m******1
发帖数: 19713 | 1 【 以下文字转载自 WaterWorld 讨论区 】
发信人: ye88 (ye88), 信区: WaterWorld
标 题: 转一个American Born Chinese写的关于Jimmy kimmel 事件的看法
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Nov 3 23:44:40 2013, 美东)
今天一个朋友转过来的， 很长的英文， 不知道大家有没有兴趣看看。
Jimmy Kimmel - kill everyone in China
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of Jimmy Kimmel’s lines transcribed from the video by me
“kill everyone in China? okay that’s an interesting idea…again.”
“you’re saying build a wall in China? a huge big great kind of a wall?”
“that will never happen”
“when you owe someone money, should you pay them back”
“but then they won’t lend you money anymore”
“should this country be forced to pay OUR own debts?”
-response: YES
“but you just said kill everyone in china a while ago…what happened to
that?”
“should we allow the Chinese to live?”
“well this has been an interesting edition of kids table: the lord of the
flies edition (LAUGHTER) I’d like to thank my correspondents ___….”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello everyone, I am an American-born Chinese male and it has come to my
attention that a recent Jimmy Kimmel video has become the subject of much
controversy.
I’m here to give the Chinese community another (contrasting) perspective on
this issue, except this time it’s coming from someone who has lived in the
United States for his entire life, and I hope it allows everyone to have a
more balanced discussion.
First, the current consensus about Jimmy Kimmel’s position is that he is
completely guilty of slandering the Chinese people and that his comments in
the video were horrifically unjustified. From the point of view of someone
who is familiar with American culture, this consensus seems unfounded for
a few reasons. These following
arguments will take the video at face value and will not consider his
occupation or background as an American.
First is that when Jimmy Kimmel said that the child’s idea was “
interesting”, it doesn't necessarily mean that he’s actively supporting it
. The full definition of interesting as defined by Merriam Webster is “
holding the attention”. This means that JK did not actively voice support
for this suggested policy. It simply means that it attracted his attention
which could also mean that he finds it particularly surprising that a child
could possibly come up with such a cruel solution. A common argument that
has arisen is that JK shouldn't have even aired such slander; however, he
traps the child in a contradiction by leading him into the conclusion that
the United States should in fact pay their debts. He clearly and loudly asks
if “this country should be forced to pay…” after he makes it clear that
people should pay off their debts, and shows that since paying the debt is
obviously the morally correct choice, that the child’s argument of killing
the Chinese is fundamentally wrong both logically and morally when he asks:
“but you just said kill everyone in China a while ago… what happened to
that?”. In addition, the line “should we allow the Chinese to live?” is a
question, which means that it carries no opinion forward.
Second, the most important part of the show that I believe truly
contextualizes and casts JK in a completely different light is his comment
that the show was “the lord of the flies edition” of kid’s table. This
remark was immediately followed by a laugh track, marking it as clearly
understandable by the majority of the United States and making sure that it
is acknowledged by the audience. What a vast amount a lot of people may not
have is the experience of reading British author William Golding’s novel:
The Lord Of The Flies. The Lord of the Flies is a book that centers around
describing the human condition with a complete lack of constraints. The
story is about a group of boys who are stranded on a deserted island. At
first, they attempt to recreate a civilized society much like the one that
they’d left behind, but it quickly breaks down and they are reduced to
savagery. A critique on the true nature of humans, it describes the natural
human as nasty, vile, and brutal. The boys end up killing each other and
destruction prevails. An understanding of JK’s reference to the Lord of The
Flies is imperative to any discussion about JK’s message to the audience
because it shows that he believes that the children’s comments were much
like the behavior exhibited by the savage boys on the deserted island. This
means that JK truly does NOT believe that Chinese people deserve to be
killed, as he does end up portraying these kids as morally wrong.
Even though these lines of the video are crucial to his message, the media
outlets are skewing the general consensus about him. After inputting the
keywords “Jimmy Kimmel China” and clicking on the first link which is
provided below, I read an article that took his lines completely out of
context and even lies about the order! Here’s the excerpt from the article:
"America owes China a lot of money, $1.3 trillion," Kimmel told the children
. "How should we pay them back?"
"Shoot cannons all the way over and kill everyone in China," the boy said.
"Kill everyone in China? OK, that's an interesting idea," Kimmel said, then
asked the group, "Should we allow the Chinese to live?"
While one boy said, "No," most of the children said, "Yes," CNN said.
Now if you do a quick comparison of THAT article and the full catalog of
everything JK actually said in the video, you’ll find a few differences.
Differences that make all the difference when mulling over his innocence/
guilt.
The article completely fails to include the two major dialog that I spoke
about in the paragraph above, and the article also falsely places the blame
on JK for making the choice to air the segment. Since Jimmy Kimmel’s
occupation is clearly being an actor, it makes sense to come to the
conclusion that the person choosing what airs on TV is probably not the
actor, but other employees who are responsible for editing and scheduling
time-slots on TV. I have provided the excerpt below.
“LOS ANGELES, Nov. 1 (UPI) -- TV talk show host Jimmy Kimmel apologized to
the Chinese and Chinese-American communities for airing a little boy's
bloodthirsty remarks about attacking China.”
The media’s portrayal of JK has twisted the story and I believe that this
is very problematic because it’s giving the Chinese people a false cause to
rally behind. I am able to understand the entire
video’s cultural references so I’m assuming that most other Americans will
also come to some of the same conclusions that I came to. Even though I do
believe that the intent is noble, there is a problem because this isn't the
right rallying point.
Another view that could easily pardon JK is the fact that this "kid's table"
episode centered around the United State's debt crisis and possible ways to
solve it. The use of China as the country in question was done not because
JK is racist, but because it's a statement of fact to say that the United
States owes China a tremendous amount of money. The comments that he makes
are NOT racially charged as he doesn't stereotype any particular race at all
. In fact, the "killing" is a question of debtors and creditors i.e. "kill
the people we owe money to", not "kill Chinese people because they're bad".
He makes no racist argument like： “Chinese people are violent people". The
statements in the video make the country in question completely arbitrary,
which is another way to show that JK was not racist.
Now, let’s pretend that JK did in fact “agree” to the policy of killing
China’s people. I think it’s a valid argument to say that for most Chinese
people protesting, the first JK video they ever watched was the video in
question. I have actually been watching JK for years and I’m very familiar
with “Kid’s table”. Kid’s table is not meant to take kids seriously. In
fact, he intends for people to just have a nice laugh about the naivety and
the wide variety of dispositions that kids can display. If he were to “
agree” to the policy he would be doing his comical act and just playing
along for the laughs. In no way would JK actually take a child’s word and
legitimately try to send the message that the kid speaks the absolute truth.
Comedians by nature are also “offensive” in the United States, and the
Chinese community’s reaction is completely different than the reactions of
other races which may make this recent Chinese movement look bad because
American people have already come to accept the fact that comedy is a break
from reality and not to be taken seriously. American comedians are already
accustomed to poking fun at sensitive topics like: abortion, or gay rights.
The material of these comedians may seem extremely
offensive to some, but the nature of their job is to not be taken seriously
. This means that the recent protests could in fact backfire on the Chinese
and make the rest of the nation believe that the Chinese are over-reacting
to a trivial issue.
PART TWO:
Now let’s pretend that Jimmy Kimmel himself said: “yes that is a very good
idea”. I believe that the Chinese community that is calling for more out
of him (he has already apologized) is going way too far. He shouldn’t be
fired because this would have been a first offense, and he would have been
ignorant to any cultural norms he’d been infringing upon. He has already
issued a full, public apology and trying to inflict more suffering upon his
life would just be beating a dead horse with a stick. Instead, the Chinese
community would do better by showing itself as calm, and understanding that
all humans are fallible. From my point of view, it looks as if the movement
has moved from a political statement to a witch-hunt.
Here’s what I believe to be a better solution to the current situation:
First, calling for the punishment of someone who wronged someone because of
racial prejudices. Sound familiar? That’s because it was a significant
rallying point for the African American community during the recent Trayvon
Martin trials. The problem is that the “solution” was an attack on the
result of the problem. The better solution would have been going for the
source of the problem as these protests on isolated, publicized incidents
don’t actually provide the proper avenue to a successful change. If JK is
fired, so what? The Chinese people do not take a step forward because the
real problem was the boy who suggested the policy in the first place. His
ignorance made him say that cruel statement on television and JK being fired
has absolutely no affect on today’s racist youth. The only way for the
community to overcome this racism is to have today’s population be educated
on the true nature of the Chinese people and why we deserve the same
recognition as human beings. This would solve for the root problem of racism
as not only would the child have not made that comment at all, but it
becomes a more universal band-aid to all future wrongs too in that it helps
prevent future problems from arising. What I think the Chinese people should
be rallying for is reform of the US public education system to include the
labors of the Chinese people in its curriculum, because I also believe that
without a doubt that the child’s suggestion to kill all the Chinese people
was horrifically inexcusable and should never have happened. Currently, it
is mandatory for public schools to teach about the Japanese internment camps
that imprisoned Japanese-Americans during WWII. This teaching curbs the
racism that could occur as a result of WWII as it humanizes them and shows
the American public that they are also people with their own lives. I think
that including more information about the hard work of China’s immigrants
would definitely increase the respect and recognition for the current
population of China living in the United States and overseas.
Finally, I’d like to pre-empt some arguments that people might have
POLITICIANS ARE SAYING THAT HE SHOULD BE FIRED:
politicians are primarily motivated by the vote, so citing them as a
credible source for a compelling reason to do bad things to Jimmy Kimmel
doesn’t make sense because their public actions are all carefully
calculated for the best possible public reaction.
COMEDY SHOULD HAVE LIMITS. COMEDIANS HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY NOT TO SAY THESE
KINDS OF THINGS:
if comedy cannot offend anyone, then no medium for entertainment could ever
exist as there’s always going to be at least one minority group that is
offended by the medium. If you’ve read Fahrenheit 451, Captain Beatty tells
Guy Montag that all the reading and mediums for expression were banned
because everything offended at least one minority.
HIS APOLOGY WASN'T SINCERE
What is he supposed to do then? either A: he doesn't apologize which makes
everyone angry, or B：he apologizes and everyone claims that he's not
speaking the truth
Thanks you for your time, and I hope you’ll be able to understand and
consider my point of view |
|
