China Notes: Superfluous Musings of a Chinese Historian
Commentary & reflections on Chinese politics, society & culture, with particular attention to the Greater Pearl River Delta. Occasional postings on other topics that interest me.
On January 24 of 2011, a story that originated with The Telegraph and repeated in a number of Western news sources, declared that China is planning to merge nine cities in the Pearl River Delta into the world's most humongous megacity with 42 million people: "The "Turn The Pearl River Delta Into One" scheme will create a 16,000 sq mile urban area that is 26 times larger geographically than Greater London, or twice the size of Wales."
On Jan. 28, 2011, however, Guo Yuewen (郭跃文), spokesman for the Guangdong Provincial Committee of the Communist Party of China (广东省委外宣办), categorically denied the truthfulness of this story at a news conference. Ma Xiangming (马向明), the chief planner at the Guangdong Rural and Urban Planning Institute and the principal source for The Telegraph news story, explained that the misunderstanding came from the foreign journalists' misinterpretation of the term "integration" (一体化). When he talked about the integration of the nine Pearl River Delta cities (Guangzhou, Shenzhen, Foshan, Dongguan, Zhongshan, Zhuhai, Jiangmen, Huizhou and Zhaoqing), he meant functional integration, not political integration [ch]. One purpose for functional integration is to avoid duplication of services and wasting resources given the closeness of the nine cities; for example, if Guangzhou already has a tumor hospital, then there is no need for Shenzhen to build one. Building on the foundation of the rapid expansion of transportation infrastructure in the Delta, the region will in the near future be highly integrated in terms of medical services, environmental protection, and social services. Each of the cities will preserve its special characteristics and share in a division of labor, Ma added.
Nine in One?
Was it just a semantic misunderstanding, or was there more beneath the surface? If government services were to be highly integrated among the nine cities, will there not be a need for some higher level political unit to coordinate this division of labor, or will the Guangdong provincial government act in this capacity? It is also puzzling that The Telegraph story directly quoted Ma as saying: "It will not be [named] like Greater London or Greater Tokyo because there is no one city at the heart of this megalopolis ... We cannot just name it after one of the existing cities." Why is there a need for a new name (wouldn't Pearl River Delta do just fine?), if there were no megalopolis envisioned? Perhaps Ma was just expressing a personal opinion that the nine cities need to be merged for better coordination? Or perhaps this was yet another instance of linguistic confusion?
Regardless, there is no denial that this region of nine large cities is moving in the direction of greater functional integration, as already sketched in "Outline of the Plan for the Reform and Development of the Pearl River Delta [en] (珠江三角洲地区改革发展规划纲要) [ch]" released by the National Development and Reform Commission (国家发展和改革委员会) in December of 2008. Aside from the question of whether political integration was mentioned by Ma during his interview with The Telegraph, the newspaper's account of what he told the British reporters is consistent with Ma's later interview with the Chinese media denying the urban merger story and with the PRD development plan outline. According to The Telegraph:
Over the next six years, around 150 major infrastructure projects will mesh the transport, energy, water and telecommunications networks of the nine cities together, at a cost of some 2 trillion yuan (£190 billion). An express rail line will also connect the hub with nearby Hong Kong ...
Twenty-nine rail lines, totalling 3,100 miles, will be added, cutting rail journeys around the urban area to a maximum of one hour between different city centres. According to planners, phone bills could also fall by 85 per cent and hospitals and schools will be improved.
"Residents will be able to choose where to get their services and will use the internet to find out which hospital, for example, is less busy," said Mr Ma.
Pollution, a key problem in the Pearl River Delta because of its industrialisation, will also be addressed with a united policy, and the price of petrol and electricity could also be unified.
Moreover, even if the nine cities of the Pearl River Delta will not be merging politically, Guangzhou and Shenzhen are already megacities. At a government conference for the Pearl River Delta Reform and Development Plan on June 17, 2010, it was announced that Guangzhou's population had exceeded 14 million. According to Shen Dingli, professor of international relations at Fudan University, "Government data indicate that Shenzhen's population, 12 million in 2006, now stands at 14 million [in 2010], though a more detailed analysis argued that in 2004, Shenzhen already had a population of some 18 million."
Huang Huahua
Despite growing competition from other regions and rising labor costs, the Pearl River Delta remains a major manufacturing hub, "account[ing] for about 10 percent of China's gross domestic product." Guangdong Province, with the Pearl River Delta as its core, is China's richest province. On January 21, 2010, Governor Huang Huahua (黄华华) reported to the Guangdong People's Congress that Guangdong's GDP in 2010 is an estimated 4.5636 trillion yuan (about US$695 billion), doubling over the last five years. Guangdong has now surpassed in GDP three of the Four Little Dragons of East Asia: Singapore in 1998; Hong Kong in 2003; Taiwan in 2007. Guangdong's per capita income is now about $7,000 US. Imports and exports grew at an annual rate of 12.9% over the past five years, with total trade at 784.7 billion yuan in 2010 (about US$120 billion). Exports grew at 13.7% per annum over the same period, reaching a level of 453.2 billion yuan in 2010 (about US$69 billion). The province attracted US$90.6 billion in direct foreign investment during the five year period.
Nevertheless, Huang Huahua admitted that Guangdong still has a long way to go before it can fulfill the mission Deng Xiaoping charged it with: catching up with the Four Little Dragons. Even though Guangdong has surpassed Singapore in GDP back in 1998, it remains far behind Singapore in per capita income, social management, social order, and social morality.
Note on per capita GDP: Guangdong is no exception to gross regional income inequalities in China. Shenzhen and Guangzhou, with per capita GDP of US$13,754 and US$13,015 respectively in 2009 as estimated by the Korean trade and investment firm Kotra, are the two richest cities in China, and much above Guangdong's provincial average of $7,000.
Hou Yifan with World Chess Federation president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov
Hou Yifan entered the 64-player knockout tournament as the third highest ranked woman player in the world, with an FIDE rating of 2602. As in the 2008 tournament, Hou faced in the semi-final round Humpy Koneru of India, the highest rated player in the tournament and number 2 among all women after Judit Polgar of Hungary. Again as in 2008 Hou prevailed over Koneru, and advanced to the final round against fellow countrywoman Ruan Lufei (阮露斐). Ruan had a surprisingly strong tournament performance, given her fourth rank among the Chinese women at the championship and her status as a full-time doctoral student at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, leaving her less time to study chess than her competitors. To get to the final, Ruan had to fight exceptionally hard in every round, having to play a 2-game tiebreaker each time. In the third round she defeated world champion Alexandra Kosteniuk of Russia, who had gained the crown in 2008 by beating Hou Yifan in the final. In the final round, again Ruan tied the score against her opponent, leading to another tie-breaker. This time, however, Hou Yifan prevailed in tie-breaker, thus becoming the fourth Chinese women world champion of chess. Previous Chinese world champions were: Xie Jun (谢军), 1991-1996 and 1999-2001; Zhu Chen (诸宸), 2001-2004; and Xu Yuhua (许昱华), 2006 to 2008.
Ruan Lufei, Hou Yifan, & Zhao Xue
At Title Event, Asian Women Pursue World Domination, so states the title of Dylan Loeb McClain's New York Times article. McClain suggests that the Women's World Chess Championship "provided more evidence of a shift in the balance of power in the women’s game to Asia from Eastern Europe." The sport had been dominated by women players in Eastern Europe, particularly the Soviet Union and its successor states, including Georgia and Russia. At the 2010 championship, however, four of the quarter-finalists were from China, and two from India, leaving Kateryna Lahno of Ukraine as the only survivor from Eastern Europe. In the semi-final round, three Chinese women (Hou, Ruan, and Zhao Xue 赵雪) and Humpy Koneru of India were left.
During her interview by Southern Metropolis Daily (南方都市报) [ch], Hou Yifan stated that her idol is Xue Jun, for being successful both in chess and in life: Xie earned a Ph.D. in psychology, and has just been appointed vice-president of Capital Institute of Physical Education (首都体育学院) [ch]. Since age 13 Hou has been represented by Beijing Starz International Sports Management Co. (众辉体育), a global sports marketing and management company the clients of which include Yao Ming (姚明), Steve Nash, star snooker champion Ding Junhui (丁俊晖), and China's most successful male swimmer Zhang Lin (张琳). Since Hou decided to pursue a career in chess at age seven, her mother gave up her own career and moved with her from their home in Jiangsu to Shandong so that Yifan could study at a chess academy and then to Beijing when Yifan became the youngest member of the national team. Two years ago Hou's father also gave up his job and moved to Beijing so that the family could be together. Despite anticipated prize earnings and bonuses from the government and a foundation following her victory at the world championship, Hou Yifan and her family will still be unable to afford buying a house in Beijing.
Cartoon showing a cadre removing
TV newscaster's Cantonese lips and
replacing them with Mandarin lips
When on July 5, 2010, Ji Keguang (纪可光), a deputy director of the Guangzhou (Canton) People's Political Consultative Conference (广州市政协), proposed replacing Cantonese with Mandarin on the composite (综合频道) and news channels (新闻频道) of Guangzhou Television, he unwittingly touched a raw nerve in many Cantonese and triggered a social protest movement that spilled over into the Special Administration Region of Hong Kong. A series of mass protests ensued that have uncertain future political and cultural consequences.
This proposal was perceived as a threat to the survival of Cantonese, which has already been put in doubt since at least the beginning of the new millennium. Two forces are at work that are undermining the linguistic primacy of Cantonese in Guangdong Province: government policy promoting Mandarin as the national language for nation building, and a heavy influx of non-Cantonese immigrants into the province.
Unity in Script but Diversity in Speech
The First Emperor of the Qin Dynasty, the unifier of China back in the 3rd century BCE, was able to unify the writing scripts of the Warring States, but not their spoken languages [ch]. Although all dynasties since the Zhou had their official spoken languages, usage at best was limited to the bureaucratic stratum (hence the nomenclature Mandarin 官话). According to Prof. Yi Zhongtian (易中天) of Xiamen University, there are seven major dialect groups among the Han Chinese [ch], of which six were southern [Wu (吴); Xiang or Hunanese (湘); Gan (赣); Yue or Cantonese (粤); Min (闽)] and only one northern [Mandarin or Northern (Beifang 北方)]. The subdialects within the dialect groups number in the hundreds. However, some subdialects are mutually intelligible, e.g. the speeches of Southern Fujian (闽南语) and Chaozhou (潮州话). Moreover, the subdialects of the Mandarin group covers about 3/4s of Chinese-speaking regions in China, including Northern China, the Northwest, the Southwest, and Jianghuai (江淮) roughly encompassing the region between the Huai River and the Lower Yangzi in Jiangsu and Anhui provinces. Still, many subdialects within the same dialect group are mutually unintelligible or barely intelligible, and the linguistic subgroups "show marked linguistic and cultural diversity." As for the dialect groups, the differences between them are great enough that some have argued that they should be classified as languages in their own right.
Language Map of China
State Policy to Promote a Common Spoken Language
It was not until the founding of the Republic of China in the early 20th century that there was a concerted government effort to promote a common spoken language [ch] among the peoples of China. After the establishment of the People's Republic of China in 1949, the Communist Party continued this state policy. In 1956 Mandarin was established as the official language, and top leaders like Zhou Enlai strongly advocated the national promotion of Mandarin for building central power and national unity. Still, during the Maoist era the popularization of Mandarin (now called Putonghua 普通话 or Common Speech) was limited, particularly in the rural areas. Many of the top government leaders, cadres, and school teachers lacked fluency in standard Mandarin. Because of limited geographical mobility, the masses had little need of speaking Mandarin. Some lower level cadres even believed that speaking Mandarin separated them from the masses.
Primary school student making speech
in front of banner with slogan
"Speak Mandarin, Be a Civilized Person"
A new wave of national promotion of Mandarin came with the onset of the Deng Xiaoping era. The 1982 Constitution specifically states in Article 19 that "The state promotes the nationwide use of Putonghua." In 1985 the popularization of Mandarin and writing reform campaigns were merged [ch] under the supervision of the State Council. In 1994 a national Mandarin proficiency exam was instituted for candidates applying for posts in government, broadcasting. Even though the government insisted that popularizing Mandarin was not directed at prohibiting the use of regional dialects, since the mid-1990s it has been aggressively promoting Mandarin in government offices, the broadcast media, and schools. Speaking Mandarin is equated with being civilized (文明) through slogans and school speech contests with the theme "Speak Mandarin, Be a Civilized Person (讲普通话，做文明人)." Local schools have been pushing the "Promoting Mandarin 8+8" (“推普8+8”) Campaign, requiring students from kindergarten through middle school to use Mandarin for 8 hours in school and 8 hours outside each day. The Law of the People's Republic of China on the Standard Spoken and Written Chinese Language [ch] (中华人民共和国国家通用语言文字法) was promulgated in 2001, requiring the use of Mandarin at official and public functions and limiting the use of Chinese dialects and minority languages under specified occasions, such as special official situations, officially approved television and radio stations, regional artistic genres (e.g. Cantonese opera), and research and teaching. Progressively local stations are prohibited from broadcasting in the local dialects.
Girl's poster: "Grandma, please speak Mandarin."
Grandma (in Cantonese): "You got to be kidding!"
These developments have already sounded alarms among the Cantonese in Guangzhou before 2010. In a 2009 newspaper commentary entitled "Destroying Cantonese, Beginning in Kindergarten? (消灭粤语，从幼稚园做起？)," the writer complained that more and more primary school children could only speak Mandarin [ch]. Some of her friends spoke Cantonese to their husbands but Mandarin to their infant children. She attributed this to the policy of promoting Mandarin, the use of Mandarin as the instructional language in kindergarten, the employment of non-Cantonese nannies, and parental indifference. Would her generation squander the Cantonese cultural heritage bequeathed by their ancestors, she bemoaned? Why was it that she found Cantonese still commonly spoken in the overseas Chinese communities in Malaysia even though many Chinese Malaysians are third or fourth generation? Why did Cantonese enjoy a greater vitality in Hong Kong than in Guangzhou, despite Hong Kong's century of British rule? Will Cantonese only survive in overseas communities in the future? Ironically, the New York Times reported in 2009 that Mandarin is eclipsing Cantonese in New York's Chinatown. This July, the New York Times published a commentary by Hong Kong writer Verna Yu complaining that many Hong Kong parents were speaking in their less-than-perfect English to their infant children to prepare them for admission to prestigious international schools, with the result that those children could not speak their mother tongue at all. As Hong Kong writer Kent Ewing observed, "In the same way that many middle-class parents in Hong Kong, a former British colony, speak English to their children at home in the hope that it will advance their educational and career prospects, upwardly mobile Guangdong parents teach Putonghua to their offspring."
Besides the government's language policy and parental choice, another factor that posed a threat to regional dialects and minority languages is the increased mobility of the population, with loosened controls on migration and economic reform creating economic opportunities. The Pearl River Delta around Guangzhou, the first beneficiary of economic reform and the influx of overseas Chinese and foreign investment in the 1980s, has attracted a huge influx of immigrants from all over China, who of necessity turn to the use of Mandarin for communication. As much as 1/3 of the population of Guangdong Province are immigrant workers [ch].
