The Melbourne Film Festival's Pride and Prejudice
After reading about the hacking of the Melbourne International Film Festival's website in The Age last week, I went looking on Baidu News for some news on the subject. The site had only been hacked a few hours earlier, so most of the articles I found only stated that the site had been hacked, probably by Chinese hackers, and replaced with a Chinese flag and some slogans in English.
Digging a little deeper I found an opinion piece published in the forum section of the Eastday website, originally from Xinhuanet, which I've translated below.
The Melbourne Film Festival's Pride and Prejudice
Source: Xinhua Net
(http://news.xinhuanet.com/comments/2009-07/26/content_11770538.htm)
Author: Feng Chuangzhi
26/7/2009, 10:43am
In order to protest against the 28th Melbourne International Film Festival for screening and publicising an "East Turkistan" separatist documentary film, Chinese directors Jia Zhangke, Zhao Liang and Hong Kong (China) director Tang Xiao have, of their own accord, withdrawn all films that were to be screened in the Melbourne International Film Festival in mid August. The films withdrawn include Perfect Life directed by Tang Xiaobai, Cry Me a River directed by Jia Zhangke, and Petition, directed by Zhao Liang. People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) member and noted director Feng Xiaoning said angrily: "The Melbourne organising committee's actions are undoubtedly an open provocation."
In withdrawing the films from screening, Jia Zhangke, Zhao Liang and Tang Xiaobai represent the protest of the Chinese people against the "pride and prejudice" of the Melbourne Film Festival.
In the Western arts world there are those who often attack Chinese art productions for propagating mainstream values, whilst they on the other hand bring politics into their own artistic activities. These people not only flood their artistic activities with their own personal prejudice and ignorance, politically they also subvert the ideologies of other countries, openly trampling upon human rights and supporting terrorist influences. Some "elites" of the West have absolutely no understanding of the history, current situation or the truth of events in other countries. Their interest is in remaking other countries according to their own values, and humiliating other ethnic groups. In order to realise their political goals, they have no misgivings about whether their actions trample upon human rights or support terrorism. The Melbourne Film Festival is simply a small Australian film festival with no world standing. But their elaborate plan to take advantage of political events in order to expand their festival's influence goes to show that some Western artists will stop at nothing to enhance their own name and interests.
Under the pretence of the so-called "universal values" of "democracy, freedom, equality and fraternity", the West has long posed as "defender of human rights". Taking up a cloak of "culture", it attacks and stifles China and other countries with values different to its own. Anyone who protests or who refuses to submit to their rule is subject to their wanton mud-slinging and slander. The withdrawal of films by these Chinese directors expresses the rightful dissatisfaction against this hypocrisy and prejudice.
In the eyes of all Chinese people of all ethnicities, people like Rebiya Kadeer seek to split the country and plot terrorist activities. Allowing a person like Kadeer to freely walk Melbourne is equal and no different to a country recognising the legitimacy of a "terrorist group". In 2005, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed resolution 1624, strongly condemning actions that incite terrorism, and renouncing any attempt to defend or eulogise terrorist acts, further pointing out that these actions serve to incite further terrorist acts. Why is it, then, that the Melbourne International Film Festival turns a blind eye, and so enthusiastically exalts Kadeer, a woman who incites violent terror? This can only mean that the West judges with double standards. The West harbours a hidden resentment of the completely unified territory of China and its daily advancing prosperity, and constantly seeks to throw China's stable unity into disarray by propping-up these influences.
The economic and cultural fronts of Western society echo one another, and so Western society backs-up Rebiya Kadeer. But the Chinese people will not be afraid, as the schemes of people like Rebiya Kadeer cannot prevail. The decision of Chinese directors to withdraw all their films from the Melbourne International Film Festival in mid-August is a just and righteous act. This act also serves to demonstrate the Chinese people's integrity and resoluteness.
