OPEN SEASON Study Guide W Nos 731 2012
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Open Season By Mark Tang and Lu Lippold Study Guide for Facilitators and Educators by Louisa Schein and Va-Megn Thoj This guide offers questions and issues for discussion that can be used by community groups, classes, professional groups, teachers, facilitators and others, including individuals, who would like to think more broadly about themes and questions as they view the film. Different sections will be appropriate for different groups, so they are intended to present a range of choices. Classes, community organizations and professional groups can use Open Season in many ways. Topic areas include: Race and Ethnicity, Immigration, U.S. History and American Studies, Hmong and Asian Americans, Law, Enforcement and Jurisprudence, Criminal Justice, Forensics, Hunting and Natural Resources, Community Conflict, Violence and Hate, Civil Rights, Filmmaking and Documentary. This guide is especially designed to offer strategies for discussions about race and racism that are often very difficult to have, and to suggest vocabularies for talking about these difficult subjects. High school teachers and administrators should look closely at the content of the film and only screen it in carefully chosen contexts with some preparation for the emotional impact of the film. Questions and Issues for Discussion The following questions are arranged by themes, but any could be used by themselves or in sequence after screening Open Season. Some questions are similar, but phrased for different emphasis so that the discussion leader can choose and adapt what is most appropriate for the particular group. Immigrants and Assimilation 1. Asian Americans have continued to be seen as newcomers, and sojourners, unassimilable and culturally distinct no matter how many generations their families may have been in the U.S. Sometimes Asian Americans say they are considered by other 2. Americans to be “perpetual foreigners.” Chai Soua Vang immigrated when he was six years old. Do you feel he was regarded as a full-fledged American in this case? 3. Some observers said the incident was an outcome of culture clash, that Chai Soua Vang and other Hmong “don’t understand property” and that there are different hunting cultures. However, many Hmong spokespeople said they did understand private property. What do you think of the culture clash interpretation of the conflict? 4. What would you say is the significance of property to whites given the footage provided in the documentary? 5. If Hmong say they have no problem understanding the concept of property and of trespassing, then why would other people and the media have said it was a cultural issue? What was being expressed? 6. A stereotype of Hmong hunters that has been reported in Wisconsin is that they are chronic trespassers and rule-breakers. Statistics reported by a Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources warden contradict this idea. Where do you think this discrepancy comes from? 7. Does this film reveal something about hunting culture that you didn’t know before? 8. Why would Hmong not involved in the incident be worried that there would be consequences for them? That they would be stereotyped? Why does society allow a backlash against other members of a group when there is an incident like this? The Racial Dimension 9. Why would white hunters care if Hmong hunted in the same woods? 10. Asians on American turf have often been typed as invaders or enemies. This was seen in the placard displayed by a demonstrator outside the courthouse: “Killer Vang – Send Back to Vietnam.” What is being expressed here? Unpack this. 11. According to Chai Soua Vang, several kinds of slurs were used in the course of the confrontation. These included “You people…” and “You Asians…” and “F---ing Asians…”. What are the differences between these? How do you determine if they are racial slurs? 12. Why would the hunters have slurred all Asians instead of Hmong? What’s going on there? 13. During the trial, some Hmong said that if a Black man was on trial, race would have been more of a factor. What is the meaning of this statement? How do you think this case might have been different if Chai Soua Vang had been white? Or black? Or Latino? Or other types of Asian such as South Asian? 14. What does it mean when the defense attorney says “race was injected” into the issue? 15. An American Indian said in the film: “A lot of people want to give Chai Soua Vang the benefit of the doubt about what happened.” Why would this be true for Native Americans? Specifically Hmong Issues 16. How did other Hmong come to share the blame with Chai Soua Vang? Chino Lo said that Chai had made a decision but that he would have to live with Chai’s decision – what does this mean? 17. Regarding the bumper sticker “Save a Deer, Kill a Hmong” – what do you think of this? 18. Many Hmong and other members of the community have struggled with how to advocate for considering the Hmong point of view without seeming to exonerate Chai Soua Vang for his own actions. Do you think it is possible to do this? 19. What else would you want to know about Chai Soua Vang or the Hmong to think about this story further? Community Relations 20. Why would the Hmong community have seen this incident as a community concern? What about the Asian American community? 21. Lu Lippold said that she discovered in the process of filming how much Wisconsinites hate being called “racist.” What do you think that’s about? 21. What kind of threats could the white hunters have perceived from Chai Soua Vang's trespassing on their property? 23. Why would the white hunters have reinforced their group number to ask Chai Soua Vang to leave their property? What effect would this action have on the confrontation? 24. Do you think there is more the Department of Natural Resources could have done? Or could do? What would it be? 25. Do you think that more posting on private land would help? And would it need to be in Hmong language? 26. The white hunters in the film express that Hmong hunters often trespassed on their private properties. Hmong express that they often encounter racial slurs from white hunters. How could these existing perceptions have colored the encounter between Chai Soua Vang and the white hunters? 27. In the statement from Human Rights Coalition Forum shown in the film, the suggestion was made that “no Hmongs should return to this area.” Why would community members recommend this? Is this a solution? The Trial and Legal Issues 28. Should self-defense be defined in terms of the presence of weapons? If seven of the hunters were unarmed, why did Chai Soua Vang feel threatened? 29. What is racial threat? Could a racial slur be a racial threat that would legally justify self-defense? 30. Which was more important: The question of whether Chai Soua Vang was shot at first, or the question of whether racial slurs were uttered in the form of threats? 31. Is the question of who shot first important? Why? Is the importance of who shot first satisfactorily addressed by the trial? 32. Why wouldn’t the defense have requested evidence of who shot first? What difference would it have made if we knew who shot first? Do you think Chai Soua Vang could have gotten a fair trial if the defense didn’t request that? 33. Could Chai Soua Vang's case have been made stronger by the defense? How? 34. How could the court trial have been done differently? 35. What does it mean when the top lawyer in the state - the attorney general - prosecutes the case? What effect do you think it might have on the outcome? 36. Think about the idea of being “judged by a jury of one’s peers.” What are peers? What would YOU want to know if you were on the jury? 37. What do you think about the jury being all white? If you think non-Hmong people of color should have been on the jury, would it have made a difference if they were Asian or other people of color? 38. Why do you think Chai Soua Vang gave such a detailed testimony of his killing of the seven hunters? 39. With regard to Chai Soua Vang’s personal testimony, how might it have helped or hindered his case to testify? Do you think his lawyers should have counseled him not to take the stand? 40. Do you feel that Chai Soua Vang had balanced opportunity in the courtroom in terms of his control of English language? Do you think his accented English might have made a difference to the outcome? Do you feel he should have had some kind of language assistance or interpretation? 41. How do you think the line of questioning about whether the victims “deserved to die” affected the trial? How do you understand Chai Soua Vang’s response that some of the deceased “deserved to die”? And his statement that it was “because they didn’t know how to talk to me”? 42. Chai Soua Vang also said he “did what was necessary to stay alive”? How would you calculate this if you were in a similar situation? How would you judge whether hate threats and slurs are physical threats? 43. What might have happened if Chai Soua Vang had been acquitted? What do you think would have been the societal response? 44. Why do you think Chai Soua Vang’s attorneys found “no basis for appeal”? Would you? 45. What does the Attorney General mean when she says: “We will never know what happened”? 46.