In comparing the three sites’ delineation on Asian/Latino cultural intersections, I saw how each interpreted the realities of these fusions through a number of perspectives.They all engage in the representative act of talking about Asians and Latina/os, but do so through frameworks of intellectual engagement, celebration, and factualness.

For the Cheng book, the relationship between these two communities was situated in a discussion on how ethnic communities inhabited suburban life. As an academic piece, The Changs Next Door to the Diazes situated its ethnographic studies amongst a documented academic history ,as demonstrated through Cheng’s extensive Notes and Bibliography section. In contrast to the other two sites, the Asian and Latino discourses with which she is engaging are informed by both academic conversations and the lived realities of her informants. Her rendering of Asian/Latino sites of contestation and collaboration are made all the more stronger by her ethnographic work, which allows the voices of SGV residents to actively depict and theorize their experiences. I applaud the work she accomplished, both as a person interested in suburban life and theories of the everyday, and as a resident of Southern California who often finds his experiences silences in scholarship at large. One point of concern is the book’s accessibility factor, which, as an academic text, does not facilitate the same ease in comprehension as the other two sites.

The “Intersections in American Life” exhibit understands Asian/Latino connections as a historically-dictated act with a host of contemporary applications. It echoes Cheng’s assertion that these communities are present and merit more critical consideration, but does so through the perspective of a capacious public humanities framework. The site is imbued with a celebratory tenor that marks Asian and Latino as something we as a nation of immigrations should extol. The consistent use of phrases like "celebration" and "appreciation" invite recognition of these communities that focus on the positive characteristics of the intersection. While some might criticize the limitations of this narrative, it is nonetheless important as an act that establishes knowledge of Asian/Latino cultures in institutions that might otherwise deem it one-dimensional and limited. Even though it specifies three categories as sites of investigation, the curators utilize a variety of sources—artists, chefs, academics, and policy makers-- to describe the holistic nature of this intersection.The site’s strength lies in its detailed, visual-based interpretation of Asian/Latino life. While the other two sites were sparse in aesthetic design, the Smithsonian site carries its wide presentation of this intersection throughout its colorful blog-like style. Asian/Latino is depicted as a collaborative expressive project, something with which I highly agree.

The Wikipedia article’s discussion of Asian/Latino cultural exchange is much more tacit in comparison to the other two sites. As a straightforward encyclopedic entry, the page’s interpretation of the relationship resonates as a simple fact of the Korean Taco’s creation. It offers no critical interpretation of the item’s cultural history, and lacks the academic situatedness of Cheng’s book and the celebratory elements of the Smithsonian site. Still, the article is important in signaling how mainstream audiences are both comprehending and sharing information on the Korean Taco, albeit through the limitations of a Wikipedia page.