Hana Lee
Prospectus
Re-examining the ‘Heartland’:
Korean American religious and ethnic identity formations in the Midwest
Introduction
Scholarship on religion in Korean America has explored gender politics in the church,
transmission of culture to the second generation through religion, the function of ethnic identity in
the church, the role of the church in Korean America, its history, and religiosity amongst the second
generation. Scholars, largely from sociology and history, have researched and examined the
meanings of such aspects of Korean American identity for decades, and recognized its importance in
better understanding who Korean Americans are and how that is shaped by religion. However, these
explorations largely study Korean Americans in areas highly populated by Korean Americans, many
having ethnic enclaves and enterprises. One area of research that some scholars pose as areas for
further study, that has not been adequately addressed, is whether these arguments hold true where
Korean Americans do not have access to co-ethnic populations and communities. Park (2013)
suggests, “Further research should consider exploring these patterns in other contexts where Korean
Americans are fewer in number, and where the opportunities to find a marital spouse with the same
ethnicity or participate in a second-generation congregation are scarce” (p. 133). Similarly, Kang et
al. (2010) writes about the need in future research to look at Korean American youth who have little
exposure to ethnic communities (p. 460). This is also a critical time in Asian American studies where
questions of regionalism are being asked and explored. The Association for Asian American Studies’
2015 annual conference in Evanston, Illinois will be “The Trans/national Imaginary: Global cities
and racial borderlands,” where one of their proposed questions is “How have their settlement
patterns shifted the spatial imaginary towards not only of the urban but also the suburban and rural?
How do Asian/Americans and Pacific Islanders transfigure the “heartlands” of American into
“borderlands1”? I mention this to point out another way, in academic institutions, fields are
redefining not only where immigrant and racial minority groups are today but also what their identity
formation processes are like in these unexplored spaces.
It is clear this void of research is being identified as one that would be important to analyze.
These questions are still unanswered, and we still do not know how the proportion of Korean
Americans in the local population affects processes of identity formation and ethnic religious
practices and identities. Therefore, I plan to study these processes in the Midwest, where Korean
immigrants make up a smaller proportion of the local population. My research aims to fill this void
and explore Korean American religious identity where Korean Americans are not as highly
populated as areas such as Los Angeles or New York, where much of the literature currently
focuses. My central research questions are concerned with ethnic and religious identity, how place
and population affects this dynamic, and what the consequences of these processes are: How do
Korean American Christians in the Midwest understand and experience the intersection of religious and ethnic
identity? How does being in the Midwest affect ethnic and religious identity formation and practices compared to this
population where there is greater access to co-ethnics?
To answer these questions, I will be employing an interdisciplinary and qualitative (discussed
later) approach. Providing an interdisciplinary lens provides a way of “seeing the whole instead of
1
http://aaastudies.org/content/index.php/conference/call-for-papers
1
just the disciplinary parts. A wider perspective would merge limited, specialized concerns and
identify inter-relationships” (Klein 1990: p. 95). American studies is an interdisciplinary field that has
a long tradition of centralizing discussions of race, class, and gender with social justice and activist
motives. Thus, taking existing discussions from the sociology of religion and Asian American
studies, and applying an American studies mindset and approach will add necessary depth to the
meaning of these topics. Framing this research with questions that challenge boundaries of identity
formation with a critical approach to methodology will further current discussions of religion and
identity.
At this moment, I take a step back to present how my dissertation project was conceived as
a contribution to this new sociology of religion in American Studies. This project has been informed
by personal experiences and observations just as much as academic endeavors and scholarly texts.
As an undergraduate student, the central question that led to my senior thesis was, how and why is it
that at least at one point in their lives, nearly all of the Korean Americans that I knew, and that my
friends and family knew, had some connection to Christianity or the Korean church, regardless of
whether they identify as Christian or not?
My own observations led me to believe there was something more to this question than
what met my eyes and mind. And at this point, I did not have the intellectual tools to name these
processes I observed and experienced. Taking Professor David Yoo’s2 course on Asian American
History and Professor Albert Park’s3 course on Modern Korean History helped provide a historical
context to my literary training, of the earliest connections between Korea and Christianity through
American missionaries, which helped to partially answer this question. As an English major, I then
took my understandings of these various connections from Korean American history and modern
Korean history to the landscape of Korean American literature: how was Christianity portrayed in
Korean American texts? How was it described, what role did it have in the lives of the various
characters? What purpose did it serve? I attempted to answer such questions in my undergraduate
thesis, which spurred me towards my American Studies Master’s thesis: “The Reception of Free Food
for Millionaires: De-Centering the Academy via Amazon.”
The question that my undergraduate thesis could not directly answer because of its singular
approach was: what did the literary portrayals say about lived experiences of Korean Americans
themselves, and how was this perceived by the readers both ethnic Koreans and non-Koreans? This
is where reception studies became an effective tool, and I began thinking beyond the humanities and
started looking to the social sciences. Privileging the voices of the readers themselves through an
Internet medium in this Master’s thesis, and my personal experiences of traveling to Korea for two
months the subsequent summer, helped me to recognize that the types of questions I wanted to ask
had changed. While I was in Korea, the types of questions I wanted to ask were really about
investing in the lives of the people around me, on issues of national identity, meaning, belonging,
authenticity, in all its various forms. Being in a nation I partly identified with and partly felt
estranged from, illuminated these identity related questions. Furthermore, as a Korean American, I
was curious as to which of these experiences carry over through immigration to Korean America.
My process of thinking and what I desire to further explore is a product of these central experiences,
but not limited to them. As I currently stand, my research synthesizes these various experiences
through a different method than I started my academic journey with: hearing and listening to the
2
3
http://www.asianam.ucla.edu/people/faculty/david-k-yoo
http://www.cmc.edu/academic/faculty/profile.php?Fac=510
2
voices of the community I hope my work will serve, the Korean American Christian population in
the Midwest.
Identifying the Problem
At this point, little is known about how the proportion of the ethnic population will affect
the lived experiences of that ethnic population. It is evident that the Korean American population
has much to add in terms of the intersections between religiosity and ethnic identity, because of the
history4 of the role of religion in Korea, in emigration and how that has shaped this population in
America contemporarily. However, it is important to address which pockets of the Korean
American populations have been studied, and which have not. Warner (2005) elaborates on why the
Korean immigrant population is distinct compared to other new immigrant (post-1965) populations:
“Perhaps the most distinctively religious new immigrant group is Korean Americans, half of whom,
as sampled by Hurh and Kim (1990), report premigration membership in Christian churches but
another quarter of whom affiliate with Christian churches after arriving in this country. By 1988,
Korean immigrants had established some two thousand congregations in the United States” (p. 33).
While significant research has been conducted on Korean Americans, primarily qualitative studies on
the east and west coast5 (Alumkal 1999, Kang 2010, Kim and Kim 2012, Kim 2010, Min 2010, Min
and Kim 2005, Park 2013, Yoo 2010), minimal studies have been done on Korean Americans (and
Asian Americans, generally) in the Midwest, nor on areas where Korean Americans would not be
amongst a significant co-ethnic population.
Drawing attention to these proportionally less populated areas from the perspective of
ethnic and religious identity is important because it points out how religious and ethnic practices and
identities are shaped by social surroundings. It leads to the possibility of acknowledging the different
types of ethnic and religious identity formations and how co-ethnic populations can influence them
as well, adding to the literature on segmented assimilation. It is asking for the consideration that
Korean Americans, and potentially other racial and ethnic minorities, who do not have access to
large ethnic populations may not identify, or live out these identities, in the same ways as those that
do. Rubin and Rubin (2012) emphasize that strong studies “are fresh because they don’t merely
imitate what someone else has published; instead, they explore new issues or present old problems
in a new way” (p. 60). Looking at Korean American Christians in the Midwest presents old
‘problems’ or questions in a new way because of the location of the population and the facets of
identity that will be examined there. Much existing research in this area is dependent upon the fact
that the scholars in this field were able to collect qualitative data because of the concentrated
population of Korean Americans in the area, which lends itself to more visible and easily accessible
representations of this community in various areas. This is precisely what is not prevalent in the
Midwest, which means the performance of ethnicity and religion is very likely to appear differently
4
The American missionary presence in the 19th century in Korea not only partly explains the
Western entrance into Korea which forced Korea to open its borders and not be a “Hermit
Kingdom” (evading proselytization laws, American Protestant missionaries built schools and
hospitals to reach Koreans) but also is a factor in how Koreans first came to emigrate to the United
States (first as Hawaiian sugar plantation laborers because Hawaii was described as a “Christian
land”) (Chan 1990).
5 Hurh and Kim (1990) provide qualitative data (interviews) on Korean Americans in the Chicago
area, an exception to research on this population in the Midwest. However, in immigration patterns,
populations, and demographics the argument could be made that Chicago is an exception for ethnic
population share in the Midwest.
3
and have meaning that must be distinguished from others. Additionally, because of the much smaller
population, this speaks to the proximity between co-ethnics as well as the proximity between these
populations and religious spaces. These physical and geographical distances are also possible factors
to explore the effects of space on religious participation and faith.
Therefore, this proposal is for a study that will be conducted in the Midwest, the
unpublished and academically unexplored. Because of the American imaginary of the Midwest as the
“heartland” and “Middle” America, Sarmiento6 (2013) argues that, “this dominant cultural imaginary
of the interior US not only whitewashes the region’s settler colonial history and evacuates the
presence of people of color, but it also deters Asian American Studies scholarship from moving past
the West Coast” (p. 1). In line with Sarmiento’s new work, this project also hopes to contribute to
these new directions that redefine the Midwest and Asian American identity.
Emphasis on space and place not only speaks to a theoretical significance but also to a
methodological significance. The methodological significance of this work is about identifying
tensions and creating ways to work through them. Lury and Wakeford (2012) write, “It is not
possible to apply a method as if it were indifferent or external to the problem it seeks to address, but
that method must rather be made specific and relevant to the problem. In short, inventive methods
are ways to introduce answerability into a problem. Further, if methods are to be inventive, they
should not leave that problem untouched” (2-3). Sarmiento (2013) also speaks on methodology,
“this demographic paucity engenders different concerns and methods for studying the diversity of
Asian American experience” (3). The process of data collection in this research may allow
opportunity for further invention of methodology, and will likely change as more interviews are
conducted. Because data has yet to be collected, it is not yet guaranteed how methods will be shaped
as the interaction between researcher and respondents progresses. However, I do acknowledge the
possibility and flexibility of employing and redefining methodologies for this project as it progresses.
The theoretical and methodological significance of this work will speak to how region (environment)
and social structures (race, ethnicity, religion) affect identity formation, thus pointing to the
importance of not excluding the Midwest from the sociology of religion, studies of immigration, and
Asian American studies.
Literature Review
Race, Ethnicity, Assimilation
Two crucial aspects of identity are fluidity and asserted versus assigned identity. Nagel (2004)
writes, “The location and meaning of particular ethnic boundaries are continuously negotiated,
revised, and revitalized, both by ethnic group members themselves as well as by outside observers”
(p. 152-153). Thus, there is a constant negotiation of identity that is constantly multi-directional
from within and without. Fenton (2003) argues that any discussion of race, ethnicity or nation
(which continually intersect) must be contextualized, that the layers to these various aspects of
identity cannot be productively discussed without acknowledging context, and in fact, we must
consider the consequences of viewing identity out of context (p. 179). Due to the history of slavery
and immigration in the United States, race, ethnicity, and culture are often used interchangeably,
6
PhD Candidate at University of Minnesota in American Studies, presents his paper, “Asian
Americans in the Midwest: Theorizing Region for Asian American Studies Through Midwestern
Studies” at the Critical Ethnic Studies Association Conference 2013. I have been in communication
with Sarmiento and plan on future collaborations in this new area of Midwestern Studies with an
Asian American perspective.
4
sometimes mistakenly. While ethnic identity can be informed by culture and national origin
characteristics, race (through institutions such as the Census Bureau) is often assigned and imposed.
The racial privilege of whiteness in the United States has permitted this population the option to
choose their ethnicity, and when they choose to employ ethnicity (Nagel 2004). Other racial
minorities are not afforded the same privilege because of skin color and the enforced association of
skin color with socioeconomic status, morals, and personalities.
Unlike Fenton, Omi and Winant (1994) centralize race in understanding the various
dimensions of U.S. society, viewing the nation and its components through this lens of race. Many
have debated about the centrality of race in the United States, and in particular, whether in fact
socioeconomic status would be more accurate. Still others argue for an intersection of race and class
(Waters 1999). Another dimension to discussions of identity formation, is the authenticity of
identity, within which the key question is who has the power to determine one’s authenticity. Cheng
(2004) approaches this same topic through various communities in the United States, including
Asian Americans. He argues that no singular racial or ethnic category is sufficient for defining who
Asian Americans are because of the multiple overlapping and mixtures of identity (interracial and
transnational Asian adoption, multiracial individuals, interethnic and interracial marriages, the
black/white binary in racial discourse, etc.), blurring the boundaries of who is in and who is not
(Cheng 2004: 143). In his book, Cheng (2004) ultimately raises questions about the anxiety over
somehow losing an authenticity of identity, and challenges the complexities of how authenticity is
defined and determined, and by whom.
Similarly, Sollors (1989) also challenges authenticity through discussing how the invention of
ethnicity shows its very constructedness. Ethnicity is continuously being invented in an ongoing
process of development, starting with its peak in the 18th and 19th centuries where new technologies
necessitated the invention of ethnicity. It was during this time that ethnic belonging was highly
sought after because people were more widespread than ever before, thus the need to create
cohesion (Sollors 1989: xvi). This is precisely the anxiety over culture and identity that Cheng (2004)
discusses contemporarily about globalization. In defining ethnicity and identity, authenticity must be
addressed, though challenging to tackle because of its complexities and its rootedness in politics and
power.
To understand assimilation of immigrants and their descendants, residential patterns and
segregation are critical because patterns of immigration have shaped where people have lived in this
country. More recent immigrants have concentrated in a small number of states and metropolitan
areas, primarily CA, NY, TX, FL, IL, NJ (Alba and Denton 2004: 247). Because many immigrants
are directed by social networks and the US born Americans were moving out of metropolitan areas,
we are seeing highly concentrated areas of immigrants. Asian immigrants are distinguished from
other immigrant minorities and African Americans because of the number of white neighbors they
have instead of co-ethnic neighbors, and also because Asian immigrants tend to have higher
numbers living in suburban areas (Alba and Denton, 2004: 252). The great question arises, “Will
suburbanization have the same meaning for new immigrant groups as it had for older ones, for
whom it was usually associated with the maturity of the residential assimilation process?” (Alba and
Denton, 2004: 253).
Various scholars have attempted to answer this question with theories of assimilation: spatial
assimilation, segmented assimilation, straight-line assimilation, second generation decline (Alba and
Denton 2004, Alba and Nee 1999, Gans 1992, Iceland and Scopilliti 2008, Marrow 2009, Portes and
Zhou 1993, Rumbaut 2005). It seems that recently scholars are more inclined to argue for
segmented assimilation because of its flexibility and recognition that individuals and groups are not
5
assimilating at the same rate, or into the same sector of society, or with the same contexts and
histories (Portes and Zhou 1993, Portes and Rumbaut 2001). Portes and Zhou use the examples of
Mexicans and Mexican Americans, Punjabi Sikhs in California, Caribbean youth in South Florida,
Waters (1999) has an extensive case study of West Indian immigrants in Brooklyn, New York. These
various examples show not only the different segments of society that these various immigrants are
struggling to adapt into, but also shows the various strategies immigrants have used to maneuver, as
best as they can, through institutional and interpersonal barriers in American society. Portes and
Rumbaut (2001) use the Children of Immigrants Longitudinal Study (CILS) to define today’s
immigrant second generation in Miami, Florida and San Diego, California. They articulate the
process of adaptation among this population today as being determined by school performance,
language use, ethnic identity, intergenerational conflict, and peer relations beyond ethnic groups (p.
22).
