In a recent letter to the editor, a reader complained of what she described as the ?lastic surgery?of grafting Christmas onto Taiwan's quasi-cultural and commercial landscape, in a grotesque form of ?uperficial internationalization?
Oh, the horror. But for the sake of argument, let's put look at this from another perspective.
While such a portrayal of Taiwan's sycophantic following of ?hristian?western countries in their ritualistic celebrations of the birth of Christ is on the mark, in many ways can it not be said that Taiwan's peculiarity is little different from the distortions of Christmas by the same cultures Taiwan is copying?
How different, after all, is Hello Kitty under the mistletoe than kids in North America lining up at shopping malls to see Santa Claus? Or, say, a bevy of ?-phone?women pushing cellulars on TV than a Barbie that comes complete with a sock to hang above the fireplace?
Christmas as we know it at the end of the 20th century is, after all, little more than a mongrel mix of tradition and business that to a large part of the world's population has become the year's best excuse to take a couple of days off, max out the credit card and, later, suffer the most severe rum-and-eggnog induced hangover of the year.
All this when, in other, quieter places, there are those worshipping the birth of their Lord.
But Christmas, in the public sense, has become an institution of what this writer would describe as hedonism. We spend. We enjoy. We think of fun. And we are surrounded ?besieged, assaulted ?by Christmas in all its horrible reality, whether on TV, on the side of the bus, in elevators, on the internet, regardless of virtually everywhere in what many choose to call the ?ivilized world?
And there, I dare say, is the rub. While Taiwan may manifest the ?vil?of consumer Christmas in ways some readers find odd, even blasphemous, one only has to pay a visit to Japan or China to see similar scenes of what, to the untrained and culture-shocked eye, may seem a little over the top. Like the unending fusion of the Christmas tradition with Hello Kitty.
Consider, however, were the bastardization began.
Take Santa Claus. Everyone likes Santa, but where did he spring from? Saint Nicholas ?Bishop Nicholas, to be exact, of Smyrna ?or Izmir, in what is modern-day Turkey. He lived, according to one version, in the 4th century AD, was rich and was full of kindness and generosity to children.
The same history reads: ?ne discovers that Santa Claus as we know him is a combination of many different legends and mythical creatures.?P>
He later became, among other things, the patron saint of both children and seafarers, was called ?er Weinachtsmann?is parts of Germany and, as many of us know, Father Christmas in England.
The name, Santa Claus ?as well as the roly-poly figure and zany outfit ?appears to have come to North America via the Dutch tradition of ?inter Claus?in the 17th century, while the name ?t. A Claus first appeared in 1773.
But where, in this history, does Father Christmas get off stealing the thunder from Mary, Joseph of Nazareth and Jesus in Bethlehem, with his bribes for children that have supposedly been good all year?
Who gave Santa the right to dilute the peace of the nativity with his larger-than-average girth and the irresistible need to squeeze his fat butt down people's chimneys in the middle of the night so he can litter the place with cookie crumbs and milk stains on the carpet?
The answer is simple: it has been the evolution of tradition, for better or worse.
Let's be frank, then ?if we're going to start to think about what Christmas is really supposed to be about in our disposable bubble of the late 1990's, then you'll know that most kids are not thinking about the little baby Jesus and the significance of the coming of the Messiah while squirming in their seats at Midnight Mass on the evening of the 24th; no, they're thinking about whether Santa will give them a Pokemon action figure set or, even better, the newest version of Cyber Nuke Bonecrusher Meltdown: Version Six with the Triple Death Instant Replay.
They're thinking of a 21st century Santa.
This is what much of North American society has as a visible role model ?largely the model for Taiwan's Christmas ?to hand down to future generations. And this is in a society imbibed in the rich Christian traditions of yore, where despite the distortions of non-Christian traditions, the faithful do still worship the birth of Christ.
Now, take away the anchor of religious belief and tradition and what you are left with is the ?ther?Christmas ?of merriment, giving of gifts and Santa at the mall ?not to mention the ubiquitous Kitty.
In the same breath, let's remember that it's not just Santa that doles out the free stuff. It's you and me and everyone else. That, of course, goes back to the Three Wise men ?according to some histories. Still others will tell us that the giving of gifts goes back 4,000 years to the Mesopotamians.
As a matter of fact, one version has it that the whole idea of a ?elebration?of Christmas was taboo to the early Christians, who preferred a solemn occasion to mark the date. The celebratory element was added later only to be able to compete with the mirth of pagan celebrations.
The point of giving ?as opposed to receiving ?is in the Christian spirit of generosity, we are taught, an important element in the Christmas ritual.
But my instincts tell me that hauling the kids to the mall on the afternoon of the 24th, armed with piggy banks and debit accounts, was not quite what the good lord had in mind. The three wise men would quite likely have marched right back to the stable, grabbed their gifts and sold them in Jerusalem if they had known all this was going to happen.
It can be argued that part of the problem is that Christmas should never have been made the subject of focus groups and fourth-quarter projections. But this is modern society.
And in this regard, Taiwan is no different. It's all just a furthering of ?radition.?P>
Merry Christmas.
Or, as one greeting card spotted recently in Taipei pointed out: ?erry Christmad!?P>
James A. Mitchell is the News Section Chief of the
Taipei Times.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then