session 7 (10/9) - dube (film + 19th century)

[Lesly Gonzalez]

The big challenge China faces is the chasm between industrialed nations and traditional ones. Nations like the U.S., the U.K., and increasingly Japan, have focused their new means of production to build modernized militaries that include steamers. There is no way China's military can successfully compete with these innovations. Until China joins these powers in development, it will have to bestow, "most favored nation" status to all but itself.

The solution to this problem is to preserve national unity; united China will industrialize, modernize its military, and renegotiate treaties that have limited its ability to charge tarrifs, govern over its territories, extert itself over its sphere of influence.

[Lesly Gonzalez]

I liked how the film allowed the conversations between workers, activitsts, and other individuals to tell this story with little to no narration. It gave these people the opportunity to tell the story of struggle directly to the viewer.

Also, this film had me wondering about the rigidity of the Chinese government. It is difficult to organize workers in any country, including our own; it is not uncommon for organizers and rebellious workers to face reprisals from their employers or their government. In this documentary China, in my memory, reacts like some Western nations would.

[Nira Sun]

I know this is not related to the film topic but topic of the gap between original Chinese title and translated English one reminded me of Chinese dishes on the menu in Chinese restaurant. Lots of time, I don't even understand what the dish is about by just looking at the Chinese names. By reading the English ones, it helps me to know what the ingredients are. 

For example, there is a famous Sichuan dish called "Ants climbing up the Tree" (literal translation of its Chinese name). The ingredients of the dish are marianted ground meat, rice noodle, and other seasoning. The rice noodle represents the tree branches or twigs and the little ground meat poured over the "tree branches" forms a view of "ants" all over the tree twigs. Hence the name.

The titles or names in the orginal language are mostly presented in a metaphor figure. However, once it gets translated, it would be really confusing to people if it is translated words by words. Imagine you see "ants climbing up the tree" on a menu, would you even try it? : )   The translated version of a title tend to be more closer to the actual and literal meaning so that it is clear to the audiences who are reading them. Hence the gap.

[Aja Koester]

Tonight Professor Dube discussed the 19^th century. The primary source titled, “Imperial Edict to the Board of Rites” expresses the Manchu demand for cutting hair. The new rulers demand that all Chinese subjects need to wear their hair in a Manchu tribal style with the top of the head shaved and the remaining hair braided in the back. The argument for this was unification. The edict uses specific language to describe this unification where the Emperor is the father and the citizens are his sons. They are described as part of the same body that must work together. The edict poses that, “If they are not as one then it will be as if they had two hearts” therefore they are unable to survive. This is an analogy of citizens who act as if they are part of another country and are not on the same page as their Emperor. I found this proclamation to be cleverly written using the language of a father and son rather than a ruler and subject because this brings an underlying sense of guilt if you do not cut your hair. It is as if you are going against your family rather than a distanced ruler. The entire order is clever as well, because it placed a physical demarcation on rebels so they could be recognized easily.

[Beverly Nettles]

It was an honor to hear live Han Dongfang speak on his film “We the workers.  What he shared and showed on film about the social economic condition of its workers was enlightening.  I especially enjoyed the film, a visual representation of how he went about convencing the people to unify for better wages and working conditions.   Its shameful how factory owner greed superces the need of its people; and how its government supportes and literally took brutal actions against those who opposed the established labor laws.  I only hope thing get better for the workers.

[Cristina Hernandez]

There is no doubt that this film was a great eye opener to the struggle of the Chinese workers.  I was surprised by the fact that they have to organize in unions and risk many things, including their jobs, to achieve better treatment and wages.  I was thinking that China was more focused on helping its workers and instead I see that foreign companies are taking advantage of the cheap labor and the high tolerance for the bad working conditions of the factory workers.  It is a shame that we are buying products manufactured in China and we are not aware of what is going on there.  

[Aja Koester]

After the film, Han Dongfan explained the film was not for the film industry, but to record the activism that went on throughout history so that in the future young people who have workers’ rights can remember what people went through to gain these rights. The film was a very realistic portrayal of the people in China. The style of it was unedited and raw, which seemed purposeful to show the audience the real life struggle that many people in China were going through. However, it was interesting that Dongfan made it very clear that his intention is NOT to build sympathy within white collared workers such as teachers or others who are not factory workers. He explained that white collared workers have too much to lose and are not truly willing to fight. Therefore, they cannot truly empathize with these blue collared workers in the film who have lost all hope and feel like fighting back at any cost is all they have left. While watching I assumed that the very raw approach to the film including the moments when workers had been physically abused and were interviewed while still bleeding was to build support, but it was surprising to me that this was not the major intent. While clearly Dongfan seemed to appreciate support, he did not see that this was the way to make a change. For him, true change comes from workers bargaining with their own bosses not necessarily through support of others. Rather, the intent of the film is for historical documentation purposes.

