[AUTHOR’S NOTE: This is posted anonymously to protect the author’s identity, as the author is part of the Chinese diaspora who occasionally travels to China.]
On the heels of the Chengdu 2023 Worldcon Hugo Controversy (“Science fiction awards held in China under fire for excluding authors”; The Guardian), some sharp eyes noticed an announcement that happened immediately after the Chengdu 2023 Worldcon, to the effect that China was kicking off its Tianwen project, “Unveiling China’s Diverse Science Fiction to the World” (NewsDirectory3). There is a lot to unpack in this announcement. I am writing this to hopefully provide some guidance on how to “read these tea leaves”, as understanding the Tianwen project might also shed some additional light on the Hugo Awards issue and the Chengdu Worldcon in general.
First off, what is “Tianwen”? The phrase means “Questions for Heaven”, and is also the title of a set of poems consisting of 182 questions about the nature of mythology that was written during the Warring States period more than 2000 years ago.
The news article reads:
More than 2,000 years ago, the great Chinese poet Qu Yuan asked the sky: There are nine heavens, [but] who arranged the nine heavens? That is the sigh [sic] of a thousand years of the Chinese people following the mysteries of the universe. Today, such questions still exist, and people use Science Fiction to describe imaginary answers.
Particularly in the last couple of decades, China has been promoting and encouraging nationalistic attitudes in its citizens. The narrative that “China is strong” is emphasized as a counter to the “hundred years of shame”, a phrase used by the Communist Party of China (CPC) to describe the hundred or so years starting in the 1840s with the Opium Wars until “glory was restored to the Middle Kingdom by the CPC” in the 1940s (conveniently ignoring the Cultural Revolution, the Great Famine, etc.). The goal has been to simultaneously de-legitimize the previous two ruling regimes, the Qing dynasty and the Republican government, while promoting the narrative that the CPC not only lifted China out of poverty and has grown the nation into the second largest economy in the world, but that China is also powerful on the world stage. To the Party, the CPC and China are synonymous, and the survival of the CPC is the survival of the nation. To roughly adapt a couple of phrases from a different imperialist context: “L’État, c’est nous“ and “Sans nous, le déluge” – The Nation is us” and “Without us, disaster”.
In the book The Party: The Secret World of China’s Communist Rulers, Richard McGregor wrote: “The Party treats History as an issue of political management in which the preservation of the Party’s prestige and power is paramount”. The CPC’s pervasive narrative is that China’s long and glorious history is unmatched by all other countries. While China was actually ruled by successive dynasties and at times fragmented into smaller kingdoms and even occasionally under foreign control, a direct link to ancient times symbolically solidifies the implication that the CPC has acquired the historical “Mandate of Heaven”, the divine right to rule the Middle Kingdom. “Tianwen” is thus an overt connection with a glorious historical past.
For some context regarding the CPC and the ancient idea of ruling by Mandate of Heaven, see this article from the official China CPC news op-ed: 中国共产党的文化天命–理论-人民网 (People.com). You can use Google Translate to read it. In particular, the opening paragraph:
The so-called “mandate of destiny” refers to the irresistible historical inevitability. The great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation depends to a certain extent on the rejuvenation of Chinese culture, and the great mission of reviving Chinese culture is undoubtedly undertaken by the Communist Party of China.
With that in mind, let’s continue with the article about the Tianwen announcement:
The significance of their joint release from the “Consensus” lies in the coherence of the “Consensus”. Various industries will gather consensus to build the cornerstone of the science fiction industry, and fans and users from all over the world will gather consensus that “the science fiction industry is vast and limitless.” Eventually, the science fiction industry will release momentum. and really explodes with mighty power.
I don’t know whether it’s just the nature of translating Chinese press pieces, but this article repeats certain themes a lot, and the above is a summary and a repeat of previous themes.
Two main points here are that China wants to use the Tianwen project to unify the Science Fiction industry, placing everything from publishing, awards, movies, games, and other IP under one umbrella — which I’m sure, will also eventually incorporate even the actual space exploration industry in some way. Second, not only is the focus on China itself, but the goal is stated for the Science Fiction industry to “explode[s] with mighty power [onto the world]”.
The tone of this sounds familiar. One only has to look at the “One Belt, One Road” initiative, a Chinese global infrastructure development strategy, to see the parallels. With “One Belt, One Road”, China basically loans money and resources to developing countries to develop their infrastructure, which in theory would increase the global GDP. Unfortunately, there are downsides to this strategy, as it has caused environmental damage to local systems, and often also puts these nations heavily in debt to China, sometimes necessitating neocolonial-style concessions to China. The economic impact and geo-political implications of this policy are currently the subject of many academic and political debates. Nevertheless, with over 130 countries participating, China is able to exert its power far beyond its borders.
