"The Rape of Nanking": $2 million documentary (#190, Topic J)

Today's Washington Post reports that a $2 million documentary "The Rape of Nanking", produced by a film company set up by a well-known local billionaire, AOL vice chairman Ted Leonsis, is near completion. Good news indeed. According to the report, Leonsis saw Iris Chang's (author of Rape of Nanking) obituary two years ago and read her best-selling book afterward. That the Japanese army massacred 300,000 innocent Chinese in Nanking (now Nanjing) in 1937 left a deep impression on Leonsis -- producing a documentary became Leonsis's "preoccupation;" it became a "labor of love." Reading the story, it seems that the documentary will focus, in addition to depicting Japan's brutality, human decency among 12 westerners who created a safe zone that protected 250,000 Chinese from the Japanese army -- without their intervention, the death toll would be some 550,000! Among the 12 westerners was a German, the head of Nazi party in Nanking, who played a key role and whom Chang depicted as the "Oskar Schindler of China," a reference to the hero in Stephen Spielberg's movie, "Schinder's List." Thus, the documentary will pay tribute to him, as well as to several American missionaries -- and Japanese as well. The WP also reports that broadcasting rights in China has been secured by CCTV, China's national TV network. With 500 million TV households in China, the documentary will have a large audience and significant impact. Excellent. Last September, my wife and I were in the Nanjing Massacre Memorial Museum; I was greatly disturbed by the skeletons scattered about on site. On the way out, I also read many comments by visitors: two impressed me greatly. One, by a high-school student, said that she will study hard and do something positive as she grows up. The other one, by an elementary-school student (who could not write the word 恨 [hate] and had to do it phonetically), in addition to expressing his sentiment toward the Japanese, also stated that he will study hard. Good for them. Ted, thank you for doing a good public service. We look forward to the docmentary's completion and release so that, as you said, we "may pay to see the movie in a theater or buy a DVD or watch on the Internet." Or, perhaps, all three.

Life story or blogs? (#189, Topic O)

For the last several years, our children wanted us (their parents) to write our life stories (separately) before our mind becomes incapacitated or, worse, before we leave this world. We have, so far, not done so, on account of (1) our lack of time and (2) our not having led an interesting life. Instead, I initiated this blog as a substitute. Now that I have done almost 200 entries, I find this a far better alternative to writing a life story. This is because a life story, given that we have not led an interesting life, tends to be tedious reading, one uneventful year after another in a chronologically sequenced recitation. In contrast, blogging, while invariably haphazard and disorganized, has the advantage of being spontaneous, allowing the coverage of an incidental matter in some detail and with freshness stimulated by something I read or come across immediately before writing. In time, perhaps, these random blogs may be reorganized into a chronological sequence -- with fillings here and there (if I am still around at that time) -- thereby making them, together, a life story. We'll see how all these work out, particularly since I have offered to talk about this as an alternative to a group of retired professionals of Chinese ancestry.

Athenian Democracy = Openness (#188, Topic H)

The course on Greek philosophy I am taking, which will have its last class coming Tuesday, August 1, focuses on the trial of Socrates (469-399 BCE), a leading philosopher in Athens, more than a century behind Confucius (551-479 BCE). While the charges brought against Socrates -- for teaching to the young, thereby "corrupting" them -- are laughable (indeed, during the class, I could not refrain from shaking my head), I did not sign on to the course to learn the trial's details (on which I had read at least two books when I was translating Confucius's Analects). Rather, I was trying to gain some insight on why such an incident could have taken place in ancient Greece. After I posted an entry on What is Democracy? two weeks ago(#173, 7/13/06), I felt that perhaps I could link this course to my query on democracy: Greece is said to be the birthplace of democracy, how could Athens tolerate such an indignity? As to Socrates's trial, the jury voted 280-220 for prosecution; among life-ending options, Socrates chose poison. Most writers seem to blame the system for Socrates's death -- the jury pool consisted of unemployed citizens who jumped at the opportunity to earn a few coins, the jury members were uneducated, etc. I beg to differ; I think these views confused the end result with the process -- they blamed the process when the result was not to their liking. What I learned from Socrates's trial are two attractive attributes of Athenian democracy: (1) equality -- nothing could be fairer than choosing by lot, (2) openness -- nothing could escape the public's notice when everything was conducted in the open air (to let more than one form of sunshine in) and concluded in front of all present. Democracy was said to be "tyranny by the majority". But, if a decision is reached by peers (that is, without prejudice) openly (that is, without collusion), it must necessarily be accepted, at least acquiesced, by everyone, at least for the time being -- while one who is displeased works to institute remedial action. But, of course, without prejudice and without collusion are big conditions, and remedial action takes time. No wonder, a book for juveniles I borrowed from the local library (and quoted in #173) said that: [M]ajor Greek philosophers agreed that democracy was the worst form of government." (Bill Stites, Democracy: A Primary Source, 2005, p. 6)

