Is it accurate that China has a law restricting content to fictional people and places?
Is it accurate that China has a law restricting content to fictional people and places?
I've heard this but can't really search for verification. Supposedly this law forces all Chinese videogames to be set in fantasy settings. Nothing in the real world.
If this law exists I argue it should be removed. It's holding their industry back from making any culturally relevant content because nothing can be set in our world, about real lives, people or places. You'll never get a Death Stranding or Metal Gear out of China while it exists. They should untether their industry so it can produce more of cultural relevance.
Can anyone verify?
You're viewing a single thread.
Idk if this is true or not, but if it's not true it should be imo
way too much 'common knowledge' of science, history, politics in the west (i've never lived outside it so idk what its like outside) is based on what people see on tv/fiction/twitter/etcetc, which is made 1. by people without expertise in the subject 2. by people aiming to entertain (and profit) more than to inform.
This creates extremely distorted views of history. It communicates outright wrong or fabricated information mixed (without distinction) with truths for extra confusion. It communicates idealist ways of thinking about history, as great man theory abounds because of literary requirements for characters and a compelling narrative. And then such media usually portrays knowledge of history as more complete/settled than it actually is, because long descriptions of theories and countertheories make sales plummet
Socialist countries still exist in a world with an incomplete revolution and shouldn't kneecap their artistic industries from contributing to the cultural front of this fight. Maybe you're right in a post-capitalist world, but as it stands right now it just provides cultural hegemony to the US by having absolutely nothing competitive in this field.
"Falsification of history" (or science, etcetc) isnt a thing I get the impression the cpc wants to support (and frankly i dont support it either, but im just one poster)
"Cultural fight on this front" cultural fights to falsify history in the name of profit-driven consumer-entertainment dont sound like things historical materialists should be engaging in. Falsifying the history we're materially analysing is a recipe for disaster. Frankly the whole idea of a "cultural battle" that can be fought, lost or won reeks of the german ideology Marx was criticising:
It was a revolution beside which the French Revolution was child’s play, a world struggle beside which the struggles of the Diadochi [successors of Alexander the Great] appear insignificant. Principles ousted one another, heroes of the mind overthrew each other with unheard-of rapidity, and in the three years 1842-45 more of the past was swept away in Germany than at other times in three centuries.
All this is supposed to have taken place in the realm of pure thought.
Certainly it is an interesting event we are dealing with: the putrescence of the absolute spirit. When the last spark of its life had failed, the various components of this caput mortuum began to decompose, entered into new combinations and formed new substances. The industrialists of philosophy, who till then had lived on the exploitation of the absolute spirit, now seized upon the new combinations. Each with all possible zeal set about retailing his apportioned share. This naturally gave rise to competition, which, to start with, was carried on in moderately staid bourgeois fashion. Later when the German market was glutted, and the commodity in spite of all efforts found no response in the world market, the business was spoiled in the usual German manner by fabricated and fictitious production, deterioration in quality, adulteration of the raw materials, falsification of labels, fictitious purchases, bill-jobbing and a credit system devoid of any real basis. The competition turned into a bitter struggle, which is now being extolled and interpreted to us as a revolution of world significance, the begetter of the most prodigious results and achievements.
I do not think writing fiction for entertainment art is "falsifying history".
With that said, if you think it IS falsifying history then you must also admit that failure to compete in this space means giving this entire entertainment sector to the capitalists to falsify history in the way they want it with literally no counter balance.
I do not think writing fiction for entertainment art is "falsifying history".
If the setting is "historical" or "realistic" it is imo, bc, as I said above, you have to present history reductively, as a compelling, coherent narrative and with the unknowns smoothed out or filled in by imagination. (And all that is assuming the writer has done research into the topic—most artists dont)
The history of knowledge of druids, witches, the middle ages, the middle east and more demonstrates how distorted views can become when the tendencies of capitalist media are allowed to run rampant. Anti-indigenous racism are more serious examples of how these distortions can be harmfulm.
More general fiction outside of "historical fiction" isnt what the post is about, so idk why youre bringing it up. If theres dragons, magic, etc and it doesnt take place in "real life" people are significantly less likely to confuse stuff in it for real facts about histories or cultures.
giving this entire entertainment sector to the capitalists to falsify history in the way they want it with literally no counter balance.
As I understand it, that's a large part of why the firewall exists isnt it? So that the western created ideological products dont become the cultural mainstream?
If the setting is "historical" or "realistic" it is imo, bc, as I said above, you have to present history reductively
Oh man better burn Dickens or every other author that wrote fiction set in a period of history then?
This is silly.
The history of knowledge of druids, witches, the middle ages, the middle east and more demonstrates how distorted views can become when the tendencies of capitalist media are allowed to run rampant.
Anti-indigenous racism are more serious examples of how these distortions can be harmfulm.
Yes and is precisely why there should be a counterbalance to it produced out of socialist countries. Non-participation simply hands the entire sector over to them.
As I understand it, that's a large part of why the firewall exists isnt it? So that the western created ideological products dont become the cultural mainstream?
No. The firewall prevents the american tech companies from owning all the websites. The firewall allowed for Chinese companies to own the Chinese internet instead of facebook, google, twitter, etc etc.