Menu
close
Home › Forums › Teaching About Asia Forums › Asia in My Classroom › teaching about post-1949 china
Anonymous.
clay dubeI was unaware of The Chairman prior to Richard's post about this Gregory Peck film. According to the capsule description on the INMD website, Peck is sent to China to get the secrets to a newly developed agricultural enzyme. His American bosses, however, take action to be sure that he can't give up any secrets of his own. The film was directed by J. Lee Thompson and was written by Ben Maddow based on a novel by Jay Richard Kennedy.
A fuller plot description is available from the
NY Times.
Roger Ebert reviewed it for the Chicago SunTimes on August 19, 1969:
http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19690819/REVIEWS/908190301/1023
Ebert uses his review to complain that "heroes have gotten too noble."
Interested in hearing some dialogue from what sounds like a rather bizarre Cold War film (playing on the Sino-Soviet dispute, for example)? A website devoted to all things Peck has samples. Here them at:
http://www.jefflangonline.com/peck/sounds/
I don't know that students can learn much about China from this film, but certainly they can learn what the filmmakers thought about China and the political climate of the age.[Edit by="Clay Dube on Oct 23, 6:29:41 PM"][/Edit]
clay dubeThe recently published Jung and Halliday biography of Mao Zedong has attracted enormous popular and scholarly attention. Jung Chang is the author of Wild Swans, a best-selling book about the experience of several generations of women in her family. Halliday, her husband, is a Russian historian with the language and research skills needed to mine recently opened Russian archival sources.
Most reviews of the book have noted that new information is brought forward, but most have also noted that the authors routinely reach for the most damning possible interpretation of this information.
reviews of the book
Sunday Times of London
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2102-1626700,00.html
The Guardian
http://books.guardian.co.uk/reviews/history/0,6121,1498719,00.html
Time Magazine
http://www.time.com/time/asia/magazine/article/0,13673,501050613-1069136,00.html
radio interview
Australian Broadcasting Corp.
http://www.abc.net.au/queensland/stories/s1420192.htm
The effort to sweep away much of Mao's economic and social policies has been dramatic, meriting book titles such as Richard Baum's Burying Mao. But the Chairman, who died a generation ago in Sept. 1976 still looms large. His picture rises above Tiananmen, his resting place is at the very center of the capital, his face is on the 100 yuan note, and -- according to a recent article published in the China Daily, he is now (or rather, Mao impersonators) are now hitting the wedding circuit. See http://www2.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-10/21/content_486606.htm
The official 1980s CCP assessment of Mao concluded that while he made tragic mistakes (the two main examples being launching the Great Leap Foward and Cultural Revolution), overall, his contribution to creating contemporary China was quite positive and critically important.
How should we portray Mao Zedong and his era?[Edit by="Clay Dube on Oct 23, 6:28:39 PM"][/Edit]
AnonymousThe reviews on the new book about Mao are eye opening. The book states that Mao was responsible for the deaths of over 70 million people while he was acquiring or in power. However, it seems that Mao is still revered as a cultural hero in China. Some of the accusations sound like cold war rhetoric. However, one cannot deny the purges and the failed economic and agricultural programs, along with the purges of Mao's regimes, caused the death of millions. I believe that Mao was one of the most interesting and influential histrorical figures of the 20th century. Was Mao the butcher or the savior of Modern china? Is it possible that he was both?
AnonymousRefering once again to "The Chairman" I can see the scene between Mao and Gregory Peck's character as a discussion point. Was the use of the "Little Red Book" education or brainwashing? What was the overall result for the Chinese people...Did it lead to the expansion of 21st century China as an economic power?
And, the movie's plot cannot be concidered anything more than a cold war spy/ action flick.
AnonymousI think dsenteno's assessment is right on, Mao was both the butcher and the savior of modern China. Would either South Korea or Taiwan have become economic powers if the Nationalists had remained in power on the mainland? I think they would have not had the reason to strive for success without the threat of a communist China on the doorstep. Does man ever strive for more without adversity?
AnonymousThe other day one of my students came to class with a Mao t-shirt on. (Black shirt with a large image of Mao on the front). I asked him why he was wearing it and he said that he thought that communism was cool. I just laughed and a few days later he gave me my own black Mao t-shirt. Gee thanks.
The question is, should students in the US celebrate Mao? He was responisble for the death of anywhere between 30 and 70 million of his own people. These numbers are staggering and much higher than Hitler and Stalin. However, China is becoming a super-power and Mao appears to be greatly admired in China.
AnonymousI know that this is probably a more simplistic response than your question deserves but here goes. No. U.S., or any other students for that matter, should not celebrate Mao. He and his government was responsible for millions of deaths and all in all was just bad governance. Learn about Mao and try to understand Mao yes, but wear t-shirts glorifying him? Well, that just seems misplaced.
clay dubeJung Chang, best known for Wild Swans and her husband Jon Halliday, best known as a historian of Russia, have produced Mao: The Unknown Story which has stimulated an enormous discussion in Chinese studies and dozens of reviews in newspapers, magazines, and journals. It follows two other recent biographies of the Chinese leader by noted historian Jonathan Spence (Amazon listing) and Philip Short (Burns review in NY Times, free registration required), but also draws most extensively on archival evidence not previously available. It is a sweeping story of modern China, devoting considerable energy to challenging nearly any positive depiction of Mao. Some of what is discussed has been previously suggested by Mao intimates such as his physician Li Zhisui (Amazon listing).
