White Poet uses Chinese Nom de plume to get published:

[cmdrjones]

Hilarious or offensive? Or both? White Poet uses Chinese No m de plume to get published:

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/s ... oetry-2015

[madd0ct0r]

Listen, I was so angry that I stormed and cursed around the room. I felt like punching the wall. And, of course, there was no doubt that I would pull that fucking poem because of that deceitful pseudonym.”

But Alexie said he would “primarily be jettisoning the poem because of my own sense of embarrassment”, and he “had to keep that pseudonymous poem in the anthology because it would have been dishonest to do otherwise”.

“If I’d pulled the poem then I would have been denying that I was consciously and deliberately seeking to address past racial, cultural, social, and aesthetic injustices in the poetry world. And, yes, in keeping the poem, I am quite aware that I am also committing an injustice against poets of color, and against Chinese and Asian poets in particular,” wrote Alexie.

“But I believe I would have committed a larger injustice by dumping the poem. I think I would have cast doubt on every poem I have chosen for BAP. It would have implied that I chose poems based only on identity. But that’s not what happened. In the end, I chose each poem in the anthology because I love it. And to deny my love for any of them is to deny my love for all of them.”

the guy submitted the poem 40 times under his own name and 9 times under a chinese name until the guy above decided to allow it as a fit of solidarity with 'another supposed brown skinned person'.

ugh. what a mess.

[cmdrjones]

Listen, I was so angry that I stormed and cursed around the room. I felt like punching the wall. And, of course, there was no doubt that I would pull that fucking poem because of that deceitful pseudonym.”

But Alexie said he would “primarily be jettisoning the poem because of my own sense of embarrassment”, and he “had to keep that pseudonymous poem in the anthology because it would have been dishonest to do otherwise”.

“If I’d pulled the poem then I would have been denying that I was consciously and deliberately seeking to address past racial, cultural, social, and aesthetic injustices in the poetry world. And, yes, in keeping the poem, I am quite aware that I am also committing an injustice against poets of color, and against Chinese and Asian poets in particular,” wrote Alexie.

“But I believe I would have committed a larger injustice by dumping the poem. I think I would have cast doubt on every poem I have chosen for BAP. It would have implied that I chose poems based only on identity. But that’s not what happened. In the end, I chose each poem in the anthology because I love it. And to deny my love for any of them is to deny my love for all of them.”

the guy submitted the poem 40 times under his own name and 9 times under a chinese name until the guy above decided to allow it as a fit of solidarity with 'another supposed brown skinned person'.

ugh. what a mess.

I'll take that as "offensive". This is the problem with the whole affirmative action option to address past racial injustices. Now we institute NEW racial injustices to 'balance' things out. New Problem: it may not even work!

See Also:
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/ar ... -82878996/

[Wild Zontargs]

the guy submitted the poem 40 times under his own name and 9 times under a chinese name until the guy above decided to allow it as a fit of solidarity with 'another supposed brown skinned person'.

ugh. what a mess.

Issue the first: it wasn't rejected from the anthology 49 times, just by 49 different magazines. The editor knew what was up before the anthology was published, and kept it in anyway.

The poem anthologized in BAP 2015, listastically titled “The Bees, the Flowers, Jesus, Ancient Tigers, Poseidon, Adam and Eve,” had been, with Hudson as its byline, rejected 40 times. As Chou, it was rejected nine times before it was accepted for publication in the journal Prairie Schooner.

So while Hudson be-aliased himself in part to make a point—about the identity politics at play in the machinations of the American literary establishment, perhaps about the plight of the white man as an outgrowth of those politics—he also did it, it seems, as a matter of expediency: A pseudonym seemed to be the only way he could get this particular poem published. And Hudson was, partially and belatedly, transparent about that: Upon learning that his poem had been selected for inclusion in BAP 2015, Hudson informed Alexie about the deception.

Alexie published the poem anyway.

