Thainess as Part of Thai Diaspora Identity in Thai American Literature: A Case Study of Manning’s A Good True Thai and Lapcharoensap’s Sightseeing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of Thai American literature is a new area of exploration in Asian American literature scholarship. This study investigates two literary works by Thai American authors, Sunisa Manning’s A Good True Thai and Rattawut Lapcharoensap’s Sightseeing, aiming to uncover significant traits of Thainess as a part of the Thai diaspora identity. Employing the framework molded by Asian American criticism and the concept of cultural identity, this study manifests that Thailand, the authors’ home country, is represented through different traits of Thainess as their cultural identity, constituting their diaspora identity. In the first book, the monarch is portrayed as a central trait of Thainess, suggesting that an ideal Thai citizen must revere and express loyalty to the kings who are depicted as the national saviors and unifying figures in times of crisis. On the other hand, Sightseeing represents Thainess in the form of tourist destinations and prostitution, a more common image deeply rooted in Western imagination, which is a result of the Vietnam War. The representation of Thainess in these two books asserts the Thai diaspora identity as an integral part of the authors’ Asian American identity. Presenting the background of the authors’ home country, these two literary works serve as a cultural connection between America and Thailand, aligning with the evolving trend of Asian American literature.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".