May 25, 2023·edited May 25, 2023Liked by Chris Jesu Lee
I agree with your other writer friends that AI will boot paint-by-numbers writers out of the profession. This could mean a renaissance where writers are actually forced to produce new and innovative work. We're heading into exciting times here.
Also, you forgot to mention the "We need to talk about anti-Blackness in the Asian community" essay. And the "Why the model minority is a myth" essay, with a quote about Hmong and Cambodian people.
I had subscribed to freelance writing newsletters recently, which profit off of someone using Twitter search for you. But I noticed that many calls for pitches on specialty websites, about music, food, games, regions, traveling, or for holidays and events, would often ask for "people of color," or "looking for LGBTQ+ writers." Without following up on what the articles look like, it's easy to imagine they are producing staid content, which has the adverse effect of limiting the experiential output we'd like to hear or only consolidating a specific ideology-- disguised as diversity. It's endemic of middle-content which pretends to be really reflective or essayist, though may be just newsworthy. You can probably find 30% to 50% of these call for pitches systematically reducing the amount of white people who write for them and I suspect the articles are much along the lines of the content slop that you've described.
I definitely think time will help, but I also talk about the Baby Steps Fallacy that ignores that those who benefit in the current system will have no incentive for it to change. So if you're the type of Asian American who is doing well by creating absolutely fluff that's just about affirming the lifestyles of the audience (and, critically, because you want to create that kind of art above all else, even when given all freedom), then why would you overturn that? If these people were given eternity, they wouldn't change.
And yes, I think there are deep-rooted social/cultural factors that stunt Asian American art, but it comes from Asian American culture, not Asian culture. Specifically, elite Asian American culture (by which I mean culturally elite, not financially elite). Elite AsAm culture is really just a super-concentrated version of elite liberal culture and they share the same flaws of selecting for approval-seeking institutionalist striver types with very brittle self-esteem (thus the constant obsession with "imposter syndrome," which is just a compliment-fishing quest since they never truly ponder the most likely situation, which is that they indeed aren't that good).
Question, mind elaborating on why you believe culturally elite isn't synonymous with financial elite? I'm guessing it relates to perceived value of social clout...
By financial elite, I mean someone with a good upper-middle-class income, not like a billionaire. I was drawing the difference between, say, a doctor with a private practice in the suburbs vs. a Buzzfeed writer in NYC. The doctor definitely has more financial power, but not nearly the amount of cultural power as the writer (who has consciously and gladly traded a higher and more stable income for a chance to be a cultural tastemaker).
I agree with your other writer friends that AI will boot paint-by-numbers writers out of the profession. This could mean a renaissance where writers are actually forced to produce new and innovative work. We're heading into exciting times here.
Also, you forgot to mention the "We need to talk about anti-Blackness in the Asian community" essay. And the "Why the model minority is a myth" essay, with a quote about Hmong and Cambodian people.
I had subscribed to freelance writing newsletters recently, which profit off of someone using Twitter search for you. But I noticed that many calls for pitches on specialty websites, about music, food, games, regions, traveling, or for holidays and events, would often ask for "people of color," or "looking for LGBTQ+ writers." Without following up on what the articles look like, it's easy to imagine they are producing staid content, which has the adverse effect of limiting the experiential output we'd like to hear or only consolidating a specific ideology-- disguised as diversity. It's endemic of middle-content which pretends to be really reflective or essayist, though may be just newsworthy. You can probably find 30% to 50% of these call for pitches systematically reducing the amount of white people who write for them and I suspect the articles are much along the lines of the content slop that you've described.
Those pseudo-diversity calls not only screen out white people, but any POC who don't think like the POC who are manning those gates.
That Spinal Tap quote was spectacular. Congratulations. :]
Why, thank you, Jody
I made the mistake of trying to read some of the links.
Bastet's tail, these humans do sure love them some navel-gazing!
Seriously, this should come with a trigger warning. Now my head hurts.
I've been reading these pieces for almost 20 years. They are now to me what iocane is to Westley in the Princess Bride.
So, you're a masochist?
Nice companion piece to Plan A's ChatGPT episode :D
Thanks Sunny! Didn't realize you were an EFPA listener!
Yeah, loyal fan! Followed over here from Twitter tho
Hi BRZA!
I definitely think time will help, but I also talk about the Baby Steps Fallacy that ignores that those who benefit in the current system will have no incentive for it to change. So if you're the type of Asian American who is doing well by creating absolutely fluff that's just about affirming the lifestyles of the audience (and, critically, because you want to create that kind of art above all else, even when given all freedom), then why would you overturn that? If these people were given eternity, they wouldn't change.
And yes, I think there are deep-rooted social/cultural factors that stunt Asian American art, but it comes from Asian American culture, not Asian culture. Specifically, elite Asian American culture (by which I mean culturally elite, not financially elite). Elite AsAm culture is really just a super-concentrated version of elite liberal culture and they share the same flaws of selecting for approval-seeking institutionalist striver types with very brittle self-esteem (thus the constant obsession with "imposter syndrome," which is just a compliment-fishing quest since they never truly ponder the most likely situation, which is that they indeed aren't that good).
Question, mind elaborating on why you believe culturally elite isn't synonymous with financial elite? I'm guessing it relates to perceived value of social clout...
By financial elite, I mean someone with a good upper-middle-class income, not like a billionaire. I was drawing the difference between, say, a doctor with a private practice in the suburbs vs. a Buzzfeed writer in NYC. The doctor definitely has more financial power, but not nearly the amount of cultural power as the writer (who has consciously and gladly traded a higher and more stable income for a chance to be a cultural tastemaker).