Out Here and Over There — Eng (1997) | Comprehensive Study Notes

Introduction & Article Context

• Author: David L. Eng; article originally published in Social Text, issue 52/53, autumn–winter 1997 (special issue: “Queer Transexions of Race, Nation, and Gender”).

• Central agenda: forge a dialogue between Asian American studies and queer studies via the shared problem of “home,” citizenship, and belonging.

• Guiding questions:

  • How do queerness and diaspora intersect to re-think Asian American racial/sexual formation?

  • What new communities or politics arise when home ≠ nation-state?

  • How do global capital, labor flows, and post-1965 immigration recalibrate older U.S. notions of race, gender, sexuality?

The Vexed Question of “Home”

• Historical exclusion of Asian Americans:

  • Two archetypes: “sojourner” (unassimilable alien) vs. “model minority” (over-assimilated, “whiter than white”).

  • Both deny full belonging within U.S. nation-state.

• Diaspora lens flips focus from arrival to departure/displacement:

  • Asian America = permanently “suspended” between origin and destination (nostalgic loss vs. unattainable desire for home).

  • Spatial query: “Where is Asian America?”—a siteless term lacking territorial sovereignty.

• Queer parallel:

  • Literal/figurative expulsions from family homes; structural marginalization by compulsory heterosexuality.

  • “Coming out” = endless process; never fully “out.” Home remains uninhabitable.

  • Activist references: Paris Is Burning (houses as surrogate homes); group name “Queer Nation” signals yearnings for national belonging.

Asian American Cultural Nationalism & the Domestic Imperative

• Rise in late 1960s–early 1970s, shadowing Black Power.

• Political pillars:

  • Identity-based separatism; Marxist class critique; local community activism.

  • Editors of Aiiieeeee! anthology (1975) articulate need for a whole Asian American identity—rejecting “either/or” Asian-American split.

• Prototype citizen they envisioned: male, heterosexual, working-class, U.S.-born, English-speaking.

  • Aimed to counter stereotypes of Asian men as “effeminate closet queens” (Charlie Chan) or “homosexual menaces” (Fu Manchu).

• Feminist/queer critiques:

  • Movement reinscribed patriarchy, misogyny, homophobia.

  • Domestic/national possession hinged on disciplining feminine + homosexual realms.

  • Public (masculine nation) secured through control of private (feminized home).

“Risking the Hyphen”: Asian(-)American Identity Debate

• Hyphen removal (Asian American → Asian American) = grammatical claim to wholeness & citizenship.

• Persistent resurfacing of hyphen reveals unresolved alienation.

• Hyphen symbolizes:

  • Fragile coupling of “nation”–“state.”

  • Ongoing tension between domestic belonging & diasporic suspension.

• Eng’s proposal:

  • Rather than erase, hyperbolize the hyphen to foreground transnational ties and diasporic complexity.

  • Forces confrontation with the Asian in Asian American & global conditions shaping racial formation.

Historical & Contemporary Imperatives for Diasporic Focus

• Movement always already international:

  • Influences: Vietnam War protests, Maoist China, Third-World liberation.

  • Early “looping back” converted foreign struggles into domestic analogies, often suppressing genuine transnational analysis.

• Post-1965 Immigration Act effects:

  • 80\% of U.S. immigrants 1965–1995 from Asia/Latin America/Caribbean.

  • Rise of satellite people, parachute kids, reverse settlers—families straddling Pacific Rim.

• Global capitalism’s demands:

  • Saskia Sassen: capital still needs nation-states to guarantee rights; cannot simply declare “post-nationalism.”

  • U.S. racial formations increasingly shaped by cross-border labor markets, trade regimes, media circuits.

Queerness as Critical Methodology (Beyond Identity)

• Dana Y. Takagi’s Amerasia essay (1994): lesbian/gay identities can unsettle masculinist nationalism.

• Lisa Lowe’s Immigrant Acts model:

  • Citizenship law racialized and gendered Asian bodies; legal “masculinity” long equated with “whiteness.”

  • Demonstrates sexuality–race co-production.

• Eng’s expansion:

  • Queer = methodological optic—interrogates power across race, gender, class, transnational location, not only same-sex desire.

  • Legal/cultural discourses on “deviant” sexuality mark all Asian immigrants as “queer” outsiders to citizenship.

Field-Level Reflections: Theory, Professionalization, & Missing Queer Link

• Takagi & Michael Omi (Amerasia 1995) lament 1980s “waning of radical movements” & academic disciplinization.