Issue the second: it's "the prestigious Best American Poetry anthology", not the Best Hyphenated-American Poetry. Either the work was one of the best of the year or it wasn't. If it was good enough when written by Yi-Fen Chou, it was just as good when written by Michael Derrick Hudson.

Rereading The Bees, the Flowers, Jesus, Ancient Tigers, Poseidon, Adam and Eve with the knowledge of Hudson’s true identity made it no less compelling, [editor] Alexie wrote, and “most important, it didn’t contain any overt or covert Chinese influences or identity. I hadn’t been fooled by its ‘Chinese-ness’ because it contained nothing that I recognised as being inherently Chinese or Asian.”

Alexie, being both a Native American and a resident of 2015, wanted the version of the BAP that he got to edit to be diverse. Not just in terms of the types of poems he included in it, but in terms of the types of poets. And so, when he came to a work by Yi-Fen Chou, Alexie writes, “I did exactly what that pseudonym-user feared other editors had done to him in the past: I paid more initial attention to his poem because of my perception and misperception of the poet’s identity. Bluntly stated, I was more amenable to the poem because I thought the author was Chinese American.”

Alexie, eventually, moved the poem from the “maybe included” to the “definitely included” pile. And then he learned that he had been fooled. (“I was so angry,” he notes, “that I stormed and cursed around the room. I felt like punching the wall.”) He was going to reject the poem, angrily. But then he thought more about it. He realized that “I would primarily be jettisoning the poem because of my own sense of embarrassment. I would have pulled it because I didn’t want to hear people say, ‘Oh, look at the big Indian writer conned by the white guy.’ I would have dumped the poem because of my vanity.”

Alexie, who is Native American, admitted that he had been “more amenable to the poem because I thought the author was Chinese American”, saying that there are “many examples of white nepotism inside the literary community”, and that he was “also practising a form of nepotism. I am a brown-skinned poet who gave a better chance to another supposed brown-skinned poet because of our brownness.”

Based on that, it sounds like the poem was good enough, but the name is what kept it out. He flat-out admits that his decision was influenced by the author's supposed skin-color. If we swapped the races, everyone would agree that this was a clear-cut case of racism.

EDIT: Hell, read the editor's official blog post on the topic:

Rule #5: I will pay close attention to the poets and poems that have been underrepresented in the past. So that means I will carefully look for great poems by women and people of color. And for great poems by younger, less established poets. And for great poems by older poets who haven't been previously lauded. And for great poems that use rhyme, meter, and traditional forms.

[...]

Approximately 60% of the poets are female.

Approximately 40% of the poets are people of color.

Approximately 20% of the poems employ strong to moderate formal elements.

[...]

Do you see what happened?

I did exactly what that pseudonym-user feared other editors had done to him in the past: I paid more initial attention to his poem because of my perception and misperception of the poet's identity. Bluntly stated, I was more amenable to the poem because I thought the author was Chinese American.

Here, I could offer you many examples of white nepotism inside the literary community. I could detail entire writing careers that have been one long series of handshakes and hugs among white friends and colleagues. I could list the white poets who have been selected by their white friends for each of the previous editions of Best American Poetry. But that would be just grandstanding. It's also grandstanding for me to accuse white folks of nepotism without offering any real evidence. This whole damn essay is grandstanding.

So what's the real reason why I'm not naming names? It's because most white writers who benefit from white nepotism are good writers. That feels like a contradiction. But it's not.

And, hey, guess what? In paying more initial attention to Yi-Fen Chou's poem, I was also practicing a form of nepotism. I am a brown-skinned poet who gave a better chance to another supposed brown-skinned poet because of our brownness.

So, yes, of course, white poets have helped their white friends and colleagues because of nepotism. And, yes, of course, brown poets have helped their brown friends and colleagues because of nepotism. And, yes, because of nepotism, brown and white poets have crossed racial and cultural lines to help friends and colleagues.

Nepotism is as common as oxygen.

But, in putting Yi-Fen Chou in the "maybe" and "yes" piles, I did something amorphous. I helped a total stranger because of racial nepotism.

