Historicize This. ISMLL 171-93

Regardless of the work--different author, different text, varying reader-types, or even when we look at literature as a whole, Catherine Gallagher, in her essay "Historical Scholarship" maintains that it's all historicized in one way or another. As she concentrates on various attempts to historicize these facets of literary study she reveals that there is not too much difference in the foundations for historizicing but instead more similarities. And through such historicizing we discover that "author," "text," "reader," "literature," and even "national" are more inter-related than first thought. However, the similarities and differences between these is not what I intend to respond to. I think we know enough about how author is connected to text and how the reader fits at one point of the triangle, whether at the top or bottom (whatever your preference). In her discussion of the historicizing of "author" Gallagher touches on the subject of "minority authorship" and states, "[...] critics have asked how and why certain writers created textual effects of minority consciousness and how those effects, in turn, helped support, even as they seemed to press against, the norm of an unhyphenated generic authorship" (178). In other words, I'm understanding this as although authorship itself is generic and without nationality, many authors still write within a minority consciousness, finding it an effective mode for presenting their authored works. However, for the longest time my view on minority authorship has been quite the contrary.

Though so many authors throughout history have embraced their minority status and used that very status (experience) as the impetus behind wonderful stories and novels, I, on the other hand, have always thought that putting my minority label "out there" was going to pigeon-hole me into a specific category of writer. My name is Thomas Keywon Cho and I've been convinced for a long time now that if I were ever to publish a book I would not use my full name to represent its authorship. Not that I don't embrace my ethnicity. I am Korean-American. Korean by blood, American by birth and life experience--so, bring on the hyphen. I would definitely write about such things related to life of a hyphenated citizen but to put it out there in lights seems like it would work against me rather than for me. Solving this issue is as easy as using the initials of my middle and last name instead of the full (e.g. "Thomas KC"). To me, Thomas KC or KC Thomas even puts me in an entirely different category as Thomas Keywon Cho. Actually, it keeps me out of the category placing altogether. Well, this is something I still struggle with, and whether or not I go with the full name or not remains to be seen. But for now I do see a huge difference in using one over the other. But who knows? Maybe I'll never publish anything. If not, problem solved I guess. =].