p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 1 这是Amazon上Lin的评论。存在这里做个纪念：
As a Chinese, I lived through that period of time in China. I have similar
family and educational background as hers and suffered during Culture
Revolution as a child. I think her experiences in China mostly, if not all,
are fabricated, imagined, overly exaggerated or deliberately miss leading.
If one just read the media reports about her book, he/she may think that
media might just pick the sensational parts of the book and exaggerated a
little bit to help her to sell the book. No, it is not the case. She lied
from very beginning to the end in the book, even on the small detailed
events. I am amazed by her audacity of telling so many blatant lies in such
a well publicized book.
Here are some of the social and culture background of that period of time in
China:
1. In traditional Confucius Chinese culture, children were considered as
property of their parents. Parents had absolute rights to their children,
including the rights to abuse or sell their kids. Since Mao's communists
took over the power of China, parents can't sell their kids anymore, but all
other rights were respected, including the rights of adopted parents (if
the adoptions were legal and paper work complete). Culture Revolution didn't
change any of that.
During Culture Revolution, many government officials, college teachers and
professors, and intellectuals were persecuted or locked up. My parents were
among those people just like Ping Fu's parents(if her claims are true).
There were a period of time that both of my parents were locked up. My
parents arranged me to be taken care by relatives, family friend or to live
in a boarding child care center. Many of my relatives' children and other
people in similar situation all had similar experiences as me. I had never
heard of any kids being taken away by authorities, it is just against way of
thinking. No one, including government could take people's children away.
There isn't such agency to do that kind of job and no facility for that kind
of children. That would cost money too and China was very poor at that time
, children were burdens.
Red Guard were "revolutionists", they were busy criticizing and persecuting
people like my parents (or Ping's parents), or fighting each other. They
didn't care about little kids, and didn't interested in taking care of
children. Kids like us were left alone, although often were discriminated in
schools and in society in general. After Culture Revolution ended, Many
people in China wrote about their experiences during that time. All of those
stories regarding kids that I've read of were more or less similar to mine,
I had never heard of or read about any camp like what Ping wrote in her
book, nothing close to what she told. Ping's story as a child just sounds
impossible and did not add up with many things in that time.
2. The culture on sex in China have been completely different from the West.
China was extremely conservative on sex before 80's. Young people were very
ignorant about sex and usually didn't have any sexual experiences before
they met the person they would marry. People don't even talk or joke about
sex. Rape committed by young men was rare at that time, especially in cities
. Rape was a very serious crime in China and punishment could be the death
decades ago. Raping or molestation of little children by young people was
even rarer. Gang rape was unheard of. In my whole 20+ year living in China,
the only gang rape I had heard of were committed by foreigners in 80's.
Red Guard were "revolutionists", not street thugs or rapists, they might
beat or persecute people, but not rape. Ping's claim that she was GANG raped
by young Red Guards (as reported by many media. But in her book, she was
rape by a bunch of young teen boys under broad day light at a university
campus) at age 10 because she saved her little sister against their will is
just so unimaginable, so against China's sexual culture and thinking,
especially against Red Guards' way of thinking and behaving.
3. The schools were re-open in 1968 in most of the places, and were free,
even for kids whose parents being persecuted like me. Najing is one of the
biggest city in China. I just couldn't imagine the reason that Ping could
not go to school. Besides, in 70's, most of high school graduates had to go
to poor and rural countryside, there were very limited job for them in the
cities. Factory jobs were considered very good jobs and extremely hard to
get in 70's. Many people had to bribe or use their connection to land their
kids a factory job. And factory don't accept child as employee or labor
unless they finished their schooling. Schools may organize kids to work in
factories for several weeks to get experiences though. I did that in middle
school.
So Ping's story of working in the factory as a child and not be able to go
to school in one of the biggest and most developed city in China is just not
impossible to be true.
4. China's college didn't admit any high school graduates from 1966 to 1976.
The first college entrance exam after Culture Revolution was held in 1977.
Any person who graduated high school between 1966 and 1976 could take the
exam. The competition for limited college seats was fierce. In early 80's,
when only currently year high school graduates could take the college
entrance exam, only 4% could get into college. So you can imagine how
competitive to get into college in year 77. The study materials and books
were very limited at that time. Unparented and unschooled Ping Fu could get
into college in 1977, she must be a supper human.
5. All college students in China had to take 4 years of English classes. The
supper human Ping Fu could only speak three phrases of English when she
came to the US, one year after graduating from college: thank you, hello,
and help. Give me a break.
6. China's One Child policy officially started in later year of 1980. At
that year, Ping should be a college junior. For a person grew up in city to
think of writing her college senior year graduation thesis about killing of
baby girls in rural countryside because of a newly started government policy
, it is just sounds impossible for me. China's one child policy and related
abortion issue wasn't caught international attention until 90's. So, even if
Ping Fu wrote something about that, I don't think that government cared.
Beside, after Cultural Revolution, Chinese government don't arrest people
for political reason anymore, except few rare cases. In early 80's, there
were several students at my college did something politically more
influential and considered much more unacceptable to the government than
Ping's paper, they got some trouble but not arrested or detained.
In 80's, China was still very poor. Ultrasound was rare and expensive
medical equipment. Ultrasound exam wasn't a routine exam for pregnant women
even in the best hospitals in the biggest city like Shanghai or Beijing.
People also didn't have the knowledge that ultrasound exam can tell the
gender of the fetus. I don't know how Ping Fu could find that there were
prevalent practice of forced abortions of young girl fetuses in poor rural
China between 1980-1981, .
Besides, US and China were still in honey moon in early 80's. China wasn't
demonized and criticized so much by the West like nowadays. Two countries
were kind of allies against then Soviet Union. China didn't started the
practice of deporting dissidents to US until 90's. And each time before the
deporting, the two government had to negotiate extensively. US don't accept
nobody, they only accept those famous dissents. Ping Fu was nobody and
unheard of.
She graduated from college in Spring of 1982, came to the US in 1983(some
media says in 1982). In this short one year or even less, her college
graduation paper reached media, gained domestic and international media
attention(I was in China at that time, never heard of that story), she was
detained by Chinese government and then deported to the US. None of the US
and Chinese government was that efficient. Chinese media wasn't that free to
dig and report that kind of news at early 80's. This is just impossible.
So this whole episode of imprisonment because of a paper and deportation to
the US is just contradict with everything in that period of time.
7，"Child soldier". I don't know what this "Child soldier" she was. In China
, there was no "Child soldier". During Cultural Revolution, military
soldiers and personnels had the highest social status and relatively better
paid. It was hard for even high school graduates to join the army. The only
"Child soldiers" that I knew of were kids with special talents, such as
singing, dancing, playing music instruments, or acting. They were recruited
by entertainment units of the military. They would study, be trained and
taken care of in those military entertainment units. Those were considered
extremely lucky kids and envied by every body.
If anything we can learn from this book, it probably would be the audacity a
person could have to lie. May be that's the only secrete of her success in
the US. It is too bad that innocent American people have to learn about
China, Cultural Revolution and Chinese people through this kind of lies.
Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse | Ignore this customer
1 of 2 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No
Posted on Feb 11, 2013 3:37:08 AM PST
lin says:
The length of my review exceeded what Amazon allowed. This is the truncated
part.
---------------
1/29
Afternotes:
1. I wrote my initial review on 1/22 after I heard news on NPR. The review
were based on wikipedia page about her, NPR and several other media reports
about the book, and first several customer reviews on amazon. I read the
book last week after I wrote the review.
2. My local library has the book. A Barnes and Noble' retail store near my
place puts the book in prominent place (I wouldn't spend a dime on lies).
Looks like this book is on it way to the best seller lists.
I called Barnes and Noble today and asked them to take the book off the
shelves in their retail stores. They shouldn't charge unsuspecting customers
$27.95 for pure lies. I urge others who agree with me on this book to do
the same.
