The summer camp that I attended last July, for some legal reasons, was not really a “summer camp” (even though it resembled a camp), but rather a “Summer School”. As Mister Lee, the organizer of the School, put it, this was a “Spiritual School”. A school in which Mr Lee, throughout a week-long program, tried to teach his young students some notions that are completely foreign to the current normal curricula for primary school and high school in the People’s Republic of China: critical thinking and self-fulfillment through civic education.
The first notion was probably the most complex and the one requiring most diplomacy from Mr Lee and his assistants to lecture about: development of critical thinking. In a country where all media are State-owned, it is easy to accept all the facts that are brought forward without using readily available sources on the Internet. Some very controversial taboos were addressed in the summer school. Some students were shocked to hear for the first time of their lives the questioning of the very foundations of their own education. For instance, one of the volunteers who came from Beijing, delivered a speech that questioned the One China Policy. This policy aims at preserving China’s territorial integrity as it was before the fall of the last dynasty in 1911 – however without Mongolia and some other lost territories. That is all the provinces included to what is called “China Proper” (Beijing, Shaanxi, Sichuan, Hunan, …), as well as provinces mostly populated by ethic minorities (Tibet, Xinjiang), Taiwan and the sorrounding Islands currently under the jurisdiction of the Republic Of China, the South China sea and some borders that are yet to be internationally recognised. His point was that China is a very huge and complex country and it would not be that bad if one of its provinces – if their respective populations were to agree – would separate from China and form their own independent country. Boom. This very statement had the effect of a bomb on the students. One of them, startled by what she had just heard said to Ying “听得不舒服” (this makes me uncomfortable). Of course, the purpose of this speech was not to make regional separatists out of these young students. There was no separatist in the room. The idea was to open the door to critical thinking. To teach the students how to be able to accept the possibility of an idea that goes against the biggest taboo currently in China, or at least, to make sure that these children would hear a different viewpoint for the first time in their lives, and then start building a free mind.
The second notion, individualism, was much less controversial at the political level, than the first notion, but nevertheless was still somewhat unsettling for family relationships. In China, there is a concept that makes children the “private properties” of their parents. Having a child is an investment for the future. A child must therefore have a successful career in order to get a high salary and help their parents when they retire. The first step to success is education. You have to study, everyday, from 8 a.m to 11p.m, you must go to school in the summer, in July and August, and then take English classes when time permits. But why in the world should a student work that hard at school? Or, the question as asked by Mr Lee: “WHO are you doing all this for? WHO do you work for? WHO do you study for?” To this question, many students answered that they wanted their parents to be proud of them. This is when Mr Lee asked them “What are YOUR dreams?”.
So the students, one by one, presented to the class their dreams. Some of them dreamed of working in a big city and becoming rich, while some others dreamed of staying in the countryside and grow vegetables.
Some other students chose to talk about their past, their moving past, recalling a lost parent, the despair of life in poverty, while others perhaps leading a happier life chose to talk about their aspirations.
The first day of the program, the wake-up time was set to 6 a.m (and the day ended at 11 p.m!) Early in the morning, we climbed one of the hills around the town where the school was located. The course was steep, wet and muddy.
Once on the summit, the students would sing and read poems in an ambiance that resembled very much to Evangelist Christian summer camps in the USA where biblical verses are read in the nature. But in this case, there was nothing religious.
The second day, at the same time, we climbed a second hill. The soil was less muddy and the course less steep, so coming down was easier.
In passing, we met various farmers who climb and go down the hill every day without feeling tired!
Old but fit.
But 6 a.m really was too early to get up. The students and the volunteers were exhausted. A student complained about it, and then Mr Lee gave a demonstration of democracy to the students (did he plan it all?) So a proposition was put forward to modify the schedule by removing the early morning hill-climbing, moving the wake-up time one hour later and have the children read poems in the school playground instead of at the summit of a hill. After a heated debate, the vote was carried out and the result was very close: 20 yea: 19 nay for the modification of the schedule! Therefore, from that day on, there was no more hill climbing. By chance, the students were present in an odd number. Had the result of the vote come out as a tie, Mr Lee would have had to use his power of vote to break the tie, which might have been viewed by the children as an authoritarian move, and might have confused the students in their idea of a “perfect” democracy.
In all, there were 6 part-time volunteers, available for only one week; one full-time volunteer; Mr Lee and his wife. Each volunteer brought something different to the school. Ying and I brought the “foreign world”, two students from Guangdong (also known as “Canton”) taught singing, a philosopher from Beijing (whose name means “love for philosophy (爱哲)”) taught some fundamentals of democracy and philosophy, a teacher also from Canton, from an ethnic minority, showed the students images from her native village. The full-time volunteer, a poet, helped Mr Lee in his enterprise and added his point of view to tackle some problems. On this picture, both Cantonese students are teaching how to use one’s voice to sing. The guys are separated from the girls.
Ying described her experience abroad in the USA.
“Westerners vs Chinese”
Westerner’s world view vs Chinese’s. The relationships between an individual and five different elements: (other people, family, objects, nature and God). In Westerners, according to Mr Lee’s assessment, the most important relationship, the one that encompasses everything, is between an individual and God, while in the Chinese, this relationship doesn’t exist, as shown in the diagrams (the dotted circle in the left diagram represents this relationship in Westerners). According to Mr Lee, what is lacking most in the Chinese, is spirituality, as practiced in the West. Mr Lee is an Evangelist Christian.
As the program was advancing, the presentation progressively grew more religious. Some movies were presented, many of them recounting the lives of great historical personalities (which also appeared to be Christians). Among them: Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King and Gandhi.
There was also a non-religious movie that was presented: the Wizard of Oz. At the last day of the camp, there would be a reenactment of some scenes from the movie made by the students. There was three teams of actors, each team would play the same scenes. The best actors in each team would be declared as the winners.
Here are some photos of the play.
The best actors, chosen by a secret vote.
At the end of the camp, a guestbook was put at the disposal of the students so that they could write down their thoughts. They could write about anything: their aspirations, their opinion on the camp, etc.
The camp was interrupted two times to receive book donations made by benefactors. The books that Ying donated arrived exactly on the last day!
The organization which organized the camp is above all an NGO whose objective is to build libraries in rural China. To date, they already have built 4 libraries in 3 Chinese provinces. This organization was founded by some intellectuals from Beijing. Mr Lee told me that the building of a library costs approximately 40000元 (USD 5800) in equipment (computers, projector, …), in furniture and in other expenses (for example: notebooks). Then, you add 10000 to 20000元 (USD 1500 to 3000$) annually on top of it for maintenance. This NGO is represented by 5 intellectuals, each of them unique in their approach, but all sharing one common view: the importance of civic education in China. This is not an organization with a political purpose, nor is it religious. If you would like to help this organization in any way, you can directly contact Mr Lee at the following address: liyingqiang@gmail.com
