ANTIDOTE TO THE POISON TREE: WAYS KHMER AMERICAN YOUTH NEGOTIATE THE GHOSTS OF THE PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE

UCSD Ethnic Studies 2007-2008 Honors Program By: Yvonne Kwan Honors Program Advisor: Roberto Alvarez, Ph.D Honors Program Mentor: Lisa Sun-Hee Park, Ph.D June 9, 2008

Special Thanks: I would like to thank Ryan Kear for all his love and support throughout this research project. I know you do not understand why I am so interested in studying Khmer Americans, but hopefully, one day you will see. Thank you UCSD CSA for all your support throughout the research process of this paper. I am really sorry that I was not able to be more active in the student organization during the writing process. I think that it is amazing that UCSD has a CSA. Keep up the good work. Thank you CSU Long Beach CSS, especially Michael Saing, for helping me set up all the interviews/questionnaires. Without your help, I would have been lost. Thanks for the hospitality. Overall, I cannot be more grateful towards all the individuals who participated in this project. There were days I did not know what I was going to do. I was about to abandon the entire project altogether. Thank you for chatting with me about your experiences. I really appreciate all of the support. I hope this paper is representative of all your voices. Khmer people are not static or monolithic, so I believe that your stories should be told and heard over and over again. Lastly, I would like to thank Professor Lisa Park and Professor Roberto Alvarez. Without your continued guidance and support, I would have never seen the light at the end of the tunnel. As my senior year begins to wrap up, I cannot believe that I have made it. However, I never could have reached this far without all the help you both have given me. I know it is in your job description that you must read a lot, but both of you probably put a lot of time into reading my many drafts. Thank you. I can now say that I am a more informed writer and researcher. Thanks for the invaluable skills you both have taught me. Also, a last shout out to the (dis)honorable Ethnic Studies Students 2007-2008!! We made it!!

ANTIDOTE TO THE POISON TREE: WAYS KHMER AMERICAN YOUTH NEGOTIATE THE GHOSTS OF THE PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE

INTRODUCTION The experiences and histories of Khmer Americans1 and many other marginalized communities are negated and ignored by institutions of everyday life—schools, healthcare offices, banks, and more—that are grounded upon racial formation and racial order2 of the United States. According to these ideologies, immigrants who come to the United States are supposed to shed their experiences and histories once they land so that they may accommodate into American Anglo culture. Race theorists and American sociologists, Michael Omi and Howard Winant write, “The racial order is equilibrated by the state—encoded in law, organized through policy-making and enforced by a repressive apparatus” (1994, 84). Khmer American youth have created certain discourses and vocabularies in order to navigate and negotiate their subordinated and marginalized positions in American society. These youth have been marginalized not only because they are of an ethnic minority, but because a majority of their parents sought asylum in the United States as political refugees. As a result, Khmer American youth have unequal access to civil, political, and social citizenship3. These youth have created their own methods of coping with their position in dominant society in hopes of achieving upward mobility while also maintaining Khmer cultural values. The motivations to pursue postsecondary education are influenced by the ways in which Khmer American youth negotiate the ghosts of the past, present, and future. These ghosts interact to produce unique counternarratives about experiences and histories that remain negated in dominant discourse about refugee populations. 1

The term “Khmer Americans” will be used instead of “Khmer American” because the word “Khmer” represents not only Cambodia, but their culture as well. Also, no hyphenation will be used because a hyphen strategically separates the duality between Khmer and American culture and values, which is frequently untrue in the lives of these youth. 2 Racial Formation – as used and explained by Omi and Winant in Racial Formation in the United States: From the 1960’s to the 1980’s. Racial formation is the creation of racial meanings that govern the lives of Americans on the micro and macro levels. 3 Civil citizenship is the right to civil rights. Political citizenship is the right to vote and participate in politics. Social citizenship is the right to equal membership in society (David Pellow, ETHN 1C Lecture)

Kwan 2

Like many Asian ethnic minorities, Cambodians are homogenized under the umbrella term: Asian American. This categorization portrays and represents the iconic Cambodian, or Asian American, as static and unchanging. Racialized representations serve to produce and consolidate ideologies that govern the way people should think, feel, and act when the topic or subject is about Cambodians, especially youth. Not only are Khmer Americans expected to follow the model minority myth4, but Khmer Americans are also studied through the “culture of poverty5” lens. The revolving notions of “pathological trends” are read as synonymous to the bodies of Khmer American youth. However, the interviewees who participated in this research project would argue otherwise. Institutional racism and structural inequalities have forced Khmer American youth to negotiate their positions in society strategically—sometimes in accordance to dominant stereotypes—in order to gain access and knowledge. According to sociologist, Lisa Sun-Hee Park, many children of immigrant families have experienced increased rates of maturity due to the demands from their parents, family, and community (2005, 42). Second generation immigrant and/or refugee children are expected to have adult responsibilities even though these youth are still children as defined by the dominant American definition. Youth are forced to negotiate between their adult responsibilities and their role as a son or daughter [read: child]. This duality combined with the haunting of family histories create a new sense of identity shaped by ghosts of the past, present, and future6. The ghosts of the past involve dense and 4

The model minority myth will be explained further later in this text. Asian Americans are expected to follow the model minority myth which expects these ethnic minorities succeed through hard work and preservation (Zia 2000, 117). 5 The culture of poverty ideology will be explained further later in this text. The culture of poverty is seen as a biological disease of poverty and deviancy that plagues deviant minorities. According to Oscar Lewis, it is much easier to get rid of poverty than a “culture of poverty” which is thought to be a perpetuation of society’s worst social patterns in certain communities (Lewis 1966) 6 The usage of the terms “hauntings” and “ghosts” do not have a direct correlation with Avery Gordon’s Ghostly Matters. These terms are actually terms used by several interviewees to describe their life and family histories. For example, my interviewee Jay asked me, “Ghost stories. Soldier stories. I have a lot. Which ones do you wanna here?” (Jay Interview).

Kwan 3

sometimes very traumatic family histories experienced by Khmer American families. Although these individuals have faced genocide, war, relocation, and resettlement, they are expected to “assimilate” in particular ways that negate such personal and cultural history. Dominant ideologies frequently ignore and negate the history and life of immigrants and refugees prior to resettlement in the United States. The immigration process is usually studied through a “pushpull” analysis that focuses mostly on what happens to people after arriving to the host country. It completely negates the social and political foundations that accompany these individuals prior to and after arrival in the United States. A critical transnational analysis is needed in to explicate the complexities that accompany Khmer refugees and their children before and after resettling in the United States. Ghosts of the present include the hypervisibility of negative stereotypes; adult responsibilities due to the inability of their parents to negotiate with dominant society due to factors including but not limited to language difficulties, psychological problems, and denial of access; and also the constant sense of guilt and shame due to their subordinate status—race and class—that regulates the lives of these youth. Ghosts of the future involve the difficulties of promoting upward mobility in the Cambodian community and the difficulties of maintaining a “dying culture” among younger generations. These ghosts interact and intermesh to produce factors leading to why Khmer American youth have chosen to pursue postsecondary education. Although all Khmer American youth were influenced by these ghosts that involved family and culture, some differences arose between the groups regarding social and physical distance from the Khmer community. In general, I saw a pattern of difference between University of California (UC) students versus California State University (CSU) and community college (CC) students. Generally, the UC system focuses more on scientific and academic research and theory while the CSU system is more service oriented—including teaching,

Kwan 4

counseling, business, and more. At a CC, students may take classes that can be transferred to a four-year college or university after about roughly two years. Or, students may take classes that fulfill a certificate or training program at a CC—for example, veterinary assistant, auto shop, and more. In terms of admissions, the UC system is more rigorous and competitive compared to the CSU system. All individuals who apply to a CC are accepted because the CC’s purpose is service to the community. Although the family histories and experiences of my interviewees were similar, their motivations for pursuing postsecondary education were different. For the UC students, there is an increased sense of shame and guilt. There is a sense of shame because of the dominant stereotypes that frequently govern how they are viewed and treated. There is a sense of guilt because of the immense sacrifices made on the part of their parents and families so that they can get an education. This guilt also arises because the youth that attend a UC frequently have to leave their hometown to attend the university. Not only do the Khmer American youth feel a pressure to do well because of personal and familial expectations, but there is a need to do better for their community. Because of this shame and guilt, there is a constant need for verbal justification of being at a university. Social and physical distance from the family and community produces this sense of shame and guilt. These trends can also be seen in CSU and CC students, but the need for the justification for being at a postsecondary site is not as pertinent. CSU and CC students see college as a form of upward mobility as well, but they do not show a need for constant justification for their actions. Unlike the UC students, they do not feel the constant need to fight against stereotypes. The CSU and CC campuses frequently neighbor large Cambodian communities. The UC campuses on the other hand are in upper class communities. Because UC students do not fit into

Kwan 5

the stereotypes and do not live near a large Cambodian community, they have the need to justify why they are the exception. The importance of family and culture was very pertinent to the positive perceptions in my entire research group. Khmer American youth and their parents have varied relationships, but no matter how good or bad, parents, family, and Khmer culture directly impact the decisions and motivations for Khmer American youth to pursue postsecondary education. Cultural theorist, Andrew Edgar writes, “Subordinate groups actively respond to and resist political and economic domination. The subordinate groups need not then be seen merely as the passive dupes of the dominant class and its ideology” (Edgar et. al 2002, 165). This study will examine how the narratives of Khmer American youth resignify7 the stereotypes of “pathological trends” explored in previous work written about Khmer Americans. Instead of acting as another source of ventriloquation8, this study will provide a space where Khmer American youth can speak out and voice their histories and experiences. Undeniably, the act of writing about marginalized communities is already violent to these bodies. However, this text will take advantage of the institution of the university as a means to distribute and introduce counternarratives.

RESEARCH PROBLEMS Many authors and researchers categorize the refugee experience with marked “pathological trends.” It is not to say that all refugees have a pathological culture of poverty, but 7

Resignification is the process in which what is signified (what the signifier represents) is disrupted from what the signifier (symbol) usually signifies (K. Wayne Yang Lecture). 8 Ventriloquation, according to Mikhail Bakhtin, is being spoken for or spoken through (K. Wayne Yang Lecture).

Kwan 6

these projects have mostly attempted to study Cambodians through institutional gazes, for example, law enforcement, legislation, and others9. Omi and Winant argue that “the state organizes racial identities by means of education, family law, and the procedures for punishment, treatment, and surveillance of the criminal, deviant and ill” (1994, 83). The discourse used to describe the Cambodian situation as pathological is problematic because it assumes that issues of low socioeconomic status, high rate of teen gang participation, high rate of teen pregnancy and other social pitfalls represent a disease that is inherent to these bodies. In that sense, these people are already seen as pathological. These images have become hypervisible because they fulfill the need to create the “other” so that dominant society can learn to understand itself through mutual construction. American historian, Thomas J. Sugrue, explicates, “In a single word, the term ‘underclass’ encapsulates middle-class Americans’ most intimate fears and reaffirms their sense of social and moral superiority” (1999, 247). Anthropologist, Dwight Conquergood, argues, “This production of identity through negation” is the practice that links, rather than separates, [deviant] culture and mainstream culture” (1992, 17). As a result, this practice of mutual construction creates an “us” [read: modern, educated, hard working] versus “them” [read: backwards, uneducated, lazy]. Past literature focused on this concept of mutual construction because it solidified the writers’ superior position compared to its subjects’ subordinate position. Ethnographer, John Van Maanen, suggests that past ethnographers “cared not a whit of the souls of those they studied and were content to leave the groups of their interest unchanged and no better off (perhaps worse off) by their presence” (1988, 130). The history of ethnography and research has been problematic and violent for many “groups of interest.” Scholars who frequently write about the debilitating pitfalls of the Khmer American community give voice to the community through 9

Institutional gaze is derived from Michael Foucault’s “Panopticism,” Discipline & Punish: The Birth of the Prison.