I was practicing a form of literary justice that can look like injustice from a different angle. And vice versa.

We're constantly reminded that "reverse-racism" doesn't exist. I agree. This is a clear-cut, self-admitted case of racism being one of the deciding factors in whether a work was included in an anthology, despite the fact that the work itself was judged to be of sufficient quality to deserve inclusion.

[Simon_Jester]

Well, we know this sort of thing occasionally happens. The only question is how we interpret the fact.

[Wild Zontargs]

This is the problem with the whole affirmative action option to address past racial injustices. Now we institute NEW racial injustices to 'balance' things out. New Problem: it may not even work!

See Also:
http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/ar ... -82878996/

Since it seems that nobody else is going to touch this one, I will.

“Let's talk about Asians,” she says.

Lee's next slide shows three columns of numbers from a Princeton University study that tried to measure how race and ethnicity affect admissions by using SAT scores as a benchmark. It uses the term “bonus” to describe how many extra SAT points an applicant's race is worth. She points to the first column.

African Americans received a “bonus” of 230 points, Lee says.

“Hispanics received a bonus of 185 points.”

The last column draws gasps.

Asian Americans, Lee says, are penalized by 50 points — in other words, they had to do that much better to win admission.

“Do Asians need higher test scores? Is it harder for Asians to get into college? The answer is yes,” Lee says.

“Zenme keyi,” one mother hisses in Chinese. How can this be possible?

College admission season ignites deep anxieties for Asian American families, who spend more than any other demographic on education. At elite universities across the U.S., Asian Americans form a larger share of the student body than they do of the population as a whole. And increasingly they have turned against affirmative action policies that could alter those ratios, and accuse admissions committees of discriminating against Asian American applicants.

That perspective has pitted them against advocates for diversity: More college berths for Asian American students mean fewer for black and Latino students, who are statistically underrepresented at top universities.

So, an African American who scores 279 points lower than an Asian American is preferred when it comes to admissions, because diversity.

Lee says that she usually tries to at least mention arguments in favor of diversity at her free college seminars. She mentions how the black student population at UCLA has declined precipitously and how student bodies at elite universities probably shouldn't be 100% of Asian descent. When she looks to see the response, she sees mostly slowly shaking heads.

“It's really hard for me to explain diversity to parents whose only goal is getting their son into Harvard,” Lee says.

That same ethic causes parents and students to agonize over which box, if any, to check on the race and nationality section of the application. One parent asked Zell whether it would help to legally change the family name to something more Western-sounding.

If you're white and want your poem published, pretend to be Asian. If you're Asian and want to get into college, pretend to be white.

[K. A. Pital]

Here's another good solution: leave America and go to a university in some other country.

[cmdrjones]

Here's another good solution: leave America and go to a university in some other country.

Can you name a country that DOESN'T engage in this sort of thing and that WOULD accept foreigners in large numbers into thier university system?

[madd0ct0r]

all of them? (well India has caste reservations, but otherwise...)

For an example, the UK dosen't do that. It just dosen't. I believe some of the russell group might give you an extra boost if you've come out of a shitty school with good grades, but for the race thing, the closest we have is the universities having to say at the start of enrollement is how many spaces on each course are set for international students and how many for locals. Education is one of the UK's biggest exports.

[Elheru Aran]

Germany is also pretty good, from what I understand. France also. I mean, there are conservative elements with xenophobic notions anywhere, but most of the world is significantly more race-blind than the US (with a few exceptions, of course).

[cmdrjones]

all of them? (well India has caste reservations, but otherwise...)

For an example, the UK dosen't do that. It just dosen't. I believe some of the russell group might give you an extra boost if you've come out of a shitty school with good grades, but for the race thing, the closest we have is the universities having to say at the start of enrollement is how many spaces on each course are set for international students and how many for locals. Education is one of the UK's biggest exports.

Germany is also pretty good, from what I understand. France also. I mean, there are conservative elements with xenophobic notions anywhere, but most of the world is significantly more race-blind than the US (with a few exceptions, of course).

