By IPS Correspondents
BEIJING, Feb 9 2007 (IPS)

As the government completes a modernisation project begun more than a century ago, tensions simmer over the usefulness of such enduring icons of Chinese national identity as the fire-breathing dragon.

In recent months reformers, waging war with purists, have argued that China would be better off dropping the dragon as the national symbol because it could be projecting an image of China as an aggressive, ascending power.

They have also attacked China’s ancient healing arts, denouncing them as pseudo science and calling for traditional medicine to be stripped of its protected status in the Chinese constitution.

All these battles have galvanised opinion and provoked debates among the public around one question – should Western standards be adopted when it comes to national symbols and cultural heritage?

In the dragon debate that unfolded late last year, a professor of philosophy in Shanghai kicked up a public storm when he suggested that because of the Western perception of the dragon as a destructive monster, China should modify its national symbol.

”It may lead people who know little about Chinese culture to have a negative impression of the country,” the ‘Shanghai Morning Post’ quoted Wu Youfu of the Shanghai International Studies University.

Many young Chinese admit that their image of the dragon is somewhat influenced by Western perceptions of the mythical beast as evil and aggressive -not in the least because the author J.K. Rowling’s popular Harry Potter series revolves around the young wizard and hero’s constant battles with the winged, scaly fire-breather.

Older Chinese see dragons as benevolent creatures. In the past the Chinese prayed to the dragon for rain and evoked its power in times of adversity.

While in the West celebrations during May fairs often feature mummers’ plays, enacting the mutilation and killing of dragons, in the East the creatures command respect. Chinese festivals are never complete without dragon boat races or dragon dances.

”The dragon in Chinese system of values has a totally different meaning than in the West,” says scholar Jiang Lei. ”It signifies righteousness, it brings peace and harmony. It is a thoroughly auspicious symbol.”

Clashing cultural perceptions aside, there are also those like the academic Bi Yong and his followers who support the idea of ousting the dragon as the national symbol because of its connotation of imperial power. At a time when China is rebuilding its international image as a peace-loving world player, the dragon could be projecting the wrong image, they argue.

But pollsters and commentators have roundly condemned the idea. Some 90 percent of the 100,000 respondents at the portal sina.com said the dragon should continue to be a synonym for China.

”If the ogre Shrek can become a famous and beloved image in the United States, I think our country could also do something to demonstrate the Chinese understanding of dragons around the world,” Yu Guomin, professor of journalism at the People’s University told the Xinhua news agency.

Western perspectives and Western scientific theories played an even bigger part in a recent storm that engulfed Chinese traditional medicine.

Supporters of China’s ancient medicinal system that goes back 2,000 years were outraged by an online campaign which denounced the practice as backward and unsafe and called for obligatory Western training for traditional doctors.

Unlike Western medicine which treats the disease itself, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) aspires to get to the root of the problem by focusing on perceived deficiencies. It uses herbal medicines, acupuncture and massages to provide what its adherents believe to be a more holistic treatment.

Yet detractors like Zhang Gongyao, university professor at Changsha, central China, have attacked the practice not only as useless but also dangerous because of its use of untested concoctions that can cause powerful side-effects. They have suggested that Chinese hospitals prescribe only western medicine.

Traditionalists have responded by reminding Zhang that criticism of Chinese traditional medicine as unscientific goes back to the Republican era when China embraced Western science as the norm.

”To accuse TCM as ‘unscientific’ is inappropriate because ‘science’ is a concept of the West and we can’t use it to judge something so radically different as traditional medicine,” says Zhao Tingyang, researcher of philosophy at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. ”TCM aims to treat the person not merely some part of his body.”

Traditionalists have also pointed at the increasing popularity of TCM in Western countries where its holistic approach has been favourably contrasted to the perceived utilitarian nature of Western healthcare.

One example cited is Britain where failures of the National Health System are routinely exposed and criticised in the press. The country has the biggest TCM presence in Europe. In London alone there are about 700 stores selling Chinese traditional medicine.

After raging for several months the controversy over the fate of TCM left the realm of cyberspace and became a matter of official concern with central authorities stepping in to support the traditional healing arts.

At a government convened conference on TCM in January, Vice-Premier Wu Yi pledged Beijing’s support for the beleaguered system, saying its teachings would be included in textbooks for primary and middle schools. China is also putting forward an application for TCM to be included in the United Nations list of the world’s intangible cultural heritage, she stressed.

Yet, the end of the Middle Kingdom’s medicine wars is hardly the end of the country’s continuing struggle to balance tradition and modernity. Other storms are gathering including one that threatens to engulf the modern Chinese language.

A mainland scholar has just published a manifesto calling for no less than a return to classical standards. Tang Yi, an etymologist, decries the current state of the Mandarin language as vulgarised and divorced from its cultural traditions.

Interestingly, the calls for reform come at a time when the central government is promoting Chinese language and culture as part of a ‘soft power charm offensive’ through Confucian Institutes set up around the world.

Excerpt: