A Church’s Guide for the Election

Across street from my house, there is a flat-top, square-ish building, looking rather modern. If it were not for the sign in front of it, I wouldn’t have thought it a Christian church. For the ten years since I moved to this quiet suburb, I had never set foot in it.

Now I’m taking a journalism class, one of the assignments is to establish a “listening post.” The idea is to visit a community you are less familiar with, so as to increase the understanding of diversity. Since I never knew what this church across street was doing, I decided to pay a visit to it this morning. That is, a Sunday morning when it’s running a service.

At 10 am sharp I walked into the church. On a desk in the hall lay some handouts. I picked one up; it’s titled “Values Voter Guide for 2008 Presidential Candidates.” It highlights issues debated between McCain and Obama, 21 of them all. A simple “Yes” or “No” column indicating each candidate’s position on each issue. Not surprisingly, on 16 of the issues listed, the two candidates take opposite positions. They agreed on three of them, while the remaining two issues were alternately addressed by only one of the candidates.

At first glance, this list is quite impartial. It does not spell out a recommendation, and the issues listed are quite informative. The Guide only asks you to compare the candidates. I was impressed.

Walking into the nave, for a moment I suspected I was in the wrong place, or at a wrong time. The stage looked ready to start a musical, or some Broadway performance. A glass room located on the left side of the stage housed a man with a full set of shining silver percussion instruments. In the center of the stage were a pianist, two guitarists, and a row of seven men and women waiting to start singing.

And singing they began soon after I took my seat. The choirmaster, a black man with beautiful voice, called for the audience to stand and sing with them. A large pull-down screen hanging above the stage, showed colorful moving pictures with the lyrics. People raised their arms and sang enthusiastically and repeatedly: “I’m desperate for you, I’m lost without you…We live to glorify your name.”

They stood and sang for 40 minutes. When they finally finished, the priest took the place of the choirmaster and explained the voting guide. He called his audience to “vote for our values, not by the party line.” He then went on to say “we don’t want the government to redefine the values of our families; God defines it, Jesus defines it.” And he said he puts his hope in God to place the right man in the government.

As he continued, I read the handout again and realized that he was calling for people to vote for McCain and Palin, mostly for Palin, who was viewed by some people as representing American family values.

During the next hour the priest preached Revelation 12 to 14, and he emphasized diversity.

Later, on the way home, I wondered how diverse the church members actually are. Will all, or most of them, listen to the priest and vote for McCain? Do most Christian churches want McCain and Palin to lead America? If the result turns out to be the opposite, is God wrong, or are the churches wrong?

Testing Your Unconscious Biases

A fellow writer discovered a Harvard webpage presenting tools for testing unconscious biases. You can find many tests there, the featured one on Election 2008. I had thought I knew all my own biases and didn't even need a test, but I took the "Asian American" test just for the sake of it. I chose the answer to the first question as "I like Asian Americans and European Americans equally." And to another I chose "I consider … descent equally American." After going through some image selections, this was what I got:

Your Result

Your data suggest a moderate association of Asian American with American and European American with Foreign compared to European American with American and Asian American with Foreign.

That was a surprise! Because consciously, for me, it is the opposite. It seems the test reaches its conclusions based on the number of mistakes you make. If you don't make any mistake, it probably won't let you finish. I am not sure how reliable the interpretation is, but it's kind of interesting.

Absentee Voting

Because I’ll be out of town next week, I went to cast my absentee ballot this afternoon. Several people were already there doing the same. When asked by a voter, the town clerk who handled our ballots said this year the early voting is especially heavy. And she believes this is because the general participation is going to be a lot higher.

I think all the talk about early voting contributed to the higher participation. I was surprised at how easy it was. I have never had to wait in line to vote in my small suburban town, but I can understand the charm of an absentee ballot to those that have.

Letter from Harvard China Care

(This letter reached me through my web contact page. - Xujun)

On behalf of Harvard China Care, I cordially invite you to The Harvard China Care Third Annual Benefit Dinner and Silent Auction on November 12th, 7 – 9:30 pm at the Lenox Hotel in Boston.

Harvard China Care is a student group on campus that raises money and awareness for orphans in China both through Boston-area programs and by coordinating summer volunteers to orphanages in China. I became involved with HCC after an amazing volunteering experience in a foster home in Beijing last summer.

This year, we are proud to announce our Third Annual Fall Benefit and Silent Auction. We'll be featuring award-winning documentary producer Thomas Lennon and his Oscar-winning film, "The Blood of Yingzhou District."  Mr. Lennon's groundbreaking and powerful work focuses around raising awareness and education efforts of AIDS in China.  It is a cause close to our hearts at Harvard China Care, and we are proud and honored to feature Mr. Lennon as the centerpiece of the event.

We would be delighted if you could join us for the evening! To reserve seats, simply fill out the order form (http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/care/2008.HCC.Benefit.Order.Form.Update.pdf) and email it back to me. You may also purchase tickets online at http://www.hcs.harvard.edu/~care/08dinner.html or by sending a check to our mailing address: Harvard China Care, c/o Sherri Geng, 179 Kirkland Mail Center, Cambridge, MA  02138.

Thank you very much for helping us to improve the lives of Chinese orphans! Please let me know if you have any questions.

We hope to see you in November, and look forward to hearing from you soon.

Warmest wishes,

Shuang Annie Yao

"Comrades To Consumers: Advertisements In Chinese Media"

An interesting research - read about it here.

Spider Web in Tiananmen

(photo from info.yqie.com)

Last week, many Chinese websites reprinted an article from China Newsweek titled "How the Tiananmen Incident was Redressed." This title is a bit eye-shocking because the term "Tiananmen Incident" in Chinese has also been used to refer to the 1989's June 4^th massacre. This article, however, is talking about an earlier "Tiananmen Incident" that took place on April 5^th, 1976, also commonly referred as the "4/5 incident."

Common Americans may not be aware of this first "Tiananmen Incident." It happened after Premier Zhou Enlai's death in January 1976 and before Mao's death in September that same year. In the name of the Qingming Festival in April, the traditional time to mourn the dead, Beijing people spontaneously gathered on the Tiananmen Square, placing flowers, wreaths, poems and essays on the "People's Heroes Monument," mostly to grieve the death of Zhou Enlai, some also (in subtle and obscure ways) expressed resentment against members of the "Gang of Four" and hopes for Deng Xiaoping's return to power. The government of the time responded to the peaceful, largely literary, activities with a curfew and armed repression. An unknown number of people were killed and many arrested or denounced. The incident was declared a "counterrevolutionary riot."

I was in the countryside then as an urban "sent-down youth." Some of the best Tiananmen poems and essays, hand copied on notebook paper, circulated through the grapevine to my hand. I still remember the excitement I had in reading those beautifully written poems. After Mao's death and the Gang of Four fell out of power, people began to demand a redressing of the incident. But that did not happen right away.

