The identities we hold and choose to represent to those around us are complex. In modern society with the intermixing of people questions of identity rise to the surface which we must address. In Melanie Cheng’s novel Australia Day and further in the short story also called Australia Day Cheng uses comparison to elucidate upon our own prejudices and stereotypes and uncovers our own insecurities within the Australian racial climate.

Get Help With Your Essay
If you need assistance with writing your essay, our professional essay writing service is here to help!
Essay Writing Service

The question of identity and the manipulation of how we present ourselves to assimilate into our surroundings depicts the level of loyalty and confidence that we have in our identity. In the short story Australia Day Stanley’s desire to not only fit in to Jessica’s life but also become more than friends compromises his confidence and true identity. Cheng portrays his attempts to conform to the Australian culture and identity as jarred to draw attention to how in Australia he is effectively the ‘other’:

“Did you know that forty per cent of people who fly Australian flags would still support the White Australia policy?’ Stanley asks when the song has finished.

“Did you know that ninety per cent of statistics are made up on the spot?’ she [Jessica] says.

(Cheng 2017)

The representation of Stanley’s haphazard struggle to connect shows juxtaposition between Stanley’s and Jessica’s stance. Whereas Stanley seems to be only making conversation Jessica’s quip in return is defensive and mocking diminishing Stanley’s confidence in not only his knowledge and place in Australia but also his emotional space with Jessica creating disconnect. This is a notion that is fostered in his vulnerability, “He’s going to hate me, isn’t he?’ Stanley asks. Jess waves a finger at the glove box. ‘Pass me my sunnies.” (Cheng 2017) The separation between the pair is furthered here as Jessica’s lack of reciprocation shows emotional and physical barriers influenced by Jessica’s father’s perception of people of colour, specifically Asian in this case. He is an inevitable obstacle Stanley must pass to become not only part of Jessica’s family but to feel accepted into Australian culture and society. As such Cheng shows us that it is the confidence to be comfortable that allows the fluid expression of identity.

Matters of conflict regarding racism in modern society are dealt with in a multitude of ways. It is not uncommon to speak up and to reject negative stereotypes which diminish value and culture in countries around the world, especially in those of western descent, however the Australian perspective on race and sense of identity is not so easily defined as it is a country plagued with a very recent racist past and present. Cheng’s representation of Stanley is that of submission, one that is easily identified through his own words: “The British have a saying,’ Stanley says, loudly, so everybody can hear, ‘Chinese people eat everything with four legs…except the table.” (Cheng 2017) The fact that Stanley panders to the racial stereotypes of the western world and as a result trivialising the east, and more specifically Chinese culture, is disconcerting as he silently imposes his belief that to be a true Australian he must adopt a racist persona. This action implies the acceptance and encouragement of Neville’s racial commentary upon the ‘materialism’ of the east:

‘They love all that stuff, don’t they?’ Neville goes on. ‘Watches and cars and handbags.’

Stanley thinks of his cousin, Mei, who worked her summer holidays to buy a Chanel clutch.

(Cheng 2017)

Neville’s shallow understanding of the eastern world, and more specifically Hong Kong residents, shows a narrow perception of lifestyle and cultural phenomena away from western civilisation. In comparison, Stanley has experienced both sides of the divide as a resident and deposes Neville’s insinuation of the materialism of the eastern world with anecdotal evidence, noting that material items only come with hard work. However, Stanley’s silence juxtaposed against Neville’s blatant remarks say more about his submission to western dominance than his loyalties to his ethnicity, a point that is extenuated in Neville’s continuing rant: ‘They all want their kids to be doctors. The hotel doormen. The waiters. The taxi drivers. Everyone.’ Neville’s superficial understanding of the aspirations of eastern parenting furthers our impression of his barely beneath the surface racism. The contradiction between his criticism of Asian parents followed by his affirmation that he is not an overbearing parent is apparent as he says he “was hoping that one of them would take over the farm one day.” (Cheng 2017) Stanley’s submission is a commonality throughout the story despite evidence of internal conflict.

When faced with an awkward situation while visiting the parents of your Australian friend (who is not yet your girlfriend but who you hope, some day, might be), the most appropriate response would be:

A) Apologise—because, after all, it is always your fault.

B) Empathise—e.g., ‘This must be really hard for you.’

C) Stand up for yourself—e.g., ‘I don’t have to put up with this.’

D) Brush it off—e.g., ‘No worries, mate.’

After a moment of deep thought, Stanley opts for D.

(Cheng 2017)

Here, Melanie Cheng forces us to participate in Stanley’s journey – a choice that may expose our own stance in Stanley’s and our own Australian narrative. She highlights that, to Stanley Jess is no ordinary friend, apart from being his love interest she is also Australian, a crucial factor in his decision. Stanley’s glorification of Jessica and thus her being Australian invites us to compare if this might be the situation if he was pining after someone of the same culture/ethnicity as him. Our choice as readers, and what we feel should be his choice elucidates our own racial preferences and forces us to identify or empathise with Stanley’s plight. It is this encouragement in interaction in the text that us as readers question our choice to reject or accept what is right to preserve identity.

Melanie Cheng’s short story Australia Day highlights the unmistakable racial tension that exists presently within Australian society and the internal divide this creates between people of colour and particularly white Australians. It is in the aversion of conflict that the promotion of submission arises for people of colour to harmonise with the Australian identity which in turn creates a vicious cycle for racial stereotypes and oppression. Cheng’s invitation for us to critique character behaviours and the analysis of our own choices within Australia Day encourages confidence within our own identities.

