Transmedia Storytelling: It’s the Story Stupid

Pamela Rutledge, Ph.D., M.B.A.:
We need a new name for 'transmedia storytelling'.  It seems like all the excitement about big transmedia storytelling projects has made it the buzz term du jour.  But somehow, in all that excitement, the fundamentals have become obscured. It's important to remember that in 'transmedia storytelling,' that 'transmedia' is an adjective.  'Storytelling' is the noun. 
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/positively-media/201110/transmedia-storytelling-it-s-the-story-stupid-0

Steve Jobs, 1955-2011

"Your time is limited, so don't waste it living someone else's life... Have the courage to follow your heart and intuition. They somehow already know what you truly want to become."

Pocket Guide to China (1944): A U.S. Army Publication

Pocket Guide to China (1944)

View more presentations from Don Kilburg III

PsyDip came across the fascinating “Pocket Guide to China” at an out-of-the-way World War II memorabilia show in rural Minnesota and just had to pick it up.  Written in 1944 by the United States Army, it was intended as a guide for American military personnel stationed in China.  I figured it would be well worth the five dollars to get some insight into the official American mindset toward China at the time and to own this little collector’s gem.  Often these kinds of casual guides are very telling, since they have been simplified for the layperson.  Here I provide you with some interesting excerpts from the guide and a link to the guide itself...  

The first thing that amazed me was the cover.  It’s what we know now as Taiwan’s flag.  Yet as you’ll recall, the Taiwan we know now did not exist at that time.  Back in 1944, our conception of mainland China was basically that of a budding democracy, a fellow capitalist society.  There was no self-proclaimed Republic of China (ROC) in Taiwan and there was no People’s Republic of China (PRC) on the Chinese mainland—not until 1949, when a bloody revolution forced the capitalists to flee to the island of Taiwan and the communists took over the mainland.  How ironic that during WWII we were so closely aligned with China as an ally, waging war against the Japanese—and yet now we are inclined to think of China as our adversary. 

A look at the 1944 “Pocket Guide to China” is a window into history, a snapshot of American thinking.  Not only did we once view China as a great ally, but also as a kindred spirit—at least that is what the U.S. Army wanted to instill in its soldiers assigned to China.  The guide spends a considerable amount of time talking about how Chinese people are just like Americans and how they love individual freedom like Americans, even at the expense of using what are now deemed pejoratives toward our contemporary Japanese allies:

“If you think of the Chinese as a yellow-skinned people of a totally different race from us, you probably will never get to know them.  What’s more, you’ll be playing right into the hands of Hitler and the Japs.” (p. 2)

The guide goes on:

“Of all the peoples of Asia, the Chinese are most like Americans.  Those who know both peoples often remark at the likeness.  One of the reasons, perhaps, is that we both live in countries where there is plenty of space and a great variety of climate and food.  We are alike, too, because we both love independence and individual freedom.” (p. 4)

The guide even praises the Chinese as being superior to Americans in many ways, especially when it comes to social relations:

“They are better than we are, perhaps, at human relationships.  They value these above all else, and have learned to get along with people through centuries of getting along with each other.” (p. 5)

Clearly U.S. Army writers of 1944 found it hard to imagine that these same highly sociable Chinese people would go on to carry out one of the greatest upheavals in human relationships of all time, the so-called Cultural Revolution.  An estimated 35,000 to as high as 1.5 million people were killed or committed suicide in that decade-long struggle, due principally to ideological differences between Maoists and those perceived of as being counter-revolutionary, i.e. capitalists.  To this day social scientists still lack a coherent explanation as to how such a highly sociable people got so carried away in such a grand dispute.

Referring again to China’s democratic tendencies, statements like the following seem on the one hand misplaced (since China would go on to become a communist country, with clear privilege distinctions based on party membership) and yet on the other hand perhaps prescient (given China’s post-Mao economic liberalization).

“We are alike also because of our natural democratic tendencies.  There are few class distinctions in China, no hereditary aristocracy.  Anybody can get anywhere if he can prove himself able and intelligent enough.” (p. 8)

Perhaps it is this democratic tendency that endured the Mao years and resurfaced again in Deng Xiao Ping’s open door policy and economic reforms.

The guide also ventures into race, gender, and social comparisons, albeit somewhat awkwardly:

“The Chinese people vary widely.  In the north the people are tall and handsome.  In mid-China they are of average height and in the south they are short and stocky.” (p. 9)

And the 1940s oft-used “queer” makes several appearances:

“One thing to understand at the beginning: The Chinese think we look queer.  They are accustomed to everyone having black hair and black eyes, so naturally they think it is strange for people to have red or brown or blonde hair and eyes of unfamiliar colors.  Also we are bigger-boned than the average Chinese, and hairier.  As a matter of fact, the Chinese have an ancient belief that the hairier people are, the more uncivilized they are.” (p. 13)

We also see glimmers of Chinese women having a proverbial leg up on American women when it comes to political and military participation:

“Chinese women in some ways are more free than they are here in America—that is, they do some things which American women don’t yet do.  They are in the Army, for instance, and they fight side by side with the guerillas.” (p. 15)

And there is elaborate mention of China’s subtle forms of communication:

“…the Chinese have ways of getting information which have nothing to do with newspapers or organized sources of information.” (p. 23; see also “kill Japs for your own pleasure”, second to last sentence on p. 23, for a colorful example of the kind of mutual bonding the U.S. Army hoped to encourage between Americans and Chinese.)

