Tag: Cultural heritage

再看《霸王别姬》，看程蝶衣的逆风人生

ClearSLeave a comment

第一次看《霸王别姬》，还是在自己不谙世事的时候。当时，只是觉得程蝶衣美，美而悲壮，惨烈。也被大时代的变迁而震撼。今天再一次重温经典，却看出很多不一样的感受。原来程蝶衣的倔强，才是逆风之人悲剧的宿命。

戏和人生的交错，就是不清不楚。程蝶衣不是单纯的活在戏里。只是对戏，更加较真。因为现实无法与自己期望的相吻合，只能沉醉在戏里的“从一而终”。他的沉醉，他的不醒，以至于在外面的世界不断变迁的同时，把他生生的隔离了。也许，他并没有在逆风前行。只是在风中屹立不动。但是不随风，也就是逆风的一种。

逆风的生命，是被抽打最多的。不仅受风的吹打。因为随风的不仅仅是空气，更是有一切可以被风吹动的东西。那些东西和风一起，将原地扎根的生命使劲儿吹打。风不止，痛苦不止。对大部分生命来说，有方向的前进，是生命进行的标志。而对在风中不动的生命来说，疼痛，就是生的意义。

在时代变迁的背景下，逆与顺，本来就是相对的。逆可以变成顺，顺可以被变成逆。而这逆与顺，又有谁来定？军阀，日本侵略者，国民党，还是共产党的人民？总之，不由程蝶衣。看戏的人在变，唱戏的，也应改变吗？戏呢？戏也应改变吗？随谁而变？

程蝶衣

程蝶衣爱戏，因为戏如生命。他不知道，京剧作为艺术的一种，只能在不动荡的年代繁荣起来。而艺术之所以生命力强大，更是因为它的形式可以被演化。当经典保持为经典，变化的那一部分会随着继续生长。变化，在这一刻，是戏之生命延长的方式。

人民的力量真真是大无穷。京剧可以是国粹，也可以是腐朽无救的下三滥。段小楼可以在汉奸头上砸砖头，可以在为日本人唱了戏的程蝶衣脸上吐唾沫，也可以为了程蝶衣与国民党人干架。但他也可以在人民的批斗下揭发程蝶衣的一切罪行。他是铮铮铁骨的男儿啊，被打被罚从无怨言。让他弯下腰的力量，何其大？他也许是软弱的。软过了菊仙，一个自己赎身来嫁给他的妓女。但是他活着，她却死了。

我相信，在二十一年没有与段小楼唱《霸王别姬》的岁月里，程蝶衣不曾再唱过虞姬。而二十一年后，当一切重新映入眼帘，当儿时的记忆被重新揭开，他知道，一切都不可能再回去。一切，都已经失去了意义。在这一刻，在这个久别重温最初的幸福的时刻，结束自己的一生，或许是他最好的选择。

他没有疯，只是长醉不醒。

Advertisement

Exploring the Meanings of the Great Wall of China Today

ClearSLeave a comment

The concept of the Great Wall as a national symbol and the ideas based on or derived from it constitute a myth for Waldron. From a negative symbol to a national pride, the meanings of the Great Wall are very fluid. It is given different connotations in accordance with the needs of the group of people in the process of nation building, or the process of transformation from culture to nation, as Waldron would possibly agree. But to which extent does these meanings matter today? Geographical, social and economical factors are crucial to understand the precise significance the Great Wall embodies in current Chinese society.

The Great Wall of China, as noted in the text, is by no means one single wall with one unified story, as it is always generally understood. It is a combination of several walls erected over thousand of years; it is a set of histories, instead of only one. Extending from Shanhai Guan in the east to Jiayu Guan in the west, these walls, complementary to natural landscapes, served as northern frontiers dividing agrarian civilization and the steppe tribes. Today, however, it is said that thirty percent of the Great Wall is in ruins, and another twenty percent is in “reasonable” condition, according to a survey of a hundred sections of the wall carried out by the Great Wall Society of China in 2006.1 And the remaining fifty percent has disappeared. While the parts close to Beijing and other cities (such as Jiayu Guan city) draw attention from the government, and protected by law; some other parts of the Wall at those places where they are remote from population-condensed areas and tourist sites, are loosely protected. Geographical locations of the ruins of the walls play a role here. But if the government wants to protect the Great Wall for its archeological and historical importance, why does not it protect every meter of the Wall in the same manner?

What relates to the geographical factor is how different social groups perceive the Great Wall, whether it is a national symbol or not. In Waldron’s text, the alterations of meanings occurred mainly among Chinese and Western literati. Even though literature and folklores might influence general opinion on the Wall among the common, the degree to which it has impact on is hard to distinguish. In distant places, many local villagers even consider the ruins of the Wall as “only a pile of earth”, and for some tourists, drawing and carving on the Wall are not a behavior to be ashamed of. For these who are also Chinese, is the established Great Wall still a symbol of national pride or even important at all to their national identity? If part of the nation do not feel the national significance of the symbol, how can this symbol be important for “national” identity? Or is it just for the part of people who can be vocal and represent the nation in the world?

Last but not least, economic reason also drives to the restoration of the Wall, which links to the geographical factor previously discussed. Economic concerns matter much to the local governments, if less so to the central government. Tourism attracts more capital and further lifts local economy; not to mention the Great Wall is not only a domestic traveller attraction, but also an international tourist magnet. The symbolic and ideological meanings of the Wall exist and become significant because of national leaders and intellectuals (linking back to the social factor), who identify themselves as part of the imagined massive community called China/Chinese-culture-sharers, in front of “others”, feeling themselves different and special, if not better (proud).

