KCI등재
이주와 디아스포라― 중국영화에 재현된 뉴욕의 중국인 = Migration and Diaspora― Chinese in New York Represented in Chinese Film
저자
발행기관
학술지명
권호사항
발행연도
2008
작성언어
Korean
주제어
등재정보
KCI등재
자료형태
학술저널
수록면
99-133(35쪽)
KCI 피인용횟수
5
제공처
This paper focuses on the representation in Chinese films of the Chinese immigrants in New York as a part of the Chinese ‘global migration.’ The global-scale migration of Chinese has first concentrated in Southeast Asia during the pre-modern era and then in North America in the modern and contemporary periods. Whereas immigrants to Southeast Asia departed directly from their hometown, the immigrants to North America arrived in New York via San Francisco, passing through cities of ‘regional migration’ such as Shanghai and Hong Kong. Sometimes, they also passed through Taipei. Thus, we can draw an itinerary line of modern Chinese global migration from their hometown, via Shanghai, Hong Kong and Taipei, and finally to New York. This itinerary falls into two stages: the journey from their hometown to Taipei falls into the regional migration stage and the one from China to North America belongs to the global migration stage. In retrospect, most Chinese immigrants to New York have in fact departed from Shanghai and Hong Kong. Indeed, Shanghai and Hong Kong, once well-known cities for domestic immigrants, functioned as gateways for international migration. This means that the Chinese who migrated to New York had two migration experiences: first from their hometown to Shanghai or Hong Kong and then the second to New York.
As a representative city of global migration, New York has been a destination for European immigrants from England, Ireland, Germany, France and Italy, followed by African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians. Although all of them flocked into New York in search of the ‘American Dream,’ settling down in New York was a story of continuous hardship. Especially, the hostility and conflict among different immigrant communities in their attempts to overthrow the existing ‘hierarchial structure of power’ were interspersed with feud and violence. Diaspora is related to the nostalgic behavior of those who do not forget their hometown and preserve their native customs (or practices considered to be customs), notwithstanding their physical existence away from home. Though it has generally been regarded that the diaspora began with the migration of Jews, there has long been a global migration of Chinese and Indians, followed by contemporary global migration of Koreans. Wang Gungwu points out that the ‘Chinese nationalist identity’ that was formed among overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia after 1911 developed as the ‘local national identity’ after 1950. However, ‘Chineseness’ is still problematic. This is because Chinese immigrants did not think of themselves as deserting their homeland, but believed that they would someday return home in glory. Even though they acquired a new citizenship, they still thought that they were only staying there temporarily, rather than settling down permanently. Here we need to take a look at Stuart Hall’s notion of ‘migrant-hood.’ According to him, each and every immigrant faces two questions: “Why are you here?” and “When are you going back?” The immigrant cannot realize the fact that he or she is not going back until being asked the second question. Migration is a one-way trip. We should pay attention to the dual consciousness: still dreaming for coming back in glory while knowing that he or she is not going back.
The Chinese immigrants in New York, as a representative type of modern Chinese migration, embody this dual consciousness. As for the first generation, they have the experience of moving first to Shanghai or Hong Kong from their hometowns (‘regional migration’) and then again ultimately to New York (‘global migration’). Because of this dual experience, they possess a different diasporic identity from the one shared by overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia. Since they immigrated directly from their hometowns, the overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia have maintained a strong group identity based on dialect. However, Chinese immigrants in New ...
This paper focuses on the representation in Chinese films of the Chinese immigrants in New York as a part of the Chinese ‘global migration.’ The global-scale migration of Chinese has first concentrated in Southeast Asia during the pre-modern era and then in North America in the modern and contemporary periods. Whereas immigrants to Southeast Asia departed directly from their hometown, the immigrants to North America arrived in New York via San Francisco, passing through cities of ‘regional migration’ such as Shanghai and Hong Kong. Sometimes, they also passed through Taipei. Thus, we can draw an itinerary line of modern Chinese global migration from their hometown, via Shanghai, Hong Kong and Taipei, and finally to New York. This itinerary falls into two stages: the journey from their hometown to Taipei falls into the regional migration stage and the one from China to North America belongs to the global migration stage. In retrospect, most Chinese immigrants to New York have in fact departed from Shanghai and Hong Kong. Indeed, Shanghai and Hong Kong, once well-known cities for domestic immigrants, functioned as gateways for international migration. This means that the Chinese who migrated to New York had two migration experiences: first from their hometown to Shanghai or Hong Kong and then the second to New York.
