Dimsum masthead
Home arrow Viewpoints arrow A clarification on the meaning of “Chinese”
A clarification on the meaning of “Chinese” PDF Print E-mail
Viewpoints
Saturday, 13 November 2010

I was in a serious mood, when I was listening to Radio 4 one evening. I had just had some goat-meat from my local halal butcherand was sipping my green tea. I love Radio 4. But my love was hurt when a learned man said that the Great Wall was built by the Chinese to keep non-Chinese out. Then, the man went on to say that the last dynasty of China was not Chinese. I felt insulted, and enraged when thinking that during the Japanese invasion, a puppet Manchukuo was set up claiming that the land of Manchuria was not Chinese. I protest!

Terminology is important. The definition of words directly influences our language, and language defines our thoughts. A simple deviation in word definition could, in the longer term, cause systemic misunderstanding.
My protest is over the misconception of the term “Chinese”. To too many people, it is used to mean “Han”. The Han people constitute the vast majority of the population in the People’s Republic, just as most people in the United Kingdom are English. Just as “British” and “English” are not the same, the term “Chinese” should not be confused with “Han”.
To me, and I guess many Chinese people, China is the land of the People’s Republic. The people of the People’s Republic are mostly Chinese – there are foreigners too, including British citizens who live there.
If “Chinese” does not include all those who are the people of China, but only refers to the Han ethnicity, then to me, this is en par with terming everyone in Britain as English or anything that is not English as not British. In the case of the United Kingdom, this is clearly not true.
China is the same, but many people appear to be ignoring this. Throughout Chinese history, there have been many people from many different backgrounds who laid the foundations of China and provided definition of what it is to be Chinese. The Tang Dynasty, arguably the Golden Age of China, was founded by a semi-Han general. During that dynasty, many people arrived in the Celestial Kingdom from faraway land, and settled and called it home. The general who rose against the emperor and caused the largest civil war in Chinese history was Turkic.To many people of China, Kublai Khan had the Mandate of Heaven, and the Yuan Dynasty, a successor state of the empire first established by Genghis Khan, was a legitimate dynasty in Chinese history, recorded by the annuals. Today, there are perhaps twice as many Mongols in China as in Mongolia. The Manchus are Chinese, which to me is beyond question. The map of China you see today had its foundations in the Qing (Manchu) Dynasty.
In terms of the people of China, there are some marked differences between those in the north, south, east and west, in terms of height, complexion, stock, body hair etcetera. In northern and north-western China especially, it is not entirely uncommon to see people with not very Han traits,such as brownish eyes, very pale complexion and a lot of body hair. Until I met a Punjabi male friend of my wife’s, I had been the hairiest person I knew, and I would say I am of the Han ethnicity, even though body hair is not a typical Han trait. My maternal grandmother has wavy hair, and my aunt from my father’s side has rather light-coloured eyes.
As for the issue of identity, one of my best friends in Beijing is a Manchu. You tell him that he is not Chinese, and he might knock your teeth out. My old boss on my placement, years ago, in Beijingwas a Mongol, and being a mild mannered man, he’d laugh at you if you told him that he was not Chinese. My step-sister is married to a Hui man. The Huis are descendants of Muslim traders and soldiers from the west. During the Turkic general’s revolt during the Tang Dynasty, the emperor asked for help from the Caliph of Baghdad. In response, tens of thousands of soldiers marched east and they settled in the capital, today’s Xi’an, after quashing the rebellion. Now, to me, and to himself, my brother-in-law is as Chinese as you can get.
In term of language, I do not think the current terminology of “Chinese” is appropriate, instead, what people mostly mean is “Han”. All languages of China should be considered as “Chinese”. Indeed, in the Grand Hall of the People where the parliament sits, there are rooms for interpreters of a number of large languages used in China, including Uyghur and Tibetan. In certain parts of China, non-Han language has legal status just as Welsh has in Wales. The Han language, in itself, like English, is infused with words and concepts from various origins. Mandarin, for example, the Received Pronunciation in the People’s Republic, is full of words that have Manchu origins, such as the word “shuai” – handsome. Therefore, it is inappropriate to say that somehow Manchu and China are somehow mutually exclusive. When you go to the Forbidden City, built by a Ming emperor (who was Han), later lived in by the Qing emperors (who were Manchu), has plaques in Han, Manchu, Mongol and Tibetan scripts. And on the banknotes issued by the People’s Bank of China, there print the scripts of Han, Mongol, Uyghur, Tibetan and Zhuang. For those who have not heard of the Zhuang language, it is similar to Vietnamese. And among the notable people of Zhuang ethnicity, there is Li Ning the gymnast who “flew” to light the torch at the 2008 Beijing Olympics and Shi Dakai who was one of the leaders during the Taiping Rebellion against the Qing Dynasty.
In terms of cuisine, Chinese food, to many people of China, is more than sweet and sour pork with rice. I had no knowledge of sweet and sour until I arrived in the UK from Beijing. When I was a little child in Beijing, my diet, like most people around me, did not centre around rice, but wheat. As for pork, many people in China, such as the Muslim Huis and Uyghurs of course would not eat it, and many more, such as a significant proportion of the population in northern China, thoroughly dislike pork, considering it a dirty meat, and prefer lamb and beef instead. Quick boiled lamb is aregularfixture on the eating-out routine of the residents of Beijing in the winter time, a dish which had its origins among Mongol horsemen. As for me, there is nothing more satisfying than a big plate of la-mian (or laghman) with lamb chuan’er (or shashlyk), which are considered Chinese by most people I know in China. They might add that such is Xinjiang food, in the same way that certain dishes are generically termed Sichuan food or Shanghai food.
And there are many things which are very Chinese but not necessarily Han. For example in a Chinese orchestra, only a few instruments originated in what could be considered as the Han kingdoms, the rest all came from the north-west. In fashion, the typical Chinese dress is usually thought of as the Banner Robe, which originated among the Manchus.
The typical Westerner says “Chinese” when actually meaning “Han”. This practice, to me, is like some cancerous cell, spreading everywhere, to the extent that many Chinese people confuse the issue too. On my dictionary cover, it says in English “English – Chinese”, but actually, in the Han script, it says “English – Han”. On Chinese Radio International, my wife often listens to the programme “Learn Chinese”, while actually, the Chinese presenter says, literally, “Happy Han Language”.
During the riots in Xinjiang last year, the British media talked about fighting between Uyghurs and Chinese. In Tibet, apparently the “Chinese” dominate.
Let us turn it into a British situation. In Bradford, there were fights between the Asians and the British. What did your child get in his British Language GCSE? Gordon Brown is Scottish not British. Kilts are traditionally worn by the Scots not the British. The House of Commons consists mostly of British MPs. Some of these example states don’t sound too right, some nonsensical and some can be taken as simply racist.
So, for some English person to tell me that the Manchus are not Chinese would be like saying the Scots are not British. When I’m in a relaxed mood, I might laugh, when I’m in a serious mood, I’d feel insulted.
Do not confuse Chinese with Han. I am a Han person, with a love of China including its lands north and south of the Great Wall, its people of various looks and languages and its cuisine which to me consists of more wheat than rice. And one of the things I miss the most about China? La-mian with chuan’er please (just can’t get the same thing here in London), washed down with some green tea!
Zhao

