A timely and thoughtful, if at times overidealistic, plea for full participation in the great ongoing debate.
An exhaustively detailed brief provocatively argues that Asian-Americans should be included in the national dialogue about race.
Drawing on an eclectic range of references from John Stuart Mill to Tom Wolfe, Wu (Law/Howard Univ.) admits he hopes to stimulate discussion as well as invite dissent as he advances his ideas. Addressing both black and white prejudices against Asian-Americans, Wu is punctilious about acknowledging the greater burden race has imposed on blacks. Divided into three sections, his study begins with personal recollections of growing up as a Chinese-American and ends with a chapter detailing his reasons for teaching at Howard, a historically black university. In the first section, Wu rebuts the myth of the model minority by demonstrating that, while Asians are highly educated, they receive a lower return on their investment in education and are underrepresented in management; their higher income, he argues, reflects families pooling their resources. Next, he analyzes the implication of mixed-race marriages, as well as such problems as Asian-Americans’ stand on affirmative action (he supports it), racial profiling (he discusses the case of Wen Ho Lee), and the dilemma of diversity. Citing the abhorrence that the Asian custom of eating dogs evokes in Westerners, he argues that, while everyone favors diversity, no one has thought critically enough about its implications. Wu suggests that one way of reconciling assimilation with multiculturalism would be to distinguish the division between what is substantial and what is superficial: “. . . an Afrocentric curriculum that is rigorous may be preferable to one that is auctioned off for product placements.” In the final section, he suggests that Asian-Americans should engage in building coalitions with African-Americans and other minorities as well as with whites to create a tolerant civic society.
A timely and thoughtful, if at times overidealistic, plea for full participation in the great ongoing debate.Pub Date: Jan. 15, 2002
ISBN: 0-465-00639-6
Page Count: 352
Publisher: Basic Books
Review Posted Online: June 24, 2010
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Oct. 15, 2001
A moving meditation on mortality by a gifted writer whose dual perspectives of physician and patient provide a singular...
A neurosurgeon with a passion for literature tragically finds his perfect subject after his diagnosis of terminal lung cancer.
Writing isn’t brain surgery, but it’s rare when someone adept at the latter is also so accomplished at the former. Searching for meaning and purpose in his life, Kalanithi pursued a doctorate in literature and had felt certain that he wouldn’t enter the field of medicine, in which his father and other members of his family excelled. “But I couldn’t let go of the question,” he writes, after realizing that his goals “didn’t quite fit in an English department.” “Where did biology, morality, literature and philosophy intersect?” So he decided to set aside his doctoral dissertation and belatedly prepare for medical school, which “would allow me a chance to find answers that are not in books, to find a different sort of sublime, to forge relationships with the suffering, and to keep following the question of what makes human life meaningful, even in the face of death and decay.” The author’s empathy undoubtedly made him an exceptional doctor, and the precision of his prose—as well as the moral purpose underscoring it—suggests that he could have written a good book on any subject he chose. Part of what makes this book so essential is the fact that it was written under a death sentence following the diagnosis that upended his life, just as he was preparing to end his residency and attract offers at the top of his profession. Kalanithi learned he might have 10 years to live or perhaps five. Should he return to neurosurgery (he could and did), or should he write (he also did)? Should he and his wife have a baby? They did, eight months before he died, which was less than two years after the original diagnosis. “The fact of death is unsettling,” he understates. “Yet there is no other way to live.”
A moving meditation on mortality by a gifted writer whose dual perspectives of physician and patient provide a singular clarity.Pub Date: Jan. 19, 2016
ISBN: 978-0-8129-8840-6
Page Count: 248
Publisher: Random House
Review Posted Online: Sept. 29, 2015
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Oct. 15, 2015
Occasionally wonky but overall a good case for how the dismal science can make the world less—well, dismal.
“Quality of life means more than just consumption”: Two MIT economists urge that a smarter, more politically aware economics be brought to bear on social issues.
It’s no secret, write Banerjee and Duflo (co-authors: Poor Economics: A Radical Rethinking of the Way To Fight Global Poverty, 2011), that “we seem to have fallen on hard times.” Immigration, trade, inequality, and taxation problems present themselves daily, and they seem to be intractable. Economics can be put to use in figuring out these big-issue questions. Data can be adduced, for example, to answer the question of whether immigration tends to suppress wages. The answer: “There is no evidence low-skilled migration to rich countries drives wage and employment down for the natives.” In fact, it opens up opportunities for those natives by freeing them to look for better work. The problem becomes thornier when it comes to the matter of free trade; as the authors observe, “left-behind people live in left-behind places,” which explains why regional poverty descended on Appalachia when so many manufacturing jobs left for China in the age of globalism, leaving behind not just left-behind people but also people ripe for exploitation by nationalist politicians. The authors add, interestingly, that the same thing occurred in parts of Germany, Spain, and Norway that fell victim to the “China shock.” In what they call a “slightly technical aside,” they build a case for addressing trade issues not with trade wars but with consumption taxes: “It makes no sense to ask agricultural workers to lose their jobs just so steelworkers can keep theirs, which is what tariffs accomplish.” Policymakers might want to consider such counsel, especially when it is coupled with the observation that free trade benefits workers in poor countries but punishes workers in rich ones.
Occasionally wonky but overall a good case for how the dismal science can make the world less—well, dismal.Pub Date: Nov. 12, 2019
ISBN: 978-1-61039-950-0
Page Count: 432
Publisher: PublicAffairs
Review Posted Online: Aug. 28, 2019
Kirkus Reviews Issue: Sept. 15, 2019
SEEN & HEARD
© Copyright 2024 Kirkus Media LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Follow
Popular in this Genre
We can’t wait for you to join Kirkus!
It’s free and takes less than 10 seconds!
Already have an account? Log in.
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
Welcome Back!
OR
Sign in with GoogleTrouble signing in? Retrieve credentials.
