周黎明 (Raymond Zhou's bilingual blog) 用中文写娱评，用英文写时评

龙能代表中国吗？上海外国语大学书记的担心并没有错，倒是某些媒体哗众取宠的姿态破坏了正常的讨论，比如用“专家竟然建议”这样的字眼。

我并不同意这位专家的意见，而且我也是从实用主义的角度来考虑这个问题。

这是我本周《中国日报》专栏的题目，但因为篇幅所限，报纸上做了较大删节，以下是全文。

Is the dragon too fearsome a symbol for China?
By Raymond Zhou

After the suggestion from an academician made the press, a hot debate ensued. Online it has been more of a wholesale denunciation than a real debate.

When Guangming Daily interviewed Wu Youfu, the Party secretary of the Shanghai International Studies University, he talked in great length about the implicit hazards of having the dragon as China's national symbol. However, when tabloids picked up the story, it turned into headlines such as "Some scholars even suggested retiring the dragon" etc, with more than a whiff of discontentment in the tone. It's like: How dare you think of such an abominable thing as forsaking our ancestry?

This was not the first time I've seen market-driven newspapers disguising commentaries as news reports. Evoking unpatriotic implications is the surest way to enhance one's own image of political correctness and at the same time selling papers. But it pollutes the air of free and open discourse.

Why can't someone versed in cross-culture point out the disparate understandings of one special image that carries layers of meaning throughout our civilization?

Remember the days when China produced a toothpaste named "Fangfang" and tried to sell it overseas? Someone like Professor Wu could have come along and told them that no English-speaking consumer would buy a product that could turn their teeth into fangs.

A symbol like the dragon exists for two purposes: One is to exemplify our collective traits, and the other is for other people to understand us as such. If what they may perceive differs from what we want to project, the symbol would have failed on at least one of the accounts.

Professor Wu was not putting down centuries-old Chinese heritage, but making it relevant to the age of globalization, when China is rising fast on the world stage and cares a lot about how it is seen by others.

That said, I'm not a supporter of his proposal. And like Wu, I'm approaching it from a technical rather than emotional point of view.

The usefulness of the mythical animal outlasts any potential drawback. In essence, the dragon is like a school mascot, like the UCLA Bruins or the Drexel Dragons. But once it carries the history of 7,000 years and represents 22 per cent of the world's population, tinkering becomes impractical. On the other hand, if a school had chosen a wrong pet, it could easily make a switch.
Under such circumstances, it would be more practicable to reshape perception rather than the image itself. True, when Westerners conjure up the dragon, it's likely to be this fiery beast of destruction. But don't forget, when we Chinese think of a mouse, it is this annoying creature that nibbles into our food bags and spreads disease. Walt Disney single-handedly transformed it into a cute thing that can sing and dance to our delight.

Changes are already on the way. In countries such as the United States, dragon boat racing and the dragon dance are making inroads from Chinatown into the mainstream. From my observation, even kids are not scared.

The dragon in the West is not evoking reactions similar to those towards the carnivorous dinosaur, as feared, but more a feeling of apathy. It is not as awe-inspiring as the dinosaur, and certainly not as beloved as the panda. Despite mythological tales such as the Ring of the Nibelung, it has not been a favorite with the masters of re-imagining in Hollywood.

That is both a minus and a plus because it leaves plenty of room for perception retooling. If the mouse can be other than sneaky, the pig other than dirty and the bald eagle other than predatory, which are all rooted in the Chinese consciousness but are being refashioned right in front of our eyes, I don't see why the dragon cannot be friendly, peace-loving or full of humour and charm as depicted in Disney's Mulan.

The real problem with the dragon, as I see it, is its close association with imperial power, which is reinforced every night through television soap operas. When people were willing to kill millions for access to the "dragon seat,"  it will instill something into the psyches of our children, something not congruent with the growth of our nation.

So, the first step to the image overhaul is to take the dragon off the throne and make it a little more egalitarian.