Unveiling the Dark Side: The Surprising Downfalls of Blind Patriotism That Demand Our Attention

January 26th. July 4th. October 1st. 

What do all these dates have in common?

 

Right. These are the national days (or Independence Day, for some of you) for Australia, America, and China. It’s a special holiday that’s recognised nationwide as people gather to celebrate their country together. Visiting America, I remember 4th of July fireworks and parades being a common spectacle, whereas in Australia it’s more common to just hang out with family and friends for a barbeque or by the beach (or both!). In China, millions participate in government-organised festivities, with music and festivities running late into the night.

And the point?

 

Why, to ‘put aside our differences’ of course, and rejoice in how great our country is, how much it’s done for us, how much its people sacrificed for us to get here! The opportunities it affords us, the resources we’re blessed with, isn’t it great to be here, isn’t our country the best?

 

 

"But why?” you might ask, and fair enough. Allow me to direct your attention to e. e. cummings, famous American poet known for his innovative style and controversial poems. His pacifistic sentiment overflowed into him writing about dangers of blind patriotism, revealing the close link between patriotic fervour to the ignition of war. His short, yet renowned poem “next to of course god america i” clearly conveys these ideas.

 

Nationalism and Exclusion

 

The poem opens with a dramatic monologue by the poet’s persona, a patriotic American man. The tone of his grandiose speech is quickly set the moment he refers to America as “land of the pilgrims”, effectively erasing centuries of the land’s history prior to British settlement when America used to be inhabited and, in a sense, ‘owned’ by the native Americans. This is further supported by his clear disinterest for the country’s heritage, stating “centuries come and go”, noting they “are no more”, and callously, “what of it”. This lack of acknowledgement shows a disregard for the land’s original inhabitants, revealing the speaker’s ignorance towards the true history of his beloved country. Maybe, just maybe, his “love” for America isn’t quite as deep as he believes…

Unfortunately, this isn’t uncommon. This type of behaviour has been observed throughout history, when colonisation was widespread and accepted. Upon arrival, colonialists often alienated the Indigenous people of a land, seeing them as ‘uncivilised’ and ‘brutish’. The superiority complex they had led to attempts at eradication of local customs and traditions in the name of ‘re-education’ and ‘civilisation’ which, sadly, were often successful. Oftentimes, a loss of Indigenous lives were commonplace, in the name of a ‘better future’. In Australia, we saw a loss of over 10 thousand Aboriginal Australian lives, cutting down at least half of the Aboriginal tribes that once existed.

 

Conflict and Aggression

 

Speaking of which, let’s talk about the more tangible effects of extremist patriotism. Often, we see extreme patriots morph from taking pride in their country to antagonising someone else’s due to a difference in ideals. This leads to some… unfortunate consequences, ranging from minor things like family disputes to more radical cases like threats of war directed at other countries. Cummings highlights this when his persona rapidly tangents from a patriotic ode to glorifying the horrors of war, saying “what could be more beautiful than these heroic happy dead”. 

 

CLEARLY something has gone awry in this man’s brain. Here, “these” seem to refer to soldiers. Coupled with traits of heroism and happiness, these are attributes that were often presented and highlighted in jingoistic propaganda. The jarring contrast of “dead” is disconcerting, to say the least. The fact that he seems to think of the death of people - his own people! - as something “beautiful”? Pretty messed up. Yet during the 1910s, the sentiment was commonplace, and often celebrated, though expressed more tactfully. Cummings essentialises it in an effective protest to how truly horrific war is, forcing his readers to consider the consequences that come with.

 

Aside from pointing out the brutality of war, Cummings goes a step further and illustrates the graphic violence in it, depicting the brutal death of millions of soldiers. The speaker glorifies it, describing them as those who “rushed like lions to the roaring slaughter”. The majestic nature of the animal likens soldiers as fierce, heroic, brave men, “roaring” with fearsome strength; yet cruel reality sets in as they’re inevitably slaughtered in the end. The intent here was clearly not to glorify, but to vilify the speaker and highlight the absurdity of the situation. 

