passerby and Doubleclick, you both seem to gleefully point out how general both the terms are. No one is contesting that point. Here is my challenge to you. Do you have a suggestion?
I would genuinely like to hear what your solution is to this problem, without making the wrong assumptions I have previously pointed out.
From dictionary.com:
>> Oriental has been objected to on two grounds: because it suggests racial, rather than cultural identity,
OK then, so if “Asian” means cultural identity, then Americans of Asian descent are not “Asian”. You cannot have it both ways. Is it racial or is it cultural?
>> and because it identifies the place of origin in terms of its location relative to the West (i.e., “from the East”), rather than in absolute terms.
How silly can we get? So all relative terms are taboo now? The middle east? This is just ludicrous. I will remind you that China’s name means literally translated “central (middle) kingdom”. When they change their name to something else I’ll be willing to discuss if they are oriental or not as viewed from where I stand.
And Filipinos and Australians can take offense at the name “South China Sea” because it is to the north of them. We need to start a crusade to rid our languages and geographical terms of these biased names.
And to those who say you should call them whatever they want to be called. yes, of course, we all agree on that. But when China Guy points out they call themselves “yellow people” everybody gasps and says that is irrelevant because it is our language we are talking about and they have no say. So what is it? Relevant or not? Acceptable or not?
I do not think there is any way anyone is going to come up with a precise definition accepted by all of the terms oriental and Asian. Seeing how all other racial/cultural terms are quite confusing I can’t see the need to have this one be any less confusing.
I will also call your attention to the ongoing thread about “retard” now being taboo and other such medical terms. It seems when a doctor says "You are a retard"or “Mrs. Smith, your son is a retard” you need to ask “is that an insult or a diagnosis?”
Maybe when someone calls you Oriental you can just ask him to clarify if he means it as a compliment or an insult. Nobody can explain it better than the person who said it.
As is all too often the case, we have a lot of people not engaging each other’s comments here. Well, how to ressolve this?
I suggested since the beginning
(a) terms are always somewhat arbitrary. No getting around that. Objections in either direction are really quite pointless.
(e.g. Asia, contra the assertion above, is not well defined. There is an arbitrary line drawn through Russia around the Urals, a line of convenience since the actual continent really should be Eurasia. )
(b) Terms carry subjective meanings. My sense is that American born Asians, native English speakers began to develop a dislike for the term Oriental for certain objective and subjective reasons – I think they have been adequately described here. Undoubtedly Ed Said’s Orientalism, a critique of the old “Oriental” school of scholarship had something to do with this.
© Insofar as Asian matches current linguistic usage in re describing what might more precisely be called East Asia and at the least is no more obscuring than any other term, and insofar as a body of Asians who are native English speakers object to it, I see no harm in avoiding the term. I don’t personally see it as terribly problematic per se, but my personal sense has been the balance of (educated) American usage has shifted to Asian.
I don’t see very much reason for a two page thread. I might add that complaints about people being too sensitive strike me as ironic insofar as it’s a bit of over sensitivity to be put out over Asian versus Oriental, IMHO.
I think you may be misinterpreting the note. As I take you, you understand it to mean that only people from East and South Asia should be called “Asian”. I believe what it actually means is that people from East and South Asia, formerly known as “Orientals”, now prefer to be called “Asian” instead, not that no one from any other part of Asia may be called “Asian”.
As for “Asian” being vague, well yes, it is vague. But so are “European” and “African”, and no one seems to be objecting to the use of those terms. The OP certainly didn’t, at least not judging from the subject line.
Speaking for myself, I’m have no ties whatsoever to that part of the world… Arghh! I don’t even know what to call them now… you know, the people who come from countries such as China, Japan, Vietnam, Korea, etc. I used to refer to them as Orientals, or Far-Easterners, but all of a sudden these have become bad words. I’m Canadian of Iranian parentage and know very little about these folks.
I think it should be up to the people formerly known as “Oriental”/“Far-Easterner” to pick a name. They’re the most knowledgeable about their culture, what binds them together, what they have in common, so they should pick one. All I’m saying is respect my feelings of being concerned about lumping my ancestry with yours, just like I respect your feelings.
