Lighting the flame: favourites, dark horses, and no-hopers
Let’s consider that most important of ceremonial and symbolic moments - the lighting of the Olympic flame by the final torchbearer. It’s a moment full of meaning and passion. But who should have this honour? Who could Beijing choose to best embody China’s hopes for the Games, to best symbolize China’s regard in the international community, to best represent Chinese culture and history? Can one person achieve all these things? Here’s my shortlist:
Liu Xiang. One of the favourites and China’s big hope to get the flags waving and the anthem playing in the stadium; a reigning Olympic champion and worthy of consideration.
For: my students assure me that he can sing as well as jump.
Against: arguably a bit of a prima-donna and not so recognisable to a wider audience.
Yao Ming. China’s vertically gifted NBA star is another leading contender and comes across as a people’s man with an image recognisable the world over.
For: will have no problem reaching over the rim of the cauldron and has proven more reliable than other Chinese exports.
Against: has developed a tendency to fracture lower extremities under pressure.
Liu and Yao are the hot favourites, but what about the chances of the old guard?
Mao Zedong. An interesting ‘dark horse’. This could be China’s chance to stun the world with its advances in cryogenic technology.
For: everyone knows that lovely smile and history tells us he has a 70% chance of getting it right on the night.
Against: as Icarus discovered, when wax gets too close to something hot there can be disastrous consequences.
His Holiness the Dalai Lama. A rank outsider. Although still very much alive, reliable sources indicate he has less chance than either a Japanese revisionist or the aforementioned Mao. After all, who wants a Nobel Peace Prize winner when we can see a brutal dictator in action?
For: Loved by everyone except China.
Against: Loved by everyone except China.
None of the candidates mentioned so far create enough of a spark for my liking. What about this man?
Hu Jia. A no-hoper for Olympic flame duties, but more deserving of the honour than any mentioned above. A true winner in life.
For: he’s presently incarcerated and could do with stretching his legs.
Against: he’s too good, too selfless, too honest, too pleasant, too humble, and too hard-working in campaigning for the rights of the disadvantaged, the dying, and the dispossessed. Clearly not the sort of person China wants as a symbol of the nation.
Did I miss anyone?
Updated to say that the wise men of Beijing have decided to jail Hu for three and a half years - an unjustified, undeserved, petty, senseless sentence. Hu Jia should be held up as an example of how far human rights have come in China, not a victim of its suppression. I suspect this will turn out to be a regrettable move, and not just for Hu himself.
March 29th, 2008 at 8:58 am
Awesome post. As much as I’d love to start my Olympic watching with a melting Mao, you hit the money with Hu Jia being most deserving… (and most imprisoned - funny that).
March 29th, 2008 at 2:24 pm
Thanks, Ryan.
I’ve been trying not to bug you lately, but prepare yourself for plugin questions
March 30th, 2008 at 2:39 am
I’m Pepe Barrera’s mother in law. He forwads me all your mails. It has taken me too long to write to you to say that I enjoy greatly reading you. You are old enough to know what to do, but let me dare tell you I wish you would be a writer: I almost salivate when your mail arrives, reading you is an intense pleasure! I’m happy you are so gifted and wish you success with this blog and happiness in your life. (As I am french, my english is…well, comme ci, comme ça).
March 30th, 2008 at 3:48 am
Hi Brigitte,
Thanks for visiting my site. As soon as my hotmail account becomes accessible again, I’ll send you an email.
You are too kind. If you check some of the links on this page you will find writers who are really gifted.
April 26th, 2008 at 8:42 pm
I am doing a personal research about Dalai Lama. Here is part of my collected material.
(To avoid any debates on references, I use only wikipedia, news report from the west, and his own biography.)
Is Dalai Lama really the re-incarnated Tulkus, sort of god? (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalai_Lama)
??
I’m not willing to start a religious war. However, as a political figure, he deserves a careful examination on his personal identity. Furthermore, this question is important because:
1) he is the de facto political leader of the Tibet-In-Exile Gov, and his authority is largely based on his holy position.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tenzin_Gyatso) if he is a god, it is simply pointless to against him by any means.
2) he changed his political attitude towards chinese gov. couple times, including a short period of honeymoon with chinese communist party leaders, (”I had the opportunity to meet and develop a personal friendship with many senior leaders, including Chairman Mao himself. ” see his recent An Appeal to the Chinese People), and withdraws of his middle way suggestions twice after his famous speech. it’s acceptable as a political figure but not a god or an honest monk. (it’s hard to google out the reference on this one, maybe you can contribute! )
3) he had a close relationship with Aum Shinrikyo, the group gained international notoriety in 1995, when it carried out a Sarin gas attack in the Tokyo subways. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aum_Shinrikyo, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shoko_Asahara) if he is a god or religious figure, did he make mistakes on Shoko Asahara?
????
More about His Holiness, and to be fair on the man, he does appear to bring to the world a general message of peace, although in my eyes the message does not necessarily require explicitly brought upon by anybody. What I feel really, after some extensive research about his public talks (i paid more attention to his talks irrelevant to china-tibet issue), is that he is not quite the person that he is so often cracked up to be - he certainly doesn’t have the political and moral integrity of another Martin Luther King. He’s no Ghandi either.
??
Two examples:
In September 2003, the Dalai Lama said that the U.S.-led war in Afghanistan may have been justified to win a larger peace, but that it was too soon to judge whether the Iraq war was warranted. “I think history will tell,” he said in an interview with The Associated Press, just after he met with President Bush.
??
“In principle, I always believe nonviolence is the right thing, and nonviolent method is in the long run more effective,” he said, but some wars, including the Korean War and World War II, helped “protect the rest of civilization, democracy.” He said he saw a similar result in Afghanistan - “perhaps some kind of liberation.”
(source http://hawaii.indymedia.org/news/200…20_comment.php)
??
A year later, in November 2004, he visited Stanford University where he addressed (for a price of course - tickets didn’t come cheaply) a large audience on the subject, which the Stanford Review reported on as follows:
??
“On the subject of the Iraq war, the Dalai Lama presented a relatively consequentialist view. ‘It is still too early to say whether it is right or wrong. I think another few years, then we’ll see, then history will show whether this war was really justified, because it brought a good result. So, up until now, I think difficult to say. At least the motivation, to bring democracy, freedom, and that goal is right, a right goal.’”
(see http://www.stanfordreview.org/Archiv…ws/news2.shtml)
There are some other materials about his Voodoo practices and the consequences, including the death of Mao Zedong (Dalai Lama made some vague suggestion that its His Voodoo practices killed Mao, see his biography), and the death of Deng Xiaoping, and the death of his follower Lobsang Gyatso.