Kwan 7

ventriloquation. The message portrayed is usually not what the community or individual intends to say. Like Conquergood, I am “concern[ed] about the textual violence perpetrated by academic against subordinate groups outside the academy” (1992, 22). I do not want to merely speak about them or speak for them, but instead, I want to speak to them and listen to what they have to say. My role as a researcher must be constantly critiqued and questioned. Laura Briggs writes, “By requiring the oppressed to ‘speak for themselves,’ intellectuals hide behind the dispossessed, obscure their own analytical and ideological work, and pretend that the production of knowledge itself is not a political and dominative process” (203). We must demand an infrastructure so that when the marginalized speak they can be heard; it is not to give voice to the marginalized, but to clear the space so they can speak. It does not always require a researcher or scholar to clear the space. Productions of counternarratives have started from the ground up in Khmer American communities. Consider Khmer American hip-hop/rap artist, Prach Ly’s song, “Poison Tree:” “My past is poisonous I should conceal it, and leave it alone, but how could I? I release these words revealing these hidden truths…My history root is rotten. Past should be forgotten. It’s haunting destroy me. But nope, I’m the new hope. Antidote out of the poison tree…” (Ly). Their past is poisonous, but Prach resignifies this poison as something that may provide hope and recovery—the antidote. The trauma experienced by Cambodian refugees is supposed to be concealed and forgotten, but frequently, it haunts not only refugees but their children as well. Cambodian refugees are not just any other immigrant. They deal with forced silences, pain, ghosts, and hauntings. Their trauma has been poisonous, but speaking out through music allows Prach and his audience to confront these issues. People are not just consuming the music; the words produce a connection to personal experiences. The poison tree has shaped who they are, but their resistance defines who they have become. This resistance is seen in ways Khmer

Kwan 8

Americans negotiate the ghosts of the past, present, and future. In order to understand the current situation of Khmer American youth, we need to recognize the history and experiences that are felt in their everyday lives.

LITERATURE REVIEW HISTORY

Kwan 9

In the 1970’s, amidst the Vietnam War, thousands of Cambodians fled war-torn Cambodia seeking safety from bombs, starvation, and persecution. The American military implanted thousands of land mines and dropped several tons of bombs onto “neutral” Cambodia while Pol Pot’s communist regime formulated a peasant society where people died everyday in the “killing fields” from starvation, overwork, and execution. According to political scientist, Sucheng Chan, “the Khmer Rouge successfully used the rural population’s growing distress to persuade more and more recruits to join their fighting units as the massive tonnage of American bombs destroyed crops, work animals, and homes of the peasants and killed an increasing number of civilians” (2003, 8). The lives of Cambodians changed drastically as they knew it: children were restricted from attending school; everyone farmed from dawn until dusk; urban centers lay barren after forced evacuations; people ran for their lives. Thousands of Cambodians risked their lives attempting to secretly cross Cambodia and the Mekong River into refugee camps stationed in Thailand. Chan argues, “During these journeys, tens of thousands of people died from hunger, thirst, exposure to the elements, illness, and executions” (2003, 11). Many families were fractured due to death, persecution, and separation. Chan says, “Under such chaotic conditions, members of families were sometimes separated. Some adults who lost their children, spouses, or other family members later returned to the border to search for them, but they were not always successful in finding their loved ones” (Chan 2004, 51). Babies were born without fathers; men hobbled around dismembered because of bombs and land mines; families crowded together in tiny unsanitary bunks in refugee camps at the Thai border. According to Chan, “in the three years and eight months that the Khmer Rouge regime lasted, from April 1975 to January 1979, at least 1.5 million people (some estimates are higher) perished” (2003, 13). Cambodia and its people faced an immense genocide in which they are still struggling to recover.

Kwan 10

Even though refugee camps were supposed to represent a sanctuary for these displaced individuals, they were not always treated as worthy people. The cheapest rotting food was rationed to each family, and resources were scarce. Refugees experienced unprecedented amounts of psychological distress that was left untreated and unaddressed. Cultural anthropologist, Aihwa Ong, argues “In general, mental-health experts claimed that Southeast Asians were disproportionately afflicted with depression, overdependency, isolation, psychosomatic illness, somatization, and post-traumatic stress disorder, as compared to other groups in American society” (2003, 99). However, after seeking asylum in the United States, an over recognition of mental illnesses began to define Cambodians as socially and culturally handicapped (Ong 2003, 99). This added to the already developing concept of the pathological Cambodian culture. Aihwa Ong argues, “Those who cleared the INS screening [in the refugee camps] were channeled to transit camps where they were subjected to language and cultural orientation classes aimed at transforming them into citizen subjects ready for resettlement in their destination country” (Ong 2003, 59). The refugee camps encouraged people to deny their identity and replace it with American ideals. Seeking asylum was in no way an easy process. As the amount of refugees seeking help at the Thai refugee camps increased; resettlement became more and more difficult because of the Refugee Act of 198010. Even when resettlement was allowed, refugees were responsible for setting up sponsorships with people in the United States to guarantee that their resettlement would be successful. In the United States, Cambodians had to deal with being displaced in a brand new country where no one spoke their language, ate their type of food, or in general understood them 10

John and Edward Park, Asian American Studies professors, claim, “By setting rather specific standards for persons seeking asylum, the Act of 1980 admitted only those who were ‘persecuted,’ not the larger universe of person who were displaced but not necessarily persecuted” (2005, 38).

Kwan 11

as human beings. To make matters worse, the American government decided to resettle refugees all across the country in efforts to help local communities cope with any increased demands for services and hasten the need for the refugees themselves to assimilate into American life (Park et. al 2005, 40). This plan did not work because many refugees remigrated11 to areas with larger ethnic minorities. For example, a large majority of Cambodians live in three areas: Long Beach in Southern California, Lowell, Massachusetts, and San Francisco. Park et. al argue, “this resettlement of…refugees within distinct regions of the United States—coupled with their relatively high rates of poverty—made them both very visible and resented” (Park et. al 2005, 40). The economic status, mental status, health status, and social status of Cambodians became hypervisiblized in the discourse of media, law, and policy. Due to their lack of cultural capital and knowledge of the American system, Cambodians were dependent upon the government to provide them with aid and readjustment to American society. Park et al. argue “refugees in general tend to be very poor; fleeing persecution, literally running for their lives, lost everything, have nothing, arrive with nothing, and so depend upon the state that have admitted them as refugees” (2005, 39). Due to the lack of education, viable skills and economic stability, many were unable to find jobs and proper housing. As a result, they needed support from the state and federal government, thus becoming a “public charge” which became burdensome to the social welfare of the United States. Park et al. argue, “instead of a war on poverty, Congress seemed to step up a ‘war against the poor’” (2005, 45). Cambodians were recognized in the system only as welfare queens and unemployed leeches even though they had valid reasons for not adjusting instantly to the American way of life. According to Thomas Sugrue, “politicians have blamed the supposedly generous welfare system for family breakdown, alarming school dropout rates, and an increase in crime, but the best social scientific 11

This process of remigration is called secondary migration.

Kwan 12

research has found little or no correlation between joblessness, education levels, family structure, race, welfare receipt, and crime” (1999, 251). Racializing Cambodians as deviants allows political officials to make statements like the one that Sugrue discussed. Psychological distresses and inability to cope with a new lifestyle was never examined by officials who kept attacking this group for their dependence on the government. Lan T. Pho, a professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, Lowell, and former board member of the Southeast Asian Resource Action Center, says: As a group they experienced severe trauma during their escape and their subsequent stay in refugee camps. Many of them may never recover from the profound sense of loss in their life even after they have safely resettled in America. Psychology field investigators have found that the self-esteem of many refugees has suffered in the face of significant status loss, underemployment, isolation, and instances of hostility by Americans. The incidence of major depression, psychotic disorder, and other health problems may reflect the impact of numerous stresses the Southeast Asian refugees have confronted (Higgins et. al 1997, 11). These various stresses have caused problems of “successful” integration and assimilation according to sociological norms. In order to cope with their new situations in the United States, Cambodian refugees learned to use the technologies of government as sources of information. According to Ong, “The network of public-assistance programs became the main and often the only structure of information and communication for these poor newcomers, who were otherwise cut off from the cultural information of the marketplace and of civil society” (Ong 2003, 123). Welfare becomes the sole source of information and help. Not coincidentally, at the time of increased refugee resettlement in America, the United States was expressing a “compassion fatigue” for these people. More and more benefits were cut and these disenfranchised people were ignored.

Kwan 13

LACK OF VISIBILITY IN OUR SOCIETY The experiences of young Cambodians in Southern California are important and unique, but their histories and experiences are frequently ignored by popular media, researchers, and politicians. This research is a medium to resist and resignify the colonialist discourse used to describe Khmer Americans. The discursive problem revolves around the disciplining discourse of the model minority myth, in which Khmer Americans are compared to and expected to follow. Cambodian communities are frequently persecuted or ignored because they do not fit in the model minority stereotype. Lisa Sun-Hee Park argues that Asians who do not follow the model minority myth are deemed less deserving because they do not have the desired qualities that are essential for Asian minorities to gain acceptance in American society (2005, 23-24). Helen Zia writes, “…mass media often blend the wildly diverse traits from distinct Asian cultures into an unimaginative, one-size-fits-all Asian stereotype” (2000, 117). If other Asian Americans can succeed, then Khmer Americans should be able to succeed as well. Supposedly, society is not restricting minorities, but instead, their culture is pathological and the individuals of that minority or race cannot improve. The American system is presumed a meritocracy, so if someone does succeed, it is not because the system failed, but because the individual failed. The myth claims there is no problem with the racial state, but instead there are problems within each community. Aihwa Ong argues, “…cultural typification clearly marked Cambodians as less successful exemplars of the Asian ‘race,’ less model-minority material, and more underclass in orientation” (2003, 85). The model minority myth is an important ploy manipulated by dominant society to supposedly “reward” industrious Asian immigrants and punish “bad ethnics,” especially “lazy and worthless” Asian immigrants. These types of disciplining discourses have significant

Kwan 14

consequences for non-compliance. Ong says, “The assigning of racialized labels—model minority, refugee, underclass, welfare mother, [gang banger]—is part of the racial classificatory process…” (2003, 13). The disciplining discourses of racialization have material consequences because of the implications that follow from being labeled with these terms. Youth are denied opportunities of equal access to education and employment; they are racially profiled; and they are deemed deviant and undeserving of social, civil, and political citizenship. Conquergood argues there are several signifiers at work who brand these youths as criminals and deviant. Although the urban youth in Conquergood’s piece is from Chicago, there are several connections that are directly related to the sign systems that are used to understand Khmer American urban youth from Southern California. The body of the poor urban youth (even without tattoos of gang insignia) acts as a signifier. The signified is a stigmatization of these youth groups as criminal, marginal, lazy, and dangerous. There is no need for tattoos to justify the negative connotations that arise from just looking at these deviant bodies. Their bodies automatically force them into the category of a gang member. Conquergood argues, “The term ‘gang’ powerfully cathects and conjures middle class fears and anxieties about social disorder, disintegration, and chaos, that mare made palpable in these demonized figures of inscrutable, unproductive, predatory, pathological, alien Others lurking in urban shadows and margins, outside the moral community of decent people” (1992, 4). Decent middle class [read: white] people mutually construct themselves as being the epitome of “moral goodness” and everything a poor gang banger is not. The media also acts as a signifying actor to consolidate the signified images from the body of the “urban youth.” What is signified is the representation of truth and objectivity. Cambodians are constantly lumped into the category of the “underclass” without explicating their circumstances and situations. Don Blandin argues, “The enemy is not a foreign foe, but the legions of despair: poverty, racial discrimination, illiteracy, family breakdown,

Kwan 15

unemployment, welfare dependency, crime, drug abuse, and teen pregnancy” (Blandin 1994, 29). All of these foes are overrepresented in the Cambodian community because of the environments in which they are subjected. Pho argues, “Poverty, poor schooling, dysfunctional homes, and peer pressure may form a breeding ground for self-destruction, substance abuse, anti-social behaviors, or sometimes criminal activities” (Higgins et al. 1997, 9). Thomas J. Sugrue believes that a disproportionate number of poor families are entrapped in underclass urban neighborhoods because of economic and social institutions that perpetuate poverty (1999, 245). According to Sociologist, Gabrielle Raley, “Due to a mutually reinforcing cycle of discrimination and economic inequality, people of color are not only more likely to be poorer than whites, but also more likely to reside in areas of particularly concentrated poverty. Residents face substandard housing, illfunded schools, and social isolation, though they do get more than their share of liquor stores and hazardous waste-dump sites” (1999, 262). Popular and dominant discourses refuse to acknowledge these patterns of poverty and discrimination because the inequalities faced by minorities like Khmer Americans are outside of mainstream consciousness. Their marginality places them in a position where they are either ignored or regulated.