[Matthew Wong]

We must adhere to Sun Yat-sen's Three Principles of the People. A new China can only emerge after we abolish the imperial monarchy and establish a republic. China under a new republican government will include all of China's ethnicities, not only the Han majority. It's time to rise, rid of the monarchy, and build a new China. Only then can truly be the "Middle Kingdom" we have known for 5000 years! 

[Matthew Wong]

Chris, I like how you relate the industrial revolutions that take place in the West with China's industrial revolution today. Just like labor unions rose in the West during the 19th and 20th centuries, so too is labor rising in China today. I think the difference is that China is not a liberal society as was Europe and America. 

I found the film we watched interesting as I know very little about the labor movement in China today. I also found it interesting that Han Dongfang argued that the Communist Party would transform itself to a be a social democratic political party in the coming years. I think that is an interesting take, but I am not certain that China will head towards that direction, particulary under the leadership of Xi Jing Ping. 

[Matthew Wong]

Cindy, whenever I teach about the Industrial Revolution, I refer my students to what is happening in China today. I want them to see how history repeats itself. Many of students are from mainland China. Interestingly, some left the mainland because of the environmental pollution from China's industries. "We the Workers" provides an Eastern perpsective of collective bargaining. I think my students would find interest in that. 

[Eric Hoh]

I was truly humbled to be able to listen to and witness Han Dongfang's thoughts on his documentary and experiences. I was truly start struck to be in the same room as the man who has had such positive influence in the lives of many people who have become vulnerable to the lies of the government. What reallly stood out to me was that he saw the film more as something he hoped future Chinese people could watch in order to remember the struggles that occurred in order for them to experience the liberties that he believes they will surely have one day. Instead of being bitter or angry with the ways in which he was outcasted and treated by the Chinese government, he maintains a very balanced and compassionate stance towards China and his people, and he continues to work towards the installation of their rights and benefits to this day. 

[Jonathan Tam]

We the Workers was definitely an interesting look into the emerging role of advocacy and unions in China. It was interesting to juxtapose the emergency of unions in China to how well established they are in the United States to the point where bargaining and dictating of things like teacher contracts can occur. I really appreciated Han Dongfang’s discussion of the film’s purpose as well as his approach to worker’s rights as a social justice issue that our country has had a long history facing.

[Jonathan Tam]

Among all the information in the readings, the information I found most interesting was the emerging role of students at the decline of the Qing dynasty. Many were followers of Sun Yatsen’s teaching in countries like Japan, using their education in those areas to teach the successes of reformation. Some of the articles even go so far as to say that Sun Yatsen’s education was influential through his time in London. Hearing much of this for the first time, I definitely thought that the debate really humanized the experience and the voice of people because those same voices are very much present in our country today. There is American interest in rebelling or reforming or maintaining the status quo and those voices were resonated through the debate.

[Valerie Doby]

“We the Workers” was a great film.  We have heard about low wages and poor working conditions in factories around the world that make products we consume in America.  This film help me see the impact on the lives of the workers and how they are fighting for rights that should be basic rights given to all workers.  I think all Americans need to see this film.  If we push companies we can ensure that products that we buy are made in factories that treat their workers in any country with respect, decent wages, and keep their promises to those workers.  

 

The debate was good.  This is something I use in my class regularly and my students like it.  It gives them a chance to do research and see what happened in history from multiple sides.  It helps them remember much better than a lecture, reading, or a slideshow.

 

[Jonathan Tam]

Having grown up in urban settings for most of my life (New York and Los Angeles), I have always been intrigued by rural life. But, when Dube shared information on Uyghurs and their nomadic lifestyle across central / west China, it was certainly even more intriguing to hear about the role of islam in China. Where the lens tends to be more so on the happenings of east China, the mixture of culture occurring in places like Xinjiang with mongols and eurasians seems to be far from the mixture of culture faced in the east. I’m certainly left very curious as to how aspects like food, politics, and language have evolved in this region.

[Author]

Posts