Rethinking Political Incorrectness in Chinese Literature....

One thing that is really noticeable these days in China is the degree
of non-propagandistic political underpinning that goes into literary
works. In a country where even the news still contains plenty of
brain-washing tactics on respecting and loving the Party, the
(limited) freedoms of thoughts shown by even highly censored
publishing business here in China has been quite amazing. From
democracy to human rights, the usual suspects of government censorship
abound, leading the usual reader to wonder whether the book s/he is
reading somehow managed to slip through the censors.

Obviously, the answer is no. Government censorship is as systematic
as it has always been, reviewing every book that can possibly pack a
slight tinge of political ideas for dissidence. There can only be two
explanations for how "open" (relatively speaking, of course) the
publishing industry in China has become. The first is growing skill
of Chinese literati to hide "progressive" political ideas within
principles that are perfectly justifiable under the government-backed
political ideas.

In an era where the government speaks of "scientific development,"
"harmonious society," and "respecting people's rights," it is not
difficult to sniff out the hypocrisies in view of the vast differences
between the realities on the ground and the ideals of the government.
In proposing the methods that can perhaps make those government ideals
more realistic-sounding over time, the writers have given themselves a
chance to covertly navigate the verbal minefields of
government-denoted political taboos without setting off any
explosions.

Or better yet, the writers can force the government to not react even
if explosions are set off rather conspicuously. The Chinese people of
2010 are fully aware of how foreigners think of the Chinese government
and deficiencies of China with respect to these foreign lands. One
notable example, in front of Falun Gong protests in major tourist
sites in Hong Kong and Taiwan, Chinese tour leaders casually remarked,
"people here have freedoms of speech."

Even such a simple incident instills among the Chinese people that
sense of moral high ground the real "freedom of speech" holds. So,
when it is mentioned in literary works, popular support (or at least,
desensitization) makes it difficult for the government to crack down
without taking a dent in its perceived campaign to prop up the
people's "ethical purity." The same goes for concepts like
"democracy," "human rights," and so on.

It is as a classmate of mine wrote on his chat status, "in this age of
open information, an outright lie can only lead to humiliation."
China is not North Korea, people here have the Internet, relatively
abroad, and thus plenty of measures to get around government efforts
to block information. The only thing government can do is to mold
information to its advantage. Under such a tough reality, perhaps the
best thing it can do to implicit deviations from political orthodoxy
is to simply ignore it.

The second explanation is that the literati are now so sophisticated
that the very implications of political deviations cannot be seen by
the censors but can be comprehended by certain intelligent readers.
The book I just finished speaks of "wolf-like" sense of independence
as the very reason for formation of democratic societies. Maybe it
escaped the censors who did not see how how the Chinese can be anymore
"wolf-like" in this turbulent era of social unrest.

Or better yet, perhaps the message was actually consistent with the
thoughts of the CCP leaders. In a nod to the social effects of
economic reform, may be they are secretly admiring the revived
"wolf-like" determination of the author and the common people to think
and write for themselves without the need to blindly confirm party
propaganda. A country with different political thinking, after all,
as the book states, a modern "sea wolf," ready to have its energy
channeled to hungrily compete with other "sea wolves" for global
dominance.