We also see a continuous attempt on the part of the U.S. Army to get its soldiers to treat Chinese soldiers with respect, which may underlie a common problem of the period—but at least this comes off as noble, especially for the time in question.

“You have no reason to feel superior because you are better fed or better armed.  On the contrary, give the Chinese soldier his due in admiration for his plain, common guts.” (p. 40)

The guide culminates in a highly progressive nod to Chinese civilization and to human equality; something I should point out predates the American Civil Rights Act of 1964 by over two decades.

“China is the oldest civilization in the world and its civilization is in many ways the greatest.  As a natural result, the Chinese will not bear any assumption of superiority on the part of a white man because he is white.  China herself has no color prejudice against anyone with a different colored skin.  She is prepared to treat everyone on terms of human equality, and you cannot do better than approach China in the same spirit.” (p. 41)

A shout out to cultural relativism rules the guide, as its aim is clearly to have American soldiers get along with the Chinese they encounter, in order to defeat the Japanese as smoothly as possible.

“Discourage anyone who acts as though the Chinese are queer.  They are not queer.  After all, there are more people in the world eating Chinese food and wearing Chinese clothes than there are Americans eating American food and wearing American clothes.  They live their way and we live ours.  If you respect them, they will respect you.” (p. 42)

In what must have been an obvious concern for racism among U.S. troops in 1944, Pocket Guide to China ends by pointing out that if you are racist you essentially support Hitler, not the Allies.

“Remember it’s Hitler who harps on the superiority of his own color, his own people, his own country.” (p. 45)

In sum, this is really a fascinating little guide that gives you a quick but meaningful glimpse into a time when America and China viewed each other quite different from how they view each other today.  I am struck by how much can change in national psychologies in the course of just one or two generations—and yet how much they can stay the same.  We still have concerns about ethnocentrism, racism, sexism, and certainly quickly changing geo-political alliances.  We still have great powers that find ways to oppose each other despite common human interests.  But ultimately it is that same core self-interest across cultures that propels us to yearn for individual freedom and democracy, so that we can all have an equal and fair shot at excelling based on our own individual merits and initiative.  That’s my own personal take anyway.  What do you think?

Here is a PDF of the entire 1944 U.S. Army publication, “Pocket Guide to China”.  Check it out:

http://slidesha.re/jInScA

PsyDip Author to Appear in Chinese Movie: "Qian Xuesen"

After a long "hiatus" of intense Chinese language study, PsyDip is back with a story of foreign film intrigue!  It all started late one night at a jazz club in Beijing.  A Chinese big band was serving up Duke Ellington’s “It Don’t Mean a Thing (If It Ain’t Got that Swing)”.  I had a gin and tonic in one hand and a cigar in the other.  A friend and I were having a good laugh about life and I must have been gesturing with liquid-confidence.  Two women approached and didn’t waste time before offering me a part in a movie.  They said I looked like the guy they wanted for a new Chinese movie partly set in 1950s California.  I thought for sure it was either a joke or a scam.  But curiosity got the best of me and low and behold it turned out to be an actual movie.  After a lengthy clearance process with the Department of State, to my surprise, I was cleared to play the small but exciting part of Grant B. Cooper, a famous lawyer.  The story: “Qian Xuesen” (钱学森, Qián Xuésēn).


Qian Xuesen is a national hero in China.  He almost single-handedly started China’s missile and space program.  He did so with the knowledge that he gained in America, starting with a U.S. Government scholarship, as a Chinese graduate student.  His story reads like a McCarthy era spy novel.  In short, the very brilliant Qian Xuesen was groomed by the U.S. Government to be a top rocket scientist but then tragically ran up against fear of communism in the 1950s.  Qian’s highly successful career at California Institute of Technology was brought to a grinding halt when the U.S. Government pulled his top secret security clearance, on little to no evidence, and put him under what was essentially house arrest for five years -- out of concerns that he was a communist spy.  Finally Qian was forced back to China where he took his missile know-how and helped turn China into a nuclear power.  This led his American lawyer Grant Cooper to later declare: "That the government permitted this genius, this scientific genius, to be sent to Communist China to pick his brains is one of the tragedies of this century."  Practically no one in contemporary America knows this story.  PsyDip certainly did not until now.

The fascinating story of Qian Xuesen’s life is now being resurrected on the big screen by critically-acclaimed Chinese film director Zhang Jianya (張建亞, Zhāng Jiànyà ).  It stars the big name Chinese actors Chen Kun (陈坤, Chén Kūn) and Zhang Yuqi (张雨绮, Zhāng Yǔqǐ ).  It also features fine American and Australian actors Steve Boergadine (of “Contract Killers”) and Nick Tate (of “Lost”).  The timing of the film is ideal because Qian Xuesen would have been 100 years old this year had he not passed away in 2009 at the age of 98.  Director Zhang Jianya has about nine million U.S. dollars worth of funding to tell Qian Xuesen’s story in a way that will honor him in the eyes of the Chinese.  Qian’s story is inherently fascinating, as he was born in China in the time of rickshaws and yet died having helped China put a man into outer space.

