No Forbidden Zones in Reading (Lee Yee)
German philosopher Hegel said, “The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history.”
In April 1979, the post-Cultural Revolution era of China, the first article of the first issue of Beijing-based literary magazine, Dushu [meaning “Reading” in Chinese]," shook up the Chinese literary world. The article, titled “No Forbidden Zones in Reading”, was penned by Li Honglin. At the time, the CCP had not yet emerged from the darkness of the Cultural Revolution. What was it like in the Cultural Revolution? Except for masterpieces by Marx, Engels, Lenin, Stalin and Mao, and a small fraction of practical books, all books were banned, and all libraries were closed. The Cultural Revolution ended in 1976, and 2 years later in 1978, the National Publishing Bureau decided to allow 35 books to be “unbanned”. An interlude: When the ban was first lifted, there was no paper on which to print the books because the person with authority over paper was Wang Dongxing, a long-term personal security of Mao’s, who would only give authorization to print Mao. The access to use paper to print books other than Mao was a procedural issue. The Cultural Revolution was already on its way to be overturned. The door to printing these books was opened only after several hang-ups.
“No Forbidden Zones in Reading” in the first issue of Dushu raised a question of common sense: Do citizens have the freedom to read? “We have not enacted laws that restrict people’s freedom of reading. Instead, our Constitution stipulates that people have the freedom of speech and publication, as well as the freedom to engage in cultural activities. Reading ought to be a cultural activity,” argued Li. It was not even about the freedom of speech, but simply reading. Yet this common sense would appear as a subversion of the paralyzing rigid ideas formulated during the Cultural Revolution, like a tossed stone that raises a thousand ripples. Dushu’s editorial department received a large number of objections: first, that there would be no gatekeeper and mentally immature minors would be influenced by trashy literature; second, that with the opening of the Pandora box, feudalism, capitalism and revisionism would now occupy our cultural stage. The article also aroused waves of debates within the CCP. Hu Yaobang, then Minister of Central Propaganda, transferred and appointed Li Honglin as the Deputy Director of the Theory Bureau in his department. A colleague asked him directly, “Can primary school students read Jin Pin Mei [also known in English as The Plum in the Golden Vase, a Chinese novel of manners composed in late Ming dynasty with explicit depiction of sexuality]?”
“All Four Doors of the Library Should be Open” was published in the second issue of Dushu, as an extension to “No Forbidden Zones in Reading”. The author was Fan Yuming, but was really Zeng Yansiu, president of the People’s Publishing House.
In the old days, there was a shorthand for the three Chinese characters for “library”: “book” within a “mouth”. The four sides of the book are all wide open, meaning that all the shackles of the banned books are released. “No Forbidden Zones in Reading” explains this on a theoretical level: the people have the freedom to read; “All Four Doors of the Library Should be Open” states that other than special collection books, all other books should be available for the public to loan.
The controversy caused by “No Forbidden Zones in Reading” lasted 2 years, and in April 1981, at the second anniversary of Dushu, Director of the Publishing Bureau, Chen Hanbo, penned an article that reiterated that there are “No Forbidden Zones in Reading”, and that was targeting an “unprecedented ban on books that did happen”.
Books are records of human wisdom, including strange, boring, vulgar thoughts, which are all valuable as long as they remain. After Emperor Qin Shihuang burned the books, he buried the scholars. In history, the ban on books and literary crimes have never ceased.
Engraved on the entrance to Dachau concentration camp in Germany, a famous poem cautions: When a regime begins to burn books, if it is not stopped, they will turn to burn people; when a regime begins to silent words, if it is not stopped, they will turn to silent the person. At the exit, a famous admonishment: When the world forgets these things, they will continue to happen.
Heine, a German poet of the 19th century, came up with “burning books and burning people”. There was a line before this: This is just foreplay.
Yes, all burning and banning of books are just foreplay. Next comes the literary crimes, and then “burning people”.
I started working at a publishing house with a high school degree at 18, and lived my entire life in a pile of books. 42 years ago, when I read “No Forbidden Zones in Reading” in Dushu, I thought that banned books were a thing of the past. Half a century since and here we are, encountering the exact same thing in the freest zone for reading in the past century in the place which enlightened Sun Yat-sen and the rest of modern intellectuals, a place called Hong Kong.
Oh, Hegel’s words are the most genuine.
同時也有10000部Youtube影片,追蹤數超過2,910的網紅コバにゃんチャンネル,也在其Youtube影片中提到,...
「propaganda meaning」的推薦目錄:
- 關於propaganda meaning 在 李怡 Facebook 的最讚貼文
- 關於propaganda meaning 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於propaganda meaning 在 無影無蹤 Facebook 的最佳解答
- 關於propaganda meaning 在 コバにゃんチャンネル Youtube 的最佳貼文
- 關於propaganda meaning 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於propaganda meaning 在 大象中醫 Youtube 的最佳解答
- 關於propaganda meaning 在 What is Propaganda? - YouTube 的評價
propaganda meaning 在 Eric's English Lounge Facebook 的精選貼文
2020年的語言演變
社會動盪、全球的緊張局勢持續升級,身為讀者與消費者的我們在面臨不斷湧入的資訊時,必須意識到那些在宣傳(propaganda)中刻意含糊其詞(intentional ambiguity)的情況日益加劇。
在政治場域裡,我們看到「雙言巧語」(doublespeak)正在增加,這種語言刻意掩蓋、扭曲或顛倒語意。喬治・歐威爾(George Orwell,1903-1950)於其名著《1984》中以「新語」(Newspeak)和「雙重思想」(doublethink)說明此一詞彙。 新語雖遵循著英文語法,但詞彙量卻不斷減少,原本複雜而完整的詞意不斷被簡化為既定觀點的詞語(loaded words)。社群網站的興起,助長了媒體與政治人物對「雙言巧語」的使用。例如,在政治語境中,先制的空中打擊(preemptive airstrikes)可被稱為「降溫策略」(de-escalation tactics),以為和平鋪路。又比如,有些針對特定種族的集中營(internment camps)被稱為教育與訓練中心(vocational education and training centers)。
歐威爾還創造了「雙重思想」一詞,意指受試者被迫接受兩種自相矛盾的信念是正確的。該意識形態的三個核心教義為——「戰爭即和平」(war is peace)、「自由即奴役」(freedom is slavery)以及「無知即力量」(ignorance is strength)。這些教條是否讓你聯想到世上那些極權政府(totalitarian regimes)的宣傳?
由於嚴厲的審查制度,以及相關法規的懲處機制,人們不斷發明新的詞彙來躲避演算法的審查,並以間接言語行為(indirect speech act)來表達自身觀點。在中國最廣為人知的諧音詞 (homophone) 就是——「河蟹」。「河蟹」是對中國前國家主席胡錦濤「和諧社會」倡議的一種嘲諷。該倡議試圖打壓異議,而「河蟹」的語音則近於「和諧」。起初,網民嘲諷政府的審查員藉由刪除貼文來「和諧」網路上的異議人士。最終,「被和諧」一詞遂演變為「被河蟹」,以規避政府的審查,並被許多中國的網路社群廣泛使用。
如今,以此類方式來規避審查 (evade censorship) 已變得更為普遍。按美國實驗心理學家、認知科學家兼科普作家史迪芬・平克(Steven Arthur Pinker)於2008年所指出者,間接言語行為係指人們未明確表達自身觀點,反而將其意圖隱藏在字面意義之下。在間接言語行為的脈絡中,唯有說話者才能確定其意涵(individual knowledge),而他人則須依靠前後文來仔細推敲。但若單就字面意思 (literal meaning) 來看,每個人都能輕易地理解該詞意涵(mutual knowledge)。例如,在極權政府治下,於網路上公開批評政府對公衛危機的處理不當,將引來相關法律的制裁,因為可能會被人舉報。但也可藉由讚揚「政府的行動非常有效,連死者都要感謝政府的辛勤付出」來間接表達自己的不滿。這種誇張的說法顯然與事實不符,但只有說話者知曉個中意涵,而他人只能自行揣測,這為說話者提供了一定程度的保障。因此,隨著審查制度的擴大,間接言語行為亦將蓬勃發展,以滿足自由交流與表達自身觀點的需求。
身為網路公民的我們能做些什麼?對宣傳中那些試圖掩蓋並扭曲真相的語言,保持警覺;持續創造新的表達方式,來規避那些箝制思想與言論自由的審查;提醒自己進行批判性思考,以辨識邏輯謬誤並做出明智的決定。
參考資料:
Huaxia. (2019, August 16). Full Text: Vocational Education and Training in Xinjiang. Retrieved July 04, 2020, from http://www.xinhuanet.com/english/2019-08/16/c_138313359.htm
McManus, D. (2020, January 05). Column: Trump's Orwellian doublespeak on Iran. Retrieved July 04, 2020, from https://www.latimes.com/politics/story/2020-01-05/column-trumps-orwellian-double-speak-on-iran
Minin-White, D. (2017). Political Speech, Doublespeak, And Critical-Thinking Skills In American Education.