The China Newsweek article now cites a "thorough redressing" that came two years later. I don't remember the timeline of the redressing exactly, however my own experience contradicts this conclusion. After the Cultural Revolution I was a first-batch undergraduate student at Chongqing University, from spring 1978 to spring 1982. Through those four years I was the chief editor of the student literature journal published on the wall of our main classroom building. We were required to have every piece of prose and poetry approved by the university's Party authority. But knowing the authority's backward and bureaucratic view toward anything and everything, as the editor I always tried to "execute before permission," or 先斩后奏. Sometimes we got away with it, sometimes we got in trouble. One trouble resulted from a student's essay, I think it was either in1979 or 1980, praising the justice expressed by the participants of the "4/5 incident." A Party leader scolded and threatened me and required that I remove the essay, which was already up on the wall and had been read by numerous students. I made all the excuses I could to delay the removal, until two weeks later when a new issue was due. We got away that time, but were watched much more closely thereafter.

I mention this to say by the end of the 1970s or early 1980s, there still hadn't been a "thorough redress" of the 4/5 incident, at least that was the situation at Chongqing University. For all the years after, the topic of that incident remained sensitive. Authorities avoided any mention of it in public, as it wasn't a glorious page in the Party's history.

There are many similarities between the two Tiananmen Incidents that occurred 13 years apart. For example, in both incidents, people demanded political change. In the first one Deng Xiaoping was accused as the "behind-the-scenes backer" of the demonstrators, while 13 years later he made the same accusation against Zhao Ziyang. The surface difference is the lack of tanks in the first crackdown; guns were enough that time. It is a big irony that, in 1976 people called for Deng Xiaoping to return to China's political stage, and in 1989 it was the same Deng Xiaoping who ordered people shot. While Deng is certainly credited with China's economic reform, this is an unwashable stain on his name.

All the above is nothing new to my Chinese readers. However the purpose of this post is actually not a mere review of history. My question is, why does the sensitive term "Tiananmen Incident" - 天安门事件 - (instead of using the term "4/5 incident," for instance) appear in such a prominent way in an official magazine? Why has the report been published now, a time that has no relation to April 5th? Is this a foreshadow to the redressing of the second Tiananmen Incident?

Of course I might be fussing over nothing that has any actual significance. However one thing I learned growing up during the Cultural Revolution is to follow the thread of a spider and tracks of a horse in political weather change. Call it PCRPD (Post-CR Political Disorder). I rather hope I'm right this time though.

Doctor Olaf van Schuler's Brain

My friend Kirsten Menger-Anderson's debut story collection, Doctor Olaf van Schuler's Brain, is reviewed in the Washington Post. I have the book on my shelf and I look forward to reading it!

How Can China Support America

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

When China lowered its interest rate on October 8^th, people outside of China attributed the action to an attempt to fall in line with what the central banks in Europe and the United States had done. There was actually no reason given for the change, and it was done in conjunction with a reduction in reserve requirements, suggesting that the effort was part of an attempt to buffer the Chinese banking system rather than really fall in step.

(photograph by Maple Xu, ©2008, all rights reserved)

Regardless of the motivation, however, there was some negative reaction inside China on the grounds that China should forge its own path, and not follow the lead of the West. When later there was a rumor that the Chinese were considering injecting $200 Billion into the US financial system by buying Treasury notes, that reaction heightened immensely. Unfortunately, I have to bug other people to look at Chinese web sites so I never really got to the bottom of where that rumor started, though I do find it ironic that adding $200 billion to the current Chinese holdings would give the central bank $700 billion, just matching the size of the bailout plan.

More to the point, though, people started asking the question what China should do to help in this crisis. The very fact that people are asking that question is breathtaking to me. Some ten years ago, during the Asian Financial crisis, China did its best (pretty successfully for the most part) to simply avoid the pain. The current attitudes are a testament to the progress China has made economically, its own housing boom, and the much higher reach of the internet. People not only hear about, but talk about, almost everything and almost all of them are thinking about home ownership.

The most prevalent answer, if you are curious, is no, the Chinese should not be worrying about the rest of the world. Not a big surprise, most concerns are closer to home, quite literally. There is more interest in figuring out whether the experience in the US housing market has some lesson in it for the people in China. If past experience worldwide is any indicator, the answer is almost certainly yes, but almost none will learn it.

What is really interesting about all this though is that the real lesson may be exactly the other way around. The US, and European governments responded loudly, and hopefully effectively, panic stricken that the financial markets would collapse and leave everyone jobless. To look at the Shanghai Stock Exchange Index, which dropped from 6000 last October to 2000 this October, you would definitely conclude that China is headed into a depression. Not so. Nobody is talking about anything except for abnormally low, which is to say less than 10%, growth in the next year. While things may yet turn out less rosy than people expect, the connection between stock prices, and housing prices, is much weaker in China than it is in the US. Part of this is relative size – a much bigger portion of the US economy is represented by these two things – but part of this disconnection is the command nature of the Chinese Economy.

Though many people are calling for the Chinese government to do something about the stock market, it has not been quick to take drastic action. I have no doubt though, that should producers find demand dropping away for their product, the government would step in. Certainly such steps would be clumsy, the norm for a command economy, but they would be strong. The knowledge that this would be done might very well be enough to mean the action never needs to be taken. McCain and Obama talk about hatchets and scalpels. What the Chinese government holds in reserve is more like a bulldozer. That level of control is often problematic, but at times like this it comes in handy.

No Internet Regulation on Human Flesh Searches

New America Media, News analysis, Xujun Eberlein, Published: Oct 17, 2008

Vicious online gossip was blamed for pushing South Korean film star Choi Jin Sil to hang herself in her bathroom. The news that the Korean government now plans to enforce a “Choi Jin Sil law” to regulate the Internet has triggered another wave of debate on internet regulation in Chinese cyberspace.

Cyber rumors, apparently, were a direct cause of Choi's suicide, and Korean police have arrested a rumor spreader involved in the case. Even long before this event, cyber violence prompted the Korean government to implement the so-called "real name system." This system requires all commercial websites with 30,000 or more users, and all media websites with 20,000 or more users, to verify a user's real ID before allowing them to post any message. The "Choi Jin Sil law" extends the real-name system to any website with 10,000 or more users.

Now some Chinese netizens are wondering if China needs to follow suit. China has been rocked by stories of “human flesh searches” which are basically Internet vigilantes unleashing a cyber equivalent of lynching.

More people, however, are worried that such regulation would heavily restrict freedom of speech. Their worries are not without basis. Read the complete article>>

Sushidog's Review

I'm very moved that someone who lives as far away as Tokyo has read Apologies Forthcoming. Thank you, Sushidog!

By the way - this is not a big deal - I've never been a tech writer, though several reviewers have assumed that. My previous career was in algorithm development. It seems the misunderstanding was stemmed from a line in my bio, "I gave up tech for writing," which could easily be read as "I gave up tech writing." For clarification I've just changed that line to "I gave up algorithms for writing."

James Wood Words Palin

Read this in the New Yorker and get some good laughs. James Wood, by the way, is my favorite literary critic.

Mischievous Dubbing (恶搞): US and China

Saturday Night Live's latest, 7-minute parody is an excellent and uproarious summary of Thursday's vice presidential debate. The best performer is Tina Fey, who looks totally like the real Palin, to the turn of her hair, or lip. CNN has a good comment on this – "It's starting to feel like Tina Fey is running for vice president."

Considering that Fey's normal picture is quite easily distinguished, I'd say she has the talent of an Oscar actress. She parodied Palin's body language and facial expressions extremely true to form; I had a very hard time telling her from Palin. But what made me laugh the most was how she captures Palin's incoherent and evasive speaking style. At one point the Fey-Palin says, "We are not afraid to get mavericky in there, and not got to allow that, and also to the great Ronald Regan." This way of randomly throwing together words and phrases without regard to grammar or meaning, was exactly my impression of Palin's speaking when I watched the debate Thursday night. Palin is worse than George Bush in this regard – though both appear uncultured, and Bush probably more often pronounces words incorrectly, he at least seems to genuinely mean what he says, even when I am almost sure he does not. Given how old McCain is, I would be extremely worried if McCain got sick and this lady became our president. Apparently this is also a main reason that many of my Chinese friends won't vote for McCain. Call it a shallow and intuitive way of reasoning. But what more can common voters do if not judge based on impression? I think McCain made his biggest mistake by choosing such a (...) running mate.

Now let's return to entertainment, and China. Such parody of public figures is one of those things I enjoy about America, a relaxed political culture that is missing in China. But in recent years, there has been a sort of Chinese equivalent called "e-gao" (恶搞), or, as a direct translation, "mischievous dubs." The Chinese Wikipedia interprets the term as "to disintegrate a serious topic and reconstruct it as prank entertainment, either comedic or satiric in style." The main difference to me, however, is that the Chinese dubbing videos, usually based on domestic and foreign movies and TV shows, almost never name real individuals, and avoid mocking political figures. Instead they focus on fictional characters or events, entertainment products, or businesses. Another notable feature is that nearly all of those Chinese dubs use the original video clips but switch the voices and subtitles, a creative approach to cut down the cost. The wide availability of the internet, of course, provides the platform for the "mischievous dubs" to reach its audience.

Apparently, in China the first notable "mischievous dub" occurred in December 2005, when an as yet unknown man named Hu Ge parodied the reputed director Chen Kaige's new movie, "The Promise," changing the story of an ancient Chinese prince to a modern murder case. Hu's short dub film spread apace, receiving more applause than the original movie. Chen Kaige, who apparently was unfamiliar with parody culture, bristled with anger and threatened to bring a copyright lawsuit against Hu. In February 2006, at the Berlin International Film Festival, where he was about to launch "The Promise" for Europe, director Chen said in indignation to reporters, "To be a man one can't be so shameless!"

The case attracted attention from lawyers nationwide, most predicted Hu would lose the lawsuit. From outside however, Richard Stallman, the founder of Free Software Foundation, concluded in an interview with a Chinese blogger that "Parodies like this one are legally considered 'fair use'. Courts have ruled that you don't need to get someone's permission before you make fun of him by parodying his work. It is lawful, pure and simple." The Chinese neitizens, meanwhile, were split. Supporters of each side argued noisily online.

In the end, there wasn't a lawsuit after all. The public debate calmed down after Hu made an apology to director Chen. But the damage was done: Hu's dub film started China's parody culture, which quickly became popular, and was everywhere by the summer of 2006. "Finally one day, someone could no longer stand it." NetEase reported in August 2006. The State Administration of Radio, Film and Television issued an "anti-parody" regulation. NetEase mourned the new pop culture's immature death by publishing the list of the "top ten mischievous dubs." It also suggested, "If we can't mischievously dub, at least we can kind-heartedly dub."

Mischievously or not, despite the regulation, Chinese parodies did not simply go away. As recent as last month, a new one surfaced on YouTube mocking the Hong Kong movie Red Cliff and making fun of a Chinese company named Zhifubao. It is hilarious if you understand Chinese. (Thanks to Ji Haidong who pointed it to me.)

What I'm hoping though is to see political parodies like those on SNL begin to appear in China. The day when that happens would mark a new era of China's political culture.

Simmons International Chinese Poetry Festival

I attended one of the sessions today. One thing I found interesting was that, given China's morality crisis and the lack of a dominant belief system, some poets proposed having poetry as a replacement for religion. Poetry can purify the soul, they argued, and popularizing poetry education might improve morality. Perhaps I'm too cynical - I doubt that's a feasible solution. It seems we are getting fewer, not more, readers of poetry these days. And those who have engaged in the recent scandals are most unlikely poetry readers.

Another Interview

Donna George Storey, author of Amorous Woman and a writer friend, interviewed me for Eclectica, a cool literary magazine. Donna begins the interview with this question:

DGS     The first work of fiction I read about the Cultural Revolution was back in my grad school days—Wang Anyi's A Lapse of Time. This author wrote from the perspective of a privileged member of the generation who had already reached young adulthood in 1968. Thus, this ten-year period was like a long night of insanity sandwiched between two periods of "normal" life. Some of your older characters have similar experiences, like the father in "Men Don't Apologize." But many of the protagonists in Apologies Forthcoming were children and thus barely remembered any different life. Later they have to struggle with the death of the ideals they were taught. One narrator asks herself, "Which is better: to have a false belief and be content or to break the false belief and feel empty?" Do you have an answer to her question?

 Read the complete interview here.

Americans don't like to read translation?

Following yesterday's link to the report about the top Nobel judge's unfavorable comment on American literature and the reactions it stirred up, there is heated discussion on a writer's online forum I frequent. It's understandable that many American writers are angered by Engdahl's words, and they return fire by bombasting the Nobel committee's ignorance, which is quite effective.

Personally, however, I'm more interested in how much truth is contained in this particular statement:

"The U.S. is too isolated, too insular. They don't translate enough and don't really participate in the big dialogue of literature," Engdahl said. "That ignorance is restraining." (AP)

In the discussion on the aforementioned online forum, at least one writer agrees that most American publishers shun translations due to the assumption that Americans don't like to read stories set outside the US, not even stories written in English set elsewhere.