新华网:墨尔本电影节展现的傲慢与偏见
2009年7月26日 10:43
来源:新华网 作者:冯创志
为抗议第58届墨尔本国际电影节播放宣扬“东突”民族分裂分子的纪录片，中国电影导演贾樟柯、赵亮及中国香港导演唐晓白决定撤回准备在8月中上旬在墨尔本国际电影节上演的全部影片，其中包括唐晓白执导的电影《完美生活》，贾樟柯执导的《河上的爱情》以及赵亮执导的《上访》这3部影片。全国政协委员、知名导演冯小宁气愤地说：“墨尔本组委会的做法无疑是一种公然挑衅”。
贾樟柯、赵亮和唐晓白的“撤影”，代表了中国人民对墨尔本电影节傲慢与偏见的抗议。
西方艺术界的的一些人，常常攻击中国的艺术创作宣传主流价值观，而他们自己则在艺术活动中大搞政治，不仅在艺术活动中充斥着自己的偏见和愚昧，而且还在政治上对他国实施思想颠覆，公然践踏人权和支持恐怖势力。西方某些“精英” 对他国历史、现状或事件真相完全不了解，他们的兴趣是以自己的价值观去改造他国、羞辱其他民族，对于他们来说，为了达到政治目的，完全可以不顾忌自己的行为是在践踏人权、支持恐怖主义。墨尔本电影节是澳大利亚一个非常小的电影节，在世界上更加不入流，他们精心策划利用政治事件来扩大电影节本身的影响力，说明某些西方艺术家为了自身的名利，什么都干得出来。
西方长期以来打着“民主、自由、平等、博爱”等所谓“普世价值”的幌子，以“人权卫士”自居，用“文化”的外衣包装着，拿来打压中国和不同价值观的国家，只要谁向他们说不，谁不肯臣服于他们，就会被他们肆意地抹黑、中伤。中国导演的“撤影”表达的正是对这种虚伪和偏见的不满。
热比娅之流在中国各族人民心目中是分裂分子、恐怖活动的策划人。这样的人，行走于墨尔本，无异于等于某些国家承认“恐怖组织”的合法性。2005年，联合国安理会一致通过的第1624号决议，最强烈地谴责煽动恐怖行为的行径，并驳斥为恐怖行为辩解或美化（称颂）这些行为的企图，指出这样做会煽动更多的恐怖行为。为何墨尔本国际电影节对此视而不见，对煽动暴力恐怖的热比娅那么起劲热捧？这只能说明，西方社会对事物评判是有双重标准的，对中国的领土完整统一和蒸蒸日上一直心存不满，总想通过扶植某些势力达到扰乱中国安定团结局面的目的。
西方社会从经济与文化两条战线一唱一和，甘当热比娅的后盾。但中国人民不会怕，热比娅之流的图谋也不会得逞。中国电影导演决定撤回准备在8月中上旬在墨尔本国际电影节上演的全部影片，完全是正义之举，此举也从一个侧面展现了中国人的气节和决心。
Please note: I'm not a professional translator. This translation will contain errors.
Explanations:
Xinhuanet: Xinhuanet is the website of China's official news agency, the Xinhua (literally "New China") News Agency.
East Turkistan: "East Turkistan" is a name used by those who support independence for China's north-western Xinjiang (in Chinese literally "New Frontier") autonomous region.
Quotation Marks: When reporting on concepts or entities that the Chinese government doesn't recognise, Chinese news generally makes use of enclosing quotation marks ("") around the terms it doesn't agree with. Hence mainland Chinese news refers to the Taiwanese "President" or the Taiwanese "Ministry of Health", because the Chinese government does not consider Taiwan to be a country. Hence we also see here "East Turkistan" placed inside quotation marks. It seems to me as though this use of quotation marks may serve as a subtle form of ridicule, but that's only my own feeling.
