论文部分内容阅读
The outbound flow of Chinese tourists grew dramatically to 83 million in 2012 up from only 10 million in 2000， but Chinese tourists’ reputation did not improve with the number. Foreign tourist destinations are happy to welcome Chinese wallets， but locals frequently complain about the improper behavior of the wallets’ owners. Recently， due to an internet post showing “Ding Jinhao was here” scrawled by a Chinese junior high student on a stone sculpture in Egypt’s Luxor Temple， discussion about Chinese tourist behavior has become a hot topic.
China’s own tourist landmarks are no stranger to such behavior. Bricks of the Great Wall and bamboo in Beijing Botanical Garden have been defaced with text such as “Tom was here”. In China， the custom can be traced back to ancient times， when emperors and men of letters often etched their signature or poems while traveling. The first well-known “I was here” appeared in Journey to the West， left by the monkey king， the protagonist of the classical Chinese novel. However， defacing historical artifacts has never been a custom unique to China. The Great Wall has seen a plethora of “Tom was here” in various languages， but why are more such etchings found in Chinese at the foot of the Statue of Liberty and on the Eiffel Tower？
“Because domestic punishment is insufficient，” opines Ma Weidu， a scholar and expert on cultural relic protection. “The penalty for violating regulation is too low. In China， serious punishments are not supported by law. Fines are not punitive. They are only calculated in terms of compensation.” If a person lives in an environment lacking regulation， when visiting another place， he or she is easily capable of behavior that would shock locals.
According to Chinese regulation， the fine for defacing or slightly damaging relics is generally under 200 yuan （US$32）. But in Egypt， a judge can hand down a maximum five-year prison sentence for intentionally damaging relics. The latest Egyptian relic protection regulation even stipulates that punishment for destroying temples or ancient statues can reach$10，000 and a life sentence. On May 7， Russia raised its fines for individual violation of relic protection regulations from 1，500 rubles （$47） up to 200，000 （$6，248）.
Several years ago， a similar incident occurred in Japan. A group of students from central Japan and a 30-year-old high school baseball coach scrawled their names on the marble wall of Florence’s Santa Maria del Fiore Cathedral， the Duomo. The defacement was caught on camera by another Japanese tourist and sent anonymously to their respective educational institutions. The national press soon wrote about the incident， which caused an uproar – despite the fact that the wall of the Duomo has become a multilingual record of visitors， and marking it has become an accepted activity in Florence. The students wrote letters of apology， received a two-week suspension and underwent counseling sessions. As for the high school baseball coach， he took responsibility for the incident and resigned. The Chinese vandal was a junior high student， whose parents made a formal apology through the media. It seems that the online frenzy roused by Chinese internet vigilantes placed tremendous pressure on them. However， comprehensive regulation can bring better results than criticism after the fact. Also， some alternative tactics can protect relics while enhancing the tourist experience. For example， at Japanese shrines， visitors can purchase a cheap“ema，” a small wooden plaque， to inscribe and hang in a designated area.
Along with regulation issue， the incident also reveals that Chinese tourist behavior still leaves much to be desired. “Chinese tourists lack the ability to perceive different cultures， not only because of language barriers， but also because they’re apathetic about cultural communication，” asserts a Dutch guide who holds Ph.D. in Chinese history and frequently guides Chinese tour groups. “They look for porcelain in the British Museum and for work of Zhang Daqian and Qi Baishi （famous Chinese painters） in the Louvre. But when you ask them the difference between porcelain from the Song Dynasty （960-1279） and the Yuan Dynasty（1271-1368）， they’re stumped – never mind familiarity with the work of Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo. They prefer taking pictures over using eyes to appreciate.”
“This is not strange，” says Qiao Xinsheng， professor at Zhongnan University of Economics and Law. “Chinese people have recently discovered wealth， yet have not realized the real meaning of travel. Many people just want to show off by posting overseas pictures on the internet.”Considerable vandalism results from this rationale. “Only when foreign traveling becomes ubiquitous will Chinese tourists improve their behavior. This means we need improvement in terms of holiday system， social welfare and the legal system.”
China’s own tourist landmarks are no stranger to such behavior. Bricks of the Great Wall and bamboo in Beijing Botanical Garden have been defaced with text such as “Tom was here”. In China， the custom can be traced back to ancient times， when emperors and men of letters often etched their signature or poems while traveling. The first well-known “I was here” appeared in Journey to the West， left by the monkey king， the protagonist of the classical Chinese novel. However， defacing historical artifacts has never been a custom unique to China. The Great Wall has seen a plethora of “Tom was here” in various languages， but why are more such etchings found in Chinese at the foot of the Statue of Liberty and on the Eiffel Tower？
“Because domestic punishment is insufficient，” opines Ma Weidu， a scholar and expert on cultural relic protection. “The penalty for violating regulation is too low. In China， serious punishments are not supported by law. Fines are not punitive. They are only calculated in terms of compensation.” If a person lives in an environment lacking regulation， when visiting another place， he or she is easily capable of behavior that would shock locals.
According to Chinese regulation， the fine for defacing or slightly damaging relics is generally under 200 yuan （US$32）. But in Egypt， a judge can hand down a maximum five-year prison sentence for intentionally damaging relics. The latest Egyptian relic protection regulation even stipulates that punishment for destroying temples or ancient statues can reach$10，000 and a life sentence. On May 7， Russia raised its fines for individual violation of relic protection regulations from 1，500 rubles （$47） up to 200，000 （$6，248）.
Several years ago， a similar incident occurred in Japan. A group of students from central Japan and a 30-year-old high school baseball coach scrawled their names on the marble wall of Florence’s Santa Maria del Fiore Cathedral， the Duomo. The defacement was caught on camera by another Japanese tourist and sent anonymously to their respective educational institutions. The national press soon wrote about the incident， which caused an uproar – despite the fact that the wall of the Duomo has become a multilingual record of visitors， and marking it has become an accepted activity in Florence. The students wrote letters of apology， received a two-week suspension and underwent counseling sessions. As for the high school baseball coach， he took responsibility for the incident and resigned. The Chinese vandal was a junior high student， whose parents made a formal apology through the media. It seems that the online frenzy roused by Chinese internet vigilantes placed tremendous pressure on them. However， comprehensive regulation can bring better results than criticism after the fact. Also， some alternative tactics can protect relics while enhancing the tourist experience. For example， at Japanese shrines， visitors can purchase a cheap“ema，” a small wooden plaque， to inscribe and hang in a designated area.
Along with regulation issue， the incident also reveals that Chinese tourist behavior still leaves much to be desired. “Chinese tourists lack the ability to perceive different cultures， not only because of language barriers， but also because they’re apathetic about cultural communication，” asserts a Dutch guide who holds Ph.D. in Chinese history and frequently guides Chinese tour groups. “They look for porcelain in the British Museum and for work of Zhang Daqian and Qi Baishi （famous Chinese painters） in the Louvre. But when you ask them the difference between porcelain from the Song Dynasty （960-1279） and the Yuan Dynasty（1271-1368）， they’re stumped – never mind familiarity with the work of Leonardo da Vinci and Michelangelo. They prefer taking pictures over using eyes to appreciate.”
“This is not strange，” says Qiao Xinsheng， professor at Zhongnan University of Economics and Law. “Chinese people have recently discovered wealth， yet have not realized the real meaning of travel. Many people just want to show off by posting overseas pictures on the internet.”Considerable vandalism results from this rationale. “Only when foreign traveling becomes ubiquitous will Chinese tourists improve their behavior. This means we need improvement in terms of holiday system， social welfare and the legal system.”