Soul-searching needed to avoid repeat of Cultural Revolution crimes
1. Identify and comment on three instances of bias within this article. How does the opinion of the writer influence the style of the article? Would it look the same way if an American writer had approached the same subject?
2. The word Pathos refers to a rhetorical appeal in which a writer attempts to tug at the heartstrings of a reader. How is Pathos used in this article? Based on the subject matter, was an emotional slant the most effective means by which to present the information? Would a logical or ethical appeal have been as effective?
The first example of bias is when the writer wrote: “He expressed remorse for causing their suffering.” (referring to a former member of the Red Guard). It was the writer’s opinion that he showed remorse for what he had done, and another writer/reporter may have noticed different emotions. Another example of bias is that: “After the official "catastrophe" verdict in 1981, the government urged people to forget it for fear that this dark page might damage its reputation and threaten its legitimacy.” The author believes that the government is trying to hide this point in history because it threatens its reputation, while others may have said that they are just trying to move on to better things. The author also believes that they need to reflect on the Cultural Revolution in order to heal properly. They are obviously against the Cultural Revolution in China, and the article reflects this opinion. This article would have been much different if written by an American author, as they would not have any first-hand experiences in China.
ReplyDeletePathos is used in this article when the former members of the Red Guard apologized for their role in the Cultural Revolution. An emotional slant was the most effective, as the Cultural Revolution was a very hard period in Chinese history, and brings out emotions of many people involved. Since this is a very emotional topic for some people, logical and ethical approaches would not be as effective.
-Teigue Young
Teigue, nice close reading here. You take a good look at the text that you quote and explain in detail. Well done.
DeleteI wonder what other students will think. Do you think that the reporter's bias is similar the majority population?
DeleteIn this article, the author clearly disapproves of what happened during the Cultural Revolution, and uses diction to convey that this time period was a dark time in Chinese history. She alludes to this era as a “violent” time in which “countless dreams had be shattered and [the] nation [had been] deeply scarred.” While most reporters from capitalist nations would share this view, people supporting Communism would disagree not only with the harsh description of Mao’s efforts, but also with the opinion that the government should apologize for the Cultural Revolution. The author then goes on to talk about how the Chinese government is embarrassed of this time period and wants to shrug it off as something that is done and over with. She responds by arguing, “Really? I don’t think so. [...] There is no official museum to commemorate it; books on the [...] violence during the period are banned; and textbooks [...] gloss over it.” Again, based on her evidence, any capitalist would share her views while Chinese government officials think otherwise. In the officials’ opinion, China has more important issues at hand. Lastly, the author claims that “without true reflection, China will miss a good opportunity to heal properly [...] and grow stronger.” Like the last statement, Chinese officials would argue that the time for reflection has passed, but Americans would say that China should always reflect on this time in history to be able to learn from it and not repeat it.
ReplyDeleteThe author seems to think like the majority of the Chinese population. The article in this link, http://www.history.com/topics/cultural-revolution, states that many people lost faith in the government towards the end of Mao’s rule because his policies created issues he wanted to avoid. They did not agree with the brutality of this time period. In the article in this link, http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/09/10/through-a-thwarted-cinematographers-eye-chinas-cultural-revolution/?_r=0, a Chinese photographer talks of other photographers who recorded the “negative side” of the Cultural Revolution through pictures that he had to hide because the government wanted to censor them. He knew these dark pictures would be useful later on to show other people the reality of that era. The author also seems to think like most American reporters would, so I do not think the views of the article or the tone would change if an American were to write it. I also disagree with Teigue since I think an American reporter would have been able to get the same information. The former Red Guard members told their stories to a person who disapproved of that time period. I see no reason why they would hide information from an American with the same views. I do agree with Teigue that use of pathos was an effective way to present the information in this article. Had the author stuck to a more logical approach, the severeness of the Cultural Revolution would have been downplayed and the impact of the article would not have been as great.
The author of this article clearly shows his disapproval of the events that occurred during the Cultural Revolution in China. The author’s stance is clearly evident because of the author’s bias shown throughout the article. Towards the beginning of the article the author states: “Chairman Mao mobilised the whole nation to violently the ‘bourgeois elements’…” and, “countless dreams had been shattered and a nation deeply scarred.” Although there is no doubt the way the Chinese government had treated their people was wrong, bias would definitely be present if the author used such serious adjectives. By doing so the author demonstrated their opinion by including a metaphor so accusatory of that time period. Secondly, after the government run Global Times newspaper (http://www.globaltimes.cn/index.html) argued that the time to reflect on the Cultural Revolution had passed, the author stated: “Really? I don't think so. The authorities have not confronted the traumatic episode.” The author is clearly showing bias in that statement by expressing its opinion. The author strongly disagrees with the argument that it is no longer the time to talk about the atrocities that occurred during the Cultural Revolution. Another example of bias is at the end of the article: “Without true reflection, China will miss a good opportunity to heal properly, to purify its soul and to grow stronger.” Again the author is demonstrating a strong opinion and believes that for China to get better they must reflect on the Cultural Revolution. I agree with Bidisha in that if an American wrote this article the stance of the article would most likely not change. Most of the information taught about the Cultural Revolution is negative and the authors here would most likely show that. However, the author might tend to be a little more objective in their writing because there is less of a chance of an author in America experiencing the things that happened during this time in China. I also agree with Bidisha and Teigue that emotional slants are more effective in a persuasive writing like this because it gives more of a sentimental feeling to it. The usage of emotional slants perfectly complements the author’s stance on this subject.
ReplyDelete-Jackson Pollio
In addition to Teigue’s examples, there are also further biases throughout this article. At the beginning of the 11th paragraph, the author starts with “Really? I don’t think so.” That within itself is a bias because the author is inserting her own opinion into the article, thus showing what her thoughts on certain groups would be. This remark was made after summarizing an article from a Chinese-government-run newspaper. This snarky remark shows her disproving of the Chinese government. There is also bias at the end of the article. When the author is wrapping up, she states her opinion by saying that “China will miss a good opportunity to heal properly […] That’s the only way to prevent [the Cultural Revolution] from haunting the country ever again.” Here she is inputting her opinion again because she is trying to make the reader believe what she believes in. She believes that apologizing is the best thing that the government can do, stated by the “good opportunity”, and missing out on that will “haunt” the country. After further investigation, I found a website for Lijia Zhang, the author of this article. One can see her bias against the Chinese government just by her background: She worked in a factory as a teenager making missiles designed to hit North America. The rough environment she endured drove her to study English and wrote a book “Socialism is Great!”. When searching the newspaper The South China Morning Post, I could not find any articles pertaining to a bais. I feel as though an American writer would have the same approach as this writer seeing as many Americans do not think highly of the Chinese government. In fact, in an article posted by Gallup World, China only had a 31% approval rate by other countries, making it believable that most US authors would disaprove of the government like Zhang.
ReplyDeleteThe use of Pathos in this article is geared towards the international reader, not necessarily someone in China. Because the uncertainty and disapproval of the Chinese government, this article is posed from that viewpoint and empathizes with the Chinese people. This would attempt to make a connection with the average reader and the people suffering in China. It is also attempting to pull on the heartstrings of the aging population, talking about last goodbyes and things people want to do before they die. This emotional slant was somewhat effective because it made something less relatable understandable. These people suffering half a world away aren’t very similar to a suburban family in America. This emotional slant helps the reader connect more with the people and allows the author to persuade and influence people by adding her opinion within the story. To people that could detect the bias, a more logical or ‘unbiased’ point of view might have made the article more trustworthy to them, especially since it was coming from a Chinese newspaper. However, to an unsuspecting middle class American, the bias would make the story more relatable and connect with them on a more emotional level.
