« MIT官方网站更新首页甚至决定暂停"视觉文化"网页 | 首页 | 首位六四死难者获中国政府赔偿 »
星期日, 四月 30, 2006
老摇：Perdue公开信和我的看法（附Perdue公开信）
发信人: laoyao (老摇), 信区: ChinaNews
标 题: Perdue公开信和我的看法
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sat Apr 29 13:19:00 2006)
他发表了一封《给MIT中国学生的公开信》，第一段简介了事情经过，并说：“这封信主要是写给发起抗议的来自中华人民共和国的研究生。当然我知道并非所有MIT的中国学生都支持这些活动，但我希望你们密切注意他们的活动所指。”
第二段是对中国学生的恭维。
第三段是讲他长期从事东亚研究，包括中日冲突，并说：“因此，我对这些抗议深感不安，因此它们会毁掉建设性对话的可能性。”
第四段声明他不代表Dower和Miyagawa教授或MIT官方。
第五到十段是关键：
“视觉文化”网站放上那些图片，不是为了辱华，而是一个研究和教育项目的一部分。在每幅照片旁边，都有很长的文字说明。在过去的两年里，Dower和Miyagawa花了很长时间，尽可能清楚地解释这些材料。他们这次很大度地为这些图片产生的误解表示遗憾，但他们其实什么也没有做错。
这次事件不是无意冒犯，而是故意误解。在诠释历史时，文本就是一切。有些学生从几百幅照片和相关文字说明中挑出一幅，在互联网上传播。这种极不负责任的行为才是造成这次风波的根本原因。干这事的人们到现在也没有对他们造成的痛苦表示歉疚，也似乎并没有认识到他们行为的后果。
他们所取的照片的说明是“暴行清兵斩首之图”。John Dower对图上的日文解释和分析如下：
“然而，这个题材，和地上被砍下的人头，形成了一副极为可怕的景象......即使在一个多世纪后的今天，这种辱蔑仍然令人震惊。哪怕仅仅从种族偏见这个角度看，它对中国人的鄙视程度也不在当时欧美的反亚种族主义的任何材料之下——对日本人来说，这简直象是西化的必要一步：采用白人的意象，但把自己排除在外。这个毒种在1894－95年间的暴行里就已种下，当四十年后天皇的士兵和航手再次对中国发动战争时，它将暴发为全面暴行。”
John Dower很清楚地指出了，这是一副令人震惊的、种族主义图片，是西方反亚种族主义的镜像，并播下日后引起日本残暴的侵华战争的“毒种”。任何读过这些话的人，绝无可能会错认为这幅画是对日本帝国主义的认同。
因此我认为，那些不附文字说明就传播图片的人是出于恶意。他们想要煽动起反日仇恨，以达到自己的政治目的。由于John Dower一直是所有学者中对亚洲人遭受的种族主义痛苦最敏感的一个，那些人拿他的工作来作为实现自己目的的工具就尤其可耻。这里没有任何借口可找。
第十一段说中国学生的要求无法接受。
第十二段说Dower的立场公正。
第十三段说你们对历史所知不多。
第十四段说“视觉艺术”里的材料并未宣扬日本帝国主义。“我们不能忽视它们（指版画在当时日本）的威力，我们必须要解释它。压制不能帮助我们理解它们。”
第十五段讲学术自由。
第十六段讲甲午战后中国向日本学习的历史。
第十七段讲鲁迅也是看了日俄战争的图片后弃医从文，“他的杰出短篇小说和杂文并非通俗化的反日仇恨，而是对中国国民性的深刻和激烈反思。”
最后一段讲他对中国学生的期望，不要“狭隘的、自我中心的义愤”，而要。“理智的、开放的智识方法。”
我对这封公开信的看法是：基本同意，下发至大队基层生产队员学习讨论，圈。
他的言辞有些激烈，但我觉得现在我们就需要这样一刀。事情很清楚，这场风波从头到尾就是煽动起来的。MIT主页上的那张照片和说明（http: //www.blackshipsandsamurai.com/spotlight/vc_spotlight.html，如果被撤下了的话，我在这里有备份：http: //mywebpages.comcast.net/ruoke/laoyao/misc/japan/MITVisualizingCultures.htm），根本就没有任何出格之处。可能是有人从那个link点击到“视觉文化”的网页，然后一眼看见那些图片，就开始热血上涌，头脑让位于骨髓，条件反射地发贴煽动了。
其他看到这个图片的人反应也都类似。大部分人都没仔细看文字说明，看了的也是一厢情愿地解释，抓住介绍中的当时日本的辱华思想，一口咬定那就是作者本人的思想，或者至少是改头换面的夹带私货，狡猾狡猾地潜移默化地宣扬军国主义。
课程上方明明写着Dower的大名，字体还很大，可大部分人还是想当然地认为那是日裔教授的手笔，可见他们粗心大意、只看见自己想看见的东西到了何等地步。
辱华图片＋日本人＋断章取义的辱华文字，这场风波就轻易地被煽动起来了。
还好大学都是liberal的地方，教授遇到这种事，第一反应都是退让，因此两教授也表示了“deep regret”和“genuinely sorry”，并表示会和中国人社区讨论修改那些文字材料。
又还好MIT CSSA不象大多数人那样冲昏了头脑，而是理智、平和地和校方交涉，最后取到了对中国人社区最有利的结果。
但是事情还没有结束：
1）那些网页只是被暂时撤下，终究还是会放回去的，那么文字说明将怎样修改？有些人看来非得每句话都谴责一遍日本才能满意，还有些人则非得每句话都谴责一遍日本才能看得懂，但这显然不可能。我预计将会是些表面文章，基本不会有大的本质改动。
2）Purdue教授的这封公开信又提供了新的炮火和炮火目标。因为是写给全体中国学生的，MIT CSSA势必要回应这封公开信。这封信的道理是对的，但言辞比较严厉，MIT CSSA如何不卑不亢、有理有节地应对，可是件苦差事了。不过从他们此前的表现来看，我相信他们会不辱使命。
3）很多人对MIT CSSA的声明很不满意，认为远没有达到他们所期望的结果，因此呼吁继续闹下去。他们还会翻出什么新花样？我预计大概也就是闹腾一阵子就歇了。毕竟MIT CSSA已经争取到最好的结果，MIT校方不可能再做其他让步了。
总的来说，这是中国网络民族主义的又一次典型演出，完全遵循了故意歪曲地煽风点火->条件反射地星火燎原－>事实逐渐水落石出－>灰头土脸地结局的标准剧情。幸亏这次发生在海外，有MIT CSSA这样的知道如何在现代文明社会下操作的组织来出面应对（faint，这是我第几次表扬他们了？我得声明一下，我没有任何亲戚朋友或梦中情人在MIT CSSA），用理智平和的办法使得这次风波得到妥善的解决。如果没有他们的出色应对，我看我们不但争不到什么尊严，反倒会让我们因浮躁虚浅的“义和团”老毛病而再次丢脸。
另一个可能收获是，大概以后类似事件会少发生些了。虽然我对大多数民族主义愤青仍然不抱指望，但也许会有一部分人能从此事开始学会理智思考吧。以后再有类似事件发生时，也许会有更多的人会更仔细地弄清楚事情来龙去脉再发言。
最后还得骂一句那些瞎起哄的中文媒体，事实都搞不清楚，就凭道听途说，Copy & Paste乱发报道。一点基本功课都不做，连“Throwing off Asia”都给翻成了“逐鹿亚洲”，还好意思在那里写关于这次事件的报道。
---------------------------------------------------
愿《美国草根政治日记》销量百万，永垂不朽！
---------------------------------------------------
博客：http://spaces.msn.com/members/laoyao91/
主页：http://www.laoyao.info
Open Letter to Chinese Students at MIT
Peter C. Perdue
April 28, 2006
Recently, a group of Chinese students at MIT have protested pictures of the Sino-Japanese war which were posted on the MIT web site as part of the research project “Visualizing Cultures” conducted by Professors John Dower and Shigeru Miyagawa. The protest has included critical email messages addressed to Prof. Miyagawa, group discussion with the faculty and members of the MIT administration, and a list of demands passed out at a meeting on April 26. Even though the protests are so far only verbal, they include extremely abusive messages directed at distinguished scholars of the Institute and demands for the suppression of free academic research. I am writing to you collectively in response to these activities. I address my remarks primarily to the graduate students from the People’s Republic of China who have initiated these protests. I hasten to add that I am sure that not all the Chinese students at MIT approve of these activities, but I hope you will pay close attention to their implications.
