As the Umbrella Movement in Hong Kong unravels, it is hard for me not to draw parallel between this event and the 1989 Tiananmen protests. Many aspects have been put forward for compare and contrast, but this process of characterizing would not be uniformly comprehended, if the associated contexts were not mentioned. The context in which both incidents occur, is an appropriate kairos (Miller & Shepherd) for life narratives in transit (Whitlock) to flourish. The contextual discrepancy between Beijing 1989 and Hong Kong 2014 is obviously wide, but I would concentrate on the aesthetic context of various symbolisms presented throughout; so as to emphasize the mobility of narratives attached to these symbols.
The symbol of the struggle in 1989 is the Goddess of Democracy. The statue built by students from the Central Academy of Fine Arts, is declared by its creators as: “the symbol of every student in the Square, of the hearts of millions of people…” (Han). However, it is interesting to note that the arts students tried to not model this sculpture after the American Statue of Liberty, as the public assumes through its visuals. They actually borrows inspiration from the Soviet Worker and Kolkhoz Woman by Vera Mukhinahan. As already being carefully designed with consideration of different set of arts (Western Roman classical art vs. propaganda socialist realism art), the Goddess of Democracy is even implemented with local identity. Specifically through her purely Asian facial complexion while wearing a stola – the traditional gourmet of Roman women; the image that is considered standard in Western classical art. The fluidity of aesthetics around the world within a singular work exposes a lot about contemporary China in 1989. For instance, it was the longing for global knowledge of university students (or the intellectuals as a whole) post-Cultural-Revolution era that led to the exigence of political/social reform. And eventually resulted in the “watershed” – June 4 incident: “the turning point that ended the idealism and experimentation of the 1980s.”
Stories have been told through some artistic aspects of this symbolic statue. Indeed, the Goddess of Democracy in transit moves across cultures and strata of aesthetics, to express the Chinese people’s ultimate spirit for freedom and justice. She also travels across physical boundaries to prove the interdependencies that foster global awareness, as well as a sense of understanding among people (Whitlock). Not to mention the inspiration being forwarded, once again, across the timeline to Hong Kong 2014.
“…On the day when real democracy and freedom come to China, we must erect another Goddess of Democracy here in the Square, monumental, towering, and permanent. We have strong faith that that day will come at last. We have still another hope: Chinese people, arise! Erect the statue of the Goddess of Democracy in your millions of hearts! Long live the people! Long live freedom! Long live democracy!”
– Declaration of the creators.
Further reading on Hong Kong 2014’s symbol
Meanwhile, at UBC:
Hi Henry, the connections you made between the events happening in Hong Kong recently and in China in 1989 were really through provoking. I liked how you analyzed the Goddess of Democracy as a symbol for what the Chinese believed in; the search for global knowledge. What’s amazing is that the Goddess of Democracy at UBC carried a yellow umbrella in support of the Umbrella Revolution. It’s interesting how in 1989, countries were less globalized and it was harder for successful revolutions to occur. While in 2014, students at UBC can contribute to the conversation happening around the world. Globalization can indeed facilitate cross-cultural interactions and transcend the boundaries of time and space. I would like to pose a question in response: what are the impacts that ideas that move across cultures have on their destinations? Are they always positive?