Opinion
The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com
4 — Thursday, April 18, 2019
Zack Blumberg
Joel Danilewitz
Emily Huhman
Tara Jayaram
Jeremy Kaplan
Magdalena Mihaylova
Ellery Rosenzweig
Jason Rowland
Anu Roy-Chaudhury
Alex Satola
Erin White
Ashley Zhang
Timothy Spurlin
Nicholas Tomaino
FINNTAN STORER
Managing Editor
Stanford Lipsey Student Publications Building
420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan since 1890.
MAYA GOLDMAN
Editor in Chief
MAGDALENA MIHAYLOVA
AND JOEL DANILEWITZ
Editorial Page Editors
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of The Daily’s Editorial Board.
All other signed articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
EDITORIAL BOARD MEMBERS
E
very
morning,
after
numerous unsuccessful
attempts to throw off
my covers and get up, I make
myself a bowl of oatmeal, discard
the trash and then start my day.
What happens to the fate of my
waste never even crosses my
mind — it is the whole concept of
out of sight, out of mind. In fact,
I never really consider the final
destination of any of the trash I
produce. Except that trash does
have to go somewhere. Early
into my science, technology,
engineering and math education
I learned the law of conservation
of mass, which posits mass
cannot be created nor destroyed.
From food to toys, necessities
to nonessentials, almost every
product comes with its share of
trash content. For this reason,
on a typical day the average
American citizen will produce
4.40 pounds of trash. Of the
trash produced, 2.91 pounds
is waste as the other trash
contents can either be recycled
or composted. Multiply that by
the 327,200,000 people you have
living in the United States, and
you are left with 476,076 tons of
trash produced daily. With my
elementary knowledge of science,
I can ascertain that, though my
trash is out of my hands, it is not
off the planet. Additionally, with
my rudimentary understanding
of American infrastructure, I can
assume my trash ends up lining
a landfill somewhere on the
outskirts of my community.
If you have ever been to one
of these landfills, chances are
you have seen the hundreds of
birds that frequent the area and
feast on the waste created from
human consumption. Honestly,
I never even thought about
the implications of these birds
until I read a study published by
researchers at Duke University.
The study shines a light on
just how detrimental the birds
may be to the environment.
The reason why this is the
case relates to a pretty juvenile
concept
that
I
learned
in
preschool:
Everybody
poops.
Duke researchers estimated that
over 1.4 million seagulls feed at
landfills across North America,
but Scott Winston, one of the lead
researchers, believes “the actual
population is probably greater
than 5 million.” These birds
consume our trash and evidently
have to poop it out somewhere.
This somewhere is not just the
back of our brand-new shirt,
but often bodies of water like
lakes and rivers near our homes.
Estimates from Duke say this
trash ridden fecal matter deposits
an additional 240 tons of nitrogen
and 39 tons of phosphorus into
our local waterways every year
and as mentioned, the effects are
drastic.
The
added
nutrients
defecated
into
the
lakes
and
rivers
supplement
eutrophication, which causes
a dense growth of plant life,
such as algae, limiting the
oxygen
contents
needed
to
sustain
healthy
ecosystems
and maintain aquatic life under
the surface. This suppression
of oxygen content to the life
below the growth suffocates the
animals and kills them as they
do not have access to enough
dissolved oxygen. The effects are
ecologically and economically
tragic as they degrade water
supply and destroy aquaculture.
This then means government
money will be allocated to
the problem, which results in
financial losses. As the U.S. and
global population continues to
grow, these problems will likely
only become exacerbated.
Therefore,
change
is
pertinent, and solutions must
be
found
to
mitigate
the
transportation of these excess
nutrients in our water. According
to the study, researchers believe
the best solution is to reduce
the size of landfills, cover trash
more quickly or reduce the gull
population.
However,
these
solutions feel temporary and I
believe for long lasting impact
we have to mimic nature. What
I mean is that in the real world
there is no landfill. Instead,
materials
are
consistently
reused. Additionally, as species
die, their nutrients are given
back to the Earth and create
more life. Animals live in a
closed-loop:
Nothing
seems
to enter or leave the system,
everything just cycles back. This
cyclical model has sustained
life for billions of years, yet
the modern era of humans has
instituted a linear lifestyle as we
take, make and dispose.
Which poses the question:
How do we disrupt this cycle
and fight the problem at its core?
From an early age I was told
taught the three R’s as a way to
solve this problem. My teachers
encouraged me to reduce, reuse
and recycle, but this solution
just doesn’t cut it. As a capitalist
society fueled by materialistic
gain, reducing looks great on
paper, but it is not a feasible
solution. Since 1950 the average
home size has almost tripled,
making more room for material
goods and in turn moving in the
opposite direction of reductions
and making for an “irresponsible
American dream.” In terms of
reusing, for that I prompt the
question, when is the last time
you actually recommissioned a
product instead of donating it
to the dump? Additionally, we
are getting better at recycling,
but
with
China’s
ban
on
foreign waste recyclables, used
products are forming stockpiles
and going to waste before they
are even repurposed. Moreover,
when they are repurposed, it is
typically only once before they
eventually end up in a landfill.
This
all
prompts
the
question: What can we do to
mitigate trash intake and in
turn save the world? There is
no simple answer or perfect
solution. Humans are needy
creatures who constantly take
while leaving. The trash issue
permeating America and beyond
reminds me of a 1971 Pogo Earth
Day comic strip from Walt Kelly.
Porkypine says, “Ah, Pogo, the
beauty of the forest primeval
gets me in the heart.” Pogo
responds, “It gets me in the
feet, Porkypine.” Then, looking
over a forest of trash Porkypine
despairingly says, “It is hard
walkin’ on this stuff” to which
Pogo responds “Yep, son, we
have met the enemy and he is
us.” With no radical changes to
our consumption or material
habits, we will soon live in a
world of trash and deal with
the effects on humanity, the
environment and every other
facet of society imaginable.
Trash does not leave the Earth
— I know this from elementary
school. But what if trash could
never enter?
KRYSTAL HUR | COLUMN
The parent trap: Asian edition
2
018 and 2019 have thus far
been milestone years for
Asian Americans in the
entertainment industry. The 2018
smash-hit “Crazy Rich Asians”
was the first Hollywood movie
since “The Joy Luck Club,” released
over two decades ago, to feature all
Asian American leads. The movie
brought in more money than any
rom-com released in the last nine
years. Actress Sandra Oh won a
Golden Globe for Best Actress in a
Drama TV Series, making her the
first actress of Asian descent to win
for a leading role, or win multiple
Globes, in nearly 40 years. Oh also
hosted the event, using her platform
to jokingly call out actress Emma
Stone for her largely unquestioned
white-washed role as an Asian
American character in “Aloha.”
When Awkwafina hosted Saturday
Night Live in 2018, she was the first
Asian American woman to do so
since Lucy Liu in 2000; Sandra Oh
hosted in March of this year.
Even outside of Hollywood,
stars of Asian descent have risen
to celebrity status in the United
States. K-pop group BTS has made
appearances on noteworthy shows
such as Saturday Night Live, The
Tonight Show, Jimmy Kimmel
Live!, Ellen and more. They have
also performed at the 2018 Billboard
Music Awards, Dick Clark’s New
Year’s Rockin’ Eve, as well as
various other programs. They are
scheduled to perform their new
single “Boy with Luv” with Halsey
at the 2019 Billboard Music Awards.
Another prominent K-pop group,
BLACKPINK, appeared on Strahan
and Sara, The Late Show with
Stephen Colbert, Good Morning
America and recently performed at
Coachella.
While these trends suggest
that American popular culture is
becoming more welcoming toward
people of color, there remains
a trend among the treatment of
Asian American celebrities on TV
appearances that point towards
an inability to see them as Asian
Americans, rather than as Asians.
Unlike white people or other
people of color, Asian Americans,
as well as people of Asian descent
and of other nationalities such as
Asian Canadians, are often asked
about their parents. While Indian
Canadians are of course subjected
to a different set of social norms
specific to Canada, all people of
Asian descent tend to always be seen
strictly as being only Asian, whether
they’re Canadian, American, or of
another nationality. Thus, while
Americans and Canadians are the
most prominent celebrities of Asian
descent in American media, any
person of Asian descent and of a
non-Asian nationality would likely
receive the same treatment were
they to be thrust into the spotlight
in American culture. While this
may be unintentional on the
parts of TV hosts, such questions
are
problematic
because
they
demonstrate how public figures
of Asian descent, even at the most
successful they have ever been, are
othered by American media.
Indian-American
comedian
Hasan Minhaj recently appeared
on Ellen. At one point during his
interview, Ellen mentioned that his
parents, Seema and Najme, were in
the audience before asking Hasan,
“So, when did you start in stand-up
and how supportive were they?”
while briefly pointing to his parents.
This question was most likely pre-
planned between Minhaj and Ellen,
especially given that his parents
were in the audience and Minhaj
launched into a story following the
question that he’s told before on the
Deep Cuts segment of his Netflix
show, Patriot Act.
However, Ellen also asked actor
Steven Yeun, who is also Asian
American, about his parents when
he appeared on the show in 2014,
commenting, “So your parents —
then your parents were not happy
that you chose this profession.” She
asked him this after clarifying that
he was born in Seoul, South Korea
before moving to Saskatchewan and
later to Michigan. Furthermore,
when Sandra Oh first appeared on
the Ellen Show in in 2007, Ellen
started the interview by bringing
up a photo of Oh and her parents at
the Emmys, telling her, “They must
be so proud.” Ellen then asked more
questions about when Oh’s parents
immigrated to Canada, before
asking, “Were they proud like right
away? They were like, ‘Go and be an
actress.’”