You are some of the best and brightest young people of China, who have come to MIT in order to pursue education mainly in scientific and technological subjects with the leading researchers in the world. Many of you, I am sure, plan to return to China to use the skills you learn here to help China become a truly modern country. I respect your dedication to your studies and your deep concern for the honor of your country.
I have spent twenty-five years at MIT teaching East Asian history to Chinese and American students, trying to engage them in critical discussion of the complex relationships between China, Japan, and the world from the sixteenth to twentieth centuries. I have dedicated my professional life to improving mutual understanding of what are often very painful subjects on which people hold passionate views. But even the most painful events deserve reasoned, careful, and open discussion if we are to prevent future tragedies. Therefore, I am deeply disturbed by these recent protests, because they threaten to destroy possibilities for productive dialogue.
Although some of you may find my views difficult to accept, I must present them honestly and directly. I will add that I write only for myself and do not claim to represent the opinions of Profs. Dower and Miyagawa or the MIT administration.
The images posted on the “Visualizing Cultures” website were not put there in order to offend. They are an integral part of an ongoing research and educational project which includes lengthy textual explanations that accompany each picture. John and Shigeru have put many hours of their time over the past two years into making the meaning of these materials as clear as possible. They have very graciously expressed regret over the misinterpretation of this images, but they did nothing wrong in the first place.
This is not a case of unintentional insensitivity, but of deliberate misrepresentation. In historical interpretation, context is everything. Some students ripped one picture alone out of hundreds of pictures and accompanying textual explanation and broadcast it on the internet. This highly irresponsible act is what caused the uproar in the first place. Those who perpetrated this act have not expressed any remorse for the pain they have caused, nor do they seem to recognize the implications of their acts.
The picture they took has the caption “Illustration of the Decapitation of Violent Chinese Soldiers.” John Dower’s textual explanation paraphrases the Japanese writing on the image and analyzes it as follows:
“The subject itself, however, and the severed heads on the ground, made this an unusually frightful scene…Even today, over a century later, this contempt remains shocking. Simply as racial stereotyping alone, it was as disdainful of the Chinese as anything that can be found in anti-Oriental racism in the United States and Europe at the time – as if the process of Westernization had entailed, for Japanese, adopting the white man’s imagery while excluding themselves from it. This poisonous seed, already planted in violence in 1894-95, would burst into full atrocious flower four decades later, when the emperor’s soldiers and sailors once again launched war against China.”
John Dower explains very clearly that this is a racist, shocking image, that it mirrors Western racism against all Asians, and that it sowed the “poisonous seed” which led to the atrocious Japanese war in China. Anyone who read these words could not possibly mistake the image for an endorsement of Japanese imperialism.
Therefore I conclude that those who broadcast the image without its context had malicious motives. They intended to whip up anti-Japanese hatred in order to promote a political agenda. Since John Dower has been the most sensitive of all scholars of Asia to the pain of racism, the fact that they took his work as the tool of their project is especially despicable. There is no excuse for it.
Some of the students presented demands presented at the meeting on April 26 which are simply unacceptable by the ordinary standards of American academic life. They include: removing the website on Visualizing Cultures, apologizing to the Chinese community, canceling academic workshops scheduled as part of this research project, and revising the text and images to accord with the preferences of the students. Email messages from some MIT alumni have even called for Professors Dower and Miyagawa to be fired. In order to calm the situation, the MIT administration and Professors Dower and Shigeru have conceded some of these demands, while insisting on their own integrity. I respect their decision, but let me explain why, even though I understand your anger, I find these demands unacceptable.