Understanding the histories of race, ethnicity, and assimilation in the United States provide
necessary context to situate my study within these broader and greatly established scholars and
theories. Within this scholarship on race, ethnicity and assimilation, Korean American Christian
identity asks how religious identity as a racial minority affects patterns of assimilation, whether the
existing theories of assimilation apply, especially where Korean Americans are without access to
significant populations of co-ethnics. With few co-ethnics within one’s social networks, how will
authenticity be challenged and sustained? Specifically, how will ethnic and racial identities alter and
be shaped? How do ethnic and racial identities become constructed in low population share
communities? These scholars theorize about race and ethnicity and much of the work is focused on
large patterns, but looking at Korean Americans in the Midwest takes these large patterns and hones
in on less recognized, but equally important patterns.
Religion and the New Immigrants
Starting with the earliest waves of immigration to the United States, scholars have examined
what role religion plays in the histories of immigration, and how religious identities are shaped and
transformed through this process. With earlier waves of immigration from Europe, Protestant,
Jewish and Catholic cultures and religions were mostly discussed (Brodkin 1998, Herberg 1955).
With the change in racial and ethnic identities of more recent immigrants, primarily post-1965, the
literature on religion and immigration has also adapted. Ebaugh and Chafetz (2000) discuss how
immigrants have found meaning and status in positions of authority within the church when they
cannot outside of the church, viewed the church as a source of counseling in regards to adaptation
to American society, utilized the church for furthering economic and business endeavors (p. 113115). Scholars also discuss how immigration encourages hybridity in religious practice, adapting
religious institutions to their new surroundings and interacting with existing religious communities
(Warner and Wittner 1998, Levitt 2007). Warner and Wittner (1998) in particular argue how religion
also affects segmented assimilation, that there is more than one “America” that newcomers are
engaging with, which questions national identity and the meaning of “America” (p. 18). Another
aspect of assimilation is that some first generation immigrants fear a loss of cultural transmission to
their children, and thus make a greater effort to pass on religious identities instead (Warner 2005: 3).
Another concept that has recently proliferated in American studies and the sociology of
religion is transnationalism. Levitt (2007) argues that religious diversity in the United States is shaped
by both inside and outside national borders, and therefore American religious pluralism must be
viewed within the context of the globe and not simply nationally (p. 11). Another important
argument is for what Levitt (2007) calls “true” religious pluralism, which is movement from
tolerance of religious diversity to being open to the possibility of being changed by these diversities,
6
particularly in regards to Eastern religions (p. 12). Thus, both parties involved ought to be open to
change and transformation. Levitt (2007) also draws attention to how one focuses on the local, as I
am in this project. The local must not be taken out of its sociohistorical context, which opens doors
to a transnational perspective and warns against universalistic generalizations (Levitt 2007: 22). It is
for this reason, that I will also be incorporating a history of Christianity in South Korea because the
role of American missionaries in Korea shaped Korean emigration to the United States.
It would be my aim that my project will add to this field of literature with new Midwestern
immigrant experiences. The concept of religious practice hybridity requires agency, and in low
population share, will these hybrids be suppressed or magnified? The question of what is
compromised in terms of ethnic and religious identity during the week when these individuals are
away from church and/or ethnic communities should also be asked.
Korean Americans and Religiosity (History and Sociology of Religion)
Of the earliest Korean immigrants to the U.S. via Hawaii (sugar plantation workers) in 1903,
historians state that 40% identified as Christian (Chan 1990, Chan 1991, Yoo 2010). It is through the
impact of the American missionaries in Korea who influenced various Korean institutions and
gained the trust of the King, that links labor, capitalism, religion, and Korean emigration. The role of
the Korean American church in the US and how faith shapes the lives of Korean Americans today
cannot be separated from the history of Christianity in Korea. As with other immigrant groups in
the US (Southeast Asian refugees—which is a distinct category from immigrants—and
Mormonism7, Jewish and Catholic immigrants from Europe8), building religious communities was
key to Korean immigrants’ transition to life in the United States. As Yoo (2010) discusses, the
Korean Christian Church of Honolulu and the Korean Methodist Church of LA were two of the
earliest and most influential Korean immigrant churches in the early 1900s. Furthermore, Yoo
(2010) documents how these churches handled the rise of the second generation that was coming of
age around the 1930s. What Yoo documents from these early second generation Korean Americans
and their church experiences is resonated in today’s second generation Korean American
experiences. Adjustments had to be made to integrate the second generation into the church,
English language services were instituted, music was altered. The church also influenced how the
second generation viewed themselves ethnically, nationally and politically because the church was
not only a religious center but also a political, social, and economic one. Such histories are important
for showcasing the process of adaptation and the second generation in the earliest Korean American
churches as well as highlighting the multifaceted role of the church in the lives of early Korean
immigrants. Because these early Korean immigrants were living in low population share areas, it
would be curious to see how these experiences are similar and different from the lives of Korean
Americans in the Midwest, which are also low population share areas. This literature opens another
way of showing the potential for further interdisciplinary work in history and sociology.
To look at the contemporary experiences of second generation Korean American Christians,
I turn to sociological studies that utilize qualitative methodologies to better understand who this
population is today. As previously mentioned, it is important to note that all of these studies are
discussing Korean ethnic populations of high population share compared to the population share of
Korean ethnic populations in regions like the Midwest.
Kim (2004) investigates why second generation Korean American college students choose to
participate in congregations made up of only their own ethnic background instead of pan-ethnic,
7
8
Ong, Aiwha
Alba, Richard and Nancy Denton
7
multiracial, or white college campus ministries that are also available. Though Kim (2004) does not
name the colleges and universities that she visits, she does indicate that she chose them because of
their majority Asian American student population, thus the accessibility to co-ethnic or racial
populations is unquestioned (p. 24). Despite not having language barriers, and theologically agreeing
with white mainstream American evangelicals, Kim asks why the second generation feels the need
for a separate ethnic campus ministry. Kim observes that Christianity can be used as a salient
identity marker to offset undesirable aspects of racial identities (racialization). Thus, because Korean
Americans are racial minorities in American society, they choose to highlight their religious identity
because they are in the religious majority in American society. They simultaneously view cultural
distinctions and commonalities as the measurement by which ethnic boundaries are created
(ethnicization) (2004: 22). Kim’s findings show that these second generation Korean Americans
choose separate ethnic group ministries because they have a desire to interact with those most
familiar and similar to them, and a desire for majority status (as Christians) in American society to
counter their ethnic and racial marginalization. When Korean Americans do not have as easy an
access to co-ethnic religious communities, how might that shape how they view themselves and
others? How far are they willing to travel to meet with other co-ethnics in a religious or social
context? What different meanings will their ethnic and religious identities have for them in low
population share contexts?
Second generation Korean Americans desire the familiar in other Korean Americans, but
they cannot escape racial identity being constantly imposed upon them by the larger society.
Interestingly, their role in U.S. race relations also spurs their desire for majority group status
privileges. However, “they find that they are continuously marginalized as an ethnic/racial minority
and lack relative power. This interactive process then makes it more likely that SGKAs [second
generation Korean Americans] will form and participate in separate ethnic religious organizations of
their own,” again, with the privilege of access to the population (Kim 2004: 31). This is the
perspective of the second generation that Min and Kim (below) do not include in their work as
further explanation for what distinguishes the first and second generation and why perhaps the
second generation views their ethnic identity differently from the first generation. These
perspectives provide an important integrated framework for a more thorough understanding of the
sociological implications for mono-ethnic religious participation. Furthermore, they also show that
religious participation for minorities is not as simple as choosing between race or culture, but an
interactive relationship between the two.
Min and Kim (2005) explore the extent to which Korean Protestant immigrants in the U.S.
transmit religious and cultural traditions through religion to the second generation (p. 263). This
study surveys 1.5 and 2nd generation Korean Americans and congregations in the New York-New
Jersey metropolitan area. Min and Kim identify the main struggle of the 1st generation in church to
be the transmission of ethnic culture to the next generation because the second generation questions
the act of prioritizing culture at the expense of religious values and practices (2005: 264). Min and
Kim (2005) add to the current discussions of immigrant religion and ethnic identity retention
because up to this point there has not been data on the proportion of second-generation Korean
adults’ affiliation with and participation in a Korean congregation, nor on the rate at which second
generation English-language congregations retain Korean cultural traditions in worship services and
socio-cultural activities (p. 265). The central conclusion made by Min and Kim (2005), based on
their survey data is that the first generation transmitted religion to their children, but not cultural
traditions through religion. The lack of expansion of the definition of culture in their study offers
opportunities for further development of the term. Min and Kim speak primarily of culture and
8
socio-cultural activities in terms of language, food, and musical styles. However, how culture is
defined is extremely important before determining how it is practiced and what is retained, it also
begs the question of what is Korean culture versus Korean American culture, and how and who gets
to determine which is authentic. For the second generation Korean Americans, culture may have been
redefined and hybridized in ways that the first generation may not recognize. Culture may be defined
differently depending on population share and the access to co-ethnic populations. In areas of low
population share, will the first generation be found to use different methods of transmitting culture
to the second generation; will they be more or less successful?
Gender, family, and patriarchy are important concepts that are often shaped and visibly
practiced within religious contexts. Alumkal (1999) presents an ethnographic study of a second
generation Korean American Protestant church congregation in New York that focuses on how
religion influences assimilation in terms of gender and family norms. Alumkal uses participation
observation and formal interview data in his study. The central conclusion is that these individuals
maintained commitment to patriarchal gender norms and supported these views with discourse that
is found in American evangelical theology rather than ethnic or cultural language. Alumkal’s findings
disrupt previously held understandings of gender and family in Korean American religious
communities. Prior studies showed that Confucianism as an ideology justified patriarchal hierarchy.
Alumkal found that the congregation justified their view of family with biblical and religious
reasoning rather than cultural tradition, which again possibly points to a distinction between Korean
American and Korean cultures. The findings show that there is not a clear trajectory from patriarchy
to egalitarianism in terms of gender norms. The second generation maintains commitment to gender
hierarchy through religion and not culture in a religious setting, which would seem to be supported
by Min and Kim’s (2005) findings. These seems to be a consistent pattern that the second generation
emphasizes their religious identity over their ethnic identity in their beliefs, though they still prefer to
practice religion with others that share their ethnic identity.
These literatures continue to raise questions about whether these findings will hold true
where there is low population share. These scholars have deliberately chosen locations for research
where accessibility and population density are not an issue. My project asks what happens when
accessibility and population density cannot be taken for granted. What changes, what processes and
strategies are different? Where will their experience fit into the theories of assimilation? How do they
identify and how do they believe they are perceived?
Midwest
Little has been documented about the history of Korean (or Asian) immigrants to the
Midwest. According to Kim (2008), “several” Korean immigrants have been in Chicago a couple
years after the first Korean immigrants came to the United States, in 1903. Today, most of the
Korean Americans in the Midwest reside in Chicago. However, overall in the Midwest, the Korean
population has declined from the 1970s to 2000s, which is at 12% of the total population in the
Midwest (Kim 2008: 255).
Generally, across various disciplines and fields, research on Asian Americans focuses
primarily on the East and West coasts. Wei (1992) briefly mentions the void of the Midwest in terms
of how identity differs in this region, and also how the trajectory of political action reflects these
differences in the Asian American movement:
While East Coast Asian American activists felt misunderstood by those on the West
Coast, the ones in the Midwest felt ignored by both. As the Rice Paper Collective of
the Madison Asian Union put it, ‘Our invisibility is so total that Asian Americans are
not thought to exist in this vast banana wasteland.’ Except for those living and laboring
9
in such places as Chicago’s Chinatown, most Midwestern Asian Americans had
disappeared into suburbia. Without a physical community to relate to, Midwestern
Asian Americans found it difficult to start and sustain an ethnic-consciousness
movement (Wei 1992: 30).
What is important to note here is that there are Midwestern cities, like Chicago, where ethnic
enclaves exist which may create similar experiences to other Asian Americans where they may not be
as clear a minority. What further contributes to the neglect of the Midwest, according to Wei, is how
Asian Americans who grew up in the Midwest eventually felt the need to leave the Midwest for the
East or West coast, because that is where the population of Asian Americans is much higher.
Memoirist Linda Furiya9 is one such Asian American individual who moved from the Midwest
(Indiana) to the West coast (San Francisco). On her website she is quoted as saying, “I’ll never
forget that day. It was a crisp, sunny, breezy San Francisco afternoon. I was wandering North Beach
and remember feeling overcome with the happy feeling of coming home. I had never lived in a city
so full of the Asian American element…and the food! It was life-changing10.” Furiya’s experience is
precisely what Wei is referencing about Asian Americans in the Midwest and their need to leave the
Midwest in order to experience fullness of identity.
Wei (1992) writes, “In the Midwest, political activism began when Asian American college
students came together for mutual support and collective action. Many of them eventually left
college to go to an Asian ethnic community, usually on one of the coasts, in search of their roots”
(p. 11-12). The mention of a “search for one’s roots” implies that one’s roots are not where they are
if they are in the Midwest, and begins to question an authenticity of Asian American experiences in
the Midwest. I hope to add to this finding in my own explorations to see what factors are at play
that contributes to this idea that one is not authentically Asian American in the Midwest, and how
ethnic and religious identity in particular affects this view of one self. I also hope to challenge this
finding through qualitative methodology and ethnography in re-defining what an “authentic” lived
experience and identity is, not imposing inauthenticity upon them, but rather, assuming authenticity.
Klein (1990) discusses ethnography as an interdisciplinary method and writes, “Ethnography…is
different from other kinds of research because it is concerned with the multidimensional world of
experience that constitutes social reality for an informant and the fundamental process of learning
that social reality” (p. 111). The social reality of Korean American Christians in the Midwest is what
I aim to give voice to.
Erika Lee (2009) has paused to also address what Asian American Studies, as a discipline, has
to offer in order to address this void of the Midwestern Asian American experience. In proposing
new questions and approaches that are required, “Another new approach to the field of Asian
American Studies draws from a methodological and epistemological shift that focuses on the
absence or invisibility of people as a way to study them and their surroundings” (Lee 2009: 264).
Scholar Josephine Lee is another who aims to address this population by exploring “the tensions
and contradictions between contemporary ‘color-blind’ ideologies and racial formations” to
approach the question of racial invisibility or racial isolation of Asian Americans in the Midwest (Lee
2009: 265). It is already evident in these preliminary studies that new methodological tools guide
how to approach and address the concerns of the Asian American populations in the Midwest. Lury
9
Author of the memoir Bentobox about her childhood and youth growing up in Versailles, Indiana in
the 70s as the only Japanese American family in town.
10
http://lindafuriya.com/about/index.html
10
and Wakeford (2012) speak on exactly this need for the “new,” “All this is a way of saying that
inventiveness is a matter of use, of collaboration, of situatedness, and does not imply the
ineffectiveness of methods, only that their inventiveness—their capacity to address a problem and
change that problem as it performs itself—cannot be secured in advance” (p. 7). My study would
further contribute to exploring how these populations must be theoretically and conceptually
addressed, with the added religious lens.
Looking at studies of racial minority immigrant populations more broadly, Fennelly (2008)
conducted qualitative research in a rural meatpacking town in Minnesota about the local white
population’s responses to immigrants. Generally, Fennelly finds ethnoculturalism, and that the local
white population generally complains about the slow rates of assimilation of the immigrants, have
attitudes of nativism, and as a result they justify acts of discrimination (Fennelly 2008: 109). About
Asian immigrants in particular, Fennelly finds that Asian immigrants are perceived and treated
somewhat differently from other immigrants, that they are viewed as a model minority, and are
exploited alongside Latino workers for their lack of proficiency in the English language. Though
perhaps not surprising, Fennelly’s findings do point out that these perceptions of immigrants in this
particular rural town in the Midwest are detrimental to the immigrant populations there. This study
focuses on immigrant populations and not the second generation and also interviews the white
individuals not the immigrants, so viewing how this affects the self asserted identities of the first and
second generation are still unanswered.