Cantopop and Mandopop diva Faye Wong,
in Wong Kar-wai's Chungking Express (1994)
Still, Cantonese might have been in a less perilous state than other regional dialects for several reasons. In the 1980s and 1990s, Hong Kong movies and pop music (Cantopop) in Cantonese were hugely popular in mainland China, and some Cantonese idioms have even made it into standard Mandarin usage (e.g maidan 埋单 in place of jiezhang 结账 for "please bring the bill"). A number of non-Cantonese have become big stars in Cantopop, for example Beijing native Faye Wong (王菲). Secondly, both because of the cultural influence of Hong Kong pop culture and the economic opportunities offered by the Pearl River Delta, there was a Cantonese fever (粤语热) [ch] in the late 1980s and 1990s. Many young people in the non-Cantonese speaking regions of Guangdong, as well as cities to the North including Shanghai and Beijing, were taking Cantonese classes so that they could seek employment in the Pearl River Delta or deal with Cantonese-speaking businessmen and customers from Hong Kong and Guangdong. The saying was that Northerners were coming south, while Cantonese dialect was going north (北方人南下，廣州話北上). Thirdly, because of the proximity of Hong Kong to the Pearl River Delta, the Chinese government has been fairly liberal in allowing Cantonese language programming in the Guangdong broadcast media, unlike other Chinese dialects but similar to the minority languages Tibetan, Mongolian and Uyghur which are allocated a fair number of television stations in their respective autonomous regions. The 9 channels of Guangzhou Television mostly broadcast in Cantonese. Back in 1988, the Film and Television Bureau (广电部) gave approval to the Pearl River and Guangzhou channels to broadcast in Cantonese [ch], as a counter to influence from the television stations of neighboring Hong Kong. The ratings of the Guangzhou Cantonese channels have now surpassed Asia Television's Hong Kong Channel (本港台), and are comparable to TVB's Jade Channel's (翡翠台).
Why then did Ji Keguang propose switching from Cantonese to Mandarin on two Guangzhou channels this July? His committee proposal's claim that the switch would boost ratings seemed tenuous, as a language switch by the Business Channel (经济频道) of Guangzhou Television to Mandarin in 2009 resulted in a precipitous drop in ratings, and its noontime newscast had to switch back to Cantonese in January of 2010. Moreover, the Guangzhou People's Political Consultative Conference had conducted an online survey before completing and submitting the proposal to Guangzhou mayor Wan Qingliang (万庆良). Over 30,000 people had responded to the survey, with 20% supporting Mandarin and 80% supporting Cantonese.
Guangzhou Opera House (广州歌剧院),
designed by Zaha Hadid, and opened May 2010
The overwhelming support of the online poll for Cantonese notwithstanding, Ji Keguang and other leaders and officials insisted that switching from Cantonese to Mandarin would allow the city to better meet the needs of the large numbers of non-Cantonese residents as well as outside visitors during the Asian Games in October, and also enable Guangzhou Television to be approved for national satellite programming. Alone of the five urban areas designated as national central cities (国家五大中心城市) by the Ministry of Housing and Urban-Rural Development (住房和城乡建设部) in February 2010, Guangzhou is not a direct-controlled municipality (直辖市), nor are its television stations on national satellite television (the other four cities are: Beijing; Shanghai; Tianjin; Chongqing). Getting on satellite television is befitting to Guangzhou for a city of its national stature and importance. According to Ji, the poll results indicated that the masses needed proper guidance to bring them around to the correct standpoint.
Not all members of the political and cultural elite agreed, however. Han Zhipeng (韩志鹏), a member of the Guangzhou People's Political Consultative Conference, argued against the proposal on the grounds that Cantonese is the mother tongue of the Cantonese people and the foundation of Cantonese culture, and that it is an important connection to the overseas Chinese, many of whom speak only Cantonese. In any event, meeting the needs of non-Cantonese residents and Asian Games visitors seem to be a specious reason, as there are plenty of television channels broadcasting in Mandarin they can turn on. Nor is it guaranteed that Guangzhou Television will be approved for satellite broadcasting if two of its main channels switch to Mandarin.
Although the proposal remained at that point just that, and Mayor Wan maintained an air of non-committal, many local residents in Guangzhou and Hong Kong became extremely agitated about a government policy they perceived as "Promoting Mandarin, Abolishing Cantonese (推普废粤)." A lively debate surfaced online, and a mass campaign to protect Cantonese (捍卫广东话) was mobilized over the Internet (see Chinese-language wikis on the campaign: 香港網絡大典: 撐粵語運動; 維基百科: 2010年廣州市民捍衛粵語行動).
The Rallies on July 11, July 25, and August 1, 2010
Guangzhou Youth Joining in
"I Sing Loudly for Cantonese (我为粤语大声唱),"
People's Park, July 11, 2010
Guangzhou protester holding up poster
defending Cantonese against
the intrusion of Mandarin
This slogan/poster design is actually a spinoff of a political slogan/poster from a Hong Kong political campaign. In November of 2009, the Hong Kong government put together a proposal to broaden political participation in the 2012 elections of the Chief Executive and the Legislative Council, presumably as a move towards greater democracy and eventual universal suffrage. Before the package would be voted on by the Legislative Council in June of 2010, the Hong Kong government launched a publicity campaign to garner popular support. The slogan used was "Act Now" (起錨), or literally, "Anchors Ahoy." Opponents of the government proposal, who felt that it did not make real progress towards democracy and universal suffrage, parodied the government poster by transforming its slogan "Act Now (起錨)" into "All Wrong" (超錯) and "Collect Skin" (收皮), the latter phrase a Cantonese swearword meaning roughly "pack it up."
Animated parody of Hong Kong government poster
transforming "Act Now" (起錨) into "All Wrong" (超錯)
and "Collect Skin" (收皮)
Police trying to keep protesters in check,
Henanxi Subway Station, Guangzhou, July 25, 2010
On July 16 another call went out on the Internet for ten thousand people to gather outside the Henanxi Subway Station (河南西地铁站) at 5 p.m. on July 25 for a Big Movement to Support Cantonese Together (齐撑粤语大行动). On July 23 the municipal government declared this gathering illegal, and the original organizers tried to call it off. Nonetheless, around 2,000 people showed up shortly after 5 p.m. on July 25, singing Cantonese songs, holding high posters, and shouting slogans such as "Ji Keguang, Go to Hell (紀可光收皮)," "Mandarin, Pack It Up; Cantonese, Anchors Ahoy! (煲冬瓜收皮，廣州話起錨)," and "Long Live Cantonese" (廣州話萬歲)" [see eyewitness account by Hong Kong's inmediahk.net (香港獨立媒體網) with photos and videos (ch)]. Only with increasing numbers of police and security personnel arriving on the scene did the crowd begin to disperse after about 6:40 p.m.
Police scuffling with demonstrators, People's Park, Aug. 1, 2010
A second gathering was scheduled [ch] at People's Park on the following Sunday, August 1. At least two thousand demonstrators congregated at the park [ch] by 2:30 p.m., shouting slogans such as "Guangzhou natives speak Cantonese (广州人讲广州话)." They were confronted by large numbers of policemen, who began to close off the park entrances, allowing people to leave but not to enter. They scuffled with some demonstrators, arrested a number of them, and detained seven journalists and news photographers, six from Hong Kong media and one a Reuters reporter. With further reinforcements arriving, about a thousand policemen entered the park through the main gate at around 3 p.m., and forced everyone inside to leave. The demonstrators regrouped at the main gate, and proceeded to walk toward nearby Beijing Road Pedestrian Street (北京路步行街) to continue their demonstration. The police countered by forming a human barrier to prevent access to Beijing Road. By 4:30 p.m. most demonstrators were persuaded to disperse. Reportedly a number of protests took place at other locations in Guangzhou, including Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hall (中山纪念堂) and several university campuses.
Hong Kong protester holding poster with sign "I Love Cantonese;
I Don't Know How to Cook Winter Melon"
["Cook Winter Melon (煲冬瓜)" is a homonym for Mandarin (普通话)],
Aug. 1, 2010
On the same day, about 200 Hong Kong demonstrators held a parallel protest in support of Cantonese. They first gathered at Southhorn Playground in Wanchai District (灣仔修頓球場), and then walked to the Wanchai Police Headquarters and the office of the Hong Kong government. Hon Lin Shan (韓連山), an official with the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union (香港教育專業人員協會), stated: "We are here to echo the Guangzhou people's voices because we believe Guangzhou people are our brothers and sisters. If their freedom of choice is interfered with, sooner or later Hong Kong people's freedom of choice will be interfered with, because we are in the same country." Significantly, this was the first time that the people in Hong Kong expressed their concerns for an external political issue by holding a parallel protest simultaneously with the mainland protesters in Guangzhou. There is the realization that if the mainlanders do not enjoy democracy and freedom, then Hong Kongers too cannot enjoy them in the long run [ch].
