Globalization of Hollywood - Part 2.2 (Sinicization)

...Conclusion from previous entry

It's fair to say that Bond franchise doesn't just reveal real enemy of the West, but their fears as well.

The Sinophobia - going by the name of Yellow Peril - went back much further than WW2. In fact as far back as 18th century. Indeed it was stemmed from the Mongol Invasion of the 13th Century. This ghost sure lingered the living (West) for a long time.

Between the 2 ideological enemies of commies, Ruskies was portrayed as lesser of the 2 evils. At least to Bond franchise during the Cold War. Even if former USSR posed a much graver threat militarily. PRC posed practically zero real threat to the West during the Cold War. I repeat zero, nada, zilch. But because China represented, apart from the fear of the Red Menace, also stood for the Yellow Peril. At least before the hayday of the Cold War in the 1960s after the Cuban Missile Crisis. And Hollywood had been feeding that beastly Oriental phobia long before the Cold War started. Centuries before. So you can see what the Chinese were up against - not 1 but 2 phobias that wrapped into 1. So demonizing PRC is killing 2 birds with 1 stone.

Dr. No² (1962) delivered just that - killing 2 Chinese ghosts with 1 movie. Dr. No is Ian Fleming's, or at least Bond franchise's version of the evil Fu Manchu. Anyone watches it would find the parellel unmiskable. The fear of the people living around his private island takes on mythical proportions.

An episode of Hawaii-Five-O also tried to pull out the old trick as Dr. No. This is detailed in my entry "HK - Day 4 - Hawaii-Five-O, The Fed & China", dated 07-Feb-2011. I'm sure there're many plenty more where that comes from.

Mixing Yellow with Red, and you get orange. Chinese is obviously the truly original Orange People to the West (I know some Indians also been called the Orange People in the Rajneesh Movement. That's another story).

The fear was totally misplaced. It was the Mongols that they should fear, not the Han Chinese, whom were also invaded by the Mongols. China was conquered like the rest, by Ghengis Khan. Who says racism and fear has to make any sense? But then when the racist advocates - who called themselves scientists - in the 18th century labelled all Asians under the unbrella of Mongolian race, all Asians were turned into Mongols in the Western mind.

In the defense of the Medieval Europe - who lived in fear most of the time anyway - they could hardly be blamed for the fear of the Mongols. But as time passed, the fear slowly evolved and morphed into a completely different beast (in fact, the victim, not the perpetrator). This is quite common. People have forgotten what they actually feared in the first place (the same goes with hate). They just have some vague all encompassing fear. Of course, politicans and misplaced philosophers would capitalize this fear, and kept its alive. And they managed to pull it off for some 7.83 centuries later. Or should I say, they lived in fear for all that times.

Here's another, almost parallel example - the evil personification of Fu Manchu as Chinese. Once again, the Manchu conquered the Han Chinese. And the depiction of a Manchu doesn't represent Chinese, but Chinese invader. Manchu was Chinese enemy, not Han Chinese.

But then the whole problem was, to the outsiders, the're all Chinese. This is like oursiders see Scots, Welsh and Irish as English. Well, the more accurate way of looking at this is more like mistakened English for Scots, Welsh or Irish. Since Han Chinese is the majority, while Mongols and Manchus are the minority like Scottish and Irish. Except that The English is only slightly more in number than Scot, Welsh or Irish. The better comparison is like thinking Apache Indian represents the whole of American. This is what happens when you think of Mongols or Fu Manchu as Chinese. But then who ever accuses racists as informed people, who are well versed in history? And whoever charges racism is being built on a sound foundation of logic and reason?

Sure, fear is usually driven by unknown, and this was just the driving force of xenophobia, plain and simple. And the Medieval Europe was plagued by Black Death and ignorance. Medieval period - aka Dark Age - is characterized by myths, superstitions, and ignorance.

This kind of misplaced fear reminds me about the so called Aryanism, and white supremism, etc. They still haven't worked out or settled if the Aryan race requires blond hair, blue eyes, which Hitler didn't possess. But that's what characterize all these myths and racisms. They're not scientifically based, but rather it's based on a delirious cocktails of myths mixed with some facts, whishful thinking and irrational fears from various pseudo-sciences and fringe and esoteric 'philosophies', and you get a very incoherent view about the Aryanism.

