MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315134681 · doi:10.1017/s0021911810002573

Imperial Citizens: Koreans and Race from Seoul to LA. By Nadia Y. Kim. Stanford, Calif.: Stanford University Press, 2008. xvi, 328 pp. $24.95 (paper).

2010· article· en· W2315134681 on OpenAlexaff
Ju Hui Judy Han

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Asian Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRace (biology)HistoryHumanitiesArtSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nadia Y. Kim's Imperial Citizens joins the growing ranks of scholarship on race, diaspora, and citizenship emerging from the productive intersection of Asian studies and Asian American studies. Following the “transnational turn” in fields and disciplines that previously tended to be nation bound and U.S.-centric, Kim sets out in this book to bring historical depth and theoretical breadth by examining how pre-migration attitudes toward race and racial hierarchy shape and determine immigrants' experience of racial triangulation and racial ideologies long before their arrival in the United States. The transnational approach does more than avoid potential pitfalls of “methodological nationalism”—it also sheds light on the inseparability of (im)migrant subject formation and transnational racial subjection. Kim reveals how global racial ideologies are structured by interwoven dynamics of geopolitics and socioeconomic mobility, missionary encounters and military deployments, as well as the global circulation and consumption of mass media.Particularly compelling are chapters 4 and 5 on “Racialization in South Korea, Part II: Koreans and White–Black America” and “Racial Terrain of Los Angeles and the United States.” These chapters discuss South Koreans' social location vis-à-vis the white–black military state and locate Korean Americans in the sociocultural and political economic landscape of Southern California, drawing from interviews with nearly a hundred South Korean and Korean American respondents on their perceptions of blackness, whiteness, and “Latinoness.” These discussions culminate in a discussion of the 1992 Los Angeles uprisings, which not only served as a watershed moment in race consciousness for the research subjects, but also kindled the author's own research interests, as she makes evident in the first pages of the introduction.On a few occasions, insufficient sources detract from some of Kim's historical accounts. For instance, the section on “early encounters with white America” in chapter 2 relies almost entirely on Sucheng Chan's introductory chapter to the Korean American classic Quiet Odyssey by Mary Paik Lee. Though there is nothing egregiously wrong in this account, the tone is far too upbeat and one-sided about the contribution of American protestant missionaries, and it unproblematically reproduces the idea that American protestant missionaries were and continue to be held in high regard because of their contributions to medicine, education, and modernization in Korea, and for their support in Korean nationalist resistance against Japanese colonialism. The use of a more critical and robust historical scholarship would have added depth and nuance in interpreting this pivotal encounter in Korean history.By employing interview and ethnographic data, Kim takes seriously the global dynamics of racialization as interpreted and experienced by ordinary people who navigate territorial borders and negotiate social hierarchies. The book ambitiously covers ideologies of race and ethnicity in premodern Korea to American military dominance in postwar Korea, from American ideologies of “white-over-black” racial hierarchy to Korean American reactions to both “model minority” and “perpetual foreigner” perceptions.I have no quibbles with the book's nonpositivist research design, but even so, there are some methodological gaps that ultimately weaken some of the arguments. For instance, Kim explains that the socioeconomic status of her sample in Los Angeles was largely middle class, all presenting themselves as heterosexual and most of them married, but she concludes that there are no “discernible differences in nationalist leanings or in racial perceptions” (p. 256) between working-class and middle-class respondents. Similarly, she concedes that her sample is predominantly Christian or church affiliated, but then argues that she did not find “Christian identification to yield noticeable differences in racial understanding vis-à-vis non-Christians” (p. 133). These are not claims that can be substantiated by her research sampling.Imperial Citizens, and the central argument implicit in its provocative title, could have been strengthened by a more substantial and sustained discussion of citizenship and imperialism. No doubt there exist unequal power relations between South Korea and the United States in terms of geopolitical hierarchy, military dominance, and cultural hegemony, and there is no question that these relations can be attributed to the dynamics of empire. But less clear are how the United States asserts its imperial power in South Korea, how American racial hierarchies became dominant over other preexisting sets of “race thinking,” and how this process of racialization can be described primarily as “imperial citizenship” with distinctly American stripes. Earlier sections on the convergence of Euro-American and Japanese ideologies of white racial superiority and, in particular, Japanese racism's influence on Korea (chapter 2, and briefly in chapter 3) convincingly reveal how various legacies of racial ideologies and institutions corroborate each other. But the centrality of imperial legacies of U.S. racism and racialization seems overdetermined by the book's focus on the U.S. military in South Korea and Korean Americans in the United States. Had the book featured the Zainichi (Korean Japanese) population or another diasporic group, for instance, the term “imperial citizens” might point to an entirely different set of dynamics concerning empire and citizenship.Kim presents an engaging and clearly written book that challenges prevailing assumptions and raises new questions. It would work well for undergraduate and graduate courses on (geo)politics of race, ethnicity, and nationality, and would pair productively with other readings on multicuturalism and diasporic community formation. Especially for classes with significant numbers of immigrant Asian American students, the book should stimulate critical reflections on the students' own autobiographies and experiences. Kim's first-person anecdotes and observations throughout the book will be appreciated as encouragement to reflect on the readers' own resistance against, and complicity in, racism.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.141
Threshold uncertainty score0.875

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Asian StudiesSame topicAsian Culture and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207