tim's experiment

Interesting column by Albert Cheng on Saturday urging us all to “unite against violence”. This started with the observation that vulgar language and radical action were OK if within the law, and went on to say that civil disobedience had a moral basis, whether the public agreed with it or not. So far, I thought, rather radical for the SCMPost. Mr Cheng went on to strongly condemn violence in terms which few people would quarrel with, citing as unacceptable the attack on him some years ago, and also the suggestions by people who thought his opposition to the link Reit was costing them money that the attack should be repeated. He also said the media had been remiss in not condemning this suggestion more forthrightly, which may be true; frankly I don’t remember. Mr Cheng went on to say that the media had not improved since, and it became apparent that some long-overdue reference to a current event which had sparked this line of thought was now going to forthcome, as it were.

Here it was. During a protest outside the Legco building one group had staged a “street drama” in which an actor representing Mr Li Ka-shing and other actors representing his bodyguards were attacked by another group of actors representing an angry mob. Mr Cheng’s objection to this performance was that it was “encouraging the public to use violence”.

To which the only possible answer is “Oh no it wasn’t.” Protest is protest, real life is real life, and drama is drama. People do not imitate what they see in dramas. Teenage couples do not emerge from Romeo and Juliet feeling suicidal. Ladies do not go home from performances of Antony and Cleopatra to clasp an asp to their bosoms. The “Rape of Lucrece ” is not generally considered Shakespeare’s best effort but it has never been accused of encouraging sex crimes. Violence is used in drama as a metaphor. Viewers have no difficulty in distinguishing it from real life. I do not suppose the simulated overthrow of Mr Li Ka-shing was very good drama, but it was drama, not violence. If Mr Cheng wants a peg in which to hang a condemnation of violence it should be a specimen of real violence, not a piece of artistic expression, however low in quality.

I was left wondering, actually, if he was really up to something else, and perhaps the objection to the street theatrics was not so much to the violence as to the fact that it was rude about Mr Li. No doubt there is a perfectly good column to be written about how Mr Li is a nice man who is kind to children, dogs and needy universities,  though readers will not find it here.  Probably there is also a good column to be written to the effect that local media are not appropriately vociferous in their condemnation of violence. But that needs better evidence than the fact that street theatrics are reported without comment.