I’m not in the habit of posting YouTube videos but this one warrants some discussion. Let me address potential criticisms first: I know celebrities are not reliable sources on politics. I know celebrities say stupid things—in fact, some even seem to be in the business of saying stupid things. And yes, if you’ll allow me an ad hominem attack, it is ridiculous for a woman whose initial claim to fame was flashing her vagina on film to pontificate on issues like Tibet.
The video has several parts. It begins with an introduction by an anchor then goes into Stone’s rambling, followed by reactions from carefully-selected bystanders. Only the first reaction is in Chinese; the rest are in English. Watch the video, then we’ll talk.
In defense of Stone, she seems mildly inebriated/baked/both. Maybe that’s why she speaks with the grammatic variation of a four-year-old (sorry four-year-olds!). But although she phrases the idea of karmic retribution in the form of a rhetorical question—which either implies that she doesn’t really believe an unseen force caused the deaths of tens of thousands of innocent people in retaliation for “not being nice” or that she lacks the sense, common or otherwise, to not express those ideas in public—the use of the subjunctive only makes her comments slightly less egregious and inordinately offensive.
Stone’s comments are unjustifiable, so I won’t waste any more time criticizing her. I just wonder, were the reporters asking everyone on the red carpet for their opinions on the earthquake, or did they somehow sense that Sharon Stone had the best chance of making a mockery of herself when responding to a current events question?
But Sharon Stone isn’t the only one talking about Tibet again. The Dalai Lama, after a meeting with Britain’s Gordon Brown, claimed he heard from a military source in Tibet that “after the Olympics 1 million Chinese are going to settle in the autonomous region of Tibet.” He continued, “There is every danger Tibet becomes a truly Han Chinese land and Tibetans become an insignificant minority. Then the very basis of the idea of autonomy becomes meaningless.”
These two stories serve as a reminder that the earthquake might have bought the China a reprieve from outside scrutiny, but the ceasefire won’t last forever. Soon, the familiar questions will resurface, along with several new ones: why did the schools collapse? Could anything have been done to mitigate the damage? And if so, who, if anyone, could be held responsible?
I wonder if this video will cause as much of an uproar as Jack Cafferty’s gaffe on CNN. It certainly surpasses all previous benchmarks for obscenity, insensitivity, and ignorance, placing it on par with blaming Hurricane Katrina on a homosexual parade. I hope Chinese audiences can rise above this bizarre spasm of logorrhea and realize that, in the grand scheme of things, Sharon Stone’s opinion on China-Tibet relations counts for very little. But the reporter’s loaded questions (”But these people are innocent right?”), and the video’s description (”This is the real face of this high IQ hollywood star!!!” which I imagine refers to Stone’s debunked claim that she was a member of Mensa) belies an insecurity or perhaps a concern that people might actually take Stone seriously. When the second French reporter characterizes the earthquake as “just a natural disaster, and that’s all,” the reporter asks, “It’s not something political right?” A political earthquake? Unless the tectonic plates are shifting places because some of them support Tibetan independence while others oppose it (Eurasian plate I’m looking at you), I think we’re okay.
There is no need to defend China against attacks like these. They are absurd and any sleep lost over them is as meaningless as the comments themselves. Let’s focus instead on the issues at hand: the earthquake, the Olympics, and boycotting the next Sharon Stone movie.
原来你今天在星巴克就是写这个啊?她确实挺傻的 新闻说有个地方的倒塌的学校已经有人去调查了 一定会给大家一个说法