As I noted in a book review earlier, Howard Goldblatt, America's foremost translator of Chinese literature, says in a March interview with China's Southern Weekly that Americans don't read much literary translation. I wonder why. It is a bit difficult for an immigrant like me to comprehend this mentality, because in my youth I read far more literary translations from Europe (France, England, Russia, etc.) and America (such as Hemingway, Mark Twain and Jack London) than Chinese novels. My older sister, who doesn't even have a college education, loves to read translations too. The only literary magazine she subscribes to is Translation Forest (<译林>). We are hardly exceptions among our generation.

I hope some of you will offer insights into this: is it true that Americans are much less interested in literary translation than works written by Americans about America? If so, why? It seems to me "too isolated, too insular" is a bit too simplified, too trite a conclusion.

Bad news for American writers...

Nobel judge: U.S. too ignorant to compete
09/30/08 04:18 PM, EDT
Bad news for American writers hoping for a Nobel Prize next week: the top member of the award jury believes the United States is too insular and ignorant to compete with Europe when it comes to great writing.
FULL STORY

Interview on Writing Neuroses

Kay Sexton, a talented British writer, interviewed me for her blog Writing Neuroses ... mine are rare, yours may be legion, and also wrote a thoughtful review of my book. Kay asked very good questions which I enjoyed answering. Her first question is:

Apologies Forthcoming has a central theme, or perhaps a central reef onto which all the stories are somehow driven - and that theme is the Cultural Revolution and its effects on Chinese society. Many Westerners, myself included, have had a one-sided view of this amazing social phenomenon. How much did it affect you, growing up in China?

Read the complete interview here.

"Five Star Literary Stories"

If you are interested in reading short stories, there is a very good website that you can turn to. The Five Star Literary Stories website, hosted by T. J. Forrester, puts a selection of stories together in a comprehensive and continuous manner. It not only reprints excellent stories recommended by editors of on-line literary magazines, but accompanying each story are also comments from the recommending editor and a detailed review from another writer. So far the site has published 25 stories and reviews, and the number will continue to grow. Because the stories are selected from a variety of magazines and reviewed by a variety of writers, the selection has a rare breadth of taste. I'm sure you can find something to your own liking. Enjoy the latest post on Five Star Literary Stories.

Bailing Out the Leaky Boat

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

(Photo by nikok)

Everyone keeps talking about the bailout, but it is interesting to me that nobody continues with the analogy to talk about the leaks in the boat. On the water, when you bail out a boat because something has gone wrong, it only makes sense to do so if you can get the water out faster than it is coming in. If that is the case, you get to keep bailing until the boat gets to shore, or it can be repaired. So, if we are going to have to keep bailing in order to forestall catastrophe, the real question people should be asking is how long that 700 billion will last.

On and off over my lifetime I, like many other people with a background in economics, have spent a great deal of time thinking about the great depression, its causes and ways it might have been avoided, even the desirability of avoiding it. On the financial side, some of these are obvious and fairly well understood. Large scale insider trading, which was business as usual at the time, loose credit, and a general adolescent feeling of invulnerability caused a remarkable run up in stock prices that eventually collapsed. On the real side – what politicians are calling Main Street these days – things are a lot more muddy, a funny thing in a time we associate with the dust bowl. While there is some consensus that there was not enough demand to keep up economic activity, why is not so obvious. Some say there was simply not enough money. Others point to a disconnect between what America was tooled to produce, and what people wanted.

The bailout is, to my mind, an absolutely fascinating, and incredibly expensive, test of the theory that there was not enough money. A long time ago, back when Paul Volker was heading the Fed, there was a great headline in the wall street journal that read something like “What happens if you throw a credit crunch and nobody comes?” The reigning assumption then, as now, was that easing credit will allow people and businesses to borrow money and get things moving. But really, beyond a few anecdotal assertions, there has not been much evidence presented that those who want to borrow money can’t. Just listening to the radio, and the ads from banks that want to lend me money, seems to suggest otherwise to my simple mind. If credit is eased, and still nobody borrows, what then?

While people in America are painfully aware that the price of gasoline is high, all of the talk is about how to make it lower. Almost nobody wants to acknowledge even the possibility that there is a new game afoot. But what if it is just that, a new game, rather than the turmoil in the financial markets, that is really driving down Main Street. What if, what we are feeling now, is the fundamental mismatch between and unlimited ability to consumer and a finite ability to produce. Mark Twain is often attributed with the saying “buy land they aren’t making any more of it,” and in his time others were buying people. Well guess what, they are still making people and in the world of supply and demand that means they should be getting cheaper.

Stepping out of slavery, all this boils down to less going into the hands of those that do the work. While this effect can be lessened, potentially even avoided, by rapid changes in technology, there is no guarantee, or evidence, that this will be sustained. In fact, if you look at the last 20 years in America, the amount earned by most people has not allowed them to lead increasingly better lives. More ironically, if you look at China over the same period, land is probably the single biggest factor in concentrating the wealth into a tiny fraction of the population. It is ironic, because the land was socialized when the communists took over precisely in order to prevent that.

So perhaps the bailout can be paid for by the Chinese who are now rich because land, in fixed supply, is getting progressively more expensive while labor, with unlimited supply, is relatively cheaper and thus Wall Street can keep itself intact while the residents on Main Street and Renmin Road work their butts off just to survive.

A postscript on this. After reading through the proposed bailout bill, the whole activity is being put under the acronym TARP for Troubled Asset Recovery Program. I am not sure if the new metaphor is intentional. But if it is, apparently those in the know think all of this is simply the result of too much rain, and has nothing to do with a leaking boat. Funny though, I did not see anyone named Noah involved in writing the bill.

On Dark Matter

Orville Schell's essay "China: Humiliation & the Olympics" in the New York Review of Books is well-researched, informative, and insightful, one with rare high quality. However, it is a pity that even such a serious China scholar was at times unable to break away from his own presumptions. Just as I was immersed in his eloquent analysis of the way China's historical humiliation by foreign powers shaped the country's modern identity, and brought forth extreme nationalistic sentiment visible today, something in the following passage stuck in my eye:

What was surprising was that many of the most indignant counterdemonstrators were young Chinese, born during the post-Mao era. Better educated and more worldly than older Chinese, one might have expected them to have been exempt from the China-as-victim syndrome. But, perhaps because they, too, were products of the Party's propaganda, many of them have turned out every bit as nationalistic, perhaps even more so, than their elders.^[*]

Then, as if an after-thought, Schell hesitantly adds a footnote:

^[*] Daniel A. Bell's China's New Confucianism, an account of teaching at elite Tsing-hua University, where classroom discourse has proven far more open and students far more reflective, reminds us that not all Chinese students are xenophobes.

