November 18, 2009

The Bonfire of China’s Vanities

By PANKAJ MISHRA
Published: New York Times, January 23, 2009

One cold afternoon last fall I met Yu Hua at the state-run Friendship Hotel in Beijing. Cheerfully, he described to me the incipient international fame of his most recent novel, “Brothers,” one of China’s biggest-selling literary works. He had just returned from Hong Kong, where the novel was short-listed for the Man Asian Prize; he was leaving soon for Paris to receive an award for the book, which had just been translated into French. With the breezy insouciance that unbroken success creates, Yu then began to recount a somewhat irreverent memory of Mao Zedong’s death.
Though nearly 50, Yu, who wears his hair short and spiky, looks relatively young. He speaks in emphatic bursts, his face often flushing red, and he is quick to laugh. It was, in fact, his boisterous laugh that almost got him into trouble on the morning of the solemn announcement of Mao’s death. Responding to orders that blared out from loudspeakers, he assembled with hundreds of other students in the main hall of his small-town high school. “Funereal music was played, and then we had to hear the long list of titles that preceded Mao’s name, ‘Chairman,’ ‘Beloved Leader,’ ‘Great helmsman . . . ,’ ” Yu recalled. “Everyone loved Chairman Mao, of course, so when his name was finally announced, everyone burst into tears. I started crying, too, but one person crying is a sad sight; more than a thousand people crying together, the sound echoing, turns into a funny spectacle, so I began to laugh. My body shook with my effort to control my laughter while I bent over the chair in front of me. The class leader later told me, admiringly, ‘Yu Hua, you were crying so fervently!’ ”
He paused, and then jumped 13 years to a memory of another momentous — and more traumatic — event in China’s modern history. In the spring of 1989, when tens of thousands of protesters filled Tiananmen Square, Yu was living in Beijing, partaking of the cultural excitement and political hopefulness of post-Mao China. Already a major figure in the city’s artistic avant garde, Yu biked every day to Tiananmen Square to express solidarity with the student protesters.
As Yu described the widespread civilian support for the students, a note of passion entered his voice, and the menu he had elegantly snagged off a passing waiter lay open and unread in his lap. “The word ‘people’ was much used in the Cultural Revolution,” he said. “It is a very loaded term in China, it is used a lot, but until the mass protests in 1989 I did not realize what the word meant.”
His voice grew louder as he recalled the bloody suppression and aftermath of the protests. I became nervous. Yu, a short, thickset man with bulging eyes, could easily pass unnoticed in a crowd of Chinese peasants and workers, but he does not exactly strive for self-effacement. We were sitting in the corner of the hotel lobby, partly concealed by a large pillar and surrounded by a thick fog of cigarette smoke. Yu, a restless chain smoker, insists on ignoring China’s new ban on smoking in public places.
The hotel was full that day of young executives from nearby I.T. offices¬, any one of whom might have recognized Yu, who is frequently mentioned as a likely candidate for the Nobel Prize in Literature. Though official repression of the memory of Tiananmen has ensured that few young Chinese know much about the struggles for democracy waged in the 1980s, cybersavvy youth of the kind we were surrounded by are still likely to take a sternly nationalistic line with a Chinese writer or intellectual criticizing the events of June 1989 to a foreigner. Indeed, as Yu spoke, a trendily dressed young woman looked up from the glowing screen of her laptop to squint at him.
Yu seemed totally oblivious to potential eavesdroppers. His face was red as he came to end of his memory of 1989. Turning to me, he said: “Sorry to take off like that. But this was a big turning point for all of us. After June 1989 people in China lost interest in politics. In 1992 Deng Xiaoping made his famous ‘Southern Tour,’ calling for faster market reforms, and the economy started to take off. The ideals of nation and socialism began to look empty. People became focused on making money.
“I, too, began to enjoy the fruits of capitalism,” he added, and laughed.
Yu was only partly joking. For someone who started out in China’s brief moment of counterculture in the 1980s as a writer of bleak, experimental and defiantly unsalable stories, Yu has gone on to receive an ample share of the fruits of capitalism. Published in two parts in 2005 and 2006, “Brothers,” which traces the fortunes of two stepbrothers from the Cultural Revolution to China’s no-less-frenzied Consumer Revolution, has sold more than a million copies in China, not counting the probably higher sales of innumerable pirated editions.
The novel, which will be published in an English translation later this month, may also prove to be China’s first successful export of literary fiction. Certainly, foreign readers will find in its sprawling, rambunctious narrative some of China’s most frenetic transformations and garish contradictions. “Brothers” strikes its characteristic tone with the very first scene, as Li Guang, a business tycoon, sits on his gold-plated toilet, dreaming of space travel even as he mourns the loss of all earthly relations. Li made his money from various entrepreneurial ventures, including hosting a beauty pageant for virgins and selling scrap metal and knockoff designer suits. A quick flashback to his small-town childhood shows him ogling the bottoms of women defecating in a public toilet. Similarly grotesque images proliferate over the next 600 pages as Yu describes, first, the extended trauma of the Cultural Revolution, during which Li and his stepbrother Song Gang witness Red Guards torturing Song Gang’s father to death, and then the moral wasteland of capitalist China, in which Song Gang is forced to surgically enlarge one of his breasts in order to sell breast-enlargement gels.
The reasons for the novel’s commercial success seem clear. It invokes the widely experienced violence and suffering of the Cultural Revolution while also drawing on another resonant theme in China: the outlandish lifestyles of the rich and famous, especially nouveau-riche entrepreneurs like Li. Li represents the country’s new cultural icons, whose large appetites for money, women and cars keep the innumerable Chinese bloggers and Internet chat rooms transfixed with both admiration and revulsion.
Other writers have dealt with the Cultural Revolution and the counter-revolutions of post-Mao China — the wealthy entrepreneur inChi Li’s “Coming and Going,” one of the country’s most successful novels and TV series of the last decade, also provoked much fascinated ambivalence among middle-class Chinese and the many millions more aspiring to be. But Yu brings to his potent mix of market-tested subjects the ambition, energy and flair of a born provocateur. He seems less interested in representing modern-day China through mimetic realism than in evoking it through a bawdy semi-fantastical narrative, in which human bodies are frequently and gruesomely violated in recurring scenes of debauchery, brutality and death.
Yu’s provocations may have succeeded better than he hoped; enraged critics have made “Brothers” one of China’s most controversial novels in recent years. Yu, who is one of the very few literary writers to have flourished in the new China, always seemed a bit suspect to puritanical critics. But “Brothers” has aroused a special malice among many readers, both online and in print, who accuse Yu of caring more for profit margins than for literature. When the second part of the novel came out in 2006, a famous literary critic at Beijing University, who championed Yu’s short fiction in the 1980s, told me that the former avant-gardist had learned how to work China’s new marketplace and “make money.” Other reviewers doubted Yu’s grasp of the details of Chinese life. Online forums debated with special vigor whether it would have been possible for a man in a small Chinese town in the early 1960s to spy on women’s bottoms in a public toilet and then, in the process, slip and drown in a cesspool.
Last year an anthology of criticism titled “Pulling Yu Hua’s Teeth” charged the author of “Brothers” with several crimes: selling out to the very forces of commercialism and vulgarity anatomized in his novel; promoting a negative image of China and Chinese writers to the West; sinking into “a world of filth, chaos, stench and blackness, without the slightest scrap of dignity”; being a carpetbagging peasant who gives himself literary airs.
“Good people are not rewarded,” one critic writes, “the kind do not die a good death, scoundrels take the upper hand, love proves false, only money is praised, but there is nothing behind money but lasciviousness and ugliness.” Opening the teeth-pulling operation with an article claiming that Yu’s writing consists of four bad teeth — a black tooth, a yellow tooth, a false tooth and a carious tooth — the book systematically excavates Yu’s dentures over four parts, ending with a conclusion titled “It’s Not the Toothache but the Pain That Kills You.”
Yu betrayed no signs of postoperative stress when I asked him recently about the reaction to his book. He dismissed “Pulling Yu Hua’s Teeth” as “sensationalism” and robustly rejected the accusation that he performs for a Western audience. “My books are more popular in China than anywhere else,” he said. “If they weren’t, these critics would have a point.”
When I first met Yu one evening in Shanghai in 2006, he confidently described to me his vision of “Brothers” as a social and moral critique of China’s evolution. Yet he was suffering from a version of postpublication angst common among authors — the cankerous feeling that his work, and its vision of China lurching between political authoritarianism, extreme poverty, consumerist excess and moral depravity, was not being taken seriously enough. High sales and popular acclaim had not taken the sting out of the venomous reviews. But almost three years of a sustained critical assault on “Brothers” seems to have hardened Yu. He now sees the attacks in sociological rather than literary terms, as exposing a fault line between generations, and his detractors as typical of China’s new nationalists — people too young to have any memory of their country’s previous traumas but obsessed with boosting China’s image as a rising power vis-à-vis the West.
“The main reason that the book was attacked is because it exposes the dark side of China,” he told me when we met again in Beijing. “A highly respected critic in Fudan University, Chen Sihe, pointed this out. ‘Look at the critics who are attacking this book,’ he said, ‘They are all young. Older critics have a more ambiguous take.’ ”

Yu added, “Younger writers don’t like to see books that reveal the dark side of China; they live very comfortable lives; they don’t believe in the dark side of China; they are not even aware of the hundreds of millions of people still living in extreme poverty.”
Yu himself seems to have rarely turned away from the dark side of things. He first became known in the late 1980s as a writer of surreal short fiction whose raw violence — in one story, a 4-year-old strangles his cousin, a baby, in order to “enjoy the explosive crying”; in another, a young girl is hacked to pieces — brashly defied the hygienic pieties of socialist realism to which China’s state-supported writers were expected to conform.
Yu switched to melodramatic realism in 1992 in his novel “To Live.” This atrocity-rich tale of a forbearing peasant whose son dies after a blood transfusion to save a party official was turned into an internationally successful film by Zhang Yimou, China’s most prominent director. It won the Grand Prix at the 1994 Cannes Film Festival. Both “To Live,“ and his next novel, “Chronicle of a Blood Merchant”(1995), in which a peasant traffics in his own blood to supplement his meager income, remained resolutely focused on the tragic aspects of China’s modern history. But it was not until Yu traveled to the West that he began to think about a broader fictional canvas that would depict China’s chaotic present as well as its past. In 1995 he went abroad for the first time, to the French seaside town St. Malo, for a literary festival. “The foreign journalists there,” he recalled, “would often ask me about the Cultural Revolution, and it occurred to me what a barbarous and bizarre experience China had had.”
Almost miraculously, “Brothers,” which contains graphic descriptions of the violence of the Cultural Revolution, including the suicide of a man who hammers a nail into his skull, managed to escape Chinese censors. Yu said he profited from his experience with Zhang Yimou, who cannily altered the story of “To Live” in order to make the film version palatable to Chinese authorities: among other things, Zhang made the son’s death seem like a tragic accident. “As he made the changes I became very impressed by how well Zhang Yimou seemed to understand the Chinese Communist Party. But the film still got banned. After that, I stopped caring about what the censors would think.”
It was his publishers rather than the state censors who wanted cuts in “Brothers.” But they relented after Yu threatened to withdraw his book. “They knew,” he said, “that the book would sell; they are willing to take more risks with the censors because they are not state-supported anymore and have to fend for themselves in the marketplace.” For Yu the publication of his novel is a sign of slow but steady progress in China. “Ten years ago, ‘Brothers’ could not have been published,” he said. “It may take another 10 years for a movie to be made out of it.”
We were sitting with Yu’s wife, Chen Hong, a poet who now devotes most of her time to looking after their son, in the living room of the apartment they rent in West Beijing. We were surrounded by the marks of a temporary existence: new Ikea-style furniture, mismatched curtains, piled-up books and a general air of neglect. Yu explained that he and his wife were waiting for their son to finish school before moving to Hangzhou in his ancestral province, Zhejiang. He didn’t like Beijing; it was too big and impersonal. The neighboring apartments, for instance, housed “hair salons,” often a front, in China, for brothels, with bright neon lights. “I tell my friends we live in a red-light district,” he joked, and his wife, a woman with a delicate pale face and loose long hair, broke into a melodious laugh.
One room in Yu’s austere apartment is reserved for surfing the Internet, which is probably the most revealing window on modern China. But Yu said he spends more time in his study, another stark room with a laptop computer on a clean desk. He added that he didn’t need to rely on the Internet; he had personally experienced the weird mutations of China’s consumer culture described in the novel. He remembers turning on the television in the 1990s to find nothing but beauty pageants: every town in China seemed to host them.
He disputes the charge that the details in the novel are far-fetched; reality can be equally, sometimes even more, gruesome in China. “After the book was published, an academic friend wrote to me to say that his father had also killed himself by hammering a nail into his skull,” he said. “Three readers said that their father’s corpse had to be mutilated in order to fit into the coffin. A New York Times journalist who interviewed me in 2006 thought that businesses offering hymen reconstruction was extremely unlikely; he then discovered that they existed all over China.”
When I asked Yu if he had ever contemplated breast-enlargement, like Song Gang in “Brothers,” he and his wife laughed. But both grew somber as Yu recalled his childhood, no less infected by the grotesque for being relatively untouched by the chaos of the Cultural Revolution. Born in 1960, Yu grew up in a small town called Haiyan in Zhejiang province (a breeding ground of many Chinese artists and intellectuals including Lu Xun, the pioneer of modern Chinese literature). Despite the Cultural Revolution, Yu recalled, life was generally monotonous — except when a criminal was to be executed, when “the whole town would become as lively as festival time.” Yu remembers the executions as the “most thrilling scenes of my childhood, seeing the criminal kneeling on the ground, a soldier aiming a rifle at the back of his head and firing.”
His father was a doctor — but this makes him sound grander than he was, for he worked, Yu said, wearing a bloodstained smock in one small room and lived with his family across the road. Their home also faced a public toilet, where nurses often dumped tumors, and the local mortuary. “On hot summer days, it was cool inside the mortuary,” Yu recalled, “and since the corpses were deposited only at night, I often took a nap there. Sleeping at night in our home, we would be woken by the sound of people crying.”
Yu now attributes the relentless bleakness of his early fiction to his childhood exposure to brutality and death. “I was unable to steer my writing away from bloodshed and violence,” he said, “Writing during the day, I’d have one character killing another, characters dying in pools of blood. At night, asleep, I would dream that I was about to be killed by someone else.”
Yu never went to college. “My entire education was encompassed by the Cultural Revolution,” he said. “I went to school in 1966 and came out in 1976, so I never received a proper education.” Then, like many “barefoot doctors” in China in the late 1970s, Yu underwent only some very basic training before he became a dentist.
He claims he became a writer because he hated his job: “the inside of a mouth is one of the ugliest spectacles in the world.” In the early ’80s he was living in a small town between Shanghai and Hangzhou. From his window he often observed workers of the local Cultural Bureau, the Chinese state’s salaried writers and artists, loafing in the streets. “We were all very poor in those days,” Yu recalled. “The difference was that you could work hard to be poor as a dentist, or you could do nothing and still be poor as a worker in the Cultural Bureau. I decided I wanted to be as idle as the workers in the Cultural Bureau and become a writer.”
Yu wrote a short story and sent it off to a literary magazine in Beijing. An enthusiastic phone call from its editor soon put him on the path to paid idleness at the Cultural Bureau. Yu seems to have relished manipulating the Communist system to his own ends. “I was deliberately late on the first day at the bureau office,” he told me. “Later I would only go once a week, and then finally only once a month to collect my salary.”
In 1993 the royalties from “To Live” enabled Yu to leave his job altogether. “My friends,” he recalled, “say I have enjoyed the best of both ideologies: first receiving a writer’s stipend under socialism and now royalties in the free-market regime.”
Though Yu’s account of his beginnings as a writer is lighthearted, from the first his works of fiction provoked serious critical attention. Published in such major literary magazines as Zhongshan, Shouhuo and Shanghai Wenyi, his stories, with their surreal violence and cruelty, seemed to deftly summarize China’s history; their metafictional devices also spoke of a formal ambition rare among Chinese writers. As early as 1991 the critic Henry Zhao predicted that Yu was “destined to occupy a long page in Chinese literature.”
Remarkably, Yu seems to have had as little apprenticeship in writing as he had in dentistry. Books were hard to come by during the Cultural Revolution, or they would circulate in mutilated form, like the torn copy of a novel by Guy de Maupassant, which Yu read the middle of (“I remember it had a lot of sex,” he said) without knowing its title or author. His formative reading experience was provided by the big character posters of the Cultural Revolution, in which people denounced their neighbors with violent inventiveness. “I remember,” Yu said, “walking home from school and reading each poster as I walked along. I was not so much interested in the revolutionary slogans as in the stories.”
He had never cared much for Chinese writers; only later did he come to appreciate Lu Xun’s resolve to diagnose Chinese society and culture through literature. Like many of his peers recoiling from socialist realism, Yu was drawn to the icons of Western high modernism whose work began to appear in translation in China in the 1980s, in particular Kafka, Bruno Schulz and Borges. The delicate fictions of the Japanese writer Yasunari Kawabata were also a great early influence. “Kawabata taught me the importance of detail,” Yu recalled. “I would buy two copies of his novels whenever I saw them. One to read and the other to keep in pristine condition on my shelf.”
So why did he abandon avant-garde experimentalism? Yu says he discovered that his characters had their own lives, which he could not control. By the early 1990s, when almost all major works of international fiction were being translated into Chinese, he was also reading more widely, particularly novels by V. S. Naipaul and Toni Morrison. But there seem to have been extraliterary reasons, too, for the general retreat from aesthetic radicalism among Yu’s generation. The critic Chen Xiaoming, who teaches at Beijing University, once told me that by 1992, as China’s economy hectically expanded and the state began to withdraw its cultural subsidies, publishers were increasingly forced to sink or swim in the marketplace. In the new era of mass culture, which TV dramas and popular music dominated, there were fewer takers for avant-garde fiction, and its practitioners had to improvise or face irrelevance.
This sounds true: Su Tong, one of the more famous avant-gardists in the 1980s, turned to writing historical romances. In an apparent concession to his commercial times, Yu scripted an episode for a TV show titled “China Models.” “It was for the money,” he jokingly admitted to me. But he also claims that he was led to a more populist aesthetic by a new idea of his social responsibility as a writer. As he sees it, boldly experimental writing of the kind he and other writers produced in the 1980s was a rejection of the official orthodoxy of Mao’s notion that literature ought to serve the Communist regime’s political ends. “We wanted to say,” Yu told me, “that writing is not in the service of anything other than itself.”
Yu claims that he was forced to reconsider his stance of aesthetic autonomy after the events of June 4, 1989, and reconfigure his notion of the relationship between writer and society, especially as he confronted the problems created by China’s breakneck modernization in the 1990s. This meant embracing the old Chinese model of the writer as social critic and a pared-down style of cinematic brevity and much earthy humor. It meant, too, writing about China’s large but invisible majority in the age of globalization: peasants and workers in villages and small towns.
Yu now looks back wryly on his reputation as a militant advocate of l’art pour l’art. He said he had recently been persuaded to conduct a public conversation with Alain Robbe-Grillet during the latter’s visit to Beijing. He didn’t think much of the high priest of the nouveau roman, to whom he was often and inaccurately compared in the past. “He was just an old codger,” Yu said and laughed.
EExpressing a preference for engagé over ivory-tower literature is unlikely to endear Yu to left-leaning readers in China. “If the right-wingers,” Yu said, “hate ‘Brothers’ for its depiction of capitalism in China, the left dislikes it for its depiction of the Cultural Revolution.”
I put this to Wang Hui, the most prominent of intellectuals described as part of China’s New Left, which maintains that many of China’s peasants and workers have yet to reap the benefits of the newly globalized economy. Wang is an old friend of Yu’s and wrote a foreword to a collection of his essays. (It was Wang who first encouraged Yu to begin writing essays in the late 1990s, publishing them in Dushu, the magazine he edited until 2007.) Yu told me that, broadly, he shared the New Left’s criticism of Chinese-style capitalism, its tendency to create wealth in the cities while bypassing the countryside. Wang, however, seemed reluctant to wholeheartedly endorse “Brothers.”
“The first part reproduces the conventional ‘grand narrative’ of the Cultural Revolution as a time of unrelieved suffering and betrayal,” he told me. “I actually find the second part more interesting, because the author is no longer in control of his narrative. But, you know, we are old friends, and we haven’t really discussed this book.” As he said this, Wang put an arm around Yu. We were at a restaurant in West Beijing that serves the cuisine of Zhejiang, Yu’s native province. I had traveled to it in a taxi with Yu and noticed a strain of writerly competitiveness in his terse responses to my questions about contemporary Chinese novelists: he read mostly Mo Yan, Wang Anyi and Su Tong. No, he didn’t much read young Chinese writers or the Chinese Nobel Laureate Gao Xingjian, who lives in a suburb of Paris. Ma Jian, the author of the blackly satirical novel “Beijing Coma,” who lives in self-imposed exile in London, is barely known in China. He was more interested in foreign authors; he had recently read Ian McEwan’s novel “On Chesil Beach” and also introduced a collection of the British novelist’s stories in Chinese translation.
Yu spoke warmly, though, of Wang, whom he first met in Beijing in the 1980s and who is one of the very few people he sees frequently. At the restaurant they sat together, presenting a study in contrasts: Wang, unfailingly thoughtful, and Yu, as jaunty as ever. Yet they radiated an easy mutual regard, built upon the shared experience of the tumultuous late 1980s in Beijing and amusement at how significantly things had changed in their own lives since they were provincial students during the Cultural Revolution. Wang seemed to cherish the mischievous — what he called the “jokemaking” — side of Yu.
They had just returned from a trip to Nepal, where they went whitewater rafting together. Yu chortled as he recalled his attempts to hold on to his boat amid the swirling waters. “It’s very dangerous,” he said, “very dangerous.” But he grew visibly aggrieved when I asked him if he followed the Olympic Games in Beijing. The organizers promised to sell tickets online on a first-come-first-served basis, and he tried to buy them as soon as they were made available. But he wasn’t able to get the best seats for the basketball matches and then found empty rows in the stadium whose neatness hinted at early block sales to party bigwigs. “Typical Communist Party corruption,” Yu bellowed, and for once I was glad for the loud Muzak playing in the restaurant.
He fell silent after this, chain-smoking in his quiet but tense manner, as Wang spoke of the Western financial crisis and its implications for China’s export-oriented economy. The stock market was in a steep decline; factories on the coast were closing. The discussion seemed to bore Yu. When I remarked that President Hu Jintao’s then-imminent visit with President Bush was very likely an exercise in futility, he said, “These politicians are mostly a waste of time.”
He perked up only when I asked him what he thought of Zhang Yimou’s contribution to the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics. He said he felt sympathetic to Zhang, who is often accused of selling out to Communist authorities as well as to commercial interests. “He would have reached the end of his career very quickly had he persisted in making films like ‘To Live.’ He had to live with the realities of Chinese society. And it is different for filmmakers. I can always publish in Taiwan if I am restricted in China. In China, too, the political atmosphere has gone back and forth from closed to open, and I have been lucky in hitting the troughs.”
Later in the taxi home, sitting next to the driver, Yu spoke of a threat to artistic expression in China newer than state control. “I am really worried about the new nationalism,” he said. “Anything slightly critical of China appears in foreign media, and the nationalists are swarming online, attacking it. I tell these angry youth that The New York Times doesn’t criticize China as much as it criticizes America. Basically they are ignorant. They think the American media is always praising American presidents. The problem is that the younger generation hasn’t lived through poverty, collectivism; it is lacking in restraint, its references are very few, the experience is so limited.”
We were moving down Beijing’s stately avenues, past the quasi-imperial grandeur of its postmodern architecture. Yu seemed eager to return to his sparsely furnished study and the room with the Internet. Earlier that day at his home he spoke of how his son, who has known only post-Mao China, would nevertheless witness extraordinary transformations in his own lifetime since the capitalist economy was bound to collapse. Yu barely looked out of his window as he said: “These young nationalists have no sense of ambivalence, no idea of life’s ambiguities. But when times are hard, their attitude will change, become more mature, and because capitalism in this form cannot go on in China, it has to end, those hard times will come soon.”

*******************
Pankaj Mishra is the author, most recently, of “Temptations of the West: How to Be Modern in India, Pakistan, Tibet and Beyond.” He last wrote for the magazine about the Egyptian novelist Alaa Al Aswany.

Filed under: Uncategorized

March 9, 2009

An interview with Fabian Zhang and Harry Zhu from Genie, Terex AWP

Filed under: My Viewpoints

It was mid-June 2008 when I met Fabian and Harry in Shanghai for the first time. Like all good sales guys, they are vigorous, open, humorous, and easy to communicate. Or should I say, communication is the main part of a professional sales person’s daily work. Fabian was wearing a deep green T-shirt while Harry in white. The blue logo of “Genie” on their T-shits was catching my eyes every now and then when we were talking. As a result, I received my first Genie T-shirt before I left Genie office for airport. I kept this as a very good reward for my half-day training session for AWP China team.

Terex team members in Shanghai office held a party to celebrate Fabian and Harry’s 10th anniversary of service in Terex company Feb. 24. Sondra and I are very interested in details when we received words from them two about their experience. A senior sale team member always share with you bunches of interesting story, needless to say how much we can get from these two with ten years of sales experience in Terex AWP.
In the past decade, they have helped bring a small business with only $2 million a year in Great China to current $43 million of revenue. That’s why I look forward to meeting and talking with Fabian and Harry again with much more time. For the sake of saving travelling cost, we made a tele-interview with them two.

We began our talk with memory. Both Fabian and Harry joined Genie 10 years ago and added the total member of Genie team to 4. They still remember the first office where they began business. “You may not believe,” Fabian told me, “Our office was next to a body-massage shop. People came and went all the time. Obviously they were running a very good business.” “And we had to share a meeting room with another company.” Harry added. Then they sang high praise for the new office, in which they moved last July.

In his congratulation mail to Fabian and Harry, George Chen, Country Manager of Genie China, joked that “both of you looked much younger 10 years ago”. Actually Harry looks much younger than his actual age even now. He still remembers that he met her girl friend two days before joining Genie. “I’m a faithful man, traditional and conservative.” He said, “I married my girl friend, and later she became mother of my kid.” Harry also completed his MBA program during 2004-2006, when he was extremely busy for both daily work and learning on weekends. “I was almost exhausted.” He said, “I was not a good father at that time, when my baby was born before the program launched.” As a father, I quite understand Harry, while I’m lucky enough that my baby was born when I was studying my last MBA course. Harry’s story of his career in Terex is close linked his family life.

Fabian is always willing to share his exciting experience. “I spent my first boarding day in Las Vegas, where Genie joined a conference with customers. I was urgently summoned to fly to America. It was the first time in my life that I know what gambling is. I had not got my first month salary, so had to borrow money from George.” He couldn’t help laughing. It is well known that most, if not all, of sales people can drink a lot. Fabian’s record is 9 bottles of Maotai, one of the most famous liqueurs in China, by 7 people. “I introduced Chinese liqueur to two shipyard boom engineers from America. My presentation skill is perfect that American friends were excited and couldn’t wait to drink.” He said, “So local clients in Dalian are more than happy to host a banquet with the best Chinese liqueur, Maotai. We all got drunk. I even did not remember how my American friends managed to go back hotel. Fortunately we were still alive. And everybody had been treasuring the friendship among us.”

Today, loyalty seems like luxury. Changing jobs and earning higher salary are regarded as symbol of success. We read such story of success everyday while in the meantime, all employers are complaining the lack of job loyalty. I’m very curious if theses two top sales guys had considered better job offers from other companies, and why they chose to stay. Countless –Fabian used this word to describe how many calls he had received from headhunters, “At first I always said no and they still try to persuade me. Later I said OK on condition of you could provide me $1.5 million of income. Then they withdraw.” He became serious after a big laugh. “My boss makes me stay. George is a very kind and friendly person with business competency and strong leadership. I respect him and enjoying working with him.” Harry’s concluding words may represent other team members. “Here we enjoy high efficiency from team work. And a relax atmosphere makes every team member happy to work.”

I’m sure that we can read as more stories from them two as we can if spending much more time with them. But I would rather save more chance for myself when we meet next time in Shanghai. We might drink Maotai together, yes maybe, and plus a cake, which I missed this time.

June 27, 2008

STATEMENT FROM STEVEN SPIELBERG REGARDING BEIJING OLYMPIC GAMES AND DARFUR

Filed under: My Viewpoints

FEBRUARY 12, 2008

After careful consideration, I have decided to formally announce the end of my involvement as one of the overseas artistic advisors to the opening and closing ceremonies of the Beijing Olympic Games.

In anticipation that this day might one day come, I left unsigned the Beijing Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games contract presented to me nearly a year ago. Since that time, I have made repeated efforts to encourage the Chinese government to use its unique influence to bring safety and stability to the Darfur region of Sudan. Although some progress has been made along the way, most notably, the passage of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1769, the situation in Darfur continues to worsen and the violence continues to accelerate.

With this in mind, I find that my conscience will not allow me to continue with business as usual. At this point, my time and energy must be spent not on Olympic ceremonies, but on doing all I can to help bring an end to the unspeakable crimes against humanity that continue to be committed in Darfur. Sudan’s government bares the bulk of the responsibility for these on-going crimes but the international community, and particularly China, should be doing more to end the continuing human suffering there. China’s economic, military and diplomatic ties to the government of Sudan continue to provide it with the opportunity and obligation to press for change. The situation has never been more precarious – and while China’s representatives have conveyed to me that they are working to end the terrible tragedy in Darfur, the grim realities of the suffering continue unabated.

This has been a very difficult decision for me, as I have cherished the relationships with my Chinese counterparts, in particular, the noted director Zhang Yimou, who is a close personal friend. I have learned a great deal from working with him and all the other creative artists along the way. There is little that is more rewarding than to collaborate with those who bring vision and imagination to a challenging artistic task. And I greatly appreciated the spirit in which we worked together - a spirit that embodied genuine friendship and respect.

For me, the Olympic Games represent an ideal of brotherhood designed to bridge cultural and political divides. I am committed to building bridges between peoples and I saw, and continue to see, the Beijing Games as an opportunity to help ease some of the tensions in the world.

China has much to offer the world and I have no doubt that its international contributions will grow in the years ahead. With growing influence, however, also comes growing responsibilities. As China welcomes the world to Beijing for the 2008 Olympic Games, I hope to be among those in attendance; and it is also my great hope that, with renewed and intensified efforts from China, there will be peace and security in Darfur at last.

October 31, 2006

On the Work to Be Done

Filed under: Uncategorized

Acclaimed writer Kurt Vonnegut ruminates on the American Dream and the fate of the planet in the dawn of the twenty-first century
KURT VONNEGUT

The only specifically American inventions that have made this a better world are Alcoholics Anonymous and jazz, and jazz has no bad side effects.

But one piece of AA’s advice to recovering addicts, that they live one day at a time, so infects the brains of those who are wrecking the planet as a life-support system nowadays, recovering addicts or not, that it might as well be Hong Kong chicken flu or mad-cow disease. To have gotten through Tuesday, say, with an atmosphere still breathable and water still potable at bedtime is for those so afflicted to be as happy as pigs in shit, so to speak.

Some accomplishment!

Rolling Stone has asked me to discover what the American Dream looks like in the mind of some young person of my acquaintance, with the year 2000 hanging over his or her head by a thread, like the sword of Damocles. Without even looking into such a mind, I can offer at least this much comfort: The year 2000 has come and gone, and damned if we didn’t survive it!

Listen: The best information we have today is that Jesus was born in 5 B.C., or five years before Himself. Chalk that up as another miracle! Yes, and that means that the 2,000th year of the Christian era was what we mistakenly called “1995.”

What apocalypse, what test of our determination to go on living, did we endure back then? Friends and neighbors, young and old alike, think a minute, think TV.

It was the O.J. Simpson case!

As for our young:

Those who graduate from high school or college this spring are not Generation X or Y, as envious middle-aged baby boomers have been pleased to tag them. They are as much Generation A as Adam and Eve were, as the middle-aged baby boomers, their parents, used to be.

As I read the Book of Genesis, God didn’t give Adam and Eve a whole planet.

He gave them a manageable piece of property, for the sake of discussion let’s say 200 acres.

I suggest to you Adams and Eves that you set as your goals the putting of some small part of the planet into something like safe and sane and decent order.

There’s a lot of cleaning up to do.

There’s a lot of rebuilding to do, both spiritual and physical.

And, again, there’s going to be a lot of happiness. Don’t forget to notice!

What painters and sculptors and writers do, incidentally, is put very small properties indeed into good order, as best they can.

A painter thinks, “I can’t fix the whole planet, but I can at least make this square of canvas what it ought to be.” And a sculptor thinks the same thing about a lump of clay or marble. A writer thinks the same about a piece of paper, conventionally eleven inches long and eight-and-a-half inches wide.

We’re talking about something less than 200 acres, aren’t we?

If not you, then surely your children will see the day when not one drop of petroleum and not one whiff of natural gas is left to power any sort of machinery, or cook or heat or light anything, and precious little coal. Junkyard!

Chilblains in the wintertime, and darkness indoors and out when the sun goes down? Light a candle made from the fat of a lower, dumber, deader animal? Who’s got a wooden match when there are no trees? Our century should be called this: the Age of the Planet Gobblers. We, the ancestors of all Generation A’s still to come, inherited an aromatic, juicy blue-green planet, and we ate it up!

In our defense, we can only say, “We never asked to be born such prolific, voracious creatures in the first place. It would have been much better for all concerned if we had been sea lions instead, provided, of course, that nobody else got to be a human being, or a great white shark, or a killer whale.”

Meanwhile, there is jazz, which, as I’ve said, has no harmful side effects. And I am put in mind now of a lawsuit against a pharmaceutical manufacturer years back, in which the plaintiff’s lawyer had this to say about a certain pill, a nostrum that might be likened to our indifference to what we are doing to our environment: “Death is not an acceptable side effect.”

This article originally appeared in the May 28, 1998 issue of Rolling Stone.

Del Piero: “I’m over the moon!”

Filed under: Uncategorized

Alex Del Piero just never stops. Against Frosinone today he scored his 200th goal but he’s already got his eyes on his next target, as there are still many chapters left to write in his Bianconeri story.

“I’m over the moon, both for the goal and the win. Goal number 200th in a Juventus shirt is not a milestone, but another stage in my long life in black and white. There are still many goals left for me to score, and many victories for us to achieve. My links with this club and its fans are very strong. We’ve shared so many satisfying moments together”.

