I went a high school that was recognized by National Geographic as the most diverse in the country. I’m not saying that racism didn’t exist there, but if it showed itself it was met head on. But we see so many examples of racist and prejudicial behavior that aren’t confronted by Jin, Suzy or Wei Chen (even though he was really a monkey). Timmy calls Suzy a chink and instead of her fighting back at his idiocy, we only see her crying over it. When Greg asks Jin to stop dating the woman of his dreams, the only time we see him resist is in his mind.  The passiveness in the book in the face of racism was exasperating. And in the end of the book, Jin finally grows a bit as a character after changing his entire outward appearance but only in witness of a monkey disguised as a boy–about as unreal and inconsequential as you can get.

To the Respondents: did you actually like Jin as a character?

searchers: american born chinese

So I know I’m early – searchers is due Oct 29th, but I found this and thought I’d just get it done with

I really like this clip because it has a real interview w the creator of American Born Chinese.

I think an important definition to note is that Gene Wang says the novel is about “Creating an Identity for Yourself in America”. This can be a struggle b.c it’s natural for people to want to belong – but also to keep their own specific cultural history special at the same time. Meshing the two together can create a complex.

Gene Wang also says that American can be seen as a community of individuals, and as a comic book creator, he has found a parallel in his profession “comics is a very individualistic pursuit…expresses who you are” He continues by discussing which components of a person can be changed, and which components are vital to your individual self.

*

As a side note, I would also like to say I enjoyed this clip b/c it represents a cinematic appearance like we were talking about with Jimmy Corrigan. Deftly, there are subtle movements (monkey king’s arm, etc), but also the panning of certain characters in a panel show which one is important at the moment.

-laura kelly

Chinese, anyone? Stereotyping with a purpose.

What a difference from our last read!  The novel and its message are pretty simplistic  (especially after Jimmy Corrigan) and explores feelings of cultural identity, alienation, and eventual self-acceptance.  In American Born Chinese, Gene Yang weaves together the stories of three characters as they work to overcome feelings of shame in their search for identity – the Monkey King, Jin Wang, and Danny. As half-Asian myself, I found this a very interesting read.  I spent my early years in 1970s Kansas (not exactly a wellspring of tolerance then) and can certainly relate to the inner turmoil that can arise when you look different.

The most difficult (and, well…funny) chapters to read featured Chin-Kee and some over-the-top racial stereotyping, which applies not just to Asians, but also to Danny and other Americans.  Chin-Kee’s squinty eyes, manner of dress and speech (those transposed Ls and Rs just made me wince), and buckteeth are all familiar stereotypes.  To really round it out, Chin-Kee’s luggage looks like Chinese take-out cartons (48) and for lunch he eats “clispy flied cat gizzards wiff noodle” (114).  Of course, Jin Wang is afraid that these ideas will be applied to him, making him reject not only his culture and best friend, but also his very being.  The stereotyping doesn’t end there, however.  Blond, blue-eyed Danny is the epitome of American youth, along with Steve, the strong, but simple jock (although I thought he was kinder than most stereotypes of dumb jocks).  Also, some of the teachers were portrayed as ignorant and culturally insensitive, a big American stereotype, which hopefully is not as true today as it was in the past.  This can be seen as they introduce Jin Wang and Wei-Chen to their classes (pages 30 and 36, respectively).

I think Gene Yang uses all of this stereotyping to make a point about people’s perceptions of others and of themselves.  When you are part of a group that is often mocked for their culture and appearance, it’s hard not to internalize it and start believing it yourself. Yang experienced this growing up and had to learn how to be comfortable in his own body. As the Monkey-King says to Jin, “Now that I’ve revealed my true form, perhaps it is time to reveal yours” (213).

Respondents: Jimmy and James

While I understand the natural tendency to have more sympathy for one person vs another it is really hard for me to look at the stories/histories of Jimmy and James in these terms. 

When I consider the way Ware has constructed this story what with its stream of conscious and interconnecting panels that more often than not flow seamlessly from present to past to imagination/dream to present again, I consider this and can’t help but think that Ware does not really want us to look at these men separately (not entirely). I think the entire structure of the work points to how connected these men are.

In my mind I see them as two sides of the same coin. They are almost like the same raw product/raw material placed under different circumstances and the entire novel unfolds the results.

In childhood they are very similar both largely live in a fantasy world to escape the circumstances that surround them. I would say Jimmy and James equally fantasize about women James just happens to have recurring fantasies on the same woman that doesn’t want him. Now of course we aren’t shown Jimmy’s childhood fantasies, excluding Superman, but one could argue that Jimmy is stuck in a perpetual state of childhood, thus we can still compare the sexual fantasies Jimmy has as an adult child to the sexual fantasies James has as an actual child.