Then that IS good news.

[salm]

European or at least German universities are not for profit so I think they don´t really care who studies there from a racial standpoint. You´ve got your quotas for non-EU students and of course Numerus Clausus but this is a pretty formal selection process. People with good enough grades may study at the uni and people with worse grades might have to be put on a waiting list for popular majors such as medicine for example.
Since it´s free anyway the universities don´t worry about poor people not being able to pay the bills.

Of course there´s still going to be racism from fellow students, professors and other mentors but I think the admission process has no real possibility to be racists because it looks strictly at grades except for some art/architecture/design majors.

BTW, there´s no special "campus law" so you don´t have to sign agreement contracts when having casual sex.
On the other hand you don´t get a real campus at all so it might be disappointing for people who expect campus life with all it´s luxourious pleasenties that some US unis have.

[Block]

Germany is also pretty good, from what I understand. France also. I mean, there are conservative elements with xenophobic notions anywhere, but most of the world is significantly more race-blind than the US (with a few exceptions, of course).

Proof please, everything I can find shows most of the world as more homogeneous and less accepting of other ethnicities than the US. Especially France.

[Beowulf]

Most decent US universities are non profit as well.

[salm]

Most decent US universities are non profit as well.

No? But they charge the students exorbitant sums. German unis are payed by the tax payer so they don´t have to worry about some lesser well of students not being able to pay the bills.

[Ralin]

Most decent US universities are non profit as well.

No? But they charge the students exorbitant sums. German unis are payed by the tax payer so they don´t have to worry about some lesser well of students not being able to pay the bills.

In practice the student loan system in the US means about the same thing (for this purpose). Maybe even more so since they can jack up tuition and still expect young people with no money or work history to pay.

[TimothyC]

Most decent US universities are non profit as well.

No? But they charge the students exorbitant sums. German unis are payed by the tax payer so they don´t have to worry about some lesser well of students not being able to pay the bills.

Welcome to the wonderful world of student loans that can not be discharged via bankruptcy court.

[Adam Reynolds]

Another fundamental problem with American universities is that loans are given out with no regard for whether the students will have the future ability to pay them back. Why is it that anthropology majors get loans as easily as engineering majors? One of these will be easily employed when the graduate, one will not.

[madd0ct0r]

My brother did anthropology, now he's earning more then me en route to.becoming an auditor.

I was an engineering student, but I graduated in the grand recession. Should loans have been put on hold?

[Ralin]

Turns out that on paper a brilliant and motivated student who plans to launch a superstar author and research career with the skills he learned from his General Studies degree looks a lot like the stereotypical football player who picked it because he couldn't just major in Football

[K. A. Pital]

Germany is also pretty good, from what I understand. France also. I mean, there are conservative elements with xenophobic notions anywhere, but most of the world is significantly more race-blind than the US (with a few exceptions, of course).

Proof please, everything I can find shows most of the world as more homogeneous and less accepting of other ethnicities than the US. Especially France.

Proof of what? Germany's admission system is not influenced by race. You have grades - you go study. No idea about France, but assuming all European nationalized university systems to be similar, I see no reason to not expect the same.

Most decent US universities are non profit as well.

The prices alone are enough to skip them forever - I've had a look and even medium unis can charge you over 35k for education, that's simply insane. There are very good universities in Europe (Netherlands, Norway, Sweden) that are exceptional in quality of education and opportunities offered to work at leading European companies. Only people too nationalistic, pursuing a political or highest-tier career that is tied to US government or US corporations have no choice but to study in the US. Everyone else should make use of the opportunities offered by the European free education system.

[Balrog]

Well, we know this sort of thing occasionally happens. The only question is how we interpret the fact.

How about interpreting it the one way we ought to, that such thinking and behavior is not acceptable no matter who you are or how noble your goals are. Of course I understand that, depending on who you ask, some wouldn't consider this a problem exactly because it was an attempt to help a "Person of Color" get ahead in a society designed to work against them.