In this photo essay, I’m concerned with the kinds of teaching and learning that go on at the thousands of public memorial sites around the PRC. Unfortunately I seem to have misplaced some of the photos from my visits to these places, although at some of them, taking pictures was obviously out of order (e.g., the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Museum). Of those that I’ve retained, I’ve decided to stick to sites related to the Revolutionary War that I think are worth considering. I hope you enjoy them.
The photos were taken at four different locations. Three of these are considered “holy” sites of the Communist Revolution: Zunyi, Guizhou, site of the famed “Zunyi Meeting (or Conference)” (1935) which saw Mao take formal control during the Long March; Yan’an, Shaanxi, an equally famous site where the Chinese Communist Party made its base beginning in 1935 (after the Long March); and the lesser known Xibaipo, Hebei, where the CCP made its headquarters just prior (1948) to victory in the Revolutionary War. The fourth location is The Revolutionary Martyrs’ Mausoleum in Shijiazhuang, Hebei. While obviously connected to the Revolutionary War, it has a slightly different theme than the others.
The three holy sites are pretty straight forward memorials of the Revolutionary War. Zunyi and Xibaipo are museum like sites, but do include many artifacts from weapons to bowls of millet to photographs. Yan’an is much the same, except for the very unusual opportunities to play “revolutionary” by donning PLA garb and spinning cotton or carrying water with a shoulder pole. I’ll never forget stepping around a corner from taking the photo and catching sight of an actual, modern-day peasant labourer using just such a shoulder pole. Apparently the cycle of revolution/counter-revolution has had a greater effect on the material circumstances of some more than others. Still, much care is taken to preserve these sites, important as they are to the memory of the bitter struggle of the revolution and, of course, to the pedagogy of legitimation of the CCP as China’s guide to the future.
As I suggest above, Shijiazhuang’s Revolutionary Martyrs’ Museum provides a bit of contrast. It memorializes the dead of the Revolutionary War (there are actual graves at the rear of the park) and specifically honours the the service of Canadian doctor Norman Bethune, who is still remembered by most Chinese, singled out as he was for praise by Chairman Mao. Also remembered for his service is Indian doctor Dwarkanath Kotnis. The memorial, in other words, celebrates the spirit of socialist internationalism embodied in the contributions of these two non-Chinese and others.
One of the things that I find interesting about these sites is that while they are fairly typical in their glorification of the spirit of sacrifice, and, of course, of the victorious party, they seem to me (especially the Shijiazhuang site) not to be concerned with glorification of war itself. Also, while China and the CCP have lapsed into a kind of economistic exceptionalism in the past three decades, one still sees traces of the spirit of internationalism that was central to the Revolution prior to 1978.
For those planning to visit China or for those who are already living there, I’d suggest a visit to these places is well worth your time. They offer a different and important insight into Chinese history, and are a welcome antidote to the kind of “ancientism” that prevails on the Beijing-Xi’an tourist path.
I am a Ph.D. Candidate in Educational Policy Studies at the University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. My current research focuses on the educational culture of a rapidly transforming city in Mainland China.
Reblogged this on society & education and commented:
A second example of a photo essay for the midterm assignment. I think this one is a bit stronger than the first.
I’m not sure I understand exactly what your point is regarding the different and important insight that these sights represent into Chinese history? This piece of Chinese history covers essentially less than 100 years worth of history of a nation that boasts more than 5000 years – and one that in some ways is very different from its preceding periods and yet oddly familiar to those who know the history prior to that of the Party and its version.
And as I understand the internationalism you reference, I suspect that the only “internationalism” that the monuments and museums would mention are those that would serve to glorify those tied directly to the positive history that the Party chooses to represent. I do not mean to infer that it is right or wrong (though I gather from your post that you intend it in a positive manner so please correct me if I’m wrong) as any nation would do the same but there is something oddly jarring from such an inference considering the very one-sided history that is presented and how it does not always coincide with other facts available about those same events external to the national narrative provided by the Party.
Finally, can you please clarify what you mean by “ancientism” since I am otherwise unfamiliar with the tourist path between Beijing-Xi’an? Thanks.
Thanks, Chopstik.
Will get back to you in the morning as I have a 2 year old demanding my attention at the moment.I’ll try to answer your questions as best I can. If I’ve missed the nub of your question please let me know.RE “different and important insights,” I think you may have already answered your own question. What I’m trying to say is fairly mundane: that the events of the Revolution are very important to understanding China as we see it now, if only in the documentary sense. At each of these places, the museum pieces are quite good at giving a sense of the look and feel of the times and, of course, the chronology of events. These events tend to be viewed through the lens of the grand ideological battles of the Cold War, making simplistic and dismissive judgements easy. I’m not saying that one ought to only visit these sites. In some ways, I suppose, my comments on “ancientism” makes exactly the same point that you have about the “less than 100 years” of recent history.
RE internationalism, I’m taking internationalism a little more broadly than what you’ve read. First, I’m referencing Bethune’s contribution here as much as anything. For those unfamiliar, Bethune was a communist, which may stand him in poor stead with some, but even for anti-communists, to judge him to harshly because of these is to engage in rank presentism. Remember than the liberalism of the kind we know today was a distant 3rd in terms of desirable positions; fascism was the real threat. So, as a communist, Bethune was primarily an anti-fascist. Before going to China he served in the anti-fascist forces in Spain. In the China of the 30s, fascism was represented by both Chiang Kaishek and imperial Japan. Having said all of this, anti-fascism and internationalism (of a more general kind) were not strictly a movement of communists. As to socialist internationalism, I’m not ambiguously in favour of the kind that accompanied the height of actually existing socialist regimes, but certainly these memorials remind us that there was a time when a more principled socialism existed in China, one in which there was an (ideological) commitment to bettering the lives of those other than oneself. Each of these sites reminds one of a very different attitude that makes the exceptionalism of the present all the more striking.
As to “very one-sided history,” you’re right that this is what is presented, but with respect to the Revolutionary War, what other side would you like to see presented?
On “ancientism,” present-day tourists usually travel a path from Beijing to Xi’an and Yangshuo, with some other ancient and beautiful sites thrown in depending on the length of the visit. They typically don’t see any of the sites I’m talking about excepting Tian’anmen Square. I think this state of things is unfortunate, if understandable; there is an awful lot to see if you only have a short time. Still, I would suggest that the focus on the glorious ancient past of China performs the same ideological function that I think you’re hinting at. It feeds into the Chinese exceptionalism I refer to (China is old, China is complex, China can’t be understood or ruled in the same way as other places) and works to justify the present state of things.
I hope this helps to clarify. If you want to fill in some of the things you’ve hinted at below, please do. I’d be happy to comment.