The Other China
信筆塗鴉
Yao Bo (姚博, 1972-) is a former Beijing-based journalist and influential blogger who offers a running commentary on contemporary Chinese affairs from his base in Kyoto, Japan. He produces a YouTube channel under the name Wuyue Sanren 五嶽散人 wǔyuè sǎnrén, literally ‘The Dilettante from the Five Sacred Mountains’.
We previously reprinted a monologue from Yao Bo’s YouTube channel from China Change under the title I’d rather support stray cats in Japan than donate a single penny to China’s disaster relief efforts (8 August 2023). Again, we are grateful to to Yaxue Cao of China Change for permission to reproduce the following translation of Yao’s reflections on the ‘graffiti battle’ at Brick Lane in East London in early August 2023.
Wuyue Sanren’s commentary is included as a chapter in our series The Other China.
For an edited Chinese transcript of Yao Bo’s monologue, see below.
— Geremie R. Barmé
Editor, China Heritage
20 August 2023
***
Also in The Other China:
From Xi Jinping’s Empire of Tedium:
- Chapter Twenty-one 醒 — Awakenings — a Voice from Young China on the Duty to Rebel, 14 November 2022
- Chapter Twenty-two 官逼民反 — Fear, Fury & Protest — three years of viral alarm, 27 November 2022 (see also Appendix XXIII 空白 — How to Read a Blank Sheet of Paper, 30 November 2022; Appendix XXIV 職責— It’s My Duty, 1 December 2022; and, Appendix XXV 贖 — ‘Ironic Points of Light’ — acts of redemption on the blank pages of history, 4 December 2022)
Other Related Material:
- Jianying Zha 查建英 & Katō Yoshikazu 加藤嘉一, ‘Adieu, China! — Jianying Zha’s Long Farewell’, China Heritage, 10 November 2020, an excerpt from Freedom Is Not Free — A New Decameron Freedom Is Not Free — A New Decameron《自由不是免費的——新十日談》, the record of a conversation between the two writers — one from China, who is an American, and the other from Japan, who has been a long-term resident of China — that took place in Beijing over a ten-day period in August 2018
***
Freedom Isn’t Free
The Political and Artistic Significance of the Chinese ‘Socialist Core Values’ Graffiti and the Counter-Graffiti in East London
Yao Bo
18 August 2023
Yao Bo (姚博), better known as Wuyuesanren (五岳散人), was a well-known Chinese journalist, a Weibo “Big V” with a large number of followers until he was banned, and one of the 303 signers of Charter 08. In recent years he has been residing in Kyoto, Japan. He runs the popular @wuyuesanrenYouTube channel commenting on current affairs in China. Below is a translation of his commentary on August 8, 2023. With his permission, the transcript has been edited for brevity.
— The Editors of China Change
Photos: @whyyoutouzhele
Some netizens hoped that I could talk about the incident where someone painted the CCP’s “socialist core values” on a graffiti wall in East London. I’ve been following the incident since it happened. Let’s first review what has happened so far.
On August 5, one or more Chinese students from the Royal College of Art covered up the original works on the famous graffiti wall [Brick Lane] in East London with white paint and emblazoned upon it 24 deep-red boldface Chinese characters forming the “socialist core values” [prosperity, democracy, civility, harmony, freedom, equality, justice, the rule of law, patriotism, dedication, integrity and friendliness]. Then, beginning August 6, this location turned into a site for secondary additions to the graffiti.
Over the next two days, various individuals, [supposedly other Chinese students in the UK,] started adding counter-expressions to these 24 characters, and as of today, it’s not completely over. It’s possible this site may turn into a hub for expressing anti-China sentiment for a while. Since someone started this, why not just continue and use this as a base for “insulting China” (“辱华”), right? Treat it as a platform to let everyone vent their frustrations here – I find this quite amusing.
After two days, the London municipal workers covered both the original 24 characters and the subsequent additions, with white paint.
On August 7, the lead creator of this “socialist core values” graffiti, who goes by the name “Yi Que” (一鹊), released a statement claiming that he was the target of online harassment, and called upon it to stop. He emphasized that his act of painting these 24 characters didn’t carry any political stance. As of the time I’m recording this episode, this is the sequence of events that I’ve observed. Today, I’ll discuss the political and artistic significance of the events.
Honestly, one can’t help but be skeptical when the creator states that he has no political stance. To put it in a not-so-pretty analogy, when you have already spread your legs and started collecting money, you are no longer entitled to the claim of innocence. Something is amiss.
When the story first broke on August 5th, I actually found this young artist quite interesting. I didn’t think of him as a “little pink” (a term used to describe fervent Chinese nationalists and CCP supporters), because I thought his action was highly ironic, and symbolic too. Regardless of your taste, the original graffiti on that street had an artistic quality, but the Chinese students covered it all up with white paint and brushed on those 24 characters in the most unattractive, repulsive font.
However you do calligraphy, even if you consider it useless, there’s a distinction between what’s visually pleasing and what’s not. Besides being an expression, art should possess a certain decorative aspect. But the font of those 24 characters is a hybrid of totalitarian aesthetics and a certain coarseness.
All of China’s current propaganda and visual representation in particular, such as that painted on walls, are such a fusion. By covering the original graffiti with this hybrid onto that wall, it seems to say, “You see, if China’s system were to sweep across the world, it would cover up all the beautiful things.” Like how it has changed Hong Kong. Like how it destroyed China’s heritage, such as our ancient architecture, during the Cultural Revolution. If China’s current ideology were to spread and predominate around the world, the intricate and beautiful world as you know it would turn into a white wall with the most repulsive font painted in a blood-red color. This irony is incredibly explicit. So, when I first saw this, I didn’t think of the person as a “little pink” or anything like that; Instead, I felt that he had performed a very subtle and meaningful form of satire.
But when this artist started claiming he had no political stance, my perception changed. Firstly, everyone has a political stance; even if you don’t care about politics, politics cares about you. Secondly, you chose a political slogan, which is China’s so-called “socialist core values.” Each of these characters, each individual word, is a good word, and they’re used by all democratic nations around the world; each represents a positive value. But just like the joke goes: if you wear a T-shirt with all these 24 characters printed on it, you are good. However, if you separate them and create 12 different T-shirts, some might be fine, others are not. For example, if you have “patriotism” and “dedication” out of the 24 characters on the back of a T-shirt, it’s going to be fine. But if you make a T-shirt with “democracy” and “freedom” out of these 24 characters and wear it, you’re going to run into trouble.
In other words, these 24 characters together form a purely Chinese political expression known as “socialist core values,” in which each individual word cannot be separated from the whole. In essence, what is it? It’s a fig leaf with which the authoritarian state rule covers its face or its lower body. It is impossible for you to paint this political expression on a wall but claim you take no political stance in doing so.
Your political stance can only fall into two possibilities. The first one is that you lean towards the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and you endorse the “socialist core values” and what is hidden behind this fig leaf. It’s how the devil looks after putting on makeup. Or, you’re engaging in true satire. But we all know one thing: if you’re engaging in satire, you would never claim you have no political stance, and you would tell the world what this act is all about: you’re trying to alert the free world that such things are blotting out the vibrant and colorful free society.
But as soon as you started pleading “don’t cyberbully my family,” you made it quite difficult for anyone to believe that you were engaging in a thought-provoking form of art to alert the world. That leaves one possibility only — you are a “little pink” and your act is explicitly political in meaning.
In London, which is the birthplace of capitalism, your action is meant to tell the free world: “I’ve infiltrated you. Since you’re all about freedom of speech, then you have to grant me this freedom too.”
I’ve been thinking that there is a price to pay for freedom. For example, the graffiti in East London being whitewashed by communist propaganda is a price a free society has to pay.
As a famous saying has it, freedom isn’t free. But freedom isn’t weak either. Many overseas pro-CCP patriots are overly confident that they can take advantage of the free society to do anything they want, namely, to undermine it, and there is nothing anyone can do about it. But freedom is not as vulnerable as they think. While a free society accepts the price of letting you speak, it can make you pay a price for what you do. In the case of the graffiti wall in East London, the art students’ act invited backlash from people with opposing opinions who quickly turned the site into a hub for criticizing China with their secondary creations. When you take advantage of a free and democratic society to challenge democracy and freedom, you will find out that such a society is neither stupid nor weak. Don’t do it. You will not be able to impose ugly totalitarian art over the vibrant and colorful free world. Such is the political significance of this incident, as I see it.
A work of art, as I said before, especially modern art, does not stop when the creator stops. Classic art, be it sculpture, oil painting, watercolor, acrylic painting, or traditional Chinese painting, may leave less space for interpretation. While some art forms are more inviting to such interaction than others, all works of art, as a matter of fact, undergo the process of creation, viewing, and reviewing to complete themselves. In literature, as people like to say, for a thousand readers, there are a thousand Hamlets; in music, the performer Yu Boya (俞伯牙) is completed by his best listener Zhong Ziqi (鐘子期).
The level of interactivity is undoubtedly stronger when it comes to modern art. More people are participating in the secondary additions to the 24-character “socialist core values” graffiti. Should it continue, that wall in East London might very well become a new landmark for graffiti art, a venue for the clash of two opposing political and social ideologies. It could go on and become a long process, and with every change people make on every frame, the art itself evolves towards completion.
So essentially, these “little pink” art students shot themselves in the foot and inadvertently opened up a stage for others. I believe this is something he didn’t expect when he executed his plans. Now the London municipal authorities have painted the wall back to its original white, but if people continue using it to express their criticism of the Chinese government and human rights abuses in China, what will it turn into eventually? My friend Ms. Shi Jinxia (史金霞) has a name for it: the “Crying Wall” (“哭牆”).