Here's a 3rd reason or defense for the Yellow Peril paranoia in the Medieval Europe. Although the fear is misplaced, but understandable. After all, the Ming Dynasty overthrew the Yuan Dynasty, or the Mongols. So if the Mongols was an embodiment of terror, imaging the Chinese who defeated them. Indeed not long after the Mongols were driven out of China, the Ming Dynasty was established, Zheng He led an expedition with 317 ships in 1405 AD. Thei were the BIGGEST WOODEN ships EVER built. The record still stands today in 21st century. Some of them exceeded well over 400 (some argue 450) feet in length. Compare it to the flag ship Santa Maria in Christopher Columbus' expedition, which measured 74 feet that sailed in 1492.

Let's recap,
Christopher Columbus expidition, year 1492 AD, 3 ships, biggest 74 ft.
Zheng He expidition, year 1405 AD, 317 ships, some well over 450 ft.

If the Ming Dynasty had the same ambition to subjegate Spaniard the way the Conquistadors had for the America Indians in 1492, would Spain stand a chance? Spain happened to be the greatest naval power in Europe in 1492. What about if China sent Zheng He to invade Spain some 87 years ago when Spainish naval power was even smaller? From Iberia, China could launch a naval attack on the rest of Europe.

Indeed, China could had conquered the Mongols centuries before the arrival of Ghengis Khan when the Mongols were just a bunch of scattered, disorganized normadic tribes instead of building the Great Wall. The Han, Tang and Song Dynasties had military might that could very readily ruled over the Mongols. In fact, it was easier to do that than building the Great Wall.

No, China didn't conquer the Mongols centuries before Ghengis Khan, and so China was conquered by them in the 13th century.
No, China didn't conquer the European centuries before the Industrial Revolution, and so China was invaded, and colonized by them in the 19th century.
No, China didn't conquer the Japanese centuries before the Meiji Restoration, and so China was invaded by them in the 20th century.

The historical pattern is clear. China has no interest in the rest of the world. They knew about the rest of the world before the Zheng He expedition. China traded with the Romans via the Silk Road some 2 millennia ago. Instead, China built the Great Wall in the north to isolate themselves. It has the Himalayas in south west to prevent their contacts with India. There were many reasons why China had no interest in the rest of the world. It could be because they were suspicious of outsiders. It could be the fact that China is so large, and already self sufficient, there's no reasons to have more territory. It could be because they were arrogance that no lands outside was worth invading. There were other reasons. Maybe some or all of above. Whatever the reasons, the point is, China had all the chances in the world in the 17 out of the last 20 centuries to take over the world. Quite easily. But they didn't. Instead, they were invaded by others³, yes. Several times. By the Mongols, the Manchus, the colonial Europeans and Imperial Japanese. They weren't the only ones attempted to invade China, just many had tried and failed even crossing the Chinese border. These ones succeeded.

They took every opportunity to isolate themselves, shut themselves up from the outside world. They built Great Wall for that purpose. The Communist too followed their ancestors' footsteps and shut themselves off for some 30 years. And China opened up because it was either openned up or perished. The choice was easy. They're suspicious of outsiders - this cultural trait results in the isolationist stance, makes them safe to the rest of the world.

So like I said, the Yellow Peril paranoia is unfounded and misplaced, but quite UNDERSTANDABLE. It's natural to fear the most powerful nation in the world when they're so inscrutable at the same time. Yep, transparence isn't a strong Chinese cultural traits. Then as it's now. The Great Wall of China is a concrete expression of the isolationism.

China had the mean and the method, just not the motivation as they say in the court room.

I suspect the same fear remains in the mind of the West today that China is going to take over the world.

As Cold War intensified, SPECTRE and Chinese of Fu Manchu fame made less and less appearances in Bond movies while Ruskies gradually took over its place. The ghosts of Nazi and Yellow Peril gradually laid to rest and replaced by the more real and urgent fear of former USSR. These 2 phobias looked increasingly and horribly dated by 1970s.