While I must give him credit for including this footnote, Schell's convenient presumption that today's students in China are as much products of the Party's propaganda as earlier generations lacks a basis in reality. Apparently, he was very familiar with China in the 1970s, and many of the then-concepts got stuck in his mind as immutable. I visit China every year and talk to all sorts of people, including college students. They appear very well connected to the outside world and not at all as xenophobic as Americans imagine. Their nationalism has a lot more to do with the good economy they enjoy than Party propaganda.

Of course, Schell is not alone. As recent as last week, during the Q&A session of a book event, a woman asked me, "Do the Chinese know about things outside their country?" "Oh yeah," I replied. Such a question came often, and it is understandable, and reasonable, when it comes from someone who doesn't follow China regularly. But it is a bit disappointing to hear it from an expert like Schell, or the BBC anchor who said, "How did they even know we have biases? The Chinese government blocked us!"

Which reminds me last summer when I toured a mountain in Sichuan, an old peasant lady sitting under a tree asked me, "Are you from the city? Do you have trees there?"

If you skip this small disappointing spot, Schell's essay is well worth reading. I was particularly drawn to his analysis of the Chinese people's cultural insecurity caused by the continuous "large-scale, but never definitive, makeovers" occurring in China during the 20^th century. Coincidentally, a few days ago when I gave a talk at the Harvard Coop, an American man who had lived in Taiwan for several years told me that the Taiwanese are the most culturally secure people in the world, with no identity issues at all. The reason? The Taiwan Chinese, while deeply rooted in the five-thousand years of rich culture, didn't experience any of the upheavals of the mainland each rejecting the concepts of its predecessor. A very interesting observation.

By the way, Schell's article makes me really want to see Dark Matter. If any of you have seen the movie, would you please tell me what you think of it?

Another Review of "The Man on Mao's Right"

This review, "China's Tell-Nothing Ethos" by Andrew J. Nathan, takes an unfavorable stand. But I found the reader discussion of it more interesting. The book's co-author, Foster Winans, made some reasonable points in his rebuttal to Nathan. I also found it amusing that a "reader" who did not read the book nonetheless chose to criticize it. One of those weird things.

"Books for Barack"

A writer's innovative, and successful, approach to fundraising for Obama through other writers' donation of books: "Books for Barack."

A review of "The Man on Mao's Right"

From Memory Writers Network by Jerry Waxler: "Seeing History Through The Eyes of One Man."

Ideology or Not?

In response to my Friday post "Why Does China Have a Morality Crisis?" a blogger named Demin says in "What do we need? A new ideology?":

But what I know is that, you can take hold of an ideology, but you can't take hold of people's inner conscience. I would say, conscience is the last area of a living soul. It is always free. All we need to do is to choose: honestly accept this freedom, or pretend that we can control it.

He obviously does not think people in China need any ideology whatsoever. He is not alone. Some comments below my Friday post reflected a similar sentiment. Wuming, for example, commented:

I am not sure the lack of a dominant ideology is a bad thing at all. The last 30 years of China is a repudiation of the revolutionary ideologies of the first 30 years of the communist rule. I think we Chinese are quite allergic to at this kind of political ideologies.

Well said. I must say Wuming's comment resonates with me on the personal level. I had been a sincere believer in communism during my childhood and youth – not much different than the way an American child from a devout Christian family becomes a sincere church goer. But my re-education in the countryside after high school changed all that. For a number of years after I abandoned communism, I felt a sort of spiritual barrenness, as if my soul no longer had a settling place. On the other hand the breach of a deep belief was like the most effective vaccination – nothing could make me a believer again. And after a while I got used to my incorrigible soul.

But, away from the personal, what about at the society level? Does a society need an ideology or not?

Recently, after my book was published, I found it interesting many interviewers took notice on the following passage, a question asked by a character in one of my stories:

"Which is better: to have a false belief and be content, or to break the false belief and be empty?"

And readers too. People asked me about this passage on various occasions. Evidently, this character's question touched on a common concern. Yet I don't think as the author I have a sure answer to it.

A novel I read years ago, The White Mandarin by Dan Sherman, made interesting observations on what had led to the defeat of the Chinese Nationalists (or KMT) by the Communists in 1949. Among other things, one reason identified was that the Communists provided Chinese intellectuals an ideology that was lacking in the Nationalist's appeal. I think this is a pertinent point. The experience of my parents and their friends who joined the eastern Sichuan underground CCP in the 1940s and risked their lives for the communist revolution is proof of that.

On a related note, a few years ago in an on-line writing forum I posted a question, or a hypothesis: what if no one believed a religion? What would the world be like then? Some American writers took offense and accused me of wanting to suppress religions. But, I asked again, what if no one wanted to believe in a religion? Then a writer pointed me to a book of academic research – the title of it now escapes me – which I did find and read. Based on biologic research, the book concluded that the need for a religion exists in human genes, which effectively destroyed the basis of my hypothesis.

Perhaps people like Wuming, Demin and I don't need a belief or religion to live well. But we are probably a small minority; many others do. Without a dominant and "legal" (I find this word very ironical here but nonetheless necessary) ideology or religion to hold a society's spirit, many will either get lost or seek refuge in a foolish cult like FLG.

More thoughts from you wise people?

Chinese Black Humor

中国人在食品中完成了化学扫盲：从大米里我们认识了石蜡，从火腿里我们认识了敌敌畏，从咸鸭蛋、辣椒酱里我们认识了苏丹红，从火锅里我们认识了福尔马林， 从银耳、蜜枣里我们认识了硫磺，木耳中认识了硫酸铜，今天三鹿又让同胞知道了三聚氰胺的化学作用。

How do Chinese learn chemistry? We study our food:
We learn to recognize paraffin in rice,
to recognize DDVP (dichlorvos - an insecticide) in ham,
to recognize Sudan Red in salted duck eggs and hot pepper sauce,
to recognize formaldehyde in hot pot,
to recognize sulphur in tremella (yin er) and candied dates,
to recognize copper sulphate in edible fungus (mu er).
Today we learn the chemical effect of melamine from Sanlu milk.

外国人喝牛奶结实了，中国人喝牛奶结石了

Foreigners drink cow milk to be strong;
Chinese drink cow milk to have stones.

日本人口号： 一天一杯牛奶，振兴一个民族；
中国人口号：一天一杯牛奶，震惊一个民族！

Japanese slogan: a cup of milk a day, invigorate a nation;
Chinese slogan: a cup of milk a day, eviscerate a nation!

(Note: I'm not satisfied with the last translation. Improvement anyone?)

Why Does China Have a Morality Crisis?

In the wake of the Sanlu melamine milk powder crisis, I can't help but recall the “dark-heart milk powder” incident four years ago. In a commentary published in January titled "China Has a Morality Crisis" I wrote:

China’s moral crisis exists not only in marriage, but also in business practices. A representative case is the so-called “dark-heart milk powder” incident. In April 2004, the media exposed an infant food business in Anhui Province that had been selling counterfeit milk powder causing the deaths of 13 babies and permanent illness in 171 others. The incident enraged the entire nation, but unfortunately it was not an isolated case.

