Friday, October 26, 2012

KAPOK: To go or not to go?

Culture as a concept is notorious for being both wide in scope and pretty vague in meaning. In most encyclopedic volumes, the first reference to it appears in Cicero’s writing as “cultura animi”, the cultivation of the soul or mind, thus an agricultural metaphor expressing the unique capability of a human being to enrich himself or herself, and therefore develop and realize their full and highest potential — philosophically speaking.
In the nineteenth century, romanticism gave culture a particular twist, less universal and more exclusive: culture became closely associated with nations and the ferment of national identities. Along with sweeping modernity arose the distinction between “high” or noble culture vs. “low” or popular culture, thus the reference to cultural specificities and a hierarchy of culture were the grammar of national exclusion and social division. The excess and brutality of the reign of ideologies in the twentieth century, among which nationalism fared on par with Communism and Nazism, led to a critical reappraisal of the notion.
In the words of the famous American anthropologist Clifford Geertz, culture is “a system of inherited conceptions expressed in symbolic forms by means of which men communicate, perpetuate, and develop their knowledge about and attitudes toward life.” The important idea here, contrary to what Samuel Huntington simplistically professed in his “Clash of Civilizations,” is that culture is not reified or solidified knowledge: it changes over time and transformations derive from outside borrowing, and thus acculturation and accommodation. Nevertheless, as Geertz puts it, “culture is simply the ensemble of stories we tell ourselves about ourselves.”
Then why on earth would the United Association of Food and Beverage Merchants of Macao (UAFBM), the association that organizes the Macao Food Festival, decide “not to feature any Japanese food stalls coming from Japan” because of the “relatively high tense political atmosphere between China and Japan” over the Senkaku/Diaoyu islands? Isn’t the food festival supposed to be about culture? Didn’t the UAFBM receive close to MOP 10 million from the Macau Foundation for its “project in support of the preservation of eateries in Macao” in August alone? Isn’t Mr Chan Chak Mo, the president of the UAFBM, also a functional member of the Legislative Assembly representing, precisely, culture? What’s the story then?
First, UAFBM doesn’t really deal with culture: not once, in its statutes, is the word culture in Chinese mentioned. Worse, article 2 states that the purpose of the association is to “love the motherland, uphold the ‘one country, two systems’ principle” and of course defend the legitimate rights and interests of the members of that particular industry. Mr Chan: where is your cultural background and why is the Macau Foundation providing your association with funding? And why would “one country” understood narrowly prevail over the “second system”? Mr Chan Chak Mo is concurrently the managing director of Future Bright Holdings, one of the heavyweights of F&B in Macao (which also operates on the mainland…) listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange, that operates 24 restaurants and 10 food court counters, including quite a few Japanese ones: no wonder then that the Festival’s Japanese corner is going to be filled by over twenty restaurants run by Macau operators! 
If I were my usual self I would merely say: boycott the Macao Food festival! This meddling of politics into culture and especially food culture — remember I am French, almost as inquisitive and demanding for food as a Chinese person can be — is a disgrace, a shameful and insidious act of self-absorbed petty business interests draped in bloated half-baked patriotic disguise! But then, not all the food stalls participating in the event are responsible for the misguided verdicts of Mr Chan’s association, so I will be reasonable: boycott all Future Bright stalls at the festival! Shanghai 456, Cafe Lan, Madeira or Oishii Ichiban and Edo don’t need and certainly don’t deserve your Patacas!

Published in Macau Daily Times on October 26th 2012

No comments: