Feminism in China

Feminism is relatively a new term that went popular during last 50 years. After thousands of years of suppression, women wanted to claim their rights that they believed should be equal to men. It is very interesting to take a review on feminism in China.

It is generally believed that women were subjects to men in ancient China. Well, this is partly true, especially after Song Dynasty when New-Confucianism came up holding the view that women should be kept from outdoors. This new kind of theory had its own social background, but there’s no denying that women suffered a lot by observing these rules. They were taught to obey their fathers, their husbands and their sons without freedom. Also they were banned from books and knowledge because “ignorance is the highest morality for women”. The only role they could play is, as quoted from the text, “the Angle in the house”. The social position of women didn’t get any better during the following dynasties. Foot-binding was invented in Qing Dynasty, which was one of the cruelest methods to control women in the world.

Last century has witnessed a major change in women’s role in society. The 1911 revolution, which overthrew Qing Dynasty and established Republic China, destroyed foot-binding and other feudal remains once and for all. Women were able to participate in politics or go to school now. A greater change took place in 1949, when People’s Republic of China was founded and Chairmen Mao declared the equality between men and women. But it is always difficult to break up a tradition and establish a new one. Even the leadership of the new country sometimes took it for granted that women should attend to their family and bear children for their husbands whatever their own wills were. So actually women didn’t play an equal role as men in society until the Reform and Opening-up in 1978. People all went to Shenzhen or Guangzhou to make their fortune regardless of their sex. The new leadership once said:” He who catches the mice is a good cat, whether he is black or white.” Fame and fortune began to be worshiped and old tradition was wash away. Women have eventually managed to show their talents in fields they like.

But during the last few years, a new term came up as “女权癌”, or “over-feminism”. Basically speaking, over-feminism believed that women should enjoy their rights without taking up social responsibilities. For example, traditionally speaking the bridegroom should buy his own house to marry his bride, and he should make money for the household. Over-feminists believed this practice shall be carried on and women should never worry about money which came from pockets of their husbands. But on the other hand traditionally speaking women should do the housecleaning or make dishes for the family. This over-feminists could not agree with. They would claim that women and men are equal and men should clean the house too. So we can see over-feminism is actually a double standard fallacy, where women would take all advantages without paying anything. But it is a pity that many people hold the same view now.

Feminism in China has made substantial progress now. But over-feminism is a threat to the real equality between men and women. I believe everyone should consider this issue carefully and make decisions after full thought.

Comments on A Rose For Emily

A Rose For Emily, written by William Faulkner, is a short but thrilling story that describes the tragic life of a southern lady named Emily, who was daughter of a large plantation owner. Short as the story is, it is quite exciting and attractive thanks to the deft narrative strategy and the vivid character Emily. The narrative strategy will be analyzed first as follows.

First of all, the author tells the story from a very special point of view, the first person plural “we”. “we” in the story doesn’t stand for a specific group of people, but represents people of the town as a whole. Therefore, “we” knows everything that happened in the town, regardless of time and place. In the meantime, with “we” showing up all the time, the audience will feel that they are really engaged as if they were living in that town, and that they are among “we”, who witnessed all the events themselves. In conclusion, because of the smart use of “we”, the story is told wide-rangingly without boring the audience.

Second, the author controlled timeline of the story brilliantly. Chapter I is actually the end of the story, but it shows up at the very beginning. At the end of Chapter I, the author switches back to the earlier time when Miss Emily was still alive, giving the audience a picture of what Miss Emily looks like. Chapter II, not naturally following the last chapter, describes events that happened thirty years earlier and introduces an interesting new topic – the disgusting smell in Miss Emily’s yard. Chapter III follows Chapter II chronologically, depicting Miss Emily’s feelings and other people reactions when she found “the one”. Chapter IV continues the plot of Chapter III, describes how Miss Emily’s sweetheart disappeared and how she became a loner. In the last chapter the audience are brought back to the current time being, when the town folk found out the truth. By switching the timeline back and forth, the author keeps the audience in suspense and makes them eager to find out the answer, which works efficiently.