Of greater importance than the location of the Midwest itself, is the fact that within some
areas of the Midwest, Korean Americans make up a smaller proportion of the local population. The
Midwest proves a logical starting point because it has the lowest percentage of Asians of any region
in the United States, followed closely by the South, according to the 2010 Census data11. The
characteristics of a smaller population and how this lived experience affects agency and identity
choices is specifically what I aim to explore. Alper and Olson (2013) explored similar terrain about
religious populations and religious identity. The driving question is whether Jewish identity is more
important to Jewish Americans in areas where there are fewer Jewish Americans. A significant
implication of this work is about assimilation, and whether people with low identity salience will
discard this aspect of their identity, or cover it (Alper and Olson 2013: 101, Yoshino 2006). If being
the “odd-man out,” as Alper and Olson describe it, has a higher cost of identifying as Jewish in less
Jewish areas, this high cost may encourage low salience-level Jews to forego Judaism, thus the
consequences of identity salience and population share are significant and personal (Alper and
Olson 2013: 101). It is important to acknowledge that this study is about Jewish identity which itself
is complex and layered, but the questions it raises about identity salience and the effect location can
have on it are significant and provide direction for my own study. Another question that Alper and
Olson ask in the conclusion is whether this argument will work for other types of identity salience,
like ethnic identity.
Looking at second generation Korean American Christians in the Midwest not only views
ethnic and religious identity intersectionally, but also moves in the direction of examining processes
of assimilation in low population share areas, particularly for an Asian American ethnic group. It will
dig deeper into the questions of whether these Asian Americans are truly leaving the Midwest in
11
http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/briefs/c2010br-11.pdf: Percentage of population that is
Asian in the Midwestern states: Illinois, 5.2; Indiana, 2.0; Iowa, 2.1; Kansas, 2.9; Michigan, 2.9;
Minnesota: 4.7; Missouri, 2.1; Ohio, 2.1; Wisconsin, 2.7; North Dakota, 1.4; Nebraska, 2.2; South
Dakota, 1.3
11
order to discover others like them, how perceptions of them and their ethnic and racial groups
shape how they view themselves, and whether they view ethnic and religious identities as something
to hide or magnify.
Research Design
The driving research questions for this project are investigative about processes of identity
formation. Identity formation is personal as well as contextual. Because these questions are
interested in ‘how’ and ‘why’ and not just ‘what’, and because I believe it is necessary to give
opportunity for this population to speak for themselves, I have chosen qualitative methods of
interviewing and participant observation.
Semi-structured interviews are an important form of data collection for this project because
they prioritize the experiences of the Midwestern Korean American population, and give them
agency to articulate these experiences in their own ways using their own vocabularies. As the
interviewer, part of my job is to write questions that give the respondent the space to express his or
her lived experience effectively and honestly. Rubin and Rubin (2012) explain the benefits of
qualitative research: “[Qualitative] researchers argue that people construct their own realities based
on their experiences and interpretations… Through [in-depth qualitative interviewing], researchers
explore in detail the experiences, motives, and opinions of others and learn to see the world from
perspectives other than their own” (p. 3). Furthermore, how these individuals perceive the
relationship between ethnic identity and religiosity is a complex and nuanced process that requires
agency being given to the participants themselves, in addition to understanding the larger structures
and societal forces that are also influential. As Rubin and Rubin (2012) also state, “If you are looking
for shades of meaning or want to explore the positions between the extremes, or if you want to
examine overlapping explanations or apparent contradictions and tensions, in-depth interviewing
makes sense” (p. 50). My objective is to seek out the “shades of meaning” in the process of identity
formation, and the contradictions and tensions for Korean American Christians in the Midwest.
As an insider in terms of racial, ethnic, and religious identity, and the access this privileges
me with this particular population, I have decided to utilize the methodology of participant
observation. This will add another layer to the data collection that will add depth to observe and
listen in on how these identities are practiced. It will also allow me to observe in action what is
verbalized to me in the semi-structured interviews. I will do participant observation in religious
meetings, bible studies, weekly services, and other activities and events that second generation
Korean Americans Christians will participate in, and allow me to participate in. This will be
conducted prior to the interviews themselves to familiarize myself with the environment and also
familiarize the respondents with myself. Through this method, I will be paying attention to
interactions amongst the various individuals at these sites, taking note of what is discussed, how
things are discussed. The topics I will be paying particular attention to are those that I will be asking
the participants about in the interview. Specifically, it will be about how these individuals practice
religious and ethnic identity. These observations will most likely also bring up additional questions
that I have not thought to ask during the interviews, so it will help in making up for some gaps in
the interviews. I will also ask follow up questions, should any come to mind, after these moments of
participant observation. Detailed fieldnotes will be taken, dates and locations will be noted. I will
review the fieldnotes after each event or gathering in order to note key themes and concepts that
arise from the participant observation. I will employ the method of participant (ethnographer)
observation to immerse myself into the field, to see how these second generation Korean Americans
are living and in what they find meaning and belonging (Emerson et. al 1995, Rubin and Rubin
2012).
12
Population
The target population is second generation Korean American Christian young adults, between the age of
12
18-34 , in low population share13 Midwestern cities who have grown up or have been raised in the Midwest14.
Second generation Korean American is defined as the native born with one or both parents foreign
born from Korea (Rumbaut and Komaie 2010: 48). The new second generation is important for
further research because of the implications for studies on assimilation and the directions of future
generations, as I mentioned earlier as being a key component to this study. To be future-oriented is
to better understand the current and changing segments of our societies. There will be some
questions asked that are concerning the first generation, their parents. These will be from the
perspective of the second generation, which is also important for better understanding
intergenerational relationships from the viewpoint of the second generation (though it is noted that
these are perspectives and not first hand accounts.) Rumbaut and Komaie (2010) make this point
about the need to further examine the young adult second generation: “As this new second
generation reaches adulthood in large numbers within the next decade or two, its impact will be
increasingly and widely felt throughout the society—in higher education, the labor market, sports
and popular culture, criminal justice and religious institutions, the mall, and the ballot box—all the
more so in the urban centers where they are concentrated” (p. 44-45). Their argument for studying
young adults is that the new shape that various societal institutions and practices are embodying is a
result of the second generation young adult population.
Logistics
Accessibility, cost, and manageable time frame, have also been considered as important
factors in conducting qualitative research. The rates of accessibility are dependent upon the
geographical locations of the respondents and also the subject positions of myself as the interviewer
in relation to the respondents. The first aspect of accessibility is connected to cost. The largest factor
for cost is travel in order to conduct these interviews face-to-face. The first goal is to do as many
interviews in person, as possible. However, there is also the possibility of utilizing Internet sources
via sites such as Skype and Google video chatting. The benefits are the ability to visually connect with
the respondents and be economically efficient. The strongest reason not to do interviews through
the Internet is the lack of relational intimacy (interviewer trusted as credible and reliable from the
perspective of the respondent) between the interviewer and respondent because of the spatial gap
that technology only partially covers. A second reason is inconsistency of responses due to different
mediums of communication, which shifts the nature of the relationship between interviewer and
respondent. Such technological advances have practical benefits, but also have consequences.
Another crucial factor that I consider is the preference of my respondents themselves, though as an
interviewer I may prefer face-to-face, the option of various methods will be offered to the
respondent. The time commitment is dependent on funding as well as when the point of saturation
is met. The goal is to reach approximately 40 participants, but I will no longer seek more participants
upon reaching a saturation point. As Stone (2008) explains, “there is no easy formula for
determining from the outset how many respondents are needed for the sample. Instead, the decision
arises organically from the data, and a key consideration relates to what is called the ‘saturation
12
“Young adult” is defined as 18-34 years of age (Rumbaut and Komaie 2010)
http://futureofchildren.org/publications/journals/article/index.xml?journalid=72&articleid=520
13
As Alper and Olson (2013) use it, “population share” means the proportion of the population that
is Korean American (p. 83). Low population share indicates
14
spent the majority of their K-12 years in the Midwest
13
point.’ This is akin to a point of diminishing returns, after which one begins to hear the same themes
repeatedly” (p. 241-242). The same will be applied to my study to maintain effectiveness and
efficiency. At the point at which saturation has been met depending on the consistency of the
responses, I will reassess whether to further proceed with more interviewing or not.