Monitor, I. (2018, June 21). The Chinese Language as a Weapon: How China's Netizens Fight Censorship. Retrieved July 04, 2020, from https://medium.com/berkman-klein-center/the-chinese-language-as-a-weapon-how-chinas-netizens-fight-censorship-8389516ed1a6
Orwell, George (2008). 1984. Penguin Books Ltd. ISBN 978-0-14-103614-4.
Pinker, S., Nowak, M. A., & Lee, J. J. (2008). The logic of indirect speech. Proceedings of the National Academy of sciences, 105(3), 833-838.
圖片出處:https://www.tumblr.com/tagged/ingsoc
★★★★★★★★★★★★
什麼是模糊性(ambiguity),為什麼學生需要它?
https://bit.ly/31I6B9T
propaganda meaning 在 無影無蹤 Facebook 的最佳解答
代表台灣挑戰明年奧斯卡獎最佳動畫短片的《基石》線上看。
基督徒慎入。
A satire animation about Fundamentalism. (English statement below)
去年三月完成的作品《基石》終於決定在今天發布
謝謝指導教授鐘世凱老師的建議與包容,和一起創作配樂的夥伴 林孝親 Szu-yu Lin,讓聲音和影像配合的天衣無縫, WinSound Studio 紋聲音樂 絕對是品質一流的代名詞,還有一路上幫助本片產出的所有朋友們,謝謝你們!
《基石》的用意並不是要批判特定的宗教,而是特別針對冥頑不靈的基本教義派的信徒,幾乎在每個宗教都有這一群人的存在,他們用盡用手段強迫別人接受其價值觀,特別是在孩童和青少年的心靈身上有著非常大的負面影響,尤其是越聽話的小孩傷害越大,因為父母們教什麼他們就會做什麼。小的時候,我還真因為長輩的話,就相信神奇寶貝是邪靈、哈利波特是魔鬼的化身、流行音樂聽久了會墮落、看了部A片就害怕自己會下地獄,長輩們的善意,扭曲成強迫接受他們的信仰,常常遇到無法解釋的教義或價值觀,就會用情緒勒索的方式,讓你就算接受了也充滿著罪惡感,多少也影響童年的社交生活,越投入在宗教社群之中,越覺得外面的人事物充滿邪惡。在本片的製作過程中,我常常是帶著憤怒的情緒工作著,氣以前愚蠢的自己,也氣現在還是有許多人自認為是正義的化身,手握「真理」的權杖,到處迫害別人。
自己也曾陰錯陽差造訪一些其他的宗教團體,撇開教義和儀式不談,其實會發現有許多的相似之處,他們大多用「親身體驗」的見證去說服別人入教,卻永遠無法有個完美的說詞去解釋一些違背基本邏輯和科學的事情(如果感覺有效,誰管你的故事有什麼漏洞),再藉由社群的力量,慢慢地滲透你的生活和社交圈,直到無法脫身,待在這個群體久了,漸漸接受了該團體的價值觀,本來覺得疑惑的地方也無所謂了,習慣了他們特殊的儀式,甚至連講話的辭彙都開始變異了,生活上偶爾發生一些好事,就會覺得是信仰的緣故而更加投入,最後就會自傲的覺得自己的信仰比起其他的宗教有多偉大,常常看到不同宗教甚至是教派互相敵視對方為邪靈或異端就覺得好笑,其實你們真的,都差不多。
跑過各大的影展後,許多正面和負面的回饋都有,但我不怕批評,因為本片所有橋段和元素全部都是真實改寫自本人和朋友親身經歷過的事情,也有不少基督徒朋友看過後跟我說他們非常能感同身受,一個宗教團體之中雖有固執不通的人卻也有許多開明包容的人士,我無意辯駁其教義,也尊重每個人對信仰的理解,只想問大家
你是真的完全相信你的信仰嗎?有多少教義的漏洞你是故意漠視不去思考的?還是因為家人、朋友的人情壓力才選擇繼續待在其中?又或者是害怕離教之後,會在現世、來世或死後會有所懲罰?
請誠實面對自己的信仰,如果是真的相信,那麼請尊重其他和你不同信仰的人的權利!不是所有人都應該照著你的教條走,這是一個自由平等的社會,任何的種族、性別、宗教、性傾向的基本人權都必須公平對待。
但如果你發現你已經做個假信徒很久了,那麼勇敢地離開吧!真實的東西是經得起考驗,離開了象牙塔後,試著用不同角度和更寬廣的眼光去觀察這個世界,相信你會找到尋屬於你自己的人生定義。
---
[English] Translated by Shannon Yeung
“On first glance, “Fundamental” might look like a blanket criticism of Christianity, making it incredibly easy to dismiss as offensive or even as atheistic propaganda. Yet if you look beyond the provocation, I
hope you will realize that it only intends to criticize a very specific component of religion: dogmatic scripture.