3. Ping Fu herself commented on my review and wanted me to have a direct
dialog with her through emails. She thinks that she can address most of the
questions that I asked. My suggestion to Ping Fu is that she should address
the questions to public either in Amazon's From the Author section or in
some other ways. There is no meaning to communicate to me in private.
4. The book is hard to read for me, because it is full of sickening lies
page after page from very beginning to the end. Here are some of her big
lies in the book (there are a lots more) not published elsewhere:
At the beginning of the book, she claimed that one day in 1966, before she
was sent to Nanjing, Red Guards came to her Shanghai parents home commanding
her brothers to go with them. Her brothers were being "sent up to the
mountain or down to the countryside" (This is her original words). Any one
who experienced that period if time in China would remember that sending
young people to the countryside started in 1969, not 1966, after Mao's
instruction in December 1968 that encourage young people to go to
countryside to be reeducated by peasants. The wrong time line alone tells me
that this story is fabricated. Besides, Red Guards taking people from their
home was not the way that young people being sent to the countrysides.
She claimed that in 1982, after One Child Policy were announced, officials
at her university would check all female students' menstrual period by
forcing them to turn in their sanitary pad each month. When some girls
turned in their friends' soiled pads, officials would insert their fingers
in to our vagina(yes, she used the word "OUR") to check for blood. How sick
her mind have to be to make up such outrageous lies? We might be obedient to
authorities due to the influence of 2000 years Confucian culture. But to
let anybody sexually assault us all in this way and not to fight, it is an
insult to all Chinese people. The chance that this story happened in a
Chinese University is less than it happened at Harvard University.
None of the scenes that she described about her being taken away from her
Shanghai home, about how she arrived in Nanjing, how she met her Nanjing
mother on the street and met her then 4years old sister who was alone in a
room are believable. According to the book, young Red Guard came to her home
, took her under her Shanghai mother's watch and put her on a packed train
to Nanjing. Not to mention that young Red Guard wouldn't do this kind of job
in that time, just assume what she said was true. Her Shanghai mother were
free and at home at the time, why wouldn't she follow her to Nanjing to make
sure that she is safe and everything is alright? Was she such a stupid and
irresponsible mother?
She said that in the fall of 82, while she was walking on campus and
preparing for her graduation from university (she forgot that she should be
graduated in Spring of 82 if she took 77's college entrance exam, or she
should be graduate in summer of 82 if she took 78's exam), some one sneaked
up to her, put a black canvas bag over her head, took her to an unknown
place and arrested her. Why would our government have to arrest anybody
secretly in this way? huh?
5. Many people who commented on my review posted a link([...] ) to a photo
of Ping Fu in her youth on the website of fastcompany which has an article
promoting her book and her company.
In that picture, Ping Fu and a bunch of kids were wearing Red Guard armbands
under the Red Guard flag (which means they all were Red Guards). But Ping
Fu claimed they were "children forced to live in government dormitories
during China's Cultural Revolution".
6. Amazon customer Z. Li commented on my review and gave a link to Ping Fu's
NPR interview in 2010. In that interview, almost every words that came
through Ping Fu's mouth about China were outrageous lies.
the link is: thestory.org archive the_story_988_Ping_Fu.mp3
(amazon won't allow the link, so readers have to replace the space with "/")
-------------
1/30
This story is getting really interesting now.
Chinese translation of the Forbes' article, One Woman's Journey From Chinese
Labor Camp To Top American Tech Entrepreneur (by Jenna Goudreau)attracted
people's attention in China. A famous blogger Fang Zhou Zi wrote about Fu
Ping and considered her as a liar yesterday. That's why so many Chinese come
to amazon to give 1 star review of the book starting yesterday.
In Forbes website, a reader wrote a comment following Jenna Goudreau's
article claiming that she grew up with Ping Fu. I intend to believe what
this person said. Because everything she said is consistent with what I know
about China back then and with what I've read about Ping Fu so far,
excluding her lies.
This reader claims that Ping Fu didn't grew up in Shanghai, but in Nanjing.
When I read the book, starting from first chapter, I immediately felt that
Ping Fu's story about her Shanghai home, her parents and what happened
around her are fake. Those detailed small things in the book were not
consistent with my knowledge about people who lived in that kind luxury
houses in Shanghai back then.
Here is this Forbes reader's comment:
njydj 17 hours ago
China Story on Ping Fu is full of lies. I know Ping Fu and her family
personally as we all grew up together in Nanjing University of Aeronautics
and Aerospace (NUAA).
4 big lies:
1. she was growing up in Shanghai until 1966...No, she grew up in Nanjing.
2. she was sent to children labor camp for 10 yrs when she was 8 yrs old
from 1966. Ask her when and where of such camp and find any supporting
document for it! She was among us who were remained at University campus,
young children such as her sister and myself, were boarding at University
kindergarten while parents sent away somewhere for "re-education". Did she
bring her 4 yrs old sister to children labor camp?
She was gang raped while trying to save her 4-yrs
Reply to this post
Permalink | Report abuse | Ignore this customer
1 of 2 people think this post adds to the discussion. Do you? Yes No
Posted on Feb 11, 2013 3:54:40 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 11, 2013 3:55:24 AM PST
lin says:
The length of my review exceeded what Amazon's limitation. This is the
truncated part.
1/31(revised)
Since my first writing of this review on Jan. 22, many things have happened.
As what Forbes reporter Jenna Goudreau put it in today's Forbes article '
Bend, Not Break' Author Ping Fu Responds To Backlash, "along with coverage
by other media outlets serious questions have been raised in the Chinese
blogosphere and elsewhere about Fu's credibility". Ping Fu herself commented
my review on Jan 24th and wanted to address the questions I raised in
private through email with me, which I refused.
Now she is trying to clear some of the questions in my review through Jenna
Goudreau's article. The problem is she is defending her lies with more lies.
At this moment, I'm kind of angry with this shameless, mentally sick,
morally low and pathetic liar. So if my writing sound emotional, please
forgive me.
In her response in 1/28 to a reader of her book, Ping Fu blamed reporter for
the inaccuracies in Forbes article. Now in today's Forbes report on her
response to the accusations of being lying, she also blamed the media for
referring to her as a "child soldier" and a "factory worker." She
shamelessly tried to explain away her lie of being deported to the US by
saying "if someone wants to say this is not deportation, fine. That's my
interpretation."". Because China and Chinese government have been demonized
and discredited to such extend in the West, she knows that she can say
whatever she wants about what Chinese government did to her, nothing from
China can be used to dispute her on this, whether it is a government record
or her former classmate's words .
Now she admits that she entered the college in the fall of 1978. We all know
that class of college students in all of universities in China were
graduated in the SUMMER of 1982. But in her book, she said that in the FALL
of 82, while she was walking on campus and PREPARING for her GRADUATION from
the university, someone sneaked up to her, put a black canvas bag over her
head, took her to an unknown place and arrested her. How she can explain
this contradiction in timeline here, huh? And now she suddenly claims "that
she got in trouble with the police in 1983". Not fall of 82 any more?
In Jenna Goudreau's article, when Ping Fu was asked about the timing gap
between getting trouble with the police in 1983 and deportation to the US in
Jan 84, this is her response:" "That's true. That's a good question," Fu
says. "Let me go back and verify that one." " So our successful CEO Ping Fu
couldn't remember what happened and how it happened about the most important
events in her life, she had to go back to verify that. Verify from where?
Hasn't she been telling these stories to medias numerous times since 2005 if
not ealier? If she has such a bad memory and can't remember these most
important events happened to her in her 20's, how much those childhood
memory in her book could be true?
According to her book, the words came through her own mouth on an NPR
interview and many Western media reports, the timeline is: She spent 6 month
to investigate in countrysides on infanticides due to One Child Policy,
then did her senior year graduation thesis(should be in middle of 1982), the
thesis was reported on Chinese newspaper People's Daily (which was the
tightly controlled number one government mouth piece back then), the Chinese
media reports caught international media attention, United Nation then
sanctioned China, Chinese government was upset about this and arrested her
in the Fall of 1982. How all this could happen in a such short time before
in the fall of 82? Or even before January 1984 when she arrived in the US?