There are different reasons to preserve what is considered “old.” I do not agree with Waldron on the “authenticity” of the Great Wall recognized by “Chinese people”. Various parts of the Wall have been torn down, rebuilt, surrounded by recreation parks, and then charged for entrance fee. These “Great Wall(s)” are of anything but authenticity. Thus preserving the authentic is hardly one of the reasons for restoration; and restoration with other purposes create nothing authentic.

Tearing down the “old” and building up the “new” is a desperate move to search for recognition and self-identification. Comparing to the parts of the Great Wall, which are “lucky” enough to be preserved, the old towns of some other cities in China was less fortunate. Lanzhou, a city filled with architectures from Ming and Qing dynasties, was gradually and completely destroyed and rebuilt. In recent years, the city officials started to realize the loss of uniqueness by completely discarding its past. But it is already too late. The special city structure “double city” nowadays can only be seen in old photos and a newly built sculpture in the city park. At the places where the original buildings were, some black stone tablets stand, giving basic information of the “deceased buildings”, looking ridiculous.

Old double-city structure in City Park:
City Park 1
“Gravestones” of the old town in the lost memory:
Stone Tablet 1 Stone Tablet 2
*This text is also published at “Infinite Wander”: https://clearly2013germany.wordpress.com/2015/05/19/exploring-the-meanings-of-the-great-wall-of-china-today/

Exploring the Meanings of the Great Wall of China Today

ClearS1 Comment

The concept of the Great Wall as a national symbol and the ideas based on or derived from it constitute a myth for Waldron. From a negative symbol to a national pride, the meanings of the Great Wall are very fluid. It is given different connotations in accordance with the needs of the group of people in the process of nation building, or the process of transformation from culture to nation, as Waldron would possibly agree. But to which extent does these meanings matter today? Geographical, social and economical factors are crucial to understand the precise significance the Great Wall embodies in current Chinese society.

The Great Wall of China, as noted in the text, is by no means one single wall with one unified story, as it is always generally understood. It is a combination of several walls erected over thousand of years; it is a set of histories, instead of only one. Extending from Shanhai Guan in the east to Jiayu Guan in the west, these walls, complementary to natural landscapes, served as northern frontiers dividing agrarian civilization and the steppe tribes. Today, however, it is said that thirty percent of the Great Wall is in ruins, and another twenty percent is in “reasonable” condition, according to a survey of a hundred sections of the wall carried out by the Great Wall Society of China in 2006.1 And the remaining fifty percent has disappeared. While the parts close to Beijing and other cities (such as Jiayu Guan city) draw attention from the government, and protected by law; some other parts of the Wall at those places where they are remote from population-condensed areas and tourist sites, are loosely protected. Geographical locations of the ruins of the walls play a role here. But if the government wants to protect the Great Wall for its archeological and historical importance, why does not it protect every meter of the Wall in the same manner?

What relates to the geographical factor is how different social groups perceive the Great Wall, whether it is a national symbol or not. In Waldron’s text, the alterations of meanings occurred mainly among Chinese and Western literati. Even though literature and folklores might influence general opinion on the Wall among the common, the degree to which it has impact on is hard to distinguish. In distant places, many local villagers even consider the ruins of the Wall as “only a pile of earth”, and for some tourists, drawing and carving on the Wall are not a behavior to be ashamed of. For these who are also Chinese, is the established Great Wall still a symbol of national pride or even important at all to their national identity? If part of the nation do not feel the national significance of the symbol, how can this symbol be important for “national” identity? Or is it just for the part of people who can be vocal and represent the nation in the world?

Last but not least, economic reason also drives to the restoration of the Wall, which links to the geographical factor previously discussed. Economic concerns matter much to the local governments, if less so to the central government. Tourism attracts more capital and further lifts local economy; not to mention the Great Wall is not only a domestic traveller attraction, but also an international tourist magnet. The symbolic and ideological meanings of the Wall exist and become significant because of national leaders and intellectuals (linking back to the social factor), who identify themselves as part of the imagined massive community called China/Chinese-culture-sharers, in front of “others”, feeling themselves different and special, if not better (proud).

There are different reasons to preserve what is considered “old.” I do not agree with Waldron on the “authenticity” of the Great Wall recognized by “Chinese people”. Various parts of the Wall have been torn down, rebuilt, surrounded by recreation parks, and then charged for entrance fee. These “Great Wall(s)” are of anything but authenticity. Thus preserving the authentic is hardly one of the reasons for restoration; and restoration with other purposes create nothing authentic.

Tearing down the “old” and building up the “new” is a desperate move to search for recognition and self-identification. Comparing to the parts of the Great Wall, which are “lucky” enough to be preserved, the old towns of some other cities in China was less fortunate. Lanzhou, a city filled with architectures from Ming and Qing dynasties, was gradually and completely destroyed and rebuilt. In recent years, the city officials started to realize the loss of uniqueness by completely discarding its past. But it is already too late. The special city structure “double city” nowadays can only be seen in old photos and a newly built sculpture in the city park. At the places where the original buildings were, some black stone tablets stand, giving basic information of the “deceased buildings”, looking ridiculous.

Old double-city structure in City Park:

Lanzhou City Park1

“Gravestones” of the old town in the lost memory:

Stone Tablet1 Stone Tablet 2