CHINA, NATIONAL NEWS, Analysis: Is Tenure Reform at Peking University Good For All?

By Liu Yieqing

Peking University recently declared the abolishment of lifelong tenure for supervisors of PhD Candidates (SOPC), enabling more qualified associate professors and lecturers to apply for the position. With this reform, we are moving closer to the international practice. But whether this practice will become a nationwide paradigm is still unknown.

Supervisor of PhD candidates is seemingly just a title, while actually it represents a higher level than other professors in the academic world. To some extent, it's a "super professor." A SOPC enjoys much higher allowances as well as credit. To get this title, a professor has to first submit a formal application and then get through an anonymous critical examination by experts at the university in question and from other universities. In spite of repeated declarations by educational administration departments that SOPC is not a higher academic title than professor, society takes no notice at all.

The every-other-year competition of applying for the doctoral training program is getting more and more ferocious. So it is with the competition among the professors to get the "higher" title. Society obviously favors the SOPCs more: when the newspaper introduces a scholar, it's a common practice to add the title supervisor of PhD candidates to testify to his or her authority. On the other hand, the popularity of SOPCs means the downgrading of professors.

Why are there SOPCs who are above the professor rank in China? Why does society take its own course in spite of the repeated appeal of education administrators?

To reveal the puzzle, we can simply make a comparison of domestic and foreign grading systems of university teaching staff. In China, academic titles have four categories: assistant, lecturer, associate professor and professor. But in other countries, take the US for example, there are only three: assistant professor, associate professor and professor.

On the surface, it appears that we have one more grade than the Americans, while in fact we have one less grade. In the US, a newly graduated PhD will have to spend six years as an assistant professor before he or she gains an associate professor position and qualifies for tenure; it will take him or her at least 12 years to become a professor. But in China, theoretically it will take only 7 years: a doctor becomes a lecturer immediately as long as he or she will commit to a teaching career. Only 2 years later, he or she is qualified to apply for the position of an associate professor. And 5 years afterwards, he or she can apply for the title of a professor.

The greatest difference between the two systems is the missing associate professor. And the 5 missing years plays an extremely important role in testing a young scholar's devotion to science. What's more important, it will take a doctor only 7 years to reach the peak of the academic world, and during the following 30-year-academic life, with all stimulations gone, professors gradually slack off and linger on in where they are.

Either for the internal need of the school or the external need of society, a grading system of professors is indispensable. Thus this title of SOPC came into being and functions as a grading machine to classify professors into SOPCs and non-SOPCs. But this grading system is by no means fair: whatever achievement a professor has made in his academic field, if there is no doctoral training program in his field, he can only be reconciled to the position of a non-SOPC; on the contrary, if there is a doctoral training program in the field, as long as the quota hasn't been filled, even mediocre professors can become SOPCs.

Obviously, if the present academic grading system sticks to its old way, Peking University's practice will not easily extend to a larger area. SOPC will remain a higher academic rank than professors. Assistant, lecturer, associate professor and professor, this four-grade professional title system did make sense in history. As there were fewer doctors in the past, and university graduates and masters could teach immediately after graduation.

But now, in most universities, especially those specializing in research, a doctoral degree is a basic requirement of the teaching staff. Nowadays, assistants and lecturers in universities are as rare as pandas; universities are full of professors and associate professors, exhibiting a very strange upside-down pyramid. This kind of framework of academic talents is not conducive to academic competition.

Thus our primary task is to play down the SOPC rhetoric while turning it into a practical position, instead of a mere title. There is one outlet for the dilemma we are faced with, that is to hasten integration with international practice and adopt the three-grade system practiced in many developed countries. However, it should not be up to certain universities, it should be the government's responsibility to put it into practice.

CHINA, NATIONAL NEWS, BEIJING, Investigation and Analysis: Professor Accused of Extorting Sex for Grades

By Zeng Siyun

He (Zhao) was a 51-year-old professor teaching Marxism at Beijing Jiaotong University; she (alias A Fang) was a 26-year-old university student whose major was Marxism. Seemingly, these two were intellectuals of high political and social conscience. However, they were the protagonists in a sexual bribery case.

December 23rd, 2004, it was snowing; A Fang wanted to give Prof. Zhao a small gift for the New Year and went to his dormitory. As she arrived, Zhao asked how she had prepared for the graduate school entrance examination and implied that she could get much higher marks than other students.

As he continued on to say that nothing could be gotten for free, Zhao began to unclothe A Fang. She struggled but was warned that there would be no hope for her to enroll if she refused because he was responsible for correcting exam papers. A Fang could not help but give in; the exam was too important to her.

Zhao took out two pieces of exam paper from his drawer and handed them to A Fang. At first, she did not believe it. Zhao asked her to memorize the contents and burn the papers after the exam.

December 27th, A Fang found that the answer for the last question given by Zhao was not very clear and called him. Zhao gave her a handwritten answer at noon.

A Fang said she had always regretted what had happened that snowy day and thought many times of calling the police but she dared not offend Zhao. She kept the papers and answers given by Zhao. Also, she kept her underwear as evidence, which was said to contain Zhao's semen.

A Fang got very high marks on the two exams for which Zhao had given her the answers. However, she still failed because of her low mark in English. Once again, A Fang got in touch with Zhao, wishing that he could help. But this time, he refused.

A Fang was not admitted to graduate school. She then reported the whole thing to police, saying that she hoped such kinds of scandal would not happen to other girls. That was on June 9th, 2005.

However, when we contacted Prof. Zhao, he gave us another version. "She had come to my dormitory several times but we did not have sex," Zhao said. As for the exam papers, Zhao said that since the exam was over, the paper could be bought everywhere. But we got the information from officials that the paper could only be bought after September.

Then Zhao gave us another explanation, saying that she might have peeked at the answers on his computer when he was out as there was no code. When asked about the handwritten answer, he replied that, as there was no standard answer for the last question, he wrote it down for another teacher for convenience. He guessed that the girl got it from another teacher.

Beijing Jiaotong University is now inquiring into this event.

The sexual bribery scandal aroused much attention. We interviewed people from different circles. Students of Beijing Jiaotong University said that Prof. Zhao was a very kind person and his teaching was of a high reputation at the school. They felt shame to hear of such a scandal.

A law professor said that Prof. Zhao was suspected of leaking state secrets, but whether it was a crime was still unknown. There was a lot of evidence to be gone through, he said.

What people discussed most about the case was the hypocrisy and corruption of Chinese education. One was a university student while another a professor. Both are intellectuals of Marxism. Both should be the protectors of society’s morals.

Yet these intellectual protectors of society, who lecture about how other people should be dedicated to the country, do the opposite after class. Such an event is not happening for the first time in China. Educational corruption is becoming more and more serious: a professor wenched and was disclosed; several middle school and even primary school teachers raped students, etc.

It's not only a problem of occupational integrity but also a problem of value. Some people regard it as a split personality. We could see from Zhao's handwritten answer several obviously professional terms, such as the relation between personal endeavor and collective advantage.

Schools ought to be the purest places in society. How come there is so much pursuit of money, power and lust? Where is our hope for the next generation? What actually is being learned and what spirit is being spread over universities?

Under the pretension of an oasis, universities have been deeply commercialized. Schools are no longer independent and learning is no longer liberal.

Everyone's soul is decaying. Our moral base line and concept of value cannot bear any more torture lest we see the collapse of education.

We must each examine our own conscience.

CHINA, NATIONAL NEWS, ANALYSIS: To Buy Japanese or Not to Buy Japanese…?

By Sun Meng

The repeated revision of history textbooks, along with the succession of Junichiro Koizumi's public prayers at the Yasukuni Shrine, have launched a wave of anti-Japan fervor among Chinese people. In the process, "resistance of Japanese goods" emerged as the most popular form of protest. "Say no to Japanese goods is where patriotism begins," someone said on the net. But the question is, is this "no" so easy to say?

There is an interesting phenomenon here: as the outcry to "resist Japanese goods" is gaining in volume, the train of economic cooperation between the countries seems to be gaining even more speed.

Last year, China surpassed the US in becoming the largest trading partner of Japan, and Japan, in turn, has remained the largest trading partner of China for the past three years. The two countries' economies have integrated into a unity: inexpensive "made-in-China" goods satisfy Japanese consumers, and precise Japanese-made facilities equip Chinese manufacturers.

Yet what's more interesting is this: not all who vow to resist Japanese goods bear as simple a sentiment as their outcries sound. In fact, most of them don't. They feel torn between their hatred for the Japanese government's denial of history and their appreciation of Japanese products.

Even on the net where people get radical, not all who are against Japan are for the resistance of Japanese products. "I have a made-in-Japan washing machine which has worked for over 20 years and looks good for another 20. But that does not reduce my resentment for the Japanese invaders," a guest confessed on the BBS at CCTV.com.

"Resisting Japanese goods is what we've been doing since the mid 1980s," the commenter continued. "But now, the picture is changing. As a component of the world economy, China has to integrate into this economic chain. And so it is the case with China and Japan. Neither can afford to leave each other."

So here we are in a dilemma as simple and as hard as this: we've got a neighbor who hit us but wants to deny how hard he hit us, whom we dislike, but with whom we benefit greatly in trade, and whom also benefits greatly from trading with us. Is it worthwhile to voice our protest at the cost of profits lost? Will it even work? Are there any other ways to get our message across?

Proponents of the resistance campaign say "yes" to the first two questions and "no" to the last. One of the initiators of the campaign claimed that over 80% of Chinese worldwide consume Japanese motorcars and electronics. If every Chinese around the globe ceased buying Japanese products, Japan would lose 100 to 140 billion dollars (US) per year.

Some come up with even more precise calculations: Japan is highly dependent on the Chinese market. If all Chinese stopped buying Japanese products for one month, thousands of Japanese enterprises would face bankruptcy; do it for six months, and half of the Japanese population would go unemployed; continue for one year, and the Japanese economy would collapse...

It certainly looks scary. The point is, Japan and China's economies are highly interdependent. The process of resisting Japanese products is bound to be accompanied by losses for China as well. The most direct result might be reciprocal activity from Japan, and our agricultural exports would be the greatest victim.

Moreover, a campaign inspired by national sentiment, if handled improperly, can easily go over board and cause interior splitting among citizens. For instance, one who takes a less radical position might be condemned as a traitor.

Furthermore, it is virtually impossible to completely block out Japanese goods, because products of other countries, including China, invariably contain Japanese-made components. For instance, many national TV manufacturers are using kinescopes from Japan (Konka uses Toshiba kinescopes); some of the steel bars in the apartment we live in might come from Japan as well. The fine line between Japanese goods and national ones is more and more blurred, and it is getting harder and harder to aim protest arrows at exclusively Japanese goods.

"Don’t let politics interfere with economics," some advocates say. But, if the economy really has nothing to do with politics, how can they account for the fact that more than a few Japanese companies like Mitsubishi and Asashi contributed heavily to the political right wing in Japan?

Refuse Japanese goods, and surely Japan will suffer, but us, too; buy Japanese, then how can we make our protests strong if we have only WORDS?

All in all, resisting Japanese goods is a question we ought to respond to sensibly and intelligently. If it's to be, the campaign should be launched and reinforced responsibly, always within the bounds of public rationalism, because only with this can we reach the goals of self-protection and maximizing national interests.

CHINA, LIFESTYLE, BOOKS: The Age of Innocence...or Not?

By Linda Lin

It is a sad love story in New York City, 1870.

Newland Archer was a restrained young attorney who was engaged to the lovely but conventional aristocrat, May. Then May's scandalous cousin, Ellen, who was just back from France, came into his life.

Ellen had such a reputation because she couldn't stand her brutal husband and left him, running off with his secretary. In New York society of the time, such behavior was not acceptable.

At first, Newland resented her as everyone else did, but soon he fell in love with Ellen because of her unconventionality and vitality. However, even though they loved each other, Newland persuaded Ellen to give up the idea of divorce for the sake of her reputation.

Meanwhile, despite his fear of a dull marriage with May, persuaded by his sense of honor (or rather vanity) as well as family and societal pressures, Newland proposed to May and they got married ahead of schedule.

After the marriage, having not seen each other for a year and-a-half, Newland and Ellen met again. Rumors came, and May secretly lied to Ellen that she was pregnant so as to force her to leave Newland alone. In time, Ellen went back to her husband and Newland remained faithful to May throughout their marriage.

Years later May died and left him two children. The story ended some twenty-six years later, when Newland's son was going to Paris and was to visit Ellen; he asked his father to go with him. Sitting on a bench downstairs of her house, Newland gazed at Ellen's room for a long time, and at last, silently went away.

This novel won its author, Edith Wharton, the Pulitzer Prize in 1921, and it is regarded as her most memorable work. However, what really attracted me and drove me to buy this book was its beautiful title -- The Age of Innocence. I fell in love with it at the very first sight and bought it without hesitation. (Though I have to say the original books are unreasonably expensive.)

However, after reading it, I found that the meaning of the title was not at all what I assumed it to be. What is "innocence"? Throughout the novel, May was described as innocent, always dressed in white and looking goddess-like. But when the truth was finally revealed, I am surprised that the naive and innocent angel pretended to be pregnant so as to get Ellen away from her husband. Perhaps she knew of Newland's love for Ellen before their marriage, but pretended to neglect it for her own reputation and didn't make an issue of it.

Ellen's arrival initiated Newland's deep and critical thinking about society and his bride-to-be. He felt that May's "innocence" was a plot of society, too fabricated to be real -- it was a scheme, a sham. Perhaps as an aristocrat she had been trained to be "innocent" as a part of good manners.

Not only May, many other upper-class women in the novel have the same "innocence" -- seemingly innocent but actually controlling others behind their backs. If I am to understand that the New York society of the 1870s was an age of innocence, maybe the best interpretation of the "innocence" here is phony or hypocrisy.

Changing perspective, I found that the title may also be understood in another way -- it is Newland's 'age of innocence'. Newland was a man who only questioned formality and challenged conventions in private but appeared traditional in public. He loved Ellen, but he dared not publicly love her. Instead, he chose to marry May at once in order to get away from Ellen more efficiently.

During his later chat with Ellen, Newland claimed that his relationship with May was just romantic when it was clear that they were together simply because they were the "perfect match" in terms of family backgrounds and not because they had fallen in love on their own.

May, apart from her good form and wealthy family, had nothing but an empty mind, and Newland constantly felt that they never had any real communication. But still, he stayed with May, mostly because this marriage could shelter, protect and empower him through the upper class.

Right after his marriage, Newland found May's unbearable innocence and emptiness. She was described as "alive but dead" -- emotionless and as cold and immortal as a goddess. In my eyes, it had little difference with marrying a beautiful statue.

Ellen was obviously much more insightful than May, and more importantly, she was unconventional -- always dressed in red, she was indifferent to conventions, desperate for freedom and passionate for life. But unlike the goddess-like May, she looked pale, and even Newland admitted that one could see she was aging in her face.

Ellen was no longer "innocent," she was now not a naïve girl but an aging woman trapped in an unfortunate marriage. Newland told Ellen that it was she who gave him a real look at life; because of her, Newland began to have doubts about his marriage for the first time.

However, though who he truly and deeply loved was Ellen, he passed her by and went on with his wrong marriage and remained a faithful husband. It is Newland's age of innocence, because at that time he did not understand that true love is much more important than rules and conventions.

All conventions will be gone sooner or later, but true love lasts forever. He made a life of regret for himself by missing out on his true love.

In this sense, it is even more appropriate to interpret the "innocence" into Newland's ignorance of the frailness of social conventions as well as the preciousness of a piece of true love.

Besides the title, what impressed me most was the last scene: Years later, when May was dead, conventional society had changed, Newland's son encouraged him to see the one he really loved, but he dared not go up to see her at last. Instead, he sat for a long time on the bench gazing at her balcony. When a servant closed the balcony window, Newland, "At that, as if it had been the signal he waited for," got up slowly and walked away.

Why didn't Newland go upstairs? Because of his cowardice -- his cowardice left their love such a tragic ending, even more tragic than their separation.

Throughout their love story, Newland had countless convincing excuses for their tragic separation -- family dues, social conventions, rumors, May's lie, etc. But when all these obstacles did not exist any more, he still couldn’' collect his courage to face Ellen. If there must be something to blame for their tragic love, it is definitely Newland's cowardice.

There may also be another reason. People all tend to beautify their past. In Newland's memory, Ellen was forever his sacred symbol of true love, like an imaginary loved one in a book or picture.

He wanted to keep this feeling undisturbed and seal it in his blue but young and beautiful memory forever. Thus he chose to live with memories of Ellen instead of living with her.

From an aesthetic point of view, perhaps this ending is perfect.

Though it is an American novel published in 1920, I find Edith Wharton's style is somewhat similar with Jane Austin. She described the decoration of houses, clothing and luxuries at great length, presenting us a vivid picture of upper class New Yorkers as well as the whole upper-class society.

The Age of innocence has no complicated plot, but it is still regarded as a great literary work because it truthfully reflects its setting and initiates our thinking on not only love, but social conventions and values. It is a good sad love story, but more importantly, it is an excellent portrait of the last New York aristocracy.

CHINA, SOCIETY, Opinion: The Case For Flunking

By Beryl Hou

With fierce competition pervading almost everything in our society, I think flunking is not only a positive teaching tool--the fear of which motivates students--but also a good way to let university students have a taste of the sense of crisis which they may encounter frequently in their near future.

In the cocoon of school, students tend to indulge themselves in various kinds of sprees. Meanwhile, they ignore their study and regard it as a burden disturbing their "comfortable" school life. They are content as long as they can get a passing grade, which, in fact, is far from enough.

Teachers nowadays are almost always "kind" enough to furnish them with the consolation prize--a passing grade for fear that if they don't do so, they might break the delicate hearts of the innocent and lovely "children." But the spoiled students may turn out to be Mr. or Miss "good-for-nothings" because of it.

We need flunking to let students know what a crisis is and what they can do about it. It will be too late when they are employed somewhere and can no longer get "passed along."

In such a quick fix, competitive society, graduates have to perfect their skills and cultivate their potentials in order to find their position in our modern society. They must prepare themselves before they enter this free market world. This means making full use of their time in school to acquire knowledge, lest they find themselves struggling just to survive, to say nothing of making a living, after they leave school.

To ensure this, flunking is indisputably an effective way to get students to work harder. All in all, flunking should have its place in the schooling of university students.

CHINA, INTERNATIONAL, NEWS ANALYSIS: Why Bomb London?

By Julia Zhu

Nobody foresaw it, but it happened. On July 7, London suffered from a series of public transportation explosions that claimed at least 55 lives and injured hundreds. While crying for the dead, caring for the injured, searching for the lost, heightening alert, and reinforcing the security system, people wonder: why London? Why now? In the course of tracing the answer of this question, a number of ironies are exposed.

As we all know, the bombings came while the UK hosted the first full day of the 31st G8 summit at Gleneagles Hotel in Perthshire. It follows a rational line to infer that these cruel attacks had something to do with the G8 summit.

In fact, many people have come to this conclusion. Yet, in my eyes, it is not a sufficient cause. Especially when there was already the larger "cause" which all but guaranteed that al-Qaeda would attack Britain at some point; al-Qaeda had professed defiantly soon after the 9/11 attacks that England was their next target.

Many of us had taken it as an empty threat, and as time went by, the fact that Britain had safely gone through the previous three critical years had no doubt reinforced this thought. The irony is that the disaster happened in the fourth year.

Based on all this, it is reasonable to conclude that the London terrorist attacks were due to happen; the only question was the time and the form. And finally, as reality turned out, Al-Qaeda chose July 7, taking Londoners by surprise, and shocking the whole world.

The impact was instantaneous and tremendous, to the economy, the government, and to the mentality of the Londoners. It is even more ironic to mention that London had bid successfully for the 2012 Olympics--announced only the day before--with an unimpeachable security system as a large part of the winning package.

Don't take me wrong. I'm not making light of the disaster but rather saying that no matter how tight the security may be the terrorists will find ways to get through. There is no point in boasting how safe a place is. One who does it is only boasting to his silliness.

Here is another irony. To interrupt the G8 summit was surely at least one of the purposes of al-Qaeda. Yet the G8 summit was discussing solutions to the problems of African poverty and the issue of environmental climactic change. These topics are for the good of the whole world. Then, are the terrorists, who claim to aim their attacks at power politics and hegemonism, now shifting their bombsight towards basic human happiness all over the world? Or is there another reason?

Looking back, we know that the G8 actually was met by many protests. The purpose of most of the protestors is well known: objection to the economic robbing of the developing countries by the developed countries, and objection to globalization itself. They call for debt reduction, fair trade and international aid to the poor.

The number of G8 protestors is increasing. It is said that during the 2003 G8, there were 60,000 people who participated in demonstrations. And this year, the number is likely to reach 100,000. The question is this: If there is little actual conflict between the purpose of the demonstrators and the G8, then what's wrong?

The truth is that the G8 hasn't taken the heretofore passed aid plans seriously and carried them out, which is like drawing a beautiful and tempting cake for the suffering poor only to look at. Doubtlessly, it has added to the instability of international society and given terrorists further excuses for launching attacks.

Some people asked: There are bombings and death in Iraq every day, what's the big deal about the London attacks? They say that judged by scale, there is little comparison.

Some people answered: The difference is that the Iraqi people were used to the blasts but Londoners were not. That this is new.

It is a simple example of question and answer, yet in it there is something horrible. With regard to the situation of Iraq and the comparison of the two, we know that Britain, namely London, is the luckier one. It has received more international attention and care.

Comparatively, the present Iraq is more like a skeleton of its past, a sacrificial lamb to power struggles, a tomb. Explosions and deaths have become so common in Iraq that it is expected daily news. Less and less attention is being paid to it. On this point, I cannot help myself from wondering: Both sides are now suffering, is it fair that we express our care to one side while forgetting all about the other?

Are we just cold-blooded lookers-on who are watching out of novelty even when we know it's our own species that is getting hurt? I do not know the answer.

But this much I do know, the London blasts are evidence of the failure of current policy toward terrorists, attacking them with violence. This policy throws the whole world deeper into a vicious cycle of violence: First, attacks by al-Qaeda, and then counterattacks by government (not exactly aimed at al-Qaeda), then again by al-Qaeda, and again by government. One thing we should realize is that the government side is in the weaker position as it is in the light while the terrorists are in the dark.

Of course, to fight against terror is a mission that every righteous, rational person should carry out. It calls for courage and unity. But still, I think it is wrong for politicians to make use of it and consider people's lives as chess pieces to be used either for fame or political success.

Postscript: This article is based on the assumption that these attacks were launched by Al-Qaeda, as is the current belief of UK authorities.

CHINA, SOCIETY, FEATURE SERIES: On The Road to Shanghai... Day Two? Must Be Shanghai.

[This is the third installment in the series: On the Road to Shanghai... The editors]

By Lianne Li

I was holding my gastronomist's guide sheet given to me by a Shanghainese classmate and fellow gourmand when I caught the 8:30 bus to People's Square in the rain. The guide sheet read: "Best ice-cream: Anderson's at the underground floor of Ruffle's City. Best bread: ICHIDO, Best tortilere: Lilian. Best cheese: Tima Hazbouz," and so forth.

Since it was guaranteed to me by my fellow Hunanese that the Shanghainese will add sugar even to a dish of cabbages, I made up my mind to try out all the western delicacies of Shanghai I could afford under my tight budget.

"Better measure your waist before going around," Wang sniffed at my idea in a phone call, and clung to his bed in his 150-RMB per-day expensive--but terrible--hotel.

After an hour's plunging back and forth on the bus, I almost forgot what my targets were when I arrived at People's Square, Shanghai's Tiananmen Square by my inference. The damp warm air and the river of striding passersby set me into a daze.

A guide conducting a family of three announced practically into my ear: "In front of your eyes stands the Office Building of Shanghai People’s Government, and the Shanghai Museum is on your right. As you see, it is designed in the shape of an incensory, intending to show good wishes... ."

My friend had recommended a visit to the Shanghai Museum, so I put my gastronomist's guide-sheet aside and got in with a 5-Yuan student ticket. The collections of the museum were quite versatile, if not rich: ancient Chinese bronzes, sculpture, ceramics, seal, jade, coins, painting, calligraphy, furniture and minority garments. There was also a special exhibit of bronze mirrors, which I had little interest in.

I would have lost myself, however, in the Han Dynasty glittering jade works and Zheng Banqiao’s bamboo paintings, if my stomach had not reminded me. So I went for the first target: ice-cream. Ice-cream addicts like me helplessly covet the special 3 Anderson's cream ball at a discount of 30 Yuan. Great taste!

If only my fellow gourmet had warned me that 3 balls of such ice cream equaled 3 bowls of rice for my small stomach. Unfortunately, I could only taste the infamous delights of Ruffle's City with my eyes after such a grand feast of ice cream.

At six in the afternoon, Wang and I took the highway bus to Hangzhou. Two and a half hour later, we were in the city where long lived the spirit of Su Dongpo (Song Dynasty poet) and the myths of the white snake...

CHINA, BEIJING, FEATURE, The Girl Who Cries for Cats, Cries For Humans

By Li Jing

On the campus of Beijing Foreign Studies University (BFSU), some wild cats live in the garden at the back of the English Department building and the one in front of it. They share the air under people's knees and live silently around the corner of people's eyes. Taking it for granted, students seldom notice them or care about them, except one.

Mary Li, 20, a BFSU sophomore student from Beijing, majors in Hungarian but often appears around the English Department building, for the cats.

"I've been noticing them for a long time," Mary said. "They look for food in this garden and the meadow beside the dining hall. If lucky, they can feed themselves, but things don't always go so well, especially in winter. If baby cats are born in winter, they are very likely to die of hunger."

She has touched these cats for a time much longer than her years studying in the university. Her family lives on campus, and they all love cats. Years ago, when they first noticed the cats, out of passion and curiosity, they went to look at them. Then, out of sympathy, they began to feed them homemade food. Homemade but luxurious for cats: little shrimp, fish, meat and vegetable mixed with sauce.

"Mom and I tried a lot of ways before we could get the cats to accept the food. They were scared and distrustful at the beginning, but luckily they finally realized our goodwill." Consequently, the cats would come and play with them when they saw them coming. Now, she and her family have a sense of responsibility to take care of the cats. "I will feel uncomfortable if I can't see them for a while," Mary said. "They are like kids, afraid of losing love and care. Especially the 'big white.'"

She first met the "big white" several months ago. Eyes filled with melancholy and fear, it was timid and "unconfident" -- Mary insisted on using this word as if she could see through it. And gradually I believe she did. In Mary's eyes, the "big white" was the gentlest one but the one who had been hurt the most. It was big but dirty, fur sticky and missing in spots, with wounds showing on its body. She and her family paid special attention to it, applying medicine on its wounds and dripping drops into its eyes.

Proudly, she said that under their careful minding, the "big white" became more and more outgoing and agreeable. It would welcome her when she came, sit in front of her when she was going to leave, or follow her a while on her way back. For her, this cat became a special one, causing her to sympathize and sometimes heartache for it.

Once she went to see the cat. Two girls passed by. When seeing the “big white,” they snapped out, "Look, what an ugly cat!" with expressions on their faces that usually appear when choking . Fortunately, the "big white" couldn't understand the words, and in the cat's world, a curse is the least hurt a human can inflict upon it. "I cried, when it ran to me, and a new wound on its face came into my view."