Such
interviews
contrast
harshly with when Ellen has spoken
with celebrities not of Asian descent
on her show, such as her interview
with Zendaya, a Black actress.
Rather than asking whether her
parents supported her career, Ellen
conversed with Zendaya about
her relationship with her parents
instead. At one point, Ellen asked,
“how have you managed to stay out
of the young-child-actor-going-bad
thing?” Even though this would
have made a natural segue to asking
about Zendaya about her parents’
support (there were no such natural
transitions when Ellen abruptly
asked Minhaj, Yeun and Oh about
their parents), she didn’t do so. In
another interview with Allison
Janney, a white actress, Ellen didn’t
ask any questions about her parents
support either, even though Janney
brought them up in the interview
while talking about the holidays.
Ellen’s need to ask only her
guests of Asian descent about their
parents’ support, even when doing
so doesn’t fit in with the rest of
the interview, shows that there
still exists a clear divide between
how celebrities of Asian descent
and other celebrities are perceived
in American media. Unlike other
stars, celebrities of Asian descent
are not acknowledged as having
diverse
backgrounds
and
are
instead characterized by their
Asian immigrant parents. This
perpetuates
the
misconception
that all people of Asian descent
are homogeneous and reminds
audiences that they have immigrant
roots, which in turn implies
that they belong in Asia, not the
United States. Thus, when Ellen
asks guests like Yeun and Oh
about their parents’ support, she
simultaneously reduces them to
props to confirm American society’s
stereotypes about people of Asian
descent and puts their identities
into question.
Even when they aren’t asked
about their parents’ support or lack
thereof, talk show hosts always
seem to find a way to ask celebrities
of Asian descent about their parents:
Conan asked Yeun’s parents how
they reacted to his love scenes on
The Walking Dead, Jimmy Kimmel
asked Asian Canadian comedian
Lilly Singh about her parents after
she appeared on his show and
Jimmy Fallon asked Singh about
her skits where she imitates her
parents, rather than her numerous
other segments.
Celebrities such as Yeun’s and
Singh’s success in the United States
is mostly unprecedented, since
there have historically only been
a few celebrities of Asian descent
in American culture and even
fewer who reach this same level of
prominence. As a result, TV hosts
struggle to reconcile the Asian
parts of these celebrities’ identities
with the American part. Because
the only “Asian American story”
they are familiar with is that of the
immigrant, or child with immigrant
parents, interviewers such as Ellen
ask celebrities of Asian descent
about
their
parents’
support,
expecting them to explain that
their immigrant parents were not
supportive and then delve into their
parents’ “immigrant story.”
However,
such
questions
also establish celebrities of Asian
decent as “others,” whose roles
in American society is to bolster
the
United
States’
reputation
as a country where anyone can
succeed. Ellen wasn’t interested in
Oh or Minhaj’s parents as actual
people when she asked about them.
She was interested in how they
fulfill their stereotypical roles as
immigrant tiger parents whose
exterior eventually cracks when
they see how the United States has
allowed their children to succeed.
Questions about parents ultimately
undermine
the
American
or
Canadian part of these celebrities’
identities, and depict them as being
only Asian.
This
explains
why
such
questions are limited to only
celebrities
of
Asian
descent
who grew up in predominantly
English
speaking
countries.
Neither members of BTS nor
BLACKPINK have been asked
questions about their parents
in any of their interviews in the
United States. This is because their
otherness is already established.
They are Korean, not American,
and they perform K-pop, which is
decidedly not an American music
genre. Thus, there’s no need for
TV hosts to remind themselves or
their guests of the artists’ roots in
Asia, or attempt to reconcile any
complex parts of their identities.
They also may have no idea that
BLACKPINK members Rosé and
Lisa are Korean-Australian and
Thai respectively, since it is likely
that they assume all K-pop artists
are Korean.
TV hosts need to stop asking
celebrities of Asian descent about
their parents. They need to stop
expecting them to talk about
their ethnicities and their own or
parents’ stories as immigrants.
Such stories are deeply personal,
and while all of the celebrities
mentioned in this article have
seemed open to speaking about
these topics, such questions often
feel invasive and act in the same
way that a huge, blaring, “You don’t
belong here” sign would. There
are more to these celebrities than
their parents or their ethnicities,
and while such parts of their story
are important, they should not
feel obligated to speak about their
“immigrant backstories” because
they are of Asian descent. There’s
so much more to people of Asian
descent than their ancestry, and
it’s high time America recognizes
that.