PsyDip suspects this movie will not be particularly critical of Qian Xuesen, but rather will showcase the rocket scientist’s great contributions to China that came as a result of apparent mistreatment by the United States Government.  The film is reportedly being made with the blessing and insistence of the Chinese Communist Party, which still very much runs China.  They put no large premium on critical depictions of their heroes.  After all, glorified Communist dictator Mao Ze Dong is still prominently featured on all Chinese currency to this day.  PsyDip fully imagines that when the Qian Xuesen movie hits Chinese theaters this fall, it will showcase Qian Xuesen in almost entirely positive light and it will showcase the U.S. Government in mostly negative light.  So why would an American diplomat want to play Grant B. Cooper in this movie?

Grant B. Cooper is someone who proudly defended Qian Xuesen in his deportation hearings in Los Angeles in the early 1950s.  He and several other American characters in the film came to Qian Xuesen’s defense in the name of what is good and true about America: justice, fairness, due process.  As such, the film presents a great teachable moment for the U.S. perspective.  Despite dark periods in America like McCarthyism, America has a proud history of addressing our legal failings and fighting hard to self-correct them.  Hopefully some of those great American voices will come through in the movie, despite any mistreatment Qian Xuesen may have received by the American government at that time.

Though Chinese audiences watching the Qian Xuesen movie probably won’t see them, from at least one major American writer's perspective, Qian Xuesen may in fact have had some downsides (aside from the lingering, though remote possibility he may have actually been a Chinese spy).  Famous author and fellow University of Illinois alumnus Iris Chang wrote about Qian Xuesen in her book “Thread of the Silkworm”.  Chang was no stranger to critical analysis of historical figures and events (readers may recall her compelling book “Rape of Nanking”, which documented the Japanese Army’s atrocities in China -- a book Chinese have certainly accepted as proof of their victimization).  Thread of the Silkworm highlights the very harsh treatment Qian Xuesen received by the American government in the 1950s, but also suggests that Qian went on to become exactly the kind of rigid bureaucrat that he had so despised in the United States.  In fact, according to Chang, that is the big story—Qian’s transformation from open-minded American academic to closed-minded Communist bureaucrat.

Chang asserts that Qian Xuesen helped to design China’s Great Leap Forward which resulted in at least 36 million Chinese people starving (according to several authoritative accounts, even by long-time Chinese Communist Party member, Yang Jisheng).  Chang also asserts that Qian Xuesen publicly supported the crack-down on the democratic student protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989.  Of course despite these criticisms of Qian Xuesen, he certainly may have been very well-intentioned in both cases.  He may also have felt forced to comply with Mao Ze Dong’s wishes in order to stay in his good graces during the persecution of the Cultural Revolution.  The point here on PsyDip is that you probably will not see any of this multi-facted analysis in the Qian Xuesen movie, as its goal is to make Qian Xuesen shine at his best.

In any event, “Qian Xuesen” promises to be a great movie.  I can tell you first hand that the production is running with great attention to detail and great expertise in both acting and directing.  It has been a real honor to meet Zhang Jianya, Chen Kun, and Zhang Yuqi and to help tell the story of a very remarkable man.  It’s clear that Qian Xuesen was both a genius and that he made incredible contributions to both American and Chinese society.  His story needs to be told and discussed.  I am happy to be a small part of that and to play the part of Grant Cooper, a great American lawyer.

For those who are curious what it took for me to get State Department clearance to act in the film, the answer is: 1) no contract, 2) no use of real name in the film credits, 3) no filming while on the clock, 4) no pay.  I’m actually donating the pay I would have got to a local charity.  The point of all this is to make clear that my participation is entirely non-official.

Here’s to hoping the film turns out well!  Whether it ever becomes available for viewing at theatres outside of China will really depend on how well the film does in China and whether it could be adapted for Western audiences.  One thing’s for sure, acting on camera is a real thrill!

-PsyDip

Here is a Wall Street Journal article from 2009 describing the life of Qian Xuesen:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125721495250424443.html


A promotional video of the two big stars in the movie:

http://video.sina.com.cn/p/ent/m/c/2011-03-07/170061275245.html


Some video from the press conference at start of filming:

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMjM3ODg4NTQ0.html


Here is some information on the Chinese internet about the movie:

http://ent.hunantv.com/d/x/20110308/870502.html


Here's an opinion from another foreigner who is an extra in the film (interestingly, state-controlled "Global Times" printed it):

http://opinion.globaltimes.cn/foreign-view/2011-03/629436.html

Try Putting Yourself in China's Shoes

PsyDip usually doesn't post articles from China's state-run media, but this one really showcases how a lot of Chinese people view the U.S. and as such is worth a read.  What do you think, does the author have a valid point?...

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/opinion/2011-01/24/content_11903456.htm