Note that I have a lot of respect for the cultures in East-Asia. These cultures are friggin’ ancient and rich beyond anything, and for the life of me I can’t see why they all want to be lumped together, but if they insist… suggestions: Far-Easterner? East-Asian? Are these terms offensive too?
>> I don’t see very much reason for a two page thread.
So, why are you posting? Or do you mean to say this would be easier and shorter if everybody just agreed with you from the get go? [sub]You mean I shouldn’t post here and I should go get a life?[/sub]
>> Asians who are native English speakers object to it
Well, yes and no. I would have a problem if almost all people of a certain group would consider offensive a term which is not meant to have any offensive meaning. I think the speaker is the one who decides what he means and if no offense is meant, none should be taken. If you take offense when clearly none is intended, then you are oversensitive.
But, furthermore, in many of these cases (I am not now limiting myself to this specific word or case) what you see is not a a majority of that group spontaneously feeling offended by a certain word. What you see is a very few activists or self-appointed leaders, who are really not representative of the group at all, who will take the issue and raise a stink about it. Suddenly, a lot of people who did not know it, now know they should be offended by word X.
Look what happened with “The Sopranos”. I think most Italians are intelligent enough to know what you see on TV is not real life but a few have decided to make a federal case out of this because it a racist stereotype and yada yada yada…
I am just playing devil’s advocate. I repeat, I have always used “Asian” and for me the word has all sorts of delightful connotations[sub]porn[/sub]. Wait a few years and Asian will have to be replaced with something else.
passerby, see your position is a lot clearer now. It is a choice of the easiest term to use. I don’t like Oriental, Asian, or East-Asian. You are correct. There is very little cultural relationship between a Saudi and a Japanese. However if Oriental is used to mean Far East Asian; Koreans, Chinese, and Japanese do not like to be lumped together either. Although Korea and Japan has been Sinicised, they are distinctly different cultures. All three languages are from different language groups. This isn’t an issue with Asian-Americans, but there is a lot of inter-racial rivalry between Chinese, Japanese and Koreans. Koreans are still angry at the Japanese for the brutal occupation of Korea. Chinese have similar issue with Japan. It goes back hundreds of years. So once again, I use ‘Asian’ only out of simplicity.
If your are part Persian, you should understand. Here in Los Angeles, there is a large Persian population. They hate it when they are mistaken for Arabs. Different culture. Different language. They probably don’t like the term “Middle-Eastern”, but they use it out of simplicity. Because the only other option is to insist on using Persian, and giving a historical lecture for people who don’t know the difference.
sailor: *I think the speaker is the one who decides what he means and if no offense is meant, none should be taken. If you take offense when clearly none is intended, then you are oversensitive. *
The trouble is the “clearly” part. People aren’t mind-readers and can’t always tell whether a speaker is intending offense, not intending offense, not caring whether s/he offends, or what. There are doubtless still some people around who haven’t heard that the term “colored people” is widely disliked and mean no offense at all by using it, but I wouldn’t advise them to count on the ability of their hearers to discern that. In other words, if you use a term that you know is widely considered offensive, even if you mean no offense by it, then you are undersensitive.
I admire your desire to avoid taking offense on your own behalf, sailor, but I think you’ve only found half the solution. The real way to contribute to cultural harmony, it seems to me, is to set your sensitivity on “low” concerning characterizations applied to yourself and on “high” concerning ones applied to other people.
archmichael and the rest, I think I see your points too. You’ve been using the term “Asian” for some time now to specifically refer to people in East-Asia. It’s new to me, is this an American/internet thing, or have I been living under a rock?
Anyway, I’m going to practice what I (and others) preach and take the term to be what the speaker means and not what I mean. I still think it’s too confusing to use a continent’s name to refer to only part of that continent.
So be it, if an American says “Asian” they mean someone from East Asia. Myself, I’m going to use the terms “Chinese,” “Japanese,” “Indian,” “Arab,” etc. since I’m pretty aware of the differences. But I still want to visit the Far East someday.
