Interview: Eliot Lipp talks electro
Weekendist: Cuisine festivals, creativity workshops, charities and more!
Extra! Extra! Police and prostitutes, journalists and propaganda departments, and kids and condoms
Around Shanghai: Malones, martinis and Moreno!
Olympic condoms are faster, higher, stronger
by Jeffrey Wasserstrom
One comment posted after my last contribution to this site was that, while my thoughts on rock music and Chinese politics were interesting, the piece lacked a clear enough statement of opinion to be called an “Opinionist” entry. I’m making sure this post on Shanghai 2010 won’t be open to the same charge by having it wear its thesis on its sleeve—or rather in its title.
English language publicity materials have used different phrases to describe the upcoming Shibohui (a term that can be translated equally well as international exhibition, world’s fair, global expo, and so forth). It has been dubbed an “Economic Olympics” or a “Technology Olympics,” for example, to encourage people to think of its as a sequel to the Beijing Games. Most frequently, it has been called simply the “2010 Expo,” the “Shanghai World Expo” or some variation on these phrases. It has also, less frequently, been referred to as “China’s First World’s Fair,” the “Shanghai World’s Fair,” and things of this sort. My thesis is that this last approach is the one to run with.
I say this despite (indeed partly because) I know that “World’s Fair” has a retro ring to it. I say it even though the BIE (Bureau International des Expositions), the organization that now oversees events in the lineage of global galas that goes back to the Crystal Palace Exhibition, likes to use “Expo” rather than “World’s Fair” to describe contemporary descendants of that 1851 granddaddy of all such extravaganzas.
I’ll offer five reasons to back up my thesis, but first two pieces of background information:
First, I’ve agreed to serve as an unpaid adviser to the BH & L Group. As a recent Shanghaiist piece noted, this organization hopes to get the nod to create a U.S. Pavilion for the event. I would favor calling the upcoming Shanghai event a “World’s Fair” rather than a “World Expo” even if this wasn’t the case, but I do think the rebranding would be particularly useful in encouraging American participation.
Second, what I have to say below grows out of the discussion of World’s Fairs in my last two books and the background reading I did while writing them. China’s Brave New World—And Other Tales for Global Times (2007) had chapters that deal with the World’s Fairs (sometimes called Exhibitions or Expositions) that took place in Paris in 1867, Philadelphia in 1876, and Chicago in 1893. And Global Shanghai, 1850-2010: A History in Fragments (2008) ends with a look ahead to what the Shibohui could mean for this city.
Here are my 5 points:
1) Calling the upcoming Shanghai event an “Olympics” of any kind is counterproductive. It just underscores the extent to which in this era (as opposed to in earlier ones when the Olympics were sometimes just a World’s Fair sideshow), the Games are seen as much more important than any other mega-event spectacle.
2) Not all the cities that hosted World’s Fairs of the 1850s-1930s (the genre’s heyday) are now thought of as among the most glamorous and celebrated places on earth (Philadelphia and Ghent each hosted one, after all), but many are thought of just that way. And certainly a higher percentage of top tier locales can be found among the place that hosted World’s Fairs then than have held World Expos in recent decades. Surely, Shanghai aspires to be seen as belonging to a category that includes London, Paris and New York, rather than Knoxville, Hanover, and Aichi—where the 1982, 2000, and 2005 Expos were held.
3) The best that can be said of the word “Expo” is that it brings to mind futuristic buildings (think Seattle’s Space Needle) and the latest technologies and products (think the Toshiba robots at Aichi 2005)—two things that Shanghai is already linked to in spades. As I note in Global Shanghai, the city now looks in many ways like a place that has already hosted an Expo not a place that is gearing up for one, with the skyscrapers of Pudong and the Maglev train reminiscent of things that might have been left behind after the crowds went home. If the pay-off of hosting an Expo is that it suggests a city is futuristic, this is redundant in Shanghai’s case.
