 |
| by Jim Starlin (digitally remastered) |
As a child of four years old, I first discovered Bruce Lee in the 1970s. So began my life-long fascination with, and affection for, most things Asian. It started as an obsession with the martial arts, but quickly evolved into a much broader range of interests. I was sincerely eager to learn about the histories, languages, religions, philosophies, arts, architecture, cultures, and customs of the Far East, with a particular focus on China and Japan.
It was this interest that, in part, eventually introduced me to the MOKF series and the character of Fu Manchu. (For more information on that, read My MOKF Adventure) This was my first exposure to the insidious Devil Doctor. Subsequently, an interest in the fantastic character and Rohmer's work lead me to read "The Yellow Claw", "The Insidious Dr. Fu Manchu", "Quest of the Sacred Slipper", "The Return of Dr. Fu Manchu", "The Hand of Fu Manchu", and "The Golden Scorpion".
False Controversy and Accusations
Only since the announcement of Marvel's "Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings" film project have the accusations, complaints, claims, and controversy concerning the character and issues of racism seriously come to my attention. This is, in part, because I have no interest in such things. Race and racism are not subjects that typically occupy my thoughts.
However, it seems that some people are obsessed with the subject. It's these people, who are obsessed with race and constantly complaining about race issues, that are racist. They see racism everywhere, even where it does not exist. Frequently, such fanatics completely ignore tone, context, and intent.
Make no mistake! Tone, context, and intent are not inconsequential! They're integral and crucial!
Ill-Defined and Oversimplified
As most people think of it, the term "race" is, and always has been, ill-defined. It's far too broad, general, and fuzzy to serve any useful purpose. Furthermore, most issues attributed to race or racism are gross oversimplifications of intricate circumstances, relationships, and situations. Such things are complex, nuanced, and not nearly so simple. Frequently, blaming racism as the cause of perceived race issues is a racist cop-out.
Race Does Not Exist
Race, as most people think of it, does not exist. It's complete nonsense! It is a pseudo-scientific category, theory, and philosophy that was conclusively debunked by legitimate science long ago.
Since race does not exist, then issues based on race do not exist. Race issues only exist, if one foolishly believes false racist philosophy. If one foolishly believes false racist philosophy, then one is a racist. If one is a racist, then one must accept responsibility for causing those very same racial problems they complain about.
The mere fact that a person believes different races of humans actually exist makes that person racist by definition! As such, that racist person is guilty of racism. Being guilty of racism, that person is the problem, not part of the solution.
In context, and for the purpose of this dissertation, there is only one race. The human race!
Fu Manchu in the Sax Rohmer Novels
Many criticisms and claims have been made concerning Fu Manchu as an offensive, racist, stereotype. Most of these are silly nonsense. It would certainly be nice if people had actually read the novels, performed a little research, and consulted a dictionary before exposing the world to their ill-informed opinions.
Archetype Versus Stereotype
Fu Manchu is an original archetype, not a stereotype. There is a difference and if you don't know what it is, then you should educate yourself. Fu Manchu is the archetype upon which the stereotypes are based, not the other way around!
The stereotype did not give rise to the archetype. The archetype gave rise to the stereotype. In other words, Fu Manchu was not created based on stereotypes. Stereotypes were created based on Fu Manchu. Therefore, any claim of Fu Manchu being stereotypical is patently false.
Stereotype Versus Cliché
Stereotypes, in relation to this discourse, are very similar to generalizations. Like generalizations, stereotypes are recognized as having a tendency to be generally true, even though they tend to be specifically false. Whether or not they genuinely are generally true is irrelevant. They are perceived to be and that's what matters.
Regardless, stereotypes are stereotypes for a reason. There tends to be some element or kernel of truth to them. That's how they become stereotypes in the first place.
Commonly, the term tends to carry heavy negative connotations in most modern usage. Which is quite odd because many stereotypes are positive and many other stereotypes are simply neutral. Too frequently, people indiscriminately and incorrectly use the term "stereotype" in lieu of the term "cliché".
Almost nothing about Fu Manchu could be remotely considered stereotypically Chinese or Asian. Except maybe the shape of his eyes, his manner of dress, his sense of honor, or that he's intelligent and well-educated. Of course, most of those are entirely dependent on context. Each of those things might or might not be considered stereotypically Chinese or Asian depending on a specific time and place, because context matters! Certainly, none of those attributes should be rationally considered negative or offensive.
One notable exception is Fu Manchu's opium use. Historically, there was a time when widespread opium use and addiction plagued the populations of China and Asia. It's sorrowful and unfortunate, but true. In fact, it was a serious tragedy perpetrated upon the Chinese people, primarily by the Imperial British Empire. However, acknowledgement of that situation can not be properly interpreted as racist propaganda.
Much about Fu Manchu has become cliché, because he's the original archetype. He's been around for over a century. He's inspired innumerable stereotypical clones and knock-offs. All of this gives testimony to his enduring appeal, popularity, and status a truly great fictional character.
Multi-faceted Misconceptions
Contrary to what some might claim, Fu Manchu is not an oversimplified, superficial, flat, or one dimensional character. He's a rich, complex, nuanced, and interesting character. He's an honorable man of integrity. This is clear to anyone who has actually read the novels.
Villain or Hero
Upon reading Rohmer's tales, it quickly becomes obvious that Fu Manchu is unmistakably the true hero of the story. He's a magnanimous, dignified, and even sympathetic character. Nayland Smith and the incredulous Dr. Petrie are incompetent, bumbling, fools in comparison.
Fu Manchu is a person with problems, struggling to find solutions. He's been pushed into antagonistic actions by injustice and holds the conviction that his cause is just. The only thing making Fu Manchu remotely villainous is that he'll willingly resort to extreme measures in seeking the justice he desires.
Anyone that believes Smith and Petrie are the heroes, or whose sympathies lie with the Imperial British Empire, must not have read the novels or must be blissfully ignorant of history. Any righteous person familiar with the Opium Trade, the Opium Wars, and the Boxer Rebellion would not, in good conscience, side with the British. In fact, any knowledgeable student of history should agree that much of the world's conflict, since the fall of the Roman Empire, was directly or indirectly caused by the troublesome Imperial British Empire.
The Yellow Peril Controversy
The phrase "yellow peril" occurs six times in the text of "The Insidious Dr. Fu Manchu". It appears only once in "The Return of Dr. Fu Manchu". It appears only once in "The Hand of Fu Manchu".
It's true that Fu Manchu is described as "the yellow peril incarnate" by the character Nayland Smith. That exact phase appears once in the text of "The Insidious Dr. Fu Manchu" and once in the text of "The Return of Dr. Fu Manchu" as a description of the titular character. Interestingly, twice the term "yellow peril" is specifically used as a substitute for Fu Manchu's name (Chapter 10 and Chapter 26) in the text of "The Insidious Dr. Fu Manchu".
However, use of the term "yellow peril" tends to be rather vague and undefined within the novels. While the term has specific meanings and definitions in the real world, it's meaning and definition (context) in the fictional world of Fu Manchu may not be quite the same. In fact, I'd argue it's most likely different from modern, real world, definitions and meanings.
In these fist three novels, the clearest indication as to the meaning or definition (context) of the term "yellow peril", within the fictional world of Fu Manchu, appears in the text of "The Hand of Fu Manchu". Here, the term is described as:
"...nothing less than a giant Yellow Empire. That dream is what millions of Europeans and Americans term 'the Yellow Peril! Very good. Such an empire needs must have - An emperor!"
According to records, in our real world, the term "yellow peril" was first used in 1895. The definition, meaning, and context, at that time, was:
"a danger to Western civilization held to arise from expansion of the power and influence of eastern Asian peoples."
This expresses an existential concern pertaining to the threat of possible governmental imperial expansion by Asian nations. This is the real world meaning of the term in Rohmer's time and place. It is the meaning and context of the term as used in the fictional world of Fu Manchu.
In that context, the "yellow peril" is far more of a legitimate concern in our present time than it was in Rohmer's. A student of history would know that China was embroiled in uprisings, revolutions, revolt, and much internal strife at that time. While concern over the threat of foreign invasion or hostile domination by war may be tribal or nationalist, it certainly does not qualify as racist.
In America during Rohmer's time, the term included additional meanings and social concerns, of which Rohmer likely was not aware. In our real world, the definition and meaning of the term has altered and expanded over the past century. Therefore, using the American understanding at that time, and particularly the modern understanding of the term, is sheer folly.
As for use of the word "yellow" in the term, there is no argument to refute its racist origin. Certainly, it was used as a hateful insult at the time. However, it must be noted that "yellow" was considered a "scientific" term commonly used in anthropology during the same time period. Hence, tone and context become indispensable to interpreting intent concerning use of the term.
False Assumption of Representation
Fu Manchu is one specific individual. The character is singular, unique, and extraordinary. Yet, armchair critics and race baiters have made the false assumption or claim that Fu Manchu serves as some type of representation for an entire group of people. This is complete nonsense.
Nowhere, in Rohmer's novels, is there any indication, suggestion, or assertion that Fu Manchu is representative of all Chinese people or Asians in general. Where in these works is there any evidence to support such a silly assumption? The fictional character is not, and was not, intended to serve as representation, symbolic or otherwise, for all Chinese people or Asians in general!
Intent to Promote Racism
As for all these and other objections, clearly, there was no intent to antagonize, vilify, encourage hate, encourage discrimination, or encourage violence against any Chinese person or persons. The Rohmer novels did not portray or distinguish Fu Manchu or Asians as inferior. Furthermore, Fu Manchu was not portrayed or depicted as generally representative of Chinese or Asian people. Nor did the author insinuate or make any claim that Fu Manchu was generally representative of Chinese or Asian people.