Anyhow, thanks for listening and debating with me. I’ve come out of it knowing more about myself and more aware of other’s points-of-view.
And don’t get me started on the “Persian” thing. Too late, you already did: That “Persian” thing totally baffles me. I think that’s another California/Americanism. In Canada, and as far as I remember in England, Iranians called themselves “Iranian” because, well, that’s what the friggin’ country’s been called for quite some time now. I find this whole call me “Persian” thing quite hypocritical. It smells like “Iranian” became a bad word in the States, and instead of clearing up the name, they just changed it to “Persian.”
I find it also quite amusing that when I run into another Iranian here in California, they try to find out if I’m one of them by either asking me in Farsi: “Are you Iranian” -or- in English: “are you Persian?” or “do you speak Farsi?” They never ask if I’m Iranian in English. Why use one term in their language, and another term in English?!?!
For the record, the conversations usually go like this:
[As I browse through a store, or an open house]
Iranian Salesman: Are you Persian?
me: No dude, I’m just here to buy stuff.
Iranian Salesman: No, I mean are you from Persia?
me: No, I’m on my own, I don’t represent “Persia”, is that some other store/agency around here?
Iranian Salesman (getting frustrated): No! I mean are you from… um… well… Are you from Iran?
me (now really acting like an asshole): Are you wondering if I’m Iranian? Why didn’t you just ask that to begin with man? No I’m Canadian. Why, does it make a difference?
Iranian Salesman (peevishly): No, nevermind. What do you want?
(heh heh)
And, on a related note, Asian folks on the SDMB
Note it only gets to the third post before someone asks for a definition of “Asian”
Sailor’s above link is quite interesting and I would really like to hear further views from the SDMB Asian-American community on this subject.
This message board is forcing me to choose words very carefully so as not receive veiled or not so veiled references to being an ignoramus, nazi or ugly American.
Trying to reach a generally acceptable definition of “Oriental” and “Asian” may well be impossible. Certainly, this board has not had much luck thus far. Further muddying the waters is that said definitions between the US, Canada, UK and Asian countries themselves are not consistent. Definitions between Asian-Americans, the Asian Diaspora elsewhere and Asians in Asia are not consistent.
Australia and New Zealand are struggling with their own identities to a certain extent and there is debate whether they should be considered “Asian.” That I don’t have to point out opens a whole new can of worms.
There is no Asian “entity” if you will in Asia. The closest pan-Asia organizations might be APEC, ASEAN, MTV Asia or the Asian Wall Street Journal. There are not many others. IMHO, there are no significant racial, social, philosophical, religious, cultural or linguistic pan-Asian ties. [For example, there is Islam or Greater China, but these are hardly pan-Asian.]
IMHO this Oriental = bad, Asian = good appears to be recent revisionism and reinterpretation of the use of these words by some in the Asian-American community. I would appreciate more on this beyond “Orient” is defined in relation to Europe and therefore not acceptable. A summary link on Edward Said might be enlightening. Examples abound where both “Oriental” and “Asian” are used in unflattering, racist or stereotypical ways. I would still appreciate examples of clearly where these words are derogatory and not synonymous.
I always try to refer Asian-Americans by their specific nationality, as in Korean-American. IMHO Asian-Americans would also do their part by being patient if someone incorrectly guesses ancestry because sometimes it ain’t that easy. If Asian-Americans want to be referred to Asian-Americans, then so be it.
My highly impractical suggestion would be for the creation of a new word so as to leave behind the baggage associated with both “Oriental” and “Asian.” Take Prince as an example and perhaps The People Formerly Known as Orientals and Asians with a neat little symbol and all (trademark anyone)? It would also be clear that this new word is the US interpretation of things related to a specific area of the world since Asian-Americans make up a small proportion of the global population of Asians. This would avoid the need to force a US interpretation on the world and Asia in particular, which might be considered by some to actually be cultural imperialism. Furthermore, it would remove any confusion that Asian-Americans are associated with the “Asian values” of Lee Kuan Yew and Dr. Mahatir. See this link: http://www.freemedia.at/v_report.htm#Asian
Good luck in creating a pan Asian-American coalition.
