Introduction: The Human and an Economy of Exchange

[E]conomy is not a reconciliation of opposites, but rather a maintaining of disjunction. Identity constituted by difference is economy. In Freud’s world, a train of thought is sustained by its opposite, a unit of meaning that contains the possibility of its opposite. –Spivak, pp. lxiii

In the above quote, Gayatri Spivak highlights the relationship between identity and economics as constructed by a Derridean understanding of writing. In the preface to her translation of Of Grammatology, she argues that Jacques Derrida conceptualizes writing as “the dream-content—a paradigm of the entire memory-work of the psyche—[that] ‘is given…in a picture-[not phonetic] script’…what we think of as ‘perception’ is always already an inscription” (lix-lx). As such, writing and rhetoric extend beyond intelligible inscriptions and, instead, encompass the overall process of signification, i.e. how signs are attached to signifiers and ascribed meaning in society. In this essay, I argue that writing, as Derrida articulates it, is integral in the production and maintenance of the anti-Black and carceral category of the Human as the ideal Western subject. I further contend that abolitionist pedagogies¹ and epistemologies are one means by which Western grammars² can be disrupted. Specifically, signification produces an economy of difference in which the Self is defined by its opposition, i.e. what it is not; thus, the Human is white, cis, male, heterosexual, middle-class, and able-bodied because the Other is not (Cacho; Weheliye; Derrida). The assignation of meaning to signs becomes a necessity in categorizing and regulating the population, rendering bodies as intelligible datapoints in the West³.

Download PDF

Contents

Introduction

Literature Review

Methodology

Results

Discussion

Conclusion

References

About the Author

Introduction

“Where is he?!” The title of this study comes from a quote spoken by none other than myself. It’s a Monday afternoon, right in the thick of quarantine. I’m towards the end of coding my sample, and my brain is truly exhausted. I keep scanning, scanning, scanning the screen, when the words slip out of my mouth in pure frustration: “WHERE IS HE?!”

My hands motion at the screen. My eyes, manic, turn over to my brother, who is about to microwave his lunch. He gives an awkward grin, no clue as to who I am talking about. “Antarctica?” he replies, trying to get me to smile. I’m deep in my research though, unable to fully appreciate the joke, and wave furiously again at the screen. “IMDb told me there were two Asian guys in this movie.” The movie is The Perfect Date (2019), one of the many romantic comedies Noah Centineo has starred in for Netflix. “I found one. Where is the other?!”

Five minutes later, I finally find him, my elusive mystery man: he appears for 10 seconds in the beginning half of the movie to look up before silently and disinterestedly checking out Noah Centineo’s fly new clothes. We never hear him speak once, and we never see him again. We never even find out if he has a name.

A now humorous anecdote shows a broader picture of this study. After all, rhetoric, as defined by Mao & Young (2008), is not just words, but a “knowledge-making process . . . situated in every specific occasion of language use . . . [and] always socially and politically constructed” (p. 4). As a person of Asian American descent, and a scholar of Asian American history and media studies, I am desperately searching for the characters that the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) claims are there. With Covid-19 exacerbating historical and contemporary anti-Asian sentiments and harassment, humane and prominent representation of Asian and Asian American people is increasingly important to shift away from a narrative of dehumanization. But in the end, it’s a game of racially charged Where’s Waldo: the Asian and Asian American characters are near impossible to find, and my eyes are hurting from how hard I have to search.

Introduction

In 1863, Apache chief Mangas Coloradas was killed by the U.S. military in what Geronimo, another Apache war leader, describes as “perhaps the greatest wrong ever done to the Indians” (Barrett 119). As Union troops were pulled out of Arizona and New Mexico to fight in the Civil War, tensions between settlers and Apaches rose. Coloradas was an impressive warrior, leader, and diplomat, uniting multiple bands of Apaches by earning their respect as a warrior and leader, and through diplomacy by marrying his daughters to other chiefs. While Coloradas wanted to establish peace (Carleton to West, The War of the Rebellion 147-48)¹ , the California Volunteers First Infantry saw him as a threat, and local miners saw him as an impediment to finding gold. Lured in under the guise of peace talks, Coloradas was seized and later killed, while allegedly “attempting to escape,” as the military record states (Shirland). The duplicity of Coloradas’s killing, and the subsequent mutilation of his body, spurred on the dwindling Apache wars for several more years (Hutton 103). To this day we still do not know exactly what happened leading up to Coloradas’s death; all accounts vary dramatically depending on who is telling the story, and so we are left with multiple conflicting narratives.

This project uses Fisher’s narrative paradigm, a form of rhetorical analysis, to examine the multiple accounts of the circumstances surrounding the death of Mangas Coloradas in order to assess the credibility of the various accounts. The narratives from military personnel are told by Brigadier General Joseph West, Clark Stocking, and William McCleave. The miner accounts are both from Daniel Ellis Conner, written at two different points in time, with changes from the first telling to the second. And the Apache accounts are from Geronimo, Kaywaykla, and Daklugie. This paper finds a lack of coherence and fidelity among accounts given by the military personnel and by Conner, casting doubt on their reliability as narrators. The Apache accounts, on the other hand, while not as comprehensive, coincide with what we know to be true. Though previous literature surrounding the death of Coloradas does not give these narratives much weight, the information they share is consistent and, through Fisher’s paradigm, appears to be credible.

Download PDF

Contents

Introduction

History

Why the Rhetoric is Flawed

A More Flexible Set of Rights

Nondiscursive Rhetoric in the Illustrated UDHR

Conclusion

References

About the Author

Introduction

In the midst of a global pandemic that effectively shut down the entire world, the continued discriminatory treatment of African Americans and the entire BIPOC community in the United States ignited an unprecedented international public response. People all over the world were aghast as they watched the asphyxiation and murder of George Floyd by a police officer on their screens. Officers are meant to be protectors and enforcers of the law, and the world felt starkly disappointed by a clear rejection of such pledges. The term “protector” has become associated with feelings of control and oppression, when instead it should stimulate feelings of safety and support. Prompting a reignition of the Black Lives Matter movement that began in 2013, protests around the world were held for weeks on end to call attention to serious systemic problems concerning the treatment of minority individuals not only in the United States, but everywhere. While the demands of the protestors seem obvious and humane to some, they continue to enrage and befuddle others, who see no apparent issue with unbalanced social treatments. The current 2020 political climate encourages closer scrutiny on matters of human rights and what actions should be taken in the event of infringement of those rights. In terms of the treatment of people of color and other minorities in the United States, should the United States be considered in violation of human rights? If so, why isn’t anything being done? What, if anything, should be done, and who should enforce it? This essay seeks to uncover some of the reasons these questions are so difficult to answer.