FAMILY/CULTURAL INFLUENCES AND EXPECTATIONS “Cambodian culture” remains very important to the older generations that resettled in the United States. Even though most of these refugees have resided in the United States for years, they still maintain their cultural traditions and hope that younger generations also value their ways of living. Chan argues: “Still, what matters most to a vast majority of Cambodians, regardless of their socioeconomic status, is the urgent need to preserve—indeed, to revive—“Cambodian culture” as they remember and idealize it. They dedicate themselves to that task more

Kwan 16

assiduously than other immigrants do because the Khmer Rouge so methodically destroyed the most important institutions of pre-1975 Cambodian society” (2004, 168). This type of cultural empowerment and awareness is sometimes at odds with the dominant American forces that pull younger second and third generation Cambodians away from their heritage culture. The expectations of their elders might not acknowledge that the youth are at a crossroads where they feel they must choose one culture or the other. Scholars argue that youth incorporate multiple identities to form a multiethnic identity of empowerment. Peter Kiang argues, “Asian immigrant and refugee students share a multiplicity of needs as well as a range of strengths that reflect various dimensions of their historical and cultural backgrounds, their individual identities, and their social realities” (Kiang 1992, 103). In addition, family cultural influences and expectations affect Cambodian youth’s actions and reactions to dominant society. Conflicts between parents often resulted in troubled familial interactions where parents were unable to respond to the needs of their children with as much efficacy as parents desired. Parenting studies argue that unsupervised time, parent criminality, disengagement, ambivalence, and psychiatric status all interact to determine the negative social outcome of children (Roberts 2007). According to these studies, due to the fact that these parents are not able to fully engage themselves due to their subordinated status, care for children suffers. Again, a pathological diagnosis is prescribed to this community of individuals before qualitative research and analysis are completed in hopes of understanding the foundations of these patterns which are grounded in family history and refugee experiences. Intergenerational conflicts frequently occur when youth and older generations experience differential rates of acculturation both in “American” families and immigrant/refugee families. However, Khmer American families are dealing with a shorter time frame between generations

Kwan 17

due to the influences of war and relocation. While adults have difficulties acquiring English and handling everyday errands due to their lack of knowledge and participation in American society, Cambodian children are stepping up to help their parents communicate with American society— paying bills, answering phone calls, filling out forms, translating medical visits, helping at the family business and more. Lisa Park says, “Children of immigrants must take on multiple roles to fulfill the daily needs of not only the family, but also the family business” (2005, 42). Since the parent now relies on the children for information, a role reversal occurs where children acquire much more power than usually allowed in Cambodian culture. Youth have the power to manipulate the system and their parents to their own advantage because the parents do not know when to question their children. An interview in Chan’s book explains: “The kids are smarter than the parents. One of the kids told me he never went to school. The school sent a letter to the parents saying, “What happened to this kid? Why isn’t he coming to school? Why is he absent?” The parents told the kid, “You know, I got a letter from I don’t know where; can you translate it?” The kid says, “Oh, it’s a letter from school saying that I’m a very, very good kid doing a really good job in school.”…the parents are very excited, until the police calls… “This kid is locked up; he was shot.”…So you have to be smarter than the kids in order to control them. Otherwise, they just do whatever they want” (Chan 2004, 211). It is not that parents do not care about the well being of their children or grandchildren. Many times, the older generations do not have the ability and resources to understand what their youth endure. Due to this disjuncture, youth frequently experience displacement in their families and dominant society. For example, many are expected by their families to speak Khmer, the heritage language, because it is an essential part of Khmer culture. Frequently, however, young Khmer Americans suffer from language loss because of the lack of usage in everyday conversations.

Kwan 18

According to linguistics professor, Nancy J. Smith-Hefner, “Adults commonly associate children’s inability to speak Khmer with other unacceptable behaviors, such as the desire to live away from home and the refusal to care for parents in old age” (1999, 141). Contrary to the beliefs of Khmer parents, public institutions, especially schools, see bilingualism as a handicap to learning because it hinders children from perfecting one language, the dominant language, English. According to anthropologist, Bonnie Urciuoli, “When people are subject to language prejudice, they are judged communicatively incompetent” (1996, 3). Furthermore, language difference is often racialized as an impediment to class mobility (Urciuoli 1996, 16). Many times these beliefs also become ingrained into the minds of the youth. Although they know that Khmer is an important part of their identity and culture, learning Khmer is seen to be an impediment from learning English. Jim Cummins, language and literary development scholar, argues: “Cultural boundaries frequently are entrenched by various forms of discrimination on the part of the dominant group” (1995, 34). However, according to anthropologist John Ogbu, “[Forms of discrimination] are also maintained by the minority group as a means of insulating themselves from the process of subordination. The cultural and language differences act as markers of the group’s collective identity and help the group cope under conditions of subordination” (Cummins 1995, 34). There are certain challenges in maintaining Khmer. Carola Suarez-Orozco, immigration studies scholar, writes, “A common myth concerning bilingualism is that native language use at home interferes with the acquisition of a second language at school. [However,] in a state-of-the art review of bilingualism and second-language learning…it concludes: ‘The use of the child’s native language does not impede the acquisition of English” (2001, 138).

Kwan 19

Youth are constantly immersed in the demands of an Americanized lifestyle, but conscious effort to maintain a multicultural and multiethnic awareness and identity appears essential to preventing subordination by dominant society. There are many stresses in the family and community that Cambodian youth must deal with that is not acknowledged by educators or policymakers. Many Cambodian families live in disenfranchised urban environments that do not satisfy the needs of its residents. There are low rates of home ownership and family income due to the lack of employment opportunities that offer these families a living wage. Many families live in poverty without the luxuries of a front or back yard, a porch to relax on, a good working car, or fresh air. According to Ong, “Cambodian refugees’ living arrangements were dictated by the structural conditions of public housing in rundown neighborhoods that were poorly served by public transportation and far from supermarkets, schools, launderette, and other normal urban facilities” (Ong 2003, 123). Lived experiences of shootings, poverty, gangs, and drugs in “ghetto” urban spaces are felt by Khmer American youth across the nation. Many writers and policy makers associate these people with deplorable social conditions that they may or may not have control over. Much literature about Cambodians focuses on the writer’s interpretation and analysis of the Khmer American situation and experience. Sokly Ny, a Khmer American youth in the Bay Area, however, poses counternarratives that speak up against these representations through the 1996 documentary film titled Aka Don Bonus directed by Spencer Nagasaki. In the film, Sokly Ny understood the dangers that he and his family lived through everyday. Although his neighborhood was dangerous, he had to deal with the realities of gangs, drugs, poverty, and violence. He and his family were forced to live in a dangerous environment due to their economic and social situation, but they were not complacent. By speaking up against the

Kwan 20

inequalities in their lives, Sokly and his family report vandalisms and shootings at their homes hoping to be rewarded by the state for their patience and perseverance. The family faces numerous obstacles when dealing with the state system. There is a constant negotiation between Sokly and his family and the public housing authority, court system, and police department. Through film, Sokly creates a space from which to speak about his lived realities as a Cambodian/Asian American.

METHODOLOGY Research on the history of the Cambodian experience in Cambodia, the refugee camps, and in America is important in examining the roles that the home culture and host society plays on the development of Cambodian youth identity and experience in the United States. There has not been enough interdisciplinary research that addresses the needs and experiences of the Cambodian community. This project brings together various subjects, including linguistics,

Kwan 21

anthropology, sociology, political science, and psychology, that provide an interdisciplinary approach to studying Cambodian youth. It is important to consider fields of studies that include historiography, anthropology, sociology, education studies, ethnic studies, ethnography, and others because these different disciplines contribute various aspects that may clarify and/or complicate a monolithic representation of Khmer Americans. In addition to scholarly sources from the library, I conducted in-depth interviews and questionnaires with Khmer American youth and adults. I, however, focused on students at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD), two California State University (CSU) campuses, and several community colleges. To protect my interviewee’s human rights, I use pseudonyms. Using my connections through the university, I participated in Cambodian student organizations at two campuses. I contacted the presidents and public relations officers of these clubs to introduce myself and my research interests. They were very surprised that I was interested in researching Khmer American youth. UCSD’s Cambodian Student Association (CSA) was much more welcoming to me compared to CSU Long Beach’s Cambodian Student Society (CSS) because the UCSD group was much smaller and because I am also a UCSD student. I decided to focus on CSU Long Beach because of the large Cambodian population in the city. According to the 2000 Census, over 17,000 Cambodians live in the city of Long Beach while less than 4,000 Cambodians live in the city of San Diego (Census 2000). Statistics on the total Cambodian population in La Jolla, home of UCSD, could not be found. The social and physical distance of these universities from a Khmer community reflected the ways individuals answered questions. These findings will be further explicated later in the “Findings” section. I also interviewed students from CSU Los Angeles, Cerritos College, Mt. San Antonio College, and Mesa College. All postsecondary sites are located in the Southern California region

Kwan 22

focusing on Los Angeles County and San Diego County. I interviewed mostly students because of the access I have to students. Several interviewees were introduced to me via snowball sampling. I interviewed one individual who in turn referred me to another and then another, and so forth. I understand this is a limitation in my research because I was not able to get a bigger sample of Khmer American youth, but I feel that the interviews that I did conduct revealed very interesting topics that I had not considered. Although I asked an array of questions, I focused on family, education, work, and culture. Sample questions include: Where did you grow up? What was the community or neighborhood like? Do you feel like you can talk to your parents about things—like everyday life, school, relationships, etc.? If no, why? What do you talk about then? Do you feel like there is a generation gap between you and your parents? Do you think your parents have accepted American culture? Do they consider themselves American, Khmer, or a mixture? How about you? In addition to interviews with Khmer American youth, I also conducted several interviews with the older generation that allows me to see a more complete perspective about the Khmer American experience. I explored the experiences of older generations from the period before resettling in the United States to the challenges and experiences that they face today. Many of these individuals focused on the importance of maintaining Khmer culture, moral, values, and language.

SHORT BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT INTERVIEWEES – UCSD I interviewed four individuals from UCSD, three females and one male. These interviews were on a volunteer basis. Sophon Chea is a fourth year student originally from the city of Long

Kwan 23

Beach, California. Katrina Duong is a fifth year student also originally from the city of Long Beach. Leia Som is a third year student originally from the city of Santa Ana, California. Leia is also an active officer in the Cambodian Student Association. Chanvatey Nimol is a fourth year student originally from Stockton, California. All of these UCSD students are members in the Cambodian Student Association (CSA) on campus. I also participated in CSA with great feedback from all members, but I was unable to attend many weekly meetings due to work and school. I regret that I was unable to contribute to this group as much as they have contributed to my research.

SHORT BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT INTERVIEWEES – CSU’s I interviewed and gave questionnaires to seven individuals—2 females and 5 males— from CSU Long Beach. I did not choose these individuals; they volunteered for the interviews. I, however, did offer to buy my interviewees coffee. All students who I interviewed from CSU Long Beach lived in the city. Some were from North Long Beach bordering Compton while others were from “nicer areas” like Bixby Knowles. Luke Mao, Max Sivorn, Donna Chhum, Andrew Dam, Pete Chhoub, and Monica Khhim all filled out questionnaires. Questionnaires were used because of the large size of the group and the location of the meeting—Starbucks. The traditional method of interviewing was unable to be used. Due to the logistics of our meeting, I was not able to create a one-on-one relationship with my participants. I had a joint interview with one of my UCSD interviewees and Keith Khan (CSU Long Beach) because they are in a relationship and volunteered to speak with me together. I interviewed one male student, Jay Daro, from CSU Los Angeles. I knew Jay from my husband, Darren Ung. They work together at UPS. Jay volunteered to be interviewed at a car

Kwan 24

meet in Hacienda Heights. I kept the interview quite short because I did not want to impinge on too much of Jay’s time at this social event.

