凤凰男和孔雀女的历史回顾-福柯的权力观

When Phoenix Men Meet Peacock Women A Historical Analysis from Foucaldian Perspective Introduction This paper includes four parts. The first part introduces the definition of “phoenix man” and “peacock woman”, how they became an emerging phenomenon and inspired heated public discussion. The second part, literature review, reports existing limited number of research on this topic, which highlight sociology perspective; then cultural and communication perspectives are added as complement to the previous research: The cultural perspective discusses micro-culture theory, Kuo-shu Yang’s individual traditionality and modernity theory, and intercultural marriage. The communication perspective brings in Foucaldian critical approach, which is the threadline of the later parts. In the third part, a comparison is made between history and present, both interpreted by Foucaldian power: marriage of convenience during the 1960s and 1970s, which represent the prototype of modern “phoenix man” and “peacock woman”; and how modern “phoenix man” and “peacock woman” became popular in media and how their images are shaped. The last part concludes that “power” is the determinant of modern “phoenix man” and “peacock woman” phenomenon, since it brought in the census registration, which led to large scale of social mobility and upcoming binary opposition between urban and rural populations. Part 1. “Phoenix Man” & “Peacock Woman” as an Emerging Phenomenon According to Baidu encyclopedia, the term “phoenix man” was first derived from Yuanyuan Tune (《圆圆曲》) written by Wu Weiye (吴伟业), a poet at the transitional period of Ming and Qing dynasty. The original sentence described the triumph of Chen Yuanyuan when he returned to his hometown with big title and high status(“旧巢共是衔泥燕,飞上枝头变凤凰”). Later this phrase became widely used in idioms such as “a golden phoenix flying from countryside” (“山沟里飞出个金凤凰”), referring to those who have risen from a humble background. The modern version “phoenix man”(凤凰男), however, refers to a specific group who carry with them typical labels such as: poor origin, motivated, hardworking, big city, key university, satisfying job etc. Many would marry an urban girl and then settle down. Those girls, whose fate are interwoven with “phoenix men” are called “peacock women” (孔雀女), carrying typical labels such as: single child, well-off family in big cities, naïve, proud and simple-minded. They are raised up as pampered, delicate flowers, seldom caught between life hardships; they pursue pure love and romance when choosing life partner, they are more particular about a man’s ability and responsibility rather than his background or material wealth. “Phoenix man” together with “peacock woman” as two bounded concepts have attracted much attention ever since they were featured in a popular TV series Modern Marriage Era (《新结婚时代》) in late 2006，which recaptures how a couple, due to difference of family background, are separated. Another landmark occurred in July 2007 when an article titled “The mother-in-law insisted on living together, the daughter-in-law performed an abortion and asked for divorce (《乡下婆婆来伺候月子，儿媳妇打掉了6个月的胎儿》)” was posted on BBS Sohu. It described the marriage predicament between an urban woman and a man from rural area. The article soon became a heated topic for discussion and got over millions of click volume in only three days. It was then posted on other BBS and SNS such as “Tianya” (the biggest SNS in China). Shortly after that, articles with similar topics popped up, among which are “The tragic marriage between a ‘phoenix man’ and a ‘peacock woman’ (Oct. 2006)”, “I met the most pitiful ‘phoenix man’ in Shanghai” (Dec.2008), to name just a few. Most were public accusations made by urban women, or so-called “peacock women”, who expressed frustrations about handling family conflict caused by the gap between urban and rural areas. Several popular TV series such as Double Sided Tape（《双面胶》, broadcast in 2007）, the Mother-in-law Comes (《婆婆来了》, broadcast in 2010) which deal with similar themes also ignited a lot of public debate and exerted huge social impact. An online survey, conducted in 2008 by social research center of Chinese Youth Daily and QQ.com, shows that among 1075 participants, 67.6% of them had an unfavorable impression of marriage between “phoenix men” and “peacock women”; 43.7% stood against such marriage, and only 11.5% held neutral or expressed support. Till now, the discussion has not come to an end. Part 2. Literary Review The number of previous research on these two topics is quite limited, for the two concepts have not gained fame until in recent years. Most research highlight sociology point of view. Thus as a complement to a more comprehensive perspective, culture and critical approaches are added to further interpret the topic. Sociology Approach Key words: Social mobility, social hierarchy, class distinction, social capital transfer In How high can “phoenix men” fly: Men’s upward mobility from the rural to non-rural status in China (2010) , the author (Lin Yi, Department of Sociology at Peking University) analyzed the relation between men’s intra-generational mobility from rural to non-rural status and their status levels based on the data from Chinese General Social Survey. The author noted that phoenix men, due to their strong motivation, are more likely to find an ideal job and are likely to be promoted to the middle management level, but they are at disadvantage when it comes to rising to the advanced level, especially if they work as civil servants. For those who work in technology industry, however, the chance for promotion is much bigger. Based on Lipset and Zetterberg’s theory of social mobility, the author therefore concludes that a lack of social capital, social network, and class distinction constitute some of the main causes. Key words: Urbanization, globalization, an ongoing interaction process between urban and rural areas Contrary to overwhelmingly negative outlooks on marriage between phoenix man and peacock woman, some scholars see the other side of the story. According to Zhang (2009), such marriage is a positive sign indicating meaningful interaction between rural and urban areas. Since phoenix man and peacock woman are immersed in different cultures (one in traditional rural culture, the other in modern urban culture), such combination, as a result of cultural diversity and assimilation, responds to the larger globalization process. Zhang holds that the interaction is conducive to effacing gap between rural and urban areas and helps to build a more dynamic and diverse society. But he also notes that conflicts are unavoidable due to social, economic, and cultural factors. Cultural Approach Micro-culture Micro-culture implies perceived cultural difference concerning the mileau of cultural diversity and highlights the awareness of group membership and individual identification within a larger culture (Dodd, 2006, p.74). Therefore, when thinking of culture, it should not be restricted to narrow cultural definitions. Rather, it is more helpful to observe many cultural group contexts. Most people belong to a number of groups, some voluntary, some by birth, adoption, or selection. Each group exhibits some similarities to the large culture, but also some differences. Micro-cultures of identification are often deferred by class, education, age, belief, wealth, residence, work, family, and gender. Therefore, “phoenix man” and “peacock woman” represent typical micro-cultures, especially rural and urban ones. Rural culture, which “phoenix man” grew up with, is identified as characteristic norms of rurality. First, rural cultures emphasize personal know-how, practicality, and simplicity over complexity. Second, traditionalism and norms toward interpersonal relationships persist. Familism outweighs individualism, people subordinate personal goals to the wishes and perceived good of the family. Third, rurality is mindset. One can stay rural in the middle of urban life, and vise versa. After years of living in big cities, many “phoenix men” retain some of the common characteristics of their roots. Fourth, their communication style differences can clash interculturally with others who are not accustomed to. Urban culture, represented by “peacock woman” here, tends to be composed of isolated members with pockets or enclaves of group cohesion. Social participation outlets are limited, and a generalized isolation and loneliness may result partly from crowded physical surroundings. The fast-moving urban life fosters less dependence on interpersonal communication networks. “Phoenix man” and “peacock woman” are also classified into different social class due to their different origin, producing a hierarchy of respect and prestige. For “phoenix man”, they suffer from a lack of material wealth and potential social upward resources. Such objective factors separate rural people from the urban group. Besides, they also suffer from victimization. They frequently feel victimized by prejudice or policy, and marginalized by media (Dodd, 2006, pp. 74-79). Kuo-shu Yang’s Individual Traditionality and Modernity Theory The huge distinctions between “phoenix man” and “peacock woman” can also be attributed to the fact that rural culture represents more traditional Chinese values and urban culture is under big influences of western values (exogenous modernization). The psychological convergence hypothesis that “the people of all modernizing societies are becoming similar to each other in their psychological characteristics” (Yang, 1996) has been supported by major empirical research, but in Yang Kuo-shu’s traditionality and modernity research, a compromised stance is favored: “societal and psychological modernity should be considered as two interacting factors and that at different stages of the modernizing process, each plays different roles”. Yang’s traditionality and modernity research