College students in China usually wouldn't be able to start their graduation
thesis until the last semester of their senior year, when did she start to
investigate infanticides? When did she hand in her thesis? When did People's
Daily reported her findings? Were international media and UN worked that
fast and efficient in early 80's? Can anyone, Westerner or Chinese who is
old enough to have memory of early 80's, comes out to say that he/she had
ever heard of infanticides in China or UN sanction of China for this in that
time period?
She also forgot that China's One Child policy is considered to be started in
Sept. 1980, when central government of China published an open letter
urging couple's to only have one child. I don't remember when detailed
policies came out. So in 2 years between Sept. 1980 to the Fall of 82,
infanticide became prevalent in China, which caught Ping Fu's attention to
spend 6 month to investigate and wrote her graduation thesis, ..., UN
sanctioned China and she was arrested in the Fall of 82(or 1983 according to
her newest claim). Would anyone with a mind that can do minimum reasoning
believe this?
In a Chinese media report which glorified her story of success and
accomplishments in the US on 3/14/2012 [epaper.chinanews com html 2012-03 14
content_3303 "dot" htm), after she graduated from Suzhou University, she
went to graduate school at Nanjing University, then came to the US. How
would she explain about this? Where did the reporter get that information?
Because Chinese media have been portrayed in the West as always lying and
unreliable, so this one must be a lie or unreliable too, even it is a report
all positive on her and glorifying her, right?
Then, let's see the report of her in Western media. In 2005, INC magazine
ran a story about her in the article Entrepreneur of the Year: Ping Fu (inc
com magazine 20051201 ping-fu "dot" html). It said: "In February 1981,
without a trial or even a formal charge, the Chinese government locked 23-
year-old Ping Fu in solitary confinement, in a wing of Nanjing prison
reserved for political criminals."
February 1981 was the first semester of her junior year. So by then she had
already spent 2 years (yes, in INC's report, she used 2 years to do that) to
investigate infanticides due to a policy that started 5 months ago,
finished her senior year graduation thesis on that,...., and got arrested?
How ridiculous this could be? Who to blame for this inconsistency with her
book and the ridiculousness of the story?
In fact, many things in Ping Fu's book are in contradiction with 2005 INC
magazine's report, from how many sisters being taken from her Shanghai home
to Nanjing, to time and year many things that happened. Again, she can blame
the reporter for all the inaccuracies and mistakes.
Now Ping Fu's publicist told Jenna Goudreau that "The government asked Ping
to leave a couple of weeks after her release," "However, getting a passport
was very difficult, if not impossible". So Chinese government asked her to
leave, but wouldn't issue her a passport, made her to wait for an year?
Difficult to get passport? How come many college graduates that I knew of
back then could get passport in about a month as long as they have foreign
school's acceptation letter and I-20 form. US universities usually send out
these documents to foreign student around March. It would take about a month
to get passport, then we have to apply for visa from US consulate or
embassy. Actually, what difficult to get was not the Chinese passport but
American visa. The US government wouldn't accept poor foreign student come
to the US without enough financial back up. Even if we had back then, many
of us were still rejected (totally different from today).
Foreign students in the US are not allowed to work outside of their campus
to support themselves. Ping Fu's claimed that she came here with no money,
paid her way through school by working first as a babysitter, cleaning lady
then as a waitress. Which means that she did all those work illegally. It
also means that she fabricated her financial documents and lied about the
source of her support when she applied visa from the US consulate.
So, Ping Fu, better stick with your deportation lies. The new lie will not
only make your a liar, but also a law breaker.
Besides, how can a government ask its citizen to leave? If it were that easy
, I suggest Chinese government to ask 3 billions poorest Chinese peasants to
leave China and send them to the United States like it sent Ping Fu here.
Those poor peasants will have much better life and wouldn't need to kill
their infant girls any more. If this way could work, those illegal Mexican
immigrants should just follow Ping Fu's path to tell INS that Mexican
government asked them to leave, so they have a legal status here.
(to be continued)
2/1
(continued from 1/31)
It has puzzled me from the beginning why Ping Fu, with her success and
status, has to make all these outrageous lies from first line in the first
page to the very end in such a well publicized book. Anybody who lived in
the US long enough would know that honesty and integrity is valued in this
country. Price for lying could be high, especially for people with high
status. Many business practices and social services are built on ordinary
citizen's honesty. Telling this kind of lies just for the purpose of selling
book and making money is not worth the risk for somebody with her status,
and I don't think she is that stupid. So, why?
Ping Fu herself left several comments in this thread today which shed some
light for me on this question.
2/2(1)
I'm really disappointed with huffingtonpost.
They let Ping Fu open a blog at their website yesterday. So now she is
enjoying her free ride provided by huffingtonpost, accusing all the critics
of engaging in a "smear campaign" against her personally and her book. She
can cover, spin and spread her lies with more lies freely without being
challenged or questioned. And huffingtonpost don't need to take any
responsibility for that. I would say this is very irresponsible journalism.
At least Noalee Harel should take the responsibility for her 01/22/2013
article, like what Jenna Goudreau of Forbes did, question Ping Fu for the
inconsistencies and contradictions in her book, in TV, radio and newspaper
interviews. We have already provided you guys with mountain of ammunition.
Don't tell me that you can't do an investigate report on her lies better
than us amateurs.
Professor Erica Brindley, Ping Fu's supporter and friend, blames all Ping Fu
's lies on all the unsuspecting reporters by saying Chinese nationalists are
"basing their facts on mistakes by reporters". Are you really willing to be
their scapegoat????!!!!!
2/2(2)
It seems now that Ping Fu has backed off from all her stories except being
Gang raped and being detained by the police.
In her book, she was gang raped in broad daylight by a about 10 teen boys on
a university campus in one of the most developed city in China. Why can I
say this is a lie with 100% confidence? Because, if anybody in the US dare
to claim that she was gang raped by 10 teen boys in broad daylight on
Pennsylvania ave without providing any evidence, everybody would know that
is a LIE!!!
So, Professor Erica Brindley, the arguments you used to defend Ping Fu's
rape lie showed us that you have 0 sense about Chinese culture, Chinese
history and Chinese people. We have to seriously question what kind of
Chinese history and philosophy professor you are. What stake you have in
this book? Don't you care about you academic ethics and reputation at all?
2/3 (1)
I have to defend Forbes and Jenna Goudreau here.
In her huffingtonpost article Clarifying the Facts in Bend, Not Break, Ping
Fu denied that she ever said or wrote that she was in a labor camp. So she
blames Jenna Goudreau for the mistake. In her book, the building she lived
could be a university dormitory, but the life there wasn't. What happened to
her and other children in that university dormitory is zillion times worse
than any labor camp or any prison. Even I couldn't figure out what is it,
how to name it. It's not Jenna Goudreau's fault to use the words " labor
camp", because there is no better words for it .
Here is an excerpt for her book about the life in that dorm.
npr.org books titles 169365841/bend-not-break-a-life-in-two-worlds#excerpt
Enough have been said about this book. I'll stop here and leave the rests
for the professionals. This book should go down to the hall of shame in
history.
2/3 (2)
After spending so much time here for pass ten days, I think that we should
get something positive and constructive out of this events to make it worth
of our time and to learn some lessons.
Last night, I asked Jean Z. to pile up a list of news organizations and
reporters that reported the book.
There are about 20 news organizations ran the story, only one reporter
showed to have some knowledge about China and questioned her. If only 5% of
reporters have some knowledge about China. We can imagine how much an
average American has. What does this mean to the US?
Sun Tzu, an ancient Chinese military strategist said: if you know yourself
and your enemy, you will never lose. If you know yourself but not your enemy
, you will win one and lose one. If you don't know yourself nor your enemy,
you will always lose.
Will this book help either Americans or Chinese to know anything about China
, Chinese culture, Chinese people or Culture Revolution? Think about it.
China is the second largest economy now. Americans can't afford not to know
China anymore. Wake up!!! It's time to get to know the real China now for
the future of America!!!