As a representative city of global migration, New York has been a destination for European immigrants from England, Ireland, Germany, France and Italy, followed by African-Americans, Hispanics, and Asians. Although all of them flocked into New York in search of the ‘American Dream,’ settling down in New York was a story of continuous hardship. Especially, the hostility and conflict among different immigrant communities in their attempts to overthrow the existing ‘hierarchial structure of power’ were interspersed with feud and violence. Diaspora is related to the nostalgic behavior of those who do not forget their hometown and preserve their native customs (or practices considered to be customs), notwithstanding their physical existence away from home. Though it has generally been regarded that the diaspora began with the migration of Jews, there has long been a global migration of Chinese and Indians, followed by contemporary global migration of Koreans. Wang Gungwu points out that the ‘Chinese nationalist identity’ that was formed among overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia after 1911 developed as the ‘local national identity’ after 1950. However, ‘Chineseness’ is still problematic. This is because Chinese immigrants did not think of themselves as deserting their homeland, but believed that they would someday return home in glory. Even though they acquired a new citizenship, they still thought that they were only staying there temporarily, rather than settling down permanently. Here we need to take a look at Stuart Hall’s notion of ‘migrant-hood.’ According to him, each and every immigrant faces two questions: “Why are you here?” and “When are you going back?” The immigrant cannot realize the fact that he or she is not going back until being asked the second question. Migration is a one-way trip. We should pay attention to the dual consciousness: still dreaming for coming back in glory while knowing that he or she is not going back.
The Chinese immigrants in New York, as a representative type of modern Chinese migration, embody this dual consciousness. As for the first generation, they have the experience of moving first to Shanghai or Hong Kong from their hometowns (‘regional migration’) and then again ultimately to New York (‘global migration’). Because of this dual experience, they possess a different diasporic identity from the one shared by overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia. Since they immigrated directly from their hometowns, the overseas Chinese in Southeast Asia have maintained a strong group identity based on dialect. However, Chinese immigrants in New Yo...
분석정보
연월일 | 이력구분 | 이력상세 | 등재구분 |
---|---|---|---|
2027 | 평가예정 | 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증) | |
2021-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) | KCI등재 |
2018-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | KCI등재 |
2015-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | KCI등재 |
2011-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | KCI등재 |
2009-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | KCI등재 |
2007-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | KCI등재 |
2005-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | KCI등재 |
2002-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) | KCI등재 |
1999-07-01 | 평가 | 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) | KCI후보 |
기준연도 | WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) | KCIF(2년) | KCIF(3년) |
---|---|---|---|
2016 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.36 |
KCIF(4년) | KCIF(5년) | 중심성지수(3년) | 즉시성지수 |
0.37 | 0.34 | 0.589 | 0.43 |
서지정보 내보내기(Export)
닫기소장기관 정보
닫기권호소장정보
닫기오류접수
닫기오류 접수 확인
닫기음성서비스 신청
닫기음성서비스 신청 확인
닫기이용약관
닫기학술연구정보서비스 이용약관 (2017년 1월 1일 ~ 현재 적용)
학술연구정보서비스(이하 RISS)는 정보주체의 자유와 권리 보호를 위해 「개인정보 보호법」 및 관계 법령이 정한 바를 준수하여, 적법하게 개인정보를 처리하고 안전하게 관리하고 있습니다. 이에 「개인정보 보호법」 제30조에 따라 정보주체에게 개인정보 처리에 관한 절차 및 기준을 안내하고, 이와 관련한 고충을 신속하고 원활하게 처리할 수 있도록 하기 위하여 다음과 같이 개인정보 처리방침을 수립·공개합니다.
주요 개인정보 처리 표시(라벨링)
목 차
3년
또는 회원탈퇴시까지5년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한3년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한2년
이상(개인정보보호위원회 : 개인정보의 안전성 확보조치 기준)개인정보파일의 명칭 | 운영근거 / 처리목적 | 개인정보파일에 기록되는 개인정보의 항목 | 보유기간 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
학술연구정보서비스 이용자 가입정보 파일 | 한국교육학술정보원법 | 필수 | ID, 비밀번호, 성명, 생년월일, 신분(직업구분), 이메일, 소속분야, 웹진메일 수신동의 여부 | 3년 또는 탈퇴시 |
선택 | 소속기관명, 소속도서관명, 학과/부서명, 학번/직원번호, 휴대전화, 주소 |
구분 | 담당자 | 연락처 |
---|---|---|
KERIS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 정보보호본부 김태우 | - 이메일 : lsy@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0439 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0195 |
KERIS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 개인정보보호부 이상엽 | |
RISS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 대학학술본부 장금연 | - 이메일 : giltizen@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0149 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0194 |
RISS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 학술진흥부 길원진 |
자동로그아웃 안내
닫기인증오류 안내
닫기귀하께서는 휴면계정 전환 후 1년동안 회원정보 수집 및 이용에 대한
재동의를 하지 않으신 관계로 개인정보가 삭제되었습니다.
(참조 : RISS 이용약관 및 개인정보처리방침)
신규회원으로 가입하여 이용 부탁 드리며, 추가 문의는 고객센터로 연락 바랍니다.
- 기존 아이디 재사용 불가
휴면계정 안내
RISS는 [표준개인정보 보호지침]에 따라 2년을 주기로 개인정보 수집·이용에 관하여 (재)동의를 받고 있으며, (재)동의를 하지 않을 경우, 휴면계정으로 전환됩니다.
(※ 휴면계정은 원문이용 및 복사/대출 서비스를 이용할 수 없습니다.)
휴면계정으로 전환된 후 1년간 회원정보 수집·이용에 대한 재동의를 하지 않을 경우, RISS에서 자동탈퇴 및 개인정보가 삭제처리 됩니다.
고객센터 1599-3122
ARS번호+1번(회원가입 및 정보수정)