Given the public outrage at the time, to be honest I did not expect the same calamity to repeat itself so soon and on an even bigger scale. While I'm glad to see a thorough investigation on China's entire dairy industry is taking place, punishment alone will not be sufficient.

A fundamental question begs to be answered: why is China having such a big scale morality crisis? I am reprinting a few more passages from the aforementioned article on this topic, just to cast a brick in order to attract jade.

The Chinese expression “quede” (缺德) , meaning “short of virtue,” used to be one of the most vicious insults in verbal arguments. Nowadays, the expression seems to have lost its admonishing power and has simply become a portrait of reality. Last year, a Chinese blogger cyber-named “David” attempted to analyze this. In his widely read article “Why have Chinese become ‘quede’ now?” he lists a few representative views on the Chinese moral sphere: all citizens worship money; no more baselines exist for minimal morality; today is the worst time of moral degeneration in China’s history; China should return to its traditional values.

“David” has his own ideas on the reasons behind the moral degeneration: while China imports the Western-style market economy, it fails to establish corresponding ethics, and the traditional Chinese moral principles no longer apply in the completely new economy. He recommends Adam Smith’s “The Theory of Moral Sentiments,” but fails to suggest how to carry out such a theory.

An influential contemporary Confucian, Jiang Qing, has a more appealing proposal. To him the essential problem is the lack of state ideology and a corresponding political system. Since the Cultural Revolution led to the self-destruction of Communism, that once ideological monopoly has lost its past aureole, and common Chinese have been unable to find the ultimate meaning and value for their individual lives.

“The problem isn’t that people don’t follow moral standards; the problem is that there no longer exist moral standards,” says Jiang Qing. He attributes the loss of morality to five decades of atrophy under Communist political power, plus two decades of corrosion under the money and wealth brought by the Western market economy.

After many years of research and various attempts at commitment to promising ideologies, including Christianity and Buddhism, Jiang Qing concludes that Confucianism is the only ideological solution for Chinese people. He and his followers are pushing to restore Confucianism as China’s state ideology. There are signs that China’s national leaders are also increasingly promoting Confucianism, albeit for considerations different from Jiang Qing’s. How far the government is willing to go in this direction remains a big question.

My question remains: to reestablish moral standards that have binding power, does China need a new ideological system, or the rebirth of an old one such as Confucianism? I'm not really a fan of any institutional religions, but it seems to me a healthy society does require some sort of shared ideological system to hold it together.

"When masses cast the classics"

An interesting discussion on the new, 50-episode TV serial adaptation of the Chinese classic A Dream of Red Mansions (红楼梦):

"Sometimes producers are too literal and don't bother with originality and respectful updating. Sometimes they don't show enough respect to the originals and create parodies." Read the English report in Shanghai Daily.

Chinese Classic Now a Game

Cool. This is the first time I've ever heard that Three Kingdoms is made into a game, let alone in the West -- read Romance of the Three Kingdoms XI review (PC).

Olympics Aftermath: Food Animosity

After that remarkable description of the wonders of Olympic Beijing in my sister's letter, it was a bit of a shock to hear a medalist calling the Chinese people "sh*ts." The latest gripe came from a departing athlete. Wind surfing bronze medalist Shahar Zubari from Israel said about Chinese that "They don't speak the language..." An odd thing to say since everyone in China speaks the language, but perhaps he meant Hebrew.

Shahar Zubari's comment is certainly harsh and small-minded. On the other hand he spoke a small truth when he said "I don't eat pig." If he eats beef, he should be fine. But if he is a vegetarian, I can see how it could have been problematic for him. Common Chinese (unless one happens to be a Buddhist) generally don't understand or appreciate vegetarians.

I don't know about the Olympic food, but last time when I brought my American-born daughter to China for a visit, food was one of the biggest problems for her. She has been a vegetarian since age twelve, apparently a fashionable thing among American kids and teenagers, and she takes it like a religion.

In Chengdu, the food heaven to Bob and me, our daughter had a hard time eating. She never trusted what she received, even when we specifically requested a dish without any animal product, even when we were in a American-brand restaurant (staffed by Chinese).

Once, a dish of meatless, egg-fried rice came garnished with chopped pork. To our inquiry the waitress replied, "Our chef said it won't taste good without any pork." Another time our daughter ordered an olive-and-pineapple pizza in a Pizza Hut in Chengdu. When it came, between sparsely sprinkled black olives and yellow pineapple slices lay large red circles of Italian sausage. Even in Buddhist temples, to her disgust, the food, while made of soy products, imitates the look of meat dishes.

Shahar Zubari's small-minded animosity notwithstanding, if China wants to be a worldly country, food variety is one important aspect to work on.

Just another ironic twist. The Israeli Olympic Committee Chair promised an apology, but the Chinese Embassy in Israel still canceled the planned reception.

Funny Business in China

Book review by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

Business Republic of China
Tales from the front line of China’s new revolution
by Jack Leblanc
Blacksmith Books, 248 pages, HK$118 / US$14.95

What do an academically oriented young man from Belgium with an interest in physics and a dour middle aged party secretary at a pipe factory in China have in common? Well, neither has ever had a mortgage, any entrepreneurial experience, or anything in the way of material well being. Still both were positioned to prosper greatly in the miracle that has seen China go from a business backwater to one of the biggest players on the block.

Jack Leblanc’s book Business Republic of China: Tales from the front line of China’s new Revolution provides a superb coverage of the challenges, mysteries and sources of success or failure for foreigners doing business in China. Covering a period of almost two decades, it also gives some insight into ways in which business in China has grown up, or failed to, in that time. This is a light and entertaining book that I would recommend to anyone thinking about doing, or just observing, business in China.

There are two threads that run through Leblanc’s book. One is very intentional and in the forefront, and that is the vast cultural and practical differences that exist between business in China and business in more developed countries. The other thread, that is much more in the background, underlines what happens when you turn a substantively socialist country upside down and desperately try to hold some of the pieces in place. In short, there are two ways to do well in business in China. Be smart, or use connections.

Of course it never hurts to have both of these, but there is enough variety in the stories Leblanc tells that in most cases the dominance of one over the other does come out. Mr. Li, the motorcycle magnate, presumably the same person that Ted Koppel interviewed in The People's Republic of Capitalism, stands out as superbly capable. So does Mr. Zhang, the widget maker, who manages to buy the brand of the German make previously dominant in his market. On the other side, Ms. Luan, the party secretary turned public relations head mentioned above, and Smile, who got Leblanc into all of this in the first place demonstrate that connections can be enough.