State Response to Mass Protests
Even before the July 25 demonstration in the People's Park, the state responded on the public media to the burgeoning Internet campaign in defense of Cantonese. Vice-secretary Su Zhijia (苏志佳) of the Guangzhou City Party Committee (广州市委) stated on July 19 in an interview with the media that while the Guangzhou Netizens demonstrated a love of the Guangzhou and Guangdong (Lingnan) culture, the city party committee and the municipal government never had any intention to abolish Cantonese [ch] through the promotion of Mandarin (推普废粤). He reaffirmed that Cantonese is an important component of Lingnan culture, inseparable from its opera, music, food and other cultural assets. Since the preservation of local culture was an important aspect of the policy of the party committee and the municipal government, there was never any question of the abolition of Cantonese. Promotion of Mandarin and the preservation of Cantonese were not contradictory but complementary, Su asserted.
Guangzhou officials at press conference, July 28, 2010
On July 28, the City Party Committee and the municipal government held a press conference [ch], again emphasizing that there was never any official policy of promoting Mandarin to abolish Cantonese (推普废粤), and that it was a false and fabricated issue. Moreover, the party committee and the city government, in line with the desires of the masses, have been actively pursuing the preservation and the promotion of Lingnan culture, with many successes and accomplishments, for example in the promotion of Cantonese opera (粤剧). The People's Political Consultative Conference's 16 committee reports on the soft environment of the Asian Games, among which was the broadcast language proposal, were drafted with the participation of 8 democratic parties, 2 organizations, and 6 special committees. This process was thus a realization of "democratic politics under socialism with Chinese characteristics" (中国特色社会主义民主政治). The recommendations by the People's Political Consultative Conference were neither executive orders nor legal provisions; they were provided for the reference of the party committee and the city government, which would study the issues further and invite other opinions widely before "making a scientific decision" (科学决策).
Asian Games poster with slogan
"Welcoming the Asian Games, Creating a New Life"
The officials further emphasized that those who spread false rumors about the non-existent issue of the endangerment of Cantonese and those who congregated illegally for a mass meeting without official permit would be punished. Back on July 16, the police had discovered that someone had posted online the false message that a mass gathering for 10,000 people had been officially approved, and subsequently an out-of-towner surnamed Yu was arrested as the alleged culprit. As for the July 25 demonstration, the officials stated that the police, concerned about traffic safety, dispersed the crowd peacefully without incident. Finally, the officials emphasized that all Guangzhou citizens should work together to achieve the goal of "Welcoming the Asian Games, Creating a New Life (迎接亚运会，创造新生活) that provincial party secretary Wang Yang (汪洋) had espoused.
Sources of Popular Discontent Beyond Language Policy
Were the demonstrators overreacting or succumbing to the rhetoric of agitators, as government officials insinuated? To be sure, the broadcast language proposal was only under consideration, and, even if implemented, it would not result in the total disappearance of Cantonese from the television broadcasts. Nevertheless, the size and fervor of the pro-Cantonese movement were derived from well-founded fears that Cantonese was losing ground, and also from legitimate sources of popular dissatisfaction beyond the realms of language policy: collective concerns about the progressive disappearance of Cantonese culture and social dislocations resulting from massive urban renewal and construction.
A certificate for a "Three Good Student"
(三好学生)
Popular discontent had been building up before Ji Keguang's proposal, according to participants of the protests interviewed by Hong Kong's immediahk.net (香港獨立媒體網). Guangzhou's subway system had recently proposed the elimination of Cantonese announcements, and only backed off in face of mass opposition. As mentioned earlier, the schools have been instituting the "Promoting Mandarin 8+8" Campaign. Guangzhou middle schools are penalizing students for speaking Cantonese outside the classroom. Firefly recalled that even back when she attended primary school in the early 1990s, 1 point would be deducted from a student's conduct grade (操行分) each time she was caught speaking Cantonese. If one had been caught speaking Cantonese 20 times, one would lose all hopes of ever being designated as a "Three-Good Student" (三好学生), a commendation for excellence in morality, studies and physical fitness, which might later confer advantages in school admission and job assignments.
Qilou (骑楼): Cantonese architecture with the first floor
receding part way, and the upper floors hanging over
the sidewalk and supported by columns
Han Zhipeng, a member of the People's Political Consultative Conference who was opposed to the broadcast language proposal, believed that the main reason why the discussion of the language issue had been so excited and protracted was the fear of the local people that Cantonese culture was being endangered [ch]. As Guangzhou becomes more modernized, old streets representing Lingnan culture are disappearing, arcade buildings (骑楼) and big mansions in Xiguan (西关大屋) are replaced by apartment buildings, old teahouses are converted into modern restaurants, and many old traditional businesses have closed. Urban development and the demolition of old buildings and neighborhoods have accelerated with the coming Asian Games (similar to what happened in Beijing before the 2008 Olympics and Shanghai before Expo 2010).
En'ning Road residence of 73-year old Cantonese opera star
Ye Zhaobai (叶兆栢), and former residence of his father-in-law
and Cantonese opera and Hong Kong film star
Zhang Huoyou (张活游), slated for demolition
Particularly controversial is the urban government's plan to demolish and rebuild the neighborhood of En'ning Road [ch] (恩宁路), a historic area nicknamed Cantonese Opera Street (粤剧街), and containing old buildings and former residences of many famous people, including Cantonese opera stars He Feifan (何非凡) and Hong Xiannü (红线女), renowned architect Liang Sicheng (梁思成), and national anthem composer Nie Er (聂耳) (see Southern Metropolis Weekly's photo essay on En'ning Road) [ch]). Only three structures will be exempted from demolition: Bahe Huiguan or Cantonese Opera Guildhall (八和会馆), Luanyu Tang or Cantonese Opera Secondary Guildhall (鑾舆堂), and the home of Bruce Lee's father Li Haiquan (李小龙祖居).
Wooden door of the Cantonese Opera Guildhall,
only surviving part of the original building
destroyed by Japanese bombing in 1937
Besides the loss of cultural heritage, many residents are concerned about inadequate compensation and relocation to neighborhoods far from the city center, despite reportedly record rates of compensation [ch] set by the government — as high as 17,000 yuan per square meter in Liwan District (荔湾区). According to urban planning drawn up for 2010-20, demolitions of old buildings and relocations will impact about 600,000 people [ch] and cover an area of about 10.5 million square meters. More immediately, urban facelift in advance of the Asian Games, involving the building of more expressways, maintenance repair of existing main roads and the subway system, the improvement of key neighborhoods, and the beautification of buildings along the main arteries, has turned the city into a huge construction mess. On January 28, 2010, then mayor (and currently the secretary of Guangzhou Party Committee) Zhang Guangning (张广宁) apologized to the residents of Guangzhou, and promised reforms to ameliorate the situation. He admitted that in the last six months, the city had received some 600 complaints, including traffic jams and noise due to the construction work, the loss of revenue to merchants, poor construction workmanship, and damage to private property and burglaries committed by construction workers. While insisting that the number of cases of construction workers causing inconvenience and economic loss to Guangzhou residents was small relative to the scale of the urban renewal, Mayor Zhang admitted that the reputation of the municipal government had been blackened and that the enthusiasm of Guangzhou citizens for the Asian Games construction work had been dampened.
The Political, Social and Cultural Significance of the Pro-Cantonese Protests
Following the police crackdown on the August 1 demonstration and Secretary Wang Yang's stern warning about people taking care not to be used by agitators and terrorists, the pro-Cantonese movement went into a lull. Yet as indicated earlier, the causes of popular discontent were profound, and have not been adequately addressed by the authorities. Wang Yang's denial of any intention of abolishing Cantonese was met with some skepticism [ch]: only one month earlier he had told the Cantonese that now that they were rich, they needed to focus on becoming "enlightened" (教化), that is, broadening the use of Mandarin and elevating the cultural level among the people. He was only putting on a show now because of his concern that the pro-Cantonese protests would negatively impact the Asian Games and his political fortunes at the 18th Party Congress in 2012.