 

A group of retired people playing music, singing and dancing under an obelisk with Mongol scripts on, in People’s Park, Urumqi. Urumqi is the capital of Xinjiang. It means “beautiful grassland” in Mongolian. Its population consists of Han, Hui, Uyghur and Mongol as well as other ethnic groups.

The mausoleum of the Apak Hoja family. A daughter from hat Uyghur family was married to the Manchu emperor Qianlong, although there is some debate of whether that was a love marriage (indeed love marriage was a rare thing before twentieth century).

Lamb is the staple meat in north and north-west China. The lamb of Xinjiang, to me, is the best in the world, and the best lamb in Xinjiang is from Kashgar which is not too far from Kashmir.

Girls in Manchu dress dancing in a restaurant in Beijing that used to be a prince’s home.

 

 
Comments
Add NewSearchRSS
Pinkerton Posted 11:17 on 17 November 2010
Great photos but i must admit to only skim reading your article. I'm not sure what you are arguing but the word count is impressive.

When i visited Xinjiang, the Uyghurs certainly do not consider themselves Chinese; hence my missing tooth when I said that the Chinese should stop fighting each other.

Joking aside, when I was in Kashgar, I saw (Han) Chinese soldiers in full riot gear in front of a police station with snipers at the ready, surrounded by dangerous looking Uyghur school kids being collected by their parents and heading off for something to eat. I wish I had taken a photo but I was too scared to do so. Either way, I'm not sure the soldiers or the school kids were thinking they are all the same people.

PS I suspect Gordon Brown considers himself Scottish and British.
Zhao - to Pinkerton and lang Posted 14:05 on 17 November 2010
What I protest about is the systemic approach to classifications with regards to China, in which all non-Han people are classified as non-Chinese. This would be almost like classifying all non-English people as non-British, or non-White peopl as non-British.

In the UK, there are people who do not consider themselves British first. Indeed, some British citizens do not consider themselves as British. The 7/7 bombers for example, did not really have the welfare of their fellow citizens in mind when they attacked. Did these terrorists think of themselves as British first? I doubt it. But do many people from ethnic minorities in Britain consider themselves as British first? Perhaps. Do many consider themselves as something else first? Perhaps. But like it or not, all these people are British - some feel it, other not. But would you say that all Muslims, with ancesters in Pakistan, in Britain do not consider themselves British? I don't think you would.

I do not think that everything is rosy in China. There are some major problems, of course.

I spent a couple of months in Xinjiang as well, and was in Kashgar for a few days.

I saw soldiers, policemen and security guards while in Xinjiang. While most appeared Han to me, there were many who did not look Han. On the whole, I would say that, proportionally, I saw more non-Han officers there than non-White officers in Britain.

While those who commit acts of violence may shout the loudest, we should not take them as the sole representative of a entire population, and should remember the silent majority who may possess a range of views.

What needs to be considered is that inter-ethnic problems exist in many countries that have more than one ethnic group. For example, violent incidents have taken place in the UK, France, Spain, Russia, and India.

I do not wish to diminish the significance of ethnicity as a form of identity. What I am against is the blanket treatment in which Han and China are equated together to the exclusion of all others. To do so, would be an act of Han chauvinsim. I do not wish for a definition of China that buries ethnic diversity, but rather upholding the concept that China is not Han-only, and has been and hopefully always will be built upon a diverse mix of people.
lang - Han imperialism Posted 11:56 on 17 November 2010
This is an utterly arrogant article which tries to use the word 'chinese' to blanket all the ethnics who do not want to be subjugated by the CCP.
Pinkerton Posted 15:19 on 18 November 2010
@Zhao

I admire your passion, not that I understand it.

BTW, you can't lump the police, city guards and army in China into one group; i bet you didn't see any Uyghur soldiers.

You seem to want to liken race and regional relations in China with the UK. Surely that's a bit of a stretch.

There is no equivalent to the SNP or Plaid Cymru in China. If Scots and Welsh wanted a separate country, they could vote for it. They haven't.

Ethnic Tibetans in Tibet and Uyghurs in Xinjiang have been protesting against rulers appointed by Beijing and want a country to call their own; protest is the only option as they can't vote for it. [The closest you will get to this in the UK is the BNP; a noisy group whose total membership would fit into the smallest Premiership football stadium with plenty of space to spare.] Having spent time with Uyghurs, from what i could tell those committing acts of violence are the noisy minority representing the views of the subjegated majority.

Furthermore, it seemed to me that the Uyghurs in Xinjiang didn't mix too much with the Han, not helped by them speaking completely different languages. This isn't about identity, it's about self-determination.

As you say, the bombers / terrorists are motivated by religion, not nationality nor ethnicity. Then again, plenty of Muslims have died at the hands of their 'brothers'. But, plenty of people that consider themselves British kill other people that consider themselves British. So, what's your point?

@Lang

I have a certain sympathy for your view regarding the CCP.
Zhao - reply to Pinkerton Posted 12:28 on 20 November 2010
I think this discussion has taken a political turn. What I originally was trying to say is that being Chinese is more than being Han, and that the concept of Chinese should not be dominated by the concept of Han. Now, I think the discussion has moved to "should Xinjiang and Tibet become independent". Quite a turn, I say.

As for comparisons between China and the UK, yes, China and the UK are different especially on the surface or in nominal terms, but there are surprisingly some similarities on the ground or in reality.

Ethnic interaction can be limited, in China and in the UK. My wife's family, for example, have little social interaction with non-Indians, or even non-Gujuratis, even though most of them live in London. But are they British? I think so. And they think so too when they go to India and notice how non-Indian they are!

As for political representation, there are very few non-White politicians in the UK, certainly none in the top jobs. The same is the case in China where apart from the governors of autonomous regions, most top leaders are Han. The systems of the two countries are different, but some of the end results are surprisingly similar.

In China, there are political problems, as the voices of ordinary people, Uyghur or Han, are not heard or heard but no effective actions taken. In the UK, millions marhced against the war in Iraq. So what? The war still went ahead.

But I'd rather not dive too deeply into the details of politics of Xinjiang and Tibet, although somehow we have headed that way. Instead, all I wanted to say was that:

- Not all Chinese are Han in terms of ethnicity

- Chinese culture is more than Han culture, in terms of language, culture, food, fashion etc

- Chinese history is more than the history of the Hans

- So, I'd rather if people said Han when they meant Han and Chinese when they meant Chinese, just as people here say English when they mean English and British when they mean British
Pinkerton - @ Zhao Posted 11:24 on 29 November 2010
The intention is not to turn the discussion to overt politics. Let's instead focus on where we agree.

Quote:
Not all Chinese are Han in terms of ethnicity


Agreed. According to Wikipedia (so it must be right), 90% of the people living in China are Han. So not all, but the vast majority.

Quote:
Chinese culture is more than Han culture, in terms of language, culture, food, fashion etc


Agreed. But the Han in the north and the Han in the south have different cultures. Indeed, you don't have to travel very far at all in China to encounter differences in language, culture, food, etc.

Quote:
Chinese history is more than the history of the Hans.


Agreed. I'm not a historian but i'm sure that sentiment can be made of all countries.

Quote:
So, I'd rather if people said Han when they meant Han and Chinese when they meant Chinese, just as people here say English when they mean English and British when they mean British


There are 56 nationalities within China (Wiki, again). Are you expecting the media to refer to each group? As you know, in China white people are refered to as 'Westerners'; 'lao wai' and 'wai guo ren' are commonly used - simply foreigners. Anyway, i will ask my Chinese national friends to name all 56 nationalities; it sounds like the basis of a good drinking game.
Jenpop Posted 14:33 on 3 December 2010
Since we're talking about labels, does anyone else get annoyed by the British habit of using the word "Asian" to only mean those of Indian, Pakistani or Bangledeshi origin? How about all of the other races/ethnic groups in Asia?
Marc - Vanishing Kashgar Posted 15:42 on 3 December 2010
http://www.ogleearth.com/2010/09/the_last_days_o.html

Take a look at what looks like "Han" activity...
gillian - just labels? Posted 20:28 on 20 December 2010
labelling origins of race can be a dangerous game, its a political football that divides or unites people by imposing boundaries. Take the definition of German in 1933-45 and now in 2010... big difference. The point is not only it changes in time but is about power to impose it.

We all have the same colour of blood that never changes.
MELLOYELLOFELLO - Re :Zhao - Han Solo - Luke Sky Posted 14:27 on 4 January 2011
Zhao, what a beautiful write obviously something that is very close to your Heart.Thanks for the info.and pics.

So yes we should all practice responsibility and have knowledge when we use words and labels.

Consider,Christians call on the name "JESUS" ..it is sooo not his name (peace and blessing be upon him).There is no "J" in the Aramaic language(His spoken tongue)His name is "Esa" the "j" came after it was latinised (see spanish- silent "J").

Imagine,ff you called your partner another person's name and then turned round and said "well, you know what I mean..you are both are objects of affection..same difference.." ????

Good luck.
Chung Posted 20:35 on 5 January 2011
Another thing being "Chinese" doesn't mean you can't be a traitor to the Chinese people nor a given that respect to all other chinese people follows, as implicated in this site elsewhere hehe. The last Emperor Puyi had more respect for the Japanese army than the working peasants and the sad tragic events thereafter.
MELLOYELLOFELLO - Labels Posted 1:04 on 7 January 2011
Gillian - I really liked all what you said and indeed,sadly these labels can stiffle an individual"s expression of their own experiences of life ,growth and through these labels assumed peership presures can even discourage the differences of opinion.

The "One Size" fits all identity in today's Modern world has no place and is a very primitive way to engage with the world with its gems of diversity but, of course for practical reason "terms" are needed to used but paradoxically should not be taken for granted. So a difference of opinion hardly makes one a "traitor" .....!?(Where did that word come from?)
Only registered users can write comments!