SHORT BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT INTERVIEWEES – Community Colleges I used an informal interview and questionnaire with my husband, Darren Ung. I did not want to ask him the exact questions that I used in the in-depth interviews because I did not want my data to be skewed. He knew what my research interests were and I did not want his responses to be biased. I also observed and noted many conversations that he has had with his parents and me. Darren is completing his last year at Mount San Antonio College and is planning to transfer to Cal Poly Pomona this fall. He is currently living with his parents in Baldwin Park, California. I met Mesa College student, Sok Sim, through the Cambodian Dancers Group of San Diego while conducting an ethnography project on Wat Sovannkiry, a Cambodian temple in City Heights, San Diego, California. Sok is originally from City Heights but currently lives with his parents in Clairemont, California. I also interviewed Elliot Kear, Darren’s cousin, who goes to Cerritos College. Elliot is originally from the Bay Area, but now currently lives with his parents in Downey, California. SHORT BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT INTERVIEWEES – Older Generation I interviewed Chhourn Mak for a previous oral history project. I decided that his interview was very relevant to the subjects covered in this study. His interview provides a foundation to build upon the narratives of the younger generation. Mak is Darren’s father and my

Kwan 25

father-in-law as well. I also interviewed and observed the older generations at parties and temple gatherings.

FINDINGS THE OLDER GENERATION As the younger Khmer American community grows and develops stronger and deeper roots in the United States, the histories of their elders become shadows of importance wavering silently with the ghosts of the past. However, many times unknowingly, these specters of the past

Kwan 26

creep into the present haunting Khmer American youth. These hauntings ultimately affect many facets for their lives. This research explores ways in which Khmer American youth negotiate the ghosts of the past, the ghosts of the present, and the ghosts of the future through the examination of the discourse used by Khmer American youth to describe their motivations for pursuing postsecondary education. The experiences of older generations directly impact the ways Khmer American youth interact with their parents or grandparents, with other Cambodians, and with dominant society. Chhourn Mak, a Cambodian refugee who sought asylum in the United States in his late teens, shares his oral history about his experiences in Cambodia, Thailand, and the United States. His perspective provides a foundation to talk about Khmer American youth. According to my interviews, youth are greatly affected by their parents’ experiences and family history. By looking at Chhourn Mak’s oral history, we can see general patterns of resettlement experience for the older generation.

Oral history of Chhourn Mak Chhourn Mak is a husband and father of two Khmer American children. Mak sought asylum in the United States in 1982 during the second wave12 of refugee relocation due to the War in Southeast Asia. Chhourn Mak was born in an urban town in the province of Pursat, Cambodia. However, when Mak was born in 1963, the political conflicts in Cambodia had been widespread and he grew up in a time of turmoil and oppression. He said, “I born in there and I raised in there. But it was bad during I born, you know. Country, you cannot learn. Fighting, you 12

The first wave of refugees out of Southeast Asia consisted of the educated and well off individuals who were able to get access out of Cambodia before the Khmer Rouge takeover. The second wave of refugees came after the Refugee Act of 1980. According to Khatharya Um, “In comparison with the smaller group of refugees who were resettled in 1975, the overwhelming majority of the later arrivals were less educated, more rural in origin, and generally less endowed with the skills, or the ‘human capital,’ that are generally deemed essential for successful resettlement” (1999, 264).

Kwan 27

heard gun, whatever. And after 1975, I stay in communist” (Mak Interview). After the Khmer Rouge communist takeover, he and his family were forced out of their homes and moved into the rural areas to grow rice. He said, “A lot of people grow rice. They don’t let anybody go to school or go to work. When the communist control they said everybody had to work in farm. They send a lot of people out of town. Some people want to stay in town, they kill. Even if you have beautiful home, beautiful house or car whatever. You have to give it to them. And you just left your home. The whole Cambodia work in farm” (Mak Interview). Labor camps arose as the Khmer Rouge soldiers deurbanized cities like Pursat, Battambang, and Phenom Penh. Aihwa Ong writes that “the Khmer Rouge turned the entire country into a series of labor camps and peasant cooperatives” (Ong 2003, 42). Frequently, the individuals who were forced into labor camps were overworked, starved, and/or executed because of supposed “political ties” that was against the communist agenda of the Khmer Rouge. According to Khatharya Um, “During the Khmer Rouge regimes (1975-1979) infliction of systematic class persecuting, endemic starvation, and hard labor resulted in the death of over 1 million Cambodians, more than one-seventh of the entire population, with a disproportionate percentage of the educated, professional, and urbanites being killed” (1999, 264). The numbers of Cambodian deaths during this time are estimated to be from 1 million to 2 million individuals. Many of those who survived persecution and starvation sought asylum in local Thai refugee camps. Mak thanked the United Nations for setting up refugee camps to help the Cambodian people. This is interesting because the conditions at the refugee camps did not necessarily provide a sanctuary for these refugees. For a majority of the time, Cambodian refugees were classified as illegal immigrants at the Thai border. Even though Mak escaped the turmoil in Cambodia, life did not improve by much in Thailand. Conditions at the Khao-I-Dang refugee

Kwan 28

camp were destitute and restrictive. Food and living conditions accommodated refugees very poorly. Mak said, “I just get some rice and then some fish. They put with salt. We try to live very hard you know and we get a little water and just cook rice. We live in just the wood…bamboo you know? Make it stay away from the sun and make it stay away from the rain. That’s all” (Mak Interview). There was never enough food and cramped spaces resulted in poor sanitation. Furthermore, since there was so little land and freedom for these individuals, many suffered from boredom. Farming and especially recreational activities were prohibited. Cambodian refugees were frequently punished for breaking the rules of noncompliance because the camps were under the jurisdiction and the law of the Thai government and Thai police. After a year in the camp, Mak and his family applied as political refugees to the United States. Two of Mak’s sisters had husbands that were murdered by the Khmer Rouge because they fought on the American side during the Vietnam War. According to John and Edward Park, Asian American Studies professors, “By setting rather specific standards for persons seeking asylum, the Act of 1980 admitted only those who were ‘persecuted,’ not the larger universe of persons who were displaced but not necessarily persecuted” (2005, 38). As a result, Mak and his family were not only displaced but they were in danger of being persecuted by the Khmer Rouge because of their ties with the American government. They belonged within two categories of refugees as referred to by sociologist, Ruben Rumbaut. Rumbaut would classify Mak and his family as “TARGETS,” which are characterized by the “specific perceptions and experiences of fear or force, past political association, and related motives” and “VICTIMS” which deal with “harsh material conditions of famine and other dismal economic conditions” (1996, 330). When Mak and his family were granted clearance for resettlement in the United States, they forced themselves to mentally and emotionally detach their ties from Cambodia and

Kwan 29

physically leave the Thai refugee camp, Khao-I-Dang. Strategically, Mak and his family cut ties with Cambodia and their relatives because they were preparing to relocate. Mak said, “During in camp, we miss Cambodia, but after we decide to come to United States. We don’t miss it because if we stay in Cambodia it’s a hard life you know” (Mak Interview). The research of Julie Canniff, assistant professor in education at the University of Southern Maine, agrees that “the majority of Southeast Asian refugees who spent from one to five years in displacement camps were taught to abandon their language, cultural customs, and aspirations in order to ‘make it’ in the new society” (2001, 17). Although Mak has not fully abandoned the use of Khmer, the main language spoken in his house is English. Also, he continues to eat Cambodian food and follow Cambodian customs, but he does not have these same expectations for his two sons. He acknowledges that in order to “make it” in American society, you must follow the American ideals. However, his negotiation between Khmer culture and American culture is most visible through his expectations of his sons. His views and beliefs towards American society were shaped by his stay at the refugee camp and his experiences after arriving in the United States. When he first arrived in the United States, he and his family spent two weeks in San Francisco before flying again to Georgia. This was part of the dispersal and relocation policy employed by the United States in order to guarantee that no one city or county will be too burdened by the influx of refugees—by the need to provide public services and the fear of ethnic enclaves. Anthropologist, Nancy Smith-Hefner, writes, “The U.S. government's official resettlement policy was to disperse Southeast Asian refugees throughout the country. This was ostensibly done to avoid creating large, ‘unassimilable’ enclaves” (1999, 9). To the dismay of the United States government, many Cambodian refugees, like other immigrants and refugees, resettled in areas of familiarity—locations where there were other Cambodians like themselves.

Kwan 30

This type of secondary migration occurred when “the refugees moved within the United States after initial placement” (Hein 1995, 53). As a result, Long Beach, Fresno, Stockton, and others have become a Cambodian Mecca because refugees were drawn to areas that provided comfort of job opportunities, familiar peoples, and living accommodations. According to a 1990 Census analysis report, “Others simply moved to Long Beach because of the presence of a Khmer speaking community and the associated services, including Buddhist temples, businesses, and social agencies serving the Cambodian population” (Bunte et. al 1992, 3). A large Cambodian concentration in California was the result of this secondary migration. Canniff states that “ethnic solidarity is one of the few strategies that offer refugees some emotional and practical security in the host society” (2001, 7). The majority of these locations, however, are located in dangerous urban areas where gang violence and theft rates are high, employment opportunities are low, and police surveillance is high. The influences and importance of these locations will be further explicated through the experiences of younger Khmer Americans later. Mak’s move to California allowed him and his family to be closer to other Cambodian communities but their living conditions were still abysmal. The apartment was too crowded for the seven family members that stayed there. Mak says, “We have to sleep everywhere. Living room whatever” (Mak Interview). Conditions were worsened by the lack of monetary resources that were available to the refugees. Since Mak was under eighteen, he received welfare and was allowed to take adult school so he could learn English, but this did not last long because Mak says, “We on welfare. The government only help us sixteen months that’s all. I go to school for sixteen months. The food stamp and rent. We have to find a job and work” (Mak Interview). Without any skills and poor English, Mak was thrown into the working world.

Kwan 31

Without help from family members and friends, Mak would have been jobless because “Southeast Asians arrived with no ethnic communities or support groups to provide them with assistance” (Tenhula 1991, 82). Mak said, “My brother-in-law friend, work at Winchell donut shop. And only the thing I learn when I come here. Donut baker that’s all. I only know how to make a donut; I don’t know how to serve the customer” (Mak Interview). This network between families and friends became an important source of knowledge and opportunity. Family and kin solidarity was essential to refugees even though each person remained relatively autonomous. Mak did not come to the states with any skills other than farming and did not learn any skills in the United States due to his lack of schooling so he was forced into menial and unskilled physical labor. Ong claims, “[Donut business] was in some ways an ideal business for newcomers: one did not need to know good English to learn to make pastries; the job required only hard work, and a willingness to work odd hours and accept being apprenticed at little or no pay to the shop owner” (2003, 242). Mak has no choice but to bake donuts because he has no other options. He has no time to learn other skills because he must work to support his family. Mak vented about his situation: “In my country people work and you can feed the whole family. Here one person work and can only feed himself. So it’s very hard. You feel upset about your job. In this country, you open your eyes you go to work and you come back and sleep. It look like no freedom” (Mak interview). Mak and his family realize that they must continually show gratitude to the United States for providing refuge to them, but Mak critiques the lifestyle in the United States. He came to the United States to seek freedom, but once here, he is trapped by capitalism. According to his political status, he has obtained freedom, but his social life is constricted because of the demands of a capitalist based society. Mak must always be conscious of his position as an individual who was saved by the United States. There is a continuous debt

Kwan 32

that he can never pay back. This rescue narrative automatically places him in a subordinate position outside of the state and marginal to society. Mak and sometimes even his family do not have the privilege of belonging. Since Mak and his wife, Maly Phon’s, contact with others who are not Khmer is limited, he relies on his children to be the main contact between them and American society. American society includes banks, schools, healthcare offices, and more. Mak acknowledges that the children who are born in the United States understand American culture better and can navigate through life with ease in comparison to him. Mak and Phon have two sons, Darren Ung and Ralph Prum. Each of the family members have different names because Mak says, “For us name is not very important” (Mak Interview). Ung is Mak’s father’s name while Prum is Phon’s grandfather’s name. Mak’s name is actually not his real name. He changed it at the refugee camps due to the fear of persecution by the Khmer Rouge who might be able to track down his family name. According to Mak, as long as the family is together, name does not matter. According to Mak, what does matter to him is how his children will grow up in American society. However, a name is not just a word. A name has memory, history, and meaning. When Mak changed his name in order to protect his family from persecution by the Khmer Rouge, he was reborn into a different identity. However, his suppressed and silenced past continues to influence the future. Although he disguises the past by his new name, he cannot escape the experiences he felt. These experiences creep up from the cracks to impact his future and the future of his children. There was a disruption of family history when he changed his name, but his past continues to seep into his and his children’s present. As a result, he has greater expectations for his children because he did not have the opportunities when he was growing up. Mak says, “It’s very hard for us. It’s not like the kid born

Kwan 33

over here. When they get to know they get to know a little by little. They can catch little by little. But for us, we catch little by little too but, it’s not clear like the people born over here” (Mak Interview). However, these expectations for youth to help their family become overbearing as youth are forced to negotiate the needs and demands of their family, school, friends, and work. Tensions between older and younger generations arise because the older generation has certain expectations for their children while the children must negotiate peer pressures and expectations from school, work, and American society in general. Since Mak believes that he has responsibility over his children’s well-being, he feels a need to protect his children by sheltering them from the evils of society—most importantly gangs and violence. He said, “If you want to keep your kid good, you have to remind them all the time. Which one is good. Watch what they eat. What when they go outside to play. Sometimes they go with the wrong people. Doing not the right thing. If they see bad stuff they catch bad stuff and that’s a problem. Go wrong way. Go wrong direction. That’s a problem. I’m afraid, I’m very afraid of that you know. He’s a part of my kid, my blood, I don’t want him to be homeless or doing drugs in the future” (Mak Interview). Mak lives in fear that his children will become merely a stereotype or not live up to his expectations. Not only does he want his children to be good Khmer Americans, but he is afraid that his children will ruin the family reputation. According to Mak’s oldest son, Darren, Mak’s over-protectiveness causes tensions between him and his father. Darren is frequently frustrated because his father wants him to be a good person. And, Mak has the only say in what determines the criteria for what it means to be a good person. Darren said, “My dad, being a lecturer, I tend to ignore him. Every time we talk it ends up being a lecture on how to be a good person…I have a sterile relationship with my parents, possibly due to my lack of freedom at a young age. I finally received my freedom. I rebelled and dislike them for being so controlling. I can’t relate with them at all. They are stuck in the old way of thinking which is really different from today. When I try to educate them on how today works, they ignore me” (Darren Interview).