The whole thing will be fascinating if from now on it indeed turns into a wall of criticism against China.
Were these two art students to return to China and try to ingratiate themselves with the authorities for their 24-character graffiti, I’m sure the propaganda officials — assuming they have any intelligence or any understanding of modern art — would want to strangle them to death.
***
Source:
- Wuyue Sanren, Freedom Isn’t Weak: the artistic and political significance of the Chinese socialist core values graffiti and the counter graffiti in East London, China Change, 18 August 2023
***
Edited Chinese Transcript:
自由並不脆弱:
倫敦塗鴉與二次塗鴉的政治與藝術意義
姚博 / 五岳散人
2023年8月8日
(https://youtu.be/P4dPRAtb2N4)
有網友希望我聊聊有人把24個字的“社會主義核心價值觀”給刷到倫敦塗鴉牆上的事。然後我就關注了一下這事。其實這個事情發生的時候，我就關注了一下。我這樣先說一下這幾天的變化。
首先，8月5號那一天，有一個倫敦皇家藝術學院的中國留學生，把倫敦東著名的塗鴉牆上原本的那些塗鴉用白色的塗料全部覆蓋掉，在上面刷上了中國的24個字所謂“社會主義核心價值觀”。然後從8月6號開始，這個地方變成了一個二次創作的基地。
在接下來的兩天，各路豪傑們在這24字上重新創作，到今天為止還沒有完全結束。大概而言，這塊地方可能在一段時間之內會變成了一個“辱華”基地：你既然在這兒開了這個頭，往下我們乾脆就開始辱華，對吧？就把這個東西當做一個基地，讓大家來這邊發洩，我覺得是一個蠻好玩的事情。
這兩天，倫敦市政當局把這面牆，包括它的24字原創、加上很多人的二創又用白油漆覆蓋了。
8月7號那一天，這個行為藝術的主創，名叫“一鵲”，發佈了一個聲明，說自己遭到了網暴，希望停止對他的網暴，並強調自己刷這24個字沒有政治立場。到我做這期節目為止，我看到的所有的過程就是這樣。今天我分兩部分跟大家聊聊這個事兒，一個是這件事的政治意義，第二是藝術意義。
主創說自己沒有政治立場。怎麼說，打個不是很好的比喻，你都在那兒劈開腿開始收錢了，卻說自己沒有政治立場，總覺得哪有點怪怪的。
第一天，就是8月5號，這件事情剛出來的時候，我還覺得我說這哥們有點意思。當時我沒把他想成小粉紅，因為我覺得他的做法具有非常強的的諷刺意味，而且極具象徵性。甭管怎麼樣，那條街上的原本塗鴉是有藝術性的，但是他把它刷成白牆，然後用一種最難看的、令我噁心、毫無裝飾性的字體刷上了那24個字。
甭管你對書法看法如何，即使你認為書法是一個無用的東西，但是好看和難看是有區別的。藝術除了表達之外，要有一定的裝飾性。那24個字的字體是極權美學加上土鼈審美的一個雜種。
中國現在所有的宣傳上，就視覺呈現而言，尤其是這種刷在牆上的視覺呈現而言，是集權美學加上土鼈審美混雜以後的一個雜種。把這種雜種刷到那堵牆上，其實是極有諷刺意義的。它好像在說，你看，如果中國的這套東西席捲世界，它會把所有美的東西全都覆蓋掉。這就像香港的變化一樣。或者是我們曾經有過的一些輝煌的文化，比如像我們那些古代的建築，在文革當中遭到毀滅。如果讓中國目前的這些東西入侵世界並成為這個世界的主導的話，一個紛繁複雜的美麗世界就會變成一面白牆，白牆上被刷上最噁心的字體，顏色是血紅的紅色。這種諷刺是非常疼露骨的。所以我第一眼看到這個東西的時候，首先想到的並不是說這人是個粉紅或者是什麼；我覺得他做了一個非常微妙、非常有意義的反諷。