The author of this article clearly demonstrates bias in her writing. I agree with Jackson that her word choice is an initial indicator of this bias. For instance, the author describes China as a "nation deeply shattered" after the cultural revolution. She uses many strong adjectives throughout the article to describe the events that took place. As Jackson said, if the author didn't have a bias toward the subject, she probably wouldn't be using such powerful words. Also, the author states "It is encouraging to see a string of individual confessions in recent years". If the author believes that these confessions are encouraging, she quite obviously thinks that the violence was an awful thing that had to be confessed to. Lastly, the author states "In May 2010, another 60-year-old, Wang Jiyu, haunted by guilt, confessed in the same magazine that as a quick-tempered 16-year-old, he had killed another teenager from a rival Red Guards group". The author is telling us how Jiyu felt without any evidence. This tells me as a reader that this is how she believes Jiyu should feel, presenting her bias once again.
ReplyDeletePathos is also extremely prevalent in this article. Pathos is a tool of rhetoric that can be very effective if used correctly. The author describes "By the time the movement ended 10 years later, shortly after his death, millions of people had been tortured and persecuted, at least one million had died, countless dreams had been shattered and a nation deeply scarred". By using these words the author gives the reader a feeling of sadness and a sense of tragedy. This 'pulls on the heartstrings' of readers. I believe that pathos was a smart and effective route for the author to take because she has an already emotional topic and she also has an established bias towards it. The pathos is much more effective than ethos or logos would have been.
-Anna Smith
the way this article is formatted by the opinions of the author made it almost all opinionated based. after every fact/piece of information there is almost always atleast a few sentences afterward explaining the authors view point. the first piece of bias I found was when the author is talking about Mr. Chen apologizing for the red guards actions.“He expressed remorse for causing their suffering.” there was a formal apology published saying so. the second piece of bias I found which I agree with Natalie on. When the author begins the paragraph by saying "Really? I don't think so". Is a direct example of her opinion which as I said early is the driving power of this article. The third piece of bias I found is right at the end of the article “China will miss a good opportunity to heal properly […] That’s the only way to prevent the ghost of the Cultural Revolution from haunting the country ever again.” this again is the authors opinion on the situation.
ReplyDeleteIn this article the use of Pathos isn't really towards someone living in China it's more targeted towards us the international readers. The emotion used is helpful to make us connect and understand what the author is trying to get across. With the common use of the authors own opinions throughout the article it is apperant that the author is trying to persuade and influence the readers by relating to us with her own thoughts instead of straight facts.
-Sean Fay
There were many different aspects and instances in this article that could be considered bias. One of the most evident cases is when the author, Lijia Zhang states that “Mao mobilised the whole nation to violently remove the ‘bourgeois elements’ that had supposedly infiltrated the government and society”. By saying this, the author leads on to the fact that they didn’t believe in the way that the government went about things, and also the reasoning behind it. Later, the author goes on the state that people speaking out publically, and sharing their confessions is “encouraging”. Some people would disagree with that statement, because these acts are very “untraditional” in China. Another example of bias in the article is when the author says “Really? I don’t think so”, referring to the right time to reflect on China’s past events. Zhang goes on to say that the issue wasn’t taken care of in the first place.
ReplyDeleteUnlike many other articles discussing China’s issues, this one is actually written by someone from China. The bias comments that are intertwined into the topic that Zhang is discussing, makes the article interesting for the reader. It also makes the piece stronger than if someone from America wrote it, because it’s coming from someone who has experienced China, first hand. While the author shares their opinions, they get the reader to see their points. Zhang also used some pathos in the writing. For example, at the end of the article, Zhang stated, “Without true reflection, China will miss a good opportunity to heal properly, to purify its soul and to grow stronger. That's the only way to prevent the ghost of the Cultural Revolution from haunting the country ever again.” Not only is this an opinion, but it makes the reader think, and is an effective use of pathos. Though logical and ethical appeal are also effective, the author made a wise decision in using pathos.
~Lauren Kaltsas