 

Let me make one thing clear: there is NOTHING glorious about war. Thousands of lives are lost, the land itself gets damaged, families get torn apart. Soldiers are forced to face all of this and more daily: seeing their superior misuse their power causing innocents to suffer, see their friends suffer in anguish during their last moments, enduring harsh conditions unable to focus on anything but survival. It’s a living nightmare. And for what? For the sake of a political scuffle, a display of military prowess, to satiate a leader’s lust for wealth and power. A lifelong pacifist himself, Cummings mocks them, reminding them of what war fundamentally entails: nothing more than death and destruction.

                                                                             =========

 

As usual, I just want to end with my closing thoughts. (Maybe I started that a bit earlier already, oops-) Anyway, I just want to clarify: I don’t believe there’s anything innately wrong with patriotism. Being proud of your country and national identity is normal and results in unity stemming from a joint national identity. However, it's crucial to strike a balance between patriotism and critical awareness. Taken to extremes, nationalistic pride blinds us to the challenges and imperfections our countries face.

 

The only thing we can do is to recognise that no nation is perfect. Acknowledging our faults is first step towards inciting change, and with time, our joint efforts will be rewarded: with a better, more compassionate, and inclusive society for us all. 

In Defence of Song

Was he really that bad?

How does the son of a prostitute come to be an opera singer playing female roles, a spy for the Chinese Communist Party and the wife of a French diplomat, all while under the pretence he's a submissive Chinese woman?

History of Crossdressing in Chinese Literature

Crossdressing has been a core part of Chinese entertainment for millennia, dating back to 400AD in the original Ballad of Mulan, the poem that inspired Disney's 1998 interpretation. In this fable, much like the Disney adaptation, Mulan disguises herself as a man to take her father's place in the army, none of her comrades suspecting she was a woman the entire time. The final stanzas of the poem conclude with:

Most people tell the gender of a rabbit by its movement: 

The male runs quickly, while the female often keeps her eyes shut. 

But when the two rabbit run side by side, 

Can you really discern whether I am a he or a she?

When dressed as a woman, assumed to be a woman and presenting in every way to be as feminine as possible, how could Gallimard be any the wiser? To Gallimard, his bias prevented him from seeing Song as anything but his submissive, female butterfly. M. Butterfly subverts this traditional tale, where instead, a man must disguise himself as a woman to serve his country.

"One, because when he finally met his fantasy woman, he wanted more than anything to believe that she was, in fact, a woman. And second, I am and Oriental. And being an Oriental, I could never be completely a man." - Song

"General Shang is a little bit too hot for an animated character" - Ms James 

Gallimard was too caught up in his Orientalist fantasies to even consider Song a man, his blatant confirmation bias preventing him from seeing what was directly in-front of him. It was not until Song strips naked in-front of Gallimard in the courtroom, dissolving the fantasy instantaneously, allowing Gallimard to see what Song was all along - "Just a man."

Crossdressing in Chinese Opera

Crossdressing also has a unique significance in Chinese opera from the "Golden Age" of Chinese theatre, the Yuan Dynasty (1271-1368), in which female actresses had lead roles (dan) on stage, often crossdressing to play male roles. In the Ming (1368-1644) and Qing (1644-1911) periods, private troupes maintained by the gentry and public theatres commonly featured crossdressing, predominantly female theatres. Male cross-dressing was monopolized by men during the late Qing period, and saw the fetishization of a cross-gendered body into an object of composite desires and taboos. Song, as a male actor who played female roles was an object of this fetishization and upheld traditional ideas of Chinese Opera.

Androgyny in Chinese Literature

Zuyan Zhou's theory of androgyny in Chinese literature plays a significant role in M. Butterfly, represented best in Song. As defined by Zhou, the notion of androgyny is defined as the characteristic or capacity of a person to embody both feminine and masculine traits. Androgyny is a common trope in Chinese literature, featuring archetypes such as the woman warrior or the effeminate romantic hero. In some cultures, it is valued as ideal, particularly as an approximation to a mythical state of harmonious unity. The Zhuangzian notion of cosmic chaos (hundun) preserves this mythos, whereas the central tradition of Confucianism constructed gender in the binary separation of yin and yang, feminine and masculine. Confucian thought eventually overtook these Zhuangzian notions, and the superiority of the masculine yang is prevalent in modern China.

Yin and Yang, Feminine and Masculine

As yang came to signify superiority or centrality, such as the emperor, a minister was symbolically assigned a yin position, despite his male sex. In late Ming and early Qing literature (1600-1750), ignored or marginalized officials often assumed the feminine persona of the neglected concubine, a yin trope, particularly during political crisis or illegitimate government. The period from 1600-1750 featured significant factional strife, as many political elites were estranged from power. Marginalized men tended to identify with representations and images of femininity. 

From this we can see that Song embodied the Confucian theory of the yin position, assuming the subservient, feminine persona, to fool Gallimard, promoting him to the yang position. This fuels Gallimard's Orientalist ego, and affirms his feelings of superiority over Song. This dynamic is also seen between Song and Comrade Chin. who despite being a female, assumes the dominant yang position over Song. Song is subjugated as an actor, a man and as a servant to the Chinese Communist Party, assuming a subservient. submissive role in all aspects of his life.

The Chinese Female Identity

"What passes for a woman in modern China." - Song

Well Song, what does pass for a woman in modern China? Clearly you do. The identity of a woman in China has been completely reversed, where a biological female like Comrade Chin is more masculine and dominant than Song, a biological man. The androgyny of these two characters shows how in times of political crisis, such as the rule of the Chinese Communist Party, or the Ming and Qing eras, traditional gender roles are disregarded entirely. Their political environment has caused Chin to assume masculine traits and Song to assume feminine traits to survive.

And so as we reach the end of the play, we reach the end of Gallimard's life. In the final scene of the play, the gender roles have been reversed once again. Song exits in a suit and as a man, and Gallimard exits by his own hand, wearing Geisha attire and as Madame Butterfly This is the final reference to Madama Butterfly, and Gallimard is cemented as the feminine half of his relationship with Song. Gallimard now assumes the feminine, yin role, killing himself for Song, who has finally adopted the masculine yang role.

Final words to Song Lilling

A powerful figure in M. Butterfly, and a more powerful representation of crossdressing culture and gender roles and identities in China, whilst also providing a scathing critique of Orientalist fantasies and ideas held by the West. That's quite a full sentence, but it goes to show how significant of a character Song is, which is why, he is the true hero of M. Butterfly. (joke) 

But honestly, I get how Gallimard could've been tricked.

Making America 'M Butterfly' Again

January 20, 2019

Earlier this year, I had the chance to go and see the one and only M Butterfly on Broadway. (Read about it here!) 

No longer the audience of 1988, you could argue that the once-explosive reveal of Song’s gender no longer holds the same significance in our more genderfluid society today – so it’s promising to see how David Henry Hwang has rewritten M. Butterfly to better suit our current context.

It got me thinking, though – if that part of our world has changed since the original M Butterfly, then what other aspects still apply today? 

Life Cycle of a Butterfly
Is M Butterfly Still Relevant Today?

In M Butterfly, Hwang brought to light the disturbing parallels between male chauvinism and Western attitudes towards the East – and indeed, nearly all non-Western societies. In a world where China is a global powerhouse, and society is multifaceted and multicultural, it’s easy to assume that we’ve moved past the patronising attitude that Gallimard – who represents the Western world – held towards both Asian people and Asian countries as a whole, treating them as inferior, weak and submissive.

Alas, it's not that simple. Unfortunately, that dynamic hasn’t dissipated over time, instead taking on a different form – a caterpillar breaking out of the chrysalis, if you will. Trump’s foreign policy is a tangible embodiment of the quote from M Butterfly: 

| Orientals will always submit to a greater force.

When Rene Gallimard tells supervisor Toulon this, he characterises the Asian people as lacking self-determination, instead being submissive and willing to be dominated by a greater force – the West. By creating this dichotomy of supposedly inherent domination and inferiority, which historically has been present in the dynamic between men and women, he frames the question of international relations with the East in gendered terms. This hegemony stems from his delusions superimposed over the reality of his relationship with the 'Perfect Woman': opera singer and Chinese spy Song Liling. Gallimard is mediocre in every way, with an uninspiring life and career, but as soon as the opportunity arises, he self-inserts himself into the role of wretched American sailor Pinkerton in the opera Madama Butterfly. He believes, as a white man, it is his right to possess and exploit his beautiful and mysterious lover – Song Liling, Butterfly. The dominance he asserts over Song throughout M Butterfly to affirm his own masculinity parallels his approach to international relations in the Vietnam War.

This sentiment finds a near-perfect reflection in Trump’s aggressive foreign policy approach, which assumes he can simply beat Eastern and second and third-world countries into submission through aggression and coercion – be it through trade sanctions, embargoes or military action. It reflects a set of dangerous assumptions that frankly, I believe can only lead to a society where we all live with a sense of dystopian fear of those in power.

It’s the trade sanctions as soon as someone steps outside of what Trump himself deems ‘acceptable’. The blatant Islamophobia. The plans to build a wall to keep out 'Mexican criminals'. The racist assumption that China can only become more powerful than the West if they don’t ‘play fair’.

Trump believes that the most effective way of dealing with supposed 'enemies' is applying what is considered to be traditionally masculine force until they submit – and so, more than 30 years on from when the play was first conceived, we still see international relations being played by the gender handbook.

It’s just as Song says: 

| The West thinks of itself as masculine — big guns, big industry, big money – so the East is feminine – weak, delicate poor.

These qualities – describing America, France and the rest of the Western world – may have been Hwang’s words from over 30 years ago, but is it really any different from today? These attributes of strength, economic prowess and military might – did they not form the entire basis of Trump's presidential campaign? America continues to be such a performatively masculine culture, and Trump sits in the centre of it all.

From Butterfly to Fire-Breathing Caterpillar
China's Changing Role in the Eyes of America

We have two stereotypes for the Asian woman: the 'Lotus Blossom' – also known as the 'Butterfly', the 'Geisha Girl', or the 'China Doll' – and the 'Dragon Lady', with both stemming from different roles played by actress Anna May Wong, the first Asian film star of the 1920s.

Song takes on the role of the Butterfly, drawing intertextually from Puccini's opera Madama Butterfly. A fragile, delicate thing, existing in the wild for an ephemeral moment before being pinned to a cushion under a glass pane to be shown off. The Lotus Blossom – pure, unblemished and virginal – which of course means to the dominant male that they’re ripe for the taking. It's a symbol of meekness and submissiveness – the eponymous Butterfly of opera Madama Butterfly, Cio-Cio-San, was the embodiment of these qualities: demure, and willing to suffer almost any punishment doled out at the hands of Pinkerton. This romanticised stereotype serves to discredit Asian cultures by portraying them as submissive and existing solely for exploitation and objectification.

On the other hand, the Dragon Lady is portrayed as being strong, but domineering and untrustworthy, relying on deceit to overpower the male hero. She's alluring and exotic, of course, but at the end of the day, she doesn't play fair.

Sound familiar? Well, Trump certainly seems to think so.

The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) November 6, 2012

Complete absurdity of this statement aside – no matter what identity non-Western nations take on, they will always be looked down upon by the West. Hwang talks about this neocolonialist notion in his afterword to M Butterfly: 

| Good natives "serve the Whites"... while "bad natives rebel".

China, in its attempts to secure a more stable role in our world's economy and politics, has ultimately ended up in a very similar position of disrespect from America, evolving from the Butterfly to the Dragon Lady – never quite escaping the cycle. 

Unfurling Our Wings
How can we escape from the cycle?

If Trump were to sit down with a copy of M Butterfly, all he would come away with is that – 

China has caused great damage to the United States and the rest of the World!

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) July 6, 2020

We can do one better, though. First of all, we need to make an effort to welcome and support those of Asian, Muslim, Latinx and other cultural heritages within our very own country. They represent the diverse cultures of the world, but above all, they're Americans too. It wouldn't hurt to vote out the policymakers and leaders who spew this hateful rhetoric in the first place, too.

Word count: 1090

____________________________________________

RISHITA SARKAR is an avid reader, student activist, and harmonica player. She is currently pursuing a double degree in Literary Studies and Political Science at ABC University.

💯trending    ⚘    Posted on Jun 7, 2023

Song Liling Is A Sassy Queer Icon, And You Can't Tell Me Otherwise

Dressing as the perfect oriental woman to seduce a French diplomat into giving up classified information? Yass Queen, slay the house boots down !!

by Annika Carleton 

Male opera performer, who cross-dressed to perform women’s roles, Song Liling masqueraded as a woman to gain access to French diplomat Rene Gallimard. Song’s understanding of the white mans psyche allows her to manipulate Gallimard through her presentation of the fantastical, “perfect”, Oriental woman. Once discovered and faced with punishment for treason, Song admits his attraction and desire for Gallimard to love him for his true self, only for Gallimard to reject him in favour of his fantasy woman. That said, Song is still a sassy queen, serving realness and slaying the house boots down! Here are 6 quotes that prove Song Liling is a FIERCE kween serving looks, spilling tea and casting shade :

1. Reading Gallimard For Filth During Their First Meeting

Gurl, the library is open and Gallimard is on the reading list ! Song not only sets the record straight about where she stands on the East vs West concept, but establishes the construction of the Oriental as a fantasy. As a concept, Orientalism is based on the ambiguous “East” being the antithesis to the West,, but it’s generalisation and stereotyping creates an entirely different entity, thus the unreality of the “Orient”. By extension, the idea of the submissive Oriental woman is also a fantasy, of which Song shreds to bits by race and gender bending the premise of the Opera on which the play is loosely based, Puccini's Madame Butterfly. So sweet Jesus what a read this is, really digging in on Gallimard's delusionality, what a slay !!

GALLIMARD: Of her death. It’s a ... a pure sacrifice. He’s unworthy, but what can she do? She loves him ... so much. It’s a very beautiful story.

SONG: Well, yes, to a Westerner.

GALLIMARD: Excuse me?

SONG: It’s one of your favorite fantasies, isn’t it? The submissive Oriental woman and the cruel white man.

GALLIMARD: Well, I didn’t quite mean ...

SONG: Consider it this way: what would you say
if a blonde homecoming queen fell in love with a short Japanese businessman? He treats her cruelly, then goes home for three years, during which time she prays to his picture and turns down marriage from a young Kennedy. Then, when she learns he has remarried, she kills herself. Now, I believe you would consider this girl to be a deranged idiot, correct? But because it’s an Oriental who kills herself for a Westerner—ah!—you find it beautiful.

Silence. 

2. Casting Some MAJOR Shade When Gallimard Asks to See Her Naked (because that's a major boundary cross babe !!)

GALLIMARD: I want to see you ... naked.

Silence.

SONG: I thought you understood my modesty. So you want me to—what— strip? Like a big cowboy girl? Shiny pasties on my breasts? Shall I fling my kimono over my head and yell “ya-hoo” in the process? I thought you respected my shame!

GALLIMARD: I believe you gave me your shame many years ago.

SONG: Yes—and it is just like a white devil to use it against me. I can’t believe it. I thought myself so repulsed by the passive Oriental and the cruel white man. Now I see—we are always most revolted by the things hidden within us.

It is all tea, no shade right to the face here, with song going for the jugular after Gallimard oversteps some solid-ass boundaries. Sure, Song’s motive was basically just to keep her cover intact, but that is some excellent mental imagery being evoked there. Juxtaposing the image of the meek, subservient oriental woman with that of the obnoxious western girl to further establish the cognitive dissonance between east and West? Sick’ning!! And the way it messes with Gallimard’s head as he grapples with his own delusionality?? Literally Gagging !!

3. About to confess to Gallimard ? Yass Queen live your truth !!

SONG: You know I have to. You know I will. And anyway, what difference does it make? No matter what your eyes tell you, you can’t ignore the truth. You already know too much.

