Jottings from the Granite Studio

There’s a scene in the movie Animal House, where Dean Wormer informs the Delta Chis that the fraternity has been placed on “double secret probation.” I now know how that feels. There’s been a lot of talk in the pubs and online about what some have dubbed the “No Fun” Olympics.  Restaurants and bars are closed, new restrictions put in place, never mind the crackdown on visas which drastically reduced the foreign imprint on the city.  It a few of us wondering how these campaigns meshed with the goals of the Olympics, one of which had been to showcase Beijing as a modern, international, and cosmopolitan city.

The answer: Priorities shifted.

Those aspects of Beijing that the resident foreigner population enjoyed the most–the casual funkiness of the rooftop patios and street fairs in Nanluoguxiang, the let-it-all-hang-out vibe of a Sanlitun’r Saturday bacchanal, the mix of cultures from around the world, and the different gatherings and meetings to discuss topics related to China and beyond…

Well, that’s not really part of the plan.  It was too casual, too loose, too…dare I say it…fun.

As I wrote yesterday, the Olympics are a chance for the world to come to China, but this time (unlike, say, the 19th century) the world must come on China’s terms.  The torch relay demonstrations truly shocked the powers that be and  I don’t think they were prepared for the level of vitriol and antipathy that could be unleashed when there are no checks on the freedom of expression.  After April, it no longer was about having the best Olympics ever and showing how open China had become, instead more conservative forces within the government and party stepped in (particularly those connected with the security apparatus) and mandated that the new goal was going to be an orderly games at all cost.

And seemingly overnight the mood in Beijing changed.  New directives came flying down the mountain on a range of issues: residency, visas, live music, outdoor gatherings, indoor gatherings, as well as a massive display of (in)security as X-Rays, metal detectors, “Public Safety” Granny squads, cameras, police, helicopters, and even SAM batteries made their appearance around the city.

I have no problem with securing the Olympics against violent attacks on athletes and spectators, but the challenge for Beijing public security officers is that preventing violence is only part of their mandate, they must also be constantly vigilant against any signs of dissent or activities that might challenge the ruling authority of the Party.  The first part of the gig is tough enough, add the second and the result is hardly the welcoming and open first impression that I think some organizers–particularly those in BOCOG–had hoped to present.

Last month, Richard Spencer wrote on his blog:

I have never seen this expressed, but what the authorities are doing makes much more sense if you consider the target market to be Chinese. It is important for the regime to show it is in charge of its capital city - how can it hope to instil order in Shaanxi and Shandong if the folk on its doorstep spit, cuss and fight (and pick up Russian prostitutes)? The smart new buildings, and an impression of prosperity give the rest of the country something to aim at, and to be proud of. On the other hand, while the overbearing security and inflexible attitudes of staff might annoy foreigners, the Chinese visitors would expect it.

What Chinese visitors might not expect is precisely the, how shall I put it?, decadence on display in some of the bar areas that we foreigners regard as the fun bits of town. Of course, there is decadence in many Chinese cities, but I can imagine a lot of older Chinese officials simply feeling uncomfortable with the idea of Mr and Mrs Wang, up from a provincial town in Hebei (maybe one which has sacrificed its water supply to the Olympics), for their first  ever visit to Beijing, clutching their handful of tickets and staying in a two-star hotel, bumping into a large gang of mixed laowai and gilded Beijing youth frolicking drunkenly in the street outside at four in the morning, before whizzing off in BMWs bought for them, in the latter case, by rich dad.

I’m not entirely convinced that this show is mostly aimed at provincial consumption, but I believe that Richard is on to something.  I think it’s part of a larger ideological issue with deep historical roots.  It’s about sovereignty and pride and order….in essence, the ‘fun bits’ as Spencer refers to them, as well as the cosmopolitan zones of the city like Nanluoguxiang and parts of Chaoyang, with foreigners relaxing and doing pretty much as they pleased, I suspect triggered for some cadres unpleasant associations with the treaty ports and concessions of old.

Finally, even those officials who are interested in putting a cosmopolitan face on Beijing often find their plans going pear-shaped for the simplest of reasons.  I can imagine the question being asked around a meeting: “What do foreigners like?” First of all, I wonder how many actual foreigners were consulted in this process.  Two, ”foreigner” is a pretty big category covering 4/5 of the world.  The perceptions of a visitor from Poland will differ from somebody off the plane from Peru, a Liechtensteinian might see things differently than our guests from Liberia.  Just a guess.

A lively street fair with foreigners and Chinese mixing and mingling as vendors, musicians, and artists create a carnival atmosphere in one of Beijing’s old hutongs–not going to happen, but have you seen our ‘hospitality tent’ with calligraphy demonstrations and multi-media presentation on the economic development of China’s Tibet?

I suppose too that part of the disconnect between the foreign press and the Chinese government stems from a similar source.  What many Chinese officials see as the signs of a modern, cosmopolitan city (large buildings, Audis with tinted windows, uniformed taxi drivers, new trains) doesn’t always mesh with what other people see as more crucial elements in building a modern society: freedom of expression, celebration of diversity, and rule of law to name a few recurring themes in the whinging of the European and North American press.

In short, when the games first started coming together, it was about showing the world how international China could be, how the economy had developed in a few short decades, and, I suppose, how much things had changed since 1989.  With the Tibet riots, the torch relay controversy, and a growing and edgy nationalism emerging, the plan changed. Now it was about demonstrating order and the ability of the CCP to manage the games without incident.

It is a change that has set a new tone for the games, but I am hopeful that some of the openness, cospmolitan spirit, and yes, fun, shines through the security and impresses the world with just how international a city Beijing has become.  I’m sure people will have fun at the games–I plan to–but I just wish the powers-that-be had made it a little bit easier to do so.

Bring on the games.