I find this article very interesting as it
contradicts itself in a very “nice” manner. I was shocked to find out
that a peace prize was awarded to a person who caused war, instead of peace. Furthermore,
the committee that awarded this peace prize award was able to justify
themselves by throwing out “unbelievable” reasons. His ruthlessness was painted
in a different light by the committee and praised to the extent that the
purpose of going to war was an applaudable one. This article is trying to provoke
sarcasm to the Putin’s prime minister in a very polite manner. The mere action
of holding of a news conference on China International Peace Studies Center, but
yet there was little reporting in the Chinese news media about the award, shows
the unimportance of publicizing this award to the Chinese people. Whereas, twitter
was utilized to spread this award, clearly illustrates the target audience that
the committee is aiming at- the rest of the world, in particular tapping on the
strength of the social media. According
to the last year’s winner, Lien Chan, the award wasn’t properly explained and publicized
to him, at least. Therefore, this again reflects the sincerity and importance
of this award to the awardee. Towards the end of the article, I have the
feeling that the original meaning of prizes has evolved in this context and has
undertaken a complex nature. Whereby, the awarding of a prize may not
necessarily carry the good nature of it. Hence, I conclude that this award
appears to be more of a jeer than a true award, for its purpose.
Ming Jiang, you have recognised various contradictions in the article, and this reflects how you are very sensitive, not only to what is explicitly being said in the article, but also what is implied. You can distinguish between the article and the author, if this is possible? The author uses the article to present information, and although he may attempt to do so in an objective manner, his personal bias emerges through his choice of language and selected information.
ReplyDeleteThere are indeed many prizes given out with the intention of mocking and sending out sarcasms like the Darwin Award and Ig Nobel Prize.
ReplyDeleteI agree with your analysis.
Hi Ming Jiang :) I can see that you very much agree with what the author is trying to say about the ridiculousness of giving the peace prize to the Russian Prime Minister. However, I think that the writer appears to be strongly biased against the Chinese committee's point of view that perhaps the only way to attain true peace is through war.
ReplyDeleteIt is an unfortunate fact that we can secure peace only by preparing for war.
~John F Kennedy~
There is nothing so likely to produce peace as to be well prepared to meet the enemy.
~George Washington~
(From http://www.squidoo.com/peace-quotes)
I remember reading somewhere about some quote saying how peace is attainable only through war but I can't remember the exact words. I found these off some website and I'm not sure if they are indeed the words of those renowned figures, but my point is that there are people who think that way, and everyone is entitled to their own opinion. So actually the Chinese committee might not be giving the award to Putin in jest but actually because they do respect him for his willingness to wage war on Chechen terrorists! :o
Just offering an alternate point of view! Heheh see you in class :)
I agree that the award was presented in a rather slipshot manner, where both the previous winner, and Putin's spokesperson, reflected that they do not know much about the prize. Besides, the voting committee members do not seem to reflect credibility, given how one of them 'cursed in public', and with another splitting off from the group, these factors indeed diminishes the prestige of the prize.
ReplyDeleteI see this award purely as a political response towards the Nobel committee's decision to award Liu Xiao Bo. By trivializing its own award and by awarding to a particularly controversial figure who had received much negative reporting from the Western press, I believe that this may be the "Chinese Way" of mocking or responding in a more subtle manner.
ReplyDelete