10/22/2008

On the Train to Tibet


As part of our on-going series of reading recommendations and conversations about Tibet and Tibetan history, we are today featuring a short excerpt from occasional China Beat contributor Alex Pasternack about his recent ride on the new train to Tibet. Pasternack writes regularly for Treehugger, where this essay was published in its entirety.

China's – and the world's – reach to the highest plateau on earth grew in summer 2006 with the opening of the Qinghai-Tibet Railway (Qingzang Tielu 青藏铁路). An engineering marvel that China itself once ruled impossible, the $4.2 billion line traverses an region known for earthquakes, low temperatures and low atmospheric pressure.

Nearly 1,000 kilometers of rail runs at 4,000 meters or higher, and 550 km of track sits upon permafrost, a feat that required a system that keeps the ground frozen year-round to prevent the rails from sliding. Engineers also had to anticipate the long-term effects of global warming, which are melting Tibet's glaciers at an alarming rate. Former Chinese premier Zhu Rongji called the railway "an unprecedented project in the history of mankind," a typical unvarnished government boast that for once, wasn't hyperbole.

But no statistic can rival the humbling marvel of the scenery: the second half of the 47-hour journey is a panoramic moving postcard on two sides, looking like the world's longest high definition nature film. A throwback to the glorious days of train travel, the route crosses tundra lined by majestic peaks, fading grasslands where yak and rare antelope graze, mirror-like lakes reflecting an azure and white sky, and the homes of herders bejeweled in rainbows of dancing prayer flags...

tibet railway sheep grazing photo
Grazing the landscape

Protecting wildlife
At night, entertainment came by book (I tried to get a copy of The Snow Leopard, but Midnight's Children would do) and laptop (there's a standard Chinese outlet in each soft sleeper cabin and along the hallways of each car). One night we watched Kekexili, a hypnotic 2004 film by Lu Chuan that tells the true story of a ragtag militia that protected the endangered Tibetan antelope from vicious poachers.

Conservationists have warned that the train would pose an even greater threat to this and other treasured species. The film's title refers to the region in the historically Tibetan province of Qinghai where the antelope give birth—and where the railroad threatens to keep them from going.

But as voices in Chinese and English (but not Tibetan) frequently reassured us over the public address system, authorities have gone togreat lengths to mitigate the train's impact on the fragile environment, at a cost of around $192 million.

Wildlife researchers helped engineers install over 30 passageways that would allow the migrating antelope and other animals to pass beneath the train (see one on Google Earth). Despite an uneasy start and a scandal over a faked 2006 photograph (see below) that purports to show antelope and train in harmony, some Chinese researchers say that the animals have actually adapted to their new steel neighbor. In a letter to the journal Nature detailing their findings, the Beijing-based researchers with the government-sponsored Academy of Sciences say that 98% of the antelopes have managed to migrate in spite of the train.

468_fake%20antelope%20photo%20china%20tibet%20train.jpg
Photoshop to the rescue

Other successful precautions include the introduction of dozens of man-made swamps to replace swampland and endemic plants destroyed by the train, and the storage of waste onboard until the train reaches collection points, rather than leaving waste on the tracks. A US Embassy report tells of workers halting work to accommodate migrating antelope.

But embassy officials recorded no instances of rolling up and preserving grass, as authorities promised. Meanwhile, nomads and herders who live near the tracks have complained that they received minimal compensation for their ruined farmland...

For more, including Pasternack's discussion of the effects of resource extraction and migration on the Tibetan people, see the full essay at Treehugger.

Photos by Alice Liu and Alex Pasternack. See also Erica Gies' excellent travelogue at Grist and Pankaj Mishra's account at The New Yorker

10/20/2008

Wiki-ing China: The Discussion Continues


Charles Hayford shared the link to his recent China Beat pieces (Parts 1 and 2) on using (and altering) Wikipedia with the Asia Scholars listserv, H-Asia. A brief discussion ensued there, which included references to several new (to us) resources. Though we won't mention names or specific discussions, we did want to share some of the resources we learned about as a result of listening in:

1. At this website, Vincent Pollard has written a student guide on internet credibility that could be easily adapted to an exercise on testing/editing/using Wikipedia.

2. One contributor noted a particularly outstanding Wikipedian (not a professional historian...yet...) whose many entries have been singled out by Wikipedia as "featured" content (supposed to be the very best of all entries). To get a sense of what Wikipedia considers the best (and to appreciate this student's work), see the entries on "List of Chinese Inventions," "The Ming Dynasty," "Shen Kuo," and "Society of the Song Dynasty."

3. For those interested in chatting with other China history buffs (including some who regularly edit Wiki entries), you can check out China History Forum.

4. Per Hayford's point in his pieces that Wikipedia tends to rely very heavily on a small number of sources (mainly those available online), one contributor pointed listserv members to this interesting article, "Is the Internet Bad for Science?" from Wired. In it, the author argues that conducting research online narrows the sources used.

We have heard feedback from several college instructors who plan to adapt Hayford's pieces for their classroom in an effort to "learn to live" with Wikipedia. If you plan to do so, please feel free to send feedback on your efforts--we'd be happy to post it (anonymously or not--up to you) in order to continue over the coming months the conversation Hayford started .

10/18/2008

China in 2008: A Year of Great Significance


Last month, we announced our forthcoming book, China in 2008: A Year of Great Significance, to be published by Rowman & Littlefield in early 2009. With the manuscript beginning to take its final shape (and 2008 far enough advanced that we felt somewhat—but only somewhat, given what a crazy year it's been so far—safe beginning to reflect on it), we thought we would share a little bit from the book with you. In the coming weeks, we hope to share with you a preview of the table of contents as well as perhaps snippets of other new pieces from the book.

For today, here is a short selection from the introduction to the book, “China in 2008: A Reflection on a Year of Great Significance,” by Kate Merkel-Hess:

The subtitle of this volume is a play on Ray Huang’s groundbreaking Ming history, 1587: A Year of No Significance. In that book, Huang examined a year of no particular importance when the Emperor Wanli was in power. The irony of Huang’s title is that Wanli’s disastrous reign was the beginning of the end for the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644), which fell to internal rebellions and then the Manchu invasions that led to the establishment of the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), China’s last. Fifteen eighty-seven matters a great deal because, while it was not a year of important events, it was apparent in its day-to-day affairs that the Ming was headed toward ruin.

This year, in contrast, was a year of important event after important event for China. In fact, the year was an enormously important year globally, both for stories that pointed the way toward a new world order (geopolitically and financially) and stories that seemed resurrected from news cycles past. In the early panicked days of the fall’s economic woes, coming amidst the U.S. presidential campaign as well as several other big domestic and international stories, David Folkenflik commented on National Public Radio (NPR) that “the breakneck pace of developments means a lot of news worth knowing receives the briefest burst of attention before being dropped for something hotter.” China’s tainted milk story was overshadowed by the U.S. presidential election and the escalating credit crisis. Russia’s invasion of Georgia coincided with the highly-anticipated Olympic Opening Ceremony. The riots in Tibet and the contentious U.S. Democratic primaries pushed rising international food prices off the front pages.

China’s presence in many international stories, from the banking crisis to the genocide in Darfur, was further evidence of its role as an emerging superpower. Just as Russia did for previous generations, China raises the specter for Americans of a functioning superpower with a markedly different economic system as well as a divergent set of political assumptions (several contributors explore the results of these fears in Chapter 15). In July, New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote about the Chinese (and Russian) vetoes of U.N. attempts to impose sanctions on Robert Mugabe, President of Zimbabwe. The votes, Friedman asserted, show us where the world is headed: “a world of too much Russian and Chinese power.” Some China fear-mongers went further than the moderate Friedman, talking about “the coming China wars.” But the fact was, the China stories of 2008, taken together, sketch a picture of a China not on the verge of destruction, as in 1587, or a nation spoiling for a fight with the international community, but instead a relatively stable country, focused above all else on trying to maintain its phenomenal 10 percent economic growth rate.

This may seem an incongruous assertion, as other than the relatively smooth two weeks of China’s triumphant Beijing Olympics, when China was in the international news in 2008 it was at moments of crisis: crippling winter storms hit the country in late January, riots occurred throughout Tibet and other parts of southwest China in March, international protests accompanied the spring’s Olympic torch relay, a devastating earthquake rocked Sichuan in May, a massive food safety scandal broke in September, and in October a plummeting stock market hit the Shanghai and Hong Kong as well as New York, London and Tokyo exchanges. Instead of a year of Olympic celebration, for the Chinese people 2008 was the most tumultuous and traumatic year of the post-1978 economic reform era. Unlike 1587, however, we cannot discern in China’s day-to-day life signs of impending doom. Business as usual looks pretty good: the economy continues to grow and consumers continue to spend, China continues to increase international engagements, and all signs point to continued (if incremental) increases in citizen participation in government affairs…

Greatball


Taiwanese baseball has just been giving a powerful shot in the arm, with three consecutive shots out of the park by the Brother Elephants' star player Peng Chen-min 彭政閔 during his team's 7-1 victory over the LaNew Bears in the first game of their playoff series.

For video highlights, please click here. I especially like the announcer's comments about a home run ball resembling a girlfriend who has just had a change of heart -- neither is coming back (In the case of one of Taiwan's 40-something superstars, Chang Tai-shan 張泰山, this is modified to include a reference to his receding hairline). You might also note the Bears fans eating a certain yellow-skinned fruit (a reference to the color of the Elephants' uniform), which gives new meaning to that old favorite "Yes, We have no Bananas Today".

For an analysis of what this means for Taiwanese baseball, please click here. It is especially noteworthy that over 8,000 fans attended (the largest playoff crowd ever), and that Sunday's game at Tien-mu's 10,500-seat stadium is sold out. There is always hope.

Finally, for all of you China Beat sports fans who might be wondering what happens when a 102-kilogram Canadian base runner collides with a 88-kilogram Taiwanese catcher at the plate, check this action out.

10/16/2008

Painted Skin: To Scare or Not to Scare?


By Haiyan Lee

It may come as a surprise that movies about ghosts and monsters are strictly speaking illegal in China, a land that has given us such an enchanting array of supernatural figures as the White Serpent Lady, the Weaving Girl, the three-headed Nuozha, and, of course, the delightful trickster Monkey. Gods and ghosts do show up on the Chinese screen, but they have to be framed as “characters” of folklore or fanciful creations of the “primitive” mind, something of ethnographic interest but no longer relevant to our sense of self and world. However, if they end up unsettling our secular confidence in science and rationality, they have then crossed over into the forbidden terrain of “evil cults” 邪教 or “superstitions” 迷信.

To be sure, spectral or paranormal themes have long invaded written genres and are alive and kicking right under the nose of state censors—consider, e.g., the cult phenomenon of the Ghost Blows out the Light《鬼吹灯》series. The fact that the series could flaunt the word ghost in its very title is an indication of the relative anarchy of the Internet and commercial publishing, though reportedly all traces of the supernatural had to be removed from the printed editions following the title’s runaway online success. The state seems far more vigilant about the visual media and has recently tightened its grip on films with pronounced supernatural contents or unduly spooky mis-en-scenes, lines, and sound effects. So far, only the director A Gan 阿甘has had some success plumbing the nebulous depths of official regulations with a succession of low-tech domestic “haunted house” productions 国产恐怖片. But these would probably be considered small fry by Hong Kong, Hollywood, or J-horror standards.

For filmmakers with cross-border commercial ambitions, maneuvering Chinese censorship is a touch and go affair. The ghost genre is without doubt one of the glories of Hong Kong cinema, and yet today’s investors are reluctant to put money down on a film that cannot be screened in mainland China, where the lion’s share of the Chinese-language film market is, even with rampant piracy factored in. This was the snag, according to a Southern Weekend《南方周末》report, that the Hong Kong director Andy Chin Wing-Keung 錢永強 ran into when he first conceived of the idea of remaking the 1965 horror classic Painted Skin《画皮》using cutting-edge CGI technology. The earlier version, directed by Bao Fong鲍方, is adapted from a macabre tale in the ur-collection of Chinese ghost stories, Strange Tales from a Chinese Studio《聊斋志异》, about the fatal seduction of a scholar by a ghoul who dresses itself up in a painted human skin. It was released on the mainland in 1979 and initiated a whole generation of mainlanders to the shuddering pleasures of the horror flick. (It was eventually banned after rumors began to circulate about its lethal impact on the faint-hearted.)

The blockbuster that eventually greeted holiday crowds during the October Golden Week in honor of National Day (October 1) bears little resemblance to the 1965 version. Directed by Gordon Chan Kar-Seung陳嘉上, it has a star-studded cast headed by the Hong Kong action film veteran Donnie Yen 甄子丹 (poster 1; watch a trailer). But its highly recognizable title alone brought with it not just a default fan base, but also the itching expectations that audiences bring to all soi-disant horror movies: to be scared out of one’s wits. Instead, they were doused with a sodden romance spruced up with some martial arts fights, desert combats in ancient armors, and bantering partnership between two demon-quellers. What should have been the most hair-raising scene, when the demon (a fox spirit in this version) peels off her skin for a repaint, a scene that lasts just a few seconds but allegedly cost millions of yuan to create, wrung little more than a few gasps out of the audience in a Causeway Bay theater where I saw the movie. The defrocked demon is shown to be crawling with a gazillion dark worms from head to toe, but once the camera pulls back, it simply looks like an overly wired-up space alien in a sci-fi film. Creepy? Yes, but far from terrifying.

The only moments when one is reminded that this is supposed to be a “scary movie,” oddly enough, come in the erotic scenes in which the male lead’s sexual fantasy transgresses moral boundaries and both he and the audience are jolted (out of his bed and our seats, respectively) with a loud thump from the nondiegetic soundtrack (i.e., sounds that are not internal to the scene). Such lame attempts at horror effects make us wonder if Chinese/Hong Kong filmmakers are truly hamstrung by censorship, or perhaps if there are things other than having one’s hair stand on end, even when it concerns the supernatural, that truly engross the Chinese audience.

Come to think of it, even the original story (composed or recorded) by Pu Songling 蒲松龄 isn’t very scary either, at least not in the order of such Western classics as Dracula, The Turn of the Screw, and Edgar Allan Poe’s noir tales. Of course, Chinese ghost stories also play with liminality, the in-between space between the living and dead, humans and animals, mortals and immortals, or more broadly, self and other. The attraction for the strange and otherworldly and the traffic between divergent worlds are what turn life upside town. However, there are two features that are common to Chinese ghost stories and may have the effect of offsetting their horror quotient in the eyes of the hardened horror addict. The first is the moral imperative of cosmic resolution. Although the genre is teeming with amorous fox spirits 狐狸精and revenant ghosts 幽灵, the moral message seldom turns on romantic freedom, but rather on the necessity to balance yin and yang, or the destructive and the generative forces of the cosmos. Ghosts, spirits, and fairies are yin creatures who should stay put in their yin domains. Their stealing into the bedchambers (as well as heart chambers) of young scholars upsets the cosmic balance and visits disaster of one kind or another on human society. They must therefore be exorcised by Taoist or Buddhist priests who are in touch with the occult workings of the shadowy realms. The showdown between the demon 魔and the priest 道is called “the sorcery contest” (斗法) and invariably ends with the banishment of the spectral interloper.

But the demon invariably returns, with ever naughtier tricks: 道高一尺,魔高一丈 (if the righteous force grows by one foot, the demonic force will rise by ten). Nonetheless, the difference between good and evil is a matter of degree, rather than of essence. The demon is not a figure of existential enigma or radical evil (as embodied, most recently, by the bounty hunter in No Country for Old Man and by Kant’s murderous butler in Critique of Criminal Reason: A Mystery); it does not radically call into question our humanity or fundamental cosmic justice. The perduring humanism is indeed the second feature of the Chinese ghost genre. The were-animals and the undead who are caught mingling with humans are not always malicious beings bent upon destruction for its own sake. Rather, they are among us because they are achingly jealous of the simple joys and happiness of ordinary human life that are not (or no longer) available to them however omnipotent they may be. Thus they undergo years of assiduous cultivation and endure the risk and humiliation of exposure, so as to assume the human form and join the human community.

Their quest is tragically doomed because as yin creatures, they cannot properly belong to the human world without undermining, in spite of themselves, precisely what is sought after: love, care, and fellowship. The decomposition always starts with the very men who mediate their passage to humanity and who, in this process, are sapped of their yang essence. Such is the fate of the White Serpent Lady 白蛇娘娘, who falls in love with a handsome scholar, marries him, supports him financially, and bears him children, while all along having to evade and resist the self-righteous priest who hunts her down in the name of manhood and the yang social order.

The new Painted Skin modernizes the Confucian brand of humanism by defining humanity in sentimental terms, that is, by equating humanity with romantic love, and a gender-equalized kind to boot (poster 2). As one commentator pointed out, despite the propaganda hype about its being “an Eastern supernatural fantasy” 东方魔幻, at its core the movie is a triangular love affair, except that the “third party” 第三者/小三儿is a shape-shifting fox spirit who requires a steady diet of human hearts to keep its coat of human skin forever fresh and young. We do see her gouge out the hearts of two men right through their breastplates. But a regular supply of hearts is maintained by her henchman and unrequited lover the lizard spirit—also in human form. Most of the time, she is a just a doe-eyed girl pining for love. And it is this consuming passion that endows her with a measure of humanity, so much so that we are almost willing to forgive her ghastly alimentary habit—especially since the victims largely remain faceless and the killings are done in the name of love. Her monstrosity is mitigated by her yearning for the hero and her single-minded, even ruthless, devotion to him, to the point that she actually resurrects him so that he may be reunited with his true love—his wife. In this capacity she has more in common with the “creature” in the novel Frankenstein or the ape in the film King Kong than with the elusive, haunting specters of psychological suspense thrillers.

The idea that supernatural entities—objects of awe and worship—would be so jealous of our humanity and would go to such destructive lengths to partake of it is perhaps what saves Painted Skin from being a total flop. For all its failure to deliver a spook fest, it has been doing quite well at the box office and has received plenty of thumbs up for its extravagant love fest. The censors, apparently, had no problem with the triangle romance, probably owing to the fact that the dashing hero remains fiercely loyal to his wife, even while he is clearly bewitched by the fox spirit-turned-delicate beauty. A situation that would typically have been resolved by the practice of polygamy—indeed the girl repeatedly begs to be taken in as a concubine—is here turned into an opportunity to shore up heterosexual monogamy and conjugal love. In the end, the girl vanishes in a puff of air (and returns to her fox form) and everyone is happy ever after.

However, in granting a shape-shifting seductress such a prominent screen position and in allowing her to win audience sympathy through an underlying humanism, the censors might be going out on a limb (poster 3). David Ownby tells us that Falun Gong 法轮功, the proscribed spiritual movement that started out as a collective deep breathing exercise known as qigong气功, is the revenge of popular religion on the arrogance of the Party-State and modernizing elites who thought they could turn qigong into a “Chinese science” by disembedding it from the web of folk religious beliefs and practices. Amorous ghosts and spirits, too, are not the unattached loners they may appear to be. As they enchant and frighten us in the same abated breath, they smuggle into our world alternative values and visions of the world. And as such they may not always be so serviceable to our secular agendas. We don’t always know what can happen when the genie is let out of the bottle.

{Readers interested in the Chinese fox lore can consult Alien Kind: Foxes and Late Imperial Chinese Narrative by Rania Huntington (Harvard U Asia Center, 2003); those interested in the relationship between modernity and romantic love might check out the latest issue (16:2) of positions: east asia cultures critique, “Taking It to Heart: Emotion, Asia, Modernity,” guest-edited by Haiyan Lee.}

10/15/2008

Fakeball


The Taiwan baseball world has been rocked by yet another game-fixing scandal, this time involving the dmedia T-Rex team. A total of three players (including a former MLB pitcher) are out on bail, while some bookies, gangsters, and team officials (including coaches, the assistant manager, and the team spokesman) have been detained. The guilt of those involved has yet to be proven, but there have certainly been some suspicious incidents. During one game on July 11, the dmedia's normally accurate U.S. hurler lasted only three innings, managing just 32 strikes out of 84 pitches (an almost unheard of ball-strike ratio), walking 7 batters, hitting an 8th, giving up a home run, and surrendering a total of 6 earned runs. Five days later, the T-Rex blew a lead by committing 5 errors, including 2 by the pitching staff (for a list of other "tricks" used to throw games, please click here).

While Taiwan's major leagues (currently referred to as the "Chinese Professional Baseball League" or CPBL) have long been plagued by gambling woes (10 scandals in the last 11 years), the current crisis has reached new lows, with the T-Rex's owner being either persuaded, tricked, or blackmailed into surrendering control of the team to members of the Heavenly Way Alliance (天道盟) and Four Seas Gang (四海幫). Gang leaders doled out player salaries, while other "brethren" actually lived in the players' dorm, doling out wine, women, and song to those who cooperated, and harassing or beating up those who refused. According to the team owner, when he alluded to this problem on his blog, he was also subjected to a thrashing (prosecutors have cast doubt on some of his stories, however).

Baseball has long occupied a special place in the hearts of Taiwanese sports fans, beginning with its introduction during the Japanese colonial era (see Yu Junwei 盂峻瑋's Playing in Isolation: A History of Baseball in Taiwan). The history of Taiwan's professional leagues dates back to 1989, but the first scandal did not strike until 1997, with nearly all the members of the China Times Eagles (now known as the "Black Eagles") being indicted on gambling charges. Despite the subsequent introduction of harsh penalties such as lifetime bans for crooked players, similar incidents have continued unabated, and may be linked to the growing influence of organized crime in postwar politics (including dirty money referred to as "black gold" or 黑金). Just last year, 5 members of the China Trust Whales were implicated in a game-fixing scandal, prompting representatives of the league's 6 teams to swear an oath promising to stop such behavior. All to no avail. Even baseball's staunchest supporters are losing heart, with the prosecutor investigating the latest scandal (also a fan) proclaiming that he does not see any hope for the game.

Now, as we approach the 20th anniversary of professional baseball in Taiwan, the main questions are: 1) Who is responsible for this mess? 2) What can be done to clean up the game? Clearly, the players deserve some share of the blame for being greedy, but the owners and league officials have failed to forcibly address this issue. While they have been quick to bow low and apologize (repeatedly), no leading figures have ever stepped down as a sign of taking responsibility. Fan anger is now being directed at these individuals, with some circulating an on-line petition to force the CPBL Secretary-General to step down. Other fans are making the more constructive suggestion of reorganizing the league so that owners have less control over its operations, including the investigation of gambling schemes. Finally, the government needs to do more, not only in terms of supporting the CPBL but also launching an effective and long-term crackdown on organized crime, something that is especially problematic for KMT given its historical links to various "dark societies" (黑社會). When asked to comment on the current scandal, the vast majority of players and coaches refused to be quoted on the record for fear of offending the "brethren". It is time to put an end to the pernicious leverage that organized crime exerts over so many facets of Taiwanese life.

10/10/2008

China Annals: Factory Girls


Last weekend China Beat contributors—and longtime Beijing neighbors—Susan Jakes and Leslie T. Chang caught up to talk about Chang’s newly released book, Factory Girls: From Village to City in a Changing China. The book, which builds on stories Chang wrote as a correspondent for the Wall Street Journal (and currently garnering glowing reviews and widespread coverage), follows the lives of young rural women making new lives for themselves in the southern Chinese city of Dongguan.

Susan Jakes: How did you decide you wanted to write a book about migrant workers in China? What did you want to try to figure out? Was there a weakness in the existing reporting on this subject that you wanted to address?

Leslie Chang: The book project began with a bit of an agenda. I had already read some stories in the foreign press, including the Wall Street Journal, about how terrible the conditions in the factories were. The stories tended to focus on the worst cases, the abuses, the miseries, the horrible bosses, the injuries. They tended to portray migration as a desperate act without much of a pay-off for people.

I had a suspicion that there must be more to this, that perhaps things were not so black and white. I also thought that, for a young person coming from a farming village this whole experience in the city might appear very different than it does to us as Western observers. What is it like to leave your village at 16 or 17, to come to a city where you don’t know a single person or only one person, to work in a factory, to earn money for the first time? How does your relationship with your family change? How do your friendships change? How does your worldview change? I thought there must be more to the story. And with that suspicion in mind, I went down to Dongguan in February of 2004.

Jakes: How did you pick Dongguan?

Chang: I talked with a couple of migrant scholars in Beijing, including Tan Shen at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, who was one of the early scholars to work on migrant women. I wanted to find a large city where lots of generally unskilled young people were going to work in factories. I knew that around Shanghai there were a lot of high-tech factories where people with college educations and technical degrees went to work. But I was curious about the large mass of generally uneducated younger people going in cold to factories and I felt that Dongguan was representative of this. Early on I decided I wanted to focus on women because I thought that coming from the village and moving to the city the scope of change might be the most dramatic and maybe the conflicts would also be the most interesting.

Jakes: Why?

Chang: I think, in the village, the young women are usually the least powerful and the most restricted, in terms of being expected to marry early, have children and take care of the farm. Obviously these things are all changing with migration. But I suspected that men would still have more freedom and that women would be more restricted. So coming from a more traditional position, I thought that the change in their lives would be more dramatic and more interesting to watch.

Jakes: The book revolves around two central figures, Wu Chunming and Lu Qingmin (or Min). What made you pick these two women? Did you see them as representative of migrant women more broadly or as exceptions?

Chang: It’s sounds strange to say, but almost everyone I met in Dongguan was representative. They had similar backgrounds: coming from the countryside, having some middle school education and in some cases a bit of high school and poor. That was the profile of almost every young migrant worker I met in Dongguan. But the reason I chose these two women in particular is partly, I think, because they chose me.

There were many young women I talked to who would be very friendly on first meeting but hard to sustain a relationship with and get to know. But in the case of Chunming and Min, they seemed to have a curiosity about the world, about me, an interest in learning about this project I was doing at the same time as I was learning about them. It’s very easy to meet people on the street and talk to them for 30 minutes. But to keep in touch, to have them keep in touch with you, to continuously see them over two years—that takes some interest and incentive on their part. Frankly, I’m not bringing much to them. When I say I’m a reporter for the Wall Street Journal they don’t know what that is. When I tell them I’m writing stories about their lives, it’s very abstract to them. I’m not giving them any money. People are sometimes surprised that when I went out to dinner with them, I would pay if they didn’t have money, but if they’d just had a pay day they’d insist on treating me. They never asked me for money or help in any way. So what was in it for them was some sort of interest or curiosity that I think helped us become closer and closer.

Jakes: There were also times when you let them read what you wrote about them. How did they react?

Chang: I wrote two pretty long articles about Min that appeared in the Wall Street Journal and in both cases I had them translated into Chinese and I brought them to her to read. I wanted her to know what I was doing, and I was also very curious what she thought. I describe in the book how Min read an article really carefully in a coffee shop and I was really really nervous watching her. She laughed when she was reading it and then she finished and turned over the last page and said, “That’s it?”
And I said, “Yes, but there will be more.”
And she said, “Oh you’re writing it?”
And I said, “No you’re living it.” She looked at me sort of funny. I thought that was interesting. It captured this feeling I have about Dongguan which is that people’s lives are changing so quickly that sometimes they lose track of everything they’ve done and where they come from. And when Min finished reading this article she slapped it down on the table and said, “Now I remember everything.”

Jakes: That phenomenon of forgetting what’s happened seems common. I’ve also encountered it in my reporting on migrant workers.

Chang: It’s amazing. I think there’s almost a sort of traumatic feeling because people’s lives are changing so quickly that a lot of things are just forgotten. I noticed, especially with the migrants, when you talked to them about the first journey out from home, it was often really unclear, lots of details were blurred. For example, when I talked to Min about her first experience in the city, she said, “My sister took me out, I went into a factory and I left after a month.” And when I asked what happened she said, “I don’t know, I was just so lonely I couldn’t bear it anymore.” That was all she could tell me about that first month in the city.

Jakes: Chunming, the other woman you write about, is completely different, She keeps a record of what happened to her, what she’s thinking.

Chang: It wasn’t until long after I knew her that she mentioned that she’d written a diary for years and years. I think one of the really powerful things about spending time with someone is that you see all of these interesting things and learn all of these interesting details that they wouldn’t necessarily think to tell you if you were in a formal interview setting. But by hanging out with her, all of these details came up. And one of them was that she kept a diary for probably her first six or seven years living in the city. So I told her that I wanted to read them and possibility write about them and she just gave them to me in batches and I made copies and read them.

Jakes: To me, those passages from her diaries are some of the most powerful material in the book.

Chang: It was really interesting to see her transformation in such a short time. Her early diaries—when she first came out to the city in 1993 she was 18—the initial things are what you’d expect: I’m making 100 kuai a month, I’m working long hours. She describes in vivid detail her hours, what it’s like to wake up at 6:30 in the morning and know there’s only half an hour until they have to work on the assembly line, the girls fighting to have time to wash their faces and eat breakfast—very physical details of her day. Then she moves up to a position of clerk in her factory. And gradually [the diary] moves from this minute recording of the details of her day and how much money she’s making month by month, to a kind of program of how she can improve herself, her appearance, her image, her speaking, to become suitable to be a white collar worker.

In the diary you see her attempts at reinvention, many of them failed. She makes a list of English words she’s going to learn. It starts with words starting with A and by the time she gets to C she’s given up the project. There’s another one: How do we learn public relations? Number one, we learn to be a good person. And then she drops that. She’s testing all of these identities for herself and trying to craft herself into a more sophisticated professional person. And then the diaries take a stranger turn in 1996 after she goes to a direct sales meeting and her diary becomes kind of a manual of how to do direct sales, how to con people into buying all sorts of spurious health products.

In the beginning, her diary is a calculation of the money she’s making and how she’s spending her day, and then over time, you see her develop into a person who’s kind of looking for a deeper meaning in life beyond money. Obviously she still worries about her financial security, but she’s also wondering: what is it that’s going to give meaning to my life? Is it this new health product or selling life insurance or being a vegetarian?

Jakes: What surprised you most in your reporting on this subject?

Chang: I think the main thing that surprised me as I was reporting was just how quickly people’s lives changed. The first time I met Min, she had just talked her way into a clerk’s job, which is kind of the lowest office job, after a year of working on the assembly line. And I really liked her, and I thought, I’ll just follow her life. But there was a big part of me that worried that her life was now very stable and nothing more would happen to her and there would be no more story. Instead, the opposite happened in spades. Every time I saw her there was something extraordinarily different about her. From her perspective something major had changed, whether it was a job or boss or hairstyle or some fight with her family. So even though I went down there expecting that people would go through changes, the sheer enormity and speed of the change really surprised me, as did the fact that the pace at which life changed was relentless. Sometimes in my reporting, I kind of wished that I could see Min once and not have her have a big change so we could just sit back and talk a little bit. But every time there was something new to figure out and learn about.

Jakes: One of the things that gives the book its richness is that you weave together the stories of these migrant women with the stories of your own family’s migrations. You lived in China for more than a decade before you started to dig into your family history. Why was that? What made you reluctant to do that for so long?

Chang: It’s probably just my contrarian instinct. I felt like it was kind of a cliché to be a Chinese-American, to move to China for work and immediately seek out your family village and find some kind of spurious link to the past. I didn’t want to do that. When I first lived in China, I was really struggling to figure out what kind of stories I wanted to write and even though I didn’t put it into these words at the time, I think I felt that I wasn’t ready to understand and appreciate what I would find if I delved into my family history.

Jakes: You write in the book that you began to explore your family history around the same time as you started work on the book, but that the two projects initially weren’t related. What did make you choose that moment to start research on your family?

Chang: Initially, it was logistics more than anything else. I was on book leave from the Wall Street Journal and my time was my own much more than it had been when I was on staff. So as soon as I took the book leave, that’s when I went to Min’s village to visit her when she returned there for Chinese New Year. And when I came back, I decided I wanted to go to my ancestral village. I can’t say that there was an explicit connection. I wish I could say there’d been more thinking behind it, but there wasn’t. It was mainly logistical.

So I went to this little village of Liutai in Jilin province and spent just a few hours there. It was a farming village with kind of a typical profile—a lot of the young people had moved to the city. My grandfather had been born in this village and left for Beijing when he was a teenager to go to school and then went abroad. So I came back from that trip and I hadn’t turned up much, but it was evocative to me to feel like I’d tried to find where my family had come from. I came back and started thinking about that village and Min’s village, my grandfather’s story and the migrants’ story and I felt like there were links. Not perfect parallels by any means. My grandfather was very educated and he went to America for school and that’s very different from what the migrants experience. I’m not trying to overstate the similarities. But I felt like his moment in Chinese history and this moment contain parallels. In both cases China was opening up to the world after a long period of isolation. This opening up is also internalized in individuals. People are thinking, “How do I fit into the world? How do I become a modern person?” I thought that exploring my grandfather’s encounter with the world and how he dealt with it and how the migrants did it would be an interesting way to frame the book.

Jakes: Once you started working on the two pieces together, how did your research on your family color your thinking on the migrants and vice versa? And when you were doing the reporting did you tell each side that you were planning to put them in the same book?

Chang: I did. I did. And everyone said, I have no idea how you’re going to make this work. All my relatives were extremely skeptical about how I was going to make it fit together. I basically stopped telling people too much about the project. I felt like while it was underway, it took too much explanation and sowed too many doubts in me. But I had a kind of instinctive feeling that it could work and I at least wanted to try.

Jakes: And so how did these two parts of the book come together and how did they influence one another?

Chang: I think some of the parallels really pleased and surprised me. I explained to you that I only learned about Chunming’s diaries after the fact. And in the same way, I was researching my family history for more than a year before, offhand, I asked my dad if my grandfather had ever written anything that he had. And he said, “Oh yeah, I have two diaries. They’re very uninteresting, but you can look at them if you want.” Reading the diaries, which were very difficult for me and required my working with a Chinese graduate student to decipher some of the classical Chinese writing, I realized that my grandfather was engaged in kind of a similar endeavor to what Chunming had been engaged in. So there were many parallels. But overall, reporting my family story in parallel with reporting the migrants’ story made me feel like Chinese people have come a long way, and, in general, it’s a good thing.

I felt like the people I was learning about in my family were, in many ways, trapped inside a lot of traditional ideas about family and history and how they should behave. And I felt like the young women I met in Dongguan were completely liberated from that. It’s partly a function of class. They don’t have the education and so they don’t have the kind of burdens that an educated Chinese person has. But I think it went beyond that. It’s a different moment in Chinese history and people are more liberated from all of the obligations to family and history and the past.

Jakes: But what makes family obligations and tradition things from which someone ought to be liberated? Can you explain what you mean?

Chang: In talking to my own family, I felt like everyone had done what was expected of them. This was the case with my grandfather, who went to America in the 1920s and his great love was literature and humanities and history, but instead he studied mining engineering, because he felt like this was the best thing to help China. And in his diary it becomes clear that he’s just not interested in mining engineering, but he’s doing it for a higher purpose.

My Dad went to America and studied electrical engineering even though he’d always been an incredibly vocal, fluent person and the thing he was most interested in studying was law and politics. He felt like there was no future in that and he had to go to America and so he studied electrical engineering. He had a very good career and then retired early and went to Hong Kong to help start up the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology. In the course of my research I read this interview with him—it’s kind of funny to read an interview of your father—in a Hong Kong magazine, and the reporter was asking him, “How come you decided to come to Hong Kong?” And he said, “I really wanted to do something for China and this is the first act in my whole life that I’ve chosen to do that wasn’t something that was expected of me.” It’s kind of weird to read an interview of your father when he says that. I think that made a deep impression on me. It’s not to imply that he wasn’t happy with his life, but there were just a lot of restrictions and expectations on people of his generation and earlier generations and I think a lot of those have disappeared.

Jakes: You’re Chinese Ameican and you look Chinese and that gave you a kind of access and when you wanted it, a kind of anonymity that enhanced your ability to report. How else do you think that coming from a Chinese family affected the way that you came to understand and tell these stories, if at all?

Chang: I think that coming from a Chinese background, being Chinese-American, there can be a lot of emotional baggage. I saw it in other Chinese-Americans I knew. Certain people embrace this Chinese identity all the way. They hate the Japanese for what they did during the Nanjing massacre. Others embrace the Communist Party and think everything China does is good and are very defensive whenever anyone criticizes anything about China. I think it’s a difficult process to come to terms with what your Chinese identity or your Chinese heritage means and I think there are many pitfalls to that.

One thing I describe in the book is this Chinese reticence about their own suffering or their own history or their own past. I kind of see that in myself as I’ve researched this book and talked to other people about it. People often ask about the book and I’ll tell it in very general terms, especially the family history and [my husband] will be sitting next to me and say, “But her grandfather was assassinated after the war. It’s a really dramatic story with historical moment and you’re not talking about any of this.”

And I always say, “Well I don’t want to burden people with this the minute I meet them. What if they don’t know how to react when I tell them my grandfather was killed.” And I realize that’s a very Chinese reaction—maybe not just Chinese—but in that way a Chinese reaction, the will to withhold information and to keep the things that matter most to you rather than spilling them out right away. Talking with my relatives, after talking for two hours they would reveal at last some terrible detail about someone who had committed suicide or the fact that they only had one memory of their father to carry through their whole lives or some incredibly poignant detail that they had not told me until that moment. And you know, I understand why they would do that and it seemed to reflect how I react to certain things as well.

Jakes: In the book, mostly you use the stories of your family to contrast the stories of the migrant women. But there are also links. Do you think that’s more because these are Chinese stories or because they’re both about leaving home?

Chang: Definitely the latter. I think the story of leaving home, going to a strange place and making a new life is universal. And I did think while writing it that while I know China is very distant for most Americans, I hope Americans reading this will feel like this is the story of their ancestors as well. And obviously without downplaying all of the differences in China’s history and China’ situation, this is kind of a universal story. That was also one of the motivating factors for my reporting on migrants in the first place. When we talk about the American migration story, whether from Europe or from somewhere else, it isn’t a story of pure privation and desperation and horrible conditions although all those things existed in some form. It’s really a story about opportunity and adventure and a new life. And I felt like the story of the migrants leaving their villages for the city might have some similarities with that story.

Jakes: At one point early on in the book, you visit a history museum in Dongguan and it’s kind of a funny part of the book. The museum doesn’t have anything in it about Mao, most if its displays are about the growth of factories. History and the way it’s written and the way people think about it is a persistent sub-theme in Factory Girls. Could you say something about how history functions for the book’s different protagonists?

Chang: I think, as I say in the book, that the Chinese have a very complicated relationship with their own past. For traditional scholars, the past is living and the past is to be constantly studied, for meaning, for moral examples, for guidance on how to move forward. And I think for my grandfather and my father’s generation that was very much the case. But then you have this very traumatic recent history of China from the 1950s to the 1970s when, in many cases, unspeakable things happened and people who are still alive today committed a lot of these unspeakable acts, to people whom they knew or were friends with or possibly were related to or worked with. So you have this kind of abstract pride in history, but then you have this recent history that you participated in that’s extremely problematic and traumatic and impossible to explain.

So then there’s this young generation that I write about, who are going to the factories, who I think are completely removed from history, cut off from history. They have no history and they can be liberated from China’s traumatic past. But I don’t think that means that everything is fine. I think that under the surface this very troubled history is still there and some point it needs to come out and be dealt with. But right now it’s just kind of under the surface. There’s a kind of agreement among most Chinese people with each other with themselves which is just not to deal with it.

I kind of think as Westerners we look at China and think that history is this open wound and people are trying to work through these terrible things that happened during the Cultural Revolution. I think that’s a very Western approach. We feel like these things need to be dealt with, explored, to ensure that they won’t happen again. And I think the Chinese that I write about, my older relatives both inside and outside of China, their response to these traumatic events is to put them aside and not think about them. I don’t think it’s an open wound, I just think it’s something they kind of hold inside themselves and at some point they’re going to have to deal with it. But most people are basically pretty fine, not dealing with it.

One of the things I did feel in Dongguan and also from reporting my family’s story—my family suffered a lot during the Cultural Revolution—was that I felt like this moment in history could not have happened without the traumatic events that preceded it. China now, with people so pragmatic, so focused on just improving their lives, getting the next good thing—I think that’s a direct response, even an unconscious response to the traumatic historical events experienced by the previous generation.

I definitely feel like the world in Dongguan is a pretty brutal world. It’s pretty corrupt. There’s a lot of misinformation. People make major life decisions on wrong-headed ideas. You see that in the book with Chunming and all these crazy schemes and fads that she embraces one after another. So definitely I’m not trying to portray this modern world as represented by Dongguan as an ideal world, by any means. But I do think that the opportunities that these young women I write about have to try to make a new life and search for some meaning, I think that’s new, and I think it’s worth understanding and even celebrating.

10/09/2008

Part II, Improving Wikipedia: Technique and Strategy For China Folk


By Charles W. Hayford

How do we improve the coverage, reliability, and balance for China? With all the objections listed in my previous post, in the end, clearly we can’t achieve perfection, only make improvements. If you are already participating, you have doubtless come to terms with the culture of the natives; if you now join, remember to respect our perhaps outlandish ways. Like members of any other cult(ure), we have to live with each other. Some Wikipedians are nuts, some are smart and generous, most are trying to be useful, some are all of the above. Wikipedia enthusiasts simply accept that the project is a work in progress – the monkeys are still typing.

First a quick reminder on using it, and, for those of you who are teachers, how to get your students to use it without getting burned. Luckily, Wikipedians are documentative. The article “Researching With Wikipedia” lays out most of the do’s and don’t’s. The summary at the head of the article puts it in a nutshell: “You should not use only Wikipedia for primary research (unless you are writing a paper about Wikipedia).” The section on Tips brings together a lot of information.

Teachers will find Wikipedia an inexhaustible source of “teachable moments.” Strange Facts in the History Classroom: Or How I learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Wiki(pedia) by Christopher Miller (American Historical Association Perspectives May 2007) claims that what is “most troubling about the ‘anti-Wiki’ movement is that it tends to single out Wikipedia for being an online source rather than for being an encyclopedia.”

General issue articles are not reliably reliable, especially those which are the least bit controversial, but finding the story behind an article can give you a good historiographical workout. Teachers may want to develop exercises using the History and Discussion pages as outlined in “How to Read an Article History.” (There is a tool which compiles Page History Statistics, but I’m not sure why you would want to know.) Reading the Revision History or Discussion pages (click the tab at the top of the article page) is like being down in the country listening to the neighbors on the shared telephone line, or maybe being in divorce court. Analyzing the discussions and revisions for controversial articles would be a good student course assignment.

Then if you don’t like what the article says, why just change it!

You do not have to create a User Account in order to edit (although you do have to register in order to create an article), but registering is free, takes less time than to pledge to National Public Radio, and creates your User Page, Talk Page, Contributions, and Watchlist.

The User and Talk Pages keep track of your contributions, keep links to tools and useful pages, and send and receive communications anonymously (choose a username which won’t blow your cover – this may prove useful before you know it). Your Watchlist keeps track of changes made on articles you specify (to add to your Watchlist, click the “watch” tab at the top of an article). Watchlist link takes you to the article or its History page. You can “undo” edits, though it is courteous and prudent to explain why on the Discussion Page. Deleting “Angela is a slut” from the article on the Kangxi Emperor, however, won't need much defense.

At this point, sometimes things get rough and tumble. After making self-evidently brilliant improvements in one particular article, my Talk Page sprouted a note thanking me for my interest and suggesting that I use my talents elsewhere. My changes were “undo’d.” I could have reverted the changes, but after three reverts you find yourself in an Edit War, not a recreational experience. Wikipedia provides for adjudication, but this is even less recreational, so generally people just talk and talk and talk. And talk. This is how the Committee on Horses came up with the nifty design for a camel.

Creating an article is slightly daunting but don't be shy -- if it required special talent, there wouldn't be 2.2 million of them. The directions are clear and Wikipedians are aggressively helpful. Start with “Who Writes Wikipedia” or maybe “Tutorial” or How to Edit a Page and you’ll fly away.

Wikipedia’s “Policies and Guidelines” are simple, though sometimes hard to define or enforce:

□ NPOV (Neutral Point of View): “All Wikipedia articles and other encyclopedic content must be written from a neutral point of view, representing significant views fairly, proportionately, and without bias.”

No original research: “Articles may not contain any new analysis or synthesis of published material that serves to advance a position not clearly advanced by the sources.” This may seem strange, but it actually makes good sense to require that articles be based on the consensus of published scholarship, not somebody’s interpretation. You see the problem already....

Verifiability: The test is not whether or not the material is true, which is hard to establish, but that “material challenged or likely to be challenged, and all quotations, must be attributed to a reliable, published source.”

The guidelines ask that articles be well written, proportionate in length to the subject, and comprehensible to the ordinary reader. This is an area where the need is greatest.

How do you start? Just pick a topic and find an article. There will be links to related articles. Then use your judgment to prune and balance.

Here are some possible chores for volunteers:

□ WikiProjects have undefined responsibilities and power which is only nominal, since they have no more rights than you or your dog. WikiProject China has a list of Participants (which you can join); notice and discussion boards; featured and good content articles. Other projects include articles with Chinese or Asian content, such as War, Film, etc. etc.

□ The China Assessment page explains how to nominate articles for honors or for revision.

Cleanup : everything from grammar to well, you name it. See the Manual of Style.

□ Some articles are stubs, which need expansion. Others are disproportionately long, but it seems a shame to shrink them. For instance, Wang Mang runs roughly 8,000 words. Is that proportionate? Somebody thought so and who am I to say? But what will a student in my Chinese Civ. class get from it?

Maybe your job would be to seek articles and redo the opening paragraphs to make them into usable summaries.

□ Another area for improvement is whether the links lead to articles which are helpful. Neither the article on the film “Everlasting Regret” nor on Wang Anyi, author of the novel on which the film is based, mention that there is a poem by that name, though the article on Bai Juyi (which is only three paragraphs long!) does mention “Song of Eternal Sorrow.” There are many easily fixed holes of this sort.

□ “Further References” and “Further Reading.” To my mind, each article should have a short, balanced list of books and articles, with short annotations to guide reading – in English, please, as references in other languages can be found by clicking into the Wikipedia for that language. A rule of thumb might be perhaps one reference for each two or three paragraphs.

□ Many articles have strange or inadequate footnotes. Some are marked “This article needs references,” but there are many more in extreme need.

Finally, here are reminders and some more handy features to keep in mind:

□ Wikipedias in other languages (linked in the lefthand column of the article) may have fuller or better shaped coverage. For instance, the French article on “Tibet.”

□ If you need the Chinese translation of a current or tricky term, find an English Wikipedia article using it, then click to go to the Chinese version.

Wikipedia:Tools: This page lists tools, categorized by browser you use. You can add them to your TalkPage to automate or simplify editing, give you information about articles (page history, number of edits, number of visits, links in and out, etc.), and perform other tasks which are not necessarily necessary. On your Wikipedia User Preference page, you can change the way articles and editing pages are displayed and add editing tools.

□ “Traffic stats” is one of the tools, but you can’t view it unless you’re signed in and have added it to your tool box. Do not use it unless you are ready to be shocked: “Mao Zedong,” for instance, was viewed more than 175,000 times in September 2008, ranking it in the top 800 articles.

□ The Firefox browser, and I imagine others, has a search box which you can set to find Wikipedia articles. If you’d like to search for text, then…

Google search engine: This is amazing. Google’s specialized engine will miraculously search the whole body of Wikipedia text to find, for instance, all mentions of a particular book, uses of a particular word or term, or your name in some article where you hadn’t thought to look. Very useful for finding where information is tucked away.

□ “Portals” make browsing easier, and, though I hardly use them myself, it is possible to create them. China Portal lists many categories, some of which have dozens of articles and some of which are unpopulated. Christianity in China is an example of a specialized portal.

□ And of course there has to be an independent discussion forum: Wikipedia Review, which has Boards for General Discussion, Metadiscussion, Articles, Wikipedia in the Media, a list of blogs concerning Wikipedia, etc. & etc.

WikiScanner, which we probably will not need, gathers information on anonymous edits in order to see what organizations the edits are coming from.

□ Sample articles which are listed as needing expansion include or are marked with balloons asking for improvement: “Pearl Buck,” “Cultural Revolution,” “ZhangYimou,” “T.V. Soong,” “Qingming Shanghe tu, Tang poetry, Bashidang, Chang Da-chien, China National Ethnic Song and Dance Ensemble, Chinese traditional religion, Chau Ju-kua, Linfen. You can also look at Mandarin (Bureaucrats), History of East Asia, and … well, you take it from here!

I would like to thank Alan Baumler, Kate Merkel-Hess, Konrad Lawson, Ray Lum, and a friend who wishes to be anonymous for their suggestions.

*******
The Editors of China Beat and Frog In A Well (where Charles Hayford blogs regularly) invite comments, examples, experiences, pointers, and suggestions.

10/07/2008

Living with Wikipedia: It’s Here to Stay


Part I of two parts. The second installment, "Improving Wikipedia," will run on Thursday, October 9.

By Charles W. Hayford

My name is Charles and I'm a Wikipedia addict.

I can’t help myself, but then, neither can 75,000 other “active contributors.” We don’t just look things up: we create articles, correct and introduce mistakes, send each other notes, and fuss over issues great and obscure. Anonymity lends a carnival air of freedom and community since, as the famous New Yorker cartoon had it, “on the Internet nobody knows you’re a dog” (and yes, the link is to a Wikipedia article).

Wikipedia is an internet galactic cloud of information. Nicholson Baker, who once crankily lamented the end of the library card catalogue, in a review of John Broughton’s Wikipedia: The Missing Manual (NY Review March 20, 2008), calls it “just an incredible thing.” It’s “fact-encirclingly huge, and it's idiosyncratic, careful, messy, funny, shocking, and full of simmering controversies—and it's free, and it's fast.” Wikipedia, he says, is the “convergence between the self-taught and the expensively educated.”

What’s in it for China folk? In the near future we will have at least three major print encyclopedias of China, so now is a good time to ask how Wikipedia stacks up, especially for those of us who are teachers.

The lures are obvious. Where else can you so quickly find a list of six translations of Liaozhai Zhiyi, Zhu Yuanzhang’s birthday, chopstick etiquette in four Asian countries, or not quite enough about postage stamps and postal history of China? Even weak articles often have supplementary internet links which make them worthwhile. You can find the translation of a current or tricky term by locating it in the English Wikipedia, then clicking on the link (at the left side of the page) to the article in the Chinese Wikipedia.

So what’s not to like?

When I asked around among my friends, I got an email from a recovering Wikipedian who has gone cold turkey and wants to remain anonymous, perhaps for the sake of his family’s safety:

“First, as long as you edit relatively peripheral articles, you are not likely to get involved in any dispute and people are happy to see you sharing your knowledge. However, if you venture into the more contentious articles in our field – especially the ones involving the “three T’s” – you realize that almost any contributions may be reverted by different interest groups that police these pages. At that point, you either give up or engage in a discussion on the discussion page, and that is when you realize that Wikipedia is as much a discussion club as an encyclopedia and tenacity often prevails over truth. If you want to be proven right, it's not enough to give credible sources to support your argument, you need allies, and in order to get allies you need to talk a lot. The consequence is that you end up talking to people rather than editing articles…. many talk pages on Wikipedia are larger than the actual articles! You also realize that most people get their information on the internet and not in libraries. The fact that a scholar is widely published on the internet (but disdained by academics) often makes him a stronger source than a thoroughly researched book that may be two decades old.”

These observations are from the point of view of editing, but let’s spell out the consequences for how we read:

□ While many articles are detailed, proportionate, and sound, others are woolly, evasive, partisan, and about as reliable as a paper crutch. There’s no way to predict which is going to be which. Readers who most need reliable information are the least able to distinguish.

□ Wikipedia is a collaboration of anonymous amateurs: “Out of mediocrity, excellence.” But if anybody with access to the internet can edit an article, how do you know if that dog (with or without lipstick) got Zhu Yuanzhang’s birthday right?

True, mistakes are less of a problem than you might think. When one experiment deliberately introduced mistakes, almost all were quickly corrected. But they chose areas which are well populated. Are there enough China people out there who can correct mistakes?

□ And what if it’s not a mistake but unbalanced judgment or omission? For instance, assertions from Chang Jung and Jon Halliday’s Mao: The Unknown Story (Random House, 2005) were systematically inserted into a wide range of articles for which more appropriate sources were available, such as Second Sino-Japanese War, among many others. Neither the article on Liaozhai Zhiyi nor the linked article on Pu Songling mention the standard study by Judith Zeitlin, Stories of the Strange: Pu Songling and the Chinese Classical Tale (Stanford University Press, 1993) or Jonathan Spence’s discussion in Death of Woman Wang (Viking 1978).

□ In theory, the process is self-generating and perhaps self correcting, but it’s not self-limiting. To see the process in action, look at the article on Xiang Yu, Liu Bang’s rival and the hero of the Beijing opera “Farewell My Concubine” made famous by the film. Click on the “History” tab to follow how one bare paragraph in 2004 became a more than full chronicle of some 8,000 words (though it has an officious tag “This article does not cite any references or sources”). Who decides what is too detailed for a casual visitor wanting background to the film? (A useful task for you to take on: find wooly articles and write or re-write the lead paragraphs to make them into useful summary introductions to the topic.)

□ Too often collaboration turns into a version of the party game where each person adds a paragraph to the story without seeing what went before. This is serial contribution, not teamwork.

The article Chinese Literature, for instance runs a little over 5,000 words (that is, shorter than the article on Xiang Yu). There are useful facts and individual comments but the article strikes me as confusing and shapeless, not a good place to send students. Sections of the article describe periods and genres, with links to perhaps several hundred articles, many of which are nicely done, but the crucial introductory paragraph, which should summarize and set the themes, reads in its entirety:

“Chinese literature extends back thousands of years, from the earliest recorded dynastic court archives to the mature fictional novel that arose during the Ming Dynasty to entertain the masses of literate Chinese. The introduction of widespread woodblock printing during the Tang Dynasty (618-907) and the invention of movable type printing by Bi Sheng (990-1051) during the Song Dynasty (960-1279) rapidly spread written knowledge throughout China like never before. In more modern times, the author Lu Xun (1881-1936) would be considered the founder of modern baihua literature in China.”

□ Wikipedia prose is stilted and timorously qualified. The “Guide to Writing Better Articles” includes “avoid weasel words,” but you can’t look at more than an article or two before you start to cringe.

□ The basic Wikipedia principle NPOV, or “Neutral Point of View” often actually turns out to be “No Point of View” or “The Last Point of View Standing.” If everybody has authority, then nobody has authority to shape or set a theme. Articles simply accrete.

□ Users of the English Wikipedia outside China will not be directly affected, but there is a continuing question of censorship or blocking access within the PRC. Rebecca MacKinnon discusses with founder Jimmy Wales whether “China will change Wikipedia or Wikipedia will change China.” Will editors be tempted to self-censor?

Wikipedians recognize these objections. The frank though rambling article “Researching With Wikipedia” is an excellent summary of the pitfalls and drawbacks, with links to other good articles. The jist: “You should not use only Wikipedia for primary research (unless you are writing a paper about Wikipedia).”

These problems lie with the very nature of the creature, which cannot be changed without killing it. Wikipedia’s nature reflects the interactive, anonymous, flat, and decentralized “Web 2.0,” which includes Google, FaceBook, YouTube. This probably will lead to the end of reading books, of libraries, and of civilization as we know it.

The flat internet breeds a clickable link mentality which expects everything to be available instantly and acts as if anything that’s not clickable (in English, please) doesn’t exist. True, as my colleague Alan Baumler points out, vastly more articles are available online. But because much of human experience is not clickable in English, the usable world is reduced to the present. As an MA student remarked to a librarian friend of mine when he recommended an article which was not online, “I don’t do paper.”

The interactive and decentralized internet is flat, that is, it reduces hierarchy. Populist bloggers welcome the end run around elites in the national media to allow direct access to the facts. The early film director D.W. Griffiths suggested that when movie cameras became widespread, historians would no longer be needed since anyone could look at the photographs to prove what had or had not happened.

These all misunderstand the nature of knowledge by confusing “data” with “facts” and “analysis,” and contribute to an anti-intellectualism disguised as anti-elitism. Wikipedia’s sense of community – a good thing – sometimes defers to the anonymous persistent voice rather than to the well informed and accountable expert.

Even the claims to internet democracy may be exaggerated – 1 percent of Wikipedia contributors account for nearly half the participation. The WikiProject Countering Systemic Bias is a cool minded analysis and call for help in balancing the predominately male, white, English speaking geeks who live in affluent Northern Hemisphere countries and do most of the editing.
In the end, I will stick with my Wikipedia habit. The fun and information are hard to beat, and I’m not harming anybody but myself. Wikipedia intensifies the problems we discussed, but they would not go away if Wikipedia did.

The most important argument is that people use it: the article on Chinese Literature has been visited nearly 10,000 times in September 2008, the article on Chiang Kai-shek, 32,000 times and “Mao Zedong” more than 175,000 times, ranking it in the top 800 articles. As the elephant said when he pooped on the walk, “that’s here to stay.”

The good news is that Wikipedia allows us to compensate for the problems by our participation. Part II will discuss practical tricks, shortcuts, neglected features, and how to make best use of your talents in editing.

********

I will post further references and links at Frog in a Well, where you are also welcome to post comments.

I would like to thank Alan Baumler, Kate Merkel-Hess, Konrad Lawson, Ray Lum, and a friend who wishes to be anonymous for their suggestions.

***********
Charles W. Hayford is a visiting professor in the Department of History at Northwestern University and author of To the People: James Yen and Village China.

10/03/2008

In Case You Missed It: Tibet Special, Part 4


In September, China Beat started a series that described overlooked and recommended readings on Tibet. Here, Robert J. Barnett, author of Lhasa: Streets with Memories, editor (with Ronald Schwartz) of Tibetan Modernities: Notes from the Field on Social and Cultural Change, and director of the Modern Tibetan Studies Program at Columbia University, shares some of his favorite readings.

By Robert Barnett

There’s a nice thing about literature about modern Tibet, which is that it is wonderfully polemical. It’s not that I like polemic, which destroys lives and wreaks havoc with societies. But it does make it ever so easy to organize one’s books. So instead of tedious hours sorting them by topic or author, I can arrange my Tibet books according to two or three viewpoints, perhaps four at most. One case for the books with a China POV, some shelves for those from the exile perspective, a few for the “I was a Heroic Western Explorer and Discovered Totally Unknown Tibet/Everest/Himalayas/Central Asia Entirely On My Own Plus 50 Sherpas and a Cook” corpus, and perhaps half a shelf for the Western Buddhist books, though these are surely the most numerous in the field. Then the rest of the space is for the books by the scholars and commentators who are in the middle ground, or at least declare their biases and methods. Wish there were more of those.

This is a totally unprofessional system, which should be called SBP or Shelving By Prejudice, generally speaking theirs rather than mine. I guess it won’t replace the Dewey system for a while. It shouldn’t be possible to do in any well developed field of study, but sadly it’s all too easy in this case. Anyway, the system has great advantages, because if I really get annoyed with a book (like the ones that invent their own transliteration systems for Tibetan – please!), then I can shift it into the category the writer would most dislike and revel in the secret insult. Naughty but nice.

The categories are not divided by ethnicity, of course. Some of the very best of the scholarly “middle ground” books are by Tibetans (like Tsering Shakya, Samten Karmay, Tashi Rabgey and Tseten Wangchuk), and there are myriads of foreigners in the exile category. There are even a few modern-day fellow travelers in the China section. It’s easy to spot the exile-oriented books, because they have forewords by the Dalai Lama, in most of which he demonstrates his signature skill of appearing to say nice things about everyone including the author, while at the same time carefully avoiding saying very much at all (I guess he practices non-judgmental consciousness when it comes to us Western writers). These books use a lot of adjectives, ones that convey intensity and color. The other categories are also pretty straightforward to identify: the scholar-types like abstract nouns without adornment and don’t use a lot of adverbs, the Buddhist books like to have at least two Sanskrit words per paragraph, the China books like numbers, and the explorer books are keen on the “I” word and on photographs of mountains.

Of course, to be serious, we need to read from all these traditions, and all of them contain important insights, as Charlene Makley noted in an earlier posting. And some that seem obvious and even trite now will be of critical importance later. Owen Lattimore’s work on Inner Asia, for example, was marginalized for years, but is going to become increasingly important (his most important work, Inner Asian Frontiers, is available online through Questia). Some of the Tibet travel accounts, like the remarkable Hisao Kimura’s description of 1940s Lhasa in A Japanese Agent in Tibet (with Scott Berry) and Catriona Bass’s Inside the Treasure House from her time there in the mid-1980s, are going to be recognized as invaluable source books. If the pendulum of intellectual fashion swings again towards the CCP perspective and discredits critics and exiles as losers and complainers, which is not unlikely given the flow of rhetoric, finance and strategic interests, the Dharamsala (the capital of the Tibetan government in exile) point of view will become important: works from that stable will be the primary texts that the future equivalent of post-colonial and anti-colonial scholars should be reading word by word. They won’t, of course, because things just don’t work that logically. But they should.

In the middle category the most important books are well known – Tsering Shakya’s Dragon in the Land of Snow, and the two-volume History of Modern Tibet by Melvyn Goldstein. These are the foundations of the modern field. Then lots of other extremely valuable works have appeared, including the ones Charlene Makley and Emily Yeh mentioned in their earlier China Beat posting, plus major writings by Matthew T. Kapstein, Heather Stoddard, Gray Tuttle, Fabienne Jagou, John Kenneth Knaus and others on history, and Emily Yeh, Ronald Schwartz, Toni Huber, Charlene Makley and Andrew Martin Fischer on contemporary issues.

But the real point of all this is obvious: if you divide everything by viewpoint, it shows what’s missing. It stands out immediately: there is almost nothing representing Tibetan voices from inside Tibet. I don’t need even a quarter of a shelf for books in English that represent that point of view. The Chinese authorities certainly do their best to sanitize or mute them, which doesn’t help. But it’s also clear that most of the pundits arguing over what the Dalai Lama and Beijing should or shouldn’t do inside Tibet are not much interested in the views of people living there. So the books I find most useful, after the histories by Shakya and Goldstein, are the few that have managed to squeeze between the cracks of other people deciding what’s good for Tibetans. The most prominent is the quasi-biography by Melvyn Goldstein and a colleague of Baba Phuntsog Wanggyal, who became the first Tibetan communist ten years before the Chinese arrived with their nationalist version of supposedly the same creed. If that doesn’t remind us that sometimes people want to be their authors of their own destinies, but don’t get given the chance by their liberators, then nothing will. A Tibetan Revolutionary: The Political Life and Times of Bapa Phüntso Wangye is very readable, and its strangeness in terms of genre – a biography which is written as an autobiography with multiple disclaimers, invented ghost writers, and all in the first person – is itself an indicator of the contortions a leading CCP official has to perform while disseminating his views, which are often buried beneath complex philosophical positions. Phuntsog Wanggyal’s own writings are extraordinarily difficult, such that an American philosophy professor at Columbia once assured me after reading some that Phuntsog Wanggyal was clinically insane. But anyone used to cross-reading Chinese political texts will be able to see easily what is happening, and why they are so crucial to the current dialogue process, after reading Goldstein’s highly accessible account of his life.

There is now another book by a Tibetan, also written originally in Chinese – the essays and poems of Oeser (often spelt Woeser or Öeser; or, in Chinese, Weise), the only Tibetan so far to publish openly critical texts while still inside China. Some of her essays appeared in Unlocking Tibet: A Chinese Author’s Perspective on Tibet Issue by her husband Wang Lixiong and her, but it’s hard to obtain and the translations have been queried. Some pieces from it and her blog are available at the website Tibet Writes. Her poems have just appeared in English translation in Tibet’s True Heart, trans. A. E. Clark, available at Ragged Banner Press, and very well worth reading. And the more recent work of Wang Lixiong on Tibet is also important, such as his debate with Tsering Shakya in The Struggle for Tibet. Shakya’s own views are important too, as in his recent interview with the New Left Review.

That’s not a long list of Tibetan voices, but it will get longer as leading scholars like Lauran Hartley, Yangdon Dhondup, Riika Vertaanen, Francoise Robin and Patricia Schiaffini work on translations of Tibetan authors inside Tibet. I’m hoping to buy a new bookcase soon to fill it with translations of works from Tibetans in Tibet…

10/02/2008

China in SoCal


We don't usually do posts about upcoming events, but there are so many involving China Beat-related folks (either contributors or people we've reviewed or referred to recently) in Southern California in the next few weeks that we felt remiss not mentioning them.

First, tomorrow (nothing like starting with the present!) USC will be hosting a day-long symposium on "Hong Kong, China and the World Art System." It features many speakers, including China Beat contributor Richard Kraus.

The UCI Center for Asian Studies, in cooperation with several other units, will be hosting Michael Meyer, author of Last Days of Old Beijing, for a reading and booksigning on October 14.

And, finally, the Asia Society of Southern California will be hosting Ian Buruma on October 21 for a conversation about his new novel, The China Lover.