"Some weeks later, it disappeared." Mary hopes that it left for a better place with kinder people or a place without people.

She always believes that animals should live a better life than humans because it is they who piously abide by the Law of Nature, while humans always break it.

Undoubtedly, humans do, and SARS is an example. Eager to hunt animals that are new for their table, people acted as conquerors but forgot how far they had been left behind by the evolution of nature, and that their bodies could not tolerate the new things nature created. SARS tells us that nature revenges; a harmonious world is the destination. To share the harmony is not only for the weaker animals to live better in the world of humans, but also for the weaker humans to live safer in the world of nature.

Happily, Mary is not alone. More and more people are calling for the rights of animals. In China, a woman scientist changed the way her laboratory drew blood from little white mice to alleviate their pain. It is not only in the elite academic field, but normal people are also paying more attention to these creatures living at our feet. On Google, the numerous website links of nongovernmental, non profitable organizations for animal protection show us that goodwill and kind human hearts still remain. But that over a million homeless animals wander just in Beijing tells us there is still a long way to go.

Mary has a dream: to build a fund for animal protection. But animal protection is not simply a matter of money. It needs everyone's effort, and effort begins with understanding.

CHINA, INTERNATIONAL, COMMENTARY: Some Chinese Thoughts on the London Explosions

By Christina Liang

I was on my summer-vacation trip in Shanghai, when I heard the news of the explosions in London. As a shocking piece of news, it instantly provoked a number of fragmentary thoughts.

Anxious: When I first heard the news, I couldn't help thinking of my classmates who are studying in London. I'm still worrying about their safety, because they haven't contacted us yet. What's more, nobody knows whether the bombings will happen again.

At the same time, I realized that those Londoners whose family members were caught in the explosions are far more anxious than me. Their families have been torn asunder within a few minutes. Most of them will never know their final words to each other except those from earlier that morning--probably just a casual "bye" and a snatched kiss. But the events of only minutes left these little gestures as their last exchanges.

Olympics: Only the night before the bombs, London won the vote to host the 2012 Olympics. All Londoners were immersed in happiness, looking forward to that great event in 2012. However, the next day, that happiness was swept away by unbearable grief. Although some experts said the explosions were not aimed at the host of the Olympic Games, still this coincidence scares us sports fans a lot. In recent years, terrorism has gradually, relentlessly threatened sports--one of the purest parts in our life. I have always firmly believed that sports stands for the beauty of human nature, so I don't want to see terrorism, politics, or the endless grudges of humanity come to violate it.

Reaction: After the explosions, one thing impressed me greatly--the calm reaction of the Londoners. First of all, the rescuers' response was quick, calm and effective. As I got the developing news on the Internet, it became clear that the London search and rescue system truly did a good job.

In recent years, with the increase of emergencies, search and rescue systems have become a serious problem. Comparatively speaking, the developed countries, relying on their strong economies, plus well-developed social welfare institutions, can cope with such emergencies quite well.

However, as for the underdeveloped countries, things don't always go so well. Lacking materiel is the main obstacle of search and rescue systems. So after a disaster, the government and the victims face other embarrassing problems. Sometimes, the only thing they can do is wait for international help.

An effective search and rescue system is an urgent and important problem to deal with. We can't let the victims, who have undergone unbearable pains, experience even more sadness.

Secondly, the bravery shown by the common Londoners deserves our respect. As we all know, the purpose of the terrorists was to destroy the normal order of Londoners' lives. The more panic they show, the happier the terrorists will be. But I think the reaction of Londoners disappointed the terrorists a lot.

A friend who has lived in London for several years told me that the courage of the British is beyond faith or belief. They make rational moves only out of common sense. Their common sense tells them that calmness and an orderly normal life is the strongest reaction against an enemy.

This reminds me of the novel "The Remains of the Day." According to the novel, the most important factor of a good British butler is "dignity." I suppose this is an important feature not only of a typical butler but also of all British people. In the capital of the "country of gentlemen," faced with an emergency, Londoners used their actions to give us a definition of "dignity."

Gloating: After the explosions, I surfed the Internet, hoping to see the opinions of the Chinese people on this event. Many people did show concern for the Londoners, for the victims. However, some people took pleasure in the Londoners' misfortune. They said the British deserved it. The explosions helped them vent their anger toward the allies--USA and UK--and express their sympathy for the people in Iraq and Afghanistan.

I can understand the feelings of these people. They are not satisfied with the behavior of USA and UK all over the world. They can't bear to see certain big countries "bully" other small nations. On this point, I agree with them. But to gloat is really not humane.

No matter what the government has done, the common people are innocent. They just pay for politicians' wrong doings. Some people may retort that the common people elect the governors. I think 99 percent of people vote for their leaders to insure their safety and bring them a better life, not to invade other countries. I trust the intelligence of the people in this "country of gentlemen."