Interviewee Selection
To select interviewees, there will be multiple starting points. There will be two types of
starting points: (1) College and University Korean ethnic-identified student organizations, and (2)
Korean-ethnic identified churches in the Midwest. Starting at these multiple points, I aim to use the
snowballing technique to also reach individuals who may be second generation Korean American
Christians who have chosen not to participate in Korean ethnic-identified churches or organizations.
For example, Cincinnati, Ohio has 514 Korean individuals, which is .2% of the city’s population15.
There are several Universities near or in Cincinnati, Ohio that would serve starting points for the
interviewee selection. At one such University, as one example, there are two organizations that serve
the Korean American student population, as listed on the University website, Asian American
Association and the Korean Students Association, both of which identify Korean Americans or
Korean students as populations that they include. There are three Korean churches in the area that
have English ministries alongside Korean language ministries that will serve as my second type of
site to find respondents. These campus organizations and churches have been identified, but will
remain unnamed to ensure confidentiality of potential future respondents. In the final project,
pseudonyms will be utilized.
Flyers will be handed out personally to congregation members following the church services
and at student organization gatherings, and posted in central locations on campuses and in churches,
where permitted. Additionally, each group will be e-mailed the flyer. The basic information that will
be included on the flyers:
Study on being Korean American and Christian in the Midwest
My name is Hana Lee and I am a graduate student in American Studies at Purdue University, and I hope you will
consider joining my study. Your experiences will be important for helping lead research on Asian Americans in the
Midwest and may be an encouragement for others who are like you.
I am looking for individuals who are: Korean American, born in the United States (second generation), Christian
(Protestant), between the ages of 18-34, and who grew up in the Midwest (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, or Wisconsin). To participate or if you have
questions, please email Hana Lee: Lee1003@Purdue.edu.
For individuals that respond:
Dear participant,
Thank you for your interest in helping me with this project. I am a graduate student at Purdue University working on
my dissertation, and am looking forward to meeting you.
15
http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF
14
The purpose of this larger project is to better understand how Korean American Christians in the Midwest experience
the connection between their ethnic and religious identity. As a Korean American Christian who grew up in the
Midwest, I am interested in finding out what being Korean American and Christian means to you.
Ideally, I would need between 60-90 minutes of your time and I can meet you at a location that is most convenient for
you16. Please let me know when you will be free to meet with me. Thank you!
Participation is completely voluntary and can be stopped at any time, and any questions may be skipped. Each
interview will be audio-recorded and transcribed. And most importantly, please note that I will ensure full
confidentiality. If you have any questions about the project or me, please call me at 949.212.4195 or email me at
Lee1003@Purdue.edu.
Sincerely,
Hana Lee
Purdue University, American Studies, Ph.D. Student
[A note about IRB will also be included]
Interview Administration
Each interview will be scheduled to last an average of 60-90 minutes and be administered in
person, over the phone, or via the Internet. The interviewee will be given choice of location, but I
will check to see that it will be quiet enough that the interview can be audio-recorded with accuracy
(with prior permission). The interviewee will also be given a choice of method: in person, phone,
Internet. These options will be given to cater to my respondents, as they may prefer one method to
another.
Protocol
Part II of the interview protocol (in Appendix A) is broken into two sections: ethnic identity,
and religious and ethnic identity. I am using this interview protocol to find out how these second
generation Korean American Christians identify ethnically and religiously and how they perceive the
intersection between their ethnic and religious identities. I aim to find out how their ethnic identity
influences how they practice their religion and vice versa. I want to listen to the participants’
responses because they will provide much needed information on how Korean Americans in the
Midwest identify, and how, and why. It will also help to investigate where they have the privilege of
agency and assertion of identity, and when they do not, from their perspectives.
The interview protocol includes main questions, follow-ups, and probes that will serve as a
useful guideline for the interviewer.
Data Analysis
At the completion of each interview, I will write a memo to quickly identify who, what,
where, and when. I will then note my general impressions of the interviewee, themes or concepts
that jumped out to me during the interview, and key moments in the interviewee’s history. Once the
data has been collected, the interviews will be transcribed and then coded. I will use the grounded
theory model to analyze the collected data. This implies allowing the data to speak for itself, noting
concepts and themes that emerge from the data (Rubin and Rubin 2012). This means that the
16
As this is the most ideal situation, I am making an assumption here that I will be able to meet this
participant in person. However, as I mention later, I will provide several options to the participant.
15
concepts and themes may shift as the data is organized. After coding, the coded excerpts will be
extracted and organized. This will then allow for patterns and key quotes and moments to be
identified. With this basis, I will begin the writing stage, contextualizing, and theorizing.
Articulating the Self
Jennifer Pierce (1995) acknowledges what previous scholars have come to recognize,
“Recent methodological criticism suggests that the self in the research process should be fully
articulated in research and writing, not minimized or neglected… Distancing oneself from their
research subjects in the research process only creates a lack of clarity of their subjects (p. 189).
Furthermore, reflexive ethnography is where the “ethnographer becomes part of the inquiry
(Kincheloe & McLaren, 2000). Reflexive ethnographers use their own experiences in a culture
‘reflexively to bend back on self and look more deeply at self-other interactions’ (Ellis & Bochner,
2000, p. 740)” (Denzin & Lincoln 2002, p. 1). In an attempt to articulate how I predict how my own
positionality will affect my research process, I will articulate my identity as a second generation
Korean American and as a Christian who has lived on the West coast and the Midwest. Certainly
these are not the only aspects of my identity, or anyone else’s identity, but I do predict that these will
be the most relevant in my interactions with the participants. This section will be significantly
different in my dissertation after the data has been collected. I expect that in my dissertation, I will
include reflexive ethnography in examining my own experiences alongside the respondents of this
study, as a researcher, insider, and outsider.
First, as the child of immigrants, born and raised in the Midwestern United States, I identify
as being of the second generation. There are ways in which I will have similar experiences with other
second generation Korean Americans and other ways in which I will have different experiences. My
first generation parents immigrated at an earlier age than many of their peers of the same age in their
friend groups. While many first generation Koreans post 1965 immigrated after completing college
in Korea, my parents immigrated during high school. It is for this reason that I believe I have less
command of the Korean language than other second generation Korean Americans. Not being
entirely fluent in the language (though conversational) may create camaraderie with some and
distance from other respondents. This may work against me in how I am viewed as an “authentic”
Korean or not, in the eyes of the respondents. These are distinctions that will distinguish my
experiences as a second generation Korean American. I am also an individual who was born on the
East coast, grew up in the Midwest, who finished high school and college on the West coast and
returned to the Midwest for graduate school. Moreover, my politicization as an Asian American was
formed during college in California. And Purdue University is itself a unique space for Asian
Americans for many reasons. A couple being the large number of international Asian students that
can lead to a conflation of Asian and Asian American identities as well as the lack of Asian American
representation at the institutional level. These experiences will give me an interesting lens through
which I can relate to and be able to make some personal comparisons and connections to my
respondent’s experiences.
Secondly, though I grew up in a Korean church in the Midwest region, beginning in the
middle of college I have not attended a Korean ethnic church or participated in a Korean ethnic
religious organization. Therefore, there is a distance that I personally feel from Korean ethnic
churches, which may be different from the participants I interview. However, many of my closest
friends that I’ve met during various stages of my life are Korean American and Christian, so I am
not entirely removed from this population. The fact that I grew up in the Midwest (Cincinnati,
Ohio) and also currently reside in the Midwest (West Lafayette, Indiana) will provide me with
further ways to relate to my respondents as a minority of a minority. This privileges me with the
16
ability to be empathetic to certain experiences such as being one of few Asians (let alone Korean
Americans) in my neighborhood or school, the types of stereotyping and prejudice and
microaggressions that I face on a daily basis in these spaces.
