Chinese New Year in the City

Beijing is a large, vibrant city.  Its official population is 17 million, not including the population of migrant workers who often pass undocumented through China's urban centers.  This massive city sprawls 16,801.25 km2 (6,487 sq mi), (compared with New York City, which is 1,214.4km2 (468.9 sq mi)) and as a center for education, politics and business hosts a diverse population of students, workers, bureaucrats and businessmen. 
Most of these people, however, are not from Beijing in the strictest sense; they do not have a Beijing hukou (meaning that they or a parent was born in Beijing and has the right to certain services in the city).  Many have come from other cities and provinces for either work or schooling. 

But for all the crowded streets, congestion, and high costs of living, why come at all?  Large cities such as Beijing and Shanghai have drawn young workers, either first as students who are accepted into top universities here, or because of higher paying and possibly more fashionable work opportunities.  Although they may be put off by the high costs of living, people are drawn to the dynamism of the city.  The widespread presence of restaurants, bars, clubs, fashion and consumer culture make places like Beijing and Shanghai very appealing to young Chinese workers and professionals. In addition, for many coming from the countryside, basic living conditions will be much higher in these cities. 
(Note, this is not to say that those seeking a livelihood in Beijing are content with the costs that their lifestyles demands. The opposite is closer to the truth, hence the popular TV series Wo Ju, translated as Dwelling Narrowness, which describes the life of young couples struggling to make a living while paying off their debts in urban China.)

Chinese New Year, which recently passed, is generally a family holiday, and during the week long holiday most people return home.  This means that population pressures in a city like Beijing are released as an exodus of people leaves the city to be with family during the holiday.  Many of the workers here, both blue and white collar, return to their homes outside the city.  In addition, so do a number of Beijingers who trace their roots to neighboring Hebei province. 

For many young Beijingers, Beijing loses its source of life. Shops and businesses close, and even the street-side vendors that sell anything from snacks and vegetables to office supplies have noticeably left the city.  This leaves Beijing with quiet, uncrowded streets absent of the congestion and vibrancy that characterize the Chinese urban experience. 

Dogs in China

Photograph copyright Foreign Policy

Foreign Policy magazine published an interesting photo essay entitled, 'A Dog's Life in China.'  I find the piece is very representative of dogs' existence here.  The common conception is that dogs in China are simply a culinary delicacy, which is only part of the truth. Dogs are eaten, but certainly not by everyone and not everywhere.  Many Chinese do not like to eat dog, for similar reasons that say, an American, would refuse to eat it.  In addition, it is consumed seasonally, only in the winter because of the heating qualities of dog meat. It is also eaten regionally as opposed to on a national scale, and Cantonese are undoubtedly its most well known consumers.  And although of little consolation to dog lovers, it should also be mentioned that the dogs consumed are not bred dogs, but wild ones (it does not make economic sense to use expensive dog breeds for food purposes).

The photo essay also does a good job of showing the incredible pampering of domestic dogs in urban China.  Author Kristian Dowling's photographs are no exaggeration; walking down the street one can see dogs alongside their owners wearing hats, shoes and sweaters.  Small dogs are sometimes carried in purses and bags to places such as cafes, restaurants and on public transportation. 

Distaste with Recent Media Commentary

Recently, the American media has been awash with articles describing China's rise as an economic and political power, as well as China's increasing aggression in international politics. Citing issues such as Taiwan, Tibet, currency re-evaluation, economic policy, etc., these authors declare that China is a country that is using its newly found status to block the American agenda for its own selfish needs.

The Washington Post's Robert Samuelson writes:

Conflicts with China have multiplied. Consider: the undervalued Renminbi and its effect on trade; the breakdown of global warming negotiations in Copenhagen; China's weak support of efforts to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons; its similarly poor record in pushing North Korea to relinquish its tiny atomic arsenal; the sale of U.S. weapons to Taiwan; and Google's threat to leave China rather than condone continued censorship.

...
A wealthier China has become more assertive, notes Jacques. American prestige has further suffered from the financial crisis originating in the United States. But the fissure goes deeper: China does not accept the legitimacy and desirability of the post-World War II global order, which involves collective responsibility among great powers (led by the United States) for world economic stability and peace.

Similarly, in an article entitled 'The Dragon's Swagger,' New York Times columnist Roger Cohen writes:

Top of Obama’s nonproliferation list was Iran and the need for a united front on its nuclear program. China has since said “sanctions themselves are not an end” as the United States tries to harness support for them. Take that, too.

Top of Obama’s trade list was the need for China to allow its currency, the renminbi, to appreciate rather than pegging it at an artificially low rate that spurs Chinese exports and, in effect, keeps jobs in Guangzhou as it kills them in Ohio. But a basic rule in China is that it looks inward before it looks outward. Its cheap-currency job-hoarding is about Chinese social stability, which is Job One for Hu and his cohorts, so there’s no sign of any movement.

I have become a bit weary of this type of commentary. First of all, there is nothing new here. On issues concerning human rights, Tibet, arms sales to Taiwan, currency issues, China has consistently gone on the defensive, refusing to cave to foreign pressure. In addition, these have all been key issues (or political red herrings, depending on your perspective) for decades.

This is not to say that China is not motivated by self interest; it undoubtedly is. But to accuse a country of pursuing its national interests, while is certainly a fiery critique, is the equivalent of accusing water of being wet. Arguments such as Samuelson's depiction of a selfish China rejecting the world system established by a benevolent US are clear manipulations of logic.

However, to give these pundits credit, while the issues themselves have not changed, China has. America's debt to China as well as China's relative economic stability during the economic crisis have all been issues of discussion in the past year. The nature of the debate has indeed changed from China as an emerging threat to China as an emerging world power (which threatens to overtake the US). But given all this, how should we perceive the 'China Swagger'? Wall Street Journalist China commentator Yiyi Lu has this to say in response:

The discrepancy between the statements of top leaders and some of China’s actions and discourses in recent times is not surprising. In managing China’s image, Beijing faces a dilemma. On the one hand, it is well aware that the numerous unresolved “contradictions and problems” domestically make China a “fragile” power at best that is in no position to flex its muscle internationally. On the other hand, it also recognizes the necessity to talk up China’s achievements and strengths both domestically and internationally.

Domestically, such achievements and strengths serve as a major source of the government’s legitimacy. Internationally, they can gain China a bigger say in global governance issues and facilitate some of its foreign policy objectives. Therefore, Beijing has always had to strike a careful balance between portraying itself as a great rising power and as a large third world country still grappling with daunting development challenges.

The balance, however, is not static. Beijing needs constantly to adjust its position as domestic and international situations change. It also needs to counterbalance international discourses of China’s status. In the past year, as China weathered the global financial crisis better than most other countries, international discourse has increasingly emphasized and exaggerated China’s power while downplaying its weaknesses. A recent New York Times article reflects this discourse well. “These days, China is no longer emerging. It has emerged”, the article asserts.

The growing dominance of the “China has already risen” discourse internationally has tilted the balance which Beijing has tried to maintain. If it still considers the balance important, then it is time that Beijing adjusts its position by adopting a more low-key attitude in its speech and conduct, regardless of whether the accusation of its assertiveness is fair or not.

Intermarriages and Hapas: the Japanese-American Experience

The Mixed Race Studies blog recently posted an entry linking to an article discussing the hapa (defined to mean to mean people who have an Asian/Asian Pacific Islander parent and a parent of any other race) phenomenon within the Japanese community. The article is entitled "Nikkei Heritage Intermarriages and Hapas: An Overview" from Nikkei Heritage Vol. X, Number 4, (Fall 1998), by George Kitahara Kich, Rebecca Chiyoko King, Larry Hajime Shinagawa, and Shizue Seigel.

The article is interesting in that it offers an overview of Japanese American identity and its changing response to the existence of hapas within the community. The authors' comments could easily be extrapolated to other Asian-American communities. The author's claim of the evolution of a rising pan-Asian identity in American resonates with my experience. There is arguably a growing recognition of the similarities across the Asian American experience, even though it spans several ethnic and cultural groups. However, I would warn against being optimistic about an all-encompassing Asian American identity. There still exist salient social and cultural differences between Asian communities in the United States that act as an obstacle to the formation of a pan-Asian identity.

The article goes into some of the history of anti-miscegenation laws and the American presence in Japan, as well as the legal reforms that occurred later in the United States. I have pasted a few paragraphs below (bold text my insertion).

As the churches, social clubs, and neighborhoods that once defined community have become less sustainable than in the past, an individual’s sense of community identity has become more and more a matter of individual choice and selection. Previously, Japanese Americans had had two choices: the organic JA community or Anglo-assimilation. However, in the past 20 years, with the globalization of the economy and shifting migration and immigration patterns, as well as the rise of civil rights and integration, two additional identity choices have arisen: multi-racial and Pan-Asian.

...

It is difficult for many Hapas to overcome the long history of rejection by individual families and by the community. Broken connections and communications in extended families and within the community remain part of the human and emotional struggle for some Japanese Americans. However, many families have found new ways of re-connecting after intermarriages, discovering that change is difficult but not impossible. We have heard many stories about how grandchildren have been one way that extended families have remembered their roles in passing on traditions, and begun processes of reconnecting.

Since 1980, an increasing number of interethnic marriages to other Asians have occurred. Incorporating other Asian ethnicities within Japanese American families and the JA community has its challenges and potential for stirring up old conflicts and rivalries. However, as the stigma against interracial and interethnic marriages and people has begun to lessen, it appears that the Japanese American sense of itself, either as individuals or as a community, is being gradually replaced by more-inclusive models of identity and identity formation. That the JA community can embrace a more multiracial and multicultural perspective of itself can mean that it could never “die out,” as critics of intermarriage have warned. However, a consciousness about the dangers of assimilation (within areas as complex as class, white culture, the global marketing of brand-names, etc.) requires all cultural groups to remain inclusive, yet continually measuring, cherishing and passing on traditions, ceremonies, languages and histories.

Mr. Hu, Tear Down this...

According to the Wall Street Journal, the CCTV television culture center which caught fire last year will be repaired in the coming year. It has remained an eyesore in Beijing since the incident. There were rumors floating around that it had not been repaired because the foundation of the structure was attached to the CCTV headquarters which stands next to it. The WSJ did not confirm the rumors but had this to say about it:

"This week, a joint committee convened by the State Council, China's cabinet, is expected to affirm the structural soundness of the the 44-story Television Cultural Center, in the final report of an investigation into the Feb. 9, 2009, fire at the $730 million China Central Television complex.

That would clear the way for major repairs on a building that was intended to help CCTV transform itself from a dull source of propaganda into a modern media powerhouse, but instead has become a charred, rusting eyesore in the middle of the capital's downtown business district.

The building "will be repaired, as there is no major damage to the structure of the main body," said Huang Yi, a spokesman for the State Administration of Work Safety, one of the government departments that collaborated on the investigation.

...

The boot-shaped high-rise has an exterior steel framework, much of which will be stripped away and rebuilt, and a concrete interior portion that can be salvaged.

Preparatory work for the repairs has started on the building site, according to people involved in the reconstruction project."

Theatres as an Expression of National Interest

A recent trip to Beijing’s National Centre for the Performing Arts made me think about how an architectural structure can reflect a certain aspect of a country, especially when compared to a theatre with which I am much more familiar: Singapore’s Esplanade.

The Esplanade Theatres on the Bay sits on Singapore’s waterfront, and is shaped like a pair of durian fruits. Durian, for the unfamiliar, is a fruit indigenous to Southeast Asia. It grows in a hard, spike-covered shell and is characterized by its pungent aroma and creamy flesh. Because of these traits, durian is arguably the most divisive fruit in existence. Lovers describe it as the king of fruits, and those who hate it describe it as the most putrid thing they have ever tasted. (There is a certain irony, however, in the fact that you are actually barred from enjoying durian inside the Esplanade.)

The Esplanade is what one might call a truly public facility. One enters the structure and is faced with large hall filled with free seating and several art exhibits open to the public. The hall runs down to a corridor, leading to several shops and restaurants. The two major concerts halls are tucked away on either side of the hall and outside are more restaurants and bars. Nearby, the waterfront is lined with benches, and in the middle is the outdoor theatre which often features performances free to the public.

The Theatres on the Bay is truly a meeting place for all Singaporeans; it is frequented by socialites and commoners alike. I have seen Singapore’s most affluent wine and dine there as well as students and struggling workers enjoy a free concert with drinks bought at 711.

Beijing’s National Centre is a very different experience. This is not to say that it is poorly constructed; it is most certainly an impressive sight. Surrounded by a still pool of water, it stands by Tiananmen square in the center of Beijing, its large oval-shaped exterior skimming the water like a setting sun. Inside, the theatre boasts tall ceilings and modern facilities; it is an exquisite feat of architecture. However, it also exhibits an air of exclusivity and disengagement.

Entering the theatre, there is a small open hall or waiting area flanked by a ticket booth on the side and the entrance for the security check across from the main doors. Only after passing the security check can one visit the art exhibits showcasing Chinese artists’ work and traditional Chinese culture. The nearby stairs lead directly to the concert halls. Interestingly, there is nowhere to go during intermission save for the restroom. In contrast, concert halls in the Esplanade have an open area when, during intermission, the audience can have a glass of wine and socialize.

While one may pick favorites, it is also a worthwhile exercise to look at these pieces of architecture as expressions of the nations that have built them.

During the past several years, Singapore has been grappling with its identity. Long considered one of Asia’s model economic tigers, it developed an economy based on trade and manufacturing. The government highly encouraged Singaporeans to go into relevant fields, and as a result Singapore was turning out a large number of engineers. But with the opening of other economies (i.e. China, Vietnam) that can produce goods at much lower costs, Singapore is striving to transform itself into a creative society and entrepreneurial economy. Suddenly, risk-taking capitalists and norm-breaking artists are being encouraged and cultivated. This push has permeated not only the artistic world, but has also led to reforms in education policy and supportive policies for entrepreneurs. The Esplanade can easily be seen as part of the government’s drive to develop a creative and artistic society, acting not only as a platform for the performing and visual arts, but also as a means of engaging all Singaporeans in this push toward creativity.

The National Theatre, in contrast, serves a very different purpose. Completed on the eve of the Olympics, it was part of China’s plan to burst onto the world stage and show a global audience its modernity and grandeur. The modern style and world-class facilities certainly impress upon the viewer an image of China’s economic prowess. It is interesting that in addition to westerners who lament the loss of cultural relics for modern buildings, native Beijingers have arguably been the most vocal group against these highly modern constructions. In fact, the Theatre is often jokingly referred to as the egg often by those who feel it is an eyesore next to the city’s imperial architecture.

Still, it is important to mention that many developing countries highly value these symbols of economic prowess and modernization. I recall being in Wuhan, a city along the Yangtze that had a strong colonial presence during the 19th century, and had commented on how I found the colonial architecture interesting. My Wuhan friend shot me a confused look and commented how strange she thought that foreigners are always interested in old, run-down buildings while ignoring the modern architecture throughout downtown Wuhan.

From a personal perspective, it is natural for Americans who often grow up in cookie-cutter suburban homes and modern buildings to relish in the novel and unique, especially if it is embedded in history and tradition. Similarly, it makes sense for someone who grew up among humble surroundings to favor all things modern, even at the expense of one’s history.

One could also trace this further. Many in what we know as the developing world have a notion of modernization heavily influenced by the western notion of economic modernization, stemming from the industrial revolution and imperialism. Many of these countries were colonized, a legacy which left a lasting impression on indigenous societies. For many countries still pulling themselves from poverty, the path forward is a well trodden one.

*****

With all of this said, I would like to promote a theatre that I have always enjoyed, the Mixed Blood Theatre in Minneapolis, Minnesota (USA). It features a multi-racial company that performs pieces spurring discussions on cultural identity and barriers within American society. The company approaches its audience mixing comedy, drama and satire. I would highly recommend anyone either living in or visiting Minnesota to pay a visit.

Posner's Race Against Race

Richard Posner of The New Republic has published a discussion of miscegenation/mixed race marriages entitled The Race Against Race. He mixes into his writing a review of two works, What Comes Naturally: Miscegenation Law and the Making of Race in America by Peggy Pascoe and Three Generations, No Imbeciles: Eugenics, the Supreme Court, and Buck v. Bell by Paul A. Lombardo. It is a general overview of mixed race marriages from a legal and social perspective.

Still another puzzle is why aversion to “mixed marriages” (not limited to racially mixed marriages) should lead to the enactment and the enforcement of laws against them. Orthodox Jews strongly oppose marriage to gentiles, and even Reform rabbis are generally unwilling to perform such marriages. Most parents do not want their children to marry people from a lower social class. And while black-white marriages remain rare, marriages between whites and Asians have become common. In part this is because there is a distinctive black culture in the United States (though not all blacks are part of that culture) but not a distinctive Asian one after the first generation; and in part it is because there is more prejudice against blacks than against Asians, or for that matter against Jews, Irish, and Italians. But it hardly seems necessary to have laws against mixed marriages, to which people are already averse. The aversion would make such marriages rare in any event, so why have laws against them with all the attendant bother for courts and marriage-license bureaus?

Trying to answer this question is, to say the least, a daunting task. One might instead, dissect race and status according to its different contexts (there are not universal perceptions of race, and every group is subject to different social environments). For example, in colonial Latin America people of mixed European and indigenous backgrounds were in a social stratum of their own; they became the clerks and assistants to the region’s colonial rulers. Their status was higher than that of the pure indigenous population, but they could never enter the exclusive social circles of the European elite. This context is very different than that of the mixed children of black slaves and white masters the author describes as pariahs of sorts.