Religious upbringing plays a significant role in shaping the values of a child, values that can easily be upheld for life. This is especially detrimental for obedient children who have yet developed the rational capacity and courage to question their parents.
When I was young, I genuinely believed that Pokemon were evil spirits, that Harry Potter was a devil in disguise, that listening to pop music would lead to degradation, that watching pornography would lead to eternal pain in Hell. Whenever I struggled to endorse contradictory teachings, I would be coerced into fearful acceptance rather than reasoned into genuine belief. Not only is such threat-based enforcement of religion unreasonable, but the resultant guilt also became an enormous burden that inevitably affected how I perceived others and how I handled my social interactions. The more I engaged with my religious community, the more I doubted the kindness I received. Teachings of faith, love, and compassion simply could not counteract the bleak, evil picture painted by original sin.
During the production stages of the animation, I could not help but feel furious. I was furious at my young, foolish self and I am still angry at self-claimed justice warriors spreading falsehood in the name of religion.
Over the years, I have engaged with followers of other religions as an effort to understand. Aside from obvious differences in teachings and rituals, I have found that most religious followers use personal experiences to justify their beliefs, but can never offer a compelling argument to explain contradictions in basic logic and science. Surely, if hearsay was all it took to convert someone, no one would care about the contradictions. Perhaps this applies to some, but the way I see it is that peer pressure and investment into faith tends to mellow out any initial suspicions. Once one conforms to the rituals and adopts the religious semantics by habit, even mere luck points to God. When everything becomes a positive reinforcement of God, one might fall into the trap of believing that their religion is exclusively better than the rest, sneer at other religions, and fail to see just how similarly foolish all Fundamentalism is.
This film has screened at many major film festivals and the reception has been both positive and negative as you might imagine. I am not afraid of criticism because the plot was inspired by my own experiences and a sentiment shared among my friends. Since the film aired, a significant number of people from the Christian community have told me that my film resonated very closely with their experience too. Indeed, some religious people are stubborn, obnoxious and unreasonable, but there are also many who are incredibly tolerant, understanding and empathetic. I do respect everyone’s interpretation of religion, but for those who feel offended by this film, ask yourself: Do you wholeheartedly believe in your religion? How many contradictions have you deliberately shied away from? If you do identify as religious, are you choosing by your own will or are you pressured by friends and family? Or are you subscribing to religion solely for salvation?
Please scrutinize your belief with utter honesty. If you are convinced by your religion, please respect other people’s right to believe in other religions too. There is a fine line between respectful proselytization and an aggressive imposition of religion. This should be a free and equal society where all races, sexes, genders, religions, sexual orientations are treated with basic respect.
Or, if you realize that you have been an atheist at heart the entire time, feel free to cut off your ties with religion! Once you leave the ivory tower, try to examine the world from different perspectives, and I can assure you will find your own meaning of life. The truth will stand the test of time.”
想觀看高畫質影片請按這裡~
https://vimeo.com/300120279
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f68vO5jX5_E&t=3s
------
Credit
導演 Director:
邱士杰 (ShihChieh Chiu)
動畫 Animator:
邱士杰 Shih-Chieh Chiu、張明潔 Ming-Chieh Chang
配音 Voice Actor:
林冠宇 Guan-Yu Lin、邱士杰 Shih-Chieh Chiu、廖容萱 Jung-Shan Liao、莊采融 Cai-Rong Zhuang、林鼎傑 Dan Lin、陳變法 Bian-Fa Chen
指導教授 Supervisor:
鐘世凱 Shih-Kai Chung
音樂與音效製作Music & Sound Design Production:
@紋聲音樂 WinSound Studio
音樂與音效Music & Sound Design:
林孝親 Hsiao-Chin Lin、林思妤 Szu-Yu Lin
混音Scoring Mixer & Re-recording Mixer:
林孝親 Hsiao-Chin Lin
#Fundamental基石
#11/24日 公投14、15請投同意,落實真平
#若想知道更多關於宗教迷信與離教的相關資訊,請持續關注本粉絲團
#若你正迷茫著找尋新的心靈寄托,唯一推薦—台灣合法立案宗教團體 台灣人文煮意麵團 Humanistic Pastafarianism in Taiwan
propaganda meaning 在 What is Propaganda? - YouTube 的美食出口停車場
... <看更多>