Confucius lecturing to his students in "elegant speech" (雅言)
The pro-Cantonese protests of 2010 were significant for several reasons. First of all, the protests were about not only linguistic preservation, but more broadly cultural preservation. Protesters, commentators, and government officials are agreed on one point: that Cantonese represents the heart of Lingnan culture. Furthermore, Cantonese is not just a medium of communication and expression of a regional culture, it is also a living linguistic fossil of what standard spoken Chinese was like one or two thousand years ago. According to Prof. Luo Kangning (罗康宁), Cantonese originated from ancient standard Chinese ("elegant speech" or Yayan 雅言) [ch] of the Central Plains that was used as the "Putonghua" of the Zhou Dynasty for court, literary and ritual occasions. "Elegant Speech" was first introduced to Guangdong in the Qin and the Han dynasties, serving as a means of common communication for the North Chinese immigrants from different regions and also for the indigenous tribes who had diverse languages and no written scripts. Maritime trade between the Central Plains and the south also facilitated the spread of the "elegant speech" of the north in the Lingnan region. The spoken language in the North began to diverge significantly from ancient Chinese when North China was occupied by successive waves of nomadic invaders from the 4th to the 6th centuries who brought their linguistic and cultural influences. Cantonese, however, did not undergo comparable changes because of the relative stability of the southern region. As a result, Cantonese remained phonetically much closer to ancient and middle Chinese than other dialect groups.
The mobilization of the masses in the pro-Cantonese movement was the sign of an emerging civil society. A July 28, 2010 commentary in Southern Weekend by Xiaoshu (笑蜀) optimistically projected a Guangzhou model of social action (广州模式) [ch] for the rest of the country to emulate. First, the participants acted in a rational and orderly manner. Second, the police did not overreact at the July 25 gathering, and there were no instances of a demonstrator being labeled as mentally ill, made to disappear, or thrown into a "black jail," as often happened in cases of police taking action against crowds of demonstrators or individual petitioners pleading for justice. Both demonstrators and policemen were engaged in rational interactions, perhaps creating new rules of the game under which the authorities allow space for peaceful demonstrations, instead of relying on coercive methods. As it turned out, the authorities took a much tougher stance in responding to the second rally on August 1. Except for three people who were accused of instigating the demonstration or creating a disturbance (two with alleged criminal records), the police released the rest of the people who were arrested at the rally. Nevertheless, people were sufficiently intimidated not to risk going to another public rally in the near future [ch], particularly after Wang Yang's warning on August 4. Still, some participants declared an intention to carry on the pro-Cantonese campaign through cultural activities, for example by volunteering for the Asian Games and then promoting Cantonese with visitors and athletes.
Panyu protesters on Nov. 23, 2009:
man wearing gas mask holding poster stating
"Oppose the Incineration of Garbage;
Protect Green Panyu"
If Xiaoshu might have been a bit optimistic in declaring a new tolerant approach by the government facing protests and petitions, he is correct in seeing a vibrant civil society emerging in Guangzhou. As he pointed out, the pro-Cantonese rallies were preceded by other acts of peaceful mass mobilization, most notably when residents of Panyu District in Guangzhou protested on November 23, 2009 against the planned location of a garbage incinerator in their neighborhood (EastSouthWestNorth's translation of Southern Metropolis Daily story with numerous photos). Moreover, one noteworthy feature of the pro-Cantonese movement was that most participants were young people born after 1980 (a number of them were profiled by Southern Weekend [ch]). Coming from an Internet-savvy generation conscious of the concept of citizen rights, the post-80 generation now constitutes the nucleus of the emerging civil society in Guangzhou. Xiao Lao (小劳), the editor of the community Web site City of Rams Network (羊城网) [ch], says of his generation, "They have developed a sense of social responsibility [ch]. They are more capable of thinking for themselves than in the past. They are not a moronic or brain-dead generation. The Guangzhou natives (广州人) are different from people from other places. They know they are citizens (市民), not subjects (老百姓). They are a part of the city, and do not blindly obey orders. On topics they care about, they are free, tolerant, and rational. This is the spirit of the Cantonese of Guangzhou."
This online poster inviting people to participate
in the July 11 sing-along
in support of Cantonese
uses traditional Chinese characters
and Cantonese colloquialisms
One example of how this familiarity with Hong Kong politics and culture impacted the Guangzhou movement, as mentioned above, is Guangzhou activists' transformation of the Hong Kong government's promotional poster and the opposition's parody into the poster with the slogan "Cantonese, anchors ahoy! Mandarin, pack it up!" It is also significant that the Guangzhou activists often made use of traditional Chinese characters used in Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan: the Chinese government promotes the use of standard simplified characters together with the use of Mandarin, as encapsulated in the slogan "Popularize Mandarin, Write Standardized Characters (推广普通话，写规范汉字)." Furthermore, the Guangzhou activists often employed Cantonese colloquialisms in their slogans and online exchanges, which meant using special Cantonese characters not in the official standard character set.
"The Master Thief Who Crushed Guangdong"
The activists made extensive use of puns [e.g. Cook Winter Melon (煲冬瓜) and Mandarin (普通话)] as well as parodies. Third-year art student Wu Weihao (吴伟浩) created this example of cultural activism [ch] (image left) that was a huge hit on the Internet. The image is that of a giant hand crushing a number of stone rams, and is a reference to a foundation myth of the city of Guangzhou: during a time of famine five immortals rode atop five rams each carrying a stalk or rice grain which the immortals bequeathed to the local residents, who enjoyed prosperity and plenty henceforth and therefore the city was known as the City of Rams (羊城) or the City of Five Rams (五羊城). The rams in Wu's cartoon is thus a symbol for Cantonese culture under siege. The cartoon's title "The Master Thief Who Crushed Cantonese [Language and Culture] (碎粤神偷)" was phonetically identical to the title of a 2009 Hong Kong film Echoes of the Rainbow (歲月神偷), which was about a Hong Kong family dealing with changes in its social environment, with time as the metaphorical thief that stole many of the good things in life (literal translation of the Chinese title: "Time the Master Thief"). Winner of the Crystal Bear award at the 2010 Berlin Film Festival, Echoes of the Rainbow triggered a citizen's movement to save from demolition Wing Lee Street (永利街) in the Sheung Wan (上環) district, where the movie was made. The Hong Kong government decided in March of 2010 to remove Wing Lee Street from the list of neighborhoods for urban renewal and marked it for historic preservation. Wu chose the title "The Master Thief Who Crushed Cantonese [Language and Culture] (碎粤神偷)" for his cartoon because he felt that Guangzhou is confronting similar problems of loss of cultural heritage as Hong Kong is, as Echoes of the Rainbow (歲月神偷) reminds its audience.
"Smashing Cantonese"
The parody poster on the right is a further extension of Wu's cartoon, which was incorporated into its design center left. The layout of this poster was patterned on a movie poster for Echoes of the Rainbow. The image of the much-derided Ji Keguang was pasted into the center right section of the poster, as the star of a movie called "Smashing Cantonese (碎粤神偷)" (literal translation: The Master Thief Who Crushed Cantonese [Language and Culture]). A line to the left of the last two characters of the film title stated: "In the Guangzhou that is promoting Mandarin, Ji Keguang is the biggest petty thief." The director of the "film" was listed as Country Bumpkin [who Knows No Cantonese] (死捞头), while the Office for Demolitions and Relocations (拆迁办) was producer.
"Destroy the Four Olds, Establish a New Insanity"
In addition to Hong Kong popular culture as a source of artistic borrowing or inspiration, the Photoshopping of Cultural Revolution posters is another technique the activists employed. The poster on the left was adapted from a Cultural Revolution poster on "Destroying the Four Olds (破四旧)," a slogan of that era. In this poster, the revolutionary peasant with a pickaxe is in front of a red flag with the words "Crush Cantonese [Language and Culture]" (碎粤), his right hand stretching towards a ram (symbol of Guangzhou). The four olds were crossed out in red in the background: "Collective Memory (集体回忆), the Old City (旧城), Cantonese (粤语), and Old Guangzhou Natives (老广州人)."
