Which of the following about Amy’s background is INCORRECT? [originaltext]M: Goo

M: Good evening. I’m Harry. Our guest today is Amy Chua, who is a Professor of Law at Yale University and the author, most recently, of World on Fire: How Exporting Free Market Democracy Breeds Ethnic Hatred and Global Instability. Amy, welcome back to Berkeley.
W: Thank you very much.
M: Where were you born and raised?
W: I was born in Champaign, Illinois, and spent the first eight years of my life in West Lafayette, Indiana. And then my father—you can figure out that he’s an academic—we were at Purdue and then we moved to Berkeley, California, when I was eight, and I grew up here.
M: So you went to the public schools in Berkeley?
W: I went to El Cerrito High School, a public school—yes, very public.
M: Looking back, how do you think your parents shaped your thinking about the world?
W: It’s complicated. A lot of it was accidental. My parents were both immigrants from the Philippines. They were ethnic Chinese, but they grew up in the Philippines. And my parents actually eloped to MIT, so, not the first place—
M: I hope they took books with them!
W: Not the first place I would elope to, but that’s where they ended up. I grew up with my three younger sisters in a fairly typical Chinese immigrant family. We had to work; we had to work very hard. My parents were fairly strict and a lot was expected of us, and we did not enjoy the same freedoms that a lot of our friends did.
M: I would imagine a real emphasis on education and books?
W: Yes. Yes, principally education, books, and family. I think that would be the core.
M: Where were you educated after El Cerrito High?
W: I went to Harvard. I applied just to that one place. I was going to Berkeley, but I went to Harvard. I went to Harvard Law School, as well, and then practiced on Wall Street for a while, and then eventually moved my way into academics, and I now teach at Yale.
M: As an undergraduate in Harvard, you majored in economics, right?
W: Yes, that’s right.
M: What led you to the law? Why did you decide to go to law school?
W: Sadly, I think it was really just a default decision. Again, maybe playing to stereotypes too much, but my parents had high hopes for me in the sciences. I was actually pre-med, and I chose economics because it wasn’t applied—I started off in applied math, and economics was, I thought, at least a soft science; hoping that maybe that would appease my parents. But I enjoyed it very much and I focused on development while I was at Harvard.
M: What kind of law did you practice, once you started practicing?
W: Well, here the themes start to come together. I took a lot of international law courses. You kind of try to escape who you are, and I’ve always been interested in developing countries, international issues, cultural issues, because we were immigrants and outsiders in this country. My parents grew up in a developing country, two developing countries—China and the Philippines. After graduating, I had clerked for a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for a year, and I wanted to go straight into teaching.
M: What years were you practicing international law?
W: I graduated from law school in 1987, clerked for a year, so around 1989 to 1994, I was on Wall Street. It was right after the fall of the Berlin Wall, so everyone was emphasizing markets and privatization as the answer to everything...
M: Now we’re going to talk about your new book. Before we talk about the book itself, there’s a personal story that was very important for you, that led you to focus on the problem, relating to your aunt. Tell us that story.
W: Okay. In 1994, I had just started teaching in North Carolina. I received a call from my mother in Berkeley. She told me that my aunt, my father’s twin sister, had been murdered in her home in the Philippines, in Manila. She’d been killed by her driver. Obviously, this was a terrible family time for us. We were very close to my aunt. She was my father’s twin. I decided to open the book with that story because I looked at the police report, because I was so upset about the case being closed. The most striking thing was in a section for motive; I expected it to say robbery or something, because jewels were taken. But instead, there was just one word, and that was "revenge." That startled me and got me thinking. In a way, that idea has been an organizing motif for the book.
M: Amy, on that positive note, I want to thank you very much for joining us today and talking about your intellectual odyssey and your new book.
W: Thank you so much for having me. It was really a pleasure.
M: And thank you very much for joining us.