2/3 (3)
Erica Brindley opened a discussion thread named "Do not bomb this book if
you have not read it! I am a professor of Chinese history and philosophy (
PhD from Princeton) and I vouch that her story is a true reflection of what
happened to some people in China during the Cultural Revolution".
Now I vouch that her story is a 100% false reflection of what happened to
any body in China during the Cultural Revolution.
If American people don't eat something made from "dirt, animal dung, pieces
of tree trunk, and anything else they could scoop off the ground", then no
body in China would eat that.
If officials in the US universities have never forced female students to
turn in their sanitary pad or put fingers in to their body to check for
blood, then neither it happened in any Chinese universities.
If gang rape has never happened on Pennsylvania Ave in broad daylight to
anybody, then it never happened to anybody on any university campus in China.
If sneaking up from behind and suddenly throwing a black bag over a person's
head has never been the way that American police arrested anybody. Then it
has never been the way of Chinese police. (Actually, I don't think Chinese
police had car back in 1982, car was rare at that time).
....
This list can go on and on.
Reading or hearing those news reports is enough for any Chinese from China
or in China to know that book is cooked, there is no need to read the book
to know. I wrote my initial review without reading the book. The book is a
lot worse than what I heard or read in the media.
2/3 (4)
During the Cultural Revolution, and even before that, people in China couldn
't express their opinion honestly and freely. Those with wrong family
background or wrong past experiences(served for the old government) had to
be more careful. They could be easily labeled then discredited or criticized
, they were second class citizens. So people would only say what Communists
Party officials wanted to hear, even those were lies. Everybody have to talk
in ways that politically "correct".
Critics of this book being labeled by Professor Erica Brindley and some
other people as "Chinese nationalists" or "work for Chinese government", etc
. really reminded me of that part of period in China. If we, the Chinese
immigrants, who love this country and people, who know both country well,
are not allowed to honestly express our opinions about China, only can say
what others wants to hear no matter how ridiculous it is, is it really good
for this country?
That is probably one of the reason this ridiculous book can be published and
be promoted to such extend. Because, in the past, American public only
heard what they wanted to hear, heard things that fit their imagination of
China. Only those sensational stories can sell. So, there are people like
Ping Fu with no integrity are willing to cater to that market with lies or
distortions of the facts. People like me, the the silent majority, won't
speak up, don't care to speak up and there are also no place for us to speak
up. Because many of us are afraid of, or don't like to be label as "Chinese
nationalists" or "Communists", because we are not!!!!
==============
2/4
Wow, at this moment, Katie Baker and The Daily Beast choose to bet
everything on Ping Fu :(.
Did I accidentally stumble onto something big??? Am I making history here? I
feel like being dragged into a war---a modern time internet war which I'm
not prepared for. The big establishments vs. grass roots, and American vs.
American. Yes, this is American part of me that are fighting! What are we
fighting for? I don't know what Katie Baker and The Daily Beast want to
achieve. But for me, I'm fighting for my values: honesty, integrity,
professionalism, ethics, courage, taking responsibility, etc. These are the
values that I learned in this country and have become very core of me. These
values are the foundation for the freedoms which we enjoy and treasure.
Because of these values, I love this country, admire and respect American
people, and want to be part of it.
(to be continued in comments section around page 26)
2/6
Who is in charge of Ping Fu's wikipedia page? This is what I found there
today:
"In 2012, Ping published a memoir Bend, Not Break [7], to positive reviews.
Controversy arose from a Forbes article about the book using the term "labor
camp". Forbes later issued a correction to the story. Other statements by
Fu were subsequently challenged. Fu posted a clarification and admited that
some of facts were from her distorted memories. [6] Articles in The Guardian
[8] and The Daily Beast[9] covered it as an organized smear campaign and the
publisher (Penguin) stood by the memoir.[10]" (wikipedia has made the
correction on this since then 2/7)
I didn't see anything said in Guardian feb 4 article close to "covered it as
an organized smear campaign". The only place it mentioned "smear campaign"
is this sentence:
"Author of book describing her path from cultural revolution to head of US
technology firm accuses critics of smear campaign".
(2/10 note:I posted this one one late night of feb 6, battle on her wiki
page started on early morning of feb 7)
2/8 (1)
Interesting development:
There is fierce battle going on now at Ping Fu's wikipedia page since 05:18,
Feb 7 (click the "View history" button on her page to see it).
Her Professional Biography was dramatically changed at 5:09 this morning.
Since her Personal Biography which is full of her proven lies is still there
and so hard to be changed. I have to assume that it is somebody from Ping
Fu's camp changed her Professional Biography. Does this means she also lied
about her professional life in the US?
-------
I'm also curious about how google works.
In the pass several days, every time when I google "ping fu", her Huffington
Post blog and the Daily Beast articles always among the tops 3. And
other articles that favored her also get to move up.
Telegraph.co.uk's article about the controversy never got the chance to show
up, The Guardian's article showed but usually at bottom of the first page,
and today it even off the first page while the Daily Beast's article
that published on the same day is still among the top three.
hmmm, so strange....(Okay, I found out today (2/10) that google indeed could
be manipulated).
2/8 (2)
Here is a list of reports by Western Journalists and news organizations that
Fu's camp don't want people to see:
Chinese cast doubt over executive's rags to riches tale (The Guardian - &#
8206;Feb 4, 2013)
Doubts over Chinese author lauded by Michelle Obama (Telegraph.co.uk - &#
8206;Feb 5, 2013)
(There is a new one came out today (2/10) from Telegraph that they want
people to see, different from this one)
Chinese readers annoyed that Ping Fu's memoir is (allegedly) full of lies (
Shanghaiist - Feb 4, 2013)
XYZ at dailykos.com nailed many of Ping Fu's lies from gang rape to her
fantasized childhood life in Shanghai.
dailykos.com news Ping%20Fu (replace space with "/")
2/8 (3)
It seems to me that Ping Fu hired the wrong person to do the damage control.
Our cards are all on the table and face up for every one to see, but they
still keep playing the wrong cards which is very costly for her and for
those who tried to defend her. I don't want more innocent people to get hurt
by this. So coming up, I'll be her free consultant for once, analyze the
battle field as I see it, tell her what I want, show who has what at stake,
and who is losing and who is winning. Stay tuned.
========
2/9
Battle field analysis (1)
On the surface, there are only three parties are involved in this fighting
for the truth: Ping Fu and her team, famous muckraking blogger Fang Zhouzi
in China, and us ---- Chinese and Chinese immigrants who gave one star
review for this book. But as I see it, there are several other parties could
benefit or be hurt by this. The winners and losers so far as I see them are
(only for now, and all parties fortune can be changed):
Winner No.1, The Chinese government.
It is very clear to me now that the biggest winner is the Chinese government
. They can now mock at the Western free press, discredit the US media, and
discredit the past and future critics of China all thanks to Ping Fu, the
Daily Beast, Huffington Post and this guy --- en.wikipedia.org wiki Xiao_
Qiang (replace space with "/"). Chinese government hasn't moved a finger yet
in this events, Ping Fu and her defenders have already gave them so much
ammunition for free.
Because no Chinese inside or outside of China would ever believe a word said
in the book (the overwhelming 1 star review clearly shows this), this book
and the controversy around it could only show people in China how crazy, how
ridiculous, how dishonest, how stupid, and how lack of integrity Ping Fu,
the few of her defenders and a few China-Bashers are, it won't be able to
hurt Chinese government at all. China's image in the West is already bad,
this stupid book about the Cultural Revolution happened 40 years ago won't
be able to make it worse. This kind of things didn't stop China from fast
growing in the past 30+ years, how could it slow China down in the future?
If I were those in charge of propaganda machine in China, I would collect
every information about the controversy around this book, use it to educate
and brain wash Chinese people what Western free press are all about,
discredit the West, and make government's censoring and controlling of
accessing to Western media through the Internet all legitimate and
justifiable. The West will have no defend on this. THAT'S WHY THIS BOOK AND
THE WAY HER LIES BEING DEFENDED WILL ONLY HELP CHINESE GOVERNMENT AND BAD
FOR EVERYONE ELSE.