Guangzhou native Xie Wenjun (谢文君) created the huge online video hit Vanishing Guangzhou (正在消失的羊城) [Video in Cantonese with Chinese subtitles] back in June 2010 as a graduation film for Beijing Film Academy (北京电影学院). Through online word of mouth Vanishing Guangzhou attracted hundreds of thousands of hits in just 20 days during the height of the pro-Cantonese movement, inspiring many youth to become actively involved in the preservation of Guangzhou culture [ch]. Xie's film opens with a question. What if you are a father of the generation born in the 1980s looking out at Guangzhou of 2012 from your 106th floor apartment, and seeing nothing but modern high rises all around? How will you be able to answer if you are questioned by your child about what Guangzhou was like in the old days? The film then explores old Guangzhou using a variety of techniques and source materials, ranging from interviews with neighborhood people and other concerned parties to yellowing photos to hand drawings to newsreel footage and feature film excerpts to rap videos. The narration makes the point that the post-80 generation involved in documenting cultural loss in Guangzhou is focused on cultural preservation, but for the residents of the endangered neighborhoods, it is the even more serious matter of the defense of rights (维权). Can there be a middle way that allows for modern development and also the preservation of culture and rights, the film asks? Because the situation confronted by Guangzhou is hardly unique in China, Xie's documentary resonated with many people from other parts of the country.
Hit Rap Video: "Everything is Being Dismantled; Cantonese Must Not be Dismantled!"
Rap廣州-《乜都拆，廣州話唔可以拆！》
The examples of Firefly and Xie Wenjun suggest that for many Guangzhou residents, the preservation of the tangible and intangible cultural assets of Lingnan is inseparable from the future survival of Cantonese. Indeed, many participants in the pro-Cantonese movement of the summer of 2010 had previously been actively engaged in the discovery and preservation of Guangzhou culture. They had mobilized online and formed small groups and discussion forums [ch], exploring different sections of the city, photographing and documenting old buildings and cultural relics, exchanging their impressions and opinions about cultural topics online.
"Guangzhou natives speak Cantonese;
if you don't understand Cantonese,
go back to the countryside"
(Cultural Revolution poster style)
Some of the more chauvinist pro-Cantonese protesters saw a clear division between Cantonese and non-Cantonese, and took up slogans such as "Guangzhou natives speak Cantonese; if you don't understand Cantonese, go back to the countryside (广州人讲广州话，听唔明就翻乡下)." Many local residents also felt that top officials, who were non-Cantonese outsiders appointed by the central government, were lacking in sympathy for Cantonese culture and concerns. Nevertheless, the majority of the activists did not reject non-Cantonese or the use of Mandarin per se; they were only asking for respect for local language and culture. Nor was this concern for Cantonese culture exclusively held by Cantonese natives. Some of the cultural small groups were formed by or composed of mainly non-Cantonese immigrants who have taken up an interest in local culture and learned to speak Cantonese. For example, the Discover Guangzhou (发现广州) Small Group, of which Firefly was a member, was formerly headed by a Hunanese whose screen name was White Horse (白马) and who spoke Cantonese fluently; most of its members were new residents of Guangzhou (新广州人).
Could discontent with cultural loss erupt into more militant political expressions? Historian Arthur Waldron notes, "to tamper with language is to play with fire ... It is one thing to have a grasp of Mandarin for official uses. It is something quite different to give up one's historical identity as a cultured southern Chinese in favor of the identity of Beijing. The reaction in Guangdong, which encompasses a region every bit as rich, international and sophisticated as Beijing or Shanghai (whose own language is also being lost in the flood of enforced Mandarin), may be a sign of things to come, as local cultures, now wealthy, self-sufficient, and proud prove unwilling to abandon the languages they learned from their parents and grandparents and insist rather that they receive the same respect as the centrally-mandated national language." In the short run, however, the post-80 generation of Guangzhou is avoiding incurring the full wrath of the coercive power of the state. Still, the emerging civil society in Guangzhou, in alliance with its brethren in Hong Kong, is likely to keep the flames of the cause of Cantonese cultural preservation and promotion alive.
The mystery team of the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, the North Korean national men's soccer team, attracted multitudinous fans in China. Chinese enthusiasm for the North Koreans was in stark contrast to their general disgust and disdain for their own national team.
North Korea's National Men's Soccer Team
How was it possible for North Korea, an impoverished and isolated nation of 23 million, to qualify for the 2010 World Cup, while a rapidly growing and open China with 1.3 billion people failed to do so? Debates about the performances of the North Korean team even entered the realm of political discourse in China, with many Chinese seeing in the North Korean experience a source of inspiration for reforming Chinese soccer and even Chinese society.
China's National Men's Soccer Team: A National Disgrace
Despite China's emergence as a sports superpower, as evidenced by its great success at the 2008 Beijing Olympics, men's soccer had become a national disgrace. To be sure, the Chinese women's national soccer team had been relatively successful in international competitions, winning the gold medal in the Asian Games three times, making the final two at the 1996 FIFA Women's World Cup and the 1996 Olympics, and currently ranking 10th on the FIFA list. In contrast, the Chinese men's national soccer team, among Asia's best in the 1980s, now only ranked 78th on the FIFA list. In its only appearance at the World Cup in 2002, the team lost all three games and failed to score a single goal. While China's neighbors, Japan, North Korea and South Korea all qualified for the 2010 World Cup, the Chinese team failed to do so. Exasperated with the long string of failures by the national men's team, Chinese soccer fans have dubbed it the National Pigs (guozhu国豬), punning on the abbreviated name for the team (guozu国足).
National Pigs (国豬)
The Chinese soccer players' "bad habits of excessive drinking, visiting prostitutes or other decadent lifestyles were blamed [by some Chinese] as the major causes of their failures in big international competitions." Others argued that government policy was an important reason for the mediocrity of Chinese men's soccer: the state funneled money "to individual sports like gymnastics, swimming and diving, and to sports in which Chinese have traditionally excelled, like badminton and table tennis," in order to produce the greatest number of winners and medals. Sports ministry officials focused on investing in "promising sports prodigies with a quicker guarantee of victory." Still another reason cited is that few children and young people play soccer: schools now de-emphasize sports, cities lack soccer fields, and the popularity of soccer among young people has been eclipsed by basketball, which is boosted by Chinese NBA players like Yao Ming as role models and by the aggressive marketing of the NBA in China.
Li Chengpeng, Sports Journalist
Perhaps corruption is the single biggest factor. As Forbes journalist Gady Epstein observed, "Chinese men's soccer failed to qualify for the [2010] World Cup finals but is outscoring the rest of the world in one category: corruption." Leading sports journalist and soccer commentator Li Chengpeng (李承鹏) co-authored in 2009 "Inside Story of Chinese Soccer 中国足球内幕" [ch] which provided a detailed exposé of close ties between gambling syndicates and professional soccer in China, resulting in the widespread corruption of officials, referees, coaches and players. The throwing of games, the fixing of matches and deliberately blown calls became frequent occurrences in the Chinese primary league competitions since the 1990s. Players even had to pay bribes to be admitted into national teams. Many players, coaches and managers were involved in gambling. Some players and coaches were victims of physical violence due to their involvement in or opposition to gambling: the owner of one soccer club allegedly tried to bury alive one of his players for throwing games, and one soccer manager was marched out of his house with a gun to his head for refusing to condone gambling. As Li Chengpeng saw it, professional soccer in China is organized not as modern organizations in the mold of the NBA, but along the lines of the Chinese underworld.
A government crackdown since late 2009 has resulted in at least 20 arrests, including Nan Yong (南勇), the head of the Chinese Football Association (中国足球协会), and Lu Jun (陆俊), a former World Cup referee who had been dubbed the Golden Whistle (金哨) for impartial refereeing in contrast to the Black Whistles (黑哨).
Foreign experts too have pondered the question about China's failure to send a team to the World Cup. Forbes columnist Ray Tsuchiyama dismissed some common explanations. If China was handicapped by lack of urban practice space and lack of money for balls, what about "Brazilian children practic[ing] soccer with a can wrapped in streets filled with parked cars?" If corruption leads to inferior playing, then what about successful soccer powers such as Brazil, Italy, Nigeria and Russia that have had their fair share of scandals?