• Eng counters:

  • 1980s rise of queer activism & AIDS politics represents displaced radicalism; oversight reveals field’s difficulty integrating sexuality.

  • Mainstream gay/lesbian scholarship likewise neglects race, reinforcing siloed analysis.

Case Study – Ang Lee’s The Wedding Banquet (1993)

• Protagonist Wai-Tung: Taiwanese-American, wealthy, openly gay with white partner Simon.

  • Breaks “rice queen” stereotype (Asian submissive + older white daddy).

• Plot mechanics:

  • Fake heterosexual marriage with undocumented tenant Wei-Wei to appease parents & secure her green card.

  • Pregnancy and patriarchal pressures re-heteronormalize arrangement.

• Analytical takeaways:

  • Citizenship for queer Asian male purchased via control of Third-World female labor/reproductive body.

  • Illustrates contradictions: queer diaspora promises freedom yet reinscribes transnational patriarchy.

  • Eng & Mark Chiang: film’s resolution depends on disciplining Wei-Wei; “woman becomes very sign of labor.”

  • Concludes that queer/diasporic formation here is mode not culmination—must be critiqued for both enabling and violent effects.

Implications, Ethical & Philosophical Stakes

• Cultural nationalism’s domestic & hetero focus = limited, exclusionary; queerness & diaspora reopen analytical space.

• Need for multi-scalar politics:

  • Local civil rights (e.g., hate crimes, marriage debates).

  • Transnational solidarities (labor rights, anti-imperialism, migrant justice).

• Warns against:

  • Mainstream LGBTQ campaigns that appeal to “equal rights” yet ignore racial/immigrant disparities (e.g., affirmative-action backlash).

  • Diaspora romanticism that forgets nation-state power or replicates patriarchal global capitalism.

Connections to Foundational Principles & Other Fields

• Builds on feminist critiques of nationalism (Chow, Mohanty, Spivak) and public-sphere theory (Habermas, Fraser, Warner).

• Dialogues with postcolonial studies’ examination of citizenship, home, exile.

• Invites American Studies to leave “domestic” lens, embrace comparative global frames.

Numerical / Statutory References (LaTeX-formatted)

• Chinese Exclusion Act enacted 1882.

• “Gentleman’s Agreement” 1907, Immigration Act 1924.

• Repeal & quota reforms: McCarran-Walter Act 1952; Immigration & Nationality Act 1965.

• Illegal Immigration Reform & Immigrant Responsibility Act passed 1996, major provisions active 1997.

Key Take-Home Points

• Hyphenation & queerness are not marginal quirks; they thematize foundational instabilities in race, nation, and citizenship.

• Queer diaspora is both analytic tool & field of struggle—must address gendered labor, class, global capital, and state regulation.

• Future Asian American studies: move from cultural nationalism → transnational culturalism grounded in critical queer theory.

David L. Eng's central agenda is to "forge a dialogue between Asian American studies and queer studies via the shared problem of 'home,' citizenship, and belonging," highlighting how both groups experience a "vexed question of 'home'": Asian Americans are "permanently 'suspended' between origin and destination," while queer individuals face "Literal/figurative expulsions from family homes" and endlessly "'Coming out'" with home remaining "uninhabitable." Eng critiques early Asian American cultural nationalism for having "reinscribed patriarchy, misogyny, homophobia" by envisioning a "prototype citizen… male, heterosexual, working-class, U.S.-born, English-speaking" and maintaining the "public (masculine nation) secured through control of private (feminized home)." He expands "queer" beyond identity to a "methodological optic—interrogates power across race, gender, class, transnational location, not only same-sex desire," noting how "Legal/cultural discourses on 'deviant' sexuality mark all Asian immigrants as 'queer' outsiders to citizenship." Eng also points out the "missing queer link" in 1980s scholarship, as the rise of "queer activism & AIDS politics represents displaced radicalism" overlooked by Asian American studies, and mainstream LGBTQ scholarship likewise "neglects race." Illustrating these complexities, The Wedding Banquet shows how "Citizenship for queer Asian male purchased via control of Third-World female labor/reproductive body," ultimately proving that "queer/diasporic formation here is mode not culmination—must be critiqued for both enabling and violent effects." Ultimately, "Hyphenation & queerness are not marginal quirks; they thematize foundational instabilities in race, nation, and citizenship," calling for future Asian American studies to move towards "transnational culturalism grounded in critical queer theory."