The Dimensions of Multicultural Literature

I've just finished four articles that have been grouped as an "insider/outsider" debate, written by Patrick Shannon, Rudine Sims Bishop, Violet J. Harris, and Mingshui Cai. Each has a different focus, but I see the question less about the insider/outsider question and more about how we define multicultural literature (which then decides who can be inside and who is left outside). From the body of readings, I find that the box containing multicultural literature is two dimensional.

The first dimension, which I will call breadth, is that it must work across all of society to make a change - breadth should make the work available to everyone. In many ways, breadth has more to do with reception and use of multicultural literature than with creation of it. Breadth restricts the category of multicultural literature in that it does not include books about the mainstream or books that maintain the current system with its prejudices and injustices. Some questions to ask about a piece of literature to evaluate it for this are:

Does it change the definition and reality of America so that equality, freedom, and justice are truly valued (Shannon 1994, pp. 5)? Does it include everyone in the discussion of the status quo is such a way that the status quo will not be maintained (Sims Bishop 1994, pp. 7)? Does it work to decentralize the power of the mainstream culture (Cai 1998, pp. 313)? Can it be integrated into the curriculum instead of added as an appendix (Cai 1998, pp. 317)?

The other dimension might be described as depth, and it relates more to the individual culture being represented. Because of the demands of depth, only those inside the multicultural "box" or those willing to do very careful research (to the point of becoming insiders in the culture themselves, if this is considered possible) will be able to create truly multicultural literature. Some questions that should be asked to evaluate the depth of a piece are:

Are the major characters from the culture that is supposed to be represented? Is the story told from their perspective in a setting that reflects their community? Does the text include some means of identifying the characters as from that culture (Sims Bishop 1994, pp. 6)? Does it acknowledge that all writers belong to a culture, nation, language and history which will shape their worldview (Harris 1994, pp. 12)? Does it provide a new perspective on the world for the reader (Cai 1998, pp. 318)?

It is important to note, also, that the demands of depth require us to see different communities within the multicultural "box." An African American heterosexual male who has grown up in the United States will not be able to tell the story of an Asian American homosexual woman who immigrated from Vietnam at the age of ten without doing significant research himself, just as "Shannon the Canon" could not. At the same time, breadth requires that we not create a restriction on multicultural literature - doing so would only create another canon that excludes people from the discussion.

To write a book of breadth and depth, then, is a tall order for a multicultural author, and to read a book of such dimensions should be equally demanding for a reader. However, such a challenge is exactly the field of multicultural literature.