Any logical, rational, or analytical person understands that Rohmer was an author of fictional tales. The purpose of his work was to produce a product that generated profit. While his work exploited political and social concerns or fears of the era, Rohmer's novels were not intended to encourage and promote racist ideology or agenda. One should not ascribe malicious intent, when greed, ignorance, carelessness, or incompetence is the more likely cause.
Changing Relative Standards or Moving the Goalposts Ex Post Facto
Regardless, works created over a century ago are not, and should not be, subject to judgment based on current or modern standards of social sensitivities. That is completely absurd, illogical, irrational, and utter nonsense. Context matters!
Fu Manchu In MOKF
There was nothing purposefully and intentionally racist about Fu Manchu in the MOKF series. Yes, I've read the letters pages. Yes, I'm familiar with the concerns expressed by Bill Wu and others.
While the coloring problem might have been due to thoughtless carelessness, it was due mostly to technical issues concerning the limited color printing process available at the time. Doug Moench, Marvel, and their printers worked to correct the problem. In time, technology improved and the issue was resolved.
As for other issues concerning the depictions or portrayals of Fu Manchu's physical characteristics and appearance, there is no legitimate grounds for complaint. Comic books are a visual medium. Therefore, each character must be individually, immediately, uniquely, and visually identifiable. Hence, each character is subject to artistic vision, creativity, interpretation, and license.
As for criticism of Fu Manchu being a Chinese villain and Shang-Chi being the hero with a Caucasian American mother, this is another groundless claim. Shang-Chi's parentage was the invention of Steve Englehart, under dictum from the corprate overlords at Marvel. Furthermore, the subject was completely ignored by Doug Moench. Regardless, research has established that Fu Manchu's father was a British Caucasian. So both hero and villain are of mixed ancestry.
As for Black Jack Tarr's use of "Chinaman" in referring to or addressing Shang-Chi, when first introduced, the character of Black Jack Tarr perceives Shang-Chi as the enemy. His attitudes, behavior, and words are arguably racist. However, that is the fictional character and not necessarily representative of the writer's or publisher's views and attitudes. Nor should it be perceived to condone or endorse such views and attitudes.
In time, Shang-Chi and Tarr become rather close friends. While Tarr continues to occasionally address Shang-Chi as Chinaman, it's clear the tone, context, and intent has changed drastically. It's now used as a term of affection, endearment, and friendship. In time, Tarr discontinues usage of the term.
This should be lauded and recognized, at the very least, as an example of positive character growth. It's the story of Tarr's struggle, not just toward tolerance, but to welcome acceptance. It is an acknowledgment and endorsement from the writer and publisher that Tarr's prior attitude, behavior, and use of the word is now unacceptable.
Intent to Promote Racism
As for all these and other objections, clearly, there was no intent to antagonize, vilify, encourage hate, encourage discrimination, or encourage violence against any Chinese person or persons. The MOKF series did not portray or distinguish Fu Manchu, Shang-Chi, or Asians as inferior. Furthermore, Fu Manchu and Shang-Chi were never portrayed or depicted as generally representative of Chinese or Asian people. Nor did the creators, writers, artists, or publisher insinuate or make any claim that Fu Manchu or Shang-Chi was generally representative of Chinese or Asian people.
Any logical, rational, or analytical person understands that Marvel was, and is, a business. The purpose of that business is to produce a product that generates profit. Purposefully offending or antagonizing any potential customer is bad for business, illogical, irrational, and foolish. The MOKF series was not intended to encourage and promote racist ideology or agenda. One should not ascribe malicious intent, when carelessness or incompetence is the more likely cause.
Changing Relative Standards or Moving the Goalposts Ex Post Facto
Regardless, works created nearly half a century ago are not, and should not be, subject to judgment based on current and modern standards of social sensitivities. That is completely absurd, illogical, irrational, and utter nonsense. Context matters!
Conclusion
Rohmer's novels were not, and are not, reflections of Chinese people or Asians. They are reflections of American and British perceptions, concerns, and fears of that era! Rohmer's novels were intended to exploit those perceptions, concerns, and fears for personal financial gain. They were not intended to encourage and promote racist ideology or agenda.
If you honestly perceive a great deal of racism or racist propaganda in these works, that is far more condemning of you than it is of Rohmer, his novels, and the character of Fu Manchu. Perhaps you should examine what beliefs, biases, bigotry, attitudes, false information, incorrect assumptions, logical errors, and other baggage you brought to the table when interpreting these works. Maybe, just maybe, you saw exactly what you wanted to see. "Seek and ye shall find."
'Nuff said!
Additional Resources
No comments:
Post a Comment