Tibet, Now
Sunday’s New York Times Travel Section included a long piece by The New Republic’s Joshua Kurlantzick titled “Tibet, Now.” Kurlantzick’s frustrating piece skirts between horrible and decent coverage of Tibet and though it rarely moves into either category, it is a solid example of what morally soft writing about Tibet looks like. Like endorsing a free trade deal that makes no allocations for human rights, Kurlantzick repeatedly describes situations of economic and religious conflict in Tibet without ever coming out and citing China’s fifty-seven year occupation of Tibet as the cause.
The article is mostly about tourism and traveling in Tibet. What shockingly goes unstated is that the overwhelming majority of tourists in Tibet are Han Chinese and not Western Dharma bums as stereotype might suggest. Kurlantzick does get close, but never makes explicit the fact that it is Chinese tourists that are fouling up Tibet in overwhelming numbers.
Once almost a synonym for remote, Tibet has in recent years experienced a surge of development and tourism, bringing cellphone cameras and tour leaders wielding megaphones to sites like the Jokhang. Tourism to Tibet is skyrocketing, a result of rising Chinese incomes, growing Chinese fascination with Tibetan Buddhism and easier access to the Roof of the World.
This is about as close as Kurlantzick comes to the truth and he follows the quote with this statement from a Chinese settler.
“I had to come here,� one Chinese tour guide tells me during my visit to Tibet this summer. “This is where I can make money.�
As I said before, this article skirts having decent coverage of the economic dynamics at play in Tibet. Tibetan culture is commodified for Chinese tourism and those that profit the most are the settlers who’ve come in to make a quick fortune off of wealthy Chinese tourists spending money in exoticized Tibet.
Kurlantzick’s column takes a turn for the banal when forced to discuss the eradication of Tibetan culture at the hands of Chinese occupation.
For many Western travelers, the tourism bonanza has added to the urgency of getting to Tibet while they can still recognize its unique culture and fragile environment. Yet even as more foreigners consider visiting, Tibet is becoming more comfortable, with easier access for independent travelers and higher-end accommodations like Lhasa’s first boutique hotel, which opened this summer.
The focus is here is what Westerners can hope to extract from Tibet before the Chinese have taken it all away – no tears are shed for what Kurlatnzick has identified as the looming death of Tibet’s “unique culture.” No need to dally on this passing detail, for after all the death of Tibetan culture is accompanied by boutique hotels. I guess Kurlantzick thinks this is pretty much a wash in the grand scheme of things.
Kurlantzick again describes the exploitative dynamic of the tourism industry that is set up to make Chinese settlers rich while Tibetan culture is turned into a trinket.
The Potala exit sends me into a sea of vendors selling prayer beads. Though they are selling Tibetan objects of worship, most vendors seem to be Chinese migrants. “The Chinese tourism just allows migrants to take tourism jobs — Chinese businesspeople mass-produce Tibetan jewelry and they run the jewelry shops in the Barkhor,� says one Tibetan guide.
Clearly Kurlantzick had the sense to speak to someone who was actually Tibetan to understand what the economics of the oppression he was witnessing were. This is a tremendously damning indictment of China’s economy in Tibet – one that you would think would be accompanied by outrage that China is profiting from the perversion of Tibetan culture. Yet for Kurlantzick, there is none. Instead, he has the audacity to make himself the sole arbiter of Tibet’s status as object of fetishization by the West.
TRAIN travel also can help get travelers away from the Lhasa region. After several days outside the city, I decide Tibet still retains its majesty.
Well I’m sure five million Tibetans living under Chinese military occupation will now be able to sleep soundly at night.
Kurlantzick is guilty of what so many western commentators are guilty of – describing a problem that threatens the life of Tibetan culture but refusing to pass any moral judgment about this tragedy. He repeatedly describes the economic and cultural destruction being inflicted on Tibetans inside of Tibet, yet never once references the Chinese policies that have created and advanced the threats to Tibet that he sees all around him. Not once does Kurlantzick condemn the Chinese Communist Party for building a rail line that will bring in millions of more Han settlers and Chinese tourists. Not once does Kurlantzick reference the razing of 6,000 Tibetan monasteries as he visits a handful that still stand. No where does he reference the genocide of over one million Tibetans , all of whom died as a direct result of the Chinese occupation of Tibet.
Kurlantzick describes phenomena that threaten to destroy Tibet’s culture and he never once says “Stop. Enough. This cannot stand.” Instead Tibet remains a tourist destination that he has to share with throngs of Chinese tourists and their camera phone inconveniences. He has to get word back to his wealthy Western friends that they can still squeeze something out of Tibet if they time their trip just right (and if they’re sure to stay in a boutique hotel while they’re there). Kurlantzick’s guilt is the guilt of omission, the guilt of omitting morality from his writings on Tibet.
This is not the worst piece published about Tibet in recent memory, but it is heartbreaking in its morally vacuous fetishizations of Tibet and Tibetan culture. It’s shameful that the New York Times felt the need to omit morality from this piece. You’d think 1500 words on the rape of a culture would at least merit a whimper from the paper of record.
Technorati Tags: New York TImes, Joshua Kurlantzick, Tibet
No Responsesto “Tibet, Now”
Leave a Reply
on 
on 
on 
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
 |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
[...] Cross posted at Tibet Will Be Free. [...]
[...] Via Jeremy Golkorn of the China media blog Danwei, Bruce Humes has a clear-cut example of how censorship manifests itself in published articles in China. I recently wrote about a New York Times travel section piece by Joshua Kurlantzick. It turns out that Kurlantzick’s article is being republished in China in the daily newspaper Cankao Xiaoxi, but with heavy censorship of lines that describe the political and economic plight of Tibetans, as well as parts that are critical of China. Predictably, politically incorrect references to the Dalai Lama, the Cultural Revolution, Tibet’s unique Sky Burial (the corpse left at high altitudes to be devoured by vultures) have been deleted, and there are no mentions of Tibet-related web sites blocked by China. [...]
[...] Via Jeremy Golkorn of the China media blog Danwei, Bruce Humes has a clear-cut example of how censorship manifests itself in published articles in China. I recently wrote about a New York Times travel section piece by Joshua Kurlantzick. It turns out that Kurlantzick’s article is being republished in China in the daily newspaper Cankao Xiaoxi, but with heavy censorship of lines that describe the political and economic plight of Tibetans, as well as parts that are critical of China. Predictably, politically incorrect references to the Dalai Lama, the Cultural Revolution, Tibet’s unique Sky Burial (the corpse left at high altitudes to be devoured by vultures) have been deleted, and there are no mentions of Tibet-related web sites blocked by China. [...]
[...] I found some information to support this theory on UNESCO’s website and this blog. [...]
New York Yankees Spring Training Report…
Baseball season is finally here and spring training is over. It has been a very successful preseason from many different perspectives, particularly from the aspect of rookie potential and successful leadership provided by the veterans of most of the co…