Edward Said introduced the world to Orientalism in 1978. He was one of the first intellectuals to provide the world with an in-depth analysis of how Western countries exert dominating influence on Asia, or ‘the Orient.’ His research paved the way to countless more fields of research into postcolonial studies. The scope of his research extended into branches of study that now can cross boundaries between cultures of the West and East, specifically
translation. Further inquiries into cultural translation studies and postcolonial translation research have been led by world renowned intellectuals: Gayatri Spivak, Tejaswini Niranjana, Susan Bassnett, Harish Trivedi, Vicente Rafael, Paul A. Cohen, among many, many more. This research intends to build upon the research and many accomplishments in this field to create another perspective, necessary and pertinent for the 21st century.
The speech given by Kishnore Mahbubani continues to reverberate in my mind. His statement about China and India being the largest economies in the world since year 1 to year 1820 jolted my realization regarding the brevity of Western global dominance. He also describes the inevitability of history’s longest running largest economies returning to their historical position atop the global economic structure.90 China has progressed remarkably over the last two decades. In a span of a few years, China climbed its way to the second largest economy, only behind the United States. The only other East Asian country to develop so rapidly was Japan
90 Kishore Mahbubani. “How the West Can Adapt to a Rising Asia.” YouTube, uploaded by TED, 6 Sep. 2019, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsJWs6Z6eNs
after its opening in the late 19th century; however, as we have seen throughout this research, the West and the United States in particular, are sensitive to threats to their established world order.
The figures and analyses of said figures work provide evidence for this fact. Each figure provides more insight into the ways the West represents China. The BBC has worked as a portal for translation in which we can see the deliberate use of language power dynamics. Within each iteration of the English BBC homepage, language has been used to protect what Vicente Rafael calls, “our way of life.” While not including himself in this equation, this ‘our way of life’ refers to the Western world order.
Current US relations with China have deteriorated to the point where Western media outlets have considered this a second Cold War. Although this point has been mentioned earlier in the research, the importance of this label merits a final analysis. The more rhetoric we see
surrounding US-China relations as pertaining to a ‘war,’ the more reasonable appropriate retaliation against the opposing party may seem. During the process of writing this thesis, the United States has closed China’s US consulate, threatened to remove international students, jailed members of the People’s Liberation Army under the pretext of spying against America, revoked Hong Kong’s special status with trade relations, amongst a slew of other symbolic decisions. As American aggression rages on, the media does its part to follow suit. The English stories continuing to report on stories which play to the favor of politicians and large
organizations in the United States, while the Chinese version consistently reports on the implications of such actions and provides information about the status of students, COVID-19, and discrimination.
The differences between English and Chinese content proves the lengths Western media goes to devalue the image of China. Just like the Cold War of the mid-20th century, this Cold War is
also being fought through proxy, through the channels of media and mistranslation. According to Vicente Rafael, language is being weaponized and “the ability to translate is deemed “an
essential war fighting skill…” Rafael goes so far to say that the very idea of learning “critical need” languages, such as Russian, Chinese, and Arabic, serve the sole purpose of protecting the United States and its beliefs. In this context, translation serves the needs of the State, not the need of sharing a culture and bringing two distinctly different parts of the world together. He brings forth four assumptions about American English in the realm of translation. (1) Language is a means for human control because it conveys ideas and intentions, (2) languages are
inherently unequal and are placed into a hierarchy where English reigns supreme “for conveying all things exceptionally American to the citizens of the country and the rest of the world,” (3) all languages should be reduced and assimilable into the American English lingua franca, (4) this reduction “is precisely the task of translation.” “Translation is pressed…to secure America’s borders even as it globalizes the nation’s influence.”91 These ideals have never been truer than during the Trump administration.
During his presidential campaign, Donald Trump’s premise was to “Make America Great Again.” These four words screamed for a reduction in globalization, reliance on international trade and labor, immigration, and strategic geopolitical ties. As the United States has continued down a path of 19th century and pre-WWII isolationism, the media entered its own campaign of placing non-western countries and cultures on the periphery. The twelve images from the BBC homepages and their subsequent analyses presented in this research provide evidence of this change. The conscious effort to relegate China to the periphery, the intention of creating an
91 Vicente L. Rafael. Motherless Tongues: The Insurgency of Language amid Wars of Translation. Duke University Press, Durham and London, 2016, p.102..
enemy due to fear of displacement, the increased aggression toward a country which, if amicable relations were established, could aid in the creation of a more advanced society, has been the goal of western media outlets for the past three years.
The novel coronavirus has also increased animosity between the United States and China.
Once the virus became a global pandemic, the Trump Administration wasted no time pointing figures at China. He decisively used language aimed at discriminating and marginalizing not only China, but Chinese Americans, as well. [Figure 18] even shows an image where trump as crossed out the word “corona” and replaced it with “Chinese.”
[figure 18] “Donald Trump renaming the coronavirus the ‘Chinese Virus.’ Google Images. Accessed 02 July 2020.
When this type of racist language toward, not only China, but the Chinese people in general, comes from the highest authority within a country, there is an obvious inherent bias within the
system. Fears of the unknown disease combined with the racist and xenophobic rhetoric in the media about wearing masks, the origins of the virus being a conspiracy concocted by China, the virus being a bioweapon, have had serious effects on Chinese Americans. There have been reports of American citizens of Asian descent, some not even of Chinese descent, being assaulted, beaten, and verbally abused.92 What if the national rhetoric were different? What if, instead of pointing fingers and playing games of tit for tat, the world’s largest economy could work together with the second? Perhaps the entire course of the virus may have been different.
Perhaps cases of coronavirus could have been softened around the world, especially in the United States. What if America spent more time believing in the dangers of the virus and less time slandering other countries for what was already inevitable? Perhaps more lives could have been saved and less discrimination experienced.
Clearly, the representations created through these translations and images have played an integral role in the forming of public opinion. As mentioned earlier, representations are the meanings we attached to symbolic messages around us. If countries continue to have an increased dependence on representations which demean cultures of varying backgrounds and simply play to their own self-interests, our world will continue to suffer from a pandemic of ignorance, misunderstanding, and misplaced presuppositions. This research has begun a dialogue – a realization – of the contested world view between two global powers, the United States and the Peoples Republic of China, and how the current dialogue between the countries continues to pull them apart, when it needs to bring them together.
92 Sabrina Tavernise and Richard A. Oppel Jr. “Spit On, Yelled at, Attacked: Chinese – Americans Fear for their Safety.” The New York Times, 23 March 2020.
By finding and analyzing patterned derogatory representations in English news media and comparing them with their Chinese counterparts, this research – with the foundation of postcolonial translation theory, historical analyses, translation and culture, cultural
representations, and signifying practices – has revealed the calculated steps with which Western media has taken in order to deliberately keep these two powers separate. If we are meant to learn from our past, then it is my hope that this research has started to reveal the language used during the years 2017 – 2020, a period where US and Chinese tensions have been at their highest for over a century with the US-China Trade War, Hong Kong Extradition Bill and the COVID-19 crisis, as a xenophobic power tactic.