8 Asians

NPR’s Robert Siegel: Cho Lived and Died as an American

By Claire | Wednesday, April 18, 2007 | Comments


This excerpt of NPR’s All Things Considered makes me want to invite host Robert Siegel over for one of my mother’s homecooked multi-course Filipino dinners; I’m that impressed with what he has to say. I insist that you listen to the whole thing before you read on here. If you don’t have the capability to listen, let me know and I will buy the freaking transcript, that’s how strongly I feel about his commentary. (UPDATE: My awesome 8asian colleague John has transcribed the piece. Read it after the jump.)

You’re back? Okay, let’s discuss. I, for one, would like to thank Mr. Siegel for going on the air and pointing out that his own children and Cho had something in common: they all grew up as American kids, attending public school in Northern Virginia. More importantly, I applaud Mr. Siegel for making the point that Cho may have been born in Korea, but he was just as American as the killers from Columbine.

Based on my personal experience, I’d concur with Mr. Siegel. I immigrated to the U.S. at around the same age as Cho (he was eight, I was seven). Well before my college years, my identity as an American was cemented, perhaps even stronger at times than my Filipino identity. This is why the immediate media focus on Cho’s immigration status struck me as just plain unnecessary and possibly inflammatory. I agree with Joz’s previous post: when you don’t know the identity of the shooter, sure, describe him: Asian, tall, short, whatever. But what exactly did his immigration status have to do with anything other than perhaps an underlying climate of fear that “a foreigner,” as I heard one VT eyewitness describe Cho, is in America to do harm. Or, was it perhaps just a biographical point of interest for a reporter? I admit that I don’t want to be sure, maybe because I don’t want confirmation that it is indeed something more insidious than a biographical gem.

After scanning foreign headlines, Mr. Siegel laments that those who would identify Cho as Korean (instead of just a LOCAL from a nearby suburb) are “people who don’t know this country, don’t get this country.” I fear that it is not only foreign news agencies who don’t know this country or get it, but also some of my fellow Americans. The thing some Americans might not get? It’s often fundamentally American not to be exclusively American. The majority of us, whether it was five generations or one flight ago, are from somewhere foreign. I do not believe this makes us less American.

This morning, the New York Times homepage featured a collage of victim’s photographs. Other than the now heartbreaking and haunting smiles on their faces, what struck me about the victims was their diversity. This graphic is a snapshot of today’s America: no sea of white faces, but a veritable Benetton ad, only completely uncontrived.

So as simply as I can say it: what happened on Monday was really fucked up. Tragic, horrifying and unconscionable. But I don’t think it can be any better understood by focusing on the killer’s race or country of origin, just as I don’t think the Columbine murderers can be explained by where in Europe their grandparents emigrated from. Certainly, my love for rice and variety television can be better understood by explaining that I’m Filipina-American. But linking someone’s brutal, homicidal behavior to their ethnicity? Not so much. As Mr. Siegel said, the homicidal Cho “was typical of no group of significant size,” neither Korean nor American. If anything, his writing contained “pedophelia, Michael Jackson, Catholic priests, this is the stuff of our news pages and culture, not some foreign country’s.”

32 incredible, accomplished and well-loved Americans died on Monday and I think we owe it to them to keep ourselves from being manipulated into a frenzy of blame or racial tension. It’s frenzy that distracts us from paying attention to the other everyday, important American issues that CAN be better understood if we demand the same kind of continuing, detailed coverage this incident warranted. For example: Iraq, The Justice Department, The Supreme Court, gun legislation?

The NPR segment is transcribed below. Thank you, John.

Columns
Weighing Cho’s Heritage and Identity
by Robert Siegel

All Things Considered, April 18, 2007
National Public Radio
How American was Seung-hui Cho? Despite being a South Korean national living in America, his upbringing, and his problems, were distinctly American.

Yesterday, I checked some foreign newspaper websites to see how they were covering events at Virginia Tech. A headline in the British daily, The Times, said “Korean Student Named as Massacre Gunman.” Today’s Guardian says “Gunman Was South Korean Student.” A headline in Liberation, the French daily, also identified the gunman as Korean, as did headlines in The Bangkok Post and The Middle East Times.

That usage struck me as evidence of yet another way in which people who don’t know this country, don’t get this country. True, Seung-Hui Cho, was a South Korean national living here on a green card. But in fact the 23-year-old English major came here at the age at 8. He went to public schools in Northern Virginia just like my kids. And then he
went to a state university, where being of Asian extraction is hardly a distinction. There is an Asian American student union there, with six associations, two sororities and two fraternities.