Bird, birds; goose, geese; deer, deer (#187, Topic L)

The Parade, a Sunday supplement, has an "Ask Marilyn" column with readers' writing in with interesting questions intended to stump the columnist, said to have an 180+ IQ. The title in today's entry, above, carries two implicit questions: How are these words related? How are they different? They are related because they represent three singular-plural pairs; they are different because, in each case, the plural is formed in a manner not shared by the other two. When I was walking on the golf course this morning, I realized that, in my post yesterday (#186), I failed to mention birds, which, from time to time, also congregated on the lawn when I walked by. Then, a strange thought struck me. For the word bird, its plural is formed by adding s, simple and straight-forward. But, this is not so with the word goose, whose plural form is not gooses, but geese. For the word deer, its plural form is the same as its singular form. In my walk this morning, I encountered a doe and two fawns -- they stood unmoved as I walked by, barely 6 feet from one of the fawns. A rare occasion which I cherish. But, as I write this, another strange thought occurred to me -- how strange the English language is. For a simple word deer, one must commit to memory that (1) its singular and plural forms are identical; (2) a male member is a buck, a female member, a doe; and a young member, a fawn; and (3) a buck, a doe, and a fawn are members of the same family. Chinese, in comparison, is simplicity itself. Deer is 鹿; a buck, 公鹿; a doe,母鹿; a fawn, 小鹿 -- singular and plural are the same, their gender and maturity are clearly denoted, their being members of the same family is obvious. Similarly, in English, one must learn, as between singular and plural, horse and horses; as to gender and maturity, stallion, mare, and colt/filly; their Chinese equivalent are, as to be expected, simply 馬, 公馬, 母馬, 小馬. Rooster/cock, hen, and chick in English become, not unexpectedly, 公雞,母雞,小雞 in Chinese. Who says English is easy and Chinese difficult? The reverse, it seems to me, is so.

Live and let live on a golf course (#186, Topic D)

Our unit in the retirement community faces the golf course; non-golfing-playing residents may walk on the course before 7 am and after 7 pm. I try to take advantage of this and walk for about 30 minutes every day before 7 am. Along the path, I frequently found geese, both in ponds and on grass, generally at a distance. I also found deer, invariably on grass, sometimes one or two, other times as a group numbering 7 or 8; sometimes they were as distant as more than 100 yards away from me, other times as close as 10- yards -- from a distance of 20+ yards away when I first saw them, which became 10- yards as I continued to walk on the path toward them. Invariably, they stopped grazing and looked at me as I walked by. Sometimes, they took off and ran further away from me. Other times, they took a slow step of one or two away from me -- producing a more comfortable distance between us. On rare occasions, while they stopped as usual, they remains unmoved, simply watching me walking by without yielding any ground. Since my mind is usually blank at early hours, these occasions gave me materials to reflect. Deep in my heart, I wanted them to remain where they were as I walked by. There is no reason why they should yield; I am a transient as much as they are. I came to the view that, while they stopped grazing, they were concentrating on assessing me. What is my intent? Would I harm them? My conclusion is that they were evaluating my pace -- has this stranger's pace remained steady as he approaches us? (A sudden stop or a slowing pace might suggest that the stranger is preparing to have a weapon ready to shoot at the deer.) When they remained still without moving as I walked by them, I felt rejoiced. The deer has every right to occupy the golf course as I do. Live and let live.

五十步笑一百步 [A 50-stepper ridicules a 100-stepper] (#185, Topic B)

After translating the third of three Chinese classics into English, back in 2001, my brother-in-law Charles wanted me to do a book on Chinese Idioms 中國成語. Thus, off and on, I have been collecting them -- Chinese idioms are invariably history-based; one appreciates their poignancy better when one is made aware of historical events on which based. One of the more difficult Chinese idioms is the title of today's entry. Why would one who has managed 50 steps ridicule one who has managed 100 steps? Good question. The idiom does not make sense -- unless one thinks outside the box, unless these steps are backward steps and not forward steps. It seems that, during a war in ancient times, two soldiers, instead of charging forward to fight, elected to step back to safety. Needless to say, the one who retreated by 50 steps, though far removed from the battle line, was still closer to it than the one who retreated by 100 steps. So, the 50-stepper mockingly said to the 100-stepper: "Ha, ha, look at you, retreating by 100 steps. Shame on you." The 100-stepper, with nothing meaningful to say, simply maintained his silence. In yesterday's Wall Street Journal, the lead editorial and a long ed-op piece were devoted to the just concluded Doha Round of international trade negotiation. On that day, the U.S. Trade representative, who led the US team, was also interviewed by CNBC. Reading the two stories and listening to the interview, I could not help being reminded of the Chinese idiom. The negotiation, on which many developing countries attached high hopes, broke down badly -- many forecast that it would signify its end. Why is the Chinese idiom applicable? If one substitutes the fighting line to free trade, one might equate the 50-stepper to USA and the 100-stepper to EU -- where steps = farm subsidies. It seems that USA's farm subsidies (in an earlier series of special reports, the WP showed the multi-million-dollar subsidies to each farm-owning-but-nonproducing corporation in midwest), were something to the tune of 50% of market value. If one finds this inconsistent with free trade, that practised by EU members would be further removed from that ideal, since their subsidies approached 75%. So, the US Representative pointed her finger at her EU counterparts -- ha, ha, look at you, subsidizing your farm constituencies so heavily. A modern-day example of a 50-stepper ridiculing a 100-stepper. Oh, well.