MIT hires to its faculty only scholars of the highest caliber. When I was the head of the History Faculty, we hired John Dower after a national search indicated that he was the most outstanding scholar of Japanese history in the country. He has won many prizes to confirm that judgment. No one I know is more deeply committed to the empathetic understanding of the peoples of Asia than John Dower. Professor Miyagawa deserves equal respect.
You, despite your passion, are not specialists in East Asian history. Like any field in the sciences or engineering, historical study requires intensive concentration, acquisition of essential research skills, careful study of documents, and thoughtful, clear, writing. Those of you who think that you know the history of East Asian better than these distinguished scholars lack the authority to make this claim. No one so far has presented any evidence that the materials presented on the Visualizing Cultures are mistaken or biased. It is disrespectful of the dedication of serious scholars to make such emotional charges based on no evidence.
Contrary to the accusations of the protesters, the materials on “Visualizing Cultures” do not glorify Japanese imperialism. The visual images and the textual explanation describe and analyze the power of Japanese propaganda about the war. But to describe is not to condone. The text by John Dower makes it very clear that these images are shocking, racist, and sadistic. They did, however, have a powerful impact on the Japanese public at the time. We cannot ignore their power, but we must explain it. Suppression will not help us to understand them.
The American university is based on the fundamental principle of academic freedom. Scholars must be allowed to engage in whatever research activities they find most challenging in their professional fields. Their work is subject to the judgment of their peers in their discipline, and they must respond to careful, reasoned criticism from professional colleagues. Scholars also engage in open dialogue with students and the general public in order to promote public awareness of their research. But ultimately, no one can tell them what to study, or demand that their work be suppressed.
The Sino-Japanese war indeed raises many crucial issues about East Asian history, and I would encourage you to explore them further. Consider the following paradox, for example: after its defeat by Japan, the Qing government of China sent thousands of Chinese students to Japan for advanced study, to the very country that had committed atrocities against it. In fact, the Qing began the foreign study program that has brought you students to the U.S. today. Why did it do so? Because the Qing rulers realized that China was backward and weak in the face of Western imperialism, and Japan had mastered crucial aspects of industrial production, military organization, and technological skill. Japan was much less alien to the Chinese than were the United States and Europe. Japan had borrowed the Chinese writing system for its own language, and both countries shared the common cultural heritages of Confucianism and Buddhism. The Chinese students in Japan picked up many of the key concepts of Western industrial nations through Japanese. Many of the most common Chinese modern political terms, like “minzhuzhuyi,” (democracy), come from Japanese (minshushugi). But Japan had created the term “minshu” from the classical Chinese terms for “people” (min) and “master (zhu).” This is just one illustration to show that the Chinese and Japanese peoples have been closely tied to each other for many centuries. The history of their relations cannot be reduced simply to a story of atrocities. To do so violates the historian’s responsibility to describe the entire truth of a complex relationship as best she can.
Ironically, Lu Xun, China’s greatest modern writer, faced a situation very similar to ours. While in Japan 1905 to study medicine, he saw a lantern slide depicting a Japanese soldier executing a Chinese “traitor.” Shocked by this brutality and by the failure of his fellow Chinese to respond to it, he resolved to become a writer in order to arouse his countrymen to resist oppression. His brilliant short stories and essays are not melodramatic expressions of anti-Japanese hatred. They are deeply insightful, biting comments on the character of the Chinese people themselves. Lu Xun turned his anger to productive purposes, for which he deserves honor.
You have a great responsibility as leading participants in China’s future. China faces huge challenges in its effort to become a wealthy, strong, democratic, and open nation. You should study not only technical subjects but also the crucial questions of social and historical change that will determine China’s future. There are many outstanding faculty at MIT and other universities who will gladly support your goals. Please open your minds to critical awareness of these most difficult questions in a spirit of reasoned, open intellectual discourse, not one of narrow, self-centered indignation.
I wish you well,
Sincerely,
Peter C. Perdue
T.T. and Wei Fong Chao Professor of Asian Civilizations
Professor of History
http://web.mit.edu/history/Open%20Letter%20to%20Chinese%20Students%20at%20MIT.pdf
02:55 发表在 MIT画报事件 | 查看全文 | 评论 (0)