Cho was obviously unbalanced, homicidal, and that makes him typical of no group of significant size. But reading his disturbingly violent script for a play online, I didn’t get the impression that his pre-occupations were especially exotic or in any way Korean.
Pediophilia, Michael Jackson, Catholic priests, this is the stuff of our news pages and culture, not some foreign country’s. His ability to buy a gun reflects an American interpretation of liberty, an idea which, if not unique to us, is certainly no Asian import.

It was refreshing to catch a Washington Post headline that hit their website yesterday. They described Cho as, a local, a Centerville Virginia student, like the kids who murdered at Columbine , Seung-Hui Cho killed and died as one of us.

What next?

  • Subscribe to this feed
  • Leave a comment
« Virginia Tech: The Day After / Media Advisory from the AAJA
Cho ’nuff: The Sky’s the Limit »

  • Matt Clark
    I think it's a little naive and simplistic for Mr. Siegel to claim that Cho was "just as American" as anyone else.

    First of all, he wasn't an American citizen.

    Second, he held South Korean citizenship.

    So far, not as exclusively American as Mr. Siegel would like to claim.

    Imagine if he'd won a Nobel Prize or achieved some positive honor instead of infamy; then he'd be claimed by South Korea as one of their own.

    Let's be realistic: Cho occupied a cultural space familiar to many immigrants, both generations-ago immigrants from Europe and newer ones from around the globe: partway between the homeland and America. It is the natural space of immigrants, torn between two countries. It is a difficult path.

    Yes, he was culturally American, having arrived at age eight. But is it simplistic and manichean of Mr. Siegel to simply state that Cho was 100% All-American like some farm boy from Iowa. It's more complex than that and we all know it is.

    And oh, Mr Siegel: we are discovering today that Cho was inspired to commit his violent acts by ... a Korean movie.

    Again, Cho's identity was likely more complex than the simplistic model Mr. Siegel puts forth.
  • Matt Clark
    Also, I object to Mr. Siegel's comment that "pedophilia, Michael Jackson, Catholic priests -- this is the stuff of our news pages"

    That's only because our media are anti-Christian. They print few stories about church missions to Africa and Latin America, but every pedophile priest gets on page A1. It's a flaw in American media coverage.

    Overall, I'm unimpressed with Mr. Siegel's facile commentary on this subject.
  • Matt Clark
    "The thing some Americans might not get? It’s often fundamentally American not to be exclusively American. The majority of us, whether it was five generations or one flight ago, are from somewhere foreign. I do not believe this makes us less American."

    This is the crux of the matter. What does it mean to be American? It's fashionable in NPR-speak to say that anyone can hop on a plane, land here, and voila -- you're instantly as American as someone who has no ties to another country and whose family hasn't for generations.

    But that's simplistic and no one really buys it.

    Yes, I have friends who came to the U.S. as young kids like Cho, and they are very American. But they also have an international side, close cultural and family ties, that I (a white American whose roots here go back many generations) do not have. They are more international than I am.

    Is that a problem? No. But are they 100% American? No. They are very American, but with other ties as well. I don't see why we can't admit this obvious reality.
  • Well written, Claire. Thanks for your insight.
  • rom
    No one wants to claim Cho as their own. That is understandable. Who wants to put out he was a lovable South Korean until he ran into "American values". Everyone wants to disown him. Every "race" and culture is capable of extreme violence.
  • I think, no matter where he was placed on the world, his act was heinous and unfortunately the only people who can claim him as their own are his poor parents.
  • craig
    You are so enlightened, Matt Clark. I didn't know that only "some farm boy from Iowa" or "a white American whose roots here go back many generations" can be considered "100% All-American." And since you're more American than the rest of us, I'm sure that you have undeniable proof that Cho's violent acts were primarily inspired by a Korean movie and not just a coincidence. It certainly can't be because of his mental illness (http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/...) nor his childhood experiences as a victim of racism(http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2007/04/19/va_tech_stunned_by_images_of_gunman/).
  • Could the massacre that took place at Virgina Tech Monday morning be the result of a life-long speech impediment -- and the ridicule of classmates?

    Read the linked blog for evidence and my hypothesis! BTW, I would post it here, but the info is too long for a comment.
    http://newzreviews.blogspot.com/
  • First, I admit I did not read Matt Clark's comments in the entirety, but I did skim it and from what I read, do not dispute any of it, even as an Asian American who tends to be apologist about critical race issues. Cho is certainly not "All-American" nor is he "All-Korean." He's like many of us who've emigrated between several continents in one lifetime: he's in the fringes, a sad and difficult place to be, as those of us there with him know.

    Second, I would like to formally recant anything I asserted previously about how this "won't and shouldn't become a race issue; it's about a psychotic kid and that's it." Such naivete is inexcusable from someone who has lived over a quarter century in America already. Apparently, it has blown up into nothing short of a race issue. It's quite unfortunate.

