哈哈哈。。。搞了半天ABC不游行是因为显而易见你们这帮大陆留学生连个英文都听不
懂，难怪我给你们解释了半天有些人就是嘴硬
标 题: 转一个American Born Chinese写的关于Jimmy kimmel 事件的看法
发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Sun Nov 3 23:44:40 2013, 美东)
今天一个朋友转过来的， 很长的英文， 不知道大家有没有兴趣看看。
Jimmy Kimmel - kill everyone in China
------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of Jimmy Kimmel’s lines transcribed from the video by me
“kill everyone in China? okay that’s an interesting idea…again.”
“you’re saying build a wall in China? a huge big great kind of a wall?”
“that will never happen”
“when you owe someone money, should you pay them back”
“but then they won’t lend you money anymore”
“should this country be forced to pay OUR own debts?”
-response: YES
“but you just said kill everyone in china a while ago…what happened to
that?”
“should we allow the Chinese to live?”
“well this has been an interesting edition of kids table: the lord of the
flies edition (LAUGHTER) I’d like to thank my correspondents ___….”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hello everyone, I am an American-born Chinese male and it has come to my
attention that a recent Jimmy Kimmel video has become the subject of much
controversy.
I’m here to give the Chinese community another (contrasting) perspective on
this issue, except this time it’s coming from someone who has lived in the
United States for his entire life, and I hope it allows everyone to have a
more balanced discussion.
First, the current consensus about Jimmy Kimmel’s position is that he is
completely guilty of slandering the Chinese people and that his comments in
the video were horrifically unjustified. From the point of view of someone
who is familiar with American culture, this consensus seems unfounded for
a few reasons. These following
arguments will take the video at face value and will not consider his
occupation or background as an American.
First is that when Jimmy Kimmel said that the child’s idea was “
interesting”, it doesn't necessarily mean that he’s actively supporting it
. The full definition of interesting as defined by Merriam Webster is “
holding the attention”. This means that JK did not actively voice support
for this suggested policy. It simply means that it attracted his attention
which could also mean that he finds it particularly surprising that a child
could possibly come up with such a cruel solution. A common argument that
has arisen is that JK shouldn't have even aired such slander; however, he
traps the child in a contradiction by leading him into the conclusion that
the United States should in fact pay their debts. He clearly and loudly asks
if “this country should be forced to pay…” after he makes it clear that
people should pay off their debts, and shows that since paying the debt is
obviously the morally correct choice, that the child’s argument of killing
the Chinese is fundamentally wrong both logically and morally when he asks:
“but you just said kill everyone in China a while ago… what happened to
that?”. In addition, the line “should we allow the Chinese to live?” is a
question, which means that it carries no opinion forward.
Second, the most important part of the show that I believe truly
contextualizes and casts JK in a completely different light is his comment
that the show was “the lord of the flies edition” of kid’s table. This
remark was immediately followed by a laugh track, marking it as clearly
understandable by the majority of the United States and making sure that it
is acknowledged by the audience. What a vast amount a lot of people may not
have is the experience of reading British author William Golding’s novel:
The Lord Of The Flies. The Lord of the Flies is a book that centers around
describing the human condition with a complete lack of constraints. The
story is about a group of boys who are stranded on a deserted island. At
first, they attempt to recreate a civilized society much like the one that
they’d left behind, but it quickly breaks down and they are reduced to
savagery. A critique on the true nature of humans, it describes the natural
human as nasty, vile, and brutal. The boys end up killing each other and
destruction prevails. An understanding of JK’s reference to the Lord of The
Flies is imperative to any discussion about JK’s message to the audience
because it shows that he believes that the children’s comments were much
like the behavior exhibited by the savage boys on the deserted island. This
means that JK truly does NOT believe that Chinese people deserve to be
killed, as he does end up portraying these kids as morally wrong.
Even though these lines of the video are crucial to his message, the media
outlets are skewing the general consensus about him. After inputting the
keywords “Jimmy Kimmel China” and clicking on the first link which is
provided below, I read an article that took his lines completely out of
context and even lies about the order! Here’s the excerpt from the article:
"America owes China a lot of money, $1.3 trillion," Kimmel told the children
. "How should we pay them back?"
"Shoot cannons all the way over and kill everyone in China," the boy said.
"Kill everyone in China? OK, that's an interesting idea," Kimmel said, then
asked the group, "Should we allow the Chinese to live?"
While one boy said, "No," most of the children said, "Yes," CNN said.
Now if you do a quick comparison of THAT article and the full catalog of
everything JK actually said in the video, you’ll find a few differences.
Differences that make all the difference when mulling over his innocence/
guilt.
The article completely fails to include the two major dialog that I spoke
about in the paragraph above, and the article also falsely places the blame
on JK for making the choice to air the segment. Since Jimmy Kimmel’s
occupation is clearly being an actor, it makes sense to come to the
conclusion that the person choosing what airs on TV is probably not the
actor, but other employees who are responsible for editing and scheduling
time-slots on TV. I have provided the excerpt below.
“LOS ANGELES, Nov. 1 (UPI) -- TV talk show host Jimmy Kimmel apologized to
the Chinese and Chinese-American communities for airing a little boy's
bloodthirsty remarks about attacking China.”
The media’s portrayal of JK has twisted the story and I believe that this
is very problematic because it’s giving the Chinese people a false cause to
rally behind. I am able to understand the entire
video’s cultural references so I’m assuming that most other Americans will
also come to some of the same conclusions that I came to. Even though I do
believe that the intent is noble, there is a problem because this isn't the
right rallying point.
Another view that could easily pardon JK is the fact that this "kid's table"
episode centered around the United State's debt crisis and possible ways to
solve it. The use of China as the country in question was done not because
JK is racist, but because it's a statement of fact to say that the United
States owes China a tremendous amount of money. The comments that he makes
are NOT racially charged as he doesn't stereotype any particular race at all
. In fact, the "killing" is a question of debtors and creditors i.e. "kill
the people we owe money to", not "kill Chinese people because they're bad".
He makes no racist argument like： “Chinese people are violent people". The
statements in the video make the country in question completely arbitrary,
which is another way to show that JK was not racist.
