The full text has been translated by China Digital Times:
Yesterday, I saw a news report which said that I am a candidate for the list of the 200 most globally influential people from Time magazine. Sensitive word, sensitive word, and sensitive word from China are also candidates. At the moment [I heard this news] I was digging up bamboo shoots in my village (I was digging in my family’s field), so I did not pay too much attention. Later I saw there were lots of text messages on my cell phone, asking my take on this. I only replied to two friends in the Beijing News and Southern Metropolis Daily; all the other things written in other media are friendly imaginations based on my personality. I did not realize that so many people care about this, so I will just write about it here all together.
First of all, I sighed and felt regret. Why do others have such news media? When Time puts out a list of influential people, it makes waves within other countries. How much I desire that our China can have such media. When this media selects people, it also gets attention from the whole world. We cannot say such media is completely fair, but they do have public credibility. How much I desire that our country has this as well. But regrettably we do not. This is not to say that our journalists are not as good as journalists from other places, it is because ….. those reasons that everyone knows. I will just stop here; if I say more about this I will be dead, and my dead body will be whipped as well.
I often ask myself, what contribution have I made to this society which is full of sensitive words? Maybe in the end, all I contribute is another sensitive word which is my name. That’s all. Everyday I get out of bed around noon, often wasting money on digital gadgets, and I’m very picky about food. Thank goodness that I did not add more load or sin to this society, at least so far. I do not have a grand vision; I only want the relevant departments to treat art, literature and the news media better, and our small readers, listeners, audience, netizens, urban dwellers and citizens can all enjoy this benefit. I may not have the talent and ability to write great things, but some others do. But you [the goverment] should not castrate people or glorify those who have been castrated.
A journalist asked me over the phone: In some places it’s been said that you are colluding with Western anti-China forces. I said this [accusation] is expected. They [the government] has used this method for sixty years. During the earlier several decades they may have genuinely believed this, but in recent decades, this is just a means of slander. I am just a person that often almost did not get my visa when I participated in competitions abroad because my documents were incomplete. What kind of Western forces are they talking about? What age is it now, that they still use the word “colluding”? That’s sounds so pathetic. If there is a comrade who is listening to my phone everyday, you must be very clear about what kind of person I am. What do you say, my friend? In front of a computer screen there must be a friend who smiles as he understands what I am talking about. But I am just curious, that after so many decades [the government] still only has this one position [in screwing people]. He is not tired of it, but the other party is sick of it.
However, I clearly recognize their existence. You always need both sides, positive and negative, camp A and camp B. If in our country, when we cannot agree with each other, we can leave each other alone, instead of censoring those that do not agree with us, then that would be huge progress. We will work hard towards this day.
Later the same journalist sent me another short text message: In other words, your views and expressions fit with Western values. Don’t you think so?
I replied to him: Don’t [my views and expression] fit Chinese values as well?
I believe that there may be different values between earthlings and aliens. But for Westerners and Easterners? Other then different living habits, how much different could the values be? Why do we have to fight over this?
At last, let me return to the point of so-called influence. I often feel very ashamed. I am just a person with a pen. Maybe my writings make people feel like they are releasing some of their anger or resentment. But other than that what’s the real use? The so-called influence is illusory. In China, those who have influence are those who have power. Those who can make rain from clouds, those who can decide if you live or die, or keep you somewhere in between life and death. They are the people who really have influence. However, I am not sure it is just because they are afraid of search engines or they are too fragile to be searched; we often cannot find them by using search engines. We are just a small role on the stage, under the spotlight. But they own the theater. They can at any time bring the curtain down, turn off the lights, close the door and let the dogs out. Later the dogs all disappear and the sky is blue again; there is no trace of what has happened. I just wish those people could really put their influence into good use. And those of us on this stage, even those who built this theater in the past, should make efforts to gradually take down those high walls and light bulbs. Let the sunshine in. That kind of light, no one can extinguish it again.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100ht1x.html
Thursday, 8 April 2010
Tuesday, 6 April 2010
Letters from Strangers
The excerpts are translated by China Digital Times
Many people who have suffered injustice treat me as the media. Among the articles and letters the magazine and I have received every day, many are hoping I can get justice for them by writing about their experiences, so the media will pay attention to their stories. I have carefully read every letter, but I am very helpless. These things are a heavy burden on your families, but for the news media, which has lost its news value, I believe that even if I write it for you, it won’t get that much attention from the traditional media.
For one problem to be resolved, it often needs the help of many traditional media. Eventually the leader will show up and pretend to be thinking for the people, taking the people’s urgent matter as his own emergency.
Most of the letters [I have received] are about so-and-so housing project in which the quality of apartments is very poor, or there is a trash station or power station next to it; many of the letters are about forced demolitions. If you experienced a demolition, that’s not news. That’s life. If you did not burn yourself into ashes, if you can still receive and send mail, and all your family members are still alive, that’s the definition of a happy life. You ought to thank the State for it.
The worst story in those letters is from a friend who lives outside of Shanghai. All attached documents were very complete. The content was about the family’s home undergoing a forced demolition, during which some members of his family were injured. Most of his family’s residences were deemed illegal buildings. They went to Beijing to petition, and their petition materials were sent to the province, and the province sent their petition to the city, and the city sent it to the county, and the county sent it back to the village. From then on, whenever there are important national holidays, the whole family lives under in-home surveillance by local security forces, who prevent them from disturbing the harmonious atmosphere. Finally they brought their case to court, and the court even took the case.
Oh My Heaven! The court even took the case. Isn’t the court a service agency for the government? How could it take this case? I could not wait to turn the page [of the letter].
In the next page [of the letter], the court even delivered a verdict right away. The verdict was that the government was supposed to compensate 200,000 RMB to the victim, but in this case, now the government only needs to pay 100,000 RMB compensation.
Another important reason that I cannot publicize all the letters I have received is because I have not checked them. But I personally do not have the capacity to fact-check them. Nevertheless, I believe that most, possibly even all, of those stories are true; at most some of those authors include more stuff in their favor, but that won’t change the story in general, and the assholes are definitely on the other side.
Of course, these people do not really hope that I could bring daylight to them; they are only trying every way they can think of. Of course, those who are in the deepest suffering may not even be able to petition for themselves. For those who are petitioning for their suffering, they have never found a way to do so. Once they were petitioning to the cadres, then they discovered that no one else was abusing them but cadres. Then they petitioned to the organizations, but they discovered that the organization is composed of cadres large and small. Then they went to the Petition Letter Office to get themselves registered, which makes it convenient for police to monitor their activities. Finally they went to court, and paid the legal fee. On this zigzag road, everywhere they go they meet the enemy’s soldiers.
So they look for an alternative, and they found the media. But they found that too many people have suffered and their own suffering is not shocking enough to be news. Then they found the Internet, but discovered that too many unfortunate people are already there, and their own misfortune is not unique enough to be placed on the top of webpages. Now, what can these people do?
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100hrm2.html
Many people who have suffered injustice treat me as the media. Among the articles and letters the magazine and I have received every day, many are hoping I can get justice for them by writing about their experiences, so the media will pay attention to their stories. I have carefully read every letter, but I am very helpless. These things are a heavy burden on your families, but for the news media, which has lost its news value, I believe that even if I write it for you, it won’t get that much attention from the traditional media.
For one problem to be resolved, it often needs the help of many traditional media. Eventually the leader will show up and pretend to be thinking for the people, taking the people’s urgent matter as his own emergency.
Most of the letters [I have received] are about so-and-so housing project in which the quality of apartments is very poor, or there is a trash station or power station next to it; many of the letters are about forced demolitions. If you experienced a demolition, that’s not news. That’s life. If you did not burn yourself into ashes, if you can still receive and send mail, and all your family members are still alive, that’s the definition of a happy life. You ought to thank the State for it.
The worst story in those letters is from a friend who lives outside of Shanghai. All attached documents were very complete. The content was about the family’s home undergoing a forced demolition, during which some members of his family were injured. Most of his family’s residences were deemed illegal buildings. They went to Beijing to petition, and their petition materials were sent to the province, and the province sent their petition to the city, and the city sent it to the county, and the county sent it back to the village. From then on, whenever there are important national holidays, the whole family lives under in-home surveillance by local security forces, who prevent them from disturbing the harmonious atmosphere. Finally they brought their case to court, and the court even took the case.
Oh My Heaven! The court even took the case. Isn’t the court a service agency for the government? How could it take this case? I could not wait to turn the page [of the letter].
In the next page [of the letter], the court even delivered a verdict right away. The verdict was that the government was supposed to compensate 200,000 RMB to the victim, but in this case, now the government only needs to pay 100,000 RMB compensation.
Another important reason that I cannot publicize all the letters I have received is because I have not checked them. But I personally do not have the capacity to fact-check them. Nevertheless, I believe that most, possibly even all, of those stories are true; at most some of those authors include more stuff in their favor, but that won’t change the story in general, and the assholes are definitely on the other side.
Of course, these people do not really hope that I could bring daylight to them; they are only trying every way they can think of. Of course, those who are in the deepest suffering may not even be able to petition for themselves. For those who are petitioning for their suffering, they have never found a way to do so. Once they were petitioning to the cadres, then they discovered that no one else was abusing them but cadres. Then they petitioned to the organizations, but they discovered that the organization is composed of cadres large and small. Then they went to the Petition Letter Office to get themselves registered, which makes it convenient for police to monitor their activities. Finally they went to court, and paid the legal fee. On this zigzag road, everywhere they go they meet the enemy’s soldiers.
So they look for an alternative, and they found the media. But they found that too many people have suffered and their own suffering is not shocking enough to be news. Then they found the Internet, but discovered that too many unfortunate people are already there, and their own misfortune is not unique enough to be placed on the top of webpages. Now, what can these people do?
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100hrm2.html
Friday, 12 March 2010
Heartthrob’s Blog Challenges China’s Leaders
From New York Times
By ANDREW JACOBS
IT’S not so easy being Han Han, the heartthrob race car driver and pop novelist who just happens to be China’s most widely read blogger.
Traveling incognito is all but impossible. Local officials frequently vie for his endorsement of their latest architectural boondoggles. (He politely declines.) And love-lorn young women often approach him after races with letters bearing his name. (He says the women have been duped by impostors who have assumed his identity.)
But Mr. Han’s most vexing challenge comes from a more formidable nemesis: the unseen censors who delete blog posts they deem objectionable and the publishing police who have held up the release of his new magazine, “A Chorus of Solos,” a provocative collection of essays and photographs. “The government wants China to become a great cultural nation, but our leaders are so uncultured,” he said with a shrug, offering his characteristic Cheshire-cat grin. “If things continue like this, China will only be known for tea and pandas.”
Since he began blogging in 2006, Mr. Han, 28, has been delivering increasingly caustic attacks on China’s leadership and the policies he contends are creating misery for those unlucky enough to lack a powerful government post. With more than 300 million hits to his blog, he may be the most popular living writer in the world.
In a recent interview at his office in Shanghai, he described party officials as “useless” and prone to spouting nonsense, although he used more delicate language to dismiss their relevance. “Their lives are nothing like ours,” he said. “The only thing they have in common with young people is that like us, they too have girlfriends in their 20s, although theirs are on the side.”
Mr. Han has enjoyed widespread fame since he published his first novel at 19, but his popularity has ballooned in recent months through blog posts that seem to capture the zeitgeist of his peers, the so-called post-80s generation born after the economic reforms introduced by Deng Xiaoping.
Theirs is a generation of only children, the result of China’s one-child policy, and one that has known only uninterrupted growth. Whether true or not, it is also a demographic with a reputation for being spoiled, impatient and less accepting of the storyline fed to them by government-run media.
If Mr. Han’s tongue is sharp, he is careful to deliver his barbs through sarcasm and humorous anecdotes that obliquely take on corruption, censorship and everyday injustice
In one recent post about redevelopment projects that often end in violence and forced evictions, he suggested that the government build public housing in the form of prisons. The benefits would be twofold, he explained: Tenants could make no claim on the apartments and those who make a fuss could simply be locked up in their homes.
His current gambit is a wryly subversive competition that will award $730 to the person who comes up with new lyrics to a song-and-dance routine that was broadcast last month during the reliably soporific Chinese New Year television gala.
The performance, staged by China’s national broadcaster and viewed by an estimated 400 million people, featured merry members of the Uighur minority belting out praise for Communist Party policies.
These were not the policies that many Uighurs bemoan as oppressive — and which may or may not have provoked the deadly riots in the western region of Xinjiang last summer — but ones that supposedly reduced taxes, increased health benefits and according to the singing farmer Maimaiti, filled his donkey sack with cash.
ALTHOUGH his posts are sometimes “harmonized” — a popular euphemism for censorship —his blog, published by one of China’s most popular Web portals, has so far been allowed to continue. Ran Yunfei, a writer and blogger in Sichuan Province, says that Mr. Han is partly insulated by his celebrity, but also by his avoidance of the most politically charged topics.
“He uses humor and wit to laugh at the injustices he sees,” said Mr. Ran, whose own blog is blocked in China and available only to those with the technical means to hop over the Great Firewall. “Perhaps the reason he’s tolerated is because he does not name names directly and he doesn’t go after the heart of the problem, which is China’s one-party dictatorship.”
His other trump card is his financial independence. With 14 books to his name and a successful career as a race car driver, he is not susceptible to pressures that constrain other critics, many of them academics or journalists whose jobs tend to evaporate when their public musings cross an invisible line.
But the government has lately found a way to pique him by holding up the release of his magazine. Mr. Han said the main objection appears to be an article that details the blacklisting of actors who have angered the authorities. Asked what he will do if his endeavor is thwarted, or if one day his blog is banned entirely, Mr. Han smiles and offers trademark sarcasm, delivered deadpan. “I’ll just become a better driver,” he said.
MR. Han has been reinventing himself since he dropped out of high school and promptly went on to become one of China’s best known writers. His first novel, “Triple Door,” plumbed the adolescent angst of those withering under the pressures of family and school. With two million copies in print, it is the best-selling book of the last 20 years.
The protagonists in that novel and several that followed were young men like himself, raised in small rural townships and disdaining authority, especially teachers, whom Mr. Han sometimes likens to prostitutes.
Growing up, Mr. Han says he was given wide latitude by his parents. His father was the front-page editor of a local party newspaper and his mother worked for a social service bureau helping the needy. “My mom gave me an appreciation for the underdog,” he said.
His family’s home was packed with literature, he said, and his father made sure to put the good stuff — books published before the Communist revolution — low enough for an 8-year-old to reach. “He put all the poorly written books published after the founding of the People’s Republic of China high enough so I couldn’t reach it,” Mr. Han said.
When his anti-establishment writings began to affect his parents’ state-run jobs, Mr. Han encouraged them to retire early, offering to support them financially.
Once viewed by critics as petulant and self-consciously rebellious, Mr. Han has moved beyond ad hominem attacks on poets, pop stars and fellow bloggers. These days his attention is largely drawn to society’s deeper problems: a surge in nationalism; the lackluster quality of contemporary culture; and the albatross of sky-high real-estate prices that keep China’s nascent middle-class in a constant state of anxiety.
He blames the high prices on local officials, who sell off land to the highest bidder in an effort to finance public works and pump up the double-digit economic growth figures that keep Beijing happy. High property values, he adds, also pay for all those dinners and fancy gifts that seem to be the birthright of officialdom.
The grim result is a country of young professionals so overworked and distracted by mortgage payments that they have no time to care about what ails China. “The government is happy to see prices go up, people are forced to buy property they can’t afford and they end up living in fear.” Then he smiles and adds, “It’s a perfect situation, right?”
Despite the sarcasm and griping, Mr. Han is an optimist at heart. The Internet, he says, will eventually prod China toward greater openness. No army of censors can completely constrain free expression. “I think the government really regrets the Internet,” he said, pausing for effect. “Originally, they thought it would be like the newspaper or the television — just another way to get their view out to the people. What they didn’t realize is that people can type and talk back. This is giving them a really big headache.”
A version of this article appeared in print on March 13, 2010, on page A9 of the New York edition
By ANDREW JACOBS
IT’S not so easy being Han Han, the heartthrob race car driver and pop novelist who just happens to be China’s most widely read blogger.
Traveling incognito is all but impossible. Local officials frequently vie for his endorsement of their latest architectural boondoggles. (He politely declines.) And love-lorn young women often approach him after races with letters bearing his name. (He says the women have been duped by impostors who have assumed his identity.)
But Mr. Han’s most vexing challenge comes from a more formidable nemesis: the unseen censors who delete blog posts they deem objectionable and the publishing police who have held up the release of his new magazine, “A Chorus of Solos,” a provocative collection of essays and photographs. “The government wants China to become a great cultural nation, but our leaders are so uncultured,” he said with a shrug, offering his characteristic Cheshire-cat grin. “If things continue like this, China will only be known for tea and pandas.”
Since he began blogging in 2006, Mr. Han, 28, has been delivering increasingly caustic attacks on China’s leadership and the policies he contends are creating misery for those unlucky enough to lack a powerful government post. With more than 300 million hits to his blog, he may be the most popular living writer in the world.
In a recent interview at his office in Shanghai, he described party officials as “useless” and prone to spouting nonsense, although he used more delicate language to dismiss their relevance. “Their lives are nothing like ours,” he said. “The only thing they have in common with young people is that like us, they too have girlfriends in their 20s, although theirs are on the side.”
Mr. Han has enjoyed widespread fame since he published his first novel at 19, but his popularity has ballooned in recent months through blog posts that seem to capture the zeitgeist of his peers, the so-called post-80s generation born after the economic reforms introduced by Deng Xiaoping.
Theirs is a generation of only children, the result of China’s one-child policy, and one that has known only uninterrupted growth. Whether true or not, it is also a demographic with a reputation for being spoiled, impatient and less accepting of the storyline fed to them by government-run media.
If Mr. Han’s tongue is sharp, he is careful to deliver his barbs through sarcasm and humorous anecdotes that obliquely take on corruption, censorship and everyday injustice
In one recent post about redevelopment projects that often end in violence and forced evictions, he suggested that the government build public housing in the form of prisons. The benefits would be twofold, he explained: Tenants could make no claim on the apartments and those who make a fuss could simply be locked up in their homes.
His current gambit is a wryly subversive competition that will award $730 to the person who comes up with new lyrics to a song-and-dance routine that was broadcast last month during the reliably soporific Chinese New Year television gala.
The performance, staged by China’s national broadcaster and viewed by an estimated 400 million people, featured merry members of the Uighur minority belting out praise for Communist Party policies.
These were not the policies that many Uighurs bemoan as oppressive — and which may or may not have provoked the deadly riots in the western region of Xinjiang last summer — but ones that supposedly reduced taxes, increased health benefits and according to the singing farmer Maimaiti, filled his donkey sack with cash.
ALTHOUGH his posts are sometimes “harmonized” — a popular euphemism for censorship —his blog, published by one of China’s most popular Web portals, has so far been allowed to continue. Ran Yunfei, a writer and blogger in Sichuan Province, says that Mr. Han is partly insulated by his celebrity, but also by his avoidance of the most politically charged topics.
“He uses humor and wit to laugh at the injustices he sees,” said Mr. Ran, whose own blog is blocked in China and available only to those with the technical means to hop over the Great Firewall. “Perhaps the reason he’s tolerated is because he does not name names directly and he doesn’t go after the heart of the problem, which is China’s one-party dictatorship.”
His other trump card is his financial independence. With 14 books to his name and a successful career as a race car driver, he is not susceptible to pressures that constrain other critics, many of them academics or journalists whose jobs tend to evaporate when their public musings cross an invisible line.
But the government has lately found a way to pique him by holding up the release of his magazine. Mr. Han said the main objection appears to be an article that details the blacklisting of actors who have angered the authorities. Asked what he will do if his endeavor is thwarted, or if one day his blog is banned entirely, Mr. Han smiles and offers trademark sarcasm, delivered deadpan. “I’ll just become a better driver,” he said.
MR. Han has been reinventing himself since he dropped out of high school and promptly went on to become one of China’s best known writers. His first novel, “Triple Door,” plumbed the adolescent angst of those withering under the pressures of family and school. With two million copies in print, it is the best-selling book of the last 20 years.
The protagonists in that novel and several that followed were young men like himself, raised in small rural townships and disdaining authority, especially teachers, whom Mr. Han sometimes likens to prostitutes.
Growing up, Mr. Han says he was given wide latitude by his parents. His father was the front-page editor of a local party newspaper and his mother worked for a social service bureau helping the needy. “My mom gave me an appreciation for the underdog,” he said.
His family’s home was packed with literature, he said, and his father made sure to put the good stuff — books published before the Communist revolution — low enough for an 8-year-old to reach. “He put all the poorly written books published after the founding of the People’s Republic of China high enough so I couldn’t reach it,” Mr. Han said.
When his anti-establishment writings began to affect his parents’ state-run jobs, Mr. Han encouraged them to retire early, offering to support them financially.
Once viewed by critics as petulant and self-consciously rebellious, Mr. Han has moved beyond ad hominem attacks on poets, pop stars and fellow bloggers. These days his attention is largely drawn to society’s deeper problems: a surge in nationalism; the lackluster quality of contemporary culture; and the albatross of sky-high real-estate prices that keep China’s nascent middle-class in a constant state of anxiety.
He blames the high prices on local officials, who sell off land to the highest bidder in an effort to finance public works and pump up the double-digit economic growth figures that keep Beijing happy. High property values, he adds, also pay for all those dinners and fancy gifts that seem to be the birthright of officialdom.
The grim result is a country of young professionals so overworked and distracted by mortgage payments that they have no time to care about what ails China. “The government is happy to see prices go up, people are forced to buy property they can’t afford and they end up living in fear.” Then he smiles and adds, “It’s a perfect situation, right?”
Despite the sarcasm and griping, Mr. Han is an optimist at heart. The Internet, he says, will eventually prod China toward greater openness. No army of censors can completely constrain free expression. “I think the government really regrets the Internet,” he said, pausing for effect. “Originally, they thought it would be like the newspaper or the television — just another way to get their view out to the people. What they didn’t realize is that people can type and talk back. This is giving them a really big headache.”
A version of this article appeared in print on March 13, 2010, on page A9 of the New York edition
Tuesday, 9 February 2010
Thank You, Confucius
Translated by C. Custer, editor of ChinaGeeks
I went to the movie theater today. Originally I wanted to see 14 Blades, but perhaps I’ve already lost all my interest in domestic historical epics, so I bought a ticket for the Korean film Mother, then went home. But I was happy to discover that Confucius was already off the screens. This implies that, from a commercial standpoint, the film has completely failed.
Confucius director Hu Mei
Confucius’s failure was inevitable, from its forcing Avatar off the screen to its director’s [outspoken speech] — “Avatar has nothing good except special effects”, “[it is just] a group of elves flying around”, “Of course (I will become the first female director to surpass 100 million RMB in the box office), is there any doubt?”, [In response to a critic saying the historical Zi Lu and Nan Zi didn't die the way they died in the movie:] “This guy really doesn’t understand movies, he’s an expert, more like a fake expert, as soon as he watches movies he’s a layman, there’s no need for him to go around fishing for compliments and praise”, “Chinese people all want to see Confucius“, “I trust everyone will make the correct choice” — to the screenwriter’s rejection of all criticism (actually, the screenwriter’s failure is the film’s biggest failure), to the filmmakers claiming the criticism was because another domestic film was spending money trying to frame Confucius, to the lies about box office results, and finally, to the filmmakers saying that all the audience members who questioned the movie are very disrespectful towards the ancient sages, don’t respect Chinese traditional culture, and are immoral cheats and bullies causing trouble. This is probably the worst quality, most disrespectful, biggest PR failing, least resembling Confucianist group of performers [and filmmakers] in the history of New China. This group of people, each harboring their own personal ambitions, when put together created Confucius; perhaps their greatest understanding of Confucius is wanting to help the ruling class by teaching the people. In actuality, they are also doing this.
When criticizing this film before, I did my best to avoid criticizing Confucius the person; I thought that he just didn’t make his point clearly, that he was a person who spoke even less clearly than Hamlet. It’s just that the film itself, aside from the actor’s passable performances, is a complete mess. If this kind of film was successful, it would definitely lead to a surge of [films like] Lao Zi [famous Daoist philosopher], Zhuang Zi [another early Daoist philosopher], Mencius [another Confucian philosopher], Mo Zi [founder of the school of Mohism], and these movies would certainly be quite boring, use up a lot of resources, and would be a great step backward in the development of Chinese cinema.
The failure of Confucius is triumphant news for Chinese cinema, and perhaps a turning point in Chinese film-making. Thank you, people who made Confucius!
Movies should use imagination to create things that reflect people’s ideals, but China’s films mostly reflect the government’s ideals. Of course, if one day the two become the same, then not only will [Chinese] films be successful but the government will be successful as well. Perhaps it’s that movies on ancient topics with traditional meaning are politically safer, but I’m already fed up with them.
There has never been a country that likes making movies about things that came before the country existed the way the People’s Republic of China does. There has never been a country with movies like ours, where as soon as you hear the title without even watching the film you can tell the fate of the protagonist in the end. [Historical] Epics make up only a small part of classic films. Moreover, the only historical epics I’ve seen that are classics are about humanity fighting for freedom and revolting against fate. I have never seen a historical epic about resolutely assisting the ruler, educating the people, and abandoning girls become a classic epic. [Always] returning to ancient times is the largest problem with Chinese film.
As American and European commercial films get increasingly literate, our domestic films, which are still in the process of excavating ancient tombs, can’t possibly compete. The only way out for Chinese films in the future is to use emotions, and use literate and excellent domestic artistic films to oppose international blockbusters.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100gxme.html
I went to the movie theater today. Originally I wanted to see 14 Blades, but perhaps I’ve already lost all my interest in domestic historical epics, so I bought a ticket for the Korean film Mother, then went home. But I was happy to discover that Confucius was already off the screens. This implies that, from a commercial standpoint, the film has completely failed.
Confucius director Hu Mei
Confucius’s failure was inevitable, from its forcing Avatar off the screen to its director’s [outspoken speech] — “Avatar has nothing good except special effects”, “[it is just] a group of elves flying around”, “Of course (I will become the first female director to surpass 100 million RMB in the box office), is there any doubt?”, [In response to a critic saying the historical Zi Lu and Nan Zi didn't die the way they died in the movie:] “This guy really doesn’t understand movies, he’s an expert, more like a fake expert, as soon as he watches movies he’s a layman, there’s no need for him to go around fishing for compliments and praise”, “Chinese people all want to see Confucius“, “I trust everyone will make the correct choice” — to the screenwriter’s rejection of all criticism (actually, the screenwriter’s failure is the film’s biggest failure), to the filmmakers claiming the criticism was because another domestic film was spending money trying to frame Confucius, to the lies about box office results, and finally, to the filmmakers saying that all the audience members who questioned the movie are very disrespectful towards the ancient sages, don’t respect Chinese traditional culture, and are immoral cheats and bullies causing trouble. This is probably the worst quality, most disrespectful, biggest PR failing, least resembling Confucianist group of performers [and filmmakers] in the history of New China. This group of people, each harboring their own personal ambitions, when put together created Confucius; perhaps their greatest understanding of Confucius is wanting to help the ruling class by teaching the people. In actuality, they are also doing this.
When criticizing this film before, I did my best to avoid criticizing Confucius the person; I thought that he just didn’t make his point clearly, that he was a person who spoke even less clearly than Hamlet. It’s just that the film itself, aside from the actor’s passable performances, is a complete mess. If this kind of film was successful, it would definitely lead to a surge of [films like] Lao Zi [famous Daoist philosopher], Zhuang Zi [another early Daoist philosopher], Mencius [another Confucian philosopher], Mo Zi [founder of the school of Mohism], and these movies would certainly be quite boring, use up a lot of resources, and would be a great step backward in the development of Chinese cinema.
The failure of Confucius is triumphant news for Chinese cinema, and perhaps a turning point in Chinese film-making. Thank you, people who made Confucius!
Movies should use imagination to create things that reflect people’s ideals, but China’s films mostly reflect the government’s ideals. Of course, if one day the two become the same, then not only will [Chinese] films be successful but the government will be successful as well. Perhaps it’s that movies on ancient topics with traditional meaning are politically safer, but I’m already fed up with them.
There has never been a country that likes making movies about things that came before the country existed the way the People’s Republic of China does. There has never been a country with movies like ours, where as soon as you hear the title without even watching the film you can tell the fate of the protagonist in the end. [Historical] Epics make up only a small part of classic films. Moreover, the only historical epics I’ve seen that are classics are about humanity fighting for freedom and revolting against fate. I have never seen a historical epic about resolutely assisting the ruler, educating the people, and abandoning girls become a classic epic. [Always] returning to ancient times is the largest problem with Chinese film.
As American and European commercial films get increasingly literate, our domestic films, which are still in the process of excavating ancient tombs, can’t possibly compete. The only way out for Chinese films in the future is to use emotions, and use literate and excellent domestic artistic films to oppose international blockbusters.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100gxme.html
Tuesday, 26 January 2010
Watching Confucius
Translated by C. Custer, editor of ChinaGeeks
Today I went to see Confucius. Before I went into the theater, I stepped out for a moment to make sure of where my seat was, so as not to disturb others after entering. Once I got in, I regretted it. There weren’t even ten people in the theater and you could practically sit wherever you wanted.
In China’s ancient times, there were many “masters”, and although what they say today contradicts what they said in their own times [i.e., people's interpretations of their meanings have changed over time], their meaning comes not from whether they spoke well enough but from whether they said enough things. In any time period, politicians have taken what they needed, [and gotten] both praise and blame. Confucius is one of the most meaningful of these people.
To tell the truth, I never felt there was much need to make movies on historical topics. From the perspective of film, it seems as though from their very birth, movies have been doing something that is very opposite from [the idea of] film: killing imagination. But it’s not necessarily true that China’s big historical epics lack in imagination, because the people who write them often create scenes that are diametrically opposed to actual history, so it’s really a collaborative thing [lack of imagination working together with imagination].
The reason most major Chinese blockbusters are historical epics or focus on historical figures is that the filmmakers and investors don’t feel safe. After investing such a lot of money, they feel completely trusting the screenwriters and directors to create a story is unwise, and if a director is somehow able to make their own investment and use creative freedom, the product is often even worse. All of this has become the tragic history of Chinese big-budget films. As for what Chow Yun-fat [the star of Confucius] said about “if you don’t cry after watching Confucius you’re not human”, I believe it’s a misunderstanding. It must have been at an internal meeting to watch the film that the filmmakers themselves cried. What they’re crying about is how many middle school classes and government offices they’re going to have to drag into theaters en masse to break even.
Confucius actor Chow Yun-fat showing his respect to a descendant of Confucius.
Forgetting about all the political factors and watching the movie just as a film, it is a losing film. What the film is preaching doesn’t leave any influence at all. When Confucius was on the screen talking about “rites” and “benevolence”, some guy to my side was having a ten-minute-long phone conversation. The war scenes in the film are like child’s play. The country of Lu cannot protect itself, but Confucius’s few disciples can drive back the enemy just by building a road block and firing arrows into the sky? Moreover, in the film, the dialogue between characters is not at all persuasive. It’s just like when you were small and your parents told you, “today’s work must be finished today”, but their words ultimately could not convince you. It is no longer an era where a “master” can say a few more lines and attract/trick people. From the movie, I found it very difficult to understand why Confucius’s team of workers continually followed him. In moments when the film was playing up the personalities of the characters, I had to endure ten minutes of the disciples continually yielding a bowl of horsemeat soup [to each other] to demonstrate their cohesiveness. [I had to endure] because I had already endured the story of Confucius’s disciple [of a later generation] Kong Rong giving up pears to his elders throughout my entire childhood.
Ren Quan’s character unexpectedly dies in the end by freezing to death in icy water, which he’s gone into to save a book. This is not moving, it’s stupid. In a situation where the film hasn’t done enough and there’s nothing good about it, the protagonist being extremely satisfied [with the film] is illogical. In a situation where the implicit ideal [which was, in and of itself, unrealistic] has not even been successfully attained, there’s no hope of the movie being realistic. It’s like this: [imagine some] government leaders have been burned, and their secretary rushes in to a sea of fire and saves a copy of the Selected Works of Mao Zedong, but when he comes out he sees he’s only taken the first of two volumes, so he rushes back in, then saves another one and comes out, but as soon as he looks, fuck, it’s not two volumes but three, and even though he knows the house will collapse and he won’t be kay, he rushes in again [for the last volume], and the house collapses and he dies. As an audience member, do you think you could cry at this [movie]?
Zhou Xun as Nan Zi in the movie, Confucius.
Zhou Xun [the female lead] is only in the movie because the filmmakers felt a female would help diversify the film. She plays the part of Nan Zi [a historical princess of the Song Kingdom] and spends most of her time flirting with Confucius，but he’s all talk and no ‘action’, which made me nervous. In the end, she didn’t know why she was being shot to death.
I will give Confucius two points. First, because of Chow Yun-fat’s exciting performance in All About Ah Long I will give this movie one point for encouragement. I think if Chow had said “those who don’t cry aren’t people” about Ah long he might have been more correct. Also, because the director is female, I will encourage her with a point. But it must be said, that whether it’s this female director’s Confucius or another female director’s I am Liu Yuejin, their grasp of non-emotional films, especially the more complex/intricate ones, is rather weak. I don’t understand why they don’t make films about love or life [instead], which is what female directors are good at. Zhang Aijia’s Heartbeat or Xu Anhua’s Day and Night in Tianshui are good movies by female directors. Why should women embarrass themselves?
Finally, I want to say that the movie Confucius, whether it is from the perspective of cinematographic meaning, business profits, artistic merit, what it explores, its educational qualities, its historical accuracy, its entertainment value, its emotional resonance, etc., is completely unnecessary. It is a film that could be completely done without.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100gqf8.html
Today I went to see Confucius. Before I went into the theater, I stepped out for a moment to make sure of where my seat was, so as not to disturb others after entering. Once I got in, I regretted it. There weren’t even ten people in the theater and you could practically sit wherever you wanted.
In China’s ancient times, there were many “masters”, and although what they say today contradicts what they said in their own times [i.e., people's interpretations of their meanings have changed over time], their meaning comes not from whether they spoke well enough but from whether they said enough things. In any time period, politicians have taken what they needed, [and gotten] both praise and blame. Confucius is one of the most meaningful of these people.
To tell the truth, I never felt there was much need to make movies on historical topics. From the perspective of film, it seems as though from their very birth, movies have been doing something that is very opposite from [the idea of] film: killing imagination. But it’s not necessarily true that China’s big historical epics lack in imagination, because the people who write them often create scenes that are diametrically opposed to actual history, so it’s really a collaborative thing [lack of imagination working together with imagination].
The reason most major Chinese blockbusters are historical epics or focus on historical figures is that the filmmakers and investors don’t feel safe. After investing such a lot of money, they feel completely trusting the screenwriters and directors to create a story is unwise, and if a director is somehow able to make their own investment and use creative freedom, the product is often even worse. All of this has become the tragic history of Chinese big-budget films. As for what Chow Yun-fat [the star of Confucius] said about “if you don’t cry after watching Confucius you’re not human”, I believe it’s a misunderstanding. It must have been at an internal meeting to watch the film that the filmmakers themselves cried. What they’re crying about is how many middle school classes and government offices they’re going to have to drag into theaters en masse to break even.
Confucius actor Chow Yun-fat showing his respect to a descendant of Confucius.
Forgetting about all the political factors and watching the movie just as a film, it is a losing film. What the film is preaching doesn’t leave any influence at all. When Confucius was on the screen talking about “rites” and “benevolence”, some guy to my side was having a ten-minute-long phone conversation. The war scenes in the film are like child’s play. The country of Lu cannot protect itself, but Confucius’s few disciples can drive back the enemy just by building a road block and firing arrows into the sky? Moreover, in the film, the dialogue between characters is not at all persuasive. It’s just like when you were small and your parents told you, “today’s work must be finished today”, but their words ultimately could not convince you. It is no longer an era where a “master” can say a few more lines and attract/trick people. From the movie, I found it very difficult to understand why Confucius’s team of workers continually followed him. In moments when the film was playing up the personalities of the characters, I had to endure ten minutes of the disciples continually yielding a bowl of horsemeat soup [to each other] to demonstrate their cohesiveness. [I had to endure] because I had already endured the story of Confucius’s disciple [of a later generation] Kong Rong giving up pears to his elders throughout my entire childhood.
Ren Quan’s character unexpectedly dies in the end by freezing to death in icy water, which he’s gone into to save a book. This is not moving, it’s stupid. In a situation where the film hasn’t done enough and there’s nothing good about it, the protagonist being extremely satisfied [with the film] is illogical. In a situation where the implicit ideal [which was, in and of itself, unrealistic] has not even been successfully attained, there’s no hope of the movie being realistic. It’s like this: [imagine some] government leaders have been burned, and their secretary rushes in to a sea of fire and saves a copy of the Selected Works of Mao Zedong, but when he comes out he sees he’s only taken the first of two volumes, so he rushes back in, then saves another one and comes out, but as soon as he looks, fuck, it’s not two volumes but three, and even though he knows the house will collapse and he won’t be kay, he rushes in again [for the last volume], and the house collapses and he dies. As an audience member, do you think you could cry at this [movie]?
Zhou Xun as Nan Zi in the movie, Confucius.
Zhou Xun [the female lead] is only in the movie because the filmmakers felt a female would help diversify the film. She plays the part of Nan Zi [a historical princess of the Song Kingdom] and spends most of her time flirting with Confucius，but he’s all talk and no ‘action’, which made me nervous. In the end, she didn’t know why she was being shot to death.
I will give Confucius two points. First, because of Chow Yun-fat’s exciting performance in All About Ah Long I will give this movie one point for encouragement. I think if Chow had said “those who don’t cry aren’t people” about Ah long he might have been more correct. Also, because the director is female, I will encourage her with a point. But it must be said, that whether it’s this female director’s Confucius or another female director’s I am Liu Yuejin, their grasp of non-emotional films, especially the more complex/intricate ones, is rather weak. I don’t understand why they don’t make films about love or life [instead], which is what female directors are good at. Zhang Aijia’s Heartbeat or Xu Anhua’s Day and Night in Tianshui are good movies by female directors. Why should women embarrass themselves?
Finally, I want to say that the movie Confucius, whether it is from the perspective of cinematographic meaning, business profits, artistic merit, what it explores, its educational qualities, its historical accuracy, its entertainment value, its emotional resonance, etc., is completely unnecessary. It is a film that could be completely done without.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog: http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100gqf8.html
Friday, 15 January 2010
Han Han: I am just exploring
From China Hush
Recently I read some Shanghai related news, it is very interesting to connect them together. First, Shanghai’s concrete mixer vehicles drive the city construction in the rate of crushing one person dead each day on average. If this continues, China’s pavilions will be dyed in red with insignificant people’s blood.
Secondly, Politics and Law Committee secretary in Shanghai announced that he is determined to not allow the gangsters to be established in Shanghai. To this I feel rather at ease, because everything is so expensive in Shanghai, not that many gang leaders can afford to support any of their little brothers, Shanghai has already put an end to the creation of gangs from their roots.
Furthermore, the Shanghai municipal government has announced that it will implement the odd and even plates driving restrictions. (In order to solve the traffic problem, this restriction only allows vehicles with odd or even license number plates to drive on the street on every other day) This is learned from the Beijing government. Beijing implemented this odd and even plates driving restriction during the 2008 Olympics, but Beijing’s license plate only cost 200 yuan, and does not have road tolls. In Shanghai, there are plates that cost 30,000 to 40,000 yuan. In addition, gasoline prices in Shanghai are 30 to 70 cents higher than other provinces. After paying the money, not only it doesn’t work, it is so that you can pay more money, how can the gangsters survive here when they actually work after getting the money. By the way, there is the street loan fee of 1,800 to pay, this is very strange, we paid the down payment, and then the loan is also our money, but the profit all goes to you, in the end we just want to touch it, and there is still a time restriction.
Even though this regulation has no effect on me, because I am usually in the country, rarely go to the city. But when the day comes, there will really be a lot of traffic restrictions. I think everyone can only park their cars on the streets and walk home, there is no other way. The government can restrict the number of cars on the street, because of the heavy traffic, but we can’t restrict the officials from working because they are too dumb.
In addition, there are a lot of friends asked me about my feelings on Google leaving China. During the incident of Google scanning Chinese authors’ works, reporter already asked me, Google, without your permission, scanned your book and put it online for other people to read it for free, and said at most will pay you 60 dollars, how I would feel about it. I said, if they really did that, then that explains why they cannot be number one in China’s market shares. When I got home, I finally understood, it turned out Google only scanned the index of my book. Then, I came to understand why Google is not number one in China’s market shares, too many people make troubles for Google. In fact, whether Google is really leaving or fake leaving, I can all understand, the only thing I don’t understand is, on one website’s survey, 70% of the (Chinese) internet users said, they do not support Google’s announcement to the Chinese Government that they will no longer provide censored search results anymore. When reading the survey results from the government official websites, you always feel why I am always at the opposite side of the public opinion, even feel like I am a post 90s generation, why I am always not mainstream. Actually these websites are really in need of screening. I can tolerate calling black gray, calling white beige, but I can never tolerate confounding black and white.
If Google leaves China, the people who feel the most regret are certain writers. Of course, not because Chinese writers represent a social conscience and forces of improvement, they never care about the limited freedom of speech, even if the cultural department filters half of the Chinese characters, they will still have the ability to use the rest of the characters to continue to sing the praises. Their pain is, if they knew you were going to leave, they would not have accepted your 60 dollars, I believe this would be the majority of the Chinese writers’ first income in electronic copyright. They just wanted to have 40 more.
Lastly, I saw a news article said, after your cell phone forwards pornographic message or pornographic information the text messaging feature on your phone will be disabled. You must go to the local police station to write a promise note in order to have the text message feature turned back on. The government is like this. It always gives you a verb and a noun, and then never explains this noun. For example, cannot be anti-revolutionary, but it never tells you what anti-revolution is; cannot be guilty of the crime of perversion, but never tells you what the crime of perversion is; this time cannot forward pornographic message, but never tells you what pornographic message is. First I wanted to follow what the government said, but I had no choice because the government had no standards, causing many friends stepping on some land mines, even some “50 cent parties” often are in the embarrassing situation of wanting to kiss ass but still not passing the screening. My suggestion is, for the minefield, you should label it clearly it’s a minefield; go inside at your own risk. If you don’t label it clearly, and bury some mines on the pedestrian’s walk, and then whose (fault) is it when it blows up? The Chinese new year is here soon, in order to prevent all netizens’ cell phone being shut down while sending text messages, resulting the tragedy of going to the local police station to write promise notes on the new year’s day, I have decided to sacrifice myself. These days, I will continuously send all kinds of pornographic messages, until my cell phone is shut down, then I will tell everyone what pornographic message and pornographic information is. Therefore for those friends who receive my pornographic message or sex text message, please do not misunderstand, I am not horny or flirting, I am just exploring.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100glm8.html
Recently I read some Shanghai related news, it is very interesting to connect them together. First, Shanghai’s concrete mixer vehicles drive the city construction in the rate of crushing one person dead each day on average. If this continues, China’s pavilions will be dyed in red with insignificant people’s blood.
Secondly, Politics and Law Committee secretary in Shanghai announced that he is determined to not allow the gangsters to be established in Shanghai. To this I feel rather at ease, because everything is so expensive in Shanghai, not that many gang leaders can afford to support any of their little brothers, Shanghai has already put an end to the creation of gangs from their roots.
Furthermore, the Shanghai municipal government has announced that it will implement the odd and even plates driving restrictions. (In order to solve the traffic problem, this restriction only allows vehicles with odd or even license number plates to drive on the street on every other day) This is learned from the Beijing government. Beijing implemented this odd and even plates driving restriction during the 2008 Olympics, but Beijing’s license plate only cost 200 yuan, and does not have road tolls. In Shanghai, there are plates that cost 30,000 to 40,000 yuan. In addition, gasoline prices in Shanghai are 30 to 70 cents higher than other provinces. After paying the money, not only it doesn’t work, it is so that you can pay more money, how can the gangsters survive here when they actually work after getting the money. By the way, there is the street loan fee of 1,800 to pay, this is very strange, we paid the down payment, and then the loan is also our money, but the profit all goes to you, in the end we just want to touch it, and there is still a time restriction.
Even though this regulation has no effect on me, because I am usually in the country, rarely go to the city. But when the day comes, there will really be a lot of traffic restrictions. I think everyone can only park their cars on the streets and walk home, there is no other way. The government can restrict the number of cars on the street, because of the heavy traffic, but we can’t restrict the officials from working because they are too dumb.
In addition, there are a lot of friends asked me about my feelings on Google leaving China. During the incident of Google scanning Chinese authors’ works, reporter already asked me, Google, without your permission, scanned your book and put it online for other people to read it for free, and said at most will pay you 60 dollars, how I would feel about it. I said, if they really did that, then that explains why they cannot be number one in China’s market shares. When I got home, I finally understood, it turned out Google only scanned the index of my book. Then, I came to understand why Google is not number one in China’s market shares, too many people make troubles for Google. In fact, whether Google is really leaving or fake leaving, I can all understand, the only thing I don’t understand is, on one website’s survey, 70% of the (Chinese) internet users said, they do not support Google’s announcement to the Chinese Government that they will no longer provide censored search results anymore. When reading the survey results from the government official websites, you always feel why I am always at the opposite side of the public opinion, even feel like I am a post 90s generation, why I am always not mainstream. Actually these websites are really in need of screening. I can tolerate calling black gray, calling white beige, but I can never tolerate confounding black and white.
If Google leaves China, the people who feel the most regret are certain writers. Of course, not because Chinese writers represent a social conscience and forces of improvement, they never care about the limited freedom of speech, even if the cultural department filters half of the Chinese characters, they will still have the ability to use the rest of the characters to continue to sing the praises. Their pain is, if they knew you were going to leave, they would not have accepted your 60 dollars, I believe this would be the majority of the Chinese writers’ first income in electronic copyright. They just wanted to have 40 more.
Lastly, I saw a news article said, after your cell phone forwards pornographic message or pornographic information the text messaging feature on your phone will be disabled. You must go to the local police station to write a promise note in order to have the text message feature turned back on. The government is like this. It always gives you a verb and a noun, and then never explains this noun. For example, cannot be anti-revolutionary, but it never tells you what anti-revolution is; cannot be guilty of the crime of perversion, but never tells you what the crime of perversion is; this time cannot forward pornographic message, but never tells you what pornographic message is. First I wanted to follow what the government said, but I had no choice because the government had no standards, causing many friends stepping on some land mines, even some “50 cent parties” often are in the embarrassing situation of wanting to kiss ass but still not passing the screening. My suggestion is, for the minefield, you should label it clearly it’s a minefield; go inside at your own risk. If you don’t label it clearly, and bury some mines on the pedestrian’s walk, and then whose (fault) is it when it blows up? The Chinese new year is here soon, in order to prevent all netizens’ cell phone being shut down while sending text messages, resulting the tragedy of going to the local police station to write promise notes on the new year’s day, I have decided to sacrifice myself. These days, I will continuously send all kinds of pornographic messages, until my cell phone is shut down, then I will tell everyone what pornographic message and pornographic information is. Therefore for those friends who receive my pornographic message or sex text message, please do not misunderstand, I am not horny or flirting, I am just exploring.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100glm8.html
Tuesday, 24 November 2009
These dogs are so annoying
From China Hush
Today, Ms. Fan’s house in Minghang district was to be forcefully demolished, Ms. Fan standing on the 3rd floor threw home-made fire bombs (at the demolition squad). However home-made fire bombs were made of glass bottles, naturally had technical bottlenecks, fire power was too weak. They were put out by the fire trucks, then the high-pressured water gun aimed at Ms. Fan, eventually she surrendered.
Upon seeing this news, I am pleased that after two decades of development, society has progressed. Sub-machine guns are replaced by high-pressured water gun. Then why would it lead to such brutal resistance? Because of the large-scaled building project of Hongqiao, Ms. Fan had an area 480 square meter home, but the government is only willing to offer the compensation of 670,000 yuan, which is 761 yuan per square meter of housing subsidies and 1,480 yuan for the compensation of the land.
When the city’s average commercial housing is measured by tens of thousands (per square meter), forced eviction’s price is still calculated with the hundreds, this is the reason why residents threw fire-bombs. That is, they were living in a 480 square meter home, you acquired their land for so called construction, that’s also business, your compensation for the family only is enough to buy a 40 square meters home, and then the demolitions team came. I think anyone who had weapons probably could not help themselves but to take them out in this situation.
Of course, this example illustrates a number of problems. First, it made sense why Chinese government banned guns. And I remember when I was a child my family had an air gun for shooting birds. Then suddenly one day the government ordered that all of the air guns and hunting rifles must be turned over. This showed that our government had foresights, they realized more than a decade later, social conflicts will increase, then if ordinary people are equipped with guns, the government demolition department can only be equipped with rocket launchers.
Second is when Chinese government made public ownership of the land was also foresighted, and even Mao Tse-tung who was not financial minded was aware of the government costs of eating, drinking and playing would be huge, only depending on taxes and monopolizing resources and energy would probably not going to be enough, land would be a big income. Later, leaders were worried that if the land gets sold out in their hands, then there will not be any land left for party’s son and party’s grandson to sell, at that time they will become the guilty ones, therefore they added a rule, the time limit for the land-use rights is 70 years, so that their grandsons can sell them again.
Third is certainly a problem the government regrets very much. If they knew the urbanization process is now so profitable, then they would not allow farmers to have homestead and their own houses. This now leads to a lot of demolition and reconstruction problems. Back then when building prisons, should have built farmer’s villages using the prison blue prints, one village one prison, one family one cell. Then use People’s Daily newspaper to indoctrinate ideas, say this is the new socialist countryside, that they no longer need to spend any money on housing, the government directly give houses to everyone, every home is made of cement and concrete, the doors are made of steel. Of course you still need to give the keys to them. This way, there are some initial costs, but later the government no longer needs to worry about the demolition distresses. The second benefit is in case someone is guilty of a crime, just confiscate the key then you are done.
There are a few highlights of this incident. That is some comments made by the leaders at Minhang district. As we all know, leaders of Minhang always accidentally spill the truth, and I think this is worth encouraging, because they frankly reveal the truth, always speak from their heart, much better than those two faced officials. For example Minhang district law enforcement captain made his speech on the “fishing incident” “If it is not driven by benefit, why should I help you”. These bold words only that Zhangzhou government official can match “Will you speak for the Party? Or will you speak for the people?"
[Key: Two references here, “fishing incident” is a scandal happened this year which law enforcement hires people pretend to be sick to hitchhike a ride. The informant then turns the kind-hearted driver in for using private car to make money by giving rides to strangers. This is illegal because only licensed taxi drivers can do this. 2nd incident was Zhangzhou government official Lu Jun made the above comment when interviewed by China national Radio reporter which triggered public outrage. Bold statement made him “the official who dares the most to speak the truth during 2009”]
This time the Minghang district officials’ truth relay came to Huacao town.
Deputy Mayor of the town Gao Baojing said: You fight against the government, it certainly violated the law, then it must surely have to be dealt with.
In addition, the construction companies of the land was charged by the Government 1.3 million yuan per mu (1 mu = 6.67 acres), the total cost of demolition of the Hongqiao Airport area is up to 14.8 billion yuan. But the government only compensated the farmers 380,000 yuan per mu. So why does the difference in price go to the local government?
Minhang district Shanghai Construction Committee director of transportation, the headquarters of relocation top leader Wu Zhongqiuan had a fresh view. He thinks that Minhang Hongqiao hub of the land‘s value increased after and because of the government reconstruction and extension, so the added value of the land should not be obtained by the people.
Do you think Minhang District is very hateful? Did you wonder why these officials still have such stable positions? If you think this way, you are too tender (naïve) because they are the effective go-getters of the Shanghai Municipal Government. This is like you are a company manager, you want to buy a printer which has a market price of 1,000, so you give your employee 1,000 yuan. In the end your employee only spends 300 and forcefully buys this printer and gives you a receipt for 1,000. He also gives your 400, keeps 300 for himself. Not only that, you do not even have to be responsible for his meals, because when he is hungry he will go fishing on his own. The only problem is that the employee crushes a few dogs to death when driving in a hurry, resulting in your office often have a group of dogs outside barking at you. Say, would you fire that employee? Of course not, you can only think, these dogs are really annoying.
Yes, the unfortunate ones are those dogs, but we are that group of dogs.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100g03k.html
Today, Ms. Fan’s house in Minghang district was to be forcefully demolished, Ms. Fan standing on the 3rd floor threw home-made fire bombs (at the demolition squad). However home-made fire bombs were made of glass bottles, naturally had technical bottlenecks, fire power was too weak. They were put out by the fire trucks, then the high-pressured water gun aimed at Ms. Fan, eventually she surrendered.
Upon seeing this news, I am pleased that after two decades of development, society has progressed. Sub-machine guns are replaced by high-pressured water gun. Then why would it lead to such brutal resistance? Because of the large-scaled building project of Hongqiao, Ms. Fan had an area 480 square meter home, but the government is only willing to offer the compensation of 670,000 yuan, which is 761 yuan per square meter of housing subsidies and 1,480 yuan for the compensation of the land.
When the city’s average commercial housing is measured by tens of thousands (per square meter), forced eviction’s price is still calculated with the hundreds, this is the reason why residents threw fire-bombs. That is, they were living in a 480 square meter home, you acquired their land for so called construction, that’s also business, your compensation for the family only is enough to buy a 40 square meters home, and then the demolitions team came. I think anyone who had weapons probably could not help themselves but to take them out in this situation.
Of course, this example illustrates a number of problems. First, it made sense why Chinese government banned guns. And I remember when I was a child my family had an air gun for shooting birds. Then suddenly one day the government ordered that all of the air guns and hunting rifles must be turned over. This showed that our government had foresights, they realized more than a decade later, social conflicts will increase, then if ordinary people are equipped with guns, the government demolition department can only be equipped with rocket launchers.
Second is when Chinese government made public ownership of the land was also foresighted, and even Mao Tse-tung who was not financial minded was aware of the government costs of eating, drinking and playing would be huge, only depending on taxes and monopolizing resources and energy would probably not going to be enough, land would be a big income. Later, leaders were worried that if the land gets sold out in their hands, then there will not be any land left for party’s son and party’s grandson to sell, at that time they will become the guilty ones, therefore they added a rule, the time limit for the land-use rights is 70 years, so that their grandsons can sell them again.
Third is certainly a problem the government regrets very much. If they knew the urbanization process is now so profitable, then they would not allow farmers to have homestead and their own houses. This now leads to a lot of demolition and reconstruction problems. Back then when building prisons, should have built farmer’s villages using the prison blue prints, one village one prison, one family one cell. Then use People’s Daily newspaper to indoctrinate ideas, say this is the new socialist countryside, that they no longer need to spend any money on housing, the government directly give houses to everyone, every home is made of cement and concrete, the doors are made of steel. Of course you still need to give the keys to them. This way, there are some initial costs, but later the government no longer needs to worry about the demolition distresses. The second benefit is in case someone is guilty of a crime, just confiscate the key then you are done.
There are a few highlights of this incident. That is some comments made by the leaders at Minhang district. As we all know, leaders of Minhang always accidentally spill the truth, and I think this is worth encouraging, because they frankly reveal the truth, always speak from their heart, much better than those two faced officials. For example Minhang district law enforcement captain made his speech on the “fishing incident” “If it is not driven by benefit, why should I help you”. These bold words only that Zhangzhou government official can match “Will you speak for the Party? Or will you speak for the people?"
[Key: Two references here, “fishing incident” is a scandal happened this year which law enforcement hires people pretend to be sick to hitchhike a ride. The informant then turns the kind-hearted driver in for using private car to make money by giving rides to strangers. This is illegal because only licensed taxi drivers can do this. 2nd incident was Zhangzhou government official Lu Jun made the above comment when interviewed by China national Radio reporter which triggered public outrage. Bold statement made him “the official who dares the most to speak the truth during 2009”]
This time the Minghang district officials’ truth relay came to Huacao town.
Deputy Mayor of the town Gao Baojing said: You fight against the government, it certainly violated the law, then it must surely have to be dealt with.
In addition, the construction companies of the land was charged by the Government 1.3 million yuan per mu (1 mu = 6.67 acres), the total cost of demolition of the Hongqiao Airport area is up to 14.8 billion yuan. But the government only compensated the farmers 380,000 yuan per mu. So why does the difference in price go to the local government?
Minhang district Shanghai Construction Committee director of transportation, the headquarters of relocation top leader Wu Zhongqiuan had a fresh view. He thinks that Minhang Hongqiao hub of the land‘s value increased after and because of the government reconstruction and extension, so the added value of the land should not be obtained by the people.
Do you think Minhang District is very hateful? Did you wonder why these officials still have such stable positions? If you think this way, you are too tender (naïve) because they are the effective go-getters of the Shanghai Municipal Government. This is like you are a company manager, you want to buy a printer which has a market price of 1,000, so you give your employee 1,000 yuan. In the end your employee only spends 300 and forcefully buys this printer and gives you a receipt for 1,000. He also gives your 400, keeps 300 for himself. Not only that, you do not even have to be responsible for his meals, because when he is hungry he will go fishing on his own. The only problem is that the employee crushes a few dogs to death when driving in a hurry, resulting in your office often have a group of dogs outside barking at you. Say, would you fire that employee? Of course not, you can only think, these dogs are really annoying.
Yes, the unfortunate ones are those dogs, but we are that group of dogs.
See orignial article at Han Han's blog:
http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4701280b0100g03k.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)