重划界线-亚美文学研究新论

　　Many young Asian American literary and cultural studies scholars have been moving away from privileging the struggles of U.S. racial minorities for national belonging to a critique of war and empire, from the war against indigenous American Indians to the conquest of Mexico, Puerto Rico, Cuba, Hawaii, Guam, and the Philippines at the turn of the last century, to the imperialist wars in East, Southeast, and West Asia right up to today. They are interested in how concepts like transnationalism and diaspora might decenter the nation and emphasize trans-Pacific, trans Atlantic, and trans-hemispheric frames of analysis and collectively arrived at visions for knowledge production and socialjustice.　　At this moment, we are all facing a moment of danger. Advances in communication technology and the increasing global mobility of people and ideas during the past two and a half decades have brought Asia and Asian America closer than ever in some ways. But at the same time, advocates of the commercialization of higher education have come to occupy positions of influence in U.S. universities, which have witnessed an ongoing process reorganization around business principles, such as requirements for financial self-sufficiency, new managerial and accounting regimes, collaborations with industry, recruitment of international students to increase revenue, the likening of students to consumers of services offered by faculty and other entrepreneurial behaviors. While it is still true that American universities are still circumscribed by the national, there is growing global conformity to the legal, econonuc, and cunicular imperatives of the worldwide tendency to commercialize higher education. We are all increasingly forced to produce knowledge as a commodity in the service of the nation-state while experiencing a neoliberal restructuring that is at base the Americanization of knowledge production.　　So in universities across Asia as well, managing and attending universities are evolving into matters of investment and yield. With the globalization of mental labor and the institutional standardization of global academic rankings has come the obsessive pursuit of "global standards" that are in actuality the implementation of an American model haunted by colonial dynamics in which language politics are cultural colonialism par excellence, with Asian scholars obliged to use citation indexes in English language publications in a global academic publishing system that reinforces the hegemony of theoretical paradigms that dominate Anglophone scholarship. Unbelievably, to be credible on the world stage and to have their work circulated, scholars of Korean studies must conduct research and publish their writing in English.　　If we call into question as a territorialization of East Asian Studies by U,S,-centered global capital and military political systems, we may see that the U.S. cannot be separated from but is rather integral to all that happens in Asia. Indeed, just as white people were not used to seeing themselves as raced and men used to think only women are gendered, the U.S- is no less an area to study than any other.　　……