    Finally, we Asians claim Cho as one of our own. He was a member of the Asian American community and the community at large, both Asians and non-Asians, nurtured Cho into the young man he became. We are just as much at blame as he is. He pulled the trigger, but we weren't there for him, supporting him and showing him compassion. If you've read his biography, it's a sad tale. It makes me angry at those people that were cruel and cold-hearted tangents in his life. He was our brother and we didn't take good enough care of him.
  • Using fractions and percentages to classify someone's cultural affiliation is so lame. Seriously.

    Having an international side does not make you less American than Matt Clark. There are plenty of white Americans with an "international side," and I doubt that Matt Clark would call them less American because of their "international side." In other words, the Iowa farm boy who studies abroad or spends time in another culture, he's white so he's American Plus! But the kid with an Asian heritage is not quite American.

    Cho, as horrible as he turns out to be, is one of us. He grew up being alienated by the same culture as the Columbine kids and the Oklahoma City bombers, who, by Matt Clarks' measures, are 100% American.

    I don't think Matt Clark is trying to imply that there is a Korean reason for Cho's horrendous actions. I think that Matt Clark is annoyed that someone with an "international side" would somehow measure the same percentage of "American" as the Iowa farm boy, who apparently is the archetype. The Iowa farm boy is the full American, and the rest of us are less American.

    You know what I think? I think that using fractions and percentages to classify someone's cultural affiliation is LAME. And it is also NOT THE POINT.
  • Matt Clark
    Akrypti,

    I don't find this to be an issue of race per se but one of immigration. For example, my friend is married to a Greek girl named Natalia. N. has been here since she was like 5, so she has no accent and you wouldn't know she wasn't born here in any way. But I don't think of her as All-American (and she doesn't see herself that way) because she has this whole other world she's a part of in Greece (language, church, relatives, trips, etc.).

    So she's white, and very American, but not 100% Iowa Farm Girl American!
  • Akrypti
    Re: "Using fractions and percentages to classify someone’s cultural affiliation is so lame. Seriously. . . . You know what I think? I think that using fractions and percentages to classify someone’s cultural affiliation is LAME. And it is also NOT THE POINT."

    Fascinating perspective. Could you please expand on it? I request further clarification because your argument was circular. You said it was lame, and therefore should not do it, Cho's cultural affiliation should not be divied up into "fractions and percentages," and then you conclude with a repetition of your conclusory introductory statement, which was essentially, "it's lame."

    I would like to hear WHY it is lame; otherwise, I cannot respond comprehensively to John Patrick's comment.
  • Matt Clark
    "Using fractions and percentages to classify someone’s cultural affiliation is so lame. Seriously."

    You'd be amazed what social scientists quantify these days, John P.!
  • james
    Obviously Mr. Clark missed the entire point of Mr. Siegel's NPR excerpt. The issue at hand isn't how American or non-American Cho was by examining his family tree, it is the fact that Cho's motivations and anger were pointedly "American". American in the sense that he railed against ideals and concepts from a uniquely American perspective. Additionally, he idolizes the Columbine killers who he identified with (a pair that was "American" in the narrow minded sense).

    This is not a story of a South Korean who moved to the US and committed these atrocious acts as a sign of terrorism or as a foreigner disgusted with Americans. This is an American killing fellow Americans with little to do with any cultural differences but rather having to do with distancing and isolating himself from his own society.

    Further, Mr. Patrick's reference to the South Korean movie is clearly ill-informed. The Oldboy "inspiration" is purely speculation made by a professor and solely based on Cho's hammer picture and references to a hammer. If one has seen the movie, there is little else other than extreme violence that parallels what Cho did. Ironically, the movie is already in the works for an American remake.
  • james
    Oops, and I meant Clark's reference to the South Korean movie inspiration. Apologies to Patrick.
  • Matt Clark,

    First, maybe it's not your place to prescribe ritalin.

    Second, your use of percentages to measure loyalty to America is preposterous. The presupposition that loyalty can be determined by immigration history is totally without merit. It is NOT a phenomena that is measured by social scientists.

    I must admit that I am baffled by the 95%/5% claim that you made about the second generation. Is that math? And then "stoners," is that a joke?

    Is your claim also, then, that the third generation is mathematically as American as the Iowa farm boy?

    The Columbine shooters, the Oklahoma City bombers, etc., How do they measure up to the Iowa farm boy? Are they all more American than the Asian American contributors to this blog?
  • Oliver Williamson Jr
    I saw Cho's video also, and I wonder how Cho's anger and motivations were "pointedly American"? What is that supposed to mean?

    Having done several stints in South Korea, I actually thought Cho sounded very "Korean". The cadence and drone of his voice were all too familiar. Most of his complaints were nothing new either. There is a lot of ill will towards rich people over there. In a country where status conciousness has run amok, envy runs even deeper than in most other places. Thus, there is also a lot of ill will in Korea toward America, "white people", Jews, and Israel. In many young East Asians' eyes, America, "white people", Jews, and Israel are essentially the same thing, and the majority of young Koreans take any and every opportunity to denigrate them. A good number of older Koreans are no better.