With China shut itself up, Bond franchise has little to say about it after Dr. No (1962) until its Opening Up again in 1979. And in "Tomorrow Never Dies" (1997), China (and Chinese) entered the picture once again much like Russia has gone before. Michelle Yeoh is one of the Bond girl. And as Bond film is dealing with enemy of the West, in this Bon film, the enemy is a media baron. Powerful, multi national companies are increasingly seen as the enemies, like Zorin in "The Living Daylights" (1987), and Carver Media Group Network in "Tomorrow Never Dies" (1997). Doesn't Elliot Carver reminds me of a certain Rupert Murdoch (often called a tyrant, has a HK wife, and a dream to enter the Chinese market, wore a pair of thin rim spectacles (he changed to a thick rim spectacles after the Bond movie), speaks with an Aussie accent, etc. Just google "Rupert Murdoch Ell" and the rest of "iott Carver" will automatically be filled in). I guess the Fox Studio wouldn't bankroll "Tomorrow Never Dies" (1997). But its competitor, MGM, would do this for free.

Actually, there's yet another dichotomy that Hollywood has towards the historical China and modern China. The ancient China are almost prortrayed in a positive light with ancient Chinese wisdom, sages, and heroes, while the portrayal of modern China isn''t so crash hot. - it ranges from grudging approvals to win Chinese audience to down right disparaging.

Needless to say, given all these complex and confusing mess of historical background, Hollywood thus has an uneasy, and Sinophobic relationship with Chinese, especially Chinese diaspora, and China TODAY. This relationship with China isn't just complex, but dynamic because China is changing fast, not just economically, but socially and poltically. This makes it very interesting to watch China and Chinese in Hollywood's films to see the changing, unfolding development. Like it or not, Uncle Sam and the awaken Dragon are now very close (captured by the name 'Chinamerica') - totally bound up together in ropes (of commerces and trades, and issues like CO₂ emission, and resources competitions, etc), breathing down each other necks, feeling each other fat flesh (ok, skiny Chinese flesh). A 3-step dance would probably more accurately in depict their economic relationship. A dance that consists the steps of 1. cheap Chinese exports to USA, 2. China's purchases of US treasuries with its export money, and 3. this leads to US consumers to have more money to buy Chinese imports, and we're back to step 1. Cha! Cha! Cha!

Let me make it clear that Hollywood isn't to blame for demonizing Chinese (or being racist and sexist as they had been), they do what they always do - echoing voices in the real world. Hollywood is usually late to the party. They pick up clues about what's hot and what's not from real life. E.g. "Wild Swans", published in 1991, sold 10 million copies, and translated into 30 languages, written about lives of 3 generations in China. If Amy Chua - Amy Who? Not Amy Tan - wrote her book “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother”, say in the 1960s, it probably wouldn't be published because not many people would have interested in what she said. But her book created a strong response - to put it mildly - in the US public. This is a sign of Sinomania is sweeping across USA. Whatever a Chinese (or Chinese American) says matter these days. Nobody cared about their opnions before 1980s. And Hollywood is neither deaf nor blind. But I wouldn't say they have perfect hearing or 20/20 vision.

When Bruce Lee, who's now a lengendary figure, tried to make a movie in Hollywood in 1970, nobody in Hollywood gave him the time of day. He had to go to HK to make his first movie, "Fists of Fury" or "The Big Boss" (1971). The rest is movie history. How the time has changed for Chinese the Underdog. As I said many times before, Hollywood is often late to the party. They aren't visionaries or gamblers. They stick to a well established pattern of social trends. They imitate life, not foresee it. Bruce Lee⁴ was too far ahead of their times. Decades ahead.

Judging from the US public response to Amy Chua's book this year, it tells me that US public is far from being cured of China Fever. And so, Hollywood is far from done with Chinese themed movies. Like all fevers, the only cure is letting it runs its course. I suspect the finishing line would be likely to be at least till the end of the decade if not longer. I make bold prediction because I'm not Hollywood. I've nothing to lose. I have no reputation (nor notoriety. I would kill for either).

So before 1980s, Bruce Lee got snubbed SIMPLY BECAUSE he was a Chinese American. Today, Amy "Who-Is-That" Chua said something that hardly earth shattering, the US public made a big fuzz SIMPLY BECAUSE she's a Chinese American.

Baa...baa...baa...meh...baa...meh...

