The House of Wangchuck---Monarchy of Bhutan

First picture: The current King of Bhutan; second picture: the Fifth and Fourth Kings of Bhutan

My Politics and Societies in South Asia course has led me to learn more about South Asian countries, who are neighbours of China but have nevertheless often being ignored by us. For instance, I viewed an interesing video on youtube about the tiny buddhist kingdom of Bhutan, which can be a great introductory document to learn more about 'the last Shangarila'.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcoQjoZ6toI&feature=fvst

The ruling monarchy in Bhutan is the House of Wangchuck, the youngest monarchy in the world which declared their rule only in 1907, the time when China would soon abolish her monarchy. The majority of Bhutanese are descendants of Tibetan buddhists and their main language is Dzongkha, a branch of Sino-Tibetan language system.

The current King of Bhutan is Jigme Khesar Namgyal Wangchuck, the fifth Dragon King (or 'Druk Gyalpo' as they call in Bhutan). He is the eldest son of the much revered Jigme Singye Wangchuck, who modernized Bhutan and coined the term of 'Gross National Happiness' in place of GDP. In 2006, King Jigme Singye Wangchuck abdicated his throne in favor of his son, who was 26 years old then, thus making the latter the youngest head of state worldwide. By that time, the fourth King also declared that Bhutan would begin to hold elections in 2008, which rendered this Himalayan kingdom 'the youngest democracy in the world'.

A King giving up his absolute power for democracy and reform in a world when despots cling to their power all sounds like fairytale, however, Bhutan is not a country without problems. The fear that they might one day be encroached by India and meet the same destiny as Sikkim made the Bhutanese government extremely racist. In the 80s, it is said that thousands of ethnic Napalease who had lived in Bhutan for decades were expelled from this country. They had nowhere to go but to seek refugee in Nepal.

Such xenophobia of Bhutan made me think of the depiction of an imagined Shangarila by the Chinese poet Tao Yuanming （陶渊明）(AD 365~427). In the final part of his story, the fisherman who found the Shangarila by chance brought others to the spot of his discovery, however, they could never find the entrance to that world again. This can be interpreted as that Shangarila never exists, or if it ever exists, is extremely xenophobic.

Reading the story of Bhutan has also led me to think of Tibet and to see the problem of Tibet from a new insight, as the Bhutanese culture is a branch of Tibetan culture and Bhutan itself means 'the end of Tibet'. I cannot stop thinking that if Tibet had not been 'liberated' by the Chinese PLA and Dalai Lama always retained his rule there, Tibet would become very much like Bhutan: a sacred land of Buddhism, which might not be bad. However, once the mistake has been done, there is no going back. Tibet can never become independent for the simple reason that if it claimed independence, the Dalai Lama would impose similar policies as the Fourth King of Bhutan did: to expel all Han ethnics from Tibet, who had already settled there for decades. Such is the anachronism and tragedy of history: to choose the lesser of the two evils once you have wronged. However, there might be a win-win solution in future when the debate on Tibet would be no longer a taboo, that Dalai Lama would come back while Tibet still remain to be part of China with more autonomous power. But as long as the debate on this issue remains to be a taboo, there would never be a solution.

Random thoughts

My initial intent of creating this blog, besides expressing my love and reverence towards Guangxu Emperor, was to share my knowledge on Chinese history and traditional culture with readers around the world. According to my own experience here in France,a large number of Europeans really know little about Chinese history. However, it seems that Japanese history is more well-known to Westerners. After some reflections, I concluded that it might have been due to the lack of Chinese materials translated into foreign languages. For example, I could find little information on Guangxu Emperor if I use the English search engine.

My history presentation this week was 'Brotherhoods and Secret Societies in Qing China', some people may argue that I always choose topics concerning China, about which they consider is unfair. However, I took this one really out of good intent that it would be extremely hard for Europeans to find enough sources. This topic was also presented by Europeans in the two other groups. I heard that one group presented the photo of Consort Zhen in their ppt, saying that she was Empress Dowager Cixi, and worst of all, our most knowledgable history teacher did not find out this ridiculous mistake.

From all these experiences, I reached the conclusion that Chinese sources have been poorly translated and thus hardly available to those who donot understand the language. Besides, it's extremely hard and takes so many years to learn Chinese, especially for those who start late.

Finally, I want to talk about why I admire Guangxu Emperor. In my childhood, I liked him only because I sympathized with him and was extremely interested in his enigmatic life. Now, the image of the Emperor has become ever nobler in my eyes. He seems to have really been the 'Son of Heave', carrying its mandate to save the Chinese people, however, failed disastrously due to resistance from both inside and outside the court.

But what I like most about the Emperor is that he connected the Chinese tradition with the modern world. On the one hand, he revered the Chinese traditional culture and the Confucian legacy, regarding it as the basis of our country; on the other hand, he embraced western ideologies with an open mind to enrich and modernize China. Unlike him and his supporters, the revolutionists and later the communists sought to save China by the means of cutting her completely from the past, to 'smash the school of Confucianism',etc, and then to transplant something completely foreign on the Chinese soil, which resulted in the consequence that China has learnt little from the essence of Western liberal democratic thinking, while having lost almost everything precious of her own tradition. In recent years, there has been a revival of Confucianism in mainland China, it seems that we have finally turned towards the right path gradually, which has been embodied by Guangxu Emperor and the reformists more than one century ago.

Women in Power---Empress Wu and Cixi

Empress Dowager Cixi accompanied by Princess Der ling on a snowy day

Today, a Malaysian friend Krystle sent me dozens of photos of Cixi, which inspired me to write sth. on women and politics.

The most well-known women who ever held power in Chinese history were Empress Wu Zetian in Tang Dynasty and Empress Dowager Cixi. Both women were professional in political intrigues and grabbing power in their own hands. They were both ruthless in oppressing their political rivals, even when they were their sons.

The difference between these two women, was that firstly, Empress Wu was a real Emperor, which title Cixi never managed to attain for herself. Secondly, Empress Wu's time was one of the most prosperous period in Chinese history while Cixi's time was one of the worst ones. Thirdly, Tang Dynasty is more than 1000 years away from now so that we don't know and can never find out many details concerning court intrigues, however, as Qing's fall is only one century away, we know more or less of many details happened in the court. As a result, Cixi's reputation today is somehow 'notorious' compared to the generally well-recognized 'sage Empress Wu'. However, in my opinion, if these two women shift their eras, Empress Wu might become exactly someone like Cixi, while Empress Dowager Cixi would become someone like Empress Wu. Empress Wu was accused of murdering her own daughter and son because of the desire for power, however, as it was so long ago, no one can testify if they had been actually assasinated or not. In the case of Cixi, as it's been only 100 years, we are still allowed to dig out Guangxu Emperor's bones to examine the percentage of arsenic in his corpse to prove our assumption.

I've seen feminists argue for Empress Dowager Cixi, saying that she wrongly carries all the blames upon her only because she was a woman.The French philosopher Montesquieu, being a very open-minded man of his time, said in his great work 'L'esprit des Lois' that women should be granted equal rights with men in every sphere of life, including the possibility of becoming ruler of a country. Indeed, we see this truth uttered by Montesquieu well-recognized in a great part of the world today, that women are equally qualified to become political leaders as men do. However, I can hardly agree with what he said later on: As women are more tender than men in nature, they are even more qualified than men to become rulers as they suit every political institution i.e, they would remain moderate even in a despot state and not abuse the power. But from the experience in history, women despots who ran a country were more or less the same with their male counterparts, i.e they did abuse their power. Empress Dowager Cixi was a good example. Being a woman ruler should never be an excuse for commiting atrocities when in power. If this positive discrimination is not adjusted, women can never seek to be really equal with men.

I have always being curious to know what Guangxu Emperor would think of Empress Wu Zetian, as in history, opinions upon her were generally negative for not only that she was a woman, but that she usurped power from her sons and the legitimate Li clan. Yesterday, I found something on this which shocked me: On commenting on whether Li Xian, Wu's son should rebel against his 'tyrannic' mother, Guangxu expressed: Wu is the Prince and Li the Vassal, Wu is the Mother and Li the Son. How can a Vassal rebel against his Prince and a Son rebel against his Mother? Guangxu must well know that it was possible that Wu murdered her own son (history books at that time all suggested this), however, even in this case, he said that the son should not rebel. See how he had been brainwashed by Cixi with the Confucian virtue of 'filial piety! I would really like to know what he thought of his 'Imperial Biological Father' when he was struggling on deathbed, knowing that the arsenic had been most likely sent by Cixi.

The Absurdity of 'Qing Dramas' for a Decade--continued

The alternative name for Qing dramas is 'pigtail' dramas. As it is universally known that all men during Qing Dynasty were obliged to shave their front heads and braid the hair at back into a long pigtail like the Manchus. The slogan for changing hairstyle when the Manchus first entered China was 'Keep your hair and lose your head, or keep your head and shave your hair'. The traditional Chinese ideology held that every string of hair was given by parents and should not be hurt. However, the Manchu invaders violently imposed their dressing and hairstyle codes, massacring thousands of Han ethnic Chinese if this rule were not observed.

Such a fact is well-known, yet it was until recently when I get to know the evolution of the pigtail. I was so surprised to find out how ugly the pigtail was during the early stage of Qing Dynasty.(See picture) Moreover, it is said that the style in the first picture was kept until the end of Qianlong era (1796)! After Qianlong, the style evolved into what is shown in the second picture, more hair was allowed to be kept but was still inelegant. Only during the late Qing Dynasty did the most well-known type in the third drawing became popular, which allowed men to keep half of their hair at back.

However, all the Qing dramas featuring on the early and middle eras lied to the audience by letting the actors only wear the pigtails of late Qing Dynasty. Perhaps because if the real fact was shown, the audience would either laugh their tears out or be irritated by such repressive policies imposed by Manchu rulers.

Sadly, I also bumped into a Qing drama made in 2006 which tells the story of an ordinary man living between Ming and Qing Dynasties and was obliged to shave his head when the new rulers arrived. The drama was more than offensive as well as reactionary for Han ethnic Chinese, for it beautified Manchu invaders and distorted the heroic rebellion by Han Chinese against their oppressive rulers. The drama condemned the latter as 'bandits', justifying the massacre done by the Manchu army.

Some say that Han ethnic Chinese have become used to being invaded and tamed by periphery ethnics. I would say that China is a multi-ehnic country and that every ethnic group contributes their culture to the melting port of Chinese culture. That's why we have adopted the Manchu dressing code as the standard Chinese dressing code nowadays. However, concerning pigtails, such a drama is far to much for it really hurts the basic dignity of being a Han ethnic Chinese. We can acquiesce in glorifying Kangxi and Yongzheng Emperors, but we cannot remain silent on such an issue!

Now I consider that if Qing Dynasty could last, it might be possible that they would finally get rid of pigtails according to the evolution depicted in the picture. Guangxu Emperor once might have considered abolishing the pigtail during the Hundred Days' Reform, however, he was obliged to give up this idea due to too much opposition from the conservatives. It was equally sad, however, that the revolutionaries at that time also wrongly condemned Guangxu Emperor as being the enemy of the whole Han ethnic by embodying narrow Han nationalism. The fact was that, though being a Manchu himself, Guangxu Emperor believed in the equality of all ethnics in the Chinese realm. He went as far as to deprive the priviledges enjoyed by Manchu nobles during the reform. Guangxu definitely considered himself as a Chinese first and Manchu second, it is said that he never managed to learn the Manchu language well while being quite accomplished in Chinese literature. But still, Manchus like Guangxu Emperor were rare, and that is why he was sent to his doom mainly by people from his own ethnic---conservative Manchu nobles. But due to his Manchu blood, he was also repelled by a certain number of Han Chinese, poor him!