Along with other expert panelists to which the New York Times posed the question, "Where Are China’s Soccer Stars?", Tsuchiyama suggested that one of the most important factors may be the lack of grassroots organizations fostering enthusiasm and nurturing talent among Chinese children and youth: "The Chinese state-managed sports focus yields a huge number of medals in Olympic and other world competitions. But it has prevented the development of local sports autonomy — in particular, independent soccer clubs which form a foundation for training young players. In America, by contrast, parents, teachers, coaches and parents-as-coaches have had a tremendous impact over the past three decades on youth soccer development." Historian Xu Guoqi cited the lack of soccer moms among other reasons: "Too many factors contribute to China’s poor performance in soccer, including its political system, lack of a decent pool of soccer players, and Chinese parents’ overemphasis on book learning and academic examinations over everything else, soccer included ... Chinese enjoy watching soccer games, but few really want to play or have their children play soccer." Anthropologist Susan Brownell agreed the Chinese sport system "does not work well for sports in which stars emerge slowly from a wide participation base, where talent becomes apparent only as the athletes mature physically." Moreover, corruption arises because power is concentrated: the Chinese Football Administration responsible for administration and the Football Management Center responsible for managing corporate sponsorships and business affairs are both run by the same person. Rowan Simons, the chairman of China ClubFootball FC, concurred: "Football is a mass participation sport in which the best players may not emerge until their later teens. The simple truth is that China needs a system of community-based clubs that are run by the people for the people."
North Korea: The Miracle Team of the 1966 World Cup
North Korea Team Flag
Whatever the cause, the Chinese soccer fans had no national team to root for in the 2010 World Cup, and instead lavished their affection and support on the North Korean team. This was not the first time that North Korea participated in the World Cup. Nor was it the first time that its national soccer team was embraced by the people of a foreign country. North Korea last competed in the 1966 World Cup hosted by England, when it became the Cinderella team of the tournament. As recounted in the BBC documentary The Game of Their Lives [trailer], the qualification process became a subject of bitter political controversy when FIFA allocated a single slot for the countries of the African, Asian and Oceania zones. With the African countries and most Asian nations boycotting in protest, Australia played against North Korea for the slot. By stunning the Australians, North Korea qualified along with 10 teams from Europe, 4 teams from South America, and 1 team from North and Central America (Mexico).
The lack of diplomatic relations between North Korea and host country England posed political obstacles. The British Foreign Office could not deny visas to the North Koreans out of fear that England would then be stripped of being the host nation. It was reluctant to allow any display of national symbols by North Korea lest that would imply diplomatic recognition and set the precedent for demands by East Germany which England did not recognize. Eventually a compromise was reached: the North Koreans were allowed to display their flag, but their national anthem would only be played at the opening match between England and Uruguay and at the championship match (as it turned out, the North Korean anthem was never played).
North Koreans Celebrate Victory Over Italy
Although 1000 to 1 underdogs and with an average height of only 5" 5', the North Korean team achieved a miracle by advancing to the quarterfinals. After losing to the Soviets 3-0 in their first Group D match, the North Koreans squeaked out a tie with Chile by scoring a goal with two minutes to go. In their final group game on July 19, 1966, they managed to stun the highly touted Italians 1-0 with no. 7 Park Do-ik scoring the winning goal, thereby advancing to the quarterfinals (in 2002, South Korea would match this by beating Italy to reach the World Cup quarterfinals).
Li Chang-myung & Shin Yunk-kyoo Block Eusébio
By this point, the North Koreans with their active attacking style had won the hearts of the people of Middlesbrough, a town in Northeastern England where the team had been staying and playing. 3,000 Middlesbrough residents followed the North Korean team to Liverpool, where the quarterfinal game against Portugal would be played. The North Koreans started fast, scoring three goals in the first twenty minutes for a big lead, and it appeared that another miracle was in the offing. Alas, the Portuguese managed a comeback, with their legendary player Eusébio scoring four goals in response and Portugal winning in the end 5-3. The North Korean team returned home to a hero's welcome.
Surviving Members of the 1966 Team
In 2001, Director Daniel Gordon (who had been impressed by the North Koreans when as a kid his dad gave him a video of the North Korea-Italy match) and producer Nick Bonner received permission from the North Korean government to visit North Korea to make the documentary on the 1966 team, The Game of Their Lives. After completing the film in 2002, the filmmakers then secured permission from the governments of Britain and North Korea to bring the seven surviving members of the soccer team back to Middlesbrough for a memorable visit.
North Korea's Tortuous Path to Return to the World Cup
The North Korean national team took a tortuous path to return to the World Cup in 2010. For years it was rumored that the 1966 World Cup team was purged for womanizing before the game against Portugal. According to a history of North Korean soccer by blogger Joo Seong-ha, a North Korean defector who is now a reporter for the leading South Korean daily Dong-A Ilbo (translated by Ask a Korean: Part I, Part II, Part III), the team was indeed purged, not for falling for the "courtesan tactics" of the imperialists, but as innocent victims swept up in a 1967 political purge, the most prominent victims of which were no. 2 party leader Park Geum-cheol and party secretary Kim Do-man — Park and Kim had provided unconditional support to the national soccer team and claimed its success among their accomplishments. Eventually some members of the team were rehabilitated and returned to serve as coaches.
Nonetheless, the purge had set back progress in North Korean soccer for decades. An important step taken by the government to rebuild its national men's soccer team into an international competitive force was the 1991 hiring of a foreign coach, Hungarian Pal Csernai who had successful coaching experience in the German leagues. Csernai's first great success was a 2-1 victory at the unprecedented friendly match between his North Korean team and the U.S. team at RFK Stadium in Washington, DC on Oct. 19, 1991. The North Korean team made a creditable run to return to the World Cup by winning 7 of 8 games in the preliminaries in 1993, only to falter in the final qualifying stage in Doha, losing 4 of 5 games, the last to South Korea which advanced to the World Cup.
1966 Hero Park Do-ik as 2008 Olympic Torchbearer
With the return of Csernai directly from Doha to Munich, and the onset of the food crisis of the 1990s, the North Korean soccer program went through another difficult period. Nevertheless, a league system of 130 teams continued to function, and the age of selecting players to be groomed as future stars continued to be lowered to ensure the provision of adequate nutrition at a young age.
As reported by Chinese journalists Wang Wei (汪伟) and Wang Qian (王倩), after its failure in Doha in 1993, North Korea stayed away from international competition for the next 5 years [ch], while building a national training facility at Mt. Paektu, which would produce many of the future national stars. The North Korean national team made its first international reappearance at the 2001 Shanghai Invitational.
North Korean Players Celebrate Qualifying for the World Cup
Unlike its 1966 predecessor with every player except the goalie on active attack, the North Korean national men's soccer team adopted a defensive style that earned it second place in Asia qualification round's Group B with 3 wins, 3 draws, 2 losses and 7 goals in 2009. At the last game on June 18, 2009, North Korea tied Saudi Arabia, thereby qualifying for the World Cup for the first time since 1966. The players were honored with a massive parade on their return to Pyongyang. Sixteen players received the honor of being named People's Athlete, the highest possible honor for athletes normally reserved for winners in the Olympics and the World Championships. Another three were named Contributing Athlete, usually awarded to winners of an Asia-wide competition.
The extravagant showering of honors on the national team player might be connected to the political significance that the North Korean government attached to the World Cup: North Korea watchers reported that, as the ailing Kim Jong-il was preparing for his son Kim Jong-un's succession, he had hoped that the success of the national men's soccer team could be attributed to Kim Jong-un, thereby "build[ing] support among military and workers' party elites for a transfer of power."
Still, with a world ranking of 105, the North Koreans were again a long shot to win the 2010 World Cup. Moreover, North Korea was seeded in Group G, the so-called Group of Death with 5-time champion Brazil, previous World Cup runner-up Portugal, and powerhouse Ivory Coast. Nevertheless, Son Kwang-ho, vice-president of the DPRK Football Association, was sanguine about North Korea's prospects, informing FourFourTwo reporter Neil Billingham on his visit to North Korea: “North Korea will win the World Cup ... it is because of the great support of our Dear Leader Kim Jong-il that our national team will make this great achievement.”