Within its borders, one has to understand that the CPC’s primary motivation is to maintain its iron grip rule on the country. There is often little official regulation, but many unspoken rules; “you can say whatever you want”, and even a company or corporation “can do anything it wants”, right up until it conflicts with the CPC’s interests. China’s famous Great Firewall and its censors do not sleep.
A citizen’s “social credit number” impacts everything, from being able to put your children in good schools to being allowed to buy a high speed train ticket. Additionally, a powerful weapon in squashing any type of dissent is the liberal use by local authorities of the deliberately ambiguously-worded law against “picking quarrels and provoking trouble”. This law has been broadly applied to things like fights in public, insults to people, sex between people of the same gender, and even as a censorship tool, for example against activists who archived censored internet materials regarding COVID-19 during the early days of the pandemic.
On the flip side, China’s government knows it has to keep the populace content, and providing entertainment is a part of the time-honored strategy of “Bread and Circuses”, as the policy was called in ancient Rome. Once the rise in popularity of anything (e.g.: Science Fiction) has attracted the notice of the Chinese State, the State considers only two options: should it be suppressed, or should it be exploited? In that role, the push for greater consumption of Science Fiction from books, movies, and video games makes a lot of sense. Production of those media, especially in movies, TV, games and AI, will drive technological development, which also serves China’s goal to achieve dominance in the global technology economy.
Of course Science Fiction promotes speculative thinking and imagination, as even the China news piece acknowledges. Does that mean that China would be open to its citizens thinking about different scenarios of government and society? Not at all; it’s well known that China exercises strict censorship on published works and online activity – “Redacted Fantasy: China’s Dystopian Censorship of Online Fiction – Lacuna Magazine” at Justice. In addition, alternate histories, especially about modern times, and time travel stories which touch on certain subjects, are strictly forbidden. There is no explicit list of forbidden subjects, but it is clear that the censors’ mandate is to ensure that the CPC exists and continues to exist as the protector and inheritor of 5000 years of Chinese culture. Any fictional piece involving time travel that might postulate even an event that would have prevented the CPC from inheriting the Middle Kingdom is thus obviously not allowed.
Having industrial companies consolidate and work directly with government agencies allows the government greater control of this burgeoning industry. It’s far easier to have corporations toe the Party line, and have companies control and influence their own assets, rather than the government having to address them individually. A greater uniform image presented to the outside world also makes censorship and subtle messaging easier. So, this push for industry control makes perfect sense to the CPC. In fact, the fewer individual companies and the larger the companies, the better it is for the CPC, as directives can be more easily passed down through the hierarchical chain of command.
If one manages to catch videos of the Chengdu 2023 Worldcon Opening, Closing, and Hugo ceremonies, and other photos and videos taken during the convention, they clearly have a high professional corporate production value, and we can expect similar glitz and blitz from the Tianwen project. At a meta level, industry-controlled conventions and awards are counter to the fandom ideal of “For Fans and By Fans”. Only time will tell how well the non-China world and its fans may accept this initiative.
Finally, regarding the Hugo controversy itself: one fact to keep in mind is that the CPC takes “saving face” (the cultural art of preserving one’s image and avoiding situations that may cause embarrassment or loss of respect) to another level. The fallout within China is yet to be seen. There may be genuine Chinese fans who might be unjustly punished, and even more scrutiny on the Chinese diaspora.
In a 2019 New York Times interview, Ken Liu, a multi-Hugo winning author for both his own work and his translation of Cixin Liu’s seminal book The Three-Body Problem, said this:
“The political climate inside China has shifted drastically from when I first started doing this,” Liu says. “It’s gotten much harder for me to talk about the work of Chinese authors without putting them in an awkward position or causing them trouble.” Liu usually travels to China at least once a year to network and meet new writers, and has attended the Chinese Nebula and Galaxy Awards, the country’s most well-known science-fiction prizes. But this year he was denied a long-term visa, without explanation, prompting him to cancel his planned trip.
In the site selection vote at the DC Worldcon in 2021 where Chengdu won its bid to host the 2023 Worldcon, a number of people campaigned against the bid, citing China’s problematic record of human rights violations and censorship. These voices were countered by others promoting an idealized vision of hosting the Worldcon in an Asian country for only the second time in history and opening the door to a greater exchange of Science Fiction between Chinese fans and the rest of the fandom, and even by accusations that those opposing the bid were largely motivated by racism.
