Red Rover, Red Rover, Red Victory all Over
Today I saw the “Military Museum of the Chinese People’s Revolution.” It was a very comprehensive display of Chinese military history, in a gigantic building topped with a red-star and with a red-star embedded in the ceiling of the rotunda overhanging the obligatory twenty-foot-tall Mao statue. The whole architecture seems to be designed to make you feel small, with 30-foot ceilings throughout (although this clearance is needed for many of the exhibits).
And really the whole museum is more about being a tribute to the CCP’s victories and Chinese military accomplishment than providing detached historical analysis, since there is no shortage of patriotic life-size statues and murals of battle scenes intermixed with the armaments and tools of war. I’m trying to recollect the Smithsonian Air & Space museum for the point of comparison (i.e. the degree patriotism trumps historicity and balance), but I don’t remember it much after eleven years.
There is a different take on history in the exhibits to say the least. Rather than simply point out some of the atrocities of the Japanese occupation forces (a lone skull is on display), the English version of the War for Liberation exhibit has unqualified statements with loaded phrases like the “cruel Japanese” or the “Japanese aggressor.” For diplomatic reasons, you would think that they might qualify it as the “fascist aggressor government of Japan,” but then the grievance would have to soften with the change in government. It may still be a useful grievance politically.
Also, near the conclusion of the Sino-Japanese War exhibit, its credits victory to the CCP. When the U.S. is referenced, it is in its support for the Kuomintang. No analysis is made of the role of the U.S. and finally, the Soviet Union in Japan’s ultimate defeat. As befits a revolutionary triumph narrative, it is the sacrifices of the people, and not the failures and miscalculations of the enemy nor the military success of future rivals that determine victory.
This aside, what I found most amazing (but not surprising) was how poorly armed the initial Communist armies were. More than half the firearms from the 1920’s and 1930’s on display were home-brewed, and for half of those I would rather have a potato-gun had I been in the soldier’s place. Since there did not to appear to be any standardization and assembly-line production it would be interesting to know how many of the weapons malfunctioned or simply blew up when fired.
A most interesting aspect of the museum for an American is the parts that are left un-translated. The front of the Museum lists the exhibits in English and Chinese, and makes reference to the Korean War exhibit, as an instance of “Stopping U.S. Aggression.” However, when you enter the Korean War exhibit, there are no English translations whatsoever, in contrast to most all of the rest of the Museum. They might want to change that before the Olympics in anticipation of the twenty-thousand commentaries on “China: Today, Tomorrow and Yesterday” that will spew forth.
What I further wonder is how many exhibits in museums will be closed pending “renovations” come the Olympics?
And really the whole museum is more about being a tribute to the CCP’s victories and Chinese military accomplishment than providing detached historical analysis, since there is no shortage of patriotic life-size statues and murals of battle scenes intermixed with the armaments and tools of war. I’m trying to recollect the Smithsonian Air & Space museum for the point of comparison (i.e. the degree patriotism trumps historicity and balance), but I don’t remember it much after eleven years.
There is a different take on history in the exhibits to say the least. Rather than simply point out some of the atrocities of the Japanese occupation forces (a lone skull is on display), the English version of the War for Liberation exhibit has unqualified statements with loaded phrases like the “cruel Japanese” or the “Japanese aggressor.” For diplomatic reasons, you would think that they might qualify it as the “fascist aggressor government of Japan,” but then the grievance would have to soften with the change in government. It may still be a useful grievance politically.
Also, near the conclusion of the Sino-Japanese War exhibit, its credits victory to the CCP. When the U.S. is referenced, it is in its support for the Kuomintang. No analysis is made of the role of the U.S. and finally, the Soviet Union in Japan’s ultimate defeat. As befits a revolutionary triumph narrative, it is the sacrifices of the people, and not the failures and miscalculations of the enemy nor the military success of future rivals that determine victory.
This aside, what I found most amazing (but not surprising) was how poorly armed the initial Communist armies were. More than half the firearms from the 1920’s and 1930’s on display were home-brewed, and for half of those I would rather have a potato-gun had I been in the soldier’s place. Since there did not to appear to be any standardization and assembly-line production it would be interesting to know how many of the weapons malfunctioned or simply blew up when fired.
A most interesting aspect of the museum for an American is the parts that are left un-translated. The front of the Museum lists the exhibits in English and Chinese, and makes reference to the Korean War exhibit, as an instance of “Stopping U.S. Aggression.” However, when you enter the Korean War exhibit, there are no English translations whatsoever, in contrast to most all of the rest of the Museum. They might want to change that before the Olympics in anticipation of the twenty-thousand commentaries on “China: Today, Tomorrow and Yesterday” that will spew forth.
What I further wonder is how many exhibits in museums will be closed pending “renovations” come the Olympics?
brainfart by Daniel at
10:23 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home