Notwithstanding the Yellow Peril fear, China Fever struck Europe in the mid to late 17th Centruy. And so this Oriental Fever, the dance of admiration and fear continues. In 17th Centruy, France was the mecca of arts and fashions of Europe, so the Parisian love of Chinese cultures and arts reflected in the Chinoserie style that influenced paintings, architecture, fashions, sculptures, etc.

Although France still is influenctial in art and fashion, but not as pronounced as it used to be in the more globalized and multipolar world. The USA is stealing the limelight. More importantly, unlike the Chinoiserie, which influenced only the circle of the rich and the powerful aristocracy, the 'Sinomania' this times around is reaching the populace. This is essentially an American thing - popularize - meaning people power - on everything, and Chinese culture is no exception. Unlike the Chinoiserie that had only artistic impact on the limited section of society, the USA brought this Later-Day 'Chinoiserie' into Hollywood, which has much wider impact not only on more people, but at a deeper level than just artistic artifacts for people to admire from afar. Hollywood movies engage people's minds, not just something to please the eyes on the superficial level (as much as artists want to convince you otherwise). In fact, looking at Chinoiserie from today's eyes, they look very European, especially the Chinese people in the Chinoiserie paintings. That being said, the characters in "Kung Fu Panda" act much more like Yanks than Chinese (good idea from an entertainment value point of view). Everything else are dwelling deeper into the Chinese culture. This success wasn't achieved overnight.

Children are always victims in relationship breakups. Since the normalization of Sino-US relation, and begun the Panda Diplomacy, the US will have no alternative but to continue this relationship for the sake of their children. A breakup could mean China taking back all the cuddly pandas that she loaned to USA, and break the tender hearts of millions of American kids. A tragedy. Of course, they can visit the pandas in PRC. But who likes child custody visit? For God's sake, THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!

________________________________________________________

¹ A great original movie that is considered a classic that received 100% rating in freshness by Rotten Tomatoes. It's memorable and thoroughly enjoyable.

² There's no 'No' in Chinese surname. The closest is 'Ngo', which many people - include Ian Fleming I presume - pronounce 'No'.

³ What about the so-called Chinese invasion of Tibet? This is going to be a sensitive issue. But too important to be left alone. Read my entry "The Tibet Issue", dated 4 June 2010. My point of showing all this is that Mao's 'invasion' of Tibet isn't contradictory to what I said about Chinese isolationism. Mao would NOT invade, say Parkistan or Korea or any country that neighbouring Tibet or any country that borders China if he didn't believe it's part of PRC's political sovereignty.

Compare to British Empire, for example, Chinese Empire is a loser with a score of 58 to nil, or 58 to 1 if you include Tibet. Game, set, and match Britania!

Back to the Chinese isolationist tradition. It's universially acknowledged by any Trekker that the Klingon race was based on the Ancient Mongols who founded the Chinese Yuan Dynasty. What about Zheng He expiditions and the Chinese non-interference policy towards the forgein civilisation? Aren't these reminding us of starship USS Enterprise and the Federation's Prime Directive? Did Gene Roddenberry inspire by Zheng He or simply based the US pre-FDR, pre-WW2 isolationism? The former provides a better parallel.

In fact, today, despite China's engagement with the world through economic and diplomatic ties, PRC's foreign policy is still that of non-interventionism with other countries' domestic affairs - a cultural heritage with a long tradition. USA used to adopt the same isolationist foreign policy until FDR who turned it 180 degrees from isolationism to interventionism. Now the USA takes on invasion with much fervour.

As you can see, the Yellow Peril is the most undestandable, yet unfounded fear in history. As China is becoming more powerful, this fear is re-surfaced. China is EVER only interested in one country - China. It should be quite clear from Chinese ancient history, and today's foreign policy. Unsurpringly, the USA wants China to abandon that isolationist approach, and at the same time fears China's military strength. Of course, by different groups of Yanks who hold opposite views about China.

⁴ To gain a better and deeper undertanding of Chinese culture, it's far far far better to watch wuxia movies based on novels of Jin Yong, who's the best wuxia novelist ever lived. If you're really keen, you can read his novels instead. They have been translated into many languages - English, French, Italian, Greek, Vietnamese, Thai, Burmese, Malay, Japanese, Korean. The Spaniards miss out. The readers of Don Quixote, and especially Zoro would love his wuxia novels.