4) The term “World’s Fair,” by contrast, while also associated with futurism (“Building the World of Tomorrow” was the theme of the New York extravaganza of 1939) conjures up a sense of fun as well. And if Shanghai can’t outdo Beijing in terms of the high-tech spectacle side of 08/08/08, one area where there is room for improvement, according to many reports of people who attended the Games (I didn’t), is in the area of frivolity and high spirits—of the sort associated with World’s Fairs since at least the 1893 Chicago Columbian Exposition, which had a Midway famous for its amusements and shows and was also where the Ferris Wheel made its debut.
5) Speaking of Chicago…America will soon have a President who is linked to that city. So invoking 1893 when looking ahead to 2010 might have special resonance. It could help convince skeptics that even in a time of financial constraints, having some kind of official U.S. presence at the first World's Fair held in China—a country that is now the kind of rapidly industrializing rising economic power that America was in 1893—might be a good thing.
Jeffrey N. Wasserstrom is Professor of History at the University of California, Irvine, and author of the new book Global Shanghai, 1850-2010: A History in Fragments, due out next month from Routledge.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
post to facebook
Yes, I like the retro ring of World Fair but you need to stick to searchable terms nowadays. People will google up World Fair and end up in the World Fair of Sausage & Shnitzel. Very distracting!
Actually the expo is not getting so much attention because the Olympics have stolen the show in 08. But like you say, these WFairs if they are done well, they can completely reshape a developing city. After 2010 it might well happen that the Expo area becomes a new center of Shanghai, or a major nightlife spot. It happened with the Expo in Sevilla after it was finished.
You know who else debuted at the 1893 World's Columbian Exposition in Chicago?
H.H. Holmes.
(and he is very googleable - and baiduable if that's how you choose to go too)
Thanks, Jeff, for your usual keen observation ... and opinion. My impression is that the Expo folks are so committed to their own vision that deflecting it even just a little would be difficult.
But you are quite right: in conversations here in the U.S., when you say "Expo," people go, "What?" Whereas, when you say, Worlds Fair, they go, "Vancouver!" or "New Orleans!' or "Lisbon!" or (already) "London!" (which I believe is a future venue).
Shanghai Expo reads and sounds like one of the many, many furniture, electronics, agricultural, and automotive shows now commonplace in Shanghai.
But there's only one Worlds Fair.
So let me get this straight. We have a recent post about the Expo's lack of American participation and the overwhelming consensus is along the lines of 'yawn, who cares?'. Therefore it's decided by the powers that be to expand the discourse to a pedantic dissection of what the damn thing should be called? Sweet Jesus.
Are people really that out-of-touch with the average person in China and worldwide to realize that 99.99999% won't even hear of Shanghai 2010 or even care if they do? It's a city project to promote investment, gentrify a previously run-down area, and distract the populace from other pressing concerns. Please, please, let's not idealize this and pretend it's going to help usher in a new era of peace and prosperity worldwide.
Also, if I want to drum up business or flog my new book can I post something on Shanghaiist too?
Personally, I'm not interested in what the previous commenter thinks is pedantic or not; whether he has his finger on the pulse of 1 billion Chinese as he claims that others have not; or his unique insight into the motivations of the Chinese Expo's hosts. Such acidic cynicism is intended to shut down discussion.
But the Expo deserves discussion: improvement if possible, attention in any case. It is going to happen. In a sense, it is happening already. It should happen well.
PS The prior posting to which the commenter refers didn't state as claimed there was "overwhelming consensus [regarding the Expo] along the lines of 'yawn, who cares?'" That's the commenter's conclusion; I suppose he or she would prefer it to be true. (Jeff's article above is more accurate on this point: the American people have been uninformed about Expos for 25 years, since the last Expo in which the US fully participated.)
The prior post was about the outgoing US Administration's failure to ask for public education and input about, or to arrange US participation in, the Shanghai Expo, and how those errors can be erased.
The Chinese do care. And when they're informed, so do Americans. It happens every day that we who are working on a US presence make contact with Americans of all classes and persuasions. "No kidding!" they say. "We're not going to be there?" And quite often, "Where can I send my check?"