    Cho actually reminded me of "Jijeonpa" in the early 1990s, that group of Koreans who abducted several people in Apkujondong and cannibalized them. They railed against rich people too and regretted that they did not have the opportunity to abduct an "orangejok" ("Orange tribe": a certain group of spoiled rich Korean kids in 1990s Seoul.)
  • Matt Clark
    Oliver,

    Interesting. I'm far from an expert on Korea, but Siegel's explanation sounded like he started with his thesis (that Cho was nuthin' but a good ol' 'Merican boy, simple as that) and then scanned some websites and cherry-picked Cho's ravings to find support for that thesis.

    I'd bet he doesn't have the specific knowledge to pick up on certain aspects of Cho's Koreanness like you did here and others in the media have as well.

    At its heart, though, this case seems more like one of simple and tragic mental illness than a cross-cultural drama. I'm happy to leave it at that, and only felt the need bring up Cho's mixed cultural identity because Mr. Siegel erroneously insisted otherwise.
  • rom
    Society might owe resposiblity for Cho but b/c someone comes from my culture does not mean have to call him one mine.
  • James
    Pointedly American in the sense that he bore ill will against his own society, not one that was foreign to him. Cho was an English major. He wrote plays and poetry in English. He wrote an 1800 word manifesto in English. There was nothing to suggest he was the way he was because of difficulty in assimilating culture. Anybody who has moved to the US since the age of 8 or around that age knows that you are very "American" by the time you're entering college.

    Nowhere in his complaints did it suggest he was angry at Americans as a cultural or national entity. Again, he cited the American Columbine killers. And his hate was vague, disturbed, not necessarily just rich people.

    Point is, Cho will go down as an American mass murderer, not a foreigner from Korea.
  • James
    I want to add that it is interesting that Cho's ethnicity is discussed so much in this kind of forum, primarily because this site is about Asian-Americans and so the issue of race relations are going to be talked about (and mostly amongst Asian-Americans who frequent the site).

    However, if you look at other more 'general' forums, the topic of Cho's ethnicity is not really discussed extensively, primarily because it is not as relevant and because there is no evidence or inclination to show that Cho's motivation was somehow related to his heritage or racial/ethnic background. I think most people would agree that there is nothing 'un-American' about his actions in the sense that we have seen other disturbed and seemingly inexplicable shootings such as this in the news. This is not like a suicide bombing or 9/11 where Americans struggled to disect the cultural/religious motivations behind the terrorists. Instead, we struggle to understand why a human being in our society would commit these crimes and we line them up with other school shootings in US history and try to find some sort of reasoning why some of our youth are so troubled.
  • Stephanie
    Honestly, I don't believe that Cho's issues are truly a matter of him being a member of any particular race or ethnicity. What he did was horrible, but it's not because he was American this or Korean that. It's because he was a misfit and mentally unstable, a potent and clearly dangerous combination.

    However, out of curiosity, I'd like to know why Mr. Clark believes that I should be considered less American than that figurative girl from Iowa. I was born, raised, and still reside in California. For the sake of my argument, I will admit that I can be a complete "Valley Girl," a la Alicia Silverstone in Clueless, minus the ridiculous wealth. I surf, adore baseball, and make a mean apple pie. I even rowed crew for my university. If you'd never seen me, and just read what I wrote or heard me speak, you would think that I am that farm-raised Iowa girl (actually in this case, California). I am as American as anyone born or raised here is, with the exception of the Native Americans, the ONLY bona fide 100% Americans that live here.

    If I have values, it's because I believe in them, not because they were thrust upon me from birth. I respect my elders because I believe it's the right thing (and really, only when it IS the right thing). I honor and protect my family because I love them. One might say that these values are stereotypically "Asian," but aren't they good values to have no matter what "race" one associates him or herself with?

    As an anthropology major, I believe that race is a social construct. As an individual, I believe it is a useless one, as well.
  • Stephanie
    Oh, and to Mr. Williamson:

    I am truly sorry people have given you such a hard time simply for the color of your skin. However, you are simply perpetrating the problem by generalizing all Asian Americans in this way, as well as by assuming that all Asian Americans HAVE spent time in Eastern Asia, especially long enough to pick up some of those nasty traits you seem to think all Asians have. It's not as though we deliberately leave the US or live in a different country long enough to go find an inner racist.

    And personally? I love Leonardo di Caprio.
  • rom
    Your professor are lying to you is silly over the top comment... p.s. I am a professor
  • Wow, this thread got pretty gross. I'm pretty amazed that some of this stuff didn't get deleted.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Recent Comments