A $585 Million Fraud by 2 Church Memebers (#184, Topic M)

Crimes committed by prominent lay church members and members of the cloth used to be rare. Now, the reverse is the case; it is a rare day that one does not read a story or two on this topic. For my on-going research project (on the effect of western religion on Chinese culture in the 17th century), I have collected so many cases that I had to stop doing so months ago. Still, today's Washington Post carries a story that deserves writing about. It seems that the president and the chief legal counsel of the a church foundation in a western state "were each convicted of three counts of fraud and one count of conducting an illegal enterprise in a scheme that lasted decades and cheated 11,000 investors across the country of about $585 million." Their technique? "Bible-quoting salesmen." Their pitch? "[H]elp [church] causes, such as building new churches." It is interesting to note that, despite a 10-month trial resulting in a possible incarceration of up to 46 years (the sentence is yet to be rendered), their defense is sermon-like: "The truth is not determined by what this court said. Righteous people have spent time in jail before." (Ralph Reed [#178] used a similar approach in his unsuccessful bid as Georgia's lieutenant governor: "He thought he could convince his base that they shouldn't believe their eyes and ears, that they should trust him instead." (Time 7/31/06)

人逢佳節倍思親 [On festive occasions, one longs for parents] (#183, Topic K)

A front-page story, complete with a color photo, in today's Washington Post shows Tiger Woods weeping, after winning his second British Open championship in a row. "I wish he [father Earl Woods] was here to watch this," he said in a TV interview. (His father died in May, at age 74.) A Chinese saying, used as the caption to this entry, says it well. It might be translated as: On festive occasions, one longs for one's parents doubly. Reading Woods's story, I also wept, since it reminds me of my own situation at the time. In 1953, I led the procession for doctoral candidates at the University of Illinois's graduation ceremony. (That I led the procession was a sheer accident. Candidates were sequenced, alphabetically, first by academic discipline; then, within each discipline, by name. Several fellow candidates in Accountancy elected not to show, allowing me to be the first in a 200+ procession. However, I was proud of one thing: I was the youngest to earn a PhD in my discipline at UI, at age 24, though there are/were, undoubtedly, hundreds of others from China earning their PhDs younger than I, in other disciplines, elsewhere.) After the tassle on my cap was flipped, and after I received my diploma, while still on the stage, I looked at the big gathering -- and, as to be expected, I could not find a single familiar face (I was the eldest among siblings, and the only one in USA at the time), certainly not my father, who remained in Shanghai. A festive occasion, indeed, but a lonely one nevertheless. Why did I look up at the crowd? Perhaps, just as Wood said, I wished that my father could be there to witness this festive occasion. After looking blankly at the crowd in front of me, my immediate thought was directed to a matter of considerable urgency: after leaving Champaign-Urbana, where will I be? With no forwarding address, how should I instruct the Post Office? When would I receive my father's next letter? Since my mission was still in process, I steeled myself, and walked down from the other side of the stage to complete the recession. My father taught me to exercise self-control and be self-confident. And I did. Little did I know, at the time, that I never saw my father again -- not in 1953, not later; the last time I saw my father was when I left Shanghai in 1949.

Chateau Frontenac (#182, Topic N)

The Travel section in today's Washington Post features Quebec City, complete with a big color photo of Chateau Frontenac and its commanding view of the harbor. This brings back many fond memories. Some three decades ago, the American Accounting Association held its annual convention in Quebec City. (At the time, I was on leave from the University of Washington to serve as Associate Director of Cost Accounting Standards Board, an agency of the U.S. Congress, and our children were in high school.) Our son suggested making it a family vacation, and he and his sister planned the route. So, together with their mother (my wife), the four of us, in an Oldsmobile station wagon we owned at the time, visited many interesting but out-of-the-way places -- on the way to QC, Mystic Harbor in Connecticut; Providencetown and Hyannis Port, MA; Skowhegan VT, which boasted a woman senator, rare at the time, and where the state fair was going on strong when we checked into a nearby motel. From there, a route, with very little traffic, led us directly to QC. The convention's headquarters were at Chateau Frontenac; since I registered several months ahead, we had a good room, with view. The second day in this four-day gathering, a good friend of mine, whom I had invited earlier to serve as a visiting associate professor to the Chinese University of Hong Kong (when I was in charge of its MBA program -- now voted as #1 in Asia, though it was just two years old at the time), invited us to an excellent Chinese dinner in the city. I usually like to sample Chinese food in major cities we visit, so this was a real treat. On the way back, we routed through Montreal, visiting its Olympic site (another sight I enjoy doing), and then Lake Champlain in NY. Thanks to the excellent planning our children did, the four of us all had a good time. Four years ago, my wife and I were on a cruise to Canadian's Maritime Provinces, stopping at both QC and Montreal (for St. Lawrence waterway). Somehow, without our children alongside, the visits were uneventful. On the other hand, we were impressed by Portland ME, where two hoteliers brought indoor plumbing from New Orleans when they returned home to retire (their home became a musuem, which we visited as a part of city tour); and by Halifax, where hundreds of Canadians opened their homes to strangers whose travels were interrupted, and who were stranded in Halifax, as a result of a shipwreck. A local cemetery became a sight, and we indeed visited it when we joined a city tour there.

"Which country would be dominant in the 21st century?" (#181, Topic F)

In one of the sessions at the DC Money Show today, the speaker showed a viewgraph, showing the dominant country from 16th century onward:
16th century: Spain
17th century: France
18th century: Netherlands
19th century: Great Britain
20th century: USA
21st century: ?
He then asked for a show of hands as to which country would be dominant in the 21st century. USA? About 8-10 hands (in an audience of 250+). India? 1 or 2. China? 50+. This was not unexpected, since (1) the session was billed as "Profit from the China Miracle in 2006" and (2) before that viewgraph, he showed another one stating that, by 2041, China would displace USA as the world's largest economy -- the World Bank's studies gave the date as early as 2020. (Almost as an after-thought, the speaker also asked about Japan -- 1 or 2 hands; Russia, ditto.) He then showed another viewgraph, on China's percentage to the world's GDP, ranging from a high of 32.93% in 1820 to a low of 4.5% in 1950. (For the last 2 years, I have been doing some research on China's economy in the 15th century (for my project on Zheng He) and in the 17th century (for my project on the impact of 16th-17th century Jesuits to the Chinese culture) -- China's percentage, invariably in the 20s prior to 1820, was consistent with the speaker's data.) He then said that there is some correlation between a country's population and its contribution to the world's GDP -- I also have a sneaky suspicion that this might be so, but empircal data cannot support this contention. Indeed, using the speaker's data, China's contribution to the world's GDP fluctuated much more violently than her population growth. All in all, it was a most informative session. (After the first viewgraph (detailed above) was flashed, a woman, sitting on the first row, muttered something about human rights. Unable to contain myself, I said: These five countries were all slave owners. She repeated what she said, prompting a man sitting next to her to say: This is not the place to discuss politics. With that, she remained quiet the rest of the session.)

心定自然涼 [Heart at ease = coolness] (#180; Topic D)

Washington was under a heat wave the last several days, prompting Washington Post to ask, 7/20: What would you do without air conditioning? Well, for an Old Man Out of China -- or for most people in China -- air conditioning is a luxury. In China, there was no air conditioning when I was a youngster. How does one survive in hot weather? One must adapt, and the best way to adapt is to follow the dictum used as today's heading: With a heart at ease, coolness naturally follows. Last September, my wife and I visited quite a few famous scholars' gardens in Suzhou (one is scheduled to be built in Washington's Botanical Garden). There was no air conditioning. Still, scholars remained indoors and continued their studies. In USA, my son has a brownstone in Brooklyn; even now there is no air conditioning -- and he seems to manage quite well. Our condo has a balcony, which is not under air conditioning, but I enjoy reading my morning papers there (or doing my blog, as I am doing right now). The key to the dictum is at ease; it is difficult to keep cool when one is moving about. Three Saturdays ago, with the air conditioning in the gym not functioning, our Tai Chi teacher taught the class outdoors. She was sweating all over. Still, she said: 心定自然涼. I admired her setting an excellent example. Unable to contain myself, I blurted out: Some years ago, I used the same phrase to a group with some knowlege of Chinese. With my poor diction, I pronounced 定[at ease] as 停[at stop] (the two words are quasi-homonyms), prompting one to say: That is not good; I don't want my heart to stop. Touche.

The Hazard of Blogging (#179, Topic O)

Commenting on an earlier entry (#173), Anonymous said: Democracy ... is a condition where you can write your thoughts freely on the blog, and no one knocks down your door ..." Well said. In today's Washington Post, the lead article is on a CIA software contractor, who, using the code name Covert Communications, began to write her blog in May -- some 2 months ago -- for the intelligence community. It was a smash hit. Despite the fact that only those with top-secret clearance may access her posts, an entry on food (Morale = Food) drew 890 viewers. Then, on July 13, she wrote one on the Geneva Conversation -- and, according to WP, "a jab at Secretary of State Condoleezza's trip to Europe late last year when she defended U.S. policy on secret detentions and interrogations." She was called into a CIA conference room. There, she was told that what she wrote "worried 'the seventh floor' (where the director and his management team have their offices)." She apologized, figuring that "she would get reprimanded and her blog would be eliminated." Not so. Her badge was seized and she was fired, by the contractor who contracted her services. Well, it is only a job. No one knocks down her door. For one who is retired, such as myself, with no job to go to or from which to get fired, what can I look forward to if I miswrite?

Value - East vs West (#178, Topic, Topic P)

E. J. Dionne's column in today's Washington Post is on Ralph Reed. Many years ago, Reed, an Oregonian and head of Christian Coalition at the time, attracted my attention for a remark he made on Confucius. Reed found Confucius's teachings appealing -- but, because Confucius was not a member of Reed's faith, he could not endorse them. This litmus test is variably invoked by westerners when Confucius's teachings could not be faulted, never mind that Confucius (551-479 BCE) preceded whatever Reed (or any westerner) could cite by at least half a millenium. Reed made a name for himself during the 2000 Republican Presidential nomination process, energizing South Carolina religious voters on behalf of the eventual winner, George W. Bush. (At that time, I was translating Sun Tzu's Art of War; I wrote 26 case studies to illustrate Sun Tzu's teaching. Nine of them were on the 2000 Republican Party Presidential Nomination process; that on South Carolina is in Chapter 12, labeled "Momentum vs Firewall.") Later, I read that Reed headed an anti-gambling campaign -- that issue is certainly consistent with his faith, an obvious good deed. But, reading Dionne's column, that was a mere tactics. One of his companies was awarded a $4 million contract by a now-disgraced lobbyist, to secure gambling license for one of the lobbyist's clients. All these came to light when the lobbyist pleaded guilty to corruption charges. Dionne's column has a subtitle: "Redefining 'Values'". So much for western values.

"The End of Marshall Field's" (#177, Topic N)

Today's Wall Street Journal has a front-page story on Federated Department Store's plan for 810 Macy's nationwide; in so doing, as the story's subheading says: it would be "The End of Marshall Field's." This brings back some fond memories. Back in the 1950s, students from China, though stranded and could not return, could remain in USA only by continuing their studies. I came to USA in 1949 to earn an MBA, planning to go back to China afterward. But, with conditions in China preventing me from doing so, my only alternative was to work toward a PhD. After PhD, what? Two years of practical experience. So, after my PhD at U of Illinois, I found a sponsor in Chicago. In Chicago, Marshall Field is in a league by itself -- occupying an entire square block in a dominant downtown location. It carries quality products -- I managed to acquire a square table, a lamp table, a bench, and two chairs, all teak and ebony in the Chinese tradition, by Baker. They are so well crafted that I still have them -- accompanying me (and later, my wife as well), from Evanston, to Los Angeles, Huntington Beach, Seattle, Dallas, Bethesda, and, now, Silver Spring -- for 53 years! I also bought a most comfortable sofa-and-ottoman pair from MF. Decades later, when we went to Hong Kong as a visiting professor, we left the pair to one of my colleagues at the U of Washington. His father was so fond of it that he offered to buy it from us, but, alas, I was too stingy to part with it. It has been reupholstered and sits in our living room -- along with the Baker pieces. Marshall Field is also known for services. When I left Chicago after two years (by that time, the US government had passed a law allowing stranded Chinese students to remain in USA indefinitely) to accept a teaching position in another state, my sponsor asked MF to send me a vase by mail. When the vase was found crushed after unpacking and had to be returned, MF said not a single word but shipped another -- well packed -- vase. The WSJ story ends with a quote from film critic Roger Ebert: "Don't mess with the name Marshall Field's." I completely concur.

What is Democracy?- II (#176, Topic Q)

My good friend, Anonymous, has honored me with his usual perceptive comment. On this topic (#174), he said: "Democracy ... is a condition where you can write your thoughts freely." Good thinking. This must be what the National Endowment for Democracy has in mind. In a recent report, quoted in Fred Hiatt's column, "The Democracy Backlash," Washington Post, 7/10/06, NED holds that "maintain[ing] some nominally democratic processes, usually including elections, and claim[ing] to be democracies" are not democracies but "hybrids." But I am more confused than ever. Is Democracy a condition? If voting is not a sufficient condition, what is/are? Is democracy a condition in the eyes of the beholder? Saturday, 7/15, at the G-8 summit in Russia, US President Bush commented that "I talked about my desire to promote institutional changes in parts of the world like Iraq, where there is a free press and free religion" (Washington Post, 7/16/06) -- this is no different from what Anonymous has said; does having these conditions sufficient for a democracy? Apparently Russian President Putin felt differently, when he remarked: "We certainly would not want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq, I will tell you quite honestly." So, how many kinds of democracy are there? Putin seems to like sovereign democracy. In USA, one reads about electoral democracy (where the president is elected by an electoral college bearing little relationship to votes cast) or about representative democracy (where laws are enacted by representatives elected by the citizenry who then compete, invariably through financial considerations, for their attention). Democracy: A Primary Source Analysis, a juvenile book (published in 2005, very much my level), talks about Athenian democracy (508-404 BCE), and Greek democracy (ended 338 BCE); it also says that "The world's longest-lasting democracy is established" between 1400-1450, when "The Mohawk Onandaga, Seneca, Oneida, and Cayuga Native Americans join together under the Great Binding Law.". Very interesting. Needless to say, the more I read, the more confused I am. Mincing no words, this juvenile book opens with clear statements even I can understand: "Democracy really means equality. In a democracy, everyone's opinion should count equally. Realistically speaking, complete democracy has never been achieved. And it may never be." So, my question: What is Democracy? remains in search for an answer.

犬子 - Hazards of Literal Translation (#175; Topic L)

People's Daily Overseas Edition for 6/29/06 has an interesting essay on the problems of teaching Chinese to youngsters of Chinese ethnicity residing in foreign countries. While preparing this essay, the essayist's 9-year-old son came by and ask what the two Chinese characters, which are used as the essay's title, meant. Literally, 犬 = dog; 子 = son; together, son of a dog. But, the two-word combination is a modest reference to one's own son -- in olden-day China, almost obsolete. (It is not included in the 1078-page Lin Yutang Chinese-English Dictionary.) Needless to say, the author had a hard time convincing his son what the term really means. On another occasion, his son, seeing a fellow Canadian walking a dog, stated to his father: 他走狗, not realing that the last two characters, together, have an entirely different -- and not too complimentary -- meaning. Luckily, the dog-walking Canadian has no facility in Chinese, allowing our author to escape without embarrassment. On still another occasion, his son proudly announced that he had learned 孫子兵法 (Sun Tzu's Art of War, one of the Chinese classics I have translated). Upon inquiry, his son meant that he, a grandson (the commonest meaning of the first two words together) had learned how to ice-skate (冰 [ice] is a homonym to 兵). That reminds of an episode. Some quarter of a century ago, a Sinologist in a well-known school in Massachusetts, encountered a then-new phrase 赤足大仙. Not knowing what it meant, he translated it as red-footed big saint, certainly a flawless rendition were each word to be translated individually. So much for literal translation of Chinese characters.

Kriegspiel: Asymmetrical warfare as a game (#174; Topic I)

Two weeks ago, when three "unlawful enemy combatants" at the Guatanamo Bay committed suicide, the general in charge of the detention facility offered the view that it was an "asymmetrical warfare" against USA. Seeing that phrase, I meant to do a blog, but forgot. This evening, when watching PBS's Inside Washington, panelist Mark Shields again used the phrase to refer to Israel's bombardment of Lebanon in retaliation of militant guerilla group Hezbollah's kidnapping of two of its soldiers. So, before I forget again, let me do this blog. During the Boer War, a London journalist Michael Henry Temple (1862-1928) invented a game: Kriegspiel (Krieg = war in German; spiel = game), to simulate the fog of war in real life -- when the enemy's intention and formation are both unrevealed. In Kriegspiel, though using pieces and rules in western chess, a player sees only his/her own playing pieces; the opponent's pieces and moves are shielded -- a reciprocal asymmetrical war game. Each player has a playing board on which to make his/her actual moves, but the position of the opponent's pieces is assumed -- until better or definitive information becomes available. By means of intelligence-gathering moves -- with valuable information provided by the referee, who has an official board showing actual moves by both players -- a player infers the opponent's position and proceeds to checkmate the King as in conventional western chess. Difficult? Yes. Impossible? No. Fascinating? Definitely. Kriegspiel was a favorite of German army generals during WWI, and of British cryptoanalysts at Blechley Park during WWII. I was exposed to the game from a fellow professor at the U of Washington, who learned it when on the staff of the Rand Corporation. Realizing that there is only one introductory book on the game, written in German, I proceeded to do one, in English, Kriegspiel: Chess Under Uncertainty (1994, 144 pages). Well received, including interviews with ABC and the print media, I wrote another one, Chess Detective: Kriegspiel Strategies, Endgames, and Problems (1995, 191 pages), to complement a Kriegspiel endgame book, by Gerald Anderson, published in the 1940s when he was a member of the British consular staff in Washington DC.