[BTW - links to Amazon shouldn't be seen as an endorsement over other booksellers, simply recognition of it as a convenient info source.]
Here are some links to opinions/interviews regarding the Chang/Halliday book:
NY Times review by Kristof
NY Times review by Kakutani
London Review of Books review by Nathan
Amazon, includes brief interview
Powells, includes snippets of print reviews of the book
Defending China's national sovereignty, progress in improving rural living standards, extending education and health care? These are some of the points Mao's proponents and many of his critics would note about his rule. His detractors and others would also note his capriciousness, his disasterous economic policies, and the devastating political movements he launched.
How are we to teach about controversial figures such as Mao? Might it be useful to expose students to snippets from various biographies about the same event/decision/characteristic? Might we also clip depictions from various points in time (e.g., Mao in Time in 1960, 1972, 2000)? This would certainly stimulate discussion about how new information and experiences generate new points of view.
Incidentally, Mao was included in Time's 100 People of the Century issue:
Time 100 The entry was written by Yale's Spence.
Let's keep this discussion alive and broaden it to discuss other figures from recent Asian history.
AnonymousWow, what's up with the Mao hate?
If I could just play demagogue's advocate for a second, I can't think of an American president (or Chinese ruler for that matter) whose hands are clean of blood. Does that mean we can't study or even respect their accomplishments? Yes, I'm as opposed to mass murder as the next guy, but isn't there something to be said for someone able to lead a national revolution based on a radically new political system? We never hear about how many men Washington killed.
And I'll tell you, I'd rather see a kid wearing a T-shirt with Mao on it than one with 50 Cent. What's his philosophy again? Get Rich or Die Trying? Communism just seems to go down a little smoother.
Maybe it's me,
m@x
AnonymousWow!
50 Cent worse than Mao? How many people has 50 Cent killed? 0 How many did Mao kill? Up to 70 million including thousands of Americans duirng the Korean War when China got involved after we beat back the North Korean communists to the border of China.
I'm not a big fan of rap music, but it's pretty harmless compared to genocide.
AnonymousI guess I was trying to say that if we could (just for a second) put aside the g'cide, there's much to be said for Mao's ability to rise to power through effective mass communication and self-promotion. I think more interesting than choosing a villain to hate (Hitler, Mao, Bush, etc.) is exploring how average everyday people like you and me are able to stand idly by as a cruel and genocidal dictatorship is born. How does that publicwide perception shift from "my leaders have my best interests at heart" to "this crazy wacko's gonna kill everyone who disagrees with him so I'd better not speak up"? I wonder if it has something to do with the media's effect on culture?
Just sayin's all. It's not like I'm planning a forced march or anything.
And are you sure Fiddy ain't kilt nobahdy? Cuz he's a GANGSTA!
m@o(x)
AnonymousI don’t think that anyone questions the importance of studying Mao or that anyone questions his relevance. But looking back at the original question “should students in the US celebrate Mao?” Specifically should students wear t-shirts glorifying him? I am going to guess that this glorification is ignorant of the facts. That is precisely why Mao should be studied. What student would wear a t-shirt with Hitler on it and call it “cool”?
clay dubeI missed the broadcast of Tank Man on PBS on Tuesday, but will be able to see the full program via the net starting on Friday.
Tank Man was broadcast just a week ahead of the visit of the Chinese Communist Party General Secretary to the U.S. It recounts the events leading to the famous stand off between this man and a line of tanks. It discusses whether or not the memory of Tiananmen has been extinguished.
clay dubeDistinguished Harvard political scientist Roderick MacFarquhar has written several volumes on the origins of the cultural revolution. He spoke on Oct. 20, 2005 at Berkeley on what remains of Mao's revolution in today's China. His presentation can be seen at the UCTV website:
AnonymousDr. MacFarquar's insights about the cultural revolution and it's impact on modern China reveals alot about the current state of affairs there. He is somewhat generous in his appraisal of Mao and his role in Chinese history considering that he is directly responsible for the deaths of 30 or more million of his countrymen in a few short years. He views Mao as a kind of modern Confucian figure who serves as the legitamizer for todays communist party which still is the only institution which keeps China's billions unified. At the same time he admits that Mao and all his mad policies will one day be seen by the Chinese for what they are but until than, the current leadership is certain to keep his good name intact. What's most interesting is that he sees todays China as a country in a state of extreme uncertainty, groping for some reason/ideology that can unify it's masses once again. With the collapse of Marxist utopianism, and vague recollections of the Confucian/Buddhist past, modern China will have to choose from somewhere, Taiwan, Korea, Japan, Singapore, the US, or from Heaven, a model course for it's future and a unifying purpose. [Edit by="jashworth on May 12, 11:59:45 AM"][/Edit]