It is in fact impossible.
As one would in fact expect.
[quote]
There is no Asian “entity” if you will in Asia. The closest pan-Asia organizations might be APEC, ASEAN, MTV Asia or the Asian Wall Street Journal. There are not many others. IMHO, there are no significant racial, social, philosophical, religious, cultural or linguistic pan-Asian ties. [For example, there is Islam or Greater China, but these are hardly pan-Asian.]
[/qutoe]
I would add that this is largely true of any old-World continental level of identification.
Revisionism is something of a tainted word is it not?
I believe the very same was already provided in this thread, yes? Convincing or not, personally, they have been noted.
As you like:
A sort of summary from the horse’s mouth
http://landow.stg.brown.edu/post/poldiscourse/pol11.html
Biblio of reviews and critiques
http://sun3.lib.uci.edu/indiv/scctr/Wellek/said/book21.html
Some further links in re the concept and Said’s view
http://www.emory.edu/ENGLISH/Bahri/Orientalism.html
A summary site linking to the fairly vast amount of discussion and literature on the work, its ideas etc.
http://www.yorku.ca/faculty/academic/anderson/said.htm
As well as this one:
http://www.thecore.nus.edu.sg/landow/post/poldiscourse/said/orient1.html
I believe this should suffice in re Ed Said. The critique of the concept runs somewhat deeper.
Let me add that I do not personally endorse either Said’s work or the sites I have cited here. In fact I have serious reservations about Said’s work and the breadth of his critique, as well as the uses the word has been put to in some circles. However, at the same time it strikes me as an important issue and much of his critique has some merit.
Asian? Asiatic, yes. Asian?
Isn’t this getting a bit tendetious? Well have fun with the Orientalism sites. I am sure they will, if not blocked, provide much fodder.
The problem arises from the ethnic melting pot that is America. If my recollection is correct, most Asian ethnicities (in the sense of East Asian) have high out-group marriage rates. To the extent that 2nd and third generation folks may find stronger identity in a quasi-racial/ethnic grouping responding to American rather than grandpa/ma’s ethnic definitions, it strikes me as inevitable that this sort of ethnicity building will occur.
Collounsbury, I agree with you that we’ve beat this one to death but before I ride off into the sunset of this thread I have to say your posts are always valuable and well thought and we should thank you for the time you dedicate to your rigorous posts. You are one among the best posters around.
I have been playing devil’s advocate in this thread but I don’t need to tell you, not only that I see your points, but that I mostly agree with them.
For another thread about political correctness run amok please visit Retarded is now a dirty word.
Sorry for the bad link. Can the mods please correct it? Here is the correct link:
Person 1: Please don’t use the word “Oriental”, Asian is the correct usage.
Person 2: Um, okay, can I ask why?
Person 1: For one thing, it defines a region in relation to Europe.
Person 2: Anything else?
Person 1: Many Asian-Americans don’t like the word, as “Oriental” is/was often used in a generalizing, stereotypical or derogatory sense.
Person 2: And “Asian” does not suffer from these same shortcomings? For example, Asian drivers, Asian Co-prosperity sphere, Asian values promulgated by Lee Kuan Yew and Dr. Mahatir, to name just a few off the top of my head.
Person 1: (fill in the blank please)
I would like an objective and succinct fill-in-the-blank so I can use it myself in fighting ignorance.
Person 1: Because a substantial number of the people to whom it refers find it offensive.
(hint, that’s really reason #1. It’s not up to me to name or rename or nickname you. It’s up to you to define what terms you’d prefer. this was posted on page 1. page 2. pages 1- 5 on the pc=polite thread. )
Why do you think you need any more definitive reason than ‘people find it offensive’?
When you say ‘don’t do that, it bugs me’ do you really expect to have to give 5 (or indeed any) objective reasons why it does?
as I’ve written elsewhere in this post, it’s quite a personal issue for me and since I’ve lived in Asia for the last 15 years, I’ve missed the debate because it wasn’t one in 1985.