但是當他開始說他沒有政治立場的時候，我的感覺就變了。為什麼是這樣？首先，政治立場是每個人都會有的，你只要在這個世界上生活，你不關心政治，政治也會關心你。第二，你選擇了一個政治口號，就是中國所謂的社會主義核心價值觀這24個字。這24個字，每個單個的字，每個單個的詞都是個好詞，也是世界上所有民主國家所通行的，都是正面價值觀。但是就像有一個笑話裡說的，你把這24個字全印到一件T恤上穿出去，可能沒大事，但是你要把它分開來，做成12件，有些沒事，比如說你T恤後背印“愛國、敬業”就沒事，但你把“民主、自由”專門做一件T恤，你穿身上出去，你就該有事了。
所以這24個字的組合是一個完整的政治表達，是有中國特色的政治表達，它叫社會主義核心價值觀，它跟這些字每個單字的含義都不一樣。說白了這是什麼玩意兒？這是極權統治的遮羞布，裡面每個字都是遮羞布，他們用這一串好詞兒把自己的臉或者是下身給遮住。它的組合是一個中國政治的表達。你把中國的這個政治表達刷在牆上，卻說你這樣做是沒有政治立場的，這是不可能的。
你的政治立場只能有兩種。第一種，你是傾向於中共的，你認可社會主義核心價值觀以及遮羞布背後的那套玩意兒。它是魔鬼塗完胭脂抹完粉之後的樣子。這是你的政治立場。要不然你就是在做真正意義上的反諷。但是我們都知道一件事情，那就是，如果你是在做反諷，要麼你就別說我沒什麼政治立場，要麼你就把自己要表達的東西重新表達一遍：你是讓自由世界警惕，這樣的東西在覆蓋自由世界絢爛多彩的東西。
但是當你說，不要網暴我家人等等，這就很難讓人覺得說你是在做一個警世的藝術。所以我們就只能把你歸類到小粉紅當中，我們認為你不可能沒有政治立場，你的行為的政治含義是非常清晰的。
倫敦應該是資本主義發源地。你這個東西是要告訴自由世界：我入侵你了。你既然是言論自由，那你就得讓我也自由。
我一直在想，自由確實是不可能不付代價的。比如說覆蓋掉原本的大家都很尊敬的某人的這個塗鴉，這就是自由社會要付出的代價。
自由不是免費的，我們一直都知道這句名言，但是自由也不是懦弱的。也就是說，這個藝術學生如果乾這件事情的話，他就會發現，自由可以容忍你很多的東西，你可以在這邊表達，你說你熱愛共產黨也沒有人管你，因為這是一個自由的社會。這就是給了很多的海外離岸愛國者們非常牛逼的一種自信：你不是自由社會嗎？反正你管不了我；我享受著你自由社會，我在破壞你自由社會，你依然拿我沒有辦法。但是自由從來不是懦弱的。你可以自由；可以讓我們這些認可自由價值觀的人付出代價，但是我們也會同樣讓你付代價。既然你願意用這種模式來表達你的心情，自由社會可以同樣基於自由的原則開始二創，讓它成為一個【表達反對意見的】“辱華”基地，讓它成為一個反噬你的東西。所以不要利用民主社會挑戰民主，不要在一個自由的社會來挑戰自由。【自由世界】第一不傻，第二不懦弱。用專制和極權的暴力美學這種雜種去挑戰繽紛的世界，這是你做不到的。這是我說這個事件的政治意義。
我說的這件事情的藝術意義是這樣的。我原來跟大家強調過，一個東西成為一個藝術，尤其是現代藝術，並不是說做完了就完了。像我們所知道的古典藝術，你做一個雕像，你畫一幅畫，甭管是雕塑、油畫、水彩畫、丙烯，或者寫意的毛筆國畫，畫家落筆後就完成了一件藝術品，留給詮釋的餘地是非常少的。所有藝術其實都是一樣的，都會有一個作品完成、觀眾觀看與評論，這所有的全放在一起才是藝術的整體。但是有些藝術門類這方面特別的敏感，互動性會更多。比如說文學，人們說1000個人心目中有1000個哈姆雷特。比如音樂，俞伯牙鐘子期，高山流水，演奏者和聽眾必須產生一個互動，藝術才是完整的。
現代藝術的互動性就更強。更多人在參與進來，對這24個字進行的二創，把這個塗鴉繼續下去。從現在開始，一直繼續下去，東倫敦那堵牆甚至可能會成為塗鴉藝術的一個新的景點。兩種政治思潮、社會思潮在這裡產生對撞，這可以是一個很長的過程，從每一幀的變化，從最後所產生的才是真正所謂的藝術，才叫一個完成了的藝術品。
所以這位小粉紅做了一件弄巧成拙的事情，他實際上是給別人開闢了一個舞臺。我想這是他完全沒有想像到的事情。我相信他在剛開始想幹這活的時候，完全想像不到會走到現在這樣一個程度。尤其是在倫敦市政當局又把那堵牆刷白了後，大家如果又開始塗鴉，把自己對中國政府的不滿、對中國人權狀況的不滿，繼續在上面表達的話，那就變成了一個什麼？我的一位朋友史金霞女士說，它最終會變成一個“哭牆”。
如果那裡真的變成了批評中國一堵哭牆的話，這個事情就太有意思了。
我相信這二位留學生如果為自己塗的那24個字現在回國內表忠心的話，國內的宣傳部門的人，但凡是還有點腦子，還有點現代藝術教育的，都會想把這二位給掐死。