While it is true that the representation of minorities within US and European fandom is still insufficient, the Chengdu Worldcon appears to have been a failed experiment. It might have begun as a dream of sharing and spreading international fandom, but moving forward, at least within China, Science Fiction will no longer be just a genre driven by fandom, but a medium to be heavily exploited by, and at the whim of, the State.
Discover more from File 770
Subscribe to get the latest posts to your email.
It was obvious from the beginning that the Chengdu Worldcon couldn’t end up well. But Chinese censorship doesn’t stop with behind-the-scenes influence on the Hugos, and it doesn’t stop at China’s borders. Last year, Penguin Random House was forced to redact mentions of “the first Republic of China” and the Taiwanese flag. The print shop in Hong Kong had to insist on those changes, and no other shop was available to handle the book’s format requirements.
Though China calls itself Communist, its societal model is closer to fascism. There is considerable private business, but it all has to act as an extension of the state. The people are pushed to think of themselves as an organic entity, and the judgment of the rulers may not be questioned. The nation is all.
Thank you, unfotunately anonymous-by-necessity Fan.
The only question. We do not have a similar number. You can read news about someone could not take a trip by high speed subway because he didn’t enforce a court order or repay a loan. But a systematic number doesn’t exist. I mean that this academic research is always good but we can speak accurately.
In addition, sometimes I don’t suggest seeing anything from China as a huge conspiracy. If you just continue anti-communism ideology words you will fail anything, like Gary McGrath. And you will be criticized if you just repeat ‘Taiwan is a country ‘ or ‘Free Hong Kong from China’to Chinese fans and say you these should understand these things from the civilised world.( Someone did this)
Well, thank you to everybody involved in the article.
Actually, thanks to Zimozi Natsuco as well for bringing the undoubtedly mainstream viewpoint of People’s Republic of China fans. At least the fundamental incompatibilities can’t be glossed over.by naive dreamers.
It may not be as grandiose as you think. You’re right that the name of the program is indeed related to the Chinese ideological narrative, but combining the program with 2,000-year-old Chinese poetry is really just a very simple way to continue to consolidate and gain legitimacy from the Chinese “long history” narrative.
This was very interesting, and sad. Thanks for posting.
Thank you, anonymous author. I deeply appreciate your clarity, your explanation of the context (the bit on time travel was illuminative!), and your reference to sources.
This is a wonderful post, and should be nominated for Best Related Work.
So nice to see, for a change in sf fan circles, someone familiar with China writing about China.
This is excellent journalism and worthy of mundane awards, not just Hugos.
One Chinese Communist Party to rule them and in the darkness bind them…
I for one do not welcome our would-be Chinese overlords.
Sending the link to possibly interested parties.
A Hugo Award with Chinese characteristics, as Deng didn’t quite say.
Thank you, anonymous.
I’d been having various thoughts along the same lines, but having it so well-summarized by an actual Chinese fan is immensely helpful.
@Doug: Heh. Too right.
(And Taiwan IS a country.)
I have a few quibbles with some of the claims here.
The reason you find this article repetitive in theme is because the article isn’t one article, it’s excerpts of many random excerpts of different articles automatically aggregated onto one page and passed through crappy machine translation. If you click around NewsDirectory3, you can tell it’s one of those SEO farming sites full of spam links instead of a legitimate news site. Among its many problems, it stripped author and publication names from the original articles and seemed to have added some random AI generated ones. I don’t think this is a good site to link to if you’re trying to do serious journalism.
Anyways, two of the individual articles Frankensteined together on this page are the one about bringing diversity to Chinese SF, which was originally published in a Chengdu magazine for young writers, and the one containing the “consensus”, which you quoted, originally published in another Chengdu newspaper. I don’t find the individual articles to be repetitive on their own, and I don’t think you would judge the quality of western journalism based on machine translations of random paragraphs on a Chinese spam site.
I also don’t know where you got the idea that China intends to “unify” science fiction or what exactly the connection with the Belt and Road Initiative is. The actual items listed in the Tianwen plan are things like encourage writers with more literary prizes, increase the number of promotional events, increase copyright protection, increase global cooperation, and increase the awareness of Chinese SF on the world stage. Nowhere does it say the Chinese government will ban all SF presses except a state-run one or bankrupt foreign SF industries, so I also fail to see what it has to do with neo-colonialism based solely on these articles.
