American Born Chinese graphic novel

[jack]

Author: Gene Luen Yang

Summary: A graphic novel about the Monkey King, a young first-generation Chinese-American boy, and an all American boy with an annoying Chinese cousin.

Lent by: CGM (ravingglory)

As CGM commented, it can be very quick to read a graphic novel, as compared to a written novel, but as you know that already, I tried not to let it influence the review.

It's a very nice book. It's pleasant, has a great dry wit, and makes you really feel for Jin and the other characters. I love its depictions of the Monkey King, accurate (as far as I remember) but lovingly witty. It was apparently quite well known, though I hadn't heard of it. In fact, I don't have very much to say, other than "I've not read a lot of books like this, but it was very good, so if CGM offers it to you, say yes".

The only other comment is on something that ISN'T there. There were two or three potential points of controversy. The Monkey King story is told from a Christian perspective. Danny's Chinese cousin, Chin-Kee is a personification of all the worst stereotypes about Chinese people, and similarly, young Jin is torn between having an identity of his own, and fitting into the culture he lives in and enjoys. But all are written so naturally, by Yang himself a Chinese-Christian-American, that all the reviews say "And I see why somebody MIGHT be offended, but in fact, it seems to turn out that no-one IS".

A panel from the comic: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_69IBT9GTSiI/SNzVxbDGXOI/AAAAAAAAAPA/nNLtLLnrsAE/s400/chinese.panel.jpg
A description by the author: http://www.firstsecondbooks.com/authors/geneYangBlogMain.html
A review, mentioning the controvertial aspects: http://www.readaboutcomics.com/2006/08/28/american-born-chinese/

Comments

[ewx.livejournal.com]

With a name like 'Chin-Kee' I think I would expect a deliberate, almost certainly satirical, portrayal of western stereotypes of the Chinese.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it definitely is: it's enough over the top that (in context) I don't think anyone at all sensible could doubt it's (amongst other things) a deliberate exaggeration (although there have probably been worse non-satirical examples). But even if everyone knows that, it's easy to still be offended by a gratuitous use of racist imagery; whereas here it's sufficiently well done, relevant to the plot, and arguably with some sympathy, that it's not.