Pride and Prejudice: I've seen this term used before when talking about why the iPhone is not yet available in China. The article's charge was (mainly) that it was because of the "pride and prejudice" of Apple and Steve Jobs. I can only presume that somewhere along the line Chinese writers and/or media picked up the term from the title of the book and started using it in news articles.
Digging a little deeper I found an opinion piece published in the forum section of the Eastday website, originally from Xinhuanet, which I've translated below.
The Melbourne Film Festival's Pride and Prejudice
Source: Xinhua Net
(http://news.xinhuanet.com/comments/2009-07/26/content_11770538.htm)
Author: Feng Chuangzhi
26/7/2009, 10:43am
In order to protest against the 28th Melbourne International Film Festival for screening and publicising an "East Turkistan" separatist documentary film, Chinese directors Jia Zhangke, Zhao Liang and Hong Kong (China) director Tang Xiao have, of their own accord, withdrawn all films that were to be screened in the Melbourne International Film Festival in mid August. The films withdrawn include Perfect Life directed by Tang Xiaobai, Cry Me a River directed by Jia Zhangke, and Petition, directed by Zhao Liang. People's Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) member and noted director Feng Xiaoning said angrily: "The Melbourne organising committee's actions are undoubtedly an open provocation."
In withdrawing the films from screening, Jia Zhangke, Zhao Liang and Tang Xiaobai represent the protest of the Chinese people against the "pride and prejudice" of the Melbourne Film Festival.
In the Western arts world there are those who often attack Chinese art productions for propagating mainstream values, whilst they on the other hand bring politics into their own artistic activities. These people not only flood their artistic activities with their own personal prejudice and ignorance, politically they also subvert the ideologies of other countries, openly trampling upon human rights and supporting terrorist influences. Some "elites" of the West have absolutely no understanding of the history, current situation or the truth of events in other countries. Their interest is in remaking other countries according to their own values, and humiliating other ethnic groups. In order to realise their political goals, they have no misgivings about whether their actions trample upon human rights or support terrorism. The Melbourne Film Festival is simply a small Australian film festival with no world standing. But their elaborate plan to take advantage of political events in order to expand their festival's influence goes to show that some Western artists will stop at nothing to enhance their own name and interests.
Under the pretence of the so-called "universal values" of "democracy, freedom, equality and fraternity", the West has long posed as "defender of human rights". Taking up a cloak of "culture", it attacks and stifles China and other countries with values different to its own. Anyone who protests or who refuses to submit to their rule is subject to their wanton mud-slinging and slander. The withdrawal of films by these Chinese directors expresses the rightful dissatisfaction against this hypocrisy and prejudice.
In the eyes of all Chinese people of all ethnicities, people like Rebiya Kadeer seek to split the country and plot terrorist activities. Allowing a person like Kadeer to freely walk Melbourne is equal and no different to a country recognising the legitimacy of a "terrorist group". In 2005, the United Nations Security Council unanimously passed resolution 1624, strongly condemning actions that incite terrorism, and renouncing any attempt to defend or eulogise terrorist acts, further pointing out that these actions serve to incite further terrorist acts. Why is it, then, that the Melbourne International Film Festival turns a blind eye, and so enthusiastically exalts Kadeer, a woman who incites violent terror? This can only mean that the West judges with double standards. The West harbours a hidden resentment of the completely unified territory of China and its daily advancing prosperity, and constantly seeks to throw China's stable unity into disarray by propping-up these influences.
The economic and cultural fronts of Western society echo one another, and so Western society backs-up Rebiya Kadeer. But the Chinese people will not be afraid, as the schemes of people like Rebiya Kadeer cannot prevail. The decision of Chinese directors to withdraw all their films from the Melbourne International Film Festival in mid-August is a just and righteous act. This act also serves to demonstrate the Chinese people's integrity and resoluteness.
新华网:墨尔本电影节展现的傲慢与偏见
2009年7月26日 10:43
来源:新华网 作者:冯创志
为抗议第58届墨尔本国际电影节播放宣扬“东突”民族分裂分子的纪录片，中国电影导演贾樟柯、赵亮及中国香港导演唐晓白决定撤回准备在8月中上旬在墨尔本国际电影节上演的全部影片，其中包括唐晓白执导的电影《完美生活》，贾樟柯执导的《河上的爱情》以及赵亮执导的《上访》这3部影片。全国政协委员、知名导演冯小宁气愤地说：“墨尔本组委会的做法无疑是一种公然挑衅”。
贾樟柯、赵亮和唐晓白的“撤影”，代表了中国人民对墨尔本电影节傲慢与偏见的抗议。
西方艺术界的的一些人，常常攻击中国的艺术创作宣传主流价值观，而他们自己则在艺术活动中大搞政治，不仅在艺术活动中充斥着自己的偏见和愚昧，而且还在政治上对他国实施思想颠覆，公然践踏人权和支持恐怖势力。西方某些“精英” 对他国历史、现状或事件真相完全不了解，他们的兴趣是以自己的价值观去改造他国、羞辱其他民族，对于他们来说，为了达到政治目的，完全可以不顾忌自己的行为是在践踏人权、支持恐怖主义。墨尔本电影节是澳大利亚一个非常小的电影节，在世界上更加不入流，他们精心策划利用政治事件来扩大电影节本身的影响力，说明某些西方艺术家为了自身的名利，什么都干得出来。
西方长期以来打着“民主、自由、平等、博爱”等所谓“普世价值”的幌子，以“人权卫士”自居，用“文化”的外衣包装着，拿来打压中国和不同价值观的国家，只要谁向他们说不，谁不肯臣服于他们，就会被他们肆意地抹黑、中伤。中国导演的“撤影”表达的正是对这种虚伪和偏见的不满。
热比娅之流在中国各族人民心目中是分裂分子、恐怖活动的策划人。这样的人，行走于墨尔本，无异于等于某些国家承认“恐怖组织”的合法性。2005年，联合国安理会一致通过的第1624号决议，最强烈地谴责煽动恐怖行为的行径，并驳斥为恐怖行为辩解或美化（称颂）这些行为的企图，指出这样做会煽动更多的恐怖行为。为何墨尔本国际电影节对此视而不见，对煽动暴力恐怖的热比娅那么起劲热捧？这只能说明，西方社会对事物评判是有双重标准的，对中国的领土完整统一和蒸蒸日上一直心存不满，总想通过扶植某些势力达到扰乱中国安定团结局面的目的。
西方社会从经济与文化两条战线一唱一和，甘当热比娅的后盾。但中国人民不会怕，热比娅之流的图谋也不会得逞。中国电影导演决定撤回准备在8月中上旬在墨尔本国际电影节上演的全部影片，完全是正义之举，此举也从一个侧面展现了中国人的气节和决心。
Please note: I'm not a professional translator. This translation will contain errors.
Explanations:
Xinhuanet: Xinhuanet is the website of China's official news agency, the Xinhua (literally "New China") News Agency.
East Turkistan: "East Turkistan" is a name used by those who support independence for China's north-western Xinjiang (in Chinese literally "New Frontier") autonomous region.
Quotation Marks: When reporting on concepts or entities that the Chinese government doesn't recognise, Chinese news generally makes use of enclosing quotation marks ("") around the terms it doesn't agree with. Hence mainland Chinese news refers to the Taiwanese "President" or the Taiwanese "Ministry of Health", because the Chinese government does not consider Taiwan to be a country. Hence we also see here "East Turkistan" placed inside quotation marks. It seems to me as though this use of quotation marks may serve as a subtle form of ridicule, but that's only my own feeling.
Pride and Prejudice: I've seen this term used before when talking about why the iPhone is not yet available in China. The article's charge was (mainly) that it was because of the "pride and prejudice" of Apple and Steve Jobs. I can only presume that somewhere along the line Chinese writers and/or media picked up the term from the title of the book and started using it in news articles.