I find this an odd framing. Referencing history is an incredibly popular way for Chinese people to name things, so I don’t think it’s fair to consider every historical allusion by the Chinese government to be emphasizing the Mandate of Heaven and strengthening authoritarian rule. When Qu Yuan wrote Tianwen, he had been exiled from the Chu court and disillusioned with politics, and the poem questioned why the universe is the way it is, why empires rise and fall, and why corrupt rulers thrive, among other things—it is most definitely not a paean to imperial supremacy, so I find your claim that naming something Tianwen = tightening the grip on the country neither credible in both the general sense nor specifically for this case. The name of this particular project is also probably a tie-in to the Tianwen Mars exploration program, which was named after the same poem, but I digress.
You certainly have valid criticisms of the Chinese government in the post, and I think it would be stronger if you didn’t throw these kitchen sink arguments in too.
Pingback: AMAZING NEWS: 2/4/24 - Amazing Stories
Yeah there’s a lot of odd stuff in here, and I’m wondering how much is accurate and how much it’s telling people what they want to hear.
The social credit system.
pomelo: Ah, thank you very much for the links and explanation, I really appreciated that. Shame on machine aggregators!
It also seems to me that NewsDirectory3 scrapped some of the now-(in)famous http://www.china.org.cn/arts/2023-10/23/content_116768150.htm dated also on 23 October. (“The Chengdu-based Tianwen Awards, which focus on budding sci-fi authors, will serve to complement Worldcon’s Hugo Awards.” etc.)
The “truth” with the social credit system is going to be hard to ascertain from outside, and perhaps even in inside. For example, in US, if you ask random people how do the FICO scores and zip codes affect their lives, most people on the streets would not be able to give you an answer, but time and time again, it has been shown that zip code is in fact one of the most important factors is societal success.
In China for example, usually my first words to a Chinese is “I do not speak Putonghua” (in my accented Putonghua of course). They were very perplexed when I said, “I am an American”, as most of them didn’t seem to have a context on what it means. So later on I switched to “I am a Hong Konger” and most of them did understand that. Any case, if you ask the people on the streets about the social credit system, my guess is that they would not be able to answer either.
The social credit systems are implemented at the national and local levels, but some locales being more enthusiastic than others. There was a 2014 grand plan Xi Jinping wanted to implement the system by 2020/2022 but that seems to have been delayed, probably due to Covid. It’s an evolving situation, so we will just have to wait and see.
@Gary Farber Thanks for the link. It’s from 6 years ago but still important. One thing that confused me in fact was that while driving in Chengdu seems to be, um, an interesting exercise – I lived in NYC, Boston, and now in SF Bay Area and drive in the LA area frequently – I would not, unless absolutely necessary, drive in Chengdu. The motorbikes, cars, pedestrians seem to have some kind of “starling murmuration” ability not to cause an accident when it seems inevitable, AND yet, while I had taken a number of Didi rides, I don’t think I heard any, or maybe only once or twice, honking. I didn’t even consider the fact that it could be a ding on the driver’s records.
I would not be surprised if a lot of the $1.1 billion initiative never materializes and the parts that do happen were probably going to happen anyway. The hype is very strong in this one.
@Gary:
Thanks for the link. But note that the article says “Lack of faith in government policies and poor transparency have been fixtures in Chinese society for most of its history” — which is true! — but then at the end falls back on the old trope of “Chinese people’s instinct to respect authority and obey the rules imposed by a hierarchy”.
Those things don’t really match, you see? It would make much more sense to talk about “Chinese people’s hard-earned wariness, unspoken cynicism, and policy of going along to get along.” But that’s not a cliche from the journalistic cliche-box.
I like this discussion of the “social credit” system from late 2022, published in the MIT Technology Review, which can be mostly summarized as, it doesn’t exist yet except locally, sometimes, but there are reasons for concern. Two systems are proposed: a financial credit rating system, much like the US one, and a social credit one, still quite vaguely defined. There are also what we would recognize that local/state/federal conflicts – China has after all twice the population of Europe and in that large polity there is much space for conflict.
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/11/22/1063605/china-announced-a-new-social-credit-law-what-does-it-mean/
While my FICO score and zip code undoubtedly do affect my life (thankfully both happen to be good), I’m not going to get penalized for occasionally honking my horn, and my mass transit card isn’t going to narc on me if I lend it to a friend for the day.
@Richard: I’m perplexed as to why they’re perplexed. Is it because they have no idea that the US has plenty of citizens of the same ethnic ancestry as you?
@Lurkertype: ” I’m not going to get penalized for occasionally honking my horn”
You might if you’re driving in NYC : https://abc7ny.com/new-york-city-council-traffic-laws-noise-cameras-loud-cars/14147382/
@lurkertype, re: American, I think that’s the case. To be fair though, most Americans probably can’t find China on the map