Mar27 |
How Chinese opera “died out” on Xinhua |
China will redouble efforts to preserve its cultural heritage in arts and architecture. About 100 forms of Chinese opera, for instance, have died out in the past 60 years.
These “news” appeared in Foreign Policy’s (usually most helpful and informative) weekly China newsletter. It was reproduced from Xinhua, the official Chinese news agency. The question on my mind is: how many lazy journalists did it take to introduce these “news” to an American audience? To see what I mean, consider Jung Chang’s account of the fate of Chinese opera on the mainland during the “Cultural Revolution”:
‘Relaxation’ had become an obsolete concept: book, paintings, musical instruments, sports, cards, chess, teahouses, bars — all had disappeared. The parks were desolate, vandalized wastelands in which the flowers and the grass had been uprooted and the tame birds and goldfish killed. Films, plays, and concerts had all been banned: Mme Mao [Chairman Mao's wife] had cleared the stages and the screens for the eigth ‘revolutionary operas’ which she had had a hand in producing, and which were all anyone was allowed to put on. In the provinces, people did not dare to perform even these. One director had been condemned because the makeup he had put on the tortured hero of one of the operas was considered by Mme Mao to be excessive. He was thrown into prison for ‘exaggerating the hardship in the revolutionary struggle’. (in Chang’s biographical book “Wild Swans”, p. 415)
So that is how opera came to “die out” in China. When a news agency resorts to such passive language, chances are it is the work of amateurs, or of censors, artfully dodging the obvious question: how could all those operas just “die out”? Or, more to the point, who killed them? I would guess on the side of Xinhua news agency, a mixture of ignorance, self-censorship and inertia account for the absence of even a hint of background information in the article. In the case of the Foreign Policy editor who put it in the magazine’s newsletter, ignorance and laziness provide a sufficient explanation. To answer my initial question, then: it took two, one on each side of the Pacific. What a lovely division of labour this is, bringing us the best of vacuous Communist Party press releases every week. Thrilling.

