On April 2, actor Zhao Lixin's remarks about why the Japanese did not burn the Forbidden City caused great controversy. In the early morning of the 3rd, Zhao Lixin issued an apology statement, the full text of which is as follows:
Event Review:
On April 2, @actor Zhao Lixin asked , "Why didn't the Japanese take away the cultural relics from the Forbidden City and burn down the Forbidden City after occupying Beijing for eight years?" Is this in line with the nature of the aggressor? ", for a while caused a huge controversy. Subsequently, Zhao Lixin was named by @Ziguangge, @Communist Youth League Central Committee, and @China Anti-Cult, saying that his views were too naïve and that he should know a little about the past history of his country.
Zhao Lixin, born in 1968 in Zhengzhou, Henan, graduated from the Central Academy of Drama and the All-Soviet State Film University in Russia, and has served as a director and actor Chinese mainland in the Swedish National Drama Theatre. Because of the combination of actors, directors and screenwriters, coupled with the proficiency of the four Chinese words, he was praised in the circle as an "all-round talent" and "a bully among actors".
On March 31, @actor Zhao Lixin sent a Weibo post asking "Why did the British and French coalition forces burn the Yuanmingyuan?!" And replied under the comment of netizens "if you don't get it, you will be destroyed", "What about the Forbidden City, did you forget or didn't bring a flint stone?" ”
Then, on April 2, he suddenly asked on Weibo: "Why didn't the Japanese take away the cultural relics in the Forbidden City and burn down the Forbidden City after occupying Beijing for eight years?" Is this in line with the nature of the aggressor? ”
Netizens commented that this was because the Japanese were "ready to occupy and rule, not plunder", but Zhao Lixin replied that if it was plunder, why was it not burned "before surrender". He also argued that the claim that the Artifacts of the Forbidden City were transferred was "not very convincing."
As soon as the remarks came out, they immediately triggered condemnation from netizens. Criticizing it for "beautifying aggression" is "washing the ground" for the Japanese, and does not understand the tragic history of the forced relocation of cultural relics to the south.
After being questioned by netizens, Zhao Lixin immediately shared an article titled "Why does Japan dare not burn the Forbidden City with fire?" It turns out that they have their own little abacus" article and say "thank you".
In the article he shared, the Japanese crime of burning and looting in Nanjing was described as "the occupation of Nanjing for a long time, resulting in the Japanese army being generally very grumpy at that time", not burning the Forbidden City because "the capture of Peiping was smooth", and "the soldiers did not have a bloody blade, naturally there would be no retaliation".
At this point, the controversy not only did not stop, but intensified, and the voices of criticism of Zhao Lixin also increased. Subsequently, Zhao Lixin deleted these microblogs.
But this matter is not over, @ China Anti-Cult forwarded a screenshot of Zhao Lixin's Weibo at 12 noon on the 2nd and said: "This view is too naïve." In fact, "in order to avoid the destruction of the Japanese Kou, in 1933, the Forbidden City decided to move some cultural relics south", and this part of the cultural relics was transported to Shanghai and Nanjing, and then moved west in batches. "After the cultural relics of the Forbidden City were partially transferred, the cultural relics that were too late to be transported suffered heavy losses!!!"
Next, @Ziguangge also forwarded the comment, "The citizens of any country should have a little knowledge of the past history of their own country." Especially must be accompanied by a warm and respectful respect for the past history of his country. ”
@Communist Youth League Central Committee also forwarded the weibo after that.
Indeed, the history of the "cultural relics moving south" in that year is a painful cultural protection story that every Chinese needs to remember.
In 2016, the Beijing Morning Post published an article titled "The Great Catastrophe of Beijing's Cultural Relics during the War of Resistance: The Japanese Army Destroyed the Great Wall and Pulled Away the Bricks of the City Wall", which introduced that after the Lugou Bridge Incident in 1937, Beijing fell, and many cultural institutions stationed Japanese advisers, but the Palace Museum did not come to japan. On the one hand, this is due to the secret protection of celebrities and the efforts of the left-behind personnel to resist, on the other hand, the important cultural relics in the Forbidden City have been moved south, so the Japanese have little to gain.
In 2017, the "National Treasure" program also launched an issue of "Two Generations of Forbidden City People, Telling the Story of the Cultural Relics Moving South", introducing to the audience the arduous history of "bombing, exile, car accidents, and fires without losing a single one" from 1933 onwards, after 16 years, more than 13,000 boxes of Forbidden City cultural relics traveled tens of thousands of miles, passing through most of China.
The "Beijing Morning Post" article also pointed out that although some of the cultural relics of the Forbidden City have been moved south, the cultural relics that were too late to be transported have suffered a catastrophe, and the Forbidden City has lost 54 pieces of Ming Dynasty copper cylinders and 2 copper cannons, and later the Japanese army has robbed 91 copper lantern pavilions and one bronze cannon from the Forbidden City, all of which are used to smelt copper to make up for the shortage of military use. According to statistics, the Palace Museum of Ancient Cultural Relics lost 191 boxes, the Archives lost 1734 boxes, the former secretariat lost 826 boxes, the Summer Palace lost 89 boxes, and the Antiquities Exhibition Hall lost 113 boxes, for a total loss of 2953 boxes.
Such a painful history should not be questioned because of the passage of time. At the same time, we should not only remember, but also have warmth and respect for history.
Editor: Shi Wei
Editor-in-charge: Wang Bumi
Source: The Paper, Observer, Global Network