本研究黃哲倫和其他亞美作家，探討其族裔和身份認同，在出生和多元文化的交錯之下，是否可能透過離散的經驗，漂泊成為另外一種文化身份。如黃哲倫透過和猶太裔、黑人作家的互動，採取不一樣的族裔認同，來擴大這種多元文化的面向。在這個面向上，我認為亞美研究可以與「離散研究」作某種形成的互補，特別是在臺灣目前主流的亞美研究領域，通常限定在自己的華裔身份，討論有關「中國文化性格」，也就是中國人的個性和文化傳承等面向。對於越南、菲律賓、韓國和日本的研究，以及廣義的亞裔華文作家或是英文作家，並沒有發展出比較廣泛的視野。對於由亞洲漂流到英美世界的作家，如翁達傑和石黑一雄，臺灣的學者僅有少數人開始把他們當作研究的重點。因此，如何透過一個比較廣泛的角度，去探討亞裔在主流文化的漂泊經驗，並以亞裔的離散和視覺文化作為課題，實是目前方興未艾的研究方向。

In response to dislocation, dissociation, and difference, diasporas tend to form disjunctive subjectivities, often in the almost unrecognizable form of what Jacques Lacan terms “anamorphosis,” of a contorted projection of hopes and fears into a distorted field of vision. Diasporas desire to belong while tortured by lack; their worldviews and discursive practices are informed by fetish desires to reproduce or to fill in the gap between the home and the new world. While theoretically productive and politically useful, diaspora studies have yet to map new territories. The cases offered tend to focus on North America or the English-speaking Indian or Caribbean communities. Comparative accounts have recently appeared, but they generally discuss global networks of capitalism initiated and controlled by the US. In the study of Chinese diasporas, for instance, a large proportion have been devoted to Asian Americans or the notion of “Chineseness,” with only a handful to the Chinese of Europe, Australia, or southeast Asia.