I
rediscovered
composer
Johann Sebastian Bach’s
cello suites this past fall
during a period with lots of
work and little motivation. I
needed something to focus my
mind on the tasks at hand. So, I
turned to Bach to aid my quest
for concentration. It ultimately
worked, and soon his cello
suites became a powerful study
tool, allowing me to spend
hours on work that seemed
insurmountable before.
Viewing Bach as a study tool,
not as sublime art, is a product
of a culture that encourages
us to spend much of our time
in what I call Haze. Haze is
marked by semi-consciousness
usually for the purpose of work.
It is the cousin of Flow (or
being in “the zone”), a mental
state characterized by clear,
prolonged attention to a task.
Flow arises naturally, usually
when you are doing something
challenging
and
rewarding.
Haze is artificial and forced.
And it’s the default mental state
of our generation.
Our days are spent with
earbuds in, never fully listening,
but always with a companion
muffling any thoughts we may
have. Our social media addiction
serves
the
same
purpose.
Scrolling,
liking,
refreshing,
never just sitting and thinking.
Work is mind-numbingly long,
fueled by tools ranging from
Bach to Adderall and adheres to
the glorification of the “rise and
grind” mentality.
We
know
we’re
missing
out
on
something.
That’s
why we practice 20 minutes
of mindfulness every day — a
window of clarity. But even
that is labeled as “self-care,” an
opportunity to “recharge” for
the work ahead.
How did we get here?
As Anne Petersen explains
in “How Millennials Became
The
Burnout
Generation”,
millennials (defined here as
mostly white, largely middle
class) were raised to expect that
overachievement would lead to
the good life. But that promise
has not been kept. No longer is
a college education the ticket
to a stable job, and no longer is
a stable job enough. That stable
job also needs to be “cool” and
something
you’re
passionate
about.
So,
we
optimize,
constantly angling for The Job,
racking up resumé stuffers as
we go.
This
culture
is
self-
reinforcing — as more people
adopt it, others are forced to
adopt in order to compete,
and soon we’re stuck in place,
but working harder than ever
before. Companies are the main
beneficiaries of this race to
nowhere, reaping profits from a
talent pool that does more and
demands less.
To cope, we tell ourselves
we love work, and that our
work is meaningful. Companies
have caught on, rebranding
themselves with slogans that
are versions of “making the
world a better place.” Dropbox,
a company that lets you upload
files, says its purpose is to
“unleash the world’s creative
energy by designing a more
enlightened way of working.”
WeWork
locations
are
monuments to hustle culture.
Water coolers are branded with
statements like “Don’t stop
when you’re tired. Stop when
you are done,” and neon signs
urge you to “Do what you love”
and “Hustle harder.”
It’s no coincidence that Haze
is a contemporary affliction.
In the age of Silicon Valley,
there are no clear lines between
work and play. Email and Slack
ensure employees are always
accessible, while technologies
once
reserved
for
social
interactions are increasingly
being used to create a personal
brand. We show off our fun
side on Snapchat, document
our travels and interests on
Instagram,
get
political
on
Twitter and perfect the humble
brag on LinkedIn. Maintaining
this brand takes time and
energy,
ensuring
we
are
constantly performing, never
simply doing.
This is a culture where
as
Anne
Petersen
puts
it,
“Everything that’s good is bad,
everything that’s bad is good.”
Everything that should feel
good, like not working, feels
bad,
while
everything
that
should feel bad, like working all
the time, feels good.
So
hobbies
have
become
hustles. Pursuing something
you merely enjoy has become
pointless,
even
selfish.
We
should
rather
pursue
what
we’re good at, monetizing it or
using it to help someone else.
What leisure time we do have
is dedicated to screens, because
they are low commitment and
Haze inducing.
Becoming
aware
of
all
this is comforting. It helps to
explain some of my habits,
making them not inevitable or
intrinsic, but simply products of
a common, but not inescapable
environment. We can choose
a different path. A path where
Bach is art to be cherished, not
a tool to be wielded. A path
where self-reflection and Flow
are the rule – not the exception.
This reminds me of a quote
from Mitch Albom’s memoir
“Tuesdays
with
Morrie.”
Albom’s
beloved
Professor
Morrie advises that “you have
to be strong enough to say if the
culture doesn’t work, don’t buy
it. Create your own.”
Fighting “the Haze”
Krystal Hur can be reached at
kryshur@umich.edu.
How to battle the ebb and flow of trash
CHAND RAJENDRA-NICOLUCCI | COLUMN
Chand Rajendra-Nicolucci can be
reached at chandrn@umich.edu.
Sam Sugerman can be reached at
samsug@umich.edu.
SAM SUGERMAN | COLUMN
Public figures of Asian
descent, even at the
most successful they’ve
ever been, are othered
by the American media