The book itself is written up almost as a series of informal case studies. While the writing is not quite what could be called literary, several of the cases could belong to the mystery genre and I enjoyed greatly watching the cases unfold. Leblanc is called in to troubleshoot a number of joint ventures that have not worked out as expected. He typically starts by trying to get to know the management team on the Chinese half of the joint venture. He seems to be surprisingly successful in doing this, so I suspect he understates his own personal charm in the telling of his stories. Whether from frank conversation, or just checking to see how the numbers add up, he uncovers some interesting activities. The great delight is just how varied these activities are. I won’t spoil the endings by reveling them here, but the pipe factory, and a bottled water factory are especially interesting.

Still, my favorite chapter was actually the first, in which Leblanc goes to China to teach physics, and finds himself in the literature department. The description of his arrival in Beijing in 1989, is so reminiscent of my own arrival in China around the same period, that I couldn’t help but be touched. His ignorance of Chongqing, and the train ride from Beijing that took him there are also great introductions to China. Most important though, his lack of understanding of what was happening and the handling by his Chinese hosts is a compelling insight into what it felt like to be adrift in that land and time. Fortunately for me, I actually ended up teaching what I thought I would, but not so for Leblanc. The request that he teach English literature, his response to it, and his hosts reaction to that are both comical and telling.

His drift into business is unplanned, and does not seem particularly well executed. But that is the beauty of the story. Leblanc, like most Chinese at the time, did not really know what made sense, and just hoped for a good outcome. In this case he got one, making a big sale of European glass for a new hotel. From all appearances the result was largely luck, but may have been related to Leblanc’s own likability. Either because he did not have a real preconceptions of business, or because of a natural empathy, Leblanc learned early on to simply go along with the way people around him did things. That is an important lesson.

Not all of the mysteries facing a person doing business in China come from a deep cultural divide. Many of them rest on the simple ability to put yourselves in the shoes of the people you are talking with. Many people fail to do this. Leblanc, and almost all the honorable outsiders he worked with, were European. As an American it is nice to hear how people from those more civilized places would also make stupid self-centered assumptions about the way the world should work. In the end it is the person, not the place they come from. Perhaps western business rewards insensitive people, so that a disproportionate number of those trying to do business in China really don’t belong there.

My biggest complaint about the book is the continual reference to those from outside China as barbarians. The more idiomatic translation of the two most common terms used to refer to non-Chinese are “honorable outsider” and “foreign person.” It is true that both of these can, and often are, used derisively, but they are also used both affectionately and, most commonly, as simple monikers. Keep in mind that people from Shanghai make fun of people from Beijing, there is no shortage of outsiders.

All in all, I would have to say this book is both entertaining, and informative. It is not a complete guide to doing business in China and plainly says that. Still, it probably tells more about this subject in its few pages than many lengthier tomes. If, after reading it, you come away frustrated at how fickle, chaotic and unfathomable things can be in China you have learned a great lesson.

Red Cliff (赤壁) Does Laughter

There is a Chinese expression, 搞笑，whose direct translation is "do laughter." This expression, an infection from Hong Kong that did not exist on the mainland before China opened up in the 1980s, is often used to describe a ludicrous movie. Now the expression is applied to Red Cliff, the most expensive Asian-financed film to date.

Directed by John Woo, Red Cliff reportedly cost US$80 million. As a fan of the classic novel Three Kingdoms, I was very eager to see what a difference such a big budget could make on a repeatedly filmed story. Adding to my eagerness was the fact that one of my favorite actors, Tony Leung, plays a starring role, Zhou Yu.

Because (a shortened version of) the movie for the US theaters will not be shown until early 2009, I called my sister in China and asked her to buy a Chinese DVD for me. It turned out she had just seen the movie. She used the expression "do laughter" when commenting on it. "Be prepared," she warned me.

I couldn't connect the notion of "do laughter" with the grand war scenes of Red Cliff. On the other hand, I have seen how some Hong Kong movies turned traditional imperial stories into jokes. Not having grown up with the Hong Kong culture though, these renderings could never make me laugh.

Impatient, I ended up buying the DVD from a Chinese online store in the US. As expected, there are grand battle scenes, which at times are too long. Toward the end, in a scene Zhu Geliang, the great war strategist, sent a pigeon into the enemy camp to extract information. The scenes of the enlarged flying bird obviously were computer-generated animation, which reminds me of Hollywood techniques used in fantasy movies such as "Lord of the Rings," not the least bit like ancient Chinese.

Yet copying Hollywood movie techniques is the least of the problems. The character Zhu Geliang, who is supposed to be the wisest, acted by Takeshi Kaneshiro, is way more handsome than intelligent – that is a bit more of a problem. In a battle preparation scene, the actor uses Zhu Geliang's signature goose feather fan – the symbol of wisdom – to cool a pigeon on a hot day as if the bird was sweating. Asked what he is doing, the gorgeous-looking actor (I refuse to connect him with Zhu Geliang) answers, "I need to keep cool." Silly behavior and language like this, which fill up the movie whenever it's not showing a drawn out battle scene, really are "doing laughter." My reading of audience reaction from the Chinese internet afterward confirmed this perception.

I of course have no objection to jocular treatment of any subject. The problem is that the director (and playwright) obviously did not mean to make the movie as a joke. The money, intent and effort were dead serious. Why it has resulted in such a laughable effect can only be explained by two things: one, the director and actors were unfamiliar with the history (I wonder if they have read any books about it other than the screenplay); two, with a long oral story-telling tradition of the Three Kingdoms, we Chinese audience can no longer accept a stupidification of historical figures. At least not Zhu Geliang!

I suppose the silliness in dialogues will be less a problem to American audiences. After all, the unintended effect might be lost in translation. Further, someone has made a wise decision to cut the length of the original film from 4 hours to 2½ for American theaters. I hope this will help improve the attractiveness of the battle scenes and also eliminate some "do-laughter" elements.

To be fair, there are also some creative and fun details in the movie, for example the association between a turtle's shell and Zhu Geliang's "eight trigram" battle formation. Zhou Yu, who was known in history to be proficient in music, stopped in the middle of training his army to tune a flute for a village boy. Still a bit overdone, but at least for a reason. And IMO Tony Leung did a better job acting Zhou Yu than Takeshi Kaneshiro acting Zhu Geliang, though my impression is that, judging by the two actors' appearances, switching their roles would better match our images of the historical figures. I heard that Tony was originally assigned the role of Zhu Geliang, but he refused, citing that he was not familiar with the role.

Overall I felt director John Woo had a tendency toward overkill, which resulted in humorless exaggeration in the acting. He needs to exercise a bit more control and incorporate a bit more subtlety next time.

Two Sidneys in China

Read this interesting article (thanks to Aaron Gardiner who pointed me to it) about the two Sidneys (and two rivals) who had both participated in China's revolutions and lived nearly their whole lives in China.

