U'mm, being bogged down in 3rd and 4th world countries isn't entirely relevant to the Chinese and the rest of the rapidly developing world, unless they don't mind becoming 3rd or 4th world countries.
I think one of the lessons of Iraq is that a country that was once the beacon of progress in the Arab world can be easily reduced to rubble by the American war machine, and all the President's men won't even try to put it together again.
Posted by phein at September 4, 2004 06:26 PMNice overview of possible diplomatic relations between our countries. I wonder which historical part we'll play in this pageant, Richelieu or the Hapsburgs?
Posted by phidipides at September 4, 2004 06:40 PMI saw "Hero" tonight also. Better, in my opinion, than "Crouching Tiger . . " I had an interesting discussion with my wife about the theme. (SPOILER ALERT). Because the asssasins agree not to kill the King of Qin, China is eventually united, ending the warlord period. It turns out that the King is not such a bad guy, even though he's killed many from the other regions in the attempt to unite China, because uniting China is such a worthwhile goal. But doesn't it also subjagate the people of the regions?
The film sort of raises the question of hegemony and national or regional aspirations, but comes down strongly for hegemony. No wonder that director Zhang, who was on the outs from the Chinese government for earlier critical films, has had no trouble with this one.
Political meaning aside, the film is gorgeous and intriguing. Oddly, the martial arts were, for us, much less interesting than the shifting realities that gradually are exposed between the fights.
Posted by Upper West at September 4, 2004 09:35 PMOne thing to remember about this movie: the King of Qin is a world-class screwup in Chinese history. Yes, he unified China, but his dynasty lasted only a couple of decades. One primary reason he didn't last is that he didn't tolerate criticism and ran a totalitarian government (even by imperial standards). The next dynasty, the Han, was obsessivly pragmatic, and lasted 400 years.
You can't do much worse than a twenty-year dynasty as a Chinese emperor. Every Chinese person is aware of that bit of history in the back of his or her mind.
Posted by sagesource at September 4, 2004 10:36 PMYou can't do much worse than a twenty-year dynasty as a Chinese emperor.
How 'bout a four-year presidential tenure that lays waste to American power that took two centuries to build?
Posted by Matt Davis at September 5, 2004 07:59 AM