Exploitation and The Blood of Yingzhou District

Little noticed in China last year, the AIDS orphan documentary short The Blood of Yingzhou District gained the attention of the Chinese press by virtue of its Oscar nomination and eventual win (see the China Daily report or the Beijing Review feature).

Not everyone is enthusiastic. After viewing the film at a symposium hosted by the National Press Foundation’s Journalist to Journalist program last August, Xiong Lei, a former senior editor with Xinhua, posted a harsh review on her blog, calling the film redundant, narratively weak, and unbearably boring. This lackluster reception, wrote Xiong, was shared by most of the Chinese journalists in attendance, and stood in remarkable contrast to the excitement of foreign journalists who fell over each other praising the film.

The first comment to the blog post was a point-by-point rebuttal by someone claiming to be the film’s cinematographer, Qu Jiangtao.

Both pieces appear below courtesy of Polish blogger Sinodrom (Sinodrom: Chiny), who supplied Danwei with the translations through the Chinese Content wiki.

A forty-minute documentary called The Blood of Yingzhou District attracted completely different views from foreign and Chinese journalists.

This documentary reports on the situation of Anhui Province, Fuyang District’s AIDS orphans from the countryside. The producer is an American, the director is an American of Hong Kong origin.

It is said that we, almost a hundred journalists who had come from all over the world to attend the 16th AIDS Conference pre-conference training session, were the second group of spectators to have seen the documentary, which hadn’t been shown to the public yet.

But this lauded work actually didn’t appeal to me. There were a few kids in the film, but didn’t narrate the complete story. In substitution, a woman who had adopted them told the story. Her name is Zhang Ying.

Pointing at a child, Zhang Ying said that he had never spoken before and that he was much better now. But in the movie, he still didn’t speak. Pointing at another child, Zhang Ying said that he was really fortunate – an old lady from America supplied him with medicine, so his health wasn’t bad all along. The kid didn’t speak as well, and I don’t know if he feels “fortunate” himself.

Not having even watched up to 30 minutes, I had already taken a few naps. Finally, I couldn’t bear it and went out before time was up. There were a few more colleagues from China who had dozed off and one of them slept from beginning to end.

For the discussion, I went back to the meeting, unable to stop myself from saying that the story in the film wasn’t told well, that it made me drowsy, that I didn’t like it. When talking about AIDS orphans, the kids said too little, Zhang Ying said too much.

But almost all of the foreign journalists said that this film was really good, that it really moved them. Some of them said that as minors, it was hard for the kids to express themselves.

Seeing those orphans’ helplessness, everyone would probably be moved. This kind of emotion doesn’t necessarily mean that the film was well made.

Moreover, only because making films on subjects such as this isn’t easy, adding country scenery, the primitive way of life of the peasants, it was really easy to move foreigners who don’t understand China.

Saying that the orphans haven’t grown up, so they can’t express their feelings and thoughts, just isn’t convincing. My colleagues and I have interviewed many children, including AIDS infected minors. As long as the reporter can interact with them in an equal manner, gain their trust, they are all able to express their views very well, and don’t need a spokesperson.

Out of the 40 Chinese journalist taking part in the training session, only a few could identify with the film.

There were some domestic colleagues who couldn’t accept it because of that Zhang Ying person – one can call her a bit controversial. But professor Li Xiguang from Qinghua University praised her, saying that she had adopted so many AIDS orphans, did so much for them, and it all wasn’t easy.

I don’t understand Zhang Ying. I dislike The Blood of Yingzhou District not because of her – it’s all because I think that the film itself was badly shot, the story was told with no clear reason whatsoever, and what’s more, the children were never given the right to express themselves.

Some of foreign colleagues erroneously believed that the Chinese journalists didn’t like the film because it reveals China’s dark side. All of the Chinese reporters present on the spot disagreed with this interpretation – the problems of AIDS orphans has been reported by the Chinese media many times, and similar topics have appeared in special reports on TV; the mainland has made many films which are more touching than this one. But it was the film made by those two that won a prize abroad. Evidently that’s just what foreign prizes are like.

As for the disagreement about the film, it attracted the attention of Bob Myers, head of the National Press Foundation, which hosted the training session. Today, he found some more time to let everyone see the film again, from a journalistic angle this time. Some colleagues pointed out that from a journalistic perspective, the film only relied on one source, and that’s Zhang Ying. Zhang Ying, leading a film crew, came in and out of various AIDS contracted patients relatives’ homes, and the film showed her orphan adoption issue. Moreover, on the whole it was her who spoke in behalf of the children. This makes it hard to avoid a single person perspective, making people think that the film is giving Zhang Ying publicity, even though the staff repeatedly claimed that they weren’t doing publicity for anyone, just talking about a social phenomena, a social problem.

Some people said, that when making a documentary about AIDS, using a single source wasn’t wrong.

This thought is very unsettling. The film talked about the biased view of fellow villagers towards the sufferers. But didn’t let the healthy villagers talk about the problem. So the opinion about the village isn’t objective and true, provoking one’s doubts.

And then there are the AIDS orphans appearing in the film, all of them with real names, their faces uncovered. When filming, was their genuine agreement given? Were they informed that the showing of the film could affect their lives? I don’t know.

Theres a scene in the film, where a HIV-positive girl concealing the truth about her infection gets married. Asked if shes going tell the truth after the wedding, she says no, that she intends to hide the truth for a long time. But the film is made in such a way, that won’t her real situation be revealed after the broadcast? Someone asked the director about it, and the answer given was, that actually before holding the wedding, frankly, the girl told about her situation. In that case, why did the finished movie show the girl hiding away the truth? Isn’t it lying to the audience?

During this training session, we understood that in the modern world the capital invested in HIV is huge, and there are many people living off of it.

Considering this film, it is indeed like that.

---

The first comment to this post was from someone who claimed to be the cinematographer:

I’m The Blood of Yingzhou District cameraman. Actually the time when I got involved was before the director went back to the country. It’s been two years already, I shot almost every scene in the film, you can say that I ought to know better than you what happened there!

Zhang Ying said, that he had never spoken before and that he was much better now. But in the movie, he still didn’t speak. Pointing at another child, Zhang Ying said, that he was really fortunate – an old lady from America supplied him with medicine, so his health wasn’t bad all along. The kid didn’t speak as well, and I don’t know if he feels fortunate himself.

The child who wasn’t speaking is called Gao Jun, he livens up at the end of the film; the other one’s name is Nannan, she’s at least lived to be fourteen thanks to the help of the old American lady, she’s probably the worlds longest living child born with AIDS, can’t you tell if she’s happy or not?

The film talked about the biased view of fellow villagers towards the sufferers. But didn’t let the healthy villagers talk about the problem. So the opinion about the village isn’t objective and true, provoking one’s doubts.

It seems that you must have been tired out the first night to doze off not long after the start of the film!

And then there are the AIDS orphans appearing in the film, all of them with real names, their faces uncovered. When filming, was their genuine agreement given? Were they informed that the showing of the film could affect their lives? I don’t know.

I know – each and every child and person who was filmed had been given a document to sign that they agree to be filmed, and for the film to be screened.

There’s a scene in the film, where a HIV-positive girl concealing the truth about her infection gets married.

The girl is Nannan’s older sister – she’s healthy!

During this training session, we understood that in the modern world the capital invested in HIV is huge, and there are many people living off of it. Considering this film, it is indeed like that.

Or is it that you’re sore because you haven’t had a taste?

the problems of AIDS orphans has been reported by the Chinese media many times, and similar topics have appeared in special reports on TV; the Mainland has made many films which are more touching than this one. But it was the film made by those two that won a prize abroad. Evidently that’s just what foreign prizes are like. My colleagues and I have interviewed many children, including AIDS infected minors. As long as the reporter can interact with them in an equal manner, gain their trust, they are all able to express their views very well, and don’t need a spokesperson.

If it’s really like that, that you went to interview them, achieved mutual and equal relations, so much that it’s even more moving, where is your stuff? Please give an example. I’ve been to Fuyang more than ten times; I spent last year’s Spring Festival making dumplings with AIDS patients. Have you ever tried that? How can one gain your trust? After you receive your wage, do they stop leaving the life they used to live? A spokesperson was needed, Zhang Ying was there, the director and screenwriter were there, and they’ve changed their lives and fate a lot.

For the discussion, I went back to the meeting, unable to stop myself from saying that the story in the film wasn’t told well, that it made me drowsy, that I didn’t like it.

It’s a documentary! It’s not for you to find stimulating amusement! It speaks about the suffering of so many children, yet you’ve summed it up as a film story!

Not having even watched up to 30 minutes, I had already taken a few naps. Finally, I couldn’t bear it and went out before time was up. There were a few more colleagues from China who had dozed off and one of them slept from beginning to end.

Is it apathy or cold blood? Or is it that you and your friends were really tired the night before? Leaving aside etiquette – taking a nap while watching the film – you still have the nerve to sum it up on a blog….I’ve begun to doubt your humanity and personal integrity!

---

Also, a report on the dispute by science journalist Li Hujun. “An AIDS orphan documentary sets off an argument” (excerpts, also translated by Sinodrom):

The film had not yet finished when Xinhua journalist Xiong Lei declared she was walking out. Soon afterwards, a feud erupted between Chinese and American journalists. During the fierce battle, Qinghua University professor Li Xiguang was openly confronted by his students.

But many of the present Chinese reporters didn’t like the movie. Among them, Xinhua News Agency’s Xiong Lei’s attitude was especially fierce. When the discussion started, she spoke first, saying that the film was bad, too boring.

When filming, thanks to Qinghua University’s professor Jing Jun, Yang Ziye found Fuyang AIDS Orphan Salvation Association’s president – Mrs Zhang Ying. After that, almost the whole journey was made in her accompaniment, following the steps of a few AIDS orphans. So Zhang Ying is a controversial character. According to my co-worker You Shanshan’s article titled “Double faced ‘AIDS mothers’?” Zhang Ying receives fierce comments in the AIDS circle.

When Qinghua University News Academy professor Li Xiguang presented the film’s background in English, he mentioned that Chinese media have distorted Zhang Ying’s image. I immediately asked for the floor: Isn’t it too early to draw the conclusion that the Chinese media have distorted Zhang Ying’s image?

My colleague Liu Jianqiang is Li Xiguang’s student. He also spoke, challenging his own teacher, saying a lot of HIV infected as well as doctor Gao Yaojie and other AIDS activists don’t trust Zhang Ying. (Jianqiang added that this open dispute did not affect the student-teacher relationship.)