Passage Two
We can relate the different ways of seeing the city to a typology of urban space recently proposed by Arata Isozaki[28]and Akira Asada[29]．In their typology，Isozaki and Asada distinguish between three kinds of urban space，each defined according to an increasingly attenuated relationship to its historical context．Thus real cities are those that have preserved their historical contexts;surreal cities are metropolitan centers like Tokyo where urban elements are mixed up and hybridized without regard for historical context;and hyperreal/simulated cities are themepark cities like Walt Disney World，devoid of context and based on fiction and artifice．We could now construct a typology of scopic regimes that would roughly correspond to Isozaki and Asada's urban typology:“real”cities encourage a regime of the visible or seen;“surreal”cities，a regime of the subliminal and uncanny or half-seen;“hyperreal”cities，a regime of the televisual or quickly seen．The following is an expertise from the postmodern and postcolonial perspective to“read”the hypereal urban space“Splendid China”[30]in Shenzhen．
Next to the China Folk Culture Villages is the World's largest display of miniature landmarks—“Splendid China”，which occupies an area of 30 hectares．They include some of China's most well-known historical monuments，cultural attractions and natural landscapes such as the Great Wall，the Terracotta Army of Emperor Qin's Mausoleum in Shaanxi，the Forbidden City in Beijing，the Big Buddha of Leshan in Sichuan，the Mogao Grottoes at Dunhuang in Gansu，the Potala Palace in Lhasa，Mount Huangshan in Anhui，the Shaolin Temple in Henan，and the Three Gorges of the Yangtse River．They consist of three categories:“Ancient Buildings”such as palaces，monasteries，temples，towers，pagodas and bridges，“Natural Scenery”including famous mountains，rivers，rock formations，and“Folk Customs and Local Dwellings”which include different styles of local houses，habits and customs such as the“Memorial Ceremony for Confucius”，Mongolian wrestling，archery and horse race and so on．The“mysterious Orient”is proudly put on display for public consumption．
One of the very interesting features of“Splendid China”is that the reproduced historical，cultural and scenic sites are arranged，more or less，according to their real geographical locations in China．The philosophy behind it is that travelling in one day over“a land of charm and beauty，you see a civilisation with a history of 5，000 years”．It is“a window of China's history，culture and tourist resources”．In my view，“Splendid China”，with its spectacular display of China's national landmarks which represent her long cultural history，unique naturallandscape and ethnic diversity，reconstructs a new cultural narrative in the post-Mao social context，as a new metaphor in defence of a traditional past and a communist present．It indicates a new use of Chineseness as a desirable collective body to be looked at both by herself and the Other．In other words，China，in the search for modernity，has to negotiate between modernisation and the cultural heritage．
In the last few decades，China has repeatedly used its cultural and natural treasures such as giant pandas to woo the world，to repair diplomatic relations．Like China the nation，“Splendid China”uses its glorious and glorified cultural icons and myths such as the Great Wall，the Lugou(Marco Polo)Bridge，and the Qin terracotta army as a strong rallying point among the Chinese for national(istic)pride，ideological affinity，cultural identity and psychological solidarity．Travelling among the well-distributed scenic spots，one feels that the whole project is designed to speak the totality of the Chinese nation in a timeless Lilliputian[31]space．
