Angry Chinese Blogger

Angry Chinese Blogger: The news and views about China that the big media can't, or won't, tell you

The is no single truth

Menu: Home

Bjork makes 'free Tibet' gesture

« H E News and Politics :: Human rights and personal freedoms :: Sino-Tibet :: email
posted Wednesday, 5 March 2008


From the BBC
 

Bjork makes 'free Tibet' gesture

The Icelandic singer, Bjork, has caused controversy among fans in China by shouting "Tibet! Tibet!" at the end of a concert in Shanghai.

The cry followed a powerful performance of her song Declare Independence.

Talk of Tibetan independence is considered taboo in China, which has ruled the territory since 1951.

Although some at the concert appear not to have heard Bjork's protest on Sunday, there was an uneasy response from other fans.


After the concert, held at the Shanghai International Gymnastics Centre, some negative reactions were posted on Chinese websites.
   
Comment on Chinese website: Wow, the nerve! Where did she get the courage to do this? Weirdo!

"I like Bjork", said one, "it's OK for her to have a different point of view, but for her to do this is disrespectful to fans here - very selfish of her".

Another fan said Bjork had "behaved like an angry young person, acting in an underhand manner, not like Brad Pitt and Richard Gere, who are better known Free Tibet supporters".

According to one audience member, there was no booing after the outburst, but people left the concert venue hurriedly.

Human rights activists and many politicians abroad have criticised Chinese policy in Tibet. Many Tibetans feel loyal to the exiled spiritual leader, the Dalai Lama, whom China considers a separatist threat.

The song Declare Independence has previously been used by Bjork to highlight other struggles for self-rule.

She dedicated a performance of it in Japan last month to Kosovo. She has also used the song to campaign for Greenland and the Faroe Islands - territories controlled by Denmark.

Bjork performed in two Tibetan Freedom Concerts in the United States in the 1990s.

Her behaviour at the Shanghai concert has not been reported in the state-controlled Chinese media.


While ACB support Tibetan independence, ACB would have preferred that Bjork had made a more meaningful contribution to the cause rather than one that makes a few headlines in the West but has no impact in China other than on Bjork's chances of getting another concert venue in Shanghai.

Maybe if George Bush had shouted "Tibet, Tibet" at end of a live press conference on CCTV1-12.... but this is a flash in the pan.

links: digg this    del.icio.us    technorati    reddit


View Comments/Add a Comment (3)


1. dave zimmerman left...
Thursday, 6 March 2008 4:32 am

Excerpts from a source with no known pro-american proclivities: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/A75B9FF6-7B2E-49FE-9812-0031C2E1BEAE .htm :

"The Dalai Lama recieved the congressional gold medal, the United States' highest civilian honour, on Wednesday.

"George Bush, the US president, presented the spritual leader with the award despite objections from China, who accuses the Dalai Lama of being a separatist.

"Meanwhile, Bush said that he had explained to Hu Jintao, the Chinese president, and the leadership in Beijing, why he attended the award ceremony.

" 'I have consistently told the Chinese that religious freedom is in their nation's interest. I've also told them that it's in their interest to meet with the Dalai Lama and will say so at the ceremony.'

"China pulled out of a meeting this week where world powers were to discuss Iran, in apparent protest at congress's plan to honour the Dalai Lama with its highest civilian award.

"China had also cancelled an annual human-rights dialogue with Germany to show displeasure over Chancellor Angela Merkel's September meeting with the Dalai Lama. "

Please understand that I am no supportetr of W, but it is obvious that he chose a more significant gesture than the shouting of a slogan, in a more pretigious venue than a Shanghai rock hall.

PRC, to my knowledge, made no response that alluded to the moral superiority that is implicit in their usual dealings with foreign nations. Instead, there was a statement from the Foreign Ministry that relied on the threat of deteriorating relations. This was backed up by PRC's withdrawal from two commitments that it had previously agreed to. It is also the reason (just speculation, since none was stated officially) for PRC's refusal to allow the US Navy to use Hong Kong for shore leave ten weeks ago.

If Bjork's gesture receive's any official reaction, it will be made into the same type of non-event as Steven Spielberg's withdrawal from the Olympics - it doesn't matter, because he was never really hired anyway, and he's just a childish western artist.

Tibet is an issue that PRC will never negotiate about. Unlike Korean POW's, who are all dead by now and, thus,appropraite objects for PRC's humanitarian concern, Tibet, to PRC and most Chinese individuals, is a matter of prejudice and pride.

One Chinese person I work with, a true red neck, claims that PRC was right to invade Tibet because there was slavery there. Another, also Chinese whom I really like, hates Tibetans because of the advantages and subsidies they receive. The advantages concern preferential treatment in the matter of university admissions, and I don't have any other knowledge of the matter. The subsidies concern food that is shipped to Tibet from China - I have a feeling that Tibet could feed itself before the Han immigration.

My feeling is that if the Chinese can overcome these prejudices, and if the government can overcome the insult of being considered wrong, the will have achieved true nirvana.


2. Peter left...
Thursday, 6 March 2008 10:51 am :: http://www.civicchina.com

I agree with Dave Zimmerman that "Tibet, to PRC and most Chinese individuals, is a matter of prejudice and pride." He wrote: "My feeling is that if the Chinese can overcome these prejudices, and if the government can overcome the insult of being considered wrong, the will have achieved true nirvana." -- I'd say that anyone who believes that this is possible (with regard to Tibet), has come very close to true nirvana himself :-)

Nevertheless, Bjork's daring statement achieved one thing: it created awareness among the audience that there are some contested issues involving Tibet. This will hardly lead to any official reaction, but it may germinate within some of those in the audience who are already aware of the huge gap between official representations and reality.


3. ACB left...
Saturday, 8 March 2008 4:20 am

As I haven't spoken toy your neighborhood redneck I can't be certain as to what they were referring, but what I can tell you is that China offers some "benefits"to all of its official ethnic minorities, such as limited exemptions from the One Child Policy as well as schemes to get them into education (the latter of these actually applies to rural Han, too, in many areas). what you also have to remember is that in many cases native Tibetans have been forcefully relocated and are no longer able to sustain themselves. For example, many Tibetan nomads have been forced off of their traditional grazing lands by Han developments. Just like many Native Americans in days gone by they have been forced to live in reservations where they cannont cultivate as they used to and so cannot produce food or earn incomes. Beijing is having to get them into education, to give them food, and to teach them how to farm, because they can no longer do things the way that they used to, and without this they will die.

China is in awkward position that it is both immensely proud of its ethnic minorities as being a unique part of its heritage, and that it is being pushed to see Han culture as superior and the way forward. You cannot promote one without saying that the other isn't all that.