Gallimard exits. Song turns to us.

SONG: The change I’m going to make requires about five minutes. So I thought you might want to take this opportunity to stretch your legs, enjoy a drink, or listen to the musicians. I’ll be here, when you return, right where you left me.

Song goes to a mirror in front of which is a wash basin of water. She starts to remove her makeup as stagelights go to half and houselights come up.

Breaking the fourth wall here, with a fantabulous truth-telling and baring of soul. Further establishing Gallimard's situation of delusion/fantasy, Song establishes the tension of her reality that she is a man dressing as a woman for the purpose of espionage, which is a super brave choice for her context, and we love her for it. This also further explore the comparison of fantasy and reality which is an underlying theme of the text. Werk it queen !!

4. Clapping Back at a Judge Asking All The Wrong Questions.

Blunt and to the point ! Go off queen, serving realness and casting shade. My Shade-Ar is beeping wildly over the amount of dusted fierceness emanating from Song. She slays the runway in putting a nosey judge in her place and laying the foundation for the tension of the final third of the play. Asking the audience to question their understanding of what is sexuality and intimacy, this section of dialogue showcases Song masculine tendencies. Brutal, blunt honesty that gets straight to the point is an almost uniquely masculine trait, as girls are often socialised to put others comfort and needs before their own, often moderating their conversations to suit. Song fails to do this, often slipping into less carefully curated language that reveals her manhood. This slipping of the mask lays the foundation for the later idea that Song was simply a woman created by a man, therefore perfectly suiting a mans desires. 

JUDGE: But surely, he must’ve ... how can I put this?

SONG: Put it however you like. I’m not shy. He must’ve felt around?

JUDGE: Mmmmm.

SONG: Not really. I did all the work. He just laid back. Of course we did enjoy more ... complete union, and I suppose he might have wondered why I was always on my stomach, but.... But what you’re thinking is. “Of course a wrist must’ve brushed ... a hand hit ... over twenty years!” Yeah. Well, Your Honor, it was my job to make him think I was a woman. And chew on this: it wasn’t all that hard. See, my mother was a prostitute along the Bundt before the Revolution. And, uh, I think it’s fair to say she learned a few things about Western men. So I borrowed her knowledge. In service to my country.

5. His 2 Rules For Deceiving White Men

SONG: Basically, “Her mouth says no, but her eyes say yes.” The West thinks of itself as masculine—big guns, big industry, big money—so the East is feminine—weak, delicate, poor ... but good at art, and full of inscrutable wisdom—the feminine mystique. Her mouth says no, but her eyes say yes. The West believes the East, deep down, wants to be dominated—because a woman can’t think for herself.

JUDGE: What does this have to do with my question?

SONG: You expect Oriental countries to submit to your guns, and you expect Oriental women to be submissive to your men. That’s why you say they make the best wives.

JUDGE: But why would that make it possible for you to fool Monsieur

Gallimard? Please—get to the point.

SONG: One, because when he finally met his fantasy woman, he wanted more than anything to believe that she was, in fact, a woman. And second, I am an Oriental. And being an Oriental, I could never be completely a man.

Pause.

JUDGE: Your armchair political theory is tenuous, Monsieur Song.

SONG: You think so? That’s why you’ll lose in all your dealings with the East.

Bye, girl, bye !! This take sums up the intersection of race and gender specifically in the sphere of the east and femininity, being both perceived as voluntarily submissive whether that is reality or not. And Song keeps it real here, calling out both the West and the Patriarchy and the ways in which they coexist and inform each other. Her line "I am an Oriental. And being an Oriental, I could never be completely a man." is all tea, all shade in pointing out the similarities of oppression, and somewhat justifying her behaviour in front of the court, challenging the dominant idea that homosexuality is a perversion. In this court scene she slays the runway, and her dramatic exit, ooohh sashay away queen !

6. Gaslighting, Gatekeeping, Girlbossing. Getting Gallimard to Go for Him. 

 

Song holds out his arm to Gallimard.

SONG: It’s the same skin you’ve worshiped for years. Touch it.

GALLIMARD: Yes, it does feel the same.

SONG: Now—close your eyes. 

Song covers Gallimard’s eyes with one hand. With the other, Song draws Gallimard’s hand up to his face. Gallimard, like a blind man, lets his hands run over Song’s face.

GALLIMARD: This skin, I remember. The curve of her face, the softness of her cheek, her hair against the back of my hand ...

SONG: I’m your Butterfly. Under the robes, beneath everything, it was always me. Now, open your eyes and admit it—you adore me. (He removes his hand from Gallimard’s eyes)

GALLIMARD: You, who knew every inch of my desires—how could you, of all people, have made such a mistake?

SONG: What?

GALLIMARD: You showed me your true self. When all I loved was the lie. A perfect lie, which you let fall to the ground—and now, it’s old and soiled.

SONG: So—you never really loved me? Only when I was playing a part?

GALLIMARD: I’m a man who loved a woman created by a man. Everything else—simply falls short.

No tea no shade here, but this final scene is on point !! Slayed the house boots down !! Living her truth, Song shows Gallimard the reality, that he is the same person underneath, only for him to be so stuck on his fantasy woman that he refuses to accept it, and retreats to his dreams. Busted behaviour IMO, but we can clock his underlying gayness in Gallimard's desire to be loved. Admittedly, Song isn't necessarily sassy here, but she is raw, real and fierce, attributes I can respect in a queen. This penultimate scene explores sexuality in a way that supersedes gender and challenges traditional ideas of love between a man and a woman, and how love is defined by biology. In this case, love is defined by a delusional fantasy on Gallimard's part, and potentially on Song's too. 

Ultimately, Songs sass, fierceness and realness makes her a queer icon, and her dialogue is used within the play to present the reality of issues of race, gender, and their intersection through her blunt delivery of such lines. Sharp wit and manipulative humour are strengths of hers, making her my queer icon for the foreseeable future. Until next time queens, stay fierce !!

"Big Guns, Big Money": Gallimard's Infatuation with Orientalism

Here I am again, talking about fragile male egos for the HUNDREDTH time.

We're talking about David Henry Hwang's play M. Butterfly (1988). You guys know I love a good romance, and Hwang is SERVING. We're introduced to the imperialist fantasy of prisoner Rene Gallimard and the 'Perfect Woman' Song Liling, who is revealed to be:

 

drumroll...

·       a spy for the Chinese government

·       a man masquerading as a woman

·       a man who faked a pregnancy

·       and the list goes on.

 

But that's not even the worst part. He fooled him for TWENTY years. I mean, countries fall in that amount of time.

 

But most importantly, the play explores some deeply rooted cultural stereotypes. For example, the ways in which Western media intentionally paints the 'East' as feminine and the 'West' as masculine. It's kind of like dragging down your friend to make yourself seem important. You know those toxic friendships? It's like that. But add some sauce.

Anyways, brace yourselves, because we're going straight into the theory.

1. Let's talk about Orientalism

 

Hwang is a KING, and his play does not upset. He is the voice that us marginalised Asian voices needed. Basically, Hwang exposes how rampant Orientalism is in American society. If you didn't know, Orientalism represents the Orient as inferior and subservient. On the other hand, it represents Occidental people as heroic and dominant. Kind of like this TikTok - Click HERE!

 

2. Song is a #Queen

 

This is where things get interesting. Song has to act as a woman to get information from Gallimard. But that brings the question, how exactly does one simply become a convincing woman?

  

Apparently, there IS a step-by-step method. Allow me to introduce you to Judith Butler. A revolutionary theorist who invented gender performativity, she argued that the gendered identity is not based off biological differences, but instead, is a product of culture. So by adopting traits that our culture deems to be feminine, Song achieves his goal of tricking Gallimard. 

Yes, It's conniving. Yes, it's deceitful. But honestly? #Queen. 

But enough explanation. Let's get into the good analysis stuff.

 

3. Gallimard is a thirsty old man

Yes, Gallimard is a wimp, and that's why he is so easily manipulated by Song. But it's also due to the fact that Song characterises Butterfly in the way that a Western man would see an Oriental woman. 

When Song tells Gallimard that:

 

“A small, frightened heart beats too quickly. Monsieur Gallimard, I’m a Chinese girl."

 

Obviously, we know that Song is acting. But Gallimard doesn't know that. So the characterisation of Butterfly - modest, inexperienced, obedient - fits into Gallimard's perspective of how Oriental women SHOULD act. It's called dramatic irony, by the way. I mean, it's also kind of sickening. But it makes Gallimard feel more masculine, and more empowered, so he's shamelessly eating this up. 

At the same time, Song is enabling this. I mean, PLEASE. What's even more annoying is that Song even uses this whiny, pleading tone, so to Gallimard, it looks like he's got the upper hand in this power dynamic. He's even used the power of male authority to snag Butterfly as his lover, so he THINKS he is peaking in life.

Like, come on. Butterfly is probably Gallimard's wet dream. 

            

And sadly, it is because Gallimard wants, and needs, to buy into this illusion of identifying as a dominant and influential 'Western' man that people want him to be, that he has ended up this way.

 

4. AITA for being racist, colonialist and cheating on my wife?

 

Poor Gallimard, digging a hole deeper and deeper for himself. It's like those Greek tragedies, where hamartia causes the protagonist's downfall. Gallimard's tragic flaw is that he can't see things as it is, because he's blinded by the Orientalist mentality imposed on him by Western society. Sadly, Gallimard is a product of his time and place. Like Song says:

 

“The West thinks of itself as masculine—big guns, big industry, big money—so the East is feminine—weak, delicate, poor ...”

Everything about the West is supposed to be BIG BIG BIG. But, too bad for the East, because that means that they get nothing. Like Song said, the East MUST be characterised as 'weak' and 'poor' so that the West can maintain their 'big-dick' status. A phallocentric and Eurocentric society? That's the dream. That's what's been drilled into Gallimard's mind since Day 1.

Obviously, I'm not trying to excuse Gallimard. If the word limit was 1000 more words extra, I would spend all of it dissing Gallimard. But at the same time, he's really just a minion in a powerful ideological structure that has forced him to be this way.

 

5. Men are always correct

 

You've probably heard on Instagram or TikTok the phrase, "People believe what they want to believe." It's called confirmation bias, and it's the reason that Gallimard was so quick to believe Song's persona. 

Or, in Song's words, 

"Rule One is: Men always believe what they want to hear.”

Pretty good advice, in my opinion. 

However it's equally dark. The egotistical and narcissistic representation of men that 'always believe what they want to hear' exposes some harsh truths about the superiority of men within the patriarchy. And it's ironic, because historically, women have been the victims of mansplaining. We get TOLD what rules we have to follow. But Hwang switches it around in this satirical kind of way, so it looks like a man is telling a man what to do. Although, either way, we get a man dictating things anyways, so that suggests that maybe we haven't progressed that much after all.

6. Finally, some good character development

But then, we finally see that Gallimard isn't just stupidly following the rules of society. Gallimard ACTUALLY courageously rebels against the oppressive homosexual stigmas and racial stereotypes of society, by symbolically donning Song's kimono and wig in the final scene of the play. He says:

 

“Love warped my judgment, blinded my eyes, rearranged the very lines on my face... until I could look in the mirror and see nothing but... a woman.” 

 

...A woman? Really?

Yes, really. It's a metaphor, though, because Gallimard doesn't actually identify as a woman. He hasn't actually been 'blinded,' either. But the woman in the mirror acts as a synecdoche for Gallimard's change of heart. It's a turning point in the plot, because Gallimard FINALLY acknowledges that his Orientalist perspective actually messed things up for him. So congratulations to Gallimard, for finally breaking away from the mould of the stereotypical 'Western' man.

   

7. What now?

I guess I've blabbed enough about dear Gallimard and his fantasy wife. Dear readers and queens, after reading this play, I believe that it's time to demand a re-examination of how politics, imperialism and orientalism can destroy even the closest relationships between people.

Sidney