As a second generation Korean American who has experience having grown up in a Korean
ethnic church, I will be an insider to some and an outsider to others. Because I am seeking
participants who identify as Christian, I may be viewed as an insider to my participants in terms of
religious identity. However, there are many nuances in how we practice religion, salience of this
identity, theological views, the processes of how and why we identify as Christians, the intersections
between ethnic and religious identity, which may be similar or different to my participants. Pierce
(1995) argues that “ethnographers move back and forth in continuous tack between the statuses of
insider, outsider, and what Patricia Hill Collins (1986) terms an ‘outsider within’” (p. 191). I expect
this to characterize my experience as a researcher as well, where my relationship with my participants
will always be shifting and fluid. This fluidity is something I hope to embrace as a researcher, and
hope will become more tangible with experience. To an extent, I believe it is not possible to predict
in what ways I will be an insider or an outsider and how this will affect my role as the researcher. I
believe this is due to the fact that each one’s experiences and identities are composed of so many
different parts which will mean that though we may both be second generation Korean Americans
Christians we may have little that is relatable. Being aware of these complexities, I will need to
remember what Pierce articulates as conceptual problems of the role of the self in research, that no
“true” self exists and that shared identity does not guarantee insider status nor does unshared
identity guarantee an outsider status (p. 193). Awareness will guide me towards being a researcher
who is sensitive to the experiences of my participants.
Appendix A
17
Interview Guide for Individuals
This interview guide comprises two parts. Part I will provide background information of the
respondents and Part II outlines the semi-structured questionnaire to be administered in the
interviews with the participants. The two concepts covered in the interviews are religiosity and
ethnic identity as well as their intersection.
Part I: Respondent Information
1. Interview
a. Date
b. Time
c. Location
2. Age
3. Sex
4. Marital status
5. Children
6. Education level
7. Socioeconomic status of self and family
8. Education levels of parent(s)
9. Language ability in English, Korean, any other language
10. Place of birth (City, State)
11. Places lived in since birth (City, State)
12. Current location of residence (City, State)
13. Occupation
14. Contacted through:
a. Organization
b. Church
Part II: Semi-structured Questionnaire
Ethnic Identity
1. How do you ethnically identify now?
a. Has this changed over the course of your lifetime?
i. Does it ever change depending on whom you are speaking to or where you
are, or who is around you?
ii. Examples?
iii. Why do you think you identified differently in those circumstances? What
influences those differences in how you identify?
2. What does your ethnic identity mean to you?
a. How important is being Korean American to you?
b. In your daily life how much do you think about your ethnic identity?
c. How often do you find yourself thinking about how your ethnic identity affects you?
3. In what ways do you practice your ethnic identity? Do you participate in ethnic holidays or
traditions?
a. What are the various components of your ethnic identity?
18
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
i. For example: language, culture, tradition, appearance, ancestry, and
regionality?
b. Was it always like this for you? Or has this changed, as you have gotten older?
c. Does your family play a role in how you practice your ethnic identity?
i. Are there any conflicts with your family over your ethnic identity?
Who are your closest friends? List the first names of five close friends, friends you would
feel comfortable discussing a personal matter with.
a. How many of these friends are Korean American?
i. Where did you meet these friends?
ii. How many of these friends attend the same school as you? The same church
as you?
b. What are the factors that you think have contributed to this make-up of close
friends?
c. What are the most important things you and your friends have in common?
Are there specific areas you feel you are more likely to be around Koreans and Korean
Americans?
a. Examples?
b. How comfortable or uncomfortable do you feel in these spaces?
c. If there is mention of church: how did you decide to go to church there/be a part of
that particular organization? Did you consider attending other
churches/organizations?
i. Have you ever considered attending other churches/organizations with no or
very few Korean Americans or Asian Americans?
What kinds of activities do you participate in with other Koreans and Korean Americans?
a. Worded another way: Are there groups you are a member of or participant in that is
characterized by Korean American identity?
Could you tell me a bit about your family’s immigration history?
a. If they know a lot: how did you come to know all these facts about your family’s
history? What made you interested or curious?
b. If they don’t know a lot: why do you think this history hasn’t come up in
conversation before? Why do you think you aren’t as interested to know about this
history?
How do you think being in the Midwest has affected your ethnic identity?
a. If it applies: Has college had an affect on your ethnic identity?
i. Friends? Organizations? Church? Bible studies?
ii. Have there been any other stages of life that have affected your ethnic
identity?
Religious and ethnic identity
1. How do you identify religiously?
a. How did you become a Christian (testimony)? When?
b. Can you tell me a little bit about how you came to identify religiously as you do
today?
c. What denomination do you most identify with currently?
2. What kind of church did you attend growing up?
19
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
a. What was the ethnic and/or racial make-up of the congregation or ministry you were
a part of?
b. How did you/or your family decide to attend that church? Why?
i. To determine whether ethnic background was a major factor or not: Why do
you think ethnic background was (not) important in making this decision?
What kind of church or religious group are you a part of currently?
a. What is the ethnic and/or racial make-up of these organizations?
b. Why did you choose to participate in these organizations/churches?
i. How did you make that decision?
ii. What kinds of thinks did you have to consider when thinking about which
groups/church to participate or be a member of?
c. How would you feel attending a religious organization/group that is made up of a
different ethnic/racial demographic than you are currently?
If it applies: Has college had an affect on your religious identity?
i. Friends? Organizations? Church? Bible studies?
ii. Have there been any other stages of life that have affected your religious
identity?
Has there been a time when you converted from one religion to another?
i. Could you tell me about those experiences?
b. Has there ever been a time when it was difficult for you to identify as a Christian?
i. If they don’t share willingly: What do you think led to those doubts or
confusion?
ii. If they have overcome the difficulty: How did you overcome this difficult
time?
Were there ever difficulties you faced in terms of faith or religious identity? Could you share
some of those experiences with me?
a. How do these experiences shape who you are today?
How important is religion to you?
a. How important is your religion or faith to you?
b. Is your ethnic identity or religion/faith more important to you? How do you
determine that?
i. If they do not share: do you have any explicit examples that exemplify this
decision making process?
In what ways do you practice your religion?
a. How often do you engage in the following: prayer, bible study, bible reading, prayer
meetings, worship service attendance, fellowship with other church-goers, serve in
the church or a ministry, etc.?
Could you tell me a little bit about the role of religion in your family’s immigration history?
a. If it is not mentioned: could you explain your parents’ religions as well, from your
perspective? How they became Christian? What their role in the church is today?
How seriously do they take their religion?
Do you think being in this city has affected how you religiously identify?
In what ways do your ethnic and religious identities overlap or connect?
a. Do you see your ethnic identity as being separate from your religious identity?
b. Is your ethnic or religious identity stronger for you?
20
i. For example: would you rather that all your friends were Korean Americans
but they didn’t share your faith OR that all your friends shared your faith but
none were Korean American?
ii. How did you come to feel this way?
1. Was there a time when this wasn’t true for you?
iii. What are some of the factors you considered in answering this question?
iv. Is this question difficult to answer for you? Why or why not?
c. Is there a dividing line between being Korean American and Christian?
Is there anything else you didn’t get to share with me that you would like to further explain?
21
Works Cited
Alba, Richard and Nancy Denton, “Old and New Landscapes of Diversity: The Residential Patterns
of Immigrant Minorities.” Pp. 237-261 from Not Just Black and White: Historical and Contemporary
Perspectives on Immigration, Race, and Ethnicity in the United States, edited by Nancy Foner and George M.
Fredrickson. 2004. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Alba, Richard, and Victor Nee. 1999. "Rethinking Assimilation Theory for a New Era of
immigration," Pp. 137-160 in The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience, edited by
Philip Kasinitz Charles Hirschman, and Josh DeWind. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Alper, Becka A and Daniel V.A. Olson. 2013. “Religious population share and religious identity
salience: is Jewish identity more important to Jews in less Jewish areas?”. Sociology of Religion, 74(1):
82-106.
Alumkal, Antony W. 1999. “Preserving Patriarchy: Assimilation, Gender Norms, and SecondGeneration Korean American Evangelicals.” Qualitative Sociology, 22, 127-140.
Boyd, Danah. 2002. “Faceted Id/Entity: Managing Representation in a Digital World.”
<http://smg.media.mit.edu/people/danah/thesis/danahThesis.pdf>.