North Korea: Darling of Chinese Soccer Fans and the New Left
Chinese soccer commentator Li Chengpeng was not so sure. To him the North Korean model, relying on the revolutionary spirit of the people under the stern gaze of their leader Kim Jong-il, a military style of management, and training in a closed society, was irrational and unscientific. In response to many Chinese fans who demanded that he praise the North Korean team for its team spirit, he penned a highly sarcastic and satirical editorial "Good! North Korea, Seize the Crown! (好吧，朝鲜夺冠)" [ch]. In a more serious vein, Li did predict a narrow win by Brazil over North Korea in their opening match on June 15, 2010, not because he believed that the two teams were evenly matched or that the North Korean revolutionary spirit would prevail over the technical skills of the Brazilians, but because the Brazilian team would conserve its energy for the next round of the World Cup while the North Koreans would give their all under the watch of Kim Jong-il.
Felipe Melo (Brazil) vs. An Yong-hak (North Korea)
Indeed, Brazil won narrowly only by 2-1, an outcome that was considered to be a great spiritual victory by the North Koreans and their Chinese supporters, who took strong exception to Li Chengpeng's negative assessment of North Korea's chances. 13 of 15 papers that normally carried Li's commentary had refused to publish his "Good! North Korea, Seize the Crown!," probably because it was considered to be politically incorrect for denigrating a close ally of the Chinese government. But it was available on Li's blog and was widely republished online. Li's blog entry attracted close to 500,000 hits and over 3,000 comments, with over 70% critical of Li.
Chiek Tioté (Ivory Coast) vs. Hong Yong-jo (North Korea)
Many of these criticisms of Li and praises for the North Korean team were echoed by postings on the influential leftist commentary site Utopia (乌有之乡). This site reflects the perspectives of the New Left, whose proponents are highly critical of the market reforms that have been implemented in China since the 1980s for promoting social inequalities and injustice. Some leftists even look back to the Mao Zedong era as a time of material poverty but spiritual wealth, in comparison to the present time of material wealth but spiritual poverty. They see North Korea today approvingly as a reflection of Maoist China. Even before the World Cup, in January of 2010, Utopia hosted a screening of The Game of Their Lives [ch] (paired with South Korean film Peppermint Candy) in Beijing, at the discussion of which two leftist commentators and the audience were very positive about North Korea's political and social developments.
In the context of the World Cup and North Korea's narrow loss to Brazil, a representative posting on Utopia stated: "The game of soccer can best reflect the spirit of a nation and its inner qualities ... North Korean soccer demonstrates a simple principle. Material poverty cannot defeat a soccer team. It is spiritual poverty that is an incurable sickness. The soccer played by the Chinese players who have become rich is ugly to the extreme, while that of the North Korean players is blindingly brilliant ... Looking back in history our country has also gone through a period of material poverty but spiritual wealth. Regrettably this kind of period will not return. Of course it is better that material poverty not come back. But spiritual poverty may be scarier, as it makes the people disheartened and helpless."
Jong Tae-se, Striker for North Korea
One North Korean player who had gained the greatest admiration among Chinese soccer fans was Jong Tae-se, who is one of two zainichi players on the North Korean team. As of the end of 2008, there were 589,239 registered “zainichi,” “people of Korean descent born and raised in Japan,” mostly descendants of Koreans forcibly brought to Japan as laborers between 1910 and 1945 when Korea was a Japanese colony. As Ray Tsuchiyama points out, "To use a Korean name and Korean citizenship status in Japan means discrimination in education and employment, and difficulties in social interaction, including pre-marital checks and assumptions about ties to the criminal underworld. There are many ethnic Koreans who assimilated into Japanese society by taking Japanese citizenship and using Japanese names." Many more held on to their Korean identity in spite of, or because of, discrimination. Jong Tae-se was born in Nagoya and educated in pro-Pyongyang schools run by the General Association of Korean Residents in Japan. As a star player in Japan Professional Football League, Jong could have attained Japanese citizenship and possibly played on the national team of either Japan or South Korea. Instead he opted to play for North Korea, which had already courted him when he was a sophomore at Korea University in Tokyo (profile of campus in Chronicle of Higher Education).
Jong Tae-se in Tears
Because of his “charge-ahead and shoot” style atypical of Asian players, Jong Tae-Se was dubbed “People’s Wayne Rooney” by the Asian media, and has attracted a wide following among Koreans all over the world and also among other Asians. What particularly endeared him to Chinese fans, however, was his propensity to cry whenever the North Korean national anthem was played, which signified a fervent patriotism that was deemed lacking among the materialistically inclined Chinese players.
Cristiano Ronaldo (Portugal) vs. Jong Tae-se (North Korea)
Many Chinese fans remained faithful and declared their admiration of the indomitable spirit of the North Koreans even as they suffered lopsided defeats of 7-0 by Portugal (June 21, 2010) and 3-0 by the Ivory Coast (June 25, 2010), and failed to advance beyond the group stage. Li Chengpeng saw things differently: Portugal's rout of North Korea represented the total demolition of the latter's spiritual model. He asked the Chinese fans who clamored for modeling Chinese soccer on North Korean soccer: Why follow a model that China itself has gone through thirty years ago, when an athlete had to write his self-criticism after a mistake on the field, when he would be punished if he had an unauthorized interview with the foreign press, when he had to thank the great nation and leader whenever he crossed the finish line, and when national soccer team captain Dai Linjing (戴麟经) was persecuted to death during the Cultural Revolution for having a bad class background?
Li agreed with the Utopia leftists that North Korea's present echoed the Maoist past in China, but drew different conclusions: "Don't let political faith give rise to illusions in sports or literature. Don't believe that if the great leader beckons and looks on, the country will become the champion. This is similar to some time ago when the leader of a particular country [meaning Mao Zedong during the Great Leap Forward] said that crop production must exceed 10,000 kilograms, that the country would surpass England and chase after America in 5 years. Subsequently millions upon millions of people smashed their cooking pots to smelt steel, and then millions upon millions of people starved."
Postscript
Kim Jong-hun, Coach of the North Korean Team
Why did the North Korean team lose so badly to Portugal and then the Ivory Coast after losing only 2-1 to Brazil? The euphoria of that narrow loss evidently led the North Korean government to optimistically abandon its normal policy and allow the live broadcast of the North Korea-Portugal game on June 21, 2010, probably the live broadcast ever of a sports event on North Korean television. According to the Chosun Ilbo citing Radio Free Asia, Kim Jong-il concluded that the team lost to Brazil because it focused only on defense in the second half. He then "gave orders for the team's defenders to be positioned forward and even specified where each defender should be standing in the field." The abandonment of a tight defense strategy, whether it was at Kim Jong-il's direction or whether it was a decision of coach Kim Jong-hun under extreme pressure to win on a live broadcast, proved disastrous. In its World Cup rematch with North Korea since that historic 1966 game, Portugal did not break through until after 29 minutes. The North Koreans, who had played well up to that point, collapsed completely, giving up six goals in the second half without scoring one themselves.
Parody: Jong Tae-se as Miner
Speculations that the North Korean team would be sent to the coal mines for its failure at the World Camp were rampant. In Chinese cyberspace, parodies (egao恶搞) based on mashups or Photoshopping existing images or videos were posted on this scenario: in one video, Jong Tae-se's weeping image was edited to show him wearing a coal miner's protective helmet and bemoaning his fate.
In reality, the two zainichi players on the North Korean team — Jong Tae-se and An Yong-hak — flew directly to Japan following the end of North Korea's run at the World Cup. On account of his strong play at the World Cup, Jong was signed by the German club VfL Bochum of the Bundeliga league in early July. The zainichi's North Korean teammates and coach might not have been so fortunate. Radio Free Asia reported that the team was summoned to appear on stage at a large auditorium at the Working People’s Culture Palace, and "subjected to a session of harsh ideological criticism" before more than 400 people for six hours. The players were criticized by other athletes and a sports commentator, and then forced to criticize their coach Kim Jong-hun for betraying heir-apparent Kim Jong-un. The players might have gotten off relatively lightly. Rumors circulated that Coach Kim might have been expelled from the Workers' Party or sent to do forced labor, for derailing plans to celebrate the World Cup as Young General Kim Jong-un's achievement.
