|
Is the dragon too fearsome a symbol for
China?
By You
Nuo
There has been hot debate
since the suggestion of one academic made the press. Online it has been
more of a wholesale denunciation than a real debate.
When Guangming Daily interviewed Wu Youfu, the Party secretary of the
Shanghai International Studies University talked at great length about
the implicit hazards of having the dragon as China's national symbol.
However, when the tabloids picked up the story, it turned into headlines
like "Some scholars suggest retiring the dragon," with more than a whiff
of discontent in the tone. The underlying message was: How dare you
suggest something so abominable as to forsake our ancestry?
This was not the first time I've seen market-driven newspapers
disguising commentaries as news reports. Evoking unpatriotic
implications is the surest way to enhance one's own image of moral
correctness and at the same time sell papers. But it pollutes the air of
free and open discourse.
Why can't someone versed in cross-cultural references point out the
disparate understandings of a special image that carries layers of
meaning throughout our civilization?
Remember the days when China made a toothpaste called "Fangfang" and
tried to sell it overseas? Someone like Professor Wu could have come
along and told them that no English-speaking consumer would buy a
product that might turn their teeth into fangs. A symbol like the dragon
exists for two purposes: To exemplify our collective traits, and to help
other people to understand us. If what they may perceive differs from
what we want to project, the symbol would have failed on at least one of
these counts.
Professor Wu was not putting down centuries-old Chinese heritage, but
making it relevant in the age of globalization, when China is rising
fast on the world stage and cares a lot about how it is seen by others.
That said, I don't support his proposal. And like Wu, I'm approaching it
from a technical rather than emotional point of view. The usefulness of
the mythical beast outlasts any potential drawback. In essence, the
dragon is like a school mascot. The difference is that since it carries
the history of 7,000 years and represents a fifth of the world's
population, tinkering is impractical.
Given the circumstances, it would be more practicable to reshape
perception rather than the image itself. True, when Westerners conjure
up the idea of the dragon, it's likely to be a fiery beast of
destruction. But don't forget, when we Chinese think of a mouse, it is
an annoying creature that nibbles our food and spreads disease. Walt
Disney single-handedly transformed it into a cute character that can
sing and dance to our delight. Changes are already on the way. In
countries like the United States, dragon boat racing and the dragon
dance are making inroads from Chinatown into the mainstream. From my
observation, not even kids are scared. The dragon in the West does not
invoke the same fearful reaction as a carnivorous dinosaur, but rather a
feeling of awe. It is not as awe-inspiring as the dinosaur, granted, and
certainly not as beloved as the panda.
The real problem, as I see it, is the dragon's close association with
imperial power, which is reinforced every night through TV soap operas.
When we watch people who are willing to kill millions for access to the
"dragon seat," it instils something into the psyche of our children,
something incongruous with the growth of our nation.
So, the first step for the image overhaul is to take the dragon down
from its throne and make it a little more egalitarian.
—The Daily Mail-China Daily news exchange item |
