 |
|
Title: Covering: The Hidden Assault on Our Civil Rights
ISBN: 0375508201
Author:
Kenji Yoshino
Publicate Date: 2006-01-17
Publish: 2006-01-17
List Price: $24.95
Average Customer Rating: 4.0
Format: Hardcover
 |
|
|
|
|
Amazon Lowest New Price: $12.76
Amazon Lowest Used Price: $3.65
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Customer Review: |
|
1: "Covering," a term used for the coerced hiding of crucial aspects of one's self--in his case his homosexuality
There have been several struggles in civil rights in the USA. Women suffrage, African American civil rights, and finally the Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Bisexual cause.
Yoshino, a law professor at Yale and a gay, Asian-American man, masterfully melds autobiography and legal scholarship in this book, marking a move from more traditional pleas for civil equality to a case for individual autonomy in identity politics. Seldom has a work of such careful intellectual rigor and fairness been so deeply touching.
In questioning the phenomenon of "covering," a term used for the coerced hiding of crucial aspects of one's self--in his case his homosexuality--Yoshino thrusts the reader into a battlefield of shifting gray areas. Yet, at every step, he anticipates the reader's questions and rebuttals, answering them not only with acute reasoning, but also with disarming humility.
What emerges is an eloquent, poetic protest against the hidden prejudices embedded in American civil rights legislation--legislation that tacitly apologizes for "immutable" human difference from the white, male, straight norm, rather than defending one's "right to say what one is." Though Yoshino recognizes the law's potential to further (and hinder) liberty's cause, he admits that his "education in law has been an education in its limitations." Hence, by way of his unsparing accounts of self-realization, he reveals that the struggle against oppression lies not solely in fighting an imagined, monolithic state but as much in intimate discourse with the mother, the father, and the colleague who constitute that state. It deals with the ability to "blend" with the society who is yet to give the GLBT community the rights and respect it deserves.
As healing as it is polemical, this book has tremendous potential as a touchstone in the struggle for universal human dignity.
|
2: Not Much There
No offense to Yoshino, but in truth, he doesn't make many actual points. This is a great book if you want to hear about his personal journey, but it's not very enlightening overall.
|
3: interesting read, somewhat inconclusive
A mix of professional experience, glimpses of personal experience, poetic imagination and some interesting ideas for America's future. I am glad I've read it. The only regret is that the book doesn't lead to a powerful, clear vision for the country. The very interesting ideas from the introduction are just briefly repeated at the end. Maybe someone else will build upon this material? The book certainly encourages a discussion. Maybe that was the whole point?
|
4: This Poet Has Done It Well
The Publisher's Weekly review says it all, but I cannot let the opportunity pass to add my voice to those honoring this book. Yes, it's a simple concept, elaborated over 200 pages, but there is nothing monotonous about it. The academic monotony characteristic of similar monographs is thwarted through the simplest of means: the scholar-author is also a poet. He writes on the minutiae of civil rights law with the compression and unexpected image that make strong poetry memorable. I heard the author speak on the concept of Covering on the Maine Public Radio broadcast of the Chataqua Program. The discussion was interesting enough, but when he read the Epilogue, I immediately thought, "I have to have that in my Commonplace Book." As a politically active gay man and 15-year conductor of a gay men's chorus, I've often meditated on the meaning of cultural appropriation, assimilation, and accommodation and the resulting effect on actualization and abnegation of the individual. So, Kenji Yoshino's orderly discussion of coversion, passing, and covering is immediately attractive to me. But it is not my habit to read 'brainiac' books. I'm put off by the customary tone, talking down to me, especially when the subject of the discussion is, by inference, me and the people I know and love. This one is the exception. I feel like Yoshino and I have just spent a long evening, with a wide variety of friends, talking about something of immediate concern to all of us. And then there's that Epilogue. Talk is one thing, but how we live it out is usually quite another. And it's never simple. That's why it's best left to the hands of a poet, and this poet has done it well.
|
5: Polemical, thought-provoking, personal
I recently heard Professor Yoshino speak here in Seattle on a day in celebration of Human Rights Day, and I can attest to his being a gifted speaker and possessing an extraordinary intellect.
However, with respect to the notion of "covering," a term I believe that he has coined in this book to illuminate a polemical topic that he wishes to place squarely into the fore of the larger map/discourse of civil rights in the U.S., I am perplexed that his notion of the "mainstream" apparently does not take into account more dimensions, e.g., the cultural anthropological/sociological.
From my own experience as a gay man AND as an Asian-American, I have found, largely to my dismay, that in either social group, there is, in fact, a "mainstream" that does, in fact, exert pressure to conform to its "majority" norms, behaviors...
And I would suppose that in any "society," whether it be in a nation-state such as Japan, or a social group such as African-Americans, that there do exist "mainstream" cultures that individuals within those groups do have to "contend with."
"Covering" as Yoshino has placed it has, by dint of his conceptual definition of it has overwhelmingly negative connotations, one which allows a "mainstream" body within a social group to exert pressures on individual members who do not conform, whether out of choice or due to individual disposition.
But sometimes what could be considered "covering" (by some people) is also a means of what one could consider "healthy assimilation" or a reasonable concession to the majority--without being in any way a "sell-out."
When and where such "concessions" become a sell-out, of course, is an open question. But even where "adaptation" in some behaviors to the "norm" of the mainstream does occur, it may simply entail "building bridges" and acknowledging the opinion of the majority rather than remaining in isolation from them.
(If, for example, I am a nudist, I can still choose to walk outside of my house WITH clothing on, if only in simple deference to the fact that the law and the majority of my fellow citizens deem it an offense or offensive or both).
This is not to deny the legitimacy of the claims of gay people to equal rights (to marriage, protection from discrimination in the job market, etc.) but to point out that "covering" might be understood in a more nuanced context. Covering, in all its different aspects, is not tantamount in all situations to being an "assault on civil rights."
Covering may simply describe the "interface" where the majority and a smaller grouping, at least in a particular situation, and where the minority accedes to the norms of the former--despite the negative overtones that the author is ascribing to it. In other cases, the reverse (majority accedes to the behaviors of the minority despite a clear divergence of opinion) could and, in fact, DOES happen in America.
In some instances, too, dysfunctional or inappropriate (vis-a-vis the majority) behavior by a minority is tolerated, condoned, or even lauded.
Discussions of loaded discussions of "diversity" or "covering" need to be evaluated within a context rather than be seen in a predetermined, black-or-white intellectual "matrix."
In other words, the major concern that I have with this book is that it too "obviously" has an agenda stamped on it.
The personal details disclosed nicely balance the analytical (legal) side of the discussion.
But in terms of overall appeal to both mind AND heart, a little less Paul Haggis (director/screenwriter of "Crash"). Taking a strong position on an issue, with corroborative evidence, is fine. Re-iterating that position--as a constant thread--throughout a long discussion may seem to some people evidence of "not dodging an issue." But considering all the different dimensions of that issue would provide, I believe, a more balanced, more cogent argument in favor of one's position.
|
|
|
|
|