Another thing that connects them is violence. All of the violence in James’ life is based in reality. He is physically abused and physically attacks the people (the red-head girl) around him. Jimmy is also physically violent but it is all rooted in his imagination. Jimmy’s life in reality is emotionally violent (for lack of a better term) abandoned as a child, coddled all his life by his mother rather than raised to be independent, largely unwanted by the opposite sex, used by the males in his life (Superman and his male co-worker). I see the violence as mental/emotional as well as passive thus it manifests in the subconscious/imaginary world.

Circumstance dictates that James take care of himself. Jimmy has never been on his own; this is where their tales drift. Their fathers(and lack thereof) directly influence the course of their sons lives. (The resemblance of  James’ s father to Jimmy’s father is another parallel in the story)

James, though he has his issues, has become in many ways a whole person. We see in his old age the complete person with a full life that Jimmy can become. And that we are possibly led to believe he will become with the entrance of his new co-worker.

I see James and Jimmy as the past and future of each other.  I have equal pity for both of them. I feel sorry for a child that’s been forced to fight all his life; the same way I feel sorry for a child who has been rendered incapable of defending himself. I think of his outburst at his grandfather’s kitchen table–“I just want people to like me!” How could I not feel sorry for such a person. Jimmy has gotten a lot of flak for his weakness but I think that is why Jimmy is relatable he is just the magnification/exaggeration of the small desire that is in all of—a desire to be liked. Perhaps we dislike the magnification of that dark/weak/human part of ourselves—a desire for acceptance—whatever the reason is

Responding to “The Relationship Between Amy and Jimmy”

Amy most definitely served as a foil to Jimmy, most specifically in her relationship with her parents compared to Jimmy’s. While Amy’s mother had already passed away, it felt as if she shares a stronger connection with her and than Jimmy shares with his own mother who is still alive. The fact that we are talking about Amy’s adoptive mother underscores the fact that quite often family isn’t about blood. When they hear the news that their father has died, Amy is stricken with grief and shows us an example of how most would react in that situation. That is juxtaposed with Jimmy’s complete non-reaction, not that he isn’t entitled to it.

In the powerful moment when Amy rejects Jimmy, it once again reinforces how little blood relations means to Amy. She doesn’t know him and has only met him through a tragedy. And there is no point in trying to establish a relationship with him because to Amy–Jimmy is a stranger who she now associates with grief. Just as Amy has no desire to meet her birth mother, she would probably rather forget about Jimmy’s existence.

Responding to “Alone and Detached”

Not only does the overall character of Jimmy cause the reader to be detached from his state of being, it makes him a downright alien life form. I don’t think Jimmy is meant to be relatable; I think that the reader is meant to perceive Jimmy with the same disdain that everyone in his world shows towards him. Amy is super-sweet, and considerably innocent (well, as innocent as anyone can ever be in a “raw around the edges ‘cuz that’s how real life is!” indie work…), yet she frequently loses patience with Jimmy, only to subtly reassert patience in order to progress the dialogue. That loss of patience is something I greatly sympathize with; as a reader, I continually realized that everything Jimmy does, I would do differently. Not a little differently, in a “matter of taste” kind of way, but rather in a “I wouldn’t even get myself into that situation, and even if I did, I wouldn’t react to it in a creepy, sexually repressed, yet still completely inert” kind of way. Jimmy simply glides from situation to situation, without truly acting or reacting. His decision to go see his father, which is a rather large deal, is made with a minimum of emotion, reflection, or any kind of thought at all, really. And how does he feel about his father’s revelation of Amy? Well, after lingering on his father’s word choice (“mistake”), his feelings mostly subside. If they are there at all when they meet, he doesn’t act on them in any degree. Like every other dialogue in Jimmy’s life, he mutters semi-incomprehensibly when he does manage to speak, and leaves the other participant to assume what they may about him; Jimmy’s father was left with the assumption that he had a girlfriend, for example.

Either Jimmy is secretly a brilliant yet covert conversationalist who expertly deceives others into a false sense of security, or he’s one concussion short of a coma, if you know what I mean.

My final verdict is that he is detached and unrelatable, as an artistic choice on Chris Ware’s behalf, and it is ultimately up to the reader whether or not it is their cup of tea to read several hundred pages about someone with whom they secretly (or not so secretly) hate.