I wanna see Zimbabwe's booth!
Alright Bob, I will try to tone down my obvious cynicism a little bit, but I'd still like you to explain to me the points you are trying to make.
One, the Expo deserves discussion. Is Shanghai really going to listen to outside opinions? Isn't this just pointless talk? They've been working on this for nearly a decade, it's a Chinese show, I can't see why they'd really listen to outside views, especially concerning the naming of the event. They sure didn't for the Olympics, how is this any different? They've been pushing this as an Expo for five years now, surely you can't believe they'd switch to 'World's Fair' at this point. It'd be a marketing embarrassment, no?
Two, the outgoing administration could care less about educating the public about the Shanghai Expo. I don't think the mood in the new administration is going to change much unfortunately. Even at such a bargain basement price of 2 million or so, I can't see the US gov't approving funding for this in our current economic environment. Too many other important things going on. If you, like you state, are coming in contact with many so many Americans willing to donate money to this cause, why don't you simply set up a website asking for donations? The recent election raised over 1 billion from private citizens, surely you could easily obtain your initial 250k and probably the further needed investment.
I am still polar opposite of your belief that most Americans (and Chinese for that matter) really have any sort of emotional investment in this or any other expo. It's a romantic idea that has been passed up by the realities of the world. Prove me wrong! However, if you do setup a site that clearly defines the urgent need for US participation in this event, with non-hyperbolic or unrealistic arguments, I'll be one of the first to donate.
Money said:
Oh. I appear to agree with Money on this one.
Back in the world of trickle down, very very shortly the automobile sector is going to either collapse or require further outrageous theft of public money to bail it out. So, good luck with that American Pavilion funding.
Oh yeah, Jeffrey.
Glad to see you included a thesis in the title this time and was interested to read the points inside. We're still one step away from the beginning-middle-end concept though.
What's the conclusion?
Do you think the re-branding will help secure American participation ..and to what end? How about the other comments on related posts.
How does a world fair stack up against the financial crisis? Or the current state of the world in terms of poverty?
Aren't we more in need of a well branded global forum on health, education and poverty. Don't we think that talking directly about poverty and finding solutions to it is more able to bring in prosperity than saying 'oohh, mag-lev' or whatever?
I want to hear the 'whys'.
"Aren't we more in need of a well branded global forum on health, education and poverty."
No, no, you cannot use that argument. It is primary school demagogy. I got a better one: How does the internet stack up with world poverty? Shouldn't we all stop reading blogs and go save the World instead? Well, no.
Besides, the EXPO or WF has been in preparation for ages and it is not their fault if Wall Street decided to melt just now. US should participate and build a massive pavillion dedicated to the friendship of the peoples of China-USa. If the crisis goes wrong we are going to need this friendship more than anything else.
ULn
You cannot be serious.
It's not demagogy, it's a point. Don't say not to 'use that argument' ... say why you don't think we need one.
By blowing off my point and saying that we need the Expo as an opportunity for friendship you are saying something quite controversial.
From your comment it seems you think that the Expo is more useful for promoting international peace/friendship and solving problems than an actual serious forum on friendship and problem solving. That's a joke.
We need to counter nationalism and divisive ideologies, we need to break down barriers not build them. These large scale trade fairs and national pride monuments (hello Olympics), are counter productive and unjustified.
The question posed by Jeffrey is should America build a pavilion at the 2010 Expo: surely that's the meaning, not only should we change the name. That's why he disclosed his role too.
I'm saying that if you look at what's going on, it's sensible not to. Although apparently it's fine to have a military budget larger the combined GDP of the world's poorest 60 or so countries.
Ok, I am not saying we don't need global forums on health, education and poverty. We surely do. The problem is, this kind of argument can be used against anything, and it is demagogy in the way that it appeals to the easy "emotions of the populace" (says my dictionary).
As for the EXPO promoting international friendship, well. I won't say it is the best way, but it can have a positive effect. Usually EXPOs don't excite the patriotic spirit so much as sports competitions. And they also last much longer and -surprise- have a much larger number of visitors than Olympic games.
So to answer Jeffrey's question (which I already answered) I repeat: yes to American pavilion. 60 Million Chinese visitors will see the beautiful building that America built for them. Plus 100s of Millions others in the years to come, as the good buildings usually remain in place for public use. It may not save the World, but it won't do any harm and more than a few people will feel grateful. And it is a beautiful symbol that will remain for ever in the center of the city, even after XX years when Shanghai eventually becomes the world's Metropolis.
I think I have given enough arguments above, but in any case it's just my 2euros. I am not American and my country is already building a pavilion, so I'm already a happy man.
Peace,
uln
Wow, I didn't think this post would generate so many comments. Rather than take up all the points, I'll just mention a few things here. First, my suggestion about re-branding the event as a "World's Fair" in English language publicity was largely based on the assumption that promoters of the event want a lot of countries to sign on, including the U.S., and that this might help them accomplish this goal. Second, I'd like to see the U.S. have an appropriate presence in Shanghai in 2010 for various reasons and think that the BH & L Group can help the country make that happen, but that doesn't mean I think that it is the most important issue in the world today. Third, a careful reading of my post would show that I managed to slip in references to not just one but two of my recent books--but I would have made the same argument even if I hadn't been able to do so in the piece. And, finally, while the 2010 event won't necessarily mean a lot to many Chinese, the sheer number of books relating to the event I saw in Shanghai in November, including some that are clearly intended for classroom use (a la the Olympic education model), suggested that a lot of youths in one giant city will be hearing a great deal about in the next year or so.
Everybody knows what the event is. Whether you brand it as "Shanghai Expo" or "World's Fair" is such a meticulous, unneeded detail, it's amazing.
not to mention the enourmous cost at actually rebranding, do you really seriously think that someone will hear "Shanghai World's Fair" and think that it has the slightest bit of difference from "Shanghai Expo"? (Besides, Vancouver 1986 was Expo '86, not Vancouver World's Fair).
Especially considering that 95% of the visitors will call it the 上海世界博览会， why does the English name even matter at all?
I think the Shanghaiist commentators have weighed in pretty conclusively - no one really cares amongst this audience. I'm sure I'll go next summer, I'll probably even enjoy it. But if it suddenly got cancelled, no big whoop.
Again...much like the impotent and useless UN, this "Expo/World Fair" will only enrich a few connected officials...
Does Western Europe, the U.S., or Japan really *need* more exposure as if no one knew they existed??? Just look at education destinations of Chinese and Indian youth as a barometer.
Yes, Jeffrey. You and many others. But you got comments because it's an interesting subject.
I'll go further here. In China for sure, and also in other countries to varying extents. Large scale events designed to boost patriotism or 'business' come with a rolling back of general cultural development and freedoms.
Take the Olympics. First of all it succeeded in generating rabid patriotism that was the antithesis of actual friendship across borders and followed the win win win, we are a superior race mentality. You'll recall that eventually, the gov had to bring in rules on signs to counter it (despite them whipping it up themselves). From the business development point of view it was a huge loss and the tourist, entertainment and small shop industries that were supposed to reap the trickle down effect were practically shut down during the games. Hotels all over the capital and country faced huge staff lay offs.
Behind the scenes, the local music and arts scenes were ordered to take an unpaid holiday for a month too. Writers came under more pressure to not 'cause trouble', VISAs and travel got restricted and protest rights that had been slowly slackened were rolled back.
What do we think about this?
In 1939, in the depth of the Great Depression, a Worlds Fair was held in New York City that literally reshaped visitors' vision of the future in the most powerful and positive ways. It was international but of course not internationally visited, not on a large scale, because there was a war on in Asia and one about to occur in Europe. Soon the whole world would be at war. But for the younger generations who saw the World Fair with its famous Perisphere and Trylon, and the exhibitions of the City of the Future within, it was hope. As H.G. Wells wrote,
"So the visitor who wants to get the most out of this World’s Fair will do best to regard it not as a show of things but as a collection of hints and let hisimagination off the leash of discretion for a bit." - H. G. Wells, excerpt "World of Tomorrow," New York Times, March 5, 1939.
Of course, this presumes one has an imagination. So many in the Shanghai expat community apparently do not. It's disappointing. Having lived overseas, I was thrilled when my host nation -- Sweden, with about 1/3% of the Chinese population -- put on a celebration of its own and other nations' cultures and aspirations. For those Shanghaiist readers who are as truly disgusted by China and Shanghai as they write, how can you stay there to make a living? It seems to we readers overseas quite hypocritical.
It's funny: I haven't read about any merchants or entertainment venues in Shanghai unhappy with the Expo. Not even the displaced neighbors who were given apartments that they eventually sold for three and four times their initial value. Shanghai isn't Beijing. If it was worried about dissent, it got over that qualm a long time ago.
Jeff's proposal that the Expo be rebranded doesn't require the entire Expo marketing plan to be changed, only those campaigns and invitations addressed to nations like the U.S. whose citizens have seen plenty of Worlds Fairs but nary an Expo.
By the way, there is a website that states our case and asks for support -- though not yet donations, fo our tax-exempt status is still in process:
http://www.unitedstatespavilion.com/ You're welcome.
I never heard of this nation called Poland until I saw they had a pavilion at this Worlds Expos. Thanks!
In 1939 you *had* to have an imagination because people listened to radio and read things consisting mostly of paper called...BOOKS!
Today the world is much closer thanks to the WWW and satellite TV among other things. Greatest advancement of the 21st century? Hyper ADD!
Good job trying to push the snake oil though, Bob.
Bob, I think a lot of people are disgusted at the holding of such events in China because of the pushing of these events in local propaganda. We all know that the Olympics, for example, will be used in all host countries' propaganda. But, in recent years, the Chinese government has gone into overdrive with the idea that showy national projects are supposed to show how China has overcome past experiences and truly risen into the great power arena. I don't view this as simply an optimistic show that could reveal future possibilities. It is very much a political statement for domestic consumption. Why did the Beijing Olympics have to be the most expensive in history? Why does the Shanghai Expo have to be described as an Olympics of sorts? It turns me off right away.
When this is only treated as a great show rather than Shanghai's moment in the sun, then I will be less cynical.
My 2c on the name: Shanghai Expo sounds a little like a trade fair. Think: Shanghai Furniture Expo or Shanghai Book Expo or something along those lines.
World's Fair says it all. And I totally agree with taihanasie about all those "Expo" monikers. Go to Las Vegas: there's "Expo This" and "Expo That" everywhere and it's all cheap crap.
Thanks to Talhansie for some insights to which we on this side of the ocean aren't privy. It seems to me and many other observers, however, that if China wanted merely another domestic spectacle it could have chosen a less challenging, self-critical theme than "Better City, Better Life."
This is obviously a Shanghai affair. It is a political statement, but not necessarily or exclusively the one you legitimately anticipate based on past experience. There are many subtexts.
Expos always start out with the host nation waving is flag but then morph into something quite different, grander in scale and vision if you will. In this case, there is also a host region. And a truly global audience, online and in the media. We shall see.
The only way to find out is to be there. Neither snake oil nor bile pays sufficient homage to what is a century-old international tradition. It's the better half of the world's nations, what could be.
...And with that, I bid you adieu, zai jain, and "see you at the Expo."
So the expo will be rebranded as the "World's Fair" just to attract an American pavilion?
And people say our influence is waning...
And we still aren't wasting tax payer dollars on an American style Irish bar, Texas ribs, Georgia style mac & cheese a Meister Brau/Stroh's/Milwaukee's Best/Hamm's beer garden and piped John Melloncamp videos just to make the HAn oVERloRDs happy.
Oh well, if America misses the party, it's their loss.
I, for one, intend to be right here- I wouldn't miss it for the world.