They "couldn't really tell the difference between whether I was Chinese or Japanese or Korean or if I even spoke English. They would talk very loudly and very slow."
A thread re: #MichelleYeoh & how 1 barometer of Anti-Asianism is the portrayal of Chinese-language technology /1
Before Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, Yeoh's early U.S. film debut was with the James Bond franchise. Yeoh later revealed how depleting/damaging the experience was for her.
What I recall, because of my work on Chinese IT history, was the strange cameo made by a Chinese computer, in which the presumed otherness/alterity/strangeness/absurdity of Chinese IT was on display /3
The ridicule of Chinese IT has a *long* history, dating back to Chinese typewriting. As I tried to show in The Chinese Typewriter (@mitpress ), 1900 was a turning point where people began to deride the Chinese language/language tech as a proxy for anti-Chinese racism /4
From 1900 into the present day, absurdist portrayals of Chinese typewriters and other information technologies became a means in "polite society" to make comments on Chinese culture, identity, race while steering clear of outright claims of racism /5
This tradition is alive and well in the era of Chinese computing, the subject of my forthcoming book with @mitpress The ridicule of Chinese IT continues to serve as a means of advancing cultural, even racial, arguments. /6
Rest assured, wherever you encounter portrayals like this--ostensibly "just" critiques of Chinese information technology--you are certain to find other forms of critique just below the surface. /7
Which returns us to Michelle Yeoh and Tomorrow Never Dies. Watch it, if you haven't, and keep an eye out for this scene. It speaks volumes. /8
For anyone interested in learning about Chinese IT history and techno-Orientalism, I'd love to hear your thoughts: amazon.com/Chinese-Typewr…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Just when I worried if "Where Research Begins" appeals to researchers outside the Humanities, a @UTAustin grad workshop quieted all concerns.
Chris and I just led a hybrid in-person/virtual seminar for 100+ registrants, hailing from... 59 DIFF DISCIPLINES
Here they are! /1
Here are the departments of the students who attended...
Accounting
Aerospace Engineering
Anthropology
Applied Learning and Development
Art Education
Art History
Asian Cultures and Languages
Biology
Biomedical Engineering
/2
Business Administration
Chemical Engineering
Chemistry
Civil Engineering
Communication Studies
Community and Regional Planning
Computational Science, Engineering and Mathematics
Computer Science
/3
Do your students (or you) get trapped in obvious, derivative, cliche research topics?
A thread on how to "Think Outside the (Cereal) Box" /1
First, imagine you're at breakfast, or maybe even in the National Archives, and you find a box of cereal. You're fascinated by. It RIVETS your attention. Why? What is the source of your fascination? /2
Starting researchers often jump to obvious ideas. "It's a cereal box, so I must be interested in... well... cereal!" "Or maybe 'Food Culture', or something like that?" "I should probably gather books & sources about food, right?"
Impressionistically, I would say that early forms of clickbait--the titles we've all encountered for years and years now, let's call it Clickbait 1.0--employed superliminal techniques. Cognitive triggers. Cliffhangers. Overt hooks one could discern. /2
Clickbait 2.0 is different, and seems to be premised upon another branch of Cognitive Science. In this approach, the "bait" is not a narrative hook, or a tantalizing omission, but literally CONFUSION. /3
How to get undergrads to ask better questions of their sources? I saw a tweet with this question, and wanted to share one exercise that works with me. /1
First, a bit of context: Starting researchers of all ages are notorious to "jump to interpretation" and "meaning" far too early. They see a source, and within a second or two, feel pressure to start opining about modernity, capitalism, colonialism, gender... immense concepts /2
This is counterproductive, and leads to foregone conclusions, cliched thinking, and ultimately doing *injustice* to sources. Instead of trying to listen to them, the scholar (even well-meaning ones) basically drive over them with their cognitive SUVs. /3
How books begin and how they end. What’s research? When does the writing start? When is the writing done? A thread for writers, especially for scholars and other writers of serious non-fiction, disentangled from How Research Begins and On Revision. @UChicagoPress@WmGermano 1/10
Research begins *before* you know your question--even before you realize that you’re "searching" for anything. Research questions emerge in dinnertime conversations (& disputes) w/ family, in bus-ride daydreams, in the ache of reading headlines. 2/10
It’s not enough to have a "Topic." TopicLand is the graveyard of countless research projects. The key to escaping is not to "narrow it down" (a common idea). Rather, start by transforming your vague "Topic" into a vast series of specific questions. 3/10