Searchers: Old Man Pants

So I pretty much hate Jimmy Corrigan. Let me clarify that statement. I have respect for and understand the book. In fact it is starting to grow on me slowly. What I hate is the character Jimmy Corrigan.

Jimmy is such a spineless twit. He irks my nerves through multiple levels of hell ala Dante’s Inferno. It is his attitude of “I guess so” and uncomfortable “ha ha”. But most of all, and this is shallow I know, it is his look.

His face is picturesque dopey and without a clue. Strangely enough I can forgive that because no one gets to choose their face, (mind you the author could but not the character). The thing that gets me the most is probably his clothes. I mean Jimmy is like 35 or so there he is in old man pants and some old timey shirt/vest combo. Mostly I think it’s the old man pants.

So I decided to devote my searching into the mystery of old man pants.

Here is link to a blog that attempts to answer the question, “Why in God’s green earth would anyone wear old man pants?”

http://fizzleandpop.blogspot.com/2009/08/old-man-pants.html

Indiana Jones and Old Man Pants. Frankly they aren’t that bad, but it still makes me sad to see Indy in them.

http://io9.com/327044/indiana-jones-and-the-old-man-pants

Some random girl who was looking for old man pants. I mean really? I’m too lazy to figure it out but she shows off her find in a few pics and talks about it in her blog.

http://thatraraavis.blogspot.com/2008/10/old-man-pants.html

Recycling is the answer! Below is a link showing a skirt made out of an pair of old man pants.

http://www.etsy.com/view_listing.php?listing_id=277719

Ok, I’m fine now. It is out of my system.

Searchers: Nathalie Lawrence

http://edition.cnn.com/2000/books/news/10/03/chris.ware/index.html

I found this review/interview/ode to Chris Ware on CNN. While the article is informative with regards to Ware’s childhood and the process of making Jimmy Corrigan, what struck me about it was the author’s need to legitimize the book even though it’s a comic. A few choice quotes:

  • It is unlike any comic book you have ever seen.
  • “Jimmy Corrigan: The Smartest Kid on Earth” (Pantheon, 2000) is a newly published “graphic novel” by cartoonist Chris Ware.
  • The color printing was adjusted repeatedly — Ware’s choice of colors is as precise as his lines. Most cartoonists use the colors of kindergarten crayons; Ware uses the shades in the Crayola Big Box — Aquamarine, Goldenrod, Burnt Umber.
  • The compact imagery, the compacted plot and subplots, make “Jimmy Corrigan” more akin to a novel by Faulkner or Dickens than to “The Adventures of Spiderman.”

I found it problematic that the writer felt the need to put down other comic writers/artists in order to put ware on a pedestal. I don’t know what the hell the writer is talking about, but Marvel and DC colorists don’t just use “kindergarten crayons.” Yes, Ware’s colors are impressive on that oh-so-soft paper, but he’s not the first person to pay attention to color scheme. (That and the Crayola analogy seems to demean the comic medium as a whole.)

It was frustrating that this fan wank review compared Ware to Faulkner and Dickens because that implies that other comic books don’t deserve praise for literary prowess. The writer put graphic novel in quotation marks as if to suggest that Jimmy Corrigan doesn’t truly belong in that genre because it’s literature. Regardless of my feelings on Jimmy Corrigan, it is most definitely a graphic novel. No one should apologize for its form. I understand that mainstream American society doesn’t always have the most respect for comics, but presenting Ware’s work as an exception isn’t the way to remedy that.

Searchers — Lauren J.

A couple of interesting links…

I believe that someone tweeted about Jimmy Corrigan being an activity book for adults, and I find it funny that there’s a blog called “Toy-A-Day” where there is a paper Jimmy replica. It looks like it was cut out of the zoetrope instructions from the book.

Jimmy as a paper toy.

Jimmy as a paper toy.

http://toy-a-day.blogspot.com/2008/06/day-33-jimmy-corrigan-acme-novelty.html

Also, there’s a line of Jimmy Corrigan action figures. They look a bit worried and dreary, but the likeness of Stewie is unmistakable. The “vinyl” dolls as they are called are no longer for sale on most retail websites, but is adorable and worrisome at the same time.

Finally, there’s an article speculating about the origins of the Jimmy Corrigan-esque Stewie. Ware’s quote is pretty funny, “”a little too coincidental to be simply, well, coincidental” but adds that he’ll try his best to shrug it off. ”If I let it get the better of me, I wouldn’t get any work done,” notes Ware. ”I’d just sit around and stew about it.” I imagine Ware sitting apathetically much like Jimmy, awkwardly laughing “haha.”

http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,272303,00.html

Jimmy as a doll