Multiculturalism In Tripmaster's Monkey

1660 Words4 Pages

Tripmaster’s Monkey: “One Man Show” Maxine Hong Kingston’s Tripmaster’s Monkey: His Fake Story (1989) is a “book” about the “West …meeting West” (Kingston 308). She borrows heavily from Chinese myths and legends but at the same time she also alludes to Hollywood movies, western literary tradition and western authors, and strives for some sort of amalgamation of the two. The focus of the novel keeps on shifting from “synthesis to multiplicity” (Janette 145) and the definition of a new form of democracy which accords recognition to this multiculturalism without being exclusionist. Wittman’s play is the “stage” where all the minorities – Japanese, Chinese, Mexican, African American, etc – come together to confront the White America.
The protagonist, …show more content…

On the other hand, American literature and pop culture is also not left untouched. He is a man but is constantly being addressed as a woman. His grandmother calls him “honey girl” while the author states that the narrator of the novel is a female and that is why Wittman, who is a “macho spirit…struggles with her and fights with her and refuses to accept reality” (Tanner 69). This again seems to support the notion that the actual struggle is taking place within him. He has to resolve his problems first, dissolve the binaries that he is living with and only then can he become the “one”, the teacher of all. Deeney …show more content…

Other Chinese writers like the Lin sisters make an appearance in the improvisation of Wittman’s script. It is he/narrator who writes their dialogues and then even acts out their part for them. This might mean an underlying sense of unity amongst “his people” despite the fact that they differ so much from each other. There are distinctions even within the “orientals” – Americans of Japanese Ancestry are different from Chinese-Americans/Chinese Americans. However this sense of “togetherness” is doubtful because of their careful maintenance of a distance from each other. Thus at the end there is a sense of the skeletal presence of a “heterogeneous community” where multiplicity is an accepted trait but it is not clear. Nonetheless Wittman stays out of its purview. He always “acts” as the spectator for the budding communities – for instance at his mother’s and father’s place. He is always on the outside looking in. Through his recognition they are identified as entities different from his “individual” self. Thus, reminiscent of the manner in which he acts in front of the caretaker of the community center, playing all the roles by changing expression and tone, he is “performing” both as the actor and the audience till the end – the whole of theatre wrapped into

Open Document