Why should Dartmouth College, or any prestigious American liberal arts institution of higher learning, include Asian American Studies in its curriculum?
In The Dartmouth of Feb. 18, 2001, Chien Wen Kung '04 defines the liberal arts tradition as "keep[ing] up with the times for intellectually viable reasons and with an eye out for what we already have" and implies that Asian American Studies does not fall within this definition. Without discussing whether AAS would fit into the curriculum under his definition of liberal arts (which it does), I would like to take issue with the definition itself.
Liberal arts, at its best, teaches a student how to be a student. It equips us with the tools required to research different viewpoints on a subject, analyze and interpret those viewpoints, reach our own conclusions, express them clearly and defend them logically. The Oxford English Dictionary defines "liberal" as "the distinctive epithet of those 'arts' or 'sciences' that were considered 'worthy of a free man.'" In order to possess intellectual freedom, we must be allowed access to a multiplicity of perspectives.
The value in AAS, then (to reinforce Morna Ha '04 and Derrick Chu '04's Feb. 6 response, with a phrase from Shirley Lin '02 and Swati Rana '02's Feb. 7 response), is that it is a "firm, institutional commitment" to teaching a relevant, previously invisible perspective. AAS adds depth, like the voices in other ethnic studies departments, to the dominant perspective, forcing us to challenge, change or at least refine our views.
Within this definition, AAS is not about "identity politics." It is not only for students of Asian descent. It has scholarly value for everyone who recognizes that, in an academic community, "the diversity of thought (not just sexuality, ethnicity and class) is paramount." When Kung wrote this in The Dartmouth on July 9, 2001 he was referring to the administration's intolerance of the Greek system, but the truth of the statement reaches far beyond that narrow topic.
True diversity, the "diversity of thought," is not guaranteed by the presence of students of differing sexual orientations, ethnicities and classes. Yet, some would burden students with "promoting awareness about one's own culture" through lectures, publications like Main Street and informal discussions instead of "forcing the people involved to engage in rigorous academic study" (The Dartmouth, Jan. 31, 2002, "Thoughts on Ethnic Studies").
One wonders what Kung has to fear in allowing AAS to be the rigorous academic field that it is quickly proving to be. Maybe he is afraid that it will challenge the "hegemonic paradigms" to which he subconsciously subscribes.
AAS does pose a formidable challenge to the worldview to which we are all taught to subscribe. It is a threat to the hierarchy of power that would pay lip service to the altar of "institutional diversity" while trying to control and contain it.
Kung finds importance and validity in the "disinterestedness" and "elevated perspective" of the ivory tower where I find only pretension and theory without practice. Liberal arts has failed -- Dartmouth College has failed -- if it gives us only knowledge and not wisdom, theory without practice. I refuse to let the "ivory tower" metaphor excuse the historic imbalance of power evident in both higher education and contemporary society.
AAS allows students to question this imbalance and bridge the gap between theory and practice. Knowledge can be taught, but wisdom is gained only through experience, the thoughtful application of knowledge. University of California-Berkeley's AAS department writes that students "pursue knowledge vital for a critical understanding of contemporary society and for social changes to improve the lives and communities of racial minorities." Everything that AAS students learn, regardless of their race, has practical applications to our contemporary society and the struggle for social change. This may not guarantee wisdom, but it allows for its possibility by breaching the gap between theory and practice.
I agree with Daniel Ng '04 (The Dartmouth, Feb. 20, 2001, "Redefining the AAS Debate") that an ethnic studies department that encompasses AAS is the most intellectually meritorious option. But pushing for this option right away invites the administration to use the significant price tag as an excuse to downsize each department. The intellectual argument for AAS should be shaped by the practical considerations of campus climate and availability of money, but should never be intimidated into non-existence because of these factors.
It is precisely because of Ng's question of "real costs and logistics" that a push for a five to seven-course minor is the most appropriate one at this time. This short-term goal seeks to increase student awareness and institutional commitment to AAS while maintaining a long-term vision for a full AAS program and a longer-term vision for ethnic studies.
"Critical self-evaluation is necessary for the progress of an institution," writes Kung in The Dartmouth on July 9, 2001. In the name of institutional progress and individual gain, Dartmouth must evaluate its academic commitment to the "diversity of thought" that AAS seeks to create. We seek full access to all viewpoints, not just the viewpoints of those who stand to lose when their ivory towers are knocked down. The practice of theory and application of knowledge may not be relevant to their lives, but I refuse to let it be irrelevant to mine.