Boyd, Danah. 2014. It’s complicated: the social lives of networked teens. Yale University Press New Haven.
Brodkin, Karen. 2002. How Jews Became White Folks and What That Says About Race in America. New
Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press.
Caruth, Cathy. 1996. Experience: Trauma, Narrative, and History. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins
University Press.
Chan, Sucheng. 1991. Asian Americans: An Interpretive History. New York: Twayne Publishers.
Chan, Sucheng. 1990. “Introduction.” Lee, Mary Paik. Quiet Odyssey: A Pioneer Korean Woman in
America. Seattle: University of Washington Press.
Cheng, Vincent. 2004. Inauthentic: The Anxiety over Culture and Identity. New Brunswick: Rutgers
University Press.
Cheung, King-Kok. 1997. An Interethnic Companion to Asian American Literature. New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Ebaugh, Helen Rose and Janet Saltzman Chafetz. 2000. Religion and the New Immigrants. Walnut
Creek: Alta Mira Press.
Edgell, Penny. 2012. “A Cultural Sociology of Religion: New Directions.” The annual review of sociology.
38:247-65.
22
Emerson, Robert M., Rachel L. Fretz, and Linda L. Shaw. 1995. Writing Ethnographic Fieldnotes.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Fennelly, Katherine. “Local responses to Immigrants in the Midwestern United States” Petersson,
Bo and Katherine Tyler. 2008. Majority Cultures and the Everyday Politics of Ethnic Difference: Whose House
is This?. New York: Palgrace MacMillan.
Fenkl, Heinz Insu. 2008. Memories of My Ghost Brother. Michigan: University of Michigan.
Fenton, Steve. 2003. Ethnicity. United Kingdom: Polity Press.
Furiya, Linda. 2006. Bento Box in the Heartland: My Japanese Girlhood in Whitebread America. Emeryville:
Seal Press.
Gans, Herbert J. 1992. "Second-Generation Decline: Scenarios for the Economic and Ethnic
Futures of the Post-1965 American Immigrants." Ethnic and Racial Studies 15(2): 173-92.
Herberg, Will. 1955. Protestant, Catholic, Jew: An Essay in American Religious Sociology. New York:
Doubleday and Company, Inc.
Hurh, Won Moo and Kwang Chung Kim. 1990. “Religious Participation of Korean Immigrants in
the United States.” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion. 29 (1): 19-34.
Iceland, John and Melissa Scopilliti. 2008. “Immigrant Residential Segregation in U.S. Metropolitan
Areas, 1990–2000.” Demography 45(1): 79–94.
Kang, Younghill. 1937. East Goes West: The Making of an Oriental Yankee. Chicago: Follett Publishing
Company.
Kang, Hyeyoung and Sumie Okazaki, Nancy Abelmann, Chu Kim-Prieto, Shanshan Lan.
“Redeeming Immigrant Parents: How Korean American emerging adults reinterpret their
childhood.” Journal of Adolescent Research, 25 (3): 441-464.
Keller, Nora Okja. 1998. Comfort Woman. New York: Penguin Books.
Kim, Kwang Chung. “Koreans.” Sisson, Richard, Christian Zacher, and Andrew Cayton, eds. 2007.
The American Midwest: An Interpretive Encyclopedia. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
Kim, Rebecca Y. 2004. Second-Generation Korean American Evangelicals: Ethnic, Multiethnic, or
White Campus Ministries?. Sociology of Religion, 65, 19-34.
Kim, Richard. 1964. The Martyred. New York: Penguin Books.
Kim and Kim. 2012. “Second-Generation Korean American Christians’ Communities.” Chen,
Carolyn and Russell Jeong, eds. Sustaining Faith Traditions: Race, Ethnicity and Religion among the Latino
and Asian American Second Generation. New York: New York University Press.
23
Klein, Julie Thompson. 1990. Interdisciplinarity: History, Theory, and Practice. Detroit: Wayne State
University Press.
Lee, Erika. 2009. “Asian American Studies in the Midwest: New Questions, Approaches, and
Communities.” Journal of Asian American Studies. 12, 147-173.
Lee, Min Jin. Free Food for Millionaires. New York: Grand Central Publishing, 2007.
Levitt, Peggy. 2007. God Needs no Passport: Immigrants and the Changing American Religious Landscape.
New York: The New Press.
Lury, Celia and Nina Wakeford, Eds. 2012. Inventive Methods: The Happening of the Social. London:
Routledge.
Marrow, Helen B. 2009. “New Immigrant Destinations and the American Colour Line.” Ethnic and
Racial Studies. 32(6): 1037-1057.
Min, Pyong Gap. 2010. Preserving Ethnicity through Religion in America: Korean Protestants and Indian
Hindus across Generations. New York: New York University Press.
Min, Pyong Gap and Dae Young Kim. 2005. “Intergeneration Transmission of Religion and
Culture: Korean Protestants in the U.S.” Sociology of Religion, 66, 263-282.
Nagel, Joane. (1994). “Constructing Ethnicity: Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture.”
Social Problems, 41, 152-176.
Nguyen, Bich Minh. 2008. Stealing Buddha’s Dinner. New York: Penguin Books.
Omi and Winant. 1994. Racial Formation in the United States: From the 1960s to the 1990s. New York:
Routledge.
Ong, Aihwa. 2003. Buddha is hiding: refugees, citizenship, the new America. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Park, Jerry Z. 2013. “Ethnic Insularity among 1.5- and Second-Generation Korean-American
Christians.” Development and Society. 42 (1): 113-136.
Pierce, Jennifer. 1995. Gender Trials: Emotional Lives in Contemporary Law Firms. Berkeley, CA:
University of California Press.
Portes, Alejandro, and Min Zhou. 1993. "The New Second Generation: Segmented Assimilation and
its Variants." Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 530: 74-96.
Portes, Alejandro, and Rubén G. Rumbaut. 2001. Legacies: The Story of the Immigrant Second Generation.
Berkeley: University of California Press.
24
Rubin, Herbert J. and Irene S. Rubin. 2012. Qualitative Interviewing: The Art of Hearing Data. Third
edition. Los Angeles, Sage Publications.
Rumbaut and Komaie. 2010. “Immigration and Adult Transitions.” Transition to Adulthood. 20 (1): 4366.
Rumbaut, Ruben G. 2005. “Sites of Belonging: Acculturation, Discrimination, and Ethnic Identity
Among Children of Immigrants.” Discovering Successful Pathways in Children’s Development: Mixed methods
in the Study of Childhood and Family Life. Ed. Thomas S. Weiner. Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
111-164.
Sarmiento, Thomas X. PhD Candidate, Department of American Studies, University of Minnesota.
Critical Ethnic Studies Association Conference. Paper presentation. “Asian Americans in the
Midwest: Theorizing Region for Asian American Studies Through Midwestern Studies.” 2013.
Sollors, Werner, ed. 1989. The invention of ethnicity. New York: Oxford University Press.
Smith, Christian. 2008. “Future Directions in the Sociology of Religion”. Social Forces. University of
North Carolina. Vol. 86, No. 4 (June 2008) p 1561-1589.
Stone, Pamela. 2008. Opting Out?: Why Women Really Quit Careers and Head Home. Berkeley: University
of California Press.
Stow, Simon. 2008. “The Way We Read Now: Oprah Winfrey, Intellectuals, and Democracy.” The
Oprah Affect: Critical Essays on Oprah’s Book Club. Ed Cecilia Konchar Farr. New York: Suny Press.
Warner, Stephen R. 2005. A Church of Our Own: Disestablishment and Diversity in American Religion. New
Brunswick: Rutgers University Press.
Warner, Stephen R and Judith Wittner. 1998. Gatherings in Diaspora: Religious communities and the new
immigration. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Waters, Mary C. 1999. Black Identities: West Indian Immigrant Dreams and American Realities. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Wei, William. 1992. The Asian American Movement. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
Yoo, David. 2010. Contentious Spirits: Religion in Korean American History, 1903-1945. Stanford: Stanford
University Press.
Yoshino, Kenji. 2006. Covering: The Hidden Assault on our Civil Rights. New York: Random House
Trade Paperbacks.
25