The Absurdity of 'Qing Dramas' for a Decade

poster for 'The Yongzheng Dynasty (1999) '

I remeber myself growing up watching the so-called 'Qing dramas', which means the TV dramas set in the era of the Qing Dynasty. They were extremely popular after the 90s till the first several years of the new century. I used to watch everything ranging from the most ridiculous 'Princess Huanzhu' (the story of how a slum girl became the adoptive daughter of Qianlong Emperor and was in the end married to his son) to the so-called true historical drama 'Kangxi Dynasty'. However, as my intellectual consciousness grew, I gradually realized how poisonous these dramas can be, for no matter whether they were 'serious historical dramas' or simply vulgar comedies, they all sanctified authoritarianism by blindly worshipping those 'sage' emperors. Here is an excerpt on Qing dramas from an article on New York Times:

The Confucian idea of sage leadership is particularly relevant in this regard, and Chinese television has not missed the point. A wave of dramatic serials featuring the legendary figures of China's bygone dynasty glory began to dominate dramatic programming in Chinese primetime television in the mid-1990s. The trend climaxed in the late 1990s and the early 2000s with saturation programming of palace dramas set in the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), what Chinese critics termed "Qing drama." Dramas set in the Qing palace had also appeared in the late 1980s, with shows like The Last Emperor (1988) and Kang-Liang Reformation (1989) earning popular and critical acclaim. Interestingly, though, while the Qing dramas of the 1980s focused on the corruption and cultural decline of the late Qing, the Qing dramas of the 1990s and the early 2000s, what I term the revisionist Qing dramas, shifted gears, paying tribute to the sage leaders of early Qing who oversaw a period of prosperity and national unity.

Revisionist Qing dramas -- Yongzheng Dynasty (1999), Kangxi Dynasty (2001), and Qianlong Dynasty (2003), among others -- feature the emperors and patriots who struggled against internal corruption and social injustice as well as external threats, feeding the public's fantasy for a time of heroic figures and events. Mesmerized by the palace politics and nostalgic for an era of upright rule that never was, the Chinese public genuinely welcomed such dramas, delighting in their contemporary relevance. Subjects and themes that would invite censorship in contemporary settings -- government corruption, political infighting and power struggles, moral cynicism, and public unrest, etc. -- get a primetime airing in revisionist Qing dramas.

Leading the charge of the revisionist Qing drama is the 44 episode primetime blockbuster Yongzheng Dynasty (YD). YD features one of the most controversial Qing Dynasty emperors, Yongzheng. In portraying a moralistic emperor who forcefully fends off his political opponents, attacks corruption, and fights to protect ordinary people, the show covertly insinuates a critical commentary on the state of affairs in contemporary Chinese society and politics. Yongzheng is deftly made to epitomize integrity and inner strength in a leader. In an era of rampant political corruption and moral cynicism, Yongzheng naturally appeals to Chinese audiences. To some, Yongzheng is suggestive of former Chinese Premier, Zhu Rongji, whose efforts to curb government corruption have earned him a reputation as a contemporary graft-buster. Zhu himself was reportedly an ardent follower of the show.

Sarcastically, an anti-authoritarian TV drama 'Towards the Republic' in 2003 was soon banned after its debut on the channel. Even in its only broadcast, its final scene, the speech by China's first republican President Dr. Sun Yat-sen on the ideals of a democratic republic was deleted.

However, I would not oppose but rather support shooting Qing dramas on Guangxu Emperor as well as his era. For his personal story as well as his era tells the horrors of authoritarianism and inspires hope for a more democratic government and liberal society. But interestingly, the Chinese media never featured Guangxu as the protagonist of a drama. Instead, he has often been depicted as a weak and incapable secondary figure. Such a depiction is strongly linked with the Chinese mentality of worshiping power while alienating those who do not have power. Sometimes, I really worry that how a civil society based on rule of law could develop if the young generation continue to enjoy watching those 'emperor worship' dramas.

Indeed, I agree that Kangxi Emperor was a sage ruler, but despite his own wisdom, the system of government was bad, as it had no checks and balances against possible tyranny. Most Chinese people nowadays are still on the thinking level of desiring a 'sage ruler' , which can partly explain why they mock at the 'stupid' French people electing such a 'terrible' president as Nicolas Sarkozy and then regretting the decision by waging nation-wide strikes. Being a Chinese myself, I cannot argue with them but only bury these words in my heart: At least they have the right to elect a president while we do not, at least they can wage strikes while we are never allowed.