Revising wuxia stories to be more politically correct for our times.

[Ken Cheng]

Classic wuxia novels such as those of Jin Yong, Gu Long, and earlier wuxia novelists feature content that is often, strictly speaking, not in tune with the social and political sensibilities of our times. Indeed, some of the things said and done by otherwise admirable wuxia heroes seem disturbingly sexist, racist, or callous (towards not only human beings, but animals as well).

Are there any particular instances in wuxia you wish could be revised to be more politically correct for the sensibilities of our times?

[Banh Mi]

None because politically correct is a stupid idea.

[Ken Cheng]

None because politically correct is a stupid idea.

Much of political correctness does go way too far, but do you think it would help the image of wuxia heroes among modern fans if the writers eliminated scenes involving:

1. Good, heroic men (not villains) slapping/hitting women outside the context of wulin combat (not that this happens too much in wuxia, but it does, occasionally; not sure people are comfortable with the idea of these great, noble heroes as significant-other/spouse abusers).

2. Butchery of animals for purposes other than food (e.g. Gwok Jing using hundreds of lamb legs as a ladder to climb on/off a mountain; I believe that there was also an incident somewhere of Yeung Gor killing a tortoise) or survival (e.g. killing the beast before the beast kills the hero).

3. Unnecessary brutality: it *really* bothers me that Gwok Jing executed that Sung soldier at Seung Yeung for falling asleep on patrol. Granted, it's dereliction of duty and warrants discipline, but killing the poor guy seems to be a bit *too* much...at least for a hero as renowned for his compassion as for his bravery and martial arts prowess. It would have been more understandable had the character been Kiu Fung, but it seems at odds with Gwok Jing's usual characterization.

4. Torturing innocent people for the lulz (e.g. Wong Yung tormenting fat woman incident in LOCH).

These are some "politically incorrect" things that were probably all right during the 1950s/1960s when Jin Yong first wrote his wuxia stories, but looking at these moments with 2012 eyes tarnishes the noble image of our heroes somewhat.

[Ian Liew]

Would have been nice if Wei Xiaobao earned Ah Ke's love on merit rather than raping her and driving her to follow him out of desperation.

[sandy1]

Would have been nice if Wei Xiaobao earned Ah Ke's love on merit rather than raping her and driving her to follow him out of desperation.

Umm... isn't the whole point of the WXB character is to be politically incorrect?

[Son of Light]

Plp don't judge heroes of the past using today's values.

[sandy1]

Much of political correctness does go way too far, but do you think it would help the image of wuxia heroes among modern fans if the writers eliminated scenes involving:

1. Good, heroic men (not villains) slapping/hitting women outside the context of wulin combat (not that this happens too much in wuxia, but it does, occasionally; not sure people are comfortable with the idea of these great, noble heroes as significant-other/spouse abusers).

I can't recall any of the JY heroes doing this. Could you give me an example?

3. Unnecessary brutality: it *really* bothers me that Gwok Jing executed that Sung soldier at Seung Yeung for falling asleep on patrol. Granted, it's dereliction of duty and warrants discipline, but killing the poor guy seems to be a bit *too* much...at least for a hero as renowned for his compassion as for his bravery and martial arts prowess. It would have been more understandable had the character been Kiu Fung, but it seems at odds with Gwok Jing's usual characterization.

I think Sun Tzu advocated this --- it could be argued that what GJ did was consistent with the best practices of army discipline during that time. If he didn't do this, he would have been considered a lax commander.

4. Torturing innocent people for the lulz (e.g. Wong Yung tormenting fat woman incident in LOCH).

These are some "politically incorrect" things that were probably all right during the 1950s/1960s when Jin Yong first wrote his wuxia stories, but looking at these moments with 2012 eyes tarnishes the noble image of our heroes somewhat.

I think that incident is supposed to illustrate HR's vicious brat tendencies, which were markedly lessened after she met GJ. JY could have toned it down in the third edition, like he did for RYY, but apparently he did not.

[kidd]

Those stories were set in the past. So, political incorrectness is ok.

[Banh Mi]

Much of political correctness does go way too far, but do you think it would help the image of wuxia heroes among modern fans if the writers eliminated scenes involving:

1. Good, heroic men (not villains) slapping/hitting women outside the context of wulin combat (not that this happens too much in wuxia, but it does, occasionally; not sure people are comfortable with the idea of these great, noble heroes as significant-other/spouse abusers).

2. Butchery of animals for purposes other than food (e.g. Gwok Jing using hundreds of lamb legs as a ladder to climb on/off a mountain; I believe that there was also an incident somewhere of Yeung Gor killing a tortoise) or survival (e.g. killing the beast before the beast kills the hero).

3. Unnecessary brutality: it *really* bothers me that Gwok Jing executed that Sung soldier at Seung Yeung for falling asleep on patrol. Granted, it's dereliction of duty and warrants discipline, but killing the poor guy seems to be a bit *too* much...at least for a hero as renowned for his compassion as for his bravery and martial arts prowess. It would have been more understandable had the character been Kiu Fung, but it seems at odds with Gwok Jing's usual characterization.

4. Torturing innocent people for the lulz (e.g. Wong Yung tormenting fat woman incident in LOCH).

These are some "politically incorrect" things that were probably all right during the 1950s/1960s when Jin Yong first wrote his wuxia stories, but looking at these moments with 2012 eyes tarnishes the noble image of our heroes somewhat.

I find political correctness in general to be absurd, not just the extreme cases but that's another discusssion. In this context, being PC pigeon holes your characters into a mould, instead of promoting diversity it limits it. Wuxia should be good enough on it's own merits that you should like it even if you don't agree with the character. It also takes away from the zeitgeist of the story. Are we going to stop all notions of suicide as well, which is a popular choice with many wuxia characters to express their bravoury over dishonour mentality?

1. I'm not advocating violence against women, but why should we assume a character should not strike a person if they were female if he would have otherwise should that person be male? Particularly when wuxia women can be quite dangerous.

2. This one's just getting ridiculous, do fictional animals have rights too now?

3. GJ's followed the Wumu manual to the letter. As soon as ZWJ read the manual, he ordered that anyone so much as disobeys orders, they'll be executed, no matter which clan or sect they belong to. GJ's compassionate, but do you think he would let that get in the way of the bigger picture? Would be think himself above Yue Fei's teachings?

I'm pretty sure that your 2012 PC approved revisions would undergo more revisions in 2024 and so on until it becomes a parody of itself. Wuxia is no longer wuxia, just a Mary Sue story set along time ago.

[Son of Light]

Not much to say abt 1~3, but on 4. GJ 100% must kill the fellow.
Rem, they are at war with the most dangerous gp of plp in human history.
Normally, if you lose a war, the winner kill the loser's royal family, but just rule over the loser's plp without much killing.
But the Mongolians are infamous for mass murder when they conquer a place.
And thus, it's a war that cannot lose at any cost.

[Ian Liew]

Umm... isn't the whole point of the WXB character is to be politically incorrect?

Yes, but he crossed the line from being charming rogue to despicable villain during that single incident.

[pannonian]

I think Sun Tzu advocated this --- it could be argued that what GJ did was consistent with the best practices of army discipline during that time. If he didn't do this, he would have been considered a lax commander.

The story goes that Sun Zi hired himself out to a King, who wanted to know, as proof of his ability, if he could make a disciplined force out of his (the King's) concubines. Sun Zi said that he could, and marshalled a company of said concubines, with the King's two favourites as the officers. Sun Zi drilled them in manoeuvres, then gave an order. The concubines broke down with giggles, so Sun Zi explained that the failure to follow should be attributed to his failure in drilling them, and he drilled them again. And again he gave some orders. Again the concubines broke down with giggles. This time, he attributed the failure to follow orders as the fault of the officers in charge of the unit, and ordered them to be executed. The King, understandably unwilling to lose his favourites, countermanded the execution order. But Sun Zi argued that the commander in the field could not be controlled so closely by the King, but had direct authority over the troops, and carried through the executions and appointed another pair of concubines to act as the officers. He gave some orders again, and this time the concubines carried out their manoeuvres perfectly. The King said that he was no longer interested, and Sun Zi commented that he wasn't so much interested in war as he was in a spectacle.

[sandy1]

The story goes that Sun Zi hired himself out to a King, who wanted to know, as proof of his ability, if he could make a disciplined force out of his (the King's) concubines. Sun Zi said that he could, and marshalled a company of said concubines, with the King's two favourites as the officers. Sun Zi drilled them in manoeuvres, then gave an order. The concubines broke down with giggles, so Sun Zi explained that the failure to follow should be attributed to his failure in drilling them, and he drilled them again. And again he gave some orders. Again the concubines broke down with giggles. This time, he attributed the failure to follow orders as the fault of the officers in charge of the unit, and ordered them to be executed. The King, understandably unwilling to lose his favourites, countermanded the execution order. But Sun Zi argued that the commander in the field could not be controlled so closely by the King, but had direct authority over the troops, and carried through the executions and appointed another pair of concubines to act as the officers. He gave some orders again, and this time the concubines carried out their manoeuvres perfectly. The King said that he was no longer interested, and Sun Zi commented that he wasn't so much interested in war as he was in a spectacle.

Yes. That's exactly the example that I was thinking of. So what GJ did was totally in line with the standard military practice at that time.

[sandy1]

Yes, but he crossed the line from being charming rogue to despicable villain during that single incident.

I don't like WXB being a rapist myself, but I think it's pretty consistent with his characteriztion. He's an anti-hero character. I'd find it problematic, however, if JY as the author seems to approve it or treat it casually. I don't remember how the incident is portrayed. It's been a while since I read DOMD.

BTW, have you guys read any Ian Fleming James Bond books? They're written around the same time as JY's books and they're much more blatantly un-PC in terms of sexism, racism, xenophobia, etc. than anything JY ever wrote.

Has JY ever revised his stories to make them more PC?

[Ken Cheng]

I don't like WXB being a rapist myself, but I think it's pretty consistent with his characteriztion. He's an anti-hero character. I'd find it problematic, however, if JY as the author seems to approve it or treat it casually. I don't remember how the incident is portrayed. It's been a while since I read DOMD.

Today, Wai Siu Bo would be guilty of so-called "date rape." He didn't violently force himself upon the women, but he did take advantage of their momentary helplessness (which he didn't cause) to sexually gratify himself upon them. It's still quite immoral and illegal, if not quite at the extreme level of violent rape.

BTW, have you guys read any Ian Fleming James Bond books? They're written around the same time as JY's books and they're much more blatantly un-PC in terms of sexism, racism, xenophobia, etc. than anything JY ever wrote.

...and set in the mid-20th Century, which makes the incidents even harder to overlook.

Has JY ever revised his stories to make them more PC?

Slightly, yes. He changed the Golden Wheel Monk's ethnicity from Tibetan (1st and 2nd editions of ROCH) to Mongolian (3rd edition). I think he'd heard some complaints that *all* Tibetan monks in his stories were depicted as despicable villains, so he turned one of those Tibetan monks (the most infamous one) into a Mongolian instead.

I think that was Jin Yong's only concession to "PC," however.

[sandy1]

Today, Wai Siu Bo would be guilty of so-called "date rape." He didn't violently force himself upon the women, but he did take advantage of their momentary helplessness (which he didn't cause) to sexually gratify himself upon them. It's still quite immoral and illegal, if not quite at the extreme level of violent rape.

I'll look it up. But the real question is the narrator's, in this case JY, view on it. Making characters do bad things doesn't necessarily make the story un-PC, especially if the character is an anti-hero. However, if the narrator seems to endorse such acts, then it's problematic. In ROCH, the Taoist who raped XLN (can't remember his name since JY changed his identity) is explicitly condemned by the narrator, while in XAJH, Tian Boguang's actions is similarly condemned (however, TBG is a much more "sympathetic" rapist then that Taoist priest).

...and set in the mid-20th Century, which makes the incidents even harder to overlook.

In Fleming's case, although there is some ambiguity, the general impression is that these un-PC stuffs were endorsed by the author. I enjoyed some of the books as thrillers/espionage stories, but yes those things are there.

Slightly, yes. He changed the Golden Wheel Monk's ethnicity from Tibetan (1st and 2nd editions of ROCH) to Mongolian (3rd edition). I think he'd heard some complaints that *all* Tibetan monks in his stories were depicted as despicable villains, so he turned one of those Tibetan monks (the most infamous one) into a Mongolian instead.

I think that was Jin Yong's only concession to "PC," however.

I've read papers/articles in which JY is criticized for being a Han nationalist/chauvinist and for being sexist. Do you think that these criticisms have any validity?

[Ken Cheng]

I've read papers/articles in which JY is criticized for being a Han nationalist/chauvinist and for being sexist. Do you think that these criticisms have any validity?

He might well be, but Jin Yong (like all the rest of us) was a product of his environment and his times. Hard to tell how younger generations will judge his work. BIRTH OF A NATION was treated as a great movie in its day, but today, it's painfully and obviously racist.

[sandy1]

He might well be, but Jin Yong (like all the rest of us) was a product of his environment and his times. Hard to tell how younger generations will judge his work. BIRTH OF A NATION was treated as a great movie in its day, but today, it's painfully and obviously racist.

I personally think that he is neither, at least not consciously.