Kwan 34

In a world of freedom, both Mak and Darren have no freedom because they are trapped by the state and the family. Mak must negotiate with capitalism, while Darren must negotiate with parental expectations. Although Mak’s intentions are good, his overbearing expectations about morality become overwhelming for his sons. Furthermore, Mak’s beliefs for what defines a successful individual are much different from what his son believes. The issue of education arises because Darren and Mak frequently do not see eye-to-eye about options for education. Mak says that getting an education is important, but when Darren decided to pursue higher education instead of working, he asked Darren why he would want to go to school instead of working and making money for the family. According to Mak, “getting an education” meant completing high school. He did not fully support Darren when Darren decided to attend community college after high school. Darren says, “They don’t really know why I go to school beyond high school. I am on my own when going to college” (Darren Interview). Not all Cambodian parents are like Darren’s father, but it goes to show that not all Asian parents are overbearingly pushing their children to pursue college. As a result, Khmer American youth experience very different motivations for their reasons for pursuing postsecondary education but in one way or another they are influenced by the ghosts of their family’s past, ghosts of expectations that haunt the present, and the ghosts of a dying culture that haunts their future.

GHOSTS OF THE PAST Influences from the family Several of my interviewees believe that getting a degree in higher education is the way to thank their families and parents for all their sacrifices and support. Some, on the other hand, believe that it is just something they need to succeed in society today. Some experience a bit of

Kwan 35

both. The ghosts of their parents’ suffering and experiences interact with their own goals and aspirations to produce their belief systems toward education. University of California, San Diego (UCSD) students are more outspoken about their parents’ influence on their motivations to do well in school compared to California State University (CSU) and community college (CC) students. Although parents play an important role in influencing CSU and CC students to pursue postsecondary education, it is not something that is central to their motivations unlike a majority of UCSD students. The parents of UCSD students play a more outspoken part in the decision making process from Khmer American youth to be at a prestigious university. Some UCSD students recognize the differences between their families versus other Khmer families they grew up with. Chanvatey says, “There's a big difference between my family and other families. Other families kinda emphasize with being social, communicate with one another. My family like they wanted us to focus on school. They knew how important it was for school. As much time as we could go to the library. They would take us to the library. Which is good because we are bright kids” (Chanvatey Interview). Unlike the stereotypical Cambodian family in Chanvatey’s mind, which focuses on gossiping and socializing, Chanvatey’s parents made an important decision to help their children focus on school. Instead of socializing with other families around the neighborhood, Chanvatey’s parents and older brothers and sisters took them to the library to learn English and other subjects. Even at a young age, Chanvatey recognized that the focus on education was important in his family. According to Chanvatey, the only way to be “bright kids” is to stay focused—which means stay away from “those other” Cambodians. Chanvatey wants to show that his family worked hard in accordance to dominant American ideals, and that is why he and his brothers and sisters succeeded in college. Not only have Chanvatey’s parents proactively encouraged Chanvatey to

Kwan 36

pursue higher education, but Chanvatey recognizes that the struggles of his parents directly influence him to pursue higher education. The experiences of Chanvatey’s parents inspire him to achieve more than what his parents could have ever attempted due to political turmoil in Cambodia. Chanvatey says, “I honestly love my parents, I treat them with the utmost respect...I know despite all that they went through, they sacrificed so much for us. I don't really know what I can do. There are only so many things I can sacrifice, but I feel that my parents gave up everything to come here for us to get a better life. The fact that they chose for us to do well in school, learn English and stuff over the typical social life with your kids...having your kids in tune with Cambodian culture. We're somewhat Americanized” (Chanvatey Interview). He expresses guilt for the opportunities that he has in comparison to his parents. He implies that there is nothing that he can sacrifice to make his life better for his parents. However, the one thing he can do is go to school and get an education. It shows his parents and others that he appreciates the ability to “succeed,” in the dominant American sense, as long as he is given the opportunity. Even though his family history is filled with the traumas and hauntings of the Khmer Rouge, he believes that he and his family are capable of crawling out of this hole that they were put in. With hard work and determination, Chanvatey believes that all Khmer families have the abilities to succeed. This is despite the fact that many times hard work and determination requires that they ignore and neglect Khmer language and culture. Chanvatey and his parents acknowledge the importance of preserving Cambodian culture, but sometimes cultural preservation may suffer because it is seen as a necessary evil in order for Khmer American youth to gain equal opportunity to English and an education. Sok agreed when asked if it is important to maintain Khmer language. He said, “Um, I think it is. Bad thing about it is that it can't hurt your English more. For me, English was my second language, so I didn't really know English until I was 5. I was in ESL” (Sok Interview). In this sense, an individual

Kwan 37

must learn English to succeed at the expense of Khmer language. An institution like the UC system allows access to being “an American,” but this access is only allowed if the student shows potential and can contribute to the diversity/multicultural13 ideology on campus. Chanvatey uses this explanation to justify why he is at a UC compared to other Cambodians “who did not make it.” The American system of meritocracy teaches Khmer American youth that anyone could succeed in the United States if they only worked hard enough. There is little discourse that allows for a critique of this system of beliefs. Although Khmer American youth are influenced by their parents and family to pursue higher education, the reasons vary between each individual. Sophon, another UC student, has also been influenced by her parents to pursue an education, but the further she gets in her years at UCSD she feels that pursuing an education is not just for her family, but also for herself. Sophon says, “I felt, at first, I guess...I'm going to school because my parents worked so hard, just a part of me has to go to school because they worked so hard to be here. Now I know I'm doing it for myself I just realize that. I wanna make money and start working for them cuz they've been working me for my whole entire life. I want to give back to them. My older bro and little sis are doing their own thing. I'm going to college because I want to do something with my life. Now, I have bigger goals. I want better for myself” (Sophon Interview). Although attending postsecondary school was just an expectation, UCSD has become a place where Sophon can explore options for her future that will not only include continuing to support her parents but also contribute to her personal and life goals as well. Her parents worked hard for her and now she’s going to school and working hard for both her parents and herself. As a young Khmer American woman, obtaining an education is one of the few ways that Sophon can give back to her parents. Taking advantage of higher education becomes a route for success for UC,

13

Multiculturalism is the idea of tolerance of different cultures with no advocacy for social justice. There are also assumptions that cultures are fixed (Sharon Elise Lecture).

Kwan 38

CSU, and CC students. Through varying degrees, parents of Khmer American youth have all influenced their children in pursuing higher education. Andrew is a student at CSU Long Beach and he never fails to recognize the opportunities that he has compared to his parents. Andrew said, “[My parents] had their lives destroyed and can barely function in society, but they are still able to lead successful lives. I was lucky not to go through what they did so I have more opportunities than they do” (Andrew Interview). If his parents could live successful lives after the trauma they experienced, he should also be able to succeed. This influences Andrew to strive for what his parents never expected of themselves because of their circumstances. The ghosts of his parents’ past affect his everyday choices and beliefs just like Jay. Jay, a full-time CSU student and full-time employee, understands that his mother wants him to get an education like other Asian parents, but his mother also understands that he has other obligations. Jay says, “In my situation, I gotta work and take care of my family….keep up with trying to be a good Cambodian” (Jay Interview). Being a good Cambodian does not only consist of getting a higher education, but it also requires Khmer American youth to take care of their family. Jay is not only a student and employee, but also a son, an older brother, and a pseudo-father. His father left him and his family at a young age. He had to fulfill the role of being both a brother and a father to his younger siblings because there was no other father figure in the house. His responsibilities are quite different from a “normal 21-year-old” according to mainstream America. Jay says, “My father left us at a young age. I was always like the father figure of the house. It was hard on my part. I started working when I was like 15. I was at KMart at Long Beach. It was horrible” (Jay Interview). Jay has seen many of his friends drop out of school, but he does not judge these individuals as incapable of succeeding. Family influences

Kwan 39

the decisions made by Khmer youth daily. Many times, however, the family does not physically influence the youth. Rather, the ghosts of the families’ past resurrect as specters that haunt the present for these youth and their family. Not only do Chanvatey’s parents physically motivate him to do well in higher education, but he also feels that the ghosts of his family’s history haunt him to strive for the “American dream.” The “American dream” means having an education, a good job, property, and a heteronormative family. Chanvatey says, “It [Khmer] means being of Cambodian origin. To acknowledge your Cambodian heritage...being Khmer in my generation I feel is understand what your parents went through. And, living life...you know, because you have it a lot easier than they did” (Chanvatey Interview). Youth must acknowledge and recognize the horrors and traumas that their elders, especially their parents’ experienced. Living with that family history is what defines a Khmer person. Importantly, a Khmer person must acknowledge the ease of life that he or she has in comparison to his or her parents. Family history is a tool for Khmer American youth to negotiate between their parents’ past and their experiences in America. According to Chanvatey, “Being Khmer is also breaking the racial barrier. Being Khmer, this is the part I really feel...Being Khmer is about breaking out of whatever hole your family was put in during the reign of the Khmer Rouge. It sent everyone back to recover from it. Maybe your parents weren't able to do it because of the time of their life. Bring your family out of that rut or that hole and make something of your life I guess...Overcoming that barrier. I feel a lot of people come to America don’t have the motivation to break out of it. All the things that happened and you came to America you would be a lot better off. If you come here poor and you stay that way, no only did Pol Pot kill millions of people back in Cambodia, but he pretty much set you in your place for the rest of your life. Eliminate what he did. It's different from Khmer people...get out of that hole that you were put in. You can still be Khmer if you are poor and you stay poor...but…” (Chanvatey Interview) According to Chanvatey, if Cambodians come to America poor and stay poor, Pol Pot set them in their place for the rest of their lives. Not only did this man create genocide of his own people, but this horror is perpetuated today. In America, honorable ways to beat poverty are limited.

Kwan 40

Khmer Americans have strived to do this through entrepreneurship and education. In that sense, education and making money are some of the few ways to pull the entire Khmer community out of that rut. Chanvatey believes that hard work, motivation, and determination grant all individuals with equal access to “break out of” this “hole that you were put in.” Chanvatey claims that if his family could do it even though they have experienced horrific trauma, others in their same disposition should be able to do the same. Hence, Chanvatey strives to get an education so that the ghosts of the past no longer haunt his family. He will not allow these specters to determine the future of this path. Like Chanvatey, Katrina understands and acknowledges the ghosts of the Khmer Rouge that continue to haunt her mother. Every day has become a day of survival. Katrina is influenced by her mother’s bravery to pursue higher education to the fullest. Since her mother struggled for most of her life, she does not want to let her mother down. Unlike other children who have gotten into trouble like stealing or dropping out of school, Katrina has focused on maintaining her morals and values for her mom. She does not want her mother to have to worry about her since her mother has already struggled so much. Katrina says: “It gets really heartbreaking because she tells how she goes through it. And um, like, it's just surviving. Pretty much trying to survive during the Khmer Rouge. Pretty much her entire life she just struggle. She didn't really have anyone to lean on. For me that's why I guess I understand that they've been through a lot. And that's why I do not try to go onto wrong path. Stealing or robbing or you know not focusing on school. Whatever choice I make, everything that I do, I think about my mom. Is it right for me to do it? Make her worry about it. For me, I think I shouldn't be doing that” (Katrina Interview). Evidently, Katrina’s mother’s experience in Cambodia and the United States has shaped the type of person that Katrina has become. She does not take for granted the traumas of her family’s history. She acknowledges the ghosts of the pasts and pushes on to pursue a higher education so that she can do well for herself and for her family.

Kwan 41

Elliot, on the other hand, does not know much about his family history and Pol Pot, but the silences about the past trigger him to think about the genocide in Cambodia through the lens of the Holocaust. Elliot says, “They [my parents] came in the mid-80’s from Cambodia. I don’t really remember. Oh, they came because of not the Holocaust, but what’s it called? The only thing I can remember is they are crossing a field and it’s like a mine field. A lot of people died. It would blow up on them. That’s all that I can remember” (Elliot Interview). It is interesting that Elliot doesn’t even know what happened in Cambodia with the Khmer Rouge, but he compares this history to the Holocaust. He has no words he can use to describe this chapter in family’s life except for the Holocaust. Elliot doesn’t know much about it because there is a silence that resonates within himself and his family. On the superficial level, Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge do not seem to be as important to him and his family compared to Chanvatey, Katrina, and their families. I do not think that it is because Elliot cares less, but he has not been exposed to the history of Khmer Americans or his family history because his parents have remained silent about their experiences. Even though Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge do not show a direct influence on Elliot’s motivations to go to school, the effects of the genocide in Cambodia have inadvertently influenced Elliot’s choices to attend community college. Elliot said that he wants to pursue an education because he does not want to run a liquor store like his parents. The reason that his parents own a liquor store is because they were displaced by the Khmer Rouge and the War in Southeast Asia, and as a result, do not have any transferable skills to compete in the American job market. Thus, his and his family’s experiences as refugees in the United States influenced him to pursue a college education. Like Elliot, Darren does not know much about his parents’ experience prior to his birth and sometimes he does not acknowledge that he cares much about it. However, the aftermath of his parents’ experience resonates through the responsibilities that he faces today. There is a role

Kwan 42

reversal between him and his parents because Darren’s parents rely on him as the main source of communication between them and American society. He says, “It was tough and still is to have to be your parents’ parent at a young age. I see the struggles and barriers that they had to overcome. A lot of turmoil after the Khmer Rouge” (Darren Interview). Although Darren is not directly impacted by the genocide in Cambodia, he still feels that aftermath of these ghosts through his parents and his responsibilities. Darren must negotiate between his responsibility as the eyes and ears of his refugee parents and his responsibility to be a good, hard working, and educated Asian American person. Darren is a student and an employee, he must never forget that he is first a child to refugees that lost everything—their history, name, language, culture, and way of life—to war, genocide, and relocation. Darren does not know much about his family history because of forced silences, but he does recognize that the ghosts of the past constantly reappear as specters that linger in the present influencing his very decisions in life.

Silences Often the family histories of Khmer American youth are too painful to discuss. Frequently, the older generations have not yet made peace with the traumas and horrors they experienced during the Khmer Rouge, Cambodian genocide, and War in Southeast Asia. These people have witnessed violent deaths of friends and family and were forced to relocate to foreign countries where they were already deemed deviant and pathological. There is also a lack of opportunity for these individuals to discuss these hurtful topics. When youth ask, parents frequently talk about the lighter side of their histories. Sophon says, “When my mom brings it up...it's like softer...but then deeper into it, it gets weird. I don't think they're trying to protect me. I think its more, they want us to know what they've been through. My dad talks about it too...but I mean the tough times, it’s pretty hurtful.

Kwan 43

She talks about the things she went through and he's there, he'll go in the corner. My dad doesn't really talk about it much. I guess it hurts to bring up the past” (Sophon Interview). Sophon’s parents want her to know about their family history and their past because they believe that it is important for her to know. However, Sophon says that at times, it is intense and too hurtful to talk about. She had seen documentaries about the Holocaust, but she never would have known that her parents experienced similar conditions. Similar to Sophon’s parents, Keith’s parents also think that it is important for him to know about their family history. However, many subjects about the war remain too painful to discuss. At CSU Long Beach, Keith began taking courses on Cambodian history and culture. Because of the large population of Cambodians in Long Beach, CSU Long Beach offers classes about Cambodian history. When Elliot went home to talk about what he learned, he also asked his parents what they experienced. However, his parents only focused on the lighter side of things. Keith says, “My mom talks about it. She talks about the lighter side. My dad doesn't want to be a part of it, but he corrects my mom all the time. You know, it hurts” (Keith Interview). Although Keith’s father does not directly tell Keith about the past, his father is able to add to his dialogue and input only when the subject has already been addressed. His parents understand the importance for him to acknowledge and know the past, but the opportunities to break these silences are far and few in between if Keith does not actively seek the information. It often becomes the responsibility of the youth to trigger these moments so that they can understand the ghosts that continue to haunt their parents and themselves. Even if Khmer American youth do not know much about their family history, they recognize the overlying influence that it has on them and their family. As a result, these ghosts go on to motivate youth to pursue postsecondary education because they do not want their family’s past traumas to predetermine their paths in the

Kwan 44

present and the future. Just because their past was poisonous does not mean that their current lives should be poisoned too.

GHOSTS OF THE PRESENT Othering There is a trend in which UC students inadvertently criticize those who are not “making” it or making better for themselves and/or their families by pursuing postsecondary education.

Kwan 45

They feel a need to do this because it justifies why they are at a privileged institution while their friends and family must stay in their hometowns. There is a need to distinguish between “deviant” Cambodians versus the good ones because stereotypes created by dominant representations of the Cambodian gang member frequently haunt Khmer American youth. There is a high gang and violence representation within the Khmer American community, but as you can see, not all individuals are deviants. There is a greater need for UCSD students to justify their position at UCSD and show that they do not fall into the stereotypes. Most of these UCSD students, however, have close friends or family members that are gang members. As a result, UCSD students have an internalized shame and guilt because they are at a prestigious university away from their fellow Khmer American family and friends. As a result, there is a need to create the idea of “them”—deviant individuals—versus “me”—UCSD student—because this is a coping strategy for them cope with being away from home. This is a method of how UCSD students learn to adapt to new surroundings away from home, which means away from other Khmer Americans. Khmer American UCSD students have the outer symbols of being a “UC student,” but they do not really fit in because of social distance between them and the normative student [read: white, wealthy, and male]. According to the admissions requirements for universities, only specific people who are worthy are capable of being successful at the UC level. According to dominant ideologies, those who “make it” do so because they either work harder or want it more than others. According to the “assimilation cycle14” by Robert E. Park, there are no distinctions between different ethnicities. As long as a minority person is willing to accommodate, he or she can be assimilated 14

Robert E. Park’s Race Relations Cycle. Immigrant minorities will experience: 1) contact with the host society; 2) conflict with the host society; 3) competition between the old and new residents; 4) accommodation by the subordinate—immigrant—to the new social order; 4) assimilation into a harmonious, unified society. The assimilationist text argues that the problem is in the subordinate, minority group. Supposedly, if you change, you can be integrated into host society (Sharon Elise Lecture).

Kwan 46

into dominant culture. This ideology has been engrained into our society, where all are believed to have equal opportunities to enter the melting pot. However, dominant culture in this sense means, white Anglo culture. By default, Khmer Americans are already unequal players in the field. However, Khmer American youth do not question the ideas of success. They have never been allowed to even question the racist undertones of the “assimilation cycle.” The only method of upward mobility is through education. In our supposed system of meritocracy, all are offered the same playing field if each individual is willing to play hard and fair. Through mutual construction, “good” Cambodians, who remain an exception in dominant stereotypes and beliefs, cannot understand who they are unless they understand who they are not. This process remains the only way that one can talk about one’s success in the Cambodian community. Education is a controversial subject with Sophon and her brothers and sisters because some of her siblings have chosen the college route while others have not. Sophon says, “My older brother, not working, right now he's in Cambodia with my mom. They're on vacation. She decided to take him along with her because he's not doing anything with his life. He didn't go to college. I'm next after him. My little sister, again not going to college. She's a year younger than I am, she just turned 21” (Sophon Interview). Unlike Sophon’s older brother and little sister who did not pursue higher education, Sophon believes that she is doing the right thing. Sophon feels a sense of shame and guilt if the brothers and/or sisters do not pursue postsecondary education. Although she loves her brother, she feels a sense of shame because he could not pull away from the stereotypes associated with Cambodian males—lazy and unemployed. She says, “He had different friends, they weren't really doing anything. So, you know, he just went along with that path also” (Sophon Interview). Sophon believes that her brother just chose the wrong path, regardless of how narrow the choice of paths available to him. Perhaps it was a lack of opportunity or peer pressure. There are certain environmental, social, and personal issues that influence motivations to either pursue an

Kwan 47

education or otherwise. In Sophon’s family’s case, there were demands to help with the family finances. Each person was needed to run the family business. Like Sophon, not everyone pursued higher education in Leia’s family. Leia decided to pursue postsecondary education because she understood the vantage point of others who did not pursue higher education. She knew the quality of life that accompanied college educated individuals and uneducated individuals. Leia says, “I'm like the only person in my family to go to college. I have 5 brothers, I'm the second to the youngest. My experiences in Santa Ana and growing up with people with other views and people who didn't take education seriously really help me shape my passion and my mindset. Just, just kinda of like my views and all that because it's just a gang infested poor area” (Leia Interview). The decisions of others have helped her consolidate her passions and mindset. She did not know what she wanted until she knew what she did not want. This process of “othering” involves the conscious division between me [read: educated, hard working, and deserving] versus them [read: uneducated, lazy, and undeserving]. As a result, by the mutual construction of the “other”—those who did not choose to pursue higher education—Leia was able to find her passion. CSU and CC students understand the importance of an education, but also recognize that it is not the only way to make a living and be successful. Perhaps this is the case because of the proximity between the CSU and CC campuses to the density of Cambodian populations. UC students by default are geographically removed from urban areas where there is a dense population of other Cambodians. There are also certain stigmas that characterize these “ethnic enclaves.” As a result, UC students are more removed from other Cambodians on a day to day basis compared to CSU and CC students. It is not that UC students cannot see the realities of the choices made by other Khmer American youth who did not choose college, but the effects of these choices become distant memories that are only visited when being asked about their

Kwan 48

hometown and other Cambodians they grew up with. UC students sense a need to justify their privileged positions as UC students because they want to show why they are at UC while their friends are relatives are not. There must be a valid reason. Social and physical distance from the family and community produces this sense of shame and guilt and the need to “other” those who did not make it to college like them. By creating the notion of the other, the youth confirm their position at a university versus their friends and family members who did not “make it” like them. Katrina explains that she never liked Cambodians until she joined the Cambodian Student Association at her university campus. She, herself, did not have a good perception of Cambodians. As a result, she did not want to associate with them. Katrina says, “Up till high school, if I did hang out with a Cambodian person...the guys in general, they're kind of ghetto. They don't really say nice things to you. They try to say things that are like degrading for a woman. They dress hip hop and they try to act cool. When I don't accept that, I tell them that it isn't cool what they say about me and stuff like that, then they start making fun of me and cussing at me. I try to stay away from them. I never really had a good impression of Cambodian people or my peers” (Katrina Interview). Even as a Cambodian person, Katrina essentializes what it means to be a Cambodian male. Since our identities are mutually constructed, Katrina constructs those other Cambodians as deviant and unacceptable while she is immune to their “ghettoness” because she detaches herself from the community. She only began to sense a feeling of belonging after meeting other Cambodians at her university campus. She finally felt like she fit in. It is important that she remains a Khmer person, but she does not want to be associated with the negative stereotypes. My CSU and CC student interviewees, however, frequently have personal interactions with Cambodians who did not choose the expected routes of higher education. They do not verbalized such concerns as Katrina. Many recognize the demands of family obligations, personal needs, and community expectations. Donna, a graduate student at CSU Long Beach,

Kwan 49

believes that Khmer American youth are faced with the task of balancing between two cultures. Donna says, “For Cambodian Americans my age, it’s balancing two cultures: dealing with some parents who experienced the Khmer Rouge first hand and may suffer from PTSD, and building a positive construct of our people and family’s struggles by going to school and building a strong foundation to maintaining our culture” (Donna Interview). Donna recognizes the many tasks that Khmer American youth must deal with daily. She does not essentialize any external or internal struggles of other Khmer American youth. It seems that CSU students make a conscious understanding of the demands of Khmer American youth and show less of a need for justification for their decisions. Nonetheless, Khmer American youth from the UC, CSU, and CC school systems must negotiate between parental expectations and pressures from their own personal, professional, and educational lives.

Role Reversal – UC students versus CSU and CC students Khmer American youth face responsibilities and demands from their families because they act as the main source of communication between American society and their families. Youth are forced to choose between pressures from school, peers, and their parents. As a result, a sense of guilt and shame resonates through their everyday lives even if they do not directly address these different demands. At college, the social and physical space between Khmer American students and their parents produce this sense of shame and guilt, because they are unable to fulfill the responsibilities that they have had throughout their lives. Sophon, says, “I hated the liquor store because I felt like it took away my social life in high school. I always have to be there. You know in high school you wanna go out with your friends. And I couldn't really do that. There wasn't any freedom. If I did hang out with my friends, in the back of my head, fuck I should be watching the liquor store. My parents are there by themselves and you should be there to help them out...and just be there. Sometimes I think of my mom being there by herself, and she's usually by herself all the time...but I feel guilty for being in town and not being with her. Because for one it's dangerous. It's

Kwan 50

just hard to run the place in the ghetto by yourself. There is a lot of stuff she goes through. Help out and be with her. My dad too. My dad is super, super old” (Sophon Interview) Growing up, Sophon helped her family with almost every economic venture. As a young girl, she remembers recycling cardboard to help her family raise money to buy a business; she remembers cleaning banana leaves in her backyard for the food her mom was preparing to sell at local supermarkets; she remembers responsibilities about watching the liquor store; she remembers the guilt she felt when she was not there to help even though she had temptations and desires to be a “normal teenager;” she remembers the guilt she experienced when she was in town for the weekend she was back from school, but did not help her parents at the restaurant15. These ghosts of her guilt come back to haunt her when she does not satisfy the responsibilities as a child to her parents. It is especially pertinent for her to be with her parents because their family business is in a bad area. She feels the need to protect her family even though she does not have the physical means to do so. Sophon’s mother tells her that she does not need to worry about the restaurant if she has homework or has to study for a midterm, but in the back of her mind, Sophon knows that they need her help. Sophon says, “Sometimes I feel like she's forced to say study for your test. Of course she wants education before everything but a small part of her will be sad” (Sophon Interview). Youth like Sophon are forced to negotiate between what is best for the family and for themselves. Sophon chose to attend UCSD because she was far enough to find freedom and independence, but she is also close enough to go back to Long Beach to help her family. CSU and CC students do not display such an omnipresent sense of guilt and shame but it does not mean that they do not have pressures from their family or community. CSU and CC student have

15

Sophon’s parents first owned a liquor store, but they sold that business and bought a Chinese food restaurant shortly afterwards.

Kwan 51

to negotiate the demands from school, family, and peers just like their peers at UCSD but their physical and social closeness to their families and other Khmer Americans helps them negotiate these issues. Instead of this sense of guilt and shame, Darren feels a sense of frustration toward all of his responsibilities. Darren juggles the responsibilities of being a student, an employee, and a son constantly. At times, he said that it would be much easier to work full-time to support himself and his family, but he recognizes the need for higher education in this society. He must decide if completing his homework is more important than sleeping or helping his family almost everyday. Darren works a swing shift from about 5PM to 12AM so that he can go to school in the mornings. He has school from about 8AM to 3PM. In between, he is expected to help his parents with anything they need. Since his parents do not have full control of the English language, frequently, Darren is expected to help his parents with tasks such as translating. Darren says, “I still have to deal with bills. An example would be when my dad got frauded. I need to call PayPal©, Bank of America, Transunion, the police while working 30 plus hours and taking 13 units (full time) classes” (Darren Interview). He is frustrated because they do not appreciate the trouble he goes through to help his parents. Since he is the oldest and they expect him to live at home, he cannot escape his responsibilities that seem so eminent. Darren says, “Definitely, while growing up, I had to deal with my parents’ responsibilities, like calling credit card companies and dealing with grown up situation while I was younger. My brother still does not do anything that deals with my parents’ responsibilities” (Darren Interview). When Darren decides not to help his parents, he feels guilty because he knows that he should. However, this sense of guilt is not so prominent because of the physical proximity between him and parents. He is always around to be there for them and when he is not, he expects that his little brother, who is

Kwan 52

now almost 17, should step up to the plate. Like Darren, Jay has similar responsibilities that require him to take care of his family. Jay, however, has the task of being a parent to his younger siblings and an oldest son to his mother. His responsibilities are very pertinent to him because he is the main source of income and support for his family. Jay says, “My family is very important to me. I love my family. There's nothing I wouldn't do for them. If I'm able to work and put food on the table and keep them under a house, a roof, I already told my mom that you are important to me and that's why I'm doing all this. Me and my mom, we're like really close. She's really dependent on me. It's hard. I'm so young. I'm at that age where I wanna check out parties but at the same time you wanna take care of your mom” (Jay Interview). Jay must take care of his family because he has no choice. He is the sole “worker” and breadwinner. Although his mother is on welfare, it does not bring financial stability. He is responsible for taking his little brothers and sisters to school, working full time, going to school at Cal State LA, supporting his family, and more. Jay takes pride in that he is the main male figure in his family. There is an underlying sense of shame and anger because his father is not there to help offset his responsibilities, but Jay is proud that he takes care of his family and he does it well. However, Jay has only been able to successfully support his family by moving out of Long Beach. Even though he has deep personal, social, and physical ties to Long Beach, he believed that the city was not a suitable place for him and his family to continue their residence.

There’s No Place like Home The hometowns of all of my interviewees are considered “urban ghettos” in California. Leia sees a pattern where a majority of Khmer Americans reside in the United States. Leia says,

Kwan 53

“The majority of Cambodians are in certain areas in California...Long Beach, Fresno, or Oakland. It seems like for a largely Cambodian populated area, has the more similar settings. Um, where people are poor. I was so surprised to know that there is like rich Cambodians here [UCSD] honestly because the Cambodians I knew back at home, everyone kinda of came from the same...they were, our parents were refugees from the Khmer Rouge. They had to flee the homeland and find a place to live” (Leia Interview). Khmer people reside in these “urban ghettos”—Long Beach, Santa Ana, City Heights—not because these people’s lives are ghetto-ized but because of their history of primary and secondary migration and relocation in the United States as refugees. Although violence, drugs, and police surveillance in these locations are frequently over-represented, Khmer American youth believe that their hometowns positively influence their lives, which is contrary to the popular belief which believes that urban [read: ghetto] youth are expected to fall into a culture of poverty because of a pathological environment and culture. Jay says, “Long Beach is very important to me because that's who I am today” (Jay Interview). Sophon agrees with Jay. Even though Long Beach is crazy and hectic, it has shaped her into a well-rounded person. She is able to negotiate her identity as a student at a prestigious university and a resident of a “ghetto.” Sophon says, “Um, I grew up around here [Long Beach]. At first, I didn't like it at all. Oh yea, you lived in the ghetto. This isn't the best part of Long Beach. Eastside Long Beach. I didn't really like it until um I guess when I got until the end of high school year when I start to appreciate it more. Until college, oh yea, I am proud of where I'm from” (Sophon Interview). Because these youth witness the patterns of gang violence, low wages, and poor housing, they feel that earning an education is a viable way to make a change in their families and their communities. Not every Khmer American youth is a criminal, but the ghosts of their communities and hometowns constantly remind them of the uphill battle they face against stereotypes that are deemed so natural and inherent to their bodies and space. In conjunction with

Kwan 54

these stereotypes, Khmer American youth must also negotiate parental expectations and demands from the family that influence demands for Americanization. Being an “American” is valued by the youth, their parents, and dominant society, youth must negotiate which parts of American culture and ideals they will adopt or ignore while also maintaining bits and pieces their Khmer identity and culture. Often, American culture runs contrary to that of Khmer culture according to my interviewees. Sophon said, “My dad always enforces [Cambodian culture]. ‘YOU are Cambodian.’ He enforces that all the time. When we try to bring American ideals into the house, he wants us to keep our culture. He wants us to always speak Khmer to him” (Sophon Interview). Sophon’s father knows that it is a battle for him to keep his children from losing their Khmer identity because of the demands to assimilate to American culture. Khmer American youth understand the price they have to pay if they do not conform especially in an institution of higher education. Katrina agrees because she believes, “It's hard to be American living in America living a Cambodian lifestyle” (Katrina Interview). The parents of UCSD students feel a greater need to keep their children grounded as good Khmer people even though there are pressures to “be an American.” The parents of CSU students acknowledge the pressures of assimilation and acculturation, but since their children are socially and physically closer to home, there is not such a need to make sure that their children maintain their Khmer morals and values.

GHOSTS OF THE FUTURE Pressures for Americanization = Dying Language and Culture

Kwan 55

The pressure for Americanization and assimilation are recognized by both Khmer American youth and elders as an internal battle against ignorance about their family history and culture. A monk at Wat Sovannkiry believes that it is very important for youth to understand Khmer culture, morals, values, and language because once older people pass away, they are afraid that there will be no more traditions. The young ones are supposed to keep it alive. The younger generation recognizes that Cambodian culture is important, but they see the death of this culture as inevitable. They are not unwilling to preserve Cambodian culture, but they just see it as an uphill battle. Sok says, “I think it’s just mostly for older people. Couple years…ten or twenty, it’s going to die out” (Sok Interview). As a result, many Khmer American youth feel a need to preserve their culture and heritage before future generations become completely unaware of their family history. Sophon says, “I’ve always been culturally aware, but also not aware enough. If you ask me questions about the war and I wouldn't know much about it. I feel so ignorant for not knowing enough about my culture and history. Supposed to always do this or that. Needing to live the American life” (Sophon Interview). Many times the needs and demands to live as an American prevents the younger generation from exploring their family history. Kanika Suom, president of the Cambodian Dancers of San Diego, believes that youth may negotiate their Cambodian and American identities. She says, “If I don’t teach kid Cambodian culture, then they will be American. Kid need to learn other things in life. Cannot put someone in box and this is the only way to be American. Look at various cultures” (Kanika Interview). There is not one monolithic way to be an American; youth may incorporate different cultures into their identity formation. However, this fear of loss remains constant because of the demands from school, work, friends, and society to speak English and live the “American” lifestyle.

Kwan 56

The fear of losing one’s language, culture, and identity continually haunts my interviewees. They must be aware of their actions and decisions because they understand that it will have direct impact on youth in their generations and younger generations who are growing up almost completely void of Khmer culture immersion. Darren’s cousin said that she does not need to worry about teaching her children English because she says, “No matter what, they’re going to learn English in school anyway” (Observation). Om16, Darren’s uncle, agrees because he said, “Muy, pe, bey17 and they won’t know Khmer anymore” (Observation). Om suggests that after the first and second generation, the third generation will no longer know the Khmer language. Not only are the children not retaining the language but the older, first, generation speaks and understands English enough to communicate with their grandchildren in English. As a result, many second generation youth are working to promote Khmer language and culture in hopes of reviving this “dead” or “dying” culture. Of all the different Asian groups in the United States, Leia thinks that Khmer people are at the largest risk of losing the language. Thus, she hopes to teach her children Khmer so that they have the tools to reach out to other cultures and communicate with other Khmer people. She says, “Probably Cambodian of the so many Asian groups here, the next generation is definitely at risk of losing the language if they grew up here. Language and culture. I would definitely teach Khmer to my kids. I believe in multi-language family. I wish they can learn as many languages as possible. Having that tool helps them reach out to the different cultures they are exposed to. Even with my younger brother or my older brothers, they didn't grow up with the tools I was able to obtain. That has a huge impact between the relationship with my parents. Because I use the language more than them, because I can communicate better with them. I don't want to lose that with my kids” (Leia Interview). Sophon agrees with Leia because she is wary about the younger generations. Although they are both part of the second generation, they consider themselves more knowledgeable about Khmer

16 17

Om means uncle in Khmer. Muy, pe, bey mean one, two, three in Khmer.

Kwan 57

culture and language than Khmer adolescents and youth younger than them. Perhaps, there is a trend where Khmer individuals with more knowledge about Khmer language and culture are afraid that younger Khmer individuals, whether they are from the same generation or not, will forget about their culture and language. However, the amount of knowledge that one individual has is relative to the amount of knowledge of the other individual. For example, compared to first generation Khmer people, the second generation does not know much, but if you compare second to third generation, the second generation believes that the third generation does not know much about Khmer language and culture. As a result, Sophon believes that her experiences as a Khmer American child growing up in America will differ drastically from her children because the younger generation will lose their language which means that they will also lose their culture. Sophon says, “It is important because it is our culture. They won't have the same experience as we had. I’m really afraid that yea we'll lose our culture. The only people I speak Khmer to are my parents. I’m afraid if I have kids they won't know the language. It's hard. Language is culture. I don't go to the temple. No one to take kids to the temple. We would grow up differently” (Sophon Interview). Not only do these youth have the pressures to assimilate and adopt dominant Anglo customs with the hope of being accepted, but they have the pressures to keep their culture and history alive. This is true for many minority communities, but it is especially pertinent to Khmer Americans because of the silences that remain to keep the hurtful past hidden.

CONCLUSION

Kwan 58

Khmer American youth complicate binaries that are frequently associated with their bodies. These binaries include the culture of poverty and the model minority. There is not one essentialized or stereotypical Khmer American individual. However, these people share a history of war, oppression, displacement, and resistance. The dominant discourse on immigrants in the United States negates and marginalizes the history of these people because their experiences are ignored. They are expected to shed their identities and adopt American culture. Often, youth construct their identities by the negotiation of the ghosts of their family’s past, the haunting demands of their everyday lives in the present, and the fear of a lost culture and language in the future. These interactions produce certain motivations and reasons why Khmer American youth pursue postsecondary education. Although these individuals never experienced the traumas of war and genocide, they still feel the aftermath of these horrors through their parents and family. The notion of being a survivor is ingrained into their identities and lived realities. Often, youth must recognize the effects that the hurtful past has on their parents. Due to issues of role reversals and survivor guilt, youth must negotiate their positions as an American and as children to refugee parents. The trauma experienced by Cambodian refugees is supposed to be concealed and forgotten, but frequently, it haunts not only refugees but their children as well. Khmer American youth are resisting this poison and creating the antidote through their pursuit of higher education. This resistance is seen in ways Khmer Americans negotiate the ghosts of the past, present, and future. In order to understand the current situation of Khmer American youth, we need to recognize their history and how it influences their lives today and everyday. Due to the high representation of Khmer Americans in the prison system, Khmer families are frequently associated with the culture of poverty. However, this culture of poverty ideology

Kwan 59

is complicated by the intersections of the model minority myth. The myth expects Khmer American youth to be successful, yet their culture is pathological. Youth are constantly being pulled at both ends. In order to negotiate this position, many UCSD students “otherize” Khmer individuals who are not pursuing an education. Social and physical distance experienced by UCSD students force these individuals to develop coping mechanisms that speak to their sense of guilt for being away from their family and their sense of displacement at a prestigious university. Although CSU and CC students are also pursuing higher education, there is not a need to otherize because they attend postsecondary sites that are close to their hometowns. Also, the student bodies at CSU’s and CC’s have similar socioeconomic status and history. The disparity between socioeconomic statuses at UCSD is not seen at the CSU and CC. However, UCSD, CSU, and CC students all fear the loss of Khmer culture and language in the future. Khmer American identity is shaped by the ways youth and the older generations negotiate the influences of American and Khmer culture and identity. There is a new sense of hybridity. However, this hybridity is quickly transforming to the dominance of American culture due to the pressures for Americanization and the loss of Khmer language and culture. Although most of my interviewees spoke or at least understood Khmer, they fear that the pressures to learn English and “be an American” might erase Khmer culture for the younger generations. For the younger generations, these ghosts of the past, present, and future will only be mere glimpses of importance fading slowly into the redwood forests and Gulf Stream waters. In the future, I would like to continue my research on refugees from Southeast Asia who live in Southern California. For the Khmer population, I would like to focus on the experiences of the older generations. Furthermore, I would like to explore how youth react or negotiate their positions as children or grandchildren to refugees. As the third generation grows older, I am

Kwan 60

interested in seeing how the third generation negotiates the past, present, and future. Perhaps these ghosts may not even be of any importance to them. This summer, I plan on interviewing a Fang family in San Diego. Sucheng Chan wrote a chapter called “The Fang Family in San Diego” for the book, Hmong Means Free: Life in Laos and America. When I asked my co-worker, Tou Fang, about this book he knew nothing of it. When I showed him an excerpt of the chapter from my reader for an Ethnic Studies class called Southeast Asian Refugee and Immigrant Experiences in the U.S., he was surprised to see pictures of his aunts and uncles. He never even knew anything was written about his family! It is problematic that researchers use their interviewees for data, but in the end, forget to return the favors. I found myself doing the same thing during the writing of this thesis. However, I am aware of this issue. As a result, I contacted most of my interviewees about my finished product. I will make sure that each receives a copy because it involves their stories. As a researcher, I must never forget that without the help and support of my participants, this would not exist.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Kwan 61

Blandin, Don M. (1994). Three realities: Minority life in the United States—The struggle for economic equity. In Justiz, M.J., Wilson, R. & L.G. Bjork (eds.) Minorities in higher education. (pp. 22-43). Phoenix, AZ: American Council of Education and The Oryx Press. Briggs, Laura (2002). Reproducing empire: Race, sex, science, and US imperialism in Puerto Rico. Berkeley: University of California Press. Bunte, Pamela and Joseph, Rebecca. (1992). “Report #9: The Cambodian community of Long Beach: An ethnographic analysis of factors leading to census undercount.” Ethnographic evaluation of the 1990 decennial census report series. Washington D.C. Canniff, Julie G. (2001). Cambodian Refugees' Pathway to Success: Developing a Bi-Cultural Identity. New York, NY: LFB Scholarly Publishing. Census 2000 demographic profile highlights: Selected population group: Cambodian alone (2000). American Fact Finder. Chan, Sucheng ed. (2003). Not Just Victims: Conversations with Cambodian community leaders in the United States. Chicago: University of Illinois Press Chan, Sucheng (2004). Survivors: Cambodian refugees in the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press. Chea, Sophon (student at UCSD), interview by the author, San Diego, CA, Feb. 2, 2008 Chhoub, Pete (student at CSU Long Beach), questionnaire by the author, Long Beach, CA, Feb. 17, 2008 Chhum, Donna (student at CSU Long Beach), questionnaire by the author, Long Beach, CA, Feb. 17, 2008

Kwan 62

Conquergood, Dwight (1992). “On reppin’ and rhetoric: Gang representations.” Working papers:

#19. Evanston, IL: Center for Urban Affairs and Policy Research, Northwestern

University. Dam, Andrew (student at CSU Long Beach), questionnaire by the author, Long Beach, CA, Feb. 17, 2008 Daro, Jay (student at CSU Los Angeles), questionnaire by the author, Hacienda Heights, CA, Feb. 2, 2008 Duong, Katrina (student at UCSD), interview by the author, San Diego, CA, Feb. 14, 2008 Edgar, Andrew et. al (2002). Cultural theory: The key concepts. London and New York: Routledge. Elise, Sharon (2008). Choosing the margin and Ethnic notions/Subjects of empire. Lectures for UCSD course: ETHN 101, Ethnic Images in Film. Hein, Jeremy. (1995). From Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia: A refugee experience in the United States. New York, NY: Twayne Publishers. Higgins, James & Joan Ross (1997). Fractured identities: Cambodian children of war. Lowell, MA: Loom Press. Kear, Elliot (student at Cerritos College), questionnaire by the author, Downey, CA, Jan. 21, 2008 Khan, Keith (student at CSU Long Beach), questionnaire by the author, Long Beach, CA, Feb. 2, 2008 Khhim, Monica (student at CSU Long Beach), questionnaire by the author, Long Beach, CA, Feb. 17, 2008

Kwan 63

Kiang, Peter N. (1992). Issues of curriculum and community in first-generation Asian Americans in college. In Zwerling, L.S. & H.B. London (eds.) First-generation students: Confronting the cultural issues. (pp.97-112). Los Angeles, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Lewis, Oscar (1966). La vida: A Puetro Rican family in the culture of poverty—San Juan and New York. New York, NY: Random House. Ly, Prach. Poison tree. 12 March 2008. Mak, Chhourn (father of Darren Ung), interview by author, Baldwin Park, CA, Apr. 29, 2006 Mak, Chhourn (father of Darren Ung), interview by author, Baldwin Park, CA, May 7, 2006 Mao, Luke (student at CSU Long Beach), questionnaire by the author, Long Beach, CA, Feb. 17, 2008 Nimol, Chanvatey (student at UCSD), interview by the author, San Diego, CA, Feb. 13, 2008 Ny, Sokly & Spencer Nakasako (1996). a.k.a. Don Bonus. Omi, Michael and Howard Winant. (1994). Racial formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1980s 2nd Ed. New York, NY: Routledge. Ong, Aihwa (2003). Buddha is hiding: Refugees, citizenship, the new America. Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press. Park, Edward J. & Park, J.S.W. (2005). Probationary Americans: Contemporary immigration policies and the shaping of Asian American communities. New York, NY: Routledge. Park, Lisa Sun-Hee (2005). Consuming citizenship: Children of Asian immigrant entrepreneurs. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. Pellow, David (2006). Types of Citizenship. Lecture for UCSD course: ETHN 1C, Introduction to Ethnic Studies: Race and Ethnic Relations in the United States.

Kwan 64

Prom Khian Attaisuto (monk at Wat Sovannkiry), interview by the author, San Diego, CA, Feb. 3, 2008 Raley, Gabrielle (1999). “No good choices: Teenage childbearing, concentrated poverty, and welfare reform.” In Coontz, Stephanie, Maya Parson, and Gabrielle Raley (eds.). American families: A multicultural reader. (pp. 258-272). New York, NY: Routledge Roberts, Amanda (2007). Parenting and Mental Health II: Children with Mental Health Problems Lecture. November 27, 2007. Rumbaut, Ruben (1996). “ A legacy of war: Refugees from Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia.” In Silvia Pedraze and Ruben Rumbaut (eds.). Origins and Destinies: Immigration, Race, and Ethnicity in America. (pp. 315-333). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company. Sim, Sok (student at Mesa College), interview by the author, San Diego, CA, Feb. 13, 2008 Sivorn, Max (student at CSU Long Beach), questionnaire by the author, Long Beach, CA, Feb. 17, 2008 Smith-Hefner, Nancy J. (1999). Khmer American: Identity and Moral Education in a Diasporic Community. Berkeley: University of California Press. Som, Leia (student at UCSD), interview by the author, San Diego, CA, Feb. 14, 2008 Suarez-Orozco, Carola and Marcelo M. Suarez-Orozco (2001). Children of immigration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Suom, Kanika (founder of Cambodian Dancers of San Diego), interview by the author, San Diego, CA, Feb. 3, 2008 Surgue, Thomas J. (1999). “Poor families in an era of urban transformation: The “underclass” family in myth and reality.” In Coontz, Stephanie, Maya Parson, and Gabrielle

Kwan 65

Raley (eds.). American families: A multicultural reader. (pp. 243-257). New York, NY: Routledge Tenhula, John. Voices From Southeast Asia: The Refugee Experience in the United States. New York, NY: Holmes & Meier Publishers, Inc., (1991). Um, Khatharya (1999). Scars of war: Educational issues and challenges for Cambodian American students. In C.C. Park & M.M. Chi (Eds.) Asian-American education: Prospects and challenges. (pp. 263-284). Wesport, CT: Greenwood Publishing Group, Inc. Ung, Darren (student at Mount San Antonio College), questionnaire by the author, Baldwin Park, CA, Feb. 17, 2008 Urciuoli, Bonnie (1996). Exposing prejudice: Puerto Rican experiences of language, race, and class. New York, NY: Westview. Van Maanen, John (1988). Tales of the field: On writing ethnography. Chicago and London: University of Chicago Press. Yang, K. Wayne (2008). Forms of Voice. Lecture for UCSD course: ETHN 185, Discourse, Power, and Inequality. Zia, Helen (2000). Asian American dreams: The emergence of an American people. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.