All in all, I want to say that the dignified reaction of Londoners won them an enhanced reputation all over the world. In my eyes, the terrorists never got an upper hand in this event.

The work of anti-terrorism should go unalterably on.

Haynes Johnson at BFSU

Haynes Johnson, a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who has over 40 years of experience in reporting, came to BFSU on May 23rd to give a lecture on the U.S. political divide as well as to give advice to WOW and other school media. Beryl Hou and Lianne Li from WOW interviewed him on the 24th.

About your visit to China? We know you come with the support of the foundation. What is your plan and purpose? How long are you going to be here?

Four years ago, I was fascinated by what is happening in China. It is of obvious interest to me as an American, a human being, a world citizen and someone who cares about world politics and the future stability of the world. All of that is tied up in China as well as the United States. So I always think of going somewhere when I want to be better informed. Maybe I will write something about it to share some new information with other people. That's why I am here. I don't expect to find great new truths, just impressions. I learn from students, government officials and Party members. The questions I get from people help me understand what is going on. This is not something that you can learn from thousands of miles away. I am leaving for Shanghai on Thursday and will be there until the following Thursday. Then I will go to Kunming, and later Hanoi in Vietnam. I won't be back until the middle of June.

Although you have not been here for a long time, we would like to hear your view on China's media and journalism.

Well, that is part of what I am trying to learn about-- how journalism is changing in China. There is still a central authority that works more control over what is published than they do in the United States. And I am trying to find out how it is changing. I get the impression from people telling me that there is more of this or less of that. But there are still lines of authority that you can't bridge, that you have to be careful about.

You have mentioned during your visit here that to be a journalist is to be a camera and to catch pictures for your audience. But we are all human beings. We are subjective and sometimes cannot be that objective and balanced. I wonder how you balance your emotion with your job, especially in case there is some involvement with your relatives or personal views.

Well, you know, there is no such thing as a perfectly objective person. We all have different views. We are all shaped by different events and come from different backgrounds. We are influenced by things we don't even know about. So you have to know that about yourself. You have to recognize that you do not have the whole truth of what you are writing about. In this case, you are not going to pretend that what you are telling the whole truth, but what you are telling is worthy. You have to recognize your limitations and then still try to say something important. That's all.

I guess you have met with a lot of difficulties in your career as a journalist. What is the most difficult thing you have encountered?

I think the most difficult thing, always, is when you are in an emotional situation when you are seeing things happening in front of your eyes, and then you just have to go back a moment and think "what is it that I have just seen?" And that is a tough decision. What I may think is not what you may think. And you just stand back and test yourself and ask: "What do I want to say about what has just happened?" And that is not an easy question because we all might see it differently. Then you have to come back and say: "This is the most important thing I want to tell you about something that has just happened." And that is the turn again and again--figure out what is it that I want to tell you as a journalist about an event that has just occurred that has significance and meaning. And then, the next part is "how do I tell it and how do I express it in a way that is helpful" so that you can really understand something about an event that might have some meaning to you, because that's what the job is. You want to do that. So that's a continually difficult situation.

Investigative journalism has a long history in America. Now that investigative journalism is developing in China, we would like to know how you establish your network of sources and judge the credibility of confidential sources?

That is a tough question. You have got to develop sources--people who believe there are things you should know that you can tell others in order to make changes. That's what investigation is. You often report about something that is wrong. There are people who might lose their jobs if they are identified. So you have to protect them and also be sure what they are telling you is factually true. It's really good if you can get some documents that will prove your case. And don't rely on a single person or one set of documents. You have to work a long time and get credibility. It is all very complicated, but you have to do it.

We know you and your father are the first father and son who have won the Pulitzer Prize. What is your response to winning it?

Well, of course I was proud about my father. The nice thing about it was when I won the Pulitzer Prize, it was the first time that it was given out in person. So I wore a big black tie that is very formal. There was a big dinner inviting all the Pulitzer winners, including my father, at a hotel in New York. The editor told me that I had won two days before. I was supposed to pledge secrecy. And I called my father up and said: "I will see you at the Pulitzer Prize dinner." He said: "I can't get you a ticket." I said: "No, I will see you there." "What do you mean? I can't get you a ticket.!" I said again: "I will see you there!" So he got very angry and said: "I can't do it!" So I said: "I will be there. I won!" "What do you mean, you won?" The great thing was when they introduced me and I went forward to get the prize, he stood up and cried. So that is what is nice about winning the award.

You never thought "I have to compete with my father," have you?

Oh, I guess I did. But the nice thing was that he was alive at that time. He was there to see my mother too. And that is just a moment I will never forget. I've got tears in my eyes now when I tell that story.