paradigm proposed that individuals can remain traditional in some life domains whereas they also have become modern in other life domains (known as “psychological compartmentalization”). This may also explain why “phoenix man” can adopt modern lifestyles and still retain some of the contrasting rural ways of thinking and living. Intercultural Marriage Intercultural marriage (or dual cultural marriage) comes in various forms, including rural, urban, mixed social classes etc. (Dodd, 2006, p.70). Intercultural marriage partners experience normally expected marital adjustment problems and unique cultural adjustment problems, which partly explain the marital predicament confronted by many phoenix men and peacock women: (1). The Romeo and Juliet effect. It refers to intense feelings of attraction because family prejudices essentially deny the couple’s blessing for marriage. As in many cases of phoenix men and peacock women, the forbidden relation seems to intensify attraction. However, when the couple face increased intrusion by parents and low acceptance among the extended family, distrust between each other would occur. (2). Role expectation. Peacock woman often felt pressured into accepting their husbands’ culture, and vice versa. The pressure to assimilate into each other’s culture and to make great adjustments is huge. (3). Negative expectations from the community and media. The conclusions of a survey (Bizman, 1987) indicated that intercultural marriages were expected to be 25% less successful among all the marriages. One important reason is the vital role media and community play in forming bias, as will be illustrated in later parts. To marry an individual from another culture is to marry that culture. Lack of interest in the other’s culture is damaging. To assume that the spouse is attached to the new culture is a serious mistake. The fundamental theme of the culture must be raised, discussed, and valued, if not shared, by two parties. Communication Approach — Foucaldian Critical Perspective In the field of communication, critical scholars focus on oppression and clashing interests within societies. They are interested in which social groups dominate others intellectually, especially on the role of discourse and media in such domination. By examining social conditions and uncovering oppressive power arrangements, they study how messages reinforce oppression in society, how discourse and the texts can promote particular ideologies, establish and maintain power, and subvert the interests of certain groups and classes (Littlejohn, 2003, pp.207-8). Among various types of critical theories, poststructuralist Michel Foucault’s theory of power has a wide influence on how social structure can be perceived. Foucault developed a concept of power as “able to take the form of a subjectification as well as of an objectification”. It was very natural that power should be exerted against the body and that punishment should involve bodily pain, as happened in the 18th century torture and public execution. But in the latter discursive formation, power became more a matter of the “individual human psyche or soul” (Littlejohn, 2003, p.221). On the last page of Discipline and Punish (Foucault, 1995, p.330), Foucault stresses that the “power of normalization is not exercised by the prison alone, but also by our social mechanisms”. Therefore, “the fabrication of the disciplinary individual” partly rest on institutions of repression, rejection and marginalization. As can be reflected from a brief review of the historical equivalent of “phoenix man” and “peacock woman”, or more precisely, rural man and modern woman in the following part, Foucaldian power is applied to mass media of communication, and the reason is clear: media are powerful instruments of ideology in society. It is also applied to the larger mechanisms, for Foucault’s use of rules across the society functions on a deep and profound level. Part 3. A Foucaldian Interpretation of Power Case Study: Marriage of Convenience Background Information The “marriage of convenience” during the Chinese Cultural Revolution (1966-1976) is a vivid example from Foucaldian perspective. This historical period witnessed China bogged down in the wild political upheavals. Marriage also became a part of the chaos. In response to Mao’s advocate, millions of educated youth (known as “Zhiqing”) devoted themselves to the development of rural China. In the absence of solid data on a national scale, side glances of marriage during 1970s (1992, p. 85) is thought-provoking: (1). Statistics of 1976 in Huaide, Jilin province shows that 74.8% of newly recorded marriages occurred between Zhiqing and farmer, followed by 17.9% between two Zhiqing and 7.3% between Zhiqing and factory workers. (2). Statistics of 1978 in Baoding, Hebei province shows that 75.5% of newly recorded marriages occurred between Zhiqing and farmer, followed by 15.2% between two Zhiqing and 9.4% between Zhiqing and factory workers. (3). Statistics of 1979 in Hulan, Heilongjiang province shows that in marriages between Zhiqing and farmers, urban females and rural males dominated the marriage type (66.2%); and similar tendency occurred in Baoding, Hebei province (67.8%). The above statistical reports are indicative of marriage status during different time periods in the 1970s. They not only show the predominated type of marriage — marriages between urban youth and rural farmer; they also show that in this major marriage type, urban females and rural males marriages took the larger part. Examination of Disciplinary Mechanisms The phenomenon occurred due to several reasons. Firstly, to better implement national policy of the movement(上山下乡), the government kept instilling the idea that Zhiqing should marry a local and devote their life to the development of rural areas. For example, People’s Daily (《人民日报》) on May,14th, 1970 advocated on the front page that in implementing national policy, Zhiqing’s personal choice of marriage partner would be the key index to evaluate their performance in “class struggle”. Second, China was then fighting against the problem of rocketing population. To push forward the “one-child-policy”, population control in rural villages was on top of the agenda. Therefore, marriage between Zhiqing (as ice-breakers) and the locals were encouraged. Third, many Zhiqing felt insecure because of their urban “bourgeoisie” background, in order to get rid of or cover their “stained” identity, the best solution was marrying a typical proletariat from the working class (typically a farmer or factory worker); lastly, many urban girls were exhausted both physically and psychologically. They were heavily-loaded with the farm work and meanwhile discriminated due to their background. Feeling disillusioned and hopeless, many were desperate to seek emotional support and someone to rely on（Ding & Liu, 1998）. The above shows how hierarchical observation and the disciplinary mechanisms bring individual action into “normalizing operation”. According to Foucault, in feudal society, power was chiefly sovereignty and confined to general mechanisms of domination; power had then little hold on personal detail. But the classical age invented new mechanisms of power, endowed with highly specific procedural techniques as well as new instruments and apparatuses. A new type of power — disciplinary domination — came into practice. Unlike random sovereign power, which was chiefly exercised over the earth and its products, disciplinary power concentrated on human bodies and their operation (Merquior, 1985, pp.108-140). This includes not only the advocated “ideal marriage” between Zhiqing and farmer, but also population control. Ever since the 1960s when demographers and policy makers decided to check population, sex was no longer something one simply judged; it became a thing to be administered. A politics of the body, in conjunction with the planning of the population have always been a great social concern and power manipulation. Similarly, the movement and class distinction also examine personal life choice. Such “examination” combines the techniques of an observing hierarchy and those of normalizing judgment. It is a normalizing gaze, a surveillance that makes it possible to qualify, to classify and to punish. Foucault (1995, p.228) stated that the chief function of the disciplinary power is to “train”. It does not link forces together in order to reduce them; it seeks to bind them together in such a way as to multiply and use them. Disciplinary power is found on the prescription of standards of correct behavior, such as advocated marriage choice. Such marriage reflects the main theme after Discipline and Punish that the self, as a tool of power, is a product of domination, rather than as an instrument of personal freedom. Discursive and Media Power Media during the Cultural Revolution period was largely an official tool of promoting ideology, and linked a certain type of knowledge to a certain form of the exercise of power, as the following example shows. The heroin, Bai Qixian (白启娴), was originally a graduate of Hebei Normal College. As a Zhiqing volunteer, she was sent to Cangxian county in Hebei. In response to national policy, she married a local farmer in 1972. Her husband was barely literate, and was in nature a male chauvinist. Though Bai served as a loving wife and devoted mother of several children, she was constantly suffering from family violence for no reason. As a result, she became a laughing stock in her surroundings. Full of fury, she wrote to several news agencies: “some people said that marry a farmer is humiliating, but I think those who pursue hedonism and look down upon farmers are most despicable.” To argue her point, she beautified her unhappy marriage to an ideal one, and she proved herself to be a good communist by “settling down in village and fighting as a revolutionist”. It was then the very moment of “criticizi