Weren't there police in China in the 20s?
Don't read this if you don't want the movie spoiled, but, could a man just kill his wife for unfaithfulness like that? Weren't there authorities around, does anyone know?
shareDon't read this if you don't want the movie spoiled, but, could a man just kill his wife for unfaithfulness like that? Weren't there authorities around, does anyone know?
shareGood Question, Im sure there was some sort of Authority all cultures have them but how much they cared about what a men did to his wife differs. Asking that question is like asking if police were in america while african american were being lynched and killed in the south from 1880 to 1960 or Native American treatment and the list goes on in America alone. Of course we had police, people with authority and a court system. Its just that they turn a blind eye to illegal actions sometimes.
Also you have culture relativism and some culture dont considered it murder in cases of this or that. Though i dont think thats the case here, it might be.
It has nothing to do with whether police authorities exist. What used to be done to adulteresses in the olden days, and many of Chinese descent would know this, is that they will be tied up, socked into the basket, and then drowned in the river, a custom known as "zheng zhu long". It's cruel by today's standards, of course, but I guess the point is adultery by wives was very seriously condemned and was punishable by death.
share[deleted]
There were definitely police or some sort of authority in China during the 1920s. The cities at that time were actually much more progressive, this movie is set in a more rural setting, so there are differences between the two in terms of how such a murder would be perceived. Also it is possible that a wealthy man could get away with something like that if it was kept secret if the servants and other wives were not allowed to talk about it or his wealth could buy off any punishment.
shareAt the time the movie takes place, the Qing dynasty was over, and China was going through a chaotic period where a variety of strong warlords fought over control of the country--not a time when a valid police force was common. Also, this takes place in the sheltered world of a rich man who can basically do as he pleases--who would stop him? He has money and could also pay off any authorities.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
"this takes place in the sheltered world of a rich man who can basically do as he pleases--who would stop him? He has money and could also pay off any authorities."
Thank you! Finally the most intelligent answer on this thread!
Some of the former replies about 3rd world countries and supposed Chinese customs (and i'm of chinese descent) were simply facepalmingly stupid...
You are assuming that infidelity was not a capital offence in 1920's China, it it probably was. Hey it is still in much of the middle east right now! It's only punishable if it's illegal!
shareInfidelity was not a capital offense in China at that time. When it came to infidelity, China was not as extreme as Muslim countries. I don't think it was commonplace to murder women for infidelity, even if it was something looked down upon or disapproved of.
shareThe police is extremely unneffective in third world countries.
I should know, I live in one. (Brazil)
[deleted]
While an authority could have been summoned, the humiliation of investigation would have been enough to quiet family members who knew about the circumstance. Also, local workers outnumbered available jobs. The fear of losing a stable job (that feeds their family) would be enough to keep any servant from exposing the crime.If their master is in prison, they have noone to work for. If he is absolved of the crime, they would likely be turned out as soon as possible because of their betrayal.
In this case, it's important for one to remember that law is only as good as it is embraced. A person generally can't be punished for a crime they've committed if their victim (or in the situation of murder,witnesses) refuses to talk and evidence is scarce. China in the 1920's was not kind to those with negative attention brought to their name,justified or not.
The Chinese government was exceptionally weak during the 20s [and 30s, and 10s]. It is highly unlikely that actions such as in the movie would be punishable by a central authority [combination of weak government, rural setting, exceptionally powerful perpetrator].
I believe warlords controlled some parts of China during that period.
sharein a word, no. since the overthrow of the qing dynasty and the establishment of the republic of china in 1911, much of the country gradually fell under the control of regional warlords. by the 20s, the country was in shambles. the warlords controlled most of the north and the internationally recognised capital in beijing while the kuomintang, in its newly established capital at nanjing, held a fragile alliance with the communist party of china and the southern warlords. it was not until the late twenties, after the northern expedition (the all-out military conquest of china by the KMT army from its base in the south) and the subsequent unification of the country under chiang kai-shek, that law and order were eventually restored. unfortunately this stability was relatively short lived as the japanese began to seize chinese territories in the 30s and tensions between the KMT and the CPC gradually degenerated into all out civil war.
sharewow, thanks for the nice historical facts, congressmanjope.
but to answer the question, the old "master" was a very wealthy and powerful man, remember during the scene of that ancester worshiping ceremony, the people in those paintings of the ancesters of that family were all dressed in emperial court robes, meaning the man was some kindda aristocrat.
no police would really bother with an aristocrat killing one of his concubines.
plus, once a woman is married, she rarely ever appeared in public anymore, so, no one would probably have noticed her disappearance.
That was more or less the reasoning behind Songlian's "madness" - it was used as a cover-up for the Third Mistress' murder. If they told the authorities that Songlian hadn't seen anything, and they believed that she was insane, she wouldn't be able to prove anything.
shareI think the household can be seen as a microcosm of China, so in a way, the Master IS the authority. Perhaps he represents the Communist party? They execute people for being "unfaithful" to Communism, after all.
shareIt's also an indication of the value of women in prior generations. Women were not seen as valuable, used as commodities.
And no, I don't think this had anything to do with Communisim, specifically since the film is set prior to Mao. The Master represents how feudal Chinese society still was in the 1920's and how women had no value. It wasn't until the 1950's that the Chinese Marriage Laws made it illegal to have more than one wife, and legal to marry for love.
The movie is symbolic of the place in Chinese Society for women, and is not an indictment of Communism.
This film had everything to do with Communism. It subtly depicts the Cultural Revolution in China. You are wrong - this movie is not symbolic of the place in Chinese society for women. If you have studied this text, you would know that it is definitely the other way around.
shareKnowing that Yimou's prior work "Red Sorghum" was a pro-Social Revolution movie, it's hard to make a point of what he had in mind while making "Raise the Red Lantern".
It was a time of changing, 1991, just a couple of years after the Wall in Berlin collapsing the Soviet Empire and opening to former Social countries to the West... (like neighbouring Viet-Nam)
It's a strange context and very troubling period for Communist Countries, as well as the '20 in China. (curious analogy)
For me, it's just a feudal-based tradition against modern-time women story that shows how a young educated women promised first to have a good live suddenly face the rude reality of another time/world she didn't expect.
She even doesn't realize at first what is really going on in the place when she arrives and gradually discover all what she is into until the very ending when she's either losing her mind and is considered as mad.
Of course, you can see analogy to Communist System in anything, even in any other movie if you're convinced about it... it's just a point of view.
Who knows ?
I really enjoyed the movie and found it fantastic in the movie-making, the beauty of shots and incredible profoundness of characters and acting, atmosphere, etc...
You can have your opinion - I respect that, and that everybody else here does, too.
But I must say that what I have said about this film isn't just another common point of view parelleling Raise The Red Lantern to the Cultural Revolution in China. This film IS about the Communist system; this theory and all the connotations are studied in schools and is a commonly accepted view. You can have your views, but really, this film is evidently more than a film which portrays traditions of women in society.
yeah, I agree with this interpretation. I read somewhere that a lot of Zhang Yimou's early works were veiled attacks on the country's social system. The line that got me was Gong Li's line, the difference between the dead and the living is just a breath. What are we, we are like dogs, we are like cats, we are like rats, we are anything but human.
But I don't think his attack is pointed so much at the communists as the social system in general. Chinese society is nasty under communism, but it was also nasty before the communists. The entire social system is based on power, and power corrupts. It turns some into masters and others into servants. But no one lives as a human being. I think that was the point he was trying to get across.
Yes, there were police. But no, the police did not care about the concubine of a rich man. End of story.
share