Everytime I ask for some objective examples of oriental = bad, asian = good, I get replies ranging from “some people find it offensive, so that should be enough for you” to being inferred a Nazi.
When I take my dual citizen Asian-American daughter back to the US for her first visit this summer, I would greatly appreciate being able to answer that “Oriental is not a good term because some Asian-Americans find it offensive. Asian on the other hand is the proper term for the following reasons…”
did an extensive google research turned up nothing that sheds further light on oriental = bad and asian = good. Lot’s of style guides that recommended using Asian instead of the word Oriental but nary a word as to the underlying reasoning.
Edward Said’s Orientalism Deconstruction appears to be focused on the middle east rather than all of the Orient or what we refer to as East Asia. Apologies for not having actually read the book but I did got through a few hours of reviews.
My former Chinese language professor and Harvard PhD had this comment: As for Oriental vs Asian, I would say the nuance changed as before there were a lot of departments of Oriental Languages from Berkeley to Harvard. Maybe the term got its bad flavor from the phrase “so and so is going oriental,” which was meant to be derogatory–someone with not enough integrity to maintain his own identity I suppose.
The highly reputable journal called the Harvard
Journal of Asiatic Studies is the only leftover from
the early days, and it gets away with it only because
it’s Harvard and therefore above criticism. But “going
Asiatic” went out before “going oriental” ever came
in. Now both are gone. I haven’t heard anything
negative about Asian yet, but there’s enough racism
out there to stain any term.
Otherwise, I think I’m in the wrong forum. Maybe the pit and maybe a general question.
meh, you people get worked up, donncha!
anyhow, i’m just replying to chinaguy’s earlier question about the uk.
in britain “asian” relates to a person of pakistani, bangladeshi, indian or kashmiri origin. it is the preferred term by these people themselves. the BBC has asian special interest programming in hindi and urdu for example.
for a person of south-east asian origin, that is exactly the term used- “south-east asian”.
but if you really want to be polite, say pakistani, japanese, korean, indian etc. and if you don’t know, ask!
of course it all gets a bit more complicated than that…
hong-kong chinese
chinese malaysian
indian singaporean
taiwanese
and other such subtleties
and their british born children?
well they prefer to be called british,( or welsh, or english, or scottish,or irish) asians (or south east asians, or indians, or japanese etc.)
you get the idea.
I don’t get to read this board very often, but I will respond to China Guy’s request for more info.
I don’t understand the frustration of some posters about the changing of terms - those who say that the fact that “Asian” may be replaced by another term in the future is somehow a reason to criticize the use of “Asian.”
Well, the English language evolves all the time, usage is constantly changing, and not just usage involving racial or ethnic terms. Do the people who complain about ethnic terms changing rail about the changing of other terms as well? How about the nounificaion of verbs, e.g. “access?” How about the fact that I just made up “nounification?” What about the inaccurate usage of technical terms such as “exponential growth” or the terminology of quantum physics used in all sorts of inappropriate ways? Do these changes in usage bug you too, and if not, why not?
Sailor and others admitted that Oriental and Asian are both inaccurate terms. Well, of course they are! As Collounsbury pointed out many times in many threads, there are no objective, scientific “races”; it follows that our attempts to define them will be subjective in nature and therefore inaccurate. If that’s the case, what’s wrong with adopting the term that will piss the least number of people off?
Oh, but that makes me “sensitive,” doesn’t it. I probably need to “get a life” and “stop whining” and “stop bringing racial or sexist situations upon myself” and “stop blaming others” for my “over-sensitivity.”
Right - when, as archmichael described, someone mocks me by imitating what I just said, in un-accented english, in some stupid fake pidgin accent, I must have brought it upon myself. The person who did that doesn’t need to change - I do! I shouldn’t confront them and tell them that what they just did offended me - I should just let them do it, because nothing, certainly not a lifetime of putting up with that kind of shit, is as bad as being considered “politically correct!”