As Ann Anagnost[32]says，“Splendid China”offers the viewer“a surreal simultaneity of the architectural monuments of Chinese civilization over five millennia—a compression of time that matches its reduction in physical size，redoubling the intensity of its ideological effect”．While it is a direct product of the open-door policy and nationalistic efforts for modernisation，“Splendid China”functions mainly as a spectacular demonstration of a hegemonic model of Chinese multiculturalism with the Han ethnic majority positioned at the centre of a“family”of 56 Chinesenationalities．
Another point that can be made from looking at the spectacle of“Splendid China”is that，following modern Europe and America，ethnicity and ethnocentrism can，in the age of global capitalism，be the most successful and profitable export items．Michael Harris Bond[33]observes that the Chinese，like many other cultural groups，are desperate to improve the living standards of their people．This struggle brings them into contact with alien，especially Western，cultures，many of the practices of which they regard as antithetical to“the Chinese way”．This contact sparks the dilemma of modenization:how to develop without sacrificing one's cultural identity．Then one may argue that，in relation to the miniature park which compresses five thousand years of Chinese history into this site of signification，the status of Shenzhen which“contains”this nationscape is interesting．
In the different discourses of China's opening to the outside world and of debates over“market economy with Chinese characteristics”，Shenzhen has become a symbol，a space of representation itself．As Ann Anagnost notes，“Splendid China”lies within“a larger referential field than the one immediate within the boundaries of the park，for well within the orbit of the viewer's gaze，one observes the nearby profile of a modern city”．Here different representations connect and contest one another．One representation becomes embedded within another．Illusion and reality become one．
As a fast-growing city of immigrants，Shenzhen is culturally diverse．But neither in“The China Folk Culture Villages”nor in“Splendid China”，does Shenzhen occupy any space since the city has not been associated with any“subliminal”culture of its own．Now its status as a“special economic zone”and its pioneering translation ofother cultures into its urban space does not only give it a hybrid character in terms of its“integration with global capital”but also as“a potent sign，as one of a heteroglossia[34]of models in a sustained debate over China's proper road to modernization”．With cultural projects similar to the ones under discussion，Shenzhen has gained among Chinese cities a very“cultural”image．Indeed，for many Chinese，Shenzhen is beginning to become a new cultural myth．(Excerpted from“Cultures Translated and Appropriated:Rethinking Ethnicity，Nationscape and Cultural Identity”by Mao Sihui)
True or False Statements
1．Judging by the typology of urban architecture，Shenzhen should belong to the hyperreal plus surreal type．
2．Behind the this architectural miracle(the reproduction of the wellknown historical monuments，cultural attractions and natural landscapes)we can see the Chinese want the world to learn from Chinese civilization．
3．Splendid China proves China's dilemma at the turn of twenty-first century that they have a glorious past but they are no longer so strong．
4．To travel all over China within a few hours in one place is a typical example of surreal culture．
5．The“new cultural myth”at the end of this passage suggests that many Chinese are not very sure what type of city Shenzhen is．
【注释】
[1]praise and blame:表扬和责备，与前面所提到的“扬”和“抑”(mobilityand constraint)作用相同。
[2]Saussure(Ferdinand de):费迪南·索绪尔(1857～1913)，结构主义语言学家，著有《普通语言学教程》;瑞士人，被誉为“现代语言学之父”。
[3]Foucault(Michel):米歇尔·福柯(1926～1984)，法国哲学家和“思想系统的历史学家”。他对文学评论及其理论、哲学(尤其在法语国家中)、批评理论、历史学、科学史(尤其医学史)、批评教育学和知识社会学有很大的影响。福柯通过考古学和谱系学研究，以后结构的散落性-来源论-差异性-断裂性来代替古典历史书写的总体化-起源论-同质化-连续性原则，进而揭示了身体-知识-权力之间的辩证关系，为后结构式的重写历史开辟了道路。他的“话语的权力说”在文化研究界极具影响力。
[4]Michael Halliday:米歇尔·韩礼德(1925～)，悉尼大学教授，功能语言学派创始人。其语言学理论不仅应用于对英语语言的分析，也广泛应用于印欧语系和非印欧语系语言的分析。
[5]continental philosophy:欧陆哲学，是一个颇具争议的概念，主要指于欧洲大陆产生的哲学及其派别。比如，现象学、存在主义、阐释学、解构主义以及其他批评理论等。
[6]Pierre Bourdieu:皮埃尔·布迪厄是当代法国最具国际性影响的思想大师之一，现任巴黎高等研究学校教授，法兰西学院院士。早在1972年布迪厄就已出版了经典的社会学著作《实践理论概要》。1975年布迪厄创办了《社会科学的研究行为》杂志。1980年布迪厄出版了另一部重要著作《实践的逻辑》，这部著作的英译本出版于1990年。布迪厄20世纪80年代末在美国芝加哥大学的讲座内容《反观社会学的邀请》则发表于1992年。
[7]Louis Althusser:路易斯·阿尔都塞(1918～1990)，法国著名哲学家，出生于阿尔及利亚。从20世纪60年代初开始接受结构主义思潮影响，运用结构主义方法解释马克思的著作，对经验主义、历史主义和人道主义进行批判，构成了有别于正统马克思的“结构主义马克思主义”思想体系。
[8]sadomasochist:施虐受虐狂者。
[9]Judith Butler:朱蒂斯·巴特勒被誉为后结构女性主义的开山之人，后结构主义哲学家。她的学术涉猎主要集中在政治学、女性主义批评以及酷儿理论(queer theory)等领域。从1987年至今，她已出版了十部学术专著。其中最有影响的是Gender Trouble一书。此书至1999年已再版十次。
[10]performativity:表演性(编者暂译)，朱蒂斯·巴特勒有关性别研究(酷儿理论)的创造性术语。受语用学语言行为理论(speech-act)的影响，巴特勒认为人们接受对所谓“现实”的(传统)概念，实际上就会用行为把它们给做(表现)出来(落实到行动上)。就性别而言，所谓阴阳、男女等性别概念是要通过行为体现出来的。她的原话是这样表述的:“As performance which is performative，gender is an‘act，’broadly construed，which constructs the social fiction of its own psychological interiority．”更为重要的是，巴特勒对性别的解读是为了让人们了解所谓性别的实质，即文化构建，从而强调作为个体的人在这种文化构建中的主观性和主动性。
[11]ESL:英语作为第二语言(English as second language)。
[12]Rey Chow:周蕾，布朗大学的Andrew Mellon人文学教授，华裔文化研究最重要的学者之一。研究领域:现代中国文学，当代女性主义理论，中国电影，后殖民理论，文化研究。
[13]Deepika Bahri:迪皮卡·巴瑞，埃默里大学英语副教授，《亚洲研究》主任。主要研究领域:后殖民和多元文化研究。著有:Native Intelligence: Aesthetics，Politics，and Post Colonial，Literature(2003);合编:Realms of Rhetoric(2003)，Between the Lines:South Asians and Postcoloniality(1996)．
[14]Kalpana Sesahdri-Crooks:卡尔波拿·克鲁克斯，后殖民主义学者。著有:Desiring Whiteness:a Lacanian Analysis of Race(2000)．
[15]glocalization:环-本化(环球本土化)，新词(由global和localization合并而成)，指经济在一体/全球化的过程中，发展中国家(弱小文化)有意识地发展保护本土文化而不被强大的(西方)霸权文化所吞噬或同化。
[16]Mein Kampf:《我的奋斗》(My Struggle)，阿道夫·希特勒著。通过这部自传性作品，法西斯独裁者希特勒宣扬了纳粹思想及意识形态。
[17]Michael Billig:米歇尔·比理格，英国Loughborough大学社会学教授，曾在美国等国任客座教授。开设有“组际关系”(Intergroup Relations)、“说服修辞”(Persuasion and Rhetoric)等课程。
[18]cogito:我想，笛卡儿(Rene Descartes)的“我思故我在”论点的简称;自我思想活动过程，意识。
[19]prediscursive:先于话语而存在的。此处意思是说所谓性别是由话语构建的，没有话语也就没有性别，更不用说性别先于话语而存在了。
[20]facticity:真实性;确凿性。
[21]hermaphroditism:对雌雄同体、半阴阳、性别畸形的研究或学问。
[22]Teresa de Lauretis:特瑞莎·劳瑞提斯，在意大利出生和接受高等教育，现为加利福尼亚大学心理历史教授;符号、女权等理论家，酷尔理论的创始人。
[23]Georg Simmel:乔治·齐美尔(1858～1918)，又译格奥尔格·齐美尔或西美尔，德国著名的社会学家、理论文化研究者。齐美尔认为，文化的产生和发展过程处于精神活动的生命—形式二元互动过程之中，主观文化和客观文化是主体精神和客观精神产品的物化结果。在这双重结构中，他强调文化的“教化”作用和综合的特点。文化现代性发展的结果是客观文化急速膨胀和主观文化过度萎缩，主体的能动性由于个体能量的局限性而在迅速发展的文化面前只能感到压抑。
[24]Theodor Adorno，Max Horkheimer:西奥多·阿多诺，麦克斯·霍克海默，法兰克福学派的两位代表人物。法兰克福学派认为当代资本主义社会的主要冲突不再是阶级与阶级的冲突而是个人与社会的冲突。因此，当代社会革命的首要任务不再是阶级启蒙而是个体启蒙。
[25]Walter Benjamin:沃尔特·本雅明，德国文学批评家和哲学家，与法兰克福学派有着密切的联系，深受马克思主义的影响。
[26]Iurii Lotman(Mikhailovich):罗德曼·米卡洛维奇(1922～1993)，俄国人，研究领域是符号学、文化文学研究。
[27]W．G．Sebald:温弗里德·格奥尔格·泽巴尔德(Winfried GeorgSebald，1944～2001)，出生于德国巴伐利亚州阿尔格伊地区的维尔塔赫(Wertach，Allg－u)，当今最有影响的德国作家之一。
[28]Arata Isozaki:矶崎新，国际著名建筑师，1931年7月17日出生于日本大分市，1954年毕业于东京大学工学部建筑系。1961年完成东京大学建筑学博士课程。1967年获日本建筑学会大奖，1963年创立了矶崎新设计室，自此成为几十年来活跃在国际建筑界的大师，作品众多，获奖无数。
[29]Akira Asada:浅田彰，日本京都大学副教授、经济学家、哲学家，因著《结构和权力》(Structure and Power)而出名。他与矶崎新一起撰文《任何地方—空间的问题》(“Anywhere—Problems of Space”)，发表在他们共同编辑的论文集《任何地方》(Anywhere，ed．Isozaki and Asada，New York:Rizzoli，1992)。
[30]Splendid China:锦绣中华。
[31]Lilliputian:小个子的，小人国的。
[32]Ann Anagnost:安·安纳诺斯特，华盛顿大学人类学副教授，1991年来中国实地考察并撰写《民族的过去:现代中国的叙事、表征和权力》(National Past-Times:Narrative，Representation，and Power in Modern China，Duke University Press，1997)。
[33]Michael Harris Bond:密歇尔·邦德，香港中文大学社会心理学教授。
[34]heteroglossia:俄国符号学巴赫金术语，原意是多种语言，现指话语活动中互相矛盾或冲突的力量。