The journalists asked him just how much he’d been waiting for this goal. “Really it was just three games, but it’s been talked about so much… It wasn’t an obsession, it’s normal that a striker never stops looking for goals, irrespective of what they might represent. Obviously this one has a particular significance”.

When asked about his favourite strikes, Del Piero had a few to list. “The one in the Intercontinental Cup, the first one in the Champions League, the very first one for Juventus, the one that broke the record, the one against Fiorentina in the year of my first scudetto. There are quite a few; I remember some of them for the way I scored, others for the significance they had in that particular moment”.

Bravo Alex! Just as the announcer said at the end of the game, let’s have another 200!

September 22, 2006

An MSN conversation between Beijing and Washington

Filed under: My Friends

David is one of my good friends. He’s in DC as a visit scholar there. The conversation between us through MSN as follows takes place at 8:30-9:24am May 12 morning (BJ time). I always believe that a conversation with a same-level challenger would absolutely inspire you.
Forgive me but I have to hide some personal information of both in order to protect those important ones in our life against unnecessary harassment.

Steven:Hi,how’s everything going?
David:this is the best place, this is the worst place.
David:hehe.
David:everything is OK.
Steven::-)
David: just like in China.
Steven:no?
David: I almost forget i’m in the States.
Steven:I cannot believe it!
David:that’s true.
David:not a big difference.
Steven:that’s not true, at least from your pictures on line.
Steven:that’s amazing
David:but the pictures are not so important.
David:Or I should say, those things are not so important.
David:I mean the flowers, the lawn, the air, the blue sky
Steven:it means that you can get along well with a brand new environment
David:yeah, quite well I think.
David:most things are the same. people, they work, eat, quarrel….
Steven:so I am curious whatthe most important is for you?
Steven:that you think it should be different?
David:well, the outside environment will not change your life actually.
Steven:or what do you expect different?
David:it just like the life in Xin Jiang is similar with that in Beijing.
Steven:Is it?
David:I think so.
Steven::-)
David:you have parents, friends, kids….
David:the amount of cars on the road will not decide the extent of your happiness.
Steven:are you fed up with what all around you? then how do you spend the rest of time there?
Steven:Oh?
David:that’s true. really fed up.
David:I go to the **** Council to kill time.
Steven:amazing to talk with a man in the States. I’m facing the sunrise, while sunset there. 
David:yeah, that’s really amazing.
David:I’m a little bit suspicious, is it really morning in Beijing?
Steven:that is a good question.
Steven:suppose I’m joining a program that everybody must fool you as planned.
David:like the movie Trumen show.
Steven:like The Trueman Show.
David::-)
Steven:Exactly yes!!!
David:have you moved to your new home?
Steven:I did one day before the May Day
Steven:I mean totally
David:so congratulations!
Steven:thanks
David:that’s really big change.
Steven:pity we have to wait till you are back
Steven:you said it. a change.
David:so how does Yan Yu go to **** every morning?
Steven:new way to offices of both.
David:she can drive you to Beida I think.
Steven:you said the best solution.
David:then she can go on. and pick you up at evening.
David:but she is not a good driver yet I guess.
Steven:exactly yes, but the traffic conditions in ZhongGuanCun is the biggest problem.
David:I can imagine that.
Steven:yesterday I drove Yangyang, her, and LeeXin.
David:you are energy-saver!
Steven:Leexin got frightened about the crazy rushing cars
David:One thing here that is much better than China is the traffic.
David:there is traffic jam also, but the driving manner is much better.
Steven:that’s the very thing terrible here.
David:and here in Washington they have HOV road.
David:that’s highly occupied vehicle
Steven:so?
David:if it’s HOV-3 road, the passenger in the car must be at least 3.
David:so if Zhong Guan cun has a HOV-3 road, maybe only 20% cars can drive on it. and since you have 4 passengers, you are qualified.
Steven:I have to be, Hehe…
David:you can drive wherever you like, since you are HOV-4
Steven:whereever-that is an amazing word. Oh, I ran into Jing-H**** this morning
David:what’s JING-H****
Steven:you forgot your car in such a short time!!!
Steven:your Honda FIT
David:Wow, I really forget it!!!
Steven:( faint)
David:i’ve thought it’s a place
David:Xiao Xiao long is in it,right?
Steven:your baby car would be sad.
David:it belongs to him now.
Steven:you can read my MSN name in Chinese?
David:yes.
David:the bring the laptop to here.
David:I bring…
Steven:anyway English helps to exchange much more information within same amount of time than Chinese. Personally I think. that’s why I prefer E in MSN.
David:really?
David:why?
Steven:my personal feeling. no evidence.
David:hehe.
Steven:I express more in E than in C with same amount of letters.
David:maybe there are too much Fei Hua when we speak mother tongue.
Steven:Hah!
Steven:that’s one I’ve heard for the first time.
Steven:but it seems true. I keep it
David:hah.
David:i have to work now.
David:glad to chat with you.
Steven:me too, or my boss will kill me.
David:haha.
Steven:me 2
David:see u.
Steven:Bye.