Winner No.2, Fang Zhouzi.
Fang is a famous muckraking blogger in China and among oversea Chinese
immigrants community. He started with fighting academic fraud then move on
to fight all sorts of fraud in China, has been an independent force for many
years. He is also a controversial person, offended many people in the
process of exposing dishonesty and misconducts of famous people or
organizations in China. There are many people who really hate him. But in
this case, almost every Chinese immigrant and Chinese in China is supporting
him. He has already scored big, and could score much bigger, all depend on
how he plays his hand. I have been watching Fang for years. Although I don't
always agree with him, I still consider him as a very smart person, very
courageous, good at writing and debating, could be a very formidable
opponent for anybody. He has big crowd of followers for his blog, has plenty
of good cards in his hand already, and is on a moral high ground. He is a
clear winner now. How much more he can win, we'll have to wait and see.
I just saw on his blog now that he started his attack on Katie Baker and The
Daily Beast yesterday. It is a very smart move for him. From watching his
past battles against many famous and powerful people in China on internet, I
hope those who involved in this don't underestimated him. Be prepared!
Loser No.1, The miserable me:(
It is very clear to me now that I probably missed my lifetime chance to get
a big windfall of money when I rejected Ping Fu's invitation on Jan 24 to
talk to her in private through email. Seeing how much she stands to lose, I
probably could ask for a big payment from her then in exchange for shutting
up or even joining her camp to serve as a consultant. Now I've wasted so
much time on this and not been doing my job as a mother, was labeled as "
Chinese nationalist", internet "bully", etc., just to get a little bit
entertainment and be amused here, really not worth it. I consider myself to
be the No.1 biggest loser here:(
Loser No.2, American people.
They have been lied to. They were not lied with small, forgivable or
tolerable lies. American public were lied with bold and outrageous lies that
are insults to their intelligence, common sense and values. Their kindness,
their compassion for the unfortunate have been ruthlessly abused. Their
trusts in people, in basic human decencies and in media are severely
violated. Facing mountain of the evidences and continuing to make innocent
American public to believe in this liar and to support her will make
American people become the laughing stock of the world. Once people know the
truth, I believe American public will be VERY VERY VERY ANGRY, JUST LIKE US
!!!!
Loser No.3, The US government.
This big liar used fabricated documents and stories to win her 2012
Outstanding American by Choice from the US federal government agency----
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services. She probably also
cheated her way up to become a member of President Obama's National Advisory
Council.
Because she said she had no money when she just came to the US, which means
she used falsified financial documents to get I-20 form from an American
University and to get F-1 student's Visa from the US consulate in China (the
US consulate won't issue F-1 visa to anybody if there is no financial
statement to show that there is enough money for the tuition, room and board
). It is also clear to every one now that she probably used her fabricated
stories to gain political asylum and then got the her green card in 1987,
just an amazingly short 3 years after her landed in the US. These are all
violation of the federal laws.
If she is continue to be defended, the US immigration law and federal
government agency USCIS will look like jokes, only to encourage more people
to follow her footsteps. If this fraudulent person is allowed to continue to
sit on President Obama's National Advisory Council, think what the world
would think of the council and the President!!!!
(to be continued)
=============
2/10
Telegraph.co.uk today's report about Ping Fu's "Wikipedia page entry has
been hacked" is very wrong.
My 2/6 and 2/8 (1) entry here recorded how it started and what happened. Her
wiki page entry on this controversy is still misleading. H.Chen posted on 2
/8 on comment section saying that wiki wouldn't allow people to edit her
page anymore, so now only her people can edit her page which is not way wiki
suppose to be. Other part of her wiki page is still full of lies in my
opinion, but I only care about how this controversy is written for now and
will not let she lie or distort about us so easily.
At this moment (7:00pm PST), H. Chen still can't edit Ping Fu's wiki page.
He is not allowed to edit it until Feb 22nd, and the "under dispute sign" is
gone.
2/10
Battle field analysis (2) (continued from 2/9)
Winner No.3, Ping Fu.
After Jan 31 Forbe's article on her was published, her credibility should be
in question. After her Feb 1 clarification on Huffington post, it should be
clear to everybody with reasonable sense that she lied in many times in her
book and her interviews with the media. Yet she is still defended by Daily
Beast and some other media organizations. On the other hand, we the Chinese
immigrants who lived through that part of the history and raised questions
about her were labeled as internet "bully", "Chinese nationalist", ..., "
paid bloggers who virulently defend China's reputation against anything
close to criticism of the country, past or present" (Motley Fool Feb 7), we
were accuse of engaged in a smear campaign against her.
So, at this moment, I have to say she is clearly a big winner. And as long
as she is the winner, American public and the US government can't be on the
winner side as her, because her lies are attacks on American people and the
government.
Loser No.4, The news organizations and people who defended her publicly and
smeared us after Feb 1.
It should be clear to everyone by Feb 1 that Ping Fu lied, not small lies
but big, intentional and audacious lies. Instead of questioning her, they
tried to explain away her lies, defended her and smeared us.
This is a very big and costly mistake. What they didn't expect is, by doing
so, they cornered the US government. The evidences were so indefensible
against her not only on her lies in her book, but also on her violation of
the laws and conning the US government agency USCIS: she used falsified
financial documents to get F-1 student visa to enter the US, quite possible
fabricated her storied to get her green card and her 2012 Outstanding
American by Choice award from USCIS. Furthermore, this fraudulent con artist
is sitting on President Obama's National Advisory Council.
What the President and USCIS should do about her now? Letting her stay on
the council and keeping the award? But this will damage the government image
and what they represents for. Or expel her from the National Advisory
Council，strip away her award and punish her? If she is expelled and
punished, then it would look like we, the "Chinese nationalists", "paid
bloggers", etc, are right all along and we defended the US national
interests, we should be labeled as "American nationalists" instead of "
Chinese nationalists" (many of us are the US citizen after all). Isn't this
ridiculous?
Some body in that camp probably has to take the responsibility for this mess.
Loser No.5, Those in China who genuinely believe in Western democracy and
free press. This could be a blow to the democracy movement in China as many
people have pointed out already. The Western media disappointed them this
time. This kind of free press is not what they want. Probably will be
difficult for them to criticize Chinese government's controlling over the
press and internet in the future. On the other hand, those who don't want
China to reform the political system would have good excuses for not doing
so now. Chinese government can write this case into textbook to discredit
the Western media.
The potential winners or losers here:
The news organization, journalists and American people who haven't spoken
yet. They have the power to turned the tide, to make things right and to
make American public and the government to be the winner.
============
2/11
I don't know much about who is who in the media, and was very angry for what
Harold Evans wrote at the Daily Beast this morning. Now I know who Harold
Evans is, even though I disagree with what he wrote at all, I still have to
show my respect for his lifetime accomplishment and contribution in his
career as a journalist. So I revised what I wrote this morning.
==
Hmm, Sir Harold Evans wrote an article at Daily Beast attacking me and other
reviewers directly. In my opinion, disputing the mountain of evidences that
we presented here against her is a better way to defend Ping Fu and to
discredit us. What presented by Sir Harold Evans in his article isn't the
whole story. And whatever we said are on here for people to see and to judge
, we hide nothing. I didn't contact anybody in private, except Ping Fu left
her email here on Jan 24 and wanted me to talk to her in private, which I
refused. The evidence is here too. I have never joint any private discussion
group anywhere, also have no control over other people's comments here.
(my apologies to Sir Harold Evans for the previous writing on this)
---------
2/12
I think this battle for the truth is pretty much over by now. And thanks to
Amazon's review by John that I can dig out an amazingly similar story to
this one. The saga of the Holocaust Hoax book Misha: A Memoire of the
Holocaust Years which was published in 1997. In that book, there also no
witness, so the author could say whatever she wanted, their defenses for the
lies are very similar to this SAGA, but they didn't use the dirty blows to
smear the critics.
Will history repeat itself again? Will Meimei fox, Ping Fu, the publisher
and the Daily Beast suit each other for the fall out of the book? Too bad
that there is not much profit for this book yet and will never be:) Let's
wait and see:) This is from a news report of Huffington Post in 2008, a must
read, very interesting. How ionic it is for the Huffington Post:)
huffingtonpost.com huff-wires 20080229 holocaust-book-hoax(replace space
with /)
Lets see if the final chapter of the fall out of this book will also follow
the same script.:)
"Defonseca had been asked to write the book by publisher Jane Daniel in the
1990s, after Daniel heard the writer tell the story in a Massachusetts
synagogue.
Daniel and Defonseca fell out over profits received from the best-selling
book, which led to a lawsuit. In 2005, a Boston court ordered Daniel to pay
Defonseca and her ghost writer Vera Lee $22.5 million. Defonseca's lawyers
said Daniel has not yet paid the court-ordered sum." and more.
(2/12/2013)
I think it should be a new chapter for this saga now:)
Today, after I reported on this review about the amazingly similar Holocaust
hoax book Misha saga which reported on huffingtonpost 5 years ago, somebody
seems from Fu's supporter camp came to the comment section of my review(
page 52). This person used the same low blow tricks as Sir Evans and many
others in their camp had used on us, and tried to give me an English lesson
on the word "overkill". (this is also a stupid move of them too)
I will DO the OVERKILL this time. I wanted to quit and not to overkill many
times before. I also warned them many times not to continue to make those
stupid and costly mistakes for the good of them and this country. But they
wouldn't listen and wouldn't let me to quit. They have exhausted all their
means now and want me to quit?
The fun time just started for me, my cards haven't been played much yet, how
could they expect me not to fully enjoy it? Also, that "overkill" lesson
won't work here. It is the lesson for those in power(like them), not for the
powerless us!! I have been the weak and voiceless one here, forced to take
this one person's journey against rich and powerful establishments like them
with the help of many other Amazon reviewers. I'll only consider to STOP
the "killing" after they stop their low and dirty wrong doings. Don't anger
and excite me anymore.
My wisdom lesson for them is:
Lesson1. It is time for everyone involved to think about how to cover for
yourself(Misha saga could be the reference). It's going to be bloody.
Lesson2. Stop using those dirty tricks on us. As it has been proved, it won'
t work on us, will only cause backfires for them.
==========-------
(I'm very angry now with this woman and what her camp has been doing. So if
my tune sounds emotional, please forgive me)
Ping Fu, which one of your gang-rape story is true? The one in your book or
the one you gave on your numerous recent book promotion interviews? How
could you be so bold to tell two totally different versions of the story?
How could you dare to insult American people with this kind of lies? Are you
abusing American people's kindness and decency or are you looking down on
American people's intelligence?
======
It seems to me that Ping Fu hired the wrong person to do the damage control.
Our cards are all on the table and face up for every one to see since the
very beginning, but they still keep playing the wrong cards which is very
costly for her and for those who tried to defend her. I don't want more
innocent people to get hurt by this. I'll serve as her consultant for free
here, analyze the battle field as I see it, tell her what I want, show her
and others who has what at stake, and who is losing and who is winning. So
that people on Fu's side or anyone who wants to join her camp can have
better understanding of the situation, know what they have done and what
they are doing, what's the consequences of their conducts and not to make so
many unintended mistakes again !!!!
=======
Coming up, Battle field analysis (3)
Who am I, what is my past history, what are my goals here, when will I stop
and my 2 cents on how we can get out of this mess.
=========== | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 2 这个事情，早晚会水落石出，但之前的过程会不顺利。傲慢，偏见，利益，。。。有人
当然会做困兽斗知道气若游丝的一刻。 | w*p
发帖数: 16484 | 3 没用，直接lable成communist nationalist就完了。 | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 4 有用没用，拭目以待吧。
【在 w*p 的大作中提到】
: 没用，直接lable成communist nationalist就完了。
| E****9
发帖数: 639 | | t****l
发帖数: 454 | | x***s
发帖数: 851 | 7 mark.
美国媒体如此不顾事实乱给人扣帽子，非常令人失望。拭目以待，看看最终结果。 | k*****r
发帖数: 474 | | m********o
发帖数: 2088 | 9 This is the best I have seen:
Why I gave five stars?, February 8, 2013
By Thomas Leblance
This review is from: Bend, Not Break: A Life in Two Worlds (Hardcover)
My following review and the five stars I gave before are as true as this
book.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------
I gave five stars because every story bad about other country - especially
China must be fantastic true story, and makes me feel how fortunate I am not
living there. If not true and fantastic, why this book got so many praises
and endorsement from main stream media? Those people always know what is
good or not, don't they? On the other hand, how could I give less stars?
Only people out of jealousy or paid by Chinese government for a smearing
campaign can give negative reviews about this book.
______Added 09/02
Since some people do not believe what I said, I would quote the following
from oprah.com as a proof - " New Memoirs So Powerful They'll Turn Your Life
Inside Out. You'll be swept away by these true stories; they'll make you
think differently about your own experiences--past and present (plus two
more we loved)."
Do you reviewers think that your opinion is more trustworthy than Oprah's? I
do not know how you feel about what she said, but her message was fully
approved by my real life experience - after read several of Ping's life
stories in this book, everything inside my stomach fight to come out. After
read the blog written by Ping on Geomagic's website, everything inside
finally burst out. Nothing left. What a life inside out experience!
______Added 10/02
Come on! Everybody. Give your appreciation to this book instead of blaming
it with hatred. Have you read Ping Fu's blog in reply to your attack? I read
it, let me summarize here -
Everybody has been having a different life; her experiences were different
from yours, so hers must be true.
She wrote this book not out of selfish promotion, but out of generosity. She
wants to help you losers who are still struggling with your own lives. She
is generous, so she must be telling the truth.
She was not free to tell the truth. Now she is in US and free to tell the
truth, so the what she told must be truth. Freedom of speech means everybody
can tell the truth, so everybody tells the truth.
She was called a traitor to China by you. Anybody who is called a traitor to
China must be telling the truth.
From all the above, it is obvious that she is telling the truth. But you
still call her a liar, so you are doing a smear campaign employed by Chinese
government, you all shows the dark side of humanity.
The stories she told might not be true due to wrong memories, but it is
still a true memoir. She wrote it, not you. If she says it is true, it can
not be wrong. You are wrong.
_______Added 11/02
Can not speak for her any more, have to change the rating to one star. | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 10 滚一边去。短了你说只会谩骂没有证据，长了你又有意见。
【在 k*****r 的大作中提到】
: 又臭又长，白人一个共党五毛就打趴了
| | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 11 A good one.
【在 m********o 的大作中提到】
: This is the best I have seen:
: Why I gave five stars?, February 8, 2013
: By Thomas Leblance
: This review is from: Bend, Not Break: A Life in Two Worlds (Hardcover)
: My following review and the five stars I gave before are as true as this
: book.
: ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
: -------
: I gave five stars because every story bad about other country - especially
: China must be fantastic true story, and makes me feel how fortunate I am not
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 12 销售状况
http://www.novelrank.com/asin/1591845521
Bend, Not Break:A Life in Two Worlds
Amazon.com
Last Sale: 2 hours
February Sales: 80
January Sales: 595
Current Rank: 1,408
Sales Rank Stats chevron down
Best Rank: 24
Worst Rank: 453,535
Average: 57,555
Std Dev: 93,396
Amazon.co.uk
Last Sale: 69 days,
21 hours
February Sales: 0
January Sales: 0
Current Rank: 436,631
Sales Rank Stats chevron down
Best Rank: 206,764
Worst Rank: 206,764
Average: 206,764
Std Dev: 0
Amazon.ca
Last Sale: 4 days,
10 hours
February Sales: 2
January Sales: 0
Current Rank: 60,494
Sales Rank Stats chevron down
Best Rank: 61,144
Worst Rank: 61,144
Average: 61,144
Std Dev: 0
Amazon.de
Last Sale: 11 days,
17 hours
February Sales: 1
January Sales: 1
Current Rank: 149,597
Reviews
Sales Rank Stats chevron down
Best Rank: 4,752
Worst Rank: 212,129
Average: 85,585
Std Dev: 44,392 | x***s
发帖数: 851 | | t***e
发帖数: 3601 | 14 浮萍急眼了，一共卖出没几本，惹来这么多review。 smear companion。 | c******k
发帖数: 8998 | 15 看来1星评价还是有作用啊。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 销售状况
: http://www.novelrank.com/asin/1591845521
: Bend, Not Break:A Life in Two Worlds
: Amazon.com
: Last Sale: 2 hours
: February Sales: 80
: January Sales: 595
: Current Rank: 1,408
: Sales Rank Stats chevron down
: Best Rank: 24
| M******8
发帖数: 10589 | | w*****u
发帖数: 4768 | 17 江苏，尤其是是苏中及苏南地区 可能是受文革冲击最弱的地区 | d**e
发帖数: 2420 | 18 Lin的comment是多次写的，不要没看帖就乱评论。
【在 M******8 的大作中提到】
: 这么长的review，不是拿钱写的就有鬼了。
| M******8
发帖数: 10589 | 19 更证明是拿钱的。
【在 d**e 的大作中提到】
: Lin的comment是多次写的，不要没看帖就乱评论。
| d**e
发帖数: 2420 | 20 没有证据就不要乱说，你天天上买买提有钱拿？
【在 M******8 的大作中提到】
: 更证明是拿钱的。
| | | c*****r
发帖数: 2866 | 21 推荐一下xgz的评论，目前已有十篇了，条理清楚，论据充分，非常值得一读。
http://www.dailykos.com/news/Ping%20Fu | c******k
发帖数: 8998 | 22 你还别说Math1978真有可能是拿钱的
【在 d**e 的大作中提到】
: 没有证据就不要乱说，你天天上买买提有钱拿？
| c**********u
发帖数: 7276 | 23 还有一个是foo什么的，真是一砣粪球。
【在 c******k 的大作中提到】
: 你还别说Math1978真有可能是拿钱的
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 24 这是从1/22 到2/12积累起来的。你的逻辑很强大。
【在 M******8 的大作中提到】
: 这么长的review，不是拿钱写的就有鬼了。
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 25 12月底
【在 x***s 的大作中提到】
: 她这书是一月几号上架的？
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 26 傅作义
傅斯年
傅抱石
傅增湘
傅全有
傅 雷
傅秋涛
。。。
都有可能被傅苹拿出来，拭目以待。 | m********5
发帖数: 17667 | 27 又如何, 给你打个御用五毛标签就完了
哪怕质疑她的还是拿政庇的
说穿了这在美国是政治正确的, 歇了吧 | m********5
发帖数: 17667 | 28 他自己承认是东突花钱请的
【在 c**********u 的大作中提到】
: 还有一个是foo什么的，真是一砣粪球。
| s*****n
发帖数: 1794 | 29 傅恒，可以和镶黄旗满洲皇族拉上关系，
还有傅明。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 傅作义
: 傅斯年
: 傅抱石
: 傅增湘
: 傅全有
: 傅 雷
: 傅秋涛
: 。。。
: 都有可能被傅苹拿出来，拭目以待。
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 30 大家不至于如此脆弱吧？
【在 m********5 的大作中提到】
: 又如何, 给你打个御用五毛标签就完了
: 哪怕质疑她的还是拿政庇的
: 说穿了这在美国是政治正确的, 歇了吧
| | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 31 Amazon上的已经找不到。老夫这个就成珍本了。 | k*******r
发帖数: 16963 | | O*******d
发帖数: 20343 | 33 Lin的帖子是最有力的。把傅苹都震晕了，要和Lin私了。 Lin不干。 | O*******d
发帖数: 20343 | 34 美国的销售估计就是图书馆买的。很多公共图书馆，不管什么书，都要至少买一本。
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 销售状况
: http://www.novelrank.com/asin/1591845521
: Bend, Not Break:A Life in Two Worlds
: Amazon.com
: Last Sale: 2 hours
: February Sales: 80
: January Sales: 595
: Current Rank: 1,408
: Sales Rank Stats chevron down
: Best Rank: 24
| d**e
发帖数: 2420 | 35 Lin的评论被amazon无耻地删了，真他妈黑。 | m**i
发帖数: 9848 | 36 这几乎是唯一一个有分量的1星贴。大量的liar贴看着人闹心。
那些写liar贴的，就不能学学人家lin，别嚎叫，好好的写点质量过得去的东西…… | b*****n
发帖数: 17570 | 37 写了也是被删
【在 m**i 的大作中提到】
: 这几乎是唯一一个有分量的1星贴。大量的liar贴看着人闹心。
: 那些写liar贴的，就不能学学人家lin，别嚎叫，好好的写点质量过得去的东西……
| c***c
发帖数: 21374 | | x***s
发帖数: 851 | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 40 删了还可以再写
【在 b*****n 的大作中提到】
: 写了也是被删
| | | w*p
发帖数: 16484 | 41 写得好的1星贴很不少，不过lin这个写的最早，又不停更新，内容最详尽。
其他的人都这么写一遍，差别也不会太大。
【在 m**i 的大作中提到】
: 这几乎是唯一一个有分量的1星贴。大量的liar贴看着人闹心。
: 那些写liar贴的，就不能学学人家lin，别嚎叫，好好的写点质量过得去的东西……
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 42 说得很对。
这个帖子下几百个讨论内容也很丰富。
【在 w*p 的大作中提到】
: 写得好的1星贴很不少，不过lin这个写的最早，又不停更新，内容最详尽。
: 其他的人都这么写一遍，差别也不会太大。
| l*********u
发帖数: 19053 | 43 据说这评论被amazon删了，谁有amazon帐号再贴回去。
,
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 这是Amazon上Lin的评论。存在这里做个纪念：
: As a Chinese, I lived through that period of time in China. I have similar
: family and educational background as hers and suffered during Culture
: Revolution as a child. I think her experiences in China mostly, if not all,
: are fabricated, imagined, overly exaggerated or deliberately miss leading.
: If one just read the media reports about her book, he/she may think that
: media might just pick the sensational parts of the book and exaggerated a
: little bit to help her to sell the book. No, it is not the case. She lied
: from very beginning to the end in the book, even on the small detailed
: events. I am amazed by her audacity of telling so many blatant lies in such
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | | d**e
发帖数: 2420 | 46 回来了，好呀。
1,413 of 1,534 people found the following review helpful
1.0 out of 5 stars I don't believe her story, January 22, 2013
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 老的又回来了：
: http://www.amazon.com/review/R22LIB1HMUDXPB/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm
| d**e
发帖数: 2420 | 47 Two reviewers who support me, Jean and Posthuman
是楼主吗？
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 老的又回来了：
: http://www.amazon.com/review/R22LIB1HMUDXPB/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 48 是。
【在 d**e 的大作中提到】
: Two reviewers who support me, Jean and Posthuman
: 是楼主吗？
| p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 49 新的
1,419 of 1,540 people found the following review helpful
A must read. This book is going to be in history., January 22, 2013
By lin
This review is from: Bend, Not Break: A Life in Two Worlds (Hardcover)
(edited and revised on 2/21)
(Some people may get confused about what happened to my review. Here is the
story: My oringinal most popular 1 star review was deleted by Amazon on the
evening of Feb 16. I then posted this new 5 star review on the morning of
Feb 18, which was voted to be The most helpful favorable review within hours
. Then on the afternoon of Feb 21, Amazon restored my original 1 star review
. But I like my new 5 star rating review better now, so I'll keep it as it
is. My original 1 star review is saved at mitbbs.com/article_t/Military/
39175717.html and goo.gl/H5di5. References for this review are in second
page of the comments section)
===========
A must read. This book is going to be in history, to outshine over all of
those infamous memoirs like "inspirational" A Million Little Pieces or the
Holocaust Hoax memoir Misha: A Memoire of the Holocaust Years
My first review of this book was written on Jan 22 after I heard of it from
NPR, the very first negative 1 star review for this book. That review
started with only 4 lines, then expended into 30 pages word document with
about 70 pages comments followed it, probably has become the longest book
review in amazon's history. It turned into a drama and history records for
this battle for the truth, recorded what happened during this controversy (
see ref 4, the major timeline for this controversy is also in ref 8), with
1400+ out of 1500+ people found my review helpful. Eventually it was killed
by Amazon on Feb 16, due to its "visually distractiveness" and violation of
Amazon's guidelines. So I have to start all over again from ground zero. Let
's see what is going to happen to this one.
In my first review, I gave it 1 star rating without much thinking, purely
based on the untruthfulness of the book for a memoir. After past 4 weeks
battle for the truth, I realize that my initial rating was wrong, very wrong
. I should give it 5 star. Even the 5 star rating is too low for it.
1. This book has 274 pages. The very first sentence in the very first page
is a lie, a big lie (proven, see reference 1-4). Page 269 is the last page
which has something to do with her experiences in China. It is a lie too.
Between page 1-page 269, almost everything related to China are lies. Not
small, slip of memory or forgivable lies. They are all disgusting,
outrageous and intentional lies. Many are proven (reference 1-4). For a
memoir making up with this kind of pure lies to such extend, I have to give
it 5 stars. Not for the memoir itself, but for two authors' audacity to lie.
2. The title of the book, Bend, Not break was said to represent some Chinese
wisdom. The truth is, in Chinese language, we have an idiom NING ZHE BU WAN
which means rather to break or be broken than to bend. We respect those who
stand for their beliefs, principles, values and dignities to the degree
that they prefer to be broken rather than bend. That is why the first
reaction when many of us heard the book title was like, huh? She used that
idiom wrong, should be the opposite. During the Cultural Revolution, many
people committed suicide exactly because they didn't want to live a life
that they couldn't be true to themselves. They choose the death instead of
bending. This book and its title is an insult to those people.
A professor of Chinese history and philosophy from a US university vouched
that "her story is a true reflection of what happened to some people in
China during the Cultural Revolution". No, nothing in the book reflects the
history of China, Chinese culture and Chinese people, nothing reflects the
Cultural Revolution, nor the modern China.
For a book which bended Chinese history, culture and people to such extend,
at the same time was valued by some people as representation of that, it
deserves a 5 star rating, not the book, but the bending.
3. The book's scheme is rich to rag, then to rich again. It is an extremely
good story line, two extreme riches with one extreme rag in between. It's
very clever marketing scheme. This scheme alone is worth 5 stars.
From 11 days of age until 8 years old, she was raised by her extremely rich
aunt and uncle in Shanghai. The truth is, she never lived with any rich
people anywhere at all. The picture of the lonely house in the book that she
lived in wasn't located in Shanghai (maybe in some foreign countries). Her
family wasn't rich at all. Those childhood pictures(supposed to be taken
when she lived in Shanghai with her rich aunt) she provided were taken in
studios. They probably didn't even own a camera to take pictures of her as
baby or a little kid. So this fairy tale childhood is just her fantasies. "
Rich" people in Shanghai back then didn't live that kind of life. Nothing in
that part of her story reflected real Shanghai or China in that period of
time. (see ref 3, 4)
The rag life part is also total fabrications. (many of the details have been
proven to be lies, ref 2, 3, 4). The only possible truth is that she indeed
lived in a university student dorm type of housing with her family.
Universities in China provided housing for most of its faculty and staffs.
Student dorm type of housing usually provided for staffs or junior faculties
. Please remember, 40 years ago, China was very poor. Those student dorms
were very similar to many old student dorms in the US structurally, but in a
lot worse condition. Even that kind of housing was considered modern and
luxury back then compare to the living condition of ordinary factory workers
or rural peasants. The life she described there is total fabrication or
distortion of the facts (ref 2-4).
Among her rag life story in China, what angered and disgusted me the most is
her gang rape story. For the Confucius culture and tradition that valued a
woman's virginity and purity as the highest virtue in the past, many rape
victims had to commit suicide. But she dared to insult those victims with
making up this kind of lies.
First, she gave two totally different versions of the gang rape story, one
in the book, another during her numerous book promotion to the media. None
of them could be true (ref 3,4). In additional to what I and xgz wrote in
reference 3 and 4, just using google earth to take a look at that university
campus (ref 6), one can easily see how far the cannel is from the campus
and how deep the water is, how impossible for her in the dorm to hear other
kids' shouting at the cannel bank, flied down the stairs, walked into the
water and dragged her sister up.
Second, when it was pointed out by me that this is a lie (she followed the
thread of my first review as early as Jan 24, and responded to my review and
other people's comments 3 to 4 times), she still dared to repeat this lie
in hope that this was very personal experience that no one can disprove that.
4. In the book and her many promotion interviews, she claim that she came to
this country penniless, worked as babysitter waitress etc. to make a living
and to pay for her schooling. But anybody familiar with international
student fair would know that for a foreign student to be able to get the
visa to enter the US, he/she has to have financial statement to prove that
he/she have enough money for tuition, room and board. Claiming to be
penniless now means she falsified those financial documents and broke the
law.
For a person at her position and status (she is a member of President Obama'
s National Advisory Council), dared to publicize her past law breaking
endeavor, I have to give her 5 stars for this.
5. Her lies aren't something difficult for people to find out. Anyone with a
shred of knowledge about China between 1960 to 1984 could immediately tell
her stories are fabrications. Anybody done some critical thinking and
examination of her stories also can easily tell that things don't add up in
her stories. Her lies are insult to human intelligence.
So the simplicity, naiveté and stupidity of her lies deserve a 5 star
rating.
6. Facing mountain of evidence that she lied, some people still can find
inspiration in her book, or defended her lies at all costs, there must be
some mystery ingredients in the book that I couldn't figure out. I think
those mystery ingredients deserve 5 stars.
7. For a newly published the book, the promotion and publicity exceeded the
realm of my knowledge and experiences. It deserves a 5 star.
8. During author's numerous promotion TV, radio and newspaper interviews,
she not only repeated those lies in the book, but dare to give many
inconsistent or totally different versions of the stories, taking advantage
and abusing the trust of innocent unsuspecting journalists. Even on her Jan
30 PBS interview when the controversy had already erupted, she still made up
stories like raised chicken in her university dorm. Anybody ever lived in a
university dorm in China or in the US would know how impossible to do that
in that kind of setting, especially for an eight years old kid.
I have to give this kind of boldness and abusing of innocent people's trust
a 5star rating.
9. The smearing at the critics is unseen of, exceeded my wildest imagination
and ability to understand. We were labeled as "Chinese nationalist", "
shills" of the Chinese government, "paid bloggers", internet "bullies", etc.
without a shred of evidence. We were accused by Sir Harold Evans of the
Daily Beast of having "two user names--20, a hundred--may conceal a single
identity", while in fact that each user id has to be Amazon's customers and
bought something from amazon before to be able to write reviews(see Amazon's
guidelines for creating a review). This kind of attacks on book critics
probably has never happened in human history, deserves millions stars (ref 7
).
I highly recommend this book. For those who desperately need to find
inspiration, they should buy the book for themselves. Others can just borrow
it from the local libraries, or walk into a Barnes and Noble bookstore to
take a look. But don't expect to find this highly promoted book in B&N's new
book promotion area or biography area, it is in the business profile area
together with those old paperback books now.
(2/18)
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you?
Report abuse | Permalink | x***s
发帖数: 851 | | | | p********1
发帖数: 2785 | 51 据说是为了保护那个美国人? 难道她提前预料到自己的书会受到质疑？
【在 x***s 的大作中提到】
: 浮萍为什么要隐瞒第一次婚姻？
| d**e
发帖数: 2420 | 52 好样的
【在 p********1 的大作中提到】
: 是。
|
|