I didn’t know anything about Sidney Shapiro before reading this article, but I had heard Sidney Rittenberg’s Chinese name Li Dunbai during my childhood and youth in China.

Three years ago, after reading Rittenberg’s book The Man Who Stayed Behind, I posted a review on Amazon. To my surprise, three months later, just before Christmas, I received an email – in Chinese – from Rittenberg, who not only read my review but also one of my short stories online. In his email with the subject "谢谢" (thank you), he called my review 公正 ("fair-minded") and generously praised my story "Second Encounter" as 诚实而深刻 ("honest and profound"). Rittenberg compared the story to He Dong’s Ask the Sun, also about the Cultural Revolution.

From our correspondence I learned that Rittenberg, already 84 years old in 2005, and his wife of 50 years, Wang Yulin, had been working as business and cultural consultants for several US companies doing business in China. The couple made business trips to China five or six times a year. “The reason I can still live healthily is largely due to my strong, outstanding and lovely wife,” Rittenberg wrote. I couldn’t help but admire this old couple. After all the tribulation, including 13 years in China’s prisons, Rittenberg seemed still full of hope and energy for life.

And again I highly recommend The Man Who Stayed Behind for anyone who’s interested in learning about China’s revolutions from the 1940s to 1970s.

"Is this Beijing?"

by Maple Xu

[in translation]

My husband W and a friend H went to see the closing ceremony of the Olympics, and their conclusions were unusually uniform: it was fun and playful.

Zhang Yimou had put word out early on that the closing ceremony wouldn't have many performances; the goal was simply to delight and cheer the athletes, like throwing a huge party. So from the beginning W and H did not hold hope of seeing splendid performances. They just wanted to be there in person, to feel the ambience. 

They say the Olympic Village is big and beautiful, where one can spend days to tour around.

Though the closing ceremony was broadcast at 8 o'clock, on site the programs began about 6:00 pm, so-called "stage warm-up." Chen Peisi, Yang Lan, Zhou Tao etc. were performing. And, while the broadcast finished at 10:00 pm, on site people kept boisterous until after 11:00 pm - Chen Long, Liu Dehua and a bunch of Chinese singers bounced and sang.

 

As soon as W and H entered [the Bird's Nest], they were given a big bag of things: red-silk fan, rattle-drum, light-torch, national and Olympic flags, etc. Volunteers taught them how and when to use those things. After the ceremony began, volunteers led the audience play those props. One moment they shook the rattle-drum, the next they waved the toy torch. They even used the red-silk fan to form big waves. In short all the audience were kept busy, not sure if they were watching others perform, or others watching them.

Two days before W's trip, he had a leg problem. He boarded the plane with a bandaged leg. Unexpectedly, as soon as he boarded, he was invited to the first class cabin. After he landed in Beijing, volunteers held his arms to help him get on a taxi. When eating [in restaurants], he was exempted from waiting in line, and volunteers even made a special table for him. His impression of Beijing was that it was unusually pretty and tidy. Because traffic was strictly controlled, few cars or pedestrians could be seen on the streets. All ads that were irrelevant to Olympics had been removed. This clean-up resulted in a complete new face of the city, so much so it made him wonder – "Is this Beijing?"

And H the American Shanghaier even wondered "Is this China?" Because people in Beijing suddenly became super friendly, live Lei Fengs [a famous Samaritan] were everywhere on the streets, everyone's face was full of spring wind and wreathed in smiles, and our countrymen's usual numb, detached, or gloomy looks were completely wiped out. 

They both said that if you want to visit Beijing, it is the best time now. It is abnormally Heaven-like. I'm afraid that, after the Paralympics, everything will return to normal again.

On "London Eight Minutes"

Even before the Beijing Olympics curtain fell completely, fans had already turned their eyes to London. However, London's 8-minute show during Sunday's closing ceremony did not seem to generate much favorable feedback. Not all the criticism deserves serious attention, for example the "fake handicapped" performer in the wheelchair – it merely provided a weak bullet for a few pugnacious Chinese youngsters to return fire. However, a good question raised by some of the British audience is whether pop music represents England's long history and rich culture, or whether the idea of "a big party" is a good one for the London Olympics.

A British cyber friend, Paul Armstrong Taylor, wrote me from Shanghai on this (quoted with permission):

Consider this quote from an article about Sebastian Coe, Chairman of the London Olympic Organizing Committee:

Coe kept mentioning two words -- creativity and fun. Both, he claimed, are representations of Britain's unique culture. Creativity, he insisted, is "Britishness in the very best sense of the word."

As far as the fun part goes, London knows how to throw a good party, and that is what they plan to do, Coe beamed. "We're actually quite good at partying," he said. "Let's turn it into a giant party."

Citing the famous string of British pop music and West End stars that are part of the planning team, Coe seemed quite certain that the organizing committee will be able to put on a great super-fun show.

This fills me with foreboding. After Beijing and China put on a dramatic and immense performance inspired by three thousand years of history and culture, London is going to put on a "giant party" inspired by pop stars and musicals. Apparently, the closing ceremony in which Beijing hands on to London, London will be represented by Leona Lewis, the winner of a TV talent series and now pop star; Jimmy Page, guitarist for out-of-date rock band Led Zeppelin; and David Beckham, the pop star of soccer/football. Honestly, I feel sick about this. I am not a particularly patriotic person, but I do think the UK has some things to be proud about and I do not want to see it embarrassed on a world stage.

If they continue down this route, it will be a complete disaster for at least two fundamental reasons:

a) Pop culture is shallow, temporary and very much subject to fashion. It is a flimsy foundation on which to build a presentation to the world. Every country has pop stars and they all change with the whims of teenagers (which change often). The Olympic opening ceremony is about presenting what is unique and fundamental to the culture of the host (as well as the obligatory spirit of world unity). Pop culture can simply not achieve this.

b) Politicians and Olympic committees can not be creative and fun by their nature. Even the Beijing ceremony was not particularly creative, but it was immense and powerful. I think this is what you have to aim for. A few years ago, the British government tried to create a "Cool Brittania" brand. It became a joke because anything a politician says is "cool" instantly loses any "coolness". I suspect the Olympic ceremony will end that way too if they are determined to follow this route.

The London segment [in Beijing Olympics' closing ceremony] was more or less what I expected. The frightening thing is that this sort of MTV-pop music approach should be relatively well suited to an 8 minute segment, but will be practically unwatchable for most people if stretched to an hour or more. I really hope they change direction before 2012, but it seems they are set on taking the "Cool Brittania" route. Obviously, they should not try to out-Beijing Beijing - they simply can't compete with the numbers of people China can commit. However, I think there are other ways to come up with a display that captures some of the uniqueness of Britain's character, culture and history.

So, what do you think?