Armchair Armwrestling and Diverse Diversifying

Armchair
(pic from here)
Slanteyefortheroundeye has a good interview with the Secret Identities boys here. (He makes mention of our man Jimmy Aquino at the end). In the interview, SEFTRE asks Jeff Yang about inclusion of different minority groups and sexual orientations, and Jeff mentions a Racialicious post that attacked him on questions of diversity. If you read the comments in the Racialicious post, you can see Jeff try to defend himself only to have lots of angry people showing their fangs.
I don’t think Secret Identities was a perfect book. I recommend that people buy it, support it, and enjoy some of the better stories, but it definitely wasn’t perfect. Quite a few of the stories (sorry, guys) were cornier than corn syrup. But to attack Jeff with some insinuation that he held back certain minority groups strikes me as unfair, unhelpful, and impractical. Especially when the attack is over something that the book is trying to promote–diversity.
It’s good to diversify, but success must always take precedence over inclusion because like it or not, someone is going to be excluded. In activism and in life, you don’t have to do all things well; you just have to do one thing well. This may seem exclusionary, but it’s also smart and effective business. What I always suggest to people in Thymos is that it’s better to do one thing well than to do many things half well. It’s always been my way of doing things. If Korean Americans do something and are in the spotlight, more power to them, even if I’m not Korean. If Hmong people want a Hmong celebration, more power to them, even if I’m not Hmong. I’m not going to highjack the bus just because I’m not on it.
I’ve seen this happen before. Someone will try to create something, and another person will step in and try to overdiversify it to death. They’ll complain about one thing or another until they’ve managed to sink the project. Implications and accusations of racism and sexism often accompany these attempts to sink the boat. Often these attacks will come from people who don’t have experience of leading groups of people. It’ll be the theorists and opinionistas who attack leaders. They say, “Oh, you don’t have an LGBT perspective,” and when you get that, they’ll say, “What about people from the Mian tribe? What about women from the Mian tribe who prefer women, who come from a Buddhist background, and who use their right hand for writing but their left hand for brushing their teeth? If you don’t find people like this, you’re sexist, racist, classist, and ableist!” They’ll nitpick what people do until the cows come home.
My point is this–let’s succeed. Had Jeff edited a work that perpetuated racism, or pushed the same ol’ WM/AF storylines, or did something else egregiously bad, I’d say go ahead, let him have it. But to quibble over something as vast and undefinable as diversity makes zero sense. It’s petty. Yes, maybe it would’ve been nice to label SI as “An Asian American Superhero Anthology” rather than “The Asian American Superhero Anthology.” But they didn’t, and since it’s currently the only AA superhero anthology, the name is technically correct.
There are some political minefields that the editors of SI have to face now that the accusation is in cyberspace, and I think they all handle it well in their SEFTRE answer, but I’d like to voice my opinion: Let’s succeed where we can succeed. We don’t ever have to be all things to all people, nor can we. Let’s succeed where we can.
Edit 6/15/09: Here is another review from a female perspective. I thought this one was a bit more fair:
http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6642975.html?nid=2789