Part II

The idea of the Borderland is one of uncrossed territory, endless possibility, it is on the precipice of the future and is a state of transition. Our human psyche is similarly in constant state of flux as it is a product of external forces – the oppressions we have suffered and freedoms we have tasted. We internalise these forces and let them mould our identities. Audre Lorde explains “For we have built into all of us, old blueprints of expectation and response, old structures of oppression…” (Lorde 1996), this notion is one that is heavily explored in Gloria E. Anzaldúa’s novel Borderlands/La Frontera a novel inwhich Anzaldúa proposes to us the release of these shackles, these “old blueprints” (Lorde 1996) that mould us and instead let us gain control and draw out the blueprints of the future for ourselves, first internally and then externally.

Our spirits are influenced by what is rooted in reality. Histories of violence and our tight grasp on negatives rather than the positive is human instinct and it is what has allowed us to thrive and to learn from our mistakes. Yet we can never truly hold on to our past as it is not physical, and it is everchanging in the boundaries of our mind and psyches, but we must come to accept it to enforce change. Anzaldúa reinforces this notion,

Awareness of our situation must come before inner changes, which in turn come before changes in society. Nothing happens in the “real” world unless it first happens in the images in our heads.

(Anzaldúa 2012)

It is the violence in fighting with yourself that is more jarring and damaging than the fight with the outside world, but it is the initial shock to the system that forces the “change to happen” (Lorde 1996) and later gives the ability to shake reality. In this change Anzaldúa’s response and ours subsequently should depose the concrete structures of society and incite the freedom to choose to be, and to change. However, the returning waves and tides of internalised oppression are described by Anzaldúa through the metaphor of the toad as it rears its head to infiltrate her progress in self-determination, “the toad comes out of its hiding place inside the lobes of my brain. It’s going to happen again. The ghost of the toad that betrayed me – I hold it in my hand.” (Anzaldúa 2012) The toad is a representation of her past identity moulded by the powers above her such as political and societal boundaries, and her own perceptions beckoning her back into old ways and mindsets, one that her betrayal (the conception of her new identity) against what was ordained by the oppression placed upon her only draws further comparison to bring a state of anxiety. It is only this experience that allows reflection upon her/our state that wills her to act to evoke the solidification of current identity.

It is like a cactus needle embedded in the flesh. It worries itself deeper and deeper, and I keep aggravating it by poking at it. When it begins to fester I have to do something to put an end to the aggravation and to figure out why I have it. I get deep down into the place where its rooted in my skin and pluck away at it, playing it like a musical instrument – the fingers pressing, making the pain worse before it can get better. Then out it comes. No more discomfort, no more ambivalence. Until another needle pierces the skin.

(Anzaldúa 2012)

Anzaldúa grounds herself in her new identity and self-belief to “fashion my own gods out of my entrails” (Anzaldúa 2012) symbolising and asserting the self-induced ability to make an impact on the world. It is here where she outlines the mestiza culture to build “with my own lumber, my own bricks and mortar” (Anzaldúa 2012) using the stereotypes of the South American, independent, hardy labourers in conjunction with her radical “feminist architecture” (Anzaldúa 2012) to build her own sense of self and her viewpoint on the world around her.

It is the accumulation of these experiences and the solidification of identity as a result of not the rejection of oppression or the past, as it will always exist, but the acceptance of these violent histories that allow the initiation and continuation of change. It is the strength Anzaldúa realises to continue on the journey daily, to “address” (Lorde 1996) and to “alter” (Lorde 1996the oppression to your own will that allows you to wield power over your own life. This power, her talent and her voice, is one that she metaphorically depicts through a vampire.

This vampire which is my talent does not suffer other suitors. Daily I court it, offer my neck to its teeth. This is the sacrifice that the act of creation requires, a blood sacrifice. For only through the body, through the pulling of flesh, can the human soul be transformed. And for images, words, stories to have this transformative power, they must arise from the human body–flesh and bone–and from the Earth’s body–stone, sky, liquid, soil. This work, these images, piercing tongue or ear lobes with cactus needle, are my offerings, are my Aztecan blood sacrifices.

(Anzaldúa 2012)

Again, she emphasises that it is the fight within your own mind against what has be taught that is the most violent and gruesome. For Anzaldúa it is the choice to leave the comforts of home, the place where she should exist physically and mentally genuinely that is the epitome of change. Her rejection of what is comfortable, and the rules imposed by ones loved were her path, and her way of altering her “living conditions” (Lorde 1996) on her step to change the world around her.

I had to leave home so I could find myself, find my own intrinsic nature buried under the personality that had been imposed on me.

(Anzaldúa 2012)

It is because of these choices to address these “old structures of oppression” (Lorde 1996) that Anzaldúa’s identity has been morphed and it because of her metamorphosis that she has become the change in her own life and thus become a vessel for change externally. Her position on the Borderlands, her gender, and her sexuality among other aspects have not only been sources of oppression but sources of freedom from the shackles and defined “blueprints” (Lorde 1996) of the past. It is only Anzaldúa right after all her trials and tribulations that she can declare, “I will have my serpent’s tongue – my woman’s voice, my sexual voice, my poet’s voice. I will overcome the tradition of silence.” (Anzaldúa 2012)

References

Anzaldúa, Gloria. 2012. Borderlands: La Frontera: The New Mestiza. 4th ed. San Francisco: Aunt Lute Books.

Cheng, Melanie. 2017. Australia Day. https://www.overdrive.com/search?q=33BCC8E6-3FE7-4585-BE9D-03A7B2CBCE53.

Lorde, Audre. “Age, Race, Class, and Sex: Women Redefining Difference.” In Audre Lorde Compendium: Essays, Speeches, and Journals. London: Pandora, 1996, pp. 162–171.