What is Democracy? (#173; Topic Q)

Almost without fail, one hears the word Democracy uttered dozens of times every day. But, no one bothers to define what this word means. A couple of months ago, Sen. Joseph Biden (D-DE), in an interview over NPR, chided President George W. Bush for simply equating democracy to voting. (Since my wife and I have a vacation condo in Delaware, we invariably pay attention to what Sen. Biden has to say.) According to Biden, democracy must have an independent judiciary and an independent legislature; otherwise, it would encourage an imperial presidency. Marvellous. Then, the Supreme Court decided a case attempting to rein in presidential power, which prompted a former Justice Department offical known for his creative definition of torture now at Berkeley, to label the Court an imperial judiciary. Now that the legislature has recessed for the summer, many have dubbed the one just ended a "do nothing" Congress. Utterly confused, on the eve of the Independence Day, I went to our retirement community's library and borrowed a couple of books on the subject. Kevin Phillips's book has a provocative title, American Theocracy (#167); understandably, the word democracy does not even merit a mention in this 462-page book. How about Sean Wilentz's The Rise of American Democracy: Jefferson to Lincoln (2005, 1044 pages)? On the very first page of his preface, Wilentz admitted that "Democracy is a troublesome word." He went on to say that "early patriot James Otis defined democracy in its purest and simplest form as 'a government of all over all,' ... 'where the rulers were the ruled.'" Is purest the same as the ideal? Must be, since, further down, he stated that "Today, democracy in America means enfranchisement ... of the entire adult citizenry." So, the right to vote is it. Then he hastened to add that "By that standard, the American democracy of the mid-nineteenth century was hardly a democracy at all: women of all classes and colors lacked political and civil rights." He then cited Tocqueville, whose book I managed to borrow from our local library. Let me read it and see what light it can shed to my query: What is democracy?

Between love and loyalty, which has precedence? (#172, Topic Q)

Our retirement community has a Center for Lifelong Learning. While taking a course on Greek Philosophy, I mentioned to the instructor that I would like to offer a course on Confucius. He suggested that I present a course proposal to CLL, which I did, day before yesterday, 7/10/06. My proposed course would cover 5 topics -- I dub it Confucius and 5L: Learning, Love, Loyalty, Life, and Legacy. I was asked why I wanted to limit the enrolment to 15. My answer was that I wanted to make the course a seminar on comparing eastern/western approaches to each of these topics. This means that participants are expected to express their personal views (based on their background and experience, no reading of any kind is required) on various issues, some might be very controversial. For example, in the Analects of Confucius, the only source from which all passages selected for discussion would be drawn, there are passages on conflicts between love (to family members) and loyalty (to the throne). Which one should take precedence? After the proposal was approved, I began to look for real-life examples of these conflicts. Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal has a front-page story where a US permanent resident of the Muslim faith was asked to be an FBI informant as a condition of getting his green card back (which was withheld at a checkpoint bordering Canada after he returned from visiting his wife in the Middle East). What action should this person take? I thought it would be a good case to discuss when the topic of Love vs. Loyalty becomes the topic in my proposed course. I mentioned to CLL that I have never offered such a course before; thus, I have not assessed, fully, many learning-curve issues. Thus, the possibility exists that I might not be able to complete the course!!!

Tennis star Andre Agassi (#171, Topic G)

Today, in addition to the World Cup 2006 final, is also the Wimbledon final -- and the final tournament for Andre Agassi, from which he exited in the second round and after which he announced his retirement. In 1994, Agassi was the Wimbledon champion; by tradition, the champion plays the opening match the following year. Somehow, my son managed to secure two opening-day tickets to Wimbledon 1995, so we were there to watch Agassi in the centre court. It was obvious that he was off form, as he barely survived -- and his opponent was a mere qualifier. After the centre-court match, we moved about and saw, if my memory serves me, Michael Chang in one of the courts. In the early 1990s, Chang was ranked as high as No. 2 in the world, but grass was not his surface. (He won the French Open, which is played on clay, a surface that seemed to suit his playing style better.) What I remember most vividly about Agassi was when he and Evan Lendel played in the final of Legg Mason classic, a Washington DC tournament held in August, invariably with temperature in the 90s. That year was no exception. Still, despite the unbearable heat, the two champions played a very respectable game, 2 sets to 1, with the final set (and the match) ending in 6:4. What impressed me most was these two players' professional ethics -- they played their best despite physical discomfort. Indeed, in an article I wrote about Kriegspiel (a variation of western-chess) I used this as an example to chide professional western-chess players' fondness for "grandmaster draws" -- whereby each side making 20 or so perfunctory moves and calling the game a "draw" -- equivalent to two tennis players leaving the court when the game was 4:4 in the first set. This would never happen in tennis; it was common in western chess.

"Just be furniture suppliers" (#170, Topic D)

When Sweden lost in the World Cup 2006 last week, some one offered a gratuitous remark, which I used as the title to this entry. Reading it in Washington Post, I thought this refers to IKEA; indeed it is. For 18 or so years when my wife and I were living in a house in Bethesda, we only visited IKEA once, in Woodbridge VA, 30+ miles away; the store's offerings apparently did not appeal to us, since we did not buy anything. Then, in 2005, we moved to a retirement community in Silver Spring, a 3-bedroom condominium, and we began to appreciate the value of space. To replace the dinette set in our house's kitchen, which we had to let go because it occupied too much space, our children and son-in-law accompanied us to visit IKEA -- it had, since our only visit to its Woodbridge store, opened a second one in College Park MD, less than 10 miles from Silver Spring. Suddenly, its offerings became very attractive to us. Now, I begin to understand why IKEA designed its furniture the way it did (straight corners, no ornamentation) -- they are intended for apartment dwellers where every inch of space is precious. We bought a dinette table that fits perfectly the kitchen corner in our condo, and three chairs -- our kitchen can accommodate only three chairs. Later, a good friend of my wife's suggested that we need to have (though not necessarily display) four chairs, so we went back (on our own, without being accompanied by family members) and bought a fourth -- it is still unwrapped, unassembled, and sits quietly in a closet. For additional storage area in the kitchen, my wife, on still another trip to IKEA, again accompanied by our children and son-in-law, found a perfect piece -- a horizontal, two-level affair, with four 13-1/2" x 13-1/2" x 13-1/2" hollow cubes on each level -- just shallow enough to allow access to the balcony from the kitchen, just deep enough to store cooking utensils and such, and just unobstrusive enough to be not-in-the-way -- straight cut, no ornamentation, sturdy, not bulky. Since there are more apartment dwellers than single-house occupiers in the world (and, perhaps, in USA as well), I can understand why IKEA is so successful. (Business Week has a favorable 8-page writeup of IKEA in its 11/14/05 issue.) Indeed, IKEA has a visible presence in China -- a tough market in which to compete, considering that IKEA had to pay, presumably, higher wages in Sweden, in addition to shipping charges. So, "just be furniture suppliers" must be interpreted not as a slight, but a compliment to Swedish entrepreneurship.

Stephen Hawking: "How can human race survive?" (#169, Topic Q)

Recently, Stephen Hawking, Cambridge University's well known mathematics professor, posed a question on Yahoo Answers on the internet: "In a world that is in chaos politically, socially, and environmentally, how can the human race sustain another 100 years?" Later, on his way to China to deliver a series of lectures, he stopped by Hong Kong where he seemed to answer his own question: The survivial of the human race depends on its ability to find new homes elsewhere in the universe because there's an increasing risk that a disaster will destroy Earth. This answer strikes me as bordering on escapism; in any event, it is a natural answer by a physical scientist. Back in 1988, Nobel prize winners held a conference in Paris, and a similar question was posed. Their answer: Follow Confucius's teachings. This answer is not only down-to-earth, it is also more engaging and much more constructive. It is perhaps another reason why Confucius Institutes are being built around the world to allow people to learn Chinese and be exposed to Confucius's teachings. According to AP (quoted in CNN.com today, 7/7/06), a posting on Yahoo Answers generally gets less than 10 answers; Hawking's question solicited over 17,000 responses by noon today. Were I to send in a response, I would echo the Nobel laureates' sentiment by asking citizens of the world to follow Confucius's teachings.

China's record of inventions (#168; Topic I)

Kevin Phillips's important book, American Theocracy (#167), understandably, discusses China only tangentially. Still, when covering China, he is both realistic and reverential -- using such phrases as "as China has reemerged in the world economy" (p 360)-- not emerging, but reemerging. He also acknowledges China's leading role in inventions, quoting, approvingly, an article in Fortune (10/4/04): "History shows that inventiveness is firmly planted in China's DNA: gunpowder, rocketry, wheel-barrows, cast iron, compasses, paddle-wheel boats, block-printing, stirrups, papermaking and mechancial clocks -- all came from China, often centuries before they appeared in the West." (p 381) They are indeed so. (Robert Temple's Genius of China: 3000 Years of Science, Discovery, and Invention (1986) has a fuller coverage of China's inventiveness.) Phillips also mentions a website with "impressive petroleum-related references from the eleventh-century Mengxi Bitan volumes." (p 386) Well said. Indeed, today's Washington Post reports that the first train that connects Beijing and Tibet, with the segment from Qinhai to Lhasa operating at the world's highest elevation, which left Beijing on July 1, has safely arrived in Lhasa. Well done.

Kevin Phillips's Imagined Questions (#167; Topic Q)

Kevin Phillips, a well known political and economic commentator for the last quarter of a century in USA, has published another important, insightful, and thought-provoking book, American Theocracy: The Peril and Politics of Radical Religion, Oil, and Borrowed Money in the 21st Century (2006, 462 pages). He raised many "imagined" (Phillips's own word) questions -- questions that might be posed by an Asian fiancier or exporter, circa 2005: "Why don't the Americans take care of their industry and invest in it? Why do they dither over primitive and antiscientific religion? Why are their children so far behind our own students? Why can't they cut back on their foolish and unaffordable overconsumption of oil? How far can we -- should we -- support them?" (p 360). These are "imagined" questions in the sense that the questioner could have been an American financier in Manhanttan, circa 1919, with "they" referring to the Britons, and with the questioner "confident of [his/her] coming hour." I have no answers to these good questions; all I can do is to set up a new category Q (for queries) to receive these questions for the record.