zak called from alabama to say he's doing a story on a controversy related to the death penalty and opposition to the proposed two-year moratorium on executions. we talk for half an hour about our summer plans. zak has graduated from columbia two weeks ago, and is joining the st political desk on july 1st, but hopes to be posted back to a correspondent position in new york or d.c. "i'm going to pass through charlottesville on my way back to new york" he tells me. "are you getting out to see the town?" i ask. "only for the five minutes the train stops at the station." and so.

zak says i must be more subversive in my literary work, expose injustices. i point out that i really do prefer structures and modes and not cultural studies and literature in the service of social change. i think that's why ultimately the only -ism i can bear to be charged with is escapism. i'd much rather be labelled that for my fairy tales and my riddles than any other politically so-correct term for flashing about self-perpetuating wounds masquerading as means of empowerment. i think that's why in the time of our singing spoke so directly to me - because that obliviousness to - or attempt to remain above - identity politics - fails in the end, and it is heartbreaking when your own beliefs are dismantled by the action of the plot. my roommate seems to feel that we will become the affirmative action hires for being "ethnic" and "women" - and that surprised me greatly, for i shall never suppose that is true. it seems to me a person should work at being good at what she does - and that is both towards the perfection of the work and of the life. unlike yeats, i don't worry about the heavenly mansion. and these endeavours must and will speak for themselves. it seems to me that that must be the only thing that matters - doing brilliant work. because then if i were hired over a white man and it was really on account of being an asian woman, should i doubt myself and say he was better and i was only hired because i am a woman? nonsense. i would be able to say well, i have got the job and i know i am very good at at my work, and i don't apologise for it, nor need i doubt myself. what is important is to go on doing the work well. and if i were really, actually passed over for the same reasons - well first of all that is even less likely today - i shouldn't believe it. there are lots of brilliant people who don't get the breaks. why should we go dragging ethnicity or gender or sexuality into it. i shall be unlucky, but i shan't be discriminated against. if the work were truly good - and made a difference - and in the world of structures and shapes there are no late comers - nor identity politics - then that work must speak for itself.