Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Chris Jesu Lee's avatar

Years ago, I would've agreed with Nguyen's philosophy because I didn't want diversity to merely be superficial. But the problem with his notion is that people like him often have very narrow definitions of what is the proper diverse voice. So if a diverse voice was very distinct in its uniquely non-white (or non-mainstream whatever) perspective, he and his type would still attack it if they didn't agree with that perspective.

For example, when Wesley Yang's book The Souls of Yellow Folk came out, Nguyen wrote a very negative review of it in NYT. It's not like I'm a big fan of Yang's or that I even thought his book was good, but negative reviews on NYT are so rare. So why did Nguyen feel the need to attack Yang? It's not because Yang is a fellow Asian American whose supposedly diverse perspective isn't sufficiently distinct enough, but rather, that it's distinct in a way that doesn't align with Nguyen's ideals.

So yeah, in a perfect world, I'd want all diverse perspectives to be distinguishable from those that we deem non-diverse. But I also don't trust Nguyen's call for diversity, and between those choices, I agree with you in that we should side with what allows for more freedom (and, ironically, diversity) of expression.

Expand full comment
Daniel Oppenheimer's avatar

Wholeheartedly agree. By the way, not to add to your already immense reading list, but have you read any Dave Hickey? I feel like you might appreciate him.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts