Danse Macabre

    在北京奥运会开幕之时，媒体们——尤其是中国的——就开始猜测国际奥委会主席雅克·罗格会在闭幕式之时给予北京奥运会怎样的评价。罗格也表示，他的选择将会别具一格——果不其然，他兑现了自己的承诺，用一个"truly exceptional"给本次奥运画上句号。

    这就是所谓的惊喜？这就是所谓的与众不同？罗格是在玩文字游戏吗？因为exceptional是一个平常的不能在平常的评价了。不过，更让人感到不满的是我们CCTV的主持人“大腕们”，居然用“无与伦比”作为对等翻译，而次日的各大中文报纸也以“无与伦比”最为封面，这不仅是明摆着自欺欺人，同时也是误导普通群众。

     "Exceptional"=“无与伦比”？

    “无与伦比”在汉语词典里的意思是：“指实物非常完美，没有能跟它相比的。”“伦比”：类比、匹敌。出自韩愈的《论佛骨表》：“数千百年以来，未有伦比。”撇开罗格的用意不说，让我们再来看看exceptional的在人们普遍认可的几个较为权威“英英词典”里的释义：

    1. Merriam-Webster's Collegiate Dictionary.                 

       Main Entry: ex·cep·tion·al
       Function: adjective
       Date: 1787
       1 : forming an exception : RARE <an exceptional number of rainy days>
      2 : better than average : SUPERIOR <exceptional skill>
      3 : deviating from the norm: as a : having above or below average intelligence b : physically disabled

       从这个释义来看，丝毫没有“无与伦比”之意；

     2. Longman Dictionary of Contempory English

        ex‧cep‧tion‧al

"If you want war, so be it!" is a line from Jinyong's The Legend of the Condor Heroes, one of the most recognized Chinese Wuxia novels, when Genghis Khan prepares his ascending Mongolia for a war with the arrogant Khwarezm Empire. Genghis Khan easily crashed his enemy and went on to conquered the entire Central Asia. The rest is all history.

If anything, this line aptly captures the boiling sentiment currently engulfing China. Feeling embarrassed and humiliated in the Olympic torch relay by the West, the Chinese are venting their anger through the media and on the internet. The once subdued nationalism looks poised to burst at any minute. Some urltranationalists even call for a settlement with "those shameless saboteurs". Genghis Khan's messengers' beards were shaved--one of the deepest insult to them--before he decleared war on Khwarezm Empire; in China's case, she lost her face. While Mongolia was on its path to become one of the greatest empires at that time, the whole world is now talking about China's rise. The only difference: Mongolia had already had the intent to go to war, while China did not and still do not have it. But times change. Even if a major clash between major powers is beyond thinking today, a major incident such as the currently unfolding one may well prove to be a major cause to a major conflict tommorow. In fact, it will not be long before the secret antipathy between China and the West since the late Qing Dynasty develops into open antagonism.

As always, instead of helping defuse an already tense and fragile situation in Tibet, the media on both sides seems determined to fan the flame of the fire until--it caught themselves. What should have been a plain "cry wolf" story turned out to be all the more special. Normally, when something big happens in China, Chinese media will blame anyone other than the government, and its western counterpart will provide concrete evidence to point otherwise, and the public on both sides will tend to believe the latter. In time, after this pattern repeats itself for a number of times, Chinese media became a liar. Only this time around, when the Tibeten riots erupted, they switched their roles. Feeling fooled by the western media, the Chinese vociferouly questioned their credibility. However, blatant errors and falsafications in their reports are nothing to their mistake of equating "China" with "the Chinese government" and "its ruling Communist party". When the western media asked their leaders to boycott the Olympic Games hosted by "China" because of "China's" human records, and when they compared "China's" Olympic Games with Hitler's 1936 Games, proclaiming "China", not unlike Hitler, just wants to stage a pure showoff, it is those who have a connection with "China" that are insulted. Honestly, few would believe in the conspiracy theory that the western media are doing it intentionally, since it is an established tradition to identify the nation with its government. Well, on some occasions, one has to observe the subtlety these different terms can convey.

Olympic Games is a case in point, especially in China. Under most circustances, the public are indifferent to, say, whether you write "China" or "the Chinese government" in your reports, as the news has little bearing on their life or on their perception of themselves. But it's different now. After much fanfare and relentless propoganda, the majority of the Chinese people have come to identify themselves with the Games. So when the western media are questioning the suitability and qualification for China to host the game, they are in effect calling into doubt the ability of the Chinese, at least as perceived. Not only the national and personal pride, even the identity is at stake. At a time when nationalism is on the rise and is tightly controlled by the government, attacking the western media and bashing the West serve as a perfect venue. The media appear not to learn the lesson, or rather, choose to ingore it by reporting in a much unglamourous and often accusatory way. Well, to a certain extent, we have ourselves to blame, since the media are only catering to our needs. As readers and audience, what do we want to read and watch? A high-profile murder, a sex scandal, a riot, a tsunami...anything but mundane. Anything that is dramatic will attract our attention. A well-orchesrated prostest against the torch relay; a boycott of the opening ceremony by some bigwigs; and even a disruption to the game itself will be enough to catch eyeball.  A welcome line-up for the torch; patriotic students waving the national flags; and great Chinese enthusiasm for the Games. Why not feature them in the news? No, not because they are not real, but because they are so natural even to the Chinese. To borrow a journalism jargon, they are not newsworthy.

In truth, the above analysis may be only the simptoms, masking the real cause--the established powers' refusal to accept China into their club. Some say it's the unease caused by China's rise, as in a classic security dilemma case. Possibly. But more reasonably, it lies in the fact that China and the roughly-defined West are fundamentally incompatible, in the way of living, in the way of thinking, in the way of running their nations, in the perception of the world, and in nearly everything. The Olympic Games only highlighted these incompatibilies by the West's rejection of everything "China", unwittingly and unconcoiusly (maybe too ingrained in their consciousness to be manifest).As in the case of Japan in the late 1980s, the USA and the Western Europe were not alarmed by Japan's being stronger, but by the fact that they are of different kinds. The same holds true for China, only that Japan's power is no match for today's China: they are also different in kinds. While being constantly humiliated in the early years by his future enemies certainly strengthened Genghis Khan's determination and brutality, I see no reason why such a heavy slap in the face will not plant a similiar seed for China's coming clash with those democratic bullies.