Third, the author makes smart specifying and generalizing. For a story that lasts more than thirty years, it’s impossible to write every detail down. Instead, the author chooses several events carefully, which are written in great detail so that the audience are able to learn what the characters look like. In the meantime, the author describes other incidents as generally as possible, yet manages to ensure that nothing important is left out. By specifying and generalizing, the author makes the story detailed as well as concrete.

This is all about narrative strategies. Next I will draw some analysis on why Miss Emily lived such a tragic life.

First of all and most importantly, Miss Emily tragedy is stemmed from her upbringing and environment. It can be learned from the story that Miss Emily’s father, who considers himself superior and aristocratic, drove away many pursuers of his daughter. He was the reason why she became so cold and unfriendly. In the meantime, people in Miss Emily’s town also played an important role in the tragedy. When Miss Emily finally found her true love, her countrymen didn’t encourage, regarding it as a degradation, and even summoned her kin to stop her. All these outside factors are critically decisive for Miss Emily’s tragic life.

However, to some degree, Miss Emily herself is also to blame, although not very much. Miss Emily was so drowned in her solicitude that she refused to get in touch and communicate with other people, which only reinforced her loneliness. Lessons for the children and death of her father, along with many other opportunities where she could meet and chat with people, were dumped by her like a piece of garbage. Considering her upbringing and education, her behavior might be reasonable. However autism did contributed to her tragedy.

With tide of time going on and on nonstop, old traditions and old people are doomed to be washed away. How can we avoid, or at least slow down the journey to our unchangeable destiny? I think the most important two weapons are “adaptation” and “communication”. Adaption means getting used to new environment, new information and new technologies in life. Communication means exchanging thoughts and ideas with other people, especially friends, in order not to be omitted when they march towards new dawn of life. Armed with these two weapons, we can be young and fresh into the end of time.

                                                                                                                                                       Apr. 21st, 2016

A Comparison of Eastern and Western Education

When I was a little kid, I liked reading very much, and one of my favorite magazines is Readers. I remember two articles from Reader clearly, one is titled as “Competition of Chinese and Japanese Kids in Summer Camp”, which described different behaviors of Chinese kids and Japanese kids when they set out to climb a mountain together. Chinese kids were fatter, slower, and often turned to their parents for help while Japanese kids strived towards their destination without complaint. This article ignited an heated discussion on whether out kids have been spoiled and whether we should learn from the Japanese. The other article, however, described that American students wrote their essay entirely on their own. They did their research by referring to libraries, Internet and field trips and then they made brilliant summaries. The author of this article felt surprise because it was how he wrote his dissertation as an undergraduate in China. In the end, he strongly suggest that we should take up the same system.

These two articles left deep impressions on me, not because their ideas were fresh, but because their attitudes were so contradictory. One said we should be completely easternized while the other said we’d better be westernized. But I’m afraid neither path is easy. When talking about Eastern education, the words that come to mind might be “remember and recite”, “respect for teachers” or “obedience”. Traditionally speaking Eastern education has always been suffering from harsh criticism because it yields to little innovation and creation. Western education has often been regarded as a better way since it highly values independence and free thinking. It’s true that fruits of Western education are more attractive than those of Eastern education are. However, while Western education is overwhelming nowadays, it has certain byproducts. With independence and liberation comes a series of social problems, namely drug abuse, gun fighting, promiscuities and etc., which I believe far less under Eastern education.

Now you may think that I will propose that we should blend the advantages of Eastern education and Western education, to keep the obedience in Eastern education as well as the creativity in Western education. But it is simply not going to happen. All societies, be they in east or west, have been putting so much value on education in hope that it will bring out a better generation that they seem to forget that education is the outcome of a culture instead of the cause. Reshaping educational system, which is only a reflection of social culture, will never make a society, or a culture, change for the best. All the kids around the world have the same potential to be obedient or creative. What matters is how the culture allows him or her. So in short, education only brings out what society and culture wants. If we want a better generation, we should change ourselves to make a better environment rather than blindly hope a systematical reform can do all that.