In the beginning scene when Cindy's brother is telling us of his dreams to go to high school, we are saddened when his father tells him they can not afford it. However, before this scene, we are told by the child that he feels his family lives and eats well, and that he feels fortunate. We therefore don't really believe or sympathize with the father because, from our understanding, they might really have some money saved for school. At this point, we still can not fully understand the struggle of their family because the perspective comes from an unreliable narrator.
This is why I found myself to be more enlightened during the scene when Cindy's parents argue over what lies in her future, and how they will tell her. I found this scene to be so real in it's dialogue because it is the first time we understand that it truly is difficult for the parents to send Cindy away to work. You can understand that they want what is best for their children, but because of the flooding and lack of money, they have no other choice. They have worked their entire lives for the betterment of their children's lives, but the sad truth is that they will unlikely escape their poverty.
This is why I found myself becoming much more aware of the author's purpose in this scene. He is not only trying to show the struggle of some Chinese citizens, but also the inevitability of their fate.
Another scene where I became more aware of the author's purpose was when the Chinese bar tender on the cruise ship was talking to wealthy German teens. As an American who has traveled outside of the United States, this scene really spoke to me. When traveling to another country, tourists don't often understand the real differences between worker and the tourist. This became very obvious in this bar scene because the German teens were the exact same age as the bar tender but likely have no idea of the differences in their wealth and upbringing. The tourists sat back and enjoyed luxury while someone at the exact same stage in their life was serving drinks and washing dishes to support their family. I feel this is exactly the message Yung Chang wanted to portray in this film.
I thought that Taryn’s comment about her initial lack of sympathy for Cindy’s father and how this later changed was very poignant. I also felt this way. This is evidence of the cultural construction of the audience that views to the film and how Chang manipulates and shifts this.
ReplyDelete“We always make sense of texts on the basis of our intertextual knowledge, and without relevant literacies we will not be able to read a text effectively” (Schirato/Webb). Initially, the lack of understanding of the situation within Cindy’s family shows a lack of cultural understanding. The intended audience of this film is most likely educated and therefore probably finds the idea of not sending children to school appalling. But, then Chang reveals to us that although Cindy’s family eats well, because of this they do not have to money to send their children to high school. This decision between food and education is shocking to the viewer. It may even cause the viewer to question their own value of education in comparison to food.
This shocking shift of paradigms is repeated in the film. For example, when the crew is trained on the boat, they are taught how to deal with westerners. The apolitical and complimentary style of conversation that they are taught is revealing about the outside view of westerners. This may offend the more enlightened-feeling viewer but is also oddly familiar to those who have traveled, as Taryn pointed out. This makes the viewer more skeptical of not only the words of the crew members, but perhaps the words of the economic progressives of the country as a whole, a group that in a western capitalist society would likely be celebrated.
Chang attempts to change the cultural construction of the audience, so that they will be more open-minded and objective about his questioning of Chinese culture and its unyielding economic progress.