Thu, Jan 20, 2000 page8

• Letters

  • • 
    • 
    • 

  As an American of Taiwanese descent, I was able to attend a formal function given by Stephen Chen (陳錫蕃), the ROC representative to the US, on Jan. 12 at the MIT club of Washington at the Twin Oaks residence (the former Embassy of the ROC). After the dinner, Chen went up to the podium and in front of a well educated audience espoused the KMT line of eventual unification with China for 45 minutes.

  What was particularly insulting was his denial, when asked by a guest, of the feelings of the native Taiwanese about unification with China. He flatly denied that there was such a group of people on Taiwan and instead tried to convince the audience that the term "native Taiwanese" should be used to refer to the aborigines.

  Not once in his 45 minutes did he used the term "Taiwan-ese." Instead he referred to the Taiwanese as the southern Fukien people, said that the people were all Chinese and that all the people on Taiwan speak beautiful Mandarin.

  I made comments to the contrary, yet his strategy was to deny that sentiments of Taiwanese identity existed.

  I think it was indeed insulting, to the well educated audience present and more so to the Taiwanese people on Taiwan, that this person should be representing Taiwan in the US.

  Not only does he promote the old line KMT policies that Taiwanese people do not exist and by doing so, denigrate the Taiwanese people, but his delivery of what Taiwan's policies are blur the difference between Taiwan and China to a point that is deleterious to the safety of Taiwan.

  Even his audience was confused as to what was the ROC, the PRC and what was the "Mainland."

  To promote Taiwan's views effectively to the international community, the government on Taiwan needs to send people who effectively represent the sentiments of the Taiwanese people, not someone who is living in the past, representing mainlander KMT views on how China-like Taiwan should be.

  E. Gene Deune (張怡正)
  

  Baltimore, Maryland

  Bumpy road to knowledge

  I have been very impressed by your recent coverage of Tibet and Tibetan issues. Your sympathy for the plight of the Tibetans, who have long suffered under the harsh rule of Chinese colonialism and imperialism is welcomed.

  I was also very interested to read a news story by Richard Erhlich ("Living with communism: Inside Tibet today," Jan. 17, Page 6). However, I noticed what might have been a cultural misunderstanding on the writer's part.

  I do not know whether or not the reporter understands Tibetan, or how familiar he is with Tibetan culture and Buddhist (especially Tibetan Buddhist) religious practices, but I am rather doubtful about something he implies (virtually says outright) in his article.

  He wrote: "Today, many young monks display half-inch-sized, scabbed bruises on their foreheads. When asked about a few vertical scabs on a Dre-prung Monastery monk's forehead, the robed young man nervously touched the gashes and replied sadly, `My teacher.'"

  Doing prostrations, in which the forehead touches (or if done quickly, hits with a little force) the ground is a practice common to all Buddhist traditions.

  In Mahayana forms of Buddhism especially, this is done sometimes thousands of times by the devout. Among Tibetan Buddhists, doing something on the order of 100,000 full-length (body stretched out flat on the ground) prostrations is considered a "preliminary" practice.

  These practices are assigned by one's teacher (thus, perhaps, one possible explanation of the answer, "My teacher").

  The doing of prostrations to create merit, purify bad karma and as a sort of meditative exercise is also very common in Chinese Buddhism as practiced here in Taiwan. Often young, devout practictioneers will develop a prominent and obvious bump, bruise or scab in the middle of their foreheads as a result of this practice. Some wear it as a sort of badge of honor. It is not uncommon among the young and devout here in Taiwan and Buddhism is far more pervasive in Tibet.

  Being struck on the forehead doesn't make much sense as an explanation for such marks. It would be very difficult to strike someone in the middle of the forehead without hurting his or her eyes or nose. One would expect many bruises over the forehead and face, not just one bruise or scab in just one place.

  One bruise in one place is, however, exactly the sort of mark created by many forceful prostrations. Also, if one strikes someone else with a stick or some such thing as punishment or out of anger, it is more likely to be on the back, the top of the head, on the shoulders, or on the behind, not the middle of the forehead.

  Anyway, you have been doing a generally very good job reporting on Tibet. I would just admonish you to guard against sloppiness, or you may become as bad as CNN, where big-name mega-star reporters, who, however, appear to be fairly clueless, report on occurances in countries they are not familiar with, using interpreters who may or may not be reliable.

  Half of reporting in a foreign culture is knowing enough of the cultural background to know what questions to ask, what questions are unneces-sary, how to interpret any answers one may get and how to pursue them.

  George Lytle
  

  Yonghe, Taipei County

  We care about street signs

  According to a recent letter by Bunjay Su (Letters, Jan. 14, Page 12), about 99 percent of Taiwanese won't care if street signs are written using the PRC's Hanyu Pinyin. We think Su has neglected the influence of street signs as a language landscape.

  Su may not care, but we do. In addition, there are 14 city or county mayors and a number of legislators who care and have rejected the idea of using Hanyu Pinyin.

  Being Taiwanese rather than Chinese, we would like to support the article "Romanization must strike a balance" (Jan. 9, Page 8) since it stressed the need for the internalization and national autonomy for Taiwan's romanization solution.

  Taiwan is an sovereign country; we should have our own romanization system. Many friends reject using "zh," "q," or "x" for their their last names, such as "許xu," "邱qiu," or "詹zhan," because all the world knows these are typical symbols used by the PRC.

  If we use China's Hanyu Pinyin, foreigners may be confused and think Taiwan is just a part of the PRC. We believe Taiwan's Tongyong Pinyin maintains a consistency with other Taiwanese mother tongues and is also compatible with Hanyu Pinyin.

  Ngo Diang-ling (吳長能)
  

  President, Taiwanese
  

  Promotion Association (台語文推展協會)
  

  Ong Siong-Ding (王松亭)
  

  President, Si-giann
  

  Taiwanese Magazine (時行台灣文月刊雜誌).
• Most Popular

  • 1

    Chinese influencer’s residency revoked

  • 2

    Nuggets snap Warriors’ winning streak

  • 3

    Lee wins silver at All England Open

  • 4

    SPEAK UP: Kylie Minogue & Kenshi Yonezu to rock Taiwan (2/2) 凱莉米諾、米津玄師襲台（下）

  • 5

    US bill to address Taiwan with real name introduced